Current press reports focus on PRISM, the NSAâs relationships with the biggest tech companies in the world, and the spilled leaks of Ed Snowden.
Iâve already laid out serious questions about Snowdenâs work history and whether heâs told the truth about it.
Is it likely he could have accessed and snatched thousands of highly classified NSA documents?
âLetâs see. Whoâs coming to work for us here at NSA today? Oh, new whiz kid. Ed Snowden. Outside contractor. Heâs not really a full-time employee of the NSA. Twenty-nine years old. No high school diploma. Has a GED. He worked for the CIA and quit. Hmm. Why did he quit? Oh, never mind, who cares? No problem.
âTell you what. Letâs give this kid access to our most sensitive data. Sure. Why not? Everything. That stuff we keep behind 986 walls? Where you have to pledge the life of your first-born against the possibility youâll go rogue? Let Snowden see it all. Sure. What the hell. Iâm feeling charitable. He seems like a nice kid.â
Here is a more likely scenario.
Snowden never saw any of those thousands of documents on an NSA computer. Never happened.
Instead, he was either used or volunteered as a CIA operative to carry the endless turf war between CIA and NSA a new step forward. People at the CIA WERE able to access those NSA documents and they gave the documents to Snowden and he ran with them.
This was a covert op launched by the CIA against a chief rival, the NSA. NSA, the agency thatâs far bigger than the CIA. NSA, the agency thatâs been taking over intelligence gathering, that considers itself superior to everybody else in the intelligence field.
The CIA, of course, couldnât be seen as the NSA leaker. They needed a guy. They needed a guy who could appear to be FROM the NSA, to make things look worse for the NSA and shield the CIA.
They had Ed Snowden. He had worked for the CIA in Geneva, in a high-level position, overseeing computer-systems security. People would later assume he had the wherewithal to get into NSA files and steal documents all by himself.
Somewhere in his CIA past, Ed meets a fellow CIA guy who sits down with him and says, âYou know, Ed, things have gone too damn far. The NSA is spying on everybody all the time. I can show you proof. Theyâve gone beyond the point of trying to catch terrorists. Theyâre doing something else. Theyâre expanding a Surveillance State, which can only lead to one thing: the destruction of America, what America stands for, what you and I know America is supposed to be. The NSA isnât like us, Ed. We go after terrorists for real. Thatâs it. Whereas NSA goes after everybody. We have to stop it. We need a guyâŚand there are those of us who think you might be that guyâŚâ
During the course of this one disingenuous conversation, the CIA is killing 37 innocent civilians all over the world with drones, but thatâs beside the point. Ahem.
Ed says, âTell me more. Iâm intrigued.â
He buys in.
And what his CIA handler said, in his completely cynical self-serving way, is true. The Surveillance State isnât about catching terrorists.
At a quite insane level, itâs about a partial science trying to become a complete science. Itâs about the vision of systems engineers:
To be able to predict and control the actions of any and every human.
Can enough useful information on Human Being X be compiled, collated, and analyzed, quickly, that would enable overseers to know what Human X is going to doâand to redirect his next action?
His next action and future actions?
To put it another way, minds who are enraptured by the Matrix want to make that Matrix even tighter and more nearly perfect.
They want to play 100-dimensional chess with most difficult piece on the board as the main target: the human. They want to see whether they can operate that piece and work it and predict it and control it and win the game.
Winning the game means reducing 100-dimensional chess to a closed system.
This is what the engineers of the Surveillance State are trying to do with the global population.
Because they think they can.
Because they work for men who want to own all life.
Because they view individual freedom as a highly convincing illusion they want to invalidate and smash.
Iâm reminded of a 1982 story I did for LA Weekly. I interviewed Bill Perry, who had just quit his job as head of PR for Lawrence Livermore Labs, where they do research on building better nuclear weapons.
Bill cited, as one of his defining moments, a conversations he had with a physicist there who was complaining that the Lab needed more funding.
Bill said, âLook, we can already blow up the world a dozen times. What else do you need?â
The physicist looked up from his desk and said, âYou donât understand. This is a math problem, a physics problem.â
Thatâs the mindset. Itâs all about making a better system. Who cares about collateral human damage?
When these scientists see freedom, they shrink away from it. It disturbs them. It reminds them they arenât free. It reminds them they donât know what freedom is.
You can even see this in some of more astounding press comments about Ed Snowden. Yes, it was all right that he exposed NSA butâŚhe should have stayed in America and faced the music.
A mind-boggling assessment to say the least.
However, itâs really based on a perception, true or false, that Snowden is currently running around free, uncontrolled.
And that he has no right to be, because nobody does, outside the range and reach of government.
Freedom is the wild card. âOrder must take its place.â Thatâs what the Surveillance State is all about.
âWeâve got these biological machines called humans running around out there and itâs crazy. Theyâre possibly in possession of something called FREEDOM which is too horrible to contemplate, because I, an obsessive problem solver, long ago sacrificed MY OWN FREEDOM on the altar ofâŚIâve forgotten. Anyway, wait a minute, these biological machines donât really have freedom, theyâre running on faulty programsâŚ.YES, THATâS IT, and the programs have to be changed, ONCE AND FOR ALL!! Yes, that feels better. There is no such thing as freedom.â
âYes, thatâs it. No one is free, itâs all a delusion. There are only good and bad programs, and these billions of human machines are running on bad programsâŚso we need one central program, one CENTRAL PROGRAM for everybody, and then order will prevail and coordination will prevail, and peace will prevail.â
âIn order to develop such a program, we need Total Surveillance. We need to observe all these biological machines in their crazy lives, 24/7, wherever they go, whatever they doâŚ.and then we can collate that information and analyze it and come up with a solution. Algorithms. A better program. An all-encompassing program. Then we can insert it into the behavior of every human.â
The Surveillance State is based on a psychology and a philosophy that has this view of life and human beings.
Thatâs what weâre dealing with. Nothing less.
Mass mind control. Operant conditioning. Coercion.
In Orwellâs 1984, thatâs what âBig Brother is watching youâ was all about. The Surveillance State wasnât merely curious. It wasnât merely trying to stamp out terrorists. It was part and parcel of control.
The author of an explosive collection,Â THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29thÂ District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world.
The voice in this video belongs toÂ William Cooper, a true patriot who predicted 9/11 in June of 2001, was murdered by government agents several months after theÂ FALSE FLAG/INSIDE JOBÂ by government agents.
When Israel realized that it could murder theÂ US president JFKÂ and not worry about repercussions and then savagely attack an unarmed American ship in international waters without any retaliation, that’s when that psychotic state of mass-murdering, land stealing con artists, liars, thieves, murderers and corrupters knew they could pull off the greatest FALSE FLAG of all, theÂ 9/11 attacksÂ against the USA.
The pilot of flight 77 which supposedly hit the Pentagon, was an ex-navy F4 pilot who, just 10 years prior, participated in an exercise in the Pentagon, in which it gets attacked by a commercial airliner. The project is documented by the government. No, we aren’t making this stuff up!
Even Fox ‘news’ talks about how an ex-navy man was the pilot, but they fail to tell you about the real story…
1990–Charles Burlingame participates in a department of Defense exercise labeledÂ project MASCAL, in which a commercial airliner is used as a weapon and crashed into the pentagon. (photos from exercise below, audio mistakenly says year is 2000).
2001–Charles Burlingame is flying the flight 77, the airliner that supposedly crashed into the pentagon
2002–Condaleeza Rice says “No one imagined an airliner being used as a weapon”.
But it seems, not only did the United States government contemplate it, they in fact created a mock-up exercise depicting that very event, complete with a model of the Pentagon, a model jetliner, and even model rescue vehicles on scene.
In 1990, before the 9/11 attacks, the government simulated a Boeing 757 attacking the Pentagon. It appears as if they are interested in how the airliner will look in the aftermath. As though they are considering what ‘scenes’ to stage, for maximum pictorial effect.
In the experiment, emergency personnel were required to hold radio and other communications devices to increase their operational readiness for quickly transporting massive casualties from the disaster area to medical centers. Toy trucks were used as miniature models to simulate emergency transport vehicles for victims.
The next FALSE FLAG/INSIDE JOB attack on the USA will most likely be a cyber one, so theÂ Internet can be shut down, on a temporary basis, so that the same fucks behind 9/11 can lock down the Internet, effectively negating all the truth coming out about 9/11.
TheÂ real reasonÂ behind the invocation of 9/11 in the context of “cyber terror” was revealed last year by Harvard law professor Lawrence Lessig. He told a technology conference that former counter-terrorism czar Richard Clarke admits there is a cyber equivalent of the constitution-destroying Patriot Act ready to be rubber stamped into law; all it requires is a “cyber 9/11″ to make such legislation politically viable.
In effect, the cyber security establishmentâthe advisors, agents and experts in the newly-minted multi-billion dollar cyber security industryâare waiting for a spectacular cyber terrorist attack to go ahead with plans for ‘identity management’ schemes like fingerprinting for internet access which would put an end to the free Internet as we have known it.
97 BILLION pieces of intelligence captured in one month alone by the illegal spy network set up by the USA and monitored by Israel, in their never-ending hunt for ‘al CIA Duh.’ Feel safer now?
Bilderberg 2013 participant: âIâm honored to have been asked to go. But itâs crazy. They [the organizers] wouldnât tell us where we were going to stay until a couple of weeks beforehand.â
Sherard Cowper-Coles, former diplomat and current director at BAEÂ told a reporterÂ at the Standard that the organizationâs veil of secrecy not only applies to the outside world, but also extends to those invited to participate.
The Standard reported yesterday that âeven those inside the perimeter are victims of Bilderbergâs steel ring of secrecy.â Journalist Joy Lo Dico quotes the influential BAE director as saying:
âIâm honored to have been asked to go,â he told me last night in London. âBut itâs crazy. They [the organizers] wouldnât tell us where we were going to stay until a couple of weeks beforehand,â adding with a smirk: âSome people had to book their private jets in advance.â
Cowper-Coles, who as former Special Representative to Afghanistan and Pakistan hasÂ extensive experienceÂ guarding British interests in the Middle-East, is not the first Bilderberg participant to openly criticize the way the groupâs Steering Committee upholds the veil of secrecy that has shrouded any insight into the annual confab for the last 59 years.
As InfowarsÂ reported today, there are obvious signs that some Bilderberg participants are now ventilating their discomfort with the Groupâs unaccountable way of doing business, even contemplating a press-conference to appease protestors.
Paul Joseph Watson reported that âa source close to the security operation for the 2013 Bilderberg Group conference has told Infowars that numerous members of the secretive organization are aggrieved at the way it is being operated with scant regard for transparency and are lobbying for Bilderberg steering committee members to allow them to address protesters this week.â
According to Infowarsâ source there are âa numberâ of participants involved in the meeting from tomorrow onward have criticized the meetings, even suggesting that a small delegation of Bilderberg members may come out and speak to the protesters and media set to assemble from June 6-9 at the Grove Hotel grounds. As Infowars relates today itâs very likely that the criticism is originating from the âLibertarian campâ within the group, most notably Peter Thiel- who is set to attend this yearâs conference. Alex Jones, who has had contact with two separate contacts in the US Senate in the previous months, confirms that there is a discussion waging within Bilderberg about the issue of transparency.
The latest words by this yearâs participant Sherard Cowper-Coles underlines the fact that there appears to be a division within the Group, which makes it likely that the core Group may dissolve the annual meetings and retreat into other, lesser known meetings in the future.
When youâre picking a spot to hold the worldâs most powerful policy summit, thereâs really only one place that will do: Watford. I guess the Seychelles must have been booked up.
On Thursday afternoon, a heady mix of politicians, bank bosses, billionaires, chief executives and European royalty will swoop up the elegant drive of the Grove hotel, north of Watford, to begin the annualÂ BilderbergÂ conference.
Itâs a remarkable spectacle â one of natureâs wonders â and the most exciting thing to happen to Watford since that roundabout on the A412 got traffic lights. The area round the hotel is in lockdown: locals are having toÂ show their passports to get to their homes. Itâs exciting too for the delegates.
The CEO of Royal Dutch Shell will hop from his limo, delighted to be spending three solid days in policy talks with the head of HSBC, the president of Dow Chemical, his favourite European finance ministers and US intelligence chiefs.
âIt runs contrary to [George] Osborneâs public commitment in 2010 to âthe most radical transparency agenda the country has ever seenâ,â says Michael Meacher MP. Meacher describes the conference as âan anti-democratic cabal of the leaders of western market capitalism meeting in private to maintain their own power and influence outside the reach of public scrutinyâ.
Earlier today, Infowars received word from the Grove Hotel in Watford, England â the site of Bilderbergâs 2013 meeting â that reservations Alex Jones had made for himself and his team of journalists would no longer be honored.
Itâs time for people in the United States, the UK and Europe, or who ever else in the world can get to Watford, England, to go there and cover the police state and the giant iron curtain theyâre erecting around it at taxpayer expense.
In response to Infowars being ousted from the hotel and having their reservations canceled at the last minute at the behest of a criminal globalist mafia syndicate, Alex Jones is asking that anyone concerned with preserving liberty, free speech, the freedom of the press and the right to assemble stand together under the banner of freedom, and march into Watford against this unprecedented and arrogant abuse of power.
If past meetings are any indicator, thousands of activists and protestors are already set to descend upon the British compound this upcoming week, from Thursday, June 6 to Sunday, June 9.
As Alex highlights in the above video, prior to last yearâs Bilderberg meeting in Chantilly, Virginia, he and his crew had traveled to the Westfields Marriott Hotel to examine the rooms Bilderberg would be meeting in as press.
They were greeted by police who denied them entrance into the facility, and were officially kicked out of the hotel by a manager on the premise that ârenovationâ was underway.
Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
If you were to look at past official Bilderberg participant lists, you would see a large number of U.S. citizens, including Massachusetts senator John Kerry, the governor of Indiana, a National Security adviser, and a large number of bankers, business CEOs, and assorted others among the attendees.
All of them are in violation of the law and should be arrested immediately.
The fact that they have moved to squelch the freedom the press shows theyâre desperate and indicates theyâve over-played their hands.
This is the peaceful revolution of exposure against Bilderberg 2013. The people will no longer be pushed around.
Infowars is now calling on concerned citizens from all over the United Kingdom and Europe to rally to the cause and communicate the message to Bilderberg that they cannot crush the right to free speech, freedom of the press, and the right to demonstrate.
To posit that oneâs government may be partially composed of unaccountable criminal elements is cause for serious censure in polite circles. Labeled âconspiracy theoriesâ by a corporate media that prompt and channel emotionally-laden mass consent, such perspectives are quickly dispatched to the memory hole lest they prompt meaningful discussion of the political prerogatives and designs held by a global power elite coordinating governments and broader geopolitical configurations.
Cultural historian Jack Bratich terms such phenomena âconspiracy panics.â Potentially fostered by the coordinated actions of government officials or agencies and major news organs to generate public suspicion and uncertainty, a conspiracy panic is a demonstrable immediate or long-term reactive thrust against rational queries toward unusual and poorly understood events. To be sure, they are also intertwined with how the given society acknowledges and preserves its own identityâthrough âthe management and expulsion of deviance.â
In the American mass mind, government intelligence and military operations are largely seen as being directed almost solely toward manipulation or coercion of unfortunate souls in foreign lands. To suggest otherwise, as independent researchers and commentators have done with the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, the CIA-Contra-crack cocaine connection, and 9/11, has been cause for sustained conspiracy panics that act to suppress inquiry into such events by professional and credentialed opinion leaders, particularly journalists and academics.
At the same time a conspiracy panic serves a subtle yet important doctrinal function of manifesting and reproducing the apt ideational status quo of the post-Cold War, âWar on Terrorâ era. âThe scapegoating of conspiracy theories provides the conditions for social integration and political rationality,â Bratich observes. âConspiracy panics help to define the normal modes of dissent. Politically it is predicated on a consensus of âusâ over against a subversive and threatening âthem.ââ These days especially the suggestion that an official narrative may be amiss almost invariably puts one in the enemy camp.
Popular Credence in Government Conspiracy Narratives
The time for a conspiracy panic to develop has decreased commensurately with the heightened spread and availability of information and communication technology that allows for the dissemination of news and research formerly suppressed by the perpetual data overload of corporate media. Before the wide access to information technology and the internet, independent investigations into events including the JFK assassination took place over the course of many years, materializing in book-length treatments that could be dismissed by intelligence assets in news media and academe as the collective activity of âconspiracy buffsââamateurish researchers who lack a government or privately-funded sinecure to overlook or obscure inquiry into deep events.
Not until Oliver Stoneâs 1991 blockbuster filmÂ JFK, essentially an adoption of works by author Jim Marrs, Colonel L. Fletcher Prouty, and New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison, did a substantial conspiracy panic take shape as a response to such analysis thrust upon the public in popular narrative form. This panic arose from and centered around Hollywoodâs apt challenge to traditional journalismâs turf alongside commercial news outletsâ typically deceptiveÂ interpretation of the event and almost wholly uncritical treatment of the Warren Commission Report.
Shortly thereafter investigative journalist Gary Webbâs âDark Allianceâ series for theÂ San Jose Mercury NewsÂ demonstrated the internetâs capacity to explain and document a government conspiracy. With Webbâs painstaking examination of the CIAâs role in the illicit drug trade hyperlinked to a bevy of documentation and freely distributed online, the professional journalistic community and its intelligence penumbra fell silent for months.
In the interim the story picked up steam in the non-traditional outlets of talk radio and tabloid television, with African Americans especially intrigued by the potential government role in the crack cocaine epidemic. Then suddenly major news outlets spewed forth a vitriolic attack on Webb and theÂ Mercury NewsÂ that amazingly resulted in theÂ Mercuryâs retraction of the story and Webbâs eventual departure from the paper and probable murder by the US government.
Criticism of Webbâs work predictably focused on petty misgivings toward his alleged poor judgmentâspecifically his intimation that the CIA intentionally caused the crack epidemic in African American communities, an observation that many blacks found logical and compelling. So not only did Webb find himself at the center of a conspiracy panic because of his assessment of the CIAâs role in the drug trade; he was also causing mass âparanoiaâ within African American communities allegedly predisposed toward such thinking.
Since the mid-1990s conspiracy panics have increasingly revolved around an effort by mainstream news media to link unorthodox political ideas and inquiry with violent acts. This dynamic was crystallized in Timothy McVeigh, the principal suspect in the April 19, 1995 Oklahoma City Murrah Federal Building bombing,Â who through the propaganda-like efforts ofÂ government and major news media was constructed to symbolize the dangers of âextremistâ conspiratorial thought (his purported fascination with white supremacism andÂ The Turner Diaries) and violent terrorist action (the bombing itself). Conveniently overlooked is the fact that McVeigh was trained as a black ops technician and still in US Army employ at the time of his 2001 execution.
Through a broad array of media coverage and subsequent book-length treatments by the left intelligentsia on the âradical right,â the alleged lone wolf McVeigh and the Oklahoma City bombing became forever coupled in the national memory. The image and event seemingly attested to how certain modes of thought can bring about violenceâeven though McVeighâs role in what took place on April 19 was without question one part of an intricate web painstakingly examined by the Oklahoma Bombing Investigation Committee  and in the 2011 documentaryÂ A Noble Lie: Oklahoma City 1995.
The Quickening Pace of Conspiracy Panics
Independent researchers and alternative media utilizing the internet have necessitated the rapid deployment of conspiracy panic-like reactions that appear far less natural and spontaneous to neutralize inquiry and bolster the official narratives ofÂ momentous and unusual events. For example, wide-scale skepticism surrounding the May 1, 2011 assault on Osama bin Ladenâs alleged lair in Pakistan was met with efforts to cultivate a conspiracy panic evident in editorials appearing across mainstream print, broadcast, and online news platforms. The untenable event supported only by President Obamaâs pronouncement of the operation was unquestioningly accepted by corporate media that shouted down calls for further evidence and alternative explanations of bin Ladenâs demise as âconspiracy theories.â
Indeed, a LexisNexis search for âbin Ladenâ and âconspiracy theoriesâ yields over five hundred such stories and opinion pieces appearing across Western print and broadcast media outlets for the week of May 2,Â 2011.
âWhile much of America celebrated the dramatic killing of Osama bin Laden,â theWashington PostÂ opined, âthe Sept. 11 conspiracy theorists still had questions. For them and a growing number of skeptics, the plot only thickened.â
Along these lines retired General Mark Kimmitt remarked on CNN, âWell, Iâm sure the conspiracy theorists will have a field day with this, about why it was done? Was it done? Is he still alive?â
âThe conspiracy theorists are not going to be satisfied,â Glenn Beck asserted. âNext thing you know, Trump is going to ask for the death certificate, and is it the real death certificate? And then all hell breaks loose.â
Like 9/11 or the Gulf of Tonkin, the narrative has since become a part of official history, disingenuously repeated in subsequent news accounts and elementary school history booksâa history handed down from on high and accepted by compromised, unintelligent, or simply lazy journalists perpetuating nightmare fictions to a poorly informed and intellectually idle public.
This psycho-symbolic template is simultaneously evident in the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting and Boston Marathon bombing (BMB) events and their aftermaths. Indeed, the brief yet intense Sandy Hook conspiracy panic, and to a lesser degree that of the BMB, revolved at least partially around the âconspiracy theory professor,â who, as a credentialed member of the intellectual class, overstepped his bounds by suggesting how there are many unanswered questions related to the tragedies that might lead one to concludeâas social theorist Jean Baudrillard observed concerning the 1991 Gulf Warâthat the events did not take place, at least in the way official pronouncements and major media have represented them. It is perhaps tellingÂ that critical assessments of domestic events and their relatedness to a corrupt media and governing apparatus are so vigorously assailed.
Yet to suggest that the news and information Americans accept as sound and factual on a routine basis is in fact a central means for manipulating their worldviews is not a matter for debate. Rather, it is an empirically verifiable assertion substantiated in a century of public relations and psychological warfare research and practice. Such propaganda efforts once reserved for foreign locales are now freely practiced in the US to keep the population increasingly on edge.
Still, a significant portion of the population cannot believe their government would lie to or mislead them, especially about a traumatic and emotional event involving young children or running enthusiasts. To suggest this to be the case is not unlike informing a devoted sports fan that her team lost a decisive game after sheâs been convinced of an overwhelming win. Such an allegation goes against not only what they often unconsciously accept to be true, but also challenges their substantial emotional investment in the given mediated event.
In a revealing yet characteristic move the reaction by corporate media outlets such as theÂ New York Times, FoxNews, CNN, and in the case of the BMB theÂ New York Times-ownedÂ Boston Globe, has been not to revisit and critique their own slipshod coverage of the Newtown massacre or BMB that often bordered on blatant disinformation, but rather to divert attention from any responsible self-evaluation by vilifying the messenger in what have been acute conspiracy panics of unusual proportion.
As a disciplinary mechanism against unsettling observations and questions directed toward political leaders and the status quo, conspiracy panics serve to reinforce ideas and thought processes sustained by the fleeting yet pervasive stimuli of infotainment, government pronouncements, and, yes, the staged events that have been part and parcel of US news media and government collaboration dating at least to the Spanish-American war. Despite (or perhaps because of) the immense technological sophistication at the dawn of the twenty-first century a majority of the population remains bound and shackled in the bowels of the cave, forever doomed to watch the shadows projected before them.
 Jack Z. Bratich,Â Conspiracy Panics: Political Rationality and Popular Culture, Albany NY: State University of New York Press, 2008.
 Oklahoma Bombing Investigation Committee,Â Final Report on the Bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building, April 19, 1995, 2001. See alsoÂ Oklahoma City: What Really Happened?Â Chuck Allen, dir., 1995.
Following theÂ brutal murder and mutilation of UK soldier Lee RigbyÂ on Wednesday by Islamists, a uniformed French soldier on an antiterrorism patrol west of Paris, France was wounded in the neck as he was stabbed with a box cutter by an assailant wearing a prayer cap and a North African-style robe called a jellabah.
The soldier was reported to be out of danger after being transported to a nearby military hospital. But the attack sent a shudder through the French capital because it recalled the gory killing of a soldierÂ in the streets of LondonÂ on Wednesday allegedly by a pair of homegrown Muslim extremists, an act that the British government called terrorism.
According to a police account, he was monitored on security cameras and seen shedding his robe and fleeing in European clothes before disappearing into the crowd in a subway and suburban train entrance.
A broad manhunt was launched to track him down. President Francois Hollande, in a televised statement from Ethiopia, where he is on a state visit, urged security authorities to âlook at all the possibilitiesâ as they investigate the assault.
The attack took place at La Defense business center in the suburbs, about a mile west of the Arc de Triomphe. Military patrols have been deployed for months in such transit centers around Paris and other French cities as part of an antiterrorism plan called Vigipirate.
The French authorities have warned for months that they were in danger of a jihadist attack because of theirÂ military interventionÂ against Islamist jihadists in northern Mali. Obama alsoÂ sent US troops thereÂ to aid France in the same week that Benghazi whistleblowers were preparing to testify.
The Associated PressÂ reports,Â âFrench President Francois Hollande said the identity of the attacker, who escaped, was unknown and cautioned against jumping to conclusions about the assault on the uniformed soldier in the La Defense shopping area. The life of the 23-year-old soldier was not in danger, the Interior Ministry said in a statement.â
Perhaps Hollande needs to wake up in the same manner thatÂ British Prime Minister David Cameron and London Mayor Boris JohnsonÂ do. These leaders are complicit in the attacks. There is no way they can say with a clear conscience that they donât think this has anything to do with Islam. They are simply lying if they claim otherwise.
AP went on toÂ report, âThe French soldier was on a group patrol as part of a national protection program when he was attacked from behind, prosecutor Robert Gelli told BFM-TV. The assailant did not say a word, Gelli told Europe 1. âThere are elements â the sudden violence of the attack â that could lead one to believe there might be a comparison with what happened in London,â Interior Minister Manuel Valls told France 2 television. âBut at this point, honestly, let us be prudent.ââ
It appears that the human race and the UN in particular has learned nothing from our short but devastating history of inhabiting planet Earth. Not content with depleting and/or destroying the resources on the surface it seems the seabed is the latest target.
The prospect of a modern era ‘gold rush’ with the sea bed being the new frontier is moving closer by the day.
The United Nations has published its first plan for managing the extraction of so-called “nodules” – small mineral-rich rocks – from the seabed.Â A technical study was carried out by the UN’s International Seabed Authority – the body overseeing deep sea mining.Â It says companies can apply for licences and start mining from as soon as 2016.
The idea of exploiting the vast mineral reserves found in the sea bed is not new, it has been considered for decades, but new technology which would make the mining easier and safer, and the high cost of rare earth minerals seems to have provided the push needed to turn the drawing board ideas into reality.
Although experts from many different fields have highlighted the hazards that such mining would cause the UN seem hell bent on pushing through the proposal.
The International Seabed Authority (ISA) a division of the UN carried out a study and the report openly admitted that mining the seabed will cause:
“inevitable environmental damage”
Even with indications from the UN that environmental damage will occur, that biodiversity will be affected there has been a surge in applications for seabed mining licences from private and STATE OWNED companies. The licenses don’t come cheap, $500,000 each which allows the company to mine for 15 years. That of course is a drop in the ocean…no pun intended, against what these companies will earn from their pillage of the oceans.
One of the most recent applications that was granted, was to UK Seabed Resources, a subsidiary of the Lockheed Martin the USÂ defenseÂ company.
Why these companies are interested is plain to see. A recent assessment of the eastern Pacific Ocean, an area called the Clarion-Clipperton Zone which covers an area of just under two million square miles concluded that that area alone contains around 27 billion tons of nodules. The licenses will cover the Pacific Ocean, the Atlantic and Indian Oceans.
With nickel, copper,cobalt and even gold contained in the rocks the lure is in some ways understandable, but at what cost?
The possibility of seabed mining has already provoked scientists Â to speak out against it. Biologists fear a loss of diversity and more importantly the possible disruption of the marine life food chain.
Many people rely on fish and other marine creatures as their main or only source of protein. Any disruption of the food chain would have disastrous consequences for millions of people who live in areas where livestock ownership is not possible either due to economics or the geography not supporting the raising of animals for food.
The UN set up the ISA to:
“encourage and manage seabed mining for the wider benefit of humanity-with a share of any profits going to developing countries”
It’s obvious that this is another way of saying they will pay compensation for the disruption that those living in coastal areas will suffer. Hubs will have to be built to off load the nodules and most likely processing plants to extract the valuables they contain. The spoil left after extraction will have to be dumped disposed of somewhere, most likely into the oceans, disrupting areas that were not licensed for extraction, further damaging the fragile marine eco-systems. It seems unlikely spoil will be dumped within licensed areas…it would quite literally muddy the waters and reduce extraction levels.
The ISA reports admits that:
“competency cannot be gained without actual mining on a commercial scale, but at the same time mining should not be allowed without prior demonstration of competence”
It doesn’t mention how that competency can be proven. We cannot continue to cripple the system that provides for us with impunity. Extracting much sought after resources from the sea bed may be a commercially viable option to those with billions of dollars to spend on the venture but to those that rely on the oceans for their livelihood and their food supply Â it could well be the straw that breaks the camels back.
Starvation is a great way to reduce to planets population. Agenda 21 wrapped up as a benefit to humanity. Nice touch.
Lois Lerner told House investigators she didnât do anything wrong and she didnât break any laws, and then she invoked her Fifth Amendment Right to remain silent to avoid self-incrimination. But then, sheâs already told so many lies, what difference does it really make? Nobodyâs believe her, anyway.
Following the advice of her attorney, Lois Lerner, the IRS official responsible for granting tax exemptions, decided to plead the Fifth rather than risk entangling and probably incriminating herself in the tangled web of lies surrounding the IRS controversy.
Before clamming up, Lerner said, âI know some people will assume I have done something wrong. I have not,â she said. âI have not broken any laws. I have not violated any IRS rules and regulations, and I have not provided false information to this or any other congressional committee.â
Represtative Trey Gowdy, (R-S.C.) protested Lernerâs action. âYou donât get to tell your side of the story and then not stand for cross examination,â he said. âShe waived her right against self-incrimination, she ought to sit here and answer our questions.â
Chairman Darrell Issa, (R-Calif.) said not to worry.Â Lerner could be recalledÂ if committee lawyers determine whe waived her rights by delivering an opening statement.
However,Â Jenny Beth Martin, Tea Party PatriotsÂ Co-Founder and National Coordinator, was none too happy that Lerner was allowed to plead the Fifth. She says her group was one of those targeted and harassed by the IRS.
âWhile we respect Ms. Lernerâs use of the Constitutionâs Fifth Amendment, we are disturbed she saw fit to trample over our First Amendment rights by harassing us and many other groups for our views.â
A teacher received a huge shock last week after uploading a copy of a book to his website that offers free educational resources for students. The Latvian publisher behind the work, a $4.00 history book, complained to the authorities which resulted in the teacher being raided by the police. During interrogation the teacher learned that his mistake could cost him dearly â two years in jail, forced labor, or a fine.
While the online sharing of music has been widespread for close to a decade and a half, the sharing of books has only gathered real traction in the past few years.
When it came to legal action to prevent sharing the music industry led the way but even now, book publishers âÂ WileyÂ aside â seem generally unwilling to follow the example. However, there are companies prepared to make uploaders suffer, even those with no malicious or commercial intent.
PÄvels Jurs is a teacher in Latvia who operates a website where children can research history topics, see presentations and find other learning aids. Jurs created the site so that children from poor families can still have access to education. According to Latvian media, Jurs even received recognition from the Ministry of Education for his efforts.
Last Thursday, however, Jurs was leaving home to go to school and found himself confronted by four police officers from the Economic Crime Bureau. They proceeded to search Jursâ home and confiscate the computer he uses in his teaching job. He was arrested and subjected to two hours of interrogation during which he learned he had committed a serious offense that could result in a two year jail sentence.
Jursâ crime was to upload a scanned copy of the high school history book âVÄsture Vidusskolaiâ to his website, an act which drew the ire of publisherÂ Zvaigzne ABCÂ and an official complaint earlier this year.
The publisher currently sells the book for the princely sum of $4.00 and it appears that Jurs had previously held discussions with its author but there was a misunderstandings over what content should have been removed from his site.
Nevertheless, the episode has left Jurs questioning why such heavy handed tactics were needed when a civil action would have sufficed. The police have taken down Jursâ website and since exams are currently underway, students no longer have access to its resources.
âIs there really such a need for punitive action against these methods of teaching, such as the maintenance of a websites from which I did not receive any benefit, but, on the contrary, cost most of my salary payments for maintenance? I understand that I have violated copyright laws, but is it really necessary to act this way?â JursÂ said.
Since the raid a meeting has taken place during which some kind of a settlement was discussed. Further meetings will take place this week but itâs now believed that the publisher will not raise any âsubstantive claimsâ against the teacher.
Media sources confirm the seizure of an Israeli military vehicle in Al Qseir inside Syrian territory.
The vehicleâs licence plate corresponds to that of the Israeli military with a black background and the letter Tsade (×Ś) (see image below)
Al Qseir is a strategic border town on the Northern frontier of Lebanon. Occupied by rebels, it was taken back by Syrian forces on Monday.
Al-QseirÂ controls the highway which runs from the Lebanese border to Homs. It is through this border city that weapons and foreign mercenaries have entered Syria.
According to SANA, quoting (unconfirmed) media source:
âThe seizure of an Israeli military vehicle which terrorists had been using in al-Qseir refutes the allegations made by Israel to justify its aggression on Syria and proves the scale of Israelâs military and intelligence involvements in the events in Syria.â
âThe source said that the Israeli military support for the armed terrorist groups proves the involvement of Qatar, Turkey and Israel in the aggression on Syria which is waged through a single central operations room.
The source pointed out that the Israeli military support for terrorism in Syria proves once more that Israel was and still is adopting the policy of organized state terrorism, stressing that the world must act to confront this terrorism.
The source said that the questions raised by the seizure of the Israeli military vehicle and the surveillance and jamming equipment in al-Qseir show that the armed terrorist groups with all their different names are merely headlines for a single structure led by Israel, Qatar and Turkey.âÂ Â (SANA, May 20, 2013)
According to Press TV quoting Lebanese TV Station Al Mayadeem
The Lebanese channel al-Mayadeen broadcast the video of the confiscated vehicle on Monday.
The report also said that military uniforms as well as wiretapping and jamming equipment were found in the vehicle, but it did not display the items.
The Syrian army has restored security in al-Qusayr in the central province of Homs, after taking back control of 50 percent of the city from foreign-backed militants.
The army said it has killed two militant commanders during the operation in the strategic city, which is located near the border with Lebanon.
Fierce battles are still going on in the city as the Syrian army continues its operations there, while large numbers of militants abandon their weapons and flee the city.
The Syrian army entered the strategic city from every front on Sunday following weeks of battle.
The Syrian army says it has also found Israeli-made rockets in a weapons cache seized from militants in Homs province.(Press TV, May 20, 2013)
The issue of the vehicle requires confirmation.
The capture of an Israeli military vehicle does not in itself confirm the involvement of Israeli forces.
Israeli registered military vehicles would not normally be used in covert operations by Israeli special forces.
Dzhokhar Tsarnaev will not be indicted within the 30 days even though that is the requirement under the Federal Speedy Trial Act. Prosecutors didn’t explain why they need more time, just that the indictment will not be going ahead on Monday as was previously expected.
Tsarnaev is charged with using a weapon of mass destruction in the Boston marathon bombing that killed 3 and injured 260.
The so-called Monsanto Protection Act signed into law earlier this year caused such an outrage that people around the world are planning to protest the biotech company later this month. Now a United States senator is expected to try and repeal that law.
According to the Huffington Post, Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Oregon) plans to introduce an amendment in Washington that would repeal Section 735 from the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act of 2013, a provision that has put St. Louis, Missouri-based Monsanto in the sights of environmentalists around the world.
Deep within the nearly 600-page spending bill, Section 735 includes language that lets biotech companies that experiment with genetically-engineered and genetically-modified crops test and sell lab-made products even if legal action is taken against them.
âThe provision would strip federal courts of the authority to halt the sale and planting of an illegal, potentially hazardous GE crop while the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) assesses those potential hazards,â dozens of farmers wrote the House of Representatives before the bill was passed in March. âFurther, it would compel USDA to allow continued planting of that same crop upon request, even if in the course of its assessment the Department finds that it poses previously unrecognized risks.â
But despite pleas from agriculturalists around the world, both the Senate and House approved the spending bill â with Section 735 in tow â and the act wasÂ signedÂ into law just days later by US President Barack Obama.
Since being passed in late March, the spending bill has attracted immense criticism from all different sectors, including small-time farmers, Tea Party activists and even members of Congress. According to Huffington Post, however, Sen. Merkley is expected to be the first lawmaker in Washington to walk into the Capitol with a plan to repeal the amendment. HuffPo reported on Thursday that Merkley is planning to introduce an amendment on a separate farm bill going up to vote shortly that will reverse the so-called âProtection Act.â
Should the prediction prove correct, it would suggest a change of heart for Sen. Merkley. According to the Vote Smart Project, Merkley was one of 73 senators that voted in favor of the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act when it went up for vote on March 22. Only 26 senators voted ânayâ during that hearing, and the HouseÂ approvedÂ it shortly thereafter.
Monsanto has called Section 735Â âa positive step to ensure US farmers and our food chain are shielded from supply disruptions caused by litigation over procedural issues unrelated to sound science or the safety of biotech crops.â
Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Missouri) told Politico earlier this year that he co-authored the language of the amendmentÂ along with Monsanto. Previously, Blunt received $64,250 from Monsanto to go towards his campaign committee between 2008 and 2012.
Demonstrations are scheduled in 36 countries on six continents later this month for anti-Monsanto activists to come together and protest the company.
Speaking to Bloomberg this week, Monsanto CEO Hugh GrantÂ saidÂ his critics exercise a âstrange kind of reverse elitismâ fueled by social media campaigns to condemn his company.
âMost of the people that become motivated to engage the political issues have become convinced that going down the road of genetically engineered foods is not the way to meet the needs of a food insecure population,â Grant said. âThere is space in the supermarket shelf for all of us.â
Holly Paz, director of the Office of Rulings and Agreements at the IRS, is an Obama supporter who donated $2,000 to his election campaign in 2008, according to aÂ National Review OnlineÂ search of the Open Secrets database.
Paz heads up the office responsible for the improper targeting.
âData from the Center for Responsive Politics indicateÂ that Pazâs donations are consistent with broader trends at the IRS, where agencyÂ employeesÂ donatedÂ overwhelming to President Obama in both the 2012 and 2008 presidential Elections,â writes Eliana Johnson for the NRO website.
On May 15, IRS employees working in the department Paz manages were told not to delete data from their computer hard drives. The move is seen as an indication that the inspector generalâs office isexpanding its investigation of the IRS.
Two Bear H nuclear-capable bombers were detected flying into the militaryâs Alaska Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) near the Aleutians, where a strategic missile defense radar is located, and Alaskaâs North Slope region by the Arctic and Chukchi Seas on April 28 and 29, military officials told theÂ Washington Free Beacon.
Lt. Cmdr. Bill Lewis, a spokesman with the U.S. Northern Command, confirmed the fighter intercept of the latest bomber incursion but declined to provide details.
âTwo U.S. F-22â˛s from Elmendorf Air Force Base, Alaska, were launched and visually identified Russian aircraft on the night of April 28, as the Russian Air Force flew standard out of area flights near Alaska,â Lewis said.
The bombers did not enter U.S. airspace, he said.
However, the Alaska ADIZ is a formal national security zone used by the military to monitor both civilian and military aircraft. The dispatch of F-22s is an indication the bomber flights posed a potential threat to U.S. territory.
The bombers were âwere visually identified by NORAD fighters,â Pentagon spokesman Capt. John Kirby said.
This is the second incident involving Russia and the airspace near Alaska, and the fifth incident involving Russian bombers since June. Back in late June, two Tu-95 Bear H bombers near Alaska were conducting âwar games,â which included mock simulated attacks on air defenses and strategic facilities, according to a Russian military spokesman.
Back in February, I reported that two Russian Bear bombers circled the U.S. territory of Guam, which is a key U.S. military hub in the Pacific.
While the current panderer-in-chief is set to make concessions to the Russians on missile defenses, just two days after this incident Northern Command announcedÂ issued a press releaseÂ that it would be cooperating with Russian military in implementing plans for a joint U.S.-Russian flight exercise that would be designed to counter hijacked aircraft.
âThe VIGILANT EAGLE exercise series has been an extraordinary and historic opportunity for NORAD and the Russian Federation to coordinate on the response to a mutually acknowledged hijacking threat,â said Joe Bonnet, Director of Joint Training and Exercises for NORAD and U.S. Northern Command. âFrom a participantâs perspective, it is more than a military exercise; it is creating lasting bonds and partnerships extremely valuable for the security of our nations.â
âThis yearâs exercise will continue building and strengthening the cooperation and partnership established between the two countries,â the statement reads.
To me this has to be one of the stupidest things to do. In fact, itâs next to the stupid ideas we have about bringing foreign troops on our soil to engage in counter terrorism training or training Afghan police officers. All the while we are teaching themÂ exactlyÂ how we do things. They are not teaching us how they do things. In fact, it seems not only stupid to me, but incredibly foolish.
Others have a problem with the way the Obama administration is working with the Russians as well.
âThe Russians continue to play the administration like a fiddle, sending signals that they still have a strategic air force and can project power while the U.S. continues to ground alert squadrons and unilateral disarms,â said retired Air Force Lt. Gen. Tom McInerney, a former Alaska Ari Command commander.
âIs this the administrationâs idea of âreset relationsâ with Russia?â he asked.
Back in April McInerneyÂ said, âRussia continues to conduct aggressive offensive missile training in the Pacific against U.S. and Allied Forces.â
âWe should understand that they look at âresetâ differently than we do,â said the retired three-star general. âThey look at it as regaining their previous USSR position as a superpower while this administration is moving towards unilateral disarmament.â
Retired Air Force Lt. Gen. Trey Obering, a former director of the Missile Defense Agency (MDA), who has since left government, said that he has continued to take part in talks with the Russians on missile defense cooperation in much the same manner as he did previously.
Last month heÂ toldÂ the Beacon,Â âThese efforts were met with Russian intransigence. The Russian opposition and now simulated attacks âmeans to me that there is no way the Russians want to cooperate on missile defense in any meaningful way. We should not be conceding anything to the Russians. We should be pursuing our national security interests to defend this country and our allies.â
In other words, Obering believes Moscow will not be cooperating in any meaningful way with the United States. What a surprise, not!
The US should be looking after her own interests, not making concessions with the former Soviet Union.
Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, the 19-year-old surviving Boston Marathon bombing suspect, has told FBI interrogators that he and his brother had considered suicide attacks for the Fourth of July, the United States’ Independence Day, before settling on April 15.
The younger Tsarnaev brother told investigators on April 21, only two days after being captured by police, that the pair’s plans were accelerated after they finished building explosive devices at their Cambridge, Massachusetts, apartment faster than they anticipated.
Law enforcement officials questioned Tsarnaev immediately after he woke up in recovery after suffering gunshot wounds during his capture, according to The New York Times. Investigators then invoked a “public safety exception” to the Miranda Rule, which allowed them to interrogate him without notifying the suspect of his right to remain silent. He was later notified of his Miranda rights by a judge.
According to Dzhokhar’s account of his plans to investigators, he and his brother chose the finish line of the Boston Marathon as the attack site after looking around Boston for other possible locations.
The younger Tsarnaev also told investigators that he had watched videos by American jihadist Anwar al-Awlaki with his brother. However, there was no evidence that the Tsarnaevs ever communicated with al-Awlaki, who was killed in September 2011 in a drone strike in Yemen, according to The New York Times.
The news coincides with the long-awaited release of Tamerlan Tsarnaevâs body to his family. The body was released by Massachusetts Office of the Chief Medical Examiner on Thursday, where it lay since the fatal April 19 shootout with the police, following the events of the attack in Boston.
A spokesman for the office said the body was claimed by a funeral services company that had been hired by Tsarnaev’s relatives.
Earlier, three new suspects in the Boston Marathon bombing case were taken intoÂ custody.
Nineteen-year-old University of Massachusetts-Dartmouth college students Azamat Tazhayakov, Dias Kadyrbayev and Robel Phillipos have been accused of interfering with a federal probe into the April 15, 2013, terrorist attack at the Boston Marathon.
Investigators say the three students were classmates of suspected bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev and attempted to hinder an investigation by destroying evidence they uncovered from his UMass-Dartmouth dormitory room three days after the marathon bombing.
Tamerlan Tsarnaev and his brother Dzhokhar allegedly detonated two homemade bombs near the finish line of the Boston Marathon on April 15, killing three and injuring more than 260 people. Tamerlan was killed in a police shootout that followed accompanied by a massive manhunt that put the whole city on lockdown. Dzhokhar was later discovered hiding in boat parked in the backyard of a Franklin Street home.
Dzhokhar has been formally charged with using a weapon of mass destruction and has been transferred to Federal Medical Center, Devens outside of Boston, Massachusetts.
Visited by First Lady Michelle Obama while in hospital
Saudi national Abdul Rahman Ali al-Harbi, who was briefly held as a âperson of interestâ in the Boston bombings and then downgraded in less than 24 hours to a witness, visited the White House on numerous occasions since 2009,Â The RightscoopÂ reports today.
The startling allegation follows an earlier report indicating that al-Harbi was visited in the hospital by First Lady Michelle Obama after he allegedly sustained injuries from one of the explosives placed at the Boston Marathon.
The Department of Homeland Security confessed today that al-Harbi was on a terror watch list, althoughÂ DHS boss NapolitanoÂ attempted to minimize this revelation by stating that he was just in the wrong place at the wrong time.
âBecause he was being interviewed, [after the he was at that point put on a watchlist, and then when it was quickly determined he had nothing to do with the bombing, the watch listing status was removed,â she told Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa during a hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee.
âNapolitano seems to either flatly contradict herself or openly admit that it is easy for someone to be put on a terrorist watchlist even though they donât reach âperson of interestâ status,âÂ Walid Shoebatwrites on his blog today. âThatâs either a lie or a chilling statement of what this government is doing.â
A couple obvious questions come to mind. First, why did the First Lady visit a man who was on a terror watch list, no matter how briefly, and second, how is it that he gained access to what is supposedly one of the most secure buildings in the United States?
Is it possible we can attribute the hospital visit and multiple visits to the White House to a special relationship shared between Saudi royals and at least two presidents? For instance, is well-known that George W. Bush had aÂ close relationshipÂ with the corrupt Saudi monarchy.
American Free Press received e-mail from Grove Hotel staffer, apparently confirming that Bilderberg 2013 will be going down near Watford in the United Kingdom from June 6-9.
AFPâs Mark Anderson reports that he received an e-mail from a Grove Hotel employee, apparently confirming a UK-based Bilderberg meeting this coming June. Anderson writes:
âAn email reply to AFP from a Grove staffer and a check of the hotel websiteâs calendar confirmed the hotel is booked solid June 5-9. The Bilderberg meeting itself, by all the latest indications, is to take place June 6-9. This updates a recent AFP report that stated England was likely the general meeting location but that the meeting would be held June 9-11. At the time, the hotel where the meeting was to be held was not yet known.â
Indeed. In recent weeks there have been several indications pointing to a probable UK Bilderberg meeting. As I recently reported, a call handler at the Hertfordshire constabulary confirmed that the Grove Hotel, both the surroundings and the Hotel itself will be cordoned off by the local Hertfordshire constabulary in a âsecurity exerciseâ. The exercise, by the way, is planned exactly at the time that the Hotel, according to its employees, will accommodate a âhigh profileâ international group- booking all 220 rooms. As Anderson notes in his article:
âThe hotelâs location, some 18 miles outside of London, provides easy access to and from Heathrow Airport. Its rural setting is well suited for Bilderbergâs usual ring of armed security to keep pesky reporters and activists at bay.â
Thanks to many citizen-journalists probing the Hotel and local Hertfordshire constabulary it is also becoming obvious that an elite club will indeed descend on the area at the beginning of June. According to a recent vigilant posting on the Planet X website, an employee of the Grove Hotel has revealed that the hotelâs golf course is booked out by an âAmerican Groupâ from June 6-9. The commenter, pretending to be interested to reserve the golf court, no booking is possible on those dates:
âNo that is not possible during those dates because the private American Group Organizers have requested that they have full exclusive use themselvesâ.
The âAmerican groupâ- comment is interesting in more than one respect. Not only does this slip-up by a Grove employee confirm the grounds (Hotel, all its facilities and the surrounding lands) are off-limit to the general public (meaning anyone not holding key power positions), it also suggests that the organizers are predominantly American.
When we take a look at Bilderbergâs current steering committee we find no less than 11 Americans among the 34 members (including David Rockefeller). Because the event itself is âinternationalâ in nature, concerning âhigh profileâ individuals â we now have further indications the UK will host this yearâs Bilderberg conference.
Adding this little information-droplet to the others, spilled by employees of the Grove Hotel and the local constabulary, the Hertfordshire venue is increasingly likely to be the spot where the annual Bilderberg conference is set to take place.
There is no debate as to whether our right to bear arms is under attack. This will be a perpetual battle between the forces of Tyranny and Liberty. Americans needs to now question all those who claim to be Pro-Gun and Pro-Freedom as to whether or not they are really on the side of Liberty or are they merely espousing rhetoric to garner donations for their various organizations? One such man is Stewart Rhodes of Oathkeepers. While Stewart Rhodes recently spoke out in defense of the Second Amendment, he failed miserably to identify one of the largest, well-funded, anti-gun groups in America, The Islamic Society of North America (ISNA).
As of this, post it is a fact that Mr. Rhodes has not called out the Islamic agenda by American Muslims to disarm the infidels of our nation. He cannot claim that he is unaware of this and the information contained in this article. If he does claim to be aware, it will only prove that he is unfit to lead and command and he should step aside.
Some would say, âBut wait I know peaceful Muslims.â However, think of those that have carried out terrorist attacks. Many would say they were âpeacefulâ until the day they launched their attacks. America donât be duped. All Muslims are either:
1. Supporting the violent acts against non-Muslims and or are part of it.
2. Are supporting the Islamic organizations who are actively seeking to subvert our Constitution and disarm America which, if they succeed, would guarantee another major genocide in this world of non-Muslims.
Real Patriots should be outraged by the attack on the U.S. Constitution by American Muslims and their leaders.
The ISNAâs demand for gun control was in an article, with the unambiguous title âISNA Seeks Gun Control,â which cited their opposition to S. 2188, the âNational right- to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2012,â and S. 2213, the âRespecting Statesâ Rights and Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2012.â An April 13thÂ 2012Â action alertÂ on the ISNAâs website directs their supporters to contact Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to have him stop the legislation from becoming law.Â The same action alert states that ISNA is part of the Brady Centerâs âFaiths United to Oppose Gun Violence,âÂ and the Islamic group signed onto the Brady Centerâs âFaithâÂ group letterÂ to Reid demanding he block the legislation.
This is not the first time that ISNA and the Brady Center have united to oppose the Second Amendment.
As noted byÂ The Truth About GunsÂ in February 2011, ISNA was one of the original founding groups of the âFaiths United to Oppose Gun Violenceâ when it was rolled out by the Brady Center.
However, the Second Amendment is not the only constitutional freedom under assault by ISNA and its leaders. AsÂ reportedÂ by Neil Munro at the Daily Caller, a group of representatives from many of the Obama administrationâs favored Islamist groups met with Tom Perez, the head of the Justice Departmentâs Civil Rights Division, and now nominee for Labor Secretary. During the meeting, the Muslim leaders, including those from ISNA, called for a redefinition of anti-discrimination laws to punish criticism of Islam.
Azizâs advocacy was supported by a second Islamist advocate, Islamic Society of North America president Mohamed Magid. He argued that âteaching people that all Muslims are a threat to the countryâŚ is against the law and the Constitution.â Magid asked Perez to change the federal governmentâs rules governing terror investigations, for more private meetings with top justice department officials, for the reeducation of FBI agents, and for more people to oppose criticism of Islam, which he labelled âreligious bigotry and hate.â
According to the Daily Caller, when the meeting was finished Perez jumped on the stage to embrace Magid. Islam is a threat to the country. To say that it is against the law and the Constitution, meaning the First Amendment, and to use the protection of freedom of speech to bludgeon Magidâs perceived enemies demonstrates a profoundly perverse interpretation of the Constitution that should be rejected across the political spectrum.
Then again, there was a time when Magid himself and his organization were rejected. Back in June 2007, during the first round of the Holy Land Foundation trial, then-Attorney General Alberto Gonzales cancelled a Justice Department outreach event because of,Â according toÂ Newsweek, Magidâs planned presence at the meeting as a representative of ISNA.Â The federal prosecutors in the Holy Land Foundation case had just weeks beforeÂ named ISNA as an unindicted co-conspirator.
In a related court order by the federal judge hearing the case, which wasÂ later unsealed,Â Judge Jorge SolisÂ ruled:
that there was âample evidenceâ that ISNA and other U.S. Islamic groups had acted in support of Hamas.
The Obama administrationÂ came under fireÂ at the time of inaugural in January 2009 because one of the leaders at the National Prayer Service was then-ISNA president Ingrid Mattson.Â And yet the Obama administration continues to work with ISNA, granting the organization the highest level of access.Â In February, ISNA leaders were included in a closed door meeting with FBI Director Robert Mueller where theyÂ demanded a purgeÂ of the bureauâs counterterrorism training materials of anything or anyone they deemed âIslamophobic.â One of the pieces of items entered into evidence during the Holy Land Foundation trial was aÂ strategic memoÂ of the Muslim Brotherhood in North America that identified what their goal was in this country:
The process of settlement is a âCivilization-Jihadist Processâ with all the word means.Â The Ikhwan must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and âsabotagingâ its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and Godâs religion is made victorious over all other religions.Â Without this level of understanding, we are not up to this challenge and have not prepared ourselves for Jihad yet.
At the end of that memo is a list of those organizations that the Muslim Brotherhood leadership identified as âours.â
At the very top of the list was ISNA.
The Islamic Society of North America has a vision for America.Â And yet it isnât one that treasures the protections on freedom recognized by the Constitution. Taking down theÂ First and Second Amendments wonât be sufficient to realize ISNAâs Islamist vision. But for them, itâs a good start.Â .
Islam is Americaâs number one threat. Every mosque in America is either supporting the ISNA and or CAIR? By failing to call out the Islamic attack on our 1st and 2nd amendment rights, along with other freedoms, I have to ask this question: Stewart are you an apologist for Islam? If not, then come out now and publicly stand against Islam which seeks to destroy our nation and absorb it into a Global Caliphate.
A common feature of authoritarian regimes is the criminalization of alternatives to government-controlled education. Dictators recognize the danger that free thought poses to their rule, and few things promote the thinking of âunapprovedâ thoughts like an education controlled by parents instead of the state. That is why the National Socialist (Nazi) government of Germany outlawed homeschooling in 1938.
Sadly, these Nazi-era restrictions on parental rights remain the law in Germany, leaving parents who wish greater control over their childrenâs education without options. That is why in 2006 Uwe and Hannalore Romeike, a German couple who wanted to homeschool their three children for religious reasons, sought asylum in the United States. Immigration judge Lawrence Burman upheld their application for asylum, recognizing that the freedom of parents to homeschool was a âbasic human right.â
Unfortunately, the current US administration does not see it that way, and has announced that it is appealing Judge Burman’s decision. If the administration is successful, the Romeikes could be sent back to Germany where they will be forced to send their children to schools whose teaching violates their religious beliefs. If they refuse, they face huge fines, jail time, or even the loss of custody of their children!
The Administrationâs appeal claims that the federal government has the constitutional authority to ban homeschooling in all fifty states. The truth is, the Constitution gives the federal government no power to control any aspect of education. Furthermore, parents who, like the Romeikes, have a religious motivation for homeschooling should be protected by the free exercise clause of the First Amendment.
The federal governmentâs hostility to homeschooling is shared by officials at all levels of government. Despite the movementâs success in legalizing homeschooling in every state, many families are still subjected to harassment by local officials. The harassment ranges from âhome visits” by child protective agencies to criminal prosecution for violating truancy laws.
Every American who values liberty should support the homeschoolersâ cause. If the government can usurp parental authority over something as fundamental as the education of their children, there is almost no area of parenthood off limits to government interference.
Homeschooling has proven to be an effective means of education. We are all familiar with the remarkable academic achievements, including in national spelling bees and other competitions, by homeshcooled children. In addition, homeschooled students generally fare better than their public school educated peers on all measures of academic performance.
It makes sense that children do better when their education is controlled by those who know their unique needs best, rather than by a federal bureaucrat. A strong homeschooling movement may also improve other forms of education. If competition improves goods and services in other areas of life, why wouldn’t competition improve education? A large and growing homeschooling movement could inspire public and private schools to innovate and improve.
When the government interferes with a parent’s ability to choose the type of education that is best for their child, it is acting immorally and in manner inconsistent with a free society. A government that infringes on the rights of homeschooling will eventually infringe on the rights of all parents. Homeschooled children are more likely to embrace the philosophy of freedom, and to join the efforts to restore liberty. In fact, I would not be surprised if the future leaders of the liberty movement where homeschooled.
I believe so strongly in the homeschooling movement that I have just announced my own curriculum for homeschooling families. Please visit this revolutionary new project atÂ http://www.ronpaulcurriculum.com.
Almost seven months have passed since the attack on the Benghazi consulate building and nearby CIA annex by al-Qaeda affiliate Ansar al-Sharia, in which four Americans were murdered, including U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens.Â Despite demands for further information into why the Obama administration and the military failed to act to defend and protect the U.S. diplomatic mission in Libya even as they had intelligence of increasing Islamic violence, no answers have been given. Â Many Americans rightfully wonder whether or not the truth will ever come out about the murders at the American diplomatic mission in Libya.
The American public, in fact, has been shamefully left before without answers in the face of obvious government failures, as illustrated by the shoot-down 17 years ago by Cuban military jet fighters of two civilian planes and the deaths of four Cuban-Americans rescue pilots.Â Like the Benghazi attacks, no answers were ever given about the murder of four members of the activist group Brothers to the Rescue (BTTR), and the lack of action by U.S. military and government authorities to defend and protect them.
According to an in-depth interview with Jose Basulto, BTTR founder, and the examination of official documents and other sources, here is what occurred in that earlier example, on Feb. 24, 1996, of governmental failure.Â It serves as a reminder that until we demand a full accounting and require action on the part of our government and military, Americans will be left unprotected and vulnerable, even in mortal danger, by government authorities who fail in their duties to protect and defend while, in effect, even engaging in deathly complicity with our own enemies.
Brothers to the Rescue
In 1991, after learning of the death of a 15-year-old Cuban rafter who died following his rescue by the U.S. Coast Guard, Cuban-American Jose Basulto decided that it was time to act.Â That same year, Basulto, well aware of the desperate situation faced by citizens of Castroâs repressive regime and their dangerous journey to freedom on flimsy rafts through the Florida Straits, founded Brothers to the Rescue (BTTR). Â The group, a humanitarian search-and-rescue mission, would directly save over 4,000 lives.
Basultoâs efforts to free his beloved Cuba date back to his return to the island from college in Boston to join pro-democracy groups opposed to Castro. Â Later, as a Cuban exile, he was part of the failed Bay of Pigs 1961 invasion of Cuba.Â Decades later, with the founding of BTTR, Basulto saw another avenue to help his beloved, besieged country of origin.
BTTR volunteer pilots, from 19 different nationalities, patrolled from the skies for desperate Cubans seeking to escape the brutal Communist government and risking their lives in makeshift rafts and boats without adequate food and water, exposed to the elements.Â Later, BTTR dropped leaflets over Cuba, sending messages of hope and information about peaceful resistance.Â Their activities embarrassed the Cuban government, puncturing the myth of a socialist paradise.Â Castro clearly worried about their potential to cause internal problems and, on occasion, threatened to shoot down BTTR planes.
Not surprisingly then, BTTR was infiltrated by a former fighter pilot and member of the La Red Avispa (âWasp Networkâ) Cuban spy network, Juan Pablo Roque, who staged his defection from Cuba in 1992.Â That year, Roque swam to the U.S. Naval Station Guantanamo Bay (GITMO) and sought asylum.Â Earlier, fellow La Red Avispa member and BTTR infiltrator Rene Gonzalez had âdefectedâ in Florida by âstealingâ a plane from a Havana airfield.Â At some point after his arrival, Roque became a paid FBI informant, although the Bureau was apparently aware of his membership in the subversive Cuban group, and his actions were suspect, viewed as an attempt to infiltrate the agency.
U.S. Political Situation
Around the same time as BTTR was active, President Clinton was ânormalizingâ the U.S. relationship with China â which included providing 11 million pages of classified data for the Chinese to modernize their missile and nuclear technology â and also trying to engage Castro. Â The president met in Marthaâs Vineyard with author and Castro emissary Gabriel Garcia Marquez, who relayed that the Cuban dictator wanted an end to negative publicity from the balsero crisis â the torrent of Cubans desperately taking to the high seas in barely seaworthy crafts to seek freedom in America. Â BTTR, which had a reputation of goodwill among Cubans, was viewed as a serious threat to Cuban government stability.Â Besides rescue operations, BTTR was introducing principles of strategic nonviolent action and attempting to unite Cuban citizens with Cuban exiles to overthrow the repressive regime and usher in a return to democracy.
Events Leading to Shoot-Down
In 1995, then-Clinton confidant and U.S. Congressman Bill Richardson (D-NM), a frequent envoy for Clintonâs various foreign policy missions, was asked by Castro to visit Cuba. Â Richardson, following a briefing by Richard Nuccio, a member of the House Intelligence Committee and Clintonâs adviser on Cuba, traveled there in January 1996.Â Richardson met Castro and other Cuban officials and, allegedly, negotiated the release of American political prisoners in exchange for a U.S. promise to end BTTR missions to Cuba.
AÂ CNN reportÂ published shortly after the incident stated that Castro issued the order to take action against Brothers to the Rescue after two anti-Castro leaflets drops over Cuba the month before.Â Castro admitted, âWe gave the order to the head of the air force.Â They shot the planes down.Â They are professionals.Â They did what they believe is the right thing.Â These are all people we trust, but I take responsibility for what happened.â Â Cuban MiGs began test firing air-to-air missiles and practicing attack maneuvers against slow-moving aircraft similar to the Cessnas flown by BTTR. Â Although U.S. government officials obtained radar evidence of these practice runs, BTTR was not informed.
In early February 1996, U.S. Navy Admiral (ret.) John Shanahan â who would later advocate reduced U.S. defense spending, including the demise of the F-22 program â hosted a delegation of diplomats and retired Pentagon officials to Cuba.Â The U.S. contingent was directly and shockingly asked by Cuban intelligence and military heads how the United States would respond if Cuba shot down BTTR planes.Â Upon their return here, the delegation discussed this threat with officials from the U.S. State department, the Center for Defense Information and Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), but again neglected to inform BTTR.Â Allegedly, no U.S. response to Castro was given, which could have led him to conclude that no significant repercussions would be forthcoming.
The Day of the Shoot-Down
The BTTR flight of Feb. 24, 1996 began like most of their others, as a planned search-and-rescue operation in international airspace following all established protocols. Â On Feb. 23, the day before, double-agent Roque suddenly and suspiciously returned to Cuba.Â Although the state department was aware of his departure, it was never communicated to BTTR.Â Also, that same evening, U.S. radar and monitors had been placed on alert to follow the scheduled BTTR flights the next day.Â Local military had also been alerted to coordinate flight plans and departure times with the watch supervisor and to trace BTTR transponder codes for as long as possible.
On Feb. 24, BTTR flight plans filed for a 10:15 a.m. takeoff were transmitted to Miami and Cuba.Â Circumstances delayed the BTTR flight until the late afternoon, yet a Cuban military commander reported that Cuban MiGs were nonetheless sent out at BTTRâs anticipated arrival time to intercept three unidentified aircraft violating Cuban airspace.Â The U.S. commander in charge ordered a military aircraft response in accordance with standard operating procedures, and the MiGs returned to Cuba.
Inexplicably, however, U.S. reports did not show any unidentified aircraft or Cuban military aircraft activity during that time interval. Â As he flew his Cessna on that day, Basulto reported detecting aircraft north of the 24thÂ parallel, the line which marks the U.S. airspace boundary.Â He also crossed paths with a U.S. Navy Orion aircraft, something he had never seen before during any of his missions.Â Per protocols and well-established procedures followed over the previous five years and 1,800 search-and-rescue missions, Basulto notified Havana of a five-hour stay in the area once he arrived at his airspace destination.
Meanwhile, in California, senior detection systems specialist Jeffrey Houlihan, with the U.S. Customs Service Domestic Air Interdiction Coordination Center, saw something amiss as he read and interpreted information from multiple antennae and Aerostat balloons.Â A seasoned radar and air weapons control expert and former Air Force pilot, Houlihan became alarmed as he observed Cuban interceptors operating without transponders, flying at high speeds, and making rapid maneuvers in and out of radar range.Â Much to his astonishment soon thereafter, he detected Cuban MiGs far out in international airspace flying directly above BTTR.Â Armed with the knowledge that an emergency response could be forthcoming from Tyndall Air Force Base in South Florida, he made a frantic call for help. Â Momentarily satisfied by the information that the Air Force base had been briefed and was handling the situation, Houlihan returned to his watch. Â As he continued to monitor the situation, he was astonished to see that no American interceptor aircraft showed up in the area to protect BTTR from attack, which would have been in accordance with standard operating procedures.
Little did he realize at that time that he was to witness the senseless murder of four dedicated BTTR pilots.Â Houlihan later recounted that the Air Force Base had been on battle stations alert at the time of his â911âł call.Â The alert was inexplicably lifted at some point shortly thereafter.
The shooting down of BTTR planes without warning began with Cuban MiGs reporting visual contact and confirming planes registrations with Havana. Â As documented as part of an investigation conducted by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), no warning passes or redirecting or escorting procedures, required by international law for civilian aircraft, were attempted. Â According to Basultoâs account, later denied by U.S. authorities, after shooting down the two planes of his fellow pilots, the Cuban MiGs chased Basulto for 53 minutes over the 24thÂ parallel within three minutes of U.S. airspace.Â Upon Basultoâs safe landing back in Florida, U.S. Custom officialsâ top priority was to obtain the video and audiotapes made by Basulto of his flight, which they demanded immediately.Â Later investigations revealed that the Federal Aviation Administration and the U.S. Air Force and Navy were all on alert and had monitored the events of that fateful day.
For his humanitarian efforts, Basulto incurred accusations by Castro of âbeing involved in terrorist actsâ and âsubverting the internal order of the island.âÂ In an interview with television journalist Dan Rather, the Cuban dictator admitted to planning and ordering the shoot-down and misled the American public with false statements that BTTR had committed âserious terrorist actionsâ and had been warned on several occasions about flying in Cuban airspace.Â Basulto was punished by the U.S. government, losing his pilotâs license for six months.Â Plus, he was censured, discredited, and misrepresented as an agitator.
Following the BTTR shoot-down, U.S. policy on balseros underwent a dramatic change.Â In the year of the shoot-down, Clintonâs Attorney General Janet Reno warned that rafters discovered in the Florida Straits by the U.S. Coast Guard would risk being stopped and prosecuted by the U.S. government.Â A serious indictment of the Castro regime was that refugees reported preferring their internment at GITMO to the oppressive life in their native land.
By 1995, U.S. policy toward the balseros became more restrictive, and the Clinton administration began sending them back to Cuba if they failed to reach dry land. Â The U.S. resolved to curtail exile demonstrations thought provocative to Castro and sought a reduction of hostile rhetoric between the two countries.
In early 1998, the Pentagon released a report concluding that Cuba âdoes not pose a significant military threat to the U.S. or to other countries in the region.â
Yet, later that year, a mere two years after the shoot-down, The Cuban Five, part of La Red Avispa, were arrested in Miami.Â Their arrests shed light on their activities: the successful infiltration of the U.S. Southern Command (SEADS) and Cuban-American groups.Â Their subversive activities contributed to the BTTR shoot-down, and the five were viewed as national heroes in Cuba.
It is also worth noting that on the day of the BTTR shoot-down, convicted Cuban spy Ana Montes was the senior intelligence expert on the Cuban military at the Pentagon.Â According to Scott Carmichael, a senior security and counterintelligence investigator for the DIA, military officials looked to Montes, as the designated Cuban expert, for answers on the day of the shoot-down.Â Thus, she was in a prime position to provide false information and pass military plans onto the Cuban government (True Believer:Â Inside the Investigation and Capture of Ana Montes, Cubaâs Master Spy,Â Scott W. Carmichael, Naval Institute Press, Annapolis, Maryland, 2007).
According to a December 24, 2000Â articleÂ byÂ Knight RidderÂ reporter Gail Epstein Nieves, who reported on the spy trials of the five, â[t]he FBI intercepted clandestine communications between Havana and its South Florida intelligence agents that forecast a potentially violent confrontation between Cuba and Brothers to the Rescue more than a week before the planes were shot down[.]â
One of the intercepts instructed the two BTTR Cuba spies, Roque and Gonzalez, to refrain from flying on particular days.Â Former Clinton Cuba advisor Nuccio, although admitting to concerns about a shoot-down by Cuba, said there was no âhard evidenceâ of an impending attack and claimed ignorance on the intercepts.Â Yet Nuccio wrote an e-mail on the day before the shoot-down to Clintonâs national security adviser Sandy Berger warning of a possible incident.
Today and Conclusions
Â The events that took place around the shoot-down of two BTTR rescue planes on February 24, 1996 amounted to a cover-up of major proportions.Â Despite significant prior information and forewarning, the Clinton administrationâs failure to warn BTTR, a civilian search-and-rescue operation and peaceful advocate of democratic change in Cuba, was an unconscionable travesty resulting in the tragic loss of four lives.Â Furthermore, the decision not to initiate a defensive military response â the ordering of a military stand-down â smacks of complicity in this egregious incident.
This was indeed puzzling in light of previous U.S. government assistance to BTTR.Â During the Bush Sr. administration, the Coast Guard provided cover from above for a rescue mission in the water and, on another occasion, called on defense forces to rescue BTTR from a potentially dangerous situation.
Today, Obama has liberalized travel to Cuba and allowed religious, university, and cultural groups to visit the island. Â He has lifted restrictions on remittances to the island.Â In addition, he has failed to challenge efforts by the successors and allies of Castro and Hugo ChĂĄvez, enemies of the free world, to expand their sphere of influence in Latin America.
Despite mainstream media portrayals that herald Cuba under Raul Castro as leading to economic reform and political liberalization, Cuba ranks next to last, just above North Korea, on the Heritage Foundationâs latest index of economic freedom. Â This is âexactly where Cubaâs has been since Raulâs âreformsâ commenced,â said Cuban-American author Humberto Fontova, who agrees with the ranking.
âIn fact, Cuba is currently undergoing a wave of terror, a 20-year high in political beatings and arrests.Â This wave of terror and repression coincides with record tourism to the island,â Fontova says.
The lack of action and the outright dissembling of information so prevalent in the BTTR shoot-down appear to have been at play in Benghazi. Â Although officials at the Pentagon, U.S. State Department, FBI, and other government agencies were almost immediately informed that the jihadist group had perpetrated the attack, the Obama administration initially credited it to a spontaneous eruption of anger against an anti-Muslim film posted on the internet. Â This charade was maintained for several weeks, with the U.S. government going so far as to place $70,000 worth of apology ads on Pakistani TV and for then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to extend duplicitous words of comfort to the father of a fallen Navy SEAL with âWeâll make sure that the person who made that film is arrested and prosecuted.â
Following the attack, it was revealed that the late Ambassador Stevens repeatedly pleaded for extra security personnel, citing a âtroubling increase in violence and Islamist influence,â but was denied additional support by the state department.Â Tragically, American drones were overhead at the time but did nothing to stop the attack, in deference to the political expediency of Obamaâs pre-election portrayal of a successful U.S.-led operation toppling the Libyan dictator and furthering the âArab Spring.âÂ Later revelations uncovered that Stevens was aiding Syrian rebels, including al-Qaeda operatives, and supplying them with weapons to fight Bashar al-Assadâs regime as part of a U.S.-sponsored operation.
Curiously, FBI investigators arrived at the attack site almost a month later and spent only three hours collecting evidence. Â At this point, 33 survivors have not yet been heard from, and some speculate that they have been silenced by threats.
The Benghazi attacks may well come to parallel the BTTR shoot-down. Â More than 17 years after that incident, the use of misinformation, the unavailability of potential witnesses, and the omission of vital evidence to perpetuate a cover-up of massive wrongdoing still haunt the survivors of this tragic event.
The jobs recovery is a complete and total myth.Â The percentage of the working age population in the United States that had a job in March 2013 was exactly the same as it was all the way back in March 2010.Â In addition, as you will see below, there are now more than 101 million working age Americans that do not have a job.Â But even though the employment level in the United States has consistently remained very low over the past three years, the Obama administration keeps telling us that unemployment is actually going down.Â In fact, they tell us that the unemployment rate has declined from a peak of 10.0% all the way down to 7.6%.Â And they tell us that in March the unemployment rate fell by 0.1% even though only 88,000 jobs were added to the U.S. economy.Â But it takes at least 125,000 new jobs a month just to keep up with population growth.Â So how in the world are they coming up with these numbers?Â Well, the reality is that theÂ entiredecline in the unemployment rate over the past three years can be accounted for by the reduction in size of the labor force.Â In other words, the Obama administration is getting unemployment to go down by pretending that millions upon millions of unemployed Americans simply do not want jobs anymore.Â We saw this once again in March.Â According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics,Â more than 600,000Â Americans dropped out of the labor market during that month alone.Â That pushed the labor force participation rate downÂ to 63.3%, which is the lowest it has been in more than 30 years.Â So please don’t believe the hype.Â The sad truth is that there has been no jobs recovery whatsoever.
If things were getting better, there would not be more than 101 million working age Americans without a job.
So exactly where does that statistic come from?Â Well, the following explains where I got that number…
According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, there areÂ 11,742,000working age Americans that are officially unemployed.
In addition, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics says that there areÂ 89,967,000Â working age Americans that are “not in the labor force”.Â That is a new all-time record, and that number increased by a whoppingÂ 663,000Â during the month of March alone.
When you add 11,742,000 working age Americans that are officially unemployed to the 89,967,000 working age Americans that are “not in the labor force”, you come up with a grand total of 101,709,000 working age Americans that do not have a job.
When you stop and think about it, that is an absolutely staggering statistic.
And anyone that tells you that “a higher percentage of Americans are working today” is telling you a complete and total lie.Â During the last recession the percentage of working age Americans with a job fell dramatically, and since then we have not seen that number bounce back at all.Â In fact, this is the very first time in the post-World War II era that we have not seen the employment-population ratio bounce back after a recession.Â At this point, the employment-population ratio has been under 60 percent for 49 months in a row…
Since the end of 2009, the employment-population ratio has been remarkably steady.Â Just check out these numbers…
March 2008: 62.7 percent
March 2009: 59.9 percent
March 2010: 58.5 percent
March 2011: 58.4 percent
March 2012: 58.5 percent
March 2013: 58.5 percent
We should be thankful that the percentage of working age Americans with a job did not continue to decline, but we should also be quite alarmed that it has not bounced back at all.
If there was going to be a recovery, there would have been one by now.Â The next major economic downturn is rapidly approaching, and that is going to push the employment-population ratio down even farther.
But since the end of the last recession, corporate profits have bounced back in a big way and are now atÂ an all-time high.Â So you would figure that the big corporations should be able to hire a lot more workers by now.
Unfortunately, that is not the way things work anymore.Â Big corporations are trying to minimize the number of expensive American workers that they have on their payrolls as much as possible these days.
One way that they are doing this is through the use of technology.Â Thanks to robots, computers and other forms of technology, big corporations simply do not need as many human workers as they used to.Â In future years, this trend is only going to accelerate.Â I wrote about how this is changing the world of employment in one of my previous articles entitled “Rise Of The Droids: Will Robots Eventually Steal All Of Our Jobs?”
Another way that big corporations are replacing expensive American workers is by shipping their jobs off to the other side of the globe.Â Big corporations know that they can make bigger profits by making stuff in foreign countries where they can pay workers less than a dollar an hour with no benefits.Â How in the world are American workers supposed to compete with that?
And of courseÂ immigrationÂ is having a dramatic impact on the labor market in some areas of the country as well.Â Cheap labor has dramatically driven down wages in a lot of professions.Â For example, once upon a time you could live a very nice middle class lifestyle as a roofer.Â But now many roofers really struggle to make a living.
When you add everything up, it paints a very bleak picture for the future of the American worker.
The cost of living keeps rising much faster than wages do, and the competition for good jobs has become incredibly fierce.
Meanwhile, the government continues to make things even easier for those that are not working.Â This has caused some Americans to give up completely and to be content with letting the government take care of them.Â The following is from a recent articleÂ by Monty Pelerin…
As we make it easier to get unemployment benefits for longer time periods, more people take advantage of the system. So too with food stamps and disability. All programs are at or near record levels in what is supposed to be four years into an economic recovery. For many, the benefits of becoming a government dependent exceed what they can earn. One study reported that a family of four, collecting all the benefits for which they were entitled, would have to earn $65,000 per annum to have the same after-tax purchasing power.
If you are a product of the government schools and are legal to work (i.e., have skills enough that you are affordable at the minimum wage or higher), at what point do you realize that there is no need to go through the hassle of actual work. You can live pretty well by staying home and taking advantage of the entitlements available to you. That is exactly what a larger and larger percentage of the population are realizing. In many cases, it is economically irrational to work.
This behavior creates a social pathology that only worsens over time. Kids learn from their parents that work is not necessary and the many ways to game the system. In this regard, look for this problem to become worse over time unless these programs are cut back.
In some areas of the country, it actually pays not to work very hard.Â According toÂ Gary Alexander, the Secretary of Public Welfare for the state of Pennsylvania, a “single mom is better off earnings gross income of $29,000 with $57,327 in net income & benefits than to earn gross income of $69,000 with net income and benefits of $57,045.”
But the truth is that most Americans still want to work hard and would gladly take a good job if they could just find one.Â The following is one example that was featured in a recentÂ Fox News article…
After a full year of fruitless job hunting, Natasha Baebler just gave up.
She’d already abandoned hope of getting work in her field, working with the disabled. But she couldn’t land anything else, either â not even a job interview at a telephone call center.
Until she feels confident enough to send out resumes again, she’ll get by on food stamps and disability checks from Social Security and live with her parents in St. Louis.
“I’m not proud of it,” says Baebler, who is in her mid-30s and is blind. “The only way I’m able to sustain any semblance of self-preservation is to rely on government programs that I have no desire to be on.”
Most Americans want to work hard and take care of themselves.
Unfortunately, our economy is not producing nearly enough jobs for everyone and it never will again.
So there will continue to be millions upon millions of Americans that find that they cannot take care of themselves and their families without government assistance no matter how hard they try.
And this is just the beginning – things are going to getÂ much worseduring the next major wave of the economic collapse.
Yes, at the moment there are more than 101 million working age Americans that do not have a job, but that number is actually going to go much higher in the years ahead.Â The anger and frustration caused by a lack of employment opportunities is going to shake this nation.
That is why it is important to try to become less dependent on your own job.Â In this economic environment, a job can disappear at literally any moment.Â Anything that you can do to become less dependent on the system would be a good thing.
Do you hate paying taxes? Are you fighting foreclosure? Do you feel like no one should be allowed to commit violence against you and don’t always blindly follow the commands of the authorities? Do you film encounters with police or believe gold makes better currency than Federal Reserve Notes? Well you might be part of a domestic terrorism movement and not even know it.
On Friday, theÂ Los Angeles TimesÂ posted anÂ articleÂ attempting to define a domestic terrorist movement consisting of as many as 300,000 Americans. Some are even labeled as non-violent “paper terrorists”.
Is there a more Orwellian term than “non-violent terrorist”? Â If you can think of one please share it in the comments below.
They refer to this so-called terror group as “sovereigns, zealots who refuse to recognize government authority in virtually any form.”
When attempting to further define and identify individuals in this movement, some very broad and dangerous stereotypes appear.
“Sovereigns believe U.S. currency has no value but recognize precious metals as valid currency,” wrote theÂ LA Times, much like the US Constitution does.
“AÂ central tenet of the sovereigns movement is that its adherents believe they owe no income taxes,” also much like the Constitution forbids.
What’s more, federal and state law enforcement are being trained that anyone who disobeys their commands falls into this terrorist movement and may pose a violent threat to them.
“Sovereign citizens are more likely not to obey their commands and more likely to commit violence during a traffic stop,” said Detective Rob Finch who’s made a cottage industry of anti-sovereigns police training.
“They refuse to recognize your authority, and that creates a dangerous situation,” Finch emphasized.
TheÂ LA TimesÂ piece points to a handful of colorful examples of people who defended themselves against police aggression, or who were plain crazy, as to why the movement should be considered violent.
But they don’t stop there. The FBI has even invented a new form of terrorism committed by nonviolent sovereigns called “paper terrorism”.
Even nonviolent sovereigns can cause headaches through what Finch calls “paper terrorism.” Some squat in foreclosed homes and file phony deeds claiming ownership, “paying” with photos of silver dollars.
Who knew fighting foreclosure was a form of terrorism? Paying taxes and mortgages with hand-written notes and photos is just funny, not really a threat to anyone.
However, self-described “sovereign citizen” James TurnerÂ facesÂ ”a potential maximum prison term of 164 years, a maximum potential fine of $2,350,000, and mandatory restitution”Â to the state for the nonviolent act of paper terrorism.
A blog for law officers, PoliceOne.com, alsoÂ triesÂ to help cops identify sovereign citizens, saying they’llÂ ”likely to be argumentative with police authorities…mayÂ attempt to videotape your encounter…may refuse to give you their name or documents…”
To his credit, the article’s author states that the “Sovereign Citizen movement is not an organized civil or criminal enterprise. Itâs a fractured series of loosely affiliated individuals who adhere to anti-government ideologies.”
It should be noted that the Feds and local law enforcement all received these characteristics and tactics from one original source: The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC). The SPLC has been on a publicly-funded partisan crusade to demonize so-called rightwing or patriotic extremists.
In 2010, SPLC put together a short documentary about “sovereign citizens” and the threat they supposedly pose. To help identify potential sovereigns, they warn about certain bumper stickers and challenges to authority in a professionally produced propaganda video.
Significantly, the video below has three times as many down-votes on YouTube as up-votes. Â Watch it below:
Many believe that SPLC gets paid to make mountains out of mole hills to keep the terror-industrial complex thriving. After all, when are bumper stickers and paperwork a threat to anyone? And only an extreme minority react defensively when they are threatened by men in costumes they don’t worship as authority.
What’s confusing is that either those who would try to lump people with these characteristics into a collective group are either operating out of ignorance or with an agenda, or a little of both. The adjective “sovereign” when referring to a citizen or a state is defined as “enjoying autonomy, or independence”.
The most extreme sovereigns would certainly not adhere to the authority of any collective that aims to define them as a group. And just because one person who adopts this philosophy ends up shooting a cop, doesn’t mean all people who hate taxes or fight foreclosure are violent threats. To think otherwise smacks of a demonization agenda, nothing more.
The few examples of “terrorists” who committed violence are used as examples in every single article about Sovereign Citizens clearly aiming to smear the entire ideology as inherently violent. Yet, in every case, who initiated force against whom?
Some may argue that if an armed stranger forced you to pull over your car, or demanded entry into your home at the threat of shooting you or putting you in a cage, it could be considered an act of aggression or violence against you as a free and sovereign human no matter what assumed authority the aggressors think they possess. Strip away labels and you are defined by your actions. Â What does that say about actions of the cops or the feds?
Is that really too complicated to add to these articles? The problem with doing that of course is that too many people may then sympathize with these people and the label of terrorist may not stick very well. In fact, it may expose the entire war on terror as a complete fraud, looking under cracks for perceived threats against people who just want to be left alone.
It’s unclear where the Feds came up with number 300,000 for potential terrorists wrapped in this label, but the number may not even be half of it. Â Now, anyone who protests the government canÂ be considered anti-governmentÂ which is also now considered domestic terrorism. And, apparently, everyone fighting the banks in foreclosure with creative paperwork are also terrorists.
This begs the question, who isn’t a terrorist?
If the fraudulent banks and the guys with the badges, guns, armored vehicles, drones, surveillance equipment, and torture cages are the good guys in this plot, while foreclosure victims and advocates of individual liberty are terrorists, our society is in very big trouble.
James MadisonÂ himself, father of the Constitution, warned against convening a second constitutional convention. When he learned that New York and Virginia were actively calling for an Article V convention in 1788, just months after ratification of the Constitution, he was horrified. He counseled: âIf a General Convention were to take place for the avowed and sole purpose of revising the Constitution, it would naturally consider itself as having a greater latitude than the CongressâŚ. It would consequently give greater agitation to the public mind; an election into it would be courted by the most violent partisans on both sides âŚ [and] would no doubt contain individuals of insidious views, who, under the mask of seeking alterations popular in some parts âŚ might have the dangerous opportunity of sapping the very foundations of the fabricâŚ.â
ALEC passed a resolution supporting the COS resolution, and Republicans joined the fray. Thankfully, the 1995 attempt was defeated, again because patriots were alert. (As an aside, the Governor of New Mexico was then Gary Johnson, Libertarian Candidate for President in the 2012 race, and he backed the COS resolution.)
Paul Weyrichâs ALEC, (American Legislative Exchange Council) backed the COS. ALEC boasts nearly 3,000 conservative legislative and corporate members, and has been strongly pushing a Con-Con for decades.
The CSG is a private, international organization funded originally withÂ Rockefeller moneyÂ through theÂ Spelman FundÂ (John D. Rockefellerâs wife, Laura Spelman)(see CSGâs Book of the States Volume I â 1935) and currently receives millions of dollars from statesâ dues â our tax dollars. As early as 1935, the CSG had already called for gun control and the creation of 10 REGIONS for America. Today, America has 10 Federal Regions from which the federal government controls our money and therefore our states, counties, townships and municipalities.Â Regionalism is Communism! The money from the block grants coming into the states is fed into the Federal Regional Planning Commissions, HUD, HEW, EPA, Departments of Labor, Commerce, DOE, etc., which in turn doles it out to our local governments in return for their âobedienceâ in passing whatever laws and ordinances the federal planners dictate (think Agenda 21, Smart Growth). If they do not comply, money is withheld until they do.
Here we are, eighteen years later, and theyâre still at it. In this present assault on our Constitution the roles are reversed:Â ALEC wrote the model resolution; and the NCSL is solidly behind the scheme, as indicated by theÂ letterÂ that was sent to every Governor, Senate President, and House Speaker in this country by Florida Senator Jeff Atwater, from the NCSL. So, letâs take a closer look at ALEC.
American Legislative Exchange Council
The subject ofÂ ALECÂ deserves a three-part article alone, but for the sake of brevity, weâll just give an overview. ALEC was founded in 1973 by Paul Weyrich, Grand Poobah of the secretive Council for National Policy, founder of Free Congress Foundation, and theÂ Heritage Foundation. ALEC is a corporate bill mill. Itâs not just a lobby or front group, ALEC is one of the most powerfulÂ unelected councilsÂ in the country.
Corporations hand to state legislators their âwish listsâ of legislation to benefit their bottom lines. The membership of ALEC is 98% corporate and the corporate membership is the one thatÂ fundsÂ almost all of ALECâs operations. They have bought their way into the process by which corporate lobbyists and special interest reps vote with elected officials to approve âmodelâ bills. ALECâs legislative leaders are responsible for getting the bills introduced and passed. They introduce and carry the bills in their statehouses as their own brilliant ideas. As an example, the immigration bill, SB1070, was written by ALEC and carried by Russell Pearce, word for word, to Arizona. Private prison corporations had a huge part in ALECâs crafting of SB1070.
Richard Mellon Scaife has allegedly funded ALEC to the tune of more than 7 million dollars. One must remember that Scaife funds both sides of the aisle and is connected to Rockefeller (Chase Mellon Bank). Scaife also had a full page ad in the WSJ stating why it was so important for taxpayers to fund Planned Parenthood and what they do for American women.Â The danger in the ALEC organization is that its leadership apparently wants to rewrite our Constitution,Â and they claim a membership of 2,500 plus of our 7,500 legislators.Â Members of ALEC even include the Church of Scientology, which has spoken at ALEC meetings.
Sometime in the mid-1990s, the Church of Scientology became one of ALECâs underwriters, for the apparent purpose of interacting with state lawmakers on mental health-care issues. Hereâs an excerpt from a 1998 fundraising letter written by Bruce Wiseman, the president of theÂ Citizens Commission on Human Rights International, (CCHR) a highly controversial anti-psychiatry front-group of the Church of Scientology. Wiseman writes. âALEC is a national organization made up of legislators from every state as well as some federal legislators who meet and draft model legislation for every state. The return for that has been enormous! CCHR has worked its way up the conditions at ALEC and recently got an article published by ALEC in opposition to mandated mental-health parity, which went to key state legislators who deal with health issues in their respective states. In addition, the ALEC membership has opened the door to meeting numerous legislators and other opinion leaders from around the country.â
Back in 1992, when Ross Perot came on the scene, he was gung-ho for a Con-Con. He stated emphatically that we needed a parliamentary government (same as ALECâs founder, Paul Weyrich) and bragged that âhis peopleâ could get the remaining states needed for a Con-Con âin their sleep.â Thank God, we found out and it was stopped.
The legislators never disclose that corporations wrote and vetted these bills along with fellow politicians behind closed doors at ALEC meetings. So, everyone who is a member of ALEC is influencing not only state bills, but likely most federal bills as well, written by corporations with vested interestsâŚalong with lobbyists and state representatives.
ALEC is a longtime supporter of a Constitutional Convention. A 43 page handbook, written by Robert G. Natelson, entitled:Â âProposing Constitutional Amendments by a Convention of the States,âÂ was provided to their mostly-republican members, along with model legislation to carry back to their states. The booklet is full of spins, lies, and misdirection. It claims the states must exercise control as given to them by the founders that they must move quickly, that state legislatures will have complete control over the process, and will answer to the state legislatures they represent. This is far from the truth. As we discussed and made clear in Part 1 of this article, there is no provision in Article V empowering state legislators to choose the delegates to a Constitutional Convention or to âlimitâ the scope of a Con-Con. There are no rules, no regulations, and certainly no instructions.
Henry Hazlitt, American economist, (1894-1993), was the former economic advisor to pro-Constitutional Convention, National Taxpayerâs Union (NTU), headed by James Dale Davidson. Davidsonâs NTU was instrumental in promoting a Con-Con in the early 80s and he claimed he gave $100,000 every year to the cause. Hazlitt was a renowned conservative, and he wrote a book which he republished in 1974 called, âA New Constitution Now.â This book makes the argument for replacing Americaâs presidential system of government with a parliamentary one resembling Great Britainâs. I thought we fought a revolutionary war to escape that form of government!
Hazlittâs book is extremely dangerous inasmuch as Hazlitt states things like, âan amendment could be proposed that would strike out everything after âWe the people,â and that, of course, includes the Bill of Rights. He was suggesting that everything after âWe the peopleâ on down be scrapped and rewritten, which is amazing, as this document has provided more human dignity and freedom for more people than any other in recorded history.
Other suggested improvements by Hazlitt include making it easier to amend our Constitution by adopting theÂ Swiss and Australian procedure. Another would be to restrict Presidents to a single term. A third would be to abolish the office of Vice President. A fourth would reconstitute the Supreme Court, with each governor appointing a justice with the approval of his state legislature. (Think about that with these neo-conservative Trotskyite governors we have on the right, like Tennesseeâs Haslam, and the full-blown communists on the left, like New Yorkâs Cuomo.) The neo-conservative Trotskyite rightwing loved Hazlitt and still quote him.
In the final part of this series, weâll discussÂ Rexford Guy Tugwell, and theÂ Newstates Constitution.Â Tugwell was a man far ahead of his time. He deplored private property rights, declared our 1787 Constitution to be outmoded and archaic, and would have loved United Nations Agenda 21/Smart Growth/Sustainability.
In fact, in 1938 Tugwell was appointed as the first director of theÂ New York City Planning Commission. New Yorkâs reformist mayor,Â Fiorello LaGuardia, created the commission as part of a city charter reform aimed at reducing corruption and inefficiency. The Planning Commission had relatively limited powers â all actions needed approval from the legislativeÂ Board of Estimate.Â Rexford TugwellÂ tried to assert the commissionâs power. He tried to retroactively enforce nonconforming land uses, despite a lack of public or legal support. His commission sought to establishÂ public housingÂ at moderate densities, yet repeatedly approved FHA requests for greater density.Â Robert MosesÂ killed Tugwellâs proposed fifty-yearÂ master planÂ with a fiery public denouncement of its open space protections.
Tugwellâs book,Â âThe Emerging Constitution,âÂ makes it clear where he stood. He states on page 593, âThe other considerable changeÂ (to the Constitution)Â is the consolidation of states into fewer, and it is hoped, more effectiveÂ regional groupings, thus at last organizing as one system rather than a confused fifty.â
Also on page 593 is this statement about the proposed Newstates constitution, âIt will be noticed that the general emphasis on the protection of individuals from the exercise of governmental powers has been supplemented with a list of responsibilities.â
A US university student may have been planning a massacre before he killed himself instead, authorities have said.
James Seevakumaran, 30, was found with explosives and firearms in his room at the University of Central Florida.
Officials said he pointed a gun at another student, who called the police, before pulling a fire alarm and shooting himself.
Hundreds of students were evacuated early on Monday but classes were held after the explosives were removed.
The incident occurred as the US holds an emotionally charged debate about how to curb its gun violence epidemic.
At a news conference on Monday, authorities said writings found in his dorm room suggested Seevakumaran was planning a massacre on the scale of the horrific US school and university shootings of recent years.
Campus Police Chief Richard Beary said he believed Seevakumaran shot himself as police answered the emergency call shortly after midnight on Monday.
“His timeline got off,” Chief Beary said. “We think the rapid response of law enforcement may have changed his ability to think quickly on his feet.”
Four explosive devices were found in a back pack, the police chief added.
Investigators think Seevakumaran may have triggered a fire alarm in the building in order to push students outside into the open so he could massacre them, Chief Beary said.
His roommates told investigators he had at times been anti-social but had not displayed violent tendencies.
But a spokesman said the university, based in Orlando, had been in the process of removing him from his dorm after he failed to register for classes.
Venezuelaâs acting president urged U.S. leaderÂ Barack ObamaÂ to stop what he called a plot by the Pentagon and the Central Intelligence Agency to kill his opposition rival and trigger a coup before an April 14 election.
Nicolas Maduro said the plan was to blame his opponentâs murder on the OPEC nationâs government and to âfill Venezuelans with hateâ as they prepare to go to vote following the death of socialist leader Hugo Chavez.
Maduro first mentioned a plot against his rival, Henrique Capriles, last week, blaming it on former Bush administration officials Roger Noriega and Otto Reich. Both rejected the allegations as untrue, outrageous and defamatory.
âI call onÂ President ObamaÂ â Roger Noriega, Otto Reich, officials at the Pentagon and at the CIA are behind a plan to assassinate the right-wing presidential candidate to create chaos,â Maduro said in a TV interview broadcast on Sunday.
Maduro, who is Chavezâs preferred successor, said the purpose of the plot was to set off a coup and that his information came from âa very good source.â
During his 14 years in power, the charismatic but divisive Chavez, who died March 5 after a two-year battle with cancer, often denounced U.S. plots against him and his ârevolution.â Critics dismissed those claims as a smokescreen to keep voters focused on a sense of âimperialistâ threat.
In kicking off the oppositionâs campaign in the provinces on Saturday, Capriles said Maduro would be to blame if anything happened to him.
Luis R. Miranda is the Founder and Editor of The Real Agenda. His 16 years of experience in Journalism include television, radio, print and Internet news. Luis obtained his Journalism degree from Universidad Latina de Costa Rica, where he graduated in Mass Media Communication in 1998. He also holds a Bachelor’s Degree in Broadcasting from Montclair State University in New Jersey. Among his most distinguished interviews are: Costa Rican President Jose Maria Figueres and James Hansen from NASA Space Goddard Institute.
Reports are starting to surface about chemical weapons being used by armed rebel fighters in Syria. The weapon was said to have been deployed in the north of the country and killed 15 civilians.
True or not such a statement it will have raised the civil war to a new level and it’s feared it may provide Â the government with an excuse to retaliate with the same type of weapon. The BBC report says:
“Terrorists launched a missile containing chemical products into the region of Khan al-Assal in the province of Aleppo, killing 15 people, mainly civilians”
The story was released by the state news agency Sana. The Syrian government often refer to the rebel fighters as terrorists. There is so far no independent confirmation of the report.
Obama and the democrats want to confiscate guns not because they care about them, but because guns are a footnote in their plan of Complete Political Control.
The plan goes like this. Since absolute control can be achieved only through military insurrection or the political process, i.e., votes, and since there are enough patriots left in the military to forestall a military takeover, the only possibility for usurping control is through some form of vote fraud.
The country is evenly split between socialists and non-socialists, and all that is required to gain complete control is a few more socialist voters. How about twenty million illegals who are grateful to be let into the country and ultimately made citizens?
FIRST STEP. Open the borders and bring the wrath of the federal government against any group or state (Arizona) who seeks to limit the influx of illegal aliens.
SECOND STEP. Pass socialized medicine to make sure the illegals are covered and appreciative of the government that brought them here. Delay the full effects of this â reduced service, greater cost, death panels for elders â several years to avoid backlash. By the time anyone knows what has happened, it will be done.
THIRD STEP. Push legislation that legalizes the illegals. At first go for legalizing them all, but then back off and settle for what you can get. You only need a few hundred thousand to swing the vote and the rest will be legalized in subsequent years.
FOURTH STEP. Destroy the economy. Put the nation so deep in debt that people seem to have no solution but to embrace the government, since private enterprise can no longer support the population.
FIFTH STEP. Confiscate guns. At some point, people will begin to realize that the country doesnât look or feel anything like it used to. Quality of life and services, notably health care and employment, will have deteriorated to the extent of possibly sparking a revolt. Cut that off at the knees by confiscating guns. No guns, no revolt.
All of these steps need to be accompanied by a disinformation war that will disorient and demoralize the opposition. Something like political correctness on steroids. The opposition will fight among themselves about minor points and at some point will be unable to fight at all.
Common sense will tell the opposition that guns are necessary for self defense and defense against the government; disinformation will tell them that no one need fear the government of the United States and that guns are responsible for needless death and destruction.
Common sense will suggest to the opposition that something is wrong when the United States is the only country in the world with open borders; disinformation will tell them that open borders are a good thing and that we are a nation of immigrants.
Common sense will tell the opposition that you canât add twenty to thirty million people to an existing health care system and get the same level of service; disinformation will tell him that the service will be better and it will be cheaper.
Common sense will tell the opposition that granting citizenship to people who are here illegally is insane; disinformation will tell them that it is only fair and the government will appear rational when it âgives inâ on agreeing to partial legalization.
Common sense will tell the opposition that doubling the national debt in eight years is the path to ruin; disinformation will explain that going deeper into debt is necessary to âkickstartâ the economy.
When these five steps are completed, the non-socialist part of the population will be completely demoralized by the persistent distortion of the truth just as political correctness has demoralized and frightened white people into remaining silent and not speaking their minds. Once demoralization has set in, the opposition will lose its outrage and ultimately its desire to fight. In addition, there will be no means to fight, even if it wanted to.