June 29, 2009

Job Killing Cap-and-Trade Bill Is Not About Saving the Environment, It's About Destroying America

First Chairman Bernanke implied a threat to wreck the American economy if the Federal Reserve is audited, and now this. The remnant of America's fragile sovereignty will be effectively vanquished if the "Clean Energy & Climate Change" bill passes the Senate to be signed into law by Traitor-in-Chief Obama. They are creating a new speculation market to inflate and bust us with, as well as the first global tax. CO2 is a harmless gas—the real culprits are thousands of chemicals, rampant radiation, and physical environmental destruction (including war). - The Truth Will Set You Free Blogspot, Selling U.S.A. out to China with land & treasury guarantees - "We Are Chinese Now"

American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 will implement the infamous cap-and-trade system on greenhouse gas emissions, signaling the NWO’s final moves toward total financial bondage. And with Washington granting dictatorial powers to the Federal Reserve last week... the New World Order is moving fast, and there are really only two more obstacles in their way: our right to speak freely and our right to protect ourselves. - Zachary T. Baker, New World Order Rams Through Sham Cap & Trade Bill , June 27, 2009

"This bill will tax you. This bill will destroy the livelihood of those who live and work in rural America." - Frank Lucas (R-Okla.)

"The impacts of this bill will shut small businesses. It will close family farms, it will shutter manufacturing plants, and those jobs will end up in China and India" where environmental standards are less rigorous. - Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.)

The hit to GDP is the real threat in this bill. The whole point of cap and trade is to hike the price of electricity and gas so that Americans will use less. These higher prices will show up not just in electricity bills or at the gas station but in every manufactured good, from food to cars. Consumers will cut back on spending, which in turn will cut back on production, which results in fewer jobs created or higher unemployment. Some companies will instead move their operations overseas, with the same result. -
Wall Street Journal

Cap-and-Tax Scheme is 'Socialism Cloaked in Environmental Do-Goodism'

The Office of Rep. George Radanovich (CA)
June 27, 2009

Congressman George Radanovich (R-Mariposa) today released the following statement after voting against the Democrats' job-killing Cap and Tax bill (H.R. 2454, the American Clean Energy and Security Act) in the Energy and Commerce Committee. The bill passed the Committee with four Democrat members siding with Republicans in opposition:

“Today was a terrible day for businesses in America. The Democrats just passed a bill that will make every aspect of living and doing business in this country more expensive. The Central Valley is already suffering from runaway environmental regulations, and the Democrats' new Tax and Cap scheme will only make that suffering worse. Let me be clear, this bill is nothing more than socialism cloaked in environmental do-goodism. (Under Cap and Trade, the government would set emission limits and distribute allowances that would be bought and sold. Companies needing to increase emission levels would purchase credits from those with lower emissions.)

“We in the Valley know the abuses of environmental alarmism with the Endangered Species Act and the Delta Smelt. This global warming scheme is environmental alarmism on steroids.

“This legislation operates under the false assumption that we can replace the vast majority of our energy supply, which is fossil fuel based, with only renewable sources such as wind and solar—without increasing the use of nuclear power.

"I believe we should increase the percentage of renewable sources within America’s energy portfolio, but the goals in this bill are unrealistic and unattainable. We cannot rely on intermittent sources of renewable energy to replace reliability of fossil fuel or nuclear energy production.

"This bill should encourage the construction of new large scale hydropower; streamline the process for new nuclear; allow unrestricted use of Federal lands for biomass; and include these in the definition of renewable or clean energy—solutions with the real chance to help our energy problems without crippling our economy in the process.

"Even President Obama has acknowledged that 'electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket' under a cap and trade plan.

“The last thing this country needs, especially during a recession, is a tax and cap system that will cost every American household $4,800 per year, destroy hundreds of thousands of American jobs, and weaken our stance in the global economic community. Unfortunately, that is what the Energy and Commerce Democrats imposed on the American people.”

Top 10 List of Problems Associated with Cap-and-Trade Legislation

The Heritage Foundation
May 20, 2009
  1. Cap-and-trade is a massive energy tax;
  2. It will not make a substantive impact on the environment;
  3. It will kill jobs;
  4. It will cause electricity bills and gas prices to sharply increase;
  5. It will outsource manufacturing jobs and hurt free trade;
  6. It will make you choose between energy, groceries, clothing and haircuts;
  7. It will be highly susceptible to fraud and corruption;
  8. It will hurt senior citizens, the poor, and the unemployed the worst;
  9. It will cost American families over $3,000 a year; and
  10. President Obama admitted “Electricity Rates Would Necessarily Skyrocket” under a cap-and-trade program (January 2008).

Proponents of Cap and Trade, and Most “Green” Legislation, Can Be Parsed Out into Three Basic Groups

May 5, 2009

Group 1 - Those who stand to benefit monetarily
There is a great deal of money to be made buying and selling carbon credits. There is a great deal of money to be made by those who have positioned themselves to market “green” technology. There is a great deal of money tied into lobbying efforts and campaign finances. Money, money and more money.

Group 2 - Those who would gain additional power
The control that will be wrestled away from individuals and businesses will be unprecedented. What you drive, the types of lights you use, the types of technology available, the amount you pay for those things; in essence, how you live will be determined by “government.” We will all be forced to comply and, more importantly, to pay for this; and the cost will be terrible.

Group 3 - The true believers
The disciples of the “global warming” religion who truly believe in the cause. These are the ones who have drunk the Kool-Aid, who have eaten the apple, swallowed the pill, or whatever applicable analogy you can come up with. I feel for them as they have been deceived so completely by the lie that they are all but unreasonable on the subject. Even in the face of irrefutable evidence, they would continue to swear allegiance to the cause; much like a chicken divested of its head, it will take a while for the "body" of believers to realize the loss.

The impetus behind the rush to cap and trade lies not with group three, as they do not hold the political clout to warrant such a catastrophic realignment of wealth and power: the guilt lies squarely with groups 1 and 2.

This legislation is about nothing as noble as saving the planet, despite what its proponents would claim (minus group 3). This legislation is about nothing more than money and power; their gain is our loss.

With the chorus of reputable scientists growing each day, it may just be a matter of time before the unwashed masses (read that as our moronic leaders) have an epiphany and realize that we see this for what it is: and unprecedented usurpation of our sovereign authority. We can hope, at least; and until then, we can continue to debunk the myth that the science is settled.

According to Antonio Sosa, in His Response to Global Warming Activists:

June 20, 2009

No patriotic and informed American can support the American Clean Energy and Security Act (ACES) Act (cap and trade), which is based on the global warming scam.

Cap and Trade “would be the equivalent of an atomic bomb directed at the U.S. economy—all without any scientific justification,” said famed climatologist Dr. S. Fred Singer. It would significantly increase taxes and the cost of energy, forcing many companies to close, thus increasing unemployment, poverty and dependence.

Cap and Trade represents huge taxes and cost increases, which will hurt mostly the poor and the middle class. Cap and trade will give dictatorial powers to Obama and will further enrich his billionaire friends (Gore, Soros, Goldman Sachs, Obama’s Chicago Climate Exchange friends, GE, the United Nations, etc.)—all at our expense and at the expense of our children and grandchildren.

Those brainwashed to the point of wanting to destroy the economy to “prevent global warming” are behaving like the most primitive human beings who were duped into believing that human sacrifices would ensure them good weather. Human beings don’t have the power to control climate! And killing the economy will not help the environment. Poor countries can’t protect the environment. Just look at Haiti!

More and more scientists and thinking people all over the world are realizing that man-made global warming is a hoax that threatens our future and the future of our children. More than 700 international scientists dissent over man-made global warming claims. They are now more than 13 times the number of UN scientists (52) who authored the media-hyped IPCC 2007 Summary for Policymakers.

Additionally, more than 30,000 American scientists have signed onto a petition that states: “There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate.”

We pray that honest leaders—both Democrat and Republican—are able to save us from Obama’s criminal ACES Act (cap-and-trade) scam.

Based on the European experience and the fact that increased taxes and more expensive energy will destroy our economy, here are much realistic figures on the damage the global warming/cap and trade hoax will cost us:
  • Reduce aggregate gross domestic product (GDP) by $9.6 trillion
  • Destroy 1,105,000 jobs on average, with peak years seeing unemployment rise by over 2,479,000 jobs
  • Raise electricity rates 90 percent after adjusting for inflation
  • Raise inflation-adjusted gasoline prices by 74 percent
  • Raise residential natural gas prices by 55 percent
  • Raise an average family's annual energy bill by $1,500
  • Increase inflation-adjusted federal debt by 26 percent, or $29,150 additional federal debt per person, again after adjusting for inflation.

Democrats Rushing to Cap-and-Trade Suicide

The American Spectator
June 26, 2009

UPDATED: Another 300 Pages? According to Ed Morrissey at Hot Air, Henry Waxman just tacked on another 300 pages in the dead of night! This monstrosity is like one of those 1950s sci-fi creatures that just keeps growing and growing...

PREVIOUSLY: Such is the feverish haste with which Democrats are trying to rush Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade through the House that, as with the $787 billion "stimulus," they're preparing to vote on a 1,000-plus-page bill that none of them have read.

According to the Sunlight Foundation, on June 19, when the bill was placed on the House calendar, it was 964 pages. By Monday, when it was submitted to the House Rules Committee, it was 1,201 pages. Rep. Spencer Bachus (R-Ala.) has noted that the bill bypassed key committees, and none other than Rep. Charles Dingell (D-Mich.) has described it as a "huge tax."

Given this situation, the hurry to ram through the "massive job-killer" can only be compared to lemmings rushing toward a cliff. If Nancy Pelosi can impose party discipline, Democrats will find themselves under intolerable pressure to vote "yes" and the lemming impulse will prevail. But, as with the stimulus bill, no Republican should join this lemming rush.

Opponents of Waxman-Markey are praying that they can find enough "Blue Dog" Democrat votes to stop the bill. Yet the lemming impulse of the Democrats toward mass suicide could be so powerful that many House members will sign their own political death warrants today. Maybe some of these Democrats should talk to George "Buddy" Darden, the Democrat who representated the Seventh District of Georgia until he allowed himself to be talking into voting for Bill Clinton's gun-grabbing "crime bill" in 1994.

Legislative haste of the sort exemplified by H.R. 2454 contradicts the advice of our Founders. Smitty, a military man of constitutionalist persuasion who helps me out at my personal blog, was moved today to quote James Madison's famous expression of the rule of law:
It will be of little avail to the people, that the laws are made by men of their own choice, if the laws be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood; if they be repealed or revised before they are promulgated, or undergo such incessant changes that no man, who knows what the law is today, can guess what it will be tomorrow. Law is defined to be a rule of action; but how can that be a rule, which is little known, and less fixed?
Sheer regard for political self-preservation may produce enough Democratic "no" votes today to stop Waxman-Markey. If not, the repeal of this disastrous legislation should be the first campaign promise of every Republican challenger in 2010.

House Passes Climate Bill

Wall Street Journal
June 26, 2009

Landmark legislation to curb U.S. greenhouse-gas emissions was approved by the House of Representatives in a close vote (219-212) late Friday, securing an initial victory for a cornerstone of President Barack Obama's agenda. After months of negotiations, the Democratic-controlled House has narrowly passed sweeping legislation calling for the nation's first-ever limits on pollution linked to global warming.

The 1,200 page bill—formally known as the "American Clean Energy and Security Act"—will reach into almost every corner of the U.S. economy. By putting a price on emissions of greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide, the bill would affect the way electricity is generated, how homes and offices are designed, how foreign trade is conducted and how much Americans pay to drive cars or to heat their homes...

But it isn't clear how much of the sprawling House bill will survive in the Senate (this fall), where moderate Democrats and Republicans could form a majority that backs less ambitious action...

June 26, 2009

No Fly, No Buy Act of 2009

Problems With "No Buy" Terror Watch List

Similar to "No Fly List," and Like "No Fly List" Impedes Non-Terrorists

June 21, 2009

Imagine not being able to buy a home, car, or other "big-ticket" item because your name shows up on a terror watch list. That's happening to some people who haven't committed a crime and aren't terrorists, Early Show consumer correspondent Susan Koeppen reported Monday.

The "No Buy" list terror watch list, Koeppen explains, is similar to the "No Fly" list you've probably heard of. The latter is designed to prevent terrorists from boarding planes. And, says Koeppen, the "No Buy" list is hindering some innocent people, in the same way the "No Fly" list does.

Sandy Cortez knows that all too well. When the grandmother from the Denver area went to buy a car, she thought it would be a simple transaction, but she got the shock of her life: Her name popped up on a terror watch list when the dealership pulled her credit report.
"I was actually waiting for the FBI to come charging in through the door with guns blazing!" Cortez told Koeppen.
The Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control--known as OFAC for short--keeps track of known terrorists, drug traffickers, and proliferators of weapons of mass destruction. The current list has more than 7,000 names and aliases, and companies aren't allowed to do business with anyone on the list. In fact, they have to check the list before any credit transactions can take place.

The Sandra Cortez Koeppen spoke to came up as a possible match for Sandra Cortes Quintero--an accused drug trafficker from Colombia. But besides their first names, no other information matched. The Treasury Department admits the list generates false positives, but refused to tell CBS News how many innocent people have been affected.
"Virtually anyone in America could be on that list," says Phillip Hwang of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights.
His organization put out a report documenting dozens of cases of consumers who were denied homes, health insurance, even the purchase of a treadmill because of an OFAC alert.
"You know, someone who happens to have the last names Lucas, Gibson, Diaz--all of a sudden finds that they are being identified as potential terrorists, and it really creates a lot of anxiety and panic among consumers."
Recently released government documents show complaint after complaint from consumers caught up by the "No Buy" list, Koeppen points out. One from a Naval officer reads,
"Please tell me this was some mistake and you normally do not treat veterans of the U.S. military who served honorably ... in this fashion."
Another man was confused with Saddam Hussein's son. Another says receiving an OFAC alert subjected him to "serious complications and humiliations."
"This is a very troubling practice," Hwang says, "and the federal government has a responsibility and a role to play, because they are the ones putting out the watch list."
But Treasury officials say it's not them; they say the problem stems from the OFAC matching databases supplied by the credit bureaus. They are among the companies that get paid to search the list and supply information to lenders.

Stuart Pratt, president of the Consumer Data Industry Association, tells Koeppen,
"Congress said there had to be a list. And Congress said there's a law that lenders have to look at the list."
Pratt says the large fines and possible jail time for companies that do business with someone on the list forces his members to cast a wide net in their searches.
"OFAC," says Pratt, "needs to provide lenders with better guidance on what they're supposed to do to match data. The OFAC guidance says, 'Don't (establish a) match off of a single name,' but OFAC doesn't give you much guidance for what you're supposed to do when you have three names... And, by the way, for almost every record on the OFAC list, there are aliases, 'akas.' "
With the Treasury Department and the companies that provide OFAC alerts pointing fingers at each other, consumers such as Sandy Cortez are left to fend for themselves, Koeppen says. She sued the credit bureau that provided her OFAC alert and has spent the past three years trying to clear her good name.

When Koeppen noted that,"The Treasury Department says, 'Yes, a few innocent people might get caught up in this, but it's for the greater good,' " Cortez asked, "How does putting OFAC alerts on my credit report, an accountant, a grandmother from Colorado, help national security?"

How do you get off the list once you're on. It's not easy, that's for sure, Koeppen says. If you're applying for credit to buy something big, fill out your paperwork completely, and warn businesses when you walk in that you're popping up in the list, and it's a mistake.

Proposed Law Allows Attorney General to Block Gun Sales to Over a Million Americans

New York Times
June 20, 2009

...Senator Frank R. Lautenberg plans to introduce legislation on Monday that would give the attorney general the discretion to block gun sales to people on terror watch lists.

The government’s consolidated watch list, used to identify people suspected of links to terrorists, has grown to more than one million names since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. It also has drawn widespread criticism over the prevalence of mistaken identities and unclear links to terrorism.

A report in May from the Justice Department inspector general found that the list kept by the Federal Bureau of Investigation carried the names of 24,000 people included on the basis of outdated or sometimes irrelevant information.

Gun rights advocates said showing up on a terrorist watch list should not be grounds for being denied a gun.
“We’re concerned about the quality and the integrity of the list,” said Andrew Arulanandam, a spokesman for the National Rifle Association. “There have been numerous studies and reports questioning the integrity, and we believe law-abiding people who are on the list by error should not be arbitrarily denied their civil rights” under the Second Amendment.
Mr. Lautenberg introduced a similar gun-control measure in 2007, but it stalled after opposition from the N.R.A. The senator attributed the outcome to “knuckling under to the gun lobby.”

Mr. Arulanandam said the gun lobby would have to examine the details of the newest proposal before taking a position. But he added: “Senator Lautenberg has always been on the wrong side of the Second Amendment. His approach is not in the interests of public safety...”

Bill H.R. 2401: No Fly, No Buy Could Set Dangerous Precedent

By Tony Pacheco, Kansas City Headlines Examiner
May 13, 2009

Representative Carolyn McCarthy introduced H.R. 2401: No Fly, No Buy Act of 2009. The bill states,
"To increase public safety and reduce the threat to domestic security by including persons who may be prevented from boarding an aircraft in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, and for other purposes."
To simplify, the TSA's No Fly list, which currently has over one million names, will be combined with the National Instant Criminal Background Check System used to authorize the sale of firearms.

Hold up Rahmbo, did you just say, "if you are on the No Fly list because you are known as maybe a possible terrorist, you cannot buy a hand gun in America." Read that again, "you are known as maybe a possible terrorist." So let me get this straight, this bill will diminish a citizens natural-born right to own a hand gun because you think he might be [a possible terrorist]? Not good enough. Where did the fifth amendment go?

Before we move on, let's take a closer look at the TSA's current No Fly list. The list is an ineffective joke; there's no other way to put it. Just look at any number of these cases involving the No Fly list and you'll quickly see how ineffective it is.

Here is a document outlining numerous cases of innocent people harassed at the airport for being on the list. These are official reports supplied by a freedom of information act

Given those instances, it's obvious the list is ineffective at best. Unfortunately, as more DHS reports (which outline who the government views as terrorists or extremists) are released, one could only conclude those will serve as guidelines to continually add names to the No Fly list, therefore robbing citizens of their second amendment based on their views without a judge or jury. The Department of Homeland Security's Lexicon outlines who needs close surveillance for local law enforcement officials.

I have two big problems with these lists. The first being, there doesn't seem to be a clear cut way for an innocent person to get off this list. Could you imagine living your life as well and clean as could be only to be sideswiped by a list you have no business being on? My second problem is this: why aren't you notified? Why must you find out this horrendous surprise at the airport? If you really are a threat to America, why aren't you questioned the moment your added to the list? Why would our government allow over one million known or suspected terrorists to roam around the States without interference? I don't know, but I'd sure like an answer.

Who’s A Low Level Terrorist? Are You?
Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions. It is the one un-American act that could most easily defeat us. Recently, an American Civil Liberties Union report pointed out, "Anti-terrorism training materials currently being used by the Department of Defense (DoD) teach its personnel that free expression in the form of public protests should be regarded as ‘low level terrorism’.”

June 25, 2009

Cybersecurity Act of 2009

Cybersecurity Is Framework for Total Government Regulation & Control of Our Lives

Paul Joseph Watson & Kurt Nimmo, PrisonPlanet
June 1, 2009

The Obama administration’s new Cybersecurity system will only make the Internet more vulnerable to attack, while creating the framework for a massively upgraded government surveillance grid that will control and regulate every aspect of our daily lives through the implementation of “smart” technology.

Obama’s announcement of the new cybersecurity grid dovetails with a recently introduced Senate bill, the Cybersecurity Act of 2009, that would hand the president the power to shut down the entire Internet in the event of a “cybersecurity” crisis.

“The bill’s draft states that “the president may order a cybersecurity emergency and order the limitation or shutdown of Internet traffic” and would give the government ongoing access to “all relevant data concerning (critical infrastructure) networks without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule, or policy restricting such access,” reports Raw Story.

The legislation would allow the government to tap into any digital aspect of every citizen’s information without a warrant. Banking, business and medical records would be wide open to inspection, as well as personal instant message and e-mail communications.

This is President Bush’s warrantless wiretapping program on steroids, yet the reaction from the liberal left has been muted to say the least. Furthermore, the reasoning behind the proposal is a farce, since cybersecurity will make the Internet even more vulnerable to attack. According to Jennifer Granick, director of civil liberties at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the program would “basically establish a path for the bad guys to skip down.”

One of the bill’s authors, Democratic Sen. Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia, admitted that the bill was about more than just military or intelligence concerns. “It is a lot more than that. It suddenly gets into the realm of traffic lights and rail networks and water and electricity,” said Rockefeller.

Essentially, this is the framework within which every aspect of our lives will be managed and regulated by a gargantuan government bureaucracy designed to control and shape every aspect of our behavior through our dependence on technology.

This is what Nancy Pelosi was referring to when she visited China last week and let slip the fact that “Every aspect of our lives must be subject to inventory” in order to fight global warming

Under the cybersecurity grid, our electricity consumption, our water consumption, and every other basic utility that we rely upon will be subject to state regulation.

This is already being introduced through “smart” technology, manifesting in such things as fridges that are controlled by power companies and not the individual. If you are deemed to have bypassed government-approved levels of consumption, your fridge will be automatically turned off remotely.
“A domestic refrigerator that can be turned on and off by the electricity supplier without the homeowner being aware is to go on trial,” reported the Daily Mail in January. “Npower will distribute 300 ‘smart fridges’ free to homeowners throughout Britain within the next five weeks as part of the energy companies’ efforts to tackle climate change.”

“At times of high demand, the National Grid will activate the switches in the fridges to achieve a balance in the power supply. The development means that, for the first time, consumers will lose control over the use of electricity in their own homes,” stated the report.
All British homes are also set to have “smart” electricity and gas meters installed by law by 2020. The meters would “record energy use” according to a Reuters report. Likewise, water companies are preparing to force homeowners to install water meters so that water consumption can be accurately recorded and restricted in times of drought.

This is just the beginning of the imposition of a suffocating prison planet whereby our every action will not only be recorded by Big Brother but also subject to government approval and control.

The Cybersecurity grid will also be an upgrade of the pervasive snoop network that has already been operating under NSA auspices for decades.

During a speech last week on “cybersecurity,” Obama told a whopper. He said the government’s effort to protect us from cyber bad guys “will not include monitoring private sector networks or Internet traffic. We will preserve and protect the personal privacy and civil liberties that we cherish as Americans.”

Is it possible Obama has never heard of Mark Klein, the retired AT&T communications technician who said years ago that the company shunted all Internet traffic — including traffic from peering links connecting to other Internet backbone providers — to semantic traffic analyzers, installed in a secret room inside the AT&T central office on Folsom Street in San Francisco? There are similar rooms in Seattle, San Jose, Los Angeles and San Diego, all sucking up internet data.
Klein explained that the multinational corporation is doing this at the behest of the NSA. It is “vacuum-cleaner surveillance” approach that grabs everything. “Despite what we are hearing, and considering the public track record of [the Bush] administration, I simply do not believe their claims that the NSA’s spying program is really limited to foreign communications or is otherwise consistent with the NSA’s charter or with FISA [the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act],” said Klein in 2006.

After the NSA showed up in 2002 at AT&T’s Folsom Street facility, Klein began connecting the dots. “You might recall there was a big blowup in the news about the Total Information Awareness [TIA] program, led by Adm. [John] Poindexter, which caused the big upsetness in Congress, because what Poindexter was proposing to do was draw in databases from everywhere — and this was in the New York Timesdraw in Internet data, bank records, travel records, everything into one big conglomeration which could be searchable by the government so they could find out everything about what anybody’s doing at any time of day,” Klein told PBS. “And all this would be done without any warrants. This is how it was presented by Poindexter himself in the New York Times, and that caused a great upset, brouhaha, in Congress.”
On January 16, 2003, Senator Russ Feingold introduced legislation to suspend the activity of the Total Information Awareness program pending a Congressional review of privacy issues involved. In February 2003, Congress passed legislation suspending activities of the IAO (Information Awareness Office) pending a Congressional report of the office’s activities.

Congress acted after William Safire published an article in the New York Times claiming “[TIA] has been given a $200 million budget to create computer dossiers on 300 million Americans” (see You Are a Suspect, November 14, 2002).

Of course, the program didn’t go away. Legislators included a classified annex to the Defense Appropriations Act that preserved funding for TIA’s component technologies, if they were transferred to other government agencies. TIA projects continued to be funded under classified annexes to Defense and Intelligence appropriation bills.

Total Information Awareness — the all-seeing terrorist spotting algorithm-meets-the-mother-of-all-databases that was ostensibly de-funded by Congress in 2003, never actually died, and was largely rebuilt in secret by the NSA, according to the Wall Street Journal’s Siobhan Gorman,” Ryan Singel wrote for Wired on March 10, 2008. “There’s been no real debate in Congress or in the press about whether the government should be allowed to track every Americans phone calls, emails and web browsing.”

Jon Stokes, writing for Ars Technica, notes that TIA technology is nothing new. “TIA-like efforts are still going on” Stokes wrote in 2005, and “the government has been trying to use new technology, like database tech and voice recognition, for domestic surveillance for a long time. And when I say a long time, I mean well before the current administration came into office.” It really got a boost under Clinton in 1995 when the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA) was passed. “CALEA mandated that the telcos aid wiretapping by installing remote wiretap ports onto their digital switches so that the switch traffic would be available for snooping by law enforcement.”

In other words, Mark Klein had but scratched the surface.

Truman created the NSA in 1952, supposedly to serve as “America’s ears” abroad, but the agency has long served as a secret Stasi-like organization dedicated to snooping on Americans. The NSA, writes Siobhan Gorman for the Wall Street Journal, “and other intelligence agencies were found to be using their spy tools to monitor Americans for political purposes.”

The NSA’s predecessor, the Armed Forces Security Agency, launched Project SHAMROCK in 1945. It obtained copies of all telegraphic information exiting or entering the United States with the full cooperation of RCA, ITT and Western Union. A sister project known as Project MINARET involved the creation of “watch lists,” by each of the intelligence agencies and the FBI, of those accused of “subversive” domestic activities. The watch lists included such notables as Martin Luther King, Malcolm X, Jane Fonda, Joan Baez and Dr. Benjamin Spock, according to Patrick S. Poole, writing for Nexus Magazine in 1999. The FBI, the NSA, and other intelligence agencies were actively involved in creating the watch lists.

NSA has attempted to keep up on technology as the secretive agency continues to snoop on “subversives” and others the government considers miscreants. In February, trade publications reported the agency is offering “billions” to any firm able to offer reliable eavesdropping on Skype IM and voice traffic. Skype is particularity troublesome because it utilizes P2P networks, that is to say peer-top-peer (no central server owned and operated by a telecom required). The government and the corporate media may tell you they want to crack down on P2P — for instance, the vastly popular BitTorrent — because of copyright infringement, but a more practical reason is because the government has yet to figure out how to crack the file sharing protocol. Skype and BitTorrent account for a large amount of traffic on the internet.

If you think Obama will roll back the government’s massive and unconstitutional snoop program, think again. On April 3, the Obama Department of Justice filed a motion to dismiss one of the Electronic Frontier Foundation’s landmark lawsuits against illegal spying by the NSA. The DOJ demanded that the entire lawsuit be dismissed based on both the Bush administration’s claim that a “state secrets” privilege bars any lawsuits against the executive branch for illegal spying, as well as a novel “sovereign immunity” claim that the Patriot Act bars lawsuits of any kind for illegal government surveillance (see the EFF press release, Obama Administration Embraces Bush Position on Warrantless Wiretapping and Secrecy).

In March, Obama’s coordinator for cybersecurity programs, Rod Beckstrom, a former Silicon Valley entrepreneur, quit because he opposed the role of the NSA in the so-called cybersecurity initiative. Beckstrom said “the threats to our democratic processes are significant if all top level government network security and monitoring are handled by” the NSA.
“Obama’s moves drew praise from key lawmakers on Capitol Hill, who vowed to work with the president to implement new security measures as needed,” CQPolitics reported shortly after his “cybersecurity” speech. “Obama said his cybersecurity adviser — who will be a member of both the National Security Staff and the National Economic Council staff — will head a new office within the White House.”

“We applaud President Obama for highlighting the extraordinarily serious issue of cybersecurity,” Sens. Johns D. Rockefeller IV, D-W.V., and Olympia J. Snowe , R-Maine, said in a joint statement. “No other president in American history has elevated this issue to that level and we think him for his leadership.”
No other president so far has had the power to shut down the internet. The Rockefeller-Snowe bill, S 778, would grant Obama dictatorial power declare a so-called “cyber emergency” and pull the plug, or at least cripple networks deemed a threat. The U.S. government is not seriously worried about Chinese hackers or mischievous kids in Latvia (as Rockefeller cited as a danger) but rather fear free and unfettered speech and activism on the part of its own citizens.

Obama’s promise is merely an effort to string you along with a big fat lie. He has absolutely no respect for you or the Bill of Rights.

Census Bureau needs to be told to flush their intrusive Big Brother American Community Survey
Pentagon Working on Cyberwarfare Tools for GIs
Pelosi: "Every aspect of our lives must be subjected to an inventory"
US cybersecurity plan poses new war threats, attacks on democratic rights
Germany Prepares to Censor Internet
Cyberwarfare Begins in Iran: Election Has Knocked Key Websites Offline
Widespread Email Surveillance by NSA Concerns Congress
Blitz of “Cyber Attacks” as Rockefeller Bill Approaches
Big Brother is Watching You: Pervasive Surveillance Under Obama
Copyright laws threaten our online freedom
In order to uphold copyright laws, governments are beginning to restrict our right to communicate with each other in private without being monitored... The internet and new information technologies are so powerful that no matter what we do, society will change...The technology could be used to create a Big Brother society beyond our nightmares, where governments and corporations monitor every detail of our lives.
Is this cyber war? Possible U.S responses limited
More propaganda to get the people to give up their civil liberties...
Internet Attack Propaganda Increases as Cyber Bill Approaches
The new alleged threat and accompanying propaganda comes as Senate Commerce Chairman John Rockefeller prepares for a July committee vote on cybersecurity legislation he introduced in April.
Facts? Don’t bother us with facts when it comes to North Korea (or any “enemy”)
All over the news are claims of web attacks in which North Korea is “suspected.”
NSA’s cyber overkill
Snooping through the power socket
Cass Sunstein's despicable ideas on regulating the internet
New browser red-flags disputed facts on the web
Bill would give president emergency control of Internet
Internet hate speech law unconstitutional
Internet filtering a farce: Minchin
Obama Plans Internet Grab: FCC to Embrace ‘Net Neutrality’
FCC commissioners support open Internet rule
Ceding the Internet to "Global Governance"
UK House of Lords Follow China and Australia, Propose Internet Censorship Bill
Death Of The Internet: Censorship Bills In UK, Australia, U.S. Aim To Block "Undesirable" Websites
Enemies Of Free Speech Call For Internet Licensing
U.N.’s World Health Organization Wants Tax on Internet
Alex Jones exposes agenda to ‘blacklist’ dissenting sites and license users
Controlling the Ability of People and Organizations to Access the Internet
Cybercrime Needs to be Top Priority, Says Obama Aide
The End of the Internet as We Know It in Britain
ACTA treaty aims to deputize ISPs on copyrights
Internet service providers could become copyright cops encouraged to block access to suspected pirate Web sites, according to a previously secret draft treaty made public on Wednesday.
Preliminary Analysis of the Officially Released ACTA Text
US appoints first cyber warfare general
The Digital Economy Bill, A System Like China's Censorship
Cybersecurity chief amplifies call for public-private teamwork
Bloggers Beware — They’re Coming After You!
Liberal Coalition Demands FCC Move to Shut Down Talk Radio
FCC Moves to Regulate Internet--Even Though the Law Calls for Internet to be 'Unfettered by Federal or State Regulation'
Internet disconnection ‘like being imprisoned’, says Sir Tim Berners-Lee

Updated 9/30/10 (Newest Additions at End of List)

June 20, 2009

A Cashless Society in Five-to-Seven Years

The above video clip is from Alex Jones' interview of Hollywood producer and documentary filmmaker Aaron Russo, which was conducted on January 29, 2007, seven months before his death. Russo tells the story of his friendship with Nick Rockefeller and what he learned from him. He goes into depth on the astounding admissions of Rockefeller, who told him that the global elite's ultimate goal was to get everyone microchipped so that they could have absolute power and control. Rockefeller said that "if someone got out of line, they would just turn off their chip." Russo and Rockefeller's friendship ended before September 11, 2001. Russo was diagnosed with bladder cancer in 2002; he died on August 24, 2007. [Click here for Alex Jones' full interview (1 hour, 9 minutes) of Aaron Russo]

Cash to Become Extinct as Chips Take Off

By Anthony Keane, The Advertiser
June 15, 2009

Cash is accelerating down the path to extinction as new technologies threaten to mark the end of loose change within a decade. Bank and credit union bosses say cash won't be alone, with wallets and credit cards also likely to disappear too.

They told The Advertiser's round table forum that cash and cards will be replaced by computer chips embedded in mobile phones, watches or other portable devices.

Australian Central chief executive Peter Evers believes cash will be replaced for most transactions in five-to-seven years.

"Cash will disappear as there will be other forms of carrying cash, stored value in your phone or whatever it might be. It will transfer automatically," he said.

"We're very close in countries around the world. If you go in to Hong Kong or Singapore, the low-value transactions have already disappeared. You can't go anywhere, like on public transport, without pre-purchasing a card."

"I think the Australian Payment Systems Board is very much on top of it and is trying to move down a path, but hasn't publicly put things into place yet."

BankSA general manager strategy and operations Chris Ward expects Australia to follow the offshore lead, with small cash transactions disappearing first. "So you can't go and buy a bottle of water from the deli with cash; you've got to go and buy it with your chip," he said.

Bendigo and Adelaide Bank state manager SA/NT John Oliver said it was easier for retailers to use electronic transactions than manual cash transactions.

Savings & Loans chief executive Greg Connor said the concept of the wallet would go. "Whereas now we have a wallet and purse, it will be a chip in your phone or your watch or something like that as your access," he said.

Mr. Evers said credit cards were on the way out as well. "The access to credit is still going to be there through the mobile phone, but you don't need the card because that's really only a means of identification," he said. "There could be another way of identifying, but the product, revolving credit, will still sit there."

In addition to fine-tuning and tweaking the bankster control of monetary policy, the move toward a cashless society will allow the elite to control the masses to an extent previously only speculated upon in science fiction novels. The cashless society prophesized by our rulers fits right in with the choreographed move toward satellite and cellphone tracking, ubiquitous RFID chips, DARPA and NSA surveillance, the orchestrated end of Posse Comitatus, and the federalization of local police and governments now well underway. - Kurt Nimmo, Cashless Control Grid Inches Closer to Reality, June 19, 2009

CIA and Pentagon Deploy RFID "Death Chips," Coming Soon to a Product Near You!
Inside the Military’s Secret Terror-Tagging Tech
California could become third state to ban forced microchip implant tags
Geek Weekly – RFID Tags
Hybrid Tag Includes Active RFID, GPS, Satellite and Sensors - a must read!
U.K. to Begin Microchipping Prisoners
U.S. School District to Begin Microchipping Students
Microchipping of Alzheimer's patients begins in Florida
Big Brother is watching you with RFID microchips

June 15, 2009

The Wildlands Project (the 'Rewilding' of America)

U.S. Cities May Have to be Bulldozed in Order to Survive

By Tom Leonard, Telegraph
June 12, 2009

Dozens of U.S. cities may have entire neighbourhoods bulldozed as part of drastic "shrink to survive" proposals being considered by the Obama administration to tackle economic decline.

The government is looking at expanding a pioneering scheme in Flint, Michigan, one of the poorest U.S. cities, which involves razing entire districts and returning the land to nature.

Local politicians believe the city must contract by as much as 40 percent, concentrating the dwindling population and local services into a more viable area. The radical experiment is the brainchild of Dan Kildee, treasurer of Genesee County, which includes Flint.

Having outlined his strategy to Barack Obama during the election campaign, Mr. Kildee has now been approached by the U.S. government and a group of charities who want him to apply what he has learned to the rest of the country.

Mr. Kildee said he will concentrate on 50 cities, identified in a recent study by the Brookings Institution, an influential Washington think-tank, as potentially needing to shrink substantially to cope with their declining fortunes. Most are former industrial cities in the "rust belt" of America's Mid-West and North East. They include Detroit, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Baltimore and Memphis. In Detroit, shattered by the woes of the U.S. car industry, there are already plans to split it into a collection of small urban centres separated from each other by countryside.
"The real question is not whether these cities shrink—we're all shrinking—but whether we let it happen in a destructive or sustainable way," said Mr. Kildee. "Decline is a fact of life in Flint. Resisting it is like resisting gravity."
Karina Pallagst, director of the Shrinking Cities in a Global Perspective programme at the University of California, Berkeley, said there was "both a cultural and political taboo" about admitting decline in America.
"Places like Flint have hit rock bottom. They're at the point where it's better to start knocking a lot of buildings down," she said.
Flint, sixty miles north of Detroit, was the original home of General Motors. The car giant once employed 79,000 local people, but that figure has shrunk to around 8,000. Unemployment is now approaching 20 percent and the total population has almost halved to 110,000.

The exodus—particularly of young people—coupled with the consequent collapse in property prices, has left street after street in sections of the city almost entirely abandoned. In the city centre, the once grand Durant Hotel—named after William Durant, GM's founder—is a symbol of the city's decline, said Mr. Kildee. The large building has been empty since 1973, roughly when Flint's decline began.

Regarded as a model city in the motor industry's boom years, Flint may once again be emulated, though for very different reasons. But Mr. Kildee, who has lived there nearly all his life, said he had first to overcome a deeply ingrained American cultural mindset that "big is good" and that cities should sprawl—Flint covers 34 square miles.
He said: "The obsession with growth is sadly a very American thing. Across the U.S., there's an assumption that all development is good; that if communities are growing, they are successful; if they're shrinking, they're failing." But some Flint dustcarts are collecting just one rubbish bag a week, roads are decaying, police are very understaffed, and there are simply too few people to pay for services, he said. If the city didn't downsize it will eventually go bankrupt, he added.
Flint's recovery efforts have been helped by a new state law passed a few years ago which allowed local governments to buy up empty properties very cheaply. They could then knock them down or sell them to owners who will occupy them. The local authority has restored the city's attractive but formerly deserted centre, but has pulled down 1,100 abandoned homes in outlying areas. Mr. Kildee estimated another 3,000 needed to be demolished, although the city boundaries will remain the same.

Already, some streets peter out into woods or meadows, no trace remaining of the homes that once stood there. Choosing which areas to knock down will be delicate, but many of them were already obvious, he said. The city is buying up houses in more affluent areas to offer to people in neighbourhoods that it wants to demolish. Nobody will be forced to move, said Mr. Kildee.
"Much of the land will be given back to nature. People will enjoy living near a forest or meadow," he said.
Mr. Kildee acknowledged that some fellow Americans considered his solution "defeatist," but he insisted it was "no more defeatist than pruning an overgrown tree so it can bear fruit again."

Forcing People to Live Only in Certain Areas Using a False 'Crisis' of Environmental Pollution as the Catalyst

David Bay, Cutting Edge Ministries
Circa 2000

...What the President did not tell you is that these areas to be set aside in New World Order planning will be swept of all human living and/or development, as part of the United Nations Biodiversity Protection program, created in 1972.

This plan literally conceives of setting aside huge areas of the world where no humans can live—will be allowed to live—or work, or play. While this plan is global and is being instituted globally, we will limit our study of it to the United States. [The entire plan is published in a report entitled, "Our Global Neighborhood: The Report of the Commission on Global Governance," Oxford University Press, ISBN 0-19-827997-3, 410 pages long. You can order from any bookstore using the ISBN Number, above.]

This plan in America is called the "Rewilding" of America. This term means to re-wild this continent. In other words, they plan to sweep aside all evidences of human endeavor, i.e., homes, businesses, structures, entire cities, allowing the land to go back to its natural state, before the wicked White Man took the land from the Native Americans (Indians).

Using Presidential Directive, normally exercised through various Federal Government agencies, this "rewilding" project will be accomplished by declaring huge tracts of land completely off limits to humans. These tracts of land would be called 'reserves.' Reserves would "include wilderness areas and national parks while inner buffer zones would permit no agriculture, no more than 0.5 miles of road per square mile of land, primitive camping, and only light selection harvesting of forests. The June 25, 1993, issue of Science magazine reports that the plan calls for 23.4% of the land to be put into wilderness (no human use) and 26.2% into corridors and human buffer zones (very limited use by humans)." [Op. Cit., Brannan, p. 2.]

This is 50% of America!!!... As I am looking at the map, I see that many entire states are set aside to prevent any human activity at all. These "re-wilding" blocs are as follows:
  • Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Utah, Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona
  • Wisconsin, Michigan
  • Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York
  • Portions of Virginia, West Virginia, the Carolinas, Tennessee, Georgia following major river systems
  • Portions of Florida
Remember, 50% of the United States is going to be set off limits to us nasty humans!!!

We used some terms in the above quote that need to be defined.
  • 'Wilderness area' is defined as the habitat of plants and animals. All human activity is to be forbidden.
  • 'Buffer Zones' are those areas surrounding the wilderness areas. Limited and strictly controlled, only access is to be permitted by humans—no organized activity, such as work or homes or cities, will be allowed. Knowing how dictatorial government works, any humans allowed to be in these 'Buffer Zones' will probably have to be given special permits. And, of course, paramilitary forces will undoubtedly have to be patrolling these zones, enforcing the limited human access.
  • 'Cooperation Zones' are the only zones where humans will be allowed to live and, presumably, work.
But, how can this plan, extreme as it is, be implemented without arousing a population which still has the opportunity to vote? If the American people truly understood the gravity of the situation facing them, they would immediately vote the current rascals out and elect officials not associated with this New World Order Plan!

According to Dr. Michael Coffman of Environmental Perspectives, Inc., a strategy to implement these reserves and corridors would be to follow these steps carefully in the northern Rockies, for this example:
Step 1. "Start with a seemingly innocent-sounding program like 'The World Heritage Areas in Danger.' Bring all human activity under regulation in a 14-18 million acre buffer zone around Yellowstone Park." [Good-bye, tourism. Of course, tourism is a bad thing, because it wastes resources like gas and pollutes the air, the streams and waters, and the land. Oh, especially the land. How much like pigs we humans are, with our sloppy habits of throwing empty containers all over Mother Nature, much of them made of plastic which takes eons to decay!]

Step 2. Declare all federal areas, except for Indian Reservations, as 'Buffer Zones,' along with private land within Federal Administration boundaries. [Indians, you see, are good people. Their ancestors practiced a nature religion, which enabled them to live as one with Mother Nature. Have you noticed now how popular Indian culture and artifacts and books are in book stores and fashion retailers, especially in the New Age culture?]

Step 3. Extend the U.S. Heritage corridor 'Buffer Zone' along the major river systems in the United States. Critical Federal lands and ecosystems could then be converted to 'Reserves.'

Step 4. Convert all U.S. Forest Service, including grasslands and wildlife refuges, to reserves. [Ibid., p. 2-3.]
When you add the reserves and corridors that have not been yet implemented in Steps 1-3 of this plan, you will discover that 50% of the United States of America will have been swept absolutely clean of all human activity!! And, remember that the global plan for implementing this plan is 1997-2001. Obviously, America is not quite ready for this draconian plan just yet. We probably will be one of the last countries in the world to fully enact this plan.

Once the United States is thus reorganized, how will it be governed? The country will be divided into 21 bioregion councils. [Ibid. p. 3.]

As a side note, occultists love the number 21 for two reasons: first, it is derived from multiplying 7 [number of perfection] with 3 [number of the Pagan Trinity]. The actual number 21 literally means, to the Satanist, "exceeding sinfulness of sin". ["The Secrets of the Illuminati" by Doc Marquis]

So it is not surprising to me that this Satanic system is going to be 'governed' on a local level by 21 'bioregions.'

These 'bioregion councils' will supersede the authority of any local, state and national governments that might disagree with their policies. These councils will be serving a new master: the United Nations. "Environmental organizations such as the Sierra Club, Nature Conservancy, and other green organizations will be given the green light [to be] the enforcement arm of these council at the local level." [Op. Cit., Brannan, p. 4]

Have any of you read the misinformation book written by Al Gore, published just before the 1992 election? The book was entitled "Earth in the Balance," and it reiterated the extremist environmentalist message which is behind the monstrosity of the plan we have just examined. Gore's premise was hysterically alarmist, as he predicted that a variety of environmentalist disasters were about to befall the world unless global governmental action was taken on a variety of fronts.

Do you know what struck me about Gore's book? While it was chock full of "scientific" data and technical conclusions and/or warnings, Gore never footnoted anything!! Nothing, not one footnote. Even though he has a generalized "notes" section in the back, by chapter, they cannot take the place of specific notes at the many critically specific, technical and controversial subjects which he was discussing. Gore's book would have received an "F" in my English classes, both at high school and college levels. But Gore was appealing to the normal citizen of today, with education dumbed down, standards lowered across the board of human behavior, and totally unprepared to think critically. Gore simply fans the fires of emotional response.

His book is the epitome of the plan quoted above, from the "Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion:"
"When we come into our kingdom, our orators will expound great problems which have turned humanity upside down in order to bring it, at the end, under our beneficent rule."
Since Gore was such an activist in the extreme environmentalist movement while he was still a Senator, we should not be surprised that the Clinton Administration is using him to help implementing this draconian United Nations plan.
"The Ecosystem Management Plan, promoted by Vice President Al Gore, calls for 50% of the land with the United States to be returned to wilderness. Twenty federal agencies are being used to implement this plan, and the EPA is the enforcer." [Karen Lee Bixman, 'The Taking Of America', The Investigative Reporter (Huntington Beach, CA) March, 1996, p. 4, as quoted by Marilyn Brannan, "Special Report: The Wildlands Project Unleashes Its War on Mankind", p. 6.]
Has anyone here heard of the UN organization called the United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP)? It was created in December, 1972, by UN Resolution #2997. This agency is planning to organize every society on earth under the pretense of saving the environment.
The entire world has been mapped into 'bioregions' and "is responsible for virtually all of the environmental policy changes that have occurred globally in the last two decades." [Op. Cit., Brannan, p. 7.]
As expected, these Neo-pagans love the number 5, having developed a 5-step plan of action to implement their Orwellian goals.
  1. "Redraw land maps" based upon biological characteristics, not on political boundaries.
  2. "Regroup human populations into self-sustaining settlements that minimize impact on biodiversity." [Remember Argulles' goal for the 1997-2001 5-year plan, i.e., "thin out population centers and resettle populations"?]
  3. Educate humans in the 'Gaia ethic.' [This is the Satanic concept that Mother Earth is a living, breathing goddess, the creator and sustainer of all life. And, yes, she is very angry at the way mankind is treating her!! This is why we have had so many bad storms in the past several years, you know. And, believe me, too many of our current political leadership believes this paganism! This sobering fact is the reason a majority of House Republicans voted for this bill.]
  4. Remember Arguelles' assertion that the control of the planet had been turned over to shamanist control? The New World Order plan is based upon nature worship with Mother Earth Gaia at the center.
  5. "Create a new system of governance based on local decision-making within the framework of international agreements." This new system of governance will most definitely not be based upon our wonderful Constitution, with its protection of the individual, its control of the three branches of government, and its Christian base. Nature worship is here, and it is dominant!
  6. Reduce the use of natural resources by (a) reducing population; (b) reducing consumption; and (c) shifting to 'appropriate' technology. [These 5 points taken from Brannan, p. 7.]
    When discussing these terrible plans, especially #5, I think it is time to finally tell you why the leadership of the New World Order wants to so drastically change the societies of the world, why they want to kill so many people and destroy the greatest civilizations and standard of living the world has ever seen (Western and Asian countries).

    When the New World Order is finally established, its current leaders do not want to inherit an earth that has been emptied of essential raw materials. They do not want to take control of an earth that has less than 300 more years of materials such as oil, coal, iron ore, etc. Therefore, when they look at the profligate consumption of Western countries such as the United States, they are appalled. Rather than appreciate the high standard of living which our country affords its citizens, and which is the envy of the world, these leaders seeth the with anger. Their current models tell them that this earth does, indeed, have less than 300 years left of raw materials.

    These leaders are so concerned that they speak often of "Operation Starseed," which is a space program dedicated to find a new planet that will sustain life before earth runs out of materials!! This is the real reason the advanced nations of the world have large, expensive space programs, especially depending upon long range probes to tell them where to look for life, so we can plan manned missions to the planet(s) which can sustain life. I bet you did not know that NASA [National Aeronautics and Space Administration] was originally established according to the agenda of the New World Order plan. But they were, which is exactly why you cannot trust what they tell you; they are not the "impartial, objective" "scientific" organization they are portrayed to be. Yes, there are well-meaning, creative and expert scientists working for NASA, but the organization is controlled from the top by people fully in-tune with the plan.

    Now, if the leaders of the New World Order are so very concerned about the high consumption of the advanced Western societies, which single object might they hate the most? Of course, they would be most concerned about the indispensable automobile. You can see this concern expressed by Gore in his book, when he tells his gullible readers how very dangerous to society the automobile has become.
    "We now know that their [automobiles] impact on the global environment is posing a mortal threat to the security of every nation that is more deadly than that of any military enemy we are ever again likely to confront." ["Earth in the Balance: Ecology and the Human Spirit," by Senator Al Gore, Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, 1992, p. 325, ISBN 0-395-57821-3.]
    Now, wait a minute, I thought the deadliest threat to global security today is still the nuclear bomb? Maybe the threat is greater since the breakup of the U.S.S.R., because tight central control has been lost in many areas, making it likely that the nuclear bomb might fall into hands willing to use them. Yet, Gore is telling us that automobiles are more dangerous to global security than the nuclear bomb. Then he tells us that this threat is a "mortal threat." Well, it does stand to reason, does it not, that mortal threats have to be dealt with in a most direct and aggressive manner? That is exactly what this new extreme environmental "population resettlement" plan does—it deals with this "problem" in the most direct and aggressive way possible.

    What can be done about all this? You could write your elected representatives, expressing outrage that this type of activity is continuing apace, demanding that it all stop immediately. Or, you could vote the incumbents out of office, electing people who would vote to stop this juggernaut toward the New World Order. However, very few of these kind of people are currently running; and, it is not enough to vote out Democrats, because Republicans are just as committed to the New World Order as are Democrats. A good example is the Presidential race. We have the NO CHOICE of Neo-Paganist and New World Order insider Al Gore, or the equally committed Skull and Bones George W. Bush, who has just received the backing of insider McCain. Truly, God has reacted to our growing rejection of Him and His Word and has allowed Satan to cover all his bases. We truly have no choice in the ballot box now.

    The Bible states unequivocally that, once Israel is reestablished back to her land [which occurred in 1948], the clock begins to tick down to the End of the Age. At this time, Satan will begin to build his forces to stage the appearance of Antichrist. God clearly states that He will allow Antichrist to succeed: "shall prosper until the indignation be accomplished..." (Daniel 11:36b). In other words, God is going to allow Satan to set up the kind of earthly kingdom he has always wanted to set up, but will limit his time to only 7 years after confirming the national covenant with Israel.

    The only preparation is to be ready to meet your Creator, Jesus Christ, face to face? As Jesus so clearly stated, "you must be born again."

    Tavistock: The Best Kept Secret in America
    CFR-Brookings to Dominate Obama "Strategy"
    Think tank elitists downplay Bilderberg/CFR conspiracy
    CFR: 'Front Group' for the Money Changers
    An Unwelcome Development: Landowner Objects to Change in County Plan

    Updated 7/10/09 (Newest Additions at End of List)

    June 12, 2009

    America Is Not What It Used To Be

    The Daily Show With Jon StewartMon - Thurs 11p / 10c
    Peter Schiff
    Daily Show
    Full Episodes
    Political HumorNewt Gingrich Unedited Interview

    Political, Economic and Spiritual Review (Excerpt)

    By Mark S. Watson, Watson's Web
    Spring 2009


    America: here is where the crisis is centered; here is where the financial 'mafia' have their stranglehold; and here is where the most pain will be felt for the longest period of time.

    There is little that has dissuaded me from this view, even in light of a new, different and engaging new President. None of his economic polices have been directed at the source of the problems; rather; they have only exacerbated some of the major structural problems in the US economy.

    Trillions are being lent to banks, either via the Federal Reserve or the Treasury, in ways that only complicates matters by attempting to 'reflate' the bubble that was popped in October of 2007.

    The problems in the US economy are systemic and cannot be solved via bailouts, stimulus packages (however well meaning), or inspirational speeches. They cannot be solved by overburdening an already maxed-out national credit card.

    It was exactly the kind of decisions that Presidents Bush and Obama are making now that put America in her current predicament. Borrow and spend, put the banks interests before the national interest, and do not seriously investigate or prosecute serious and systemic financial crimes. This is the pattern we have seen for decades, and now the chickens are here, and they are ready to roost.

    I will not go into the gory details of the actions of Obama and Bush. Rather, I will look at the effects these polices likely will have on the America, its standard of living, and its internal stability.

    I advise my readers to take these views with a grain of salt. First, such a look is fraught with unknowns and surprises that cannot be accurately foretold. Second, my views here are no 'wish list.' The things that I think will happen are based simply on the facts and national tendencies as I see them. This, probably more than anything, separates the analysis that I do from 99% of the work done by others (who are often paid to spin things) and Christians who are too busy trying to make prophecy 'fit' events rather than a healthy re-examination of dearly-held beliefs that, a more thorough examination demonstrates, are not based on sound doctrine.

    So with that in mind, and with a little wry humor interspersed throughout, here goes.

    America will change significantly by the time this crisis is all said and done. She will be less affluent, less militaristic, and less cohesive when the dust finally settles.

    I see serious tensions ahead for America and her policymakers. Major political conflict will come to pass in the areas of defense spending and entitlements. Some may turn to 'unconventional means' in order to maintain America's military empire. The same can be said of her banking empires.

    The pillars of American power have really been under assault since 9/11, and many of the elements who benefited from those attacks are part of the problem today. They hail from what can only be called the 'imperial' side of America's establishment. Their primary goal is to maintain America's empire as long as possible. They can and have used ruthless methods in the past, and will do so again should they feel it necessary to maintain and even expand that empire.

    This is not to say that these forces of the Military Industrial Complex (MID) are monolithic or have total control over the government. They do not. But they do have enough influence to see to it that budgets as well as key National Intelligence assessments reflect their interests first and the nation's second.

    Also, it is important to note that all of the tools of political repression are present in America and have been for several decades, while they rarely have been openly displayed in a full-force method. More clandestine methods of repression have been noted throughout US history, most notably in the 1960s and during the Bush administration.

    Deadly political repression and Americanism are viewed synonymously by many of the world's poorest. All of this is said to get some perspective on the kinds of things America can expect as 2009 rolls on, and as 2010 comes in and things are not better, but are worse and worsening.

    Budget Busted

    This is something I see coming soon. I will not put a time frame on it, as America's printing factory may be able to mask a great deal of if for a considerable time. This money will be printed to pay for bailouts of the banks, stimulus packages, universal health care, and a host of things the nation cannot afford, but Washington's lobbyists will demand of the new administration.

    This will end the dollar's reign as the world reserve currency.

    Now I know that the first thing the 'dollar fundamentalists' will say is that this is impossible. They will point out that the dollar cannot fall from grace: too many others have too many dollars in their reserves and cannot let it fall, they say. This is true; they cannot do it all at once, and will not. Nor will we see the euro emerge as that new reserve currency.

    What I think is most likely to happen is that the dollar will cease to be a currency in which trade is conducted; bilateral trade will more commonly use a currency of their own or another one of choice. This is not going to happen all at once, but the old order of trade (based in the US reserve currency model) is clearly breaking down.

    Global trade is falling and will continue to fall. This may assist America's trade deficit, but not its overall fiscal health, which President Obama promises to burden with another $1.75 trillion in the 2010 fiscal year, keeping the longstanding Bush tradition of record breaking budgets.

    This kind of fiscal madness is incongruent with the rhetoric of change that Obama preached when he ran. This is really the gospel of fiscal disaster being preached by 'pastor' Obama. The effects of his economic policies are much like his campaign: lots of promises to lots of different and often opposing interests, often spoken with as great of eloquence as mendacity.

    Health care for ordinary Americans; bombs for the War Machine; stimulus packages for businesses, states and mortgage holders; new troop buildups--all to be paid for with astronomical new borrowings. It also means that US debt is being viewed as toxic by investors and that it is getting more expensive to insure US bonds.
    Bets that the safest countries, even the United States, may default on their bonds have soared in recent days as governments have issued unprecedented amounts of debt to avert long and deep recessions. In the United States and Europe, the costs of insuring government bonds against default have risen to record levels as countries roll out additional big programs to buy up battered housing-related assets and underpin tottering financial institutions. All these rescues require huge increases in debt issuance over the next year or two. At some point, bond analysts fear, supply will overwhelm demand, degrading the perceived quality of these sovereign bonds and causing investors to demand much higher yields in return for the risk of holding even AAA-rated government debt. - IHT

    To the layman this is rather esoteric, but in layman's terms it means that investors are not keen on US or EU sovereign debt. It means that all of these bailouts, stimulus packages, and reckless spending are viewed with suspicion; and when that happens, people don't buy your debt. This is of enormous concern to the US because a $1.75 trillion budget is going to have a hefty amount of borrowing in it.

    I put forward to you, the reader, these facts to show you why I will say the things I will, so you can understand that the Obama economic policy is really the Bush economic policy with a few more crumbs than usual thrown out to folks like you and me.

    The US government, in order to stave off fiscal collapse and placate competing political-economic interests, will be insolvent in a matter of months and will resort to even more currency creation to pay its bills. This will lead to inflation; and once it is clearly identified as happening in the economy, any attempt at pulling back will be met with catcalls and howls of derision by the same interests that are in control of the Obama administration.

    In short, everyone demands a piece of a pie that no longer really exists. When this happens, you will see serious inflation in food, fuel, and other items that you have no choice but to buy. It remains to be seen if the inflationary trends we see today will remain in big ticket (credit dependent) items. I suspect that they will remain to a large degree.

    But rampant inflation coupled with a large body of unemployed and underemployed people is a recipe for unrest. Even as docile and controllable as the American population is, they will not sit still and watch harsh realities hit them at home. It is OK if it is just 'those folks on TV,' but when it really hits home, they will be angry.

    There is a chance of a soft landing; and this may be one of the reasons why America's establishment is allowing President Obama to make real overtures to America's working class. They saw a real potential for unrest and decided to allow him to move in the domestic arena to quell dissatisfaction with a few budgetary crumbs. The plan may work, but given the scope of deficits and the condition of America's banking sector, I think this highly unlikely.

    So who is going to pay for this new massive spending?

    You are probably aware by now that Obama’s new spending plan is entirely deficit spending. Does everyone understand what this means? It means that the United States government is broke--they have no money--yet they want to spend one trillion dollars more! Does this make sense to anyone--that they want to spend all this money when they have to BORROW it? Where is the common sense?

    Why not let fail what is going to fail, and let the economy reset? This is the inevitable ending to this story no matter how long Obama wants to put it off.

    I get a kick out of all these people who vehemently support and protect Obama and his policies--they act as if his decisions will not affect them--only other people. They act as if they are immune to the coming Socialism and the devastating effect it will have on our country.

    What does it mean when they say that they “want Obama to succeed?” Does that mean that his supporters just want him to “personally” succeed at passing through all of his programs? This is the sense I get. His supporters seem to be only focused on this man and his own “personal” success RATHER than focusing on the outcome and ramifications of his decisions. - Americans for the Constitution
    Now first and foremost, we must understand that you cannot borrow your way to prosperity. It cannot be done. The debt always come due. And while Obama's plan does contain tax increases on those most able to pay for them (those making over $250,000 per year), the majority will be done on the government’s already maxed-out credit card.

    Through more borrowings, the Federal Reserve will buy US Treasuries, thus monetizing America's debt. This is a way of paying for it. It comes with reduced purchasing power overseas when goods become less available or more pricey (in dollar terms). When the ships from China are less frequent and half full, you will understand what that means to you and me when you go into some of your shopping stores and the shelves are empty, except for those chains that will be able to make secret deals.

    America's indebtedness will be dealt with to some degree in this fashion (behind the veils of secrecy and darkness), but the numbers are so large that nothing can come close to filling the enormous and ever-growing gaps between what America makes and what she consumes; what she spends and what she collects in taxes, fiscal realities, and economic pipe-dreams.

    In short, no one is going to pay for them, at least not the lion’s share of them. Sure China will pick up some, but EU states, China, those hedge funds in the Caribbean--well, they have their own problems right now, and shipping money to a government that is nigh unto defaulting on its sovereign debt obligations is probably not very high on their list of things to do today.

    Which brings us to some very sobering questions.

    Given the fact that it is becoming much more difficult to insure US treasuries, when will the US default on its sovereign debt? This ought to tell you a lot about how 'safe' investors really feel about treasuries. So the next thing I usually hear is, ‘Well the dollar is doing well against the (you name your currency here).’ This is true, as far as it goes, which is not very far.

    First, measuring the dollar's value in this crisis against other currencies is a good idea if (and only if) you are a currency trader, but if one wants to understand the underlying dynamic of why the dollar is rising, one of the main reasons is that the settlement of much of these debt obligations (and derivatives) require dollars. Often these must be converted from other currencies, and this naturally increases demand, which of course causes the price to rise.

    Given the hundreds of billions that need to be settled, this translates into strong demand. This is why the dollar has not done too badly. Yet, given the astronomical amount of money needed for these transactions, the dollar has been able to etch out only very modest gains. That should tell you something about where the dollar is heading.

    Remember this: after all of the toxic waste is settled in the financial system, America is still going to be saddled with $10.8 trillion plus $1.2 trillion (this years deficit spending) and all of these other bailouts that have not been put onto the books, totaling about $9 trillion.

    This does not bode well for the dollar, and any economist who says that we can deal with these deficits without gut wrenching economic pain is of the same variety that did not warn you that this crisis was coming in the first place. They are of the economically worthless variety. But today economists are not paid to study economics; they are paid to lie for those who fund their think tanks.

    So if I can see this is not going to work, and just about anyone who called this economic crisis before it happened can see it, why can't Obama? I do not have any insight into this man's mind, but I will give you some of my thoughts.

    I think Obama knows full well his plan is not going to work. In fact, I think he has come to terms that nothing is going to work with the current political dynamics in place in Washington.

    If things go on as they have, America will implode economically, followed quickly by social chaos and political upheaval.

    So what is Obama's plan? Well, before I go there, let me tell you what one of my sources said to me, not very long ago. He said that there were forces inside the Obama camp that are so appalled by the level of criminality going on inside DC that he is strongly considering doing something that will seem downright nuts, but makes perfect sense when you understand why.

    Some have suggested that he formally declare war. This will require a Congressional war declaration, but once that happens, many things can be done that cannot be done now.

    One of the major reasons Bush did not declare war was because of the enormous legal responsibility that goes with what he and his administration did. You see, once you declare war, the crimes of the Bush administration are no longer crimes--they are treason. I am here to tell you that what was going on under Bush can be described in no other terms.

    If Obama declares war, the crimes that went on and are still going on (and he has little say about) can be dealt with quickly and permanently via military courts, which are little more than the reading of the charges, a pronouncement of guilt, and a prompt leading off to the firing squad. No appeal.

    Have you wondered why suddenly those media tools of the far right are going into overdrive about Obama, now spewing the worst kind of hate against him, saying publicly that they 'hope he fails'? I am of the opinion (just opinion here) that some of this information in one form or another has filtered down to them. They are afraid it would mean the exposing of the mechanics of the right-wing slime machine that runs through Big Oil, Big Banking, and the Military Industrial Complex. You will see the worst crimes exposed and the forces behind them.

    What is stopping him now, I do not know, but I will tell you what I think based on what I have heard: Obama is very isolated, politically speaking. What do I mean? He has no 'power base' that he can fully rely upon. The power behind him now is Clinton, and the two have a very uneasy relationship: he pretty much can only get the things done that the Clinton machine allows. This is why watching which of those cabinet level appointments went through and which ones failed was so very instructive.

    He cannot rely upon the Democratic Party either, as they too are very dependent on the Clinton money machine. Barak Obama, in many ways, was something that they really did not expect, did not want, and had to come to terms with--or it would have been President John McCain right now and a Democratic Party that would never have recovered from preventing Obama from entering the White House, because Obama's money was such that he could have run ‘third party’ and been a potent spoiler and opened up third-party politics to a new level--and nobody wanted to see that.

    But Obama made a choice to stick with the Democrats and make the appropriate back-room deals. But now he is so dependent on the political machines of others that he has found his hands are tied. Sure, they will let him make promises to America's working class: it keeps them quiet and fills them with hope so that they do not begin to get really pissed off as the President shovels out yet more hundreds of billions in bailouts to the banks and refuses to prosecute serious financial crime. It is a kind of economic placebo, if you will.

    Obama is going to play it for all it is worth because, in the days ahead, he is going to need a bully pulpit to deal with the criminal elements that are deeply imbedded in both political parties, which are preventing the real change that I think he wants to bring in. This does not mean that I personally agree with some of those changes.

    Thus, I think Obama's economic policies (while seeming rather insane to those who have not been mesmerized by the theatrics) can be seen perhaps in this light as part of a larger stratagem to deal with the American criminal enterprise.

    But it must be stressed here that Obama is isolated, truly and almost totally isolated. One friend of mine who works in the government put it like this: he is like one of those maiden's from the middle ages, trapped in a high tower waiting for someone to save him. Folks are trying to reach out to him, but he has not taken any help yet.

    This is my 'two cents' based on what I know and sources who have talked to me about what is going on. I do not have all the answers and ask you to be very suspicious of (as in stop listening to) those who think they do.

    The Specter of Martial Law

    I think sooner or later, in one form or another, this President will have no choice but to call for some kind of state of emergency: the economic situation will demand it. What that will mean for us has many facets, but primarily it will mean the end of the high standard of living Americans are used to. Second, it will be a signal to criminal gangs in America, and those located in Mexico as well as sleeper cells of foreign agents (who are here in the US), to go to work; they are waiting for America to fall before they really move in.

    This does not mean that there will be a formal declaration of martial law. Nor does it necessarily mean that it will be a panic-in-the-streets kind of event. It does mean that on some level nationwide emergency measures will have to be taken.


    This is going to be a greater threat than I think most 'policy wonks' believe. As people lose their jobs and cannot find another, and find that it is no longer possible to stay in their homes or even find the basics that make life livable, the inevitable choice of crime will appeal to more and more people. Those that cannot make a legitimate living will turn to making an illegitimate one. (This you can bet on, and you will come out the winner in 7 cases out of 10.) Hungry people will do what it takes to survive; and if surviving means dealing drugs, transporting human cargo, stealing cars, breaking into homes, selling illegal movies or music, or organizing 'for hire' assassination squads, then that is what they will do.

    This is once again where I see the real threat over the longer term. You see, there will be no magic bullet saving the US economy. As laudable as our new President’s goals of using alternative fuels and new technology to drive our recovery may be, the reality is that these technologies are not here yet; and even if they come into being, will take years to develop--and even then cannot possibly bring in the kinds of economic prosperity that can fill the gap between America's standard of living and her deficits.

    Obama is giving us pipe dreams because he knows the enormous forces that would come against what really needs to be done. Folks, I hate to burst your bubble but these dreams “ain’t gonna happen.”

    The reality is this: America's economy will continue to implode so that unemployment rates coupled with serious underemployment rates rise to over 30 percent. Thus there will be no 'recovery' in the sense that most people expect; i.e., things going back to pretty much the way they were.

    Whatever recovery we have that is not based on sound economics and production will not succeed. Thus this large cadre of newly-impoverished Americans will turn to whatever means they can to feed their families, keep a roof over their heads, and purchase necessities.

    Now, I must confess that my views may be a little too pessimistic for many of you. Your skepticism is understandable. Most Americans have no frame of reference as to what real poverty is. They just don't.

    Second, I confess, I just don't have much respect for most of my fellow Americans. I have far less for the culture of greed, selfishness, lust and ignorance which have been glorified for many years by America's entertainment industry and encouraged by some of our elite.

    I know this is a far cry from the optimism of what many say about American culture and “America’s indomitable spirit,” but I am old enough, worldly-wise enough, and have lived in enough different countries (as an adult) to see things very differently than most of my fellow Americans. Nor am I encumbered with the arrogance and “sense-of-entitlement” thinking that is so prevalent in so many of my countrymen.

    In short, American’s thinking patterns, for the most part, are not rooted in anything other than personal comfort, 'getting ahead of the next guy' in consuming and, in many cases, developing a cold arrogance that I personally see everyday as I move about my local area from my jaunts to Target, Best Buy, Giant, the mall or the local park.

    A great many people are just not very nice. You know, when I was growing up, it was polite to speak to people when you passed by them. Today, it is often viewed as a threat. I cannot tell you how many times I have gone places and had people turn their heads away when I offered a friendly greeting--when I (or they) had to invade personal space, sometimes their heads turned so quickly that I thought they were going to hurt themselves and need a neck-brace and medical attention! Usually, they simply do not even acknowledge any greeting; they feel they are too good to speak to ordinary folks.

    I tell you a whole different spirit has taken over the American psyche, and it is not a good one. Older folks can see it; younger ones do not have any real frame of reference--they think unkindness is normal and OK.

    I tell my readers that sometimes more can be ascertained by noticing the little things rather than the great big things, watching patterns of behavior rather that listening to what people claim to be.

    But the root of that spirit of arrogance, which is a way of saying 'me first, screw you' (that is the root of this kind of behavior), is going to give way to crime, which is merely a different way of expressing the same spirit of 'me first, screw you.' That is what the thief says when he steals a car, breaks into a home, or picks a pocket.

    In Summary

    In the past I relayed some reasons why I thought a serious challenge to central authority of the federal government was likely. Fortunately, with Obama in office, much of that threat is reduced for the near term. Obama has shown great sympathy with the plight of the states, counties and cities, and he has opened up the Treasury in assistance to them as well as to ordinary Americans.

    However, the other threats that are being ignored or papered over with bailouts are likely to cause a crisis (or series of crises) that spirals out of all control. That frankly is what I see happening, much sooner than later. There is no easy way out of this crisis, and our enemies know it. And I strongly suspect, based on the evidence I have seen and the sources I know, that they have long prepared for a day such as this.

    Go to The Lamb Slain Home Page