yellowstone idaho cern-SPACEWAR-LCH sandhook86

Video Advertises Internment/Resettlement Specialist Jobs at FEMA Camps

https://tatoott1009.com/
Video Advertises Internment/Resettlement Specialist Jobs at FEMA Camps
May 12, 2012Exciting opportunities! Become a concentration camp guard inside the USA– all you have to do is “just follow orders” while America and its Constitution are destroyed from within. As a bonus, you get to help keep ‘big mouths’ who should’ve minded their own business quiet and unable to speak out– and your Internment and Resettlement Operations Field Manual will make it easy to identify, isolate and begin re-educating “malcontents, trained agitators, political leaders… [even] activists.”Here is the video advertisement for the “Internment Specialists” we reported in 2009, as posted by the Army / National Guard (which has been conspicuously since removed). Notice that the job description, title and duties all seem to match the terminology used in the leaked document outlining the plan to set up camps both globally and domestically (Yes, the re-education camp manual does apply to U.S. citizens, but was not meant for the public to see). Further, not only does the video seemingly feature some very Western-looking detainees, it emphasizes the use of work brigades inside the camps.

Unfortunately, the nexus of all this surfacing information only makes it more clear that a real plan is underway to crack down and ‘occupy’ political dissidents in the name of addressing one or more national emergencies. Think it couldn’t happen in America? Think again. A tyrannical force is gearing up for something…

#####################


Conspiracy Theory with Jesse Ventura FEMA CAMP… by Tats-Revolution

 

Corrections Officer Internment/Resettlement Specialist
Job Details
City: Pensacola/Panama City
State: Florida
Country: USA
Company Name: Army National Guard
Job Category: Legal/Law Enforcement/Security
Job Description:

As an Internment/Resettlement Specialist for the Army National Guard, you will ensure the smooth running of military confinement/correctional facility or detention/internment facility, similar to those duties conducted by civilian Corrections Officers. This will require you to know proper procedures and military law; and have the ability to think quickly in high-stress situations. Specific duties may include assisting with supervision and management operations; providing facility security; providing custody, control, supervision, and escort; and counseling individual prisoners in rehabilitative programs.

So thats not a normal Prison Guard is it! Alex Jones has always spoken of Martial Law coming and the only alternative to FEMA Camps is, Martial Law.

The next stage I would expect would be to move more US Troops out of the USA on deployment so they don’t become a threat as Patriots and bring in Foreign Troops.

read more:

The Constitution has been suspended since the time of reconstruction. As long as we are at WAR the Constitution is suspended. We have only had 22 years of peace in our entire history. We are under Martial Law and have been since April 23,1863 with the issue of General orders 100. If you truly want Read more [+]

Speech That Got Judge Napolitano Fired From Fox News! Asking questions as Judge Andrew Napolitano did in a recent broadcast on his now cancelled daily show may very well be the reason behind his recent dismissal from Fox. Though specific details are hard to come by because the Judge has yet to give any interviews Read more [+]

You won’t hear much about it this coming debate season, when Republican and Democratic presidential contenders take the stage in an attempt to one-up each other on “the issues.” You won’t read about it in the mainstream media, which has its own agenda and is usually far too occupied with meaningless political minutiae inside the Read more [+]

In Case You Missed It….Proof That You Are Living A Lie! In Case You Missed It….Proof That You Are Living A Lie! UPDATES DAILY posted on June 26, 2014 WHO IS ISIS REALLY? PROOF YOU’RE NOT GOING TO BELIEVE June 27, 2014 tatoott1009 OK “AMERICA BECOMES NOUTH AMERICA ,” “AND THE WORLD BECOME SLAVES”!!!! DON Read more [+]

Its A Wonderful Lie 100 Years of the Federal… Infowars has once again released its report on the film It’s a Wonderful Life in defiance of YouTube censorship. The upload was taken down multiple times last year over alleged copyright infringements despite the full film being available on YouTube at the time. =========================================== UPDATE Read more [+]

Its pretty obvious that a great many posters here have slugged down the “ism”. Some one says we should read history OK lets step back in time… If Freedom is so bad why did the Boat People flee the communist take over of Viet Nam? Many did not make it. We will never know how Read more [+]

When the UNITED STATES declared bankruptcy, pledged all Americans as collateral against the national debt, and confiscated all gold, eliminating the means by which you could pay, it also assumed legal responsibility for providing a new way for you to pay, and it did that by providing what is known as the Exemption, an exemption Read more [+]

There have been repeated warnings issued from many of our past presidents and high influential leaders starting with George Washington all the way to John F. Kennedy. These warning are not something to take lightly and quite frankly are terrifying to the core! I urge you to watch the video below to discover the ‘common Read more [+]

POST THIS PAGE JUST FOR YOU ABOLISH THE ACT OF 1871 ©2010 drkate Bridge to Independence (S. Cupp) It’s another crossing for this writer: Congress, the President, and all the agencies of the federal government work for the corporation known as THE UNITED STATES, whose jurisdiction encompasses solely the ten square mile area known as Read more [+]

over a study at the sign treaties and charters between Britain and the United States exposes the shocking truth the United States has always been and still is a British crown colony King James the first was famous not for just changing the Bible into the King James Version but for Read more [+]

Facts Handgun possession is banned under District of Columbia (D) law. The law prohibits the registration of handguns and makes it a crime to carry an unregistered firearm. Furthermore all lawfully owned firearms must be kept unloaded and dissembled or bound by a trigger lock unless they are being used for lawful recreational activities or Read more [+]

By Xinhua writer Liu Chang BEIJING, Oct. 13 (Xinhua) — As U.S. politicians of both political parties are still shuffling back and forth between the White House and the Capitol Hill without striking a viable deal to bring normality to the body politic they brag about, it is perhaps a good time for the befuddled Read more [+]

U.S. Constitution Online Quick Links: FAQ Topics Forums Documents Timeline Kids Vermont Constitution Map Citation USConstitution.net ——————————————————— The Constitution is presented in several ways on this site. This page presents the Constitution on one large HTML-enhanced page. Other pages present the Constitution as a series of individual pages, in plain text, in standard Palm Read more [+]

On Constitution Day, a reminder that the supreme law of the land requires citizens’ participation in order to remain strong According to federal law, September 17th is Constitution Day – a day that all federally financed educational and governmental institutions must teach about the Constitution. When is the last time “We the People” read the Read more [+]

Copy this below and share it with EVERYONE you know! ACT OF 1871 “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Read more [+]

Copy this below and share it with EVERYONE you know! ACT OF 1871 “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and Read more [+]

THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE … … IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA … Claims Settlement Act of 2010, and the record of Read more [+]

First Slave owner in the US was black and more history they don’t want you to know How many Americans know that the first slave owner in America was a black tobacco farmer? How many Americans are aware that thousands of free blacks in the South were, themselves, slave owners? Answer: Very few. Embedded Read more [+]

yellowstone idaho cern-SPACEWAR-LCH sandhook52IF YOU DON’T SHARE THIS YOU ARE NOT FOR FREEDOM ! The Snowden Case What You’re Not Being Told The Road to World War 3 World War 3 Has Already Begun Full Disclosure: What the Media Isn’t Telling You About War in Syria Read more [+]
Many Americans today just feel that something is not right in America, something is just not right with our government, but they can’t put their finger on it. Well I felt the same way, so I have been searching for reasons why people may feel this way. Some folks have expressed that many people are Read more [+]

Copy this below and share it with EVERYONE you know! District of Columbia Act of 1871 YOU ARE ALL SLAVES THIS IS WHY A march on THE District of Columbia WILL NOT WORK Stanislaw R. Burzynski, M.D., Ph.D. – Medical Pioneer Bill Allows IRS To Revoke Second Amendment Rights By Stealth The Real McCoy: Read more [+]

StormCloudsGathering If this doesn’t wake you up, I don’t know what will. Follow us on Facebook: http://facebook.com/StormCloudsGathering Follow us on Twitter: http://twitter.com/collapseupdates Donate: http://StormCloudsGathering.com/donate Visit our website: http://StormCloudsGathering.com Get weekly email updates: http://tinyurl.com/naturalrightsnewsl… —— Music is original sound track created by me. Composite animations are original. Links to get you started on your research: NDAA Read more [+]

History The United States exists in two forms: The original united States that was in operation until 1860; a collection of sovereign Republics in the union. Under the original Constitution the States controlled the Federal Government; the Federal Government did not control the States and had limited authority. The original united States of Read more [+]

Copy this below and share it with EVERYONE you know! ACT OF 1871 “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do Read more [+]

HB 638 – AS INTRODUCED 2013 SESSION 13-0796 09/01 HO– USE BILL 638 AN ACT recognizing the original Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. SPONSORS: Rep. Tremblay, Rock 4; Rep. Baldasaro, Rock 5; Rep. Christiansen, Hills 37 COMMITTEE: State-Federal Relations and Veterans Affairs ANALYSIS This bill recognizes the original Thirteenth Amendment to the United Read more [+]

What You Need to KNOW First To help you to fully understand what’s going on, why the Republic is here and how we’re able to do what we’ve accomplished thus far Lawfully, follow the quick course in order below. 1. Learn what a De Jure and a de facto government is HERE. 2. Learn what Read more [+]

1uoUntitled159

YOU ARE ALL SLAVES Taking Back Your Power By Allen Aslan Heart From the author’s website: Gosh, and you call me paranoid… The citizenry here is totally asleep, and when the crap comes will find out that they are owned; yes OWNED by the United STATES, an English corporation. You have given away your titles,; Read more [+]

yellowstone idaho cern-SPACEWAR-LCH 71

Copy this below and share it with EVERYONE you know! ACT OF 1871 “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain

Read more [+]

 

English: West face of the United States Suprem...Initial review of the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871 seems like it only sets up a local government (like Chicago or Seattle); how do you get that they formed a private corporation? If you take the Act out of its historical context and, from the present looking to the past, imagine who the Read more [+]

 

A Fourth of July fireworks display at the Wash... A Fourth of July fireworks display at the Washington Monument. Location: WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA (DC) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (USA) (Photo credit: Wikipedia) English: This is a high-resolution image of the United States Declaration of Independence (article (Photo credit: Wikipedia) This article by Lisa Guliani was published on this Serendipity website sometime prior to Read more [+]

Victoria N. Alexander Digital Journal March 18, 2012 A group called StopNDAA.org has filed a lawsuit against the federal government to block the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which, they claim, gives the president power to arrest and indefinitely detain U.S. citizens without evidence. The state of Virginia has declared the NDAA illegal. Arizona, Tennessee, Read more [+]

WARNING TO :::::: WE THE PEOPLE We often hear the claim that our nation is a democracy. That wasn’t the vision of the founders. They saw democracy as another form of tyranny. If we’ve become a democracy, I guarantee you that the founders would be deeply disappointed by our betrayal of their vision. The founders Read more [+]

this below and share it with EVERYONE you know! District of Columbia INC. October 23, 2015 Copy this below and share it with EVERYONE you know! View this document on Scribd ACT OF 1871 “We the People of the United States, in Order to Read more [+]

Two students are suing the University of Hawaii for violating their First Amendment rights after administrator prevented them from distributing copies of the U.S. Constitution — demonstrating a frightening lack of knowledge about the very legal document they were attempting to censor. Students Merritt Burch and Anthony Vizzone, members of the Young Americans for Liberty Read more [+]

When Howe begins to quote Tennessee state law, the officer tells Howe to put his hands behind his back and proceeds to handcuff him. After walking Howe outside, Aytes then threatens to arrest Howe’s fiance Amanda Long who is filming the incident. Video footage of the outside of the school clearly illustrates Howe’s Read more [+]

over a study at the sign treaties and charters between Britain and the United States exposes the shocking truth the United States has always been and still is a British crown colony King James the first was famous not for just changing the Bible into the King James Version but for Read more [+]

Facts Handgun possession is banned under District of Columbia (D) law. The law prohibits the registration of handguns and makes it a crime to carry an unregistered firearm. Furthermore all lawfully owned firearms must be kept unloaded and dissembled or bound by a trigger lock unless they are being used for lawful recreational activities or Read more [+]

U.S. Constitution Online Quick Links: FAQ Topics Forums Documents Timeline Kids Vermont Constitution Map Citation USConstitution.net ——————————————————— The Constitution is presented in several ways on this site. This page presents the Constitution on one large HTML-enhanced page. Other pages present the Constitution as a series of individual pages, in plain text, in standard Palm Read more [+]

yellowstone idaho cern-SPACEWAR-LCH sandhook85

Corexit dispersant used by BP during Gulf oil disaster linked to horrific human injuries

https://tatoott1009.com/

Corexit dispersant used by BP during Gulf oil disaster linked to horrific human injuries

BP says NALCO Corexit 9500 is not harmful. It does not take a rocket scientist to READ the warning label.

Corexit 9500 is a solvent originally developed by Exxon and now manufactured by the Nalco of Naperville, Illinois. Corexit is is four times more toxic than oil (oil is toxic at 11 ppm (parts per million), Corexit 9500 at only 2.61ppm).

In a report written by Anita George-Ares and James R. Clark for Exxon Biomedical Sciences, Inc. titled “Acute Aquatic Toxicity of Three Corexit Products: An Overview” Corexit 9500 was found to be one of the most toxic dispersal agents ever developed. According to the Clark and George-Ares report, Corexit mixed with the higher gulf coast water temperatures becomes even more toxic.

So to perpetuate the lie that NALCO Corexit is safe, NALCO’s PR machine sends out a press release that says the following: (P.S. the bolded sentences are my editorial commentary.)

“One ingredient is used as a wetting agent in dry gelatin, beverage mixtures, and fruit juice drinks.” I would like BP COO Doug Suttles take a cocktail of rum and Corexit.

“A second ingredient is used in a brand-name dry skin cream and also in a body shampoo.” Maybe Tony Hayward can shampoo his hair in Corexit?

“A third ingredient is found in a popular brand of baby bath liquid.”

“A fourth ingredient is found extensively in cosmetics and is also used as a surface-active agent and emulsifier for agents used in food contact.” How about a shrimp barbeque marinated in Corexit for the entire NALCO board?

“A fifth ingredient is used by a major supplier of brand name household cleaning products for ‘soap scum’ removal.” Scum removal? That sounds good for something!!!

“A sixth ingredient is used in hand creams and lotions, odorless paints and stain blockers.”

yellowstone idaho cern-SPACEWAR-LCH sandhook85If NALCO Corexit is non-toxic then why does the warning label have severe warnings?

I wonder if we can get some BP volunteers to serve as lab rats and spray an aerosol cloud of Corexit and have them breathe it in. We can also try asking them to take a bath in Corexit.

And if you wonder what happens to Corexit and oil in the sea, check out this video by Ocean Adventures’ Jean-Michel Cousteau. Oil is bad enough. Corexit and oil is far more deadly to marine life.

It's amazing how there are still people who act as apologists for BP and NALCO who claim that Corexit 9500's ingredients are not kept as proprietary secrets. As I said, read the label. In tech-talk, it's RTFM!!!It’s amazing how there are still people who act as apologists for BP and NALCO who claim that Corexit 9500′s ingredients are not kept as proprietary secrets. As I said, read the label. In tech-talk, it’s RTFM!!!

Dear BP, you may want to begin to be transparent and truthful to the public. It’s never too late.

FREE SMART PHONE APPS TO HELP DOCUMENT THE DAMAGE OF THE “OIL SPILL”

If you live in the Gulf Coast, please take pictures or videos of the oil slicks. We just wrote some iPhone, Android and Blackberry software that will help you document the damage. It is specially useful if you’re a boat owner or clean-up volunteer to take pictures and video. Please note time and place. Some smart phone cameras’ GPS chip will record location even when there is no cell signal.

Documentation of the damages is going to be critical to the people of the gulf coast. Before and after pictures and videos will be particularly helpful.

Feel free to download the apps. They are free.

iPhone App – http://foo.am/dH4

Android App – http://foo.am/dH3

Blackberry App – Point your Blackberry web browser to: http://swooshsoftware.com/SpillReporter.jad

If you have a regular digital video or still camera, up load your images to: http://gulfcoastspill.com

Huge shout out to our developer friends at Intridea and UK-based Heamish Graham from Swoosh Software!

SPECIAL TWITTER CLIENT TO GET ALL RELATED TWEETS

We now have a special Twitter client to help organize all the tweets and other social network information on the spill. You can also try the special twitter app at Tweeb.us. Shout out to Invention Arts of San Francisco.

Share this article with your friends by sending this URL: http://foo.am/fRP

The site is an all-volunteer effort and a work-in-progress and we’ll be installing search image capabilities soon. DO NOT SEND US MONEY at the Gulf Coast Spill Coalition! Donate to the Sierra Club, Greenpeace, Mobile Bay Keeper, SaveOurGulf.org or some other reputable charity of your choice. We are archiving all the pictures and video for full public use. We will soon have full search capabilities on all relevant pictures and video care of our friends at EdgeCase.

################

Courthouse News Service

Courthouse News Service

     HOUSTON (CN) – Exposure to chemical dispersants BP used in the Gulf of Mexico oil spill left a commercial diver with seizures, unable to walk and going blind – and two members of his dive team committed suicide, the man claims in Harris County Court.
David Hogan and his wife sued BP and NALCO Co. – which made the Corexit oil dispersants – and a host of other defendants, including Halliburton, Transocean, ConocoPhillips, Xplore Oil & Gas and Stuyvesant Dredging Co.
After BP’s Deepwater Horizon oil rig exploded on April 20, 2010, unleashing the worst oil spill in U.S. history, BP hired contractors to spray and inject more than 1.8 million gallons of Corexit into the Gulf of Mexico, according to the complaint.
“Between June 1, 2010 and the end of November, 2010, David Hogan performed commercial diving work from boats and vessels that were owned, leased, chartered, contracted for, and/or under the direction and control of Specialty Offshore, ConocoPhillips, Xplore Oil, and the Stuyvesant defendants in the navigable water of the Gulf of Mexico. On every one of those dives during that period of time, David Hogan dove into waters that were contaminated with both the crude oil and the Corexit® dispersants,” the complaint states.
Hogan says that on his first dive, in June 2010, “he immediately noticed that something was different from his prior diving experiences,” and that “the oil seemed to have sunk considerably deeper into the depths of the Gulf waters than he had ever seen or experienced before. He immediately terminated his dive and returned to the surface, only to find that his wetsuit looked entirely different than it had ever looked before when he had dived into waters with an oil spill.”
Hogan says neither ConocoPhillips nor Specialty Offshore provided him or his team with any information about NALCO’s Corexit dispersants.
“Expressing concern for the safety of himself and his dive team, he contacted the ConocoPhillips onsite supervisor, who gave him a ‘BP Hotline’ to call if people had any concerns with respect to health and safety,” according to the complaint.
“Upon calling that number, a person answered, identifying themselves as being with BP. After expressing his concern with respect to what he had seen and experienced during his brief dive, that BP spokesperson told Mr. Hogan there was nothing for him to be concerned about, but that he would have one of BP’s health and safety people come out to the ConocoPhillips platform to talk to Mr. Hogan and his dive team.
“Within the hour, a helicopter landed on the platform and a man who introduced himself as being a BP representative got out of the helicopter came over to talk to Mr. Hogan.
“BP’s ‘health and safety man’ represented and assured Mr. Hogan and his dive that, notwithstanding the fact that they would be diving and spending a considerable amount of time in the Deepwater Horizon’s oil spill, there was absolutely nothing harmful or hazardous to their safety or health in the oil, in the water, or whatever was causing the oil to sink so deep beneath the surface.
“In fact, when this case is tried, the evidence will show that this BP ‘health and safety man’ made Mr. Hogan feel as though it was foolish for Mr. Hogan to have called at all, and it seemed as if the BP ‘health and safety man’ had wasted his time flying all the way out to where Mr. Hogan and his dive team were located, for such a trivial matter.
“Mr. Hogan and the BP ‘health and safety man’ specifically talked about whether Mr. Hogan and his dive team would need to change to ‘haz-mat’ dive gear if there was a concern for safety and health in what was in the water and oil spill; however, the BP ‘health and safety man’ reassured Mr. Hogan that ‘haz-mat’ diving gear was not necessary since there was absolutely nothing in the oil or anything mixed with the oil that was hazardous or of any concern, from a health standpoint to Mr. Hogan and his dive crew.
“Based on that information,” Hogan says, he and his crew worked 18- to 20-hour days for the next 1½ to 2 weeks, in water that was “consistently contaminated with oil for a considerable distance below the surface.” Hogan says the water also was contaminated with Corexit.
He and his team worked in the oil- and Corexit-contaminated water for 5 months for a variety of defendants, Hogan says, including ConocoPhillips, Xplore Oil & Gas and Stuyvesant Dredging.
“Again, at the end of each diving day, Mr. Hogan and his dive team’s wetsuits would look like something they had never seen before prior to starting these diving operations back in June 2010,” the complaint states.
Hogan says at least one team member started having health problems before they finished their work for Stuyvesant Dredging.
“Two of the dive team members have since committed suicide,” the complaint states.
Hogan says due to the assurances they got from BP’s “health and safety man,” they did not initially blame their health problems on the contaminated waters.
“However, as Mr. Hogan’s health problems progressed and did not abate, he ultimately contacted a physician in Louisiana who had been treating hundreds of patients who had come into contact with the oil and Corexit® dispersants,” according to the complaint.
“By August, 2011, medical testing and medical evaluation by one or more physicians familiar with exposure to the oil spill and, particularly, exposure to the Corexit® dispersants, led physicians to inform Mr. Hogan that his progressing medical problems were caused by the contact with the oil spill during his diving operations between June and November, 2010.
“Through additional testing and medical evaluation, by November 16, 2011, Mr. Hogan had been diagnosed as suffering from neurotoxicity ‘related to chronic and cumulative exposure to chemical and heavy metals associated with the Gulf oil spill and dispersant.’
“At this time, Mr. Hogan is suffering from a myriad of health issues related to his exposure to the oil spill and NALCO Corexit® dispersants, including but not limited to the fact that he cannot walk, his vision has progressed to being legally blind in his left eye and his most recent eye examination shows that he continues to lose sight in his right eye, and for all intents and purposes, is a paraplegic.”
Hogan says that before his exposure to the chemicals he “was a very gregarious, healthy man” who climbed 14,400-foot Mount Rainier in May 2010.
“Since November 2010, he has lost 60 pounds and is wheelchair-bound. If that were not enough, David has also suffered cognitive problems, seizures, vertigo,” the complaint states. (Graph 63)
Hogan says he is rapidly losing vision in his right eye.
Named as defendants are British Petroleum Exploration & Production Inc.; BP America Inc.; BP America Production Company; BP Products North America Inc.; BP plc; Halliburton Energy Services Inc.; Transocean Ltd.; Transocean Offshore Deepwater Drilling Inc.; Transocean Deepwater Inc.; Transocean Holdings LLC; NALCO Company; Specialty Offshore Inc.; ConocoPhillps; Xplore Oil & Gas LLC; Stuyvesant Dredging Company; and Stuyvesant Dredging Inc.
Transocean owned the Deepwater Horizon rig; Halliburton performed cement work on the Macondo well beneath the rig before the blowout.
Hogan seeks punitive damages for gross negligence and negligence under general maritime law and the Jones Act, from NALCO for products liability under general maritime law, and punitive damages for past and future physical pain and suffering, past and future mental pain, suffering and anguish, past and future medical bills and lost wages.
He and his wife are represented by Craig Lewis, of Houston.

read more:

The Constitution has been suspended since the time of reconstruction. As long as we are at WAR the Constitution is suspended. We have only had 22 years of peace in our entire history. We are under Martial Law and have been since April 23,1863 with the issue of General orders 100. If you truly want Read more [+]

Speech That Got Judge Napolitano Fired From Fox News! Asking questions as Judge Andrew Napolitano did in a recent broadcast on his now cancelled daily show may very well be the reason behind his recent dismissal from Fox. Though specific details are hard to come by because the Judge has yet to give any interviews Read more [+]

You won’t hear much about it this coming debate season, when Republican and Democratic presidential contenders take the stage in an attempt to one-up each other on “the issues.” You won’t read about it in the mainstream media, which has its own agenda and is usually far too occupied with meaningless political minutiae inside the Read more [+]

In Case You Missed It….Proof That You Are Living A Lie! In Case You Missed It….Proof That You Are Living A Lie! UPDATES DAILY posted on June 26, 2014 WHO IS ISIS REALLY? PROOF YOU’RE NOT GOING TO BELIEVE June 27, 2014 tatoott1009 OK “AMERICA BECOMES NOUTH AMERICA ,” “AND THE WORLD BECOME SLAVES”!!!! DON Read more [+]

Its A Wonderful Lie 100 Years of the Federal… Infowars has once again released its report on the film It’s a Wonderful Life in defiance of YouTube censorship. The upload was taken down multiple times last year over alleged copyright infringements despite the full film being available on YouTube at the time. =========================================== UPDATE Read more [+]

Its pretty obvious that a great many posters here have slugged down the “ism”. Some one says we should read history OK lets step back in time… If Freedom is so bad why did the Boat People flee the communist take over of Viet Nam? Many did not make it. We will never know how Read more [+]

When the UNITED STATES declared bankruptcy, pledged all Americans as collateral against the national debt, and confiscated all gold, eliminating the means by which you could pay, it also assumed legal responsibility for providing a new way for you to pay, and it did that by providing what is known as the Exemption, an exemption Read more [+]

There have been repeated warnings issued from many of our past presidents and high influential leaders starting with George Washington all the way to John F. Kennedy. These warning are not something to take lightly and quite frankly are terrifying to the core! I urge you to watch the video below to discover the ‘common Read more [+]

POST THIS PAGE JUST FOR YOU ABOLISH THE ACT OF 1871 ©2010 drkate Bridge to Independence (S. Cupp) It’s another crossing for this writer: Congress, the President, and all the agencies of the federal government work for the corporation known as THE UNITED STATES, whose jurisdiction encompasses solely the ten square mile area known as Read more [+]

over a study at the sign treaties and charters between Britain and the United States exposes the shocking truth the United States has always been and still is a British crown colony King James the first was famous not for just changing the Bible into the King James Version but for Read more [+]

Facts Handgun possession is banned under District of Columbia (D) law. The law prohibits the registration of handguns and makes it a crime to carry an unregistered firearm. Furthermore all lawfully owned firearms must be kept unloaded and dissembled or bound by a trigger lock unless they are being used for lawful recreational activities or Read more [+]

By Xinhua writer Liu Chang BEIJING, Oct. 13 (Xinhua) — As U.S. politicians of both political parties are still shuffling back and forth between the White House and the Capitol Hill without striking a viable deal to bring normality to the body politic they brag about, it is perhaps a good time for the befuddled Read more [+]

U.S. Constitution Online Quick Links: FAQ Topics Forums Documents Timeline Kids Vermont Constitution Map Citation USConstitution.net ——————————————————— The Constitution is presented in several ways on this site. This page presents the Constitution on one large HTML-enhanced page. Other pages present the Constitution as a series of individual pages, in plain text, in standard Palm Read more [+]

On Constitution Day, a reminder that the supreme law of the land requires citizens’ participation in order to remain strong According to federal law, September 17th is Constitution Day – a day that all federally financed educational and governmental institutions must teach about the Constitution. When is the last time “We the People” read the Read more [+]

Copy this below and share it with EVERYONE you know! ACT OF 1871 “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Read more [+]

Copy this below and share it with EVERYONE you know! ACT OF 1871 “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and Read more [+]

THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE … … IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA … Claims Settlement Act of 2010, and the record of Read more [+]

First Slave owner in the US was black and more history they don’t want you to know How many Americans know that the first slave owner in America was a black tobacco farmer? How many Americans are aware that thousands of free blacks in the South were, themselves, slave owners? Answer: Very few. Embedded Read more [+]

yellowstone idaho cern-SPACEWAR-LCH sandhook52IF YOU DON’T SHARE THIS YOU ARE NOT FOR FREEDOM ! The Snowden Case What You’re Not Being Told The Road to World War 3 World War 3 Has Already Begun Full Disclosure: What the Media Isn’t Telling You About War in Syria Read more [+]
Many Americans today just feel that something is not right in America, something is just not right with our government, but they can’t put their finger on it. Well I felt the same way, so I have been searching for reasons why people may feel this way. Some folks have expressed that many people are Read more [+]

Copy this below and share it with EVERYONE you know! District of Columbia Act of 1871 YOU ARE ALL SLAVES THIS IS WHY A march on THE District of Columbia WILL NOT WORK Stanislaw R. Burzynski, M.D., Ph.D. – Medical Pioneer Bill Allows IRS To Revoke Second Amendment Rights By Stealth The Real McCoy: Read more [+]

StormCloudsGathering If this doesn’t wake you up, I don’t know what will. Follow us on Facebook: http://facebook.com/StormCloudsGathering Follow us on Twitter: http://twitter.com/collapseupdates Donate: http://StormCloudsGathering.com/donate Visit our website: http://StormCloudsGathering.com Get weekly email updates: http://tinyurl.com/naturalrightsnewsl… —— Music is original sound track created by me. Composite animations are original. Links to get you started on your research: NDAA Read more [+]

History The United States exists in two forms: The original united States that was in operation until 1860; a collection of sovereign Republics in the union. Under the original Constitution the States controlled the Federal Government; the Federal Government did not control the States and had limited authority. The original united States of Read more [+]

Copy this below and share it with EVERYONE you know! ACT OF 1871 “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do Read more [+]

HB 638 – AS INTRODUCED 2013 SESSION 13-0796 09/01 HO– USE BILL 638 AN ACT recognizing the original Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. SPONSORS: Rep. Tremblay, Rock 4; Rep. Baldasaro, Rock 5; Rep. Christiansen, Hills 37 COMMITTEE: State-Federal Relations and Veterans Affairs ANALYSIS This bill recognizes the original Thirteenth Amendment to the United Read more [+]

What You Need to KNOW First To help you to fully understand what’s going on, why the Republic is here and how we’re able to do what we’ve accomplished thus far Lawfully, follow the quick course in order below. 1. Learn what a De Jure and a de facto government is HERE. 2. Learn what Read more [+]

1uoUntitled159

YOU ARE ALL SLAVES Taking Back Your Power By Allen Aslan Heart From the author’s website: Gosh, and you call me paranoid… The citizenry here is totally asleep, and when the crap comes will find out that they are owned; yes OWNED by the United STATES, an English corporation. You have given away your titles,; Read more [+]

yellowstone idaho cern-SPACEWAR-LCH 71

Copy this below and share it with EVERYONE you know! ACT OF 1871 “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain

Read more [+]

 

English: West face of the United States Suprem...Initial review of the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871 seems like it only sets up a local government (like Chicago or Seattle); how do you get that they formed a private corporation? If you take the Act out of its historical context and, from the present looking to the past, imagine who the Read more [+]

 

A Fourth of July fireworks display at the Wash... A Fourth of July fireworks display at the Washington Monument. Location: WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA (DC) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (USA) (Photo credit: Wikipedia) English: This is a high-resolution image of the United States Declaration of Independence (article (Photo credit: Wikipedia) This article by Lisa Guliani was published on this Serendipity website sometime prior to Read more [+]

Victoria N. Alexander Digital Journal March 18, 2012 A group called StopNDAA.org has filed a lawsuit against the federal government to block the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which, they claim, gives the president power to arrest and indefinitely detain U.S. citizens without evidence. The state of Virginia has declared the NDAA illegal. Arizona, Tennessee, Read more [+]

WARNING TO :::::: WE THE PEOPLE We often hear the claim that our nation is a democracy. That wasn’t the vision of the founders. They saw democracy as another form of tyranny. If we’ve become a democracy, I guarantee you that the founders would be deeply disappointed by our betrayal of their vision. The founders Read more [+]

this below and share it with EVERYONE you know! District of Columbia INC. October 23, 2015 Copy this below and share it with EVERYONE you know! View this document on Scribd ACT OF 1871 “We the People of the United States, in Order to Read more [+]

Two students are suing the University of Hawaii for violating their First Amendment rights after administrator prevented them from distributing copies of the U.S. Constitution — demonstrating a frightening lack of knowledge about the very legal document they were attempting to censor. Students Merritt Burch and Anthony Vizzone, members of the Young Americans for Liberty Read more [+]

When Howe begins to quote Tennessee state law, the officer tells Howe to put his hands behind his back and proceeds to handcuff him. After walking Howe outside, Aytes then threatens to arrest Howe’s fiance Amanda Long who is filming the incident. Video footage of the outside of the school clearly illustrates Howe’s Read more [+]

over a study at the sign treaties and charters between Britain and the United States exposes the shocking truth the United States has always been and still is a British crown colony King James the first was famous not for just changing the Bible into the King James Version but for Read more [+]

Facts Handgun possession is banned under District of Columbia (D) law. The law prohibits the registration of handguns and makes it a crime to carry an unregistered firearm. Furthermore all lawfully owned firearms must be kept unloaded and dissembled or bound by a trigger lock unless they are being used for lawful recreational activities or Read more [+]

U.S. Constitution Online Quick Links: FAQ Topics Forums Documents Timeline Kids Vermont Constitution Map Citation USConstitution.net ——————————————————— The Constitution is presented in several ways on this site. This page presents the Constitution on one large HTML-enhanced page. Other pages present the Constitution as a series of individual pages, in plain text, in standard Palm Read more [+]

yellowstone idaho cern-SPACEWAR-LCH sandhook84

Re-Education Camp Manual Includes Rules On Isolating Political Prisoners & Ron Paul Is Going to the Republican National Convention

https://tatoott1009.com/

 

A shocking U.S. Army manual that describes how “political activists,” including American citizens, are to be indoctrinated in re-education camps also includes rules on forced labor and separating political prisoners by confining them in isolation.

yellowstone idaho cern-SPACEWAR-LCH sandhook84

Aside from detailing how PSYOP teams will use “indoctrination programs to reduce or remove antagonistic attitudes,” as well as targeting “political activists” with indoctrination programs to provide “understanding and appreciation of U.S. policies and actions,” the manual directs political prisoners to be separated from the rest of the camp population.

On page 284, the manual (PDF) describes how “Malcontents, rabble-rousers, trained agitators, and political officers who may attempt to organize resistance or create disturbances within the I/R facility,” are to be confined “in isolated enclosures to deny them access to the general population.”

The document also makes clear that the internment facility is not only a re-education camp but also a forced labor camp. Page 277 of the manual states, “Detainees constitute a significant labor force of skilled and unskilled individuals. These individuals should be employed to the fullest extent possible in work that is needed to construct, manage, perform administrative functions for, and maintain the internment facility.”

Page 69 of the manual notes in a section called ‘Detainee Processing Technique’ that prisoners should first have their weapons confiscated before “silence” is guaranteed by methods to, “Prevent detainees from communicating with one another or making audible clamor….Silence uncooperative detainees by muffling them with a soft, clean cloth tied around their mouths and fastened at the backs of their heads.

As we have exhaustively documented, all these provisions apply not only to prisoners in places like Afghanistan and Iraq, but also to American citizens domestically, including “civilian detainees” incarcerated for “security reasons, for protection, or because he or she committed an offense against the detaining power,” as part of “domestic civil support operations” involving FEMA and the Department of Homeland Security.

The manual details how prisoners will be identified by their “social security number,” another glaring confirmation that the rules apply to U.S. citizens.

The document makes it clear that the rules apply to processing American detainees on U.S. soil so long as the President passes an executive order to nullify Posse Comitatus, the law that forbids the U.S. military from engaging in domestic law enforcement.

Although this story has gone viral amongst independent media outlets, the only mainstream news operations to cover it have been Russia Today and Digital Journal. Having studied all the documents, Digital Journal writer Anne Sewell confirms all the points of our original article – that the manual does describe how to re-educate political activists and that its policies do apply to U.S. citizens domestically.

 

Despite what you may have heard from the mainstream media, Mitt Romney does not have the Republican nomination locked up.  In fact, he is rapidly losing delegates that almost everyone assumed that he already had in the bag.

To understand why this is happening, you have to understand the delegate selection process.  Each state has different rules for selecting delegates to the Republican national convention, and in many states the “voting” done by the public does not determine the allocation of delegates to particular candidates at all.  And the truth is that delegates are the only thing that really matters in this race.  In state after state, the Ron Paul campaign is focusing on the delegate selection process with laser-like precision, and it is paying off big time.  At this point, there is still a legitimate chance that Ron Paul will be able to win enough delegates to deny Mitt Romney the nomination on the first ballot at the Republican national convention in Tampa.  If Romney does not have the 1,144 delegates that he needs on the first ballot, then it becomes a brokered convention and anything becomes possible at that point.

Sadly, most Americans have no idea how this process really works.

For example, originally we were all told that Mitt Romney won Iowa.

Then, later on we were told that a mistake was made and that Rick Santorum actually won Iowa.

Well, it turns out that Ron Paul actually won 20 out of the 28 delegates in Iowa.  That is because the process of actually selecting the delegates occurred long after the voting by the public was over.

So what happens if the Ron Paul campaign is able to produce similar results in state after state?

The Ron Paul campaign is very organized, very motivated and they understand the rules of the game.  As a recent Politico article detailed, there are huge amounts of unbound delegates out there that are still up for grabs….

There are roughly 30 states and territories where delegates aren’t bound to a particular candidate. The majority of the other states, according to a number of party officials, call for delegates to be bound for a first round of balloting but not the ensuing rounds.

“The dirty little secret is: At the end of the day, these guys and gals can vote any way they want,” said a Republican who has attended national conventions for decades. “Each state has different (laws) on pledged delegates.”

In many states, the “official” results of voting done by the public mean next to nothing.  The talking heads on television often tell us how many delegates are “projected” to go to a particular candidate, but as we have seen in Iowa and in so many other states, those “projections” are basically meaningless.

A recent Salon article discussed how the delegate selection process really works and how the Ron Paul campaign is using these rules to shake up the game….

In many caucus states, the “official” results that most people saw this winter were from nonbinding straw polls conducted in conjunction with precinct-level caucuses. But when it comes to choosing national convention delegates, the real action is at district caucuses and state conventions. In the past, this distinction hasn’t mattered much, but for the Paul forces – who lack the numbers to win statewide primaries but have the devotion to pack any room, anywhere, at any time – it has offered an inviting loophole. When turnout is small and no one is looking, the Paul folks can win, and that’s what’s been happening in a number of states.

To Paul die-hards, this will all culminate in a surprise for the ages in Tampa, with the political world suddenly realizing that Romney actually doesn’t have the 1,144 delegates needed to win the nomination, thereby allowing Paul to extract major concessions or even steal the nomination for himself.

So could Ron Paul really deny Mitt Romney the Republican nomination?

At this point, nobody really seems to know what the real delegate count is.

Websites such as The Real 2012 Delegate Count are more accurate than most sources in the mainstream media, but even that site has been underestimating the true number of Ron Paul delegates.

Right now, Mitt Romney is not anywhere close to having the number of delegates that he needs for the nomination and Ron Paul just keeps picking up more delegates with each passing week.

For example, a Washington Post article that was posted on Sunday reported that Ron Paul just achieved a stunning delegate victory in Nevada….

Despite former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney’s overwhelming victory in the Nevada caucuses, Texas Rep. Ron Paul has won a majority of the state’s delegates to the party’s national convention later this year in Tampa, Florida.

Thanks to organized Paul supporters, who have been working to increase their candidate’s support at state conventions around the country, 22 of the 25 Nevada delegates up for grabs will be Paul supporters. (Another three are automatic delegates.)

That was a state that Romney supposedly “won”.

It looks like Romney has a real problem.

In state after state, Ron Paul is gobbling up delegates.  The following are quotes from a recent Huffington Post article about what the Ron Paul campaign has been able to achieve in the past few weeks….

-”Sure enough, Paul has already won 20 out of the 24 delegates allocated in Minnesota, by winning a majority of the congressional district contests.”

-”In Louisiana, Paulites “dominated” the congressional district caucuses this past Saturday, according to the New Orleans Times-Picayune. Paul’s supporters carried four of the state’s congressional districts, and are guaranteed at least 17 of 46 delegates in the Bayou State, with the potential to pick up more at the state convention on June 2.”

-”The other state that Benton likely has his eye on is Colorado, where the Denver Post reported in mid-April that Paul supporters and Santorum backers combined forces to win a “stunning upset” at the state convention, guaranteeing that about half of the state’s 33 delegates will be for Paul in August.”

And look what just happened in Maine according to USA Today….

In votes leading to the close of the two-day Maine convention, Paul supporters were elected to 21 of the 24 delegate spots from Maine to the GOP national convention in Tampa, Fla.

So Ron Paul is definitely accumulating a huge pile of his own delegates, but even many so-called “pledged delegates” for Romney could end up playing a huge role for Ron Paul.

In some states, Ron Paul supporters have been getting elected into delegate slots that are supposed to go to Romney.  This is highly unusual, and it could really shake things up at the national convention.  As a Salon article recently explained there will be quite a few Ron Paul supporters that will actually be going to Tampa “disguised” as Romney delegates….

Besides the pledged delegates he’s won so far and the extras he’s collecting through caucuses and state conventions, Paul will also have some supporters disguised as Romney delegates. To understand how this works, just consider his campaign’s mischief in Massachusetts, where Romney won 72 percent of the primary vote – and with it, a monopoly on the state’s pledged convention delegates. But to determine who would fill those pledged delegate slots, the state GOP held caucuses recently, and the Paul crowd came out in force, gobbling up 16 of the 19 available positions. In how many other states will this happen, or has it already happened?

But those delegates are required to vote for Romney, right?

Not so fast.

The Ron Paul campaign could actually ask those “disguised” Romney delegates to abstain during the first round of voting in Tampa.  If Romney did not win on the first ballot, those delegates would then become unbound and would be able to support Ron Paul.

In fact, Ronald Reagan considered using this tactic against Gerald Ford in 1976.  The following is from a 1976 article entitled“Reagan Forces May ‘Steal’ Ford Votes”….

“In secret strategy sessions, Reagan aides have toyed with the idea of asking delegates to abstain as long as their state laws require them to honor the primary verdicts.  This would prevent the President from riding up an early-ballot victory.  Then, in subsequent ballots, they could legally switch to Reagan.

Delegates have abstained from voting before.  Back in 2008, at least 14 delegates abstained from voting at the Republican national convention.

So what would happen if the Ron Paul campaign was able to get 100 or 150 “Romney delegates” to abstain from voting during the first ballot in Tampa?

  • #########################

That is a very intriguing question.

And remember, Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich also have significant numbers of delegates pledged to each of them.

So Ron Paul does not need to accumulate 1,144 delegates himself to deny Mitt Romney the nomination on the first ballot.  He just needs to keep Romney from getting to 1,144.

The race for the Republican nomination is not over.

You can find a state by state breakdown of delegate voting rules right here.

It is not too late to get involved.

If nobody gets to 1,144 on the first ballot in Tampa, it becomes a “brokered convention” and anyone can become the nominee – even someone that is not running right now.

So if you are not satisfied with Mitt Romney as the Republican nominee, don’t lose hope yet.

The game is still being played.

It would be a challenge, but if his supporters get energized enough, it certainly is possible that Ron Paul could still win enough delegates to deny Mitt Romney the Republican nomination on the first ballot in Tampa.

And if that happens, anything is possible.

Similar/Related Articles

read more:

The Constitution has been suspended since the time of reconstruction. As long as we are at WAR the Constitution is suspended. We have only had 22 years of peace in our entire history. We are under Martial Law and have been since April 23,1863 with the issue of General orders 100. If you truly want Read more [+]

Speech That Got Judge Napolitano Fired From Fox News! Asking questions as Judge Andrew Napolitano did in a recent broadcast on his now cancelled daily show may very well be the reason behind his recent dismissal from Fox. Though specific details are hard to come by because the Judge has yet to give any interviews Read more [+]

You won’t hear much about it this coming debate season, when Republican and Democratic presidential contenders take the stage in an attempt to one-up each other on “the issues.” You won’t read about it in the mainstream media, which has its own agenda and is usually far too occupied with meaningless political minutiae inside the Read more [+]

In Case You Missed It….Proof That You Are Living A Lie! In Case You Missed It….Proof That You Are Living A Lie! UPDATES DAILY posted on June 26, 2014 WHO IS ISIS REALLY? PROOF YOU’RE NOT GOING TO BELIEVE June 27, 2014 tatoott1009 OK “AMERICA BECOMES NOUTH AMERICA ,” “AND THE WORLD BECOME SLAVES”!!!! DON Read more [+]

Its A Wonderful Lie 100 Years of the Federal… Infowars has once again released its report on the film It’s a Wonderful Life in defiance of YouTube censorship. The upload was taken down multiple times last year over alleged copyright infringements despite the full film being available on YouTube at the time. =========================================== UPDATE Read more [+]

Its pretty obvious that a great many posters here have slugged down the “ism”. Some one says we should read history OK lets step back in time… If Freedom is so bad why did the Boat People flee the communist take over of Viet Nam? Many did not make it. We will never know how Read more [+]

When the UNITED STATES declared bankruptcy, pledged all Americans as collateral against the national debt, and confiscated all gold, eliminating the means by which you could pay, it also assumed legal responsibility for providing a new way for you to pay, and it did that by providing what is known as the Exemption, an exemption Read more [+]

There have been repeated warnings issued from many of our past presidents and high influential leaders starting with George Washington all the way to John F. Kennedy. These warning are not something to take lightly and quite frankly are terrifying to the core! I urge you to watch the video below to discover the ‘common Read more [+]

POST THIS PAGE JUST FOR YOU ABOLISH THE ACT OF 1871 ©2010 drkate Bridge to Independence (S. Cupp) It’s another crossing for this writer: Congress, the President, and all the agencies of the federal government work for the corporation known as THE UNITED STATES, whose jurisdiction encompasses solely the ten square mile area known as Read more [+]

over a study at the sign treaties and charters between Britain and the United States exposes the shocking truth the United States has always been and still is a British crown colony King James the first was famous not for just changing the Bible into the King James Version but for Read more [+]

Facts Handgun possession is banned under District of Columbia (D) law. The law prohibits the registration of handguns and makes it a crime to carry an unregistered firearm. Furthermore all lawfully owned firearms must be kept unloaded and dissembled or bound by a trigger lock unless they are being used for lawful recreational activities or Read more [+]

By Xinhua writer Liu Chang BEIJING, Oct. 13 (Xinhua) — As U.S. politicians of both political parties are still shuffling back and forth between the White House and the Capitol Hill without striking a viable deal to bring normality to the body politic they brag about, it is perhaps a good time for the befuddled Read more [+]

U.S. Constitution Online Quick Links: FAQ Topics Forums Documents Timeline Kids Vermont Constitution Map Citation USConstitution.net ——————————————————— The Constitution is presented in several ways on this site. This page presents the Constitution on one large HTML-enhanced page. Other pages present the Constitution as a series of individual pages, in plain text, in standard Palm Read more [+]

On Constitution Day, a reminder that the supreme law of the land requires citizens’ participation in order to remain strong According to federal law, September 17th is Constitution Day – a day that all federally financed educational and governmental institutions must teach about the Constitution. When is the last time “We the People” read the Read more [+]

Copy this below and share it with EVERYONE you know! ACT OF 1871 “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Read more [+]

Copy this below and share it with EVERYONE you know! ACT OF 1871 “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and Read more [+]

THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE … … IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA … Claims Settlement Act of 2010, and the record of Read more [+]

First Slave owner in the US was black and more history they don’t want you to know How many Americans know that the first slave owner in America was a black tobacco farmer? How many Americans are aware that thousands of free blacks in the South were, themselves, slave owners? Answer: Very few. Embedded Read more [+]

yellowstone idaho cern-SPACEWAR-LCH sandhook52IF YOU DON’T SHARE THIS YOU ARE NOT FOR FREEDOM ! The Snowden Case What You’re Not Being Told The Road to World War 3 World War 3 Has Already Begun Full Disclosure: What the Media Isn’t Telling You About War in Syria Read more [+]
Many Americans today just feel that something is not right in America, something is just not right with our government, but they can’t put their finger on it. Well I felt the same way, so I have been searching for reasons why people may feel this way. Some folks have expressed that many people are Read more [+]

Copy this below and share it with EVERYONE you know! District of Columbia Act of 1871 YOU ARE ALL SLAVES THIS IS WHY A march on THE District of Columbia WILL NOT WORK Stanislaw R. Burzynski, M.D., Ph.D. – Medical Pioneer Bill Allows IRS To Revoke Second Amendment Rights By Stealth The Real McCoy: Read more [+]

StormCloudsGathering If this doesn’t wake you up, I don’t know what will. Follow us on Facebook: http://facebook.com/StormCloudsGathering Follow us on Twitter: http://twitter.com/collapseupdates Donate: http://StormCloudsGathering.com/donate Visit our website: http://StormCloudsGathering.com Get weekly email updates: http://tinyurl.com/naturalrightsnewsl… —— Music is original sound track created by me. Composite animations are original. Links to get you started on your research: NDAA Read more [+]

History The United States exists in two forms: The original united States that was in operation until 1860; a collection of sovereign Republics in the union. Under the original Constitution the States controlled the Federal Government; the Federal Government did not control the States and had limited authority. The original united States of Read more [+]

Copy this below and share it with EVERYONE you know! ACT OF 1871 “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do Read more [+]

HB 638 – AS INTRODUCED 2013 SESSION 13-0796 09/01 HO– USE BILL 638 AN ACT recognizing the original Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. SPONSORS: Rep. Tremblay, Rock 4; Rep. Baldasaro, Rock 5; Rep. Christiansen, Hills 37 COMMITTEE: State-Federal Relations and Veterans Affairs ANALYSIS This bill recognizes the original Thirteenth Amendment to the United Read more [+]

What You Need to KNOW First To help you to fully understand what’s going on, why the Republic is here and how we’re able to do what we’ve accomplished thus far Lawfully, follow the quick course in order below. 1. Learn what a De Jure and a de facto government is HERE. 2. Learn what Read more [+]

1uoUntitled159

YOU ARE ALL SLAVES Taking Back Your Power By Allen Aslan Heart From the author’s website: Gosh, and you call me paranoid… The citizenry here is totally asleep, and when the crap comes will find out that they are owned; yes OWNED by the United STATES, an English corporation. You have given away your titles,; Read more [+]

yellowstone idaho cern-SPACEWAR-LCH 71

Copy this below and share it with EVERYONE you know! ACT OF 1871 “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain

Read more [+]

 

English: West face of the United States Suprem...Initial review of the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871 seems like it only sets up a local government (like Chicago or Seattle); how do you get that they formed a private corporation? If you take the Act out of its historical context and, from the present looking to the past, imagine who the Read more [+]

 

A Fourth of July fireworks display at the Wash... A Fourth of July fireworks display at the Washington Monument. Location: WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA (DC) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (USA) (Photo credit: Wikipedia) English: This is a high-resolution image of the United States Declaration of Independence (article (Photo credit: Wikipedia) This article by Lisa Guliani was published on this Serendipity website sometime prior to Read more [+]

Victoria N. Alexander Digital Journal March 18, 2012 A group called StopNDAA.org has filed a lawsuit against the federal government to block the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which, they claim, gives the president power to arrest and indefinitely detain U.S. citizens without evidence. The state of Virginia has declared the NDAA illegal. Arizona, Tennessee, Read more [+]

WARNING TO :::::: WE THE PEOPLE We often hear the claim that our nation is a democracy. That wasn’t the vision of the founders. They saw democracy as another form of tyranny. If we’ve become a democracy, I guarantee you that the founders would be deeply disappointed by our betrayal of their vision. The founders Read more [+]

this below and share it with EVERYONE you know! District of Columbia INC. October 23, 2015 Copy this below and share it with EVERYONE you know! View this document on Scribd ACT OF 1871 “We the People of the United States, in Order to Read more [+]

Two students are suing the University of Hawaii for violating their First Amendment rights after administrator prevented them from distributing copies of the U.S. Constitution — demonstrating a frightening lack of knowledge about the very legal document they were attempting to censor. Students Merritt Burch and Anthony Vizzone, members of the Young Americans for Liberty Read more [+]

When Howe begins to quote Tennessee state law, the officer tells Howe to put his hands behind his back and proceeds to handcuff him. After walking Howe outside, Aytes then threatens to arrest Howe’s fiance Amanda Long who is filming the incident. Video footage of the outside of the school clearly illustrates Howe’s Read more [+]

over a study at the sign treaties and charters between Britain and the United States exposes the shocking truth the United States has always been and still is a British crown colony King James the first was famous not for just changing the Bible into the King James Version but for Read more [+]

Facts Handgun possession is banned under District of Columbia (D) law. The law prohibits the registration of handguns and makes it a crime to carry an unregistered firearm. Furthermore all lawfully owned firearms must be kept unloaded and dissembled or bound by a trigger lock unless they are being used for lawful recreational activities or Read more [+]

U.S. Constitution Online Quick Links: FAQ Topics Forums Documents Timeline Kids Vermont Constitution Map Citation USConstitution.net ——————————————————— The Constitution is presented in several ways on this site. This page presents the Constitution on one large HTML-enhanced page. Other pages present the Constitution as a series of individual pages, in plain text, in standard Palm Read more [+]

yellowstone idaho cern-SPACEWAR-LCH sandhook83

Leaked U.S. Army Document Outlines Plan For Re-Education Camps In America And More

https://tatoott1009.com/

Leaked U.S. Army Document Outlines Plan For Re-Education Camps In America And More

A leaked U.S. Army document prepared for the Department of Defense contains shocking plans for “political activists” to be pacified by “PSYOP officers” into developing an “appreciation of U.S. policies” while detained in prison camps inside the United States.

yellowstone idaho cern-SPACEWAR-LCH sandhook83

The document, entitled FM 3-39.40 Internment and Resettlement Operations (PDF) was originally released on a restricted basis to the DoD in February 2010, but has now been leaked online.

The manual outlines policies for processing detainees into internment camps both globally and inside the United States. International agencies like the UN and the Red Cross are named as partners in addition to domestic federal agencies including the Department of Homeland Security and FEMA.

The document makes it clear that the policies apply “within U.S. territory” and involve, “DOD support to U.S. civil authorities for domestic emergencies, and for designated law enforcement and other activities,” including “man-made disasters, accidents, terrorist attacks and incidents in the U.S. and its territories.”

The manual states, “These operations may be performed as domestic civil support operations,” and adds that “The authority to approve resettlement such operations within U.S. territories,” would require a “special exception” to The Posse Comitatus Act, which can be obtained via “the President invoking his executive authority.” The document also makes reference to identifying detainees using their “social security number.”

Aside from enemy combatants and other classifications of detainees, the manual includes the designation of “civilian internees,” in other words citizens who are detained for, “security reasons, for protection, or because he or she committed an offense against the detaining power.”

Once the detainees have been processed into the internment camp, the manual explains how they will be “indoctrinated,” with a particular focus on targeting political dissidents, into expressing support for U.S. policies.

The re-education process is the responsibility of the “Psychological Operations Officer,” whose job it is to design “PSYOP products that are designed to pacify and acclimate detainees or DCs to accept U.S. I/R facility authority and regulations,” according to the document.

The manual lists the following roles that are designated to the “PSYOP team”.

– Identifies malcontents, trained agitators, and political leaders within the facility who may try to organize resistance or create disturbances.

– Develops and executes indoctrination programs to reduce or remove antagonistic attitudes.

– Identifies political activists.

– Provides loudspeaker support (such as administrative announcements and facility instructions when necessary).

– Helps the military police commander control detainee and DC populations during emergencies.

– Plans and executes a PSYOP program that produces an understanding and appreciation of U.S. policies and actions.

Remember, this is not restricted to insurgents in Iraq who are detained in prison camps – the manual makes it clear that the policies also apply “within U.S. territory” under the auspices of the DHS and FEMA. The document adds that, “Resettlement operations may require large groups of civilians to be quartered temporarily (less than 6 months) or semipermanently (more than 6 months).”


Ted Nugent Loses It During CBS Interview

Ted Nugent Loses It During CBS Interview

The historical significance of states using internment camps to re-educate detainees centers around the fact that it is almost exclusively practiced by repressive and dictatorial regimes like the former Soviet Union and Stalinist regimes like modern day North Korea.

We have exhaustively documented preparations for the mass internment of citizens inside America, but this is the first time that language concerning the re-education of detainees, in particular political activists, has cropped up in our research.

In 2009, the National Guard posted a number of job opportunities looking for “Internment/Resettlement Specialists” to work in “civilian internee camps” within the United States.

In December last year it was also revealed that Halliburton subsidiary KBR is seeking sub-contractors to staff and outfit “emergency environment” camps located in five regions of the United States.

In 2006, KBR was contracted by Homeland Security to build detention centers designed to deal with “an emergency influx of immigrants into the U.S,” or the rapid development of unspecified “new programs” that would require large numbers of people to be interned.

Rex 84, short for Readiness Exercise 1984, was established under the pretext of a “mass exodus” of illegal aliens crossing the Mexican/US border, the same pretense used in the language of the KBR request for services.

During the Iran-Contra hearings in 1987, however, it was revealed that the program was a secretive “scenario and drill” developed by the federal government to suspend the Constitution, declare martial law, assign military commanders to take over state and local governments, and detain large numbers of American citizens determined by the government to be “national security threats.”

Under the indefinite detention provision of the National Defense Authorization Act, which was signed by Barack Obama on New Year’s Eve, American citizens can be kidnapped and detained indefinitely without trial.

Read a portion of the Internment and Resettlement Operations manual below.

The following portions of the document make it clear that the policies apply “within U.S. territory” (as well as abroad in countries like Iraq and Afghanistan) and that domestic federal agencies are involved.

  1. Thursday, May 3, 2012An astounding new frontier of Internet censorship has been launched by Google-owned You Tube to copyright audio and visual characteristics of individual people, meaning third party companies could claim copyright ownership of content that doesn’t even belong to them if it features an individual person who has signed a partnership agreement with that company.

    Last night we were informed that the account for the Alex Jones Channel on You Tube was not in good standing because the channel contained years-old videos of comedian Joe Rogan’s appearances on the Alex Jones Show.

    Although the content exclusively belonged to the Alex Jones Show, You Tube claimed that the videos represented a copyright violation because its automated crawlers had determined that Rogan’s voice and image were under the sole copyright ownership of a company Rogan had partnered with called Bent Pixels.

    Although Bent Pixels had previously used its own software to place ads on You Tube videos that contain exclusive Rogan content, You Tube began using its own automated software to determine which videos contained the image or voice of Joe Rogan, and then threatened legitimate content owners with community violations if the clips were not removed.

    Not only our videos of Joe Rogan’s appearances on the Alex Jones Show but other Joe Rogan videos across You Tube were deleted on this pretext and channels were suspended.

    This software has been applied across the You Tube platform, which is why hundreds of thousands of videos are now being deleted even though they clearly represent fair use or are even exclusive content which doesn’t even pertain to fair use.

  2. VIDEO DOWNLOADER   LINK         http://atube-catcher.dsnetwb.com/video/
  3. ######################

  4. This new definition of copyright violation completely blows away any pretense of fair use. Not only does it abolish fair use, it then allows third party companies to claim they own your personal content.

    For example, if Rogan appeared on the Jay Leno show as a guest, a third party company could then claim they own that segment of Jay Leno’s broadcast.

    Despite the fact that the bill was shot down, Google is already implementing SOPA-style policies under this framework of copyrighting individuals.

    The heart of the problem lies with the fact that You Tube is now using automated applications that can not only identify copyrighted music, but also individual voices.

    As a result of You Tube treating Joe Rogan as a copyrighted individual, our long upload capability has been suspended and the entire channel itself, with over 200 million video views, is once again under threat of being deleted.

    It is important to stress that You Tube is the culprit here, Bent Pixels is merely interested in protecting exclusive content of its partners, but You Tube has applied their own draconian copyright measures arbitrarily.

    1. May 3, 2012PHOENIX – Volunteer U.S. Border Guard & outspoken former U.S. Marine, J.T. Ready, was found dead Wednesday afternoon along with three adults and one small child, in an apparent mass shooting in Gilbert, Arizona.According to local police, this mass shooting event has been declared an open and shut case just hours after the fact. According to the police, there are no survivors and no eye witnesses to mention. The ruthless slaying also included a two year old girl.Within just a couple of hours after the event the police & media were quick to accuse Ready of being responsible, with the local news officially declaring this morning that the crime a murder/suicide, “domestic violence carried out by former white supremist and lone vigilante.”Case closed.The full ballistics reports have not even been carried out for this five person shooting, yet police are rushing to draw a line under the case.But early reports from the Arizona Republic reported an unknown gunman, wearing body armor, opening fire in the area – a report which died quickly as soon as police secured the crime scene and began giving statements to the local media.Speculation of a cover-up frenzy was fueled by an early statement from Sgt. Bill Balafas stating, “We don’t believe the suspect is at large. All the information is pointing to the fact that he is one of the dead in the house;” thus, continuing the latest trend of not waiting for a full coroner’s report before publicly slandering and implicating someone
      1. Palfrey Considered Call Girl’s “Suicide” Possible Murder
      2. Obama Seals Court Records Of Border Patrol’s Murder
      3. Staged Osama Assassination: Get Ready for More War
      4. New Book Exposes Murder Linked to JFK Assassination
      5. Cover Up of Veteran Suicide Rate
      6. Local police stockpile high-tech, combat-ready gear
      7. Alleged Tulsa killers charged with murder, hate crime
      8. Police take DNA from schoolchildren WITHOUT parental consent in murder case
      9. Professors: Arizona law passes constitutional test
      10. Canadian judge rules SSRI antidepressants like Prozac can cause children to commit murder
      11. Jury convicts Mexican trafficker of agent’s murder
      12. Mexican Police Help Murder Their Own Mayor
        According the Veterans Today:

        “Miltary trucks are arriving at the murder scene in Arizona,  The FBI, ICE, Homeland Security, State and local forces all there for what the news across the nation and the world had wrongly reported as a murder suicide involving a believed one time militant extremist.

        The police press conference today, blaming the incident in domestic violence is a “cop out” as far as we are concerned.  The police say the military has to be there because the “ammunition” stored in the home was too confusing for normal people to deal with, like, perhaps, to “leave there” as they should.

        The chemical drums found may very well be rain water.  After the Gabby Giffords shooting, Gabby and so many others, police statements along with military presence has become something of a signature we have begun to understand, the more departments and agencies, the further from the truth we get.”

        What would be the motive for such a crime? Police are quick to insist it is simply that of a crazed lone-gunman.

        But Ready was campaigning as a democrat for the Sheriff’s Office in Pinal County – a county currently being ravaged by Mexican drug cartels and suffering losses due to the federal government’s Fast and Furious gun distribution operation.

        J.T. Ready had made himself a target from many quarters. His volunteer Minuteman group’s recent seizure of $4.5 million of illegal narcotics made him a target of the Mexican Drug Cartels. A post on Ready’s Facebook page yesterday alluded to just that.

        It seems there were two sides to J.T. Ready – one of a highly articulate, intelligent, principled American citizen who was deeply concerned about our country’s future, and that of a person haunted by what the media portrayed as his dark questionable past.

        JT Ready had become a ‘person of interest’ to many people in recent years.

        Ready’s opponents on issues like immigration reform and the 2nd Amendement would have been enraged by his public statements against Operation Fast and Furious, as well as his recent political relationship with Arizona State Senator Russell Pearce who recently went to the Supreme Court in Washington DC to bat for Arizona in the battle for states’ rights. Last night’s multiple murder in Gilbert, Arizona will only fuel increased speculation – as well as border tension and new attempts to smear fellow SB1070 proponent Russell Pearce by his known political connections to Ready, while also going after the 2nd Amendment.

        Ready also fashioned himself into a public figure as an advocate for the 2nd Amendment, immigration reform, and most notably as sovereign rights of individuals as well as a defender of the constitution. Some would say it was his known attendance at Neo-Nazi Rallies or perhaps that he was mentioned as a possible FBI informant  affiliated with the ‘National Socialist Movement‘ (NSM), a group known to be deeply infiltrated by the FBI.

        Association with the NSM would cause some to speculate that Ready was a federal informant at some point. If Ready was ever a federal informant, recent evidence would suggest that he would  have progressed well beyond this, and had gone independent. But Ready’s own military background along with many level-headed and constitutionally sound statements to support his role as a volunteer leader along Arizona’s hot border – suggest that he was an independent citizen and an outspoken advocate.

        Ready had been closely monitoring the border situation with fellow USBG Rangers since 2009, and according to the USBG  mission statement, had been cooperating with the Department of Homeland Security in their efforts to secure the border.

        In a recent post on his Facebook profile it shows a man saddled with the stance on illegal immigration, with Ready stating: “Volunteer elements that wish to help protect this nation should be organized and be put to use, not turned away like the current administration is notorious for doing.”

        This political position – particularly from someone running for Sheriff in America’s most embattled county, made him a target of the federal government.

        If there was motive to kill J.T. Ready, perhaps it was his role in intercepting drugs from the powerful Sinaloa Drug Cartel.  Perhaps it was his open distaste for the Federal Government and Arizona’s open borders.  Or maybe it was his ambition to become Sheriff – in a border county which is currently the number one theater for drug smuggling and border crime in the United States of America.

        So as tragedies mount and tension rises, one thing is for certain, that the snake is only starting to unravel.

In light of a newly uncovered U.S. Army document that outlines plans for prisoners, including U.S. citizens, to be re-educated in detention camps, it’s worth reminding ourselves of the fact that Barack Obama’s political mentor, Weather Underground terrorist Bill Ayers, once called for precisely the same thing.

According to former FBI agent Larry Grathwohl, who was assigned to infiltrate the Weather Underground’s Central Committee, the organization run by Bill Ayers carried out bombings targeting the Pentagon, the State Department, as well as police stations and federal buildings, in an attempt to cause the collapse of the United States government and open the door for Cuban, North Vietnamese, Chinese and Russian troops to occupy the country.

Grathwohl stated that Ayers and his group planned to deal with Americans who would try to resist this takeover by “establishing re-education centers in the south-west”. Asked what he would do with those who still refused to convert to communism, Ayers said that they would have to be “eliminated,” as in 25 million Americans would be killed in concentration camps.

Grathwohl said the Weathermen told him the camps would be used to “re-educate people into the new way of thinking.”

This provides yet more historical context to underscore the point that using detention centers to “re-educate” prisoners into a new way of political thinking is the hallmark of a tyrannical regime.

The U.S. Army document that we highlighted yesterday targets “political activists” for “indoctrination programs” once they are incarcerated inside the prison camps. The document is a how-to manual on treatment of detainees, including “civilian internees” interned for “security reasons, for protection, or because he or she committed an offense against the detaining power.”

The document makes it clear in numerous instances that the re-education program, designed to “remove antagonistic attitudes” and enforce “understanding and appreciation of U.S. policies and actions,” is not just limited to prisoners in foreign countries like Afghanistan and Iraq.

The rules also apply “within U.S. territory” as part of “civil support operations” in conjunction with FEMA and Homeland Security in the aftermath of “man-made disasters, accidents, terrorist attacks and incidents in the U.S. and its territories.” So long as the President passes an executive order bypassing Posse Comitatus, the manual says the indoctrination program “may be performed as domestic civil support operations.”

 

The fact that Bill Ayers and the Weather Underground also planned for re-education camps to be used to incarcerate American citizens is alarming given President Barack Obama’s relationship with Ayers, who helped launch Obama’s political career.

“In 1995, State Senator Alice Palmer introduced her chosen successor, Barack Obama, to a few of the district’s influential liberals at the home of two well known figures on the local left: William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn,” reported Politico’s Ben Smith.

Maria Warren, an Obama-supporting liberal who attended the Chicago meeting, also confirmed Ayers’ presence and his role in launching Obama’s political dynasty.

“When I first met Barack Obama, he was giving a standard, innocuous little talk in the living room of those two legends-in-their-own-minds, Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn. They were launching him–introducing him to the Hyde Park community as the best thing since sliced bread,” wrote Warren.

According to retired Illinois postman Allen Hulton, Ayers’ parents also bragged about how they paid to put a “foreign student,” almost certainly Obama, through school.

The connection between Ayers’ advocacy for re-education camps, his relationship with Barack Obama, and an Army document which clearly states that such “indoctrination programs” can be used against Americans so long as the President passes an executive order, represents a chilling triumvirate.

 

yellowstone idaho cern-SPACEWAR-LHC=HARRP= sandhook g 10

RNC Preempts Ron Paul Win in Nevada, Threatens to Shut Delegates Down & Ron Paul is Winning Against Mitt Romney in the Primary! .mp4

https://tatoott1009.com/

RNC Preempts Ron Paul Win in Nevada, Threatens to Shut Delegates Down

yellowstone idaho cern-SPACEWAR-LHC=HARRP= sandhook g 10

Ron Paul is Winning Against Mitt Romney in the Primary! .mp4
MoxNews
YouTube
May 2, 2012

Ron Paul has apparently secured a majority of delegates in Iowa, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Washington State and possibly other states, and is on pace to officially “win” those states and do well in others, as the process moves towards the national level. Officially winning just 5 states will mean a formal RNC nomination for Paul.

Ron Paul is Winning Against Mitt Romney in the Primary!

#########################
Ron Paul is Winning Against Mitt Romney in the Primary! .mp4

(Or at least the crowds and delegates numbers suggest as much)

Similar/Related Articles
  1. Ron Paul Wins Majority Of Washington Delegates, Other States Expected To Follow
  2. Will Ron Paul win more delegates this week than Gingrich, Santorum?
  3. Actually, Ron Paul Is Secretly Winning A Lot More Delegates Than You Think
  4. http://www.google.com/trends/?q=Ron+Paul,+Mitt+Romney,+Rick+Santorum,+Newt+Gi…
    http://www.google.com/trends/?q=Ron+Paul,+Mitt+Romney,+Rick+Santorum,+Newt+Gi…

 

RON PAUL             ______________________________________ 1.00

MITT ROMNEY       ____________________ 0.52

RICK SANTORUM   ______________ 0.42

NEWT GINGRICH   __________ 0.34

 

Mitt Romney wins Iowa caucuses
The Boston Globe – Jan 4 2012
Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum deadlock in Iowa
Detroit Free Press – Jan 4 2012
Ron Paul Swanson
Washington Post – Jan 4 2012
Rick Santorum challenges Mitt Romney
The Age – Feb 8 2012
Mitt Romney wins Ohio
Sky News Australia – Mar 7 2012
Rick Santorum Celebrates Super Tuesday Wins
ABCNews – Mar 7 2012
More news results »

 

yellowstone idaho cern-SPACEWAR-LCH sandhook82

Fully Armed U.S. Troops Patrol Minnesota Neighborhood

https://tatoott1009.com/

Fully Armed U.S. Troops Patrol Minnesota Neighborhood

A photo showing fully armed U.S. National Guard troops patrolling a quiet residential street in Crookston, Minnesota has gone viral, once again underscoring concerns that Americans are being conditioned to accept the gradual imposition of martial law.

yellowstone idaho cern-SPACEWAR-LCH sandhook82

Although the photo is undated, Guard troops from the local Crookston Armory routinely take part in off-base exercises which train the local population to accept the sight of armed soldiers patrolling their neighborhoods as normal.

One such exercise in February 2011 dubbed “Urban Operations Training” involved military Humvees and 27 armed soldiers conducting a drill around the Bridge Street area of Crookston.

According to “Maggie,” the woman who took the photograph, when she started taking pictures of the troops one of them told her, “Just training Ma’am. Joining up with another patrol at the rally point.”

When Maggie asked why they were training on the streets of a quiet residential area, a younger soldier responded, “To be honest ma’am, I don’t know.”

Members of the same Guard unit shown on the photograph – Minnesota National Guard, Unit 2-136 CAB / B Company – have been deployed to Iraq where their duties would potentially have included rounding up alleged insurgents and taking them to prison camps, a frightening prospect given that the recently passed National Defense Authorization Act allows for American citizens to be similarly kidnapped and detained without trial.

National Guard troops are routinely involved in ‘urban warfare training’ drills but they usually take place within the confines of military bases. Many fear that the increasing presence of armed soldiers patrolling residential neighborhoods is a precursor to martial law.

Indeed, back in 2008 the Washington Post reported how 20,000 U.S. troops returning from Iraq would be stationed inside America under Northcom for purposes of “domestic security” from September 2011 onwards.

Northcom officials were forced to subsequently issue a denial after the Army Times initially reported that the troops would be used to deal “with civil unrest and crowd control.

The use of U.S. troops in law enforcement duties is a complete violation of the Posse Comitatus Act and the Insurrection Act, which substantially limit the powers of the federal government to use the military for law enforcement unless under precise and extreme circumstances.

Section 1385 of the Posse Comitatus Act states, “Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.”

As Alex Jones exposed back in the late 1990’s, U.S. troops have been training to impose martial law for a considerable amount of time. During numerous urban warfare drills that Jones attended and reported on, troops were trained to raid, arrest and imprison U.S. citizens in detention camps as well as taking over public buildings and running checkpoints. During role playing exercises, actors playing prisoners would scream “I’m an American citizen, I have rights” as they were being dragged away by troops.

The fact that such drills are now set to involve Russian soldiers training on U.S. soil to hunt “terrorists” has also caused consternation.

Federal authorities in the United States have clearly been preparing for domestic civil unrest for a number of years. The Department of Homeland Security recently purchased a staggering 450 million rounds of hollow point bullets as well as bullet-proof checkpoint booths that include ‘stop and go’ lights.

The images below show U.S. troops and National Guard working with local police to incarcerate Americans into internment camps during drills Alex Jones covered in 1999 in Oakland, California.

 

 

yellowstone idaho cern-SPACEWAR-LCH sandhook81

25 Horrible Statistics About The U.S. Economy That Barack Obama Does Not Want You To Know

https://tatoott1009.com/

25 Horrible Statistics About The U.S. Economy That Barack Obama Does Not Want You To Know

yellowstone idaho cern-SPACEWAR-LCH sandhook81

25 Horrible Statistics About The U.S. Economy That Barack Obama Does Not Want You To Know

He’s Made It Worse

Apr 23 2012

The human capacity for self-delusion truly is remarkable.  Most people out there end up believing exactly what they want to believe even when the truth is staring them right in the face.  Take the U.S. economy for example.  Barack Obama wants to believe that his policies have worked and that the U.S. economy is improving.  So that is what he is telling the American people.  The mainstream media wants to believe that Barack Obama is a good president and that his policies make sense and so they are reporting that we are experiencing an economic recovery.  A very large segment of the U.S. population still fully supports Barack Obama and they want to believe that the economy is getting better so they are buying the propaganda that the mainstream media is feeding them.  But is the U.S. economy really improving?  The truth is that it is not.  The rate of employment among working age Americans is exactly where it was two years ago and household incomes have actually gone down while Obama has been president.  Home ownership levels and home prices continue to decline.  Meanwhile, food and gasoline continue to become even more expensive.  The percentage of Americans that are dependent on the government is at an all-time record high and the U.S. national debt has risen by more than 5 trillion dollars under Obama.  We simply have not seen the type of economic recovery that we have seen after every other economic recession since World War II.

The horrible statistics about the U.S. economy that you are about to read are not talked about much by the mainstream media.  They would rather be “positive” and “upbeat” about the direction that things are headed.

But lying to the American people is not going to help them.  If you are speeding in a car toward a 500 foot cliff, you don’t need someone to cheer you on.  Instead, you need someone to slam on the brakes.

The cold, hard reality of the matter is that the U.S. economy is in far worse shape than it was four or five years ago.

We have never come close to recovering from the last recession and another one will be here soon.

The following are 25 horrible statistics about the U.S. economy that Barack Obama does not want you to know….

#1 The percentage of Americans that own homes is dropping rapidly.  According to Gallup, the current level of homeownership in the United States is the lowest that Gallup has ever measured.

#2 Home prices in the U.S. continue to fall like a rock as well.  They have declined for six months in a row and are now down a total of 35 percent from the peak of the housing bubble.  The last time that home prices in the United States were this low was back in 2002.

#3 Last year, an astounding 53 percent of all U.S. college graduates under the age of 25 were either unemployed or underemployed.

#4 Back in 2007, about 10 percent of all unemployed Americans had been out of work for 52 weeks or longer.  Today, that number is above 30 percent.

#5 When Barack Obama first became president, the number of “long-term unemployed workers” in the United States was 2.6 million.  Today, it is 5.3 million.

#6 The average duration of unemployment in the United States is about three times as long as it was back in the year 2000.

#7 Despite what the mainstream media would have us to believe, the truth is that the percentage of working age Americans that are employed is not increasing.  Back in March 2010, 58.5 percent of all working age Americans were employed.  In March 2011, 58.5 percent of all working age Americans were employed. In March 2012, 58.5 percent of all working age Americans were employed.  So how can Barack Obama and the mainstream media claim that the employment situation in the United States is getting better?  The employment rate is still essentially exactly where it was when the last recession supposedly ended.

#8 Back in 1950, more than 80 percent of all men in the United States had jobs.  Today, less than 65 percent of all men in the United States have jobs.

#9 In 1962, 28 percent of all jobs in America were manufacturing jobs.  In 2011, only 9 percent of all jobs in America were manufacturing jobs.

#10 In some areas of Detroit, Michigan you can buy a three bedroom home for just $500.

#11 According to one recent survey, approximately one-third of all Americans are not paying their bills on time at this point.

#12 Since Barack Obama entered the White House, the price of gasoline has risen by more than 100 percent.

#13 The student loan debt bubble continues to expand at a very frightening pace.  Recently it was announced that total student loan debt in the United States has passed the one trillion dollar mark.

#14 Incredibly, one out of every four jobs in the United States pays $10 an hour or less at this point.

#15 Household incomes all over the United States continue to fall.  After adjusting for inflation, median household income in America has declined by 7.8 percent since December 2007.

#16 Over the past several decades, government dependence has risen to unprecedented heights in the United States.  The following is how I described the explosive growth of social welfare benefits in one recent article….

Back in 1960, social welfare benefits made up approximately 10 percent of all salaries and wages.  In the year 2000, social welfare benefits made up approximately 21 percent of all salaries and wages.  Today, social welfare benefits make up approximately 35 percent of all salaries and wages.

#17 In November 2008, 30.8 million Americans were on food stamps.  Today, more than 46 million Americans are on food stamps.

#18 Right now, more than 25 percent of all American children are on food stamps.

#19 According to the U.S. Census Bureau, today 49 percent of all Americans live in a home that receives some form of benefits from the federal government.

#20 Over the next 75 years, Medicare is facing unfunded liabilities of more than 38 trillion dollars.  That comes to $328,404 for each and every household in the United States.

#21 During the first quarter of 2012, U.S. public debt rose by 359.1 billion dollars.  U.S. GDP only rose by 142.4 billion dollars.

#22 At this point, the U.S. national debt is rising by more than 2 million dollars every single minute.

#23 The U.S. national debt has risen by more than 5 trillion dollars since the day that Barack Obama first took office.  In a little more than 3 years Obama has added more to the national debt than the first 41 presidents combined.

#24 The Federal Reserve bought up approximately 61 percent of all government debt issued by the U.S. Treasury Department during 2011.

#25 The Federal Reserve continues to systematically destroy the value of the U.S. dollar.  Since 1970, the U.S. dollar has lost more than 83 percent of its value.

But the horrible economic statistics only tell part of the story.

In communities all over America there is a feeling that something fundamental has changed.  Businesses that have been around for generations are shutting their doors and there is a lot of fear in the air.  The following is a brief excerpt from a recent interview with Richard Yamarone, the senior economist at Bloomberg Brief….

You have to listen to what the small businesses are telling you and right now they are telling you, ‘Hey, I’m the head of a 3rd or 4th generation, 75 or 100 year old business, and I’ve got to shut the doors’ or ‘I’ve got to let people go. And if I’m hiring anybody back, it’s only on a temporary basis.’

Sometimes they do this through a hiring firm so that they can sidestep paying unemployment benefit insurance. So that’s what’s really going on at the grassroots level of the economy. Very, very, grossly different from what you’re seeing in some of these numbers coming out in earnings releases.”

All over the country, millions of hard working Americans are desperately looking for work.  They have been told that “the recession is over”, but they are still finding it incredibly difficult to find anyone that will hire them.  The following example is from a recent CNN article….

Joann Cotton, a 54-year-old Columbus, Mississippi, resident, was one of those faces of poverty we met on the tour. Unemployed for three years, Joann has gone from making “$60,000 a year to less than $15,000 overnight.” Her husband is disabled and dependent on medicines the couple can no longer afford. They rely on food stamps, which, Joann says, “is depressing as hell.”

Receiving government aid, however, has not been as depressing as her job search. Joann says she has applied for at least 300 jobs. Even though she can barely afford gas, she drives to the interviews only to learn that the employers want to hire younger candidates at low wages.

The experiences have taken a toll: “I’ve aged 10 years in the three years that I’ve been looking for a job,” Joann told us. “I want to get a job so I can just relax and exhale … but I can’t. After a while you just give up.”

Meanwhile, Barack Obama and his family continue to live the high life at the expense of the U.S. taxpayer.

Even many Democrats are starting to get very upset about this.  The following is from a recent article by Paul Bedard….

B
lue collar Democratic voters, stuck taking depressing “staycations” because they can’t afford gas and hotels, are resentful of the first family’s 17 lavish vacations around the world and don’t want their tax dollars paying for the Obamas’ holidays, according to a new analysis of swing voters.

It simply is not appropriate for the Obamas to be spending millions upon millions upon millions of U.S. taxpayer dollars on luxury vacations when so many Americans are deeply suffering.

But Barack Obama does not want you to know about any of this stuff.

He just wants you to buy his empty propaganda one more time so that he can continue to occupy the White House for another four years.

####################


53 Percent Of All Young College Graduates In America Are Either Unemployed Or Underemployed

If you are in college right now, you will most likely either be unemployed or working a job that only requires a high school degree when you graduate.  The truth is that the U.S. economy is not coming anywhere close to producing enough jobs for the hordes of new college graduates that are entering the workforce every year.  In 2011, 53 percent of all Americans with a bachelor’s degree under the age of 25 were either unemployed or underemployed.  Millions upon millions of young college graduates feel like the system has totally failed them.  They worked hard in school all their lives, they went into huge amounts of debt in order to get the college education that they were told they “must have” in order to get a good job, but after graduation they found that there were only a handful of good jobs for the huge waves of college graduates that were entering the “real world”.  All over America, college graduates can be found waiting tables, flipping burgers and working behind the register at retail stores.  Unfortunately, the employment picture in America is not going to get significantly better any time soon.

All over the United States, “middle class jobs” are being replaced by “low income jobs” and young college graduates are being hurt by this transition more than almost anyone else.  Massive numbers of young college graduates are now working jobs that do not even require a high school degree.  Some of the statistics about young college graduates are absolutely astounding.  The following is from a recent CNBC article….

In the last year, they were more likely to be employed as waiters, waitresses, bartenders and food-service helpers than as engineers, physicists, chemists and mathematicians combined (100,000 versus 90,000). There were more working in office-related jobs such as receptionist or payroll clerk than in all computer professional jobs (163,000 versus 100,000). More also were employed as cashiers, retail clerks and customer representatives than engineers (125,000 versus 80,000).

Can you imagine working really hard all throughout high school and college and always getting good grades and then ending up as a bartender?

Sadly, many hard working college graduates cannot seem to find a decent job no matter how hard they try.  The following is one example from the CNBC article mentioned above….

“I don’t even know what I’m looking for,” says Michael Bledsoe, who described months of fruitless job searches as he served customers at a Seattle coffeehouse. The 23-year-old graduated in 2010 with a creative writing degree.

Initially hopeful that his college education would create opportunities, Bledsoe languished for three months before finally taking a job as a barista, a position he has held for the last two years. In the beginning he sent three or four resumes day. But, Bledsoe said, employers questioned his lack of experience or the practical worth of his major. Now he sends a resume once every two weeks or so.

Have you ever been there?

Have you ever sent out resumes week after week, month after month, only to get absolutely nowhere?

Many recent college graduates are being advised by “career counselors” that they should go back and “get more education”.

But is that really the answer?  The truth is that there are lots and lots of unemployed and underemployed Americans with advanced degrees too.  For example, a recent Business Insider article profiled a law school graduate named Erin that is actually on food stamps….

She remains on food stamps so her social life suffers. She can’t afford a car, so she has to rely on the bus to get around Austin, Texas, where she lives. And currently unable to pay back her growing pile of law school debt, Gilmer says she wonders if she will ever be able to pay it back.

“That has been really hard for me,” she says. “I have absolutely no credit anymore. I haven’t been able to pay loans. It’s scary, and it’s a hard thing to think you’re a lawyer but you’re impoverished. People don’t understand that most lawyers actually aren’t making the big money.”

But what “more education” will do is that it will get you into even more debt.  Student loan debt can be one of the cruelest forms of debt, because it cannot be discharged in bankruptcy.

As I wrote about a few days ago, total student loan debt in the United States recently surpassed the one trillion dollar mark.  Students keep on racking up student loan debt in the hope that they will find “the American Dream” at the end of the rainbow.

Sadly, many students do everything “right” and still end up in the middle of a nightmare.

But it is not just young college graduates that are suffering in this economy.

As I wrote about a while back, the U.S. economy is not producing enough jobs for anyone at this point.

The mainstream media keeps telling us that unemployment is going down, but the truth is that the percentage of working age Americans that are employed is not increasing.  In March 2010, 58.5 percent of all working age Americans had a job.  In March 2012, 58.5 percent of all working age Americans had a job.

Does that sounds like improvement?

Of course not.

Unlike what we have seen after every other recession in the post-World War II era, the employment to population ratio is not bouncing back, and that is really bad news.

The main reason for this is because of the bad economy, but also it is important to understand that we are transitioning away from an “employment economy”.

Today, most large corporations view employees as very expensive “liabilities”.  The goal for most large corporations is to minimize those “liabilities” as much as possible.  In fact, these days some large corporations lay off huge numbers of workers even while they are making huge profits at the same time.

Once upon a time, Henry Ford made a conscious decision to pay his workers enough money so that they could afford to buy the cars that they were making.

Today, most corporations simply do not care about the living standards of their workers.  They simply want to maximize profits to the fullest extent possible.

Many small businesses would like to hire more workers, but the federal government has made hiring workers so complicated and so expensive that
it has become exceedingly difficult to make a profit on a worker.  Most of the time it is simply easier to try to do more with what you already have.

The number of Americans that can work a job (“just over broke”) and still live “the American Dream” is steadily shrinking.  Increasingly, the financial rewards in our economy are being funneled to the very top of organizations and workers are finding that their living standards continue to slowly go down.

At corporations that belong to the Standard & Poor’s 500 stock index, CEOs earn 380 times what the average worker makes at those companies.  In 1980, CEOs only earned 42 times what the average worker made at those companies.

A fundamental shift is happening in our economy and it is not going to be reversed any time soon.  Workers are not valued at most companies anymore.  No matter how much of yourself you give to your company, when the day comes that you become “disposable”, you will be cast aside as so much rubbish.

That is why I try to encourage people to start their own businesses and to be their own bosses.  There is no job security anymore.  The job that you have today could be gone tomorrow.

Meanwhile, the federal government is actually spending your money to train foreign workers to take our jobs.  The following is from a recent Daily Caller article….

While the president has been urging “insourcing,” the government has been sending money to the Philippines to train foreign workers for jobs in English-speaking call centers.

According to New York Democratic Rep. Tim Bishop and North Carolina Republican Rep. Walter Jones, this is unacceptable and “shocking.”

The pair are calling on the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) to immediately suspend what is known as the Job Enabling English Proficiency (JEEP) program.

Can you believe that?

Over and over again, our politicians talk about the need to keep jobs in the United States and then they go out and do things that have the exact opposite effect.

It is truly maddening.

So what are the hordes of American workers that cannot find jobs supposed to do?

Well, one thing we are definitely seeing is a huge rise in the number of Americans that are dependent on the government.

For example, at the end of the Reagan administration the ratio of workers on Social Security disability to active workers was about 2 percent.

Today, it is over 6 percent.

During the first four months of 2012 alone, 539,000 more Americans were added to the Social Security disability rolls and another 725,000 submitted new applications.

Another federal program that is experiencing explosive growth is food stamps.

Last year, one out of every seven Americans was on food stamps, and the Congressional Budget Office is projecting that the number of people on food stamps will continue to grow through 2014.

It is so sad to see what is happening to America.  Our economy is being dismantled all around us and the future looks incredibly bleak.

Right now there are millions upon millions of Americans that are sitting at home wallowing in despair.  They don’t understand why nobody will hire them and they are rapidly running out of options.

The following is a comment that a reader left on one of my recent articles about the middle class….

I cannot believe my present situation…

I worked hard in school and college so that I could escape the low income uneducated mess I grew up in.

I made all the correct decisions with my career, finances, etc. I cannot figure out how I got to where I am at now.

In late 2008 I was laid off in the IT field. I was a go-getter, and I didn’t let anyone tell me the economy would make it difficult to find a job. I had another within 4 weeks.

Was laid off from that job last year. I qualified for unemployment, but then my employer decides to bring a bunch of lawyers and fight my eligibility. After I won again, they appealed again. I finally couldn’t afford to keep paying attorney fees. I finally lost the appeal. I had to pay all that money back.

I’m still trying to find a job in my field. Being the go-getting I am, I immediately took a job waiting tables which amounted to a 75% pay-cut.

I had saved 6 months of expenses and that is completely dry. I have completely drained my retirement and savings. Still cannot find a livable wage job after almost a decade in my field.

Things are slowly going into default and it feels utterly hopeless and stressful. My pristine credit rating is gone, my savings and everything I worked for is gone. I haven’t missed a payment on my mortgage, but it is coming. I can’t cut anything more than I already have.

I just can’t figure out how this could have happened to me. I played by the rules and made all the right choices. I skipped vacations and time off to prove I was a good worker and had what it took to be a valuable employee.

I really am just at a loss at this point. I’m single and have no family. This is really make-or-break for me. I have no fallback plan. The feeling of failure is just gut-wrenching.

Please say a prayer for that reader and for all of the other hard working Americans out there that are desperate to find a job.

If you are at the end of your rope, please do not give up.  Even in the darkest moments, there is always a way to turn things around if you will just keep on fighting.

Sadly, way too many people are giving up on life because of the economy.  In Europe, economic conditions have deteriorated so badly that there has been a dramatic increase in suicides.  The following is from a recent article in the New York Times….

The economic downturn that has shaken Europe for the last three years has also swept away the foundations of once-sturdy lives, leading to an alarming spike in suicide rates. Especially in the most fragile nations like Greece, Ireland and Italy, small-business owners and entrepreneurs are increasingly taking their own lives in a phenomenon some European newspapers have started calling “suicide by economic crisis.”

When the next major economic downturn happens in the United States, we will probably see a similar thing happen here too.

But people need to realize that our lives are not about how much stuff we own.

Even if every single thing is taken away from you and you are left with nothing that does not mean that your life is over.

Even if you have not been able to find a job for years, that does not mean that you should give up.

In life, everyone gets knocked down.

But unless you are dead, there is always a way to get things turned around in a more positive direction.

One thing that I have learned in life is that you must never, ever, ever, ever give up.

The years ahead are going to be really hard for the global economy, but that doesn’t mean that they have to be horrible years for you.

The years ahead can be the very best years of your entire life, but that will never happen if you decide to simply give up.

#######################

After a bargain? Own a three bedroom home in Detroit for JUST $500…as the city is revealed to have the cheapest housing in the U.S

In cities such as New York and San Francisco $500 might cover your monthly rent whereas in Detroit the same amount can buy you a detached three bedroom house.

New research has revealed the drastic differences in costs of buying property in different cities in the country – and shown that Michigan’s largest city has the most affordable homes by a considerable margin.

Detroit, famed as a one-time industrial city, has the lowest real estate prices per square foot in the U.S while San Francisco has the highest.

asdfGreat value: This 749 Square foot home costs only $500 – and boasts three bedrooms to boot

asdfBargain: This two bedroom, one bathroom home in Detroit is on the market for $500

 

asdfCharming: For only $3,000 this four bedroom, two bathroom Detroit house is yours

In Detroit one square foot of property will set the buyer back by $62.45 whereas in San Francisco the average cost per square foot is $420.99.

 

Struggling for decades Michigan’s largest city was hit hard by the recession which caused housing prices to plummet by 54.9 per cent.

America’s fifth largest city just 50 years ago with 1.85 million people but now Detroit ranks as the eleventh with a population of approximately 700,000 people.

asdfInvestment: This pretty bungalow spread over 692 square foot costs a bargain $2,500

asdfBoarded up: Detroit has the most affordable homes in the country – this three bedroom house is on sale for $3,000

 

asdfFor Sale: This three bedroom detached bungalow in the Motor City will set buyers back $3,000

However, incredibly cheap housing prices could attract people to the Motor City as a study by Realtor.com showed that of 146 cities only Chicago has more searches for property than Detroit, according to Wall Street 24/7.

The median list price for a property in Detroit was $84,900 – $13,000 less than any other city in America.

In its glory days the Michigan city was the centre of America’s booming car industry but has been stuck in decline for decades.

Unsurprisingly, in the cities with lowest costs per square foot, which also include other former industrial cities Toledo and Wichita, residents have lower average incomes.

The two cities with the next most affordable property were Fort Wayne in Indianapolis and Toledo in Ohio.

asdfWhat a steal: $500 will get you this home in Detroit which boasts two bedrooms, one bathroom, a garage and a basement

 

asdfCheap: In Detroit one square foot of property costs $62.45 whereas in San Francisco the average cost per square foot is $420.99 – this home costs $2,000

Property costs in Fort Wayne are the second lowest at $66.03 per square foot while in Toledo, where poverty and unemployment are incredibly high, they are $67.02.

On the other end of the spectrum the least affordable homes are found in San Francisco where the median list price is a staggering $611,700, after increasing by 3.77 per cent between January and February, the data found.

Property is similarly expensive in the Hawaiian capital of Honolulu where the price per square foot is $381.03 and in Washington, D.C where the figure is £372.11.

Last month foreclosures throughout the country fell to their lowest levels in five years however the number of homes that received foreclosure notices for the first time rose by seven per cent from February.

SALES OF NEW HOMES DROPPED TO LOWEST IN MORE THAN A YEAR IN MARCH

Sales of new homes fell in March by the largest amount in more than a year, indicating that the U.S. housing market remains under strain despite some modest signs of improvement.

The Commerce Department said Tuesday that sales dropped 7.1 percent in March to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 328,000 units. That followed a 7.3 percent increase in sales in February. This figu
re was revised up from an initial estimate that February sales had fallen 1.6 percent.

The weakness in March could reflect that a warmer-than-normal winter caused sales that normally occur at the start of the spring sales season in March to occur in February instead.

The median sales price was $234,500 in March, down 1 percent from the February price.

Sales of new homes stand at just about half the roughly 700,000-a-year pace that analysts consider evidence of a healthy market.

The supply of unsold new homes fell to just 144,000 in March – the fewest on records dating to 1963. The supply has been falling over the past two years as builders have cut back on construction.

Michael Gapen, an economist at Barclays Research, said the low inventory level should trigger a moderate pickup in housing construction in coming months and provide some support to the economy.

Last week, the National Association of Realtors reported that sales of previously owned homes fell 2.6 percent in March to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 4.48 million units. For previously owned homes, economists consider a healthy annual sales rate to be roughly 6 million.

The sales declines in March were led by a 27 percent drop in the West. Sales in the Midwest fell 20 percent. New-home sales rose 7.7 percent in the Northeast and 3.1 percent in the South.

A separate report on home prices showed that home prices dropped in February in most major U.S. cities for a sixth straight month. The Standard & Poor’s/Case-Shiller home-price index shows that prices dropped in February from January in 16 of the 20 cities it tracks.

Though new homes represent less than 10 percent of the housing market, they have an outsize impact on the economy. Each home built creates an average of three jobs for a year and generates about $90,000 in tax revenue, according to statistics compiled by the Realtors.

A key reason for weak sales in the new-home market is that builders must compete with foreclosures and short sales. (Short sales occur when lenders allow homes to be sold for less than what’s owed on the mortgage.)

About half of the states reported sharp increases in foreclosure activity in February. The pace of foreclosures is rising now that states have reached settlements with the nation’s five biggest mortgage lenders over foreclosure abuses.

Builders have stopped working on many projects because it’s been hard to get financing and to compete with cheaper resale homes.

 

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2134705/After-bargain-Own-bedroom-home-Detroit-JUST-500–city-revealed-cheapest-housing-U-S.html#ixzz1tWTZRfLu

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf

######################

Average (Mean) Duration of Unemployment (UEMPMEAN)

2012-03: 39.4 Weeks   Last 5 Observations

Monthly, Seasonally Adjusted, Updated: 2012-04-06 8:53 AM CDT

Edit Graph    Print    PDF    Save

Type:
Size:
Range:
Log Scale:
Units:

Notes: Growth Rate Calculations | US recession dates

 

######################

 

#####################

Databases, Tables & Calculators by Subject

Data extracted on: April 30, 2012 (7:10:16 AM)

Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey

 

Series Id:           LNS12300000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (Seas) Employment-Population Ratio
Labor force status:  Employment-population ratio
Type of data:        Percent or rate
Age:                 16 years and overDownload:

YearJanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDecAnnual200262.763.062.862.762.962.762.762.763.062.762.562.4 200362.562.562.462.462.362.362.162.162.062.162.362.2 200462.362.362.262.362.362.462.562.462.362.362.562.4 200562.462.462.462.762.862.762.862.962.862.862.762.8 200662.963.063.163.063.163.163.063.163.163.363.363.4 200763.363.363.363.063.063.062.962.762.962.762.962.7 200862.962.862.762.762.562.462.262.061.961.761.461.0 200960.660.359.959.859.659.459.359.158.758.558.558.2 201058.558.558.558.758.758.558.558.558.558.358.258.3 201158.458.458.558.458.458.258.258.358.458.458.558.5

2012

 

58.5

 

58.6

 

58.5

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

yellowstone idaho cern-SPACEWAR-LCH sandhook80

Obama Exploits Bin Laden Hoax For Election Propaganda

https://tatoott1009.com/

yellowstone idaho cern-SPACEWAR-LCH sandhook80

Barack Obama is desperately milking the one year anniversary of the killing of Osama Bin Laden even though the entire episode was a hoax from start to finish. Check out the plethora of evidence below.

10 Facts That Prove The Bin Laden Fable Is a Contrived Hoax

 

Merely a week after President Obama announced the death of Osama Bin Laden, there is literally a deluge of evidence that clearly indicates the whole episode has been manufactured for political gain and to return Americans to a state of post-9/11 intellectual castration so that they can be easily manipulated in the run up to the 2012 election. Here are ten facts that prove the Bin Laden fable is a contrived hoax….

1) Before last Sunday’s raid, every intelligence analyst, geopolitical commentator or head of state worth their salt was on record as stating that Osama Bin Laden was already dead, and that he probably died many years ago, from veteran CIA officer Robert Baer, to former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, to former FBI head of counterterrorism Dale Watson. In addition, back in 2002 Alex Jones was told directly by two separate high level sources that Bin Laden was already dead and that his death would be announced at the most politically opportune moment. Top US government insider Dr. Steve R. Pieczenik, a man who held numerous different influential positions under five different Presidents, serving as the Deputy Assistant Secretary of State under the Nixon, Ford and Carter, told the Alex Jones Show last week that Bin Laden died of marfan syndrome shortly after he was visited by CIA physicians at the American Hospital in Dubai in July 2001.

2) The official narrative of how the raid unfolded completely collapsed within days of its announcement. First there had been a 40 minute shootout, then there was no shootout and just one man was armed, first Bin Laden was armed then he was not, first Bin Laden used his wife as a human shield and then he did not. First the compound was described as a “$1 million dollar mansion” then it turned out to be a rubbish-strewn dilapidated compound that was worth less than a quarter of that. Almost every single aspect of the official narrative has changed since Obama first described the raid last Sunday as the White House struggles to keep its story straight


3) The alleged body of Bin Laden was hastily dumped in the sea to prevent any proper procedure of identification. The White House claimed this was in accordance with normal Islamic burial rituals, however numerous Muslim scholars all over the globe disputed this claim, pointing out that Muslims can only be buried at sea if they die at sea. While the White House claimed that Bin Laden’s death on May 1st was proven by DNA and facial recognition evidence, such proof was never released for public scrutiny and the Obama administration refused to release photos of Bin Laden’s dead body, suggesting a cover-up.

4) Despite the fact that the White House released “situation room” photos which purported to show Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden and the rest of Obama’s security staff watching the raid which killed Bin Laden live, it was later admitted by CIA director Leon Panetta that Obama could not have seen the raid because the live feed was cut off before the Navy SEALS entered the compound. The photos were described by many as having “historical significance,” forming a “captivating” record of Obama’s greatest success and being the “defining moment” of his Presidency. One image showed Hillary Clinton with her hand over her mouth as if witnessing an anxious or crucial moment in the raid. Media reports at the time claimed that the photos represented the moment when “The leader of the free world saw the terror chief shot in the left eye.” However, the photos were staged as a PR stunt for public consumption, nobody in the photos ever saw Bin Laden killed live, nor did they see the Navy SEALS even enter the compound.

5) As even mainstream journalists began to cast suspicion on the official narrative behind the raid, the media reported that Al-Qaeda itself had confirmed every detail of Obama’s address the the nation. However, the conduit for such a claim was in fact an organization called SITE, which is a notorious Pentagon propaganda front run by the daughter of an Israeli spy that has been caught on numerous occasions releasing fake cartoonish “Al-Qaeda” videos at the most politically expedient times for both the Bush and Obama administrations. The SITE organization is nothing more than a contractor for the U.S. government, receiving some $500,000 a year annually from Uncle Sam, and yet the corporate media instantly swallowed and regurgitated the claim that “Al-Qaeda” had confirmed the official story after SITE directed them to an anonymous posting on an Islamic website.

6) Almost every single neighbor that lived near the alleged Bin Laden compound in Abbottabad that was interviewed by news reporters said with absolute certainty that they had never seen Bin Laden and that they knew of no evidence whatsoever to suggest he lived there. Since the town is a staging ground for the Pakistani military, which has a training facility situated virtually a stone’s throw away from the alleged Bin Laden compound, residents were required to show ID when they moved into the area. Pakistani troops and anti-terror police in the town refused to confirm that Bin Laden had lived in the house. Barack Obama himself admitted to 60 Minutes that the White House was only 55/45 sure that Osama lived there before the raid and this uncertainty prompted concerns that the US Navy SEALS sent in could have targeted a “prince from Dubai” or some other individual that was not Bin Laden.

7) The videos released by the White House this past weekend which purport to show Osama Bin Laden making Al-Qaeda tapes in October-November 2010 are almost identical to footage first released by Pentagon front group SITE nearly four years ago. Remember, a May 2010 Washington Post story reported how the CIA had admitted to making fake Bin Laden videos. Despite the White House’s insistence that the footage of Bin Laden is recent, he looks younger and healthier than tapes released almost a decade ago, having apparently dyed his beard black. A separate video that purports to show Bin Laden in his compound flicking through satellite TV channels depicts a much older looking man with a gray beard. Analysts have pointed out that the man has different shaped ears to real Osama pictures from back in 2001. A doctor has also pointed out the fact that the man in the tapes released Saturday has no problem moving his left arm, whereas video from 2001 clearly illustrates how Bin Laden was unable to move his left upper extremity because of a permanent injury probably related to damage to the peripheral nerves. Why the cameraman would film the back of Bin Laden’s head as he watches television is also dubious. Residents in the town of Abbottabad claim the man in the “television” video is not Osama, with one individual claiming that the man labeled by the White House as being Bin Laden is actually his neighbor, a man named Akhbar Han.

8: Despite the fact that numerous neo-cons came out on the days after the alleged raid to erroneously assert that torturing terror suspects at Guantanamo Bay led to the discovery of Bin Laden, Osama himself, the supposed world’s most wanted terrorist and a treasure trove of terror information, despite the fact that he was unarmed, was not taken in for questioning, he was instantly shot in the head according to the official narrative.

9) The US government has been caught on several occasions within the past decade staging military operations for the purposes of generating contrived, pro-war sentiment amongst the American public. Both the “rescue” of Jessica Lynch and the death of Pat Tillman were complete fables, scripted and staged at complete odds with the truth and unleashed on Americans as part of a psychological warfare offensive to elicit support for the war on terror, almost identical to what we’re seeing now with the Bin Laden sideshow. Given the fact that the US government has been caught red-handed scripting tales of pure fiction in order to justify the war on terror, notably in the cases of Jessica Lynch and Pat Tillman, why on earth should we believe them now?

10) Despite the fact that Obama announced last Sunday on live television that the world was now “safer” because Bin Laden was dead, his administration, with the aid of the fearmongering mass media, instantly seized upon the situation to terrify Americans into being afraid of imminent “reprisal” terror attacks inside the United States, later claiming that Bin Laden had formulated an “aspirational rather than operational” plan to derail US trains that travel over 500mph, although no trains in the US can actually travel at such speeds. This led “terror experts” to salivate over how TSA agents were now needed in shopping malls to stick their hands down Americans’ pants, while New York Senator Chuckie Schumer called for the no fly list to be expanded to trains and subways. Obama hurried to ground zero for a photo op as he desperately tried to use the Bin Laden hoax to whip up phony patriotism as a means of boosting his flagging poll numbers. Others, like Democrat Bill Richardson, exploited the situation to try and push through policies that had no connection to Bin Laden or terrorism at all, like cap and trade. The haste with which the whole Bin Laden fable was exploited for political points scoring and as a psychological ploy to return Americans to a post-9/11 state of intellectual castration was painfully transparent, clearly suggesting that the entire farce was planned well in advance to achieve precisely those goals in the run up to 2012.

Similar/Related Articles

 

  1. Osama bin Laden dead: Blackout during raid on bin Laden compound
  2. 10 Facts That Prove The Bin Laden Fable Is a Contrived Hoax
  3. Obama Plays Bin Laden Card In Re-election Effort
  4. Hoax: White House Claims 4-Year-Old Bin Laden Video Is New Footage
  5. Obama Shamefully Exploits Bin Laden Fairytale In Transparent PR Stunt
  6. Jesse Ventura Questions Obama’s Narrative Of Bin Laden Raid
  7. Narrative Behind Bin Laden Fable Flip-Flops AGAIN
  8. Purported “Bin Laden Raid Kill Photos Released”
  9. Obama was playing golf until 20 minutes before Navy SEALs began mission to take out Bin Laden
  10. Propaganda Film: Bill Clinton Praises Obama’s Unsubstantiated Osama Kill< /a>
  11. More Propaganda: Was Bin Laden betrayed by his right-hand man?
  12. Exclusive: ‘Bin Laden Dead’ Hoax Exposed

     

    House Republicans investigating the Fast and Furious scandal plan to pursue a contempt citation against Attorney General Eric Holder, senior congressional aides told CBS News.

    The resolution will accuse Holder and his Justice Department of obstructing the congressional probe into the allegations that the government let thousands of weapons fall into the hands of Mexican drug cartels.

    The citation would attempt to force Holder to turn over tens of thousands of pages of documents related to the probe, which has entered its second year.

    Read full article

     

    Fast And Furious: 22 Shocking Facts About The Scandal That Could Bring Down The Obama Administration

    The American Dream
    Wednesday, October 5, 2011

    Could Fast and Furious be the scandal that brings down the Obama administration? With the full knowledge of the Department of Justice, ATF agents facilitated the sale of thousands of guns to Mexican drug cartels and dropped all surveillance of those weapons once they crossed the border.

    #1 During Operation Fast and Furious, ATF agents purposely allowed thousands of guns to be sold to individuals that they believed would get them into the hands of Mexican drug cartels.

    #2 ATF agents were specifically ordered not to intercept the guns before they crossed the border.

    #3 Operation Fast and Furious remained a secret until the murder of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry last December.

    #4 Many ATF agents were becoming extremely frustrated when they were ordered to cut off surveillance on the weapons that were being sold

    #5 It appears that Operation Fast and Furious began some time around September 2009.

    #6 In some gun stores, cameras were set up so that top ATF officials could actually watch these transactions take place.

    #7 In some cases ATF agents were actually the ones buying the guns and getting them into the hands of Mexican drug cartels.

    #8 Fast and Furious weapons have “turned up at dozens of additional Mexican crime scenes, with an unconfirmed toll of at least 150 people killed or wounded.”

    #9 Mexican authorities were never informed.

    #11 U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder has been withholding key documentsabout Fast and Furious from Congress and has been consistently stonewalling U.S. Representative Darrell Issa, U.S. Senator Chuck Grassley and other members of Congress that have attempted to look into this matter.

    #12 The acting director of the ATF, Kenneth Melson, had been cooperating with the investigation. At the end of August he was suddenly transferred to the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Policy.

    #13 Several other key officials that were heavily involved in Operation Fast and Furious actually got promoted.

    #14 On May 3rd, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder testified under oath in front of the House Judiciary Committee on Operation Fast and Furious. During that testimony, Holder made the following statement….

    “I probably heard about Fast and Furious for the first time over the last few weeks.”

    #15 Since that time, a large amount of evidence has come out that Holder was not telling the truth.

    #16 Holder now claims that he simply misunderstood the question. He now says that he had heard of Operation Fast and Furious previously but that he was not aware of the specific details.

    #17 Emails exchanged between two Department of Justice officials last October make it abundantly clear that high level officials at the DOJ were very aware of what was going on…

    #18 House Republicans are now asking for a special prosecutor to be appointed to investigate whether or not U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder lied to Congress during his recent testimony in front of the House Judiciary Committee on Operation Fast and Furious.

    #19 U.S. Representative Darrell Issa believes that those involved in the Fast and Furious gun trafficking operation may have violated international arms trafficking agreements and could potentially face very serious criminal charges.

    #20 U.S. Senator Chuck Grassley is absolutely convinced that a major coverup is going on…

    #21 Did Barack Obama ever know about Operation Fast and Furious? He says that he did not authorize the program.

    #22 CBS News investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson claimed on the Laura Ingraham show the other day that officials in the Obama administration were literally screaming and yelling at her for aggressively investigating the Fast and Furious scandal….

     

    FLASHBACK: Holder may be holding on to private emails about Fast and Furious

    Matthew Boyle
    The Daily Caller
    Monday, December 12, 2011

    A largely overlooked exchange from Thursday’s House Judiciary Committee hearing includes what appears to be an admission from Attorney General Eric Holder that emails to and from him about Operation Fast and Furious may exist, and that he’s refusing to provide them to Congress. >>>Read article

     

    FLASHBACK: Justice Dept. Admits F&F Docs. Inaccurate; Issa: Holder Should Reform or Quit

    Pete Yost
    Associated Press
    December 3, 2011

    WASHINGTON (AP) […] In a letter last February to Charles Grassley, the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, the Justice Department said that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms had not sanctioned the sale of assault weapons to a straw purchaser and that the agency makes every effort to intercept weapons that have been purchased illegally. In Operation Fast and Furious, both statements turned out to be incorrect. >>>Read article

     

    FLASHBACK: ATF Fast and Furious: Attorney General Eric Holder was briefed in July 2010

    Sharyl Attkisson
    CBS News
    October 4, 2011

    WASHINGTON – New documents obtained by CBS News show Attorney General Eric Holder was sent briefings on the controversial Fast and Furious operation as far back as July 2010. That directly contradicts his statement to Congress.

    On May 3, 2011, Holder told a Judiciary Committee hearing, “I’m not sure of the exact date, but I probably heard about Fast and Furious for the first time over the last few weeks.”

     

    Napolitano Knew About Fast and Furious In 2009

    DHS chief tells House committee she had nothing to do with gun running scandal, when she helped launch precursor to the program in 2009

    Paul Joseph Watson
    Infowars.com
    Thursday, October 27, 2011

    Despite telling a House Judiciary Committee yesterday that she only learned of operation Fast and Furious in December last year when the controversy went public, Homeland Security chief Janet Napolitano
    actually helped launch the previous incarnation of the program, Project Gunrunner, at a White House press conference in March 2009.

    Similar/Related Articles
    1. Holder may be holding on to private emails about Fast and Furious
    2. Eric Holder to testify on Fast and Furious
    3. House Committee to Subpoena Holder in ‘Fast and Furious’ Probe
    4. Congressman says unlikely Holder did not know about Operation Fast and Furious
    5. ATF Fast and Furious: Attorney General Eric Holder was briefed in July 2010
    6. Obama Spoke About “Fast & Furious” Before Holder Claimed He Knew
    7. ATF Officials Reassigned as Fast and Furious Continues to Derail
    8. Justice Dept. Admits F&F Docs. Inaccurate; Issa: Holder Should Reform or Quit
    9. Issa Acknowledges Gun Probes ‘Similar’ to ‘Fast and Furious’ Under Bush
    10. Napolitano Knew About Fast and Furious In 2009
    11. ATF Florida Gun Probe Earns Congressional Scrutiny in Wake of ‘Fast and Furious’
    12. Sheriff: Fast and Furious Bigger Scandal Than Watergate
yellowstone idaho cern-SPACEWAR-LCH sandhook79

House Passes CISPA: Red Alert! CISPA Passes with Fourth Amendment Busting Provisions

https://tatoott1009.com/
yellowstone idaho cern-SPACEWAR-LCH sandhook79

Speaker Boehner said that the White House was in ‘a camp all by themselves.’ | POLITICO Staff

By KEITH PERINE and JENNIFER MARTINEZ | 4/26/12 7:17 PM EDT Updated: 4/26/12 8:35 PM EDT

The House passed the controversial CISPA cybersecurity bill on Thursday, defying a White House veto threat and throwing the issue squarely into the Senate’s lap.

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) said the bill was “needed to prepare for countries like Iran and North Korea so that they don’t do something catastrophic to our networks here in America.”

Continue Reading

Text Size

The final tally was 248-168, enough to pass the measure but not enough to override the threatened veto. Forty-two Democrats broke with the White House to vote for the bill, and 28 Republicans voted against it.

The administration and Democratic critics opposed the bill because of privacy and civil liberties concerns. The other main sticking point was that, unlike a Senate bill by Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), CISPA would not mandate new security requirements for a critical infrastructure network.

Although those disagreements still exist, House Republicans have now jumped ahead of the Senate in a race to avoid the political fallout in the event of a major cyberattack.

At least some of CISPA’s Democratic supporters weren’t happy with their colleagues’ opposition to the bill, nor with the White House.

After the White House issued the veto threat Wednesday, Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger, Rogers’s chief Democratic ally, launched an all-out lobbying effort to persuade his fellow Democrats to back the bill.

“We worked it. We worked it hard, we contacted people personally. Many people I talked to just on the floor,” Ruppersberger of Maryland said after the bill passed. “This [issue] is very complicated, a lot of people didn’t understand it.” He said that, as of Thursday morning, he didn’t know how much Democratic support there was for the bill.

“Yesterday was a tough day for me with the White House,” Ruppersberger said.

Rep. Jim Langevin (D-R.I.) a CISPA co-sponsor, echoed Ruppersberger.

“It was disappointing, I think it could have been handled differently,” Langevin said of the White House move. “To do it at this stage, I don’t think it was very helpful to get an information-sharing bill through.”

Langevin and other supportive Democrats say CISPA is needed to counter the possibility of a major cyberattack.

“This is not a perfect bill, but the threat is great,” Ruppersberger said on the House floor on Thursday.

Speaker John Boehner said Thursday that the White House was in “a camp all by themselves.” Nevertheless, most Democrats voted against the bill.

“CISPA would trample the privacy and consumer rights of our citizens while leaving our critical infrastructure vulnerable,” an administration official said Thursday in response to Boehner. “We need Congress to address this critical national and economic security challenge while respecting the values of freedom, privacy, openness and innovation so fundamental to our nation.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0412/75670.html#ixzz1tCtgPDTv

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@





CISPA Passes with Fourth Amendment Busting Provisions

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
April 26, 2012

Sudden action on CISPA today signals that the House was instructed to pass the legislation despite overwhelming opposition. It was rushed to the floor a day early and quickly brought to a vote with additional amendments.

Alex Jones reports on the passage of CISPA. As of this writing, the corporate media has not bothered to post a video.

“Pushing the bill through is bad enough, but what’s worse are the amendments that Rep. Ben Quayle (R – AZ) managed to get added. These amendments make CISPA infinitely worse than it already was,” writes Game Politics.

The amendments converted the supposed “cybersecurity” bill into an outright Big Brother surveillance tool that completely nullifies Fourth Amendment protection online.

From Techdirt:

Previously, CISPA allowed the government to use information for “cybersecurity” or “national security” purposes. Those purposes have not been limited or removed. Instead, three more valid uses have been added: investigation and prosecution of cybersecurity crime, protection of individuals, and protection of children. Cybersecurity crime is defined as any crime involving network disruption or hacking, plus any violation of the CFAA.

Basically this means CISPA can no longer be called a cybersecurity bill at all. The government would be able to search information it collects under CISPA for the purposes of investigating American citizens with complete immunity from all privacy protections as long as they can claim someone committed a “cybersecurity crime”. Basically it says the 4th Amendment does not apply online, at all. Moreover, the government could do whatever it wants with the data as long as it can claim that someone was in danger of bodily harm, or that children were somehow threatened—again, notwithstanding absolutely any other law that would normally limit the government’s power.

Dirty tricks were used to pass CISPA. The legislation allows the national security state to circumvent the Constitution and allow carte blanche surveillance of the internet – from computer networks to private computers and devices to the emerging “internet of things.” Passage of CISPA is a milestone for the high-tech surveillance police state now going in place.

The traitors in Congress threw up a wilted fig leaf to cover their posteriors. House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) said the bill was “needed to prepare for countries like Iran and North Korea so that they don’t do something catastrophic to our networks here in America,” Politico reports, while Speaker of the House John Boehner said the legislation will protect the economy and create jobs.

Rogers’ transparent excuse was is little more than a sick joke considering the fact the U.S. and Israel unleashed the Stuxnet virus on Iran’s computer network. North Korea is a convenient culprit and its ability to attack the United States is seriously in question, especially after another failure to put a satellite in orbit, something the former Soviet Union and the United States did over half a century ago.

Following the defeat of SOPA and PIPA earlier this year, Congress was told to sell CISPA as a bulwark against terrorism. Obama has promised to veto the bill but this remains to be seen and is likely yet another trick.

In December at the last moment Obama signed the NDAA after he said he would veto it. No doubt he will perform the same parlor trick with CISPA.

Call your representatives now and strongly voice your condemnation. Also call your senator and warn him or her that there will be serious repercussions if they vote this monstrosity into law.

  1. The only way to defend our rights is by exercising them and that’s exactly what Amanda Liberty is doing. The 20 year old from Florida displays her affection for the 2nd Amendment, heavy artillery, and ammunition in her video submission for the Infowars reporter contest. Don’t be fooled by her youthful appearance! In the video she states, “I may only be 20 years old, but I can see what’s going on in our country.”

    With the help of her producer Craig Boileau, she composed a video that positively sent shock waves throughout the Infowars compound. It has since been featured in opening segments of the Infowars Nightly News, as well as Alex’s nationally syndicated talk show, broadcast visually through Prisonplanet.tv.

    It’s evident Amanda sees through the lies fed to us by our government and mainstream media with statements like, “You cannot get the truth from typical TV news. They are lying to us,” and “There are precious few sources for current news that isn’t propaganda.”

    Seen handling fully automatic firearms, she demonstrates she’s definitely not afraid to take matters into her own hands: “I have one of these because the government won’t and can’t protect you.” She also expresses her desire to seek the truth and her admiration of Alex and the information he puts forth stating, “Alex Jones is someone who we the people can trust…He always tells the truth.”

    It’s people like Amanda who help keep our 2nd Amendment rights intact. The phrase “use it or lose it” applies; get to your local sporting goods or gun show and purchase arms before your right gets revoked. Like the Granny who thwarted 2 would-be robbers with her own gun earlier this week, people need to stop being afraid of firearms and start learning that they are vital to ensure our personal security.

    George Washington’s infamous quote on bearing arms “bears” repeating: “Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people’s liberty teeth…”

    Amanda eloquently concludes,“If you don’t have one of these, all you can do is throw rocks.” Undoubtedly she would make our nation’s Founding Fathers extremely happy.

yellowstone idaho cern-SPACEWAR-LCH sandhook78

2 Years After the BP Oil Spill, Is the Gulf Ecosystem Collapsing?

https://tatoott1009.com/
2 Years After the BP Oil Spill, Is the Gulf Ecosystem Collapsing?

 

The BP oil spill started on April 20, 2010. We’ve previously warned that the BP oil spill could severely damage the Gulf ecosystem.

Since then, there are numerous signs that the worst-case scenario may be playing out:

– New York Times: “Gulf Dolphins Exposed to Oil Are Seriously Ill, Agency Says

– MSNBC: Gulf shrimp scarce this season (and see the Herald Tribune‘s report)

– Mother Jones: Eyeless shrimp are being found all over the Gulf

– NYT: Oil Spill Affected Gulf Fish’s Cell Function, Study Finds

yellowstone idaho cern-SPACEWAR-LCH sandhook78





– CBS:Expert: BP spill likely cause of sick Gulf fish (and see the Press Register’s report)

– “Study confirms oil from Deepwater spill entered food chain|

-Pensacola News Journal: “Sick fish” archive

– Agence France Presse: Mystery illnesses plague Louisiana oil spill crews

– MSNBC: Sea turtle deaths up along Gulf, joining dolphin trend

– MSNBC:Exclusive: Submarine Dive Finds Oil, Dead Sea Life at Bottom of Gulf of Mexico

– AP: BP oil spill the culprit for slow death of deep-sea coral, scientists say (and see the Guardian and AFP‘s write ups)

– A recent report also notes that there are flesh-eating bacteria in tar balls of BP oil washing up on Gulf beaches

– And all of that lovely Corexit dispersant sprayed on water, land and air? It inhibits the ability of microbes to break down oil, and allows oil and other chemicals to be speed past the normal barriers of human skin. Background here. NYT: Impact of Gulf Spill’s Underwater Dispersants Is Examined Speaking on the chemical ingredients of the dispersants used, “The report finds that “Of the 57 ingredients: 5 chemicals are associated with cancer; 33 are associated with skin irritation from rashes to burns; 33 are linked to eye irritation; 11 are or are suspected of being potential respiratory toxins or irritants; 10 are suspected kidney toxins; 8 are suspected or known to be toxic to aquatic organisms; and 5 are suspected to have a moderate acute toxicity to fish.”

If you still don’t have a sense of the devastation to the Gulf, American reporter Dahr Jamail lays it out pretty clearly:

“The fishermen have never seen anything like this,” Dr Jim Cowan told Al Jazeera. “And in my 20 years working on red snapper, looking at somewhere between 20 and 30,000 fish, I’ve never seen anything like this either.”

Dr Cowan, with Louisiana State University’s Department of Oceanography and Coastal Sciences started hearing about fish with sores and lesions from fishermen in November 2010.

Cowan’s findings replicate those of others living along vast areas of the Gulf

Coast that have been impacted by BP’s oil and dispersants.

Gulf of Mexico fishermen, scientists and seafood processors have told Al Jazeera they are finding disturbing numbers of mutated shrimp, crab and fish that they believe are deformed by chemicals released during BP’s 2010 oil disaster.

Along with collapsing fisheries, signs of malignant impact on the regional ecosystem are ominous: horribly mutated shrimp, fish with oozing sores, underdeveloped blue crabs lacking claws, eyeless crabs and shrimp – and interviewees’ fingers point towards BP’s oil pollution disaster as being the cause.

Eyeless shrimp

Tracy Kuhns and her husband Mike Roberts, commercial fishers from Barataria, Louisiana, are finding eyeless shrimp.

“At the height of the last white shrimp season, in September, one of our friends caught 400 pounds of these,” Kuhns told Al Jazeera while showing a sample of the eyeless shrimp.

According to Kuhns, at least 50 per cent of the shrimp caught in that period in Barataria Bay, a popular shrimping area that was heavily impacted by BP’s oil and dispersants, were eyeless. Kuhns added: “Disturbingly, not only do the shrimp lack eyes, they even lack eye sockets.”

Eyeless shrimp, from a catch of 400 pounds of eyeless shrimp, said to be caught September 22, 2011, in Barataria Bay, Louisiana [Erika Blumenfeld/Al Jazeera]

“Some shrimpers are catching these out in the open Gulf [of Mexico],” she added, “They are also catching them in Alabama and Mississippi. We are also finding eyeless crabs, crabs with their shells soft instead of hard, full grown crabs that are one-fifth their normal size, clawless crabs, and crabs with shells that don’t have their usual spikes … they look like they’ve been burned off by chemicals.”

On April 20, 2010, BP’s Deepwater Horizon oilrig exploded, and began the release of at least 4.9 million barrels of oil. BP then used at least 1.9 million gallons of toxic Corexit dispersants to sink the oil.

Keath Ladner, a third generation seafood processor in Hancock County, Mississippi, is also disturbed by what he is seeing.

“I’ve seen the brown shrimp catch drop by two-thirds, and so far the white shrimp have been wiped out,” Ladner told Al Jazeera. “The shrimp are immune compromised. We are finding shrimp with tumors on their heads, and are seeing this everyday.”

While on a shrimp boat in Mobile Bay with Sidney Schwartz, the fourth-generation fisherman said that he had seen shrimp with defects on their gills, and “their shells missing around their gills and head”.

“We’ve fished here all our lives and have never seen anything like this,” he added.

Ladner has also seen crates of blue crabs, all of which were lacking at least one of their claws.

Darla Rooks, a lifelong fisherperson from Port Sulfur, Louisiana, told Al Jazeera she is finding crabs “with holes in their shells, shells with all the points burned off so all the spikes on their shells and claws are gone, misshapen shells, and crabs that are dying from within … they are still alive, but you open them up and they smell like they’ve been dead for a week”.

Rooks is also finding eyeless shrimp, shrimp with abnormal growths, female shrimp with their babies still attached to them, and shrimp with oiled gills.

“We also seeing eyeless fish, and fish lacking even eye-sockets, and fish with lesions, fish without covers over
their gills, and others with large pink masses hanging off their eyes and gills.”

Rooks, who grew up fishing with her parents, said she had never seen such things in these waters, and her seafood catch last year was “ten per cent what it normally is”.

“I’ve never seen this,” he said, a statement Al Jazeera heard from every scientist, fisherman, and seafood processor we spoke with about the seafood deformities.

Given that the Gulf of Mexico provides more than 40 per cent of all the seafood caught in the continental US, this phenomenon does not bode well for the region, or the country.

***

“The dispersants used in BP’s draconian experiment contain solvents, such as petroleum distillates and 2-butoxyethanol. Solvents dissolve oil, grease, and rubber,” Dr Riki Ott, a toxicologist, marine biologist and Exxon Valdez survivor told Al Jazeera. “It should be no surprise that solvents are also notoriously toxic to people, something the medical community has long known”.

The dispersants are known to be mutagenic, a disturbing fact that could be evidenced in the seafood deformities. Shrimp, for example, have a life-cycle short enough that two to three generations have existed since BP’s disaster began, giving the chemicals time to enter the genome.

Pathways of exposure to the dispersants are inhalation, ingestion, skin, and eye contact. Health impacts can include headaches, vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal pains, chest pains, respiratory system damage, skin sensitisation, hypertension, central nervous system depression, neurotoxic effects, cardiac arrhythmia and cardiovascular damage. They are also teratogenic – able to disturb the growth and development of an embryo or fetus – and carcinogenic.

Cowan believes chemicals named polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), released from BP’s submerged oil, are likely to blame for what he is finding, due to the fact that the fish with lesions he is finding are from “a wide spatial distribution that is spatially coordinated with oil from the Deepwater Horizon, both surface oil and subsurface oil. A lot of the oil that impacted Louisiana was also in subsurface plumes, and we think there is a lot of it remaining on the seafloor”.

Marine scientist Samantha Joye of the University of Georgia published results of her submarine dives around the source area of BP’s oil disaster in the Nature Geoscience journal.

Her evidence showed massive swathes of oil covering the seafloor, including photos of oil-covered bottom dwelling sea creatures.

While showing slides at an American Association for the Advancement of Science annual conference in Washington, Joye said: “This is Macondo oil on the bottom. These are dead organisms because of oil being deposited on their heads.”

Dr Wilma Subra, a chemist and Macarthur Fellow, has conducted tests on seafood and sediment samples along the Gulf for chemicals present in BP’s crude oil and toxic dispersants.

“Tests have shown significant levels of oil pollution in oysters and crabs along the Louisiana coastline,” Subra told Al Jazeera. “We have also found high levels of hydrocarbons in the soil and vegetation.”

According to the US Environmental Protection Agency, PAHs “are a group of semi-volatile organic compounds that are present in crude oil that has spent time in the ocean and eventually reaches shore, and can be formed when oil is burned”.

“The fish are being exposed to PAHs, and I was able to find several references that list the same symptoms in fish after the Exxon Valdez spill, as well as other lab experiments,” explained Cowan. “There was also a paper published by some LSU scientists that PAH exposure has effects on the genome.”

The University of South Florida released the results of a survey whose findings corresponded with Cowan’s: a two to five per cent infection rate in the same oil impact areas, and not just with red snapper, but with more than 20 species of fish with lesions. In many locations, 20 per cent of the fish had lesions, and later sampling expeditions found areas where, alarmingly, 50 per cent of the fish had them.

“I asked a NOAA [National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration] sampler what percentage of fish they find with sores prior to 2010, and it’s one tenth of one percent,” Cowan said. “Which is what we found prior to 2010 as well. But nothing like we’ve seen with these secondary infections and at this high of rate since the spill.”

“What we think is that it’s attributable to chronic exposure to PAHs released in the process of weathering of oil on the seafloor,” Cowan said. “There’s no other thing we can use to explain this phenomenon. We’ve never seen anything like this before.”

***

Crustacean biologist Darryl Felder, in the Department of Biology with the University of Louisiana at Lafayette is in a unique position.

Felder has been monitoring the vicinity of BP’s blowout Macondo well both before and after the oil disaster began, because, as he told Al Jazeera, “the National Science Foundation was interested in these areas that are vulnerable due to all the drilling”.

“So we have before and after samples to compare to,” he added. “We have found seafood with lesions, missing appendages, and other abnormalities.”

Felder also has samples of inshore crabs with lesions. “Right here in Grand Isle we see lesions that are eroding down through their shell. We just got these samples last Thursday and are studying them now, because we have no idea what else to link this to as far as a natural event.”

According to Felder, there is an even higher incidence of shell disease with crabs in deeper waters.

“My fear is that these prior incidents of lesions might be traceable to microbes, and my questions are, did we alter microbial populations in the vicinity of the well by introducing this massive amount of petroleum and in so doing cause microbes to attack things other than oil?”

One hypothesis he has is that the waxy coatings around crab shells are being impaired by anthropogenic chemicals or microbes resulting from such chemicals.

“You create a site where a lesion can occur, and microbes attack. We see them with big black lesions, around where their appendages fall off, and all that is left is a big black ring.”

Felder added that his team is continuing to document the incidents: “And from what we can tell, there is a far higher incidence we’re finding after the spill.”

“We are also seeing much lower diversity of crustaceans,” he said. “We don’t have the same number of species as we did before [the spill].”

***

Felder is also finding “odd staining” of animals that burrow into the mud that cause stain rings, and said: “It is consistently mineral deposits, possibly from microbial populations in [overly] high concentrations.”

***

Dr Andrew Whitehead, an associate professor of biology at Louisiana State University, co-authored the report Genomic and physiological footprint of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill on resident marsh fishes that was published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences in October 2011.

Whitehead’s work is of critical importance, as it shows a direct link between BP’s oil and the negative impacts on the Gulf’s food web evidenced by studies on killifish before, during and after the oil disaster.

“What we found is a very clear, genome-wide signal, a very clear signal of exposure to the toxic components of oil that coincided with the timing and the locations of the oil,” Whitehead told Al Jazeera during an interview in his lab.

According to Whitehead, the killifish is an important indicator species because they are the most abundant fish in the marshes, and are known to be the most important forage animal in their communities.

“That means that most of the large fish that we like to eat and that these are important fisheries for, actually feed on the killifish,” h
e explained. “So if there were to be a big impact on those animals, then there would probably be a cascading effect throughout the food web. I can’t think of a worse animal to knock out of the food chain than the killifish.”

But we may well be witnessing the beginnings of this worst-case scenario.

Whitehead is predicting that there could be reproductive impacts on the fish, and since the killifish is a “keystone” species in the food web of the marsh, “Impacts on those species are more than likely going to propagate out and effect other species. What this shows is a very direct link from exposure to DWH oil and a clear biological effect. And a clear biological effect that could translate to population level long-term consequences.”

***

Ed Cake, a biological oceanographer, as well as a marine and oyster biologist, has “great concern” about the hundreds of dolphin deaths he has seen in the region since BP’s disaster began, which he feels are likely directly related to the BP oil disaster.

“Adult dolphins’ systems are picking up whatever is in the system out there, and we know the oil is out there and working its way up the food chain through the food web – and dolphins are at the top of that food chain.”

Cake explained: “The chemicals then move into their lipids, fat, and then when they are pregnant, their young rely on this fat, and so it’s no wonder dolphins are having developmental issues and still births.”

Cake, who lives in Mississippi, added: “It has been more than 33 years since the 1979 Ixtoc-1 oil disaster in Mexico’s Bay of Campeche, and the oysters, clams, and mangrove forests have still not recovered in their oiled habitats in seaside estuaries of the Yucatan Peninsula. It has been 23 years since the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil disaster in Alaska, and the herring fishery that failed in the wake of that disaster has still not returned.”

Cake believes we are still in the short-term impact stage of BP’s oil disaster.

“I will not be alive to see the Gulf of Mexico recover,” said Cake, who is 72 years old. “Without funding and serious commitment, these things will not come back to pre-April 2010 levels for decades.”

***

“We’re continuing to pull up oil in our nets,” Rooks said. “Think about losing everything that makes you happy, because that is exactly what happens when someone spills oil and sprays dispersants on it. People who live here know better than to swim in or eat what comes out of our waters.”

Khuns and her husband told Al Jazeera that fishermen continue to regularly find tar balls in their crab traps, and hundreds of pounds of tar balls continue to be found on beaches across the region on a daily basis.

Meanwhile Cowan continues his work, and remains concerned about what he is finding.

“We’ve also seen a decrease in biodiversity in fisheries in certain areas. We believe we are now seeing another outbreak of incidence increasing, and this makes sense, since waters are starting to warm again, so bacterial infections are really starting to take off again. We think this is a problem that will persist for as long as the oil is stored on the seafloor.”

Did the BP Spill Ever Really Stop?

 

We’ve repeatedly documented that BP’s gulf Mocando well is still leaking.

Stuart Smith – a successful trial lawyer who won a billion dollar verdict against Exxon Mobil – noted recently:

New sampling data from the nonprofit Louisiana Environmental Action Network (LEAN) provide confirmation that not only is BP’s oil still very much present in the water in Bayou La Batre, but that it still exists in a highly toxic state nearly two years after the spill.

Here are photos of brown oily foam washing ashore in Bayou La Batre (just west of Mobile Bay) on February 27, 2012:

BLB2 28 12C 300x225 2 Years After the BP Oil Spill, Is the Gulf Ecosystem Collapsing?

BLB2 28 12A 300x168 2 Years After the BP Oil Spill, Is the Gulf Ecosystem Collapsing?

BLB2 27 12F 300x225 2 Years After the BP Oil Spill, Is the Gulf Ecosystem Collapsing?

BLB2 27 12D 300x225 2 Years After the BP Oil Spill, Is the Gulf Ecosystem Collapsing?

Photo credit to the Louisiana Environmental Action Network (LEAN)

 

Water samples were taken by Dennis and Lori Bosarge, LEAN members from Coden, Alabama. The lab-certified test results are in (see full lab report at bottom), and they are startling in that they suggest that oil is still leaking from the Macondo reservoir – most likely from cracks and fissures in the seafloor around the plugged wellhead. Scientists believe the cracks were caused by BP’s heavy-handed “kill” efforts.

***

Despite numerous opportunities to do so, the U.S. Coast Guard has never publicly denied that the Macondo field is still leaking. And these latest sampling results out of Bayou La Batre provide damning new evidence that the BP oil spill never really ended.

Government Sits On Its Hands …

 

The New York Times notes today:

Congress’s response to the spill has been truly pathetic. It has not passed a single bill to prevent another catastrophe, according to a report issued Tuesday by former members of a presidential commission that investigated the spill. Congress has failed even to codify the Interior Department’s sound regulatory reforms, which could be undone by a future administration.

***

The administration has developed new standards for each stage of the drilling process — from rig design to spill response — insisting that operators fully prepare for worst-case scenarios. But the commissioners’ report notes that the new equipment systems have not yet been tested in deep-water conditions.

Indeed, Mother Jones notes that the White House pressured scientists to underestimate BP spill size. And see this Forbes write up, and our previous reporting on the topic.

Similar/Related Articles

 

  1. Mississippi River Brimming with Dead Fish Near Gulf of Mexico
  2. U.S. military purchases unwanted Gulf seafood to feed troops
  3. Gulf Oil Spill ‘Could Go Years’ If Not Dealt With
  4. Gulf Oil SPILL: What a Lie
  5. Sick fish in Gulf are alarming scientists
  6. Gulf of Mexico ‘Dead Zone’ Grows as Spill Impact Is Studied
  7. Dangerous allegations in the Gulf of Mexico
  8. Dispersants Used in BP Gulf Oil Spill Linked to Cancer
  9. Third Giant Underwater Oil Plume Discovered
  10. Gulf oil spill: BP set to avoid gross negligence charge
  11. BP offers one-off payouts to stem Gulf oil spill lawsuits
  12. BP oil spill: all states along Gulf of Mexico affected by slick
yellowstone idaho cern-SPACEWAR-LCH sandhook74

George Soros pledges $10 million to defeat Sheriff Joe for reelection

https://tatoott1009.com/

yellowstone idaho cern-SPACEWAR-LCH sandhook 7
Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio is under siege by the Obama administration.

Obama has joined forces with George Soros and “La Raza” – not to mention the ENTIRE Leftwing liberal political establishment – in a multi-million dollar smear campaign to DESTROY AND DISCREDIT Sheriff Joe, “America’s Toughest Sheriff” solely for doing his job and






OBAMA ATTACKS ‘AMERICA’S SHERIFF’

Sheriff Joe Under Seige!

Fellow Patriot,

yellowstone idaho cern-SPACEWAR-LCH sandhook74Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio is under siege by the Obama administration.

Obama has joined forces with George Soros and “La Raza” – not to mention the ENTIRE Leftwing liberal political establishment – in a multi-million dollar smear campaign to DESTROY AND DISCREDIT Sheriff Joe, “America’s Toughest Sheriff” solely for doing his job and doing it well.

And to top it all off, they are spending millions of YOUR tax dollars to do it!

Already, federal bureaucrats handpicked by this administration are working as “monitors” in Sheriff Joe’s Maricopa County office to stop him from enforcing immigration law.

More than anything else, the Spender-in-Chief wants to stop Sheriff Joe from continuing the Cold Case Posse investigation of his Constitutional eligibility to be President – an investigation which has already unearthed ‘probable cause’ and evidence of a systemic effort to cover-up and conceal information surrounding Barack Hussein Obama’s alleged citizenship.

Radical amnesty fanatics just held a protest demanding that the federal government step in and strip Sheriff Joe of his badge – Obama’s buddy George Soros even pledged $10 million to defeat Sheriff Joe for reelection!

We know Obama’s utter failure to reign in HIS out-of-control spending has left you broke as gas prices continue to soar right along with the cost of groceries. And let’s not forget, many of us will be forking over OUR hard-earned dollars to Uncle Sam this coming Tuesday to pay for Obama’s nanny-state and welfare for the 12 million illegal immigrants whose fraudulent votes he’s depending on for reelection.

Time and time again YOU have rallied to defeat illegal immigration by fighting to secure our borders and defeat backdoor amnesty. You have supported patriots running for office and held them accountable for sticking to their guns when it comes enforcing our immigration laws. Now, we’re asking you to rally for Sheriff Joe.

Make no mistake: Your decision to support Sheriff Joe WILL determine whether he wins or loses the upcoming re-election for Sheriff. 

We know you are broke.  Obama has made sure of that. We know you are sick and tired of the career politicians reciting pretty speeches about securing the borders only to turn a blind-eye once they had your vote.

But Sheriff Joe is no career politician, and unlike Barack Hussein Obama, Sheriff Joe listens to the AMERICAN people – U.S. Citizens, the folks, you and me.

Sheriff Joe is “public enemy number one” to this administration and Hypocrite Holder’s U.S. Justice Department – because he refuses to watch illegal immigration destroy our country, and despite the White House’s relentless pressure and smear campaigns against him, Sheriff Joe has not and will not back down.

Sheriff Joe is in the fight of his life, and he’s fighting it for us.

Now, we must fight for him.

Barack Obama and the Department of Justice are bringing lawsuit after lawsuit against America’s Toughest Sheriff. They’ve conspired to place Sheriff Joe’s office in a type of

federal “receivership” – essentially stripping Sheriff Joe of his power and flooding his office with Obama’s mindless minions straight from bureaucratic Washington – all so they can stop Sheriff Joe’s crackdown on illegal immigration in its tracks! Obama’s public relations team has even touted their efforts against Sheriff Joes as ones made to protect the ‘civil rights’ of illegal immigrants.Sheriff Joe needs your help, and he needs it now. Please, make the most generous contribution you can possibly afford to defend Sheriff Joe from Obama’s vindictive smear machine! Millions of dollars of warped, hate-filled ads are going to bombard Maricopa County as the Leftwing prepares to do whatever it takes to defeat Sheriff Joe.We need to be able to fight back with ads of our own. We need to be able to stand alongside Sheriff Joe and take down this administration once and for all.
NO ONE in the mainstream media is reporting the White House’s behind-the-scenes battle preparations as they ready for the most high-stakes election – an election of unparalleled importance when it comes to battling illegal immigration. You see, Maricopa County Arizona is THE busiest drug- and human-trafficking corridor along the U.S.-Mexico border. If we can stem the flow of illegal immigration there, and continue enforcing the zero-tolerance policy when it comes to illegal immigration, we have taken back the upperhand and we have a chance to take back our country. Sheriff Joe and his fellow officers are our only hope to secure the border and enforce OUR laws – not Mexico’s, not the United Nations’, and certainly not Obama’s warped interpretation of them – but the ones written in the books that declare those who illegally enter our country to be CRIMINALS to be deported back to their home countries, not given access to our taxpayer funded public services or snuck into the voting booths to bolster Obama’s radical agenda. And certainly not rewarded with amnesty at the expense of our future!
Sheriff Joe has made enemies of the most selfish person in the country – a person that has unlimited resources – and you better believe, Barack Obama has everything to lose if Sheriff Joe wins reelection.Already, in the near two years of just some of Arizona’s no-nonsense immigration laws being enforced by Sheriff Joe’s office, Americans are filling the jobs once held by illegal immigrants and the burden on public resources has dropped as illegal immigrants flee either south of the border or to neighboring sanctuary states where there are no Sheriff Joes dedicated to standing up for the American people.Sheriff Joe is a hero. Never doubt that.But instead of being treated like the America-loving Patriot that he is, and applauded for doing his job and enforcing the law, he is being subjected to the most vicious liberal smear campaign paid for with your tax dollars and Soros’ pocket-change.We know an Obama gallon of gas is more than $5/gallon in many places and that food prices are rising. Don’t be fooled into thinking this is a local election about local needs. We need to keep Sheriff Joe in office not just for the security of Maricopa County but for the ENTIRE United States of America.  Every aspect of our future – our children and our grandchildren’s future – depends on bringing Barack Hussein Obama down, and Sheriff Joe is the man for the job.Sheriff Joe has risked EVERYTHING to stand up for us. We MUST stand up for him!SELECT HERE TO STAND UP FOR SHERIFF JOE!For America,Minuteman PAC
##################################





http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=nb4yV0B7WqI

3/12/2012 updateTypewriter-Obama’s ‘Typed’ Long Form Birth Cert Forged.avi

Obama boycotting Georgia eligibility hearing
Lawyer urges secretary of state to cancel inquiry

 

 

 

 



Published: 21 hours ago

author-image by Bob UnruhEmail | Archive
Bob Unruh joined WND in 2006 after spending nearly three decades writing on a wide range of issues for several Upper Midwest newspapers and the Associated Press. Sports, tornadoes, homicidal survivalists, and legislative battles all fell within his bailiwick. His scenic photography has been used commercially, and he sometimes plays in a church worship band.More ↓
UnhappyObama

 

Barack Obama has announced through his attorney that he will boycott the administrative hearings scheduled tomorrow in Georgia to review evidence of whether he legitimately is a candidate for the presidency, prompting an attorney for one set of the plaintiffs to describe the nation’s commander-in-chief as acting like a “5-year-old brat.”

A letter apparently from his lawyer, Michael Jablonski, was posted today on the website for California attorney Orly Taitz, whose determined pursuit of Obama’s eligibility documentation has taken her to courts across the nation, including the U.S. Supreme Court.

Jablonski told Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp in the letter that “serious problems” had developed in the hearings “pending before the Office of State Administration Hearings.”

 

 

 

He said, “At issue in these hearings are challenges that allege that President Obama is not eligible to hold or run for re-election to his office, on the now wholly discredited theory that he does not meet the citizenship requirements.”

Discover what the Constitution’s reference to “natural born citizen” means and whether Barack Obama qualifies, in the ebook version of “Where’s the REAL Birth Certificate?”

Jablonski said the judge – who previously rejected Obama’s demand to quash a subpoena for him to appear and bring with him his birth records documenting his status as a “natural-born citizen” – has “exercised no control” over the proceeding.

“It threatens to degenerate into a pure forum for political posturing to the detriment of the reputation of the state and your office. Rather than bring this matter to a rapid conclusion, the ALJ has insisted on agreeing to a day of hearings, and on the full participation of the president in his capacity as a candidate,” Jablonski wrote.

In a response that was posted online after hours, Kemp said the case referral was “in keeping with Georgia law.”

“As you are aware, OSAH Rule 616-1-2-.17 cited in your letter only applies to parties to a hearing. As the referring agency, the Secretary of State’s Office is not a party to the candidate challenge hearings scheduled for tomorrow. To the extent a request to withdraw the case referral is procedurally available, I do not believe such a request would be judicious given the hearing is set for tomorrow morning.”

He continued, “I expect the administrative law judge to report his findings to me after his full consideration of the evidence and law. Upon receipt of the report, I will fully and fairly review the entire record and initial decision of the administrative law judge.”

He also had a warning about the costs of simply not showing up for a court hearing.

“Anything you and your client place in the record in response to the challenge will be beneficial to my review of the initial decision; however, if you and your client choose to suspend your participation in the OSAH proceedings, please understand that you do so at your own peril.”

“We await your taking the requested action, and as we do so, we will, of course, suspend further participation in these proceedings, including the hearing scheduled for January 26,” Jablonski wrote in the letter on the Taitz site, which indicated it had been sent to the participants in the case.

A blast of sarcasm aimed at Obama also was posted on the Taitz site.

“What Obama is asking now is totally insane,” it said. “He is asking the secretary of state of GA to take the trial away from the judge on the eve of the trial. He is mostly crying on the shoulder of the secretary of state of GA and saying that Orly is bad, because she issued all of those subpoenas. So after the judge told Obama that the subpoena that I issued was perfectly valid and he had to appear in court tomorrow and bring with him all of the documents that I demanded, Obama decided to go behind the back of the judge and send the same complaint about me to the secretary of state and he is asking the secretary of state to take the trial away from the judge.

“Does this look like a behavior of an innocent person? An innocent person would have come to court and showed all the valid documents with the embossed seals, which are verifiable,” the statement said. “Instead he is acting like a 5-year-old brat, saying, ‘I am afraid of Orly, I want the secretary of state of GA to act like my mommy and protect me from Orly.’ Some leader of the free world.”
The hearings are being brought by citizens of Georgia under a state law that allows voters to challenge the eligibility of candidates on the state’s ballot. It is the states that run elec
tions in America, and national elections are just a compilation of the results of the 50 state elections.

The schedule for the hearings was set by Judge Michael Malihi of the Georgia state Office of State Administrative Hearings. In Georgia, a state law requires “every candidate for federal” office who is certified by the state executive committees of a political party or who files a notice of candidacy “shall meet the constitutional and statutory qualifications for holding the office being sought.”

State law also grants the secretary of state and any “elector who is eligible to vote for a candidate” in the state the authority to raise a challenge to a candidate’s qualifications, the judge determined.

Citizens bringing the complaints include David Farrar, Leah Lax, Thomas Malaren and Laurie Roth, represented by Taitz; David Weldon represented by attorney Van R. Irion of Liberty Legal Foundation; and Carl Swensson and Kevin Richard Powell, represented by J. Mark Hatfield. Cody Judy is raising a challenge because he also wants to be on the ballot.

Jablonski told Kemp he should simply “withdraw” the original hearing request as “improvidently issued.”

“It is well established that there is no legitimate issue here – a conclusion validated time and again by courts around the country. The state of Hawaii produced official records documenting birth there; the president made documents available to the general public by placing them on his website,” he wrote.

Jablonski accused Malihi of allowing the attorneys to “run amok.”

“Perhaps he is aware that there is no credible response; perhaps he appreciates that the very demand made of his office – that it address constitutional issues – is by law not within its authority.”

Obama, meanwhile, has a campaign trip to several Midwest and Western states lined up over the next few days.

WND reported earlier on the stunning decision from Malihi, who refused to quash the subpoena even after Obama outlined his defense strategy for such state-level challenges, which have erupted in half a dozen or more states already.

“Presidential electors and Congress, not the state of Georgia, hold the constitutional responsibility for determining the qualifications of presidential candidates,” Obama’s lawyer argued. “The election of President Obama by the presidential electors, confirmed by Congress, makes the documents and testimony sought by plaintiff irrelevant.”

The judge thought otherwise.

“Defendant argues that ‘if enforced, [the subpoena] requires him to interrupt duties as president of the United States’ to attend a hearing in Atlanta, Georgia. However, defendant fails to provide any legal authority to support his motion to quash the subpoena to attend,” he wrote in his order.

 

“Defendant’s motion suggests that no president should be compelled to attend a court hearing. This may be correct. But defendant has failed to enlighten the court with any legal authority,” the judge continued.

“Specifically, defendant has failed to cite to any legal authority evidencing why his attendance is ‘unreasonable or oppressive, or that the testimony … [is] irrelevant, immaterial, or cumulative and unnecessary to a party’s preparation or presentation at the hearing, or that basic fairness dictates that the subpoena should not be enforced,’” the judge said.

Separately, Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio in Arizona told WND he also had received a subpoena to be at the hearings in Georgia. He said the purpose apparently is to ask him about his Cold Case Posse investigation of Obama’s eligibility, but he said since the investigation remains open, he wouldn’t be able to say much about it.

Hatfield also had filed with the court a “Notice to Produce” asking for Obama’s documents and records.

He wants one of the two original certified copies of Obama’s long-form birth certificate.

Obama’s attorney, Jablonski, also had argued that the state should mind its own business.

“The sovereignty of the state of Georgia does not extend beyond the limits of the State. … Since the sovereignty of the state does not extend beyond its territorial limits, an administrative subpoena has no effect,” the filing argued.

Taitz’s supporters joined a discussion on her website, where she also solicits support for the expenses of her court cases, judging that Obama is on the defensive.

“What a joke. He claims to be too busy performing the duties of the president of the United States. How many days of vacation has he taken? How many rounds of golf? If he is too busy to provide the documents that provide the basis for meeting the requirements of the office, then perhaps he better sit out the next four years,” said one.

Wrote another, “The election of President Obama by the presidential electors, confirmed by Congress, makes the documents and testimony sought by plaintiff irrelevant. … This is complete utter nonsense!”

In fact, a presidential elector in California brought a lawsuit challenging Obama’s eligibility at the time of the 2008 election and was told the dispute was not yet ripe because the inauguration hadn’t taken place. The courts later ruled that the elector lost his “standing” to bring the lawsuit after the inauguration.

Barack Obama

Irion said his argument is that the Founders clearly considered a “natural-born citizen,” as the Constitution requires of a president and no one else, to be the offspring of two citizen parents. Since Obama himself has written in his books that his father, Barack Obama Sr. was a Kenyan, and thus subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom, Irion argues that Obama is disqualified under any circumstances based on his own testimony.

Those who argue against his birth in the United States note that numerous experts have given testimony and sworn statements that they believe Obama’s Hawaiian birth documentation to be fraudulent.

It is that concern that also has prompted Arpaio to turn over an investigation of that issue to his Cold Case Posse. Its investigative report is expected to be released in the next few weeks.

The image released by the White House in April:

Obama long-form birth certificate released April 27 by the White House

Top constitutional expert Herb Titus contends that a “natural-born citizen” is born of parents who are citizens. That argument also is supported by a 19th-century U.S. Supreme Court decision, Minor v. Happersett in 1875. The case includes one of very few references in the nation’s archives that addresses the definition of “natural-born citizen.”

That case states: “The Constitution does not in words say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves,
upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.”

An extensive analysis of the issue was conducted by Titus, who has taught constitutional law, common law and other subjects for 30 years at five different American Bar Association-approved law schools. He also was the founding dean of the College of Law at Regent University, a trial attorney and special assistant U.S. attorney in the Department of Justice.

“‘Natural born citizen’ in relation to the office of president, and whether someone is eligible, was in the Constitution from the very beginning,” he said. “Another way of putting it; there is a law of the nature of citizenship. If you are a natural born citizen, you are a citizen according to the law of nature, not according to any positive statement in a Constitution or in a statute, but because of the very nature of your birth and the very nature of nations.”

If you “go back and look at what the law of nature would be or would require … that’s precisely what a natural born citizen is …. is one who is born to a father and mother each of whom is a citizen of the U.S. or whatever other country,” he said.

“Now what we’ve learned from the Hawaii birth certificate is that Mr. Obama’s father was not a citizen of the United States. His mother was, but he doesn’t qualify as a natural born citizen for the office of president.”


 

DO NOT CENSOR THIS POSTING!!! THANKS!! THERE IS NOTHING IN THIS POST THAT WOULD JUSTIFY CENSORING IT!!

The issue is quite simple. To be President of the USA or to run for the Presidency of the USA, Obama must be a “natural born citizen” according to the Constitution of the USA. The term “natural born citizen” has been defined previously and it requires two conditions:
1) Obama must be born in the USA.
Obama’s long form birth certificate that Obama has provided through the White House web site HAS BEEN DECLARED BY MANY EXPERTS TO BE SIMPLY A FORGERY!!!
—See evidence that Obama forged the birth certificate that was posted on the White House servers on 27 April 2011 (!!) at http://www.scribd.com/collections/3166684
—See evidence that Obama is using a SSN 042-68-4425 that was not legally issued to him (!!) at http://www.scribd.com/collections/3260742
—Just type the keywords Obama long form birth certificate forgery in http://www.google.com and you will find many articles that thoroughly explain why Obama’s long form birth certificate is simply a forgery!!!
—Therefore, the only way to check this long form birth certificate is to go to Hawaii and to check directly the original long form birth certificate and in particular to assess if even this original is genuine that is if it is not also a forgery to cover up for the possible fact that Obama was never born in Hawaii!!
2) Obama’s parents MUST BOTH be American citizens.
We know that Obama’s father was a Kenyan and that he NEVER was an American citizen!!!!!
Therefore, THIS SECOND CONDITION ALONE DISQUALIFIES OBAMA TO RUN FOR THE PRESIDENCY OF THE USA AND IT ALSO DISQUALIFIES OBAMA TO BE PRESIDENT OF THE USA, NO MATTER THE FACT THAT HE WON THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION!!!!!!

More, Obama is a former lawyer. Therefore, he knew perfectly well that he was not entitled to run for the Presidency of the USA but he nevertheless did it DISHONESTLY, FRAUDULENTLY, deceiving purposefully the entire American people.

Furthermore, Obama was confronted with the definition of what a “natural born citizen” is when he directly participated in the investigation of John McCain’s eligibility to run for the Presidency of the USA. Obama then signed Senate Resolution 511 from April 30, 2008 that reveals the indispensable requirement of having two US citizen parents in order to be a “natural born citizen” according to the Constitution of the USA and therefore to be eligible to run for the Presidency of the USA or to be President of the USA!!!!!
Therefore, once again, Obama knew very well that he FRAUDULENTLY decided to run for the Presidency of the USA despite the fact that he knew perfectly well that he was NOT a natural born citizen and therefore that he was not entitled, according to the Constitution of the USA, to be President of the USA.

First Conclusion:
—Obama is NOT a natural born citizen and therefore he is not entitled to run for the Presidency of the USA nor is he entitled to be President of the USA, no matter the fact that he won the Presidential election!!!!
—Finally, Obama is a former lawyer and therefore OBAMA CONSCIOUSLY, INTENTIONALLY COMPLETELY DECEIVED THE ENTIRE AMERICAN PEOPLE BY RUNNING FOR THE PRESIDENCY OF THE USA WHEN HE KNEW PERFECTLY WELL THAT HE WAS NOT ENTITLED TO DO SO SIMPLY BECAUSE HE KNEW VERY WELL THAT HE WAS NOT A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN, AS THE CONSTITUTION OF THE USA REQUIRES ONLY ON THE PRESIDENT OF THE USA!!!!
—THIS HUGE DECEPTION IS MORE THAN A FRAUDULENT ACT, IT IS WORSE THAN ANYTHING IMAGINABLE BECAUSE:
1) IT RELATES TO THE HIGHEST POSITION IN THE LAND, THE PRESIDENCY OF THE USA, THAT OBAMA HAS FRAUDULENTLY OBTAINED;
2) IT RELATES TO THE CONSTITUTION OF THE USA BEING TRAMPLED UPON FRAUDULENTLY AND ILLEGALLY BY OBAMA;
3) IT RELATES TO THE FACT THAT OBAMA INTENTIONALLY DECEIVED AND MISLED THE ENTIRE AMERICAN PEOPLE!!!
ANY PERSON GUILTY OF SUCH SERIOUS FRAUD SHOULD AT LEAST GET A JAIL SENTENCE, NO MATTER THAT OBAMA HAS FRAUDULENTY HELD THE POSITION OF PRESIDENT OF THE USA FOR A PERIOD OF TIME!!!

If you really want to have an expert legal explanation on what a “natural born citizen” truly is according to the Constitution of the USA and why legally speaking it is this way, then I suggest that you read at least a few articles on Attorney Mario Apuzzo’s web site “Natural Born Citizen – A Place to Ask Questions and Get the Right Answers” at http://puzo1.blogspot.com/
In particular, read:
—”The Natural Born Citizen Clause of Our U.S. Constitution Requires that Both of the Child’s Parents Be U.S. Citizens At the Time of Birth” at http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2009/09/natural-born-citizen-clause-requires.html

Second conclusion:
—If you are a rational person, no matter your political affiliation, you surely will be forced to conclude that the facts speak for themselves and that there is no doubt legally that a “natural born citizen” indeed requires that the President of the USA has to have two parents that were BOTH American citizens at the time of Obama’s birth.
—The Constitution of the USA is sacred to any American citizen AND it applies to every single American citizen, no matter one’s political affiliation, no matter one’s color of the skin, no matter what!!!!
Therefore, BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA IS UNDER THE RULE OF LAW LIKE ANYBODY ELSE (NOT ABOVE IT!!!) AND IN PARTICULAR OBAMA IS UNDER THE RULE OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE USA LIKE ANYBODY ELSE!!!!
—You now have the facts fully on the table concerning what a “natural born citizen” truly is, you cannot evade the truth about these facts!!!
Now, what path are you going to choose?
1) Keep Lying and hiding the facts, hoping that they will disappear by themselves!! Or
2) Choose to acknowledge these facts fully and be determin
ed to fight for the truth?
The choice is yours! But the Constitution of the USA is at stake!!!

==============================================================
Obama eligibility challenges spread to 6 states
Decision in Georgia case expected soon, but ballot concerns going viral
Published: 1 day ago
author-image by Bob UnruhEmail | Archive
Bob Unruh joined WND in 2006 after spending nearly three decades writing on a wide range of issues for several Upper Midwest newspapers and the Associated Press. Sports, tornadoes, homicidal survivalists, and legislative battles all fell within his bailiwick. His scenic photography has been used commercially, and he sometimes plays in a church worship band.More ↓
rss feed Subscribe to author feed

inShare56
Printer Friendly
Share
Text smaller
Text bigger

obama-worried

An administrative law judge in Georgia could decide as early as this week whether voters in the state convinced him Barack Obama’s name should be removed from the 2012 presidential ballot because he is not qualified to hold the office.

But win, lose or draw, the fight isn’t going to be over, as other cases are erupting across the nation, with challenges being raised anew even in Obama’s own adopted political network in Illinois.

The Georgia hearing was before Judge Michael Malihi, and while none of the lawyers who appeared in the proceedings was willing to predict what the decision will be, several did confirm that Malihi had considered simply granting them a default victory, because Obama and his lawyers expressly stated they would not participate in a hearing to provide evidence that he is qualified to be on the ballot.

A default presumably would have meant a recommendation from the judge that Obama’s name be stricken from the ballot, a decision which would head for review immediately by Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp.

He, however, was the one who warned Obama of the “peril” of not participating in the hearing when Obama and his attorney had asked that the event be canceled.

Discover what the Constitution’s reference to “natural born citizen” means and whether Barack Obama qualifies, in the ebook version of “Where’s the REAL Birth Certificate?”

Whatever the outcome in Georgia, the issue is gaining traction in other states, too, including Alabama, Tennessee, Arizona, New Hampshire, and even Illinois, Obama’s home political base.

There, in a complaint recently filed by Stephen F. Boulton of McCarthy Duffy LLP and Gary Kreep of the United States Justice Foundation, their client is asking for a change in state law to allow the vetting of political candidates.

Obama isn’t even mentioned by name, but don’t think for a minute that the requested change wouldn’t include his candidacy.

The plaintiff is Sharon Meroni, who long has fought inside the system for a way to challenge the candidacies there. In her new case, filed in the Circuit Court of Cook County, she is petitioning for a judicial review of the state’s election procedures as they exist now.

Targeted are the state Board of Elections, members of the board, several county clerks and others, including candidates Dan Duffy and Amanda Howland.

Meroni, a registered voter in the 27th Legislative District in the state, said her concern is that “only candidates qualified for office under the Illinois and United States Constitutions appear on the ballot.”

The state’s primary is in March.

The case alleges the candidates did not provide sufficient proof that they are U.S. citizens as required to hold the office being sought “as is required by the Illinois Constitution of 1970.”

State officials refused to remove the names from the ballots, so Meroni has gone to court. Granting ballot access, she said in the complaint, “is contrary to law, against the manifest weight of the evidence, arbitrary and capricious, and a denial of the rights of the petitioner.”

Kreep told WND the way the system is established in Illinois it essentially allows political parties to determine who runs for office, and unless voters find out about a filing and can assemble a formal objection within five days, their concerns are dismissed.

And the system has no procedure for verifying the eligibility of candidates, he said.

That particular issue has been in the headlines for the past four years, since before Obama’s 2008 election victory, because of the questions that remain over his eligibility. The U.S. Constitution demands a “natural born citizen” be president and the Founders probably thought that to be the offspring of two citizen parents when they wrote the term.

But Obama’s father never was a citizen. There also are those who contend the junior Obama was not even born in the United States.

Kreep said the Illinois procedures make it virtually impossible for candidates to be challenged for their eligibility.

He said there likely will be raised in other states concerns similar to those in Illinois, where “barriers now in existence … bar voters from reasonable investigation of the citizenship of a candidate.”

That’s simply a deprivation of the constitutional right to due process, he said. The case seeks a declaration that the political maneuvers are unconstitutional.

There also have been assembled campaigns specifically to encourage voters to file eligibility complaints about candidates with states. One such effort is the Obama Ballot Challenge, which lists contacts for state elections offices across the country.

It is, of course, the states that actually run elections; a national election is just the compilation of the results from the 50 states.

“A candidate that is not legally qualified to be on the ballot, such as Barack Obama, steals votes from other candidates who are legally on the ballot,” the site advises.

WND previously reported that cases already have been begun in New Hampshire, where state officials rejected the claims; Alabama, Tennessee and Arizona.

The newest round of court actions do not try to have a judge determine Obama is not qualified for the Oval Office and remove him from it, they simply challenge his eligibility for the 2012 election.

Many of the cases cite Minor v. Happersett, a U.S. Supreme Court opinion from 1875 that said a “natural born citizen” would be a person whose parents both were citizens.

“This complaint does not request any injunction against any state or federal government official. Instead this complaint asserts that the private entity, Defendant Democratic Party, intends to act negligently or fraudulently in a manner that will cause irreparable harm to the plaintiffs, to the states, and to the citizens of the United States,” said one of the filings.

It continued, “Because Mr. Obama has admitted that his father was not a U.S. citizen, and because this fact has been confirmed by the U.S. State Department, any reasonable person with knowledge of these facts would doubt Mr. Obama’s constitutional qualifications. Therefore, any representation by the Democratic Party certifying said qualifications would be negligent, absent further evidence verifying Mr. Obama’s natural-born status.

“Plaintiffs further request an injunction prohibiting the Democratic Party from making any representation to any state official asserting, implying, or assuming that Mr. Obama is qualified to hold the office of president, absent a showing by the party sufficient to prove that said representation is not negligent.”

Van Irion, lead counsel for Liberty Legal Foundation, also is working on several of the issues, and has brought the question in court in Arizona.

“We picked the Arizona court for several reasons, but the main one being that it is part of the 9th Circuit. The 9th Circuit has indicated in dicta that an FEC-registered presidential candidate would have standing for this type of suit,” he said. The organization is working with John Du
mmett, a Liberty Legal Foundation member who is a candidate for the office of president in the 2012 election.

Irion said the other lawsuit was filed in state court in Tennessee.

“The focus of the state-court suit is to prevent certification to the Tennessee Secretary of State. This suit puts greater emphasis on the negligent misrepresentation/fraud aspects of a certification from the DNC. It includes more facts regarding Obama’s Indonesian dual citizenship and fraudulent Social Security Number,” he said.

He said if the cases succeed, the Democrats would not be able to list Obama as their candidate for 2012.

“Neither lawsuit discusses Obama’s place of birth or his birth certificate. These issues are completely irrelevant to the argument. LLF’s lawsuit simply points out that the Supreme Court has defined ‘natural-born citizen’ as a person born to two parents who were both U.S. citizens at the time of the natural-born citizen’s birth. Obama’s father was never a U.S. citizen. Therefore, Obama can never be a natural-born citizen. His place of birth is irrelevant,” Van Irion’s group said.

WND also has reported that Maricopa, Ariz., County Sheriff Joe Arpaio has launched a formal law enforcement investigation into concerns Obama may submit fraudulent documentation to be put on the state’s election ballot in 2012.

Other attorneys involved in the Georgia case are J. Mark Hatfield and Orly Taitz.

Hatfield has told WND that the goal is for a court determination on the definition of “natural born citizen,” which then could be applied directly to Obama’s candidacy.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Sunday, March 4, 2012
CBS: Sheriff Joe’s Investigation Into Obama’s Forged Records; One of the Biggest Scandals
ObamaRelease YourRecords on 12:54 PM

CBS News: Sheriff Joe’s Investigation Into Obama’s Forged Records; One of the Biggest Scandals – VIDEO HERE

FLASHBACK to JUNE 2011: Obama’s Forged Selective Service Registration: Please explain why Obama’s Selective Service Registration date stamp is missing the 19 in it. – SEE COMPLETE DETAILS AND EVIDENCE HERE

The stamp on Obama’s selective service registration has only two digits. This video demonstrates how it could have been made.

Sheriff Joe’s Entire Obama Investigation Press Conference, 3-1-2012

 

 

See all the video presentations shown at Sheriff Arpaio’s press conference here: http://www.teapartypowerhour.com/videos

ARTICLE II ELIGIBILITY FACTS HERE: http://www.art2superpac.com/issues.html
Private Investigator: Obama’s Fraudulent Social Security Number & Selective Service Registration

19 Dec 2011: Wash Times Ad – Obama SSN Fails E-Verify System – Support New Article II Super PAC Org

Private Investigator: Obama’s Fraudulent Social Security Number &amp; Selective Service Registrationhttp://www.scribd.com/embeds/57169354/content?start_page=1&view_mode=list

yellowstone idaho cern-SPACEWAR-LCH sandhook77

Oklahoma man reports strange sounds and sky trumpets near his home

https://tatoott1009.com/

Oklahoma man reports “strange sounds” and “sky trumpets” near his home

yellowstone idaho cern-SPACEWAR-LCH sandhook77
 
YouTube.com
The forest workers in this screengrab recorded a strange sound near Conklin, Alberta in Canada. Strange sounds are being reported not only in Canada and here in Oklahoma, but around the world.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZ2ZcmMxehk&feature=plcp&context=C4a7b839VDvjVQa1PpcFOAte-5MF2q2keXIpY4nlZE035hH7MoXdE=




– /

By Andrew W. Griffin

Red Dirt Report, editor

Posted: March 28, 2012

reddirtreporter@gmail.com

OKLAHOMA CITY – In January of this year, strange reports began to circulate on alternative news websites about strange sounds being heard by people in locations around the world. The sounds, which varied in some instances, were a mix of scraping and roaring with other sounds and tones also detected.

The reports began making it into the mainstream, and while the reports have subsided somewhat, their cause and source remains unknown.

Red Dirt Report recently received a tip from a reader in a suburban/rural area between Owasso and Claremore, Okla., in Rogers County. The reader, who we will call “Owen,” gave a very eerie account of what took place at his home on a “beautiful day” in either late September or early October of 2011. Owen was home recovering from a knee operation and had his patio doors open so his dogs could go in and out and he could enjoy the fresh, autumn air.

That is when Owen – retired from the U.S. military – heard something that chills him to this day.

“I heard a BIG noise,” Owen wrote to us in a written account he emailed Red Dirt Report. “My first thought was that a large bucket loader was scraping across concrete, only it had too much of a tone quality to it. The sound persisted and by now my pets had lined up inside and one was climbing into my lap.”

Owen said he managed to get up and go out onto the patio so he could get a better sense of where the sound was coming from. He would tell us in our earlier phone conversation that it was a sound that he said made him feel “small” and “insignificant.”

“(I) listened to the biggest, most encompassing, enveloping, surrounding, permeating noise coming from where? Somewhere? No matter how hard I tried to determine where it was coming from, I couldn’t. It just came from everywhere, and it had a peculiar tone quality that almost sounded like a horn of some type, albeit a very big horn.”

Owen said he stood there on his patio for approximately 10 minutes, enveloped by this unearthly sound, until it eventually “faded away.” He wrote that as he listened “I could could not help the feeling of being somewhat worried, or concerned, even small and insignificant given the powerful, overwhelming rhythmic tone that just WAS.”

Owen’s “strange sound” and “sky trumpet” experience took place at a time when these “strange sounds” and “sky trumpets” were being heard and recorded all over the world, with YouTube videos and eyewitness (or “earwitness”) reports going viral nearly three months ago.

Concludes Owen: “Since (his experience) I have noticed on the web that others around the world have heard this as well and thankfully had the presence of mind to record and post their experience. Some of those recorded sounds are very close to what I heard. A group in Canada in the forest (recorded a sound that) was particularly close in tone to what I heard here hust a few miles east of Owasso, Oklahoma.”

A number of the reports, curiously enough have come out of Canada, with sounds recorded in the provinces of Ontario, Alberta, Saskatchewan and elsewhere. A number of reports, including this Jan. 24, 2012 report out of North Battleford, Sask., included that city’s mayor saying he heard the sound and that “What I experienced was a scraping sound, like a snowplow.”

And one of the better-known “sky sound” videos was recorded by men working in a forested area near Conklin, Alberta in Canada. This is the report Owen is referring to in his earlier comment.

In the city of Windsor, Ontario, across from Detroit, Michigan, strange rumblings and a “hum” have been heard in that Canadian border city for many months now. The CBC reported earlier this month that the “Windsor hum,” also described as sounding like an “idling semi truck,” is enough of a problem that a Canadian member of parliament visited Washington and met with Michigan’s U.S. Rep. John Dingell and asked for his help in trying to “find a solution.”

Other sounds are being heard and recorded in Europe and South America. This video from the Czech Republic, posted on YouTube in early January, is truly unsettling.

In a report from The American Dream headlined “What is causing the strange noises in the sky that are being heard all over the world?,” the reporter notes: “Perhaps the biggest reason why these strange noises have so many people alarmed is because humans generally have a great fear of the unknown. If the cause of these strange noises is revealed, the hysteria will die down. But if these strange noises continue (or even become more intense) and there continues to be no scientific explanation for them, then the hysteria may turn into full-blown panic.”

And closer to home, there was that video report out of Amarillo, Texas where some local radio disc jockeys recorded the strange sounds. On YouTube, there are several videos out of Oklahoma. One, reportedly from here in the Oklahoma City area is very faint but still noticeable. It sounds artificial. There are also uploaded videos from Tulsa and McAlester, all recorded in the past several months. One report, recorded by someone in Oklahoma City on March 20, 2012, records the roaring, whooshing sound for nearly eight minutes.

And things got so bad for folks in Clintonville, Wisconsin last week that the government had to intervene and claim that that the strange booms plaguing their town were simply the result of “micro-earthquakes,” so as to reassure the community it wasn’t something more extraordinary. However, residents weren’t convinced and the booms have returned.

Are they all fake? Are they all hoaxes? Perhaps some of them. Several, we believe, have been debunked. There is speculation that there is a connection to recent, powerful solar flares interacting with the Earth’s atmosphere. Others suspect HAARP. In the book HAARP: The Ultimate Weapon of the Conspiracy by Jerry E. Smith, he notes in a chapter on mind control that the government has developed certain, secret sound technology that can be transmitted and alter a person’s mind. Hypnotic commands could be transmitted through certain sounds that go directly to the brain. This manipulative, drug-like, advanced technology exists and could be connected to the sounds people are hearing around the world.

As Smith writes: “Could HAARP be used someday to send a target population on an LSD-like trip? The answer seems to be ‘yes.’ This could be used to do more than merely disrupt soldiers in battle. Imagine the chaos, death and destruction that could be induced if they were to beam a ‘prerecorded drug’ at a population center that made the people go wild with, say, sexual desire, or uncontrolled rage.” As Owen told < em>Red Dirt Report, the sound he heard made him feel uncomfortable, “small” and “insignificant.” Is this sound part of a secret weapon being tested on an unwitting population? We have seen an increase in bizarre behavior. Stressed-out people stabbing and shooting people. Loren Coleman, writing at his Twilight Language blog, refers to the recent uptick in bizarre and violent behavior this month as “March Madness.”

With continued wars, uprisings, economic uncertainty and a Carter-esque “malaise” sweeping many parts of the nation, strange booms, rumblings, and creepy sounds of unknown origin can’t be helping matters.

And, it goes without saying that religious people are attributing the “trumpet” sounds to the Book of Revelation in the Bible. It is seen as part of the “end times.” And with this being 2012, others believe the end of the Mayan calendar is a warning to humanity that time is short – or at the very least, life here will dramatically change in a matter of months. Look at this article about ancient pyramids shooting energy beams into space. What is going on?

Some of the bone-rattling “trumpet” sounds seem as though they were lifted from the soundtrack of the recent remake of War of the Worlds. Others like passing jet aircraft. A video report from Oshawa, Ontario features sounds like waves crashing on rocks or a chain being dragged across the floor.

But back to our friend Owen up in northeastern Oklahoma. He says he did not record or videotape the sound, but he tells Red Dirt Report: “My video camera is charged and ready.”

 

Andrew W. Griffin
Red Dirt Report
April 9, 2012

OKLAHOMA CITY – While the frenzy of reports involving “strange sounds” appears to have subsided in recent weeks, our story “Oklahoma man reports ‘strange sounds’ and ‘sky trumpets’ near his home” generated a few comments from readers who had “strange sounds experiences of their own. Names have been changed due to the controversial nature of the subject.

The first reader we heard from was Stacy. After reading the aforementioned story, Stacy, living in northern Virginia, said the portion of our story about “Owen” near Owasso, Okla. hearing a sound that sounded like a “large bucket loader … scraping across concrete” and having a “tone quality to it” was “almost exactly” how she heard nearly identical sounds two nights in a row, sometime in the fall of 2011.

While about a 20-minute drive from metro Washington’s Dulles International Airport, Stacy said she was sitting out in her outside, covered, screened-in porch, at about 11 p.m., when she heard a sound that “sounded like a very large, unusually outsized road grader or machine with a  very large blade or bucket scraping the road.”

There was no snow on the ground to be plowed, and while Interstate 66 was not far away, no road grading was going on, to her knowledge.

Millie, a media professional, wrote to Red Dirt Report with an experience that went back to October 2010 and occurred during a trip to the California side of Lake Tahoe. Living on the West Coast, Millie was with her husband, a science teacher, who needed to attend an evening science class in that area.

Wrote Millie in an email: “We were driving along Highway 89 through the mountainous pristine forest when we heard loud booms and then what sounded like a freight train going right along side our vehicle. However, there were no train tracks and there was no construction or anything or anyone in the area. As we drove and continued to hear the loud noise we rolled down the window and the sound seemed to surround us. I remember experiencing an eerie feeling or sensation almost like an out of body experience, but it wasn’t.

Continuing, Millie wrote: “I would have to say the event lasted about eight-to-10 minutes. As soon as we arrived in Tahoe we no longer heard the sound but certainly talked about it all weekend with the other teachers who were also part of the science class. We were certainly a bit spooked about what happened and now that other similar reports are coming out, we are really wondering what on earth that noise was.”

Another reader, Jeremy, simply wrote us about his experience that took place in October 2011, while he was standing on his front porch.

“I heard what I thought to be a low-flying jet fixing to come over my house. So, I walked out on the lawn and watched as it got louder and it lasted about a minute or two and then it ended. So, I checked the weather to see if an storms (were) in the area and nothing showed.” Jeremy said he has been researching this sound, thinking he was the only one to hear it, only to find our recent Red Dirt Report article. Thank you, Jeremy, for contacting us.

Perusing news reports on the web, we see that while the strange booms being heard in Clintonville, Wisconsin have subsided while “loud banging sounds, earth-shaking tremors and … flashes of light” are being heard 130 southwest of Clintonville in Baraboo, Wisconsin, according to Gather.com. Flashes of light now? It gets stranger and stranger.

We hope Red Dirt Report readers will continue to send in your “strange sounds” reports to reddirtreporter@gmail.com. And thanks to Spirit Daily for linking our earlier story.

 

More Strange Sounds in Wisconsin – Now in Baraboo (Video)

April 05, 2012 07:15 AM EDT

1 person recommends this

Strange sounds are still being heard in Wisconsin, but now they are accompanied by a flash of light. At least that’s the story coming out of Baraboo, approximately 130 miles to the southwest.

The “booming sounds” story seems to have settled in Clintonville, WI, with a week having passed with no more reports of earth-shaking booms disturbing the sleep of residents overnight.

That’s a relief to those citizens who were skeptical of a USGS conclusion that the noises were the result of micro-earthquakes.

But in Baraboo over the weekend, police received several 911 calls from spooked residents claiming to have heard loud banging sounds, earth-shaking tremors and, in a new twist, flashes of light accompanying them.

Police at first assumed it must have been a transformer explosion. “When those things go off they make a really loud pop and usually there’s a flash of light as they’re surging off the electricity,” said Chief Mark Schauf.

But a check of the local power company shows that no such thing has happened. So it’s just another mystery.

Will it continue? Will the story become as big as the strange sounds incidents which plagued Clintonville for more than a week?

Stay tuned.

 

  1.  

    Honestly I don’t know what to think…therefore I’ll just throw it out there at you and you decide.

    Within a week from each others two pyramids, one in Bosnia and one in Mexico, have been found to emit a beam of energy from their top.

    Earlier last week I was reading on an Italian website about this extraordinary discovery that a team of physicists made while studying the 12,000 year-old Bosnian ‘Pyramid of the Sun‘ situated near Sarajevo, the oldest known pyramid in the world.

    The physicists detected a beam of energy coming from the top of the pyramid. The radius of the beam is 4.5 meters with a frequency of 28 kHz and its strength increases as it moves away from the top of the pyramid.
    In addition to that the ionization levels inside the building is 43 times higher than the average outside concentration, making it an ideal place for rejuvenation and regeneration of the body.

    The 220 meter-high pyramid (the pyramid of Egypt is 147 meter) was built by an unknown civilization. The Bosnian Pyramid of the Sun, according to the Geodetic Institute, is accurately pointing to the cosmic north with an error of 0 degrees, 0 minutes and 12 seconds, too incredible to be a fluke.
    A week after reading the Italian report, I saw this photograph on Gizmodo. The Mayan pyramid of Chichen Itza in Yucatan, Mexico, seems to be irradiating a beam of light/energy off its top, similar to the Bosnian pyramid.

    The photo, taken by Hector Siliezar while visiting the ancient ruins with his family, was commented by a NASA researcher. He thinks that “the intensity of the lightning flash likely caused the camera’s CCD sensor to behave in an unusual way, either causing an entire column of pixels to offset their values or causing an internal reflection (off the) camera lens that was recorded by the sensor.”

    The photographer commented that the light-beam was not visible to the naked eye when he took the photo, and could only be seen in the captured image.
    This could corroborate the NASA explanation of a technical glitch, that I find strange being precisely aligned with the top of the pyramid, or could be, like in the Bosnian pyramid, a beam of energy not visible to the eye but the camera could have picked up.

    As I’ve told you at the beginning of the post, both reports come to no real conclusion and leave lots of room for speculation. Could simply be a matter of energy forces, a fluke, or ancient civilization sending messages to mothership.

    What do you think??

OBAMAFLYsnapshot_0051

Judge Napolitano: “Obama Is Dangerously Close to Totalitarianism”

https://tatoott1009.com/

“No president in modern times has questioned their authority.”

Steve Watson
Infowars.com
April 6, 2012

Constitutional expert Judge Andrew Napolitano says he fears that the president is skirting “dangerously close to totalitarianism” with his recent questioning of the authority of the Supreme Court to conduct a review of ObamaCare.

Appearing on Neil Cavuto’s “Your World” show Wednesday, the Judge warned that Obama was systematically flouting the system of checks and balances established by the founding fathers.

“A few months ago he was saying the Congress doesn’t count. The Congress doesn’t mean anything. I am going to rule by decree and by administrative regulation.” Napolitano said.

“Now he’s basically saying the Supreme Court doesn’t count. It doesn’t matter what they think. They can’t review our legislation. That would leave just him as the only branch of government standing.”

“I think he has some problems with understanding the Constitution or accepting limitations on his power.” the Judge added.

During a speech at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, with Vice President Joe Biden in February, Obama said “Whenever Congress refuses to act, Joe and I, we’re going to act,” adding “In the months to come, wherever we have an opportunity, we’re going to take steps on our own to keep this economy moving.”

Earlier this week Obama appeared to challenge the “unelected” Supreme Court not to take an “extraordinary” and “unprecedented” step of overturning his health reform law.

“Ultimately, I am confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress,” Obama said.

The president then stated “…for years, what we have heard is, the biggest problem on the bench was judicial activism, or a lack of judicial restraint, that an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law,” he said. “Well, this is a good example, and I’m pretty confident that this court will recognize that and not take that step.”

In essence, Obama appears to be making the case that the Constitution is outdated because it allows for “an unelected group of people” to make judicial decisions.

Judge Napolitano points out that this is an extreme view for anyone to take, let alone a president.

“There are equal branches of the government, but with respect to what the law means and what the Constitution means, the court is superior to the president.” Napolitano noted.

“No president in modern times has questioned their authority.”

“This is an extreme view of the Supreme Court and the Constitution, one that has not been articulated since Andrew Jackson.” The Judge urged.

Watch the video below:

—————————————————————-

Steve Watson is the London based writer and editor for Alex Jones’ Infowars.net, and Prisonplanet.com. He has a Masters Degree in International Relations from the School of Politics at The University of Nottingham in England.

Similar/Related Articles

 

  1. Judge Napolitano: Health-Care Reform and the Constitution
  2. Obama May Make “Unelected” Supreme Court a Campaign Issue
  3. 12 Signs That We Are Getting Dangerously Close To War With Syria
  4. Judge Napolitano: An Open Letter To John Boehner — Stand Up for The People!
  5. Janet Napolitano, Supreme Court Justice?
  6. Judge Napolitano on Obama’s EO to Hold Detainees Indefinitely
  7. 24 Signs That We Are Getting Dangerously Close To A Major War In The Middle East
  8. Judge Napolitano: Why State Efforts Against Obamacare Are Doomed
  9. 9/11 Family Group: Judge Napolitano and Geraldo Rivera Are Right to Question Building 7 Collapse
  10. Olbermann says Fox must fire Judge Napolitano for being a 9/11 truther
  11. 9/11 Family Group: Judge Napolitano and Geraldo Rivera Are Right to Question Building 7 Collapse
  12. Judge Napolitano on Congressional Power
  13. ########################

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F8y9ko6ylLc&feature=player_embedded
  14. DOJ Attempts to Install Their Own ‘Embedded Monitor’ in Sheriff Joe’s Office

  15. Patrick Henningsen
    Infowars.com
    April 6, 2012PHOENIX – Arizona continues to set the stage as a battleground pitting local and state’s rights against the federal government’s inclination to control how states are allowed to govern their own affairs.

    The Department of Justice in Washington has accused Sheriff Joe Arapio’s Office of engaging in what they describe as ‘racial profiling and mistreatment of illegals aliens and hispanics’ and alleged ‘human rights violations’ in its patrols and jails.

    The DOJ has refused to present any of its alleged evidence to support their charges, yet, they are still moving forward and are threatening to sue if Arpaio does not comply. Not intimidated by Washington’s threats, Maricopa County’s own Attorney General Bill Mongomery told the DOJ yesterday, “put up or shut up”.

    Negoiations between the Sheriff’s Office and the DOJ came to a halt on Tuesday when Arpaio flatly refused to allow a court-appointed embedded DOJ ”monitor” stationed in his office full-time, a move which many critics describe as a federal power-grab, aimed at controlling Arpaio, a duly elected office holder representing 4.5 million residents in the Phoenix area.

    Maricopa County is not the only Sheriff’s office under DOJ investigation. Arpaio explains, “They been investigating 20 other departments recently with their civil rrights unit in the Department of Justice.” In an earlier FOX interview last December, Arpaio stated flatly, “I’m not going to back down because of politics, because the President wants to get the hispanic vote.”

    “What is this, a poker game? They want to go to court, we’ll be glad to meet them in court”, blasted Arpaio.

     

    The DOJ has already spent millions of dollars to date through their three year investigation into Arpaio’s office, including applying pressure on Arpaio to resign as elected Sheriff.

    If a compromise cannot be reached between the two parties, the DOJ contends that it will file a federal lawsuit against Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office, a legal battle which is likely to cost millions for both sides, and could drag on for years.

    There may be other political reasons to force an Arpaio resignation in 2012, besides what critics claim as currying favor with Arizona’s hispanic voting bloc before the November elections. Not least of all, is because of the Sheriff’s Office’s own Cold Case Posse law enforcement investigation into the validity of President Obama’s birth certificate and Selective Service draft card.

    According to his team, early returns for the investigation have turned up conclusive evidence on two counts. “What we are looking at is two possible forged government documents”, explains Arpaio.

    On the strength of Arpaio’s investigation into Obama, the Arizona State Legislature went on to draft HB 2480 that would require Barack Obama to prove his eligibility as a US President, and would also determine whether his name would appear on the state ballot come November.

    Since the Obama I.D. bill was lodged two weeks ago, it has met with some resistance, being intentionally held-up by certain members of the state senate.

    Regardless of the outcome of HB 2480, the Sheriff’s Office says they will remain steadfast in their investigation, and will continue to follow-up on evidence of forgery and fraud in the Obama case.

    Similar/Related Articles
    1. Sheriff Arpaio office lawyers to meet with DOJ
    2. Obama Fanatic Found Guilty of Threats to Kill Sheriff Joe and Family
    3. Justice Department Gives Second Ultimatum in Sheriff Arpaio Investigation
    4. U.S. may sue Arizona’s Sheriff Arpaio for not cooperating in investigation
    5. Arizona Sheriff Vows to Enforce Immigration Law Whether ‘Feds’ Like It or Not
    6. Arizona Sheriff tasks ‘Cold Case Posse’ to investigate Obama’s birth certificate
    7. DHS strips Arizona sheriff of authority to patrol for illegal immigrants
    8. Arizona Sheriff, U.S. in Standoff Over Immigration Enforcement
    9. DHS to takeover Arizona Sheriff jurisdiction on illegals
    10. Ariz. Sheriff To Appeal Profiling Case Ruling
    11. Mexican drug cartel puts bounty out on Arizona sheriff
    12. Arpaio Has ‘No Intention’ of Testifying Before Conyers Committee on Alleged Immigration Enforcement Abuses
    13. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=feVLB9aYQx0&feature=player_embedded
      ############################
    14. Hutaree Militiamen Cleared In Court

    15. Chuck Baldwin
      Infowars.com
      April 6, 2012Much to the chagrin of the Southern Poverty Law Center, a federal judge has cleared the members of a Michigan militia who were accused by federal law enforcement agents of conspiracy to commit sedition. Since you didn’t hear much about this ruling from the national press corps, here is one online version of the report:

      photoRaid of Hutaree “compound” in Michigan, March of 2010.

      Seven members of a Michigan militia have been cleared of plotting to overthrow the U.S. government as a judge dismissed the most serious charges against them.

      “In a shock defeat for federal authorities, District Judge Victoria Roberts said the group’s expressed hatred of law enforcement did not amount to a conspiracy.

      “The FBI secretly planted an informant and an agent inside the Hutaree militia in 2008 to collect hours of anti-government audio and video that became the cornerstone of the case.

      “Senior officials had insisted they had captured homegrown rural extremists poised for war.

      “But the judge said: ‘The court is aware that protected speech and mere words can be sufficient to show a conspiracy. In this case, however, they do not rise to that level.’’

      “Judge Roberts granted requests for acquittal on the most serious charges: conspiring to commit sedition, or rebellion, against the U.S. and conspiring to use weapons of mass destruction.

      “Other weapons crimes linked to the alleged conspiracies were also dismissed.”

      Read more:

      http://tinyurl.com/7wp8jhe

      At this point, I believe it is necessary that I review a column I wrote on April 6, 2010, regarding the Hutaree militia raid. As you read the words that follow, please remember that they were written TWO YEARS AGO–almost to the day.

      [2010 column starts here] I want to try and expound on William Norman Grigg’s outstanding analysis of the Hutaree militia raid. In doing so, I am going to also expand upon Grigg’s reference to James Madison’s trenchant treatise in Federalist 46.

      Referring to the federal indictment against the Hutaree militia, that alleged members were making preparations for potential armed conflict against law enforcement officers as a “seditious conspiracy,” Grigg astutely noted, “If they were acquiring weapons and developing appropriate skills in anticipation of defending themselves against government aggression, their actions–while possibly conspiratorial in nature–don’t amount to a crime. This is particularly true in light of our cultural history, in which sedition–agitation to change the existing political order–is our proudest civic tradition.”

      Grigg then rightly observes, “Government is nothing more than the rationalization and exercise of violence. Everything done by government contains at least the implicit threat of lethal coercion. Thus the indictment’s description of Hutaree as ‘an anti-government extremist organization which advocates violence against local, state and Federal law enforcement’ is a product of rhetorical onanism [from Genesis 38:9–a great analogy, Will].”

      As a general rule, government is the most violent force on the planet. If one wants to get a true perspective on the historical record regarding who or what routinely produces the most violence and death, one should pick up a copy of R. J. Rummel’s book, “Death By Government.” Since the end of World War II, Communist China and Red Russia lead the pack when it comes to death and brutality; however, the US government has inflicted its share of carnage as well. For example, in Iraq and Afghanistan alone, the government in Washington, D.C., has killed over 800,000 civilians (and this figure is a conservative estimate noting the most credible resources possible).

      See: http://www.unknownnews.net/casualties.html

      Also see: http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2006/images/10/11/human.cost.of.war.pdf

      Plus, does anyone remember the violence that our federal government enacted upon the Branch Davidians outside Waco, Texas? Does anyone remember the mother shot in the head while innocently holding her little baby in her own home by a federal sniper near Ruby Ridge, Idaho (after her small son was shot in the back by federal agents)? In fact, the list of civilians who have been killed by federal law enforcement agents over the years is a very long one. Granted, many of these killings were done in lawful self-defense; but others amounted to nothing less than old-fashioned murder (and never was the federal agent who committed the murder ever brought to justice).

      If one wants to indict an “organization which advocates violence,” then surely the central government in Washington, D.C., should be indicted!

      If Hutaree members were indeed planning AGGRESSIVE violence against anyone–in the government or without–they deserved to be stopped. If, however, they were simply preparing to DEFEND THEMSELVES against government overreach or abuse–and would only resort to violence in an act of lawful self-defense–they committed no crime and are but the most recent victims of federal abuse of power. This is a question that will doubtless be determined in a court of law.

      To charge, however (as the indictment does), that Hutaree members (all 9 of them!) planned “to levy war against the United States, [and] to oppose by force the authority of the Government of the United States . . .” will take some doing to make stick. As Grigg points out, “If Hutaree was preparing for armed DEFENSE against criminal actions by government officials, this charge is as pointless as a broken pencil. If their efforts to ‘prevent, hinder, and delay’ various government initiatives were confined to activism, rather than armed conflict, they are–in that particular–not substantially different from hundreds or thousands of other groups.”

      The entire case against Hutaree appears to be based upon the testimony of an FBI undercover agent inside the group. Placing agent provocateurs inside groups such as Hutaree is a classic strategy of federal police agencies. This part of the story was broken by the Wall Street Journal.

      See the WSJ report at:

      http://tinyurl.com/wsj-hutaree

      Using agent provocateurs is a long-favored tactic of both the Kremlin and the White House. Joel Skousen’s latest WORLD AFFAIRS BRIEF contains an extremely trenchant and insightful analysis of how Russia and the US have used–and continue to use–this tactic.

      Skousen writes, “A related tactic [to false flag operations] is the hiring of agent provocateurs to infiltrate a group targeted for destruction and induce radical elements of that group to perform crimes against innocent civilians that will justify armed retaliation or arrest. With the sudden surge in claimed terrorism in Russia and the arrest of the radical Hutaree group in the US, it is helpful to review the role of false flag terror attacks in Russia and the role of agent provocateurs in the US as we analyze what’s really going on.”

      further states, “As we move on to discuss the arrest of the radical members of the Hutaree cult in Michigan, it is important to note that virtually every prosecution of so-called domestic terrorism in the past decade is owed to the infiltration of FBI informants. While none of us in America dispute the need to gain intelligence on re
      al threats to national security, we have to question the propriety of training and pressuring informants (most of which have been forced to accept the informant assignment in lieu of a prison term for other crimes committed) to provoke and induce angry and unstable dissidents to commit acts of terror.

      “All too often, FBI ‘informants’ have been pressured by superiors to go far beyond informing. They have provided weapons, explosives, and even acted as the guiding hand to map out the strategy and tactics for performing the deed. These things only come out reluctantly during trial, and even then I suspect that we are never allowed to know the full extent of these provocations.”

      To receive a sample of Joel Skousen’s WORLD AFFAIRS BRIEF or to subscribe to this excellent newsletter (I highly recommend it), write to:

      editor@worldaffairsbrief.com

      In addition, Will Grigg states that another major component of the indictment that is worrisome is the charge that Hutaree is guilty of “seditious conspiracy.” As Grigg writes, “Whatever is eventually learned about Hutaree, as things presently stand the indictment against it could provide a template for ‘seditious conspiracy’ prosecutions involving practically any group that endorses the use of defensive force to protect citizens against government aggression.

      “Indeed, the definition of ‘conspiracy’ used in the Hutaree indictment could make a criminal out of anyone who reads Federalist Paper 46 in public, thereby sharing James Madison’s commendably seditious admonition that the people preserve ‘the advantage of being armed’ in the event that insurrection against the central government proves necessary in order to preserve liberty.”

      Let’s look a little closer at Federalist 46, written by Founding Father, author of the US Constitution, and America’s fourth President, James Madison. In dispelling the fears of colonists toward a standing federal army, Madison said in Federalist 46, “Let a regular army, fully equal to the resources of the country, be formed; and let it be entirely at the devotion of the federal government; still it would not be going too far to say, that the State governments, with the people on their side, would be able to repel the danger. The highest number to which, according to the best computation, a standing army can be carried in any country, does not exceed one hundredth part of the whole number of souls; or one twenty-fifth part of the number able to bear arms. This proportion would not yield, in the United States, an army of more than twenty-five or thirty thousand men. To these would be opposed a militia amounting to near half a million of citizens with arms in their hands, officered by men chosen from among themselves, fighting for their common liberties, and united and conducted by governments possessing their affections and confidence. It may well be doubted, whether a militia thus circumstanced could ever be conquered by such a proportion of regular troops.”

      Madison went on to say, “Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.”

      Could Madison be any clearer? He (and the rest of America’s founders) emphatically expected the militia of the “several States” to be universally armed against the potential encroachment on liberty by the central government, meaning: the citizenry must at all times be prepared to use their arms against any aggressive nature of the federal government to trample their freedoms.

      This, of course, reinforces the founders’ intent, that the 2nd Amendment protected the right of the people to keep and bear arms for the express purpose of providing the citizenry with the capability to repel (with violence) any assault against their liberties by their own federal government.

      So, pray tell, would today’s FBI categorize James Madison’s statements in Federalist 46 as “seditious conspiracy”? If so, perhaps we are closer to tyranny than any of us wants to admit!

      Furthermore, it is not lost to millions of Americans that this is the same federal government (through Department of Homeland Security fusion centers) that just recently characterized pro-lifers; people who support the 2nd Amendment; people who oppose the United Nations and illegal immigration; people who voted for Ron Paul or Chuck Baldwin; and Iraq War veterans as “extremists” and potential “dangerous militia members.”

      But, once again, the federal government–along with their propagandists in the major news media, including its artificial authority on militias, the ultra-liberal Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) in Montgomery, Alabama–is able to use the Hutaree militia to demonize militias in general, and even more damaging, to try and destroy the concept of constitutional State militias in the minds of the American public.

      Did members of the Hutaree intend to carry out aggressive violence against law enforcement personnel? I have no idea. Until this story broke in the national media, I had never heard of this group. I will wait for the facts to come out–if indeed the federal government and national media even allow the facts to come out.

      I do know this: I do not trust the federal government to tell the truth about anything! They did not tell the truth about the Branch Davidians at Waco; they did not tell the truth about Randy Weaver; they did not tell the truth about Gordon Kahl; and, if their track record is any indicator, it is doubtful that they are telling the truth about the Hutaree militia. But we shall see.

      In the meantime, as William Norman Grigg opines, “There’s reason to believe that the Feds have expanded and escalated this ongoing enterprise to exploit, and exacerbate, growing public hostility toward an increasingly invasive and esurient government.

      “Whether it is ever demonstrated that Hutaree intended to ‘levy war’ against the U.S. government, this much is beyond serious dispute: The Homeland Security state is unambiguously preparing for war with the public–in fact, it has been doing so for a long time.” [2010 column ends here]

      I invite readers to visit William Norman Grigg’s blog at:

      http://freedominourtime.blogspot.com/2010/03/causus-belli.html

      Well, now in 2012, the facts have all been laid bare. The Hutaree militia was innocent of the federal government’s conspiracy charges, and the federal government, once again, did not tell the truth. And, furthermore, the words written by yours truly and Will Grigg seem even more relevant today than they did two years ago, do they not?

      In closing, let me be very clear about this: I have nothing but appreciation and respect for honest, God-fearing law enforcement personnel. I count law enforcement personnel among my kinfolk, and I feel very privileged to have been made an honorary deputy sheriff by my former county sheriff. I certainly share no anti-law enforcement prejudice. But the current trend to militarize and federalize law enforcement is both unconstitutional and alarming. Even more alarming is the manner in which the federal government and its toadies at the SPLC are attempting to criminalize the expressions of freedom and constitutional government–the same words, thoughts, and ideas expressed by America’s Founding Fathers. To quote myself, “So, pray tell, would today’s FBI categorize James Madison’s statements in Federalist 46 as ‘seditious conspiracy’? If so, perhaps we are closer
      to tyranny than any of us wants to admit!”

      In the meantime, congratulations to federal District Judge Victoria Roberts for representing the court in a manner consistent with the founders’ intentions: by using the gavel as a hammer to protect liberty rather than as a rubber stamp to dismantle it–as so many federal judges are inclined to do these days.

      This post first appeared on Chuck Baldwin’s website.

      Similar/Related Articles
      1. The Hutaree Militia Raid
      2. Hutaree Domestic Terrorism Trial Begins
      3. The Hutaree Case Falls Apart
      4. FBI Can’t Recall Details on Hutaree
      5. Judge OKs release of 2 Hutaree members
      6. Hutaree Militia Members Release Delayed
      7. Corporate Media Connects Hutaree Members to U.S. Military
      8. Hutaree Acquitted in Federal Terrorism Case
      9. The Manufactured Menace From Michigan, Take Two
      10. Judge acquits Hutaree militia members of conspiracy charges
      11. Precrimes, Hutaree, and Free Political Speech
      12. Judge grants bond for Hutaree militia members
      13. ###################
      14. “Not In Labor Force” At New All Time High

      15. Zero Hedge
        April 6, 2012March NFP big miss at just 120K. Unemployment rate declines from 8.3% to 8.2%. Futures slide, for at least a few minutes before the NEW QE TM rumor starts spreading. The household survey actually posted a decline in March from 142,065 to 142,034. Considering Birth Death added 90K to the NSA number, the actual number was almost unchanged. And as always, as we predicted when Goldman hiked its NFP forecast yesterday from 175K to 200K saying “if Goldman’s recent predictive track record is any indication, tomorrow’s NFP will be a disaster”, Goldie once again skewers everyone. Finally, Joe LaVorgna’s +250,000 forecast was just 100% off… as usual.

        The unemployment rate drops to 8.2% for one simple reason: the number of people not in the labor force is back to all time highs: 87,897,000.

        Birth Death:


        Average:
        Similar/Related Articles
        1. Shrinking U.S. Labor Force Keeps Unemployment Rate From Rising
        2. Long-Term Unemployment Remains High, Millions Leave Labor Force
        3. Labor Force Participation Rate Drops To Fresh 25 Year Low, Adjusted Unemployment Rate At 11.7%
        4. Real Unemployment Figures Double Those Reported By Labor Department
        5. “Labor Day” should be renamed “Corporation Day” or “War Day”
        6. Italy’s youth jobless hits record high 30 percent
        7. The Real Unemployment Rate Hits a 68-Year High
        8. Fed predicts high jobless rate through 2012
        9. Jobless Claims in U.S. Decreased Last Week to 456,000
        10. Manchester, New Hampshire Police Officer Uses Excessive Force on High School Student
        11. Fed Concludes Structurally High Unemployment is a Myth
        12. Oil down 50% from July high

2012-2015- KILLSHOT- GOV.R-V Predictitions For Future!!!!

https://tatoott1009.com/

What is the Killshot?

During the top-secret Remote Viewing (RV) CIA and U.S. Army research program, trained viewers that were normally tasked with foreseeing the outcome of war related events began picking up on a future occurrence that appeared to mark a dramatic shift in global life. At first, these viewers, along with Major Ed Dames, the program’s senior operations and training officer, had feared their subconscious was foreseeing nuclear war. It turns out after years of Remote Viewing sessions, the event is in fact a series of solar flares that are so devastating to the Earth, it may cause the death of billions and change life on Earth as we know it.

Normally, one might not take such a warning seriously, but what sets this prediction apart from others is that Remote Viewers have a track record of being amazingly accurate regarding globally recognized disasters and events. In fact, there are many predictions that were announced on national radio and TV programs that have already accurately come to pass with unprecedented accuracy including the tragic disaster in Japan, a mysterious crop fungus, the predicted Indonesian 9.0 earthquake and more!

But knowing what’s coming over the horizon is only first step. Learning how to prepare and protect yourself and loved ones comes next. For that reason, people have been learning Remote Viewing to locate their personal sanctuary locations, foresee smaller near term events, and become involved with optimal investments before time runs out.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$





Why is this free?!

You’ve probably heard that if something is so important, than why isn’t it free? In this case, it is! Major Ed Dames, along with thousands of trained students worldwide, have learned and used this declassified skill to obtain subconscious data regarding any aspect of life including finding optimal investment, locating survival locations for catastrophic events and answering some of life’s most mysterious questions. As a result, Major Ed Dames feels that this information is so important; Remote Viewers are using their own skill to generate the funding to produce and release of this shocking documentary without any intent of selling it for profit.

With times becoming more difficult with global financial turmoil and approaching natural disasters, food shortages and disease; it is more important than ever to learn and use Remote Viewing for protection. Begin by getting your FREE copy of Major Ed Dames’ The killshot on DVD or Blu-ray and join the RV community!

The world’s foremost remote viewing teacher, and creator of Technical Remote Viewing, Major Edward A. Dames, United States Army (ret.), is a thrice decorated military intelligence officer and an original member of the U.S. Army prototype remote viewing training program. He served as both training and operations officer for the U.S. government’s TOP SECRET psychic espionage unit.

Edward Dames is a ROTC Distinguished Military Graduate of the University of California, Berkeley. Between 1979 and 1983, Major Dames served as an electronic warfare officer and scientific and technical intelligence officer.

In 1982, Ingo Swann, under the direction of Dr. Harold Puthoff, head of the Remote Viewing Laboratory at Stanford Research Institute, realized a breakthrough. Swann developed a working model for how the unconscious mind communicates information to conscious awareness. To test the model, the Army sent Major Dames and five others to Swann as a prototype trainee group.

The results exceeded all expectations – even those of Swann. In six months, Major Dames’ teammates were producing psychically-derived data with more consistency and accuracy than had ever been seen in similar intelligence projects using even the best ‘natural’ psychics. In late 1983, the team parted company with Swann. As the new operations and training officer for the unit, Dames took this breakthrough skill, dubbed ‘Coordinate Remote Viewing,’ and began a new phase of research, testing, and evaluation in order to both uncover its true capabilities, and to perfect its application to fit crucial intelligence collection needs.

Remote Viewing Declassified by CIA

Due to information leaks to public and, Remote Viewing was forced into declassification by the U.S. Army and CIA. Major Dames retired from the U.S. Army in 1991 and began a full-time effort to advance remote viewing technology, and to create teams of professional civilian Remote Viewers to work on complex projects.

In 1992, Ingo Swann wrote a letter to The American Society of Psychical Research, which included, among other things, a brief summary of his knowledge about Ed:

He [Major Dames] was Targeting Director (sic) of the U.S. Intelligence Electronic & Security Command (sic), and assistant director of special operations (sic) in the DIA Directorate of Scientific and Technical Intelligence, and an area controller of special operations (sic) of Headquarters Department of the Army. For several years, he was mandated to brief on a daily and/or weekly basis DIA, NSA, other agencies, and, when circumstances required, the President and his advisors.

In order to bring this invaluable knowledge to the public, Major Dames held Remote Viewing workshops around the country in an effort to build a base of vocationally oriented Remote Viewers. This skill was quickly recognized by major TV networks and Hollywood studios that were awestruck by its accuracy and student success rate.

Remote Viewing training through live workshops was exploding in popularly but the number of people desiring to learn this declassifies protocol still far exceeded available workshop space. As a result, Major Ed Dames eventually released the long awaited, groundbreaking Learn Remote Viewing course (www.LearnRV.com) in order to reach thousands of new students globally.

The Learn Remote Viewing course is now the most advanced RV training program in the world, incorporating over 20 years of evolved, post-military operational knowledge. The training course utilizes the natural interactive menu system to provide a structured, comfortably paced training environment, with an effective mix of training targets, lectures, and feedback.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8rNMtBNbQs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TWqJ0guPdMc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQ9uFzuXh8w
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwRCOMRgxZw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CICs48zn7ug
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2kDYz1QT5SE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nmXFLNdMrsw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rcpCjQ081wQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z92Ri7-3Isw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1pinIxI71I
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yf4fS9ujQUI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B62gcghioEI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Qx20LA4PM0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2kDYz1QT5SE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f6g0hE51vow
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQ9uFzuXh8w
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q8vONKHCS_Q
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q8vONKHCS_Q
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwRCOMRgxZw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIQ-HuCOfS4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iq6mj4odJGc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1OwrnYWb_M
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nmXFLNdMrsw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdT5w3ZMe3E
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sHUKPXR5TbQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTkHP5Q3n8g
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jBbbkTjNpIQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHb83VNijBM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O8ldt4YiwuQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CdBJYHa5JGQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2dZTMV8fIto
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GSYaP3HVTL4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3tDbK_btpb0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jn6U8O3hTYQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WS6ogOzY_M4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R1uWSmclzWY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z92Ri7-3Isw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1pinIxI71I
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yf4fS9ujQUI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iq6mj4odJGc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1OwrnYWb_M
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nmXFLNdMrsw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnQMPIcgGxQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1tn9OFK8dKo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x5-80oVHxp4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQY6f_U2R74
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ZySjKkLIfU

House Passes “Trespass Bill” That Makes Protests Illegal

https://tatoott1009.com/



Alexander Higgins
March 8, 2012

New “trespass bill” makes it a federal offense to protest government business or functions, or against people or places under Secret Service protection.

The U.S. congress is pushing a bill into law under the innocent pretense of making protests at the White House illegal.

The new legislation just passed by the house H.R. 347, informally known as the “Trespass Bill”, goes far beyond the White House and will outlaw peaceful protests in an almost endless possible combinations of situations.

The bill begins by making it illegal to enter or remain in any restricted building or grounds, which are defined as any location where the Secret Service or any person under protection of the secret service is located or at any place designated as a special event of national significance.

Hence, the it will be illegal to protest at not only the White House but at any location where the The President, Former President’s, their families, Presidential and Vice Presidential Candidates,  Foreign Heads of States, U.S. Officials performing certain tasks, or any one else under protection of the secret service is located.

That would means it would be illegal for protestors to hold a rally outside an
Obama speech or even at an event hosted by Rick Sanatorium or Mitt Romney. It doesn’t stop there either.

The bill goes on to make it a federal offenseto impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions, engages in disorderly or disruptive conduct in, or within such proximity to, any restricted building or grounds when, or so that, such conduct, in fact, impedes or disrupts the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions

Then to make the bill all inconclusive it is also a crime when anyone “obstructs or impedes ingress or egress to or from any restricted building or grounds”

Here’s an article detailing just how far this bill goes into killing the First Amendment Free Speech and Assembly rights, followed by the full text of the bill.

Goodbye, First Amendment: ‘Trespass Bill’ will make protest illegal

Just when you thought the government couldn’t ruin the First Amendment any further: The House of Representatives approved a bill on Monday that outlaws protests in instances where some government officials are nearby, whether or not you even know it.

The US House of Representatives voted 388-to-3 in favor of H.R. 347 late Monday, a bill which is being dubbed the Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011. In the bill, Congress officially makes it illegal to trespass on the grounds of the White House, which, on the surface, seems not just harmless and necessary, but somewhat shocking that such a rule isn’t already on the books. The wording in the bill, however, extends to allow the government to go after much more than tourists that transverse the wrought iron White House fence.

Under the act, the government is also given the power to bring charges against Americans engaged in political protest anywhere in the country.

Under current law, White House trespassers are prosecuted under a local ordinance, a Washington, DC legislation that can bring misdemeanor charges for anyone trying to get close to the president without authorization. Under H.R. 347, a federal law will formally be applied to such instances, but will also allow the government to bring charges to protesters, demonstrators and activists at political events and other outings across America.

The new legislation allows prosecutors to charge anyone who enters a building without permission or with the intent to disrupt a government function with a federal offense if Secret Service is on the scene, but the law stretches to include not just the president’s palatial Pennsylvania Avenue home. Under the law, any building or grounds where the president is visiting — even temporarily — is covered, as is any building or grounds “restricted in conjunction with an event designated as a special event of national significance.”

It’s not just the president who would be spared from protesters, either.

Covered under the bill is any person protected by the Secret Service. Although such protection isn’t extended to just everybody, making it a federal offense to even accidentally disrupt an event attended by a person with such status essentially crushes whatever currently remains of the right to assemble and peacefully protest.

Hours after the act passed, presidential candidate Rick Santorum was granted Secret Service protection. For the American protester, this indeed means that glitter-bombing the former Pennsylvania senator is officially a very big no-no, but it doesn’t stop with just him. Santorum’s coverage under the Secret Service began on Tuesday, but fellow GOP hopeful Mitt Romney has already been receiving such security. A campaign aide who asked not to be identified confirmed last week to CBS News that former House Speaker Newt Gingrich has sought Secret Service protection as well. Even former contender Herman Cain received the armed protection treatment when he was still in the running for the Republican Party nod.

In the text of the act, the law is allowed to be used against anyone who knowingly enters or remains in a restricted building or grounds without lawful authority to do so, but those grounds are considered any area where someone — rather it’s President Obama, Senator Santorum or Governor Romney — will be temporarily visiting, whether or not the public is even made aware. Entering such a facility is thus outlawed, as is disrupting the orderly conduct of “official functions,” engaging in disorderly conduct “within such proximity to” the event or acting violent to anyone, anywhere near the premises. Under that verbiage, that means a peaceful protest outside a candidate’s concession speech would be a federal offense, but those occurrences covered as special event of national significance don’t just stop there, either. And neither does the list of covered persons that receive protection.

Outside of the current presidential race, the Secret Service is responsible for guarding an array of politicians, even those from outside America. George W Bush is granted protection until ten years after his administration ended, or 2019, and every living president before him is eligible for life-time, federally funded coverage. Visiting heads of state are extended an offer too, and the events sanctioned as those of national significance — a decision that is left up to the US Department of Homeland Security — extends to more than the obvious. While presidential inaugurations and meeting of foreign dignitaries are awarded the title, nearly three dozen events in all have been considered a National Special Security Event (NSSE) since the term was created under President Clinton. Among past events on the DHS-sanctioned NSSE list are Super Bowl XXXVI, the funerals of Ronald Reagan and Gerald Ford, most State of the Union addresses and the 2008 Democratic and Republican National Conventions.

With Secret Service protection awarded to visiting dignitaries, this also means, for instance, that the federal government could consider a demonstration against any foreign president on American soil as a violation of federal law, as long as it could be considered disruptive to whatever function is occurring.

When thousands of protesters are expected to descend on Chicago this spring for the 2012 G8 and NATO summits, they will also be approaching the grounds of a National Special Security Event. That means disruptive activity, to whichever court has to consider it, will be a federal offense under the act.

And don’t forget if you intend on fighting such charges, you might not be able to rely on evidence of your own. In the state of Illinois, videotaping the police, under current law, brings criminals charges. Don’t fret. It’s not like the country will really try to enforce it — right?

On the bright side, does this mean that the law could apply to law enforcement officers reprimanded for using excessive force on protesters at political events? Probably. Of course, some fear that the act is being created just to keep those demonstrations from ever occuring, and given the vague language on par with the loose definition of a “terrorist” under the NDAA, if passed this act is expected to do a lot more harm to the First Amendment than good.

United States Representative Justin Amash (MI-03) was one of only three lawmakers to vote against the act when it appeared in the House late Monday. Explaining his take on the act through his official Facebook account on Tuesday, Rep. Amash writes, “The bill expands current law to make it a crime to enter or remain in an area where an official is visiting even if the person does not know it’s illegal to be in that area and has no reason to suspect it’s illegal.”

“Some government officials may need extraordinary protection to ensure their safety. But criminalizing legitimate First Amendment activity — even if that activity is annoying to those government officials — violates our rights,” adds the representative.

Now that the act has overwhelmingly made it through the House, the next set of hands to sift through its pages could very well be President Barack Obama; the US Senate had already passed the bill back on February 6. Less than two months ago, the president approved the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012, essentially suspending habeas corpus from American citizens. Could the next order out of the Executive Branch be revoking some of the Bill of Rights? Only if you consider the part about being able to assemble a staple of the First Amendment, really. Don’t worry, though. Obama was, after all, a constitutional law professor. When he signed the NDAA on December 31, he accompanied his signature with a signing statement that let Americans know that, just because he authorized the indefinite detention of Americans didn’t mean he thought it was right.

Should President Obama suspend the right to assemble, Americans might expect another apology to accompany it in which the commander-in-chief condemns the very act he authorizes. If you disagree with such a decision, however, don’t take it to the White House. Sixteen-hundred Pennsylvania Avenue and the vicinity is, of course, covered under this act.

Here is the full text of  H. R. 347, which was just passed by in the house by a vote of 388-to-3.

112th CONGRESS1st Session H. R. 347


AN ACTTo correct and simplify the drafting of section 1752 (relating to restricted buildings or grounds) of title 18, United States Code. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the `Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011′.

SEC. 2. RESTRICTED BUILDING OR GROUNDS.

    Section 1752 of title 18, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:

Sec. 1752. Restricted building or grounds

    (a) Whoever–
    (1) knowingly enters or remains in any restricted building or grounds without lawful authority to do so;
    (2) knowingly, and with intent to impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions, engages in disorderly or disruptive conduct in, or within such proximity to, any restricted building or grounds when, or so that, such conduct, in fact, impedes or disrupts the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions;
    (3) knowingly, and with the intent to impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions, obstructs or impedes ingress or egress to or from any restricted building or grounds; or
    (4) knowingly engages in any act of physical violence against any person or property in any restricted building or grounds;
    or attempts or conspires to do so, shall be punished as provided in subsection (b).
    (b) The punishment for a violation of subsection (a) is–
    (1) a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than 10 years, or both, if–
    (A) any person, during and in relation to the offense, uses or carries a deadly or dangerous weapon or firearm; or
    (B) the offense results in significant bodily injury as defined by section 2118(e)(3); and
    (2) a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than one year, or both, in any other case.
    (c) In this section–
    (1) the term `restricted buildings or grounds’ means any posted, cordoned off, or otherwise restricted area–
    (A) of the White House or its grounds, or the Vice President’s official residence or its grounds;
    (B) of a building or grounds where the President or other person protected by the Secret Service is or will be temporarily visiting; or
    (C) of a building or grounds so restricted in conjunction with an event designated as a special event of national significance; and
    (2) the term ‘other person protected by the Secret Service’ means any person whom the United States Secret Service is authorized to protect under section 3056 of this title when such person has not declined such protection.’.

Passed the House of Representatives February 28, 2011.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

H.R. 347: Another Step in the Elimination of the First Amendment

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
March 5, 2012

It is fairly obvious Obama and Congress rushed through H.R. 347 in order to curtail demonstrations that will undoubtedly occur during both Democrat and Republican conventions this summer. Also known as the “Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011,” the bill makes it a felony to disrupt or protest at any place or event attended by any person with secret service protection.

photo

“Current law makes it illegal to enter or remain in an area where certain government officials (more particularly, those with Secret Service protection) will be visiting temporarily if and only if the person knows it’s illegal to enter the restricted area but does so anyway,” Michigan Rep. Justin Amash wrote on his Facebook page. “[H.R. 347] expands current law to make it a crime to enter or remain in an area where an official is visiting even if the person does not know it’s illegal to be in that area and has no reason to suspect it’s illegal.”

Amash, Paul Broun, a Georgia Republican, and Ron Paul were the lone dissenting voices opposed to this bill, which is being called  the “First Amendment Rights Eradication Act” designed specifically to counter the Occupy movement and other political groups opposed to the bankster regime in control of the Congress and the presidency. Democrats have characterized opposition to the bill as “a whole lot of kerfuffle over nothing.”

Gene Howington, a guest blogger on law professor Jonathan Turley’s blog, contends that the government deliberately made the language of H.R. 347 vague and overly broad. Howington writes that “it seems to be a trend that vague or overly broad language could be fairly described as being purposefully adopted allowing ‘wiggle room’ for Federal authorities to potentially abuse civil and human rights under the color of authority.”

While the recently enacted and also vaguely worded NDAA “poses a threat to your 4th, 5th and 6th Amendment rights, the newest attack of vague language is aimed at your 1st Amendment rights of Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Assembly and Freedom to Petition,” Howington notes. “As currently worded, it might as well have been called the ‘Federal We’re Too Important To Be Annoyed By Your Protest Act of 2011′ or (as described by Rep. Justin Amash (R-MI), one of the few Representatives to vote against the bill) the ‘First Amendment Rights Eradication Act’ because it effectively outlaws protests near people who are ‘authorized’ to be protected by the Secret Service.”

In 1998, Bill Clinton signed Presidential Decision Directive 62 establishing the National Special Security Events, or NSSE, a directive making the Secret Service responsible for security at designated events, including presidential nominating conventions. Other events under NSEE include summits of world leaders, meetings of international organizations, and presidential inaugurations. In other words, with the passage of this bill, it will now be a felony to protest the G20 and globalist “trade” summits and other neoliberal confabs where international banksters and their minions plot our future behind closed doors.

Such a draconian restriction of the First Amendment is another step in an effort to outlaw all protest against the government, especially at events where the controllers discuss and finalize their plans to implement world government and a centralized global banking system. The global elite have repeatedly demonstrated their animosity toward the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Taking down the First Amendment – in addition to the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and most importantly the Second – under the bogus and contrived aegis of a manufactured war on terror amply reveals what they have a mind: a gulag panopticon where resistance is not only futile, but illegal, and where the slaves are disarmed and powerless to effectuate change

.++++++++++++++++++++++

Does H.R. 347 Change Anything About Your Right to Protest Politicians Under Secret Service Protection? It’s All In the Word Change.

| March 1, 2012

As Brian Doherty noted below, on Tuesday the House passed H.R. 347 [pdf], officially known as The Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011. Now all it needs to become law is President Obama’s approving signage.

Contrarian standbys Congressmen Justin Amash (R-MI) and Ron Paul (R-TX) voted nay, but the bill passed 388-3. Rep. Amash wrote that the the bill “violates our rights”, but Michael Mahassey, the communications director for the bill’s sponsor, Rep. Thomas J.Rooney (R-Florida), sounding irritated on Wednesday (while he implied that I was not the first person to call and ask about it). Mahassey called the reaction to the bill “a whole lot of kerfuffle over nothing. This doesn’t affect anyone’s right to protest anywhere at any time. Ever.”

H.R. 347, said Mahassey, is simply a DC-centric update of already existing law. Section 1752 of title 18, United States Code, already protects those under Secret Service protection — except in Washington D.C. where these protections fall under local laws against trespassing, etc. Mahassey said that the Secret Service requested the changes to this law because “right now it’s not a federal violation to jump the fence and run across the White House lawn, this bill makes it a federal violation.”

Not exactly the abolition of the First Amendment, is it? RT and The New American’s warnings are hopefully an exaggeration.

But there’s reason to worry says Will Adams, the deputy chief of staff for Congressman Amash. Yes, the law updates as Mahssey said. It brings the DC trespassing violations under the federal umbrella and “Amash has no issue with that.” But also does imply something else which inspired Amash to vote “nay.”

Adams, who is a lawyer by trade, like his boss, explained the changes in updates from the previous statute in layman’s terms. It all comes down the words “willfully” and “knowingly”. As Amash wrote on his facebook (and Doherty noted):

Current law makes it illegal to enter or remain in an area where certain government officials (more particularly, those with Secret Service protection) will be visiting temporarily if and only if the person knows it’s illegal to enter the restricted area but does so anyway. The bill expands current law to make it a crime to enter or remain in an area where an official is visiting even if the person does not know it’s illegal to be in that area and has no reason to suspect it’s illegal. (It expands the law by changing “willfully and knowingly” to just “knowingly” with respect to the mental state required to be charged with a crime.)

To elaborate on what seems to be subtle legal stuff, the current law being amended, Section 1752 of title 18, United States Code, would be here. Note that the words are “willfully” and “knowingly” are there. H.R. 347 is here. The word “willfully” is indeed gone. What does that mean exactly?

Adams pointed me towards U.S. v. Bursey in which:

Brett Bursey was convicted in early 2004 — after a bench trial conducted by a magistrate judge in the District of South Carolina — of willfully and knowingly entering and remaining in a posted, cordoned off, or otherwise restricted area where the President was temporarily visiting

Bursey visited a South Carolina airbase with the intention of protesting the then-imminent Iraq war. He remained in an area that the Secret Service had coordinated off for 20 or so minutes, arguing his right to stay there. His state trespassing charges were dismissed, but he was then charged under Section 1752 of title 18 above. According to the U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, Bursey argued:

first, he maintains that the trial court erred in finding that he was in a “restricted area” at the time of his October 2002 arrest; second, he contends that the court erred in finding that he possessed the requisite criminal intent

They also noted in their decision to reject his appeal, some of the finer points of the difference between “willfully” and “knowingly””:

As the Bryan Court observed… for a defendant to have acted willfully, he must merely have “acted with knowledge that his conduct was unlawful.”…we focus our discussion on whether Bursey “willfully” violated the Statute, because, generally, “[m]ore is required” with respect to conduct performed willfully than conduct performed knowingly… requires “more culpable” mens rea than knowing violation).As a general proposition, the statutory term “knowingly” requires the Government to prove only that the defendant had knowledge of the facts underlying the offense

Bursey was fined a measly 500 dollars, but the precedent is there. And remember, the punishment under both the new and old versions of section 1752 are “not more than one year” in jail for the trespass, and “not more than ten years” if “the person, during and in relation to the offense, uses or carries a deadly or dangerous weapon or firearm.” However, as Adams summed it up an email:

The bill makes it illegal knowingly to enter or remain in a restricted building or grounds without legal authority to do so.  A restricted building or grounds is defined as a “restricted area” where a person protected by the Secret Service “is or will be temporarily visiting.”  According to federal law (18 U.S.C. § 3056), the Secret Service is authorized to protect “visiting heads of foreign states or foreign governments” and “other distinguished foreign visitors to the United States.”

So, let’s say a G-20 meeting is hosted in the U.S. and the Secret Service decides it wants a larger perimeter surrounding the event where only G-20 members and staff can be.  A person could be arrested and found guilty of violating this law—with up to 10 years in prison if they’re carrying a weapon, one year in prison if they’re not—for merely walking into the restricted area, without even knowing walking into the area is illegal.

So it’s hard to know the exact implications of this one-word change, especially when some very nasty, excessive crack-downs happen already in cases like G-20 summit protests. But law is precedent and interpretation. So in a world where the National Defense Authorization Act maybe allows for the indefiniate detainment of citizens, but maybe not, but the President says he won’t use the power so trust him, governments don’t need one more inch – not one more word of excuse — to crack down on protest and speech. The cult of the presidency has gone far enough.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

imprecise Language and the Risks of H.R. 347

Published 1, March 3, 2012 Congress , Constitutional Law , Free Speech , Politics 48 Comments

Submitted by Gene Howington, Guest Blogger

Coincidentally and often, abuses of civil or human rights in the United States derive from the same source as law made via precedent. That source is vague or overly broad legislation and imprecise use of language.  As a matter of good drafting practice, this is why precision language is encouraged – to provide clarity and minimize ambiguity in the letter of the law. When vague laws create issues in court, the court either makes a ruling creating precedent and consequently a plan of action for how to address the issue moving forward although occasionally a law is overturned in toto for vagueness and the legislature can take a fresh swing writing the law.

However, it seems to be a trend that vague or overly broad language could be fairly described as being purposefully adopted allowing “wiggle room” for Federal authorities to potentially abuse civil and human rights under the color of authority. This is a dangerous practice. The issue of vagueness is at the heart of the NDAA scandal as recently discussed on the blog here, here and here. While the NDAA poses a threat to your 4th, 5th and 6th Amendment rights, the newest attack of vague language is aimed at your 1st Amendment rights of Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Assembly and Freedom to Petition. It is found in the pending legislation of H.R. 347, innocuously titled the “Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011″. As currently worded, it might as well have been called the “Federal We’re Too Important To Be Annoyed By Your Protest Act of 2011″ or (as described by Rep. Justin Amash (R-MI), one of the few Representatives to vote against the bill) the “First Amendment Rights Eradication Act” because it effectively outlaws protests near people who are “authorized” to be protected by the Secret Service.  Being that the bill passed on a House vote 388-3 and is currently coming out of committee in the Senate, its progress is something civil libertarians and activists may want to monitor.

This is H.R. 347 (proposed 18 U.S.C. § 1752) in its entirety as it is coming out of committee:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ‘Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011’.
SEC. 2. RESTRICTED BUILDING OR GROUNDS.
Section 1752 of title 18, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:
‘Sec. 1752. Restricted building or grounds
‘(a) Whoever–
(1) knowingly enters or remains in any restricted building or grounds without lawful authority to do so;
‘(2) knowingly, and with intent to impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions, engages in disorderly or disruptive conduct in, or within such proximity to, any restricted building or grounds when, or so that, such conduct, in fact, impedes or disrupts the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions;
‘(3) knowingly, and with the intent to impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions, obstructs or impedes ingress or egress to or from any restricted building or grounds; or
‘(4) knowingly engages in any act of physical violence against any person or property in any restricted building or grounds;
or attempts or conspires to do so, shall be punished as provided in subsection (b).
‘(b) The punishment for a violation of subsection (a) is–
‘(1) a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than 10 years, or both, if–
‘(A) the person, during and in relation to the offense, uses or carries a deadly or dangerous weapon or firearm; or
‘(B) the offense results in significant bodily injury as defined by section 2118(e)(3); and
‘(2) a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than one year, or both, in any other case.
‘(c) In this section–
‘(1) the term ‘restricted buildings or grounds’ means any posted, cordoned off, or otherwise restricted area–
‘(A) of the White House or its grounds, or the Vice President’s official residence or its grounds;
‘(B) of a building or grounds where the President or other person protected by the Secret Service is or will be temporarily visiting; or
‘(C) of a building or grounds so restricted in conjunction with an event designated as a special event of national significance; and
‘(2) the term ‘other person protected by the Secret Service’ means any person whom the United States Secret Service is authorized to protect under section 3056 of this title or by Presidential memorandum, when such person has not declined such protection.’. [emphasis added]

Contrast this with how 18 U.S.C. § 1752 is currently worded:

18 U.S.C. § 1752 : US Code – Section 1752: Temporary residences and offices of the President and others

(a) It shall be unlawful for any person or group of persons –
(1) willfully and knowingly to enter or remain in
(i) any building or grounds designated by the Secretary of
the Treasury as temporary residences of the President or other
person protected by the Secret Service or as temporary offices
of the President and his staff or of any other person protected
by the Secret Service, or
(ii) any posted, cordoned off, or otherwise restricted area
of a building or grounds where the President or other person
protected by the Secret Service is or will be temporarily
visiting,
in violation of the regulations governing ingress or egress
thereto:
(2) with intent to impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of
Government business or official functions, to engage in
disorderly or disruptive conduct in, or within such proximity to,
any building or grounds designated in paragraph (1) when, or so
that, such conduct, in fact, impedes or disrupts the orderly
conduct of Government business or official functions;
(3) willfully and knowingly to obstruct or impede ingress or
egress to or from any building, grounds, or area designated or
enumerated in paragraph (1); or
(4) willfully and knowingly to engage in any act of physical
violence against any person or property in any building, grounds,
or area designated or enumerated in paragraph (1).
(b) Violation of this section, and attempts or conspiracies to
commit such violations, shall be punishable by a fine under this
title or imprisonment not exceeding six months, or both.
(c) Violation of this section, and attempts or conspiracies to
commit such violations, shall be prosecuted by the United States
attorney in the Federal district court having jurisdiction of the
place where the offense occurred.
(d) The Secretary of the Treasury is authorized –
(1) to designate by regulations the buildings and grounds which
constitute the temporary residences of the President or other
person protected by the Secret Service and the temporary offices
of the President and his staff or of any other person protected
by the Secret Service, and
(2) to prescribe regulations governing ingress or egress to
such buildings and grounds and to posted, cordoned off, or
otherwise restricted areas where the President or other person
protected by the Secret Service is or will be temporarily
visiting.
(e) None of the laws of the United States or of the several
States and the District of Columbia shall be superseded by this
section.
(f) As used in this section, the term “other person protected by
the Secret Service” means any person whom the United States Secret
Service is authorized to protect under section 3056 of this title
when such person has not declined such protection.”

As the bill relevantly cites to 18 U.S.C. § 3056, selected portions of that code read:

18 U.S.C. § 3056 : US Code – Section 3056: Powers, authorities, and duties of United States Secret Service
(a) Under the direction of the Secretary of Homeland Security,
the United States Secret Service is authorized to protect the
following persons:
(1) The President, the Vice President (or other officer next in
the order of succession to the Office of President), the
President-elect, and the Vice President-elect.
(2) The immediate families of those individuals listed in
paragraph (1).
(3) Former Presidents and their spouses for their lifetimes,
except that protection of a spouse shall terminate in the event
of remarriage unless the former President did not serve as
President prior to January 1, 1997, in which case, former
Presidents and their spouses for a period of not more than ten
years from the date a former President leaves office, except that

(A) protection of a spouse shall terminate in the event of
remarriage or the divorce from, or death of a former President;
and
(B) should the death of a President occur while in office or
within one year after leaving office, the spouse shall receive
protection for one year from the time of such death:
Provided, That the Secretary of Homeland Security shall have the
authority to direct the Secret Service to provide temporary
protection for any of these individuals at any time if the
Secretary of Homeland Security or designee determines that
information or conditions warrant such protection.
(4) Children of a former President who are under 16 years of
age for a period not to exceed ten years or upon the child
becoming 16 years of age, whichever comes first.
(5) Visiting heads of foreign states or foreign governments.
(6) Other distinguished foreign visitors to the United States
and official representatives of the United States performing
special missions abroad when the President directs that such
protection be provided.
(7) Major Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates and,
within 120 days of the general Presidential election, the spouses
of such candidates. As used in this paragraph, the term “major
Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates” means those
individuals identified as such by the Secretary of Homeland
Security after consultation with an advisory committee consisting
of the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the minority
leader of the House of Representatives, the majority and minority
leaders of the Senate, and one additional member selected by the
other members of the committee.
The protection authorized in paragraphs (2) through (7) may be
declined.
(d) Whoever knowingly and willfully obstructs, resists, or
interferes with a Federal law enforcement agent engaged in the
performance of the protective functions authorized by this section
or by section 1752 of this title shall be fined not more than
$1,000 or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.” [emphasis added]

The root of the problem with this legislation lies in the omission of the word “willfully” to make the condition simply “knowingly” in conjunction with the phrase “or so that, such conduct, in fact”.  The use of this conditional phrase effectively nullifies the intent component in the absence of “willfully” being explicitly stated.  You may not have willfully or knowingly done anything other than exercise your free speech and free assembly rights, but if you “in fact” “[impede] or [disrupt] the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions”, you can be arrested and charged under this proposed revision of 18 U.S.C. § 1752 whether the impediment or disruption was willful or not.  The reworded law as the bill is currently formulated effectively does away with intent as a requirement in addition to expanding the meaning of the term ‘restricted buildings or grounds’ to mean virtually any place in proximity to or place proper a government function or an “event of national interest” is taking place. This would allow for the arrest of protesters  just about anywhere.  Outside political rallies, near the hotels of visiting foreign dignitaries, outside sporting or other public events like the Super Bowl . . .  you get the idea.

Is this an instance of vague/imprecise language creating the potential for civil rights abuses?

Or it this an instance of purposefully vague/imprecise language to allow the government to infringe upon your rights to free speech, assembly and petition?

What do you think?

Kudos: ekeyra

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Bill Passes House: Protests Near Secret Service Protected Folk Effectively Outlawed

| March 1, 2012

In case you question the value of having a Justin Amash or a Ron Paul in the House of Representatives, they were two of only three votes against H.R. 347, the “Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011.”

As reprinted in this angry Salon blog post, Rep. Amash’s reasons for objecting:

a more truthful moniker for HR 347 would be the “First Amendment Rights Eradication Act”. As Representative Amash lamented on his Facebook page:

“Current law makes it illegal to enter or remain in an area where certain government officials (more particularly, those with Secret Service protection) will be visiting temporarily if and only if the person knows it’s illegal to enter the restricted area but does so anyway. [H.R. 347] expands current law to make it a crime to enter or remain in an area where an official is visiting even if the person does not know it’s illegal to be in that area and has no reason to suspect it’s illegal… [And to] show you the extent to which the public is misled and misinformed about the legislation we are voting on, read one prominent media outlet’s coverage of the same bill: http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/212873-house-approves-white-house-trespass-bill-sends-to-obama The report mischaracterizes not only current law but also the changes proposed by the bill.”

Full text of the bill, which includes all its penalties for attempting or conspiring to do the forbidden disruption as well. Those penalties are:

 The punishment for a violation of subsection (a) is–

‘(1) a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than 10 years, or both, if–

‘(A) the person, during and in relation to the offense, uses or carries a deadly or dangerous weapon or firearm; or

‘(B) the offense results in significant bodily injury as defined by section 2118(e)(3); and

‘(2) a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than one year, or both, in any other case.

 And the laws own language on how you run afoul of it:

 In this section–‘(1) the term ‘restricted buildings or grounds’ means any posted, cordoned off, or otherwise restricted area–

‘(A) of the White House or its grounds, or the Vice President’s official residence or its grounds;

‘(B) of a building or grounds where the President or other person protected by the Secret Service is or will be temporarily visiting; or

‘(C) of a building or grounds so restricted in conjunction with an event designated as a special event of national significance; and

‘(2) the term ‘other person protected by the Secret Service’ means any person whom the United States Secret Service is authorized to protect under section 3056 of this title or by Presidential memorandum, when such person has not declined such protection.’.

Russia Today with more about how this law could be abused:

The new legislation allows prosecutors to charge anyone who enters a building without permission or with the intent to disrupt a government function with a federal offense if Secret Service is on the scene, but the law stretches to include not just the president’s palatial Pennsylvania Avenue home. Under the law, any building or grounds where the president is visiting — even temporarily — is covered, as is any building or grounds “restricted in conjunction with an event designated as a special event of national significance.”

It’s not just the president who would be spared from protesters, either.

Covered under the bill is any person protected by the Secret Service. Although such protection isn’t extended to just everybody, making it a federal offense to even accidently disrupt an event attended by a person with such status essentially crushes whatever currently remains of the right to assemble and peacefully protest.

Hours after the act passed, presidential candidate Rick Santorum was granted Secret Service protection. For the American protester, this indeed means that glitter-bombing the former Pennsylvania senator is officially a very big no-no, but it doesn’t stop with just him. Santorum’s coverage under the Secret Service began on Tuesday, but fellow GOP hopeful Mitt Romney has already been receiving such security. A campaign aide who asked not to be identified confirmed last week to CBS News that former House Speaker Newt Gingrich has sought Secret Service protection as well….

In the text of the act, the law is allowed to be used against anyone who knowingly enters or remains in a restricted building or grounds without lawful authority to do so, but those grounds are considered any area where someone — rather it’s President Obama, Senator Santorum or Governor Romney — will be temporarily visiting, whether or not the public is even made aware. Entering such a facility is thus outlawed, as is disrupting the orderly conduct of “official functions,” engaging in disorderly conduct “within such proximity to” the event or acting violent to anyone, anywhere near the premises. Under that verbiage, that means a peaceful protest outside a candidate’s concession speech would be a federal offense, but those occurrences covered as special event of national significance don’t just stop there, either. And neither does the list of covered persons that receive protection….

With Secret Service protection awarded to visiting dignitaries, this also means, for instance, that the federal government could consider a demonstration against any foreign president on American soil as a violation of federal law, as long as it could be considered disruptive to whatever function is occurring.

The vote tally of shame. Where is your Dennis Kucinich now, progressives?

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

H. R. 347
One Hundred Twelfth Congress
of the
United States of America
AT THE SECOND SESSION
Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,
the third day of January, two thousand and twelve
An Act
To correct and simplify the drafting of section 1752 (relating to restricted buildings
or grounds) of title 18, United States Code.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Federal Restricted Buildings
and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011’’.
SEC. 2. RESTRICTED BUILDING OR GROUNDS.
Section 1752 of title 18, United States Code, is amended to
read as follows:
‘‘§ 1752. Restricted building or grounds
‘‘(a) Whoever—
‘‘(1) knowingly enters or remains in any restricted building
or grounds without lawful authority to do so;
‘‘(2) knowingly, and with intent to impede or disrupt the
orderly conduct of Government business or official functions,
engages in disorderly or disruptive conduct in, or within such
proximity to, any restricted building or grounds when, or so
that, such conduct, in fact, impedes or disrupts the orderly
conduct of Government business or official functions;
‘‘(3) knowingly, and with the intent to impede or disrupt
the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions,
obstructs or impedes ingress or egress to or from any restricted
building or grounds; or
‘‘(4) knowingly engages in any act of physical violence
against any person or property in any restricted building or
grounds;
or attempts or conspires to do so, shall be punished as provided
in subsection (b).
‘‘(b) The punishment for a violation of subsection (a) is—
‘‘(1) a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more
than 10 years, or both, if—
‘‘(A) the person, during and in relation to the offense,
uses or carries a deadly or dangerous weapon or firearm;
or
‘‘(B) the offense results in significant bodily injury as
defined by section 2118(e)(3); and
‘‘(2) a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more
than one year, or both, in any other case.
‘‘(c) In this section—
H. R. 347—2
‘‘(1) the term ‘restricted buildings or grounds’ means any
posted, cordoned off, or otherwise restricted area—
‘‘(A) of the White House or its grounds, or the Vice
President’s official residence or its grounds;
‘‘(B) of a building or grounds where the President or
other person protected by the Secret Service is or will
be temporarily visiting; or
‘‘(C) of a building or grounds so restricted in conjunction
with an event designated as a special event of national
significance; and
‘‘(2) the term ‘other person protected by the Secret Service’
means any person whom the United States Secret Service is
authorized to protect under section 3056 of this title or by
Presidential memorandum, when such person has not declined
such protection.’’.
Speaker of the House of Representatives.
Vice President of the United States and
President of the Senate.

‘Mancow’ Muller: Breitbart Was Murdered Breitbart and the CIA’s Heart Attack Gun

https://tatoott1009.com/

Chicago radio host says Breitbart’s death was a warning shot and that others are in danger

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
Wednesday, March 7, 2012


Contrary to today’s release of edited and seemingly innocuous footage that shows Barack Obama making a speech at Harvard in 1991 and has already been in the public domain for years, Chicago radio host Erich “Mancow” Muller told the Alex Jones Show today that his friend Andrew Breitbart had in fact planned to release information that would “destroy Barack Obama” on March 1st, hours after his untimely death.

Muller said he was speaking with Breitbart “every other day” about a TV show he had lined up on a major network on which Breitbart would make regular appearances in a segment called “Breitbart predicts”.

“The house of cards is coming down, I have information that will destroy Barack Obama, it’s over,” Muller says Breitbart told him, and that the information would be released March 1st.

“Everybody feels the same way, that this guy was murdered,” said Muller, who attended Breitbart’s funeral yesterday. Muller pointed to the fact that Breitbart’s death was explained as “natural causes” by the media within hours before any kind of cursory investigation had been conducted.

“The guy goes for a walk in the middle of the night, he’s about to launch a big website, he’s about to bring down the house of Obama, and he’s dead,” said Muller.

Muller said he asked Breitbart whether he was afraid given the fact that he was sitting on such incendiary footage, to which Breitbart responded, “a little bit”. Muller then warned him, “they’re gonna kill you, you can’t destroy Obama’s brown shirt army like Acorn.”

Muller said his family and friends were urging him to quit, fearing that Breitbart’s death is a warning shot and that Rush Limbaugh also “may be in danger”.

Edited footage of one of the tapes that had been in Breitbart’s possession before his death was leaked today, but not by the Breitbart media empire itself, who have announced the full unedited footage, which shows Obama giving a speech about race at Harvard University in 1991, will be played on Fox News’ Hannity this evening.

  • A d v e r t i s e m e n t

The edited film is by no means damning, suggesting that it is not the same footage Breitbart was referring to when he tipped off Muller that explosive revelations would arrive on March 1st.

Indeed, the footage released today has in fact been in the public domain for years, having first appeared on You Tube in 2008.

Breitbart gave speeches throughout February, notably at the CPAC conference, in which he said he had video showing Obama fraternizing with “a bunch of silver pony tails” like Bill and Bernardine Dohrn (Weather Underground members), who radicalized him.

He also told Lawrence Sinclair at an event in Washington DC on February 9th, “Wait til they see what happens March 1st.”

According to former FBI agent Larry Grathwohl, who was assigned to infiltrate the Weather Underground’s Central Committee, the group openly advocated the implementation of a Communist dictatorship inside the United States backed up by “re-education centers” for the recalcitrant and death camps for those who still refused to submit.

Given what Breitbart said both publicly and privately in the weeks before his death, it’s apparent that the footage released today is not what Breitbart had intended to release in the context of “destroying Barack Obama”. It remains to be seen whether such footage will ever see the light of day.

*********************

Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a regular fill-in host for The Alex Jones Show and Infowars Nightly News.===================================

=========================================

THE VETTING: Ben Smith Releases Selectively Edited Obama Race Video

Earlier today, Buzzfeed’s Ben Smith announcedon Twitter that video researcher Andrew Kaczynski had released “the mysterious Harvard/Obama/race video that the Breitbart folks have been talking about.”

The video, which Kaczynski says was “licensed from a Boston television station,” shows a young Barack Obama leading a protest at Harvard Law School on behalf of Prof. Derrick Bell, a radical academic tied to Jeremiah Wright–about whom we will be releasing significant information in the coming hours.

However, the video has been selectively edited–either by the Boston television station or by Buzzfeed itself. Over the course of the day, Breitbart.com will be releasing additional footage that has been hidden by Obama’s allies in the mainstream media and academia.

Breitbart.com Editor-in-Chief Joel Pollak and Editor-at-Large Ben Shapiro will appear on The Sean Hannity Show to discuss the tape. The full tape will be released tonight on Fox News’ Hannity.

ON BREITBART TV

http://content.bitsontherun.com/players/H3Nggg6c-svqBtzyp.swf
==========================================

Andrew Breitbart’s media empire undoubtedly posed a threat to the establishment. From the takedown of New York Rep. Anthony Weiner to the outing of the USDA’s Shirley Sherrod and very public revelations about the seamy underside of ACORN, Breitbart was considered a thorn in the side of the liberal establishment.

Senators Frank Church and John Tower examine a CIA poison dart gun that causes cancer and heart attacks.

=======================================================

But it was his promise to release information that would critically damage Barack Obama prior to an election that really grabbed the attention of the establishment and possibly led to his assassination.

As firebrand talk show host Michael Savage said following Breitbart’s collapse on a Brentwood, California, street and his subsequent death from an apparent heart attack, he would be remiss if he didn’t suggest that the liberal gadfly was assassinated. “I’m asking a crazy question,” Savage said on his nationally syndicated radio show, “but so what? We the people want an answer. This was not an ordinary man. If I don’t ask this question, I would be remiss.”

Others insist Breitbart had a history of health issues and simply collapsed and died from a heart attack as thousands of Americans do every day. They say Savage, Alex Jones and many others who posit a Breitbart assassination are engaging in baseless conspiracy theories.

However, we do know that government engages in assassination of political enemies and has the means to do so without leaving a trace.

During Senate testimony in 1975 into illegal activities by the CIA, it was revealed that the agency had developed a dart gun capable of causing a heart attack. “At the first televised hearing, staged in the Senate Caucus Room, Chairman Church dramatically displayed a CIA poison dart gun to highlight the committee’s discovery that the CIA directly violated a presidential order by maintaining stocks of shellfish toxin sufficient to kill thousands,” a Senate web page explains.

“The lethal poison then rapidly enters the bloodstream causing a heart attack. Once the damage is done, the poison denatures quickly, so that an autopsy is very unlikely to detect that the heart attack resulted from anything other than natural causes. Sounds like the perfect James Bond weapon, doesn’t it? Yet this is all verifiable in Congressional testimony,” writes Fred Burks.

“The dart from this secret CIA weapon can penetrate clothing and leave nothing but a tiny red dot on the skin. On penetration of the deadly dart, the individual targeted for assassination may feel as if bitten by a mosquito, or they may not feel anything at all. The poisonous dart completely disintegrates upon entering the target.”

Burks suggests that Mark Pittman, a reporter who predicted the financial crisis and exposed Federal Reserve misdoings which led to a Bloomberg lawsuit against the bankster cartel, may have been assassinated with the CIA weapon.

Of course, Breitbart’s untimely death prior to the release of information that would damage the presidential campaign of Obama may be purely coincidental. If he was, however, assassinated with a frozen dart that denatures and leaves no trace, chances are we will never know what really happened to him.

Untitled288

Urgent Food Stamps To Be Ended Unless Microchipped

https://tatoott1009.com/

TSA Plans Screening Americans in their Homes

Untitled288

MILWAUKEE –


USA – Think you could avoid the TSA’s body scanners and pat-downs by not flying, taking the train or bus, then you’re wrong. The TSA wants to come to your home to complete searches on U.S. citizens even if you do not use any public transport.

“This is just the next step in our special TSA pre-crime initiative where everyone will be screened before they even embark on any type of journey. We’ve heard bad things about you folks who are not even travelling or avoiding public places just because you don’t want your groin groped or an internal body search. Well, we have news for you, we’ll be knocking on your doors at home to bodysearch you there as well,” TSA head, John Lacerta Pistole, told the Washington Observer.

The new TSA rules will require the whole population including new born babies and severely handicapped people to be searched in their homes.

Freedom

Refusing entry to the TSA search party could result in the search denier being detained indefinitely and moved under duress to a secret holding area.

“Remember, the next knock on your home’s door could be from a group of TSA officials waiting with gloved hands to search your orifices and your families holes too. You must grant entry for these officials into your property so that they can violate your bodies with impunity. Once they have searched your bodies, you will be required to put your clothes back on and let the officials leave. You must be calm at all times and any form of agitation, anger or abuse towards our trained TSA goons will result in either tasering or forced detention. Please be aware that we will also be confiscating weapons in all American households, so leave your guns by the door and we’ll take those as well as your daughter’s virginity,” Kevin Pedoslime, a TSA spokesman announced on all U.S. TV channels yesterday.

—————————————————————————————-

Biometrics in Schools, Colleges and other Educational Institutions

The following guidance has been prepared as an aid to schools, colleges and other educational institutions that may be considering the installation and use of a biometric system. This document is intended to encourage such institutions to fully consider if there is need for a biometric system in the first place and then to assess the privacy impact of different systems.

The critical issues to be considered from a data protection perspective are the proportionality of introducing a biometric system and the requirement to obtain the signed consent of the student users (and their parents or guardians in the case of minors) giving them a clear and unambiguous right to opt out of the system without penalty.

The document is not intended to promote any particular system, but is intended to make schools and colleges aware of their responsibilities under the Data Protection Acts 1988 & 2003. It is the use of a biometric system that may give rise to a data protection concern, not necessarily the production or sale of a system. All situations must be judged on a case-by-case basis.

1. Different types of Biometric systems

All biometric systems operate on the basis of the automatic identification or authentication/verification of a person. What differs between systems is the nature of the biometric and the type of storage.

1.1 Information used to generate biometric data

Biometric data may be created from physical or physiological characteristics of a person. These include a fingerprint, an iris, a retina, a face, outline of a hand, an ear shape, voice pattern, DNA, and body odour.  Biometric data might also be created from behavioural data such as hand writing or keystroke analysis. Generally, a digitised template is produced from the biometric data. This template is then compared with one produced when a person presents at a reader.

1.2 Types of biometric data

There are three principal types of biometric data:

• Raw Images, consisting of recognisable data such as an image of a face or a fingerprint, etc.
• Encrypted images, consisting of data that can be used to generate an image.
• Encrypted partial data, consisting of partial data from an image, which is encrypted and cannot be used to recreate the complete original image.

1.3 Types of Biometric systems

There are two principal types of systems:

• Identification systems, which confirm the identity of an individual;
• Authentication / verification systems, which confirm that a biometric derived from a person who presents at a reader matches another biometric, typically stored on a card and presented simultaneously.

1.4 Storage of biometric data.

There are two principal methods of storing biometric data/templates:

• Central databases store the templates on a central system which is then searched each time a person presents at a reader.
• A card is used to store a template. A template is generated when a person presents at a reader, and this template is compared with the template on the card.

Data Protection issues concerning biometrics.

2. Proportionality

Section 2(1)(c)(iii) of the Data Protection Acts states that data

“shall be adequate, relevant and not excessive in relation to the purpose or purposes for which they were collected or are further processed.”

The key word here is “excessive.” Accordingly, the first question to be asked when considering the installation of such a system is what is the need for it? What is wrong with current systems or less invasive alternatives?

As individuals have fundamental Human Rights which are protected by the Data Protection Acts, a school or college must conduct some assessment of the need for a biometric system and an evaluation of the different types of available systems before the introduction of any particular system.

Determining what is excessive requires a case-by-case analysis. Some factors which may be taken into account include:

• Environment. Does the nature of the school or college require high levels of security? Are there areas of the campus which contain sensitive information, high value goods or potentially dangerous material which may warrant a higher level of security than would areas with low value goods or areas with full public access? Of course such a consideration would also point towards all persons working in the environment being similarly required to use the biometric system.
• Purpose. Can the intended purpose be achieved in a less intrusive way? A biometric system used to control access for security purposes in certain areas of the campus might be legitimate while a biometric system used by the same school or college purely for attendance management purposes might not.
• Efficiency. Ease of administration may necessitate the introduction of a system where other less invasive systems have failed, or proved to be prohibitively expensive to run.
• Reliability. If a school or college suffers as a result of students impersonating each other for various reasons, then a system could possibly be justified as long as other less invasive ones have been assessed and reasonably rejected.

3. Fair obtaining and processing.

Section 2(1)(a) of the Acts require that

“The data or, as the case may be, the information constituting the data shall have been obtained, and the data shall be processed, fairly.”

In order to demonstrate compliance with this provision, at least one of the provisions of Section 2A of the Acts must be met. In the context of the introduction of a biometric system for use by students in a school or college, these include:

• Consent, and
• Legitimate interests of the school or college: where the processing is necessary for the purposes of the legitimate interests pursued by the school or college or by a third party or parties to whom the data are disclosed, except where the processing is unwarranted in any particular case by reason of prejudice to the fundamental rights and freedoms or legitimate interests of the data subject.

Consent: In the context of students attending a place of education, the Data Protection Commissioner would stipulate that the obtaining of consent is of paramount importance when consideration is being given to the introduction of a biometric system. It is the Commissioner’s view that when dealing with personal data relating to minors, the standards of fairness in the obtaining and use of data, required by the Data Protection Acts, are much more onerous than when dealing with adults. Section 2A(1)(a) of the Data Protection Acts states that personal data shall not be processed by a data controller unless the data subject has given his/her consent to the processing, or if the data subject by reason of his/her physical or mental incapacity or age, is or is likely to be unable to appreciate the nature and effect of such consent, it is given by a parent or guardian etc. While the Data Protection Acts are not specific on what age a subject will be able to consent on their own behalf, it would be prudent to interpret the Acts in accordance with the Constitution. As a matter of Constitutional and family law a parent has rights and duties in relation to a child. The Commissioner considers that use of a minor’s personal data cannot be legitimate unless accompanied by the clear signed consent of the child and of the child’s parents or guardian.

As a general guide, a student aged eighteen or older should give consent themselves. A student aged from twelve up to and including seventeen should give consent themselves and, in addition, consent should also be obtained from the student’s parent or guardian. (Consent may not be considered to be in place for students in this age bracket unless it is given by both the student and a parent/guardian). In the case of children under the age of twelve, consent of a parent or guardian will suffice. Consent to the use of a biometric system in places of education should be obtained by means of a positive opt-in on the part of students (and/or their parents or guardians as set out above). An audit trail of the opt-ins should be maintained by the data controller for the duration of each student’s enrolment. All students (and/or their parents or guardians as set out above) should, therefore, be given a clear and unambiguous right to opt out of a biometric system without penalty. Furthermore, provision must be made for the withdrawal of consent which had previously been given.

Legitimate interests: Whilst the “legitimate interest” provision may seem appealing, it requires that a balance be struck. What is acceptable in one case may not be acceptable in another and a school or college seeking to rely upon this provision must take into account the potential effect upon student privacy rights. In any event, the Data Protection Commissioner considers that, in the context of a student environment, the processing of personal data using a biometric system would be prejudicial to the fundamental rights and freedoms of the students concerned in the absence of freely given consent.

3A. Fair obtaining of sensitive data.

If a biometric identifies sensitive data (such as data relating to a student’s health or facial appearance thereby revealing race), at least one provision of section 2B of the Acts must be met in addition to those mentioned above. In the context of the introduction of a biometric system for use by students in a school or college, these provisions include:

• consent explicitly given.
• necessary processing for the performance of a function conferred on a person by or under an enactment.

Explicit consent: As stated above, all students (and/or their parents or guardians) should be given a clear and unambiguous right to opt out of a biometric system without penalty. The same consent which applied to the principle of obtaining and processing data fairly also applies to the fair obtaining of sensitive data.

Necessary for the performance of a function conferred under an enactment: Any legal obligation to record the attendance of students need not, in itself, require a biometric system to satisfy. For example, the Education (Welfare) Act, 2000 requires schools to maintain a record of the attendance or non-attendance on each school day of each student registered at the school. This requirement does not specify how the attendance data should be obtained. The key word in this provision of the Data Protection Acts concerning the processing of sensitive personal data is “necessary.” It is the view of the Data Protection Commissioner that the processing of sensitive personal data through use of a biometric system is not necessary to meet the requirements of the Education (Welfare) Act, 2000 in respect of recording student attendance. There are several long established and successful alternative methods of recording student attendance at schools which do not require the processing of a student’s sensitive personal data.

4. Transparency

Section 2D of the Acts require that a school or college provide at least the following information to students when processing their data:

• The identity of the data controller in the school or college.
• The purpose in processing the data.
• Any third party to whom the biometric data will be given.

It is essential that students are aware of the purpose for which the biometrics data will be processed. This means that a school or college must carefully think through any purpose or potential purpose. Is the system solely for attendance management purposes? Will it be used for access control? What are the consequences for the student concerned if there is an identified abuse of the system? Under what circumstances will management access logs created by the system?

Transparency is even more important where the biometric system does not require the knowledge or active participation of a student. A facial recognition system, for instance, may capture and compare images without that person’s knowledge.

5. Accuracy

Section 2(1)(b) of the Acts require that data shall be

“Accurate and complete and, where necessary, kept up to date.”

Any biometric system must accurately identify the persons whose data are processed by the system. If changes in physical or physiological characteristics result in a template becoming outdated, a procedure must be in place to ensure that the data are kept up to date.

6. Security

The requirement, under section 2(1)(d),  that a school or college has appropriate security measures in place to prevent the unauthorised access to, or the unauthorised alteration, disclosure or destruction of data would appear to promote the use of technological solutions such as encryption.

However, in deciding upon what constitutes an appropriate security measure, Section 2C details four factors that should be taken into account:

• The state of technological development.
• The cost of implementing such technology.
• The nature of the data being protected.
• The harm that might result through the unlawful processing of such data.

A minimum standard of security would include:

• Access to the information restricted to authorised staff on a ‘need to know’ basis in accordance with a defined policy.
• Computer systems should be password protected.
• Information on computer screens or manual files should be hidden from persons who are not authorised to see them.
• A back-up procedure for computer held data, including off-site back-up.
• Ensuring that staff are made aware of the school or college’s security measures, and comply with them.
• Careful disposal of documents such as computer printouts, etc.
• The designation of a person with responsibility for security and the periodic review of the security measures and practices in place.
• Adequate overall security of the premises when it is unoccupied.
• Where the processing of personal data is carried out by a data processor on behalf of the school or college, a contract should be in place which imposes equivalent security obligations on the data processor.

7.  Retention

Section 2(1)(c)(iv) of the Data Protection Acts provides that data shall not be kept for longer than is necessary for the purpose. In the context of a biometric system in a school or college, it would be necessary to devise a retention policy in advance of the deployment of the system which clearly sets out the retention period which would apply to biometric data. The Data Protection Commissioner would expect that as soon as a student permanently leaves the school or college, his/her biometric data would be immediately deleted.

8.  Privacy Impact Assessment.

The Data Protection Commissioner cannot give a general approval or condemnation of biometric systems. Each system must be judged in respect of the situation in which it is used. A case-by-case judgement is required. With that in mind, the Commissioner encourages schools and colleges to take the above guidance into account if considering introducing any biometric system.

Before a school or college installs a biometric system, the Data Protection Commissioner recommends that a documented privacy impact assessment is carried out. A school or college which properly conducts such an assessment is less likely to introduce a system that contravenes the provisions of the Data Protection Acts 1988 & 2003. This is an important procedure to adopt as a contravention may result in action being taking against a school or college by the Commissioner, or may expose a school or college to a claim for damages from a student. Data protection responsibility and liability rests with the school or college, not with the person who has supplied the system (where that person also acts as a data processor on behalf of the employer,  it will have its own separate data protection responsibilities in relation to the security of the data).

Some of the points that might be included in a Privacy Impact Assessment are:

  • Do I have an attendance management and/or access control system in place?
  • Why do I feel I need to replace it?
  • What problems are there with the system?
  • Are these problems a result of poor administration of the system or an inherent design problem?
  • Have I examined a number of types of system that are available?
  • Will the non-biometric systems perform the required tasks adequately?
  • Do I need a biometric system?
  • If so, which kind do I need?
  • Do I need a system that identifies students as opposed to a verification system?
  • Do I need a central database?
  • If so, what is wrong with a system that does not use a central database?
  • What is the biometric system required to achieve for me?
  • Is it for attendance management purposes and/or for access control purposes?
  • How accurate shall the data be?
  • What procedures are used to ensure accuracy of data?
  • Will the data require updating?
  • How will the information on it be secured?
  • Who shall have access to the data or to logs?
  • Why, when and how shall such access be permitted?
  • What constitutes an abuse of the system by a student?
  • What procedures shall I put in place to deal with abuse?
  • What legal basis do I have for requiring students to participate?
  • How will I obtain the consent of the existing students (or their parents/guardians if applicable)?
  • How will I obtain the consent of new students (or their parents/guardians) who will enrol at a future date?
  • How will I ensure that students will be given a clear and unambiguous right to opt out of a biometric system without penalty?
  • What procedures will I put in place to provide for the withdrawal by students of consent previously given?
  • What system will I put in place for students who opt out of using the biometric system?
  • How will I ensure that students who are unable to provide biometric data, because of a disability for example, are not discriminated against by my school or college by being required to operate a different system, or otherwise?
  • Does the system used employ additional identifiers (e.g. PIN number, smart card) along with the biometric?
  • If so, would these additional identifiers be sufficient on their own, rather than requiring operation in conjunction with a biometric?
  • If the introduction of a biometric system is justified, can I offer an alternative system to individuals who may object to the invasion of privacy involved in a biometric system?
  • What is my retention policy on biometric data?
  • Can I justify the retention period in my retention policy?
  • How shall I inform students about the system?
  • What information about the system need I provide to students?
  • Would I be happy if I was a student asked to use such a system?
  • Am I happy to operate a biometric system in an educational establishment where the use of such a system can make students less aware of the data protection risks that may impact upon them in later life?
  • Does my school or college have a comprehensive data protection policy as required by the Department of Education and Science since 2003?
  • Have I updated this policy to take account of the introduction of a biometric system for use by students?
  • ———–

    ACDS, HMDA slate RFID summit for Nov

    ALEXANDRIA, Va. — Pharmacy has emerged as a crucial proving ground for radio frequency identification technology (RFID), with the stakes high for retailers, manufacturers, distributors and the public.

    With that in mind, the National Association of Chain Drug Stores is teaming up with the Healthcare Distribution Management Association (HDMA) to cosponsor the first comprehensive overview of RFID implementation strategy for the pharmaceuticals supply chain.

    The RFID Health Care Adoption Summit will be held from November 13 through November 16 at the Hyatt Regency Crystal City hotel here, with attendees given an opportunity to hear from those in the vanguard of the effort in the business community as well as public policy experts.

    “Given the high degree of interest by the regulatory agencies and the commitment of our industry to transmit pharmaceutical products across a safe and secure supply chain, this conference will focus solely on RFID and how it affects the pharmaceutical supply chain, benchmarking, pilot programs, implementation and the advantages of RFID over comparable technologies,” says an NACDS spokesman.

    The summit will begin Sunday, November 13, with an “RFID 101” session that will provide attendees with an introduction to the fundamentals of the technology, offer definitions of common terms, present a vision of an RFID-enabled supply chain and define who the various participants are in the RFID community.

    The meeting also will feature leaders across the health care spectrum. The opening comments on Monday, November 14, will be made by John Gray, president and chief executive officer of HDMA, and will be accompanied by an “FDA Call to Action” presented by Lester Crawford, commissioner of that agency.

    After those presentations Mark Parrish, chairman and chief executive officer of Cardinal Health Inc., will provide insights into “Why RFID Is Important to My Company.”

    On Tuesday, November 15, opening comments will be presented by Craig Fuller, president and chief executive officer of NACDS, followed by a presentation by Dave Bernauer, chairman and chief executive officer of Walgreen Co., who will talk about the importance of RFID to the drug chain.

    Education sessions will be broken out by function, including finance, distribution and logistics, and manufacturing.

    On Wednesday, November 16, educational sessions will focus on retailer operations, health care distributor operations and manufacturer operations, and will be followed by a closing session wrap-up of the summit.

    COPYRIGHT 2005 Racher Press, Inc.
    COPYRIGHT 2008 Gale, Cengage Learning
  • ================================================
  • Use of Biometric Identification Technology to Reduce Fraud in the Food Stamp Program: Final Report

    EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

    Biometric identification technology provides automated methods to identify a person based on physical characteristics—such as fingerprints, hand shape, and characteristics of the eyes and face—as well as behavioral characteristics—including signatures and voice patterns. Although used in law enforcement and defense for several years, it has recently been used in civilian applications and shows some promise to reduce the number of duplicate cases in the Food Stamp Program (FSP) and other assistance programs

    Biometric identification systems are currently operational at some level in Arizona, California (under county initiative, first by Los Angeles County), Connecticut, Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, and Texas. Finger imaging is the principal form of technology used in all eight States, though alternative technologies have simultaneously undergone trials in Massachusetts (facial recognition) and Illinois (retinal scanning). By the end of 2000, new systems are expected to be in place in California (statewide unified system), Delaware, and North Carolina. Other States are currently in the initial planning stages, including Florida, Maryland, Michigan, Mississippi, Pennsylvania, and South Carolina. However, there is little information available at this point regarding the specific course and trajectory these States will follow in terms of system types, implementation schedules, and the benefit programs in which they will implement the new requirement.

    This report provides an overview of the experience of nine States with biometric identification technologies as of September 1999 and discusses some of the major policy and operational issues encountered during implementation and testing. The report also synthesizes available information on the effectiveness of the technology in reducing duplicate participation and provides a discussion of measurement complexities and issues on the horizon as use of the technology continues to expand. A companion report contains an overview of biometric identification technology, examining the functional capabilities, performance, and applications of the various technologies with a particular focus on finger imaging, the most commonly used and well known.

    Telephone interviews of 1-2 hours in duration were conducted in May-June 1998 with representatives of human service agencies in Arizona, California, Connecticut, Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania. As part of an earlier task of this study, we conducted site visits to San Antonio, Texas to observe the Lone Star Image System (LSIS) demonstration and to interview State and county agency staff. Information on Texas is based on those visits and interviews. The States interviewed, with the exception of Pennsylvania, have installed biometric identification systems and are requiring applicants to federal and State benefit programs to submit to the new procedures during the eligibility determination process.

    The purpose of the interviews was to explore State experiences with biometric identification systems, including factors in the decision-making and planning processes, the dynamics of system start-up and implementation, issues and problems related to system and agency operations, and perceptions regarding the impact of biometric identification procedures on the application and eligibility determination processes. Each of the States participating in the study was asked to provide a description of the critical early events that occurred during the planning phases of their respective projects. In addition, those States that had already implemented systems were asked to describe their implementation experiences.

    Results of State Interviews

    When finger-imaging technology was first applied to reduce multiple participation fraud in assistance programs, there were many concerns about the performance and reliability of the technology in a social service application, as well as about the potential stigma that a finger-image requirement would place on potential clients. The experience of the eight States that have incorporated finger imaging into the process of applying for welfare assistance suggests that many of these fears were unfounded. Finger imaging has been readily integrated into the human services programs of the affected states. However, despite the positive reaction to finger imaging from the State officials we interviewed, there is still uncertainty regarding the extent to which this technology can reduce multiple participation fraud.

    The States planned for implementation of their biometric identification systems in response to a wide variety of factors and considerations idiosyncratic to each State environment. Some States reported that their respective legislative mandates, which prescribed specific dates by which biometric systems were required to be in place, allowed insufficient time for development and planning. The States developed and followed implementation schedules in accordance with internal priorities and considerations. The States uniformly described their implementation processes as largely uneventful, though they encountered a variety of minor implementation issues, most of which were associated with the logistical difficulties of mobilizing and managing such a complex initiative.

    Preparing staff for the implementation of the biometric systems, both philosophically and operationally, took different forms, priorities, and levels of effort in the States. At implementation, advance notification to clients and/or the general public about new biometric client identification procedures was considered important by all State representatives. The objective of providing advance notification was to inform and prepare clients for the additional application or recertification step (i.e., to explain the requirement and who is required to submit, and to address client concerns), as well as to accelerate enrollment of the existing caseload. All States prepared informational mailings to clients advising them of the new requirement. Some States reported developing additional outreach media including multilingual (English and Spanish) videos, posters, and brochures for viewing and distribution in the local office. Most of the States also identified various outlets in the community through which they informed the general public in advance about the implementation of biometric client identification procedures.

    The States with operating systems reported that implementation of new biometric client identification procedures had a negligible impact on operations at the local office level. In general, States also reported that the problems and obstacles encountered in operating their respective projects are not unlike those encountered in demonstrating any new technology or procedural modification. These States also reported that their systems and procedures were implemented without unexpected difficulty and were rapidly institutionalized. All the States confronted a range of basic physical space and logistical issues, including where to situate the new equipment, how to appropriately alter job descriptions, who to reassign or hire to handle the new procedures, and how to adjust the flow of clients and paperwork most efficiently. However, none reported any particularly noteworthy difficulties. States reported that clients have been cooperative and accepting of the technology.

    Finger Imaging and Fraud Reduction

    Assessing the ability of finger imaging to reduce fraud is difficult because the amount of fraud caused by duplicate participation in welfare programs is unknown, and because changes in caseload after the introduction of finger imaging cannot be interpreted unambiguously as reduction of fraud. The evaluations of finger imaging systems conducted by six States have produced the following findings.

    • A small number of duplicate applications (approximately 1 duplicate for every 5,000 cases) have been detected by finger imaging systems. Finger-imaging systems appear to detect more fraud in statewide implementations than in regional pilot systems. Additional matches have been found by interstate comparisons of finger-image data.
    • Institution of a finger-imaging requirement can produce a significant, short-term reduction in caseload, because some existing clients refuse to comply with the requirement. The number of refusals depends on the implementation procedures and appears to be lower when finger imaging is incorporated into the recertification process.
    • The most carefully controlled estimate of non-compliance among existing clients suggests that introduction of a finger-imaging requirement reduces participation by approximately 1.3%. However, this estimate reflects both reduced fraud and deterrence of eligible individuals and households.

    Finger Imaging as a Deterrent to Legitimate Participants

    Clients do have some concerns about finger imaging. Roughly 15% expressed concerns in the State surveys and interviews conducted to evaluate finger-imaging programs. These concerns center on issues of privacy, unjust treatment of poor people, inconvenience, and fear of interagency sharing.

    There is little data on which to estimate the size of the deterrence effect. Based on the results from client surveys in five States, a substantial majority of clients had no objection to finger imaging and thought it was a good idea.

    There was little evidence that clients discontinued benefits because they were intimidated by the finger-image requirement. Interviews with former clients in Texas found that only two of the 78 former food stamp recipients (both of whom had refused to be imaged) attributed their loss of benefits to finger imaging. Similar interviews in Los Angeles County found that, of those former clients interviewed, no one who refused to be finger imaged expressed a concern with the process.

    Cost and Effectiveness of Finger Imaging

    Since there is no reliable estimate of the magnitude of duplicate participation in the FSP, there is uncertainty regarding the cost effectiveness of finger imaging. Available data are inadequate to make precise estimates of either the costs or benefits of finger imaging for the FSP. Calculations using the data that are available, supplemented by a number of assumptions, suggest that reduction in caseload covers the costs of finger imaging technology. However, the percentage of the caseload reduction due to decreased multiple participation is unclear.

    The analysis makes no assumption about how costs or benefits are allocated among Federal or State agencies. In addition, it does not include the cost required to modify existing software to make it compatible with the finger-imaging system. Finally, it does not take into account that certain cost elements, such as the cost for infrastructure or centralized equipment, may be independent of caseload fluctuation.

  • ============================================
  • Use of Biometric Identification Technology to Reduce Fraud in the Food Stamp Program: Final Report

    EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

    Biometric identification technology provides automated methods to identify a person based on physical characteristics—such as fingerprints, hand shape, and characteristics of the eyes and face—as well as behavioral characteristics—including signatures and voice patterns. Although used in law enforcement and defense for several years, it has recently been used in civilian applications and shows some promise to reduce the number of duplicate cases in the Food Stamp Program (FSP) and other assistance programs

    Biometric identification systems are currently operational at some level in Arizona, California (under county initiative, first by Los Angeles County), Connecticut, Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, and Texas. Finger imaging is the principal form of technology used in all eight States, though alternative technologies have simultaneously undergone trials in Massachusetts (facial recognition) and Illinois (retinal scanning). By the end of 2000, new systems are expected to be in place in California (statewide unified system), Delaware, and North Carolina. Other States are currently in the initial planning stages, including Florida, Maryland, Michigan, Mississippi, Pennsylvania, and South Carolina. However, there is little information available at this point regarding the specific course and trajectory these States will follow in terms of system types, implementation schedules, and the benefit programs in which they will implement the new requirement.

    This report provides an overview of the experience of nine States with biometric identification technologies as of September 1999 and discusses some of the major policy and operational issues encountered during implementation and testing. The report also synthesizes available information on the effectiveness of the technology in reducing duplicate participation and provides a discussion of measurement complexities and issues on the horizon as use of the technology continues to expand. A companion report contains an overview of biometric identification technology, examining the functional capabilities, performance, and applications of the various technologies with a particular focus on finger imaging, the most commonly used and well known.

    Telephone interviews of 1-2 hours in duration were conducted in May-June 1998 with representatives of human service agencies in Arizona, California, Connecticut, Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania. As part of an earlier task of this study, we conducted site visits to San Antonio, Texas to observe the Lone Star Image System (LSIS) demonstration and to interview State and county agency staff. Information on Texas is based on those visits and interviews. The States interviewed, with the exception of Pennsylvania, have installed biometric identification systems and are requiring applicants to federal and State benefit programs to submit to the new procedures during the eligibility determination process.

    The purpose of the interviews was to explore State experiences with biometric identification systems, including factors in the decision-making and planning processes, the dynamics of system start-up and implementation, issues and problems related to system and agency operations, and perceptions regarding the impact of biometric identification procedures on the application and eligibility determination processes. Each of the States participating in the study was asked to provide a description of the critical early events that occurred during the planning phases of their respective projects. In addition, those States that had already implemented systems were asked to describe their implementation experiences.

    Results of State Interviews

    When finger-imaging technology was first applied to reduce multiple participation fraud in assistance programs, there were many concerns about the performance and reliability of the technology in a social service application, as well as about the potential stigma that a finger-image requirement would place on potential clients. The experience of the eight States that have incorporated finger imaging into the process of applying for welfare assistance suggests that many of these fears were unfounded. Finger imaging has been readily integrated into the human services programs of the affected states. However, despite the positive reaction to finger imaging from the State officials we interviewed, there is still uncertainty regarding the extent to which this technology can reduce multiple participation fraud.

    The States planned for implementation of their biometric identification systems in response to a wide variety of factors and considerations idiosyncratic to each State environment. Some States reported that their respective legislative mandates, which prescribed specific dates by which biometric systems were required to be in place, allowed insufficient time for development and planning. The States developed and followed implementation schedules in accordance with internal priorities and considerations. The States uniformly described their implementation processes as largely uneventful, though they encountered a variety of minor implementation issues, most of which were associated with the logistical difficulties of mobilizing and managing such a complex initiative.

    Preparing staff for the implementation of the biometric systems, both philosophically and operationally, took different forms, priorities, and levels of effort in the States. At implementation, advance notification to clients and/or the general public about new biometric client identification procedures was considered important by all State representatives. The objective of providing advance notification was to inform and prepare clients for the additional application or recertification step (i.e., to explain the requirement and who is required to submit, and to address client concerns), as well as to accelerate enrollment of the existing caseload. All States prepared informational mailings to clients advising them of the new requirement. Some States reported developing additional outreach media including multilingual (English and Spanish) videos, posters, and brochures for viewing and distribution in the local office. Most of the States also identified various outlets in the community through which they informed the general public in advance about the implementation of biometric client identification procedures.

    The States with operating systems reported that implementation of new biometric client identification procedures had a negligible impact on operations at the local office level. In general, States also reported that the problems and obstacles encountered in operating their respective projects are not unlike those encountered in demonstrating any new technology or procedural modification. These States also reported that their systems and procedures were implemented without unexpected difficulty and were rapidly institutionalized. All the States confronted a range of basic physical space and logistical issues, including where to situate the new equipment, how to appropriately alter job descriptions, who to reassign or hire to handle the new procedures, and how to adjust the flow of clients and paperwork most efficiently. However, none reported any particularly noteworthy difficulties. States reported that clients have been cooperative and accepting of the technology.

    Finger Imaging and Fraud Reduction

    Assessing the ability of finger imaging to reduce fraud is difficult because the amount of fraud caused by duplicate participation in welfare programs is unknown, and because changes in caseload after the introduction of finger imaging cannot be interpreted unambiguously as reduction of fraud. The evaluations of finger imaging systems conducted by six States have produced the following findings.

    • A small number of duplicate applications (approximately 1 duplicate for every 5,000 cases) have been detected by finger imaging systems. Finger-imaging systems appear to detect more fraud in statewide implementations than in regional pilot systems. Additional matches have been found by interstate comparisons of finger-image data.
    • Institution of a finger-imaging requirement can produce a significant, short-term reduction in caseload, because some existing clients refuse to comply with the requirement. The number of refusals depends on the implementation procedures and appears to be lower when finger imaging is incorporated into the recertification process.
    • The most carefully controlled estimate of non-compliance among existing clients suggests that introduction of a finger-imaging requirement reduces participation by approximately 1.3%. However, this estimate reflects both reduced fraud and deterrence of eligible individuals and households.

    Finger Imaging as a Deterrent to Legitimate Participants

    Clients do have some concerns about finger imaging. Roughly 15% expressed concerns in the State surveys and interviews conducted to evaluate finger-imaging programs. These concerns center on issues of privacy, unjust treatment of poor people, inconvenience, and fear of interagency sharing.

    There is little data on which to estimate the size of the deterrence effect. Based on the results from client surveys in five States, a substantial majority of clients had no objection to finger imaging and thought it was a good idea.

    There was little evidence that clients discontinued benefits because they were intimidated by the finger-image requirement. Interviews with former clients in Texas found that only two of the 78 former food stamp recipients (both of whom had refused to be imaged) attributed their loss of benefits to finger imaging. Similar interviews in Los Angeles County found that, of those former clients interviewed, no one who refused to be finger imaged expressed a concern with the process.

    Cost and Effectiveness of Finger Imaging

    Since there is no reliable estimate of the magnitude of duplicate participation in the FSP, there is uncertainty regarding the cost effectiveness of finger imaging. Available data are inadequate to make precise estimates of either the costs or benefits of finger imaging for the FSP. Calculations using the data that are available, supplemented by a number of assumptions, suggest that reduction in caseload covers the costs of finger imaging technology. However, the percentage of the caseload reduction due to decreased multiple participation is unclear.

    The analysis makes no assumption about how costs or benefits are allocated among Federal or State agencies. In addition, it does not include the cost required to modify existing software to make it compatible with the finger-imaging system. Finally, it does not take into account that certain cost elements, such as the cost for infrastructure or centralized equipment, may be independent of caseload fluctuation.

Obama's giveaway: Oil-rich islands to Russia

https://tatoott1009.com/
jmiller300

By Joe Miller

The Obama administration, despite the nation’s economic woes, effectively killed the job-producing Keystone Pipeline last month. The Arab Spring is turning the oil production of Libya and other Arab nations over to the Muslim Brotherhood. Iraq is distancing itself from the U.S. And everyone recognizes that Iran, whose crude supplies are critical to the European economy, will do anything it can to frustrate America’s strategic interests. In the face of all of this, Obama insists on cutting back U.S. oil potential with outrageous restrictions.

Part of Obama’s apparent war against U.S. energy independence includes a foreign-aid program that directly threatens my state’s sovereign territory. Obama’s State Department is giving away seven strategic, resource-laden Alaskan islands to the Russians. Yes, to the Putin regime in the Kremlin.

The seven endangered islands in the Arctic Ocean and Bering Sea include one the size of Rhode Island and Delaware combined. The Russians are also to get the tens of thousands of square miles of oil-rich seabeds surrounding the islands. The Department of Interior estimates billions of barrels of oil are at stake.

The State Department has undertaken the giveaway in the guise of a maritime boundary agreement between Alaska and Siberia. Astoundingly, our federal government itself drew the line to put these seven Alaskan islands on the Russian side. But as an executive agreement, it could be reversed with the stroke of a pen by President Obama or Secretary Clinton.

The agreement was negotiated in total secrecy. The state of Alaska was not allowed to participate in the negotiations, nor was the public given any opportunity for comment. This is despite the fact the Alaska Legislature has passed resolutions of opposition – but the State Department doesn’t seem to care.

The imperiled Arctic Ocean islands include Wrangel, Bennett, Jeannette and Henrietta. Wrangel became American in 1881 with the landing of the U.S. Revenue Marine ship Thomas Corwin. The landing party included the famed naturalist John Muir. It is 3,000 square miles in size.

Northwest of Wrangel are the DeLong Islands, named for George Washington DeLong, the captain of USS Jeannette. Also in 1881, he discovered and claimed these three islands for the United States. He named them for the voyage co-sponsor, New York City newspaper publisher James Gordon Bennett. The ship’s crew received a hero’s welcome back in Washington, and Congress awarded them gold medals.

In the Bering Sea at the far west end of the Aleutian chain are Copper Island, Sea Lion Rock and Sea Otter Rock. They were ceded to the U.S. in Seward’s 1867 treaty with Russia.

Now is the time for the Obama administration to stand up for U.S. and Alaskan rights and invaluable resources. The State Department’s maritime agreement is a loser – it gives us nothing in return for giving up Alaska’s sovereign territory and invaluable resources. We won the Cold War and should start acting like it.

The Obama administration must stop the giveaway immediately.

Author’s addendum, Feb. 17, 2012: This is not a new issue. In fact the Bush and Clinton administrations are directly at fault for the same inaction. A maritime agreement negotiated by the U.S. State Department set the Russian boundary on the other side of the disputed islands, but no treaty has ratified this action. Consequently, it is within the president’s power to stop this giveaway. The Alaska delegation’s failure to put pressure on the administration is inexplicable. State Department Watch, an organization that assisted with this article, has confronted each administration and is currently confronting the Obama administration — and has been met by silence. I’m hoping this piece will help reinvigorate efforts to stop this handover.


Joe Miller was the 2010 Republican nominee for the U.S. Senate from Alaska. He is a West Point graduate and decorated combat veteran from the first Gulf War. A former judge, Joe graduated from Yale Law School and was later awarded an advanced economics degree from the University of Alaska. He is presently chairman of Restoring Liberty Alaska PAC and Restoring Liberty Action Committee. Follow Joe at Facebook and Twitter.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Obama’s State Department is giving away seven strategic, resource-laden Alaskan islands to the Russians. Yes, to the Putin regime in the Kremlin.

The seven endangered islands in the Arctic Ocean and Bering Sea include one the size of Rhode Island and Delaware combined. The Russians are also to get the tens of thousands of square miles of oil-rich seabeds surrounding the islands. The Department of Interior estimates billions of barrels of oil are at stake.

The State Department has undertaken the giveaway in the guise of a maritime boundary agreement between Alaska and Siberia. Astoundingly, our federal government itself drew the line to put these seven Alaskan islands on the Russian side. But as an executive agreement, it could be reversed with the stroke of a pen by President Obama or Secretary Clinton.

The agreement was negotiated in total secrecy. The state of Alaska was not allowed to participate in the negotiations, nor was the public given any opportunity for comment. This is despite the fact the Alaska Legislature has passed resolutions of opposition – but the State Department doesn’t seem to care.

The imperiled Arctic Ocean islands include Wrangell, Bennett, Jeannette and Henrietta. Wrangell became American in 1881 with the landing of the U.S. Revenue Marine ship Thomas Corwin. The landing party included the famed naturalist John Muir. It is 3,000 square miles in size.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++




Sometimes I just can’t stand the stupidity.  There is a story circulating in the right-o-sphere, that Obama is ceding Alaskan territory to the Russians.

Part of Obama’s apparent war against U.S. energy independence includes a foreign-aid program that directly threatens my state’s sovereign territory. Obama’s State Department is giving away seven strategic, resource-laden Alaskan islands to the Russians. Yes, to the Putin regime in the Kremlin.

The seven endangered islands in the Arctic Ocean and Bering Sea include one the size of Rhode Island and Delaware combined. The Russians are also to get the tens of thousands of square miles of oil-rich seabeds surrounding the islands. The Department of Interior estimates billions of barrels of oil are at stake.

The State Department has undertaken the giveaway in the guise of a maritime boundary agreement between Alaska and Siberia. Astoundingly, our federal government itself drew the line to put these seven Alaskan islands on the Russian side. But as an executive agreement, it could be reversed with the stroke of a pen by President Obama or Secretary Clinton.

The agreement was negotiated in total secrecy. The state of Alaska was not allowed to participate in the negotiations, nor was the public given any opportunity for comment. This is despite the fact the Alaska Legislature has passed resolutions of opposition – but the State Department doesn’t seem to care.

The imperiled Arctic Ocean islands include Wrangel, Bennett, Jeannette and Henrietta. Wrangel became American in 1881 with the landing of the U.S. Revenue Marine ship Thomas Corwin. The landing party included the famed naturalist John Muir. It is 3,000 square miles in size.  Read more….

I simply cannot abide historical and geographical ignorance.

This is what some on our side are ACTUALLY ARGUING–all those islands really, really close to Asia are actually American!  Were you ever, ever taught that America was an Asian power?  Didn’t think so….

Right click to enlarge

Now, some of the disputed islands may have been discovered by Americans, but simply look at their location.  Common sense and looking at the geography should make you question the premise that any of these islands were, at any time, American territory. What some on our side are arguing is akin to believing that because an Englishman was the first to climb Mt. Everest, the mountain is part of England.  Think about that for a second.

Therefore, let’s look the treaty that gave Alaska to the United States in 1867.

 The western limit within which the territories and dominion conveyed are contained passes through a point in Behring’s Straits on the parallel of sixty-five degrees thirty minutes north latitude, at its intersection by the meridian which passes midway between the islands of Krusenstern of Ignalook, and the island of Ratmanoff, or Noonarbook, and proceeds due north without limitation, into the same Frozen Ocean.

One doesn’t even really have to understand latitude and longitude, because the language is very precise.

Imagine that, on the map, there sits the Russian island of Krusenstern and the now American island of Ratmanoff. And between these islands runs the new international boundary, proceeding “due north without limitation, into the Frozen Ocean.” Right click to see full size.

In other words, even if Wrangel, Bennett, Jeannette and Henrietta islands were discovered by Americans, they were, by the treaty of 1867, between the United States and the Emperor of Russia, squarely in Russian territory.

Furthermore, some on our side continue this line of delusion , additionally claiming that two more islands at the end of the Aleutian chain are also being given to Russia.

In the Bering Sea at the far west end of the Aleutian chain are Copper Island, Sea Lion Rock and Sea Otter Rock. They were ceded to the U.S. in Seward’s 1867 treaty with Russia.  Link

Good lord, that is sheer ignorance on display.  How hard is it to once again reference the 1867 treaty with Russia?

The same western limit, beginning at the same initial point, proceeds thence in a course nearly southwest, through Behring’s Straits and Behring’s Sea, so as to pass midway between the northwest point of the island of St. Lawrence and the southeast point of Cape Choukotski, to the meridian of one hundred and seventy-two west longitude; thence, from the intersection of that meridian, in a southwesterly direction, so as to pass midway between the island of Attou and the Copper Island of the Kormandorski couplet or group, in the North Pacific Ocean, to the meridian of one hundred and ninety-three degrees west longitude, so as to include in the territory conveyed the whole of the Aleutian Islands east of that meridian. Link

So Copper Island is part of the U.S.?  According to the treaty of 1867, the international boundary runs between Attou, the western most Aleutian island and Copper Island. Copper Island and Kormandorski remained Russian.  Period.

The 1867 treaty line runs between Attou and Copper Island. Right click to see full size.

In essence, the 1990 USSR-USA Maritime Treaty does nothing more than confirm the original 1867 treaty in which Russia ceded Alaska to the U.S., even though the Soviet Union never ratified it, it has been observed by both sides for going on 22 years.

I have many beefs against President Obama, from his trillion dollar deficits, his attack on the first amendment, and his lousy energy policies, but anyone who is arguing that he giving away territory to Russia, is in the same category as those who proclaimed that Obama wasn’t a native born citizen.

If you want to be taken seriously, don’t repeat every crackpot theory that you hear.  Pick up a history book, or heaven forbid, use Google, and find the original source documents.  Then and only then, proceed.

Finally, here’s the entire map, from 1867, that was used in Congress to debate the acquisition,  that outlines the new boundaries of “Seward’s Folly” (right click to see full size):

From: Speech of Hon. Charles Sumner of Massachusetts on the cession of Russian America to the United States. Wash., printed at the Congressional Globe office, 1867. F907.595. U.S. Coast Survey for State Dept. Right click to see full size.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Report: Obama Administration Is Giving Away 7 Strategic Islands to Russia


May 1881 US explorers approached Jeannette Island and Henrietta Island and claimed them for the United States. According to some US individuals, including the group State Department Watch, eight Arctic islands currently controlled by Russia, including Wrangel Island, are claimed by the United States. However, according to the United States Department of State no such claim exists. The USSR/USA Maritime Boundary Treaty, which has yet to be approved by the Russian Duma, does not address the status of these islands nor the maritime boundaries associated with them.

The Obama Administration is reportedly giving away Wrangell, Bennett, Jeannette and Henrietta islands in Alaska to Russia. The federal government drew the line to put these seven Alaskan islands on the Russian side
Former senatorial candidate Joe Miller broke this story at World Net Daily:

The Obama administration, despite the nation’s economic woes, effectively killed the job-producing Keystone Pipeline last month. The Arab Spring is turning the oil production of Libya and other Arab nations over to the Muslim Brotherhood. Iraq is distancing itself from the U.S. And everyone recognizes that Iran, whose crude supplies are critical to the European economy, will do anything it can to frustrate America’s strategic interests. In the face of all of this, Obama insists on cutting back U.S. oil potential with outrageous restrictions.

Part of Obama’s apparent war against U.S. energy independence includes a foreign-aid program that directly threatens my state’s sovereign territory. Obama’s State Department is giving away seven strategic, resource-laden Alaskan islands to the Russians. Yes, to the Putin regime in the Kremlin.

The seven endangered islands in the Arctic Ocean and Bering Sea include one the size of Rhode Island and Delaware combined. The Russians are also to get the tens of thousands of square miles of oil-rich seabeds surrounding the islands. The Department of Interior estimates billions of barrels of oil are at stake.

The State Department has undertaken the giveaway in the guise of a maritime boundary agreement between Alaska and Siberia. Astoundingly, our federal government itself drew the line to put these seven Alaskan islands on the Russian side. But as an executive agreement, it could be reversed with the stroke of a pen by President Obama or Secretary Clinton.

The agreement was negotiated in total secrecy. The state of Alaska was not allowed to participate in the negotiations, nor was the public given any opportunity for comment. This is despite the fact the Alaska Legislature has passed resolutions of opposition – but the State Department doesn’t seem to care.

The imperiled Arctic Ocean islands include Wrangell, Bennett, Jeannette and Henrietta. Wrangell became American in 1881 with the landing of the U.S. Revenue Marine ship Thomas Corwin. The landing party included the famed naturalist John Muir. It is 3,000 square miles in size.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The Obama White House held a formal news conference last year to announce “proof positive” of Barack Obama’s Hawaii birth, posted his “birth certificate” online and has been busy making fun of anyone who doesn’t believe that story ever since.

But 37 percent of Republican primary voters in Ohio, 38 percent of them in Georgia and a startling 45 percent of them in Tennessee simply don’t believe it.

Another large percentage, some 1 in 5, have doubts so that they cannot say for sure they believe him.

The results come as the voters will be making their choice tomorrow for their favorite GOP candidate to oppose Obama, the presumptive Democrat nominee for the presidency this fall.

The results were obtained by Public Policy Polling, which asked “Do you think Barack Obama was born in the United States, or not?”

In Georgia, 40 percent said he was, but 38 percent said he was not and another 22 percent were unsure. Ohio residents mirrored that, with 42 percent saying he was born in the U.S., 37 percent saying he was not, and 21 percent uncertain.

For residents of Tennessee, Obama’s word has even less impact. There, 33 percent said he was born in the U.S., 45 percent said he wasn’t, and 22 percent said they were unsure.

Commented USA Today, “PPP also noted that these voters – known as ‘birthers’ – tend to support the more conservative Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich over Mitt Romney heading into Tuesday’s contests.”

The polling company agreed. “If Romney ends up coming short on this late charge to Tennessee it may be due to his inability to compete with this fringe group. Among non-birthers, he trails Santorum only 34-33. But with the birther contingent he’s in a distant third at 24 percent to Santorum’s 35 percent and Gingrich’s 32 percent.”

No matter how much the Obama campaign makes fun, however, it appears the issue won’t disappear.

Sheriff’ Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, Ariz., last week announced the results of a formal law enforcement investigation into Obama’s eligibility, determining there is probable cause to believe his birth certificate image is a forgery and that constitutes a fraud on the American people.

He has since said the issue is being elevated and his investigators how are looking for individuals responsible for the alleged fraud and forgery.

NOTE: In case you missed the news conference of Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s “Cold Case Posse,” you can view it here.

WND reported late last year when Matt Romney, whose father, Mitt, is vying for the GOP nomination, said that his father would release his financial records when President Obama “releases his grades and birth certificate.”

The younger Romney later insisted he was joking, but Obama, in Hawaii at the time on a vacation estimated to set the taxpayers back some $4 million, saw it as an opportunity to cash in for his campaign. His 2012 fundraising machine immediately posted online: “The Birth Certificate Thing Again?” to sell mugs.

Freshly updated! Find out what Obama’s story truly is, in “Where’s the REAL Birth Certificate?” by Jerome Corsi. Or join in the billboard campaign that seeks the answer to “Where’s the Real Birth Certificate?”

The issue is that while the Constitution requires a president to be a “natural born citizen” the documentation that would reveal that for Obama remains unrevealed.

Obama has refused to allow access to whatever original documentation there might be in the state of Hawaii, where he said he was born, as well as many other documents, such as passport records, kindergarten records, Punahou school records, Occidental College records, Columbia University records, Columbia thesis, Harvard Law School records, Harvard Law Review articles, University of Chicago articles, Illinois State Bar Association records, Illinois State Senate records and schedules, medical records, Obama/Dunham marriage license, Obama/Dunham divorce documents, Soetoro/Dunham marriage license and adoption records.

There also are his critics who say that “natural born citizen” at the time the Constitution was written would have meant the offspring of two citizens of the country, and since Obama’s father was a foreign national, he would not qualify under that standard.


Barack Obama

When the Iowa caucuses were being held a Public Policy Polling report noted that one in three Iowa GOP members do not believe Obama was born in the United States – an indication of their disbelief about his eligibility to be president.

Another 21 percent were not sure. Some 47 percent said they believe he was born in the United States, but they didn’t address the argument that the “natural born citizen” requirement demands parents who are citizens.

WND reported that another recent poll showed half of registered voters would like to see Congress investigate Obama’s eligibility. It also showed nearly that many believe the definition of the constitutional term “natural born citizen” means both parents must be U.S. citizens.

“There’s no marginalizing those who want this matter investigated by Congress,” said Fritz Wenzel of Wenzel Strategies after conducting the WND/Wenzel Poll telephone survey during the summer.

“Even among Democrats, more than one in four – 28 percent – said they now want an inquiry, as do 43 percent of independents and 77 percent of Republicans. Interestingly, men are much more skeptical than are women about the question of eligibility – only 42 percent of men said they think Obama proved his eligibility by releasing the electronic birth certificate, compared to 59 percent of women.”

The poll at that time indicated 43.5 percent of Americans believe that a Hawaii birth would make no difference in Obama’s eligibility. The figure included 56.9 percent of Republicans, 40.2 percent of independents and 32.9 percent of Democrats.

The eligibility saga, as Wenzel noted, has taken on a life of its own. It began with questions about Obama’s birth place and parentage before his election. At that time, he released a computer image of a short-form  “Certification of Live Birth” from Hawaii and insisted it was original and the only document available.

Then in April, just as a new book, “Where’s the Birth Certificate? The Case that Barack Obama is Not Eligible to Be President,” by Jerome Corsi, Ph.D., reached the No. 1 spot on Amazon and was about to be released, Obama took a dramatic step.

He instructed his White House counsel, Robert Bauer, to have a private attorney, Judy Corley of Perkins Coie,  contact the Hawaii Department of Health to obtain a copy of his “Certificate of Live Birth” purportedly on file with the state.

The White House subsequently released copies of a copy of the document, as well as an online image, calling it “proof positive” of a Hawaii birth. Since then, however, dozens of experts, including several ex-CIA members, have asserted that the document is fraudulent.

The image:

                   

At its release, WND contacted the Hawaii Health Department and the office of Gov. Neil Abercrombie, an ardent Obama supporter, to request confirmation that the image released was an accurate representation of the state’s file information. Officials declined to respond.

A constitutional expert recently weighed in on the the issue and concluded that the obvious meaning of the term “natural born citizen,” which is not defined in the Constitution, is someone who obtains citizenship naturally, from citizen parents, and not from any act of Congress or other affirmative action.

“Obama came into office with such fanfare and made such sweeping claims that his administration would repair holes in our social fabric and fix our economy, but America has seen none of that. Disappointment has given way to disillusionment and anger, and this survey reveals that even on a simple, basic question of his qualification to hold the office of president, many are skeptical that what the White House has delivered is not at all what was advertised,” Wenzel said.

“There are many reasons this eligibility question has taken on a life of its own, but that only half the country [in the Wenzel poll] believes that the president has proven he deserves to hold the office reveals a deeply held belief that he is somehow trying to trick the country. This sense of distrust underlies public perception of everything Obama does and says, which means that, as he begins to build a re-election campaign, it is going to be increasingly difficult for him to make a case on any issue as long as this question about the authenticity of his birth certificate remains unanswered. In fact, releasing the birth certificate that Obama released may have made worse his standing with the American people, and that will certainly be the case if a congressional inquiry discovers it has been tampered with or forged,” Wenzel warned.

Just days after the White House released the “birth certificate” image, Gallup reported that only 47 percent think Obama was definitely was born in the U.S. and 18 percent said he “probably” was.

Obama released the image saying he had no time for such silliness as questions about his birth, then departed for an appearance on Oprah’s television show.

It was only a few months after Obama’s inauguration that a WND/Wenzel Poll showed that 51.3 percent of Americans said they were aware of the questions raised about Obama’s constitutional eligibility for office. Only 18.7 percent said they were not and another 30 percent were unsure.

At that point, 58.2 percent of Republicans said they were aware of the controversy.

Polls later revealed Americans to be increasingly skeptical of Obama’s official narrative:

  • A survey by Angus Reid Global Monitor, a division of Vision Critical Group,in October 2009 found three in 10 people in the U.S. believed Obama to be a foreigner.”While only 13 percent of Democratic Party supporters believe Obama was not born in the U.S., the proportion rises to 25 percent among independents and 51 percent among Republican Party backers,” the report said.
  • Then in January 2010, another WND/Wenzel Poll showed on the one-year anniversary of Obama’s tenure in office that fully one-third of Americans refused to believe Obama was a “legitimate
    president,” with another 15.8 percent saying they were not sure.Barely half the voters, 51.5 percent, said they believed the president legitimate even though he had not produced documentation proving his constitutional eligibility. Even 14.6 percent of the
    Democrats said they did not consider him legitimate.
  • In May 2010, a WND/Wenzel Poll showed that 55 percent of Americans wanted Obama to release all records relating to his childhood and his education, including “college records, Harvard Law School papers, passport records, travel records, and other similar documentation.””Asked what should be done should it be found that Obama does not meet the qualifications to be president, 59 percent said he should be removed from office, and 35 percent said all bills signed into law by Obama should be repealed,” the poll’s analysis revealed.
  • By June 2010, other media were beginning to put their toes in the waters of the controversy.
    A 60 Minutes-Vanity Fair poll showed only 39 percent of respondents believed Obama was born in Hawaii as he claimed in his book.”A shocking 63 percent – very nearly two-thirds of us – went out on a limb and stated for the record that we believe in the United States. It’s enough to make you proud to be an American – or 63 percent proud, at any rate.”But that figure included those who said they believe he was born in Kansas or some other unknown state, which still would conflict with Obama’s story.
  • In later 2010, a poll by CNN said 6 of 10 people were uncertain Obama was born in the U.S. The poll said only 42 percent believe Obama “definitely” was born in the U.S.The CNN report said, “Hawaii has released a copy of the president’s birth certificate – officially called a ‘certificate of live birth.’ And in 1961 the hospital where the president was born
    placed announcements in two Hawaiian newspapers regarding Obama’s birth.”

Hacked Stratfor Emails: Osama’s Body Not Dumped at Sea

https://tatoott1009.com/

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
March 5, 2012

According to “shadow CIA” Stratfor email hacked by Anonymous and released by Wikileaks, Osama bin Laden was not dumped at sea after he was supposedly killed at his hideout in Pakistan. Instead, his body was shipped via a CIA plane to a mortuary located at a military medical institute in Dover, Delaware.

Video capture of Osama bin Laden watching himself on television at the Abbottabad compound.

Osama’s body was allegedly delivered following Obama’s boasting about the dubious raid. “Reportedly, we took the body with us. Thank goodness,” said Stratfor CEO George Friedman in an email dated May 2, 2011.

“Than [sic] onward to the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology in Bethesda,” replied Stratfor vice president for intelligence, Fred Burton, who also said he “doubts [Osama] was dumped at sea” and adds the body “is a crime scene and I don’t see the FBI nor DOJ letting that happen.” Before working at Stratfor, Burton was a special agent with the State Department’s Diplomatic Security Service.

  • A d v e r t i s e m e n t

    http://youtu.be/5zNwOeyuG84

Despite concerns about preserving the “crime scene,” Pakistani authorities demolished the alleged hideout in late February. They never allowed journalists inside the Abbottabad building, and starting from a few days after the purported raid stopped them from even getting close to it, according to a February 27 Associated Press report.

A number of people, including former Pakistani dictator Pervez Musharraf, have claimed that Osama bin Laden died in late 2001 at Tora Bora in Afghanistan. Afghan President Hamid Karzai also said he thought Bin Laden was dead, as did Dale Watson, the FBI’s counterterrorism boss.

It was reported in December of 2001 that Osama bin Laden “died a peaceful death due to an untreated lung complication” and “was laid to rest honorably in his last abode and his grave was made as per his Wahabi belief,” Fox News reported, citing the Pakistan Observer.

In 2011, Dr. Steve R. Pieczenik, a man who held numerous different influential positions under three different presidents and worked with the Defense Department, told The Alex Jones Show that Osama Bin Laden died in 2001.

Pieczenik fist made the claim in 2002. “I found out through my sources that he had had kidney disease,” he told Alex Jones on April 24, 2002, several months after it was reported that Osama had died. “ And as a physician, I knew that he had to have two dialysis machines and he was dying. And you could see those in those films, those made-up photos that they were sending us out of nowhere. I mean, suddenly, we would see a video of bin Laden today and then out of nowhere, they said oh it was sent to us anonymously, meaning that someone in the government, our government, was trying to keep up the morale on our side and say oh we still have to chase this guy when, in fact, he’s been dead for months.”

Similar/Related Articles
  1. LEAKED STRATFOR EMAILS: Analysts Didn’t Believe Bin Laden Was Buried At Sea
  2. Stratfor disputes OBL killing in Abbottabad
  3. ‘That stupid b**** got what she deserved (I’ll bet she was fat and black too)’. Shocking emails of Texas police hacked and dumped online
  4. Stratfor Emails: Israel Has Destroyed Iran’s Nuclear Program
  5. Stop bombing us: Osama isn’t here, says Pakistan
  6. SEAL Disputes Official Account of Bin Laden Killing
  7. Hitler flips out over the CRU hacked emails
  8. Hacked climate emails include calls for ‘Earth Government’ as foundation of new world order, splitting of America
  9. CIA organised fake vaccination drive to get Osama bin Laden’s family DNA
  10. Dead Men Don’t Talk: US Navy Seals Destroyed to Cover Up Washington’s Bin Laden Execution Hoax?
  11. Dead Bin Laden Urges Jihad
  12. Who Needs Pictures?
  13. Kurt Nimmo
    Infowars.com
    March 5, 2012

    The Algemeiner, billed as the fastest growing Jewish newspaper in America, is reporting that Israeli PM Netanyahu has made up his mind and Israel will attack Iran, probably before the election.

    The newspaper cites a “senior American official” who allegedly told Israel’s government regulated Channel 2 that the decision was made by Netanyahu and his coalition of Likudniks to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities. The report was aired prior to Netanyahu’s speech before AIPAC, the powerful Israeli political action committee that calls the shots on U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East.

    “A senior official stressed in a conversation with News 2 there is a dispute between Israel and the United States on the question of ‘day after,’ which means the price of attacking Iranian nuclear facilities,” Channel 2′s report said, according to Algemeiner.

    So-called “day after” scenarios include regional war, a dangerous arms race in the region and a collapse of the Israeli stock market.

    • A d v e r t i s e m e n t

    Sources close to Netanyahu, Algemeiner reports, said the U.S. is doing what it can to “handcuff”  the Israelis and to “frighten the Israeli public” into opposing an attack.

    Meanwhile, the Israeli intelligence asset DEBKAfile has turned up the propaganda heat by claiming that Iran has worked closely with a renegade North Korea to test a nuclear device or a dirty bomb.

    “The disclosure invalidates the main point the US President made in his speech Sunday to the pro-Israeli lobby AIPAC convention in Washington that there was still time for diplomatic pressure and sanctions to bring Iran’s leaders to a decision to halt their nuclear momentum before military action was called for, whether by the US or Israel,” DEBKAfile claims.

    Increasingly, the establishment is either publicly calling for military action against Iran or members are feigning resignation over the fact that a military response to years of incessant propaganda and fear mongering is an inevitability.

    Gary Sick, former U.S. National Security Council member with “special expertise” on Iran and the former Deputy Director for International Affairs at the CIA’s Ford Foundation, posted an op-ed at CNN today deconstructing sanctions and moves by the Obama administration.

    Sick concludes that the Iran situation represents a new Bay of Pigs and an attack is inevitable.

  14. Interview of Steve R. Pieczenik – Alex Jones Show – April 24, 2002 (Partial Transcript)Dr. Pieczenik served as Deputy Assistant Secretary of State under Henry Kissinger, Cyrus Vance, and James Baker. He is a Member of the Council on Foreign Relations

    AJ: Our guest tonight is Dr. Steve Pieczenik and he�s one of the world�s most experienced international crisis managers. He has over twenty years experience in resolving international crises, working for four U.S. administrations. Dr. Pieczenik served as Deputy Secretary of State under Henry Kissinger and Cyrus Vance and James Baker. Working with Secretary of State George Schultz, Dr. Pieczenik has used his psycho-political expertise for the Secretary�s mediation of conflict in the Middle East between Israel, Jordan, Syria, again it goes on and on. He�s got best selling books. He�s basically an infowarrior, a crisis manager. In fact he, according to this and some of the news articles that we pulled up on him, coined the phrase, if these articles are accurate, this isn�t even in his bio here, but it says it there in some of the news articles, the �crisis mediation� and it�s just endless. It says in one of the bios here that he is also a member of the CFR. Steve Pieczenik, I really appreciate you joining us on the show. Of course, he is also a doctor and PhD as well. Good to have you on the show this evening, Sir.

    SP: Can I call you Alex?

    AJ: You certainly can.

    SP: You can call me Steve, Dr. Pieczenik or Steve, that�s fine with me.

    AJ: Well, Sir, I mean you�ve got a long bio here. (Crosstalk) just want to mention to the listeners out there.

    SP: Sure, anyway what would you like to start with Alex?

    AJ: Tell us a little bit more about yourself. Any key areas of your life, so folks know who you are.

    SP: Sure, I�ll be happy to. I started as a, I was a medical doctor training at Cornell University Medical College here. I worked my way up through scholarships and then got into the military. I was, during the Vietnam War, I was a very young O6, as many of you know, that is a colonel at the age of 32. I then went on to my training in psychiatry, at the same time at Harvard, and at the same time, I got a PhD from MIT in International Relations.

    AJ: Now that was the first MIT PhD, in this particular form of psychology.

    SP: Correct, Alex. And the reason for that was that I understood very clearly, a long time ago, thirty years ago that the very essence of relationships between countries and understanding what our national security is about has to lie in the psychological political arena. It�s not, necessarily that I am interested in what mother did or your father did, but I am much more interested in what kind of image perception propaganda has been created against us and what propaganda information we have to create against someone else. For example, one of the presidents whom I served. Unfortunately, he is ill now. But one of the most brilliant presidents I served and most people don�t recognize his brilliance. I think history will (garbled) and that is President Reagan, who was, as you know, an actor. But he had a photographic memory. And he understood the importance of psychology because he had been an actor and he understood that perception becomes reality. Well, this is a gentleman who using the study that I had worked on thirty years ago and had been intimately involved with him, using psychology and the concept of the perception, we were effectively able.. It�s a team effort. I�m not saying myself only. But Reagan was effectively able and the Reagan administration to bring down an entire Soviet empire without firing a gun by simply manipulating the psychology of perception. That we were forcing them into bankruptcy, which we were through the SBI (?) program and at the same time, manipulating their mind using the Chief of Staff. If you want me to go through the detail and showing him what our military capabilities were. And once he saw that both on land and on sea, he basically gave up. And that was Akhromeyev, who was then Chief of Staff of the Soviet military who was an Admiral, and who eventually committed suicide. But from that point on, we broke the entire, we won a war without having to fire a bullet. And that is the kind of thing that I talk about � psychological or psycho-political dimension.

    AJ: We are talking to Dr. Steve Pieczenik and he has worked at the highest levels of the psychological operations for four administrations. You are talking about controlling paradigms � paradigm management.

    SP: Well, that�s interesting. I�ve never used that word paradigm but you clearly � you must be a professor, Alex. But the notion is. No, what it is it�s a more sophisticated concept. For example, what I do is, I don�t just manage a conflict. I may sometimes be sent in on behalf of, for example, Secretary of State Schultz and Reagan. I was sent down to give Noriega a message officially that we would like for him to leave and we would provide the two planes, so and so and such and such. Well, he clearly, my sense was that he was not going to leave. And as many of you remember, this was a general who was chief of narco traffic out of Panama. And so, I would come back and report it.

    AJ: I�ve got to stop you for a second. This is intriguing. I have seen it reported that then in the military build-up before the strike, that they employed the psychological technique of having the Delta Force and others do raids in and out of the area, touch down for six months, to de-sensitize them, so when the real attack came that they wouldn�t respond with

    SP: That�s correct. I can�t confirm or deny it but I can say yes. (laughs) That�s exactly true.

    AJ: You may not know it, but they had that on the History Channel.

    SP: Oh, I didn�t know that was on History, then I can say yes. OK, I�m glad you told me, yes. General Cisnero(?) and I, we worked on a psyops program, that�s psychological operation, and we are very good at that. I don�t mean me. But the United States is. And we�ve lost some of that capability over the past administration. I�m not pointing fingers. We lost about 40% of our military intelligence capability. And I would come back and every year talk at the National Defense University at Carlyle War College � as a way of showing my appreciation to the military and try to train them in psychological operations. Some of what we saw � we saw that very effectively done in Afghanistan. When we basically gave warning to all the civilians and then we basically went in and broke up the Taliban and then starting going after al Qaeda. We used a lot of psychological operations on (garbled) which I can�t go into but we are using it right now, hopefully, around the world because of the 68 countries now with al Qaeda individuals, 68 countries filled with al Qaeda membership, including our own country. And we�re are using both psychological operations, we are using military….

    AJ: Let�s talk about his story. I mean we heard it was twenty dollar bills, now it one-hundred dollars bills, with just the picture of George Bush. And I mean that�s an obvious propaganda move and even the person pulling the hundred dollar bill out realizes that it�s propaganda but still can�t help having a pang of liking George Bush for that split second. So, isn�t that acclimating them, conditioning them, whether they like it or not?

    SP: Well that�s a good point, Alex. Yeah, I mean, there have been crises, for example, where I had three buildings here held hostage by a fundamentalist group called the Hanasi(?) Muslim. And he knew he was being manipulated. The FBI called me in and I used the Koran to take over the control and eventually he couldn�t help but follow the orders that we giving to him and he eventually released the hostages. And so, in that sense, it�s a very powerful tool and we are getting back into using that very effectively. That�s exactly right, Alex.

    What I do � I�ve done a lot of negotiation, I do a lot of stategy and tactics where I�ve done a lot of things. For example, with the Gorbachev and Reagan negotiations, with Arafat, I worked against him, I would track down terrorists and then I worked against Arafat, I worked with Osama bin Laden in �78, �81. In �79 when he was in Afghanistan and with Saddam Hussein when he was our ally and I worked against him when they weren�t our ally.

    AJ: Now again folks, we are talking to Dr. Steve Pieczenik and he is one of the infowarriors in four administrations, crafting much of the police that we have seen over the last twenty, thirty years. And I am so honored to have you on the show tonight. I hope we can keep you for a while.

    SP: I�d be happy to, Alex.

    AJ: I�m not going to mince words, I�m going to cut to the chase.

    SP: Sure. Go ahead.

    AJ: About these technologies that you are talking about that are great for defending the country being used by the wordsmiths, by the spin doctors, in camps in this country against the American people. Whether it�s gun control or big government or any of it. And I�ve seen the telltale signs all over the place. And that�s why we have you here, so hopefully the American people can become more aware of these tactics. I mean, certainly it�s just 101 Marketing to use psychology, but it�s getting a little more sophisicated than that. Can you ..

    SP: Well, yeah, I agree with you Alex. One of the things that I have been in disagreement and it keeps coming out of the conservative movement. I mean I�ve worked with these – is that the issue of the suppression of our civil liberties is unjustified and particularly in this case on terrorists. And when I mean specifically, for example, I can understand that we have to have vigilance and we have to have surveillance. But you do not change the constitution or alter it to such a degree that we have posse comitatus, which I hope your audience understands � that means military control can come in and take over civilian control. That�s a no-no.

    AJ: Well I had the former professors on this show, the former JAG colonels and generals, they say it was gone in �96 and they are concerned about it.

    SP: I�ve very concerned about it because what happens is, you know generals � I have a lot of respect for but it�s not generals that make the decision. It will be a consultant who works for somebody in the White House who may not necessarily know what he or she may be doing. And then we are talking about civil liberties and profiling � where you suddenly get thrown off the plane. They won�t tell you why. You could be blond, blue haired, you could be dark and brown eyed. I mean I was almost in preventative detention down in Reno, Nevada, and I said to the police, can I use the word terrorism? He said no. Can I use the words, are you arresting me? He said no. Then why are you sorting me out? And they couldn�t give me an answer. I said you are making a big mistake, you are violating my first amendment, you are violating my second amendment, and every other amendment. Can I talk about guns? No. So basically that�s where I agree with you and your audience and that is we cannot let the federal government or any government suppress our liberties in any way whatsoever. Now, is there propaganda that�s given to the American public. Absolutely. And I say that…

    AJ: Let me stop you professor. What was this story where they come out and go � oh we�ve got the office of strategic influence, strategic laws and manipulation, and then we are going to activate it. But we all know it was already operating for hundreds of years. Every country has one. Then, so that was a lie to say it new. Then they say, oh we are not going to use it anymore, we were just proposing it. Your take on that.

    SP: Well, I was actually, but don�t call me professor. One thing I am not is a professor of anything, but I do join you in saying that I tried to stop that vehemently on the radio. My neighbor who is around the block was in charge of that and I don�t know her all that well, Ms Clarke. It was clear to me that they didn�t know what they were doing. What they were doing was creating what we call of fusion of what we call blackops, black operations meaning covert, and white noise, that means real facts and information. Well, you don�t do that in the military. The reason you don�t do that anywhere in the United States, but particularly in the military is that you compromise the integrity of our military and at the same time, it was the stupidest idea I�ve ever seen because they said they could divide the lies from the non-lies and I said that�s ridiculous. Furthermore, we have had problems in the past where the CIA and other organizations that instill disinformation in overseas countries and American reporters pick it up as fact. And then they have been really hoodwinked and the American public doesn�t know what is fact and what is reality.

    AJ: And then that discredits the media organs which are needed by the government to form public opinion.

    SP: Well, it�s interesting that you say that. There has been an interesting kind of balance. CNN has been very, I would say, pro-Palestinian or pro-Arab in my ways, what I would consider. Whereas, thank God my friend Roger Ailes is the head of the MSNBC network, which is more conservative that the FOX network, where you can see some questions. Like Chris Matthews and the O�Reilly Factor, where we can get into some issues and really start discussing them from another perspective. That is, it doesn�t have a particular bias that is lent by the government. Now, it�s true, sometimes the government brings in, you know, they want to give their message. But if that message is out of whack, I�m more than happy to go on the air and say that guy is not telling the truth. And that�s why I go on these radio stations to say look, in my opinion, now I�m not gospel and I�m not, everything I say is not written in stone. I�m as human as anybody else. But I�ve had a lot of experience. And one of the things that I do not believe in, is the notion that policy, that�s what is unfortunately true about Washington. Politicians consider most of us, as American citizens, as pretty stupid and not very bright. And they think they can herd us around. And the answer is, they are mistaken. And I�ve said that repeatedly, that they have underestimated the intelligence of the American public, repeatedly, administration after administration. But this time around, Alex, we don�t have the flexibility, because we are in what we would call a constant struggle or war against the El-Jihad and the Muslims � Islamic fundamentalists who are more than happy to destroy much of what we have. And we can�t afford, at the same time, to be told all kinds of stories that do not correspond to reality. So that is where I do agree with you, Alex.

    AJ: Okay, thank you for that. You were, again, deputy assistant Secretary of State….

    SP: That�s correct.

    AJ: under Henry Kissinger, Vance and Baker, in key positions in many other administrations, you are also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, correct?

    SP: Yeah, I know what you are getting to. But I�m also a member of the National Rifle Association, too. I didn�t put that down. The real issue of the Council on Foreign Relations, this is where you would be concerned and others is that the Council on Foreign Relaions was once, many, many years ago, I�d say 15 or 20 years ago, a very elite Northeastern organization. What it has really turned into is pretty much, with all due respect, I think that is an old resume, but basically I haven�t attended a meeting in well over a year or two because it has become very much a rotary club. Basically it is the same people, returning by, saying the same thing and I eventually found it of very little help. It was an organization basically designed not to influence or direct everything, although, many of the secretaries of state have come out of there previously. Particularly before World War II, right after World War II.

    AJ: Since 1922, when it got founded, it was out of the Royal Institute of International Affairs..

    SP: Right, it was the Rockefeller family that funded it and built it up and there was a sense that there was a conspiracy here and I can tell you for a fact that a member of the group that you are talking to, that it is not any more conspiratorial there. There is a far more serious organization that we are concerned about and that�s called the Carlyle Group. That�s a private equity group run by a guy named Carlucci who is a former Secretary of Defense that are profiting very handsomely from this war. And I�m very much concerned about it because it because it could spread it.

    AJ: See, that�s amazing because I got some of the � I don�t know if you knew that some people were making some transcripts of some of your comments on KFI and I�ve got them here, I don�t know if they are accurate. But in these, you talk about the CIA and bin Laden in July and the rest of this …

    SP: Correct.

    AJ: That�s accurate, you said that?

    SP: Yes, that is accurate.

    AJ: Okay, Sir, I want to hear this from you when we get back.

    BREAK

    AJ: We are talking to Steve Pieczenik and he has got more titles than the Queen of England. I mean he has been all over the place. No, I�m serious. You have really led, and I envy all the dangerous and exciting situations you�ve been in and I didn�t even know if I could believe this bio and did some a little LexisNexis search and you actually play yourself down a bit on your website. Why don�t you give that to them Steve.

    SP: Oh, I can�t. Alex, I think you did a good job. I�m more than happy. Let�s talk about bin Laden.

    AJ: Your website for those who don�t know it…

    SP: Oh well, my website is stevepieczenik.com and I have a new book coming out called, �Active Pursuit� under the name of Alexander Court, and another one called �Active Measure� under Alexander Court, C-o-u-r-t, that will be coming out this week actually. It�s about the violation of Sweden, how hypocritical Sweden was during World War II, in establishing neutrality and actually helped the Nazis.

    AJ: Yeah, they made a lot of money off of it.

    SP: Oh, they made a huge amount and the Wallenburg family in particular, made a lot of money and then they violated everything we stood for. And we forced Raoul Wallenburg to join the OSS to make up for their totally treacherous behavior but the worst part about it was that I wanted to. See, I use fiction to put reality in. And one of the comments was, I went after one of their famous Nobel Prize winners, an extreme liberal, by the name of Gunnar Nordahl, who accused us… I remember when I was up in North Korea and I saw him, he said that Americans were despicable, we didn�t like human nature and all of that. I said I�m going after this guy and I found out and I put it in the book. And the Swedes have never denied it. This is a famous Nobel Peace Prize winner and he wrote the welfare state. How do you create the welfare state? Well, of all things, Alex, what happened was, and this was a fact they never denied and I put it in the book in �Active Measure� by Alexander Court, and you will read it there. What he did was to sterilize innocent Swedish women between 1945 and 1974. He sterilized over 75,000 innocent Swedish women who had nothing more than perhaps, you know, abnormal a little bit of behavior problem, or they were teenagers. But the real reason was for economic reasons. He didn�t want to have any problems with a potential abnormal child so they thought this was the best way to maintain their financial capability, maintain their welfare state. So much for greatest of free….

    AJ: Sounds like Margaret Sanger.

    SP: Well, it�s a lot more deadly than Margaret Sanger. This is a real effort to really neutralize their entire population and the guys are saying you are doing it for the welfare of the state. That�s called euthanasia.

    AJ: Absolutely and we see that now being legalized in many of those Scandinavian countries.

    SP: That�s correct and they don�t… they have denied…they have said we are looking at, and actually the kids don�t know about it. But it�s one of the things that again, again not all Swedes are bad but the point is that their government has been playing two-faced with the world for a long time, as many governments have and that is what your point is, Alex.

    AJ: Now Dr. Pieczenik, what I want to talk to you about tonight….

    SP: is bin Laden and the….

    AJ: Let�s get to that. We are about to break and start the next hour. Let�s talk about it then if you�ve got time right now.

    SP: Absolutely, I�ll give you the time.

    AJ: I want to talk about Henry Kissinger. I mean this guy, I�ve got his quotes on record where he says if there is a big enough crisis, we�d accept a new world order, global government. I mean he has said stuff like this on television and you worked under this guy. From talking to you, it sounds like you�re 180 from the views of Henry Kissinger.

    SP: Well, you are right on the nose. I, this I can share with most of your audience, that I was asked to work for him personally and I said no. I couldn�t, for many reasons that I don�t want to get into but primarily that I didn�t have the temperament to tolerate his type of, what we call, narcissistic behavior. He is very impulsive, childish and he rants and raves. As a psychiatrist, I don�t tolerate that and set limits very quickly. Secondly, I didn�t agree with his views but his deputy, Lawrence Eagleburger, who has been under (garbled) management has seen me negotiate the release of about seventeen hostages, (garbled) and he asked me if I�d come on board and work for the U.S. government. I said, no problem. I had a military commission. So the answer is you are right.

    BREAK

    AJ: We are excited to have a great guest, an intelligent guest, like Dr. Steve Pieczenik on the show. He has worked in four administrations. He has worked for the deputy secretary of state, hostage negotiator, the list goes on and on. He is a critically acclaimed author of psycho-political novels and co-creator of the best-selling Tom Clancy�s Op-Center and Tom Clancy�s Netforce series. He is a Harvard psychiatrist with an MD from Cornel University and PhD in International Relations from MIT. The doctor served for four presidential administrations. Again, now let�s start getting into this whole bin Laden situation and I�ve got a bunch of emails and I got a partial transcript of it and I called the station to confirm that you were on but they didn�t have a transcript. And….

    SP: You know, what I said was Alex, this is following issue.

    AJ: We are talking about bin Laden for those that just joined us.

    SP: Right, but we are talking about bin Laden. The issue is what the relationship is between the bin Laden family and the Bush family. It�s much more complicated than has been revealed, than has been revealed by anyone. And that is that it goes back for several decades.

    AJ: Back into the mid-70s.

    SP: It goes back, exactly. They have now, Bush, Sr, who I have served as well, and Bush, Jr. have literally gone to the bin Laden family and the Carlyle Group. This is the private equity group here in Washington, which the bin Laden family have been in. And they claimed they only had 2 million dollars, but my sense is that it was far more extensive, that they owned all kinds of companies, including one of the largest conglomerates in our military contracting. And bin Laden was, remember, our ally, supposedly our ally in 1979, �80, when he worked with us to drive the Soviet Union out of Afghanistan. He was just a young kid.

    AJ: Brzezinski talks about that in �The Grand Chessboard�.

    SP: Right, and that he then turned against us and we created a political Frankenstein. And that�s not the first time we�ve done that Alex and this is what I want to tell your audience.

    AJ: You are saying it is blowback.

    SP: It�s blowback, exactly. And what I was saying about a blowback was that if we tend to have a pattern here in the United States and it has to do, I think primarily with the fact that we don�t have good intelligence or good CIA capability to handle all of our so-called in between or gray-zone friends/enemies. And what happens is we just dump them. It was the same thing with Noriega. We had to go in and send in 22,000 troops. It was the same thing with Saddam Hussein, we fought with him for five years against Iran. We killed over a million people. We supplied him with the actual biological and chemical weapons. It was the CIA that did that. Suddenly we find ourselves at war with him. That was a blowback. Then we go to war and we don�t finish the war. Now we are going back to war again. And I am trying to say, wait a minute guys, if you messed up the first time, what makes you think you are going to do it again the second time. And so we have a blowback with Osama. But what made it more difficult was, I found out through my sources that he had had kidney disease. And as a physician, I knew that he had to have two dialysis machines and he was dying. And you could see those in those films, those made-up photos that they were sending us out of nowhere. I mean, suddenly, we would see a video of bin Laden today and then out of nowhere, they said oh it was sent to us anonymously, meaning that someone in the government, our government, was trying to keep up the morale on our side and say oh we still have to chase this guy when, in fact, he�s been dead for months.

    AJ: You are talking about the obvious fat guy, sitting there that looked nothing like bin Laden.

    SP: You�ve got it. I mean the whole thing was a, I mean it was such a hoax. I mean I said you would have to be, you know, blind and stupid to not realize that this is really being manipulating in trying to manipulate us.

    AJ: The type of psyops that we�d see coming out of Dr. Steve Pieczenik.

    SP: It�s not the kind of thing that I would do to the American public. But the more important part was that …

    BREAK

    AJ: We are talking about Osama bin Laden, the CIA asset during the �80s, right into the early �90s and now the mainstream reports here out of Europe and the U.S. confirming that he was involved in the situation in the Bosnian and the Serb war. And then what Dr. Pieczenik is calling the classic term �blowback� � the bad boy getting out of control and this report of him in the American hospital. It�s been in the Washington Times, you name it, getting nursed back to health, meeting with the CIA Section Chief for ten days. Dr. Pieczenik, a former undersecretary of State and member of the CFR, you name it, can say, oh yeah that�s true but he�s got an explanation for it. Please elaborate doctor.

    SP: Well, I don�t have a very good explanation. I was shocked as well as you were in that what is a Station Chief doing seeing Osama bin Laden when he was already declared an international war criminal under the previous administration and then the Station Chief testified, with several others, that the whole family � the notion that the family of bin Laden when they evacuated and left this country and then was subsequently interviewed, said they had no relation with bin Laden and that they didn�t know where he was and all that nonsense. It�s just sheer nonsense. And so when that popped up and I saw that, I said there is a lot of things going on here that don�t make sense. And that means that they are using bin Laden in a way that the United States government or you call Big Brother is basically using it in a very, ah, ah, ah, how should I say this, nefarious, in a very dangerous way to manipulate the American public.

    AJ: A pretext to get more control.

    SP: Well, it�s a pretext to get, I don�t know if I would say more control. They are not very good at controlling this. Because it�s really, it has really discredited the ability of the government to handle a simple situation without having to insult the intelligence of the American citizen.

    AJ: And you are saying earlier that you brushed up against this at an airport, I believe you said Nevada?

    SP: Oh yeah, in Reno, Nevada, where literally the police came and just took me away. And I said, what are you after? They searched me three to four times. I said, look you know, I�ve written these profiles. They didn�t answer anything. That�s called preventative detention. I said am I under arrest? They said no. I said what are you holding me for? And, can I tell you, well I won�t use that language on the air what I said to them but basically, this kind of activity is just totally unacceptable for the United States of America.

    AJ: And again, according to the press reports, you are the guy that coined the phrase, or did you, �conflict management� or..

    SP: I use what is called, I call it �crisis management.� I�m not sure I�m the original one, but I�ve used it for most of my life and basically every crisis from Arafat, in evacuating our soldiers, to evacuating our civilians, to going into hot spots in Cambodia and trying to stop Pol Pot from another killing field and still being on the hit list of a lot of terrorist groups all over the world. Still on the number one hit list of the Red Brigade in Italy, they still want me.

    AJ: Okay doctor, everything you are saying makes sense and we have had other CFR people on here couple of times and they are elitists. They..

    SP: I don�t want you to think of me as a CFR, all I did was pay dues. I�m haven�t attended a meeting in four or five years. So if you could use another title, I�d appreciate it Alex.

    AJ: Alright, I mean there are so many, my point is I�ve had these other guys up and they�re pompous, they don�t even seem that smart. Compared to having another talk show host on, but you seem very intelligent and obviously so, I mean working around all these people. I mean here you are talking about this bin Laden situation � give us your intel on that or what you have heard of the info you have…

    SP: Well, it�s not a good situation but it basically says to me that this is an orchestrated type of war and I think that I didn�t want to believe it for a very long time. And then I said that somebody is orchestrating something here with the agreement of the bin Laden family, knowing fully well that he would die. And I think that Musharraf, the President of Pakistan, spelled the beans by accident three months ago when he said that bin Laden was dead because his kidney dialysis machines were destroyed in East Afghanistan. Well, he was one of few that knew that he had a kidney problem. That wasn�t well known before. Everybody thought he had a heart disease

    AJ: Exactly, but we have him in this American, called the American hospital, and that report was confirmed

    SP: That was confirmed that he had kidney disease. So, what happened there is that we have Bush, Sr., Bush, Jr, dealing with the bin Laden family and then going to war with this organization that we effectively created in 1970s and 80s, when we drove out the Soviet Union. And that was the conversion, again blowback, of the young mujahideen where we gave them armament through the CIA again and that was no great secret. Everybody knew that and then there was a blowback.

    AJ: They knew the blowback was coming and allowed it to happen. Again, I am absolutely blown away, doctor, because this is in all the evidence that I have. I have over a hundred mainstream articles, government documents, Northwoods, you name it, on infowars.com in the government prior knowledge section. And, to have you up on this show, I mean I didn�t know which direction you were going to go and I just had some of the transcripts from another interview that you did, but it�s amazing and now more and more people are saying it. But look, they created bin Laden, they use him, the family is in bed with the Bushes back in the mid-70s, and you are talking about a stage-managed war. I mean, you just said it. I mean, boil it down for us. What are you saying, a former deputy secretary of state, what are you saying?

    SP: Well what I am saying is, I mean as a deputy assistant, what I am saying is that I am coming to the same conclusion that you came to. And that is, and I hope I�m wrong, but more and more evidence points to the fact that somehow, given who the people are that they appointed to the Dept. of Defense, they were civilians who had never been in the military. The same guys who were in Iran-Contra dealings. And then you have the same people who are involved with Saddam Hussein � Cheney and you have Condoleezza Rice who really wasn�t all that much impression and the same whole cast, very tightly controlled and they are managing something that doesn�t make sense to me. And that is, yeah there was an attack on the World Trade Center, yet we don�t really know who did it. And the president shows and says well here I have the evidence that bin Laden did it. Well, if bin Laden did it, then why was the first mention and the first order that was given, and I think you would remember this, so would your audience, is the FBI has to evacuate the entire family. If you were to go into a criminal scene or investigation, you wouldn�t say to everybody there, if you wanted to know who the culprit is, and you say oh that�s the culprit, let�s get rid of the whole family and not ask anybody any questions. That was a big mistake.

    AJ: That�s another red flag, another smoking gun that I didn�t even put in my 144-minute tour de force film that�s has so much evidence every 5 seconds, there�s some new document or news release or public statement. You�ve got them, when all other aircraft are grounded, other than the military, you�ve got jets flying out of Florida and Boston ferrying this Royal family out of here.

    SP: That�s exactly right. And so the question becomes, what�s going on here? And then the last one is of course is the fourth plane which had seventy-five minutes, in other words, those of you who are particularly � fighter pilots understand this. You can�t fly at about three or four-hundred feet off the ground and at seventy-five minutes out, you have to go out to the Chesapeake and the ocean and you are telling me that we couldn�t get fighter planes in there? When we had already had two attacks and you are telling me that that was not a military pilot who was trained to crash into the Dept. of Defense? That�s unbelievable and that was a sleeper. So, I can�t put that all together, but I�ll put all together and it�s not a good picture, Alex.

    AJ: What was a sleeper?

    SP: The guy, the one flying that plane into the Dept. of Defense. Those guys were sleepers. I mean you�ve got to explain, does your audience understand what, a sleeper is a concept that came out and it�s actually, they are agents that are trained that came out of the old cold war where the Russians would create and have individuals who were trained to kill and then they would be activated many years later. If you saw the movie, The Manchurian Candidate, you�d get a good idea of that.

    AJ: MKUltra mind control

    SP: MKUltra mind control, exactly.

    AJ: You know this is incredible. We�ve got one of the pre-eminent hostage negotiators, psyops guy, you know, worked with Tom Clancy, worked in four administrations, and then here you are with all the information.

    SP: It is very disturbing to me Alex as it is to anyone of our American citizens who is not buying it.

    AJ: So why did you decide to start going public with this? Was it getting….

    SP: I went public with this, no, I went public, well I�ve always been kind of a maverick. But I was offered an O7, and I said look I work alone, I�m a singleton basically and I work on my own and I work for my country. I never got a pension. I never really got paid much for what I did. I often had to pay back most of the expenses. I�m not telling you how great I am as an American. But as an American citizen, the reason that I went public, the first thing that bothered me was when Vice President Cheney was (garbled) for having had at Haliburton, and that big corporation that he had in oil, which he was given $35 million for all his knowledge in oil which he had none of, he had been a former secretary of defense, he had put in a embargo on Iraq and then he denied that he didn�t know anything about the embargo � the fact that they had violated the embargo by having a $75 million joint venture with Iraq and at that point I said, that was the straw that broke the camel�s back for me. Cheney was just outright lying and he committed a crime by violating an embargo. And I said these guys are in trouble and I�m going out publicly to say this can�t continue. Not as an American citizen, I�m not going back to war. I�m not going back and letting American soldiers die � for something that may have been concocted or created. It�s one thing if we are attacked by the Nazis or the J