Turning America into a Battlefield: A Blueprint for Locking Down the Nation 

Dees Illustration

By John W. Whitehead

In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.—President Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1961

A standing army—something that propelled the early colonists into revolution—strips the American people of any vestige of freedom. How can there be any semblance of freedom when there are tanks in the streets, military encampments in cities, Blackhawk helicopters and armed drones patrolling overhead?
It was for this reason that those who established America vested control of the military in a civilian government, with a civilian commander-in-chief. They did not want a military government, ruled by force. Rather, they opted for a republic bound by the rule of law: the U.S. Constitution.
Unfortunately, with the Constitution under constant attack, the military’s power, influence and authority have grown dramatically. Even the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, which makes it a crime for the government to use the military to carry out arrests, searches, seizure of evidence and other activities normally handled by a civilian police force, has been weakened by both Barack Obama and George W. Bush, who ushered in exemptions allowing troops to deploy domestically and arrest civilians in the wake of alleged terrorist acts.

Now we find ourselves struggling to retain some semblance of freedom in the face of police and law enforcement agencies that look and act like the military and have just as little regard for the Fourth Amendment, laws such as the NDAA that allow the military to arrest and indefinitely detain American citizens, and military drills that acclimate the American people to the sight of armored tanks in the streets, military encampments in cities, and combat aircraft patrolling overhead.
Making matters worse, we find out that the military plans to use southwestern states as staging grounds for guerilla warfare drills in which highly-trained military troops equipped with all manner of weapons turn American towns and cities in quasi-battlefields. Why? As they tell us, it’s so that special operations forces can get “realistic military training” in “hostile” territory.
They’ve even got a name for the exercise: Jade Helm 15.
Whether or not Americans have anything to fear from Jade Helm 15, a covert, multi-agency, multi-state, eight-week military training exercise set to take place this summer from July 15 through Sept. 15, remains to be seen.
Insisting that there’s nothing to be alarmed about, the Washington Post took great pains to point out that these military exercises on American soil are nothing new. For instance, there was Operation Bold Alligator, in which in which thousands of Marines and sailors carried out amphibious exercises against “insurgent” forces in Georgia and Florida.Operation Robin Sage had Green Beret soldiers engaging in guerrilla warfare in North Carolina. And Operation Derna Bridge sends Marine special forces into parts of South Carolina and the National Forest.
Yet if Americans are uneasy about this summer’s planned Jade Helm 15 military exercises, they have every right to be.
After all, haven’t we been urged time and time again to just “trust” the government to respect our rights and abide by the rule of law only to find that, in fact, our rights were being plundered and the Constitution disregarded at every turn?
Let’s assume, for the moment, that Jade Helm 15 is not a thinly veiled military plot to take over the country lifted straight out of director John Frankenheimer’s 1964 political thriller Seven Days in May, as some fear, but is merely a “routine” exercise for troops, albeit a blatantly intimidating flexing of the military’s muscles.
The problem arises when you start to add Jade Helm onto the list of other troubling developments that have taken place over the past 30 years or more: the expansion of the military industrial complex and its influence in Washington DC, the rampant surveillance, the corporate-funded elections and revolving door between lobbyists and elected officials, the militarized police, the loss of our freedoms, the injustice of the courts, the privatized prisons, the school lockdowns, the roadside strip searches, the military drills on domestic soil, the fusion centers and the simultaneous fusing of every branch of law enforcement (federal, state and local), the stockpiling of ammunition by various government agencies, the active shooter drills that are indistinguishable from actual crises, the economy flirting with near collapse, etc.
Suddenly, the overall picture seems that much more sinister. Clearly, as I point out in my new book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, there’s a larger agenda at work here.
Seven years ago, the U.S. Army War College issued a report calling on the military to be prepared should they need to put down civil unrest within the country. Summarizing the report, investigative journalist Chris Hedges declared, “The military must be prepared, the document warned, for a ‘violent, strategic dislocation inside the United States,’ which could be provoked by ‘unforeseen economic collapse,’ ‘purposeful domestic resistance,’ ‘pervasive public health emergencies’ or ‘loss of functioning political and legal order.’ The ‘widespread civil violence,’ the document said, ‘would force the defense establishment to reorient priorities in extremis to defend basic domestic order and human security.’”
At what point will all of the government’s carefully drawn plans for dealing with civil unrest, “homegrown” terrorism and targeting pre-crime become a unified blueprint for locking down the nation?
For instance, what’s the rationale behind turning government agencies into military outposts? There has been a notable buildup in recent years of SWAT teams within non-security-related federal agencies such as Department of Agriculture, the Railroad Retirement Board, the Tennessee Valley Authority, the Office of Personnel Management, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Education Department. As of 2008, “73 federal law enforcement agencies… [employ] approximately 120,000 armed full-time on-duty officers with arrest authority.” Four-fifths of those officers are under the command of either the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) or the Department of Justice.
What’s with all of the government agencies stockpiling hollow point bullets? For example, why does the Department of Agriculture need .40 caliber semiautomatic submachine guns and 320,000 rounds of hollow point bullets? For that matter, why do its agents need ballistic vests and body armor?
Why does the Postal Service need “assorted small arms ammunition”? Why did the DHS purchase “1.6 billion rounds of hollow-point ammunition, along with 7,000 fully-automatic 5.56x45mm NATO ‘personal defense weapons’ plus a huge stash of 30-round high-capacity magazines”? That’s in addition to the FBI’s request for 100 million hollow-point rounds. The Department of Education, IRS, the Social Security Administration, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which oversees the National Weather Service, are also among the federal agencies which have taken to purchasing ammunition and weaponry in bulk.
Why is the federal government distributing obscene amounts of military equipment, weapons and ammunition to police departments around the country? And why is DHS acquiring more than 2,500 Mine-Resistant Armored Protection (MRAP) vehicles, only to pass them around to local police departments across the country? According to the New York Times:
[A]s President Obama ushers in the end of what he called America’s “long season of war,” the former tools of combat — M-16 rifles, grenade launchers, silencers and more — are ending up in local police departments, often with little public notice. During the Obama administration, according to Pentagon data, police departments have received tens of thousands of machine guns; nearly 200,000 ammunition magazines; thousands of pieces of camouflage and night-vision equipment; and hundreds of silencers, armored cars and aircraft. The equipment has been added to the armories of police departments that already look and act like military units.
Why is the military partnering with local police to conduct training drills around the country? And what exactly are they training for? In Richland, South Carolina, for instance, U.S. army special forces participated in joint and secretive exercises and training with local deputies. The public was disallowed from obtaining any information about the purpose of the drills, other than being told that they might be loud and to not be alarmed. The Army and DHS also carried out similar drills and maneuvers involving Black Hawk helicopters in Texas, Florida, and other locations throughout the U.S., ostensibly in order to provide local police with “realistic” urban training.
What is being done to protect the American populace from the threat of military arms and forces, including unarmed drones, being used against them? Policy analysts point to Directive No. 3025.18, “Defense Support of Civil Authorities” (issued on Dec. 29, 2010), as justification for the government’s use of military force to put down civil unrest within the United States.
Why is FEMA stockpiling massive quantities of emergency supplies? On January 10, 2014, FEMA made a statement enlisting the service of contractors who could “supply medical biohazard disposal capabilities and 40 yard dumpsters to 1,000 tent hospitals across the United States; all required on 24-48 hour notice.” This coincides with other medical requests seeking massive amounts of supplies, such as “31,000,000 flu vaccinations,” “100,000 each of winter shirts and pants and the same for summer” and other goods and services requests as well like tarps, manufactured housing units, and beverages. And why does the TSA need $21,000 worth of potassium chlorate, a chemical compound often used in explosives?
Why is the Pentagon continuing to purchase mass amounts of ammunition while at the same time preparing to destroy more than $1 billion worth of bullets and missiles that are still viable?
Moreover, what is really being done to hold the Pentagon accountable for its doctored ledgers, fraud, waste and mismanagement, which has cost the taxpayer trillions of dollars? According to Reuters, “The Pentagon is the only federal agency that has not complied with a law that requires annual audits of all government departments. That means that the $8.5 trillion in taxpayer money doled out by Congress to the Pentagon since 1996, the first year it was supposed to be audited, has never been accounted for. That sum exceeds the value of China’s economic output.”
Given the similarities between the government’s Live Active Shooter Drill training exercises, carried out at schools, in shopping malls, and on public transit, which can and do fool law enforcement officials, students, teachers and bystanders into thinking it’s a real crisis, how much of what is being passed off as real is, in fact, being staged by DHS for the “benefit” of training law enforcement, leaving us none the wiser? These training exercises come complete with their own set of professionally trained Crisis Actors playing the parts of shooters, bystanders and victims in order to help schools and first responders create realistic drills, full-scale exercises, high-fidelity simulations, and interactive 3D films.
Given that Americans are 110 times more likely to die of foodborne illness than in a terrorist attack, why is the government spending trillions of dollars on “national security”? How exactly is the $75 billion given to various intelligence agencies annually to keep us “safe” being spent? And why is the DHS giving away millions of dollars’ worth of federal security grants to states that federal intelligence agencies ruled have “no specific foreign or domestic terrorism threat”?
Why is the government amassing names and information on Americans considered to be threats to the nation, and what criteria is the government using for this database? Keep in mind that this personal information is being acquired and kept without warrant or court order. It’s been suggested that in the event of nuclear war, the destruction of the U.S. Government, and the declaration of martial law, this Main Core database, which as of 2008 contained some 8 million names of Americans, would be used by military officials to locate and round up Americans seen as threats to national security, a program to be carried about by the Army and FEMA.
Taken individually, these questions are alarming enough. But put them together and they add up to the kind of trouble that the American founding fathers not only warned against but from which they fought to free themselves.
Indeed, when viewed collectively, they leave one wondering what exactly the U.S. government is preparing for and whether American citizens shouldn’t be preparing, as well, for that eventuality when our so-called “government of the people, by the people, for the people” is no longer answerable to “we the people.”
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.—President Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1961
A standing army—something that propelled the early colonists into revolution—strips the American people of any vestige of freedom. How can there be any semblance of freedom when there are tanks in the streets, military encampments in cities, Blackhawk helicopters and armed drones patrolling overhead?
It was for this reason that those who established America vested control of the military in a civilian government, with a civilian commander-in-chief. They did not want a military government, ruled by force. Rather, they opted for a republic bound by the rule of law: the U.S. Constitution.
Unfortunately, with the Constitution under constant attack, the military’s power, influence and authority have grown dramatically. Even the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, which makes it a crime for the government to use the military to carry out arrests, searches, seizure of evidence and other activities normally handled by a civilian police force, has been weakened by both Barack Obama and George W. Bush, who ushered in exemptions allowing troops to deploy domestically and arrest civilians in the wake of alleged terrorist acts.
Now we find ourselves struggling to retain some semblance of freedom in the face of police and law enforcement agencies that look and act like the military and have just as little regard for the Fourth Amendment, laws such as the NDAA that allow the military to arrest and indefinitely detain American citizens, and military drills that acclimate the American people to the sight of armored tanks in the streets, military encampments in cities, and combat aircraft patrolling overhead.
Making matters worse, we find out that the military plans to use southwestern states as staging grounds for guerilla warfare drills in which highly-trained military troops equipped with all manner of weapons turn American towns and cities in quasi-battlefields. Why? As they tell us, it’s so that special operations forces can get “realistic military training” in “hostile” territory.
They’ve even got a name for the exercise: Jade Helm 15.
Whether or not Americans have anything to fear from Jade Helm 15, a covert, multi-agency, multi-state, eight-week military training exercise set to take place this summer from July 15 through Sept. 15, remains to be seen.
Insisting that there’s nothing to be alarmed about, the Washington Post took great pains to point out that these military exercises on American soil are nothing new. For instance, there was Operation Bold Alligator, in which in which thousands of Marines and sailors carried out amphibious exercises against “insurgent” forces in Georgia and Florida. Operation Robin Sage had Green Beret soldiers engaging in guerrilla warfare in North Carolina. And Operation Derna Bridge sends Marine special forces into parts of South Carolina and the National Forest.
Yet if Americans are uneasy about this summer’s planned Jade Helm 15 military exercises, they have every right to be.
After all, haven’t we been urged time and time again to just “trust” the government to respect our rights and abide by the rule of law only to find that, in fact, our rights were being plundered and the Constitution disregarded at every turn?
Let’s assume, for the moment, that Jade Helm 15 is not a thinly veiled military plot to take over the country lifted straight out of director John Frankenheimer’s 1964 political thriller Seven Days in May, as some fear, but is merely a “routine” exercise for troops, albeit a blatantly intimidating flexing of the military’s muscles.
The problem arises when you start to add Jade Helm onto the list of other troubling developments that have taken place over the past 30 years or more: the expansion of the military industrial complex and its influence in Washington DC, the rampant surveillance, the corporate-funded elections and revolving door between lobbyists and elected officials, the militarized police, the loss of our freedoms, the injustice of the courts, the privatized prisons, the school lockdowns, the roadside strip searches, the military drills on domestic soil, the fusion centers and the simultaneous fusing of every branch of law enforcement (federal, state and local), the stockpiling of ammunition by various government agencies, the active shooter drills that are indistinguishable from actual crises, the economy flirting with near collapse, etc.
Suddenly, the overall picture seems that much more sinister. Clearly, as I point out in my new book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, there’s a larger agenda at work here.
Seven years ago, the U.S. Army War College issued a report calling on the military to be prepared should they need to put down civil unrest within the country. Summarizing the report, investigative journalist Chris Hedges declared, “The military must be prepared, the document warned, for a ‘violent, strategic dislocation inside the United States,’ which could be provoked by ‘unforeseen economic collapse,’ ‘purposeful domestic resistance,’ ‘pervasive public health emergencies’ or ‘loss of functioning political and legal order.’ The ‘widespread civil violence,’ the document said, ‘would force the defense establishment to reorient priorities in extremis to defend basic domestic order and human security.’”
At what point will all of the government’s carefully drawn plans for dealing with civil unrest, “homegrown” terrorism and targeting pre-crime become a unified blueprint for locking down the nation?
For instance, what’s the rationale behind turning government agencies into military outposts? There has been a notable buildup in recent years of SWAT teams within non-security-related federal agencies such as Department of Agriculture, the Railroad Retirement Board, the Tennessee Valley Authority, the Office of Personnel Management, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Education Department. As of 2008, “73 federal law enforcement agencies… [employ] approximately 120,000 armed full-time on-duty officers with arrest authority.” Four-fifths of those officers are under the command of either the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) or the Department of Justice.
What’s with all of the government agencies stockpiling hollow point bullets? For example, why does the Department of Agriculture need .40 caliber semiautomatic submachine guns and 320,000 rounds of hollow point bullets? For that matter, why do its agents need ballistic vests and body armor?
Why does the Postal Service need “assorted small arms ammunition”? Why did the DHS purchase “1.6 billion rounds of hollow-point ammunition, along with 7,000 fully-automatic 5.56x45mm NATO ‘personal defense weapons’ plus a huge stash of 30-round high-capacity magazines”? That’s in addition to the FBI’s request for 100 million hollow-point rounds. The Department of Education, IRS, the Social Security Administration, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which oversees the National Weather Service, are also among the federal agencies which have taken to purchasing ammunition and weaponry in bulk.
Why is the federal government distributing obscene amounts of military equipment, weapons and ammunition to police departments around the country? And why is DHS acquiring more than 2,500 Mine-Resistant Armored Protection (MRAP) vehicles, only to pass them around to local police departments across the country? According to the New York Times:
[A]s President Obama ushers in the end of what he called America’s “long season of war,” the former tools of combat — M-16 rifles, grenade launchers, silencers and more — are ending up in local police departments, often with little public notice. During the Obama administration, according to Pentagon data, police departments have received tens of thousands of machine guns; nearly 200,000 ammunition magazines; thousands of pieces of camouflage and night-vision equipment; and hundreds of silencers, armored cars and aircraft. The equipment has been added to the armories of police departments that already look and act like military units.
Why is the military partnering with local police to conduct training drills around the country? And what exactly are they training for? In Richland, South Carolina, for instance, U.S. army special forces participated in joint and secretive exercises and training with local deputies. The public was disallowed from obtaining any information about the purpose of the drills, other than being told that they might be loud and to not be alarmed. The Army and DHS also carried out similar drills and maneuvers involving Black Hawk helicopters in Texas, Florida, and other locations throughout the U.S., ostensibly in order to provide local police with “realistic” urban training.
What is being done to protect the American populace from the threat of military arms and forces, including unarmed drones, being used against them? Policy analysts point to Directive No. 3025.18, “Defense Support of Civil Authorities” (issued on Dec. 29, 2010), as justification for the government’s use of military force to put down civil unrest within the United States.
Why is FEMA stockpiling massive quantities of emergency supplies? On January 10, 2014, FEMA made a statement enlisting the service of contractors who could “supply medical biohazard disposal capabilities and 40 yard dumpsters to 1,000 tent hospitals across the United States; all required on 24-48 hour notice.” This coincides with other medical requests seeking massive amounts of supplies, such as “31,000,000 flu vaccinations,” “100,000 each of winter shirts and pants and the same for summer” and other goods and services requests as well like tarps, manufactured housing units, and beverages. And why does the TSA need $21,000 worth of potassium chlorate, a chemical compound often used in explosives?
Why is the Pentagon continuing to purchase mass amounts of ammunition while at the same time preparing to destroy more than $1 billion worth of bullets and missiles that are still viable?
Moreover, what is really being done to hold the Pentagon accountable for its doctored ledgers, fraud, waste and mismanagement, which has cost the taxpayer trillions of dollars? According to Reuters, “The Pentagon is the only federal agency that has not complied with a law that requires annual audits of all government departments. That means that the $8.5 trillion in taxpayer money doled out by Congress to the Pentagon since 1996, the first year it was supposed to be audited, has never been accounted for. That sum exceeds the value of China’s economic output.”
Given the similarities between the government’s Live Active Shooter Drill training exercises, carried out at schools, in shopping malls, and on public transit, which can and do fool law enforcement officials, students, teachers and bystanders into thinking it’s a real crisis, how much of what is being passed off as real is, in fact, being staged by DHS for the “benefit” of training law enforcement, leaving us none the wiser? These training exercises come complete with their own set of professionally trained Crisis Actors playing the parts of shooters, bystanders and victims in order to help schools and first responders create realistic drills, full-scale exercises, high-fidelity simulations, and interactive 3D films.
Given that Americans are 110 times more likely to die of foodborne illness than in a terrorist attack, why is the government spending trillions of dollars on “national security”? How exactly is the $75 billion given to various intelligence agencies annually to keep us “safe” being spent? And why is the DHS giving away millions of dollars’ worth of federal security grants to states that federal intelligence agencies ruled have “no specific foreign or domestic terrorism threat”?
Why is the government amassing names and information on Americans considered to be threats to the nation, and what criteria is the government using for this database? Keep in mind that this personal information is being acquired and kept without warrant or court order. It’s been suggested that in the event of nuclear war, the destruction of the U.S. Government, and the declaration of martial law, this Main Core database, which as of 2008 contained some 8 million names of Americans, would be used by military officials to locate and round up Americans seen as threats to national security, a program to be carried about by the Army and FEMA.
Taken individually, these questions are alarming enough. But put them together and they add up to the kind of trouble that the American founding fathers not only warned against but from which they fought to free themselves.
Indeed, when viewed collectively, they leave one wondering what exactly the U.S. government is preparing for and whether American citizens shouldn’t be preparing, as well, for that eventuality when our so-called “government of the people, by the people, for the people” is no longer answerable to “we the people.”
Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute where this article first appeared. He is the author of Battlefield America: The War on the American People, and A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State and The Change Manifesto.

Turning America into a Battlefield: A Blueprint for Locking Down the Nation
Activist Post
Wed, 29 Apr 2015 17:18:00 GMT

MEDIA DESK: CAMPAIGNS

Univision owner: ‘When Hillary Clinton is president…’

US Presidential Elections – For sale to highest bidder 

BY EDDIE SCARRY | APRIL 17, 2015 | 5:10 PM

Univision owner Haim Saban on U.S.-Israel relations under a Hillary Clinton presidency: “There…

Haim Saban, the billionaire media mogul who owns the Spanish-language U.S. TV channel Univision, is apparently convinced that Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton is a shoo-in to the White House.

In a recent interview, Saban said it’s not a matter of if Clinton wins, it’s a matter of when.

Asked whether U.S.-Israeli relations would remain strong under a Clinton presidency, Saban told the Israeli news outlet Channel One News, “There won’t be any problems with relations between the United States and Israel when Hillary Clinton is president.”

Saban has a history of supporting Clinton. He donated more than $12,000 to her Senate and presidential campaigns between 1999-2008, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. In 2014, The Clinton Foundation, Clinton’s nonprofit, also received between $10 million-$25 million from Saban and his own Saban Family Foundation.

Univision is seen as an important media outlet in presidential elections which are increasingly influenced by Latino voters.

Though there are two Latinos currently running for the Republican presidential nomination (Sens. Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio), Univision ran a video news package in early April titled “Julian Castro, the first Hispanic President?”

Castro is a Democrat currently serving as the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development and has not indicated he is running for president.

While the Hillary Clinton email fiasco is sure to be the talk of the town for the next few days, weeks, and months and may have seriously jeopardized the former SecState’s chances at becoming America’s next president, an even more important story is how the revelation that Hillary exclusively used a private, unencrypted and unsupervised email for 4 years of state-level, official business communications, emerged in the first place.

The answer, shockingly, comes courtesy of a Romanian hacker who was known by the handle “Guccifer”, and who is currently serving time in a Bucharest prison for his online attacks against countless public figures including the infamous leaks of George W. Bush personal paintings.

How is it possible that a Romanian convict may have helped accelerate the downfall of Warren Buffett’s presidential hopeful? According to the Smoking Gun, which first reported on this topic back in March 2013, “Guccifer” illegally accessed the AOL e-mail account of Sidney Blumenthal, who then worked as a senior White House adviser to President Bill Clinton, and later became a senior adviser to Hillary Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign.

When “Guccifer” (who was later identified as Marcel Lazar Lehel) breached Blumenthal’s account, he discovered an assortment of correspondence sent to Hillary Clinton at the e-mail address hdr22@clintonemail.com. The “clintonemail.com” domain was registered in 2009, shortly after her nomination to become Secretary of State.

While Blumenthal, a longtime Hillary Clinton confidant, used her private e-mail to send personal messages (like a get well note after she fell at home and suffered a concussion in December 2012), he also forwarded the Cabinet member a series of “Confidential” memos about foreign policy matters.

A snapshot of one leaked email between Blumenthal and Clinton can be seen below:

If Clinton used her own account only emails like the one above, it would be perfectly ok. It wasn’t.

Using her personal clintonemail.com address, the “For: Hillary, From: Sid” memos, provided to TSG by “Guccifer,” address a wide range of topics in global flashpoints like Algeria, Turkey, Mali, and Libya. Blumenthal also provided Clinton with information about the European Central Bank, the Georgia elections, and German Chancellor Angela Merkel.

Here is a snapshot of the inbox:

All of this happened through a personal email account, using a small Jacksonville, FL shell registrar called Perfect Privacy LLC, which is owned by web.com.

A registrar in whose possessions one can now, or could at one point in the past, find “confidential” memos such as this one from January 15, 2013 on “Libya internal government discussion,” which relied on “Sources with direct access to the Libyan National Government.”

Among the other memos to Clinton can be found titles like “Comprehensive Intel Report on Libya,” and included all-cap warnings that, “THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION COMES FROM EXTREMELY SENSITIVE SOURCES AND SHOULD BE HANDLED WITH CARE.”

Each memo included a note on the sources of intelligence included in the document. One typical memo referred to “Sources with access to the highest levels of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, the leadership of the Armed Forces, and Western Intelligence, diplomatic, and security services.”

The Smoking Gun adds that the memos offer no indication as to whether the intelligence gathered by Blumenthal was done at Clinton’s suggestion. Likewise, the hacked material does not include evidence of Clinton’s response to Blumenthal’s memos (which appear to have been prepared with input from Tyler Drumheller, a former Central Intelligence Agency official who ran covert operations in Europe).

As a reminder, this is just one hacked account – one which was corresponding with Hillary Clinton – and shows just the emails that were sent or received by Sidney Blumenthal. However, it provides a broad enough glimpse of the kind of information that Hillary was trafficking in without any US government supervision or tracking.

It also means to keep a close eye on Clintonemail.com registrar status, which is the server where one can find any and all of the tens of thousands of emails that the former first lady sent and received between 2009 and 2013 in her personal account: an account which was created on January 28, 2009 and is scheduled for expiration on January 13, 2017… unless, of course, something “IRSy” were to happen to it in th emeantime, and all existing emails and backups are mysteriously lost.

But most of all, keep a close eye on this email address: it will be topic of countless hours of discussion as America heads into the next presidential elections.

Especially since as of this moment, it appears to be disconnected.

hdr22@clintonemail.com – How A Romanian Hacker Exposed Hillary Clinton’s Secret Email Life
Tyler Durden
Tue, 03 Mar 2015 23:08:58 GMT

No intervention by riot police although squads were standing near by

by Associated Press | February 26, 2015

Athens: first anti-gov’t protest by far-left ANTARSYA turns ugly

The first anti-government rally in Athens turned ugly as anti-authoritarian protesters started to smash the windows of a pastry shop and two jewelry shops and put two vehicles and several garbage bins on fire.

via @MakisSinodinos

via newsit.gr

According to latest information, there was no intervention by riot police although squads were standing near by.

Earlier KTG wrote:

The first anti-government protest has been launched in Athens on Thursday afternoon. A month after the left-wing/nationalist SYRIZA-Independent Greeks coalition took office, a week after the Eurogroup agreement in Brussels.

With anti-EU banners and red party flags, members of  Anticapitalist Left Cooperation for the Overthrow (ANTARSYA) took to the streets in downtown Athens to protest the extension of continuation of loan agreements and Varoufakis’ Reform List with “austerity measures.”

picture via @MakisSinodinos

ANTARSYA calls for defaulting on Greece’s debt, and nationalization without compensation of major industries, banning of lay-offs, the disarmament of the police, full political and social rights for immigrants.

Although ANTARSYA is not successful in parliamentary elections it does manage to  win seats in municipalities since 2010. In January elections, ANTARSYA received 39,411 votes (0.64% of the overall vote).

For tomorrow, Friday, the Greek Communist party KKE has called for a anti-government protest against austerity and the loan agreements. According to KKE, Varoufakis’ Reforms list contains “all the measures adopted by the capital,  the governments and the EU against the workers.”

In Greek Parliament KKE holds 15 seats.

KKE is against the €uro, the European Union, and against everything and everyone in general. It vehemently rejected any offer form SYRIZa for coalition government. It is the party of eternal opposition.

PS I f you ask me, when Nea Dimokratia and PASOK and Potami will launch anti-government protests all I can tell you: not for the time being.

9:55 AM 02/23/2015

NEIL MUNRO White House Correspondent

A federal judge has ordered the federal government to grant U.S. civil rights to illegals who are caught at the border, and to release all migrants except for those who may endanger Americans.

The migrants “may have legitimate claims to asylum … [and] their presence here may become permanent … [so] that they are entitled to the protection of the Due Process Clause, especially when it comes to deprivations of liberty,” said the judge, who was nominated by President Barack Obama.

Under current rules, border-crossers who are released are also allowed to compete against Americans for jobs, and to attend U.S. schools and to receive welfare, until their cases are decided by immigration judges.

But immigration courts are already so clogged with asylum-seekers that many cases aren’t decided for several years. The slow process gives migrants many opportunities to find other legal avenues to become citizens, and full access to U.S anti-poverty programs for themselves, their parents and their children.

Unless reversed, the decision opens a huge hole in U.S. border security, and likely will dramatically increase illegal immigration and competition for jobs, partly because immigration enforcement has already been greatly reduced by President Barack Obama.

The judge’s decision was released late Friday, but political pushback is growing.

“If liberal federal judges and the president are determined to trash the rule of law in this manner, we are on the verge of a full-blown constitutional crisis,” said Jonathan Tobin, an editor of Commentary magazine, which generally favors large-scale immigration.

“As much as there is reason to grant many illegals a path to legality if not citizenship, without first securing the border, such proposals ought to be off the table,” he wrote in a short article titled “Immigration and the End of the Rule of Law.”

The decision comes amid a partisan standoff over the 2015 budget for theDepartment of Homeland Security.

Obama and his political allies are insisting the agency be allowed to implement his November amnesty plan, even though a court ruled Feb. 16 that Obama’s plan violated federal law. Unless the Democrats stop their filibuster of the 2015 agency budget, they will force a partial shutdown of the agency by Feb. 28.

The Democrats’ amnesty is so lawless that the GOP should change the Senate’s filibuster rules to allow the GOP majority to defund Obama’s November amnesty, columnist Charles Krauthammer wrote Feb. 19.

The judge’s decision requires border officers to go through a lengthy legal process if they want to keep a border-crosser in jail while a judge decides if the illegal is repatriated or put on a path to citizenship. “Such detention harms putative class members in myriad ways, and as various mental health experts have testified, it is particularly harmful to minor children,” the judge declared.

The government “maintains that one particular individual may be civilly detained for the sake of sending a message of deterrence to other Central American individuals who may be considering immigration,” the judge wrote.  But the government’s “ current policy of considering deterrence is likely unlawful… [and] causes irreparable harm to mothers and children seeking asylum,” he wrote.

The anti-jailing decision increases the already huge incentive for millions of foreigners to fly, sail, walk or drive across the U.S. border, and then claim asylum from foreign criminal gangs, political oppression or domestic abuse. In March 2013, Gallup reported that at least 138 million foreigners want to migrate into the United States.

The decision was issued late Friday, Feb. 20, by Judge James Boasberg of D.C.-based Federal District Court for the District of Columbia. Boasberg was nominated by Obama, and was confirmed in 2011.

Obama is likely to appeal the decision, partly because it reduces his ability to manage the inflow of migrants.

Obama favors high levels of immigration but he knows the public is overwhelmingly opposed to greater immigration.

The American public — including most Latino voters — is strongly opposed to lax border controls.

The immigration issue has dominated federal politics since 2013, when Obama’s allies in the Senate tried to push through a bill that would have increased immigration and given an amnesty to all 12 million illegal immigrants now living in the United States.

Since then, Obama has lost the battle for public opinion, lost the congressional debate over immigration, lost his Senate majority, and in February lost the first round of a lawsuit that is trying to block his November amnesty for 5 million illegal immigrants.

But Obama has used his power over the immigration agencies to minimize enforcement of immigration laws. Since 2009, Obama’s senior deputies have repeatedly instructed his immigration agencies to reduce enforcement of immigration laws. For example, since 2009, his aides have given work-permits and temporary residency to 4.7 million migrants, including illegal immigrants, tourists, guest-workers and students.

That 4.7 million is in addition to the annual inflow of 1 million legal immigrants. Roughly 4 million American youths enter the workforce each year.

In November 2014, one in every five U.S. jobs was held by a foreign-born worker, up from one-in-six jobs in January 2010, according to federal datahighlighted by the Center for Immigration Studies.

In 2014, 130,000 Central American asylum-seeking adults, youths and children crossed the border. Under Obama’s rules, a large percentage were immediately allowed to get work permits plus access to welfare programs and free schooling, ad were allowed to ask judges for permanent residency.

American’s hostile reaction to the inflow that killed Obama’s top second-term legislative priority — passage of a comprehensive immigration reform law that would have sharply increased legal immigration.

The public’s hostility also contributed to the Democrats’ crushing defeat in the November Senate elections, when the GOP gained nine seats and won a strong 54 vote-majority in the Senate.

Beijing-run side of harbour is thriving but new government has pulled plug on plans for more foreign buyouts

Piraeus port, just outside Athens, which is partly run by Cosco, a Chinese state-owned company. Photograph: Anadolu Agency/Getty Images

Helena Smith in Perama Monday 9 February 201511.05 EST

Day and night, the Chinese-run piers of the Piraeus container terminal are a hive of activity. Lorries come and go while forklift trucks zoom around and colossal cranes heave giant containers from ship to shore.

Five years after its arrival in the Mediterranean, China’s global shipping carrier, Cosco, takes immense pride in the efficiency with which affairs are conducted on these piers. Business activity has tripled since the state-owned conglomerate acquired the port for €500m (£373m), the biggest foreign investment in Greece in modern times.

But any plans by Beijing to extend its commercial reach have been rudely interrupted by the ascent to power of Syriza, the radical leftists upending conventional orthodoxies in Greece.

On its maiden day in office, the new government announced that a privatisation programme launched to trim the country’s staggering €320bn debt load was in effect null and void. Plans to sell off further port assets – repair docks as well as car, passenger and cruise ship terminals that Cosco had been bidding for – have been scrapped.

“It’s a pity,” sighed Tassos Vamvakidis, the terminal’s commercial manager, rolling a red anti-stress ball across his spotlessly tidy desk. “I think Piraeus deserves a better future. Cosco had big plans to invest in dry docks and other infrastructure. A lot of people were very upset. Foreign investors definitely did not see this with a good eye.”

FacebookTwitterPinterestexpand

A man walks between containers at the port of Piraeus, near Athens.Photograph: Aris Messinis/AFP/Getty Images

He was right. Within hours of the news filtering back to Beijing, Chinese officials were voicing concern and the local media were blasting Alexis Tsipras. Greece’s new leader, they cried, was like the mythological figure Phaeton who, when given the reins of the sun chariot for a day, lost control and, almost destroyed the earth. Subsequent attempts at smoothing ruffled feathers – with assurances that Cosco’s concession would be “respected” – have done little to placate the Chinese.

The activity at the Chinese part of the terminal in Perama is a world away from the slow motion on the other side of the port. There state employees protected by labour rules and given higher wages – the result of years of unbending trade unionism – have seen work decline precipitously.

Advertisement

If China had its way, it would have bought a majority stake in this side of the harbour, snapped up the nation’s state-run railway network and purchased the port of Thessaloniki. No other country, it says, represents a better foothold into Europe than Greece.

Powerful unions have long been blamed for Greece’s lack of competitiveness. For critics, the tempest now blowing off Piraeus’s shores offers a snapshot into the inability of Athens to slay the monster that has obstructed economic growth. Syriza has been widely accused of pandering to unions deeply opposed to enforcing changes that would roll back workers’ rights.

Many believe Cosco’s high-energy regime is what is needed nationwide if Greeks are to emerge from their worst recession on record and break free of the demands of international creditors keeping the country afloat.

But that is not how workers see it in the shipyards out of Cosco’s control.

“We’d have had no rights,” said Vassilis Savvas. “And Greece would have had no rights. We are not going to do what the previous government wanted. Sell off our land, like that, for nothing.”

From his fibreglass cabin opposite a rickety hut that is the local meeting place for communist unionists, Savvas controls the traffic in and out of the publicly owned shipyards at Perama. Here visitors are greeted not by a fountain – the centrepiece of the Cosco-run port – but a pack of snarling dogs, ripped flags and buildings daubed with slogans such as “they won’t oppress us” and “hang all fascists”.

Savvas, who has handled security at the port for 36 years, accepted the landscape was bleak. “At the most we get about 10 ships in these days, when before there would be over 80 at any given time,” he said, taking in the scrawl in his handwritten logbook. “Right now most are in for small repairs, propellers that sort of thing. Anything bigger and they go to Turkey where it’s cheaper.”

A large man with blue-framed spectacles, a nicotine-stained moustache and a round pleasant face, the 54-year-old remained animated until talk turned to Cosco. All his life he had voted for the left. Syriza’s victory in elections 10 days ago was, he said, the jolt Greece and Europe needed.

“I haven’t laboured all these years to be hired for hunger wages,” he said. “At Cosco they bring people in on subcontracts, make them work for a pittance and then send them packing. As it is, I can hardly make ends meet on a salary of €940 [£705] a month. And I’m lucky. Go! Go into Perama to see the truth, to see for yourself.”

FacebookTwitterPinterestexpand

The Chinese premier, Li Keqiang, looks at a shipping routes map at the port of Piraeus, where Chinese shipping giant Cosco controls two of the three container terminals, on a visit last year.Photograph: Lousia Gouliamaki/AFP/Getty Images

Two roads cut through Perama: Irinis (peace) and Demokratias (democracy). The former, covered with graffiti in praise of the neo-Nazi Golden Dawn party, lies at the bottom of the hills around which Perama ascends. The latter, splattered with hammers and sickles, runs close to the shores of the Saronic Gulf.

No place has mirrored Greece’s great economic crisis more than this. More than 70% of people in the suburb are unemployed, the victims of lost jobs at the shipyards; one in three families survive on food handouts and nearly all are uninsured, with no access to hospital care.

The wreckage wrought by five years of austerity is everywhere, but is most apparent on Perama’s upper slopes, overlooking the docks, where locals live in hastily built breeze-block dwellings, often without heat or electricity.

“I have seen a lot of things in my life,” said Vangelio Makris, 80, poking her head out of her sitting room window. “And I can say, honestly, that politics destroyed us. The love of power, the love of money, destroyed us.”

Down the hill, Rebecca Tzanetea and Amalia Polatou are medical specialists who volunteer at the polyclinic set up by Doctors of the World in Perama. Both drive in from central Athens, a journey from “one world to another”. At 50, Tzanetea, who has spent several stints working in Africa, has been shocked by what she has seen. “We’re offering relief,” she said, “but we’re not offering a solution. These are people who were never well-off. Perama was always poor. But before the crisis they could at least cope. Now they have lost everything.”

At least 60 patients – migrants and Greeks – come to the clinic every day. Some drop by to get hand-me-downs and other donations. But with poverty have come escalating levels of physical illness along with anxiety and depression. “Their needs are enormous,” said Polatou, a child psychologist. “A lot of the children are suffering from anxiety – but that they, and their parents, are even able to survive in such horrible conditions says a lot about the love of life.”

For a long time patients would discuss the shipyards. But what has struck the volunteers of late is that they no longer want to talk about them, or anything much that defined their lives before. “I’ve been struck by it,” said Katerina Kantziki, a midwife who has helped run the clinic since it opened at the beginning of the crisis in 2010. “Nobody wants to express an opinion. They just want to survive.”

That is not the case lower down the hill where black-clad followers of Golden Dawn do nothing but discuss policy when they meet at the party’s local branch. Barely five years ago the neo-fascist group picked up 83 votes; now it is going strong with polling rates of above 9%, the second biggest party after Syriza in the area. Increasingly, Perama is being seen as a bellwether of what could ensue if Syriza fails.

“If Greeks are disappointed again there will be only one place for them to turn,” said Alekos Papathanasiou, a long-time Perama resident who makes ends meet driving a taxi. “I hear it all the time,” he smiled. “Golden Dawn has not gone away. It is waiting to win the hearts of Greeks and there are a lot of people out there who, next time round, would be willing to embrace them.”

© 2015 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved.

» Greek Anti-EU Party Wins Election Alex Jones’ Infowars: There’s a war on for your mind!

Greek people vote to throw out the banksters

by INFOWARS.COM | JANUARY 25, 2015

On Verge of Victory, Europe’s Ascendant Left Declares ‘Subservience is Over’ | Common Dreams | Breaking News & Views for the Progressive Community

Published on Friday, January 23, 2015
by Common Dreams
Joining together ahead of Greek elections, leaders of Syriza and Podemos signal their unified fight against austerity will extend beyond national borders
by Jon Queally, staff writer




Greek opposition leader and head of radical leftist Syriza party, Alexis Tsipras (L) and Spanish Podemos party Secretary General Pablo Iglesias wave to supporters following a campaign rally in central Athens January 22, 2015. Greek leftist leader Tsipras told thousands of people gathered in Athens that an end to “national humiliation” was near after opinion polls on Thursday showed his Syriza party pulling ahead three days before an election. (Photo: Reuters/Yannis Behrakis)


“History is knocking at our door,” declared Alexis Tsipras, the leader of the leftwing coalition party of Syriza in Greece, during a speech addressed to thousands of supporters in Athens on Thursday night as he stood next to his foreign compatriot Pablo Iglesias of the Spanish Podemos Party.

“The wind of democratic change is blowing in Europe.”
—Pablo Iglesias, PodemosSyriza and Podemos have become the mouthpiece of the anti-austerity movement in southern Europe while Tsipras and Iglesias have emerged as key political leaders who emerged from the grassroots, street-level protest movements which rose in opposition to the severe economic policies imposed by elite forces following the financial crisis that began in 2008. In relatively short time, both Syriza and Podemos went from being non-existent political entities to standing on the doorstep of taking power.

With national elections in Greece just days away, and Syriza’s polling numbers only improving, Alexis Tsipras announced that his party is prepared to “overthrow” the status quo and vowed to implement swift changes to undo the austerity policies—imposed at the behest of foreign creditors and attached to a bailout package offered by the European Central Bank and the IMF—that have left the Greek economy in tatters. Standing before the large crowd, Tsipras announced that by Monday, “[Greece’s] national humiliation will be over. We will finish with orders from abroad.”

Syriza’s answer to austerity, he continued, would be this: “The bailout is over. Blackmail is over. Subservience is over.”

Watch this report from Euronews:

What Part of Shall Not Be Infringed Do You Not Understand? – The Prepper Journal.

• http://www.facebook.com/plugins/like.php?app_id=&channel=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic.ak.facebook.com%2Fconnect%2Fxd_arbiter%2F7r8gQb8MIqE.js%3Fversion%3D41%23cb%3Df3e71e0534%26domain%3Dwww.theprepperjournal.com%26origin%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.theprepperjournal.com%252Ff2918d26f%26relation%3Dparent.parent&href=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.theprepperjournal.com%2F2014%2F12%2F12%2Fwhat-part-of-shall-not-be-infringed-do-you-not-understand%2F&layout=button_count&locale=en_US&sdk=joey&send=false&show_faces=false&width=90
• http://platform.twitter.com/widgets/tweet_button.495d9dff72b38e528c989168a106fa0d.en.html#_=1422049233739&count=horizontal&dnt=false&id=twitter-widget-0&lang=en&original_referer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.theprepperjournal.com%2F2014%2F12%2F12%2Fwhat-part-of-shall-not-be-infringed-do-you-not-understand%2F&size=m&text=What%20Part%20of%20Shall%20Not%20Be%20Infringed%20Do%20You%20Not%20Understand%3F%20-%20The%20Prepper%20Journal&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.theprepperjournal.com%2F2014%2F12%2F12%2Fwhat-part-of-shall-not-be-infringed-do-you-not-understand%2F
• https://apis.google.com/u/0/se/0/_/+1/fastbutton?usegapi=1&size=medium&annotation=bubble&width=90&origin=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.theprepperjournal.com&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.theprepperjournal.com%2F2014%2F12%2F12%2Fwhat-part-of-shall-not-be-infringed-do-you-not-understand%2F&gsrc=3p&ic=1&jsh=m%3B%2F_%2Fscs%2Fapps-static%2F_%2Fjs%2Fk%3Doz.gapi.en.aatL8dgzWBI.O%2Fm%3D__features__%2Fam%3DEQ%2Frt%3Dj%2Fd%3D1%2Ft%3Dzcms%2Frs%3DAGLTcCMPfcF7-zOSDz5uWXuzoq3KsUU1JA#_methods=onPlusOne%2C_ready%2C_close%2C_open%2C_resizeMe%2C_renderstart%2Concircled%2Cdrefresh%2Cerefresh&id=I0_1422049225368&parent=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.theprepperjournal.com&pfname=&rpctoken=11559750
• http://badge.stumbleupon.com/badge/embed/1/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.theprepperjournal.com%2F2014%2F12%2F12%2Fwhat-part-of-shall-not-be-infringed-do-you-not-understand%2F

The UN’s Arms Trade Treaty which covers everything from small arms to battle tanks, combat aircraft and warships – will enter into force on 24 December 2014, Christmas Eve. This treaty has not been ratified by our Congress but has the support of our Secretary of State, John Kerry who signed it and our President, who without expressly mentioning the treaty, said in a speech at the UN in September that all nations “must meet our responsibility to observe and enforce international norms.” The problem with that statement and this treaty is that we the people aren’t in control of what those ‘international norms’ are and as we have seen time and time again, those international norms might be detrimental to our country.

Many preppers and 2nd Amendment proponents believe that the Arms Trade Treaty will first lead to registration of all firearms and when that happens, historically the next step is confiscation through some means. Technically, no treaty can be put into action in the United States unless it has been ratified by a 2/3 majority of the senate. This fact is what most people cite when they are trying to refute any legitimate concerns about the UN Arms Trade Treaty or any other treaty’s potential effect on our country. This sounds well and good and serves to placate some, but for this fail-safe to have any weight you would first need to have a government that followed the letter of the constitution and additionally, that government would need to follow the wishes of the citizens they are representing.

Our government has proven time and time again that following the constitution is simply not something they feel they have to do when it stands in their way. For example, the senate has never voted on the Kyoto Protocol but that hasn’t stopped the EPA from enacting rules complying with the main goals of that treaty. Coal plants are being shut down left and right while the US and China recently agreed to let China keep growing their output of carbon emissions (with coal power plants) until 2030. There are many examples of policies that are enacted that fall well outside the bounds of Constitutional limits on power but that doesn’t stop our representatives does it? On any issue there is more brainpower spent on finding ways around the Constitution than actually following it with the seeming goal of every single facet of law being finally decided by the Supreme Court. It’s as if in our society, the rules we decided long ago to set for ourselves are only as good as the interpretations of people today and if every single thing can be challenged (and in some cases changed), we don’t really have a Constitution at all. What we have is a framework for legal arguments that only establishes a baseline which can be over ruled completely by a simple majority of ideology on the bench.

As for a government that listens to their constituents, that long gone relic of thought is promised by every single person running for office. “I feel your pain” The truth of the matter is that in this day and age, every politician is a benefactor of the same special interests. There are no democrat and republican sides whenever both are receiving money from the same companies. The elected politicians, by overwhelming majority do not care what you say or want because they don’t answer to you. Their actions directly contradict election results, polls and public outcry. The 2014 mid-term elections recently held should have sent a very strong signal to the leadership of both parties that the country wasn’t on-board with the policies of the current administration and the direction of affairs with the Congress, however; Obamacare and Amnesty both remain intact without so much as a whimper from our newly elected majority who promised for years to repeal it as soon as they were ‘in power’. To add insult to injury, the Republicans just released a 1 trillion budget proposal just over 24 hours before a procedural vote on it knowing that nobody would have time to read it. Same tricks but a different face is behind the podium. Why should we expect anything different from what we have been seeing?

Do you really feel that there is anything ‘your party’ is going to do to stop elements of this treaty from being implemented if it is in their best interests?

What’s so wrong with simply registering all guns?

What’s the harm in simply registering you say? It makes sense that government would want to know who has guns, so they can ensure that bad people don’t have them. You can’t argue with that logic can you? Well yes I can try. Registration will only be done by law-abiding people. The criminals they will try to get you to believe this registration would stop would never turn themselves or their guns in. If that were true, why wouldn’t criminals be lining up a police offices every day because we do have laws already, don’t we? How is this not obvious to everyone? I maintain that it is obvious to the people who are pushing for any restriction and by that I am referring to registration,  of our 2ndamendment rights.

Do guns kill people? Yes they do, but deaths by guns are a small fraction of the total deaths in the US each year. If you want to know who really kills people you have to look at governments historically.

Yes, you read that right. Governments are responsible for more deaths of their citizens in the 20thcentury than any other unnatural cause. It is called Democide and is been documented by R. J. Rummel, formerly of the University of Hawaii Political Science Department. He writes:

Most probably near 170,000,000 people have been murdered in cold-blood by governments, well over three-quarters by absolutist regimes. The most such killing was done by the Soviet Union (near 62,000,000 people), the communist government of China is second (near 35,000,000), followed by Nazi Germany(almost 21,000,000), and Nationalist China (some 10,000,000). Lesser megamurderers include WWII Japan, Khmer Rouge Cambodia, WWI Turkey, communist Vietnam, post-WWII Poland, Pakistan, and communist Yugoslavia. The most intense democide was carried out by the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia, where they killed over 30 percent of their subjects in less than four years.

The best predictor of this killing is regime power. The more arbitrary power a regime has, the less democratic it is, and the more likely it will kill its subjects or foreigners. The conclusion is that power kills, absolute power kills absolutely.

But we live in a democracy in the United States and we elect our representatives. We have a rule of law and nothing like the atrocities you mention above would ever happen here. Really? I certainly hope not and so it is with much interest that I have and will be keeping track of what goes on after December 24th and into the future on this topic.

But Mr. Rummel’s statement has weight in historical precedence and is alarming when looked at from the context of where we are as a country today. One could argue that our regime has an increasingly disturbing amount of ‘arbitrary power’. That is power that they have assumed that is outside of the Constitution and the really fun part is they keep giving themselves more of it every day. Some of this power was enacted by law of course, but it is power nonetheless and it never decreases, it only becomes more vast. From the Patriot Act, to NSA Spying, to treaties with foreign nations, harassment of political parties, to illegal searches, illegal detainment without cause, tokilling people without a trial and just yesterday they passed a bill which grants the government and law enforcement “unlimited access to the communications of every American”. How much power is that?

What does this mean to preppers?

Our second amendment was written expressly to give we the people a means to protect ourselves from a tyrannical government. This wasn’t about ‘letting us have’ weapons for hunting or shooting clay pigeons. The second amendment says that our right to bear arms ‘shall not be infringed’. It doesn’t say what type of arms meaning that you can assume they only meant musket loaders. It was intentionally open and only spoke to our rights, not the specifics of the weapons.

The Supreme Court even stated in the Heller decision that the second amendment of the U.S. Constitution protects an individual’s right to own firearms for traditionally lawful purposes, such asself-defense within the home. Even with that they left some ambiguity by allowing certain restrictions to gun ownership. This argument over who can have guns and what limits authority should put on gun ownership is not going away even with this ruling and it seems that challenges to the amendment could happen one day in that ongoing process we have called the courts. I can see that on the horizon again as new actions are taken in an effort to limit the ability American’s have of defending themselves because that is what it is all about. The UN and other anti-gun voices do not believe you have a right to self-defense. So you have to ask yourself why a bunch of representatives from countries that do not recognize the fundamental right to possess weapons are so keen to take ours. They prefer to give that power solely to the State which takes me back to Democide.

Why would we willingly give away our rights to self-defense when time after time it has been shown to be the ones we have the most to fear from are the very ones telling us we don’t need guns?

I have written before about the phrase “From my cold dead hands” and I haven’t changed my opinion. I do not say that phrase lightly, but I wonder if there will be a decision we face in our future that could have far-reaching impacts on the security of our lives. Each of us should carefully consider the larger picture of events that are happening in our world. We may not get the disaster you are expecting, that would necessitate throwing on our bug out bags and living under a tarp. We may face a different enemy who will come to us with a message of “common sense reforms” and wrap this all in a promise of “keeping everyone safe”. Take that with a grain of salt and remember the words of Alexander Solzhenitsyn in the Gulag Archipelago. Gulag was his literary-historical record of the vast system of prisons and labor camps that came into being shortly after theBolsheviks seized power in Russia in 1917 and underwent an enormous expansion during the rule of Stalin from 1924 to 1953. It is a fascinating read and warning to those who can see the echos of history in our country and around the world today.

“During an arrest, you think since you are not guilty, how can they arrest you? Why should you run away? And how can you resist right then? After all, you’ll only make your situation worse; you will make it more difficult for them to sort out the mistake.

And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say goodbye to his family?

Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?

The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin’s thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt! We did not love freedom enough. Every man always has handy a dozen glib little reasons why he is right not to sacrifice himself.”

For what it’s worth, I do not believe that we will most likely see bands of armed soldiers rounding up whole cities as they did during the Soviet Union days Solzhenitsyn lived through. I do think we will need to make a choice and I think we should be guarded even more so about how far we let things slip away from us. The arbitrary power that keeps building, if left unchecked would be the same as not resisting in Solzhenitsyn’s days. If you don’t put up a fight, you might not like what happens to you.

We say “What part of Shall Not Be Infringed Do You Not Understand” as a way of challenging anyone who believes that guns and firearms only belong in the hands of the military or police. It is an in-your-face type of confrontation that we employ to convey the frustration and absurdity of the issue in our minds. Perhaps that message should be one that we ask ourselves? Maybe we are the ones who need to remember “Shall Not Be Infringed” more so than the people who want to excuse away that right. Maybe the lessons of history and the rights we have shouldn’t be used as an argument with people who will never be persuaded. Perhaps, the message is one we need to take to heart and live out to the expectations of those brave men who recorded this phrase for us. We are the only ones who need to remember this right and by that same token, we are the only ones who can lose it willingly.

http://humansarefree.com/2014/09/the-top-of-pyramid-rothschilds-british.html

There are two operant Crowns in England, one being Queen Elizabeth II.
Although extremely wealthy, the Queen functions largely in a ceremonial capacity and serves to deflect attention away from the other Crown, who issues her marching orders through their control of the English Parliament.
This other Crown is comprised of a committee of 12 banks headed by the Bank of England (House of Rothschild). They rule the world from the 677-acre, independent sovereign state know as The City of London, or simply ‘The City.’
The City is not a part of England, just as Washington D.C., is not a part of the USA.

The City is referred to as the wealthiest square mile on earth and is presided over by a Lord Mayor who is appointed annually.
When the Queen wishes to conduct business within the City, she is met by the Lord Mayor at Temple (Templar) Bar where she requests permission to enter this private, sovereign state. She then proceeds into the City walking several paces behind the Mayor.
Her entourage may not be clothed in anything other than service uniforms.
In the nineteenth century, 90% of the world’s trade was carried by British ships controlled by the Crown. The other 10% of ships had to pay commissions to the Crown simply for the privilege of using the world’s oceans.
The Crown reaped billions in profits while operating under the protection of the British armed forces. This was not British commerce or British wealth, but the Crown’s commerce and the Crown’s wealth.
As of 1850, author Frederic Morton estimated the Rothschild fortune to be in excess of $10 billion (today, the combined wealth of the banking dynasties is estimated at around $500 trillion).

Today, the bonded indebtedness of the world is held by the Crown.
The aforementioned Temple Bar is the juristic arm of the Crown and holds an exclusive monopoly on global legal fraud through their Bar Association franchises. The Temple Bar is comprised of four Inns of Court.
They are: the Middle Temple, Inner Temple, Lincoln’s Inn and Gray’s Inn. The entry point to these closed secret societies is only to be found when one is called to their Bar.
The Bar attorneys in the United States owe their allegiance and pledge their oaths to the Crown. All Bar Associations throughout the world are signatories and franchises to the International Bar Association located at the Inns of Court of the Crown Temple.
The Inner Temple holds the legal system franchise by license that bleeds Canada and Great Britain white, while the Middle Temple has license to steal from America.
To have the Declaration of Independence recognized internationally, Middle Templar King George III agreed in the Treaty of Paris of 1783 to establish the legal Crown entity of the incorporated United States, referred to internally as the Crown Temple States (Colonies). States spelled with a capital letter ‘S,’ denotes a legal entity of the Crown.
At least five Templar Bar Attorneys under solemn oath to the Crown, signed the American Declaration of Independence. This means that both parties were agents of the Crown.
There is no lawful effect when a party signs as both the first and second parties. The Declaration was simply an internal memo circulating among private members of the Crown.
Most Americans believe that they own their own land, but they have merely purchased real estate by contract. Upon fulfillment of the contract, control of the land is transferred by Warranty Deed.
The Warranty Deed is only a ‘color of title.’ Color of Title is a semblance or appearance of title, but not title in fact or in law. The Warranty Deed cannot stand against the Land Patent.
The Crown was granted Land Patents in North America by the King of England. Colonials rebelled at the usurious Crown taxes, and thus the Declaration of Independence was created to pacify the populace.
Another ruse used to hoodwink natural persons is by enfranchisement. Those cards in your wallet bearing your name spelled in all capital letters means that you have been enfranchised and have the status of a corporation.

A ‘juristic personality’ has been created, and you have entered into multi-variant agreements that place you in an equity relationship with the Crown.
These invisible contracts include, birth certificates, citizenship records, employment agreements, driver’s licenses and bank accounts. It is perhaps helpful to note here that contracts do not now, nor have they ever had to be stated in writing in order to be enforceable by American judges. If it is written down, it is merely a written statement of the contract.
Tax protestors and (the coming) draft resistors trying to renounce the parts of these contracts that they now disagree with will not profit by resorting to tort law (fairness) arguments as justification. Judges will reject these lines of defense as they have no bearing on contract law jurisprudence. Tort law governs grievances where no contract law is in effect.
These private agreements/contracts that bind us will always overrule the broad general clauses of the Constitution and Bill of Rights (the Constitution being essentially a renamed enactment of English common law). The Bill of Rights is viewed by the Crown as a ‘bill of benefits,’ conferred on us by them in anticipation of reciprocity (taxes).
Protestors and resistors will also lose their cases by boasting of citizenship status. Citizenship is another equity agreement that we have with the Crown. And this is the very juristic contract that Federal judges will use to incarcerate them. In the words of former Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter, “Equity is brutal, but we are merely enforcing agreements.”
“The balance of Title 42, section 1981 of the Civil Rights Code states,” citizens shall be subject to like punishment, pains, penalties, taxes, licenses, and exactions of every kind”
What we view as citizenship, the Crown views as a juristic enrichment instrumentality. It also should be borne in mind that even cursory circulation or commercial use of Federal Reserve Notes effects an attachment of liability for the payment of the Crown’s debt to the FED. This is measured by your taxable income.
And to facilitate future asset-stripping, the end of the 14th amendment includes a state of debt hypothecation of the United States, wherein all enfranchised persons (that’s you) can be held personally liable for the Crown’s debt.
The Crown views our participation in these contracts of commercial equity as being voluntary and that any gain accrued is taxable, as the gain wouldn’t have been possible were in not for the Crown.
They view the system of interstate banks as their own property. Any profit or gain experienced by anyone with a bank account (or loan, mortgage or credit card) carries with it – as an operation of law – the identical same full force and effect as if the Crown had created the gain.
Bank accounts fall outside the umbrella of Fourth Amendment protection because a commercial contract is in effect and the Bill of Rights cannot be held to interfere with the execution of commercial contracts. The Crown also views bank account records as their own private property, pursuant to the bank contract that each of us signed and that none of us ever read.
The rare individual who actually reads the bank contract will find that they agreed to be bound by Title 26 and under section 7202 agreed not to disseminate any fraudulent tax advice. This written contract with the Crown also acknowledges that bank notes are taxable instruments of commerce.
When we initially opened a bank account, another juristic personality was created. It is this personality (income and assets) that IRS agents are excising back to the Crown through taxation.
A lot of ink is being spilled currently over Social Security.

Possession of a Social Security Number is known in the Crown’s lex as ‘conclusive evidence’ of our having accepted federal commercial benefits. This is another example of an equity relationship with the Crown.
Presenting one’s Social Security Number to an employer seals our status as taxpayers, and gives rise to liability for a reciprocal quid pro quo payment of taxes to the Crown.
Through the Social Security Number we are accepting future retirement endowment benefits. Social Security is a strange animal. If you die, your spouse gets nothing, but rather, what would have gone to you is divided (forfeited) among other premium payers who haven’t died yet.
But the Crown views failure to reciprocate in any of these equity attachments as an act of defilement and will proceed against us with all due prejudice.
For a person to escape the tentacles of the Crown octopus, a thoroughgoing study of American jurisprudence is required. One would have to be deemed a ‘stranger to the public trust,’ forfeit all enfranchisement benefits and close all bank accounts, among other things.
Citizenship would have to be made null and forfeit and the status of ‘denizen’ enacted. If there are any persons extant who have passed through this fire, I would certainly appreciate hearing from them.
The United States of America is a corporation, ruled by the British Crown and the Vatican

The USA is, and always has been, a huge corporation ruled from abroad. Its initial name was the Virginia Company and it is owned by the British Crown and the Vatican, who receive their yearly share of the profits.
The US presidents are appointed CEO’s (they are not elected by us!), and their allegiance is to the “board of directors,” not to the American citizens. We are seen as employees of the company and voting is designed as a distraction meant to offer us the illusion that we have a say in all this.
“In 1606 [King] James set up the Virginia Company which was granted Royal authority to begin settlements in the province of Virginia, named after Elizabeth I, who had been popularly called the Virgin Queen. The Union Jack first flew on American soil at Jamestown in Virginia as a permanent fixture in the spring of 1607…
“The early members of the Virginia Company were aristocrats who supported the Church of England and the Royalist cause. They included Lord Southampton, the Earl of Pembroke, the Earl of Montgomery, the Earl of Salisbury, the Earl of Northampton, and Sir Francis Bacon…
“As chancellor of England, Bacon was able to persuade the king to issue the charters which enabled the new colonies to proliferate in the new world…
“The Virginia Company members who actually settled in America included several members of the Bacon family, and friends of his who were initiates of the Rosy Cross.” — Michael Howard – Occult Conspiracy (quoted by Michael Tsarion)
“I understand from contacts in America that it is through organizations like the London Metal Exchange that profits from the Virginia Company (United States of America) are channeled back to London.”– David Icke – The Biggest Secret;
“The House of Burgesses was formed in Jamestown in 1619. It was the first representative legislative body in the American Colonies. The House passed measures designed to help the company prosper. But a serious Indian uprising in Jamestown in 1622 caused the adventurers to lose what little interest they had left. In 1623, King James decided that the company was being managed poorly. He took over the association in 1624 and dissolved the company.” — World Book Encyclopedia;
“Its shareholders were Londoners, and it was distinguished from the Plymouth Company, which was chartered at the same time and composed largely of men from Plymouth.
“In 1619 the company established continental America’s first true legislature, the General Assembly, which was organized bicamerally. It consisted of the governor and his council, named by the company in England, and the House of Burgesses, made up of two burgesses from each of the four boroughs and seven plantations.
“…The court ruled against the Virginia Company, which was then dissolved, with the result that Virginia was transformed into a royal colony.”– Encyclopedia Britannica;
“This means that all the rights which applied to the owners of the Virginia Company to the gold, silver, minerals and duties, mined and paid in America, still apply to the British families who own the United States of America and the lands of the united states of America.
“Those same percentages have been paid since ‘independence’ and are still being paid by the American people via their federal officials who are, in fact, officials of the Virginia Company – yes, including the President.
“…But here’s yet another twist. Who owns the assets apparently owned by the Virginia Company? Answer: the Vatican.”– David Icke – The Biggest Secret;
“After the original 13 (again!) American colonies won their ‘independence’ and an ‘independent’ country was formed after 1783, the Virginia Company simply changed its name to… the United States of America.
“You see there are two USAs, or rather a USA and a usA. The united states of America with a lower case ‘u’ and ‘s’ are the lands of the various states. These lands, as we have seen, are still owned by the British Crown as the head of the old Virginia Company, although there is something to add about this in a moment.
“Then there is the United States of America, capital ‘U’ and ‘S’, which is the 68 square miles of land west of the Potomac River on which is built the federal capital, Washington DC and the District of Columbia. It also includes the US protectorates of Guam and Puerto Rico.
“The United States of America is not a country, it is a corporation owned by the same Brotherhood reptilian bloodlines who owned the Virginia Company, because the USA is the Virginia Company!”– David Icke – The Biggest Secret;
“In 1604, a group of leading politicians, businessmen, merchants, manufacturers and bankers, met in Greenwich, then in the English county of Kent, and formed a corporation called the Virginia Company in anticipation of the imminent influx of white Europeans, mostly British at first, into the North American continent.
“Its main stockholder was the reptilian, King James I, and the original charter for the company was completed by April 10th 1606. This and later updates to the charter established the following:
“…The Virginia Company comprised of two branches, the London Company and the Plymouth or New England Company…The ‘Pilgrims’ of American historical myth were, in fact, members of the second Virginia Company branch called the New England Company. The Pilgrim Society is still a major elite grouping within the Illuminati..
“The Virginia Company owned most of the land of what we now call the USA, and any lands up to 900 miles offshore. This included Bermuda and most of what is now known as the Caribbean Islands.
“The Virginia Company (the British Crown and the bloodline families) had rights to 50%, yes 50%, of the ore of all gold and silver mined on its lands, plus percentages of other minerals and raw materials, and 5% of all profits from other ventures.
“These rights, the charters detailed, were to be passed on to all heirs of the owners of the Virginia Company and therefore continue to apply… forever!
“The controlling members of the Virginia Company who were to enjoy these rights became known as the Treasurer and Company of Adventurers and Planters of the City of London.
“After the first 21 years from the formation of the Virginia Company, all ‘duties, imposts, and excises’ paid on trading activities in the colonies had to be paid directly to the British Crown through the Crown treasurer…
“The lands of the Virginia Company were granted to the colonies under a Deed of Trust (on lease) and therefore they could not claim ownership of the land…
“The monarch, through his Council for the Colonies, insisted that members of the colonies impose the Christian religion on all the people, including the Native Americans…
“The criminal courts on the lands of the Virginia Company were to be operated under Admiralty Law, the law of the sea, and the civil courts under common law, the law of the land… Now, get this. All of the above still applies today!”– David Icke – The Biggest Secret;
The United States Inc.

England, Canada, Australia and many other countries are led politically by “Prime Ministers” to the Queen. In fact she is the official head of 123 commonwealth countries. America, Russia, and other countries, however, have a “President” and “Vice-President.”
Usually corporations have Presidents and Vice-Presidents. What does this mean? The US Presidents rule from the “White House.” The Russian Presidents also rule from the White House. The Jesuits, a large force behind the Illuminati, have their own White House as well. England is ruled from “Whitehall.”
“The United States government is being ruled from the ‘White House,’ the government of England is being ruled from what is called ‘Whitehall,’ and Whitehall, like our White House, is the symbol of power because the hall is like the Masonic hall, the lodge hall, the union hall.”  — Jordan Maxwell – Matrix of Power;

“For those who think America controls the roost it would do well to consider that the Queen of England is still the official head of Commonwealth (123 countries) and the official monarch of Australia and Canada along with the United Kingdom… add to that the fact that all Bush Sr. got for his two terms as president of USA is a mere knighthood of the British Empire.” — Prash Trivedi;
The original 13 colonies were actually called companies. Military units are also called companies. We sing patriotic songs like “the Star-Spangled Banner” but a banner is a corporate advertisement, not a flag.
You surrender with a white flag, no colors. When you get mad you show your true colors. If you just won independence in a bloody revolution with Britain would you choose the same three colors for your new US flag?
Why does “every heart ring true for the red, white, and blue?” What about the gold-fringed flag used by the military, hung at all courts, schools, and government buildings?  It all has to do with the British Maritime Admiralty Law of Flags.

Barack Obama is the current CEO of the USA Corporation and

the gold-fringed flags in the background stand for “ruled from abroad.”

“This is also known as British Maritime (military) Law and this is why the American flag always has a gold fringe when displayed in the courts of the United States. You find the same in government buildings and federally funded schools.
“The gold fringe is a legal symbol indicating that the court is sitting under British Maritime Law and the Uniform Commercial Code – military and merchant law not common or constitutional law, under the Admiralty Law of Flags, the flag displayed gives notice of the law under which the ship (in this case the court) is regulated.
“Anyone entering that ship (court) accepts by doing so that they are submitting to the law indicated by that flag. Judges refuse to replace the flag with one without a fringe when asked by defendants who know the score because that changes the law under which the court is sitting.
“If you appear in a court with a gold fringed flag your constitutional rights are suspended and you are being tried under British Maritime (military /merchant) Law.” — David Icke – Tales from the Time Loop;
International Maritime Admiralty law, the law of the high seas, began in Sumeria, was perfected in Rome and continues to this day. Jordan Maxwell has explained that the way we trade commerce today is modeled after the Masons’/Templar Knights’ 1,000 year old system.
Notice how regardless of whether you send a product by air, water, or land – you “ship” it. The ship pulls into its “berth” and ties to the “dock.”  The Captain has to provide the port authorities with a “certificate of manifest” declaring the products he has brought.
Through a legal loophole the royals have created, US citizens are considered property of the queen under British Maritime law. Since we are born of our mother’s water, from her “birth canal,” we are thereby a maritime product, a “shipped” commodity. Our mothers were delivering a product under maritime law and that’s why we are born in a “delivery room.”
That’s why the “doc” signs your “berth” certificate, your “certificate of manifest.” You’re kept in the Maternity “Ward.” Why a ward? No other hospital areas are called wards. Prisons have wards and wardens.
The United States Corporation came about just after the civil war. The Act of 1871 was passed by congress creating a separate form of government for DC, essentially turning it into a corporation.
It was decided that employees would be called “citizens.”  So when you say in court or on paper, that you are a citizen of the United States, you are not a free American, but an employee of US Inc.
When you get a fine, a ticket, a bill, or get sued, you must sign in all capital letters. When you die your Masonic tombstone by law will have all capital letters to show their employee has died.
The entity that is your name in all caps is your maritime admiralty product code. Upper and lower case legally represents you, your body.
“The Uniform Commercial Code was approved by the American Bar Association, which is a franchise, a subordinate branch, of the British legal system and its hierarchy based in London’s Temple Bar (named after the Illuminati Knights Templar secret society).
As I have been writing for many years, the power that controls America is based in Britain and Europe because that is where the power is located that owns the United States Corporation. By the way, if you think it is strange that a court on dry land could be administered under Maritime Law, look at US Code, Title 18 B 7.
It says that Admiralty Jurisdiction is applicable in the following locations: (1) the high seas; (2) any American ship; (3) any lands reserved or acquired for the use of the United States, and under the exclusive or concurrent jurisdiction thereof, or any place purchased or otherwise acquired by the United States by consent of the legislature of the state.
In other words, mainland America. All this is founded on Roman law because the Illuminati have been playing this same game throughout the centuries wherever they have gone. The major politicians know that this is how things are and so do the government administrators, judges, lawyers and insider ‘journalists’.
Those who realize what is happening and ask the court for the name of the true creditor or recipients of the fines imposed by the ‘legal system’ are always refused this information by the judge.
The true creditors in such cases, and the ultimate recipient of the fines, are the bankers to which the corporation ‘country’ is bankrupt.” — David Icke – Tales from the Time Loop;
Lawyers or “barristers” have to take the Bar Association “bar” exam just as alcoholics go to the “bar,” sugar-junkies eat candy “bars,” and gamblers hope to get 3 “bars” on the slot machine. These all derive from the Templar’s turn of the 13th century “Temple Bar” in England.
Originally the Temple Bar was literally just a bar or chain between two posts next to the Temple law courts.  This soon became a huge stone gate and there were eventually eight of these gates built so the elites could restrict / control trade within the city of London.
They were taken down during 19th century, but then each stone was numbered and kept in storage until 2004 when they just re-built the Temple Bar in London.
“The United States corporation was created behind the screen of a ‘Federal Government’ when, after the manufactured ‘victory’ in the American War of ‘Independence’, the British colonies exchanged overt dictatorship from London with the far more effective covert dictatorship that has been in place ever since.
In effect, the Virginia Company, the corporation headed by the British Crown that controlled the ‘former’ colonies, simply changed its name to the United States and other related pseudonyms.
These include the US, USA, United States of America, Washington DC, District of Columbia, Federal Government and ‘Feds’. The United States Corporation is based in the District of Columbia and the current president of the corporation is a man called George W. Bush.
He is not the president of the people or the country as they are led to believe, that’s just the smokescreen. This means that Bush launched a ‘war on terrorism’ on behalf of a private corporation to further the goals of that corporation.
It had nothing to do with’ America’ or ‘Americans’ because these are very different legal entities. It is the United States Corporation that owns the United States military and everything else that comes under the term ‘federal’.
This includes the Federal Reserve, the ‘central bank’ of the United States, which is, in reality, a private bank owned by controlling stockholders (and controllers of the US Corporation) that are not even American. This is the bank from which the United States Corporation borrows ‘money’.” — David Icke – Tales from the Time Loop;
The Greater British Empire Map

The Shocking Truth About Your Birth Certificate
“If you notice on the bottom of your birth certificate it says Department of Commerce.  It is a property of the Department of Commerce because you are nothing more than a piece of commercial material.  That’s why if you’re out of work you don’t go to the unemployment office, you go to the Office of Human Resources, because you’re just a human resource.” — Jordan Maxwell, 1990 Slideshow Presentation on Hidden Symbols;
The Judge sits on the bench for the bank.  Banks are on both sides of a river. A river bank directs the flow of the current/sea – the currency, the cash flow. The current-sea is “deposited” from bank to bank down the river.
We’re just “consumers” to advertise to, just “human resources” to be used up like batteries, and they are the “social engineers,” molding us “useless eaters” into wage slavery.

Read The Atlantean Conspiracy if you want to learn more.
References: Mark Owen, Truth Control, Virginia Company, The Atlantean Conspiracy; | Additions by Alexander Light, HumansAreFree.com;

House approves $1.1 trillion spending package | WashingtonExaminer.com.POLITICS: CONGRESS

House approves $1.1 trillion spending package

BY SUSAN FERRECHIO | DECEMBER 11, 2014 | 10:14 PM

Who’s getting rich in Washington? Special interests in the ‘Cromnibus’

Washington Examiner

The vote was 219 to 206 and came hours before a midnight deadline. It now moves to the Senate for consideration. The House also voted to pass a two-day extension of funding to give the Senate time to debate and vote on the larger package.

Lily Dane
Activist Post

Well, well, well…what have we here?
Here’s what the Washington Examiner reported today:

Up to 30,000 missing emails sent by former Internal Revenue Service official Lois Lerner have been recovered by the IRS inspector general, five months after they were deemed lost forever.

The U.S. Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) informed congressional staffers from several committees on Friday that the emails were found among hundreds of “disaster recovery tapes” that were used to back up the IRS email system.

Does anyone else find it funny that suddenly – shortly after midterm elections – these emails have been recovered?
Is this timing a coincidence? I doubt it.
Remember, back in June, the IRS told us that they could not locate most of Lois Lerner’s emails. Lerner is a key figure in the Tea Party targeting scandal. The agency said that a computer crash in 2011 caused an untold number of emails to be wiped out.

Then the Watchdog organization Judicial Watch filed a FOIA request for the documents, and naturally, the IRS refused to provide them. It was only after the group filed a lawsuit that they were able to obtain the documents – which were quite damning:

Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton explained the implications of the new information:
“These new documents show that officials in the IRS headquarters were responsible for the illegal delays of Tea Party applications. It is disturbing to see Lois Lerner mislead the IRS’ internal investigators about her office’s Tea Party targeting.  These documents also confirm the unprecedented pressure from congressional Democrats to go after President Obama’s political opponents.  The IRS scandal has now ensnared Congress.”

The IRS claimed to have gone to great lengths to try to recover data from Lerner’s computer in 2011:

In emails provided by the IRS, technicians said they sent the computer to a forensic lab run by the agency’s criminal investigations unit. But to no avail.
The IRS was able to generate 24,000 Lerner emails from the 2009 to 2011 because Lerner had copied in other IRS employees. The agency said it pieced together the emails from the computers of 82 other IRS employees.
But an untold number are gone. Camp’s office said the missing emails are mainly ones to and from people outside the IRS, “such as the White House, Treasury, Department of Justice, FEC, or Democrat offices.”
Anti-tax advocate Grover Norquist called the episode “the worst attempt to blame technology in service of a cover-up since the infamous 18-minute gap” in former President Richard Nixon’s Watergate tapes.

In July, two US District Court judges ordered the IRS to start coughing up some answers. One judge gave IRS officials an August 10 deadline to provide a declaration – signed by an IRS official,  under oath – explaining exactly how the agency managed to “lose” two years’ worth of Lerner’s emails. Another judge gave the IRS until July 18 to find out what happened to the crashed hard drive responsible for erasing two years worth of Lerner’s emails. He also wanted to know if the hard drive is traceable through a serial number. If the information was truly gone, that judge said he wanted an affidavit written under penalty of perjury by an IRS IT professional with “firsthand knowledge” of the situation.
Then, surprise! In August, Department of Justice attorneys for the IRS admitted that Lois Lerner’s emails DO exist on a backup server, but said they would be hard to find.

Department of Justice attorneys for the Internal Revenue Service told Judicial Watch on Friday that Lois Lerner’s emails, indeed all government computer records, are backed up by the federal government in case of a government-wide catastrophe.  The Obama administration attorneys said that this back-up system would be too onerous to search.
The DOJ attorneys also acknowledged that the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) is investigating this back-up system.

And now, here’s what a Congressional aide told the Washington Examiner:

“They just said it took them several weeks and some forensic effort to get these emails off these tapes.”

TIGTA said it will take a few weeks to sort through the emails. Private taxpayer information will need to be redacted before the emails are presented to Congress.
Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) said late Friday that his committee is ready to examine those emails, and said he was hopeful they might shed light on how Lerner operated:

“Though it is unclear whether TIGTA has found all of the missing Lois Lerner emails, there may be significant information in this discovery,” he said. “The Oversight Committee will be looking for information about her mindset and who she was communicating with outside the IRS during a critical period of time when the IRS was targeting conservative groups.”

So much for a “phony” scandal. Looks like this is about to become more real than ever.
Lily Dane is a staff writer for The Daily Sheeple, where this first appeared. Her goal is to help people to “Wake the Flock Up!”

Shocker: Up to 30,000 Lois Lerner Emails “Recovered”
Activist
Sun, 23 Nov 2014 15:36:00 GMT

Michael Snyder
Activist Post
Did you know that some Americans are being hit with health insurance rate increases of more than 500 percent?
Taking advantage of “the stupidity of the American voter”, the Democrats succeeded in ramming through one of the worst pieces of legislation that has ever come before Congress.
The full implementation of Obamacare has been repeatedly delayed, but now we are finally starting to see the true horror of this terrible law.  Thanks to Obamacare, millions of American families are losing health plans that they were very happy with, health insurance rates are skyrocketing, millions of workers are having their full-time hours cut back to part-time hours, rural hospitals all over the country are dying, and thousands of doctors are being driven out of the industry thus intensifying the greatest doctor shortage in U.S. history.
Obamacare is a slow-motion train wreck of epic proportions, and the full effect of this law is only beginning to be felt.  In the end, the economic impact of this law will likely be measured in the trillions of dollars.
One of the primary reasons why Democrats experienced so much pain during the recent elections was because millions of Americans are receiving some very disturbing letters from their health insurance providers.  At a time when U.S. incomes are stagnating, health insurance rates are rising to absolutely ridiculous levels.

As the New York Times recently reported, even the Obama administration is admitting that “substantial price increases” are on the way…

The Obama administration on Friday unveiled data showing that many Americans with health insurance bought under the Affordable Care Act could face substantial price increases next year — in some cases as much as 20 percent — unless they switch plans.

The data became available just hours before the health insurance marketplace was to open to buyers seeking insurance for 2015.

An analysis of the data by The New York Times suggests that although consumers will often be able to find new health plans with prices comparable to those they now pay, the situation varies greatly from state to state and even among counties in the same state.

Originally, Barack Obama promised that if we liked our current health plans that we could keep them.  Well, it turns out that was not true at all.  Instead, the vast majority of us will eventually have to move to new plans if we have not done so already.  This is particularly true for those that purchase health insurance individually.  The following is an excerpt from an NBC News investigation…

Four sources deeply involved in the Affordable Care Act tell NBC News that 50 to 75 percent of the 14 million consumers who buy their insurance individually can expect to receive a “cancellation” letter or the equivalent over the next year because their existing policies don’t meet the standards mandated by the new health care law. One expert predicts that number could reach as high as 80 percent. And all say that many of those forced to buy pricier new policies will experience “sticker shock.”

This is something that actually happened to me.  I received a letter in the mail informing me that my new health insurance policy which meets the requirements of Obamacare will cost me nearly twice as much as my old one.
Needless to say, I was not too thrilled about that.
Other Americans are being hit even harder.  For instance, one family down in Texas got hammered with a 539 percent rate increase…

Obamacare is named the “Affordable Care Act,” after all, and the President promised the rates would be “as low as a phone bill.” But I just received a confirmed letter from a friend in Texas showing a 539% rate increase on an existing policy that’s been in good standing for years.

As the letter reveals (see below), the cost for this couple’s policy under Humana is increasing from $212.10 per month to $1,356.60 per month. This is for a couple in good health whose combined income is less than $70K — a middle-class family, in other words.

These rate increases are coming at a time when the middle class in the U.S. is already steadily shrinking.  A lot of families that are already stretched to the breaking point are making the very painful decision to give up health insurance entirely.  At this point, there are millions of families that simply cannot afford it.
But Obama is not about to let those people off the hook.  In fact, huge tax penalties are on the way for those that do not participate in the new system…

Penalties for failing to secure a health-insurance plan will rise steeply next year, which could take a big bite out of some families’ pocketbooks.

“The penalty is meant to incentivize people to get coverage,” said senior analyst Laura Adams of InsuranceQuotes.com. “This year, I think a lot of people are going to be in for a shock.”

In 2014, Obamacare’s first year, individuals are facing a penalty of $95 per person, or 1 percent of their income, depending on which is higher. If an American failed to get coverage this year, that penalty will be taken out of their tax refund in early 2015, Adams noted.

While that might be painful to some uninsured Americans who are counting on their tax refunds in early 2015, the penalty for going uninsured next year is even harsher. The financial penalty for skipping out on health coverage will more than triple to $325 per person in 2015, or 2 percent of income, depending on whichever is higher.

Children will be fined at half the adult rate, or $162.50 for those under 18 years old.

No wonder so many people are so angry with the Democrats.
And as Massachusetts Institute of Technology professor Jonathan Gruber has so infamously observed, Obamacare never would have become law if the American people had been told the truth about what it would do to them.
It has been documented that Gruber has visited the White House about a dozen times since 2009, and he has been one of the leading intellectual proponents of Obamacare.  A video in which he states that “the stupidity of the American voter” was “really critical” to the passage of Obamacare has gone viral over the past week.  I have posted a copy of this video below…

What he is essentially saying is that the Democrats purposely deceived the American people because it was the only way that Obamacare was going to become law.
And this is a man that has become very wealthy advising government on healthcare matters.  According to an article in the Washington Post, he has made millions of dollars from “consulting” in recent years…

Not all of the contracts could be found on public Web sites, but here is a sampling. In some cases, Gruber worked with other consultants, so the fees were shared. These figures also might not represent the final payout, and of course these are gross figures, before expenses. But it’s safe to say that about $400,000 appears to be the standard rate for gaining access to the Gruber Microsimulation Model.

Michigan: $481,050
Minnesota: $329,000
Vermont: $400,000
Wisconsin: $400,000

Gruber has also earned more than $2 million over the last seven years for an ongoing contract with HHS to assess choices made by the elderly in Medicare’s prescription-drug plan.

If you are Gruber, life is quite good.
But for most of the rest of America, the economic pain continues.
For example, one recent study found that almost half of all Floridians cannot even afford “to pay for basic necessities”…

Nearly half of Florida households do not earn enough to pay for basic necessities, according to a report released Tuesday by the United Way that seeks to cast a light on the large group of state residents who struggle financially but do not meet the official criteria for being in poverty.

While 15 percent of Florida households are below the poverty level, another 30 percent are financially insecure — a figure that also applies to Sarasota and Manatee counties — based on a new measurement developed by the United Way.

If all those people cannot even afford the basics, how are they going to pay for Obamacare?
This law is going to financially cripple millions of American families.  It truly is a death panel for the U.S. economy.  And because Barack Obama can veto anything that the Republicans in Congress do, we are stuck with it for at least another two years (and probably longer).
So what about you?
Have your health insurance premiums gone up yet?
Please feel free to add to the discussion by posting a comment below…
This article first appeared here at the Economic Collapse Blog.  Michael Snyder is a writer, speaker and activist who writes and edits his own blogs The American Dream and Economic Collapse Blog. Follow him on Twitter here.

Obamacare = A Death Panel For The U.S. Economy
Activist
Mon, 17 Nov 2014 13:13:00 GMT

Possible Rules Change Could Punish Boehner Dissidents – NationalJournal.com.

Possible Rules Change Could Punish Boehner Dissidents

Plan floated to strip committee slots from members who rebel during floor vote for speaker.

BY TIM ALBERTA AND DANIEL NEWHAUSER

Allies of John Boehner want to avoid a repeat of the 2013 floor vote for House speaker.(Photo by Saul Loeb/AFP/Getty Images)

Citizens United : Dedicated to restoring our government to citizen control.

August 10, 2014

Voter ID laws are a pretty simple concept that enjoy widespread support.  Voter ID laws simply state that anyone showing up to vote at the polls must provide a valid ID of some sort, to prove that they are who they claim to be.

Voter ID laws help prevent and cut down on voter fraud, and help to protect the integrity of elections.  Progressive Democrats abhor voter ID laws, and Attorney General Eric Holder has attacked such laws in multiple states, claiming they are racist and prevent minorities from voting.

But the only thing racist about voter ID laws is the liberal assumption that minorities are somehow unable to obtain some sort of ID.  This despite the fact that most states will offer a simple voter ID card for free, and the ubiquitous nature of ID cards in general society already, as ID cards are required for most business conducted day to day.

Sign up for our weekly newsletter right now:

Attorney General Eric Holder had sued North Carolina over their voter ID law, making his usual claim that the law was racist and discriminatory against minorities, putting an undue burden on them that prevented them from exercising their right to vote.  According toWestern Journalism, a federal District Court in North Carolina thought differently, and flat out rejected Holder’s argument.

Tom Fitton, of Judicial Watch, called this decision a huge setback for Eric Holder’s war against voter ID, saying “It is an embarrassing defeat for the Holder Justice Department. The court’s decision eviscerates Eric Holder’s politicized and racially inflammatory legal assault on commonsense election integrity measures. The court expressly rejected the Department of Justice’s contention that minorities are harmed by commonsense measures that help secure honest elections. The court’s dramatic rejection of Holder’s legal theory shows that that the DOJ’s lawsuit, which was coordinated with political activists at the White House, was always more about cynical political and racial appeals than upholding the law.”

This is huge news, and fits with the continuing trend of court defeats for the administration. Wisconsin’s voter ID law was recently upheld, with similar arguments against it being rejected by the court.

There is nothing racist or discriminatory about requiring voters to prove they are citizens that are properly registered to vote, before allowing them to vote.  The honesty and integrity of our democratic system depends upon it.

Do you think voters should have to show an ID before being allowed to vote?

Tuesday, 09 September 2014 11:51

Republicans and Democrats Working Together to Rewrite the Constitution

Written by  Christian Gomez

• font size
• Print

• E-mail

Many conservative Americans who support a modern-day constitutional convention, a.k.a. a “Convention of the States,” sincerely believe that the states will be able to control what happens should such a convention be convened and that the agenda would be limited to a predetermined “conservative” agenda, such as balancing the federal budget. Yet the evidence continues to mount that this is mere wishful thinking. As a little-publicized meeting late this spring clearly demonstrated, conservative state legislators who fashion themselves the founding fathers of a new convention recognize that they must make their “tent” big enough to include liberal Democrats in order to succeed.

On June 12-13, 2014, the Indiana State Legislature hosted what its organizers termed a “write the rules convention,” composed of both Republicans and progressive Democrats, to prepare for a future Article V “convention of the states.”

This “rules convention” was the product of the Assembly of State Legislatures (ASL), which describes itself as “a bipartisan group of currently serving state legislators from across the country who recognize that the states have a responsibility under federalism to work together to solve problems of national concern.”

Formerly known as the Mount Vernon Assembly and renamed at the June meeting, ASL appears to be the brainchild of Republican State Representative Chris Kapenga of Wisconsin. Both Kapenga’s and ASL’s desired goal is to bring about an amendments convention as provided for in the Constitution’s Article V: “The Congress … on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress.” (Emphasis added.)

Said and Unsaid

The June 12 ASL session opened with prayer and pledge in the House of Representatives Chamber of the Indiana Statehouse, followed by elaboration by Kapenga on some of the background of Article V and how the states can utilize it to amend the Constitution. Asserting that this would be a purely state-led and state-directed process, Kapenga proceeded to quote from Alexander Hamilton’s The Federalist, No. 85, which addresses Article V: “The words of this article are peremptory. The Congress ‘shall call a convention.’ Nothing in this particular is left to the discretion of that body.”

Since “The Federalist Papers are not [the] governing documents of our country,” as Democratic State Representative Raymond Dehn of Minnesota pointed out, Kapenga and other pro Article V convention advocates cannot use the above quote from Hamilton to definitively lay to rest any concerns or fears of potential congressional involvement and influence over an actual Article V convention.

Article I, Section 8, Clause 18 of the Constitution, which unlike the Federalist Papers is the nation’s primary governing document, specifically states: “The Congress shall have Power … To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or office thereof.” (Emphasis added.)

Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution lists the various powers specifically granted to Congress, among which are the power to “establish Post Offices and post Roads,” “declare war,” and “provide and maintain a Navy.” Regarding the latter, since Congress has the power to “provide and maintain a Navy,” Article I, Section 8, Clause 18 grants Congress the power to do what is “necessary and proper” to exercise this power ­— meaning the establishment of naval academies to train officers and sailors; the creation of shipyards to construct, refit, and repair warships; and the hiring and training of engineers to build, design, and operate those vessels. Clause 18 is not limited to only those “foregoing powers” listed in Article I, Section 8, but to “all other powers vested by this Constitution,” including Article V.

This means that under Article I, Section 8, Clause 18 Congress is granted the power to “make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution” Article V’s constitutional mandate that Congress, “on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments.” Constitutionally, Congress has and will execute all the powers it deems necessary for calling a convention. This would likely include choosing the location and date of the convention, allocation of delegates from the states (whether proportional by population, congressional district, one per state, etc.), the method of ratification for any proposed amendments to the Constitution, and all other preliminary rules associated with the convention.

Put simply, the power to establish such rules resides exclusively with Congress. It is not a state-led process as Kapenga and others in the pro-Article V camp maintain.

Of course, once an Article V convention actually convenes, it would then be free to create its own agenda, including possibly even coming up with a new ratification process, as was the case with the Constitutional Convention of 1787. But this historical fact underscores even more the fact that the states cannot bind the work of the convention.

Speaking about the nature and purpose of the two-day Indianapolis meeting, Kapenga told the state legislators in attendance that their current assembly meeting “does not trigger Article V authority or involvement of Congress, because remember the Article V authority is to amend.” Kapenga continued, “We are not touching amendments at this convention. This is a write the rules convention.” (Emphasis added.)

Kapenga and the other state legislators behind the ASL view their two-day gathering in Indianapolis as already being a “new legislative body” or “convention,” the same type of convention as an Article V convention, which they claim is not a one-time meeting but an ongoing assembly or continuous series of “Conventions of the States.”

Page three of the ASL’s “Committee Responsibility Form” for the Rules and Procedures Committee states:

It should also be clearly stated that we see a Convention of the States as the same legislative body, no matter if convened for the purpo
se of an Article V Convention for Proposing Amendments, or for any other purpose. It is the same precedent as if the Indiana House, for example, was in regular or special session; it is still the same body even though it is convened under a different ­purpose.

According to Kapenga and ASL documents, the June 12-13 Indianapolis meeting was the “same legislative body” as an Article V convention. To them this June 12-13 Indianapolis meeting was a Convention of the States, and is a continuous legislative body just as the houses of state legislatures or the two houses of Congress are as they go from one session to another. Where in Article V of the Constitution does it say that the convention for proposing amendments is an ongoing “legislative body,” one that can convene, meet, and pass resolutions at its own discretion, and only requiring Congress’ approval (at the behest of 34 states) before proposing amendments to the Constitution? The short answer is nowhere.

These claims are nowhere to be found in the text of the Constitution. Yet Kapenga is considered to be one of the “conservative” Republicans involved in this process. If this is what reputed conservatives are claiming about an Article V convention, then how much further will pro-Article-V-convention progressive Democratic supporters go?

Democrats in the Digs

What progressive Democratic supporters, you may ask? Wasn’t this supposed to be a purely conservative Republican effort from start to finish? That’s what the pro-Article-V-convention advocates originally claimed early on in their presentations to numerous Tea Party groups and on popular conservative talk-radio shows. Now, however, their true colors, Red and Blue (Republican and Democrat), are bleeding through as some of those who originally gave the impression that this would be a “conservative” Republican effort are now proudly proposing to work together with the Left and boasting of the Article V movement’s “bipartisanship.”

Of the 109 state legislator delegates shown in the seating chart for the ASL’s Indianapolis “rules convention,” 11 were Democrats. At the end of the two-day meeting, Kapenga promised that “we’re going to change” the political makeup of the ASL, i.e., attract more Democrats. Missouri State Senator Jason Holsman,  a participant in the Indianapolis ASL convention as co-chair of the Rules and Procedures Committee and regarded as the “greenest Democrat” in the Missouri Legislature, stressed the need to bring in and involve more Democrats, minorities, and women. Senator Holsman elaborated on the need to “change the complexion of the room,” a goal that “conservative” Republican Kapenga of Wisconsin shares.

What effect would attracting more Democrats have on the outcome of an Article V Convention of the States? Would it still be limited to a single subject or amendment, such as a balanced budget amendment? After all, ASL views its recent “rules convention” as constituting the “same legislative body” as an actual congressionally authorized Article V ­convention.

Whereas most conservative Republican state legislators favor a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution, the inclusion of more liberal Democrats will surely also mean the inclusion of a more liberal progressive agenda. Why else would liberal Democrats participate in an Article V convention unless they expected to make their own desired changes to the Constitution? Would liberal Democratic delegates seek the adoption of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s “Second Bill of Rights” that he proposed in his 1944 State of the Union Address? Would they go after the Supreme Court’s 2010 decision in Citizens United, in order to proclaim that “money does not equal speech,” that “corporations are not people,” and that all elections must be publicly financed? This type of campaign finance reform amendment is what left-wing Article V convention groups, such as Wolf-PAC, advocate.

Between 2013 and 2014, 16 state legislatures introduced resolutions requesting that Congress call a convention to propose variations of Wolf-PAC’s campaign finance amendment. The legislatures of Vermont and California passed the nation’s first two Wolf-PAC Article V convention applications in 2014 with two more states, Minnesota and Illinois, passing it in their respective state Senates. In fact, one of the Democratic participants at the ASL’s Indianapolis rules convention was Minnesota State Representative Raymond Dehn, who not only cosponsored SF 17, the Minnesota Senate version of the Wolf-PAC application, but also was the lead sponsor of the House version, HB 276. On the first day of ASL’s Indianapolis meeting, Dehn introduced himself as the “most left” leaning legislator present.

Both Minnesota’s SF 17 and HB 276 that Dehn sponsored read in part:

BE IT RESOLVED by the Legislature of the State of Minnesota that it requests that Congress propose an amendment to the Constitution that shall substantially read as follows:

(1) The rights protected by the Constitution of the United States are the rights of natural persons only.

(2) Any entity, including any organization or association of one or more persons, established or allowed by the laws of any State, the United States, or any Foreign State shall have no rights under this Constitution and are subject to regulation by the people, through Federal, State, or local law.

(3) The privileges of any entity, including any organization or association, shall be determined by the people, through Federal, State, or local law, and shall not be construed to be inherent or inalienable.

(4) Federal, State, and local government shall regulate, limit, or prohibit contributions and expenditures, including a candidate’s own contributions and expenditures, to ensure that all citizens, regardless of their economic status, have access to the political process, and that no person gains, as a result of their money, substantially more access or ability to influence in any way the election of any candidate for public office or any ballot measure.

(5) Federal, State, and local government shall require that any permissible contributions and expenditures be publicly disclosed.

(6) The judiciary shall not construe the spending of money to influence elections to be speech under the 1st Amendment.

Dehn’s resolution further affirms itself as an Article V application:

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that if Congress does not propose the amendment language or substantially similar amendment language as contained in this resolution, the Legislature of the State of Minnesota applies to the Congress of the United States to call a constitutional convention for the purpose of proposing the amendment language or substantially similar amendment language as contained in this resolution as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States. [Emphasis added.]

Despite Kapenga’s denial that a “Convention of the States” and a “constitutional convention” are the same thing, the text of this Article V application, cosponsored and introduced by a leading ASL delegate, demonstrates otherwise.

What effect would a constitutional amendment such as the one above sponsored by Dehn (“no rights under this Constitution”) have on the legal standing of (say) Hobby Lobby? On June 30, 2010, this Christian-owned corporation won a landmark decision in the Supreme Court over its refusal to participate in the Obama­Care mandate requiring it to provide abortion-inducing contraceptive drugs for its employees. Under Dehn’s Wolf-PAC amendment, Hobby Lobby and other corporations like it would have no constitutionally protected rights. Are these the type of architects we want to be amending or rewriting the Constitution?

Despite the inclusion of pro-Wolf-PAC supporters such as Dehn in the ASL’s ranks, Representative Chris Kapenga and Senator Jason Holsman are eager to invite even more Democrats to further change the future makeup of the room. Why such a bipartisan eagerness to invite the Left
to help make changes to the nation’s Constitution? The answer might lie in an e-mail from Michael Farris’ Convention of States, a project of Mark Meckler’s Citizens for Self Governance (CSG).

In an e-mail from Eric Burk, the Grassroots Coordinator for CSG’s Convention of States Project, Burk expressly states: “The plain and simple truth is that unless we can get both support from Republicans and Democrats, we cannot hope to get our application passed in 34 states.”

If the Right is making such bipartisan concessions now, before an actual Article V convention has convened, imagine how much further they would be willing to compromise at a second constitutional convention. What exactly would the results of a new, modern-day, “great compromise” be?

Those who love the Constitution should be wary of Article V convention advocates who all too easily give false assurances as to the safety of such a convention. The Constitution need not be amended, but rather should be defended by upholding it. Changing the Constitution will not correct man’s failure to properly interpret or willingly obey it. Only through an informed electorate and the educational efforts of grassroots constitutionalist organizations dedicated to the preservation of the Constitution will this latest bipartisan assault on the Constitution be thwarted, assuring the continued blessings of liberty for America’s posterity.

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/19082-republicans-and-democrats-working-together-to-rewrite-the-constitution

VIDEO: Sen. Mike Lee condemns Democrats for trying to alter the First Amendment | Ben Swann Truth In Media.

WASHINGTON D.C., September 10, 2014 – On Tuesday, Senator Mike Lee (R- Utah) gave an impassioned speech before Congress detailing the threat S.J. Res 19, a new proposed constitutional amendment, poses to the  First Amendment.

If passed, the proposed amendment would grant Congress and states the power to regulate the raising and spending of money with respect to federal and state elections. Lee blasted the Democrats attempt to limit free speech and said our political system “keeps us free only to the extent that individuals rich and poor alike are able to say what they want and join together to form voluntary associations for the purpose of influencing the outcome of elections.” You can watch the full video here:

http://benswann.com/video-sen-mike-lee-condemns-democrats-for-trying-to-alter-the-first-amendment/

Barack Obama is well known for attacking voter ID laws, contending they are being pushed “by racist Republicans who want to disenfranchise blacks.”

But now there are allegations claiming secure-ballot advocates are targeting transgenders.

It was the Williams Institute that declared in a statement Tuesday that transgenders may face “possible disenfranchisement.”

The institute said a study by its own Jody L. Herman and others found, “Many transgender people who have transitioned do not have identification that accurately reflects their correct gender.”

Herman said lawmakers “should not overlook the consequences of enacting stricter voter ID laws on transgender voters.”

“Election officials must consider the potential impact of these laws in the upcoming November elections. Voter ID laws create a unique barrier for transgender people who would otherwise be eligible to vote.”

The organization said that in 10 states voter ID laws may create “substantial barriers to voting, naming Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Mississippi, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia and Wisconsin.

In those 10 states, there are about 84,000 people “who have transitioned” and are eligible to vote, the organization said.

“An estimated 28 percent of the transgender voting-eligible population in those 10 states has no identification or records that accurately reflect their gender. Transgender people of color, youth, students, people with low incomes, and people with disabilities are likely overrepresented in that group,” the institute said.

“In order for these 24,000 voting-eligible transgender people to obtain the updated IDs required to vote in the November 2014 general election, they must comply with the requirements for updating their state-issued or federally issued IDs. These requirements vary widely by state or federal agency and can be difficult and costly to meet,” the group continued.

“Some voters may not have the means or the ability to present the required voter identification for a variety of reasons, such as poverty, disability, or religious objection. Transgender people have unique barriers to obtaining accurate IDs needed to vote. As these 10 states begin planning for their fall elections, educating poll workers is crucial in order to ensure that transgender voters in their states have fair access to the ballot,” said Herman.

What do YOU think? Do voter ID laws discriminate against transgenders? Sound off in today’s WND poll!

The Journal report said Obama stated earlier this year, “The real voter fraud is people trying to deny our rights by making voting harder in the first place.”

The report went on to explain that support for voter ID laws is strong “and transcends gender, party and even race.” It cited a Fox News poll in which 70 percent of respondents – including 55 percent of Democrats, 91 percent of Republicans, 66 percent of independents, 70 percent of men, 71 percent of women, 75 percent of whites and 51 percent of blacks – expressed support for laws that “require voters to show a valid form of state- or federally-issued photo identification to prove U.S. citizenship before being allowed to vote.”

The results comport with those of other polls, the report said.

A 2012 Washington Post poll, for example, asked if people should be “required to show official, government-issued photo identification – such as a driver’s license – when they cast ballots on Election Day.” Seventy-four percent of all respondents and 65 percent of blacks said yes.

There doesn’t seem to be a major problem with transgenders being able to afford an ID. The left-leaning Huffington Post reported: “Not only do gay people earn more than the average American does, gay people are more likely to be employed, they have more money in savings and they are better at managing debt, according to a Nov. 14 survey of more than 1,0000 gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people by Prudential.”

The report said the “average LGBT household earns $61,500 annually, which surpasses the average national household income by more than $10,000.”

The American Civil Liberties Union offers a “fact sheet” that contends voter ID laws “deny the right to vote to thousands of registered voters” who “cannot afford to pay for the required documents needed to secure a government-issued photo ID.”

The report asserted there is “no credible evidence that in-person impersonation voter fraud – the only type of fraud that photo IDs could prevent – is even a minor problem.”

But WND has reported on a wide range of allegations of voter fraud over recent years. In Pennsylvania in 2012, Obama got 19,605 votes in 59 voting divisions to zero for Mitt Romney. In 100 precincts in Ohio, Obama got 99 percent of the vote.

Talk-radio host Rush Limbaugh declared: “Third-world, tin-horn dictators don’t get [these percentages]. I mean, the last guy that got this percentage of the vote was Saddam Hussein, and the people that didn’t vote for him got shot. This just doesn’t happen. Even Hugo Chavez [of Venezuela] doesn’t get 100 percent or 99 percent of the vote.”

See the BIG LIST of vote fraud reports coming out of the 2012 election.

About that time, WND columnist Barry Farber wrote that a “single fraudulent vote is an ‘attack’ on our democratic system.”

“Massive voter fraud is a massive attack. The website Watchdog.com tells us that a group known as the Virginia Voters Alliance counted 44,000 voters registered in Maryland as well as Virginia. An additional 40 to 60 thousand dead voters were found to be on the active voters list in that one state of Virginia, according to the Social Security Administration. It’s not just Chicago any more,” he wrote.

He related a joke about voting rolls and procedures.

“In the days before voter fraud became unfunny, they told about the two men from a Democratic clubhouse in Chicago out in a graveyard late one night copying names from tombstones for voting purposes. One of the men noticed the other was falling row after row behind. ‘Hurry it up, pal,’ he said. ‘What’s wrong?’

“His buddy replied, ‘This is one of those tough Polish names. I’ve got to figure it out.’

“‘Forget about that one,’ stage-whispered his friend. ‘Just skip it and move on to the next one,’” Farber wrote.

“‘Whaddaya mean, ‘Move on’?’ he answered indignantly. ‘This guy has as much right to vote as all the rest in here!’”

The National Conference of State Legislatures details all of the voter ID laws in the nation, ranging from states with strict photo ID requirements to those with no requirements at all.

“Proponents see increasing requirements for identification as a way to prevent in-person voter impersonation and increase public confidence in the election process. Opponents say there is little fraud of this kind, and the burden on voters unduly restricts the right to vote and imposes unnecessary costs and administrative burdens on elections administrators,” the report explains.

Epic change endangers U.S. election validity
Bob Unruh
Wed
, 10 Sep 2014 00:07:24 GMT

Assault and Flattery: The Truth About the Left and Their War on Women – Katie Pavlich – Page 1.

“Women of America, you are being lied to. Manipulated. Used. By the mainstream media and the Democratic Party – as if there’s a difference – both of which tell you they have your best interests at heart. They don’t. The reason I know this is because I’ve seen firsthand how they treat women who don’t toe their line,” I write in my new book Assault and Flattery: The Truth About the Left and Their War on Women, in bookstores today. “Many of you have been persuaded that there is a ‘war on women’ being waged by the other political party. In fact, the real story is very different.”
It’s time someone pointed out the hypocrisy and lies coming from the left about women. Democrats have run the conversation for too long and I’m out to debunk the sacred cows of the so-called Republican War on Women.

If liberals really believe women can protect themselves, then why do they oppose a woman’s right to carry a handgun for self defense? If Hillary Clinton is the ultimate female role model, then why has she built her political career on her husband’s philandering while silencing his many female whistleblowers? If Barack Obama is the most pro-woman president in history, then why does he seek to make women completely dependent on the government? If the right to an abortion gives women personal autonomy and sexual freedom, then why are its debilitating aftereffects overlooked? And finally, if Republicans are so insensitive to women, then why is the sexual lechery of politicians from Ted Kennedy to Bill Clinton defended, justified, covered up, or ignored?
Those on the left love to talk about women in one way, but in reality treat women in an entirely opposite, demeaning way full of broken promises and false hope. Through research, in-depth interviews and personal stories, I reveal the shocking truth about the Democratic Party’s anti-woman agenda on issues like gun control, healthcare, the economy, sexual assault and more.
When President Obama ran for reelection in 2012, he didn’t do so based on his record but instead he propagated one of the left’s most damaging and egregious offenses against women by promoting the false idea that reliance on government is empowering. I watched the 2012 campaign up close and the Democratic strategy hinged on women, more than any other campaign in history, by distorting the truth and lying about contraception bans. After spending weeks on the campaign trail, one thing was clear: Democrats don’t want women to be independent, they want them to be dependent. Like many Democrats before him, Obama sold victimhood as empowerment for votes by scaring women into thinking government is the answer to their problems and that they probably can’t survive without it. Democrats will do the same in the 2014 and 2016 elections.

Here’s the reality. Reliance on government doesn’t provide a life of success and independence, instead it provides one of disappointment, hopeless dependency and broken promises. Democrats won’t tell women that because after all, it would expose their phony platform.
The way Democrats have repeatedly defined women by the pills they take, by their body parts and as victims of their gender, is abhorrent. Women should be appalled at liberals classifying them in such a blatantly sexist, repulsive way and they should fight back.
I encourage women, fathers, husbands, sons, and boyfriends, to read my book so they can understand the true manipulation of women and exactly what side of the political aisle it’s coming from. If you want to know the truth about the Left andtheir war on women, that’s what Assault and Flattery is all about.