ENOUGH! Our Government Needs to Stop Trying to Protect Us

This little piece by John Stossel may seem good natured on the surface, but you need to read between the lines to catch the full impact. Your government is not trying to protect you, it is trying to control you. Wake up Americans! You are not sheep. You are citizens! Act like it!

I feel so much safer now knowing that politicians like Jimmy Jeffress want to protect me!

Doctors ask about your family history because it’s one of the best predictors of what will bring your demise. My family history? Being hit by public transportation while distracted. My grandfather was killed by a bus when he was crossing the street while reading. I was hit by a taxi when jaywalking.

Arkansas State Senator Jimmy Jeffress proposed to “make it illegal for you to wear headphones in both ears if you're working out or walking on or near a street.”

He’s not alone. New York City wants to ban texting while crossing the street.

I feel safer already.

[NOT!] No. I don’t. And I feel less free. What’s next: no walking and chewing gum because some Americans can't?
The foolish legislator may have been inspired by this video of a woman falling into a fountain. It’s been viewed millions of times.

Trying to change such behaviors with legislation is pointless and intrusive. So are laws banning texting and using cell phones when driving. Those proposals are more compelling because distracted drivers do kill lots of people. But the laws don’t work. In fact, the laws may even lead to more accidents.

People do all kinds things while driving. They eat, fix their hair, put on lipstick, light cigarettes, and we even saw someone curling their eyelashes. If we must always drive with two hands on the wheel, should we outlaw picking your nose? Just putting on my sunglasses or drinking a sip of coffee takes a hand of the wheel. The radio is a big distraction problem; I'm constantly distracted trying to push the tiny buttons to avoid commercials.

In many states, the proposed laws call for hands-free devices like earpieces, but have you ever tried to put on one of those ear-pieces while driving? That's more of a distraction than the cell phone.

What one person may find to be a distraction may be an easily integrated invention for another. Carmakers keep bringing us new gadgets like navigation systems. While some of these new features may be distracting, we adjust to them. 

Why try to idiot-proof the world by banning new technology?
Just because something is wrong or dangerous doesn’t mean that banning it will solve the problem. Texting is just one of many activities that distract drivers. If I’m not texting, I’m eating, smoking, changing the radio station, trying to figure out the GPS, or simply talking to another passenger. All of these actions take our attention off the road; should they all be banned too? Maybe we are just getting better at multi-tasking? 

If outlawing cell phones didn’t decrease the number of traffic related deaths, and banning texting doesn’t seem to either, why don’t they just leave us alone. Of course, maybe these laws are passed not just to prevent accidents, but to generate tickets that provide funds for governments.

Fortunately, Arkansas’ Jimmy Jeffress has had second thoughts. This afternoon he dropped his proposal.


Article by John Stossel, Fox News

Fed Hides Major Accounting Change. Is This What Is Meant By "Fuzzy Math"?

Just another reason to ban the Federal Reserve! Wake up America... this (and every other) action by an independent banking cartel is bankrupting our country and that of our future generations!

  

Reuters has a very hot story out tonight on an accounting change the Fed snuck into a regular weekly report. It will move off the capital part of its balance sheet any losses the Fed may have on paper it purchased from Goldman Sachs, or anybody else for that matter. Here's Reuters via CNBC (My emphasis):

Concerns that the Federal Reserve could suffer losses on its massive bond holdings may have driven the central bank to adopt a little-noticed accounting change with huge implications: it makes insolvency much less likely.

The significant shift was tucked quietly into the Fed's weekly report on its balance sheet and phrased in such technical terms that it was not even reported by financial media when originally announced on Jan. 6.

But the new rules have slowly begun to catch the attention of market analysts. Many are at once surprised that the Fed can set its own guidelines, and also relieved that the remote but dangerous possibility that the world's most powerful central bank might need to ask the U.S. Treasury or its member banks for money is now more likely to be averted.

But they are averting asking the Treasury for money in the future by an accounting gimmick that will simply dump the debt off the capital part of the balance sheet, so it won't be reported as a loss, and make it a liability to the Treasury. More from Reuters:

[According to]Raymond Stone, managing director at Stone & McCarthy in Princeton, New Jersey, "An accounting methodology change at the central bank will allow the Fed to incur losses, even substantial losses, without eroding its capital."

The change essentially allows the Fed to denote losses by the various regional reserve banks that make up the Fed system as a liability to the Treasury rather than a hit to its capital. It would then simply direct future profits from Fed operations toward that liability...
 "Any future losses the Fed may incur will now show up as a negative liability as opposed to a reduction in Fed capital, thereby making a negative capital situation technically impossible," said Brian Smedley, a rates strategist at Bank of America-Merrill Lynch and a former New York Fed staffer.

"The timing of the change is not coincidental, as politicians and market participants alike have expressed concerns since the announcement (of a second round of asset buys) about the possibility of Fed 'insolvency' in a scenario where interest rates rise significantly," Smedley and his colleague Priya Misra wrote in a research note.

Bottom line: We all knew the Fed was going to have to do some kind of monkey business to deal with all the junk securities it purchased, here it is: Negative liabilities. Yes, only at your local Fed.

Note: I hasten to add this does not appear to resolve the problem of the Fed going cash flow negative as a result of having to raise interest rates on excess reserve to a point where they are higher than most of the income earning debt they hold. Expect future monkey business on this front.

Article by: Robert Wenzel, Economy Policy Journal 

Hawaii Governor Can't Find Obama Birth Certificate. Maybe The Dog Ate It? (Video)

This story is getting way too old not to have a happy ending...which of course is impossible!

Wake up America. You voted a con artist into the White House. Time to make amends and vote him right back out. Don't ya think?

Hawaii Gov. Neil Abercrombie suggested in an interview published today that a long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate for Barack Obama may not exist within the vital records maintained by the Hawaii Department of Health.

Abercrombie told the Honolulu Star Advertiser he was searching within the Hawaii Department of Health to find definitive vital records that would prove Obama was born in Hawaii, because the continuing eligibility controversy could hurt the president's chances of re-election in 2012.

Donalyn Dela Cruz, Abercrombie's spokeswoman in Honolulu, ignored again today another in a series of repeated requests made by WND for an interview with the governor.

Toward the end of the interview, the newspaper asked Abercrombie: "You stirred up quite a controversy with your comments regarding birthers and your plan to release more information regarding President Barack Obama's birth certificate. How is that coming?"

In his response, Abercrombie acknowledged the birth certificate issue will have "political implications" for the next presidential election "that we simply cannot have."

Suggesting he was still intent on producing more birth records on Obama from the Hawaii Department of Health vital records vault, Abercrombie told the newspaper there was a recording of the Obama birth in the state archives that he wants to make public.

Abercrombie did not report to the newspaper that he or the Hawaii Department of Health had found Obama's long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate. The governor only suggested his investigations to date had identified an unspecified listing or notation of Obama's birth that someone had made in the state archives.

"It was actually written, I am told, this is what our investigation is showing, it actually exists in the archives, written down," Abercrombie said.

For seemingly the first time, Abercrombie frankly acknowledged that presidential politics motivated his search for Obama birth records, implying that failure to resolve the questions that remain unanswered about the president's birth and early life may damage his chance for re-election. 

"If there is a political agenda (regarding Obama's birth certificate), then there is nothing I can do about that, nor can the president," he said.

So far, the only birth document available on Obama is a Hawaii Certification of Live Birth that first appeared on the Internet during the 2008 presidential campaign. It was posted by two purportedly independent websites that have displayed a strong partisan bias for Obama – Snopes.com released the COLB in June 2008, and FactCheck.org published photographs of the document in August 2008.

WND previously reported the Hawaii Department of Health has refused to authenticate the COLB posted on the Internet by Snopes.com and FactCheck.org.

WND has reported that in 1961, Obama's grandparents, Stanley and Madelyn Dunham, could have made an in-person report of a Hawaii birth even if the infant Barack Obama Jr. had been foreign-born.

Similarly, the newspaper announcements of Obama's birth do not prove he was born in Hawaii, since they could have been triggered by the grandparents registering the birth as Hawaiian, even if the baby was born elsewhere.

Moreover, WND has documented that the address reported in the newspaper birth announcements was the home of the grandparents.

WND also has reported that Barack Obama Sr. maintained his own separate apartment in Honolulu, even after he was supposedly married to Ann Dunham, Barack Obama's mother, and that Dunham left Hawaii within three weeks of the baby's birth to attend the University of Washington in Seattle.

Dunham did not return to Hawaii until after Barack Obama Sr. left Hawaii in June 1962 to attend graduate school at Harvard University in Cambridge, Mass.

Conceivably, the yet undisclosed birth record in the state archives that Abercrombie has discovered may have come from the grandparents registering Obama's birth, an event that would have triggered both the newspaper birth announcements and availability of a Certification of Live Birth, even if no long-form birth certificate existed.

WND has also reported that Tim Adams, a former senior elections clerk for the city and county of Honolulu in 2008, has maintained that there is no long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate on file with the Hawaii Department of Health and that neither Honolulu hospital – Queens Medical Center or Kapiolani Medical Center – has any record that Obama was born there.

Article by Jerome Corsi, World Net Daily

Texans to TSA: You Keep Scanners, We’ll Keep Privacy (Video)

You’ve heard the Texas jokes, such as: A New Yorker points to Niagara Falls and tells a Texan, “You don’t have anything like that!” To which the Texanresponds, “Naw, but we got a plumber who can fix it in 30 minutes.”

But they don’t joke about their rights and responsibilities, which is why they’re considering a plan to impose jail time on federal workers who want to enforce Obamacare provisions and are in the hunt to be the first state to require presidential candidates to document their constitutional eligibility.

Now, a government advisory board in Austin, joined by a team of citizen groups, is asking the city council there to tell the federal Transportation Security Administration that the government can keep its invasive airport pat-down procedures and nude-imaging scanners, and they’ll keep their privacy.

It is the Austin Airport Advisory Commission that has resolved, in a petition to the city council, that it is recommending the city “oppose the installation of [advanced image scanners] at [the Austin airport] and further oppose the practice of invasive body searching and encourages the city council to inform the TSA, the state and federal delegations of such opposition.”

Article courtesy of Patriot Update

Top US Federal Judge Assassinated After Threat To Obama Agenda?

A Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) report circulating in the Kremlin today states that the top US Federal Judge for the State of Arizona was assassinated barely 72-hours after he made a critical ruling against the Obama administrations plan to begin the confiscation of their citizen’s private retirement and banking accounts in order to stave off their nations imminent economic collapse, and after having the US Marshals protecting him removed.

According to this SVR report, Federal Judge John McCarthy Roll was the Chief Judge for the United States District Court for the District of Arizona who this past Friday issued what is called a “preliminary ruling” in a case titled “United States of America v. $333,520.00 in United States Currency et al” [Case Number: 4:2010cv00703 Filed: November 30, 2010] wherein he stated he was preparing to rule against Obama’s power to seize American citizens money without clear and convincing evidence of a crime being committed.

The case being ruled on by Judge Roll, this report continues, was about bulk cash smuggling into or out of the United States that the Obama administration claimed was their right to seize under what are called Presidential Executive Orders, instead of using existing laws. The Obama administration used as support for their claim before Judge Roll, the SVR says, the seizing of all American citizens’ gold, in 1933, by President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s signing of Executive Order 6102, which was ruled at the time to be constitutional.

Should the Obama administration win their argument to seize their citizen’s money by Executive Order without having to abide by the law was made more chilling this past week when reports emerged from the US stating that President Obama and his regime allies were, indeed, preparing to rule America by decree since their loss this past November of their control over the US House of Representatives, and in the words of the Washington Posts columnist Charles Krauthammer: “For an Obama bureaucrat … the will of the Congress is a mere speed bump”.

Since taking office in early 2009, Obama has completely overturned the once free United States through his use of Executive Orders that asserts his power to put anyone he wants in prison without charges or trial forever and his right to assassinate any American citizen he deems a threat.

The most chilling of these powers Obama has asserted for himself, however, are contained in Executive Order 13528 he signed nearly a year ago (January 10, 2010) creating a Council of Governors he has hand-picked to rule over the United States in place of its elected representatives when their next “disaster” strikes and orders them to begin “synchronization and integration of State and Federal military activities in the United States; and other matters of mutual interest pertaining to National Guard, homeland defense, and civil support activities”.

Going from the chilling to the outright scary, about whatever “disaster” the American regime is preparing their people for, is Obama’s Homeland Security Department, through their Ready.Gov organization, beginning to air this past week a public service television commercial titled “World Upside Down” that shows a typical family sitting in their home suddenly losing all of its gravity and warning all who watch it to begin preparing.

Note: In our previous reports US Descends Into Total Police State As 2012 ‘Solar Chaos’ Fears Grow, Pole Shift Blamed For Russian Air Disaster, Closure Of US Airport and Poisonous Space Clouds Slamming Into Earth Cause Mass Bird And Fish Deaths we had detailed some of fears the US government are most worried about, but which they still will not be truthful to their citizens about.

Interesting to note about the assassination of Judge Roll is that it is being blamed on a “lone gunman” said to be mentally unstable (aren’t they all) said directed at a US Congresswoman named Gabrielle Giffords, who survived this mass killing, and that killed at least 5 other innocent people, including a 9-year-old girl named Christina Taylor Green “curiously” born on September 11, 2001 (9/11).

 

Equally interesting to note about the assassin, a 22-year-old man named Jared Loughner, is that he is being described by the propaganda media organs in the US as an “anti-government” type individual who prior to this mass killing is said to have left “crazed rantings” on the Internet, but whose “handler”, described as a white male between 40-50 years old with dark hair, is still being sought after.

The circumstances surrounding Judge Roll’s assassination by Loughner, also, mirror those of Farouk Abdulmutallab (aka The Underwear Bomber) who “used cash to buy a one-way ticket to the United States at the last minute while carrying no luggage and being on a terrorist watch list. Incredibly, his father had communicated to the US Embassy in Nigeria in November that Abdulmutallab had been radicalized and may be planning a terrorist attack.

At least one witness—passenger Kurt Haskell—claimed that a well-dressed Indian man had escorted Abdulmutallab to the ticket counter and told a ticket agent that Abdulmutallab didn’t have a passport but needed to get on the plane.”

To if this Loughner is able to join the long list of CIA/US Military “mind controlled” assassins there appears to be no doubt as his actions, past, present and future, shows his fitting the “profile” of these maniacs as detailed in the massive lawsuit currently wending its way through the US Federal Court system [United States District Court Northern District Of California, San Francisco Division Case: CV-09-0037] filed against the US government by hundreds of veterans, and as we can read as reported by the Raw Story news service:

“It’s well known that the CIA began testing substances like LSD on soldiers beginning in the 1950s but less is known about allegations that the agency implanted electrodes in subjects. A 2009 lawsuit claimed that the CIA intended to design and test septal electrodes that would enable them to control human behavior. The lawsuit said that because the government never disclosed the risks, the subjects were not able to give informed consent.”

To if the American people will ever be told the truth about Loughner and his assassination of Judge Roll there seems little doubt as the Obama regime is fighting with everything it has to keep the information on these “mind controlled” assassins secret, and as we can read as reported by the Courthouse News service:

“The Central Intelligence Agency in January (2011) will argue for dismissal of Vietnam veterans’ claims that the CIA must provide them with information about the health effects of chemicals used on them during Cold War-era human experiments. The CIA also claims it is not obligated to provide the veterans with medical care for side effects of the drugs. It’s the CIA’s third attempt to get the case dismissed.

“In a 2009 federal lawsuit, Vietnam Veterans of America claimed that the Army and CIA had used at least 7,800 soldiers as guinea pigs in “Project Paperclip.” They were given at least 250 and as many as 400 types of drugs, among them sarin, one of the most deadly drugs known to man, amphetamines, barbiturates, mustard gas, phosgene gas and LSD.

Among the project’s goals were to control human behavior, develop drugs that would cause confusion, promote weakness or temporarily cause loss of hearing or vision, create a drug to induce hypnosis and identify drugs that could enhance a person’s ability to withstand torture.

The veterans say that some of the soldiers died, and others suffered grand mal seizures, epileptic seizures and paranoia. The veterans say the CIA promised in the 1970s to compensate those who were made guinea pigs, but the 2009 complaint states that the government “never made a sincere effort to locate the survivors.”

In its 32-page motion to dismiss the group’s third amended complaint, the CIA claims it has no legal obligation under the Administrative Procedures Act to provide the veterans with notice of the drugs’ health effects and that the veterans’ notice claim “rests solely on state common-law duty.”

The CIA claims that the law on which the veterans base their claim for health care compensation stems from the Department of Defense and Army regulations, “which do not purport to have a binding affect on the CIA.” And it claims that the Defense Department “never intended nor committed to providing medical care for service member participants in the test programs.”

Based upon the CIA’s assertion that the US Defense Department “never intended nor committed to providing medical care for service member participants in the test programs” clearly shows their knowing of the existence of these “mind control” assassins, like Loughner, leading one to wonder how many more of them are out there, and even worse, when they will strike next.

One can only hope that there is some “power” in America today able to stop the madness currently taking over that once great nation before all is truly lost, we hope it is much sooner than later for all of the worlds sake.

Article courtesy of European Union Times

Red Skelton's Pledge of Allegiance 1969 (Video)

969A skit from one of Red Skelton's 1969 TV shows... I am sure he had no clue his words would ever come to fruition. If Red Skelton was alive today he would surely be a leading voice for reason. 

Wake Up America! What he was worried about in 1969 is happening TODAY!

Appeals Court Says Cross On Federal Land Is Unconstitutional

 

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the argument that the cross is solely a memorial.

A federal appeals court ruled Tuesday that a cross displayed on public property for nearly a century is unconstitutional.

Three versions of the Christian symbol have been erected atop 822-foot Mount Soledad in the posh La Jolla neighborhood of San Diego, California, since 1913.

The current 43-foot cross was erected in 1954 in honor of Korean War veterans and has been the subject of near constant judicial back and forth since 1989, when two Vietnam War veterans filed suit against the city, saying it violated the California Constitution's "No Preference" clause.

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the notion that the cross -- since the late 1990s surrounded by plaques and paving stones honoring veterans and war dead -- was solely a memorial.

"The use of such a distinctively Christian symbol to honor all veterans sends a strong message of endorsement and exclusion," the court said in its ruling. "It suggests that the government is so connected to a particular religion that it treats that religion's symbolism as its own, as universal. To many non-Christian veterans, this claim of universality is alienating."

The court also noted that the site had, for most of history, been used for Easter services -- marked on maps until the late 1980s as the "Mount Soledad Easter Cross" -- and was designated a war memorial with a plaque "only after the legal controversy began in the late 1980s."

"It was not until the late 1990s that veterans' organizations began holding regular memorial services at the site," the court said.

And the court rejected arguments that the cross at a war memorial was no different than any other memorial that includes a cross.

To read the rest of the article click here: CNN

[Just who are these “judges” that are judging that Crosses are Unconstitutional? Have they even read the Constitution recently? Is there anything in that precious document that comes remotely close to implying that crosses on federal land are unconstitutional? 

Last time I checked the National Cemetery at Arlington was on federal land. What about those crosses? Or crosses on churches on US military bases? Or wearing crosses while on federal land? How long is it going to be before these same “judges” judge that those crosses must go? Sound a little Marxist to you? Me too!!

Wake up America!! These perfidious “judges” are trying to judge us into liberal socialism. Until we unite against this type of transgression, America will continue to suffer.]