Tag Archives: government

“Remember. Remember The 5th of November”

V FOR VENDETTA

V FOR VENDETTA (Photo credit: Adam Crowe)

So…once more we come to Guy Fawkes day. The day celebrated and, of late, remembered as a result of the 2005 movie ” V For Vendetta“. My question to you is this. Can any of you think of a reason to protest anything your government is doing currently?

Obviously I am not advocating any form of violence against individuals or even infrastructure as that path becomes self-defeating rather quickly. What I am saying is this. Find a way to voice your anger. Write on your blog. Add something to your Facebook page. Hell-send a letter to the editor of your local newspaper but do something.

The Governments of the world are in direct opposition now to the interests of the people who live on this planet. It is time we stood up, for those who have not been doing so, and let them know we know!!! The truth of the matter is that they are a bunch of rats that live in the dark and only attack when they can gang up on those who have become separated from the crowd. The young, the poor, the aged, the disabled. 

When the rest of us choose to become protective of those who cannot protect themselves and say NO MORE, things will begin to change. One example where people can stand up is in Colorado where this tax on cannabis will put the use of pot back into government control and will push the people who truly need it, or just want to use it for their own pleasure to a place where it is financially beyond their reach. A new black market will then start up and the drug war will continue.

Whatever the cause you choose, choose something today to speak out against. The Wars in…well where aren’t we fighting wars now? Afghanistan, Pakistan, Syria, Iraq, several African nations and soon Iran. How about the NSA, CIA, TSA, DHS ect. ect. Or Fracking for gas or Fuckishima (It was deliberate). Or the fact that our President is quoted in a new book as saying he is “good at killing”.

Anyway, I am sure that everyone can come up with at least one thing that really bothers them about the US Government or whatever government claims to rule over them. Speak out. Be An Anarchist for a day!

Anarchism is a set of political philosophies that hold the state to be undesirable, unnecessary, or harmful

`

Revolution is Coming

Remember, Remember the 5th of November!”

`


DOJ Targeted FOX News Reporter For Espionage

This is ludicrous! These people are crazy. It is time to stand up. I don’t care for Alex Jones‘ style but if the facts are true, and from my research they are, then what he is saying is well worth listening to. At the very least for the information. (E)

`

 


New Normal Terror Attack

Excellent article about conditioning by Tony Soldo at The People’s Voice .org (E)

Original: http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/TPV3/Voices.php/2013/04/20/new-normal-terror-attack

April 20th, 2013

By Tony Soldo

One of the objectives of the false flag Boston Marathon bombing terror attack, was to create fear, confusion, anger, and hatred, in the subconscious minds of the masses, the millions of people who absorb and accept the “New Normal”, whenever the people in power implement a tactic or agenda

(Problem).

After the media saturates the minds of the masses, the government has a greater role in their lives to rule over them and control them.

The media conditioned the masses to cheer the police and soldiers after the suspect was caught, and the whole city of Boston came out of their houses, cheering the soldiers and police, waving their flags, and singing the national anthem

(Reaction).

Now, anytime there is any kind of attack or even a suspected threat, the government can just lock down a whole city, send in the troops, stop and search anyone, go door to door, invading homes, forbidding Citizens to leave their houses, and businesses to close, etc…and the majority of people will not only allow this “New Normal”, they will cheer and sing while the oppressors are oppressing them.

(Solution).

The New Normal is a terror attack against the people, and the minds of the people.

Everything that happened after the False Flag Boston Bombing, was meant to create a new, expanded role of government and soldiers and police, on the streets of the USA.

They can violate the rule of law, the Bill of Rights, including the 4th Amendment, Posse Comitatus, Habeas Corpus, and the Miranda Act.

This False Flag attack will be used to expand the Police State, take away more of our fast evaporating freedom and liberties, but also they will use this crisis to pass laws and bills like the CISPA act, that allows the government to extract all personal information on anyone from any source, without a warrant, and pass tougher laws demanding deeper background checks, and create a grid where all of our personal information can be stored and shared by any and all law enforcement, instantly.

Look for these measures to be hidden in any new immigration reform bills (the terror suspects will be presented as an example for stronger background checks).

And also, this attack will give the politicians more “ammo” to pass more laws taking away the people’s right to keep weapons to defend themselves.

All major False Flag Events serve many purposes, and this one will serve at least three, creating the new normal in our society and nation.

1) Police State, with troops and cops patrolling the streets, searching people and homes, whenever there is any standoff (threats, or even bank robberies and other domestic crimes).

2) More information gathering, storing, and sharing, on all of us.

3) More laws limiting and restricting the people’s right to protect themselves with weapons.

Add to that two more aspects of the expanding Police State:

More cameras on the streets, and more public announcements encouraging people to spy on their neighbors and report suspicious behavior.

These new normal conditions would be impossible to implement all at once, but, when down incrementally, step by step, over time, they are almost impossible to stop.

The only hope is Citizen activism.

Start researching issues and topics like: state sponsored false flag terror, police state, martial law, war profiteering, corporate colonialism, and individual liberty, and human rights.

Then find alternative information and news sites that don’t play the left / right game, but rise above to show the big picture of how our individual freedoms and liberties are being stolen from us and the people in power are actively gaining more power and more wealth, everyday, and they will never stop on their own, like any addict, they can’t stop.

They are addicted to power and money, and they need intervention.

These power hungry people are operating in Washington DC, and on Wall Street, they are nothing more than businessmen and actors, playing a role, they are no better than you or I, and do not deserve our respect, allegiance, or obedience.

The most important thing you can do is start talking to everyone, your family, friends, neighbors, co-workers, and complete strangers.

Share with them some new information that you are discovering while searching alternative sites for truth hidden from us by the mainstream media and the government.

Stop getting your news from these two sources, (Mainstream Media, and Government), question everything you see and hear, use your critical thinking skills, and separate the truth from the lies, and encourage everyone around you to do the same.

Take all that you find, that is good and true, and move forward, leaving the bad, and the lies behind.

Peace.

-###-

https://www.facebook.com/TonySoldo?ref=tn_tnmn

Tony Soldo is a Christian Pacifist Anarchist


Real Evil: Attributing the Creation of Money to the State

Another good article from the folks over at the Daily Bell! (E)

MONDAY, APRIL 08, 2013

By Staff Report
Sorry, Libertarians, History Shows Bitcoin Isn’t the Future … As we consider the digital-currency phenomenon that is
Bitcoin, bear in mind that there are, broadly speaking, two accounts of the origin and history of money. One is elegant, intuitive and taught in many introductory economics textbooks. The other is true. The financial economist Charles Goodhart, a former member of the Bank of England‘s Monetary Policy Committee, laid out the two views in a 1998 paper, “The Two Concepts of Money: Implications for the Analysis of Optimal Currency Areas.” – Bloomberg

Dominant Social Theme: Money comes from government.

Free-Market Analysis: This is the fundamental fault line between freedom and statism and one reason we’ve spent so much time writing about it and have been subject to so many attacks.

The meme – and we early recognized it as such – that money is a state-sponsored occurrence can be found in such books as Ellen Brown‘s Web of Debt. It is a Greenbacker analysis and one that yields the conclusion that if money is state-sponsored than we can use elements of the state to “change” money and make it more equitable.

This is why the enemies of freedom and solvency are constantly trying to make the argument that money comes from the state. The Bloomberg article, above, makes the same points.

But money did not come from the state. It is ludicrous to argue that it did.

The state cannot make anything and has no incentive to innovate. There is not one single invention so far as we are aware that comes from the state. Everything is invented first in the private market and then adapted as necessary by government.

And that goes for money, too, which developed out of a competitive process, as Murray Rothbard pointed out, between various currencies.

But that is not what the sophists want us to think. They want us to believe that money was invented in the neolithic as a result of war. Here’s more from the article:

The first view, the “M View,” is named after the Austrian 19th century economist and historian Karl Menger, whose 1882 essay “On the Origins of Money” is the canonical statement of an argument that goes back to Aristotle:

As subsistence farming gives way to more complex economies, individuals want to trade. Simple barter (eight bushels of wheat for one barrel of wine) quickly becomes inefficient, because a buyer’s desires won’t always match up with a seller’s inventory. If a merchant comes through the village with wine and all a farmer has to offer is wheat, but the merchant wants nuts, there’s no trade and both parties walk away unfulfilled. Or the farmer has to incur the costs of finding another merchant who will exchange wheat for nuts and then hope that the first merchant hasn’t moved on to the next village.

But if the merchant and the farmer can exchange some other medium, then the trade can happen. This medium of exchange has to be what Menger calls “saleable,” meaning that it’s easily portable, doesn’t spoil over time and can be divided. Denominated coins work, shells and beads also fit the bill. So do cigarettes in POW camps and jails and Tide laundry detergent for drug dealers. This process, Menger argues, happens without the intervention of the state: “Money has not been generated by law. In its origin it is a social, and not a state institution.”

Goodhart points out, however, that Menger is just wrong about the actual history of physical money, especially metal coins. Goodhart writes that coins don’t follow Menger’s account at all. Normal people, after all, can’t judge the quality of hunks of metal the same way they can count cigarettes or shells. They can, however, count coins. Coins need to be minted, and governments are the ideal body to do so. Precious metals that become coins are, well, precious, and stores of them need to be protected from theft. Also, a private mint will always have the incentive to say its coins contain more high-value stuff than they actually do. Governments can last a long time and make multi-generational commitments to their currencies that your local blacksmith can’t.

But why oversee money creation in the first place? This brings us to the second theory of money, which Goodhart calls the “C View,” standing for “cartalist” (chartalist is a more common spelling). To simplify radically, it starts with the idea that states minted money to pay soldiers, and then made that money the only acceptable currency for paying taxes. With a standard currency, tax assessment and collection became easier, and the state could make a small profit from seiginorage.

The state-coin connection has far more historical support than Menger’s organic account. As Goodheart points out, strong, state-building rulers (Charlemagne, Edward I of England) tend to be currency innovators, and he could have easily added Franklin D. Roosevelt’s taking the U.S. off the gold standard in 1933 or Abraham Lincoln financing the Civil War with newly issued greenbacks. The inverse is true too: When states collapse, they usually take their currencies with them. When Japan stopped minting coins in 958, the economy reverted to barter within 50 years. When the Roman Empire collapsed in Western Europe, money creation splintered along new political borders.

If money came about independent of states, as according to the M View, one would think it would outlast transient political structures. Historically, however, this tends not to be the case, a strong argument in favor of the C View.

The article goes on to attack Bitcoin – a “currency” about which we have longstanding doubts. But even though the article is aimed at Bitcoin, what is most disturbing about the article is its mischaracterization of fundamental economic literacy.

The crux sentence of this article is “A private mint will always have the incentive to say its coins contain more high-value stuff than they actually do.”

There are no words to describe the maliciousness of such a misstatement. It really plumbs the depth of depravity.

It is the old market failure argument, but updated and casually tossed off with breathtaking arrogance. If one follows the logic of this statement, one arrives at the conclusion that the private market will always attempt to mislead and that government is a necessity to insure against private market corruption.

If one accepts this nonsensical perspective then everything else flows logically. Government was necessary to create money, to supervise it, etc.

Additionally, and most importantly, since government has MADE money, the process of government can be used to change money and make its creation and distribution more ethical and fair.

And, in fact, this is what Money Power hopes you believe.

There is a huge push underway to get people to believe that if governments are responsible for money instead of “private” monopoly central bankers, the world will benefit and societies will be financially healthy again.

Nothing can be further from the truth. Make no mistake: Those who support Greenbackerism and speak approvingly of Silvio Gesell and Major Douglas are in league with Money Power. They are propounding a myth – that government itself can be the antidote to Money Power.

But only the free market can create and circulate money fairly. Money Power controls the state, which is why statists in the employ of Money Power, want to propound the falsity that the State can liberate money.

It is a con, a falsehood … a dominant social theme.

It starts with the idea that the state created money, a falsehood on every level. It continues with the idea that the state-run money can be controlled by “the people” who can use monopoly central bank for their own benefit. This is of course the language of the Third Reich and the fascism that is now coming back into fashion.

China, India, Russia … we are supposed to believe that because these countries have public central banks, their currency regimes are “better.” What nonsense.

Conclusion: Don’t fall for this sophism. Money was created by the free market and the sooner that the creation and circulation of money is returned to the market via currency competition (including gold and silver) the better off we shall be.


The Main Reason Why Americans Need to Stand Against A War With Iran-The People of Iran

The Difference Between You & Me

“The world is not divided between East and West. You are American, I am Iranian, we don’t know each other, but we talk together and we understand each other perfectly. The difference between you and your government is much bigger than the difference between you and me. And the difference between me and my government is much bigger than the difference between me and you. And our governments are very much the same.”

Marjane Satrapi, Author


The Will Of The People Doesn’t Mean Jack To Drug Warriors

Center for a Stateless    Society

building public awareness of left-wing market anarchism

I can not say I always agree with all this site stands for but much is worth reading including the following article. (E):

Posted by  on Mar 7, 2013

The Associated Press reports that eight former DEA administrators are urging the Obama administration to sue Washington and Colorado over their voter-approved moves toward  marijuana legalization.

One former chief, Peter Bensinger, fears that successful legalization efforts will lead to “a domino effect” in the US.  Where have we heard that phrase before?  Bensinger continues breathlessly, “My fear is that the Justice Department will do what they are doing now: do nothing and say nothing … If they don’t act now, these laws will be fully implemented in a matter of months.”

So drug warriors are losing their minds over Colorado and Washington.  Good!  We can only hope that Bensinger’s dire predictions come true and that more Americans are indeed waking up to the absurdity of marijuana prohibition.

The former DEA bureaucrats argue, accurately, that marijuana remains illegal under the Controlled Substances Act.  Even in cases involving medical marijuana, the federal government may abuse the commerce clause as a rationale to criminalize users, growers and sellers of marijuana (per Gonzales v. Raich).  The commerce clause has become the federal government’s drug war equivalent of  catch-all disorderly conduct statutes in the states.

Unfortunately, these goons have a solid case to present to US Attorney General Holder.  In New State Ice Co. v. Liebmann (1932), US Supreme Court Justice Louis D. Brandeis said, “It is one of the happy incidents of the federal system that a single courageous state may, if its citizens choose, serve as a laboratory; and try novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country.”  But today’s political class views federalism as archaic.

Hopefully the administration will choose to ignore this thuggish recommendation.  But if they do decide to litigate, this will be another sign that the feds don’t give a damn about the  will of the people.  Liberty-loving Americans should respond to this federal intrusion with a massive wave of civil disobedience.

Let’s start by publicly shaming the DEA heads mentioned by the AP: “Bensinger, John Bartels, Robert Bonner, Thomas Constantine, Asa Hutchinson, John Lawn, Donnie Marshall and Francis Mullen.”  Get to know their names, libertarians.  They are your enemies!

Then, let’s publicize the efforts of these authoritarians to undermine the voters of Colorado and Washington.  Ask them why they continue to support a policy with openly racist origins which has resulted in mass incarceration.  Publicly reveal the motives  of the police agencies that enforce these laws .  When drug warriors drone on about “protecting the children,” confront them with the horrific reality of wrong door raids, slaughtered family pets and children terrorized with flash-bangs.  Wherever an apologist for prohibition gives a speech or attends a meeting, he or she should be met by throngs of boisterous picketers.

As we expose these petty tyrants, we should also seek opportunities to throw a wrench into the machinery of prohibition.  A mass movement of jury nullification in drug cases may be a promising tactic.  Prosecutors can use voir dire to remove one or two questionable jurors, but what if nullification becomes widespread?  They can’t remove all of us.  In the future,  we should view jury duty as a chance to liberate non-violent people from the state’s clutches.

In Tao Te Ching, the Chinese sage Lao Tzu writes, “The more laws are posted, the more robbers and thieves there are.”  Time and time again, this observation has been proven correct. The violence of the drug war is perpetuated by government, yet officials insist they must keep fighting.  In their vile attempt to protect their old turf, former DEA bosses show their true colors.  They are gangsters with federal pensions.  They will do anything to ensure that they and their ilk continue to get their cut of drug war booty.  It is up to us to expose their racket and to finish the job sensible voters in Colorado and Washington started in November.

C4SS Fellow Dave Hummels is a Left-libertarian writer from Central Illinois. He earned a bachelor’s degree in criminal justice from the University of Illinois-Springfield. Dave has over a decade of experience in the field of healthcare security and is also a licensed emergency medical technician.

 


Under Capitalism, Welfare State’s Main Function Is Corporate Welfare

by Kevin Carson

Thanks to a Twitter friend, I just stumbled across remarks from 2005 in which Walmart CEO Lee Scott called on Congress to pass a higher minimum wage:

“The U.S. minimum wage of $5.15 an hour has not been raised in nearly a decade and we believe it is out of date with the times. We can see first-hand at Wal-Mart how many of our customers are struggling to get by. Our customers simply don’t have the money to buy basic necessities between pay checks.”

At first glance this seems decidedly odd, coming as it does from the CEO of a company which — as you know if you’ve been following the Black Friday news — is notorious for keeping its workers’ pay as low as humanly possible. But if you think about it, there’s really no contradiction at all. There’s a fundamental prisoner’s dilemma at the heart of capitalism. It’s in the interest of large corporations collectively to guarantee sufficient purchasing power to keep the trucks moving and the inventories turning over. But it’s in the interest of individual large corporations to keep labor costs as low as possible.

Likewise, it’s in individual employers’ interests to pay only enough to maintain employees in subsistence while they’re actually working, without enough of a surplus to save against periods of sickness or unemployment. But it’s in the collective interest of employers to pay enough to cover the minimum reproduction cost of labor power.

Overcoming such prisoners’ dilemmas is the main purpose of the capitalists’ state. When the state mandates a minimum wage sufficient to facilitate the reproduction of the workforce (of course it doesn’t in practice, outside the European “social democratic” model of capitalism), the cost falls on all employers in a given industry equally. And unlike the case of a private, voluntary cartel, individual employers are unable to defect for the sake of a short-term advantage from double-crossing their competitors. So funding the minimum reproduction cost of labor-power is no longer an issue of cost competition among employers; it’s a collective cost of an entire industry that can be passed on to consumers as a cost-plus markup, via administered pricing.

Marx had a lot to say about this phenomenon, as illustrated by the Ten-Hours Act in Britain (Capital, vol. 1 ch. 10).

“These acts curb the passion of capital for a limitless draining of labor-power, by forcibly limiting the working-day by state regulations, made by a state that is ruled by capitalist-and landlord.

… [T]he limiting of factory labor was dictated by the same necessity which spread guano over the English fields. The same blind eagerness for plunder that in the one case exhausted the soil, had, in the other, torn up by the roots the living force of the nation.”

This common interest in preventing “exhaustion of the soil,” Marx argued, explained the counterintuitive support of many capitalists — as exemplified by employer Josiah Wedgwood — for the Ten-Hours Bill.

The state, in many ways, functions as an executive committee of the economic ruling class, carrying out for them in common many necessary functions it’s not in their interest to carry out individually. The state, in short, cleans up the capitalists’ messes for them.

Things like the minimum wage, collective bargaining, and universal healthcare may be perceived by individual capitalists as a restraint or an imposition. But they’re supported by the smarter capitalists — especially those in the industries that benefit most from them. Just consider the role of General Electric CEO Gerard Swope in the business coalition behind the New Deal.

The minimum wage increases aggregate purchasing power among the working class at large, and helps secure employers a reliable pool of labor power on a sustainable basis. The welfare state keeps unemployment, hunger and homelessness from reaching politically destabilizing levels that — without the state cleaning up the capitalists’ mess at taxpayer expense — might result in capitalism being torn down from below. Universal healthcare, whether on the British or Canadian model, externalizes labor costs on the taxpayer, which would otherwise be (and are, in countries like the U.S.) borne by employers who provide health insurance as a benefit.

Any time you hear soccer mom rhetoric about “our working families,” or self-congratulatory platitudes to the effect that “Democrats care,” look behind the voice and take a look at what the hands are actually doing. In a freed market — without the state to do the capitalists’ bidding — corporate capitalism would wither like a garden slug with salt on its back. The state works for the capitalists, not for you.


The Price of Liberty is Eternal Vigilance

“But you must remember, my fellow-citizens, that eternal vigilance by the people is the price of liberty, and that you must pay the price if you wish to secure the blessing.  It behooves you, therefore, to be watchful in your States as well as in the Federal Government.” ~Andrew Jackson, Farewell Address, March 4, 1837


Dr. Paul Grades Professor Obama

He Gives Him An F

Tuesday, April 17, 2012 – by Ron Paul

Ron Paul

Last week President Obama made some rather shocking comments at a press conference regarding the Supreme Court’s deliberation on the constitutionality of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare. His comments belie a grasp of constitutional concepts so lacking that perhaps the University of Chicago Law School should offer a refund to any students “taught” constitutional law by then-Professor Obama!

He said, “Ultimately, I’m confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress.” It almost sounds as if he believes the test of constitutionally is whether a majority approves of the bill, as opposed to whether the legislation lies within one of the express powers of the federal government. In fact, the very design of the Constitution, with power split amongst two branches of the legislature which write the laws, an executive who administers the laws and an independent judiciary which resolves disputes regarding meaning of the laws, was designed to thwart popular will and preserve liberty.

President Obama continued in his comments, “For years, what we’ve heard is the biggest problem on the bench was judicial activism or a lack of judicial restraint, that an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law. Well, there’s a good example, and I’m pretty confident that this court will recognize that and not take that step.”

President Obama seems to misunderstand that the criticism of an activist judiciary is not that it is overturning unconstitutional federal laws, but instead that it is usurping the authority to intervene in areas, such as abortion, where the Constitution reserves authority to the states. In fact, upholding clearly unconstitutional laws such as Obamacare because the justices bowed to the “will of the people” or believed the individual mandate was good social policy could be considered an example of judicial activism.

The founders never intended the judiciary to have the last word on whether or not a law is constitutional. The judiciary is equal to the Congress and the President, not superior. Representatives, senators, presidents and judges all have an independent duty to determine a law’s constitutionality. The founders would be horrified by the attitude of many lawmakers that they can pass whatever laws they want and federal judges will then determine whether or not the law is constitutional.

Additionally, state governments have the authority to protect their citizens from federal laws that threaten liberty. If the Supreme Court rules that Obamacare is constitutional, I hope state legislators will exercise their powers to pass legislation allowing their citizens to opt-out of the national health care plan.

Unfortunately, even many of my colleagues who correctly argue Obamacare’s unconstitutionality support the President when he asserts the power to send troops into battle without a declaration of war, or have citizens indefinitely detained and even assassinated on little more than his own authority. Other of my colleagues not only cheer the unconstitutional monstrosity of Obamacare, but support the President’s actions to defy the Senate’s appointment powers, and legislate by executive order.

Even worse, some members will only challenge a president’s unconstitutional actions if the president is from a different political party. The defeat of Obamacare in the courts would provide a stark reminder that the limits of government are set by the Constitution, not the will of the president, Congress, or even the Supreme Court. However, the victory would be short-lived as long as the legislative branch refuses to do its duty to abide by the constitutional limits and exercises its powers to ensure the other two branches do likewise.

Ron Paul:   View Bio   l  View Site Contributions

US Constitution :   View Glossary Description   l  View Site Contributions

Barack Obama:   View Bio   l  View Site Contributions

Original Article: http://www.thedailybell.com/3800/Ron-Paul-Professor-Obama-Gets-an-F


Hush-Hush Congressional Research Report: The Myth of Social Mobility … Not

Original article: http://www.thedailybell.com/3713/Hush-Hush-Congressional-Research-Report-The-Myth-of-Social-Mobility

Monday, March 19, 2012 – by Staff Report
Income inequality in the United States is more pronounced than in other developed countries, a new report from the Congressional Research Service finds, while the possibility of economic mobility is more constrained than commonly believed. “Based on the limited data that are comparable across nations, the U.S. income distribution appears to be among the most uneven of all major industrialized countries and the United States appears to be among the nations experiencing the greatest increases in measures of inequality.” – FAS Secrecy News Blog
 

Dominant Social Theme: In America, anyone can get rich.

Free-Market Analysis: Here’s a big myth: US social mobility is fungible and anyone can grow rich. Now a report from the Congressional Research Service has found that income inequality in the US is extreme and growing worse. Also, that where you’re born, socially speaking, is where you stay.Did you read about these findings? Didn’t think so. For one reason or another, Congress doesn’t seem inclined to make a big fuss over this information. Wonder why.Actually not. We think we know why. Congress’s approval ratings are stuck near the SINGLE DIGITS and have stayed there for years. This is because most people in the US likely see Congress as an instrument of repression and the increasingly savage status quo.There is a lot of truth to this assumption. Who at this point would want to work in Congress but a sociopath or psychopath? And there is plenty of evidence that the US Congress includes both.• In Afghanistan and Iraq, the US has been using depleted uranium weapons regularly for nearly a decade. The poisoning of these poor people has been so intense that many die of obscure cancers and mothers are routinely told not to have babies. Neither of these wars has been successful, and the depleted uranium poisoning has injured hundreds of thousands of returning US vets as well.• In the US, one third of citizens now have some exposure to the criminal justice system by the time they are in their early 20s. The US system of jurisprudence has resulted in some six million behind bars at any one time, more than half the world’s population of incarcerated individuals. The costs in damaged lives and families in tremendous. Routinely, as well, innocent people are put to death, victims of Draconian US “justice.”• The US population on food stamps has exploded, with some 50 million using food stamps now. And ALL US citizens eventually come to use some form of government assistance, especially if one includes Social Security. Medicare is another ubiquitous and badly run program encouraging citizen dependence on the government.• The Federal Reserve system, authorized and overseen by Congress, is responsible for the degradation of the US dollar by some 95-99 percent. The entire dollar reserve system is now on the verge of unraveling as the “depression” of the 2000s winds on with no real signs of abating.• The income tax system, and taxes generally, remove up to 50 percent or more of a person’s disposable income when one actually peers behind the various charges that are leveled on producers and consumers. Products are taxed all the way through the supply chain, so that the end price may reflect dozens of tax charges.This is but a tiny sampling of the kinds of results that Congress has been partially responsible for. The executive wing, of course, is equally culpable, as is the US Supreme Court. Those born in the US are subject to millions of regulations and thousands of taxes that they had no say in creating. They are saddled, as well, with the US’s “national debt.”The US has likely reached a point of no return when it comes to its regulatory, tax and monetary structure. The regulatory structure especially tends to freeze people into place from an economic and social mobility standpoint.This is, of course, exactly what the larger power elite wants. The apparent handful of dynastic families that control central banking around the world use regulation, taxes and fiat-money inflation as a way of ensuring that the billions beneath them have little hope of advancement.Yes, a tiny group of people seeks to implement world government apparently and uses various methodologies of control to shove the world and its billions in this direction. This is why societies around the world, including Western societies, are increasingly dysfunctional.This is a change from several hundred years ago when the US itself emerged as the hope of the world for social mobility. This is also why the US has been under tremendous attack from the elites for nearly its entire existence.The US “exception” shows us how a somewhat “free” society can actually work. Free banking, an economy based in part on gold and silver and a lack of formal regulation all catapulted the US into the topmost tier of the world’s wealthiest countries.But by the 20th century, the elites unceasing attacks on the libertarian positioning of the US had taken their toll. The proximate cause was the Civil War, which put the New York Banks (the European axis) in charge of the federation. From there it was just a matter of time.In the 20th century, the authoritarians struck. The silver standard, removed in the 19th century, was suddenly buttressed by the graduated income tax and the Federal Reserve. Two world wars effectively militarized the entire US, gave rise to an empire and a shadow world government managed out of the City of London with branches in Washington DC, Tel Aviv and elsewhere.The empire that the US has become is commonly seen by the bought-and-paid-for media as the apogee of sociopolitical and cultural achievement. But as we have pointed out, empire is nothing more than the last exhalation of a dying and corrupt culture.It is the time PRECEDING empire during which cultures achieve greatness, when people have social mobility and control over their own lives, inspirations and inventions. Empire is inevitably a military excrescence that takes each positive enumeration of civil society and weaponizes it.Pre-empire cultures are great places to live. But cultures that celebrate empire are miserable ones, full of hate, fear, paranoia and socio-economic and political control.The US, now in the empire phase, is failing fast. US citizens can only look back to the pre-Civil War period for a glimpse of the freedom that created a great country that spanned the world with its agricultural, cultural and mechanical gifts. The phrase “Yankee ingenuity” became a cliché for a reason.Above all, the US, “free banking” economic system based on gold and silver was the envy of the world. Though the power elite owned both gold and silver, it is evident and obvious that the elites could NOT control the US economy no matter how much gold and silver they owned.In fact, this directly rebuts Greenbackers’ contention that those who own the gold and silver will control the world even within a free-market economy. In the US, they didn’t and could not. This helps bear out the truth of Austrian economiststhat it is impossible to sustain unwanted monopolies in free market societies.They needed to use force, as they always do, to control society. First they fought the Civil War to destroy private banking and private money and to build up Wall Street and the power of the New York banks. After this in rapid succession came the graduated income tax, the Federal Reserve and various world wars.And now social mobility is all-but-frozen in the US. The power elite has been immeasurably aided in their quest to subvert the freedoms in the US by the various myths that still exist in the country regarding the way it used to operate. The article, excerpted above, makes this point as well:“Americans may be less concerned about inequality in the distribution of income at any given point in time partly because of a belief that everyone has an equal opportunity to move up the income ladder. A review of the literature suggests that Americans’ perceptions about their likelihood of changing position in the income distribution may be exaggerated,” the CRS report said.“It … appears that going from rags to riches is relatively rare; that is, where one starts in the income distribution greatly influences where one ends up.” See The U.S. Income Distribution and Mobility: Trends and International Comparisons, March 7, 2012.We have long been aware of the increasing inequities in US society and the “welfarization” of the economy that has accompanied its authoritarianism militarization and regulatory and penal deconstruction. But eventually, the new realities probably will begin to wake up more people in the US.When they do, we expect there may be considerable social trouble. People currently still anticipate the current “recession” will end. They cannot be blamed, struggling as they are, for not understanding that the power elite has apparently turned a fundamental page.The elites now seek frank world government from what we can tell and are promoting economic disaster, regional and world wars and increased authoritarianism around the world in order to realize their goals. Out of chaos … order.The problem, as we long have pointed out, is that what we call the Internet Reformation is increasingly educating and radicalizing much of the ‘Net intelligentsia. This is a critical breech in the elite’s plans.

Conclusion: The successful conclusion of the elite’s plans is by no means certain, even though they try to make it appear so. They have certainly managed to deconstruct US exceptionalism and make the lives of many a living hell. But even this can be reversed over time and we don’t count out the possibility that it shall be.

 


Why They’re Fascists

Original Article: http://larkenrose.com/blogs/tmds-blog/2120.html

Sunday, 08 January 2012 09:12
Larken Rose
larken@larkenrose.com

Once upon a time (back in 1994), Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum
pretended to believe in freedom. I’d even hold out the remote
possibility that to some extent, they really did almost believe in
freedom. So, assuming they weren’t completely lying from the
beginning (a big assumption), why are they being war-mongering,
control-freak fascists now?

Those who seek positions of power almost always do so because
they’re already narcissistic control freaks, who just can’t wait to
dominate and control their fellow man. Who else would want the job
of bossing everyone around? But let’s pretend that a good person,
with good intentions, ran for Congress, and won. What would happen?

Politicians get a lot of attention, a lot of money, a lot of fame,
a lot respect, and so on. They get called the “honorable” so-and-
so, and are treated like royalty. All of that can obviously make
someone conceited and self-centered, just as rock stars and movie
stars get that way. But why should it turn people into fascists?
Well, consider what the job of a politician entails. He and his
fellow politicians enact “laws,” which are then forcibly imposed
upon the rest of us by armed mercenaries known as “law
enforcement.” For all of their posturing, pontificating and
propagandizing, ultimately that’s all that politicians do: threaten
and control people. That’s their “job”–insane, evil, and horribly
destructive as it is. All of the attention they get, the money they
get, the power they get, comes from exercising their (imagined)
“authority” to control their fellow man, via the “political”
system. So how should we expect them to act when someone advocates
real freedom?

The reason fascists like Santorum and Gingrich (and Obama, for that
matter) have such tantrums against people who actually want freedom-
– -calling them indecent, extreme, dangerous, traitorous, fringe,
absurd, and so on–is because the underlying message to
politicians, from those who want freedom, is: “We don’t need you
and we don’t want you; go away and leave us alone.” It’s no more
complicated than that. Most of the time it has nothing to do with
principles, or actual philosophy. Fascists like Santorum and
Gingrich want perpetual war-mongering, the “war on drugs,” and the
rest of their megalomaniacal agendas, because, in their minds, it
makes them important. They have to exert violent control over their
fellow man (via “government”) or they become irrelevant, impotent
nothings. What would be the point of acquiring power, and then
doing nothing with it? What great historical “leader” ever said,
“Hey everybody, do whatever you want, and I won’t interfere”?

Even Ronald Reagan, who so often bashed “government,” ended up
pushing fascism forward through the “war on drugs.” Why? Because
damn near no one can have the “Ring of Power” in his clutches and
not use it. And to use it means forcibly dominating one’s fellow
man, even if the intentions for doing so are allegedly good. What
every politician wants to convey is, “I’m important, and great and
noble, because look how I use my power for good!” How well would
that work for them if they didn’t use the power at all? “Look at
me, I’m not doing anything!” Great, but who cares? What prestige,
glory and adoration (not to mention wealth) would that bring them?

Since the two-hundred-faced Mitt Romney changes his “beliefs” every
five minutes, let me use him as an example. What do you suppose
would happen if tomorrow he decided to have another philosophical
reinventing, and it went something like this?:

“If elected President, I will leave you alone. I won’t tell you
what to do or take your money. I will be irrelevant to your life.
You will have no reason to pay any attention to me, or care what
I’m doing. You’ll have every reason to forget my name, and forget
that I ever existed. So will everyone else. I will end up as an
unknown, ignored and irrelevant nothing.”

Is it any wonder that politicians so zealous despise the idea of
freedom, and those who espouse it? “Political” agendas are the
antithesis of leaving people alone. The interests of the
politicians are always diametrically opposed to the interests of
those they dominate, or their will wouldn’t have to be inflicted
via violence. When it comes to politics we remember those who
dramatically exercised their violent control over others (FDR,
Lincoln, Stalin, Hitler, etc.). We don’t remember those who did
little or nothing with their alleged “authority,” whether it was
because they didn’t want to or because their subjects didn’t let
them. Politicians hate the idea of freedom, because it renders them
completely powerless and unimportant.

Okay, now let me say what I know a lot of you are screaming by now:
“What about Ron Paul!?” If you ask me, Dr. Paul is a mutant freak–
and I mean that in a good way. How anyone could have walked the
halls of power for that long, and still have any integrity and
honesty, is a mystery to me. (Maybe Ron Paul is the reincarnation
of Frodo.) Ironically and bizarrely, he really has achieved fame
and adoration by NOT trying to control his fellow man, which is
almost unheard of in politics. In truth, as he points out, it is
the idea of freedom that people are getting excited about, and he
just happens to be a symbol of it right now. In many ways, it
really does seem as if he wants to acquire power in order to NOT
use it. How strange.

And you can see how much the establishment control freaks hate him
for it. When the politicians are out there screaming that it would
be the end of the world if we give up war-mongering, drug
prohibition, mass extortion, and all manner of other centralized,
authoritarian domination, I don’t think it’s even because they have
some deep philosophical belief in anything. I suspect this was true
of Stalin, Lenin, Mao, Hitler and the rest of them, too. Whatever
philosophical beliefs they had, or pretended to have, were
secondary to their own desire to feel noticed, important and adored
(or at least feared). They wanted attention, and they wanted to
feel powerful. That’s why Gingrich, Santorum, Romney, and the rest
of them want to be elected, too. And it’s why they shouldn’t be.
Those who seek attention, fame, power and wealth by way of
dominating and subjugating their fellow man–and that includes
street thugs and politicians alike–are the last people in the
world who should ever be given a scrap of power over anyone else.

The next time you see a politician (left or right) babbling on
about his supposedly noble plans and agendas, keep in mind that his
agenda is all about forcibly controlling you, and that he knows
that if he stopped trying to control you–if he stopped playing the
game of “politics” and just left you alone–he would become an
unknown, powerless, irrelevant nothing.

Well, unless he decided to turn around and do something useful and
productive instead, but how often has a politician done that?

And that has transitioned into this which, given the whole voluntaryist view I understand and even, to a degree can sympathize with. (E)

Romney! Romney! Romney!

Sunday, 05 February 2012 07:37

Larken Rose
larken@larkenrose.com
 

I am thrilled that Mitt Romney seems to be well on his way to
becoming the Republican presidential nominee. No, I’m not kidding.
I think it is the best possible outcome, far better than Ron Paul
winning.

Now, as anyone who knows me can guess, it’s not because I think
Romney is a great guy who will do great things. On the contrary, he
is the quintessential political whore: a delusional, narcissistic,
god-complex pathological liar who has no beliefs, values or
substance of his own. He is a slimy, dishonest prevaricator who
will say whatever he thinks will benefit himself, without the
slightest regard for truth or morality. He is a two-faced,
opportunistic con-man, a crook of the highest order, devoid of any
shred of principles or integrity.

How do you like my endorsement of Mitt so far?

So why would I want him to win? In fact, I don’t just want him to
be the Republican candidate; I want him to be the next President.
Yes, I’m absolutely serious.

But why? Because I think Puppet Romney would do an outstanding job
of finishing what Puppet Clinton, Puppet Bush, and Puppet Obama
have done so far. No, I’m not talking about their totalitarian
agenda. I’m talking about completely destroying the legitimacy of
the U.S. ruling class in the eyes of its victims, and in the eyes
of the rest of the world. If we want people to see through the
extortionistic, violent and fraudulent charade that is
“government,” what better way to do that than to have the ultimate
crooked, paid-off, self-serving empty suit megalomaniac occupying
the White house?

It took a while until the dupes who had so enthusiastically shouted
“change,” wetting themselves with joy at the coming of the
Obamessiah, started to notice that nothing changed. There are still
a few, but not many, who haven’t yet realized that the answer to
the question, “Can we use government to fix everything?” is a
resounding, “No, we can’t!” Obama’s emotion-exploiting, empty
manipulation eventually wore off, but it took a while for a lot of
people to accept reality. The guy is just Bush III.

Before that, devout Republican state-worshipers spent years going
to great lengths to try to avoid admitting that Bush II was a big-
government, collectivist control freak. But most of them now
realize it.

Well, who would have any doubt about Romney? Who would imagine for
a moment that the guy has an honest bone in his body, or that he
believes in anything at all, other than his own wealth, power and
glory? His flip-flopping is downright legendary, to a hilarious
degree. If you want to help people see through the facade of
“government,” to realize that it’s nothing but a gang of liars and
crooks plundering and enslaving mankind for its own benefit, then
Mitt is your man!

In contrast, if Ron Paul became President, it would create among
many a renewed, but completely misguided hope in the possibility of
“politics” and “working within the system” achieving freedom,
despite the fact that it has never happened in the history of the
world. With Dr. Paul in office, people might start respecting the
presidency again, and that is not a good thing. To put it another
way, don’t let Ron Paul ruin what so many politicians have spent
decades accomplishing–namely, demolishing any imagined credibility
or legitimacy the gang of crooks in Washington ever had.

The shortest path from where we are today, to an actually free
society, starts with Mitt Romney as President. Now there’s an
awesome sentence to take out of context, huh? But it’s true. If you
want state worship and blind faith in “government” to crumble, you
should try to put the biggest elitist buffoon, the most obviously
corrupt liar possible, on the throne. And Mitt Romney sure fits
that bill! Go Mitt!

I have recently come into Mr. Rose’s writings, videos etc and given that he was once a political prisoner of these United States that alone gives him some credibility. Check him out if you get a moment. (E)

http://larkenrose.com/


Government

The Tetragrammaton

YHWH

Recently I have read some things about government from individuals who think that YHWH (God) somehow approves and even desires human governments. I wish to address this here.

Governments, while at times used by YHWH (God), are not created by Him. Neither are they approved of Him. Government for YHWH is like a gun for us. We do not want to use a gun unless necessary. In the case of using it against another human it must be absolutely necessary.

Man created government. I believe it was actually demonically inspired. It is part of our fallenness that men love to rule over other men. I speak of humanity not just males. All categories and social-economic areas of humanity  are guilty of this. Whether it is a political, business or religious institution the default seems to always be somebody wants to be in charge and will, often, do whatever is expedient to be in charge and continue in that state as long as possible.

We have learned well from our overlords. You may say, “Well, someone must be in charge. Someone must decide for the rest of us what is best otherwise there will be anarchy”. Yet I must respond with a rebuke if you are a believer in Messiah Yahshua (Jesus). Where Shaul (Paul) speaks of the first Adam and how Yahshua was the second Adam he is presenting the fact that the main purpose of Yahshua’s sacrifice was to take us back to the garden.

Restoration of intimacy with Elohim (God) is the plan. To redeem us. Put us back to a state where there is no longer the debt of sin to separate us from meeting face to face in the cool of the day. We were. We are co-regents with Him. We were given dominion over the earth to tend it and mold it. We are made in our Creator’s image thus we were to take the raw materials provided and make something of them.

Now back to the subject. We were never intended to rule over one another. We were intended for be naked before Him and one another. To allow ourselves to be known at a level where all of our “stuff” we cover up, the real us is stripped away. Not stripped away through some form of abusive confrontation we call ‘tough love’.  Let me explain

It is like the virgin bride on her first night with her new husband. She is at first shy and hesitant, but as she becomes more sure of his unconditional love, as she learns that he accepts all the things she is insecure about in herself she becomes welcoming of his presence.This welcoming of his presence leads to less and less inhibition and allows her to “let her hair down” so to speak.

Some of us have had such an experience with The Master Yahshua. We have learned to be free and expressive in our adoration and desire for His closeness. We have learned to allow Him to gently and gradually undress us in His presence. To stand before Him with nothing to hinder Him from knowing us completely.The Creator of all things allowed Himself to be completely stripped and humiliated before the entire world so that we could know that He understands our hesitancy, our fear of seeing ourselves, let alone allowing Him to see us.

If you have such a relationship with our savior, relish it and realize you are unique. It is not that you should be unique in this, only that the church has, with some rare exceptions, failed to communicate this vital truth of The Kingdom. For those who do not have this relationship with Him I would challenge you to begin asking Daddy for the revelation of this truth. You have missed what you were created for without this revelation.

OK, moving on to the next step. All that I just stated about our relationship with Him is also true of our relationships with one another. The difference is that unlike with our bridegroom we do not “undress” one another but learn to ‘undress” ourselves. Please do not lower yourself or the truth of this message by trying to imagine some sensual or carnal thing here. Mature people understand that metaphor is a powerful tool for expressing spiritual truths that are beyond the capabilities of any human language to describe.

So. We are in a marriage with Him and with one another. Through loving acceptance in a safe place we are to learn, or relearn who we really are and start being that with one another. The thing is, even though we are all married to one another, we only have one Husband. Yahshua is the Head. He is in charge and not any other human being can or should ever take that place. When they do and when we allow it we become spiritual adulterers.

This is a very serious matter. Allowing someone else the place that only YHWH rightly deserves establishes that person in a position that is in direct opposition to the Creator. Put another way when you allow someone else to tell you how God wants you to act, live etc. you have made that person YOUR GOD.

Making someone your god brings some really bad results besides the obvious fact that as an imperfect human being they will eventually disappoint you. In the end, if they see themselves as your authority and you do as well and they mislead you guess what? Both of you will be judged for it. For him or her it will, of course be compounded by the fact that they likely saw themselves not only as your authority but a host of others for whom they will answer for each that was lead astray by them.

You will stand before The Great White Throne of Yahshua and give an account for why you went astray from the truth. As is the nature of going astray one normally ends up being misled in a whole lot of other things as well. Ya see once you start to follow men you will trust them to tell you the truth. You do not want to have to answer for idolatry and adultery.

I am not saying that we should not have teachers, only that we and only we must go to YHWH about everything they teach us. We must not assume because they are more learned or have a title that they are correct. YOU are accountable for what you do. Only you will answer for your deeds. The fire will test them. So you test them before the fire does so you will know whether you are doing all the YHWH wants you to.

I keep getting away from my point because so few have good foundations. So many of us have spent our lives playing follow the leader which is fine if Yahshua is your leader but that is, for most of us, not the case even if we generally would claim it to be. Don’t pull a Romans 13 sidestep on me here. You really need to understand that what you may have been taught that Romans 13 means is not at all what Shaul (Paul) was really speaking to.

Yahshua is the Head, the Husband of this marriage so that we never have any right to be in charge or run the lives of others. Each one must hear from Daddy for themselves. By the way this is true of we husbands with our wives He is the Head. She hears just as well and maybe better than you in most circumstances. Learn to trust her and her relationship with YHWH and you will have a better marriage than if you think you are “in charge”.

Does this mean there are to be no leaders. No. Just not in the form we mostly see those who take positions of leadership, even if we agree to it. The way to recognize leaders is that they are the ones who love the people in a self sacrificing way.  True leaders will die for you. They are about putting you before themselves. If they are not the servants of everyone they are not leaders. They desire that you be all that Daddy created you for. They get under you and lift you up.

Love one another as He has loved you. See others in the body as part of you even when we disagree we need not be disagreeable. If you are trying to hear and follow YHWH (God) you obey what you are hearing. Sure, seek counsel but remember that you will answer if you disobey HIM. He WILL NOT UNDERSTAND if HE tells you to do something and you don’t do it because your pastor or other leader says not to do it.

By the way, not obeying someone in “authority” when God has said other than what they are is NOT REBELLION. Rebellion is not obeying YHWH. Also, if The Bible clearly says something and some teacher tells you it does not apply or does not mean what it says you take it to Daddy. Holy Spirit will show you the truth. You are responsible to obey HIM.

May you be blessed.


Who’s Watching Who?

HomeLand Security Vs. TSA Vs. WikiLeaks Vs. Us

Bill Huff

http://www.lexrex.com/

Was there ever a secretive government that was not treacherous?

 

Who really should be watching who? History has but one answer. Tyrants and their minions always have another.

 

What can we learn by making observations about the observers? Should we be frightened of them or should they be frightened of us? Obviously tyrants are afraid of even the notion of that someone should be free from their power or control. If you look most TSA agents straight in the eye what will you see? Will they be a little uncomfortable? I’d bet you could get yourself arrested just by staring intently into their eyes.

 

When tyrants, sycophants, megalomaniacs, and all their little helpers, are getting ready to do something really nasty to the common man, they plan carefully; watch their prospective prey for a period of time, and then strike, sometimes killing tens of millions. Don’t believe it? Click here, or here.

 

“Very many and very meritorious were the worthy patriots who assisted in bringing back our government to its republican tack. To preserve it in that will require unremitting vigilance.Thomas Jefferson

In the beginning, “We” watched “Them.” “Them” being government servants, who were in fact, our servants, as required by their oaths of office and the principle of delegated authority:

Rulers are the servants and agents of the people; the people are their masters. – Patrick Henry (Va. Ratifying Convention, 1788)

It seems to have been imagined by some that the returning to the mass of the people was degrading the magistrate. This he thought was contrary to republican principles. In free Governments the rulers are the servants, and the people their superiors & sovereigns. For the former therefore to return among the latter was not to degrade but to promote them–and it would be imposing an unreasonable burden on them, to keep them always in a State of servitude, and not allow them to become again one of the Masters. – Benjamin Franklin (Remarks in Framing Convention, 1787 as summarized by Madison in his record)

Disambiguation: according to Noah Webster in 1828, definition #2 defines the word “ruler” as: “One that makes or executes laws in a limited or free government. Thus legislators and magistrates are called rulers.” In other words “rulers [in 1828 America]” were understood to have circumscribed and limited authority and jurisdiction. This is true today lawfully speaking but not in practice. The unalienable rights of a Minority of One were to be sacrosanct.

We had a better understanding of proper government and its lawful limitations:

“They knew that government was a plain, simple, intelligible thing, founded in nature and reason, and quite comprehensible by common sense.” – John Adams

According to Bastiat:

A science of economics must be developed before a science of politics can be logically formulated. Essentially, economics is the science of determining whether the interests of human beings are harmonious or antagonistic. This must be known before a science of politics can be formulated to determine the proper functions of government. Source: THE LAW.

Taking Bastiat’s wisdom above into consideration we can easily predict that once a certain faction or combination seizes power over the rest of the People they must also usurp the title of “The Watchers.” Either they take it upon themselves or they delegate it to trusted deputies. Once the government or any monopoly or combination becomes antagonistic to the lives, liberties and properties of ordinary citizens, they must contrive a way to constantly watch all competing interests and make sure everything remains under their control for their benefit. A transparent and free market will not sustain tyranny and despotism. Why do you suppose the Federal Reserve is not welcoming competition with open arms? Truly, from their point of view, they have a good thing going. It is not enough to point out that their machinations would be Anathema to the Founding Fathers. You must be able to answer the question Cui Bono [who benefits] with precision or you really can’t tell who is in control, and, by extension, Who should be watching Who. The grip of the Fed is based on the false impression that they exist for the benefit of the American People when nothing could be further from the truth. The perception of the Fed as Savior is fading as more and more Americans wake up. We are hearing subjects and perspectives in the checkout line that were never heard before in my lifetime. And fewer and fewer people think I’m crazy.

To Jefferson and his contemporaries good government did not have any permanent secrets or secret police. Even when viciously attacked by the press Jefferson maintained his advocacy of a free press at all times. It was axiomatic to Jefferson that government could never lawfully seize the property of its citizens under the pretense of taking care of them. Governments who permanently seal records on past office holders and or other notables are going to prove treacherous. Sooner or later the consequences of their lies upon lies will overwhelm those they claim to protect and defend. Lastly they often consume each other. It takes pure hubris for an individual, who is by definition a government servant, to take it upon himself not to confide in his masters, the People. We seem to have a glut of Philosopher Kings right now. And they all know what’s good for everyone but themselves.

Sadly, there are those slavish ones among us who say, “If you have nothing to hide why would you mind being groped a little so you can fly safely?” These often find TSA employees who will indulge their fantasy of security through government-sponsored child abuse. Dehumanizing certain classes can be a precursor to Genocide. Those who cry the loudest for more surveillance could be the very ones we should be watching the most. They doth protest too much. The difference between TSA activities and punishable crimes is only context with government sanction.

We should constantly be saying to all governments and the global elite: “We are all watching you and, sooner of later, you will be brought to account for your actions. If you have nothing to hide why would you resist any real audits of your activities?” In fact, whatever we can do in a lawful and non-violent context ought to be done if it will help stem the tide toward global totalitarianism. More control without accountability = less liberty with transparency. Knowing but little history we can easily predict dire consequences as government secrecy goes global. Power corrupts and global power corrupts globally.

Who is more Jeffersonian, WikiLeaks or the TSA?

I have never been able to conceive how any rational being could propose happiness to himself from the exercise of power over others. - Thomas Jefferson

Compare and contrast the embarrassment of the innocent by the TSA with the exposure of the truly hubristic and criminal by WikiLeaks.

Our “Stasi” has to go the way of the East German version.

East Germany formerly had an organization, the Stasi [or Ministry for State Security] that watched the people for political purposes. It was finally shut down. But a Wiki-like event occurred when its headquarters were stormed by an very angry group composed of many factions. Some were trying to preserve incriminating evidence against the organization. Our HomeLand Security thugs should mark well the fate of the Stasi.

The following is just a small part of the Wikipedia material on the Stasi and its demise:


As the GDR began to fall, the Stasi did as well. This meant a loss of their power. The Stasi felt that if they were to lose power, then the files with incriminating evidence would be discovered. They took desperate measures and began to destroy the extensive files that they had kept, both by hand and with the use of a shredder. Citizens Protesting/Invading the Stasi building in Berlin, the sign accuses the Stasi of being Nazistic dictators. Photo courtesy Wikipedia

When these activities became known, protest erupted in front of the Stasi headquarters.[28] In the evening of 15 January 1990, a large crowd of people formed outside the gates in order to stop the destruction of personal files. In their minds, this information should have been available to them and also have been used to punish those who had taken part in Stasi actions. The large group of protesters grew and grew until they were able to overcome the police and gain entry into the complex. The protestors became violent and destructive as they smashed doors and windows, threw furniture, and trampled portraits of Erich Honecker, leader of the GDR. Among the destructive public were officers working for the West German government, as well as former MfS collaborators seeking to destroy documents. One explanation postulated as to why the Stasi did not open fire was for fear of hitting their own colleagues. As the people continued their violence, these undercover men proceeded into the file room and acquired many files that would become of great importance to catching ex-Stasi members. Source.

So the downfall of the Stasi was a sort of pre-Wiki WikiLeak event. The people were comparing the Stasi to Hitler’s Gestapo, just as many Americans are aptly comparing Homeland Security and the TSA to WWII-era Nazi measures.

Q: What will bring down our “Stasi?”

A: Ever-increasing scrutiny! Turn up the heat.

Now it’s time for BankiLeaks!

If one of the next leak efforts targets the banking “industry” we may see even more repression of free speech and efforts to limit the effects that Internet disclosure is having on the plans of certain classes of criminals. Is it such a leap to compare the Federal Reserve’s proclivity for printing more and more funny money to the late days of the Weimar Republic when paper money became cheaper than cord wood for stoves, or more recently, the Zimbabwean Hyperinflation? But you say they probably have limited themselves to stealing only a couple of hundred trillion? Just wait ’til they get going!

What did it feel like to be a Zimbabwean with a nice cache of Zim Dollars?

Count up all your Federal Reserve Notes and divide the number by 65 followed by 107 zeroes and see what you have left. The Zimbabweans now use the US Dollar [Federal Reserve Notes – Commonly but erroneously called “dollars”] and the South African Rand, both of which are headed as inevitably toward their intrinsic value of ZERO, to “stabilize” their economy.

Is it possible that facilities like WikiLeaks can provide the tools we need to effectively watch the people in powerful positions around the world who may be plotting our destruction along with the eradication of human liberty?

Julian Assange may not prove to be an Angel of Light. But illuminating the dark places of the Global Empire may have an enlightening effect. In the beginning of any investigation it is difficult to tell which clues will help the most. The possibility of more leaks with more observers can help provide an atmosphere of caution for public servants who may not always have the best motives.

The Internet is here to stay!

Even the most powerful of governments cannot afford to take down the Internet. Not the one in China, Russia, or even the naughty one in Washington, DC. The dissemination of complete and true information is the worst thing that can happen to an Evil Empire or it may be the best thing, depending on your point of view. WikiLeaks incidents can help us to elevate the global conversation about the limited utility of government, as well as the dangers of blindly trusting it. With more facts on the table it becomes more and more difficult for government propaganda mills to spin their own version of reality.

Rahm Emanuel advised that one should never waste a good crisis. It’s such a pity that governments often use contrived crises to garner more power over their constituents, when they should react to real crises with ever more transparency and accountability. But it is up to all of us to use these teachable moments to educate our fellow citizens as well as our servants in government. We the People Must force government to be honest and transparent.

What do you see in Your mirror?

There are often those among the supporters of tyranny who have become sick of what they do; of what they have become. They have been overcome by pangs on conscience and cannot wait to get something off their chest. They feel dirty. Like Louis, in the last scene from Casa Blanca, people sometimes change sides at crucial moments. They only appear to have been cooperating.

Let’s round up the Unusual suspects!

This could be the beginning of a beautiful friendship.

Here’s looking at you Julian!

I refer all government servants to #IX of the “Ten Commandments” that apply to their lawful obligations called “The Code of Ethics for Government Service.” It reads, in pertinent part, “… Any person in government service should… Expose Corruption Wherever Discovered…” Source

So stop shredding and deleting… and start leaking!

We’ll be watching you!

Amendment IV [not yet repealed as far as I know]:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Bill Huff [send him mail] is a Classical Libertarian and proprietor of LEXREX.com and JamTheCulture.com; a former public school music teacher turned home schooling advocate; a US Navy veteran, and host of WarIsARacket.com. He is available as a guest lecturer or for interviews on talk radio. Copyright © 2011 Bill Huff



Food safety bill invokes Codex harmonization and grants FDA authority to police food safety of foreign nations

food
Wednesday, December 29, 2010
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger
Editor of NaturalNews.com
(NaturalNews) Of all the talk about S.510, virtually no one has actually read the language in the bill — especially not those lawmakers who voted for it. The more you read from this bill, the more surreal it all becomes. For example, did you know there’s a global FDA power grab agenda hidden in the Food Safety Modernization Act? Keep reading and I’ll quote text straight out of the bill itself. 

Section 305 is entitled “BUILDING CAPACITY OF FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS WITH RESPECT TO FOOD SAFETY” and it gives the FDA authority to set up offices in foreign countries and then dictate the food safety plans of foreign governments. It says, specifically, on page 217 of the bill (http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-…):

SEC. 308. FOREIGN OFFICES OF THE FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION.
(a) IN GENERAL. – The Secretary shall establish offices of the Food and Drug Administration in foreign countries selected by the Secretary.

It then goes on to say:

(a) The Secretary shall, not later than 2 years of the date of enactment of this Act, develop a comprehensive plan to expand the technical, scientific, and regulatory food safety capacity of foreign governments, and their respective food industries, from which foods are exported to the United States.

Huh? The FDA is now going to run the food safety programs of foreign governments? Look out, world: I’m from the FDA and I’m here to help!

Homeland Security and U.S. Treasury also involved

So who is involved in creating this? Believe it or not, the global “food safety” plan is to be developed under consultation to the Department of Homeland Security as well as the U.S. Treasury. As the bill states:

(b) Consultation – In developing the plan under subsection (a), the Secretary shall consult with the Secretary of Agriculture, Secretary of State, Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of Homeland Security, the United States Trade Representative, and the Secretary of Commerce, representatives of the food industry, appropriate foreign government officials, nongovernmental organizations that represent the interests of consumers, and other stakeholders.

You might reasonably wonder “What does the Department of Homeland Security have to do with the FDA’s food safety plan?” Or “Why is the U.S. Treasury involved in the food supply?” Learn more about the Federal Reserve and you’ll have the answers to these questions. I don’t have space for all the details here, but read Ed Griffin’s book and visit http://www.realityzone.com if you really want to know what’s behind a lot of this.

Codex harmonization, data sharing and more

So what does this global food safety plan actually entail? It’s all spelled out right in the language of the law. You can view this yourself on page 195 of the bill text in the PDF file at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-…

(c) Plan – The plan developed under subsection (a) shall include, as appropriate, the following:

• “Provisions for secure electronic data sharing.”

This is so that the FDA can electronically track and monitor the food production activities of foreign nations. That way, if somebody in Spain tries to sell raw almonds to the USA, the FDA can make sure those almonds get irradiated or fumigated with chemicals first. Because raw almonds are so dangerous they have actually been outlawed in America (http://www.naturalnews.com/021776.html).

• “Training of foreign governments and food producers on United States requirements for safe food.”

This is designed to shove the FDA’s “dead food” agenda down the throats of other nations. The FDA, you see, believes thatthe only safe food is dead food— that’s why, along with the USDA, they have declared war on raw milk, raw almonds and many raw vegetables (http://www.naturalnews.com/023015_f…).

Now, with this law, the FDA will begin pushing its dead foods agenda globally, essentially exporting the FDA’s agenda of death and disease by making sure other nations destroy the nutritive qualities of their food supply in the same way the U.S. is doing. It’s all great for the global Big Pharma profiteers, of course. The more disease they can spread around the world, the more money they’ll make from selling medications.

Codex Alimentarius is also promoted in the bill

The “Plan” described in this bill continues with the following:

• “Recommendations on whether and how to harmonize requirements under the Codex Alimentarius.”

This is included so that the FDA will “harmonize” the U.S. food and dietary supplement industries with global Codex requirements which outlaw virtually all healthy doses of vitamins and minerals. Under full Codex “harmonization, “America will be left with a dead food supply and the health food stores will be virtually stripped bare of dietary supplements. Selling vitamin D at a reasonable dose such as 4,000 IU per capsule will be criminalized and products will be seized and destroyed by FDA agents who recruit local law enforcement to bring in the firepower.

All this will, of course, ensure a diseased, nutritionally-deficient U.S. population. This actually seems to be the goal the FDA has been trying to achieve all along because the more diseased the population, the more money gets collected by Big Pharma for “treating” sick people with medication and chemotherapy.

It’s all right in the bill!

The text mentioned in this article is taken straight from the bill itself. You can search for it at http://thomas.loc.gov by searching for “S.510” as the bill number.

It makes me wonder why some food book authors so wholeheartedly supported this bill. Why were so many progressives on the left so enamored with this law? Didn’t they realize this was a huge FDA power expansion that would destroy many small farms and put farmers out of business while subjecting the USA to possible Codex harmonization?

Did they even know the FDA is now on a global food-killing agenda that will seek to pasteurize, fumigate, cook or kill virtually every piece of food that enters the United States?

Did they not know that the bill does absolutely nothing to limit the use of chemical pesticides on imported food? According to the FDA’s stance on all this, foods laced with DDT and other pesticides are perfectly “safe” for human consumption, but foods teeming with probiotics — such as raw milk— are deadly and dangerous! (Seriously…)

How is it that popular food book authors and food documentary producers could possibly support this bill? Do they also think small dairy farmers who sell raw milk should be criminalized? Do they agree with the Codex harmonization agenda? Do they think the FDA should run the world’s food safety systems and that the Department of Homeland Security and the U.S. Treasury should be shaping our global food safety agenda?

You really just have to shake your head and wonder about the true intentions of some people. I just have to ask: Were the supporters of this bill really so naive that they could somehow believe the FDA would actually seek to protect small, local organic farms? What about raw milk producers? What about the single-family farms that must now apply to the FDA for exemption status by authoring research reports, collecting tax returns and producing a pile of documentation the FDA will soon require?

Let me just say it bluntly: The Food Safety Modernization Act is the destroyer of local organic farming. It will gut small farms and local farms, greatly increasing the price of local organic food while decreasing America’s food security. Farmers’ Markets will be targeted by FDA agents who raid the operations of local farmers and imprison them for not having the right paperwork. Families will be destroyed, and those who have been successful at local food production will scale back their operations in a desperate effort to duck under the $500,000 / year rule (which can easily be surpassed by producing just ten acres of organic carrots, by the way).

The real agenda behind the bill

From another point of view, however, this bill is doing exactly what it was supposed to do: Destroy small farms, wipe out family farm operations, imprison raw milk producers and centralize food production in the hands of the big corporate food producers whose operations are steeped in pesticides and soil degradation.

This bill should have been called the “Big Agriculture Monopoly Act” because that’s what it does. It will ensure that America’s food supply will be controlled by Monsanto, DuPont and other agricultural giants who have been at odds with small organic farms for years.

The global food control agenda is a conspiracy, not a theory

It’s all part of the global food control agenda that we now know to be 100% true based on the leaked Wikileaks cables which revealed that the U.S. government conspired to push GMOs into Europe and “create a retaliatory target list” for any nation that resisted GMOs (such as France). Read that full report right here on NaturalNews: http://www.naturalnews.com/030828_G…

Thanks to Wikileaks, we now know that the global GMO conspiracy is quite real. It’s something that U.S. diplomats and government officials scheme on in order to appease their corporate masters in the agriculture industry. Now, with the Food Safety Modernization Act, this global conspiracy extends beyond GMOs and encompasses the global food supply, too.

It has become clear that U.S. lawmakers and bureaucrats will not stop until they have killed the entire global food supply, rendering living foods, raw foods and dietary supplements illegal or impossibly difficult to grow. You can thank your U.S. Congresspeople and Senators for all this, of course. In the end, every Senator in office today caved in and voted to pass this bill. You can also thank those who publicly promoted this bill even while having no real idea of the horrors they were supporting.

Such begins a new era of global food destruction headed by what can only be called the most dangerous government agency in North America: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration. If they do to your food what they’ve done to prescription drugs, annual food deaths will increase to over 100,000 a year.

Watch for the FDA to now set up enforcement offices in nations all around the world and start outlawing living foods on a global scale (if they can get away with it).

Also, watch for a new push for Codex harmonization which is a truly evil agenda to criminalize healing foods and nutritional supplements that prevent and evenreversechronic disease.

MORE: http://www.naturalnews.com/030863_food_safety_bill_Codex_Alimentarius.html#ixzz19XAdznTc


Your “Democratically Elected” government is Now Placing People Who Object to Naked Scanners and Being Felt Up On a Secret Domestic Extremist List

Homeland Security and Transportation Security Administration Now List People As Domestic Extremist

Unbalanced Passions
November 29, 2010

It does not surprise me that the Obama Administration responds to the backlash against the unconstitutional fourth amendment violating TSA screening measures by blacklisting air travelers who object to the over reaching intrusive searches at the airports. They are trying to send a chilling effect not to protest the TSA groping and body scanners that has the public in an uproar.

Will they add them to a list were you can not buy a new car .apply for employment or do business.Will people be put on this list that will make life hard to function because the government has blackballed people who objected to the abusive TSA.These secretive list shows the abusive executive branch bypassing the courts and due process blacklisting their political enemies and opposition.

Is this the emperor striking back against the American people he wants to subjugate?He wants us to conform to his tyrannical world view.Will there be a second wave of a push back of the people against an imperial executive branch because we can not grow our own food and might not be able to buy from the local supermarket because Homeland security has blackballed someone who dares speak out against this President.

We must not allow this to chill us from standing up for our rights.We should not be able to make the decision between protesting the government and keeping the powers the be happy so my kids will be fed and keep a roof over their head by staying silent going along to get along. The consequences of inaction are far more severe than the price standing up and being free.Use them or lose them. We are not domestic extremist.We just want to be left alone.

http://www.infowars.com/homeland-security-and-transportation-security-administration-now-list-people-as-domestic-extremist/


%d bloggers like this: