America, The New Police State?

John F. Kennedy vs The Federal Reserve

2008-06-30T06:36:00.000-04:00

On June 4, 1963, a virtually unknown Presidential decree, Executive Order 11110, was signed with the authority to basically strip the Federal Reserve Bank of its power to loan money to the United States Federal Government at interest. With the stroke of a pen, President Kennedy declared that the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank would soon be out of business. The Christian Law Fellowship has exhaustively researched this matter through the Federal Register and Library of Congress. We can now safely conclude that this Executive Order has never been repealed, amended, or superceded by any subsequent Executive Order. In simple terms, it is still valid.

When President John Fitzgerald Kennedy - the author of Profiles in Courage -signed this Order, it returned to the federal government, specifically the Treasury Department, the Constitutional power to create and issue currency -money - without going through the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank. President Kennedy's Executive Order 11110 [the full text is displayed further below] gave the Treasury Department the explicit authority: "to issue silver certificates against any silver bullion, silver, or standard silver dollars in the Treasury." This means that for every ounce of silver in the U.S. Treasury's vault, the government could introduce new money into circulation based on the silver bullion physically held there. As a result, more than $4 billion in United States Notes were brought into circulation in $2 and $5 denominations. $10 and $20 United States Notes were never circulated but were being printed by the Treasury Department when Kennedy was assassinated. It appears obvious that President Kennedy knew the Federal Reserve Notes being used as the purported legal currency were contrary to the Constitution of the United States of America.

"United States Notes" were issued as an interest-free and debt-free currency backed by silver reserves in the U.S. Treasury. We compared a "Federal Reserve Note" issued from the private central bank of the United States (the Federal Reserve Bank a/k/a Federal Reserve System), with a "United States Note" from the U.S. Treasury issued by President Kennedy's Executive Order. They almost look alike, except one says "Federal Reserve Note" on the top while the other says "United States Note". Also, the Federal Reserve Note has a green seal and serial number while the United States Note has a red seal and serial number.

President Kennedy was assassinated on November 22, 1963 and the United States Notes he had issued were immediately taken out of circulation. Federal Reserve Notes continued to serve as the legal currency of the nation. According to the United States Secret Service, 99% of all U.S. paper "currency" circulating in 1999 are Federal Reserve Notes.

Kennedy knew that if the silver-backed United States Notes were widely circulated, they would have eliminated the demand for Federal Reserve Notes. This is a very simple matter of economics. The USN was backed by silver and the FRN was not backed by anything of intrinsic value. Executive Order 11110 should have prevented the national debt from reaching its current level (virtually all of the nearly $9 trillion in federal debt has been created since 1963) if LBJ or any subsequent President were to enforce it. It would have almost immediately given the U.S. Government the ability to repay its debt without going to the private Federal Reserve Banks and being charged interest to create new "money". Executive Order 11110 gave the U.S.A. the ability to, once again, create its own money backed by silver and realm value worth something.

Again, according to our own research, just five months after Kennedy was assassinated, no more of the Series 1958 "Silver Certificates" were issued either, and they were subsequently removed from circulation. Perhaps the assassination of JFK was a warning to all future presidents not to interfere with the private Federal Reserve's control over the creation of money. It seems very apparent that President Kennedy challenged the "powers that exist behind U.S. and world finance". With true patriotic courage, JFK boldly faced the two most successful vehicles that have ever been used to drive up debt:

1) war (Viet Nam); and,

2) the creation of money by a privately owned central bank. His efforts to have all U.S. troops out of Vietnam by 1965 combined with Executive Order 11110 would have destroyed the profits and control of the private Federal Reserve Bank.

Executive Order 11110

AMENDMENT OF EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 10289 AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE PERFORMANCE OF CERTAIN FUNCTIONS AFFECTING THE DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY. By virtue of the authority vested in me by section 301 of title 3 of the United States Code, it is ordered as follows:

SECTION 1. Executive Order No. 10289 of September 19, 1951, as amended, is hereby further amended - (a) By adding at the end of paragraph 1 thereof the following subparagraph (j): "(j) The authority vested in the President by paragraph (b) of section 43 of the Act of May 12, 1933, as amended (31 U.S.C. 821 (b)), to issue silver certificates against any silver bullion, silver, or standard silver dollars in the Treasury not then held for redemption of any outstanding silver certificates, to prescribe the denominations of such silver certificates, and to coin standard silver dollars and subsidiary silver currency for their redemption," and (b) By revoking subparagraphs (b) and (c) of paragraph 2 thereof. SECTION 2. The amendment made by this Order shall not affect any act done, or any right accruing or accrued or any suit or proceeding had or commenced in any civil or criminal cause prior to the date of this Order but all such liabilities shall continue and may be enforced as if said amendments had not been made.

JOHN F. KENNEDY THE WHITE HOUSE, June 4, 1963

Once again, Executive Order 11110 is still valid. According to Title 3, United States Code, Section 301 dated January 26, 1998:

Executive Order (EO) 10289 dated Sept. 17, 1951, 16 F.R. 9499, was as amended by:

EO 10583, dated December 18, 1954, 19 F.R. 8725;

EO 10882 dated July 18, 1960, 25 F.R. 6869;

EO 11110 dated June 4, 1963, 28 F.R. 5605;

EO 11825 dated December 31, 1974, 40 F.R. 1003;

EO 12608 dated September 9, 1987, 52 F.R. 34617

The 1974 and 1987 amendments, added after Kennedy's 1963 amendment, did not change or alter any part of Kennedy's EO 11110. A search of Clinton's 1998 and 1999 EO's and Presidential Directives has also shown no reference to any alterations, suspensions, or changes to EO 11110.

The Federal Reserve Bank, a.k.a Federal Reserve System, is a Private Corporation. Black's Law Dictionary defines the "Federal Reserve System" as: "Network of twelve central banks to which most national banks belong and to which state chartered banks may belong. Membership rules require investment of stock and minimum reserves." Privately-owned banks own the stock of the FED. This was explained in more detail in the case of Lewis v. United States, Federal Reporter, 2nd Series, Vol. 680, Pages 1239, 1241 (1982), where the court said: "Each Federal Reserve Bank is a separate corporation owned by commercial banks in its region. The stock-holding commercial banks elect two thirds of each Bank's nine member board of directors".

The Federal Reserve Banks are locally controlled by their member banks. Once again, according to Black's Law Dictionary, we find that these privately owned banks actually issue money:

"Federal Reserve Act. Law which created Federal Reserve banks which act as agents in maintaining money reserves, issuing money in the form of bank notes, lending money to banks, and supervising banks. Administered by Federal Reserve Board (q.v.)".

The privately owned Federal Reserve (FED) banks actually issue (create) the "money" we use. In 1964, the House Committee on Banking and Currency, Subcommittee on Domestic Finance, at the second session of the 88th Congress, put out a study entitled Money Facts which contains a good description of what the FED is: "The Federal Reserve is a total money-making machine. It can issue money or checks. And it never has a problem of making its checks good because it can obtain the $5 and $10 bills necessary to cover its check simply by asking the Treasury Department's Bureau of Engraving to print them".

Any one person or any closely knit group who has a lot of money has a lot of power. Now imagine a group of people who have the power to create money. Imagine the power these people would have. This is exactly what the privately owned FED is!

No man did more to expose the power of the FED than Louis T. McFadden, who was the Chairman of the House Banking Committee back in the 1930s. In describing the FED, he remarked in the Congressional Record, House pages 1295 and 1296 on June 10, 1932:

"Mr. Chairman, we have in this country one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever known. I refer to the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal reserve banks. The Federal Reserve Board, a Government Board, has cheated the Government of the United States and he people of the United States out of enough money to pay the national debt. The depredations and the iniquities of the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal reserve banks acting together have cost this country enough money to pay the national debt several times over. This evil institution has impoverished and ruined the people of the United States; has bankrupted itself, and has practically bankrupted our Government. It has done this through the maladministration of that law by which the Federal Reserve Board, and through the corrupt practices of the moneyed vultures who control it".

Some people think the Federal Reserve Banks are United States Government institutions. They are not Government institutions, departments, or agencies. They are private credit monopolies which prey upon the people of the United States for the benefit of themselves and their foreign customers. Those 12 private credit monopolies were deceitfully placed upon this country by bankers who came here from Europe and who repaid us for our hospitality by undermining our American institutions.

The FED basically works like this: The government granted its power to create money to the FED banks. They create money, then loan it back to the government charging interest. The government levies income taxes to pay the interest on the debt. On this point, it's interesting to note that the Federal Reserve Act and the sixteenth amendment, which gave congress the power to collect income taxes, were both passed in 1913. The incredible power of the FED over the economy is universally admitted. Some people, especially in the banking and academic communities, even support it. On the other hand, there are those, such as President John Fitzgerald Kennedy, that have spoken out against it. His efforts were spoken about in Jim Marrs' 1990 book Crossfire:"

Another overlooked aspect of Kennedy's attempt to reform American society involves money. Kennedy apparently reasoned that by returning to the constitution, which states that only Congress shall coin and regulate money, the soaring national debt could be reduced by not paying interest to the bankers of the Federal Reserve System, who print paper money then loan it to the government at interest. He moved in this area on June 4, 1963, by signing Executive Order 11110 which called for the issuance of $4,292,893,815 in United States Notes through the U.S. Treasury rather than the traditional Federal Reserve System. That same day, Kennedy signed a bill changing the backing of one and two dollar bills from silver to gold, adding strength to the weakened U.S. currency.

Kennedy's comptroller of the currency, James J. Saxon, had been at odds with the powerful Federal Reserve Board for some time, encouraging broader investment and lending powers for banks that were not part of the Federal Reserve system. Saxon also had decided that non-Reserve banks could underwrite state and local general obligation bonds, again weakening the dominant Federal Reserve banks".

In a comment made to a Columbia University class on Nov. 12, 1963,

Ten days before his assassination, President John Fitzgerald Kennedy allegedly said:

"The high office of the President has been used to foment a plot to destroy the American's freedom and before I leave office, I must inform the citizen of this plight."

In this matter, John Fitzgerald Kennedy appears to be the subject of his own book... a true Profile of Courage.

This research report was compiled for Lawgiver. Org. by Anthony Wayne

What is the Federal Reserve Bank?

What is the Federal Reserve Bank (FED) and why do we have it?

by Greg Hobbs November 1, 1999

The FED is a central bank. Central banks are supposed to implement a country's fiscal policies. They monitor commercial banks to ensure that they maintain sufficient assets, like cash, so as to remain solvent and stable. Central banks also do business, such as currency exchanges and gold transactions, with other central banks. In theory, a central bank should be good for a country, and they might be if it wasn't for the fact that they are not owned or controlled by the government of the country they are serving. Private central banks, including our FED, operate not in the interest of the public good but for profit.

There have been three central banks in our nation's history. The first two, while deceptive and fraudulent, pale in comparison to the scope and size of the fraud being perpetrated by our current FED. What they all have in common is an insidious practice known as "fractional banking."

Fractional banking or fractional lending is the ability to create money from nothing, lend it to the government or someone else and charge interest to boot. The practice evolved before banks existed. Goldsmiths rented out space in their vaults to individuals and merchants for storage of their gold or silver. The goldsmiths gave these "depositors" a certificate that showed the amount of gold stored. These certificates were then used to conduct business.

In time the goldsmiths noticed that the gold in their vaults was rarely withdrawn. Small amounts would move in and out but the large majority never moved. Sensing a profit opportunity, the goldsmiths issued double receipts for the gold, in effect creating money (certificates) from nothing and then lending those certificates (creating debt) to depositors and charging them interest as well.

Since the certificates represented more gold than actually existed, the certificates were "fractionally" backed by gold. Eventually some of these vault operations were transformed into banks and the practice of fractional banking continued.

Keep that fractional banking concept in mind as we examine our first central bank, the First Bank of the United States (BUS). It was created, after bitter dissent in the Congress, in 1791 and chartered for 20 years. A scam not unlike the current FED, the BUS used its control of the currency to defraud the public and establish a legal form of usury.

This bank practiced fractional lending at a 10:1 rate, ten dollars of loans for each dollar they had on deposit. This misuse and abuse of their public charter continued for the entire 20 years of their existence. Public outrage over these abuses was such that the charter was not renewed and the bank ceased to exist in 1811.

The war of 1812 left the country in economic chaos, seen by bankers as another opportunity for easy profits. They influenced Congress to charter the second central bank, the Second Bank of the United States (SBUS), in 1816.

The SBUS was more expansive than the BUS. The SBUS sold franchises and literally doubled the number of banks in a short period of time. The country began to boom and move westward, which required money. Using fractional lending at the 10:1 rate, the central bank and their franchisees created the debt/money for the expansion.

Things boomed for a while, then the banks decided to shut off the debt/money, citing the need to control inflation. This action on the part of the SBUS caused bankruptcies and foreclosures. The banks then took control of the assets that were used as security against the loans.

Closely examine how the SBUS engineered this cycle of prosperity and depression. The central bank caused inflation by creating debt/money for loans and credit and making these funds readily available. The economy boomed. Then they used the inflation which they created as an excuse to shut off the loans/credit/money.

The resulting shortage of cash caused the economy to falter or slow dramatically and large numbers of business and personal bankruptcies resulted. The central bank then seized the assets used as security for the loans. The wealth created by the borrowers during the boom was then transferred to the central bank during the bust. And you always wondered how the big guys ended up with all the marbles.

Now, who do you think is responsible for all of the ups and downs in our economy over the last 85 years? Think about the depression of the late '20s and all through the '30s. The FED could have pumped lots of debt/money into the market to stimulate the economy and get the country back on track, but did they? No; in fact, they restricted the money supply quite severely. We all know the results that occurred from that action, don't we?

Why would the FED do this? During that period asset values and stocks were at rock bottom prices. Who do you think was buying everything at 10 cents on the dollar? I believe that it is referred to as consolidating the wealth. How many times have they already done this in the last 85 years?

Do you think they will do it again?

Just as an aside at this point, look at today's economy. Markets are declining. Why? Because the FED has been very liberal with its debt/credit/money. The market was hyper inflated. Who creates inflation? The FED. How does the FED deal with inflation? They restrict the debt/credit/money. What happens when they do that? The market collapses.

Several months back, after certain central banks said they would be selling large quantities of gold, the price of gold fell to a 25-year low of about $260 per ounce. The central banks then bought gold. After buying at the bottom, a group of 15 central banks announced that they would be restricting the amount of gold released into the market for the next five years. The price of gold went up $75.00 per ounce in just a few days. How many hundreds of billions of dollars did the central banks make with those two press releases?

Gold is generally considered to be a hedge against more severe economic conditions. Do you think that the private banking families that own the FED are buying or selling equities at this time? (Remember: buy low, sell high.) How much money do you think these FED owners have made since they restricted the money supply at the top of this last current cycle?

Alan Greenspan has said publicly on several occasions that he thinks the market is overvalued, or words to that effect. Just a hint that he will raise interest rates (restrict the money supply), and equity markets have a negative reaction. Governments and politicians do not rule central banks, central banks rule governments and politicians. President Andrew Jackson won the presidency in 1828 with the promise to end the national debt and eliminate the SBUS. During his second term President Jackson withdrew all government funds from the bank and on January 8, 1835, paid off the national debt. He is the only president in history to have this distinction. The charter of the SBUS expired in 1836.

Without a central bank to manipulate the supply of money, the United States experienced unprecedented growth for 60 or 70 years, and the resulting wealth was too much for bankers to endure. They had to get back into the game. So, in 1910 Senator Nelson Aldrich, then Chairman of the National Monetary Commission, in collusion with representatives of the European central banks, devised a plan to pressure and deceive Congress into enacting legislation that would covertly establish a private central bank.

This bank would assume control over the American economy by controlling the issuance of its money. After a huge public relations campaign, engineered by the foreign central banks, the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 was slipped through Congress during the Christmas recess, with many members of the Congress absent. President Woodrow Wilson, pressured by his political and financial backers, signed it on December 23, 1913.

The act created the Federal Reserve System, a name carefully selected and designed to deceive. "Federal" would lead one to believe that this is a government organization. "Reserve" would lead one to believe that the currency is being backed by gold and silver. "System" was used in lieu of the word "bank" so that one would not conclude that a new central bank had been created.

In reality, the act created a private, for profit, central banking corporation owned by a cartel of private banks. Who owns the FED? The Rothschilds of London and Berlin; Lazard Brothers of Paris; Israel Moses Seif of Italy; Kuhn, Loeb and Warburg of Germany; and the Lehman Brothers, Goldman, Sachs and the Rockefeller families of New York.

Did you know that the FED is the only for-profit corporation in America that is exempt from both federal and state taxes? The FED takes in about one trillion dollars per year tax free! The banking families listed above get all that money.

Almost everyone thinks that the money they pay in taxes goes to the US Treasury to pay for the expenses of the government. Do you want to know where your tax dollars really go? If you look at the back of any check made payable to the IRS you will see that it has been endorsed as "Pay Any F.R.B. Branch or Gen. Depository for Credit U.S. Treas. This is in Payment of U.S. Oblig." Yes, that's right, every dime you pay in income taxes is given to those private banking families, commonly known as the FED, tax free.

Like many of you, I had some difficulty with the concept of creating money from nothing. You may have heard the term "monetizing the debt," which is kind of the same thing. As an example, if the US Government wants to borrow $1 million ó the government does borrow every dollar it spends ó they go to the FED to borrow the money. The FED calls the Treasury and says print 10,000 Federal Reserve Notes (FRN) in units of one hundred dollars.

The Treasury charges the FED 2.3 cents for each note, for a total of $230 for the 10,000 FRNs. The FED then lends the $1 million to the government at face value plus interest. To add insult to injury, the government has to create a bond for $1 million as security for the loan. And the rich get richer. The above was just an example, because in reality the FED does not even print the money; it's just a computer entry in their accounting system. To put this on a more personal level, let's use another example.

Today's banks are members of the Federal Reserve Banking System. This membership makes it legal for them to create money from nothing and lend it to you. Today's banks, like the goldsmiths of old, realize that only a small fraction of the money deposited in their banks is ever actually withdrawn in the form of cash. Only about 4 percent of all the money that exists is in the form of currency. The rest of it is simply a computer entry.

Let's say you're approved to borrow $10,000 to do some home improvements. You know that the bank didn't actually take $10,000 from its pile of cash and put it into your pile? They simply went to their computer and input an entry of $10,000 into your account. They created, from thin air, a debt which you have to secure with an asset and repay with interest. The bank is allowed to create and lend as much debt as they want as long as they do not exceed the 10:1 ratio imposed by the FED.

It sort of puts a new slant on how you view your friendly bank, doesn't it? How about those loan committees that scrutinize you with a microscope before approving the loan they created from thin air. What a hoot! They make it complex for a reason. They don't want you to understand what they are doing. People fear what they do not understand. You are easier to delude and control when you are ignorant and afraid.

Now to put the frosting on this cake. When was the income tax created? If you guessed 1913, the same year that the FED was created, you get a gold star. Coincidence? What are the odds? If you are going to use the FED to create debt, who is going to repay that debt? The income tax was created to complete the illusion that real money had been lent and therefore real money had to be repaid. And you thought Houdini was good.

So, what can be done? My father taught me that you should always stand up for what is right, even if you have to stand up alone.

If "We the People" don't take some action now, there may come a time when "We the People" are no more. You should write a letter or send an email to each of your elected representatives. Many of our elected representatives do not understand the FED. Once informed they will not be able to plead ignorance and remain silent.

Article 1, Section 8 of the US Constitution specifically says that Congress is the only body that can "coin money and regulate the value thereof." The US Constitution has never been amended to allow anyone other than Congress to coin and regulate currency.

Ask your representative, in light of that information, how it is possible for the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, and the Federal Reserve Bank that it created, to be constitutional. Ask them why this private banking cartel is allowed to reap trillions of dollars in profits without paying taxes. Insist on an answer.

Thomas Jefferson said, "If the America people ever allow private banks to control the issuance of their currencies, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all their prosperity until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered."

Jefferson saw it coming 150 years ago. The question is, "Can you now see what is in store for us if we allow the FED to continue controlling our country?"

"The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he breaks, servitude is at once the consequence of his crime, and the punishment of his guilt."

John P. Curran

Source: http://www.roc-grp.org/jfk.html

Republic Magazine

2008-06-18T16:00:00.000-04:00

Awesome Video

2008-04-14T09:42:00.000-04:00

Everyone Must See This! - video powered by Metacafe

The War On Democracy by John Pilger

2008-02-07T16:15:00.000-05:00

Paul defeats Clinton in Clinton Country

2008-01-29T04:41:00.001-05:00

January 28, 2008 4:01 am EST

MIDDLETOWN, CONNECTICUT - Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul defeated Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton in the first straw poll to pit Republicans against Democrats on the same ballot. Middletown, CT held its city straw poll Saturday night at the Church of Holy Trinity. Proceeds from the $10 fee for participating were donated to the Connecticut Breast Cancer Coalition. Paul led on the first ballot with 42 percent to Clinton’s 30 percent and Obama’s 20 percent. Other candidates received 2 percent or less. Other trailing candidates were eliminated and on the third ballot Paul prevailed 46 to 42 percent.

Bryan Tracy, who is with the Paul campaign in Connecticut, said although the Clinton supporters in Middletown were surprised, he wasn’t.

“This shows Ron Paul’s electability in the general election,” Tracy said. “We think that when people get a chance to compare our stands on the issues with Hillary’s, we will prevail.”

Ron Paul Unveils a REAL Economic Stimulus Plan

2008-01-29T04:31:00.000-05:00

Introduction

America became the greatest, most prosperous nation in human history through low taxes, constitutionally limited government, personal freedom and a belief in sound money. We need to return to these principles so our economy can thrive again. When enacted, my plan will provide both short-term stimulus and lay the groundwork for long-term prosperity.

Other candidates talk a lot about stimulus packages, but my record stands alone. I have fought for these measures for years as a member of Congress and will make them a top priority as president.

Ron Paul, a 10-term Republican Congressman from Texas's 14th District, is currently the ranking member of the House Financial Services Committee's Subcommittee on Domestic and International Monetary Policy, Trade, and Technology. He has been named "Taxpayers' Best Friend" for 10 consecutive years by the National Taxpayers' Union. Ron Paul is also the author of several books on monetary policy and economics.

The Four-Point Plan

Tax Reform: Reduce the tax burden and eliminate taxes that punish investment and savings, including job-killing corporate taxes.

Spending Reform: Eliminate wasteful spending. Reduce overseas commitments. Freeze all non-defense, non-entitlement spending at current levels.

Monetary Policy Reform: Expand openness at the Federal Reserve and require the Fed to televise its meetings. Return value to our money.

Regulatory Reform: Repeal Sarbanes/Oxley regulations that push companies to seek capital outside of US markets. Stop restricting community banks from fostering local economic growth.

1. Tax Reform

Eliminate Taxes on Dividends and Savings. The basis of capitalism is savings, and Americans who do so should be rewarded.
- Pass HJ Res. 23 to encourage savings over consumption.
Repeal the Death Tax. Attacking small businesses and breaking up family farms smothers growth and kills jobs.
- Pass H.R. 2734 to make the Bush tax cuts permanent.
Cut Taxes for Working Seniors. Grandmothers and grandfathers working to make ends meet should keep all the fruits of their labor.
- Pass H.R. 191 to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal the inclusion in gross income of Social Security benefits.
Eliminate Taxes on Social Security Benefits. That money belongs to seniors, not the government. They paid into the system for a lifetime, and they should be free to spend every penny as they see fit.
- Pass H.R. 192 to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal the 1993 increase in taxes on Social Security benefits.
Accelerate Depreciation on Investment. We need to help companies grow and create jobs.
- Pass H.R. 4995 to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to reduce corporate marginal income tax rates.

Eliminate Taxes on Capital Gains. Investment should be embraced and rewarded.

Pass H.J. Res 23 (The “Liberty Amendment”), proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to abolishing personal income, estate, and gift taxes and prohibiting the United States Government from engaging in business in competition with its citizens.

Eliminate Taxes on Tips.The single parents and working students who earn their income chiefly through tips deserve to keep all of their money. This tax on "estimated income" is unfair and should be ended.

Pass H.R. 3664 to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide that tips shall not be subject to income or employment taxes.

Support the Mortgage Cancellation Relief Act. Working families who lost their homes should not be punished a second time with a big IRS bill.

Pass H.R. 1876 to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exclude from the gross income of individual taxpayers discharges of indebtedness attributable to certain forgiven residential mortgage obligations.

2. Spending Reform

Reduce Overseas Military Commitments. Our bases and troops should be on our soil.
- It's time to stop subsidizing our trading partners in Europe, Japan and South Korea.
Freeze Non-Defense, Non-Entitlement Spending at Current Levels
- I vote against all bloated, pork laden spending bills and will veto them as president.

3. Monetary Policy Reform

Televise Federal Open Market Committee Meetings. An institution as powerful as the Federal Reserve deserves full public scrutiny.
Expand Transparency and Accountability at the Federal Reserve
- Pass H.R. 2754 to require the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System to continue to make available to the public on a weekly basis information on the measure of the M3 monetary aggregate and its components.

Return Value to Our Money. Legalize gold and silver as a competing currency.
- Level the long-term boom and bust business cycle by passing H.R. 4683, which would repeal provisions of the federal criminal code relating to issuing coins of gold, silver, or other metal for use as current money and making or possessing likenesses of such coins.

4. Regulatory Reform

Repeal Sarbanes/Oxley. It has seriously wounded our capital markets and helped make the UK a financial center at our expense.
- Ending these misguided regulations would bring jobs flooding back to the United States
- Pass H.R. 1049 to reform Sarbanes-Oxley and reduce the burden it places on small businesses.
Repeal or Remove Costly and Unnecessary Federal Regulations. Neighbors know best how to help their neighbors.
- We need to make it easier for community banks, credit unions, and other financial institutions to better serve their communities and to help people in these communities get access to credit and capital.
- Pass H.R. 1869 to enhance the ability of community banks to foster economic growth and serve their communities, boost small businesses, increase individual savings, and for other purposes.

BOYCOTT FOX NEWS

2008-01-12T14:39:00.002-05:00

Because of the way Fox News has been trying to censor Ron Paul we as Americans need to boycott Fox and their sponsors. And this isn't just about Ron Paul, it's also about the other candidates that have been treated unfairly and not been allowed to be in the debates when they are clearly candidates for President of the United States of America.

But with Dr Paul it goes a little deeper, they are trying to slander him, make a joke out of him, ask him stupid questions that have nothing to do with the debate just trying to discredit him. I beg of you, don't take my word for it watch youtube, watch the debates, get informed and make up your own mind and then get involved. If your reading this then you already know that you can't get honest news from the mainstream media or you wouldn't be online looking for your news. So please lets stop Fox now before they rig another election.
J.P.

Kucinich Offers Comprehensive Plan to Address Violence in America

2007-11-08T00:15:00.000-05:00

Click here to visit Dennis Kucinich's website and read it for yourselves.

Vote for Kucinich and lose your 2nd Amendment right.

Kucinich Offers Comprehensive Plan to Address Violence in America.
The Level of Violence in Society Constitutes a National Emergency; Hand Gun Law Prepared

Washington, Apr 18 - WASHINGTON, D.C. (April 18) — In the aftermath of Monday’s deadly shooting in Blacksburg, Virginia, Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) is proposing a comprehensive, three-point plan to deal with the violence plaguing America, including a ban on handguns.

“The tragic events in Blacksburg, Virginia which took 33 lives are not an isolated example of the effects of gun violence in America. In fact, about 32 people perish each and every day in America in hand gun related incidents,” Kucinich said in a speech to Congress today.

“It is becoming painfully obvious that the easy availability of handguns constituents a growing national crisis of public health and safety, one that calls for a powerful, wide-ranging response from Congress.

“The level of violence in our society constitutes a national emergency. I’m offering an approach to change America’s direction away from death and disintegration and toward life and social cohesiveness.”

Already this Congress, Kucinich has introduced HR 808 and HR 676—two bills that directly relate to the events of Blacksburg. HR 808, legislation to establish a Department of Peace and Nonviolence, addresses the issue of domestic violence, gang violence, and violence in the schools, which is reflected in the current homicide rates. HR 808 has 62 cosponsors.

“The bill provides hope for a transformation through education of our children in principles of nonviolence and support for existing community groups and professionals whose dedication would be empowered by a national commitment to peace and nonviolence,” Kucinich said.

A recent study indicates that many perpetrators of murder had histories of mental illness. The lack of parity for mental healthcare remains one of the most serious deficiencies in healthcare in the United States – the system has long been lacking in substantive support of mental health. HR 676, Medicare for All, would establish a universal not-for-profit healthcare system, which would provide full and comprehensive mental healthcare. More than 14,000 physicians support HR 676 and it is cosponsored by 63 Members of Congress.

Kucinich is currently drafting legislation that would ban the purchase,sale,transfer, or possession of handguns by civilians. A gun buy-back provision will be included in the bill.

“America is being engulfed in violence every day. Let’s show them we have the wisdom and the courage to come from our hearts to meet this challenge,” Kucinich said.

Struggling for Relevance in Cuba: Close, Still No Cigars

2007-11-03T12:25:00.000-04:00

Straight Talk
by: Ron Paul
Nov 3,2007

Since Raul Castro seems to be transitioning to a more permanent position of power, the administration has begun talking about Cuba policy again. One would think we would be able to survey the results of the last 45 years and come to logical conclusions. Changing course never seems to be an option, however, no matter how futile or counterproductive our past actions have been.

The Cuban embargo began officially in 1962 as a means to put pressure on the communist dictatorship to change its ways. After 45 years, the Cuban economy has struggled, but Cuba 's dictatorship is no closer to stepping to the beat of our drum. Any ailments have consistently and successfully been blamed on US Capitalism instead of Cuban Communism. They have substituted trade with others for trade with the US , and are "awash" with development funds from abroad. Our isolationist policies with regards to Cuba , meanwhile, have hardly won the hearts and minds of Cubans or Cuban-Americans, many of whom are isolated from families because this political animosity.

In the name of helping Cubans, the US administration is calling for "multibillions" of taxpayer dollars in foreign aid and subsidies for internet access, education and business development for Cubans under the condition that the Cuban government demonstrates certain changes. In the same breath, they claim lifting the embargo would only help the dictatorship. This is exactly backwards. Free trade is the best thing for people in both Cuba and the US . Government subsidies would enrich those in power in Cuba at the expense of already overtaxed Americans!

The irony of supposed Capitalist, free-marketeers inducing Communists to freedom with government hand-outs should not be missed. We call for a free and private press in Cuba while our attempts to propagandize Cubans through the US government run Radio/TV Marti has wasted $600 million in American taxpayer dollars.

It's time to stop talking solely in terms of what's best for the Cuban people. How about the wishes of the American people, who are consistently in favor of diplomacy with Cuba ? Let's stop the hysterics about the freedom of Cubans – which is not our government's responsibility – and consider freedom of the American people, which is. Americans want the freedom to travel and trade with their Cuban neighbors, as they are free to travel and trade with Vietnam and China . Those Americans who do not wish to interact with a country whose model of governance they oppose are free to boycott. The point being – it is Americans who live in a free country, and as free people we should choose who to buy from or where to travel, not our government.

Our current administration is perceived as irrelevant, at best, in Cuba and the message is falling on deaf ears there. If the administration really wanted to extend the hand of friendship, they would allow the American people the freedom to act as their own ambassadors through trade and travel. Considering the lack of success government has had in engendering friendship with Cuba , it is time for government to get out of the way and let the people reach out.

A Ron Paul Poem

2007-11-01T16:31:00.000-04:00

by Nathaniel Duarte,
11 year-old homeschooler

We want Ron Paul for President,
He is the best we know,
He will follow the Constitution,
Say yes to Dr. No.

Working Americans like lower taxes,
Claims the Honorable Paul,
So we must vote for him next year
To make the IRS fall.

Taxpayers best friend
Is the name that fits him best,
For he won’t raise our taxes;
Doesn’t he sound better than any of the rest?

The war in Iraq must end,
Our own country we need to defend,
Says Republican Candidate Ron Paul,
To all the Congressmen.

He wants to protect our privacy,
And stop the national ID card;
And he will follow the Constitution,
Let’s campaign with him hard.

Yes, we want Ron Paul for President,
He IS the best we know,
And he will end the IRS,
SAY YES TO DR. NO!

There is hope for us,and our country.

2007-10-22T10:42:00.000-04:00

Congressman Ron Paul is the leading advocate for freedom in our nation’s capital. As a member of the U.S. House of Representatives, Dr. Paul tirelessly works for limited constitutional government, low taxes, free markets, and a return to sound monetary policies. He is known among his congressional colleagues and his constituents for his consistent voting record. Dr. Paul never votes for legislation unless the proposed measure is expressly authorized by the Constitution.In the words of former Treasury Secretary William Simon, Dr. Paul is the “one exception to the Gang of 535” on Capitol Hill.

Ron Paul was born and raised in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. He graduated from Gettysburg College and the Duke University School of Medicine, before proudly serving as a flight surgeon in the U.S. Air Force during the 1960s. He and his wife Carol moved to Texas in 1968, where he began his medical practice in Brazoria County. As a specialist in obstetrics/gynecology, Dr. Paul has delivered more than 4,000 babies. He and Carol, who reside in Lake Jackson, Texas, are the proud parents of five children and have 17 grandchildren.

While serving in Congress during the late 1970s and early 1980s, Dr. Paul’s limited-government ideals were not popular in Washington. In 1976, he was one of only four Republican congressmen to endorse Ronald Reagan for president.

During that time, Congressman Paul served on the House Banking committee, where he was a strong advocate for sound monetary policy and an outspoken critic of the Federal Reserve’s inflationary measures. He was an unwavering advocate of pro-life and pro-family values. Dr. Paul consistently voted to lower or abolish federal taxes, spending and regulation, and used his House seat to actively promote the return of government to its proper constitutional levels. In 1984, he voluntarily relinquished his House seat and returned to his medical practice.

Dr. Paul returned to Congress in 1997 to represent the 14th congressional district of Texas. He presently serves on the House Committee on Financial Services and the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. He continues to advocate a dramatic reduction in the size of the federal government and a return to constitutional principles.

Congressman Paul’s consistent voting record prompted one of his congressional colleagues to say, “Ron Paul personifies the Founding Fathers’ ideal of the citizen-statesman. He makes it clear that his principles will never be compromised, and they never are.” Another colleague observed, “There are few people in public life who, through thick and thin, rain or shine, stick to their principles. Ron Paul is one of those few.”

Brief Overview of Congressman Paul’s Record:

He has never voted to raise taxes.
He has never voted for an unbalanced budget.
He has never voted for a federal restriction on gun ownership.
He has never voted to raise congressional pay.
He has never taken a government-paid junket.
He has never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.

He voted against the Patriot Act.
He voted against regulating the Internet.
He voted against the Iraq war.

He does not participate in the lucrative congressional pension program.
He returns a portion of his annual congressional office budget to the U.S. treasury every year.

Congressman Paul introduces numerous pieces of substantive legislation each year, probably more than any single member of Congress.

Ron Paul on the issues:

American Independence and Sovereignty

So called free trade deals and world governmental organizations like the International Criminal Court (ICC), NAFTA, GATT, WTO, and CAFTA are a threat to our independence as a nation. They transfer power from our government to unelected foreign elites.

The ICC wants to try our soldiers as war criminals. Both the WTO and CAFTA could force Americans to get a doctor’s prescription to take herbs and vitamins. Alternative treatments could be banned.

The WTO has forced Congress to change our laws, yet we still face trade wars. Today, France is threatening to have U.S. goods taxed throughout Europe. If anything, the WTO makes trade relations worse by giving foreign competitors a new way to attack U.S. jobs.

NAFTA’s superhighway is just one part of a plan to erase the borders between the U.S. and Mexico, called the North American Union. This spawn of powerful special interests, would create a single nation out of Canada, the U.S. and Mexico, with a new unelected bureaucracy and money system. Forget about controlling immigration under this scheme.

And a free America, with limited, constitutional government, would be gone forever.

Let’s not forget the UN. It wants to impose a direct tax on us. I successfully fought this move in Congress last year, but if we are going to stop ongoing attempts of this world government body to tax us, we will need leadership from the White House.

We must withdraw from any organizations and trade deals that infringe upon the freedom and independence of the United States of America.

Border Security and Immigration Reform

The talk must stop. We must secure our borders now. A nation without secure borders is no nation at all. It makes no sense to fight terrorists abroad when our own front door is left unlocked. This is my six point plan:

* Physically secure our borders and coastlines. We must do whatever it takes to control entry into our country before we undertake complicated immigration reform proposals.
* Enforce visa rules. Immigration officials must track visa holders and deport anyone who overstays their visa or otherwise violates U.S. law. This is especially important when we recall that a number of 9/11 terrorists had expired visas.
* No amnesty. Estimates suggest that 10 to 20 million people are in our country illegally. That’s a lot of people to reward for breaking our laws.
* No welfare for illegal aliens. Americans have welcomed immigrants who seek opportunity, work hard, and play by the rules. But taxpayers should not pay for illegal immigrants who use hospitals, clinics, schools, roads, and social services.
* End birthright citizenship. As long as illegal immigrants know their children born here will be citizens, the incentive to enter the U.S. illegally will remain strong.
* Pass true immigration reform. The current system is incoherent and unfair. But current reform proposals would allow up to 60 million more immigrants into our country, according to the Heritage Foundation. This is insanity. Legal immigrants from all countries should face the same rules and waiting periods.

Debt and Taxes

Working Americans like lower taxes. So do I. Lower taxes benefit all of us, creating jobs and allowing us to make more decisions for ourselves about our lives.

Whether a tax cut reduces a single mother’s payroll taxes by $40 a month or allows a business owner to save thousands in capital gains taxes and hire more employees, that tax cut is a good thing. Lower taxes allow more spending, saving, and investing which helps the economy — that means all of us.

Real conservatives have always supported low taxes and low spending.

But today, too many politicians and lobbyists are spending America into ruin. We are nine trillion dollars in debt as a nation. Our mounting government debt endangers the financial future of our children and grandchildren. If we don’t cut spending now, higher taxes and economic disaster will be in their future — and yours.

In addition, the Federal Reserve, our central bank, fosters runaway debt by increasing the money supply — making each dollar in your pocket worth less. The Fed is a private bank run by unelected officials who are not required to be open or accountable to “we the people.”

Worse, our economy and our very independence as a nation is increasingly in the hands of foreign governments such as China and Saudi Arabia, because their central banks also finance our runaway spending.

We cannot continue to allow private banks, wasteful agencies, lobbyists, corporations on welfare, and governments collecting foreign aid to dictate the size of our ballooning budget. We need a new method to prioritize our spending. It’s called the Constitution of the United States.

Health Freedom

Americans are justifiably concerned over the government’s escalating intervention into their freedom to choose what they eat and how they take care of their health.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA), in order to comply with standards dictated by supra-national organizations such as the UN‘s World Food Code (CODEX), NAFTA, and CAFTA, has been assuming greater control over nutrients, vitamins and natural health care providers to restrict your right to choose the manner in which you manage your health and nutritional needs.

I have been the national leader in preserving Health Freedom.

I have introduced the Health Freedom Protection Act, HR 2117, to ensure Americans can receive truthful health information about supplements and natural remedies.

I support the Access to Medical Treatment Act, H.R. 2717, which expands the ability of Americans to use alternative medicine and new treatments.

I oppose legislation that increases the FDA‘s legal powers. FDA has consistently failed to protect the public from dangerous drugs, genetically modified foods, dangerous pesticides and other chemicals in the food supply. Meanwhile they waste public funds attacking safe, healthy foods and dietary supplements

I also opposed the Homeland Security Bill, H.R. 5005, which, in section 304, authorizes the forced vaccination of American citizens against small pox. The government should never have the power to require immunizations or vaccinations.

Home Schooling

My commitment to ensuring home schooling remains a practical alternative for American families is unmatched by any Presidential candidate.

Returning control of education to parents is the centerpiece of my education agenda. As President I will advance tax credits through the Family Education Freedom Act, which reduces taxes to make it easier for parents to home school by allowing them to devote more of their own funds to their children's education.

I am committed to guaranteeing parity for home school diplomas and advancing equal scholarship consideration for students entering college from a home school environment.

We must have permanency in the Department of Defense Home School Tier 1 Pilot Program, providing recruitment status parity for home school graduates. I will use my authority to prevent the Department of Education from regulating home school activities.

I will veto any legislation that creates national standards or national testing for home school parents or students. I also believe that, as long as No Child Left Behind remains law, it must include the protections for home schoolers included in sec. 9506 (enshrining home schoolers’ rights) and 9527 (guaranteeing no national curriculum).

Federal monies must never be used to undermine the rights of homeschooling parents. I will use the bully pulpit of the Presidency to encourage a culture of educational freedom throughout the nation.

Life and Liberty

The right of an innocent, unborn child to life is at the heart of the American ideals of liberty. My professional and legislative record demonstrates my strong commitment to this pro-life principle.

In 40 years of medical practice, I never once considered performing an abortion, nor did I ever find abortion necessary to save the life of a pregnant woman.

In Congress, I have authored legislation that seeks to define life as beginning at conception, HR 1094.

I am also the prime sponsor of HR 300, which would negate the effect of Roe v Wade by removing the ability of federal courts to interfere with state legislation to protect life. This is a practical, direct approach to ending federal court tyranny which threatens our constitutional republic and has caused the deaths of 45 million of the unborn.

I have also authored HR 1095, which prevents federal funds to be used for so-called “population control.”

Many talk about being pro-life. I have taken direct action to restore protection for the unborn.

As an OB/GYN doctor, I’ve delivered over 4,000 babies. That experience has made me an unshakable foe of abortion. Many of you may have read my book, Challenge To Liberty, which champions the idea that there cannot be liberty in a society unless the rights of all innocents are protected. Much can be understood about the civility of a society in observing its regard for the dignity of human life.

Privacy and Personal Liberty

The biggest threat to your privacy is the government. We must drastically limit the ability of government to collect and store data regarding citizens’ personal matters.

We must stop the move toward a national ID card system. All states are preparing to issue new driver’s licenses embedded with “standard identifier” data — a national ID. A national ID with new tracking technologies means we’re heading into an Orwellian world of no privacy. I voted against the Real ID Act in March of 2005.

To date, the privacy focus has been on identity theft. It was Congress that created this danger by mandating use of the standard identifier (currently your SSN) in the private sector. For example, banks use SSNs as customer account identifiers because the government requires it.

We must also protect medical privacy. Right now, you’re vulnerable. Under so-called “medical privacy protection” rules, insurance companies and other entities have access to your personal medical information.

Financial privacy? Right now depositing $10,000 or more in cash in your local bank account will generate a federally-mandated report to the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network at the United States Department of the Treasury.

And then there’s the so-called Patriot Act. As originally proposed, it:

* Expanded the federal government's ability to use wiretaps without judicial oversight;
* Allowed nationwide search warrants non-specific to any given location, nor subject to any local judicial oversight;
* Made it far easier for the government to monitor private internet usage;
* Authorized “sneak and peek” warrants enabling federal authorities to search a person’s home, office, or personal property without that person’s knowledge; and
* Required libraries and bookstores to turn over records of books read by their patrons.

I have fought this fight for many years. I sponsored a bill to overturn the Patriot Act and have won some victories, but today the threat to your liberty and privacy is very real. We need leadership at the top that will prevent Washington from centralizing power and private data about our lives.

Property Rights and Eminent Domain

We must stop special interests from violating property rights and literally driving families from their homes, farms and ranches.

Today, we face a new threat of widespread eminent domain actions as a result of powerful interests who want to build a NAFTA superhighway through the United States from Mexico to Canada.

We also face another danger in regulatory takings: Through excess regulation, governments deprive property owners of significant value and use of their properties — all without paying “just compensation.”

Property rights are the foundation of all rights in a free society. Without the right to own a printing press, for example, freedom of the press becomes meaningless. The next president must get federal agencies out of these schemes to deny property owners their constitutional rights to life, liberty, and property.

Social Security

Our nation’s promise to its seniors, once considered a sacred trust, has become little more than a tool for politicians to scare retirees while robbing them of their promised benefits. Today, the Social Security system is broke and broken.

Those in the system are seeing their benefits dwindle due to higher taxes, increasing inflation, and irresponsible public spending.

The proposed solutions, ranging from lower benefits to higher taxes to increasing the age of eligibility, are NOT solutions; they are betrayals.

Imposing any tax on Social Security benefits is unfair and illogical. In Congress, I have introduced the Senior Citizens Tax Elimination Act (H.R. 191), which repeals ALL taxes on Social Security benefits, to eliminate political theft of our seniors’ income and raise their standard of living.

Solvency is the key to keeping our promise to our seniors, and I have introduced the Social Security Preservation Act (H.R. 219) to ensure that money paid into the system is only used for Social Security.

It is fundamentally unfair to give benefits to anyone who has not paid into the system. The Social Security for Americans Only Act (H.R. 190) ends the drain on Social Security caused by illegal aliens seeking the fruits of your labor.

We must also address the desire of younger workers to save and invest on their own. We should cut payroll taxes and give workers the opportunity to seek better returns in the private market.

Excessive government spending has created the insolvency crisis in Social Security. We must significantly reduce spending so that our nation can keep its promise to our seniors.

The Second Amendment

I share our Founders’ belief that in a free society each citizen must have the right to keep and bear arms. They ratified the Second Amendment knowing that this right is the guardian of every other right, and they all would be horrified by the proliferation of unconstitutional legislation that prevents law-abiding Americans from exercising this right.

I have always supported the Second Amendment and these are some of the bills I have introduced in the current Congress to help restore respect for it:

* H.R. 1096 includes provisions repealing the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act and the Federal Firearms License Reform Act of 1993, two invasive and unconstitutional bills.
* H.R. 1897 would end the ban on carrying a firearm in the National Park System, restoring Americans’ ability to protect themselves in potentially hazardous situations.
* H.R. 3305 would allow pilots and specially assigned law enforcement personnel to carry firearms in order to protect airline passengers, possibly preventing future 9/11-style attacks.
* H.R. 1146 would end our membership in the United Nations, protecting us from their attempts to tax our guns or disarm us entirely.

In the past, I introduced legislation to repeal the so-called “assault weapons” ban before its 2004 sunset, and I will oppose any attempts to reinstate it.

I also recently opposed H.R. 2640, which would allow government-appointed psychiatrists to ban U.S. veterans experiencing even mild forms of Post-Traumatic Stress Syndrome from ever owning a gun.

You have the right to protect your life, liberty, and property. As President, I will continue to guard the liberties stated in the Second Amendment.

War and Foreign Policy

The war in Iraq was sold to us with false information. The area is more dangerous now than when we entered it. We destroyed a regime hated by our direct enemies, the jihadists, and created thousands of new recruits for them. This war has cost more than 3,000 American lives, thousands of seriously wounded, and hundreds of billions of dollars. We must have new leadership in the White House to ensure this never happens again.

Both Jefferson and Washington warned us about entangling ourselves in the affairs of other nations. Today, we have troops in 130 countries. We are spread so thin that we have too few troops defending America. And now, there are new calls for a draft of our young men and women.

We can continue to fund and fight no-win police actions around the globe, or we can refocus on securing America and bring the troops home. No war should ever be fought without a declaration of war voted upon by the Congress, as required by the Constitution.

Under no circumstances should the U.S. again go to war as the result of a resolution that comes from an unelected, foreign body, such as the United Nations.

Too often we give foreign aid and intervene on behalf of governments that are despised. Then, we become despised. Too often we have supported those who turn on us, like the Kosovars who aid Islamic terrorists, or the Afghan jihads themselves, and their friend Osama bin Laden. We armed and trained them, and now we’re paying the price.

At the same time, we must not isolate ourselves. The generosity of the American people has been felt around the globe. Many have thanked God for it, in many languages. Let us have a strong America, conducting open trade, travel, communication, and diplomacy with other nations.

FEMA Concentration Camps in America

2007-10-17T07:08:00.000-04:00

There over 600 prison camps in the United States, all fully operational and ready to receive prisoners. They are all staffed and even surrounded by full-time guards, but they are all empty. These camps are to be operated by FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) should Martial Law need to be implemented in the United States.

The Rex 84 Program was established on the reasoning that if a mass exodus of illegal aliens crossed the Mexican/US border, they would be quickly rounded up and detained in detention centers by FEMA. Rex 84 allowed many military bases to be closed down and to be turned into prisons.

Operation Cable Splicer and Garden Plot are the two sub programs which will be implemented once the Rex 84 program is initiated for its proper purpose. Garden Plot is the program to control the population. Cable Splicer is the program for an orderly takeover of the state and local governments by the federal government. FEMA is the executive arm of the coming police state and thus will head up all operations. The Presidential Executive Orders already listed on the Federal Register also are part of the legal framework for this operation.

The camps all have railroad facilities as well as roads leading to and from the detention facilities. Many also have an airport nearby. The majority of the camps can house a population of 20,000 prisoners. Currently, the largest of these facilities is just outside of Fairbanks, Alaska. The Alaskan facility is a massive mental health facility and can hold approximately 2 million people.

A person named Terry Kings wrote an article on his discoveries of camps
located in southern California. His findings are as follows:
Over the last couple months several of us have investigated three soon-to-be prison camps in the Southern California area. We had heard about these sites and wanted to see them for ourselves.

The first one we observed was in Palmdale, California. It is not operating as a prison at the moment but is masquerading as part of a water facility. Now why would there be a facility of this nature out in the middle of nowhere with absolutely no prisoners? The fences that run for miles around this large facility all point inward, and there are large mounds of dirt and dry moat surrounding the central area so the inside area is not visible from the road. There are 3 large loading docks facing the entrance that can be observed from the road. What are these massive docks going to be loading?

We observed white vans patrolling the area and one came out and greeted us with a friendly wave and followed us until we had driven safely beyond the area. What would have happened had we decided to enter the open gate or ask questions?

This facility is across the street from the Palmdale Water Department. The area around the Water Department has fences pointing outward, to keep people out of this dangerous area so as not to drown. Yet, across the street, the fences all point inward. Why? To keep people in? What people? Who are going to be it�s occupants?

There are also signs posted every 50 feet stating: State of California Trespassing Loitering Forbidden By Law Section 555 California Penal Code.

The sign at the entrance says: Pearblossom Operations and Maintenance Subcenter Receiving Department, 34534 116th Street East. There is also a guard shack located at the entrance.

We didn�t venture into this facility, but did circle around it to see if there was anything else visible from the road. We saw miles of fences with the top points all directed inward. There is a railroad track that runs next to the perimeter of this fenced area. The loading docks are large enough to hold railroad cars.

I wonder what they are planning for this facility? They could easily fit 100,000 people in this area. And who would the occupants be?

Another site is located in Brand Park in Glendale. There are newly constructed fences (all outfitted with new wiring that point inward). The fences surround a dry reservoir. There are also new buildings situated in the area. We questioned the idea that there were four armed military personnel walking the park. Since when does a public park need armed guards?

A third site visited was in the San Fernando Valley, adjacent to the Water District. Again, the area around the actual Water District had fences logically pointing out (to keep people out of the dangerous area). And the rest of the adjacent area which went on for several miles was ringed with fences and barbed wire facing inward (to keep what or who in?) Also, interesting was the fact that the addition to the tops of the fences were fairly new as to not even contain any sign of rust on them. Within the grounds was a huge building that the guard said was a training range for policemen. There were newly constructed roads, new gray military looking buildings, and a landing strip. For what? Police cars were constantly patrolling the several mile perimeter of the area.

From the parking lot of the Odyssey Restaurant a better view could be taken of the area that was hidden from site from the highway. There was an area that contained about 100 black boxes that looked like railroad cars. We had heard that loads of railroad cars have been manufactured in Oregon outfitted with shackles. Would these be of that nature? From our position it was hard to determine.

In searching the Internet, I have discovered that there are about 600 of these prison sites around the country (and more literally popping up overnight do they work all night). They are manned, but yet do not contain prisoners. Why do they need all these non-operating prisons? What are they waiting for? We continuously hear that our current prisons are overcrowded and they are releasing prisoners because of this situation. But what about all these facilities? What are they really for? Why are there armed guards yet no one to protect themselves against? And what is going to be the kick-off point to put these facilities into operation?

What would bring about a situation that would call into effect the need for these new prison facilities? A man-made or natural catastrophe? An earthquake, panic due to Y2K, a massive poisoning, a panic of such dimensions to cause nationwide panic?

Once a major disaster occurs (whether it is a real event or manufactured event does not matter) Martial Law is hurriedly put in place and we are all in the hands of the government agencies (FEMA) who thus portray themselves as our protectors. Yet what happens when we question those in authority and how they are taking away all of our freedoms? Will we be the ones detained in these camp sites? And who are they going to round up? Those with guns? Those who ask questions? Those that want to know what�s really going on? Does that include any of us? The seekers of truth?

When first coming across this information I was in a state of total denial. How could this be? I believed our country was free, and always felt a sense of comfort in knowing that as long as we didn�t hurt others in observing our freedom we were left to ourselves. Ideally we treated everyone with respect and honored their uniqueness and hoped that others did likewise.

It took an intensive year of searching into the hidden politics to discover that we are as free as we believe we are. If we are in denial, we don�t see the signs that are staring at us, but keep our minds turned off and busy with all the mundane affairs of daily life.

We just don�t care enough to find out the real truth, and settle for the hand-fed stories that come our way over the major media sources television, radio, newspaper, and magazines. But it�s too late to turn back to the days of blindfolds and hiding our heads in the sand because the reality is becoming very clear. The time is fast approaching when we will be the ones asking "What happened to our freedom? To our free speech? To our right to protect ourselves and our family? To think as an individual? To express ourselves in whatever way we wish?"

Once we challenge that freedom we find out how free we really are. How many are willing to take up that challenge? Very few indeed, otherwise we wouldn�t find ourselves in the situation that we are in at the present time. We wouldn�t have let things progress and get out of the hands of the public and into the hands of those that seek to keep us under their control no matter what it takes, and that includes the use of force and detainment for those that ask the wrong questions.

Will asking questions be outlawed next? Several instances have recently been reported where those that were asking questions that came too near the untold truth (the cover up) were removed from the press conferences and from the public�s ear. Also, those that wanted to speak to the press were detained and either imprisoned, locked in a psychiatric hospital, slaughtered (through make-believe suicides) or discredited.

Why are we all in denial over these possibilities? Didn�t we hear about prison camps in Germany, and even in the United States during World War II? Japanese individuals were rounded up and placed in determent camps during the duration of the War. Where was their freedom?

You don�t think it could happen to you? Obviously those rounded up and killed didn�t think it could happen to them either. How could decent people have witnessed such atrocities and still said nothing? Are we going to do the same here as they cart off one by one those individuals who are taking a stand for the rights of the citizens as they expose the truth happening behind the scenes? Are we all going to sit there and wonder what happened to this country of ours? Where did we go wrong? How could we let it happen?

Darwin Award 1996

2007-10-10T04:28:00.003-04:00

JUST WHEN YOU THOUGHT YOU HEARD IT ALL
You all know about the Darwin Awards - it's an annual honor given to the person who did the gene pool the biggest service by killing himself in the most extraordinarily stupid way. Last year winner was a fellow who was killed by a coke machine which toppled over on top of him as he was attempting to tip a free coke out of it.

THIS YEAR NOMINEE IS:
The Arizona Highway Patrol came upon a pile of smoldering metal imbedded in the side of a cliff rising above the apex of a curve. The wreckage resembled the site of an airplane crash, but it was a car. The type of car was unidentifiable at the scene. The lab finally figured out what had happened.
It seems that a guy had some JATO bottles ( Jet Assisted Take Off ), actually a solid fuel rocket used to give heavy military transport planes extra "push" for taking off from short airfields. He had driven his Chevy Impala into the desert and found a long straight stretch of road. He attached the JATO unit to his car, jumped in, built up some speed, and fired off the JATO!

The facts as best could be defined are that:

The operator of the 1967 Impala hit the JATO ignition at a distance of approximately 3.0 miles from the crash site. This was determined by the scorched and melted asphalt at that location.
The JATO would have reached maximum thrust within 5 seconds, causing the chevy to reach speeds of 350 MPH ( 560 KMPH ). JATO thrust would have continued for 20-25 seconds, insuring maintenance of that speed for that time.
The driver, soon pilot, would have experienced G-forces usually reserved for dig-fighting F-14 jocks under full afterburners, causing him to become insignificant for the remainder of the vent. The automobile remained on the straight highway for about 2.5 miles ( 15-20 seconds ) before the driver applied and completely melted brakes, blowing tires and leaving thick rubber marks on the road surface, to no avail, then becoming airborne for an additional 1.4 miles before impacting the cliff face at a height of 125 feet, leaving a blackened crater 3 feet deep in the rock face.
Few of the drivers remains were recovered. Small fragments of bone, teeth, and hair were extracted from the crater, and a fingernail and bone shards were removed from a piece of debris believed to be a portion of the steering wheel.

But did he wear a set belt?

National ID Cards Won’t Stop Terrorism or Illegal Immigration

2007-10-10T04:28:00.002-04:00

by Ron Paul, Dr. August 24, 2007

The US House of Representatives passed a spending bill last week that contains provisions establishing a national ID card, and the Senate is poised to approve the measure in the next few days. This week marks the American public’s last chance to convince their Senators they don’t want to live in a nation that demands papers from its citizens as they go about their lives.

Absent a political miracle in the Senate, within two years every American will need a conforming national ID card to participate in ordinary activities. This REAL ID Act establishes a massive, centrally-coordinated database of highly personal information about American citizens: at a minimum their name, date of birth, place of residence, Social Security number, and physical characteristics. The legislation also grants open-ended authority to the Secretary of Homeland Security to require biometric information on IDs in the future. This means your harmless looking driver’s license could contain a retina scan, fingerprints, DNA information, or radio frequency technology.

Think this sounds farfetched? Read the REAL ID Act, HR 418, for yourself. Its text is available on the Library of Congress website. A careful reading also reveals that states will be required to participate in the “Drivers License Agreement,” which was crafted by DMV lobbyists years ago. This agreement creates a massive database of sensitive information on American citizens that can be shared with Canada and Mexico!

Terrorism is the excuse given for virtually every new power grab by the federal government, and the national ID is no exception. But federal agencies have tried to create a national ID for years, long before the 9-11 attacks. In fact, a 1996 bill sought to do exactly what the REAL ID Act does: transform state drivers’ licenses into de facto national ID cards. At the time, Congress was flooded with calls by angry constituents and the bill ultimately died.

Proponents of the REAL ID Act continue to make the preposterous claim that the bill does not establish a national ID card. This is dangerous and insulting nonsense. Let’s get the facts straight: The REAL ID Act transforms state motor vehicle departments into agents of the federal government. Nationalizing standards for driver's licenses and birth certificates in a federal bill creates a national ID system, pure and simple. Having the name of your particular state on the ID is meaningless window dressing.

Federally imposed standards for drivers' license and birth certificates make a mockery of federalism and the 10th amendment. While states technically are not forced to accept the federal standards, any refusal to comply would mean their residents could not get a job, receive Social Security, or travel by plane. So rather than imposing a direct mandate on the states, the federal government is blackmailing them into complying with federal dictates.

One overriding point has been forgotten: Criminals don’t obey laws! As with gun control, national ID cards will only affect law-abiding citizens. Do we really believe a terrorist bent on murder is going to dutifully obtain a federal ID card? Do we believe that people who openly flout our immigration laws will nonetheless respect our ID requirements? Any ID card can be forged; any federal agency or state DMV is susceptible to corruption. Criminals can and will obtain national ID cards, or operate without them. National ID cards will be used to track the law-abiding masses, not criminals.

UN Plans for Global Gun Control

2007-10-10T04:28:00.001-04:00

by Ron Paul, Dr. September 5, 2007

July 16, 2001

A UN conference on small arms trading began last week in New York, with the goal of creating global standards for the manufacture, sale, export, and possession of guns. While UN spokesmen claim that any proposals arising from the conference will not be legally binding, the organization's own website details an earlier conference in Vienna (March 2001) where delegates agreed to a "legally binding protocol against the illicit manufacturing of and trafficking in firearms" (italics added). Furthermore, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan has been outspoken in advocating global gun laws, even proposing that small arms be supplied to governments only, and not individuals (as though governments use weapons wisely!). So it's obvious that the UN ultimately seeks to impose global gun control on individuals everywhere, despite any benign rhetoric. Clearly, every American who cares about the 2nd Amendment and the steady erosion of gun rights should be very concerned by this latest UN outrage.

The gun control conference merely represents the newest UN threat to our national sovereignty. The Constitution clearly requires Congress to enact U.S. domestic laws. No treaty or international agreement can transfer this legislative power from Congress to UN bureaucrats, and the 2nd Amendment plainly prohibits restrictions on private gun ownership by U.S. citizens. Yet the trend toward unconstitutional international laws already is firmly established. The UN wants to generate the same acceptance for global gun laws that it has established for global environmental and labor laws. As the global government trend intensifies, the conflicts between internationalism and sovereign constitutional government will only increase. The UN gun control conference provides Congress and the American people with an opportunity to affirm the supremacy of the Constitution and the 2nd Amendment over the dictates of global gun-grabbers.

The role of small arms in defending against aggression should not be overlooked. Gun control proponents like to characterize light weapons as ineffective in wartime, but history proves they are critical to the self-defense of nations. For example, badly outnumbered and outgunned Afghan rebels succeeded in creating havoc for the massive invading Soviet army using only light rifles and even handguns. By contrast, Jewish civilians in Germany who had been stripped of all weapons were unable to mount any resistance to Hitler's terror. UN gun control advocates ignore history when they attempt to link guns only with crime, and never with heroic resistance to tyranny.

The simple truth is that the UN is not concerned with our Constitution or our system of government. It is concerned only with expanding its power. It's hardly surprising that global government planners seek to impose global gun control, because disarmed nations will be that much easier to rule. Remember, the UN has much more power today than anyone could have imagined 50 years ago. So while it may seem far-fetched today that the UN could ever force U.S. citizens to turn over their arms, the current gun control conference could be planting the seed for such tyranny in decades to come. UN supporters like to ridicule the notion that the UN represents the beginning of one-world government, but what other label can be applied to an organization that seeks global laws, global courts, centralized legislative power, and a worldwide army?

Ron Paul talks about the abusive Patriot Act! Vote in 08!

2007-10-10T04:28:00.000-04:00

Show your support for Ron Paul, get a wholesale Ron Paul T-shirt today!:
http://www.cafepress.com/voteronpaul08

Ron Paul talks about the abusive Patriot Act!

If you support liberty and an America you can be proud of, we all need to donate to this nobel man. I suggest $20 a/month or higher should you want to reach your maximum contribution limit of either $2,300 (single) or $4,600 (married). For as little as $5/week you can really change America!

Why the GOP Must Nominate Ron Paul

2007-10-10T00:55:00.000-04:00

Why must the Republican Party nominate a 72-year-old grandfather from the Gulf Coast of Texas, until the past few months little known outside his district, as its 2008 standard-bearer? Very simple: the alternative is eight years of President Hillary Clinton. That ought to be enough to get the attention of every conservative who happens upon these words, so let me explain.

It should come as no big revelation to anyone inside or outside of the Republican Party that the GOP has lost touch with its conservative roots. Massive deficit spending that would make Bill Clinton or Jimmy Carter blush; foreign adventurism beyond the wildest dreams of Woodrow Wilson or Teddy Roosevelt; more big government programs than FDR or LBJ (Google "Medicare expansion" for a massive example) ... the Republican Party of the early 21st century is clearly not your father's or grandfather's GOP.

There are no more Robert Tafts, no more Barry Goldwaters, not even any more Ronald Reagans (as imperfect as he turned out to be after reaching the White House) ... except one: Ron Paul. Dr. Paul (an OB/GYN who has delivered more than 4,000 babies) is the last, best hope for the GOP to reclaim its once-upon-a-time status as the party of limited government.

It isn't his status as the leading advocate of limited, constitutional government that makes Ron Paul a must-nominate for the GOP, though. It is true that in the long run, the Republican Party needs him to help it reclaim its spirit, and this indeed will be his lasting legacy. But, in the short run, the party needs him to win the 2008 election and save the country from another Clinton presidency that would be far worse than the first. (Unlike Bill, who was apparently mainly involved in politics to get the attention of the ladies, Hillary is a true believer in socialism; and, with a Democratic majority in Congress, she will have an excellent opportunity to expedite its widespread implementation in America.)

Fact one: Hillary Clinton will win the 2008 Democratic nomination. She is an experienced, cut-throat politician with deep ties in the party, and can take Barack Obama down pretty much any time she wants to. And John Edwards is not serious about pursuing the nomination. He is just positioning himself to be the VP nominee again, because in the wake of the 2006 Congressional elections he believes that Hillary will win the Presidency by taking a few key states where John Kerry fell short. Long story short: forget the others - Hillary is the woman to beat in 2008.

Fact two: The 2008 election will be won by the candidate who most credibly addresses the growing anti-war sentiment that has been embraced by the majority of the country's voters. (Google "2006 mid-term elections.) 70% or more of Americans want out of Iraq, and for many of them, it is the defining issue of the campaign. You may agree or disagree, but it's a fact and it's going to decide the 2008 Presidential election.

If it comes down to Hillary Clinton vs. any of the "establishment" Republican candidates, she wins by default. She may have voted for the war originally, but she will continue to claim that she was misled by the Republican administration, and that we should trust her to make things right. (Of course she won't really get us out of the Middle East mess, but Joe Six-Pack won't figure that out until after she wins the election.)

If any of the supposed "front runner" Republican candidates (Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney, John McCain, or Fred Thompson) wins the GOP nomination, Hillary Clinton is essentially a lock. Not only will she win over a sizable portion of the independent vote with her (perceived) status as "the anti-war candidate," but - simply put - the GOP will not turn out its base in sufficient numbers to win.

Nominate Rudy Giuliani? Conservative, red-state voters are not going to turn out to support a gun-grabbing Northern liberal faux Republican who dresses in drag and is a charter member of the Wife-Of-The-Month Club. The social conservatives, along with the fiscal conservatives and the key swing voters (libertarians and constitutionalists) will either stay home on Election Day or vote third party. Rudy won't even carry his home state, and ask Al Gore how that usually works out. Slam dunk, Hillary wins.

Nominate Mitt Romney? You get basically the same result as Giuliani without the (bogus) "America's Mayor" 9/11 cachet. Conservatives in the South and West won't turn out for the former governor of "Taxachusetts" who has flip-flopped on virtually every issue they hold dear. The fact that Romney is a Mormon won't help him with the mainstream Christian base, either. He probably can't win the GOP nomination, but even if he does, Romney is toast in the general election.

Nominate John McCain? Not gonna happen. His campaign has taken a nose dive from which it will be virtually impossible to recover. As of the end of the second quarter, even (supposed) long-shot Ron Paul had more cash on hand - and, when the third quarter numbers come in, McCain will be even further behind in the money game. He probably won't even be in the top five on the GOP side. Stick a fork in him, he's done. And even if he could pull off the apparently impossible and come back to win the Republican nomination, he loses to Hillary on the war and many domestic issues as well.

Fred Thompson? He's the last hope of those Republicans who are looking for a "mainstream" candidate to save them from looming, seemingly inevitable defeat in 2008. On the surface, he appears to have more of a chance than the previously mentioned "big three." After all, he has the "actor factor." It worked for Reagan and, more recently, Arnold Schwarzenegger in California - couldn't it work for Fred, too? Well, no, not this time around.

Like Ronald Reagan, Fred Thompson is reasonably good at reading a script. Unlike the Gipper, though, Fred is just awful at speaking extemporaneously. In case anyone was wondering why Thompson waited so long to declare his candidacy, it's obvious to those who know anything about his abilities and liabilities: he wanted to avoid as many debates as possible.

Like Obama on the Democratic side, Thompson is an empty suit. He looks reasonably presentable, but sooner or later he has to open his mouth, and when he does he doesn't say anything of substance. The less he speaks in public (especially with other candidates around to rebut him), the better for Fred. Unfortunately for Thompson, while he has so far been able to duck any direct confrontation with his GOP rivals, he won't be able to avoid debating Hillary if he wins the Republican nomination. And about five minutes into the first debate, with no "Law and Order" writers to put words in his mouth, it will be over. Game, set, match, Hillary.

When you look at it objectively, there isn't a single one of the "Big Four" GOP candidates who can beat Hillary Clinton head-to-head. And none of the "second tier" candidates (Huckabee, Brownback, Hunter,
Tancredo, et al) have stepped up to the challenge. Really, there is only one remaining viable Republican candidate: You guessed it, Ron Paul.

Only Ron Paul can take advantage of the Internet the way Howard Dean did before he imploded four years ago. Indeed, he has already captured the Internet ... the Ron Paul Revolution is already in full swing online. It sure was nice of Al Gore to invent the Net for Ron Paul supporters to take over, wasn't it?

Only Ron Paul can outflank Hillary Clinton both to the left on the war, and to the right on everything else ... which is the only winning strategy the Republicans can plausibly employ in 2008.

Only Ron Paul, who is truly pro-family (married to the same woman for over 50 years, with five children and 18 grandchildren - no "trophy wives" here) can motivate the socially conservative base to actually turn out and vote.

Only Ron Paul, who wants to eliminate the IRS (and a host of other federal agencies) and stop the Federal Reserve from devaluing our money through runaway, printing-press inflation, can motivate the fiscally conservative base to cast a GOP ballot in 2008.

Only Ron Paul can keep the Libertarians and Constitution Party members from splintering off to support their own third-party nominees rather than another neo-con, Bush clone Republican. (In fact, the 2004 nominees of the Constitution Party and the Libertarian Party, Michael Peroutka and Michael Badnarik, have both already endorsed Ron Paul's candidacy.) While the LP and CP may command only a small fraction of the overall vote, that may well be enough to turn the tide in a crucial state or two. Ask Al Gore if he could have used a few thousand of Ralph Nader's votes in 2000....

Yes, when you look at things objectively, there are only two candidates who can win the White House in 2008: Hillary Clinton and Ron Paul. The contrast could not be more stark, nor the results for the future of America more divergent. If you are a social or fiscal conservative, a libertarian, a constitutionalist, or just a concerned independent ... now is the time to consider your options and act accordingly while there is still time to affect the outcome.

Bill of Rights vs The Patriot Act

2007-10-07T21:04:00.000-04:00

The New World Order

2007-10-07T19:54:00.000-04:00

As the 20th-century idols of atheism, humanism and communism are falling worldwide a spiritual vacuum is left that must be filled. In the resulting contest for the souls and minds of Americans in this new world order, the Church faces formidable opponents in godless liberal socialists, globalists, New Age religion, Islam and Satanism.

At that time many will turn away from the faith and will betray and hate each other, and many false prophets will appear and deceive many people.
- Matthew 24:11

No longer are we only threatened from without by a group of balding hard-line Communists - we are now threatened from within - by a group of intelligent, well-dressed liberals who over the coming years intend to convince America and the nations of the world that the only way to lasting world peace is the establishment of a ...
"New World Order."

"New World Order," is a term used to describe the uniting of the world's superpowers to secure and maintain "global peace."

World leaders are excited at the prospects for peace and there has been much talk about entering a "new era" and about the establishment of a "New World Order."

Mikhail Gorbachev was the first world leader to come out publicly with talk of a "new world order," and he did so nearly two years before George Bush caught the vision.

In his historic address to the United Nations on December 7, 1988, the Soviet Prime Minister made this dogmatic and even prophetic statement: "Further global progress is now possible only through a quest for universal consensus in the movement towards a new world order."

George Bush proved to be a good and faithful servant of the "brotherhood" and as no one before him, had made the "One World" agenda his main focus.

Just before leaving for Helsinki, Finland, early in September 1990 to discuss the Persian Gulf crisis at his summit meeting with Soviet President Gorbachev, President George Bush expressed the hope that "the foundation for the new world order would be laid in Helsinki" and that it would be established under the United Nations.

At the news conference with Gorbachev following their historic meeting, President Bush declared optimistically: "If the nations of the world, acting together, continue as they have been we will set in place the cornerstone of an international order more peaceful than any that we have known."

Then in 1993, the New World Order was established as a legitimate national agenda - by a socialist Democrat, Bill Clinton.

Both George Bush and Bill Clinton were beholding to the same secret orders, codes and financiers, and as a result, probably engineered the change of Presidents by manipulating the American people to pull the plug on Bush. George Bush may have actually been running a campaign to LOSE the presidency.

Globalists welcomed this as democracy's finest hour - through manipulation, the democratic system installed a socialist, new age, one-world leader with the charismatic appeal of John F. Kennedy to do their bidding!

During Clinton's reign, New World Order Socialists publicly came out of the closet in the U.S. House of Representatives. The powerful and popular lobby called the Progressive Caucus now began openly espousing the principles of socialism and publicly signed onto the agenda of the Democratic Socialists of America.

Bill Clinton's favorite answer to all questions was government. Got a problem? Bill Clinton's new government program can fix it. Lost your job? Sign up for an employee retraining program. Feeling a little under the weather? A visit to your regional health alliance will shape you up. Having difficulty raising your children? Join our village because "It takes more than a family to raise children."

Originally created to defend and protect, our government was now being asked to provide. Today, many Americans think the government must be the answer to all societal problems. And as the problems grow, so must the government.

The governments ability to provide was demonstrated following the disaster left by hurricane Katrina. Thousands of seemingly helpless Americans were left languishing for days amidst chaos and anarchy before the government was willing to step in and help them. While there were some accounts of heroic individuals taking charge of their destiny and doing something to help themselves and others in a deplorable situation, many in New Orleans sat helplessly by waiting for the government to rescue them.

New Orleans quickly fell into anarchy as Mayor Ray Nagin whimpered and whined about the federal government not acting fast enough... even though he never exercised his responsibility of taking command and control of the situation. Corpses lay abandoned in street medians, fights and fires broke out and storm survivors battled for seats on the buses that would carry them away from the chaos. Over 200 of the Mayor's police force abandoned their posts in the bedlam and one tourist said when she asked a police officer for assistance -- his response was, "'Go to hell — it's every man for himself.'"

"We are redefining in practical terms the immutable ideals that have guided us from the beginning." - President Bill Clinton

Traditionally, Democrats have stood for big government, far-reaching federally controlled and federally funded programs and taxation at levels to match. One has to only scan through a few of Clinton's policies in economic, spending, and tax strategy to see that sovereignty and freedom were the items actually targeted for reduction.

In the simplest of terms, the sum of Bill Clinton's administration amounted to socialist inspired transfer of wealth and a federal government takeover of the management of American business, health care, education and the American family. Clinton's actions demonstrated that he envisioned much more than mere renewal or reform; he wanted to create an entirely new society controlled by a massive socialist government.

The Global Age is right upon us.
It is on the horizon of our lifetime.
This New World Order has been a long time in the making, its pieces fitting into place from divergent realms and different players.

It is not some prophetically speculative or futuristic fairy tale, but a real world reality. Gears and levers of history have been moved and adjusted, and a large-scale game of Monopoly has been played, with real currency and real assets shifting hands - a game with very real winners and losers.

It is a dangerous and risky undertaking, for they are vastly outnumbered. If average Americans understood their true agenda, there would be an uprising of revolutionary proportions. Therefore, secrecy of their true agenda is critical.

While it is nearly impossible to accurately trace the interlocking agendas of these organizations, the supernatural dimension is the one that gives the puzzle meaning. How else can you explain a master plan that has existed for hundreds of years?

Today, the power of a certain group of bankers is colossal according to Harvard and Princeton professor emeritus, Carroll Quigley, who confessed to being an insider and confidant of this elite group. He said of this group:

This network which we may identify as the Round Table Groups, has no aversion to cooperating with the Communists or any other group, and frequently does so. I know of the operations of this network because I have studied it for twenty years and was permitted for two years, in the early 1960s, to examine its papers and secret records. I have no aversion to it or to most of its aims and have, for much of my life, been close to it and to many of its instruments. (Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope (New York: The Macmillan Co., 1966), pg. 950.)

Quigley summarized the insider's grand plan: "Their aim is nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. The system was to be controlled in a feudalistic fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences."

Alas, a New World Order

A "Crisis" in America

To help complacent Americans accept the New World Order and new government intrusions into their private lives, Clinton propagandists instilled fear of just about every crisis they could conjure up.

The buzzword of the nineties was "crisis." We were told we had a health care "crisis" - justifying the government takeover of one-seventh of the U.S. economy. We were told we had a ecological "crisis" - justifying the government to impose far reaching new regulations on businesses. We were told we had a child care "crisis" - justifying the government to extend its reach into the family.

President Clinton used the strategic use of Executive Orders to bypass Congress and the will of the American people. In violation of the Constitutional balance of powers, Mr. Clinton said he would legislate by Executive Order if Congress did not bow to his legislative agenda. "I have a continuing obligation to act, to use the authority of the presidency and the persuasive power of the podium, to advance America´s interests...," said Mr. Clinton.

There was no debate, no media coverage, and no vote ... just President Clinton signing into law whatever he believed "is the right thing to do." "Stroke of the pen. Law of the land. Kinda cool," said Mr. Clinton´s senior advisor Paul Begala.

Failing to get this dictatorial mandate past Congress, liberals in the White House and Congress subverted the 10th Amendment by "greenmailing" the states into submission. The fascist strategy was to withhold tax revenues from the states, if states did not surrender constitutional rights and submit to legislative mandates voluntarily.

With the government takeover of much of the American economy, health care, and the family well under way, Socialists turned its attention next to a constitutional "crisis".

While the media and across America, attention was focused on butterfly-ballots and elderly voters who could not complete a ballot, beneath the surface was brewing yet another incremental attack on the Constitution of the United States of America by Socialists determined to quietly overthrow this country from within.

As has been their technique for years, Socialists understand they will not be able to radically change this country over night. Rather, theirs is a step-by-step incremental approach of first undermining the foundations of this country by creating doubt and distrust by the TV-educated and uninformed American public.

In November, 2000, as politicians and lawyers descend upon Florida for hand recounts upon recounts, Americans were fed a daily dose of propaganda designed to sway them away from the Constitutionally established norm of electing Presidents in this country.

This attack on the Constitution did not come as a surprise. It was simply part and parcel of an ongoing and systematic dismantling of our Constitution. And, folks, Democrats and Republicans alike are not only being duped by the Socialist propaganda, but in many cases are championing it.

Shaking America's Foundations

With the son of the man who introduced the New World Order to America now in place, George W. Bush's mandate was to further his father's agenda of extending government control over American citizens and empowering the tentacles of a One World Government into foreign lands.

Recognizing that no Socialist movement can succeed unless it has control over the movement of it's citizens and insider intelligence of those who oppose them, Globalists along with President G.W. Bush, needed another "crisis" to move their agenda forward.

That crisis came compliments of a group of Muslims, perhaps even orchestrated by the CIA and/or FBI on Sept. 11, 2001.

Following the events of that day, Americans have experienced a wholesale loss of personal freedom in payment for a security "crisis". In what could be described as a coup, globalists in our government created a new fascist government initiative dubbed, "Homeland Security" and have renewed their criminal government intrusion into the private lives of Americans once used by Richard Nixon in his war on anti-war protestors, environmentalists, and civil rights activists.

Globalists everywhere can celebrate the attack on America because their goals are being accomplished before their very eyes. Their desire to instill fear into the hearts of Americans has been accomplished as Americans fear flying and are willing to exchange their freedom for the false feeling of security. Their desire to destroy our free democratic system is accomplished as we allow the government to further intrude into our private lives in the name of "national security".

Shortly after 9/11, the Bush administration announced a "War on Terrorism", accompanied by the doctrine of 'pre-emptive' military action. Within weeks, Americans saw their constitutional guarantees of freedom stripped away by the "Patriot Act" with its plethora of legislative changes which significantly increased the surveillance and investigative powers of law enforcement agencies in the United States. The Act did not, however, provide for the system of checks and balances that traditionally safeguards civil liberties in the face of such legislation. Many of the provisions of the Act relating to electronic surveillance were proposed before September 11th, and were subject to much criticism and debate.

In the post 9/11 security environment, the idea of a National ID card has gained new momentum.
"He also forced everyone, small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark of his right hand or on his forehead, so that no one could buy or sell unless he had the mark..." - Revelation 13:16-17

It Will Never Happen Again

Following every contrived "crisis" in America, the response is always the same... to erode more liberties in exchange for the promise that it will never happen again. And the result is, it continues to happen again and again, only American citizens have LESS freedom.

We heard the same argument following the Columbine High School shootings in Colorado. The result was more school violence and our children being subjected to criminal scrutiny. We heard it following the rash of hijackings during the '70s and following the crash of TWA 800 and bombing of Pan Am 103. The result was that four airplanes could be hijacked simultaneously and used to attack Americas financial center and our nations capital. We heard the argument following the bombing in Oklahoma City. The result was the total destruction of the World Trade Center.

In the wake of the Globalist inspired attack on America, we keep hearing especially politicians saying "we must do what needs to be done so that it never happens again."
No, we don't need to ensure it never happens again... we need to get at the root of the problem and why we allowed it to happen at all.
Americans should look inward and ask why our great country tolerates terrorism in our own country while condemning it elsewhere.
We should be asking why we support despots throughout the world in exchange for oil and then wonder why the victims in those regions consider us the enemy.

While some may feel a sense of security giving up their rights as American citizens, the result will be... It WILL happen again. Only, next time, it will be bigger and even more dramatic. With the proliferation of portable nuclear weapons, it's not outside the sphere of possibility that one or more American cities will be laid waste in a nuclear holocaust.

Weapons of Mass Destruction

While Americans were freely giving up many of their Constitutional rights in exchange for so-called "security" and now needing a scapegoat to rationalize their loss, President Bush moved to the next stage of the globalist New World Order agenda.

According to an article in the Sunday Herald, President Bush and his cabinet were planning a premeditated attack on Iraq to secure 'regime change' long before the events of 9/11 and even before he took power in January 2001.

The blueprint for the creation of a 'global Pax Americana' was drawn up for Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, and others. The document, entitled Rebuilding America's Defences: Strategies, Forces And Resources For A New Century, was written in September 2000 by the neo-conservative think-tank Project for the New American Century (PNAC).

The New World Order plan shows Bush's cabinet intended to take military control of the Gulf region whether or not Saddam Hussein was in power. It says: 'The United States has for decades sought to play a more permanent role in Gulf regional security. While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein.'

The Republican Party's campaign platform in the U.S. presidential election, 2000 called for "full implementation" of the Iraq Liberation Act and removal of Saddam Hussein with a focus on rebuilding a coalition, tougher sanctions, reinstating inspections, and support for the pro-democracy, opposition exile group, Iraqi National Congress.

Whipping up fear into Americans once again, President George W. Bush and Tony Blair invaded Iraq on March 20, 2003, under the guise of eliminating weapons of mass destruction.
While NONE were found, both Bush and Blair continued their charge that WMD existed with the fervor that would make Mohammed Saeed al-Sahaf proud.

On 1 May 2003 George W. Bush announced the end of "Major combat" operations in the Iraq war, yet that did not mean that peace had returned to Iraq. Iraq has been subsequently marked by violent conflict between U.S.-led soldiers and forces described as insurgents, including but not limited to violence between Sunni and Shi'a Muslims within Iraq over long-standing cultural differences.

Arguments for the New World Order

This New World Order is anticipated with hope by an elite few operating in the shadows of history and far from public view. While these insiders have avoided the spotlights, others have been thrust to the forefront to evangelize the world with its message of planetary survival and has been heralded by a multitude from among the world's most esteemed and renowned leaders in every field. The arguments calling for its existence are formidable.

Salvation from Disaster

"John Lennon came up with the consummate creedal statement and description of what a New World Order would be like in his famous song, "Imagine." Lennon entreats the world to imagine with him no heaven, no countries, all people living in peace as one brotherhood of man, with the final and only option if it is to survive, a world united as one." (Tal Brooke, When The World Will Be As One, pg. 12)

The word "survival" is never far from the lips of those who wish to impose state power in order to protect us from disaster, named or unnamed.

Those who can be convinced that survival is at stake are likely to agree to almost any remedy, since extinction seems worse than all the alternatives. If placing extraordinary powers in the hands of political leaders will truly stave off the ultimate disaster, then those who demur can be made to appear as enemies of the human race. That is why arguments based on survival are so effective in persuading people to permit actions that violate their moral code.Herbert Schlossberg, Idols For Destruction, pp. 180-181.

One of the most compelling arguments for a new world order is the danger of global annihilation. The threat of war, especially atomic war, would cause those who have only the values of personal peace and prosperity to be ready for almost any kind of authoritarian government which would be able to remove the threat of war, particularly if (as Augustus did in ancient Rome) it was brought in while seemingly keeping the outward forms of constitutionality. Those who push this argument are at the forefront of global disarmament and a one-world "peace-keeping" military force, namely the United Nations.

* B.F. Skinner says repeatedly that we cannot be saved without turning ourselves over to controllers who will condition us to act in ways that are conducive to survival.
* Heilbroner says that only obedience to the political powers can save us.
* The second Humanist Manifesto declares that we cannot survive without "bold and daring" measures, by which it means collectivist ones.

Save the Planet

"There is the ecological argument of Greenpeace, The Club of Rome, and other groups stating that mankind has come of age - that now we must be planetary stewards of the earth's ecology before the world's ecosystem is irreversibly damaged from industrial pollution by selfish nations who are accountable to none but whose irresponsibility directly affects the lives of other nations." (Tal Brooke, When The World Will Be As One, pg. 9)

People have been becoming increasingly aware that the problems of external security which are facing their national governments are problems facing the world today - ozone depletion, air pollution, acid rain, nuclear accidents, over-population, drought, famine, international terrorism, international trading, multinational corporation, international communications, etc. - cannot be controlled or solved by individual national governments. So men are beginning to look beyond their national governments to a higher denomination of government - a world government with legislative, enforcement, and judicial influence on a world scale.

Economic Security

"There is the economic call for globalism. Virtually every major name in banking from Rockefeller to Rothschild to Robert McNamara (president of The World Bank) has spoken of the reality of an interlocking global economy - that what happens on Wall Street one minute is felt in London or Tokyo the next, that the complex jigsaw puzzle of world economy is moving into an oscillating ball that will eventually unify nations and currencies in the global marketplace, and that the economic forces of the earth are moving relentlessly toward a unified world system." (Tal Brooke, When The World Will Be As One, pg. 11.)

There are the social and political voices talking about the unfair distribution of wealth and resources - that a global system of sharing and redistribution could remedy the social problems of cross-national envy, and that if this were addressed, a major component of international strife and war would be removed forever.

The Global Village

"There is the "global village" argument of Marshall McLuhan - that modern technology has altered the landscape of the earth, and that what were once great natural barriers of distance, thought, and language have been collapsed by the myriad jets and airwaves filling the sky and the Information Superhighway." (Tal Brooke, When The World Will Be As One, pg. 10.)

To help complacent Americans accept the new government intrusions, Clinton propagandists instilled fear of just about every crisis they could conjure up.

The buzzword of the nineties was "crisis." We were told we had a health care "crisis" - justifying the government takeover of one-seventh of the U.S. economy. We were told we had a ecological "crisis" - justifying the government to impose far reaching new regulations on businesses. We were told we had a child care "crisis" - justifying the government to extend its reach into the family.

"It takes more than a family to raise children." [Hillary Clinton]

Hillary Clinton said in her speech at the 1996 Democratic Convention her belief that children should be raised by a "village."

Hillary Clinton argues, "Children should have a right to be permitted to decide their own future if they are competent." "Decisions about motherhood and abortion, schooling, cosmetic surgery, treatment of venereal disease, or employment, and others where the decision or lack of one will significantly affect the child's future should not be made unilatrally by parents."

The Clinton's not only redefined the family but they created an Orwellian euphemism for bureaucracy to replace it.

Hillary Clinton chaired the New World Foundation 1987-88, ranked by the Capitol Research Center as "one of the ten most liberal foundations in the United States." From 1986-92 she chaired the Children's Defense Fund (CDF), which promotes an amoral approach to sex education and other means of destroying the very moral values which most parents want to pass on to their children. The CDF agrees with the Clinton's and wants to redefine the family believing government can serve as surrogate parents (the "village"). That means that kids would no longer be primarily accountable to their parents. To whom would they be accountable to? The answer, of course, is the state. The benevolent state. The "VILLAGE," then, would transcend the Orwellian "Big Brother" role and become surrogate parent. It would grant your children "rights" and be their legal guardian.

Authoritarian and totalitarian regimes - be they fascist or communist in nature - have always sought to destroy the traditional family unit by severing the bonds between parents and their children, thereby increasing the power of the government. Quite simply, Donna Shalala, Hillary Rodham, and other modern statists believe they can raise your children better than you can. That's what they mean by "children's rights" - the rights of children to be liberated from the shackles of their evil parents.

Believing that it takes more than a family to raise children, Clinton's Big Government, "Village", turned the rhetoric to focus on Children. In almost every speech, on about any topic, in just about any context, Bill Clinton used that "powerful" emotion-filled statement, "for the children."

What they really meant is for parents to give government more of their income so that big wasteful government programs can continue. They speak of supporting the family but what they support is a kinder and gentler way of destroying the traditional family and raising up a village or commune that is in tune with their distorted vision of the new millennium.

Following a series of events orchestrated to coerce Americans to freely give up their Constitutional Rights, on January 24, 2003, President George W. Bush created the U.S. Department of Homeland Security to more effectively control public opinion through fear and intimidation and to control the free movement of American citizens.

Scripture tells us of the establishment of a New World Order by the Antichrist in the last days. Indeed, the devil must have a dictatorial form of government if he is to rule the world. Socialism offers the easiest route. It can be implemented in any government through legislation, slowly.

Scripture tells us of the establishment of a New World Order by the Antichrist

Signs of the Last Days: Technology

The book of Revelation reveals that the antichrist will be able to track and control all financial transactions and that NO MAN will be able to buy or sell anything unless he has the mark.

He also forced everyone, small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark of his right hand or on his forehead, so that no one could buy or sell unless he had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of his name. [Revelation 13:16-17]

Not until recent times did people understand how this prophecy could possibly come to pass. There was simply no way that anyone could control the buying and selling activities on such a large scale. Certainly it will be a monumental task to keep track of all men, and their financial transactions, all across the globe.

Advances in computer technology have placed the world on the verge of an identification system capable of monitoring virtually every human transaction - an ominous development for serious students of Bible prophecy. Modern technology has created a new electronic world without borders. With modern computer technology, satellites, and devices like the Global Positioning System device can track anyone within 3 feet anywhere in the world. And new developments in biometric and smart card technology make such a feat seem more plausible as well.

Since originally writing about these emerging technologies more than six years ago, the advancements in recent years have been breathtaking. Indeed, Anticrhist's world government is not only believeable but seems to have arrived.

Palm Beach-based Applied Digital Solutions unveiled the VeriChip immediately after the 9-11 tragedy. Similar to pet identification chips, the human VeriChip is a syringe-injectable radio frequency identification microchip that can be read from a few feet away by either a hand-held scanner or by the implantee walking through a "portal" scanner. Information can be wirelessly written to the chip, which contains a unique 10-digit identification number.

No one knows how the mark will be imprinted on the hand or the forehead and I am not saying everything described here will necessarily become the mark of the beast. Given rapidly evolving modern technology, if the Lord tarries a bit longer there may be some development that would fit the bill even more closely. However, there are some good candidates and numerous ways this could be accomplished today.

Subcutaneous implant

The technology now exists and has been successfully tested to allow an identification device of some type, including a tiny microchip, to be implanted under the skin of the hand.

Programmable subcutaneous visible implants could contain biosensors to monitor temperature and blood pressure, and display these readings -- clearly a medical advancement. But the devices could have a more serious purpose. They could be used for electronic tagging. Whenever anyone wanted to buy or sell someting, he could be required to wave his hand over a scanning device that would read the chip, identify the buyer or seller, and validate or invalidate the sale.

Interval Research (Palo Alto) has patented a "programmable tattoo." The biologically inert subcutaneous implant is constructed of a flexible material so as to conform to the skin's surface. The small liquid-crystal display can be inserted just beneath the skin (e.g., in place of a wrist watch). Because human skin is partially transparent, the display is clearly visible. The implant also includes a receiver for receiving programming information from a user, and a display for displaying the programming information through the skin. The display is connected to a control chip and power comes from a small battery. Both of these are implanted beneath the skin. Implanting is an outpatient operation and the battery can be recharged inductively, by holding the wrist near a charger.

We have already demonstrated our willingness to accept devices to electronically tag or track individuals. It has become quite commonplace, for example, for law enforcement agencies to require individuals to wear electronic bracelets in order to monitor their activities.

Digital Angel

The Digital Angel™ technology incorporates a microchip that can be worn close to the body and includes biosensors that can measure the biological parameters of the body and send the information with RFID (radio frequency identification) technology to a ground station or computer. It will also have an antenna that can receive signals from GPS satellites, thus pinpointing the location of the wearer.

According the the Digital Angel™ web site, "While a number of other tracking and monitoring technologies have been patented and marketed in the past, they are all unsuitable for the widespread tracking, recovery and identification of people due to a variety of limitations, including unwieldy size, maintenance requirements, insufficient or inconvenient power-supply and activation difficulties. For the first time in the history of location and monitoring technology, Digital Angel™ overcomes these limitations.

Some of it's potential uses, according the their web site includes: monitor patients by doctors, commodities supply chain management, locating people such as small children and the elderly, tracking parolees, people under house arrest, and individuals in witness protection programs, trace valuable items such as art pieces or computer equipment. Of particular interest is its application as an important security measure. It can carry personal identification information and transmit this information via wireless communication with personal computers.

The Digital Angel human implant, called VeriChips, was recently approved by the FDA for storing medical information and the company is going forward to market their implantable chips that would provide easy access to individual medical records. (WorldNetDaily, October 21, 2004)

Applied Digital Solutions, based in Delray Beach, Fla., expressed hope that such medical uses would accelerate the acceptance of under-the-skin ID chips as security and access-control devices. (The New York Times, October 14, 2004)

All it takes is a syringe-injected microchip implant for patrons of the Baja Beach Club in Barcelona, Spain to breeze past a "reader" that recognizes their identity, credit balance and even automatically opens doors to exclusive areas of the club for them. "By simply passing by our reader, the Baja Beach Club will know who you are and what your credit balance is," Conrad K. Chase explains.

Iriscans

Iriscan technology is already being introduced in financial organizations here and abroad that require nonintrusive, noncontact, and accurate electronic identification.
Iriscan technology identifies people by analyzing the unique pattern in the iris of the human eye. The iris is the colored ring of tissue that surrounds the pupil of the eye and is a complex combination of patterns that can be recorded and stored by the computer. The iris-recognition product captures a photographic image of the iris, analyzes its unique visual structure, and then compares it to previously stored Iriscodes for authentication of identity. ["Security for Your Eyes Only," Byte, May 1998.] Imagine this technology being in place providing access control to facilities and point-of-sale control. It's already in place at some bank ATMs.

Thermograms

Thermogram's are a type of imagery that translates a person's heat-emitting facial features into an infrared image. Registering the various heat peaks and valleys in surface, the thermogram looks like a colorful, face-shaped topographic map. Like a fingerprint, each person's face creates a unique thermal pattern. Captured by a special infrared camera, the image can be digitized and stored in a computer. Later, the person is rephotographed and the new thermal image is electronically compared with the old. ["Smile, You're on Thermogram," ID Systems, August 1995.]

Bar Codes

Bar codes are everywhere: they are as familiar as a trip to buy groceries. Now part of almost every package that crosses the supermarket, drugstore, and retail counter, bar codes stand poised to move into many other facets of society.

In their quest for better device identification, the U.S. Department of Defense and NASA are testing coding systems that pack in much more information than current bar codes. These new "two-dimensional" bar codes can squeeze in enough information to fit the Gettysburg Address into a two-inch square. "It's a technology that will open up a whole range of applications," says Richard Bravman, vice president of marketing for Symbol Technologies, Inc., in Bohemia, N.Y., one firm with a new bar code system.

This next generation of identification codes needs no centralized database. Instead, the symbol itself can contain all the necessary information, says Bravman. Thus these codes can help companies and the military keep better track of products that "cross organizational boundaries," he adds. When the device, substance or person travels to a new warehouse, store, hospital or location, all its data go along, in compact form, accessible to anyone with a machine that can read the symbol.

"It's a portable data file," says Doug Mohr, mechanical engineer in program development at the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory in Idaho Falls, who is evaluating these technologies for use by the federal government. At the Wilford Hall U.S. Air Force Medical Center in San Antonio, Tex., hospital administrators expect that within a year patients there will carry ID cards with medical histories and personal data encoded on the back. The hospital had evaluated other types of codes, including current bar codes, but discovered with the two-dimensional format that "we didn't need to tie up our database memory," says Lt. Col. Frank J. Criddle, an emergency room physician at Wilford Hall.

Miniaturized, some of these new codes can identify electronic components, jewelry or even medical devices. "It represents a giant step in component traceability," says Robert S. Anselmo, president of Veritec, Inc., in Chatsworth, Calif. He boasts that his company's symbols could fit on a grain of rice. Others say they can make their codes invisible to the eye but still readable to a scanner.

Smart Cards

The smart card - a piece of plastic with a computer chip on its face - is becoming entrenched in the United States with uses from defense and health care to retailing and transportation. It looks and acts like your average bank card, but it knows a lot more about you than you may think. The cards have replaced food stamps for many and meal tickets for students in college. Marines and peanut farmers are whipping them out for boot polish and crop reports. The Clinton Administration announced a nationwide system to use electronic banking technology to deliver billions of dollars in government benefits and President Clinton's proposed health-reform plan would have required every American to carry a health identification card bearing, at a minimum, his or her Social Security number.

For businesses, the card is a shortcut to valuable market research. With your card in its computer, a company could learn your ZIP code, shoe size, what magazines you subscribe to, or the date of your sporty sedan's last oil change, and respond accordingly. Already, the Vision marketing system for supermarkets is tailoring coupons to U.S. shoppers who use smart cards. Customers insert their Vision cards into computers at the checkout line. Then the card tracks purchases and supplies the customer with product coupons, allowing the store to collect marketing data and pitch its products more effectively.

New computerized systems are being implemented for drivers licenses. Instead of the cumbersome Polaroids, the new system will use a special camera that will store the photographic image that is on the card on a computer instead. Weight, eye color, and signature will be stored on a magnetic strip on the card as well as to a computer data base. Copies will be shared with the Kansas Bureau of Investigation, giving agents quick access to photographs of suspects and victims. The KBI will share copies with other law enforcement agencies. [Dave Ranney, "Say goodbye to Polaroids next time you get your license renewed," The Wichita Eagle, April 19, 1994]

Smart card acceptance in the U.S. has skyrocketed in recent years. The Smart Card Forum, a consortium of organizations utilizing smart card technology, forecasts between 1-1.5 billion smart cards will be in use by the year 2000.

At the Smart Card Alliance 2004 annual fall conference in San Francisco, a number of sessions indicated strong growth and continuing interest in applications for contactless payment devices for fare collection in mass transit systems across the country. During the conference, Ann Flemer, deputy director of operations for the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, the transportation planning, coordinating and financing agency for the nine-county San Francisco Bay area, gave an overview of her organization’s TransLink program, which is developing a single contactless payment system for the more than 20 transit agencies, including Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), San Francisco Municipal Railway (Muni) and Golden Gate Ferries, with 1.5 million daily users combined.

The U.S. State Department is switching over to new passports that will be fitted with chips using RFID, or radio frequency identification, technology. Reader devices at borders and customs checkpoints will be able to read the information stored on the chip, including the person's name, address and digital photo.

To increase use, card makers are forming alliances with companies that are closer to consumers. Micro Card Technologies Inc. supplies cards to Copicard Inc., which worked with the University of Calgary to convert student and staff IDs to smart cards and is doing the same at several U.S. colleges. Micro Card Vice President John Taskett said a few U.S. airlines briefly tested the smart cars for frequent flyers. Meanwhile, AT&T and Lockheed Corp. will jointly seek contracts for public highways where drivers would pay tolls with dashboard-mounted smart cards. A transmitter at the tollbooth would read the card as the car goes by.

The average American who has a dozen pieces of plastic in their pocket probably doesn't even know what a smart card is," said Nicolas Samaras, a technology analyst at Dataquest Inc. in San Jose, Calif. technology analyst at Dataquest Inc. in San Jose, Calif.

* Unlike today's financial cards, the smart card doesn't need a magnetic stripe on the back.
* Instead, it's equipped with a wiry silicon chip, often displayed at left center but sometimes hidden in the plastic. (Smart cards may also have embossed account numbers, holograms, graphics and photos on the front or back.)
* Like a bank card, the smart card is slipped into a computer. Then the owner enters a four - or five-digit ID number and uses the card to make purchases, convey information, or both.
* The card can hold three pages worth of typewritten data, compared to one line of type for a magnetic-stripe card. That means several accounts could be loaded onto one smart card, said Diane R. Wetherington, president of smart card systems at American Telephone & Telegraph Co. For example, the same card that checks out library books and buys clothes on credit could give an emergency-room clerk a patient's blood type insurance data and doctor's name. Each account would have a separate ID number, so the librarian couldn't see your blood type.

He also forced everyone, small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark of his right hand or on his forehead, so that no one could buy or sell unless he had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of his name. [Revelation 13:16-17]

Mark of the Beast?

I do not believe that the people developing this technology are necessarily conspirators purposely developing a system they know the antichrist will use for his own wicked purposes. These are men and women who are developing what, to the natural eye, are brilliant ideas for the world's future. Nor, do I believe that today, as I am writing this piece, that the technologies I write about are NOW the mark of the Beast. Rather, I see them as being potential technologies that need be in place in order for the Antichrist to accomplish his nefarious scheme.

So, what's so bad about these technologies. They improve our lives ... right?

David Chaum, a leading cryptographer, believes that an identification-based system could lay the groundwork for a future dictatorship. As a Jew, Chaum is sensitive to the memory of how government records enabled the Nazis to systematically identify Jews. He is also concerned that competition and self-interest could be causing many decision-makers in this new technology to miss the broader social consequences of their decisions.

One critic calls them "little brother in your wallet." David Banisar of the Electronic Privacy Information Center believes that the ability to monitor every transaction an individual makes will soon be in place. While tracking single transactions may be harmless, the combined trail left behind by an identification system that tracks all financial transactions could one day become a tyrant's dream. What's wrong with having a single card that contains all of your personal history from medical files to veteran's status to tax records to your bank balance and credit available? It's convenient, portable and you have at your fingertips access to all the details of your life. It's like carrying around a little computer that has stored every piece of information about you.

The Smart Card - A Way To Control The World?

President Bill Clinton proposed a health plan where there is a provision for a national health identification card, and eventually, a state-of-the-art, tamper-proof numbering system. This probably means an implantaiton device in the head, arm or somewhere on the body. No one will receive health coverage without a number. We are also headed for a cashless society - first by credit card, and later by a laser implantation beneath the skin. The European Community has already planned for this.

Technology is sold to the public for it's beneficial aspects.
The U.S. government plans to use smart cards to replace food stamps and reduce fraud. According to Vice President Gore, a national Electronic Benefits transfer system will reduce "waste, fraud and abuse," and cut red tape. With EBT there will be an electronic audit trail for every transaction, making fraud much easier to detect and prosecute," said Health and Human Services Secretary Donna Shalala. ["Welfare Benefits to be Delivered Electronically," The Wichita Eagle, June 1, 1994]

One concern about the smart card is privacy. Even though manufacturers are confident that accounts on the same card would remain separate, some are still unsettled that so much personal information could be stored on one little computer chip. What if the librarian could look up someone's doctor bills? And, asked Richard Civilles, program director at Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility, could using smart cards as national IDs give the government more control over citizens at employment agencies or highway checkpoints? What if the government denied a job or benefits to someone based on personal tidbits gleaned from the card?

But manufacturers are optimistic that consumers will warm up to smart cards as they become more prevalent, said Amy Wight Eckel, product manager for AT&T smart cards. "It looks and feels like a credit card," she said. "People already know how to use it."

The Coming New World Order

One of the goals of the Jeremiah Project is to warn people of the New World Order and One World Government, which is being set up today. One of the methods to be used to enslave every man, woman and child on the face of the earth will be a new money system that will be introduced taking us into a "The Cashless Society". Sadly, many people today find it difficult to believe that those days will ever come or if it does how they can be hurt by it.

Now listen, you rich people, weep and wail because of the misery that is coming upon you. Your wealth has rotted, and moths have eaten your clothes. Your gold and silver are corroded. Their corrosion will testify against you and eat your flesh like fire. You have hoarded wealth in the last days. [James 5:1-3]

The transition from the beneficial uses of technology to that of the Beast spoken of in Revelation 13 will happen quickly. Prophecy teachers have been speaking these words for many, many years. It is only just now, during your lifetime, that the prophecies are literally being fulfilled. You would be enlightened if you were to turn to the Word of God particularly the prophecies in the books of Daniel and Revelation and understand that these are no idle words of a mere man but these are words of the living God.

Loose Change 2nd Edition

2007-10-07T19:49:00.000-04:00

America's Police Brutality Now Pandemic

2007-10-07T19:15:00.000-04:00

By Paul Craig Roberts
September 28, 2007

Bush's "war on terror" quickly became Bush's war on Iraqi civilians. So far over one million Iraqi civilians have lost their lives because of Bush's invasion, and four million have been displaced. Iraq's infrastructure is in ruins. Disease is rampant. Normal life has disappeared.

Self-righteous Americans justify these monstrous crimes as necessary to ensure their own safety from terrorist attack. Yet, Americans are in far greater danger from their own police forces than they are from foreign terrorists. Ironically, Bush's "war on terror" has made Americans less safe at home by diminishing US civil liberties and turning an epidemic of US police brutality into a pandemic.

The only terrorist most Americans will ever encounter is a policeman with a badge, nightstick, mace and Taser. A Google search for "police brutality video" turns up 2,210,000 entries. Some entries are foreign and some are probably duplications, but the number is so large that a person could do nothing but watch police brutality videos for the rest of his life. A search on "You Tube" alone turned up 2,280 police brutality videos. PrisonPlanet has a selection of the most outrageous recent cases.

Police brutality has crossed the line from using excessive force against a resisting Rodney King to unprovoked gratuitous violence against persons offering no resistance, such as the elderly, women, students, and elected officials. Americans are not safe anywhere from police. Police attack Americans in university libraries, in public meetings, and in their own homes

Last week we had the case of the University of Florida student who was repeatedlt Tasered without cause for asking Senator Kerry some good questions in the question and answer period following Kerry's speech. Two days after the Florida student was gratuitously brutalized, Senate Republicans defeated Vermont Democrat Patrick Leahy's bill to restore habeas corpus protection.

A UCLA student was Tasered by police without cause for studying in the university library without having his student ID on his person. Following police orders to leave, the student was walking toward the door when police grabbed him and repeatedly Tasered him.

On September 19, 2007 a young woman was repeatedly Tasered without cause by a large brutal cop in a parking lot outside a nightclub in Warren, Ohio.

On September 14, 2007, Roseland, Indiana, city council member David Snyder was ejected from a council meeting by dictatorial council chairman Charlie Shields. Snyder had protested being limited to one minute to speak. Police goon Jack Tiller escorted Snyder out, and as Snyder exited the building, Tiller, following behind, pushed Snyder to the ground and without cause began beating Snyder in the head with a nightstick. Snyder was hospitalized.

Local TV news stations throughout the US offer an endless stream of police brutality videos, which are then posted on the stations' web sites, often with an opportunity for citizens to express their opinion of the incidents.

There are many disturbing aspects to police brutality cases.

One disturbing aspect is that the police always arrest the people that they have gratuitously brutalized. There was no justification whatsoever to arrest Councilman Snyder, or the UCLA student, or the University of Florida student. The cops committed assault against innocent citizens. The cops should have been arrested for their criminal acts. Instead, the cops cover up their own crimes by arresting their victims on false charges that are invented to justify the unprovoked police violence against citizens.

Another disturbing aspect is that no one tells the police to stop the brutality. "Free" Americans are so intimidated by police that on February 19 of this year male customers in a Chicago bar stood aside while a drunk cop weighing 251 pounds beat a 115-pound barmaid, knocking her to the floor with his fists and repeatedly kicking her, for obeying the bar rules and not serving him more drinks.

Yet another disturbing aspect is that a minority of citizens will justify each act of police brutality no matter how brutal and how unprovoked. For example, WNDU.com's poll of its viewers found that 64.2 percent agreed that Snyder was a victim of police brutality, but 27.8 percent thought that Snyder got what was coming to him. "Law and order conservatives" and other authoritarian personalities invariably defend acts of police brutality. Perhaps the police brutality pandemic will bring the day when we will be able to say that a civil libertarian is a law and order conservative who has been brutalized by police.

The most disturbing aspect is that the police usually get away with it.

I remember decades ago when civil libertarians in New York City tried to stop police brutality by establishing civilian review boards to introduce some accountability into the police's interaction with civilians. Law and order conservatives at William F. Buckley's National Review went berserk. Accountability was "second-guessing" the police. The result would be a crime wave. And so on.

Police forces have always attracted bullies with authoritative personalities who desire to beat senseless anyone who does not quake in their presence. In the past, police could get away with brutalizing blacks but not whites. Today white citizens are as likely as racial minorities to be victims of police brutality.

The police are supreme. The militarization of the police, armed now with military weapons and trained to view the general public as the enemy, against whom "pain compliance" must be used, has placed every American at risk of personal injury and false arrest from our "public protectors."

In "free and democratic America," citizens are in such great danger from police that there are websites devoted to police brutality with online forms to report the brutality.

Nine years ago Human Rights Watch published a report entitled, "Shielded from Justice: Police Brutality and Accountability in the United States." The report stated:

"Police abuse remains one of the most serious and divisive human rights violations in the United States. The excessive use of force by police officers, including unjustified shootings, severe beatings, fatal chokings, and rough treatment, persists because overwhelming barriers to accountability make it possible for officers who commit human rights violations to escape due punishment and often to repeat their offenses. Police or public officials greet each new report of brutality with denials or explain that the act was an aberration, while the administrative and criminal systems that should deter these abuses by holding officers accountable instead virtually guarantee them impunity.

"This report examines common obstacles to accountability for police abuse in fourteen large cities representing most regions of the nation. The cities examined are: Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, Detroit, Indianapolis, Los Angeles, Minneapolis, New Orleans, New York, Philadelphia, Portland, Providence, San Francisco, and Washington, D.C. Research for this report was conducted over two and a half years, from late 1995 through early 1998.

"The brutality cases examined, which are set out in detail in chapters on each city, are similar to cases that continue to emerge in headlines and in survivors' complaints. It is important to note, however, that because it is difficult to obtain case information except where there is public scandal and/or prosecution, this report relies heavily on cases that have reached public attention; disciplinary action and criminal prosecution are even less common than the cases set out below would suggest."

There is no way to hold police accountable when the president and vice president of the United States, the attorney general, and the Republican Party maintain that the civil liberties and the separation of powers mandated by the US Constitution must be abandoned in order that the executive branch can keep Americans safe from terrorists.

Even before the "war on terror," federal police murdered 100 people in the Branch Davidian compound at Waco, and no one was held accountable.

Who is a terrorist? If the police and the US government have the mentality of airport security, they cannot tell a terrorist from an 86-year old Marine general on his way to give a speech at West Point. Retired Marine Corps General Joseph J. Foss was delayed and nearly had his Medal of Honor confiscated. Airport security regarded the pin on the medal as a weapon that the 86-year old Marine general and former governor of South Dakota could use to hijack an airliner and commit a terrorist deed.

In America today, every citizen is a potential terrorist in the eyes of the authorities. Airport security makes this clear every minute of every day, as do the FBI and NSA with warrantless spying on our emails, postal mail, telephone calls, and every possible invasion of our privacy. We are all recipients of abuse of our constitutional rights whether or not we suffer beatings, Taserings, and false arrests.

The law makes it impossible for Americans to defend themselves from police brutality. Law and order conservatives have made it a felony with a long prison sentence to "assault a police officer." Assaulting a police officer means that if a police thug intends to beat your brains out with his nightstick and you disarm your assailant, you have "assaulted a police officer." If you are not shot on the spot by his backup, you will be convicted by a "law and order" jury and sent to prison.

No matter how gratuitous and violent the police brutality, a "free" American citizen can defend himself only at the expense, if not of his life, of a long stay in prison. Osama bin Laden must wish that he had such power over Americans.

Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan Administration.

A Growing Threat Police Vs The People

2007-10-07T19:13:00.000-04:00

By now, most discriminating news junkies who seek and obtain real news via the Internet, news based on facts and truth, have seen and reviewed repeatedly the incident at the University of Florida involving journalism student Andrew Meyers and the campus cops. Of special note was the tiny little girl dressed up in a policeman's uniform enjoying her fabulous opportunity to torture the enemy: a young, white American male simply trying to voice his opinion. It appears that the little girl is the one who began torturing the male student and was thrilled by his screams of pain.

As a cacophony of protest grows over this clear and obvious demonstration of police brutality, it has, however, taken on the same kind of emotional, mindless reaction on the part of those Americans witnessing this now-sanctioned torture of an unarmed, helpless individual, helpless after having been totally subdued by five or six nasty uniformed meatballs best described as un-American, uniformed fascist goons. They were piling on once they had their victim pinned to the floor and justified using taser torture to "control" the "poip" as these mindless meatballs would probably offer.

The mindless reaction becomes such when instead of differentiating right from wrong, or justice from licensed force, many observers of this incident will assign political instead of moral interpretation as concerns both the justification for the disturbance as well as the overreaction by the uniformed goons.

If one denotes a quality of anger in my rant, it's because I am angry that yet another incident of police brutality has occurred in front of a crowd of peaceful citizens seeking only to be left alone by sub-cretiniod, mindless, mental midgets and little girls dressed up as police relishing their authority and license to terrorize and threaten peaceful citizens.

Only a few weeks earlier, I experienced the agonizing mental anguish viewing a video of a human being suffering torture, also by stomping, kicks to the groin, knees in the kidneys, and of course, electric tasering by yet another slightly built female make-believe cop. A black man in custody in a Mississippi jail suffered the same fate as Meyers, but because only a video camera was present, a device whose evidence was under the control of the "authorities," the prison staff had a blast stomping, torturing and fatally maiming their victim. He was arrested for a misdemeanor, probably some lively celebration after the Superbowl a couple years back. Kinda reminds me of the Boston killer cop who shot a college girl in the eye with a teargas exploding ball for celebrating the Boston Red Sox victory in the World Series a while back.

It appears that tasers are the favorite torture weapon of uniformed male impersonators because they lack both the size and the strength of adult males. The Mississippi torture-murder of Jesse Lee Williams, Jr., 40, by more than a half dozen "law enforcement" sheriff's deputies, was indeed a horror show. An in-house quick frame-by-frame camera showed the uniformed Nazi goons "restraining" Williams in precisely the same manner as was the case with Meyers with the UF campus cops. In both cases, the victim of the "police" was already restrained by handcuffs, ropes and other devices. In the UF case, the little girl cop actually unholstered and drew her military style 9 mm or .40 caliber semi-automatic handgun as shown on the You Tube video. Myers is lucky the little girl didn't shoot him in the head for resisting.

It should be increasingly clear that police brutality in America is reaching crisis proportions. And for some reason, politicians and citizens are doing absolutely nothing about it. We must honor the police they perform a tough job! Yeah, and massacring over one million Iraqis is "hard work!"

As stated, anyone watching the UF-Meyers incident cannot deny that it culminated in a demonstration of police brutality, but those websites of the alternate media that aired the video generally left little room for honest interpretation. In the first place, the university is a bastion of higher learning; free and open discussion and inquiry are supposed to be accessible, especially to the members of the student body. Restraining one's right to speak is not only in violation of the First Amendment, but it is morally and educationally wrong in such an institution.

It is every bit as wrong as Jewish gangster Abraham Foxman and his ADL [Anti-American Defamation League] from silencing Jewish Professor Tony Judt and Professors Mearsheimer and Walt from debating their views in public and campuses of higher learning concerning domination and control of American government by Israel and its powerful lobby. But free and open debate is just that it should be an opportunity for the free and open discussion by all who wish to speak and to be heard.

The problem with Andrew Meyers' approach is that his very demeanor precluded precisely the intent of the Kerry presence. Meyer was given more than an opportunity to pose his question or questions. Let us just suppose that Meyers had asked one question of Kerry, and that Kerry responded. Perhaps Meyers would have followed up with yet another question. And perhaps Kerry would have responded again. But let's face it realistically: what would have happened if Meyers attempted yet a third question? Would it have been obvious that Meyers was hogging the microphone? Would it be clear that he was doing just the opposite of allowing free and open debate? When was someone else to get a chance to question Kerry who was probably speaking under a time constraint?

Meyers' deliberate and prepared rant [book in hand] prevented free and open discussion. He was indeed creating a disturbance. He was asked to stop, at least twice. When he ignored a rightful order by police to stop shouting and leave the premises, he fought off police and ran forward to the stage. And on that stage was a public figure, a figure that could potentially be assassinated for his prominence in American politics, the latter an increasingly volatile undertaking. Meyers shoved them away raised his arms, and did indeed resist. Period, but not end of discussion.

Campus police had him down. Why were they torturing him? Why didn't they just continue dragging him kicking and screaming out of the auditorium? This was clearly a demonstration of police brutality; yet, there is something not completely right here. Considering police brutality in America is rising sharply, why would an individual deliberately set them off? Why would Meyers fail to "psych out" the half-pint female cop with the big military pistol strapped to her tiny torso? Are we expected to believe that this 21-year-old college man couldn't figure out that these fascist goons would just love to act out their police state fantasies? Nonsense!

In retrospect, it would appear this entire incident was staged. Meyers was deliberately goading the campus cops; the video clearly shows this. But the demonstration of police brutality is nevertheless very disturbing. As we consider this incident, more and more incidents of police brutality are migrating from the pages of the remote sites of the alternate media and making their way to the forefront of heavily trafficked websites. That is not a good thing. The increasing incidents of taser deaths demands that police be disarmed of these weapons, and that officers be removed from law enforcement and be prosecuted for the use of torture after suspects have been restrained in the normal acceptable fashion.

The official response in this case will be the usual time worn two pronged standard response: either they were following "accepted" standard procedures, or the officers involved need more comprehensive training. Both explanations are no longer acceptable, especially against the backdrop of the USA PATRIOT Act and the Military Commissions Act.

© THEODORE E. LANG 9/19/07 All rights reserved

Ted Lang is a political analyst and freelance writer.

Federal Approval To Travel WITHIN The US Soon?

2007-10-07T19:03:00.000-04:00

Your government (meaning the Department of Homeland Security) is up to no good. February 2008, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) will implement their ¨Advance Passenger Information System (APIS),¨ the gist of which is that you will need permission from the United States Government to travel on any air or sea vessel that goes to, from or through the U.S. The travel companies will not be able to issue a boarding pass until you are cleared by DHS. This applies to ALL passengers, US citizens and visitors alike. And how do you get said permission to travel? That´s for your government to know and you to never find out.

Now TSA proposes to do for domestic travel what APIS will do for international routes. That´s what I said: the new TSA rule would require that you obtain PERMISSION to travel within the U.S. Here is the summary of their proposed rules, which seem so reasonable, couched as they are in the
blandness of governmenteez [emphasis added]. The Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act (IRTPA) requires the Department of Homeland
Security (DHS) to assume from aircraft operators the function of conducting pre-flight comparisons of airline passenger information to Federal Government watch lists for international and domestic flights.

We propose that, when the Secure Flight rule becomes final, aircraft operators would submit passenger information to DHS through a single DHS portal for both the Secure Flight and APIS programs. This would [result] in one DHS system responsible for watch list matching for all aviation passengers.

Don´t you feel great knowing that your government will use economies of scale to protect you?

Edward Hasbrough states that these rules are more insidious than merely complying to demands for ¨Your papers please.¨ He states, The proposal ... require[s] that travellers display their government-issued credentials not to government agents but to airline personnel (staff or contractors), whenever the DHS orders the airline to demand them. But since the orders to demand ID of [certain passengers] will be given to the airline in secret, ... travellers will have no way to verify whether ... demands for ID are actually based on government orders.

Think about that: you will not be allowed to verify if the person demanding your papers is actually authorized to do so. In addition, the airlines or their contractors (or sub or even sub sub contractors) have the right, under the proposed rules, to do anything they like with your personal information including: keep copies of your passport ... as long as they like, use it, publish it, broadcast it, sell it, rent it, or pass it on to whomever they please.... [T]hey would have no obligation to get your permission for any of this.

Aside from the privacy issue, this is the DHS. Their past performance is an indication of future returns and we can look forward to true travel nightmares beginning February 19, 2008. Just think about the mess that occurred when CBP demanded that travelers to Canada and Mexico have a passport. Multiply that by orders of magnitude to imagine what travelers will be facing. If you can, please attend the TSA hearings on Thursday (Grand Hyatt Washington, 1000 H Street, N.W. beginning at 8:00am). If you can´t attend in person, you have until October 22, 2007 to submit written comments through the Docket Management System. The docket number is TSA-2007-28572.

Impeach Bush NOW!

2007-07-30T12:46:00.001-04:00