Archive for May, 2009

Obama Out-Bushes Bush on Preventive Detention

May 31, 2009

Constitutionality aside, Barack Obama’s preventive detention proposal is “damn near criminally irresponsible” and “like lighting a match in a room full of gasoline.” The United States was founded on the principle that “lesser” or “dangerous” peoples should be “detained” for the good of the nation – on reservations or in slavery. Were it not for “rampant race hatred directed against Arabs and spilling over to all Muslims…there would be no serious discussion of preventive detention in the United States, today.” The nation’s first Black president is provoking a racial whirlwind.

Full Story:  http://www.blackagendareport.com/?q=content/obama-out-bushes-bush-preventive-detention

 

The Presidents' Club

 

The Presidents' Club

Advertisements

Obama Picks Anti-gun Judge for the Supreme Court

May 31, 2009

obama080630_1_560-1

 

— Time to start contacting your Senators right away

Unless you’ve taken a very long Memorial Day vacation, you’ve no doubt heard the big news.

President Obama has picked an anti-gun radical to replace Justice David Souter on the Supreme Court.

Obama’s pick is Judge Sonia Sotomayor, who is currently on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second District.  There she has racked up an anti-Second Amendment record and has displayed contempt for the rule of law under the Constitution.

The Heller decision put the Supreme Court in support of the Constitutional protection of the individual right to keep and bear arms.  Sotomayor, a politically correct lover of centralized government power (as long as she is part of the power elite), immediately went into counter-attack mode against the Heller decision.

Sotomayor was part of a three-judge panel earlier this year which ruled in Maloney v. Cuomo that the Second Amendment does not apply to the states.  As she and her cohorts claimed, the Supreme Court has not yet incorporated the states under the Second Amendment.  Until then, she believes, the Second only applies to the District of Columbia.

This is pure judicial arrogance — something Sotomayor relishes (as long as she is one of the ruling judges).  In fact, protection of the right to keep and bear arms was a major objective for enactment of the Fourteenth Amendment, as recently freed slaves were being disarmed and terrorized in their neighborhoods.  

But Sotomayor disdains this important right of individuals, as indicated by an earlier opinion from 2004.  In United States v. Sanchez-Villar, she stated that “the right to possess a gun is clearly not a fundamental right.” 

Sotomayor has held very anti-gun views, even as far back as the 1970s.  Fox Cable News reported yesterday that in her senior thesis at Princeton University, she wrote that America has a “deadly obsession” with guns and that the Second Amendment does not guarantee an individual right to firearms ownership.

Sotomayor’s Second Amendment views go hand in hand with her politically correct views on the law and the role of judges.

In a speech given at Duke University in 2005, she made it abundantly clear that judges are involved in making policy.  Realizing that this did not sound very judicial (even though most judges act on this basis), Sotomayor tried to laugh off her brazen admission: “I know this is on tape and I should never say that, [audience laughing], because we don’t make law — I know.  Um, okay. I know, I’m not promoting it, I’m not advocating it.”  The audience continued to laugh.  They got the joke.

But Sotomayor’s joke will be on us and our liberties if she gets confirmed to the Supreme Court.  And that is why we need to start contacting our Senators early and often, urging them to vote against this dangerous nomination.

ACTION:  Please contact your two Senators and urge them to oppose the nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court.  You can use the  Legislative Action Center to send your Senators a pre-written e-mail message. 

 

http://gunowners.org/a052909.htm

NAIS: Farmers and Ranchers Under Attack

May 31, 2009

By Dana Gabriel – BLN Contributing Writer

The National Animal Identification System (NAIS) is a federal program which enjoys the support of large corporate agribusiness farms.  It consists of premises registration, as well as animal identification and tracing.  It remains voluntary, but some states have taken measures to mandate certain elements of the program.  There has been strong opposition from small farmers and ranchers who view NAIS as a threat to privacy and property rights.  Full implementation would also be expensive and could put many out of business.  NAIS is unfair and by all accounts, would be ineffective.  It is yet another way to squeeze out small family farmers and further monopolize America’s food production.
 
NAIS is made up of several different components.  In order to receive a premises identification number, information about the location of your animals is required, along with contact information.  The next part of the program involves farm animals being tagged withRadio Frequency Identification (RFID) chips.  Some are adamantly opposed to any electronic registration and have went so far as to describe NAIS as letting Big Brother into the barn.  There is also the cost factor which would place further financial burden on small farmers and ranchers who would be required to tag each individual animal.  Some would have no choice but to sell some of their animals, if NAIS becomes mandatory.  Others may be forced out of business.  Large scale factory farms support NAIS because it would create a livestock database which would be especially beneficial for exporting purposes.  In a past article entitled Stop the NAISCongressman Ron Paul writes, “NAIS means more government, more regulations, more fees, more federal spending, less privacy, and diminished property rights.” 
 
As a result of growing opposition to NAIS, the United States Department of Agriculture(USDA) has been holding a series of listening and information sessions across the country.  This is in an effort to get feedback in the hopes of finding possible solutions that could make the program more viable.  The debate should not be on how to best implement NAIS, but rather if it is even needed.  Some would like to see a voluntary, privately created, managed and funded program with more transparency.  Others believe that it should also be market-driven.  In early May, joint 
House Agriculture and Homeland Security Subcommittees held hearings on NAIS.  They centered around the program’s role in protecting U.S. producers and consumers from the effects of an animal disease outbreak.
 
The 
USDA describes NAIS as, “a modern, streamlined information system that helps producers and animal health officials respond quickly and effectively to animal disease events in the United States.”  Ron Paul has pointed out that, “NAIS is not about preventing mad cow or other diseases.  States already have animal identification systems in place and virtually all stockyards issue health certificates.  Since most contamination happens after animals have been sold, tracing them back to the farm or ranch that sold them won’t help find the sources of disease.”  Greater focus needs to be placed on huge industrial farms which tend to be overcrowded and present a greater risk to food safety
 
More consumer groups are joining forces with small farmers and ranchers in opposition to NAIS.  Some states have also passed anti-NAIS legislation.  Arizona was the first to pass a bill outlawing mandatory participation in the program.  NAIS does nothing to improve food safety for consumers or prevent animal diseases.  At every turn, it favors large scale farming operations and places small farmers and ranchers at a considerable disadvantage. 
 
Trade policies have enabled large agribusinesses to set up monopolies and as a result, a small number of multinational corporations control much of our food production and supply.  If NAIS were to be fully implemented and become mandatory, it would threaten the livelihoods of many small farmers.  It is costly, intrusive and would further globalize our food system.  It is important to become more self-sufficient and support local producers.  We must continue to resist NAIS and further challenge this corporate system.  Food could be used as a weapon and whosoever controls the food supply, could ultimately control the population.

Dana Gabriel is an activist and independent researcher who writes about trade, globalization, sovereignty, as well as other issues. Contact: newworldordermustbestopped@hotmail.com  

 

http://www.blacklistednews.com/news-4349-0-14-14–.html

Ron Paul on North Korea

May 31, 2009

Cybersecurity: Obama’s Promise to Trash the Constitution

May 31, 2009

obama-burns-constitution

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars
May 29, 2009

 

During a speech today on “cybersecurity,” Obama told a whopper. He said the government’s effort to protect us from cyber bad guys “will not include monitoring private sector networks or Internet traffic. We will preserve and protect the personal privacy and civil liberties that we cherish as Americans.”

Is it possible Obama has never heard of Mark Klein, the retired AT&T communications technician who said years ago that the company shunted all Internet traffic — including traffic from peering links connecting to other Internet backbone providers — to semantic traffic analyzers, installed in a secret room inside the AT&T central office on Folsom Street in San Francisco? There are similar rooms in Seattle, San Jose, Los Angeles and San Diego, all sucking up internet data.

Klein explained that the multinational corporation is doing this at the behest of the NSA. It is “vacuum-cleaner surveillance” approach that grabs everything. “Despite what we are hearing, and considering the public track record of [the Bush] administration, I simply do not believe their claims that the NSA’s spying program is really limited to foreign communications or is otherwise consistent with the NSA’s charter or with FISA [the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act],” said Klein in 2006.

After the NSA showed up in 2002 at AT&T’s Folsom Street facility, Klein began connecting the dots. “You might recall there was a big blowup in the news about the Total Information Awareness [TIA] program, led by Adm. [John] Poindexter, which caused the big upsetness in Congress, because what Poindexter was proposing to do was draw in databases from everywhere — and this was in The New York Times — draw in Internet data, bank records, travel records, everything into one big conglomeration which could be searchable by the government so they could find out everything about what anybody’s doing at any time of day,” Klein told PBS. “And all this would be done without any warrants. This is how it was presented by Poindexter himself in The New York Times, and that caused a great upset, brouhaha, in Congress.”

On January 16, 2003, Senator Russ Feingold introduced legislation to suspend the activity of the Total Information Awareness program pending a Congressional review of privacy issues involved. In February 2003, Congress passed legislation suspending activities of the IAO (Information Awareness Office) pending a Congressional report of the office’s activities.

Congress acted after William Safire published an article in the New York Times claiming “[TIA] has been given a $200 million budget to create computer dossiers on 300 million Americans” (see You Are a Suspect, November 14, 2002).

Of course, the program didn’t go away. Legislators included a classified annex to the Defense Appropriations Act that preserved funding for TIA’s component technologies, if they were transferred to other government agencies. TIA projects continued to be funded under classified annexes to Defense and Intelligence appropriation bills.

“Total Information Awareness — the all-seeing terrorist spotting algorithm-meets-the-mother-of-all-databases that was ostensibly de-funded by Congress in 2003, never actually died, and was largely rebuilt in secret by the NSA, according to the Wall Street Journal’s Siobhan Gorman,” Ryan Singelwrote for Wired on March 10, 2008. “There’s been no real debate in Congress or in the press about whether the government should be allowed to track every Americans phone calls, emails and web browsing.”

Jon Stokes, writing for Ars Technica, notes that TIA technology is nothing new. “TIA-like efforts are still going on” Stokes wrote in 2005, and “the government has been trying to use new technology, like database tech and voice recognition, for domestic surveillance for a long time. And when I say a long time, I mean well before the current administration came into office.” It really got a boost under Clinton in 1995 when the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA) was passed. “CALEA mandated that the telcos aid wiretapping by installing remote wiretap ports onto their digital switches so that the switch traffic would be available for snooping by law enforcement.” In other words, Mark Klein had but scratched the surface.

Truman created the NSA in 1952, supposedly to serve as “America’s ears” abroad, but the agency has long served as a secret Stasi-like organization dedicated to snooping on Americans. The NSA, writesSiobhan Gorman for the Wall Street Journal, “and other intelligence agencies were found to be using their spy tools to monitor Americans for political purposes.”

The NSA’s predecessor, the Armed Forces Security Agency, launched Project SHAMROCK in 1945. It obtained copies of all telegraphic information exiting or entering the United States with the full cooperation of RCA, ITT and Western Union. A sister project known as Project MINARET involved the creation of “watch lists,” by each of the intelligence agencies and the FBI, of those accused of “subversive” domestic activities. The watch lists included such notables as Martin Luther King, Malcolm X, Jane Fonda, Joan Baez and Dr. Benjamin Spock, according to Patrick S. Poole, writing for Nexus Magazine in 1999. The FBI, the NSA, and other intelligence agencies were actively involved in creating the watch lists.

NSA has attempted to keep up on technology as the secretive agency continues to snoop on “subversives” and others the government considers miscreants. In February, trade publications reported the agency is offering “billions” to any firm able to offer reliable eavesdropping on Skype IM and voice traffic. Skype is particularity troublesome because it utilizes P2P networks, that is to say peer-top-peer (no central server owned and operated by a telecom required). The government and the corporate media may tell you they want to crack down on P2P — for instance, the vastly popular BitTorrent — because of copyright infringement, but a more practical reason is because the government has yet to figure out how to crack the file sharing protocol. Skype and BitTorrent account for a large amount of traffic on the internet.

 

If you think Obama will roll back the government’s massive and unconstitutional snoop program, think again. On April 3, the Obama Department of Justice filed a motion to dismiss one of the Electronic Frontier Foundation’s landmark lawsuits against illegal spying by the NSA. The DOJ demanded that the entire lawsuit be dismissed based on both the Bush administration’s claim that a “state secrets” privilege bars any lawsuits against the executive branch for illegal spying, as well as a novel “sovereign immunity” claim that the Patriot Act bars lawsuits of any kind for illegal government surveillance (see the EFF press release, Obama Administration Embraces Bush Position on Warrantless Wiretapping and Secrecy).

In March, Obama’s coordinator for cybersecurity programs, Rod Beckstrom, a former Silicon Valley entrepreneur, quit because he opposed the role of the NSA in the so-called cybersecurity initiative. Beckstrom said “the threats to our democratic processes are significant if all top level government network security and monitoring are handled by” the NSA.

“Obama’s moves drew praise from key lawmakers on Capitol Hill, who vowed to work with the president to implement new security measures as needed,” CQPolitics reported shortly after his “cybersecurity” speech. “Obama said his cybersecurity adviser — who will be a member of both the National Security Staff and the National Economic Council staff — will head a new office within the White House.”

“We applaud President Obama for highlighting the extraordinarily serious issue of cybersecurity,” Sens. Johns D. Rockefeller IV, D-W.V., and Olympia J. Snowe , R-Maine, said in a joint statement. “No other president in American history has elevated this issue to that level and we think him for his leadership.”

No other president so far has had the power to shut down the internet. The Rockefeller-Snowe bill, S 778, would grant Obama dictatorial power declare a so-called “cyber emergency” and pull the plug, or at least cripple networks deemed a threat. The U.S. government is not seriously worried about Chinese hackers or mischievous kids in Latvia (as Rockefeller cited as a danger) but rather fear free and unfettered speech and activism on the part of its own citizens.

Obama’s promise is merely an effort to string you along with a big fat lie. He has absolutely no respect for you or the Bill of Rights.

 

http://www.infowars.com/cybersecurity-obamas-promise-to-trash-the-constitution/

New Alex Jones Documentary Pays Homage To Maverick Patriot Aaron Russo

May 31, 2009

“I loved this guy. This is someone who really didn’t have to do what he did. Like any trailblazer in the fight for freedom of all people he died an early death. They probably have a nice quick and discreet way to contaminate people with cancer down at the C.I.A. The damage is done though and Russo planted some very important seeds that will never go away.”

-F.F. 5/30/09

 

290509top2

 

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Friday, May 29, 2009

 

Alex Jones’ latest DVD documentary release, Reflections And Warnings – An Interview With Aaron Russo, pays homage to maverick patriot Aaron Russo, who left this mortal coil in August 2007 after a long battle with cancer. The film is a 90 minute full version of Jones’ seminal interview with Russo, which took place months before his death.

This was Russo’s final videotaped interview before he passed away, but his legacy as the founder of the movement to end the power monopoly of the Federal Reserve makes the documentary more contemporary than ever before in light of how the Federal Reserve has increased its stranglehold over the American economy since the beginning of the financial crisis last year.

The DVD is interspersed with new footage of Jones highlighting the progression of many things that Russo warned were part of the ultimate agenda for the prison planet before he passed away.

Russo was perhaps best known for managing star of stage and screen Bette Midler, as well as producing Trading Places starring Eddie Murphy, but his last great work was undoubtedly the most important of his life – Russo’s groundbreaking exposé of the criminal run-for-profit Federal Reserve system, the documentary America: From Freedom to Fascism.

The interview opens with Russo talking about how he first started to become aware of the fact that something was very wrong in America, when cops set him up and raided his Chicago night club and later demanded protection money, mafia style.

The conversation on the DVD features many shocking revelations that were divulged by Russo’s one-time close friend Nick Rockefeller about the elite’s agenda for mankind.

After his popular video Mad As Hell was released and he began his campaign to become Governor of Nevada, Russo was noticed by Rockefeller and introduced to him by a female attorney. Seeing Russo’s passion and ability to affect change, Rockefeller set about on a subtle mission to recruit Russo into the elite.

During one conversation, Rockefeller asked Russo if he was interested in joining the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) but Russo rejected the invitation, saying he had no interest in “enslaving the people” to which Rockefeller coldly questioned why he cared about the “serfs.”

“I used to say to him what’s the point of all this,” said Russo, “you have all the money in the world you need, you have all the power you need, what’s the point, what’s the end goal?” to which Rockefeller replied (paraphrasing), “The end goal is to get everybody chipped, to control the whole society, to have the bankers and the elite people control the world.”

Rockefeller even assured Russo that if he joined the elite his chip would be specially marked so as to avoid undue inspection by the authorities.

In another conversation, Russo states that Rockefeller told him, “Eleven months before 9/11 happened there was going to be an event and out of that event we were going to invade Afghanistan to run pipelines through the Caspian sea, we were going to invade Iraq to take over the oil fields and establish a base in the Middle East, and we’d go after Chavez in Venezuela.”

Rockefeller also told Russo that he would see soldiers looking in caves in Afghanistan and Pakistan for Osama bin Laden and that there would be an “Endless war on terror where there’s no real enemy and the whole thing is a giant hoax,” so that “the government could take over the American people,” according to Russo, who said that Rockefeller was cynically laughing and joking as he made the astounding prediction.

“Eleven months to a year later that’s what happened….he certainly knew that something was going to happen,” said Russo.

In a later conversation, Rockefeller asked Russo what he thought women’s liberation was about. Russo’s response that he thought it was about the right to work and receive equal pay as men, just as they had won the right to vote, caused Rockefeller to laughingly retort, “You’re an idiot! Let me tell you what that was about, we the Rockefeller’s funded that, we funded women’s lib, we’re the one’s who got all of the newspapers and television – the Rockefeller Foundation.”

Rockefeller told Russo of two primary reasons why the elite bankrolled women’s lib, one because before women’s lib the bankers couldn’t tax half the population and two because it allowed them to get children in school at an earlier age, enabling them to be indoctrinated into accepting the state as the primary family, breaking up the traditional family model.

This revelation dovetails previous admissions on behalf of feminist pioneer Gloria Steinem (pictured)that the CIA bankrolled Ms. Magazine as part of the same agenda of breaking up traditional family models.

Rockefeller was often keen to stress his idea that “the people have to be ruled” by an elite and that one of the tools of such power was population reduction, that there were “too many people in the world,” and world population numbers should be reduced by at least half.

Russo talks at length in the interview about how any attempt at taking America back from the criminal elite needs to be focused around dismantling the private criminal enterprise known as the Federal Reserve, by returning America to a system where the government prints its own money backed by gold without having to be in debt and pay interest to a private cabal of elitists.

At the end of the interview, Russo describes how he had plans to further fight the new world order once he overcame his cancer, which unfortunately was not to be. However, Aaron’s legacy will live on through this interview, through his outstanding documentary America: From Freedom To Fascism and through the countless people in his life who he brought joy to by way of his engaging, warm and above all, innately human personality.

Watch the trailer for the documentary below.

 

Longer chip of AJ & AR interview:

 

Russo’s Documentary,  America: From Freedom To Fascism.”

 

 

Another Establishment News Site Confirms Obama Officials Attended Bilderberg 2009

May 30, 2009

holbrooke-obama

 

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars
May 26, 2009

 

Politico has reported on a “handful” of Obama administration officials who were in attendance at this year’s Bilderberg meeting at the Astir Palace hotel in Vouliagmeni on the Aegean Sea in Greece. James Steinberg and Richard Holbrooke gave presentations on foreign policy while Paul Volcker addressed economic issues at the elitist confab, according to the news website.

It is illegal under the Logan Act for U.S. government officials to meet behind closed doors with leaders of foreign countries.

James Steinberg, Obama’s Deputy Secretary of State, is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission. Richard Holbrooke is Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan in the Obama administration and is positioned at the very apex of the CFR. He is a Trilateral Commission member and a virtual fixture at Bilderberg meetings. Paul Volcker is the former chairman of the Federal Reserve under Carter and Reagan and heads up Obama’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board. He is a Trilateral member and has had a long association with the Rockefeller family, not only with his positions at Chase Bank and the Trilateral Commission, but also through membership of the Trust Committee of Rockefeller Group.

David Rockefeller is an honorary life director of the CFR, founder the Trilateral Commission, and founding member, life member, and member of the Steering Committee of the Bilderberg Group.

A source at the meetings told Politico Holbrooke briefed attendees on the Obama administration’s “unified approach” to dealing with Afghanistan and Pakistan. In March, Obama announced a major escalation of the war in Afghanistan and Pakistan after a “review” by the State Department where Holbrooke serves as point man on the region. During Holbrooke’s appointment in January, Obama declared Afghanistan and Pakistan to be the central front in the war on terrorism.

In addition to Pakistan and Afghanistan, the Bilderbergers discussed how to best exploit the global recession and swine flu, according to Bilderberg reporter Jim Tucker’s inside sources. “Bilderberg owns President Obama,” writes Tucker. “His goal, as dictated by Bilderberg, is to persuade the new Senate (to be seated in January 2010), to ratify the ICC [International Criminal Court] treaty late on a Saturday night, too late for the Sunday papers or to make changes in the Sunday TV talkies.”

The International Criminal Court was first proposed in 1998 at a UN treaty conference in Rome. The treaty purports to establish a worldwide UN criminal court that will have jurisdiction over every nation on earth. It currently does not have legitimate authority over American citizens because the Constitution does not permit the judicial function to be surrendered to an international body. According to Tucker’s sources, Bilderberg members hope to get the treaty ratified by the Senate in 2010 in violation of the Constitution.

 

Other Obama administration attendees included Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner, James Jones, Obama’s National Security Advisor, and Lawrence Summers, Director of the White House’s National Economic Council, according to the 2009 Bilderberg attendee list.

“You will not read of this in the Bilderberg-controlled Washington Post, New York Times, Los Angeles Times or hear about it on network news broadcasts,” Tucker added.

Politico admits “the gathering produced barely a blip in the American mainstream media,” with the exception of brief reports by the Wall Street Journal and the Associated Press. Most of the coverage on Bilderberg meetings is provided by the alternative press, most notably the American Free Press, Infowars, and Prison Planet.

According to Politico, the Bilderberg’s “ultra-exclusive roster of globally influential figures has captured the interest of an international network of conspiracists, who for decades have viewed the Bilderberg conference as a devious corporate-globalist scheme.” Politico’s source said that any suggestion that Bilderberg is secretly anointing world leaders or plotting global policy is the provenance of “the black helicopter crowd.”

“As in past years, the near-absence of mainstream media coverage left Bilderberg-veil-piercing duties to a group of self-styled Bilderberg hunters whose reporting and speculation fill fringe, libertarian-leaning websites, newspapers and AM radio shows popular with those whose worldview is characterized by a deep and angry suspicion of the ruling class rather than any prevailing partisan or ideological affiliation,” writes Kenneth P. Vogel for Politico.

Politico is an establishment news website owned by media mogul Robert Allbritton and edited by former Washington Post scribes. Donald Graham, CEO of the Washington Post Company, was on the 2009 Bilderberg attendee list.

 

http://www.infowars.com/another-establishment-news-site-confirms-obama-officials-attended-bilderberg-2009/

Rabidly Anti-gun Sotomayor is Unacceptable

May 30, 2009

gun_owners_of_america

 

Obama Picks Anti-gun Judge for the Supreme Court 
— Time to start contacting your Senators right away 

Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert 
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151 
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408 
http://www.gunowners.org 


Friday, May 29, 2009 


Unless you’ve taken a very long Memorial Day vacation, you’ve no doubt 
heard the big news. 

President Obama has picked an anti-gun radical to replace Justice David 
Souter on the Supreme Court. 

Obama’s pick is Judge Sonia Sotomayor, who is currently on the U.S. 
Court of Appeals for the Second District.  There she has racked up an 
anti-Second Amendment record and has displayed contempt for the rule of 
law under the Constitution. 

The Heller decision put the Supreme Court in support of the 
Constitutional protection of the individual right to keep and bear arms. 
Sotomayor, a politically correct lover of centralized government power 
(as long as she is part of the power elite), immediately went into 
counter-attack mode against the Heller decision. 

Sotomayor was part of a three-judge panel earlier this year which ruled 
in Maloney v. Cuomo that the Second Amendment does not apply to the 
states.  As she and her cohorts claimed, the Supreme Court has not yet 
incorporated the states under the Second Amendment.  Until then, she 
believes, the Second only applies to the District of Columbia. 

This is pure judicial arrogance — something Sotomayor relishes (as long 
as she is one of the ruling judges).  In fact, protection of the right 
to keep and bear arms was a major objective for enactment of the 
Fourteenth Amendment, as recently freed slaves were being disarmed and 
terrorized in their neighborhoods. 

But Sotomayor disdains this important right of individuals, as indicated 
by an earlier opinion from 2004.  In United States v. Sanchez-Villar, 
she stated that “the right to possess a gun is clearly not a fundamental 
right.” 

Sotomayor has held very anti-gun views, even as far back as the 1970s. 
Fox Cable News reported yesterday that in her senior thesis at Princeton 
University, she wrote that America has a “deadly obsession” 
with guns 
and that the Second Amendment does not guarantee an individual right to 
firearms ownership. 

Sotomayor’s Second Amendment views go hand in hand with her politically 
correct views on the law and the role of judges. 

In a speech given at Duke University in 2005, she made it abundantly 
clear that judges are involved in making policy.  Realizing that this 
did not sound very judicial (even though most judges act on this basis), 
Sotomayor tried to laugh off her brazen admission: “I know this is on 
tape and I should never say that, [audience laughing], because we don’t 
make law — I know.  Um, okay. I know, I’m not promoting it, I’m not 
advocating it.”  The audience continued to laugh.  They got the joke. 

But Sotomayor’s joke will be on us and our liberties if she gets 
confirmed to the Supreme Court.  And that is why we need to start 
contacting our Senators early and often, urging them to vote against 
this dangerous nomination. 

ACTION:  Please contact your two Senators and urge them to oppose the 
nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court.  You can 
go to the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at 
http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm to send your Senators the 
pre-written e-mail message below. 


—– Pre-written letter —– 

Dear Senator: 

If you cherish the Second Amendment and agree that it protects an 
individual right to keep and bear arms — as stated by the recent Heller 
decision — then you must vote against Judge Sonia Sotomayor. 

This choice for the Supreme Court is totally unacceptable!  Consider a 
partial rendering of her anti-gun record: 

* Sotomayor ruled in United States v. Sanchez-Villar (2004) that “the 
right to possess a gun is clearly not a fundamental right.” 

* Sotomayor was part of a three-judge panel earlier this year which 
ruled in Maloney v. Cuomo that the Second Amendment does not apply to 
the states.  This makes her more liberal than the Ninth Circuit, which 
stated in April that the Second Amendment does apply to the states. 

* Sotomayor has held very anti-gun views, even as far back as the 1970s. 
Fox Cable News reported on May 28 that in her senior thesis at Princeton 
University, she wrote that America has a “deadly obsession” 
with guns 
and that the Second Amendment does not guarantee an individual right to 
firearms ownership. 

I will consider a vote in favor of Sotomayor as the most anti-gun vote a 
Senator could cast.  To send an anti-gun liberal judge to the Supreme 
Court for the rest of her life is to establish “legislation without 
representation.”  After all, she says that the courts are where policy 
is made, and once she’s there, we’ll never be able to vote her out. 

Again, please vote against this dangerous nomination. 

Sincerely, 

(your name)

Ron Paul on CNN American Morning 5/27/09

May 27, 2009

Billionaire: Elite Want Two-Thirds Of The “Dumb People” Wiped Off The Planet

May 27, 2009

 

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Wednesday, May 27, 2009

 

Billionaire entrepreneur Kevin Trudeau, who has been constantly harassed and sued by the FTC for promoting alternative health treatments, told The Alex Jones Show yesterday that elitists and Bilderberg members who he had personally conversed with spoke of their desire to see “two thirds of the dumb people” wiped off the planet.

Trudeau admitted that he was in Greece recently and implied that he attended the Bilderberg Group meeting, while also stating that he personally knew many Bilderberg members who he “conversed with on a regular basis”.

Overpopulation is a primary concern of the elite, and it was the subject of a recent clandestine meeting of billionaire “philanthropists” in New York. Elitists veil their agenda with the humanitarian rhetoric of the need to naturally reduce world population by means of contraception and education, whereas in reality, as we have exhaustively documented, their program has its origins in the inhumane pseudo-science of eugenics which first flourished in Britain, and the ideology of racial and genetic superiority that was later adapted by the Nazis with the aid of Rockefeller funding.

“Some of the conversations you have on the 200 foot yachts off the coast of Monaco – you can’t believe what really goes on behind closed doors,” said Trudeau, noting that Alex Jones had exposed such issues in his documentary films, notably Endgame. The billionaire said that he had recently spent time in Monaco with Crown Prince Albert II.

Trudeau stated that elitists he had talked to thought their plans were for the greater good of humanity but that they believed there were two classes of people on earth, the ruling elite and the “worker bees,” , and that the elite were defined not necessarily by money or power, but by their genetic ancestry.

Trudeau shockingly detailed conversations with elitists during which they brazenly admitted their desire for massive global population reduction.

“I’ve been sitting on the boats off the coast of Barbados with the guys who basically said we need to get two-thirds of the dumb people off the planet – I’ve been in the meetings,” said Trudeau, adding that such words were not spoken in an evil manner, but in a “matter of fact” way under the pretext that such a thing would be for the good of planet earth.

Revealingly, Trudeau said that elitists see Alex Jones as an annoyance but tolerate him because they believe Jones as well as Trudeau himself are, “desensitizing people to these realities,” – which in a way works to their benefit.

“I’ve been told that’s why I still get invited on the yachts,” added Trudeau.

Trudeau aid that the elite was divided into two camps, one larger faction that, “Categorically believes they are genetically superior than the rest of the population,” and another smaller faction, mainly comprising of younger people, that are feeding Trudeau information who, “Have come to the conclusion that some people are smarter than others, some people are more talented than others, some people are more motivated to work….but everyone should be allowed to succeed or fail based on their own choices or initiative….and that’s where there’s a split and a division right now at the highest levels,” said Trudeau.

We would urge people to listen to the  full interview with Kevin Trudeau via You Tube , as it is packed with eyebrow-raising information about the mind set of the elite and their future agenda, particularly in relation to the economy. Alternatively, support us by subscribing to Prison Planet.tv and get access to daily high-quality Alex Jones Show audio and video archives along with a plethora of other multimedia.

 

 

The Farm and Ranch Freedom Alliance (Get Involved)

May 27, 2009

http://farmandranchfreedom.org

 

front

Independent farmers and ranchers need a voice.  For too long, our elected officials have listened to the huge industrial-agriculture companies, and made the laws and regulations to benefit them.  Independent farmers and ranchers were forgotten or, worse, targeted for ever-more burdensome regulations.  It is time to make a change! 

The Farm and Ranch Freedom Alliance (FARFA) is dedicated to representing non-corporate agriculture and animal owners, from homesteaders to horse owners to full-time ranchers.  FARFA’s work also serves those who are local foods consumers, people who care about protecting our traditional way of life, and other like-minded individuals.  

 

 

 

FARFA advocates for farmers, ranchers, and homesteaders through public education and lobbying to assure their independence in the production and marketing of their food, and to prevent the imposition of unnecessary regulatory burdens that are not in the public interest.  FARFA also advocates for consumers’ access to information and resources to obtain healthy foods of their choice.  FARFA promotes connections between rural and urban communities to support diversified, local agricultural systems. 

May 27, 2009

“Come on people lets get on with it. Your all waaay too interesting and beautiful to be treated second rate. Revolution Now.”

F.F. 

Obama Betrays The Liberals

May 27, 2009

by Sherwood Ross

 

American liberals stand betrayed. Their new president, the one they sweated to elect—-a brilliant, charismatic leader with a professional background in constitutional law—has transmogrified himself from the champion who denounced in his campaign the illegalities of the Bush White House into a president bent on their perpetuation.

 

Liberals are stunned by Obama’s plan to “restart Bush-era military tribunals” for some Guantanamo detainees, reviving what the Associated Press pointed out, is “a fiercely disputed trial system he once denounced.”(May 15). Liberals are appalled by Obama’s May 21st proposal to hold terrorism suspects in “prolonged detention” inside the U.S. without a trial. “Such detention,” Senator Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) wrote him, “is a hallmark of abusive systems that we have historically criticized around the world.”

 

If liberals chaffed over Obama’s centrist cabinet choices, they were dismayed by his decision not to release photographs depicting the sadistic tortures the Bush Gang inflicted on prisoners during a so-called “War on Terror” that was nothing but terror itself. A typical reaction comes from Joe Kishore, writing on the World Socialist Website (May 22): “Whatever verbal warnings Obama may make about the erosion of democracy in the United States, the actions of his administration facilitate and escalate its breakdown.”

 

Obama’s latest policy reversals come as liberals are still reeling from his April 16th speech to the CIA, ignoring its documented history of 60 years of overthrows and assassinations, and reassuring the Agency of its “right” to continue “covert activities,” as if such conduct was not prima facie illegality in the eyes of law-abiding nations.  Earlier, Obama’s pledge not to prosecute CIA torturers that followed orders likely brought relief to the throne room in Langley that is a throbbing heart of the Dark Side. Obama calls upon the nation to “look forward” as he ignores his presidential obligation to prosecute those who, like Bush and Cheney, trampled the Constitution when they ordered torture in violation of international laws that by treaty are America’s laws as well.

 

And if Matthew Rothschild of The Progressive magazine hasn’t accused Obama of betraying his liberal subscribers, he charged in his May 21 column the President “tried to carve out an extra-constitutional arrangement for indefinite detention of some detainees without trial.” Rothschild accused Obama of “chiseling away at the basic habeas corpus right that has been the foundation of our jurisprudence dating back to the Magna Carta of 1215.”

One campaign promise on which Obama has not reversed himself is his pledge to intensify the war in Afghanistan, which, one liberal essayist predicted, will “doom” his presidency. This war is already under heated attack from the liberal quarter. Justin Raimando of antiwar.com (May 20) denounces the appointment of Lt. General Stanley McChrystal to head U.S. forces in Kabul. Asserting McChrystal oversaw torture at Camp Nama near Baghdad that was “notorious” for its “beatings, degredation of prisoners and outright, cold-blooded murder,” Raimando writes:  “That’s what they call ‘fresh thinking’ over at Obama’s Pentagon. If Bush and Cheney ordered it, it’s reprehensible and might even be a war crime. If, however, a known torture-enabler is elevated by Obama’s secretary of defense to the position of commander of our armed forces in Afghanistan – well, then, that’s a far different matter.”

 

The danger in Obama’s foreign policy was seen clearly by Andrew Bacevich, a Boston University historian, who described it in his best-seller “The Limits of Power”(Henry Holt), published the year before Obama won the White House. He quoted then Senator Obama’s view that “The security and well-being of each and every American depend on the security and well-being of those who live beyond our borders. The mission of the United States is to provide global leadership grounded in the understanding that the world shares a common security and a common humanity.” Of this, Bacevich states: 

 “Accept the proposition that America is freedom’s tribune, and it becomes a small step to believing that the ‘peace process’ aims to achieve peace, that Iraq qualifies as a sovereign state, and that Providence has summoned the United States to wage an all-out war against ‘terrorism.’”

 

Obama’s grandiosity perhaps explains why he boosted the Pentagon’s swollen budget (about as great as all other nations combined) by four percent in the absence of any significant immediate foreign military threat. As one disappointed lifelong Democrat with a son in the Army told me, “I had hoped he was going to put an end to the war.” This particular liberal now trashes appeals from the Democratic National Committee, adding, “In the next presidential election I may just not vote.”

And in a column entitled “Obama’s Betrayals,” author Sheldon Richman writes on MWC News, “In Obama we have a new Jekyll and Hyde. From harsh critic of Bush’s trampling of individual rights, Obama has transmogrified into a champion of the omnipotent state that cannot let the niceties of the traditional criminal-justice system stand in the way of ‘national security.’” Richman, editor of “The Freeman”magazine, concludes, “It’s time for the opponents of empire to see the man in the White House for who he is. Fortunately, that is starting to happen.” 

Yes, indeed. And as this painful recognition sinks in like iodine burning into a raw wound,  America’s humanist Left may yet muster its forces for a last-ditch fight to preserve  a bit of sanity in this epoch of messianic presidents hell-bent upon waging war.                                                            # 

Sherwood Ross has worked on major dailies and as a columnist for wire services and served as a press secretary to civil rights leaders. He currently runs a public relations agency for non-profits. Reach him at sherwoodr1@yahoo.com

 

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=13724

Supreme Court rules police can initiate suspect’s questioning

May 27, 2009

“This is HUGE (bad) news. This is all on OBAMA’S watch!!! Wake up people. I hope I don’t have to explain how fucked up this law being passed means for ALL of us. What is it going to take??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? I don’t understand peoples complacency in this country. It is mind boggling to me. We are rapidly approaching the political/law landscape of the former communist Russia. If you think this is a stretch then you are out of touch with reality. Sorry, it’s true.

 

Wake up!!

 

-Fred Face 5/26/09

 

constitution burning

 

By James Vicini

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday that police, under certain circumstances, can initiate an interrogation of a suspect without the defendant’s lawyer being present.

By a 5-4 vote, the conservative majority overruled a 23-year-old Supreme Court decision that barred the police from initiating questioning after a defendant asserted the right to an attorney at an arraignment or similar proceeding.

The 1986 decision held that once a defendant invoked the right to counsel, only the suspect, and not the police, can initiate the contact.

The ruling was the latest in a recent string by conservative justices expanding the power of police to question suspects, but it does not change the landmark 1966 ruling barring the police from questioning a suspect who invoked the right to remain silent or have a lawyer present.

The decision was a defeat for Jesse Jay Montejo, a Louisiana death row inmate. He was convicted and sentenced to death for the murder of a dry-cleaning operator during a robbery in 2002.

He initially waived his right to a lawyer and was questioned by the police. He told several conflicting stories. Several days later, he appeared in court for a preliminary hearing and a local judge appointed a lawyer to represent Montejo, who could not afford an attorney.

Later that day, police investigators approached Montejo in prison and he again waived his right to a lawyer.

But Montejo later claimed the police had violated his constitutional right to counsel by interrogating him without his lawyer being present and pressuring him to write a letter confessing and apologizing to the victim’s wife. That letter was later introduced as evidence against him at his trial.

The Louisiana Supreme Court and then the U.S. Supreme Court rejected Montejo’s appeal.

Writing for the court majority, Justice Antonin Scalia said there was little if any chance a defendant will be badgered into waiving the right to have counsel present during police-initiated questioning.

In overruling the 1986 decision, Scalia said, “The considerable adverse effect of this rule upon society’s ability to solve crimes and bring criminals to justice far outweighs its capacity to prevent a genuinely coerced agreement to speak without counsel present.”

Liberal Justice John Paul Stevens, the author of the 1986 decision, disagreed.

In dissent, Stevens said the dubious benefits of overruling the decision are far outweighed by damage to the rule of law and the integrity of the constitutional right to an attorney.

 

http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSTRE54P47120090526#mce_temp_url#

May 26, 2009

Glenn Beck is a freak (Larry Pratt is not)

May 26, 2009

I put this up here because of the interesting information on Bobby Rush. Coming from “Pratt,” I believe it. Not Beck. Glenn Beck is a government special op of the highest magnitude. And just a weird fuck.

Larry Pratt:  http://gunowners.org/

US Homeland Security National Interoperability Field Operations Guide, May 2009

May 26, 2009

US Department of Homeland Security National Interoperability Field Operations Guide, May 2009. Notable for its extensive list of radio frequences and call procedures.

http://88.80.13.160.nyud.net/leak/us-dhs-nifog-may-2009.pdf

WSB-TV removed expose of US Humane Society, 14 May 2009

May 26, 2009

On May 14, 2009, WSB-TV in Atlanta (an ABC affiliate) aired a provocative investigative piece detailing how the Humane Society of the United States (The HSUS) solicits donations from Americans who believe they’re funding pet shelters.

Instead, WSB reported, the HSUS spends the money lobbying and doesn’t operate a single pet shelter anywhere.

Most controversially, the HSUS hasn’t accounted for most of the money it raised after Hurricane Katrina, funds collected ostensibly to help reunite lost pets with their owners.

Shortly after this piece aired, WSB-TV removed it from its website. Other versions of the story quickly disappeared from YouTube after The HSUS made legal threats related to being publicly exposed.

The full segment tells a story about a greedy animal protection group that doesn’t appear to behave in a manner consistent with its public image.

Members of the public who donate money to animal protection organizations will need this information in order to decide whether The HSUS is a worthwhile organization to support — as opposed to local pet shelters.

If on the other hand, the WSB story is in error, WSB and HSUS should state their case publicly.
DOWNLOAD/VIEW FULL FILE FROM
fast sitecurrent siteSwedenUSLatviaSlovakiaUKFinlandNetherlandsPolandTongaEuropeSSLTor
http://wikileaks.org/wiki/WSB-TV_removed_expose_of_US_Humane_Society%2C_14_May_2009

Armed Israeli police close theatre on first night of Palestinian festival

May 26, 2009

“This is the nightmare police state army that the U.S. government supports time after time. The Israeli government is at a higher scum-fuck level then our own… thats pretty bad.”

-F.F. 5/25/09

 

 

 

Armed Israeli police last night tried to halt the opening night of a prominent Palestinian literary festival in Jerusalem when they ordered a Palestinian theatre to close.

The week-long festival, supported by the British council and Unesco, has brought several high-profile international authors – among them Henning Mankell, Michael Palin and Ahdaf Soueif – on a speaking tour of Jerusalem and the West Bank.

Shortly before the opening event was due to begin, a squad of around a dozen Israeli border police walked into the Palestinian National Theatre, in East Jerusalem, and ordered it to be closed.

Police brought a letter from the Israeli minister of internal security which said the event could not be held because it was a political activity connected to the Palestinian Authority.

Members of the audience and the eight speakers were ordered to leave, but the event was held several minutes later, on a smaller scale, in the garden of the nearby French Cultural Centre.

Israeli police were deployed on the street outside.

“We’re so taken aback. It’s is completely, completely independent,” Egyptian novelist Soueif, who is chairing the Palestine Festival of Literature, said.

“I think it’s very telling,” she told the crowd at the French centre. “Our motto, which is taken from the late Edward Said, is to pit the power of culture against the culture of power.”

Israel regularly prevents political Palestinian events in East Jerusalem, but has recently also started to clamp down on cultural events in an apparent attempt to extend control over the city.

The development comes at a time of growing international concern over the Israeli government’s demolition of Palestinian homes and the continued growth of Jewish settlements in East Jerusalem.

In March, the Israeli authorities banned a series of Palestinian cultural events in Jerusalem, including a children’s march, intended to mark the Arab League’s designation of Jerusalem as the capital of Arab culture for this year.

Israel said the events breached its ban on Palestinian political activity.

Earlier this month, Israeli police closed down a Palestinian press centre that had been established in East Jerusalem for the visit of Pope Benedict XVI.

Israel captured East Jerusalem in the 1967 war and later annexed it – a move not recognised by the international community.

Mankell, a Swedish crime novelist, told the crowd at Saturday’s event: “Don’t lose hope.”

He compared the raid to life in South Africa under apartheid and added: “What really makes us human beings is our capacity for dialogue.

“The only way we can save ourselves finally in the end is the capacity for making dialogue with each other.”

The festival will stage events in the West Bank cities of Ramallah, Bethlehem, Hebron and Jenin this week before returning to the same Palestinian theatre in East Jerusalem on Thursday night for a final event, although that also appears at risk of being closed.

Micky Rosenfeld, an Israeli police spokesman, said the event was closed down because Israel believed it was organised or funded by the Palestinian Authority.

Rosenfeld said a signed order had been handed over by police.

“This is the policy being implemented with regard to any events which are either organised or funded by the Palestinian Authority in Jerusalem,” he said.

He added that previous Palestinian events in the city, including the press centre for the pope, had been closed under the same policy.

However, Rafiq Husseini, the chief of staff to the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, who was in last night’s audience, was dismissive of the Israeli actions.

“It shows how the Israelis are not thinking, he said. “This is a cultural event. There is no terrorism, there is nobody shooting. It’s just a cultural event.

“They are creating enemies for themselves.”

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/may/24/israeli-police-close-palestinian-theatre

 

If any guy needs a serious beating… it’s this chump…

 

 

FOOD, INC. (Magnolia Pictures)

May 26, 2009

http://www.foodincmovie.com/

 

In Food, Inc., filmmaker Robert Kenner lifts the veil on our 
nation’s food industry, exposing the highly mechanized underbelly 
that’s been hidden from the American consumer 
with the consent of our government’s  regulatory agencies, USDA and 
FDA. Our nation’s food supply is now 
controlled by a handful of corporations  that often put profit ahead of 
consumer health, the livelihood of the 
American farmer, the safety of workers and our own environment. We have 
bigger-breasted chickens, the perfect 
pork chop, insecticide-resistant soybean seeds, even tomatoes that 
won’t go bad, but we also have new strains of 
e coli–the harmful bacteria that causes illness for an estimated 
73,000 Americans annually. We are riddled with 
widespread obesity, particularly among children, and an epidemic level 
of diabetes among adults 

Featuring interviews with such experts as Eric Schlosser (Fast Food 
Nation), Michael Pollan (The Omnivore’s Dilemma) along with forward 
thinking social entrepreneurs like Stonyfield Farms’ 
Gary Hirschberg and Polyface Farms’ Joe Salatin, Food, Inc. reveals 
surprising — and often shocking truths — 
about what we eat, how it’s produced, who we have become as a nation 
and where we are going from here. 

 

Play dates: 

  
http://www.magpictures.com/dates.aspx?id=3e3938d1-b785-4286-9ae0-8eb5952f1480 

David Gergen is a FREAK SHOW. Obama is a FREAK SHOW. (If you think this is over reacting than lets talk again in a couple of years).

May 26, 2009

 

Former Presidential Advisor David Gergen pushes more than 70 service organizations into a ‘new order’ of shared sacrifice

Aaron Dykes / Jones Report | May 25, 2009

Behind globalist David Gergen is the real sense of “change” that came in with Barack Obama’s election. The enthusiasm for this new president was met with calls for service and sacrifice– and that is something former presidential advisor Gergen put on the agenda years ago.

Gergen now lectures in public service at Harvard and directs its Center for Public Leadership at the John F. Kennedy School of Government.

Prior to the 2008 election, he was among those pushing for an expansion of Americorps from some 75,000 to more than 250,000 volunteers. That increase was quickly approved– by that exact number– under the passage of the National Service Act in the opening weeks of the Obama Administration.

One face of that expansion of service has come in City Yearon whose board David Gergen sits. In 2007, Gergen also helpedpush some 70 other groups through the‘America Forward’ coalition along with a ‘venture philanthropy fund’ called New Profit, Inc. One of its groups was even founded by Gen. Colin Powell.

Gergen wrote that his first visit to City Year “was electrifying… there was so much vitality in the room that I came back and said, ‘I’m almost ready to give up my day job and go over there and work with them’.”

David Gergen is perhaps the most vocal proponent of a new wave of ’social entrepreneurs’ whose businesses are modeled on a ‘more-than-profit’ basis. Most of these groups aim to incorporate a partnership between the public & private sectors (sometimes known as fascism). In other words,Gergen hopes such privately-conceived organizations can benefit from government funds:

“The government… has all the money. If you could unite the energy, ideals, and innovativeness of social entrepreneurs with the resources of government, you would have a powerhouse.”

“My argument… is that social entrepreneurs need the government’s help as a partner and a financial supporter. The government shouldn’t take over these programs. Instead, I think we’re looking at new forms of social problem solving in which government enters into partnerships with social entrepreneurial organizations.”

Encouraging Obama to usher in a new era of New Deal-style programs, David Gergen wrote only days before Obama’s inauguration that his ‘Call to Service Can’t Start Soon Enough.’

“The moment has come for a president — echoing great leaders from Lincoln, to Roosevelt to Kennedy — to call forth Americans to an era of common sacrifice. The moment is Obama’s to seize.”

City Year, among other groups, not only purports to help communities, but requires its members to undergo physical training (PT) and other activities reminiscent of a paramilitary organization. In fact, it sounds a lot like White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel’s 2006 warningto a reporter that compulsory service would include “jumping jacks.”

While that in itself is not so troubling, Emanuel made clear that such service organizations would also step up in a time of national crisis:

“It will be a common experience and we will be prepared, God forbid, God forbid that there is a chemical hit, another terrorist act or natural disaster becoming more frequent – there’ll be a body of citizens who are ready and capable and trained – that’s all you have to think about,” said Emanuel before smugly declaring, “We’re all here for you OK? It’s a circle of love.”

In fact, Americorps and its subsidiary organizations, including City Year, fall under the umbrella of the Department of Homeland Security. This is also true of the private (*but government affiliated)Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS) . The blurring between the lines of public and private is, again, noticeable and potentially troubling.

Frank Morales writes (Homeland Defense: The Pentagon Declares War on America):

In the wake of 9/11, CNCS was fully integrated into “homeland defense efforts”. In March 2002, the Corporation issued a “notice of availability of funds to strengthen communities and organizations in using service and volunteers to support homeland security.” With an emphasis on “public safety” and “freeing up police time”, the grants offered under the announcement “are to assist communities in getting involved in the war against terrorism on the home front.” In the area of “public safety” the grants “will help provide members to support police departments… in tasks and other functions that can be performed by non-sworn officers.” Now mind you, the volunteers “are not armed, nor can they make arrests, but they carry out vital tasks including organizing neighborhood watch groups…” They also “organize communities to identify and respond to crime and disorder problems…”

City Year, among other groups, clearly has a global and even one-world outlook. Its directors, including David Gergen, and even some members have stated as much. One of City Year’s flyers even carries the slogan “BE THE CHANGE, ADVANCING GLOBAL CITIZEN SERVICE.”

 

David Gergen has criticized that Vietnam generation for failing to come together in a common cause, suggesting that collective sacrifice is part of what made the “greatest generation” of WWII so good. In March of 2007, he told the graduate students of the LBJ School of Public Affairs at the University of Texas– who are coming in behind the Baby Boomer generation– that they can hope to “restore some sense that we’re all in this together– in the sense of not only building a better America, but a better world.”

In a write-up about City Year, USA Today, recently noted the rise in service among the largely pro-Obama ‘millennial’ generation. They may have been inspired by disasters such as 9/11 and Hurricane Katrina, along with the added motivation of mandatory programs.

“Unlike culturally polarized Baby Boomers or cynical Gen-Xers, this is “a generation of activist doers,” they write. More than 80% of Millennials did it, often because it was required.

David Gergen has long been an advocate of service.  Wikipedia even notes the government servant and CNN correspondent as a “well-known proponent of mandatory national service.”

It was Gergen who helped put on the ‘Service Forum’ on anniversary of September 11th during the 2008 campaign. Both McCain and Obama spoke in favor of greater service. Obama reiterated the need for a ‘civilian defense force’, restated his national service plan and prepared people for an era of sacrifice– including requirements on fuel emissions, energy efficiency and other “green” measures. Obama further emphasized the need to get youth involved in service from an early age.

 

 

May 25, 2009

The ‘AIPAC Two’ aren’t the only ones on trial

May 24, 2009

Trials can be dangerous things. And not just for the accused. They can make or break prosecutors, defense lawyers, and judges. And even a vaunted lobby.

The American Israel Public Affairs Committee and its leaders could be the biggest losers in a case that threatens to expose the group’s inner secrets.

The oft-delayed trial of two former AIPAC staffers charged with passing classified information to journalists and the Israeli government is now expected to begin May 27, but that could easily slip, and don’t be surprised if it never happens, given a series of prosecutor setbacks.

Two of those setbacks occurred last month when prosecutors lost their attempt to block the former AIPAC staffers from using critical materials and witnesses in their defense.

The government case has been losing steam as a result of these and other court rulings. Many of the Justice Department professionals responsible for bringing the case are gone, most notably the chief prosecutor, who quit last year to go into private practice, a sign some see as a lack of faith in a high-profile case.

The case was brought by the secrecy-obsessed Bush administration, which had vowed to plug all leaks unless Dick Cheney authorized them to go after his enemies.

This case was on tenuous legal ground from the start. It was the first time the 1917 espionage law was invoked against civilian nongovernment employees who distributed information they received from the government.

In the face of an increasingly weak case, the Justice Department may try to avoid an embarrassing loss by dropping it under the cover of protecting classified information from public exposure, as it has done in similar cases.

Although AIPAC claims it has nothing to do with the convoluted case, it is also on trial, in a way. The organization fired the pair and said they were rogues acting beneath the group’s standards. That will be shot full of holes from all directions in court, whether in the criminal case or in a likely civil suit by the defendants claiming damage to their reputations and careers.

The mere threat of a multimillion-dollar civil suit could prompt a very generous settlement offer from AIPAC in exchange for a vow of silence from the former staffers. But don’t worry; AIPAC can easily afford it.

Soon after the FBI raided AIPAC offices, the organization launched a fund-raising campaign to defend against any charges, and the appeals for money didn’t stop when it fired the pair. Since the scandal broke in 2004, AIPAC’s fund-raising juggernaut has hauled in so much dough that one senior staffer told me that “it’s coming in faster than we know what to do with it.”

JTA quoted tax records showing AIPAC raised $86 million in 2007, doubling 2003’s $43 million. Not all of that money was a result of the espionage case, but many millions were.

In cutting loose the pair, AIPAC insisted it had no idea what they were doing. Not so, say insiders, former colleagues, sources close to the defense, and others familiar with the organization.

One of the topics AIPAC won’t want discussed, say these sources, is how closely it coordinated with Benjamin Netanyahu in the 1990s, when he led the Israeli Likud opposition and later when he was prime minister, to impede the Oslo peace process being pressed by President Bill Clinton and Israeli Prime Ministers Yitzhak Rabin and Shimon Peres.

That could not only validate AIPAC’s critics, who accuse it of being a branch of the Likud, but also lead to an investigation of violations of the Foreign Agents Registration Act.

“What they don’t want out is that even though they publicly sounded like they were supporting the Oslo process, they were working all the time to undermine it,” said a well-informed source.

“After Rabin came in in 1992 and said he wanted to make peace and signed the Oslo accords, and the U.S. was supposed to pay the tab, every restriction on all political and financial dealings [by the Palestinians] came out of our office,” said the insider. “We took full advantage of every lapse by [Yasser] Arafat and the Palestinians to put on more restrictions and limit relations,” the source added.

In addition to cooperating with the Israeli opposition, AIPAC worked closely with congressional Republicans to undermine the Clinton administration’s Middle East policy, several sources confirmed.

If this case goes to trial, civil or criminal, the inner workings of AIPAC will be aired, and it will be clear that top professional and lay leaders were kept fully informed, said a former official.

Defense lawyers are expected to contend both staffers were following routine practices not only condoned but encouraged by the organization’s leadership. The FBI has evidence showing that when juicy material was collected it was shared with the higher-ups.

Will the organization want to go through discovery, depositions, interrogatories, subpoenas, and compelled testimony under oath about all the elements of this case? That could be the key to very generous out-of-court settlements for Steve Rosen and Keith Weissman.

That will leave unanswered the biggest question of all: Why was this case brought in the first place?

Douglas M. Bloomfield is the president of Bloomfield Associates Inc., a Washington lobbying and consulting firm. He spent nine years as the legislative director and chief lobbyist for AIPAC.
http://www.njjewishnews.com/njjn.com/030509/opedAIPACtwo.html

Obama: We Are Broke. Well, Duh!

May 24, 2009
Obama 2008 Primary
Bill Anderson
Lew Rockwell
May 23, 2009

I am utterly amazed at the continued arrogance of the Obama administration, which has managed to make the Bush administration look to be prudent, which is a major accomplishment. Obama tells C-SPAN that “We are out of money,” but then claims that this is because the government had not taken over healthcare. (I’d hate to see our medical system when government actually does completely control it, given that it pretty much is a government-run system now.)

His comments simply are stunning:

So we’ve got a short-term problem, which is we had to spend a lot of money to salvage our financial system, we had to deal with the auto companies, a huge recession which drains tax revenue at the same time it’s putting more pressure on governments to provide unemployment insurance or make sure that food stamps are available for people who have been laid off.

So we have a short-term problem and we also have a long-term problem. The short-term problem is dwarfed by the long-term problem. And the long-term problem is Medicaid and Medicare. If we don’t reduce long-term health care inflation substantially, we can’t get control of the deficit.

So, one option is just to do nothing. We say, well, it’s too expensive for us to make some short-term investments in health care. We can’t afford it. We’ve got this big deficit. Let’s just keep the health care system that we’ve got now.

Along that trajectory, we will see health care cost as an overall share of our federal spending grow and grow and grow and grow until essentially it consumes everything…

Yes, this is an administration that when it found out we were in a deep recession has turned on the Federal Reserve spigots at full blast and is throwing money around. Now that the U.S. Dollar is tanking, suddenly they realize they are painted into a corner.

What to do? It is obvious; pour another round of drinks, have a toga party, and print more money. When prices of goods skyrocket upwards, Obama will blame business (and especially the oil companies), and the media and most of the country will slavishly believe him.

Revolution in the air

May 24, 2009

small_guillotine

By Dan Jones
Author, Summer of Blood

The anger in the air is palpable. The ordinary people hold the political class in contempt.

The government is failing, as war and economic catastrophe are dealt with in increasingly unconvincing fashion by second-rate public servants. There is, for the first time in a generation, a sense of revolution brewing.

This is not today’s Britain. It is England in 1381, the year that witnessed one of the greatest popular risings in our history: the Peasants’ Revolt.

Between May and November that year, England was seized by spasms of popular rebellion, provoked by poll taxes and a disastrous war, and underpinned by the common belief that the government was a pack of scoundrels.

Towns and villages from Somerset to Scarborough rose against their rulers, beating and sometimes killing MPs, lawyers, landowners and politicians, tearing down their homes and vandalising their land.

Bloody revenge

At the heart of the rising was a march on London on Corpus Christi weekend (Thursday 13 to Saturday 15 June).

Traditionally this was a time of mystery plays and festive processions. In 1381, the main procession consisted of villagers from the Thames estuary marching along the pilgrim road between Canterbury and London, burning houses and taking political prisoners as they protested against their venal, incompetent masters.

Wat Tyler's mob burning St John's Monastery near Smithfield, London

The peasant’s revolt ransacked London before it was put down

When the protestors, led by their general Wat Tyler and the maverick preacher John Ball, reached London, they found they had significant common cause with the townsmen.

The London populace bore long-held grudges towards their own ruling elites – which included the oligarchic, super-rich merchant traders in the City as well as the hapless courtiers who governed in the name of 14-year old King Richard.

Common fury with the state of lordship bound rural and urban rebels in a compact to clean up government.

So the town mice opened their gates to the country mice, and together they all set about the cats.

At first there were organised protests, attacks on specific, symbolic landmarks: the Savoy Palace, home of the powerful and unpopular duke of Lancaster, was burned to the ground; the Temple, home of the legal profession, was sacked. Prisons were broken open and the Tower of London, where the government had holed up, was besieged.

Demonstrations became riots. A chopping block was set up at Cheapside, where the street ran sticky with the blood of the condemned.

Portrait of Richard II

Kind Richard II was only 14 years old when faced with the rebellion

The Archbishop of Canterbury had his head hacked off on Tower Hill. The Treasurer was murdered, as – in Suffolk – was a Chief Justice.

Some 140 Flemish merchants and their families were butchered on the banks of the Thames, in a shocking xenophobic massacre.

But for the luck of the young king, Richard II, and the fortitude of a few good men around him led by Mayor of London, William Walworth, the City would have been burned to the ground.

Tyler and his mob were eventually defeated at Smithfield, but it took nearly six months to calm the rest of the country.

Political revolt

The summer of discontent left a profound mark on the English political consciousness.

A few lines written, prior to the rebellion, by the Kentish poet John Gower, were suddenly recognised as an important tenet of government.

“There are three things of such a sort that they produce merciless destruction when they get the upper hand,” he wrote.

“One is a flood of water, another is a raging fire and the third is the lesser people, the common multitude; for they will not be stopped by either reason or by discipline.”

I have thought many times during the past months that our politicians would benefit from revisiting the events of the Peasants’ Revolt.

In many ways it is a tale of mutual misunderstanding: the ordinary folk thought the worst of their politicians, and politicians saw their people as an economic resource, to be taxed and tormented as the necessities of government demanded.

Skeleton from the Great Plague discovered in Spitalfields Market

The Black Death was a major factor in fermenting anti-government feeling

This government, like the government in 1381, has been caught out by a global crisis of unprecedented severity.

In the fourteenth century it was the Black Death, which killed 40% of Europe’s population.

The government’s reaction – to impose labour laws that stifled economic recovery but preserved the social hierarchy, was vastly unpopular, for it prevented ordinary people from improving their lives.

Now, it is the collapse in global credit which has brought a different sort of misery to millions.

No doubt there are many differences between 1381 and 2009. They were medieval, we are modern. And history never repeats itself as exactly as historians sometimes wish.

But if I were an MP today, I would make it my business to learn the course and the lessons of 1381 by heart. Then I would give thanks that there are no longer any chopping blocks at Cheapside.

Dan Jones is the author of Summer of Blood.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_8061000/8061725.stm

You Can Rent This Guy Out For Entertainment For Your Feal Good Parties

May 24, 2009

Tim Geithner : What’s In Your Wallet?

May 24, 2009

FINANCIAL/GEITHNER
Posted by: Jim Bourg
While testifying in front of a House Appropriations Subcommittee on Capitol Hill Thursday Geithner was shown a $50 Billion Zimbabwean bank note (rendered worthless by Zimbabwe’s hyperinflation) by U.S. Representative John Culberson (R- TX) and asked if he had ever seen one himself. Geithner immediately pulled a piece of Zimbabwean currency out of his own pocket and showed it off to the committee. At the next break in the hearing I approached Geithner and asked how he happened to have a piece of foreign currency in his pocket. His response was “I often have some foreign currency in my wallet. Want to see?” He pulled a very thin and mostly empty wallet from his pocket.

Amongst many empty slots in the thin weathered leather wallet there could be seen three credit or debit cards with Visa and Mastercard logos (all inserted into the wallet upside down so that the card issuers could not be seen) and an old and yellowed looking identification card of indeterminate origin.

From inside the wallet Geithner extracted a small pile of receipts and paper including a New York City MTA farecard, pointing out that there were European Euros tucked amongst the paper.

Notably not seen in the U.S. Treasury Secretary’s wallet? Any U.S. dollars.

– Photo Credits:  Jim Bourg/Reuters  (U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner puts a piece of foreign currency back after showing off the contents of his wallet to a photographer during a break in his congressional testimony in Washington, May 21, 2009.)
http://blogs.reuters.com/photo/2009/05/22/tim-geithner-whats-in-your-wallet/

KBR Got Bonuses for Work that Killed Soldiers

May 24, 2009

pentagon_kbr_071213_ms2

By Jeremy Scahill

May 20, 2009

The Department of Defense paid former Halliburton subsidiary KBR more than $80 million in bonuses for contracts to install electrical wiring in Iraq. The award payments were for the very work that resulted in the electrocution deaths of US soldiers, according to Department of Defense documents revealed today in a Senate hearing. More than $30 million in bonuses were paid months after the death of Sgt. Ryan Maseth, a highly decorated, 24-year-old Green Beret, who was electrocuted while taking a show at a US base in January 2008. His death, the result of improper grounding for a water pump, has been classified by the US Army Criminal Investigations Division (CID) as a “negligent homicide.” Maseth’s death had originally been labeled an accident. Bonuses were paid to KBR in 2007 and 2008, after CID investigators had officially expressed concerns about the quality of KBR’s electrical work. For its part, KBR denies any culpability for the electrocution deaths.

This information was revealed at a hearing of the Senate Democratic Policy Committee. According to the committee’s chair, Sen. Byron Dorgan, the rewards KBR received under its LOGCAP contracts were supposed to be for work of the “highest quality” with “no deficiencies” or problems. Dorgan said KBR’s work was “shoddy” and “unprofessional.” Some eighteen US soldiers have died since 2003 as a result of KBR’s “shoddy work,” according to Sen. Frank Lautenberg. KBR/Halliburton, of which Dick Cheney was chairman and CEO from 1995 to 2000, has been the single largest corporate beneficiary of the US wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. It continues to operate globally on US government contracts.

Charles Smith, the former Army official who managed the contracts under which KBR performed electrical work in Iraq, testified that it was “highly inappropriate” that KBR received these bonuses for what he called “dangerously substandard” work. He said that the Army was well aware of KBR’s “poor performance” since the beginning of the Iraq invasion, and yet continued to reward KBR because the military was “afraid” KBR would cease work. He said there was “a culture that decided KBR was too big to fail and too important to be held to account.” The “perverse incentive is that there was no incentive” for KBR to do quality work because they received bonuses for poor work.

Senator Dorgan said there are “tens of thousands of examples” of unnecessary risks to US soldiers, including deaths that have arisen as a result of KBR’s work. “Why should [KBR] be getting more contracts now that we know all this information?” asked Sen. Bob Casey. “The Defense Department has not answered these questions.”

James Childs, a master electrician hired by the Army to review electrical work in Iraq during 2008, testified that KBR’s work in Iraq was the “most hazardous, worst quality work” he’d ever seen. He said his investigation found improper wiring in “every” building KBR wired in Iraq (of which there are thousands) and that KBR’s rewiring work in buildings that were previously safely wired resulted in the electrical system becoming unsafe. Childs said that KBR did not do any work “according to code.” He also testified that the same risks exist in Afghanistan, which he recently visited. “While doing inspections in Afghanistan, I found the exact same code violations,” Childs said.

Eric Peters, a master electrician who worked for KBR in Iraq as recently as 2009, said that 50 percent of the KBR-managed buildings he saw were not properly wired. “I worried every day people would be injured or killed as a result of this work,” Peters testified. He estimated that at least half the electricians hired by KBR–many of them cheaper-costing Third Country Nationals (TCNs)–to service the US military in Iraq would not have been hired to work in the United States, saying they were not trained in US or UK electrical standards. TCNs–from places like India, Bangladesh and Bosnia–are estimated to have done some 60 percent of the electrical work for KBR in Iraq. Peters charged that KBR allowed trainees to take notes in to certification tests, making it very easy to be cleared for work.

Peters also charged that KBR “frowned upon” any refusal to sign off on work that Peters deemed incomplete or unsafe. Peters and others who testified said that “all over theater,” meaning everywhere in Iraq, KBR would effectively double-bill US taxpayers by leaving electrical work half-done or incorrectly done and then billing taxpayers again to repair its own shoddy work.

Peters characterized KBR managers as “completely unqualified” and said he is not a “disgruntled former employee” but rather a “disgusted former employee.”
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090601/scahill?rel=hp_currently

About Jeremy Scahill

Jeremy Scahill, a Puffin Foundation Writing Fellow at The Nation Institute, is the author of the bestselling Blackwater: The Rise of the World’s Most Powerful Mercenary Army, published by Nation Books. He is an award-winning investigative journalist and correspondent for the national radio and TV program Democracy Now!. more…

Federal judge threatens to sanction Obama administration over secrecy

May 24, 2009

whitehouseblackandwhiteBy Stephen C. Webster

U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker of San Francisco warned the Obama administration on Friday of severe sanctions if it does not comply with the court’s order to turn over a secret document an Islamic group says proves they were illegally spied upon.

The case, Al-Haramain v. Obama (see also: Al-Haramain V. Bush), springs out of a government mistake in which a secret document detailing the wiretapping of calls between attorneys and Saudi charity Al-Haramain was turned over to the charity’s counsel.

The document was taken back by the government, and the Department of Justice has since maintained that the attorneys who read it should not be allowed to use their memories to pursue litigation over the illegal spying.

“It could be a scene from Kafka or Brazil ,” noted Wired when the story first broke in March 2007. “Imagine a government agency, in a bureaucratic foul-up, accidentally gives you a copy of a document marked ‘top secret.’ And it contains a log of some of your private phone calls.”

“Walker, bringing to a head months of volleying between the government, the plaintiffs and himself, ordered Justice Department lawyers to explain why he should not essentially enter a default judgment against the government for violating the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act by spying on the Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation,” reported Law.com.

“The government has refused to obey court orders by repeatedly stonewalling Walker’s attempt to move the case forward, Walker wrote.”

“The Court noted the government was ‘continuing to assert legal positions already specifically rejected by the court in previous orders’ and ‘government officials in one or more defendant agencies, including the NSA Director … are refusing to cooperate with the court’s orders,’” noted the Electronic Frontiers Foundation. “Judge Walker ordered the government to show cause as to ‘why, as a sanction for failing to obey the court’s orders’ the government ’should not be prohibited … from opposing the liability’ for spying without warrants and that the ‘court should not deem liability … established and proceed to determine the amount of damages to be awarded to plaintiffs.’ A hearing is set for June 3, 2009 in the San Francisco federal court.”

Should Walker rule in favor of Al-Haramain, it would not fully satisfy the group’s legal aims, but “it would be a stiff rebuke to an administration that has pledged to reconsider Bush’s broad claims of secrecy in all cases touching on national security,” noted Bob Egelko at The San Francisco Chronicle.

He continued: “The department, under both Bush and Obama, has argued that courts have no power to decide the legality of the surveillance program unless the government acknowledges that it monitored a particular person or group. It has not done so in Al-Haramain’s case.”

“The case is one of more than three dozen domestic surveillance lawsuits pending before Walker,” reported CBS5 in San Francisco.

“Congress granted immunity to the telecommunication companies last year, essentially killing their eavesdropping lawsuits and leaving before Walker the Al-Haramain case as the only surviving legal challenge to the government’s eavesdropping program,” reported the Associated Press.
http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/05/23/federal-judge-threatens-to-sanction-obama-administration-over-secrecy/

America’s Nightmare: The Obama Dystopia

May 24, 2009

Obama 2008

by Andrew Hughes

 

After 8 years of the Bush-Cheney nightmare during which we saw the wanton destruction of Afghanistan and Iraq, the cynical  negation of centuries of Law designed to protect the most basic human rights and a foreign policy worthy of Genghis Khan, there came along the “Great Black Hope” in the persona of Barack Obama. The collective world consciousness turned uncritically to what was presented as a new era for peace, change and trust in Government. 

Never before had one witnessed such an accomplished use of manipulation, propaganda, imagery and public relations wizardry to sell the public a man who was to take the baton from Bush and run with it in the race to destroy the economy, the rights of the people and help birth a nation totally controlled by those who have always lurked in the shadows of power. “Change” was promised and was delivered in the form of a deepening of the already Dystopic  nightmare. 

Promises were broken with no apology, the same creative legalese that infested the Bush administration, in the form of John Yoo and Alberto Gonzalez, was again used to deny justice to the inmates of Guantanamo, It was used to justify more torture, more destruction of the Constitution and more illegal surveillance of U.S. citizens. 

The President that extended the hand of peace to the Muslim world has murdered hundreds of Pakistani men, women and children. The President who promised accountability in Government has filled his staff with lobbyists, banksters and warmongers. His Attorney General refuses to prosecute some of the worst war crimes committed in modern history and continues to give legal cover to criminals who tortured with impunity.

The country has been further bankrupted by the continuing theft of taxpayer money as the Wall St. campaign donors receive their quid pro quo. Obama has stood by idly as Bernancke states that the private Federal Reserve is not answerable to either Congress of the American public. The U.S. taxpayer is now on the hook for $14.3 Trillion and rising. Foreclosures and unemployment are rising with no meaningful efforts by the administration to alleviate the symptoms, never mind the cause. The new image of America is one of tent cities, lengthening soup kitchen lines, sherrifs evicting countless thousands of young and old from their homes, once prosperous towns descending in to an eerie stillness and an increasingly disillusioned populace.

The “War on terrorism” has mutated in to a control grid for an increasingly aware population. The foundation for this had already been put in place by Bush with the Patriot Act, Patriot Act 2, Military commissions act and numerous executive orders that strangled what was left of Posse Comitatus and the Constitution. 

Homeland Security now defines “Terrorists” as those who believe in the Constitution, the first, second and fourth amendments. Returning veterans are being targeted for a denial of their second amendment rights. A  “Terrorist Watchlist” of more than a million and rapidly growing, is being used as the basis for denying citizens the rights to travel and to work. 

Obama is now mulling over the idea of indefinite detention without trial for U.S. citizens. This, from a teacher of the Constitution ! Bills are in congress to criminalize free speech on the Internet via the Cyberbullying Act which will make hurting somebody’s feelings a felony. Just like the Patriot Act this will morph in to a criminalization of political free speech and any criticism of the Government.

“Cyberterrorism” is being used as a pretext to bring government regulation to the the last stronghold of unbiased information. Washington has realized that it’s getting harder to get away with their Fascist agenda and are moving to control the field. The populace have become more aware of just what kind of “Change” Obama intended to deliver. 

There has been a growing resistance on a state level with several invoking their 9th and 10th Amendment rights in a valiant attempt to stop the Federal Vampire from draining the last drops of blood, the last vestiges of Freedom and Hope. 

This is the Dystopic Nightmare that America finds itself in today and each day brings new assaults on Freedom and Sanity. The framework for total control of the citizenry, the economy and the media is being built upon in a relentless aggrandization of Govermental power. Obama sits atop his new Empire still smiling that sickeningly disingenuous smile surrounded by his seasoned courtiers who have worked for decades to bring America in to this new era of the New World Order.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=13716

May 24, 2009

Montana Governor Signs Revolutionary New Gun Law

May 24, 2009

dont_tread_on_me

 

Article written by Joe Heibel

Executive Summary – The USA state of Montana has signed into power a revolutionary gun law. I mean REVOLUTIONARY.

The State of Montana has defied the federal government and their gun laws. This will prompt a showdown between the federal government and the State of Montana. The federal government fears citizens owning guns. They try to curtail what types of guns they can own. The gun control laws all have one common goal – confiscation of privately owned firearms.

Montana has gone beyond drawing a line in the sand. They have challenged the Federal Government. The fed now either takes them on and risks them saying the federal agents have no right to violate their state gun laws and arrest the federal agents that try to enforce the federal firearms acts. This will be a world-class event to watch. Montana could go to voting for secession from the union, which is really throwing the gauntlet in Obamas face. If the federal government does nothing they lose face. Gotta love it.

Important Points – If guns and ammunition are manufactured inside the State of Montana for sale and use inside that state then the federal firearms laws have no applicability since the federal government only has the power to control commerce across state lines. Montana has the law on their side. Since when did the USA start following their own laws especially the constitution of the USA, the very document that empowers the USA.

Silencers made in Montana and sold in Montana would be fully legal and not registered. As a note silencers were first used before the 007 movies as a device to enable one to hunt without disturbing neighbors and scaring game. They were also useful as devices to control noise when practicing so as to not disturb the neighbors.

Silencers work best with a bolt-action rifle. There is a long barrel and the chamber is closed tight so as to direct all the gases though the silencer at the tip of the barrel. Semi-auto pistols and revolvers do not really muffle the sound very well except on the silver screen. The revolvers bleed gas out with the sound all over the place. The semi-auto pistols bleed the gases out when the slide recoils back.

Silencers are maybe nice for snipers picking off enemy soldiers even though they reduce velocity but not very practical for hit men shooting pistols in crowded places. Silencers were useful tools for gun enthusiasts and hunters.

There would be no firearm registration, serial numbers, criminal records check, waiting periods or paperwork required. So in a short period of time there would be millions and millions of unregistered untraceable guns in Montana. Way to go Montana.

Discussion – Let us see what Obama does. If he hits Montana hard they will probably vote to secede from the USA. The governor of Texas has already been refusing Federal money because he does not want to agree to the conditions that go with it and he has been saying secession is a right they have as sort of a threat. Things are no longer the same with the USA. Do not be deceived by Obama acting as if all is the same, it is not.

Text of the New Law:
HOUSE BILL NO. 246

INTRODUCED BY J. BONIEK, BENNETT, BUTCHER, CURTISS, RANDALL, WARBURTON

AN ACT EXEMPTING FROM FEDERAL REGULATION UNDER THE COMMERCE CLAUSE OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES A FIREARM, A FIREARM ACCESSORY, OR AMMUNITION MANUFACTURED AND RETAINED IN MONTANA; AND PROVIDING AN APPLICABILITY DATE.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MONTANA:

Section 1. Short title. [Sections 1 through 6] may be cited as the “Montana Firearms Freedom Act”.

Section 2. Legislative declarations of authority. The legislature declares that the authority for [sections 1 through 6] is the following:

(1) The 10th amendment to the United States constitution guarantees to the states and their people all powers not granted to the federal government elsewhere in the constitution and reserves to the state and people of Montana certain powers as they were understood at the time that Montana was admitted to statehood in 1889. The guaranty of those powers is a matter of contract between the state and people of Montana and the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889.

(2) The ninth amendment to the United States constitution guarantees to the people rights not granted in the constitution and reserves to the people of Montana certain rights, as they were understood at the time that Montana was admitted to statehood in 1889. The guaranty of those rights is a matter of contract between the state and people of Montana and the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889.

(3) The regulation of intrastate commerce is vested in the states under the 9th and 10th amendments to the United States constitution, particularly if not expressly preempted by federal law. Congress has not expressly preempted state regulation of intrastate commerce pertaining to the manufacture on an intrastate basis of firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition.

(4) The second amendment to the United States constitution reserves to the people the right to keep and bear arms as that right was understood at the time that Montana was admitted to statehood in 1889, and the guaranty of the right is a matter of contract between the state and people of Montana and the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889.

(5) Article II, section 12, of the Montana constitution clearly secures to Montana citizens, and prohibits government interference with, the right of individual Montana citizens to keep and bear arms. This constitutional protection is unchanged from the 1889 Montana constitution, which was approved by congress and the people of Montana, and the right exists, as it was understood at the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889.

Section 3. Definitions. As used in [sections 1 through 6], the following definitions apply:

(1) “Borders of Montana” means the boundaries of Montana described in Article I, section 1, of the 1889 Montana constitution.

(2) “Firearms accessories” means items that are used in conjunction with or mounted upon a firearm but are not essential to the basic function of a firearm, including but not limited to telescopic or laser sights, magazines, flash or sound suppressors, folding or aftermarket stocks and grips, speedloaders, ammunition carriers, and lights for target illumination.

(3) “Generic and insignificant parts” includes but is not limited to springs, screws, nuts, and pins.

(4) “Manufactured” means that a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition has been created from basic materials for functional usefulness, including but not limited to forging, casting, machining, or other processes for working materials.

Section 4. Prohibitions. A personal firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured commercially or privately in Montana and that remains within the borders of Montana is not subject to federal law or federal regulation, including registration, under the authority of congress to regulate interstate commerce. It is declared by the legislature that those items have not traveled in interstate commerce. This section applies to a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured in Montana from basic materials and that can be manufactured without the inclusion of any significant parts imported from another state. Generic and insignificant parts that have other manufacturing or consumer product applications are not firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition, and their importation into Montana and incorporation into a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition manufactured in Montana does not subject the firearm, firearm accessory, or ammunition to federal regulation. It is declared by the legislature that basic materials, such as unmachined steel and unshaped wood, are not firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition and are not subject to congressional authority to regulate firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition under interstate commerce as if they were actually firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition. The authority of congress to regulate interstate commerce in basic materials does not include authority to regulate firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition made in Montana from those materials. Firearms accessories that are imported into Montana from another state and that are subject to federal regulation as being in interstate commerce do not subject a firearm to federal regulation under interstate commerce because they are attached to or used in conjunction with a firearm in Montana.

Section 5. Exceptions. [Section 4] does not apply to:
(1) A firearm that cannot be carried and used by one person;

(2) A firearm that has a bore diameter greater than 1 1/2 inches and that uses smokeless powder, not black powder, as a propellant;

(3) ammunition with a projectile that explodes using an explosion of chemical energy after the projectile leaves the firearm; or

(4) a firearm that discharges two or more projectiles with one activation of the trigger or other firing device.

Section 6. Marketing of firearms. A firearm manufactured or sold in Montana under [sections 1 through 6] must have the words “Made in Montana” clearly stamped on a central metallic part, such as the receiver or frame.

Section 7. Codification instruction. [Sections 1 through 6] are intended to be codified as an integral part of Title 30, and the provisions of Title 30 apply to [sections 1 through 6].

Section 8. Applicability. [This act] applies to firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition that are manufactured, as defined in [section 3], and retained in Montana after October 1, 2009.

Article written by Joe Heibe

Executive Summary – The USA state of Montana has signed into power a revolutionary gun law. I mean REVOLUTIONARY.

The State of Montana has defied the federal government and their gun laws. This will prompt a showdown between the federal government and the State of Montana. The federal government fears citizens owning guns. They try to curtail what types of guns they can own. The gun control laws all have one common goal – confiscation of privately owned firearms.

Montana has gone beyond drawing a line in the sand. They have challenged the Federal Government. The fed now either takes them on and risks them saying the federal agents have no right to violate their state gun laws and arrest the federal agents that try to enforce the federal firearms acts. This will be a world-class event to watch. Montana could go to voting for secession from the union, which is really throwing the gauntlet in Obamas face. If the federal government does nothing they lose face. Gotta love it.

Important Points – If guns and ammunition are manufactured inside the State of Montana for sale and use inside that state then the federal firearms laws have no applicability since the federal government only has the power to control commerce across state lines. Montana has the law on their side. Since when did the USA start following their own laws especially the constitution of the USA, the very document that empowers the USA.

Silencers made in Montana and sold in Montana would be fully legal and not registered. As a note silencers were first used before the 007 movies as a device to enable one to hunt without disturbing neighbors and scaring game. They were also useful as devices to control noise when practicing so as to not disturb the neighbors.

Silencers work best with a bolt-action rifle. There is a long barrel and the chamber is closed tight so as to direct all the gases though the silencer at the tip of the barrel. Semi-auto pistols and revolvers do not really muffle the sound very well except on the silver screen. The revolvers bleed gas out with the sound all over the place. The semi-auto pistols bleed the gases out when the slide recoils back.

Silencers are maybe nice for snipers picking off enemy soldiers even though they reduce velocity but not very practical for hit men shooting pistols in crowded places. Silencers were useful tools for gun enthusiasts and hunters.

There would be no firearm registration, serial numbers, criminal records check, waiting periods or paperwork required. So in a short period of time there would be millions and millions of unregistered untraceable guns in Montana. Way to go Montana.

Discussion – Let us see what Obama does. If he hits Montana hard they will probably vote to secede from the USA. The governor of Texas has already been refusing Federal money because he does not want to agree to the conditions that go with it and he has been saying secession is a right they have as sort of a threat. Things are no longer the same with the USA. Do not be deceived by Obama acting as if all is the same, it is not.

Text of the New Law:
HOUSE BILL NO. 246

INTRODUCED BY J. BONIEK, BENNETT, BUTCHER, CURTISS, RANDALL, WARBURTON

AN ACT EXEMPTING FROM FEDERAL REGULATION UNDER THE COMMERCE CLAUSE OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES A FIREARM, A FIREARM ACCESSORY, OR AMMUNITION MANUFACTURED AND RETAINED IN MONTANA; AND PROVIDING AN APPLICABILITY DATE.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MONTANA:

Section 1. Short title. [Sections 1 through 6] may be cited as the “Montana Firearms Freedom Act”.

Section 2. Legislative declarations of authority. The legislature declares that the authority for [sections 1 through 6] is the following:

(1) The 10th amendment to the United States constitution guarantees to the states and their people all powers not granted to the federal government elsewhere in the constitution and reserves to the state and people of Montana certain powers as they were understood at the time that Montana was admitted to statehood in 1889. The guaranty of those powers is a matter of contract between the state and people of Montana and the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889.

(2) The ninth amendment to the United States constitution guarantees to the people rights not granted in the constitution and reserves to the people of Montana certain rights, as they were understood at the time that Montana was admitted to statehood in 1889. The guaranty of those rights is a matter of contract between the state and people of Montana and the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889.

(3) The regulation of intrastate commerce is vested in the states under the 9th and 10th amendments to the United States constitution, particularly if not expressly preempted by federal law. Congress has not expressly preempted state regulation of intrastate commerce pertaining to the manufacture on an intrastate basis of firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition.

(4) The second amendment to the United States constitution reserves to the people the right to keep and bear arms as that right was understood at the time that Montana was admitted to statehood in 1889, and the guaranty of the right is a matter of contract between the state and people of Montana and the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889.

(5) Article II, section 12, of the Montana constitution clearly secures to Montana citizens, and prohibits government interference with, the right of individual Montana citizens to keep and bear arms. This constitutional protection is unchanged from the 1889 Montana constitution, which was approved by congress and the people of Montana, and the right exists, as it was understood at the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889.

Section 3. Definitions. As used in [sections 1 through 6], the following definitions apply:

(1) “Borders of Montana” means the boundaries of Montana described in Article I, section 1, of the 1889 Montana constitution.

(2) “Firearms accessories” means items that are used in conjunction with or mounted upon a firearm but are not essential to the basic function of a firearm, including but not limited to telescopic or laser sights, magazines, flash or sound suppressors, folding or aftermarket stocks and grips, speedloaders, ammunition carriers, and lights for target illumination.

(3) “Generic and insignificant parts” includes but is not limited to springs, screws, nuts, and pins.

(4) “Manufactured” means that a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition has been created from basic materials for functional usefulness, including but not limited to forging, casting, machining, or other processes for working materials.

Section 4. Prohibitions. A personal firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured commercially or privately in Montana and that remains within the borders of Montana is not subject to federal law or federal regulation, including registration, under the authority of congress to regulate interstate commerce. It is declared by the legislature that those items have not traveled in interstate commerce. This section applies to a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured in Montana from basic materials and that can be manufactured without the inclusion of any significant parts imported from another state. Generic and insignificant parts that have other manufacturing or consumer product applications are not firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition, and their importation into Montana and incorporation into a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition manufactured in Montana does not subject the firearm, firearm accessory, or ammunition to federal regulation. It is declared by the legislature that basic materials, such as unmachined steel and unshaped wood, are not firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition and are not subject to congressional authority to regulate firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition under interstate commerce as if they were actually firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition. The authority of congress to regulate interstate commerce in basic materials does not include authority to regulate firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition made in Montana from those materials. Firearms accessories that are imported into Montana from another state and that are subject to federal regulation as being in interstate commerce do not subject a firearm to federal regulation under interstate commerce because they are attached to or used in conjunction with a firearm in Montana.

Section 5. Exceptions. [Section 4] does not apply to:
(1) A firearm that cannot be carried and used by one person;

(2) A firearm that has a bore diameter greater than 1 1/2 inches and that uses smokeless powder, not black powder, as a propellant;

(3) ammunition with a projectile that explodes using an explosion of chemical energy after the projectile leaves the firearm; or

(4) a firearm that discharges two or more projectiles with one activation of the trigger or other firing device.

Section 6. Marketing of firearms. A firearm manufactured or sold in Montana under [sections 1 through 6] must have the words “Made in Montana” clearly stamped on a central metallic part, such as the receiver or frame.

Section 7. Codification instruction. [Sections 1 through 6] are intended to be codified as an integral part of Title 30, and the provisions of Title 30 apply to [sections 1 through 6].

Section 8. Applicability. [This act] applies to firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition that are manufactured, as defined in [section 3], and retained in Montana after October 1, 2009.

http://www.republicmagazine.com/montana-governor-signs-revolutionary-new-gun-law/

 

BILDERBERG AGENDA EXPOSED

May 24, 2009

By James P. Tucker Jr.

Bilderberg boys are a bunch of grumpy old men but remain fiercely dedicated to usurping sovereignty in the United States and throughout the world. Patriots can celebrate their setbacks but never let up: Bilderberg still threatens the sovereignty of all nations while fighting for world government.

Major goals remain exploiting the global recession and an imaginary “swine flu pandemic” to establish global departments of treasury and health under the United Nations. But at the May 14-17 meeting in Vouliagmeni, Greece, near Athens, Bilderberg took a keen interest in persuading the United States to surrender sovereignty to the International Criminal Court, or ICC.

Bilderberg is also setting up a “summit” in Israel June 8-11 so “the world’s leading regulatory experts” can “address the current economic situation in one forum,” said Zohar Goshen, chairman of a subgroup of the International Association of Securities Commissions (IOSCO). Mary Shapiro, chairman of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, will represent this country. 

Bilderberg found President Obama a Willing Wilkie at its June, 2008 meeting in Chantilly, Va. near Washington. They were reassured when he chose their boy, Harold Koh, a strong advocate of the U.S. accepting the ICC, as the State Department’s top lawyer.

In the Penn State Law Review, Koh wrote sneeringly of “nationalists” who oppose surrendering sovereignty to international institutions, including the ICC. He praised the “transnationalist faction” on the Supreme Court and the wisdom of the jurists for their rejection of the “nationalist faction.”“Generally speaking, the transnationalists tend to emphasize the interdependence between the United States and the rest of the world, while the nationalists tend instead to focus more on preserving American autonomy,” Koh wrote. “The transnationalists believe in and promote the blending of international and domestic law, while nationalists continue to maintain a rigid separation of domestic from foreign law.”

The “transnationalists view domestic courts as having a critical role to play in domesticating international law into U.S. law, while nationalists argue instead that only the political branches can internalize international law,”

Koh wrote. “Transnationalists believe that U.S. courts could and should use their interpretive powers to promote the development of a global legal system, while the nationalists tend to claim that U.S. courts should limit their attention to the development of a national system.”

Five Supreme Court justices have said, to Koh’s delight, that U.S. courts should take into consideration the rulings of foreign courts in deciding domestic cases. They are: John Paul Stevens, Anthony Kennedy, David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer.

In a Bilderberg warm up, the Washington-based American Society of International Law called on the U.S to embrace the ICC. These luminaries
included former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, former Rep. Mickey Edwards and a roster of educated fools.

Carl Bildt, Sweden’s minister for foreign affairs, made a pitch for two other major Bilderberg goals: creating a global Department of Treasury and Department of Health, with all nations surrendering sovereignty over these issues to the UN. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) is to become the Treasury Department and the World Health Organization the World Health Department. But Bildt seized on an old Bilderberg issue, global warming, to make the case for WHO. Bilderberg propaganda over a “swine flu pandemic” has fallen victim to facts: On average, 300,000 Americans develop flu each year and 30,000 die. Only a few have died or even been seriously afflicted by “swine flu.”

The world economic meltdown is a “once-in-a-generation crisis while global warming is a “once-in-a-millennium challenge,” Bildt told Bilderberg. Sources inside Bilderberg said Bildt’s speech mirrored an address he gave to the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington. Carnegie’s president, Jessica Mathews, is a long-time Bilderberg participant. 

“We are at a critical time,” Bildt told Bilderberg. “The order of magnitude [of world crises] are more challenging than we are used to. The world economic recession has already reversed strong annual growth rates in many developing [poor] nations and in some parts of Europe and has the potential to bring down governments. . . . ”

“When we hit bottom, we can’t be sure where we’ll bounce back up,” Bildt said. “This is an urgent economic crisis unlike anything we have dealt with in living memory.” However, he called for a bounce-back within years, not a decade-long recession as some called for in efforts to exploit human misery.

Bildt then turned to selling global warming as the gateway to a World Health Department under the UN. Bilderberg boys, including David Rockefeller and others who inherited great wealth as the sons of smokestack industrialists, grabbed global warming as an issue more than a decade as a means of generating huge profits with investments to “save the planet.” Now, global warming has a new role.

“We know we need to take action,” Bildt said of global warming. “The global crisis is now,” he said. “The necessity to take action on climate change is now.” His calls for “global action” on these supposed “crises” were thinly disguised calls for UN control. 

Bildt called for world (UN) solutions to virtually all problems. He cited the European Union as “model of integration, saying, “the EU is emerging as a global actor.” He advocates expanding NAFTA throughout the Western Hemisphere to create an “American Union.”

The International Monetary Fund sent a report to Bilderberg advocating its rise to the role of World Treasury Department. “Further actions by policymakers, particularly in the financial sector, are needed to restore market trust and confidence,” said Marek Belka, director of the IMF’s European department and former prime minister of Poland.

U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner enthusiastically endorsed the plan for a World Treasury Department, although he received no assurance that he would become its leader. He expressed “hope” that American and European leaders could “work together” to achieve such a “global solution” to the world economic meltdown. 

The IMF’s planned new role as a world Treasury Department should be welcome news to the “little guy,” Geithner told Bilderberg. “The damage has been unfair and indiscriminant,” he said. “Ordinary Americans, small business owners and community banks who did the right thing and played by the rules are suffering from the actions of those who took on too much risk.”

But, even with a World Treasury Department, problems will not disappear overnight, Geithner warned. “These are all welcoming signs, but the process of financial recovery and repair is going to take time,” he said, lending his weight to a relative short-term recession as opposed to those who backed a long-term recovery. The people of Europe and America will have suffered enough to embrace a World Treasury Department, he said. 

“Our hope is that we can work with Europe on a global framework, a global infrastructure which has appropriate global oversight,” Geithner said. “We can’t allow institutions to cherry-pick among competing regulators and ship risk to where it faces the lowest standards and weakest constraints.”

Bilderberg is fervently working to persuade the Irish to accept an even stronger Lisbon Treaty, which would create an even stronger European Union, creating a permanent (instead of rotating) chairman and a more powerful Parliament. The EU Parliament can even now impose laws on member states.

Irish voters rejected this EU expansion in an earlier referendum, but Bilderberg is pressing for another vote. Citizens of France and Germany overwhelmingly opposed the measure, numerous polls showed, but their heads of state signed off. Ireland requires a referendum before approval.

A meeting is planned June 18-19 in Brussels to cross t’s and dot i’s in an effort to induce Irish voters to reverse themselves and endorse the treaty. Under EU rules, all states must back a change for it to take effect. Bilderberg leaders plan a “private meeting” in advance of the formal session to push ratification.

“They’re going to make us vote until we vote their way,” said an Irishman protesting at the gates of Bilderberg, who feared reprisals if identified. There were a large number of European journalists fighting to expose Bilderberg and much is being published in Europe. Many were seized by police, surrounded by pointed guns and had their film and notes seized.

But The Times of London had a helpful story the opening day of the Bilderberg meeting, Thursday, May 14. “What we have been able to establish from a World Bank spokesman, Alexis O’Brien, that the organization’s president, Robert Zoellick, will be in Athens on unspecified business May 14,” the paper said. “And that U.S. Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner’s public schedule is mysteriously empty for the next two days. Jo Ackermann, head of Deutsche Bank, will be traveling “somewhere in Europe.’ 

Jean-Claude Trichet, head of the European Central Bank, will not be around until the end of the week.” (This was a moment when all journalists were striving to identify Bilderberg participants.)

“Jim Tucker, veteran stalker of the Bilderberg club meetings, claims that [Margaret] Thatcher was ordered “to dismantle British sovereignty, but she said ‘no way,’ so they had her sacked,” the paper said. (Events confirmed this, as did Lady Thatcher in a later conversation with Tucker.)

http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/bilderberg_2009_179.html

Secret Right Movie

May 24, 2009

Pelosi mute on accusation against CIA

May 24, 2009

pelosi460x276

Nancy Pelosi, speaker of the US House of Representatives, said today she will say nothing further about her allegation that the CIA lied in 2002 about its use of waterboarding on terror suspects.

“I have made the statement that I’m going to make on this,” she told reporters at a news conference. “I don’t have anything more to say about it. I stand by my comment.” Republicans, however, are not staying quiet about the issue.

Ken Spain, spokesman for the national Republican congressional committee, issued a statement after the news conference that called Pelosi a political liability to the Democratic party.

“Her obsession with the previous administration and her disdain for America’s intelligence officials has reduced her to cheerleader status within the far left wing of her party and a distraction to the substantive debate over how to best move our economy forward,” Spain said.

Pelosi told reporters this month that she had not been told that waterboarding had been used against terror suspects, even though it had been. When asked whether she was accusing the CIA of lying to her, she said “yes”.

Pelosi has asked the CIA to declassify information that supports her claims. The CIA sent politicians a record of its notes and memos on 40 congressional briefings about interrogation techniques. The document has been found to include several errors, leaving in question exactly what Pelosi was told.

The Republicans, the minority party in both the House and the Senate, have seized on her accusation that the CIA misled Congress, contending that the California Democrat’s remarks have demoralised the intelligence community. House Republicans yesterday demanded that a bipartisan panel investigate her allegations.

“To have this charge out there and not have it resolved I think is damaging to our intelligence efforts and certainly will have a chilling effect on our intelligence professionals around the world,” House Republican leader John Boehner said.

Democrats beat back the proposal, calling it a political ploy. Republicans Ron Paul of Texas and Walter Jones of North Carolina joined Democrats in a 252-172 vote to block the resolution.

Upon leaving the news conference today, Pelosi would not answer a questioner asking whether she had called Leon Panetta, the CIA director, to discuss the matter.

Instead, Pelosi had stuck faithfully to her script, saying that Democrats were making progress on other issues.

“We’re going forward in a bipartisan way for jobs, healthcare, energy for our country,” she said. Regarding the CIA’s briefing of Congress on waterboarding, “I won’t have anything more to say about it.”

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/may/22/nancy-pelosi-cia-waterboarding

Obama keeps mum about conversation with Bush

May 24, 2009

ObamaBushAP_450x350

 President Barack Obama says he’s spoken with former President George W. Bush since taking office. But the current commander in chief is keeping mum about the details.

Obama says that even though he’s been president for only a few months, he thinks having a general policy of keeping confidence with former presidents is important.

Obama made the comment in an interview with C-SPAN that is airing Saturday.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=104493526  

In just 3 months Americans bought enough guns to outfit the entire Chinese and Indian armies combined

May 24, 2009

Money Talks
May 23, 2009

“You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass.” – Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto WWII

You also bought 1,529,635,000 rounds of ammunition in just the month of December 2008. Yeah that is right, that is Billion with a “B”. This number takes no accounting of reloading or reloaded ammunition.

…..read more at AmmoLand.com if you dare.

And how is Smith &Wesson doing? Pretty good I’d say. It looks like SWHC outperformed the general market’s 30% gain since the lows. Spaceshot!!!

SW4291

SW429

“Absolutist” to defend the law?

May 23, 2009

Michael Ratner: It’s outrageous to equate people who demand the rule of law with those who break it

Peter Schiff The Schiff Report Video Blog May 21 2009

May 23, 2009

May 23, 2009

To cover both wars, Senate passes $91.3B bill

May 23, 2009

Defense Budget

WASHINGTON – The Senate is backing President Barack Obama‘s efforts to ramp up the war in Afghanistan, granting his request for $91.3 billion for military and diplomatic operations there and in Iraq.

The spending bill, approved on an 86-3 vote Thursday night, goes to congressional negotiators to work out a compromise with a similar measure the House passed. Lawmakers expected to present a bill for Obama’s signature next month.

Voting against the measure were Sens. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., Russ Feingold, D-Wis., and Bernie Sanders, I-Vt.

The major difference in what Obama sought and what the Senate granted concerned the $80 million the president wanted for closing the U.S. detention facility at the naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The Senate joined the House in blocking the president’s plan for closing the prison until he submits a detailed plan for the disposition of the terror suspects held there.

Obama is sending more than 20,000 additional troops to Afghanistan. For the first time, the annual cost of the war in Afghanistan is projected to exceed the cost of fighting in Iraq.

With support forces, the number of U.S. troops in Afghanistan is expected to be about 68,000 by the end of the year — more than double the size of the U.S. force at the end of 2008.

Among the few cautionary voices during debate over the spending measure came from Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif.

“I want to give this administration … the resources it needs to successfully end these wars,” Boxer said. “I don’t support an open-ended commitment of American troops to Afghanistan. And if we do not see measurable progress, we must reconsider our engagement and strategy there.”

Debate pretty much fizzled after Democrats retreated and moved to delete from the bill money to closeGuantanamo, where about 240 terrorism suspects still are held.

The underlying war-funding measure has gotten relatively little attention, even though it would boost total approved spending for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars above $900 billion.

The Pentagon would receive $73 billion under the legislation, including $4.6 billion to train and equip Afghan and Iraqi security forces; $400 million to train and equip Pakistan’s security forces; and $21.9 billion to procure new mine-resistant vehicles, aircraft, weapons and ammunition, among other items.

The House version adds $11.8 billion to Obama’s request, including almost $4 billion for new weapons and military equipment such as eight C-17 cargo planes, mine-resistant vehicles, Bradley Fighting Vehicles andStryker armored vehicles. The House measure also adds $2.2 billion to Obama’s request for foreign aid, much of which appears to be designed to get around spending limits for 2010.

The Senate measure contains less for weapons procurement and foreign aid, setting up potentially nettlesome negotiations.

The Senate floor was often empty Thursday as senators wrestled privately over what final add-ons would make it into the bill.

In the end, several amendments were added, including one by Sens. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., to block the release under the Freedom of Information Act of government photographs showing the abuse of detainees. The administration is fighting the American Civil Liberties Union in federal court over the release of the photos, and the move was intended to bolster the government’s legal position.

Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., won approval of an amendment requiring the president to set forth U.S. objectives in Afghanistan and Pakistan and issue quarterly reports detailing whether those goals were being met.

The Senate bill includes $1.5 billion as cautionary funding to fight a possible flu pandemic, including the current outbreak of H1N1 swine flu.

The bill also contains $350 million for various security programs along the U.S.-Mexico border. But the money would not be awarded to the Pentagon, as Obama requested.

By a 64-30 vote earlier Thursday, the Senate rejected an amendment by Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., to kill a proposed $100 billion line of credit for the IMF to shore up the ability of countries around the globe to cope with financial crises, along with $8 billion for existing commitments.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090522/ap_on_go_co/us_congress_war_funding;_ylt=Ala37mtGSHTgcMNKuM

nlYrys0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTJwdmJhb3Q5BGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMDkwNTIyL3VzX2NvbmdyZXNzX3dhcl9mdW5kaW5nBGNwb

3MDMwRwb3MDMTAEc2VjA3luX3RvcF9zdG9yeQRzbGsDc2VuYXRlcGFzc2Vz

 

 

 

 

Rachel Maddow Criticizes Obama on “Prolonged Detention”

May 23, 2009

achel Maddow has come around… too bad it’s too late. Liberals are easy — easily fooled that is. Liberals were so mesmerized by Obama’s rhetoric, the promises he had absolutely no intention of fulfilling, that they overlooked the fact he is a front man for the same sinister forces behind George Bush, who the liberals hated — and rightly so — with a vengeance. It is now impossible to ignore the fact that Obama will not only continue the policies of the Bush administration — torture, detention, war stretching out into the indeterminable future — but will build on them, as instructed. Obama will jettison his liberal followers because he no longer has use for them. It remains to be seen if they will mobilize and fight against the dark forces in control of the government, of if they will simply repeat the process during the next staged election cycle. It was Albert Einstein who said insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. Are liberal Democrats insane?

http://www.infowars.com/rachel-maddow-criticizes-obama-on-prolonged-detention/

Report: TSA To Take Over Subway Bag Check From NYPD

May 23, 2009

The city’s overall budget cuts are apparently hitting the NYPD right in the subway bag check areaMyFoxNY reports that with few police officers available, “Transportation Security Administration bag screeners from Kennedy, LaGuardia and Newark Liberty airports will be replacing most NYPD cops in the subway that screen bags for explosives.” The TSA wouldn’t confirm the plan (but did say taking TSA screeners from airports and putting them underground wouldn’t effect air safety) and the NYPD says these are just talks. However, sources tell MyFoxNY it’s likely to happen—and it’ll work this way: “About 30 TSA screeners a day will be pulled from the three area airports Monday through Friday to inspect bags at various subway locations throughout the city. At each location they’ll be teamed up with one police officer instead of the two or three officers you currently see at inspection sites.” Naturally, the Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association says this is a terrible idea and says budget crisis or no, the NYPD needs more cops.

http://gothamist.com/2009/04/29/report_tsa_to_take_over_subway_bag.php

FBI Use of Patriot Act Authority Increased Dramatically in 2008

May 23, 2009

fbi-seal

    Wired.com

FISA-court authorizations for national security and counter-terrorism wiretaps dropped last year by almost 300, a new Justice Department report to Congress shows. But the FBI’s use of “national security letters” to get information on Americans without a court order increased dramatically, from 16,804 in 2007 to 24,744 in 2008.

The 2008 requests targeted 7,225 U.S. people.

This is still much lower than the number of NSLs issued in 2006 — more than 49,000 — but indicates that the FBI’s reliance on the self-authorized subpoenas is rebounding, after audits in 2006 and 2007 revealed the bureau had been abusing the tool.

The new seven-page report (.pdf) was submitted to Congress last Thursday.

National security letters (NSL) are written demands from the FBI that compel internet service providers, credit companies, financial institutions and others to hand over confidential records about their customers, such as subscriber information, phone numbers and e-mail addresses, websites visited and more.

NSLs have been used since the 1980s, but the Patriot Act expanded the kinds of records that could be obtained with an NSL. They do not require court approval, and come with a built-in lifetime gag order. With an NSL, the FBI need merely assert that the information is “relevant” to an investigation, and anyone who gets a national security letter is prohibited from disclosing that they’ve received the request.

 

The FBI’s use of NSLs has been sharply criticized. In 2007, a Justice Department Inspector General audit found that the FBI, which issued almost 200,000 NSLs between 2003 and 2006, had abused its authority and misused NSLs.

The inspector general found that the FBI evaded limits on (and sometimes illegally issued) NSLs to obtain phone, e-mail and financial information on American citizens, and under-reported the use of NSLs to Congress.

About 60 percent of a sample of the FBI’s NSLs did not conform to Justice Department rules, and another 22 percent possibly violated the statute because they made improper requests of businesses or involved unauthorized collections of information.

The audit also criticized the FBI for improperly tracking its use of NSLs.

Subsequently, the number of NSLs issued in 2007 dramatically dropped from 49,000 to 16,000.

The new 2009 DoJ report submitted to Congress last week and obtained by Secrecy News addresses these earlier issues by assuring legislators that the FBI has put in a number of corrective actions.

According to the report, the FBI replaced the database it used for tracking NSLs, which “has reduced errors in compiling statistics necessary for Congressional reporting.”

The report says the FBI also issued a number of “corrective NSLs” to “provide legal authority to retain information it had previously received” for so-called “exigent” requests and “blanket NSLs”. Exigent requests involve an informal emergency request to a business to voluntarily hand over information until a more formal NSL can be issued to cover the request.

For example, the FBI reviewed the circumstances around more than 4,000 phone numbers it obtained through NSLs to determine if proper legal process was used to obtain them. If the review team couldn’t find documentation that proper legal process was followed or if the process was insufficient, but the team determined the phone number was relevant to a national security investigation, the agency issued a corrective NSL for the data. If not, then the agency purged the collected data from its database.

The DoJ report to Congress only briefly discusses FISA applications for electronic surveillance and physical surveillance related to foreign intelligence investigations. According to the document, authorities submitted 2,082 so-called “FISA applications” to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court last year.

But the court, which evaluates such requests, approved 2,083 FISA applications in 2008 — the discrepancy is because two applications submitted in 2007 were approved in 2008 and are counted in 2008 figures. The court rejected one application in 2008 and made unspecified “substantive modifications” to two others.

By contrast, in 2007, the court approved 2,370 FISA applications, denied three and part of a fourth application, and modified 86 applications.

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/05/fbi-use-of-patriot-act-authority-increased-dramatically-in-2008/

FCC’s Warrantless Household Searches Alarm Experts

May 23, 2009

fcc_badge

    Wired.com

You may not know it, but if you have a wireless router, a cordless phone, remote car-door opener, baby monitor or cellphone in your house, the FCC claims the right to enter your home without a warrant at any time of the day or night in order to inspect it.

That’s the upshot of the rules the agency has followed for years to monitor licensed television and radio stations, and to crack down on pirate radio broadcasters. And the commission maintains the same policy applies to any licensed or unlicensed radio-frequency device.

“Anything using RF energy — we have the right to inspect it to make sure it is not causing interference,” says FCC spokesman David Fiske. That includes devices like Wi-Fi routers that use unlicensed spectrum, Fiske says.

The FCC claims it derives its warrantless search power from the Communications Act of 1934, though the constitutionality of the claim has gone untested in the courts. That’s largely because the FCC had little to do with average citizens for most of the last 75 years, when home transmitters were largely reserved to ham-radio operators and CB-radio aficionados. But in 2009, nearly every household in the United States has multiple devices that use radio waves and fall under the FCC’s purview, making the commission’s claimed authority ripe for a court challenge.

“It is a major stretch beyond case law to assert that authority with respect to a private home, which is at the heart of the Fourth Amendment’s protection against unreasonable search and seizure,” says Electronic Frontier Foundation lawyer Lee Tien. “When it is a private home and when you are talking about an over-powered Wi-Fi antenna — the idea they could just go in is honestly quite bizarre.”

 

George Washington University professor Orin Kerr, a constitutional law expert, also questions the legalilty of the policy.

“The Supreme Court has said that the government can’t make warrantless entries into homes for administrative inspections,” Kerr said via e-mail, refering to a 1967 Supreme Court ruling that housing inspectors needed warrants to force their way into private residences. The FCC’s online FAQ doesn’t explain how the agency gets around that ruling, Kerr adds.

The rules came to attention this month when an FCC agent investigating a pirate radio station in Boulder, Colorado, left a copy of a 2005 FCC inspection policy on the door of a residence hosting the unlicensed 100-watt transmitter. “Whether you operate an amateur station or any other radio device, your authorization from the Commission comes with the obligation to allow inspection,” the statement says.

The notice spooked those running “Boulder Free Radio,” who thought it was just tough talk intended to scare them into shutting down, according to one of the station’s leaders, who spoke to Wired.com on condition of anonymity. “This is an intimidation thing,” he said. “Most people aren’t that dedicated to the cause. I’m not going to let them into my house.”

But refusing the FCC admittance can carry a harsh financial penalty. In a 2007 case, a Corpus Christi, Texas, man got a visit from the FCC’s direction-finders after rebroadcasting an AM radio station through a CB radio in his home. An FCC agent tracked the signal to his house and asked to see the equipment; Donald Winton refused to let him in, but did turn off the radio. Winton was later fined $7,000 for refusing entry to the officer. The fine was reduced to $225 after he proved he had little income.

Administrative search powers are not rare, at least as directed against businesses — fire-safety, food and workplace-safety regulators generally don’t need warrants to enter a business. And despite the broad power, the FCC agents aren’t cops, says Fiske. “The only right they have is to inspect the equipment,” Fiske says. “If they want to seize, they have to work with the U.S. Attorney’s office.”

But if inspectors should notice evidence of unrelated criminal behavior — say, a marijuana plant or stolen property — a Supreme Court decision suggests the search can be used against the resident. In the 1987 case New York v. Burger, two police officers performed a warrantless, administrative search of one Joseph Burger’s automobile junkyard. When he couldn’t produce the proper paperwork, the officers searched the grounds and found stolen vehicles, which they used to prosecute him. The Supreme Court held the search to be legal.

In the meantime, pirate radio stations are adapting to the FCC’s warrantless search power by dividing up a station’s operations. For instance, Boulder Free Radio consists of an online radio station operated by DJs from a remote studio. Miles away, a small computer streams the online station and feeds it to the transmitter. Once the FCC comes and leaves a notice on the door, the transmitter is moved to another location before the agent returns.

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/05/fcc-raid/

Report: Faulty Communications Imperil President

May 23, 2009

cover_obamascream_inside

  • 2:48 pm
    Wired.com

The U.S. Secret Service is asking for $34 million to help upgrade its communication system, and says that without the money the president’s life could be in danger, according to a news report.

The agency says that its communication system is incompatible with the White House communication system, resulting in a “dangerous gap” that could “prevent the attainment of the performance target of 100 percent protection.”

The statements appeared in a 2010 budget request, submitted to Congress this month, according to ABC News. According to the request, the agency’s “degraded” networks and software are “adversely impacting critical operational missions” and could thwart agents communicating in an emergency.

“USSS’ protective and investigative missions will be functionally unable to respond to the increasing volume of threats without additional investment,” the budget request says.

The agency also indicated that without the multi-million-dollar upgrade, its system was vulnerable to hacker attacks.

A spokesman for the agency told ABC News that the agency isn’t currently at risk “at this time.”

“Despite the challenges we are currently facing with an aging IT infrastructure, this will not interfere with our ability to carry out our protective and investigative missions at this time,” the spokesman said.

But in testimony to Congress in March (.pdf), Secret Service Director Mark Sullivan said that “the agency’s IT and other mission critical infrastructure cannot sustain the tempo of current operations.” Sullivan also noted that the agency flunked an NSA security audit last year that was intended to detect intrusions and vulnerabilities.

“While the NSA findings are classified, I can tell you that the results were chilling,” Sullivan testified.

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/05/secretservice/

Military Personnel Ordered To Comply With Illegal Private Firearms Registration

May 23, 2009

190509top3

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Tuesday, May 19, 200

An alarming document sent to us by an Infantryman based out of Fort Campbell Kentucky shows that active duty military personnel are being secretly ordered to submit information to their Chain of Command on how many firearms they own privately, their location, as well of details of any Concealed Carry permits.

Though the order was apparently rescinded, the fact that active duty soldiers are being asked to submit every detail of their private firearm collection is a telltale sign that the second amendment is in dire straights. Furthermore, Alex Jones has personally confirmed that such directives are being issued all over the country.

The directive orders active duty personnel to report details of all privately-owned firearms to their Chain of Command, as well as future firearms purchases.

The memorandum was sent to us by a concerned 11B Infantryman based at Fort Campbell. In his e mail, the man expresses his shock at being ordered to comply with what amounts to a registration of privately-owned firearms.

“I live off post, with my firearms (which I don’t bring on post for any reason). A very frightening thing happened at work yesterday,” he writes. “I was ordered to fill out a list containing my firearm information. This included make, model, caliber, and serial number of all firearms I currently posses. In addition, I was also required to list registration information, location of all weapons individually, and information regarding any CCW permits I posses.”

The man tried to ascertain why such information was being demanded by speaking to his First Sergeant but was told, “Just put your info on the form.”

“I don’t know how high this goes, but I am hearing that this is going on in other units at Fort Campbell as well,” writes the Infantryman. “It just seems a little coincidental to me that within 90 days: the most anti-firearm President in history is inaugurated, some of the nastiest anti-firearm laws are put on the table in Washington, and then the Army comes around wanting what amounts to a registration on all firearms, even if they are off post, and doesn’t provide any reason or purpose as to why.”

The man said he had been at Fort Campbell for almost 8 years and had never encountered anything like this directive before.

“I fear something really nasty is blowing in the wind here,” he warns.

According to a World Net Daily article, the order was stopped when it was discovered the commander was not “acting within his authority.”

However, Alex Jones has personally confirmed that bases all over the nation, including in Texas, are directing active duty personnel to provide the same information about their private gun collections.

The story emphasizes how gargantuan threats to the second amendment are not being reported by the mainstream media nor by big gun groups like the NRA.

A similarly grave threat to the second amendment is the so-called ‘No Fly, No Buy Act’, (H.R. 2401), a bill that will merge the TSA’s no-fly list with the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), a point-of-sale system for determining eligibility to purchase a firearm in the United States, Guam, and Puerto Rico.

Since the Department of Homeland Security now considers veterans, advocates of the Second Amendment, and states’ rights activists as terrorists, the ‘No Fly, No Buy’ act would effectively disarm the majority of the entire country.

The language of H.R. 2401 reads as follows: “To increase public safety and reduce the threat to domestic security by including persons who may be prevented from boarding an aircraft in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, and for other purposes,” according to the Open Congresswebsite. Govtrack.us reports that the bill was referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.

http://www.infowars.com/military-personnel-ordered-to-comply-with-illegal-private-firearms-registration/

Exactly As We Predicted; Deadly NY Terror Cell Are Semi-Retarded Potheads

May 23, 2009

Temple Plot

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Friday, May 22, 2009

Exactly as we predicted in our headline story yesterday, two of the ringleaders in the “deadly” New York terror plot salaciously hyped by the media and government officials have turned out to be semi-retarded potheads.

“The men will likely turn out to be semi-retarded dropouts,” we stated in our article yesterday, basing our forecast on the fact that in every other major terror sting in the west given so much prominence by officials and the corporate media, the poor suckers rounded up by the feds always turn out to be low IQ petty criminals down on their luck, provocateured and armed by federal agents.

We already knew that the men were provided with an inert rocket launcher and fake C4 explosives by an FBI informant, and now as more details emerge, our original summation of the case is proving accurate.

According to an Associated Press report, the four men charged with planning to blow up synagogues and military planes, “Were amateurs every step of the way. They had trouble finding guns and bought cameras at Wal-Mart to photograph their targets. One was a convicted purse snatcher, another smoked marijuana the day the plot was to be carried out.”

The report continues,”Relatives said the defendants were down-on-their-luck men who worked at places like Wal-Mart, a landscaping company and a warehouse when they weren’t behind bars. Payen’s lawyer said he was “intellectually challenged” and on medication for schizophrenia. Marilyn Reader said he has “a very low borderline” IQ.”

Of course, it was only after an FBI informant radicalized these bums and provided them with weapons that they became any kind of threat, providing the feds the opportunity to swoop in, declare a victory in the war on terror and use the case as a poster child for Americans to accept police state measures and believe the hype surrounding “domestic terrorists” in the wake of controversy surrounding the MIAC report.

As the AP article concedes, “Some have criticized informants’ roles in such cases, saying they egged on and ensnared suspects who weren’t dangerous.”

As we reiterated yesterday, this same scam is played out every single time, but the media very rarely makes a big deal out of it when the suspects turn out to be retarded bums who couldn’t even have achieved whatever the provocateur prodded them into advocating without direct help from the feds. The original hyped story about the foiled deadly terror plot remains in the memory while the truth surrounding the case is buried near the back of the newspaper.

Nowhere was this more evident than in the case of the ‘Liberty City 7′, a group out of Miami that supposedly planned to “wage a full ground war against the United States” and bomb the Sears Tower, but who actually turned out to be “a bunch of dipshits living in a warehouse,” as The Daily Show’s Jon Stewart described them.

 

Campaign for Liberty Responds to Senator Lindsey Graham

May 23, 2009

May 21, 2009


Dear Friend of Liberty,

Across our nation, Campaign for Liberty’s 150,000+ members are taking action, educating their fellow countrymen, and making a considerable impact on the political landscape. Together, we unapologetically champion the principles that made our nation great: sound money, a constitutionally limited government and foreign policy, and respect for individual liberties.

These ideas transcend traditional boundaries and draw Americans (and like-minded people across the globe) from all backgrounds to the liberty message.

Many Republican leaders, however, continue to believe that principle must be sacrificed on the altar of attaining political power, despite the devastating defeats a “win-at-all-costs” philosophy brought their Party last November.  And, as you will see below, it is the liberty message that has all the momentum.

This past weekend at a South Carolina Republican convention, Senator Lindsey Graham adamantly defended supporting those who choose political expediency over substance. “We’re not going to build [the Republican Party] around libertarian ideas,” he told his audience. “[Ron Paul] is not the leader of this Party,” he emphasized.

 

Senator Graham claimed his view as being that of a Ronald Reagan Republican, but Reagan’s own words in a 1975 Reason interview remove any endorsement of the Senator’s statement.

“If you analyze it,” said Reagan, “I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism.”

What about principle vs. politics? (Emphasis in the following mine)

Reagan said: “I have been doing my best to try to revitalize the Republican Party groups that I’ve spoken to, on the basis that the time has come to repudiate those in our midst who would blur the Republican image by saying we should be all things to all people in order to triumph… I’ve been urging Republicans to raise a banner and put the things we stand for on that banner and don’t compromise, but don’t try to enlarge the party by being all things to everyone when you can’t keep all the promises. Put up a banner and then count on the fact that if you’ve got the proper things on that banner the people will rally round.”

South Carolina’s junior Senator, Jim DeMint, spoke after Graham and echoed Reagan, commenting about the Senate that he, “[w]ould rather have 30 Republicans who believe in the principles of limited government and free markets and free people than 60 Republicans who have no beliefs at all.”

South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford also defended the freedom movement, remarking, “Liberty is the hallmark of the American experiment. That is the distinguishing characteristic of our Republic, and frankly what’s made it great… I’ve been accused of being a libertarian, and I would say I wear it as a badge of honor because I do love, believe in, and want to support liberty.”

 

In his speech, Senator Graham noted that those who don’t think winning matters should head for the Party’s exits.

Of course winning is important. But when that becomes your ultimate focus at the expense of everything else, you throw away the integrity our Founders believed crucial in order to be involved in government.

The time has come to make it clear that we will no longer tolerate the rampant trashing of our Constitution by our representatives or their constant shifting on the issues. No matter what political party you belong to, you should have the courage to stand firm on your beliefs.

As our efforts with HR 1207 are demonstrating, you don’t have to cast aside principle to achieve success. A clear, consistent stand on a philosophy of freedom will find supporters, and from there real, lasting change can be effected.

To those in all political parties who wish to maximize freedom and prosperity, we invite you to join us in our efforts. To all those who would sell out our Constitution and their beliefs in pursuit of power, we turn Senator Graham’s words back on him and you by saying, “There’s the exit sign.”


In Liberty,

John Tate

President


P.S. Campaign for Liberty’s progress in less than a year after its founding has been incredible, but our fight is only beginning. If you are a dues-paying member, take the next step to reclaim your local area for freedom and become a local coordinator today. And if you are able, please consider making a contribution to C4L to help us hold our elected officials accountable.

May 21, 2009

DHS May Be Called to Explain “Rightwing Extremism” Report

May 21, 2009

bernie

 

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars
May 20, 2009

House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson has drawn up a resolution that would require DHS to explain to Congress why it created the warning about “right-wing” groups, reports Fox News. Thompson, a Mississippi Democrat, initially balked at a Republican request to probe the motives of DHS and said it was a “GOP stunt aimed at embarrassing the new administration,” an absurd accusation considering the fact the report was crafted during the Bush years and rehashed after Obama took office.

In the wake of the exposure of the DHS’ “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment” another document surfaced on May 5. It is entitled the “Domestic Extremism Lexicon” and was issued by the Office of Intelligence and Analysis in late March. The lexicon lists definitions for key terms and phrases used by Homeland Security analysts “that addresses the nature and scope of the threat that domestic, non-Islamic extremism poses to the United States,” Audrey Hudson reported for the Washington Times on May 5.

Democrats sitting on the House Homeland Security Committee are determined to block — at least partially — any investigation of the document’s origins. Republicans want documents and source material that supposedly justified the threat assessment, while Democrats merely want DHS to explain to Congress why it designated Second Amendment advocates, pro-life activists, and veterans as threats to the country.

As with nearly everything in the district of criminals, the DHS report has turned into a partisan football to be used to score points and make the other side of the one party system look foolish. Republicans are not so much interested in getting to the bottom of the report as they are in using it to lambaste the Obama administration (while ignoring the fact the document was created during the Bush administration). Democrats want a perfunctory explanation from the DHS and then relegate the report off to the memory hole.

In fact, it does not take a crack researcher to figure out where the source material and inspiration for the report came from — the Anti-Defamation League.

On April 22, DHS Secretary Napolitano appeared before the Anti-Defamation League National Leadership Conference in Washington. In a speech, she said that “the ADL and DHS have had some good partnerships. In recent years, the Department has placed our employees in your advanced training school to educate us on the tactics used by extremists and terrorists.”

It was the same under Bush. “The Department of Homeland Security has contracted with the Anti-Defamation League to provide its specialized training and expertise on extremism, hate groups, domestic and international terrorism, and civil liberties to high-level agency personnel,” an ADL press release dated May 1, 2007, states. “In remarks to the ADL’s National Leadership Conference in Washington, D.C., Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said the briefings are one way his department, the government’s third largest, is partnering with ADL to address issues of immigration, civil liberties and extremism.”

“Our trainings are intensive and offer a range of detailed information about anti-government extremists, hate groups, extremism and terrorism on the Internet and hate groups,” said David C. Friedman, ADL Director of National Law Enforcement Initiatives.

 

According to the ADL press release, Homeland Security’s training included “a briefing from Brig. Gen. Nir Meri-Esh of the Israel Police, who shared his firsthand experiences and knowledge in preventing and responding to terrorist attacks.” It was not explained how Meri-Esh’s expertise relates to “anti-government extremists” in the United States.

Not only the DHS, but the FBI as well is indoctrinated by the ADL. An ADL press release dated November 3, 2005, includes remarks by Robert S. Mueller III, director of the FBI, who said the “Anti-Defamation League and the FBI share a strong bond of friendship.” The FBI, said Mueller, benefits “greatly from education and training programs” provided by the ADL.

“The real meaning of a partnership between the ADL and the FBI and of the FBI’s willingness to accept the ADL’s judgment on the ‘changing nature’ of terrorist threats is that the FBI will devote less of its resources to the investigation of actual criminal activity and more of its resources to helping the ADL counter the people the ADL considers ‘extremists’: which is to say, people who have views the ADL labels ‘extreme,’” writes Dr. William Pierce.

On April 6, 2009, in the wake of the Pittsburgh police shootings, the ADL labeled radio talk show host Alex Jones as an extremist of the sort of interest to the DHS and FBI. “According to ADL, [Richard Poplawski, the accused shooter] frequented ‘Infowars,’ the Web site of the right-wing conspiracy radio talk-show host Alex Jones, where he shared links to its stories with others and sometimes posted his own messages to the site,” an ADL press release declares. The ADL makes the insinuation that Jones and his radio show — along with the white supremacist website Stormfront — influenced the alleged cop killer Poplawski.

An earlier ADL press release characterized Joe Banister, Tommy Cryer, Pat Shannan, Dave Von Kleist, Jack McLamb, Greg Dixon, Ted Gunderson, and Michael Badnarik as dangerous extremists.

Finally, it should be noted that the ADL has used illegal methods to gather information on its political enemies. In 1993, an ADL contractor was arrested for illegally spying on numerous groups, including the NAACP, ACLU, Mother Jones magazine, Greenpeace, Jews for Jesus, the National Lawyers Guild, Democratic U.S. Representative Nancy Pelosi, and former Republican U.S. Representative Pete McCloskey. The San Francisco district attorney at the time accused the ADL of conducting a national “spy network.”

It is precisely this spy network — in existence since the 1930s — that the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI are interested in tapping into and resulted in the production of the now infamous and embarrassing (for the government) “Rightwing extremism” report.

http://www.infowars.com/dhs-may-be-called-to-explain-rightwing-extremism-report/

Victory in Congress: Gun Ban Repealed!

May 21, 2009

gun_owners_of_america

 

Victory at Last 
— National Park Service Gun Ban Repealed! 

Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert 
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151 
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408 
http://www.gunowners.org 


“Gun Owners of America was the most consistent and loudest voice on 
Capitol Hill in support of the effort to repeal the National Park 
Service gun ban.” — Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) 


Wednesday, May 20, 2009 

Good news! 

The U.S. House of Representatives passed a bill today that included an 
amendment to repeal the gun ban on National Park Service (NPS) land and 
wildlife refuges. 

The amendment, sponsored by Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) and attached to a 
credit card industry reform bill, passed the House overwhelmingly by a 
vote of 279-147. 

For decades, law-abiding citizens have been prohibited from exercising 
their Second Amendment rights on NPS land and wildlife refuges, even if 
the state in which the land is located allows carrying firearms. 

With some limited exceptions for hunting, the only way to legally 
possess a firearm anywhere in a national park is by having it unloaded 
and inaccessible, such as locked up in an automobile trunk.  A Bush 
administration regulation partially reversed the ban, but that action 
was singlehandedly negated recently by an activist judge in Washington, 
D.C.  The Department of Interior decided not to appeal that ruling. 

Senator Coburn believes, like you do, that Americans should not be 
forced to sacrifice their Second Amendment rights when entering NPS land 
and wildlife refuges. 

GOA worked with Coburn on an amendment that simply allows for state and 
local laws — instead of unelected bureaucrats and anti gun activist 
judges — to govern firearm possession on these lands. 

The anti-gun leadership in both the House and Senate went berserk and 
fought to keep the Coburn amendment from being attached to the 
underlying bill.  Sparks were flying on the floor of the House of 
Representatives today. 

Anti-gun Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY) whined that a “very 
good” credit 
card bill had been “hijacked” by the Coburn amendment.  To 
this, Rep. 
Rob Bishop (R-UT) pointed out that gun control is the policy of tyrants, 
as evidenced by the British attempt to confiscate firearms at Lexington 
and Concord in 1775. 

Congressional leaders and entrenched bureaucrats have fought GOA over 
the NPS gun ban for the past eight years. 

But your activism has finally broken through.  The late Senator Everett 
Dirksen said, “When I feel the heat, I see the light!”  Well, 
you have 
applied a lot of heat.  Members of Congress know that they oppose your 
Second Amendment rights at their own peril. 

As it stands today, both houses of Congress have now passed the Coburn 
amendment — and President Obama is expected to sign the provision into 
law (only because it is part of a larger credit card bill that he really 
wants). 

So, congratulate yourself for winning this long, hard battle.  GOA was 
the leading, and often only, national gun group involved in this fight. 
You involvement was absolutely vital to achieving this win. 

Of course, many more battles lie ahead.  President Obama continues to 
push for the Senate to ratify massive international gun control 
treaties.  There is a battle over a Supreme Court nominee coming up. 
Anti-gun zealots in Congress are aggressively pushing to renew the 
Clinton gun ban and close down gun shows. 

And as the health care debate picks up steam in the coming weeks and 
months, GOA is battling efforts to create a computerized national 
healthcare database.  Such a database can be used to deny people their 
Second Amendment rights in the same way that so many veterans have lost 
their gun rights based only on the diagnoses of a doctor for things like 
combat-related stress. 

GOA will be calling for action on these and other Second Amendment 
issues as they move through Congress. 

In the meantime, have a safe Memorial Day as we remember those who gave 
the ultimate sacrifice so that America would remain “Land of the 
Free.”

Obama Dares Judge to Order Release Of NSA Spy Document

May 19, 2009
Media30-ObamaIssuedSecureNSAApprovedPDAMediaBytesWithShellyPalm825
1-photo-of-nsa-hq-2007
      • 11:25 pm
        Wired.com

      SAN FRANCISCO — Setting the stage for a constitutional showdown, the Obama administration dared a federal judge here late Friday to do what no judge has yet done: disclose classified data the government has declared a national security state secret.

      The administration urged (.pdf) U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker to order such a disclosure in a 3-year-old lawsuit weighing whether a sitting U.S. president may bypass Congress and adopt a program of eavesdropping on Americans without warrants. Such an order, the administration said, could halt three years of convoluted litigation and force the appellate courts to weigh in on the hotly contested issue.

      The classified data in question shows that telephone calls by two American lawyers for a now-defunct Saudi charity were intercepted by the government without warrants in 2004. Without the classified documents admitted as evidence in the case, the aggrieved lawyers for the al-Haramain charity, which the Bush administration designated as a terror group, cannot establish a legal basis to earn them a day in court.

      The eavesdropping evidence in the Islamic charity’s case came to light after the Treasury Department accidentally disclosed a classified document to the plaintiffs five years ago.

      The evidence, which the Bush and Obama administrations have declared a state secret, has never been made public. Counsel for the charity lawyers returned the document to the government, but have continued fighting to use the document to challenge Bush’s spy program, which was adopted in the wake of the 2001 terror attacks. Bush acknowledged the program in 2005, and Congress legalized it in July.

      Judge Walker has ordered the government twice to work with the plaintiff’s lawyers to craft a so-called “protective order” by which only the plaintiffs lawyers would have access to the document to enable the case to be litigated. There would be no public disclosure of the evidence.

      Walker, in January and again in April, demanded the Justice Department, in conjunction with plaintiff’s lawyers, to craft the protective order like those used to prosecute Guantanamo Bay detainees.

      But Walker has never pulled the trigger and actually ordered the disclosure of the documents to the plaintiffs’ lawyers in the case.

      So in a court filing late Friday, the Obama administration again refused to cooperate in creating a protective order. Instead, the administration challenged Walker to go beyond a protective order and actually demand disclosure of the records.

      That would commence the first constitutional showdown surrounding the disclosure of state secrets in a bid to get the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to review Walker’s decision.

      Walker’s earlier orders in the case have not been ripe enough for the San Francisco appellate court to review.

      “Accordingly, the government respectfully requests that, before the court grants plaintiffs’ counsel access to state secrets, the court enter an order directing disclosure or otherwise provide adequate notice of any disclosure to enable the government to seek a stay and take an appeal,” Anthony Coppolino, the Justice Department’s special litigation counsel, wrote Judge Walker.

      The state secrets defense was first recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court in a McCarthy-era lawsuit in 1953, and has been increasingly and successfully invoked by federal lawyers seeking to shield the government from court scrutiny. Lawsuits in which national-security information may be divulged are always tossed by judges at the request of the government –- often by judges who never reviewed any classified data.

      In this case, Walker reviewed the classified material and said the evidence pointed toward illegal spying.

      A George H. W. Bush appointee, Walker has defied the government on state secrets before, but has never ordered the disclosure of evidence the government has declared classified.

      He rejected the Bush administration’s state secrets claim in lawsuits challenging the nation’s telecommunication companies’ complicity with Bush’s once-secret electronic eavesdropping program. But Congress stepped in and immunized the telcos from the lawsuits.

      With then-Sen. Barack Obama’s vote in July, Congress also sanctioned Bush’s spy program that authorized warrantless wiretapping on Americans if they are communicating overseas with suspected terrorists.

      Walker is also weighing a challenge to that immunity legislation.

      Jon Eisenberg, an attorney for the al-Haramain lawyers – Wendell Belew and Asim Gafoor — is urging Walker to disclose the information without the government’s consent.

      “For this case to resume forward progress, the court can simply adopt a protective order under which the court will afford plaintiffs access to the classified filings,” Eisenberg wrote Walker late Friday.

      But if Walker obliges Eisenberg, another constitutional crisis may surface. The Justice Department, in an earlier filing, suggested it may “withdraw” the documents at issue regardless of Walker’s orders.

      That’s because the al-Haramain Islamic Foundation material likely remains locked under the control of the Obama administration’s Litigation Security Section of the Justice Department, according to the record in the case.

      Last month, the government acknowledged that, in 2005, it purposely destroyed 92 videotapes to cover up evidence of mistreatment of U.S. terror suspects — evidence the American Civil Liberties Union was trying to bring to light in a New York federal court lawsuit against the Defense Department.

      http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/05/nsa/

      Please Support Adam Kokesh

      May 19, 2009

      Dear Friends,

      Adam Kokesh has been a tremendous supporter – of both me AND you! As a leader of Iraqi Veterans Against the War, Adam has spent years traveling the country to spread our message of peace, a strong national defense and limited government. Adam has tremendous credibility because of his service in the United States Marine Corps and I have deep respect for his commitment to principle.

      And now, Adam Kokesh needs our support.

      Adam has formed an exploratory committee to run for Congress in his home state of New Mexico. Sending Adam Kokesh to Congress would be a tremendous victory for the Freedom Movement, and if we come together and stand behind him, he has a real chance to win.

      This race will be difficult, but I know Adam has the energy and drive to be successful and pour every ounce of himself into this effort. I urge you to go towww.KokeshforCongress.com and support him in anyway you feel comfortable. Whether it is making a financial contribution, volunteering or getting more information share with your friends and family, Adam needs your support now so he can start down this long journey with momentum and a strong wind at his back.

      We have a chance to help a real patriot and lover of liberty join me in Washington. Again, I hope you will help me support Adam Kokesh for Congress.

      In Liberty,



      Ron Paul

      Google joins Bilderberg cabal

      May 19, 2009

      evil-google-logo

       

      Posted: May 17, 2009
      10:04 pm Eastern

      © 2009 WorldNetDaily

      WASHINGTON – The latest meeting of the secretive, half-century-old Bilderberg Group concluded yesterday outside of Athens with a few arrests, but little news.

      Demonstrators from the political left and right shouted outside the Astir Palace hotel letting some of the wealthiest and most powerful people in the world know they weren’t entirely welcome.

      A photographer for the London Guardian was briefly taken into custody while police insisted he delete pictures he took outside the hotel, which was closed to the public during the three-day meeting.

      A police officer told the Associated Press the resort was being protected by hundreds of police, navy commandos, coast guard speedboats and two F-16 fighter planes. The officer spoke on condition of anonymity, in keeping with his department’s regulations.

      Attendees this year reportedly included U.S. Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner; Larry Summers, the director of the U.S. National Economic Council; Richard Holbrooke, the Obama administration’s special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan; World Bank President Robert Zoellick; European Central Bank President Jean-Claude Trichet and European Commission president Jose Manuel Barroso.

      Get the inside story of the super-secret group of globalist insiders. Learn from author who penetrated Bilderbergers

      Bilderberg attendance is by invitation only. And if you want an invitation, you’d better be extremely rich or extremely powerful.

      New invitees reportedly include the nouveau riche Google Chief Executive Officer Eric Schmidt. Henry Kissinger, a lynchpin of continuity with other secretive internationalist groups including the Council on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission, is a regular attendee, as is Wall Street Journal Editor Paul Gigot.

      Former British cabinet minister, Lord Denis Healey, one of the founders of the group, explained the purpose of the group to Jon Ronson of the Guardian: “Those of us in Bilderberg felt we couldn’t go on forever fighting one another for nothing and killing people and rendering millions homeless. So we felt that a single community throughout the world would be a good thing.”

      Meanwhile, Daniel Estulin, author of “The True Story of the Bilderberg Group,” said before the confab the main topic of the agenda for this meeting was the world economy. He said his sources inside the group told him the movers and shakers would be discussing two options – “either a prolonged, agonizing depression that dooms the world to decades of stagnation, decline, and poverty … or an intense-but-shorter depression that paves the way for a new sustainable economic world order, with less sovereignty but more efficiency.”

      As WND has reported, The Bilderberg Group meets at luxury hotels and resorts throughout the world. Last year’s conference was held at the Westfields Marriott in Chantilly, Va. WND made an effort to gain entry, but was denied. Every four years the conference is held in the U.S. or Canada. The group has an office located in Leiden, South Holland, Netherlands.

      The highly secretive meeting is off limits to press, but past reports from sources that have managed to penetrate the high-security meetings have stated that the meetings emphasize a globalist agenda and dismiss national sovereignty as regressive.

      The BBC declared it to be one of the most influential organizations in the world.

      “It’s officially described as a private gathering,” BBC reported, “but with a guest list including the heads of European and American corporations, political leaders and a few intellectuals, it’s one of the most influential organizations on the planet.”

      Attendees of the Bilderberg conference are not allowed to speak a word of what is discussed in the meeting outside of the group. The group has no website and no minutes are kept of the meetings to ensure secrecy.

      Last year, however, the Bilderberg Group made a press release available listing topics of discussion and providing a general overview of the gathering.

      “Approximately 140 participants will attend, of whom about two-thirds come from Europe and the balance from North America,” the release stated. “About one-third is from government and politics, and two-thirds are from finance, industry, labor, education and communications. The meeting is private in order to encourage frank and open discussion.”

      This year’s event was the 57th annual gathering of the Bilderberg Group, which began meeting in 1954. A scheduled meeting in 1976 was canceled, but if added to the tally, leads some to count this year’s gathering as the 58th.

      http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=98469

      Bilderberg 2009 Attendee List

      May 19, 2009

      Dutch Queen Beatrix,

      Queen Sofia of Spain

      Prince Constantijn Belgian Prince

      Philip Ntavinion Etienne, Belgium

      Joseph Akerman, Germany

      Friends Alexander, United States (NSA)

      Roger Altman, United States

      Arapoglou, Greece (National Bank of Greece governor)

      Ali Bampatzan, Turkey (Deputy Prime Minister responsible for economy)

      Francisco Balsemao bidet, Portugal

      Nicholas Bavarez, France

      Franco Bernampe, Italy (Telecom Italia)

      Xavie Bertran, France

      Carl Bildt, Sweden (Secretary)

      January Bgiorklount, Norway

      Christoph Blocher, Switzerland

      Alexander Bompar, France,

      Boten Anna, Spain

      Henri de Kastios, France

      Juan-Luis Themprian, Spain

      Clark Edmunds, Canada

      Kenneth Clarke, Great Britain (TD Bank Financial Group)

      Luc Cohen, Belgium

      George David, Greece

      Richard Ntiarlav, Great Britain

      Mario Dragan, Italy (Italia VANCA d)

      Elntroup Anders, Denmark

      John Elkan, Italy (Fiat SRA)

      Thomas Enders, Germany (Airbus SAS)

      Jose Entrekanales, Spain

      Isintro phenomena casket, Spain

      Naial Fergkiouson, United States (Harvard University)

      Timothy Gaitner, United States (Minister of Finance)

      Ntermot convergence, Ireland (AIV Group)

      Donald Graham, United States (Washington Post Company)

      Victor Chalmperstant, Netherlands (Leiden University)

      Ernst hirsh Ballin, Netherlands

      Richard Holbrooke, the U.S. (Obama’s special envoy for Afghanistan and Pakistan)

      Jaap De Hoop Scheffer, Netherlands (CC NATO)

      James Jones, the U.S. (National Security Advisor to the White House)

      Vernon Jordan, United States

      Robert Keigkan, United States

      Girki Katainen, Finland

      John profit Britain (Royal Dutch Shell)

      Mustafa Kots, Turkey (Group Kots)

      Roland GT, Germany

      Sami Cohen, Turkey (Journalist)

      Henry Kissinger, United States

      Marie Zose Ktavis, United States (Iudson Institute)

      Neli Kroes, the Netherlands (European Commissioner for Competition)

      Odysseas Kyriakopoulos, Greece (Group S & B)

      Manuela Fereira mode, Portugal (PSD)

      Bernarntino Leon, Spain

      Jessica Matthews, United States

      Philip Meis Tant (EIB)

      Frank MakKena, Canada (TD Bank Financial Group)

      John Mikelthgoueit, Great Britain (journalists, The Economist)

      Tieri Montmprian de France (Franse Instituut) Tieri Montmprian de France (French Institute)

       

      Mario Monti, Italy (University Louitzi Bokoni)

      Angela Miguel Moratinos, Spain (Minister of Foreign Affairs)

      Craig dirty, U.S. (Microsoft)

      Egkil Miklempast, Norway

      Mathias A, Germany

      Olive Denis, France (Le Nouvel Observateur)

      Frederick Ountea, France (Societe Generale)

      Avg Ozntemir, Germany (Green Party)

      Tomazo Pantoa-Siopa, Italy

      Papalexopoulos Dimitris, Greece (Titan)

      Richard Pearl, United States (Αmerican Enterprise Institute)

      David Petreous, United States (head of the Central Administration of the U.S. Armed Forces)

      Pint Manuel, Minister of Finance of Portugal

      Robert Pritsarnt, Canada (Totstar Corporation)

      Romano Prodi, Italy (former Italian Prime Minister)

      Heather Raisman, Canada (Indigo Vooks & Music Inc.).

      Eivint Reitan, Norway

      Michael Rintzier, Czech Republic

      David Rockefeller, U.S.

      Dennis Ross, United States

      Ruby Barnet, United States

      Alberto Rouith-Gkalarthon, Spain

      Susan Sampantzi Ntintzer, Turkey

      Ιntira Samarasekera, Canada

      Rountol Solten, Austria

      Jürgen Stemp, Germany

      Pedro Solbes Mira, Spain (Ministry of Finance)

      Sampatzi Saraz, Turkey (banker)

      Sanata Seketa, Canada (University of Canada)

      Samer Lawrence, United States

      Peter Sutherland, Ireland

      Martin Taylor, UK

      Peter Thiel, USA

      Agan Ourgkout, Turkey

      Eye Vanchanen, Finland, (Prime Minister)

      Daniel Vazela, Switzerland,

      Jeroen van der Veer, Netherlands

      Guy Verhofstadt, Belgium (ex-Prime Minister)

      Paul Volker, the U.S.

      Jacob Valenmpergk, Sweden

      Marcus Valenmpergk, Sweden

      Nout Wellink, the Netherlands

      Viser Hans, Netherlands

      Martin Wolf, Great Britain (Financial Times Journalist)

      James Goulfenson, United States (the former World Bank President)

      Paul Goulfovits, United States

      Farint Zakaria, United States (Analyst Journalist, Newsweek)

      Robert Zoellick, United States (President World Bank)

      Dora Bakoyannis, Greece (Minister of Foreign Affairs)

      Anna Diamantopoulou, Greece (PASOK MP)

      Papathanasiou, Greece (Minister of Finance)

      Alogoskoufis, Greece (former Minister)

      David, Greece (businessman, president of Coca-Cola 3E)

       

      http://www.infowars.com/bilderberg-2009-attendee-list/

      The 13 people who made torture possible

      May 19, 2009

      mc

      The Bush administration’s Torture 13. They authorized it, they decided how to implement it, and they crafted the legal fig leaf to justify it.

      By Marcy Wheeler

      May 18, 2009 | On April 16, the Obama administration released four memos that were used to authorize torture in interrogations during the Bush administration. When President Obama released the memos, he said, “It is our intention to assure those who carried out their duties relying in good faith upon legal advice from the Department of Justice that they will not be subject to prosecution.”

      Yet 13 key people in the Bush administration cannot claim they relied on the memos from the DOJ’s Office of Legal Counsel. Some of the 13 manipulated the federal bureaucracy and the legal process to “preauthorize” torture in the days after 9/11. Others helped implement torture, and still others helped write the memos that provided the Bush administration with a legal fig leaf after torture had already begun.

      The Torture 13 exploited the federal bureaucracy to establish a torture regime in two ways. First, they based the enhanced interrogation techniques on techniques used in the U.S. military’s Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape (SERE) program. The program — which subjects volunteers from the armed services to simulated hostile capture situations — trains servicemen and -women to withstand coercion well enough to avoid making false confessions if captured. Two retired SERE psychologists contracted with the government to “reverse-engineer” these techniques to use in detainee interrogations.

      The Torture 13 also abused the legal review process in the Department of Justice in order to provide permission for torture. The DOJ’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) played a crucial role. OLC provides interpretations on how laws apply to the executive branch. On issues where the law is unclear, like national security, OLC opinions can set the boundary for “legal” activity for executive branch employees. As Jack Goldsmith, OLC head from 2003 to 2004, explains it, “One consequence of [OLC’s] power to interpret the law is the power to bestow on government officials what is effectively an advance pardon for actions taken at the edges of vague criminal statutes.” OLC has the power, Goldsmith continues, to dispense “get-out-of-jail-free cards.” The Torture 13 exploited this power by collaborating on a series of OLC opinions that repeatedly gave U.S. officials such a “get-out-of-jail-free card” for torturing.

      Between 9/11 and the end of 2002, the Torture 13 decided to torture, then reverse-engineered the techniques, and then crafted the legal cover. Here’s who they are and what they did:

       

      Continue Article

      THIS IS A HOAX! IT IS A SWINDLE! WAKE UP AMERICA! DENNIS KUCINICH (Demand Single Payer Health Care)

      May 18, 2009

      AmeriCorps Paramilitary Propaganda Ad

      May 18, 2009

      “Yo, yo there making it legit to be a sucker! Kids are confused enough. Don’t throw it in there face that by joining some Obama smoke screen posse that they will be able to change the world. If you want to be like MLK or the “man standing in front of the tank” you have to stay as far as humanly possible from groups like this or “groups” of any kind!

      “Check-out” from your normal social schedule for a while. Start soaking up your local library. Stick yourself in a an area surrounded by nature, (no cars, no buildings, no soccer moms), and take some fuckin’ mushrooms. You’ll learn more about yourself and the world around you in those six hours than all the puke that was puked on you at puke school.”

      -Fred Face 5/18/09

       

      Infowars
      May 17, 2009

       

      In the distinctly militaristic propaganda here, the AmeriCorps organization City Year adopts Obama’s “change” mantra and remixes it with clips of Mohandas Gandhi, the Rev. Martin Luther King, César Chávez, and Mother Teresa.

      City Year’s pitch is obviously directed at middle school and high school students. In the ad, young people are assembled on a parade ground in bright red jackets. According to a Wikipedia write-up on the organization, “corps members start their day in an event called unity rally. One aspect of unity rally is PT or physical training. Some of the exercises may include jumping jacks and lunges. When PT is completed, Corps members read their sites official newspaper, called Daily or Weekly Briefings.” Comparisons to the Jungsturm Adolf Hitler and Stalin’s Komsomol are unmistakable, especially in regard to the regimented physical training aspects of City Year.

      It should be noted that AmeriCorps is fully integrated into the homeland security apparatus. AmeriCorps VISTA (Volunteers in Service to America) is part of the Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS).

      Frank Morales writes (Homeland Defense: The Pentagon Declares War on America):

      In the wake of 9/11, CNCS was fully integrated into “homeland defense efforts”. In March 2002, the Corporation issued a “notice of availability of funds to strengthen communities and organizations in using service and volunteers to support homeland security.” With an emphasis on “public safety” and “freeing up police time”, the grants offered under the announcement “are to assist communities in getting involved in the war against terrorism on the home front.” In the area of “public safety” the grants “will help provide members to support police departments… in tasks and other functions that can be performed by non-sworn officers.” Now mind you, the volunteers “are not armed, nor can they make arrests, but they carry out vital tasks including organizing neighborhood watch groups…” They also “organize communities to identify and respond to crime and disorder problems…”

      Obama has proposed arming these cadres. Recall his speech on July 2, 2008, when he said: “We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded” as the U.S. military.

      “Since the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, the Corporation has made funding available to organizations whose focus includes homeland security,” declares the  Virginia Commission for National and Community Service. “AmeriCorps engages more than 70,000 Americans each year in intensive service to meet community needs in education, the environment, public safety, homeland security, and other areas,” the IN.gov site states.

      AmeriCorps NCCC (National Civilian Community Corps) is specifically tasked with homeland security, according to The United States Conference of Mayors. “AmeriCorps NCCC, a residential, team-based program, offers approximately 1,300 young people between the ages of 18 to 24 the opportunity to serve their country for ten months on various projects. The primary focus of these are assisting in responding disaster relief and homeland security,” reports Shannon Holmes. The NCCC “are well positioned to leverage existing community efforts,” according to the Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, and “can make significant contributions to homeland security activities in American communities.”

       

      NCCC programs “may also meet homeland security needs, which the Corporation for National Service defines as engaging citizens and communities in preparedness and response to acts of terrorism and other disasters,” explains the AmeriCorps State Concept Paper Guidelines.

      According to reports issued by the Department of Homeland Security, terrorism now stems from domestic “rightwing extremists,” not a far-flung al-Qaeda, and activities such as advocacy of the Second Amendment, pro-life activism, and the growing states’ rights movement threaten the fatherland.

      As noted on Alex Jones’ Infowars and Prison Planet websites last week, Homeland Security has captured the heretofore non-political Boy Scouts and turned it into a paramilitary organization. As the New York Times notes, Boy Scouts are now training to disarm military veterans.

      On April 21, Obama signed the “Serve America Act,” which will use $1.1 billion in earmarks from the 2010 budget to reauthorize and expand programs offered by the Corporation for National and Community Service. The “Serve America Act,” co-sponsored by Massachusetts Senator Edward Kennedy, intends to extend AmeriCorps membership from 75,000 to 250,000 by 2017.

      “Although it’s likely that the recession and citizen goodwill have contributed to soaring numbers in national and international service organizations, it’s also just as likely that most people are just supporting a summoning from America’s new favorite man,” writes the OhMyGov website.

      http://www.infowars.com/americorps-paramilitary-propaganda-ad/

      The Nature of the Current Financial Crisis: The System is designed to exert Total Control over the Lives of Individuals

      May 18, 2009

      obey

      What impresses me in the current financial crisis is the near-total failure of so-called progressives to appreciate the magnitude of what is going on or the level of intelligence behind it. How many will say, for instance, that the crash was deliberately engineered by the creation, then destruction, of the investment bubbles of the last decade?

      When the financial system creates bubbles it drives up the cost of assets far beyond their true value in producing or storing wealth. When the bubbles burst the value of the assets plummets. Those with ready cash then buy them up on the cheap. When the dust settles more wealth has been concentrated in fewer hands. The rich get richer, and ordinary people are left in a deeper condition of indebtedness, poverty, and pressure to perform to the liking of the financial masters.

      Progressives think the system needs to be “reformed.” Maybe the banking system needs to be re-regulated or even nationalized. Maybe it should be possible for families facing loss of their homes to get a lower monthly payment from a bankruptcy court. Maybe the government instead of the private sector should administer student loans.

      What we fail to acknowledge is that the system itself is totalitarian. This means that it is designed to exert total control over the lives of individuals. We are accustomed to use this label when thinking of anachronisms of history like communism or fascism. We do not understand that globalist finance capitalism and the government which protects, enables, or even regulates it are also totalitarian.

      What has happened in the last year as the financial system has seemingly gone belly-up, and is coming back only through massive government bailouts, is part of a pattern that has been around for decades if not centuries. How the controllers work was laid out in 1967 when Dial Press published a leaked copy of The Report from Iron Mountain. This was a study put together by a team of academics and analysts who met at the underground facility in New York that was home to the Hudson Institute.

      The report began by identifying war as the central organizing principle of society. It stated, “War itself is the basic social system, within which other secondary modes of social organization conflict or conspire. It is the system which has governed most human societies of record, as it is today.”

      The report said that, “The basic authority of a modern state over its people resides in its war powers.” It said that any failure of will by the ruling class could lead to “actual disestablishment of military institutions.” The effect on the system would be, the report said, “catastrophic.”

      The appearance of the report caused a sensation when it came out at the onset of the Vietnam War. Officials within the government had no comment, and the report faded into history. But certain of its sections fit the situation in 2009 precisely.

      This is because the report outlined the ways the civilian population of a developed nation could be controlled even in the absence of a large-scale war that disrupted their daily lives. One of these ways was defined as follows: “A…possible surrogate for the control of potential enemies of society is the reintroduction, in some form consistent with modern technology and political process, of slavery….The development of a sophisticated form of slavery may be an absolute prerequisite for social control….” (Cited in Rule by Secrecy by Jim Marrs, 2000.)

      We see the development of such a “sophisticated form of slavery” today. What else can a system be called that subjects the population to skyrocketing personal and household debt, a widening gap between the rich and everyone else, constant warfare justified as necessary to fight “terrorism,” erosion of personal freedoms, constantly expanding power allocated to the military and police, pervasive electronic eavesdropping, complete lack of accountability by politicians for their dishonesty and crimes, a mass media devoted solely to establishment propaganda, etc.

      None of this seems to be diminishing under the Barack Obama administration. Even the economic recovery Obama is attempting to engineer through massive Keynesian deficit spending is expected by economists to be another “jobless” one like that of 2002-2005. Of course the unemployed or those who fear unemployment are easy to control. And the permanent series of Asian land wars George W. Bush instigated for control of resources and geopolitical leverage against Russia and China continue unabated.

      None of this is accidental. As The Report from Iron Mountain made clear four decades ago, it’s what has been planned all along.

      Richard C. Cook is a former federal analyst who writes on public policy issues. His book “We Hold These Truths: the Hope of Monetary Reform” is now available at www.tendrilpress.com. His website is www.richardccook.com

      http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=13551

      May 17, 2009

      Afghan probe: US strike killed 140 people, many children

      May 17, 2009

      afghan_children_poor

      “Obama’s really following through on those campaign promises, huh? Is anyone seeing beyond the making of a political celebrity yet? You realize this is who Obama is right. Nothing more and maybe a little less. He lied to you and he lies to himself every day. It must be a sad and lonely life. Well, I guess it’s not as bad as these Afgan kids whos houses get blown up, limbs amputated, and young bodies mutilated by orders from our Comander & Chief… you guest it, Obama.”

      -F.F. 5/17/09

      By Stephen C. Webster

      U.S. air strikes on Afghanistan’s Farah province on May 4 left 140 dead, an Afghan investigation has concluded. According to reports, 118 of the victims were women and children, the youngest an 8-day-old baby boy.

      “Afghans have heard promises from the US before that they would take all possible steps to avoid civilian casualties,” Human Rights Watch’s Asia director, Brad Adams, said in a statement.

      “But if the US is to have any credibility, this latest outrage needs to be the last of its kind,” he said.

      “The official death toll, announced by the Afghan Defense Ministry, makes the bombing the deadliest incident for civilians since U.S. forces began fighting the Taliban in 2001, and is likely to worsen anger over the presence of foreign troops,” reported Reuters.

      “The US military has acknowledged that ‘a number’ of civilians were killed, but said it was impossible to say how many because all the bodies were buried before investigators arrived,” noted Al Jazeera.

      “Colonel Greg Julian, a US military spokesman, said that two US investigations were still under way, one ordered by commanders in Afghanistan immediately after the incident and another ordered more recently by US Central Command, responsible for the wars in both Afghanistan and Iraq.”

      The investigation, which was reported on earlier this week, concluded Saturday. A list of victims was presented to President Hamid Karzai.

      “Titled ‘list of the martyrs of the bombardment of Bala Boluk district of Farah Province’, it includes the name, age and father’s name of each alleged victim,” Reuters noted in an earlier report.

      “The youngest was listed as 8-day-old baby Sayed Musa, son of Sayed Adam. Fifty-three victims were girls under the age of 18, and 40 were boys. Only 22 were men 18 or older.”

      The U.S. has said Taliban militants in Afghanistan were using civilians as human shields, while other reports assert the fighters left Farah Province before the bombardment began.

      “Chief Petty Officer Brian Naranjo, a U.S. military spokesman, disputed Barakat’s allegations. Naranjo said the airstrikes were in response to an attack by Taliban forces,” reported UPI.

      “The entire operation was in response to the Taliban attack. It was never an offensive engagement. The fight was in reaction,” Naranjo told the wire service.
      http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/05/16/afghan-probe-strike/

      Howard Zinn’s “Three Holy Wars”

      May 17, 2009


      Howard Zinn is an American historian, political scientist, social critic, activist and playwright. He is best known as author of the best-seller ‘A People’s History of the United States’. Zinn has been active in the Civil Rights and the anti-war movements in the United States. Zinn was raised in a working-class family in Brooklyn, and flew bombing missions for the United States in World War II, an experience he now points to in shaping his opposition to war. In 1956, he became a professor at Spelman College in Atlanta, a school for black women, where he soon became involved in the Civil rights movement, which he participated in as an adviser to the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee SNCC and chronicled, in his book SNCC The New Abolitionists. Zinn collaborated with historian Staughton Lynd and mentored a young student named Alice Walker. When he was fired in 1963 for insubordination related to his protest work, he moved to Boston University, where he became a leading critic of the Vietnam War.

      Ron Paul Thought Obama WOULD BE FIGHTING LESS WARS! (5/14/08)

      May 17, 2009

      Israel ups war training despite US discontent

      May 17, 2009

      davari20090515221508078
      The Israeli Air Force (IAF) is training against warplanes in service with Arab nations and Iran amid worries in the White House that Tel Aviv would start a war without US consent.

      The IAF has trained against Soviet-designed MiG-29 Fulcrum fighters — loaned to Israel by an unidentified foreign country — to prepare its pilots for missions where they might have to fight a foreign air force, Israel’s Channel 2 reported.

      The MIG 29, one of the fighter jets used by Arab countries and Iran, has been developed to counter American-made jets such the F-16, used by the IAF.

      “We have studied them and are using them to practice dog fights. It is a good opportunity to see how effective our Air Force can be in dealing with a possible adversary,” an Israeli test pilot told the channel.

      The report comes amid US efforts to gain reassurance from Tel Aviv that it would not launch a surprise attack on Iran without notifying the Obama administration.

      America’s spy chief and CIA director, Leon Panetta, was reportedly sent on a secret mission to Israel in early May to warn its leaders against launching a surprise attack on Iran.

      In a turnabout from the policies of the Bush administration, the Obama White House says it seeks to diplomatically engage Iran over its disputed nuclear program.

      Iran says the program is directed at the civilian applications of the technology. The US and Israel, however, accuse the country of seeking military objectives in its pursuit.

      President Obama’s decision to engage Tehran in direct talks has raised concern in Israel where officials regularly threaten to attack Iran.

      Moreover, the Israeli army has long been preparing for such an eventuality. With the emergence of the hawkish government of Benjamin Netanyahu in Israel, officials in Washington fear that Israel’s new prime minister can blindside the US government and drag President Obama into an undesirable war with Iran.

      The most recent IAF training comes ahead of Netanyahu’s maiden meeting with the US president in Washington where the two leaders will discuss their divisions on stalled peace efforts with the Palestinians as well as Iran’s nuclear program.
      http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=94859&sectionid=351020202

      Resveratrol

      May 17, 2009

      “Who knows what to believe?”

      Tucker Confirms Geithner Presence at Bilderberg Meeting

      May 17, 2009

      r1177910582

      “Geithner just has that aura of a cheat & a sad pathetic little man flowing all around him like water vapor.  Wears big baby diapers and bonnets… shit like that. ”

      -F.F. 5/17/09

      Kurt Nimmo
      Prison Planet.com
      Thursday, May 14, 2009

      Intrepid Bilderberg investigator and reporter Jim Tucker of the American Free Press confirms that U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner will attend this year’s Bilderberg meeting in Athens, Greece.

      Geithner’s presence will be in violation of the Logan Act, intended to prohibit American citizens without authority from interfering in relations between the United States and foreign governments. Congress established the Logan Act in 1799. The only Logan Act indictment occurred in 1803. It involved a Kentucky newspaper article that argued for the formation in the western United States of a separate nation allied to France. No prosecution followed.

      Tucker told Alex Jones today that Geithner will attend the secretive meeting to talk about global government. Geithner recently announced while addressing the Council on Foreign Relations that he supported a proposal to replace the dollar as the world’s reserve currency with a composite of currencies that would be managed by the International Monetary Fund.

      “Geithner, who has overseen Obama’s bailout agenda since taking over from Hank Paulson, is the perfect stooge to implement the global financial regulatory systems that elitists have called for in the aftermath of the financial downturn,” writes Paul Joseph Watson today. “Geithner’s presence at Bilderberg is noteworthy, not only because Bernanke attended immediately before the economic crisis last year, but also because Bilderberg’s agenda for 2009 is heavily weighted towards the financial crisis.”

      Other U.S. officials will attend the meeting. “US Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg will be the first member of President Barack Obama’s administration to have a meeting with Greek officials in Greece, sources said yesterday,” reports Kathimerini, Greece’s international English language newspaper. “Steinberg will be in Athens for a meeting of the international invitation-only club, the Bilderberg Group, which begins today and runs until Saturday. Sources said that Steinberg is due to meet with Prime Minister Costas Karamanlis and Foreign Minister Dora Bakoyannis.”

      “Whether Lucifer will be down there on the sun-loungers remains to be seen,” Roger Boyes and John Carr write sarcastically for the Times Online. “But what we have been able to establish from a World Bank spokesman, Alexis O’Brien, is that the organization’s president, Robert Zoellick, will be in Athens on unspecified business on May 14. And that US Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner’s public schedule is mysteriously empty for the next two days.”

      Robert Zoellick was previously a managing director of Goldman Sachs, United States Deputy Secretary of State, and U.S. Trade Representative. He is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission and attended Bilderberg meetings in 1991, 2003, 2006 and 2007.


      http://www.prisonplanet.com/tucker-confirms-geithner-presence-at-bilderberg-meeting.html

      ISAF: Afghan war statistics show 55% increase in Western troop deaths, April 2009

      May 17, 2009

      May 16, 2009
      Summary

      This important, high-level document, from April 2009, presents 26 slides of graphs, maps, statistics and text about the war in Afghanistan. It was prepared by the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) for Afghanistan and though unclassified, has pages with For Official Use Only, and NATO/ISAF distribution restrictions. The document is formally titled “Unclassified Metrics, April 2009”.

      The documents reveals, among other matters, that compared to a year ago, there has been a 64% increase in insurgent attacks, an 80% increase in IED attacks, a 90% increase in attacks on the Afghan government based in Kabul, and that ISAF (which is mainly comprised of US forces) deaths were up 55%, but recorded civilian deaths were down 44%.

      The maps reveal attack frequency (“kinetic events”) and many other important statistics about the war, including destruction of opium crops. It should be noted that the statistics are likely chosen, with some exceptions, to produce a positive image.

      Additional abbreviations used:

      • ANA – Afghanistan National Army
      • INS – Insurgents
      • PAK – Pakistan
      • SA – Surface to Air
      • ANSF – Afghanistan National Security Forces
      • ANP – Afghanistan National Police
      • BN – Battalion
      • AGE – Anti-Government Elements

      See also ISAF: Afghanistan civilian deaths rises and other statistics, 14 Jan 2009

      DOWNLOAD/VIEW FULL FILE


      http://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/ISAF:_Afghan_war_statistics_show_55%25_increase_in_Western_troop_deaths%2C_April_2009

      Guardian journalist arrested for trying to penetrate secret Bilderberg meet

      May 17, 2009

      May 14, 2009

      This series of articles, first published in The Guardian, and written by Charlie Skelton, is worth reading in full. The author is eventually followed and arrested by Greek police.

      May 12, 2009

      Once a year, it is rumoured, the global elite gather at a luxury hotel to chew the fat and fine-tune their secret plans for world domination. We sent Charlie Skelton in pursuit.

      I don’t quite know why I’m on a flight to Athens, except that it seems like the right thing to do. I’m flying out on a last minute whim to hang around outside a conference which may, or may not, be happening and to which I’ve not been invited. None of you has.

      You won’t have read about it. You won’t have seen a guest list, you won’t see photographs of it. It isn’t happening. It doesn’t exist. I’m flying out to Athens for no reason at all. To have a holiday I don’t deserve and can’t really afford. Maybe catch a little sunstroke, grab some food poisoning, and come home. Pointless.

      Unless, of course, the rumours are true. Unless, as a handful of people are saying, this weekend is Bilderberg. The yearly alignment of the distant stars that shape our destiny. A long weekend at a luxury hotel, where the world’s elite get to shake hands, clink glasses, fine-tune their global agenda and squabble over who gets the best sun loungers. I’m guessing that Henry Kissinger brings his own, has it helicoptered in and guarded 24/7 by a CIA special ops team.

      If it’s happening at all, Kissinger will be here. David Rockefeller will be here. Presidents of banks, and chairmen of boards. The Ben Bernankes and Condoleezza Rices of this world. Heads of oil companies, media magnates, the Queen of the Netherlands and Peter Mandelson. Probably Ben Bernanke, possibly David Cameron. Politicians and financiers from all five corners of the globe (don’t let them tell you there are four). And me.

      I arrived last night, under cover of darkness. I told the cab driver to stop 50 metres from the hotel. He asked why. I couldn’t tell him that it was so I could case the entrance for FBI lenses. I simply muttered that I couldn’t explain. His eyes lit up. “Aha! I see! I know!” What did he know? And who is that following us? A man in a BMW. Definite spook.

      Get a grip.

      The driver drops me on a dark corner of the Athenian Riviera, pats me on the shoulder and says: “You want to smoke some dope?” I decline. I need my senses sharp. I scurry into the hotel, glancing into parked cars, looking for vans with mirrored windows. There aren’t any. At reception they seem to have lost my booking (the tentacles of Bilderberg reach far!), but eventually I get checked in, go upstairs, unpack, have a shower, go downstairs, step outside, look across the street and realise I’ve scurried into the wrong hotel. This is who Bilderberg are up against.

      An embarrassing hour later, I set out again from the right hotel, determined to find the location where Bilderberg is said to be happening. Get some early photos, maybe see Hillary Clinton arrive. Although I’ll settle for Ken Clarke. It’s getting late. Joggers are out. FBI? Secret service? Almost certainly. I trudge on determinedly. After about half an hour I realise I turned the wrong way out of my hotel and I am walking up a deserted coastline towards Athens. I go back to bed. Another untroubled night for Bilderberg.

      At breakfast, a heavy-set man with hairy forearms sits opposite me and fiddles with his mobile phone. Definite spook. He eats a hard-boiled egg and watches me struggling with my Coco Pops. My first discovery of the day is to find out what happens to Coco Pops when they’re left to sit for a decade in a Greek presentation dish. They turn to gravel.

      The spook leaves before me. He got what he came for: a photo of me, sneaked on his mobile and wired already to Quantico in Virginia. And a hard-boiled egg.

      Outside, it’s a beautiful day, the air smells of sun and seashells, and there is no sign of a global cabal meeting anywhere near. I have a wander. From my meagre, third-hand, internet forum sources, I think I know the hotel where Bilderberg is happening: the Astir Palace resort. Further from my hotel than it looked on Google maps. Note to self: always check the scale on the zoom.

      A dozen promontories and dusty dead-ends later, and I’m ready to give up. It’s too hot. I don’t have a sunhat. The world is going to hell and Vouliagmeni is full of litter. What is it with the Greeks and bins? Do they not see them? Do they not believe they exist? Hidden in plain sight … it’s the Bilderberg way. It’s too hot. I need some water. Bilderberg’s nemesis: journalist Jim Tucker Bilderberg’s nemesis: journalist Jim Tucker. Photograph: Charlie Skelton

      And then, on the pavement ahead, there he was. I recognised him from the videos. The braces, the loose shirt, the grizzle. The tattered leather briefcase, packed with dark secrets. It was the doyen of Bilderberg hunters himself, Jim Tucker. I addressed him.

      “Excuse me … Mr Tucker?”

      “Let’s go into my hotel and talk.”

      Tucker is a man in a hurry. He’s not getting any younger, and his old enemy Bilderberg is getting stronger.

      “Hot enough for you?” I venture.

      “Too hot for a fatboy,” he growls.

      The exchange makes me feel like a resistance fighter exchanging codewords. Assured of my credentials, Tucker gestures me into his hotel lobby. I can’t believe my luck. Suddenly I’m not alone, I’m not hallucinating. Bilderberg is here. Where you find Jim Tucker, you know Bilderberg isn’t far away. He’s a herring gull, telling me there are whales beneath.

      Tucker lights a non-filter cigarette, lays his hat upon the table, and settles back into the lobby sofa to talk …

      Charlie Skelton will be filing regular updates from Athens until he is arrested by shadowy figures in dark glasses

      Continue Article

      Shadowy Bilderberg group meet in Greece – and here’s their address

      May 17, 2009

      bilderberg round table

      May 13, 2009

      By Roger Boyes and John Carr (The Times, UK)

      Don’t tell anyone, don’t breathe a word, but the world’s most powerful men are meeting secretly again to save the planet from economic catastrophe. Oh, and their address, should you want to send them your opinions, is: c/o Nafsika Astir Palace Hotel, Apollonos Avenue 40, 16671 Vouliagmeni, Greece.

      Bed space is a bit tight there for the next two days while the Bilderberg illuminati hold their private conclave in the five-star Greek hotel. Every year since 1954 a club of about 130 senior or up-and-coming politicians gather at the fireside of a secluded hotel with top bankers and a sprinkling of royalty to discuss burning issues, to trade confidences and just stay abreast of the I-know-something-you-don’t-know circuit. No lists of participants are disclosed, no press conferences are held; spill the beans and you’re out of the magic circle.

      For those of us standing outside the locked gates all that is left is to hope that they will sleep well, avoid jet ski injury and solve our problems for us. For the Bilderbergers it is a little like that recent MI5 recruitment ad: “See all your best work go unnoticed!”

      Each country delegates two people to the steering committee that is the intellectual hub of Bilderberg. In the past Kenneth Clarke, the Shadow Business Secretary, and Martin Taylor, formerly head of Barclays Bank, have had their hand on the British tiller.

      This year the club is going to talk about depression. “According to the pre-meeting booklet sent out to attendees, Bilderberg is looking at two options,” says the Bilderberg-watcher Daniel Estulin — “either a prolonged, agonising depression that dooms the world to decades of stagnation, decline and poverty — or an intense but shorter depression that paves the way for a new sustainable economic world order, with less sovereignty but more efficiency.”

      Since Bilderberg does not officially exist, it cannot deny anything and is therefore manna from heaven for the conspiracy theorist. Eurosceptics are convinced that the future development of the European Union was plotted here — EU commissioners have always been welcomed into the coven, with Peter “We are intensely relaxed about people getting filthy rich” Mandelson a particular favourite. Margaret Thatcher, it is said, was a shy debutante at a Bilderberg meeting in 1975.

      Jim Tucker, veteran stalker of the Bilderberg club meetings, claims that Mrs Thatcher was ordered “to dismantle British sovereignty, but she said, ‘no way’, so they had her sacked”. Left-wing conspiracy theorists believe that Bilderbergers form a capitalist nucleus, and there is a germ of truth in this. The meetings were started in the Netherlands, in the Hotel de Bilderberg, near Arnhem, by the Polish exile Joseph Retinger. He was worried about growing anti-Americanism and the advance of Communism in Western Europe. Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands agreed to sponsor the idea, the head of the Central Intelligence Agency, Walter Bedell Smith, threw his weight behind it and so did the White House.

      The Bilderberg consensus is that national problems are best solved by an internationally oriented elite, that a global network of decision-makers should have a common language and that the boundaries are fluid between the monied and the political classes.

      And so there has been a natural bias towards inviting conservatives and market liberals. The only socialists invited are those who “understand money”.

      Ed Balls has taken part and the most indiscreet Bilderberger of all time was Denis Healey, the former Labour Chancellor and fierce Atlanticist.

      “To say we were striving for a one-world government is exaggerated, but not wholly unfair,” Lord Healey told the author Jon Ronson for his book Them: Adventures with Extremists. “Those of us in Bilderberg felt we couldn’t go on for ever fighting one another for nothing. So we felt that a single community throughout the world would be a good thing.”

      Another way of viewing the club is that of Metropolitan Seraphim, the bishop of Piraeus, who said that the Bilderbergers represented a “criminal cabal of world Zionism and its efforts to set up a cruel world dictatorship under the headship of Lucifer”. This line is quite common on the blogosphere, where the club’s secrecy is taken as evidence of evil intentions.

      Whether Lucifer will be down there on the sun-loungers remains to be seen. But what we have been able to establish from a World Bank spokesman, Alexis O’Brien, is that the organisation’s president, Robert Zoellick, will be in Athens on unspecified business on May 14. And that US Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner’s public schedule is mysteriously empty for the next two days. Jo Ackermann, head of Deutsche Bank, will be travelling “somewhere in Europe”. Jean-Claude Trichet, head of the European Central Bank, will not be around until the end of the week.

      You get the drift. Something is going on. If only somebody would let us in on the secret.

      Thanks to Roger Boyes, John Carr and The Times for covering this issue. Copyright remains with the aforementioned.

      Source documents

      http://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/Shadowy_Bilderberg_group_meet_in_Greece_-_and_here%E2%80%99s_their_address

      The Worlds Biggest Cock Suckers

      May 17, 2009

      May 17, 2009

      President Obama Continues Assault on the Second Amendment

      May 17, 2009
      THURSDAY, 16 APRIL 2009 18:48

      By John Velleco
      Director of Federal Affairs

      President Obama is determined to eradicate the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding American citizens.

      In recent meetings with Mexican President Felipe Calderón, the American President promised to urge the U.S. Senate to pass an international arms control treaty. 

      The treaty, cumbersomely titled the “Inter-American Convention Against the Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms, Ammunition, Explosives, and Other Related Materials” (known by the acronym CIFTA), was signed by President Bill Clinton, but never ratified by the Senate. 

      President Obama is hoping to capitalize on an increased Democrat majority and push its quick ratification.  The U.S. is one of four nations that have not ratified the treaty.

      If ratified and the U.S. is found not to be in compliance with any provisions of the treaty — such as a provision that would outlaw reloading ammunition without a government license — President Obama would be empowered to implement regulations without Congressional approval. 

      Supporters of CIFTA claim the treaty is not a threat to the Second Amendment, but only a “symbolic” gesture.  But symbolic of what?  That America really is to blame for problems of violence and drug gangs in a foreign country?  That the American government can be pressed by a foreign country to alter the Second Amendment?

      If the kind of “change” that Obama wants is for the United States to take its marching orders from third world countries regarding our gun rights, we’re in big trouble!

      The fact is, this treaty will do NOTHING to combat the violence in Mexico, but it will go a LONG WAY toward eroding our ability to protect the right to keep and bear arms through our elected officials.

      Even if America BANNED ALL GUNS, the violence in Mexico would not go away.  After all, the cartels are funded — to the tune of billions of dollars — by products (illegal drugs) that are already completely banned.  How much more evidence is needed that a “prohibition” will not work?

      Actually, gun control proposals such as reinstating the ban on semi-automatic firearms will make Americans less safe, especially if violence spills over to this side of the border. 

      As Wyoming Senator John Barasso pointed out in a recent trip to El Paso, Texas: “Why would you disarm someone when they potentially could get caught in the crossfire?… The United States will not surrender our second-amendment rights for Mexico’s border problem.”

      President Obama disagrees and he continues to spread the myth about how many guns recovered in Mexico come from the U.S.  “More than 90% of the guns found in Mexico are not bought [in Mexico], but in the United States,” he said. 

      William La Jeunesse and Maxim Lott set the record straight and debunked “the 90% number” in a FOXNews.com report: “It’s just not true,” they said.  According to their report, the real number is closer to 17%.

      In other words, the Obama administration is pushing to disarm law-abiding Americans based on a massive misinformation campaign.

      So how are the cartels armed if firearms are not pouring across the U.S. border?  Keeping in mind that the cartels control BILLIONS of dollars, La Jeunesse and Lott shed some light on how they obtain the overwhelming majority of their guns:

      — The Black Market. Mexico is a virtual arms bazaar, with fragmentation grenades from South Korea, AK-47s from China, and shoulder-fired rocket launchers from Spain, Israel and former Soviet bloc manufacturers.

      — Russian crime organizations. Interpol says Russian Mafia groups such as Poldolskaya and Moscow-based Solntsevskaya are actively trafficking drugs and arms in Mexico.

      — South America. During the late 1990s, the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) established a clandestine arms smuggling and drug trafficking partnership with the Tijuana cartel, according to the Federal Research Division report from the Library of Congress.

      — Asia. According to a 2006 Amnesty International Report, China has provided arms to countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America. Chinese assault weapons and Korean explosives have been recovered in Mexico.

      — The Mexican Army. More than 150,000 soldiers deserted in the last six years, according to Mexican Congressman Robert Badillo. Many took their weapons with them, including the standard issue M-16 assault rifle made in Belgium.

      — Guatemala. U.S. intelligence agencies say traffickers move immigrants, stolen cars, guns and drugs, including most of America’s cocaine, along the porous Mexican-Guatemalan border. On March 27, La Hora, a Guatemalan newspaper, reported that police seized 500 grenades and a load of AK-47s on the border. Police say the cache was transported by a Mexican drug cartel operating out of Ixcan, a border town.

      In addition, despite efforts to clean up the system, corruption in the Mexican government is rampant.  An article in the New York Times late last year noted that, “One of Mexico’s most notorious drug cartels made huge cash payments to officials in the Mexican attorney general’s office in exchange for confidential information on anti-drug operations… the cartel might have had an informant inside the American embassy.”

      The bribes ranged from $150,000 to $450,000 each.  Clearly, these gangs have the resources not only to buy firearms by the planeload, but they can buy the planes, too!  Politicians on both sides of the border seem to ignore that they’re dealing with multi-billion dollar criminal organizations that will always be able to get firearms.

      One would think that Mexico President Felipe Calderón and Attorney General Eduardo Medina Mora would have their hands full cleaning up a huge mess in their own country, but they’re not too busy to meddle in U.S. affairs. 

      As the Times noted in an article that coincided with Obama’s Mexico trip, “Mexican officials have repeatedly called on the United States to clamp down on the flow of weapons and are likely to bring it up again with President Obama on Thursday.”

      Mr. Mora even lectured that “The Second Amendment was never meant to arm foreign criminal groups.”  

      American office holders should be more concerned about upholding their oath to support and defend the U.S. Constitution than kowtowing to “blame America first” foreign politicians. 

      http://gunowners.org/obamaacalderon.htm

      Yet Another Anti-gun Radical up for a State Department Post

      May 17, 2009
      THURSDAY, 07 MAY 2009 22:07

           We realize it sounds like old news.

           The Obama administration — the one that, during the campaign, “was not going to go after our guns” — 
      has nominated yet another anti-gun crazy for a high federal post. 

           This one is Harold Hongju Koh, a Yale Law Professor nominated to be chief legal guru for Hillary Clinton’s State Department. 

           And, even by the standards of liberal craziness (and tax evasion) that we have come to expect from Obama administration officials, this guy is off the charts.

       

       He wants to apply Sharia law here, proposes to send U.S. citizens for trial by international tribunals, and blasts American conduct in international forums. 

           Koh has also gone out of his way to be at the front of the cheerleading squad to get the UN into the business of regulating Second Amendment-protected conduct in the United States.

           Specifically, in a lecture reprinted in the Fordham Law Review, he excoriates former UN Ambassador John Bolton for insisting that any UN regulation of guns not contain “measures abrogating the Constitutional right to bear arms.”  This assertion that our international agreements should actually protect the Second Amendment was, in Koh’s words, “most amazing to a student of American constitutional law.”

           Koh went on to argue that it was ridiculous to insist that UN agreements protect the Second Amendment because “the Second Amendment had never been used to overturn any American federal gun law.”  Besides, protested Koh, the conference documents of the anti-gun conference had made it “amply clear” that they would not impede legal gun ownership. 

           Well, it’s time we make it “amply clear” that anti-gun crazies should not be in positions where they can negotiate away Second Amendment rights in international conventions.

      Gun Owners of America urges the Senate to reject this radical, anti-gun nominee.

      http://gunowners.org/koh.htm

      Pentagon Preps Soldier Telepathy Push

      May 17, 2009

      “Nahh. We don’t live in a eugenic nightmare of a country. Eat your mac & cheese and watch you TV cause everything is cool. No need to show outrage or to speak out. That would be displaying your individuality and your human nature. Thats all gone now. We are machines to protect our land from invisible enemies. We are working muscle to pay taxes to our masters. Don’t think we have a chip for that now. Life is grand.”

      -Fred Face 5/16/09

       

      04_smartsensor

      • 10:46 am  
      Wired.com

      Forget the battlefield radios, the combat PDAs or even infantry hand signals. When the soldiers of the future want to communicate, they’ll read each other’s minds.

      At least, that’s the hope of researchers at the Pentagon’s mad-science division Darpa. The agency’s budget for the next fiscal year includes $4 million to start up a program called Silent Talk. The goal is to “allow user-to-user communication on the battlefield without the use of vocalized speech through analysis of neural signals.” That’s on top of the $4 million the Army handed out last year to the University of California to investigate the potential for computer-mediated telepathy.

      Before being vocalized, speech exists as word-specific neural signals in the mind. Darpa wants to develop technology that would detect these signals of  “pre-speech,” analyze them, and then transmit the statement to an intended interlocutor. Darpa plans to use EEG to read the brain waves. It’s a technique they’re also testing in a project to devise mind-reading binoculars that alert soldiers to threats faster the conscious mind can process them.

       

      The project has three major goals, according to Darpa. First, try to map a person’s EEG patterns to his or her individual words. Then, see if those patterns are generalizable — if everyone has similar patterns. Last, “construct a fieldable pre-prototype that would decode the signal and transmit over a limited range.”

      The military has been funding a handful of  mind-tapping technology recently, and already have monkeys capable of telepathic limb control. Telepathy may also have advantages beyond covert battlefield chatter. Last year, the National Research Council and the Defense Intelligence Agency released a report suggesting that neuroscience might also be useful to “make the enemy obey our commands.” The first step, though, may be getting a grunt to obey his officer’s remotely-transmitted thoughts.

      – Katie Drummond and Noah Shachtman

      http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009/05/pentagon-preps-soldier-telepathy-push/