Obama is Secretly Talking with the Taliban, Says It’s What Reagan Would Do... Say It Aint So, Gipper!

With Islamic riots, skyrocketing deficits, and state-skipping Democratic legislators hogging the headlines, this item has not yet gotten the attention it deserves. Steve Coll writes in The New Yorker, “The Obama Administration has entered into direct, secret talks with senior Afghan Taliban leaders, several people briefed about the talks told me last week.” 

Obama mentioned reaching out to “Taliban moderates” in 2009, only to drop the idea after public backlash. Apparently, the Obama administration has decided now is the time it wishes to look weak, hopeless, and pathetic.

Hillary Clinton detailed the American stance before a meeting of the Asia Society recently. She emphasized that if the Taliban returned to its history of repression and terror incubation, it would risk being branded “an enemy of the international community.” Mullah Omar and his buddies must be shaking in their turbans.

Hillary tried to calm the situation, saying, “I know that reconciling with an adversary that can be as brutal as the Taliban sounds distasteful, even unimaginable.” But she insisted, this is what Reagan would do.

She attributed her policy to Ronald Reagan and Richard Holbrooke. The lesson she and Obama learned from The Gipper is that peace does not come by only speaking with one’s friends. “President Reagan understood that when he sat down with the Soviets. And Richard Holbrooke made this his life’s work. He negotiated face to face with Milosevic and ended a war.”

Reagan refused to hold a single summit with the Soviet Union until Gorbachev took the helm, famously joking, “I’m pleased to tell you today that I’ve signed legislation that would outlaw Russia forever. We begin bombing in five minutes.” Richard Holbrooke’s foreign policy ripped Kosovo from Serbia and turned it over to the Kosovo Liberation Army, an affiliate of al-Qaeda armed by Iran, which has since mercilessly persecuted the nation’s Christian population.

Totally Hopeless, Totally Clueless

The New Yorker writes things are worse than this. At this point, the American negotiators do not even know which members of the Taliban’s leadership would want to negotiate, “if any.” Our goal is “to persuade at least some important Taliban leaders to break with Al Qaeda.” Moreover, President Hamid Karzai has been carrying out “sporadic” talks with the Taliban since 2008 with zero tangible results.

The Clintons’ History of Surrender

Going, hat-in-hand, in the hopes someday someone in the Taliban might allow you to negotiate terms of surrender does not convey the hope of peace; it conveys weakness and gives them hope of reclaiming their nation. History is on their side. In April 1998, the Clinton administration sent Bill Richardson to Afghanistan to convince the Northern Alliance to accept a ceasefire agreement against the Taliban. Congressman Dana Rohrabacher later recounted, “I cannot stress this more forcefully: it was a pivotal moment. The Taliban could easily have been defeated.”

The Clintons talked our allies into stopping short. The ceasefire lasted one month, long enough for the Taliban to recover and take over the country. Thirteen years later, Hillary and her boss seem ready to repeat this history.

One additional point should be made. Now that they’ve been published in The New Yorker, these talks can hardly be described as “secret.” The Obama administration can’t even manage quiet surrender properly.

Article courtesy of  The Floyd Reports

U.S. Supreme Court Denies Parents Of Vaccine Damaged Children Their Right To Seek Justice

In 6-2 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court has handed down a decision that bars parents of vaccine-damaged children from seeking justice against vaccine manufacturers. The parents, Robalee and Russell Bruesewitz of Pittsburgh, saw their healthy child damaged by a diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis vaccine in April, 1992. Just hours after receiving the shot, their daughter Hannah went into seizures. Today she still suffers from residual seizure disorder. 

The parents sought compensation by first filing their case with the vaccine court -- a special pseudo-justice system set up by the U.S. government to provide blanket immunity to the drug companies while still offering settlement payouts for parents whose children are damaged by vaccines. Since being formed in 1986, this court has paid out $1.9 billion to parents whose children were damaged by vaccines.

But in the case of Bruesewitz, their claim was denied. The vaccine court, after all, is run by the U.S. government, and the government doesn't want too many payouts to take place because that would set a precedent of vaccine damage that could cost the government billions (or even trillions) of dollars in unexpected settlement fees.

So the Bruesewitz parents decided to file their claim in the regular court system as their last remaining option for seeking justice for the damage caused to their child by what can only be called a "faulty product" (the vaccine).

The great injustice of legal immunity for vaccine manufacturers

It is interesting that most people agree with the idea that when corporations make dangerous products that harm or kill children, they should be held accountable. Makers of baby strollers or infant formula, for example, are not granted immunity from lawsuits. Nor are makers of automobile child restraint seats or baby cribs. In every case other than vaccines, corporations are held accountable for the safety of their products. But like magic, when it comes to vaccines, safety is not their concern because they have zero liability anyway.

The liability, it turns out, has been shifted to the federal government which operates its "let's-make-a-mockery-of-justice" vaccine court. This puts the federal government in the position of denying any validity to legitimate claims that vaccines harm children, because to admit such a thing would cause a tidal wave of claims to come flooding into the vaccine court, resulting in potentially trillions of dollars in payouts to all the parents whose children have been harmed by vaccines.

What we have here, folks, is a genuine circle-the-wagons, cover-your-eyes, deny-the-truth cover-up involving Big Government and Big Pharma operating "in cahoots." The government gives the vaccine industry blanket immunity, then they both join hands in denying that vaccines cause any damage whatsoever.

The parents, meanwhile, are denied their Constitutional right to due process! Such is the upshot of today's Supreme Court decision, which has now condemned countless more children to suffer the seizures, comas and deaths caused by vaccines -- even while their parents will have no legitimate legal recourse.

That's why this situation is not only a travesty of public health but also a travesty of justice.

Vaccines are medical violence against children

The vaccine industry is killing children. It is maiming them, destroying their nervous systems and causing permanent harm. These are acts of medical violence committed against children. Even the vaccine court admits this link through its own cash payouts to parents of damaged (or dead) children.
And yet, the U.S. government continues to endorse these acts of violence against children. It even goes so far as to excuse them by providing immunity to the corporations those products harm these children.
 
It doesn't take a genius to realize that this blanket immunity takes away any incentive of safety from the vaccine manufacturers. With no liability, what motivation do they have to improve the safety of their products? They have none. No wonder vaccines continue to be so dangerous, manufactured with mercury, aluminum and formaldehyde among other neurotoxic ingredients.
 
This entire situation is nothing less than extraordinary. The vaccine industry gets blanket immunity. The government denies parents their Constitutional right to due process. The children continue to be harmed and killed by vaccines, and yet the parents have no means by which they can seek justice.

This is entirely un-America. It is a violation of the Constitution, a violation of justice and of course a violation of the health of our children.

This is, effectively, an act of state-sponsored medical terrorism against parents and children.And it begs the question: When parents are denied due process; denied their Constitutional rights; denied their day in court and denied compensation for the harm that has been brought upon their children, what options of recourse do they have left?
Those denied justice through the courts will seek it in other ways

This is where acts of violence will no doubt enter the picture. Violence is the last, desperate option for those who have been denied all other options to resolve their grievances peacefully. When the courts, the government and the corporations have conspired against you to harm your children and then deny you any legal recourse, it is only a matter of time before some parent of a vaccine-damaged child decides to take matters into their own hands through acts of violence committed against those who damaged their children.

Do not misinterpret this as an endorse of such actions. NaturalNews has consistently and repeatedly decried the use of violence to resolve problems. Yet we cannot deny that in this legal / pharma / government conspiracy that causes children to be harmed while denying parents any legitimate legal recourse, it is inevitable that angry, disenfranchised parents will sooner or later reach a boiling point and decide to pursue justice in the only way left available to them.

Vaccines, after all, are a form of medical violence against children. It is unreasonable for the state to maintain the position that it can support a system of violence against children without fomenting violence as a reaction.

The source of the violence is, of course, the state itself, which is now even engaged in efforts to strip away  religious exemption.

The vaccine industry declares war on America's children

This is, as I mentioned earlier, an act of war against America's children. Every war sooner or later spurs the rise of a resistance. And today, the vaccine resistance movement is growing by leaps and bounds, with more and more parents, doctors, and even scientists joining it every day. Every death of a child by vaccines is blood on the hands of the vaccine pushers and the government which now openly conspires with it.
In an age when the government actively conspires to harm and even kill your children through a system of medical violence, parents not only have the natural right -- but the duty -- to take active measures to protect their children from further harm.

The uprising against the vaccine state

If this issue of the state enforcing acts of medical violence against children cannot be resolved through the Constitutionally guaranteed right to due process, it will sadly and inevitably be resolved through acts of popular uprising. That is the lesson being learned today all over the world: In Egypt, Libya, Iran and even Wisconsin.
When the People are suppressed, with their children are maimed by the state, when their rights are denied by the courts, and when they feel as if they have no options remaining to them, they will sooner or later take to the streets with sticks, or stones, or bullets. One way or another, they will seek the justice that has been denied them by the corrupt state, operating in a criminal conspiracy with the vaccine industry.

Article by Natural News

Obama Plans to Nationalize Wireless Internet.... Shades of Mubarak and Gadhafi?

In what amounts to the next initiative undertaken by the Obama administration toward its escalating program of government expansion and nationalization of various aspects of the lives of the American people (such as the government takeover of health care, intervention in banks, and the nationalization of various automobile companies such as General Motors), the federal government is now embarking upon a program of government-directed wireless internet (Wi-Fi) delivery.

President Obama outlined his plan for government wireless access and broadband expansion at a February 10 press conference at Northern Michigan University in Marquette, Michigan. The conference revealed yet another well-known truth about the proposal, characteristic of any other initiatives which believe that government is capable of expanding access to any commodities: It is rooted in his Quixotic, insolvent, debunked, and expansionist view of government, and in his failure to realize the proper relation of government to the myriad possibilities made possible by the free market, in a more efficient and capable manner. The Wi-Fi expansion proposal not only reflects an unconstitutional view of government spending and scope, but is also a continuation of Franklin Delano Roosevelt-style economics, which failed the country at the height of the Great Depression and continue to contribute to the national deficit and economic woes.

Obama’s speech was reminiscent of FDR’s numerous addresses given to rural farmers and laborers during the era of the New Deal, relying on flawed Keynesian notions that increased government spending is an effective means of stimulating economic development and reducing budget deficits, despite the fact that such government programs and the implementation of Keynesian economics in the Nixon years have led the United States down a path of valueless, inflated fiat currency and unbalanced budgets for close to 40 years.

The New York Times reports:

“This isn’t just about a faster Internet or being able to find a friend on Facebook,” Mr. Obama said in a speech at Northern Michigan University here, after viewing a demonstration on long-distance learning over the Internet.

“It’s about connecting every corner of America to the digital age,” the president said. “It’s about a rural community in Iowa or Alabama where farmers can monitor weather across the state and markets across the globe. It’s about an entrepreneur on Main Street with a great idea she hopes to sell to the big city. It’s about every young person who no longer has to leave his hometown to seek new opportunity — because opportunity is right there at his or her fingertips.”

Indeed, as noted by Henry Payne in the National Review, and precisely debunking Obama’s view that the federal government is needed to develop wireless Internet infrastructure throughout the country, the successful Marquette wireless Internet program Obama lauds was made possible not with one cent of federal funding, but as a model program through the collaborative effort of the local government (which is constitutionally permitted to provide such programs) and private enterprise (tech giants Intel, Motorola, Cisco, and Lenovo provided the local government with matching funds, and supplied the university with the prototype for its WiMAX broadband technology). The White House’s proposal mirrors FDR’s massive Rural Electrification Administration program of the 1930s, which provided federally-funded loans for the installation of electrical distribution systems to serve rural areas, and was later amended in 1949 to provide federal funding for the expansion of telephone service to rural areas, as part of President Harry Truman’s Fair Deal.

It is even being touted as part of Obama’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, otherwise known as the stimulus, and millions of dollars in funding for Obama’s wireless Internet program has already been appropriated through the provisions of the legislation. As early as September 2010, the government website http://www.recovery.gov, which was created as a resource to highlight where taxpayer funds are being used as part of the stimulus program, touted the supposed economic benefits of government-financed Wi-Fi. Furthermore, U.S. Commerce Secretary Gary Locke praised increased Wi-Fi as an effective means of achieving a more globalized America, in which information access “shrinks the world” by reducing barriers among nations and peoples. Commerce.gov reported:

U.S. Commerce Secretary Gary Locke today announced 14 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act investments to help bridge the technological divide, create jobs, and improve education and public safety in communities across the country. The investments, totaling $206.8 million in grants, are the final awards in a program to increase broadband Internet access and adoption, enhancing the quality of life for Americans and laying the groundwork for sustainable economic growth.

“In a globalized 21st century economy, when you don’t have regular access to high-speed Internet, you don’t have access to all the educational, business and employment opportunities it provides,” Locke said. “These critical Recovery Act investments will create jobs and lay the groundwork for long-term sustainable economic growth in communities across America.”

“In total, we are investing in 233 strong projects that reach every state. Most are ‘middle mile’ networks that expand high-speed Internet availability to communities and connect key institutions, such as schools, libraries, and hospitals. This focus allows us to get the biggest bang for every grant dollar by addressing communities’ broadband problems while creating jobs and facilitating sustainable economic growth,” Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information and NTIA Administrator Lawrence E. Strickling said. “We are also investing in public computer centers and training to help more Americans compete better in today’s workforce.”

According to the Department of Commerce, $7 billion in funds are being used toward the development of rural Wi-Fi, under the administration of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) and the Department of Agriculture’s Rural Utilities Service, the latter the same agency which implemented the New Deal and Fair Deal programs of rural electrification and telephone service expansion. NTIA is utilizing approximately $4 billion of that funding for the Broadband Technology Opportunities Program (BTOP), which provides grants to support the deployment of broadband infrastructure, enhance and expand public computer centers, and encourage sustainable adoption of broadband service.

Stimulus funds are being spent toward 233 BTOP projects, which the Department of Commerce says will:

• Fund the installation or upgrade of approximately 120,000 miles of broadband networks, including fiber-optics, wireless, microwave, and other technologies. Of this amount, approximately 70,000 miles involve construction of new broadband facilities.
• Provide broadband access to approximately 24,000 community anchor institutions, including schools, libraries, government offices, health care facilities, and public safety entities
• Deploy middle mile infrastructure in areas with nearly 40 million households and 4 million businesses, many of which will benefit from new or improved broadband service provided by last-mile providers that are able to utilize the new, open infrastructure to extend or upgrade their service for consumer and business customers.
• Invest in more than 3,500 new or upgraded public computer centers in libraries, schools, community centers and other public locations.
• Invest in more than 35,000 new or upgraded public computer workstations.
• Make public computer center workstations and training available to more than 1 million new users

As early as May 2009, special interests connected with the wireless internet industry looked at the stimulus as a windfall. 
According to Stan Schatt, vice president of the market intelligence company ABI Research, the Recovery Act represents a windfall for wireless service providers as well as for satellite service providers, and it will have an enormous impact on Wi-Fi and wireless broadband vendors. In addition to the program empowering tech giants, it will also serve to further inflate big government spending and create new programs, as the Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Education, and the healthcare industry each are poised to benefit, as reported in The Register:

The healthcare biz will be itching to add or improve Wi-Fi-enabled mobile devices, sensors, and communications systems that will link health networks with the stimulus money, the report claims.

Meanwhile, the education market will want "learning anywhere" equipment that requires purchasing VoIP and WLAN equipment and software to track students' progress for No Child Left Behind record keeping.

But the real money is in selling wireless equipment to the Department of Homeland Security and US Customs and Border Protection, the report asserts. The agencies represent a "potential goldmine" to kit providers, as the government itself will be taking a generous portion of the stimulus money for tactical communications equipment, infrastructure equipment, and security equipment. Even critical infrastructure construction projects such as bridges and tunnels often require wireless video surveillance systems.

In typical Orwellian double-speak, Obama’s proposal was touted as an “investment,” rather than spending that the federal government cannot afford, and according to the White House, the spending will reduce the deficit by $9.6 billion over the next 10 years, as the government will consider auctioning off its portion of the wireless spectrum to private companies, which can result in government gaining as much as $28 billion in revenue from the sales. (This is a direct application of economist John Maynard Keynes’ Theory of Countercyclical Spending — that government should take an active economic role by imposing policies that run counter to market trends by engaging in fiscal stimulus, or deficit spending, as a means of staving off massive unemployment):

The President’s proposals to auction off spectrum freed up from the government and voluntarily relinquished by current commercial users, is estimated to raise $27.8 billion. This total is above-and-beyond the auction proceeds that are used to provide an incentive for private and government users as well as the auction proceeds that are expected even absent the President’s proposal. After the cost of the investments proposed by the President, the initiative would reduce the deficit by $9.6 billion over the next decade.

In fact, many of the industries which Obama hopes will help deflect the cost off of taxpayers have been less than enthusiastic about this proposal. Experts say that the plan is overly ambitious and complicated, relying heavily on the participation of cautious television broadcasters who are loath to easily give up their greatest asset — the wireless broadband spectrum. Government estimates don't include how much money it would return to broadcasters who give up airwaves in voluntary "incentive auctions." Those television broadcasters will get a cut of the proceeds, the administration has promised, though it hasn't offered more details; broadcasters want more guarantees auctions will be voluntary, and they are searching for details on how much they would receive from the auctions. Those details, however, are crucial for broadcasters, said Gordon Smith, president of the National Association of Broadcasters."We aren't against the plan but want to make sure this is truly voluntary, and we want to hold harmless those who don't want to participate," Smith said, as reported in The Washington Post.

In addition, advocates for Internet competitiveness and choice in the digital marketplace fear that Obama’s proposal may adversely affect both the taxpayer and the integrity of the technological free market. Gigi Sohn, president of the public interest group Public Knowledge, said that while federal attention to mobile broadband technology was a positive development in her view, “It is not at all clear that incentive auctions will take place. Even under circumstances of familiar auction procedures, estimates of revenue can vary greatly from what is actually achieved." Sohn and many lawmakers also pointed to a questionable track record for federal programs to expand broadband connections. Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.), chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, said that “Before we target any more of our scarce taxpayer dollars for broadband, it is critical to examine whether the money already being spent is having an impact, as well as how we can minimize waste, fraud and abuse.”

While there is no direct benefit anticipated for the taxpayer, manufacturers of consumer electronics such as the iPhone and Netbook are hailing the plan, which was met with approval by the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA), one of the largest technology trade associations in the world.

Article by Daniel Sayani, The New American

Those Who Do Not Learn From History...

This cartoon was published in the Chicago Tribune in 1934. We all know what was happening to our country during that time. 

Are we so ignorant as to not have learned our lesson from history? 

 

Click on image to enlarge

Wake Up America!

LESSONS FROM EGYPT

For the sake of the safety and well-being of our Republic, there are at least two lessons to be learned from the current Egyptian Event:

1.       America's leaders have been hypocritical, pretending to be what we have not been for far too long - i.e., defenders of the essential Principles underlying America's system of governance, and  

2.       A critical mass on the streets, imposing economic sanctions on the government, can peacefully remedy violations of natural Rights, when individuals and small groups cannot.

"All Men (including Egyptians) are created equal."

How utterly hypocritical it is for any public official in America, elected or appointed, to favor or facilitate despotism and its companion, "stability," at the expense of Individual Rights, limited government and democracy, whether in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Jordan, Israel, China or anywhere else.

For far too long, America's leaders have been selling our souls for a plate of beans, pretending to be something they are not - i.e., defenders of the essential Principles underlying America's system of governance.

For decades, over many administrations and by both political parties, the public promises and assurances of America's leaders regarding limited government, individual Rights and the equality of man have been a deception, masking the true character of their collective acts, which actually sustain abusive government power over individual Rights.

Their acts, speaking louder than their words, have instead institutionalized abuse of power and populations around the Earth, all for the purpose of securing material bounty and geopolitical advantage, not in the national interest but for the few and privileged. 

The proof of this is demonstrated by America's foreign policy and its devastating, adverse impacts on the ordinary, non-aligned People of other countries. Egypt is but one example.

During the last three weeks, the political leadership of the United States, particularly the Executive, have appeared frequently on world-wide television to present statements regarding the obligation of Egypt's leaders to "address" the Grievances of the Egyptian People, respect the Natural Rights of Individuals and avoid violence.

These broadcasted claims by America's leaders, however, are nothing short of sheer hypocrisy when contrasted against the similar refusal by America's leaders to "Redress" the Grievances of the American People, repeatedly served via First Amendment Petitions for Redress, concerning gross violations of Rights guaranteed by our Constitution - (allegedly, still) the Law of the Land.

After America's leaders were finally shamed into finding quiet words of support for the unalienable Rights of common Egyptians, and forced to tacitly admit to America's policy of enduring support of the Egyptian dictator's despotic regime, we offer this reminder. These same U.S. leaders have, for over a decade now, steadfastly REFUSED  to Redress similar Grievances of the American People, that is, violations of our Constitution that continue to adversely impact the Life, Liberty and Prosperity of the American People, while continuing to wreak havoc, unrest and injustice abroad.

America's leaders during the Clinton, Bush and Obama administrations have refused to respond to the People's Petitions for Redress of Grievances, including those relating to: the application of the armed forces in hostilities overseas without congressional authorization;  the cartel of private banks known as the Federal Reserve System; the fiat (paper) Federal Reserve currency and fractional banking practices; the imposition of direct, un-apportioned taxes on labor; the virtual evisceration of the Bill of Rights by the USA Patriot Act; the failure of the Executive to "faithfully execute" existing immigration laws; the giving and lending of public funds to private entities for definitively private purposes; the use of public funds to bail out foreign currencies without congressional appropriations; the eligibility requirements of the office of President; and the movement towards a North American Union.

In true authoritarian style, between December 2006 and May of 2007, cornered by the persistent, highly visible pressure brought by members of our organization in the public exercise of the unalienable Right to Petition for Redress to hold the government accountable, the leaders of all three branches of the U.S. Government went as far as to collude in an veiled attempt to outlaw the First Amendment Right to Petition.

In short, just as we have witnessed in Egypt, Liberty is a force of Nature and no People can be expected to forever be deprived of their individual, unalienable and natural Rights, Freedoms and Liberties.

We, the People of America must hold America's leaders accountable to the following essential principles of Just and Lawful Governance:

·         All men (including Egyptians) are created equal; equality is not an American monopoly.

·         All men are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, including Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. Egyptians, too, have them simply because they are alive. Life-furnished Rights are not an exclusive American commodity.

·         To secure these Rights, governments are instituted among men; Government's sole purpose in America and elsewhere is to protect the Rights of their sovereign People.

·         People everywhere have the unalienable Right to Petition their Governments for Redress of Grievances if their Rights are being repressed, ignored and violated; All governments of, by and for the People are obligated to respond.

·         Whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it; the Right to think freely and to hold the Government accountable extends to all People in America and beyond. 

Governments that prefer the calm seas of despotism rather than the boisterous sea of Liberty, where waves crash whenever Freedom is challenged, ought to be avoided like the plague by Americans and their leaders.

What is America after all, if it has all but abandoned its essential values both at home and abroad?  How can We, as a People, continue to claim moral primacy and spiritual authority for our acts when as a nation we have essentially forsaken our Founding Principles? 

The truth is coming to the surface and cannot be hidden; for decades America's leaders have used the unlawfully extracted wealth of this nation's citizens and violated its Constitution almost without restraint, to immorally and unlawfully meddle in the internal affairs of foreign countries, taking sides and assisting knowingly corrupt governments that openly oppress and violate the natural Rights, Freedoms and Liberties of the Free and Equal People within their borders.

America is now paying a heavy price for our hypocrisy.

As Ronald Reagan put it, "Government is the enemy of Freedom." Thus, every country has its Freedom Fighters whose Natural causes are limited government, individual Liberty and equality under the Law.

When the populations of despotic, authoritarian regimes realize the United States is the "friend" of their Governments, is it any wonder that America would have hostilities directed at us by those people, knocking down our buildings and the like? Even Osama Bin Laden and Michael Scheuer have told us this is so. Click to read the Petition regarding unconstitutional Foreign Aid.

So in the end, it is you and I, the working citizens of America, who end up not only financing, but becoming enduring victims of a "War on Terror" and its companion police state, all in the name of "security," but in clear violation of the Constitution which begins:

"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 and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

Despite the fact our nation may well have enemies, ironically many created as a product of our own ill-conceived foreign policies, a global war on terror and domestic police state do not serve the general Welfare of the People of the United States of America and should not be tolerated.

Where will it end?

Is there an alternative to a critical mass on the streets of America, imposing economic sanctions on the government, demanding an end to the police state and rising en masse to call for a foreign policy centered on the belief that the principal obligation of all governments is to protect the Creator-endowed, equal Rights of all men? 

 

Could a critical mass of Americans peacefully remedy the continuing violations of our Constitution, where individuals and small groups have thus far failed?

Article Courtesy of We The People

San Diego Port Officer Says Nukes Have Been Found In San Diego by 'Partner Agency' (Videos)

This video should make ALL Americans think twice about this country's border security and their own safety as a result. DHS (a misnomer if there ever was one) is at it again with their lies, denials, and excuses, however thankfully sometimes the truth seeps through the BS. 

Watch the video interview of a San Diego Port officer and his honest answers to some very tough questions. 

Wake Up  America!! Our border are a sieve and our government will not admit to the fact. The administration's reputation takes precedence over your safety any ol' day...

Please watch the follow up interview below

The REAL Reason Ben Bernanke Leaves a Paperweight on the “Print” Button When His Finger Gets Tired

We’ve been over the numerous BS excuses that US Dollar destroyer extraordinaire Ben Bernanke has made for QE enough times that today I’d rather simply focus on the REAL reason he continues to funnel TRILLIONS of Dollars into the Wall Street Banks.

I’ve written this analysis before. But given the enormity of what it entails, it’s worth repeating. The following paragraphs are the REAL reason Bernanke does what he does no matter what any other media outlet, book, investment expert, or guru tell you.

Bernanke is printing money and funneling it into the Wall Street banks for one reason and one reason only. That reason is: DERIVATIVES.

According to the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency’s Quarterly Report on Bank Trading and Derivatives Activities for the Second Quarter 2010 (most recent), the notional value of derivatives held by U.S. commercial banks is around $223.4 TRILLION.

Five banks account for 95% of this. Can you guess which five?

 

Looks a lot like a list of the banks that Ben Bernanke has focused on bailing out/ backstopping/ funneling cash since the Financial Crisis began doesn’t it? When you consider the insane level of risk exposure here, you can see why the TRILLIONS he’s funneled into these institutions has failed to bring them even to pre-Lehman bankruptcy levels.

Ben Bernanke is a stooge and a fraud, but he is at least partially honest in his explanations of why he wants to keep printing money. The reason is to try to keep interest rates low. Granted he’s failing miserably at this, but at least he understands the goal.

Of course, Bernanke tells the public and Congress that the reason we need low interest rates is to support housing prices. He doesn’t mention that $188 TRILLION of the $223 TRILLION in notional value of derivatives sitting on the Big Banks’ balance sheets is related to interest rates.

Yes, $188 TRILLION. That’s thirteen times the US’s entire GDP and nearly four times WORLD GDP.

Now, of course, not ALL of this money is “at risk,” since the same derivatives can be traded/ spread out dozens of ways by different banks as a means of dispersing risk.

However, given the amount of money at stake, if even 4% of this money is “at risk” and 10% of that 4% goes wrong, you’ve wiped out ALL of the equity at the top five banks.

Put another way, Bank of America, JP Morgan, Goldman, and Citibank would CEASE to exist.

If you think that I’m making this up or that Bernanke doesn’t know about this, consider that his predecessor, Alan Greenspan, knew as early as 1999 that the derivative market, if forced into the open and through a public clearing house would “implode” the market. This is DOCUMENTED. And you better believe Greenspan told Bernanke this.

In this light all of Bernanke’s monetary policies and efforts are focused on doing one thing and one thing only: trying to shore up the overleveraged, derivative-riddled balance sheets of the Too Big to Fails.

The fact that the bank executives taking this money and using it to pay themselves and their employees record bonuses only confirms that these folks have NO interest in taking care of shareholders or their businesses. They’re just going to take the money and run for as long as this scheme works.

I don’t know when this will come unraveled. But it WILL. At some point the $600+ TRILLION behemoth that is the derivatives market will implode again. When it does, no amount of money printing will save the Too Bloated To Exist banks’ balance sheets.

At that point, it’s game over for Wall Street and the Fed.

Article by Graham Summers, Phoenix Capital Research

Tracing the Fed’s Vital Role in the Decline of the US Dollar

A Century of Ineptitude…Almost

Tracing the Fed’s Vital Role in the Decline of the US Dollar

Eric Fry Reporting from Laguna Beach, California… In 2013, we Americans will commemorate a century of wealth destruction in the United States – the Federal Reserve will be 100 years old. In 1913, the Federal Reserve Act became law – granting sole authority to the Federal Reserve to “issue legal tender.” Armed with its new power and its good intentions, the Fed embarked on a 98-year process of currency debasement. That’s not what the Fed set out to do; it’s just what it did do. In the early days of the Federal Reserve, this monetary authority enjoyed the support of a gold standard. Few Americans doubted that the Fed’s new greenbacks would be as good as gold. As such, gold coinage and paper dollars intermingled effortlessly in the US economy for most of the Fed’s first two decades. But as the wheels of progress roared ahead, America’s “hard money” coinage disappeared and soft promises took its place – soft promises and lots of chatter about hard money. As it turns out, chattering about hard money does not preserve wealth as well as hard money itself. The purchasing power of a one dollar bill has plummeted more than 95% since the Federal Reserve first began printing its legal tender in 1914. Although the dollar’s epic decline began glacially, it has gathered luge-like momentum. The greenback’s value dropped only 50% during the first 33 years of the Fed’s stewardship – i.e. between 1913 and 1946. But the 1946 dollar would lose half its value in just 24 years, while the 1970 dollar would lose half its value in just nine years. The rate of decay slowed somewhat during the Volcker years, as the 1979 dollar did not lose half its value until 14 years later. Nevertheless, the dollar’s progression toward zero since 1913 feels more geometric than arithmetic. In 1914, the year the Federal Reserve began conjuring dollar bills into existence, 700,000 shimmering new $10 Indian Head Gold Eagles rolled out of the Philadelphia, San Francisco and Denver Mints. Once in the hands of a working stiff, each $10 coin would buy $10 worth of goods and services. Likewise, the Fed’s crisp, new McKinley $10 bill would also buy $10 worth of goods and services. Over the ensuing 98 years, a succession of Federal Reserve Chairmen labored to “preserve” the purchasing power of their McKinleys, Washingtons and Lincolns. The Gold Eagles had to take care of themselves. The results are in; the unprotected Gold Eagles flourished, while the “protected” Mckinleys withered. Based on its metal content, a 1914 $10 Indian Head Gold Eagle is worth $643.45. A 1914 $10 bill is still worth ten dollars. To examine this contrast from a slightly different perspective, consider the divergent paths of the two $50 bills pictured below. The first $50 bill is a 1913 “Gold Certificate,” issued directly by the US Treasury and fully convertible into gold. The second $50 bill was issued by the Federal Reserve in 1914 and was convertible into nothing. Both versions of this $50 bill circulated freely in American commerce. Any holder of the $50 Gold Certificate held title to 2.41896 troy oz. of Gold – at the fixed rate of $US20.67 per troy oz. These certificates could be redeemed at any bank or from the US Treasury itself at any time…until 1933, when FDR outlawed gold ownership. Notwithstanding this little nuance, let’s consider the plight of two hypothetical buddies from 1914. The first buddy, Caleb, stashes a $500 “rainy day” fund under the floorboards of his house – a roll of ten $50 Ulysses S. Grant dollar bills. The second buddy, Josiah, also stashes $500 under the floorboards – he walks into the neighborhood bank with ten $50 Ulysses S. Grant Gold Certificates and exchanges them for gold. Josiah then takes his gold and hides it under his floorboards. Both buddies forget about their hidden stashes. Eventually, let’s say 2010, the respective heirs of these two long-deceased buddies happen to conduct simultaneous renovations of their respective residences. Caleb’s heirs find the ten ancient $50 bills. “How quaint,” they think to themselves. Josiah’s heirs find $32,172 worth of gold! Thus, 98 years of history demonstrates conclusively that a blind monkey could have preserved the dollar’s purchasing power better than a Federal Reserve Chairman. Unfortunately, it’s tough to find a blind monkey who will take the job.