Thursday, September 25, 2008

Using the Crisis To Move Toward One World Government.

The socialists longing for one world government are moving in for the kill.....

George Soros calls for World Currency and end of the dollar.

U.N. Cheif calls for global leadership over monetary system.

China calls for new world order for global currency

China Halts Loans to the US in order to weaken the dollar and move us toward world currency.

Chavez calls for world wide socialism to save us.

Wednesday, September 24, 2008

Can you handle the TRUTH?

This amazing video will open your eyes to the truth.... if you can handle it.

Please Click on the picture to watch

Ron Paul On The Bailout.... MUST READ

Wednesday, September 24, 2008

Dear Friends,

Whenever a Great Bipartisan Consensus is announced, and a compliant media assures everyone that the wondrous actions of our wise leaders are being taken for our own good, you can know with absolute certainty that disaster is about to strike.

The events of the past week are no exception.

The bailout package that is about to be rammed down Congress' throat is not just economically foolish. It is downright sinister. It makes a mockery of our Constitution, which our leaders should never again bother pretending is still in effect. It promises the American people a never-ending nightmare of ever-greater debt liabilities they will have to shoulder. Two weeks ago, financial analyst Jim Rogers said the bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac made America more communist than China! "This is welfare for the rich," he said. "This is socialism for the rich. It's bailing out the financiers, the banks, the Wall Streeters."

That describes the current bailout package to a T. And we're being told it's unavoidable.

The claim that the market caused all this is so staggeringly foolish that only politicians and the media could pretend to believe it. But that has become the conventional wisdom, with the desired result that those responsible for the credit bubble and its predictable consequences - predictable, that is, to those who understand sound, Austrian economics - are being let off the hook. The Federal Reserve System is actually positioning itself as the savior, rather than the culprit, in this mess!

• The Treasury Secretary is authorized to purchase up to $700 billion in mortgage-related assets at any one time. That means $700 billion is only the very beginning of what will hit us.

• Financial institutions are "designated as financial agents of the Government." This is the New Deal to end all New Deals.

• Then there's this: "Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency." Translation: the Secretary can buy up whatever junk debt he wants to, burden the American people with it, and be subject to no one in the process.

There goes your country.

Even some so-called free-market economists are calling all this "sadly necessary." Sad, yes. Necessary? Don't make me laugh.

Our one-party system is complicit in yet another crime against the American people. The two major party candidates for president themselves initially indicated their strong support for bailouts of this kind - another example of the big choice we're supposedly presented with this November: yes or yes. Now, with a backlash brewing, they're not quite sure what their views are. A sad display, really.

Although the present bailout package is almost certainly not the end of the political atrocities we'll witness in connection with the crisis, time is short. Congress may vote as soon as tomorrow. With a Rasmussen poll finding support for the bailout at an anemic seven percent, some members of Congress are afraid to vote for it. Call them! Let them hear from you! Tell them you will never vote for anyone who supports this atrocity.

The issue boils down to this: do we care about freedom? Do we care about responsibility and accountability? Do we care that our government and media have been bought and paid for? Do we care that average Americans are about to be looted in order to subsidize the fattest of cats on Wall Street and in government? Do we care?

When the chips are down, will we stand up and fight, even if it means standing up against every stripe of fashionable opinion in politics and the media?

Times like these have a way of telling us what kind of a people we are, and what kind of country we shall be.

In liberty,

Ron Paul

McCain To Clean Up Washington? YEAH RIGHT!



Anyone who hasn't watched "Money As Debt," an animated DVD by Paul Grignon, should consider purchasing this extraordinary explanation of money's origin in an economy totally dependent on debt. Almost everyone has seen footage of federal printing presses cranking out paper money, and some of us have even visited a government mint or two and have observed the process firsthand. But like so many other illusions with which the U.S. economy is replete, money is not created by government printing presses.

"Money As Debt" is not entertainment-far from it. The film offers amazingly elementary facts about the creation of money in the United States, narrated by a soothing voice, which could make for a bland presentation, yet the film's message is anything but vapid. In fact, if it doesn't leave your blood boiling, it behooves you to check your vital signs.

Beginning with the most fundamental question of all, Grignon asks: Where does money come from? The answer to this question will almost never be found in grammar school-or even college. What we aren't told in formal education is that money is created by central banks.

Banks create money, not from their own earnings or from the funds deposited by customers, but from the borrowers' promises to repay loans. Most importantly, borrowers not only promise to repay, but to repay with interest, and the bank writes the amount of money of both into the borrower's account.

Grignon opens with a story from antiquity. In the days before paper money, goldsmiths produced gold coins and kept them safe for the purchaser in the same way that banks hold deposits today. These goldsmiths soon noticed, however, that purchasers rarely came in for their actual gold and almost never all at the same time. So the gold merchants began issuing claim checks for the gold which made the exchange of gold in the marketplace easier and less cumbersome. Thus, paper money was born which made doing business much more convenient.

Eventually, goldsmiths began loaning money to customers and charging interest on the loans, and borrowers began asking for their loans in the form of claim checks. The goldsmith shared interest earnings with depositors, but since no one actually knew how much gold he was holding, he got the idea that he could lend out claim checks on gold that wasn't actually there and soon started becoming enormously wealthy from the interest paid on gold that didn't exist.

Thus began the power to create money out of nothing, but it wasn't long before bank runs began, and banking regulations evolved regarding how much money could be lent out. However, the regulations allowed a ratio of 9 to 1-that is, banks could lend out 9 times the amount of the deposits that were already there. This policy has come to be known as Fractional Reserve Banking. Regulation also arranged for central banks to support local banks with emergency infusions of gold, and only if there were many runs at once would the system crash.

Fast forward to 1913 when that so-called progressive president, Woodrow Wilson, signed into law the Federal Reserve Act which created the banking cartel now in charge of America's money system.

For those who have not seen Aaron Russo's DVD "Freedom To Fascism" - run, don't walk to see or purchase it. It is required viewing for understanding the Federal Reserve System and the power it has over the U.S economy and over our individual lives. Very few Americans know how money is created and even fewer know how the Fed originated and what it actually does. Does anyone really believe this is an "accident"? As the media guru Marshall McLuhan is reported to have said, "Only the small secrets need to be protected. The big ones are kept secret by public incredulity."

Whereas U.S. paper currency used to be backed by gold, that is no longer the case, and we have instead a fiat currency backed by nothing except the word of the Federal Reserve that the money is worth its stated value. Moreover, money today is created as debt, that is, money is created whenever anyone takes a loan from a bank. In fact, every deposit becomes a potential for a loan-a process which can be and is repeated many times, ultimately creating infinite amounts of money from debt.

Whereas the 9 to 1 ratio reigned at the beginning of banking regulation, today in some banks, ratios are as high as 20 to 1 or 30 to 1, and frighteningly, some banks have no reserves at all!

The bottom line is that banks can create as much money as we can borrow!

One wonders how individuals, banks, governments, and other entities can all be in debt at the same time, owing astronomical amounts of money. This question is answered when we consider that banks don't lend actual money; they create it from debt, and since debt is potentially unlimited, so is the supply of money.

But what is so wrong with this scheme? Hasn't it been working all these years? Actually, there are several things very wrong with it.

The first issue is that the people who produce the real wealth in the society are in debt to those who lend out the money in that society. Moreover, if there were no debt, there would be no money.

Most of us have been taught that paying our debts responsibly is good for ourselves and for the economy. We imagine that if all debts were paid off, the economy would improve. In terms of individual debt, that's true, but in terms of the overall economy, the exact opposite is true. We are continually dependent on bank credit for money to be in existence-bank credit which supplies loans. Loans and money supply are inextricably connected, and during the Great Depression, the supply of money plummeted as the supply of loans dried up.

Secondly, banks only create the amount of the principal of loan. So where does the money come from to pay the interest? From the general economy's money supply, most of which has been created in the same way.

A visual image is helpful. Imagine two pools of water-one full and one empty. The pool with water in it represents the amount of the principal of a loan; the empty pool represents principal plus interest. The pool of principal has only a certain amount of water in it, so that it can't possibly fill up the other pool of principal plus interest. The rest of the water needed to fill the pool doesn't actually exist and has to be acquired from somewhere.

The problem is that for long-term loans, the interest far exceeds the principal, so unless a lot of money is created to pay the interest, a lot of foreclosures will result. In order to maintain a functional society, the foreclosure rate must be low, so more and more debt must be created which means that more and more interest is created, resulting in a vicious and escalating spiral of indebtedness.

Furthermore, it is only the lag time between the time money is created to the time debt is repaid that keeps the overall shortage of money from catching up and bankrupting the entire system. It takes only a few second of reading the headlines of the financial pages during this month, August, 2007, to notice that foreclosure rates and lag time are threatening to meltdown the entire U.S. economy. The preferred method of the Federal Reserve and central banks addressing this calamity is, yes, you guessed it: to create more debt. The lowering of interest rates in recent years, the bombardment of credit card applications we find regularly in our mailboxes, the red ink in which the United States government is drowning are all an attempt to stave off the collapse of the entire system.

Can any sane human being believe that this situation can persist forever? What is the inevitable outcome of a fiduciary game of musical chairs? Monetary historian, Andrew Gause, answered this question:

One thing to realize about our fractional reserve banking system is that, like a child's game of musical chairs, as long as the music is playing, there are no losers.

And finally, a system based on fractional reserve banking is, to say the least, not sustainable because it is predicated on incessant growth. Perpetual growth requires perpetual use of resources and the constant conversion of precious resources into garbage just to keep the system from collapsing.

Grignon suggests that in order to begin addressing and resolving the nightmare of money as debt, we must ask four pivotal questions:

1) Why do governments choose to borrow money from private banks at interest when governments could create all the interest-free money they need themselves?

2) Why create money as debt at all? Why not create money that circulates permanently and doesn't have to be perpetually re-borrowed in interest?

3) How can a money system, dependent on perpetual growth, be used to build a sustainable economy? Perpetual growth and sustainability are fundamentally incompatible.

4) What is it about our current system that makes it totally dependent on perpetual growth? What needs to be changed to allow the creation of a sustainable economy?

A crucial assumption that must be questioned is the practice of usury or the charging of interest for lending money. Grignon asserts that it is a moral and a practical issue because it necessarily results in lenders ending up with all the money, particularly when foreclosures happen. Not only is debt deplorably profitable for lenders in terms of interest and service charges, but when borrowers cannot pay, as in the case of housing foreclosures, lenders walk away with the proceeds. In a recent article "Panic On Wall St.", Andrew Leonard explains how obscenely advantageous subprime and liar loans have been for lenders and provides damning evidence to support the long-time assertions by Catherine Austin Fitts that the housing bubble has been engineered by centralized financial systems.

In a transformed economy, which I do not anticipate happening in the twenty-first century, banks would exist as non-profit services to society-lending without charging interest at all. But, as Grignon says, if it's the fundamental nature of the system that's causing the problem, then tinkering with the system can't solve the problem. It must be replaced.

One solution might be the replacement of paper dollars with precious metals, which of course, could once again become cumbersome and inconvenient, unless the economic system had experienced collapse and digital and paper transactions were no longer possible.

Perhaps the best solution offered by "Money As Debt" is the creation of locally-based barter money systems in which debt is repaid by hours of work valued at a dollar figure. Additionally, government spending on infrastructure, not using borrowed money, would also create value locally and nationally.

The Federal Reserve banking cartel has been shrouded in secrecy and lack of information among the American people regarding its creation and functioning. One American president appeared to have understood it very well:

Whoever controls the volume of money in our country is absolute master of all industry and commerce...when you realize that the entire system is very easily controlled, one way or another, by a few powerful men at the top, you will not have to be told how periods of inflation and depression originate.

~James Garfield, 20th President

Assassinated, 1881

"Money As Debt" is not only a must-see for any American who wants to be politically and economically literate, but is particularly crucial for high school and college students to see in order for them to understand how the money works in the United States. Yet we should not assume that the film's simplicity of presentation ranks it as less than adult because most adults in this nation are clueless regarding the connection between money and debt.

I personally hold no hope of changing the money/debt system which is truly the eight-hundred-pound gorilla in the American economic landscape. What I do envision, and what must happen, in my opinion, is its total collapse, whether gradual or sudden, so that the transformation and relocalization of the nation's economic system will be possible, which it is not in the current milieu. However, what we are presently witnessing in the bursting housing bubble and credit crisis may well be the beginning of the end of "money as debt."

Suggested Reading:
The Creature From Jekyll Island, by G. Edward Griffin
Secrets Of The Temple: How The Federal Reserve Runs The Country, by William Greider

Tuesday, September 23, 2008

Homeland Security Wants To Read Your Mind.

Homeland Security is now testing the next generation of security screening — a body scanner that can read your mind.

Most preventive screening looks for explosives or metals that pose a threat. But a new system called MALINTENT turns the old school approach on its head. This Orwellian-sounding machine detects the person — not the device — set to wreak havoc and terror.

MALINTENT, the brainchild of the cutting-edge Human Factors division in Homeland Security's directorate for Science and Technology, searches your body for non-verbal cues that predict whether you mean harm to your fellow passengers.

It has a series of sensors and imagers that read your body temperature, heart rate and respiration for unconscious tells invisible to the naked eye — signals terrorists and criminals may display in advance of an attack.

But this is no polygraph test. Subjects do not get hooked up or strapped down for a careful reading; those sensors do all the work without any actual physical contact. It's like an X-ray for bad intentions.

Currently, all the sensors and equipment are packaged inside a mobile screening laboratory about the size of a trailer or large truck bed, and just last week, Homeland Security put it to a field test in Maryland, scanning 144 mostly unwitting human subjects.

But what I can tell you is that the test subjects were average Joes living in the D.C. area who thought they were attending something like a technology expo; in order for the experiment to work effectively and to get the testing subjects to buy in, the cover story had to be convincing.

While the 144 test subjects thought they were merely passing through an entrance way, they actually passed through a series of sensors that screened them for bad intentions.

Homeland Security also selected a group of 23 attendees to be civilian "accomplices" in their test. They were each given a "disruptive device" to carry through the portal — and, unlike the other attendees, were conscious that they were on a mission.

In order to conduct these tests on human subjects, DHS had to meet rigorous safety standards to ensure the screening would not cause any physical or emotional harm.

So here's how it works. When the sensors identify that something is off, they transmit warning data to analysts, who decide whether to flag passengers for further questioning. The next step involves micro-facial scanning, which involves measuring minute muscle movements in the face for clues to mood and intention.

Homeland Security has developed a system to recognize, define and measure seven primary emotions and emotional cues that are reflected in contractions of facial muscles. MALINTENT identifies these emotions and relays the information back to a security screener almost in real-time.

This whole security array — the scanners and screeners who make up the mobile lab — is called "Future Attribute Screening Technology" — or FAST — because it is designed to get passengers through security in two to four minutes, and often faster.

If you're rushed or stressed, you may send out signals of anxiety, but FAST isn't fooled. It's already good enough to tell the difference between a harried traveler and a terrorist. Even if you sweat heavily by nature, FAST won't mistake you for a baddie.

"If you focus on looking at the person, you don't have to worry about detecting the device itself," said Bob Burns, MALINTENT's project leader. And while there are devices out there that look at individual cues, a comprehensive screening device like this has never before been put together.

While FAST's batting average is classified, Undersecretary for Science and Technology Adm. Jay Cohen declared the experiment a "home run."

As cold and inhuman as the electric eye may be, DHS says scanners are unbiased and nonjudgmental. "It does not predict who you are and make a judgment, it only provides an assessment in situations," said Burns. "It analyzes you against baseline stats when you walk in the door, it measures reactions and variations when you approach and go through the portal."

But the testing — and the device itself — are not without their problems. This invasive scanner, which catalogues your vital signs for non-medical reasons, seems like an uninvited doctor's exam and raises many privacy issues.

But DHS says this is not Big Brother. Once you are through the FAST portal, your scrutiny is over and records aren't kept. "Your data is dumped," said Burns. "The information is not maintained — it doesn't track who you are."

DHS is now planning an even wider array of screening technology, including an eye scanner next year and pheromone-reading technology by 2010.

The team will also be adding equipment that reads body movements, called "illustrative and emblem cues." According to Burns, this is achievable because people "move in reaction to what they are thinking, more or less based on the context of the situation."

See what else may happen when you travel. Click Here

The Bailout gives Federal Reserve ALL power. - It's Unconstitutional!

Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson draft proposal for the bailout of struggling financial-services firms sought to make himself the most powerful unelected official in American history through his proposal to take charge of vast sectors of the U.S. economy -- setting policy, buying and selling assets, determining whether financial institutions thrive or collapse -- with no oversight.

Under Paulson's draft plan, Congress and the courts would have been barred from reviewing or challenging his moves to stabilize financial markets -- effectively making him the nation's economic czar.

That's not just a dangerous power grab for economic and politic reasons. It's unconstitutional.

Paulson's power grab was specifically spelled out by the treasury secretary in Section 8 of his proposal, which read: "Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency."

Senate Banking Committee Chris Dodd, the Connecticut Democrat who sought his party's nomination for president this year but has arguably emerged as a more influential player in his role as the congressional point-man on a crisis that is bigger than an election, pushed back on Monday.

Dodd offered a plan to give Paulson extraordinary -- and, frankly, excessive -- powers. But the senator also moved to place tighter time limits on the period in which the treasury secretary would be able to exercise those powers, to establish an special inspector general to monitor the program and to set up an emergency board with two congressional appointees to provide oversight.

Ultimately, Dodd and his compatriots should be able to restrain Paulson's power grab. But they must be as specific in their constrain of Paulson as the treasury secretary was in his overreach. Section 8 of the Paulson proposal must be stripped in its entirety. There can be no vagueness, no gray area.

Otherwise, the treasury secretary would become a more powerful -- and unaccountable -- figure even than our powerful and unaccountable president. And, as such, he would be operating in direct conflict with the Constitution. The nation's essential document makes it clear that every member of the executive branch is subject to legislative and judicial review.

Congress cannot delegate its oversight authority to a cabinet member, even in a time of turmoil. The opening section of the Constitution gives all -- emphasis on all -- legislative authority to the House and Senate. Under the well-established constitutional doctrine of nondelegation, Congress cannot cede that power in the manner that Paulson's draft plan proposed -- or, for that matter, in any manner whatsoever.

"It's hard to run afoul of the nondelegation doctrine, but if anything does, this is probably it," Jamie Raskin, a professor of constitutional law at American University's Washington College of Law, told the Maryland Daily Record, a newspaper that deals with legal issues. "How does Congress just give away $700 billion and tell the Secretary of the Treasury to figure out the rest?"

Raskin, a state senator, said that the doctrine of nondelegation "was the first thing I thought of when I heard that the administration's entire plan was on three pages and that the third page said $700 billion would be allocated to this purpose [and] programmatic details are to be fleshed out by the treasury department."

It is good that Raskin and a few others are reading the fine print.

It is necessary that Congress do the same.

John Nichols
Tue Sep 23, 12:07 AM ET

Monday, September 22, 2008

Ron Paul Predicted the Crash in Feb.

How Big Government Caused The Financial Crisis

Sept. 22 (Bloomberg) -- The financial crisis of the past year has provided a number of surprising twists and turns, and from Bear Stearns Cos. to American International Group Inc., ambiguity has been a big part of the story.

Why did Bear Stearns fail, and how does that relate to AIG? It all seems so complex.

But really, it isn't. Enough cards on this table have been turned over that the story is now clear. The economic history books will describe this episode in simple and understandable terms: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac exploded, and many bystanders were injured in the blast, some fatally.

Fannie and Freddie did this by becoming a key enabler of the mortgage crisis. They fueled Wall Street's efforts to securitize subprime loans by becoming the primary customer of all AAA-rated subprime-mortgage pools. In addition, they held an enormous portfolio of mortgages themselves.

In the times that Fannie and Freddie couldn't make the market, they became the market. Over the years, it added up to an enormous obligation. As of last June, Fannie alone owned or guaranteed more than $388 billion in high-risk mortgage investments. Their large presence created an environment within which even mortgage-backed securities assembled by others could find a ready home.

The problem was that the trillions of dollars in play were only low-risk investments if real estate prices continued to rise. Once they began to fall, the entire house of cards came down with them.

Turning Point

Take away Fannie and Freddie and it's hard to imagine how these highly liquid markets would ever have emerged. This whole mess would never have happened.

It is easy to identify the historical turning point that marked the beginning of the end.

Back in 2005, Fannie and Freddie were, after years of dominating Washington, on the ropes. They were enmeshed in accounting scandals that led to turnover at the top. At one telling moment in late 2004, captured in an article by my American Enterprise Institute colleague Peter Wallison, the Securities and Exchange Comiission's chief accountant told disgraced Fannie Mae chief Franklin Raines that Fannie's position on the relevant accounting issue was not even ``on the page'' of allowable interpretations.

Then legislative momentum emerged for an attempt to create a ``world-class regulator'' that would oversee the pair more like banks, imposing strict requirements on their ability to take excessive risks. Politicians who previously had associated themselves proudly with the two accounting miscreants were less eager to be associated with them. The time was ripe.

Greenspan's Warning

The clear gravity of the situation pushed the legislation forward. Some might say the current mess couldn't be foreseen, yet in 2005 Alan Greenspan told Congress how urgent it was for it to act in the clearest possible terms: If Fannie and Freddie ``continue to grow, continue to have the low capital that they have, continue to engage in the dynamic hedging of their portfolios, which they need to do for interest rate risk aversion, they potentially create ever-growing potential systemic risk down the road,'' he said. ``We are placing the total financial system of the future at a substantial risk.''

What happened next was extraordinary. For the first time in history, a serious Fannie and Freddie reform bill was passed by the Senate Banking Committee. The bill gave a regulator power to crack down, and would have required the companies to eliminate their investments in risky assets.

Different World

If that bill had become law, then the world today would be different. In 2005, 2006 and 2007, a blizzard of terrible mortgage paper fluttered out of the Fannie and Freddie clouds, burying many of our oldest and most venerable institutions. Without their checkbooks keeping the market liquid and buying up excess supply, the market would likely have not existed.

But the bill didn't become law, for a simple reason: Democrats opposed it on a party-line vote in the committee, signaling that this would be a partisan issue. Republicans, tied in knots by the tight Democratic opposition, couldn't even get the Senate to vote on the matter.

That such a reckless political stand could have been taken by the Democrats was obscene even then. Wallison wrote at the time: ``It is a classic case of socializing the risk while privatizing the profit. The Democrats and the few Republicans who oppose portfolio limitations could not possibly do so if their constituents understood what they were doing.''

Mounds of Materials

Now that the collapse has occurred, the roadblock built by Senate Democrats in 2005 is unforgivable. Many who opposed the bill doubtlessly did so for honorable reasons. Fannie and Freddie provided mounds of materials defending their practices. Perhaps some found their propaganda convincing.

But we now know that many of the senators who protected Fannie and Freddie, including Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and Christopher Dodd, have received mind-boggling levels of financial support from them over the years.

Throughout his political career, Obama has gotten more than $125,000 in campaign contributions from employees and political action committees of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, second only to Dodd, the Senate Banking Committee chairman, who received more than $165,000.

Clinton, the 12th-ranked recipient of Fannie and Freddie PAC and employee contributions, has received more than $75,000 from the two enterprises and their employees. The private profit found its way back to the senators who killed the fix.

There has been a lot of talk about who is to blame for this crisis. A look back at the story of 2005 makes the answer pretty clear.

Oh, and there is one little footnote to the story that's worth keeping in mind while Democrats point fingers between now and Nov. 4: Senator John McCain was one of the three cosponsors of S.190, the bill that would have averted this mess.

(Kevin Hassett, director of economic-policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute, is a Bloomberg News columnist. He is an adviser to Republican Senator John McCain of Arizona in the 2008 presidential election. The opinions expressed are his own.)

To contact the writer of this column: Kevin Hassett at

Wednesday, September 17, 2008

ATF should be shut down.

click on picture

WASHINGTON - The ATF lost 76 weapons and hundreds of laptops over five years, the Justice Department reported Wednesday. Thirty-five of the missing handguns, rifles, Tasers and other weapons were stolen, as were 50 laptops, the internal audit found. Two of the stolen weapons were used in crimes. Ironically, if any of us did that the ATF would arrest us and put us in jail.

Additionally, ATF employees did not report 13 of the 76 lost weapons, or 365 of the 418 missing laptops, to internal affairs as required. ATF officials also did not report much of the lost equipment to the Justice Department.

They concluded that nine of 20 ATF field offices surveyed did not have proper accounting methods for ammunition. And they want to tell you how to sell your guns. There are more guns missing from ATF than from Gun Shows. ATF is worse than those they are trying to regulate.

Go HERE to read about how the ATF abuses power. Then you will know why they should be shut down.


Tuesday, September 16, 2008

Obama brings Chicago Style Liberal Leadership

Look at the body count. In the last six months 292 killed (murdered) in Chicago, 221 killed in all of Iraq.

Sens. Barack Obama & Dick Durbin, Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr., Gov. Rod Blogojevich, House leader Mike Madigan, Atty. Gen. Lisa Madigan (daughter of Mike), Mayor Richard M. Daley (son of Mayor Richard J. Daley).....our leadership in Illinois.....all Democrats.

Thank you for the combat zone in Chicago liberal leaders. Of course they're all blaming each other. They can't blame Republicans, they're aren't any!

State pension fund $44 Billion in debt, worst in country. Cook County (Chicago) sales tax 10.25% highest in country. (Look'em up if you want). Chicago school system one of the worst in country. This is the political culture that Obama comes from in Illinois. He's gonna 'fix' Washington politics?

Click HERE to see how Obama worked for a slum lord who is presently under federal indictment for fraudulent schemes involving government officials and government funds. And click here to learn how this slum lord helped get Obama his house in a shady deal. Obama now says that was a mistake. And he's gonna 'fix' Washington politics?

Vote Third Party!

Monday, September 15, 2008


Big brother IS watching you right now. First they scare us into allowing invasion of our rights in the name of stopping terrorists. Then after a couple years they aplly the new rules not only to terror cases but to anything so that the FBI can spy on you without any oversight.

The FBI has admitted that agents have been abusing the powers given them by the Patriot Act. So what is their solution... give the Agents even more power! Are we all crazy?

See below...

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Justice Department unveiled proposed new rules on Friday for FBI investigations, changes a civil liberties group criticized for giving agents powers to investigate Americans without proper suspicion.

In its first major change in years, the Justice Department proposed a consolidated set of guidelines for domestic FBI operations, seeking to apply the same rules for criminal and terrorism cases, and for collecting foreign intelligence.

The guidelines were first adopted in the 1970s following disclosures that the FBI under J. Edgar Hoover had run a widespread domestic surveillance program that spied on civil rights activists and political opponents.

Officials said the new guidelines, which total 45 pages, were still being revised after consultations with Congress and civil liberties groups. The new rules are expected to take effect on October 1.

Justice Department and FBI officials told a news briefing the changes would allow agents to use informants, do physical surveillance and conduct interviews without identifying themselves or their true purpose.

Many have expressed concern the rewritten rules had been drafted in a way to allow the FBI to begin surveillance without factual evidence to back it up. Continued...


1) FBI disregarded secret court order not to obtain private records twice and spys on people everywhere.

2) GW Bush to veto new surveillance bill because it allows citizens the right to sue telecommunications firms when they let the government spy on use illegally.

3) Meanwhile, a new audit finds even more new FBI privacy abuses.

(Say with thick German accent) May I See Your Papers Please?

Homeland security has setup up 3 internal checkpoints on the Olympic Peninsula. These checkpoints are in addition to checkpoints at Washington Ferry docks and highway border crossings. According to the U.S. Border Patrol, it has a jurisdiction of about 100 miles from the border. This puts most of Washington state in an area where border checkpoints are authorized, including Seattle. Washington State, let us see your papers.




Click on the links below...


WHILE campaigning in public for a speedy withdrawal of US troops from Iraq, Sen. Barack Obama has tried in private to persuade Iraqi leaders to delay an agreement on a draw-down of the American military presence.

According to Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari, Obama made his demand for delay a key theme of his discussions with Iraqi leaders in Baghdad in July.

"He asked why we were not prepared to delay an agreement until after the US elections and the formation of a new administration in Washington," Zebari said in an interview.

Obama insisted that Congress should be involved in negotiations on the status of US troops - and that it was in the interests of both sides not to have an agreement negotiated by the Bush administration in its "state of weakness and political confusion."

"However, as an Iraqi, I prefer to have a security agreement that regulates the activities of foreign troops, rather than keeping the matter open." Zebari says.

Though Obama claims the US presence is "illegal," he suddenly remembered that Americans troops were in Iraq within the legal framework of a UN mandate. His advice was that, rather than reach an accord with the "weakened Bush administration," Iraq should seek an extension of the UN mandate.

While in Iraq, Obama also tried to persuade the US commanders, including Gen. David Petraeus, to suggest a "realistic withdrawal date." They declined.

Obama has made many contradictory statements with regard to Iraq. His latest position is that US combat troops should be out by 2010. Yet his effort to delay an agreement would make that withdrawal deadline impossible to meet.

Supposing he wins, Obama's administration wouldn't be fully operational before February - and naming a new ambassador to Baghdad and forming a new negotiation team might take longer still.

By then, Iraq will be in the throes of its own campaign season. Judging by the past two elections, forming a new coalition government may then take three months. So the Iraqi negotiating team might not be in place until next June.

Then, judging by how long the current talks have taken, restarting the process from scratch would leave the two sides needing at least six months to come up with a draft accord. That puts us at May 2010 for when the draft might be submitted to the Iraqi parliament - which might well need another six months to pass it into law.

Thursday, September 4, 2008


Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4


Stocks plung as banks borrow more from Fed

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Banks borrowed more over the past week from the Federal Reserve's emergency lending program Full story

Wall Street plunges as retail sales reports, jobless data add to market's gloom about economy. Full story

Promise me you'll ditch the federal reserve and I'll vote for you Sarah Palin!

Israel Wants To Use Georgia bases to attack Iran.

Why would the US and Israel be helping little Georgia stand up to the mighty Russian army? Simple... we want to use their air bases to attack Iran. Get ready for another war people.

You should have voted for Ron Paul! Meanwhile, Georgia used US weapons and Israel's trainging to attack Russian peace keepers and start a war with Russian. Opps! See what happens when you start playing these games. Innocent people die. Want proof? Follow the link below.

Click here to learn more

Obama's Ties to Saudi billionaire and the Black Panthers

New evidence has emerged that Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama was closely associated as early as age 25 to Dr. Khalid al-Mansour, a key adviser to a Saudi billionaire who had mentored the founding members of the Black Panthers.

Read more here

Wednesday, September 3, 2008

Somebody please tell Obama that....

You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich.

You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong.

You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift.

You cannot lift the wage earner up by pulling the wage payer down.

You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred.

You cannot build character and courage by taking away men's initiative and independence.

You cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they could and should do for themselves.

-Author Unknown

Tuesday, September 2, 2008

Obama Voted 3 times to keep murder legal:

Barak Obama vote 3 times to keep what you see in this above picture legal.

Not So Presidential...

McCain aids stop him from cheating on his wife?

McCain Jokes publically about bombing Iran

McCain jokes about killing the people of Iran again.

McCain joked about women enjoying rape...

And then there was this...

Why I wont vote for McCain - You can not trust a thing he says

He is a flip flopping Liar!

McCain Flip Flop on Abortion

McCain Flip Flop on Tax Cuts

McCain Flip-Flops On English As The Official Language

McCain Flip-Flops on Immigration

McCain Flip Flops on Social Security

McCain Flip Flops on Cuban Policy


Here is why the protests turn violent...

The people are peacefully protesting the war. How? By holding out flowers to police. What do the police do to a girl who offers them a flower and holds it out to them? They pepper spray her repeatedly in the face even after she walks away choking. After abuse after abuse a few young men get fed up and throw rocks. The police insight the riot.

Monday, September 1, 2008

Is This Your America?

Start A Revolution!

Police Ignore Constitutional Rights of Hippies

Liliana Segura
September 1, 2008.

"St. Paul is a free country!" cried a resident of Iglehart Avenue, a neighborhood street in St. Paul, Minn., as she watched her next-door neighbor’s house being overtaken by police officers on Saturday afternoon. Just one in a series of house raids over a 24-hour period the weekend before the Republican National Convention, St. Paul police surrounded the private home with weapons drawn, detaining people in the backyard, while journalists, activists and neighbors — including several children — looked on.

Their crime? None whatsoever. No one was trespassing or engaging in acts of civil disobedience. Instead, members of I-Witness Video, a New York-based media watchdog group that records police activity in order to protect civil liberties, were holding an organizing meeting at 949 Iglehart, the home of St. Paul resident Mike Whalen, when armed police officers arrived in the early afternoon and ordered their surrender.

Among them was Eileen Clancy, founder of I-Witness Video, as well as a producer with Democracy Now! DN! host Amy Goodman and her staff had just arrived at Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport when they received word that producer Elizabeth Press was in the house and being threatened with arrest.

An urgent alert had been sent by Clancy:

This is Eileen Clancy. … The house where I-Witness Video is staying in St. Paul has been surrounded by police. We have locked all the doors. We have been told that if we leave we will be detained. One of our people who was caught outside is being detained in handcuffs in front of the house. The police say that they are waiting to get a search warrant. More than a dozen police are wielding firearms …

… We are asking the public to contact the office of St. Paul Mayor Chris Coleman at 651-266-8510 to stop this house arrest, this gross intimidation by police officers, and the detention of media activists and reporters.

By the time we arrived at the 900 block at Iglehart Ave a short while later, the people in the house had been handcuffed and taken out back. Police officers could be seen sitting in unmarked cars, blocking off the residential street, where a growing crowd of observers gathered in front and across the street from the blue house with green columns, straining to get a glimpse of what was happening.

With two officers flanking the entrance of the house, it was hard to see anything — but moments later, a woman emerged from the house next door. "You guys go in my backyard," she called out. "They’re handcuffed back here!" With that, the crowd rushed around to the back, where over a short chain-link fence they spotted the handcuffed group, seated and surrounded by stoic police in sunglasses.

"These are nice people," the neighbor admonished the cops. "These are good people."

Sitting with her hands behind her back, Clancy spoke calmly and deliberately as she described what had happened and answered questions from people on the other side of the fence. Someone asked whether they had been read their Miranda rights. "NO!" yelled one of the detainees.

As Press would later explain, a pair of police officers had actually shown up at the house earlier that day, at 11 in the morning, asking about the owner of the house. One of them identified himself as being with the FBI. "I think that was them just checking out the scene at the house," said Press, who videotaped the officers coming to the door. They claimed to want to question a former resident about an action that had occurred a few months earlier. "We’re not here from the convention," one officer said. Nervous I-Witness members didn’t know what to make of it — "We were like, this is f-d up let’s get out of here," recalled Press — but they chose to finish their meeting anyway. It was only when they were getting ready to leave that the police showed up, some 20 officers this time, with guns drawn.

Sara Coffey of the National Lawyers Guild had just left the house and was immediately handcuffed. But, as described in Clancy’s alert, Press and the rest of the people in the duplex refused to let the police in because they did not have a warrant. However, at around 3:00 p.m., a warrant materialized for the adjacent space, apartment 951. "They entered through 951, detained everyone in that apartment, including the owner," recalled Press, "… and then broke into 949 through the attic." The police entered with their guns drawn, ordered everyone’s hands up and handcuffed them.

Their belongings were confiscated and searched, and the group was assembled in the backyard. But soon after the crowd gathered with video cameras and legal observers, including an attorney for Mike Whalen — and after Amy Goodman jumped the fence to interview people and ask the cops why they were holding nonviolent people who had done nothing wrong — they were released.

Preemptive Strikes

Unlike the preceding raids, including one targeting the convergence space of the RNC Welcoming Committee — an anarchist group dubiously described by Ramsey County Sheriff Bob Fletcher as "a criminal enterprise … intent on committing criminal acts" — the raid on the I-Witness house was specifically designed to target media activists whose mission is to hold police officers responsible for abusing their authority. I-Witness Video was instrumental in documenting police abuse during the 2004 Republican National Convention in New York, during which some 1,800 people were arrested. Working in cooperation with the National Lawyers Guild, I-Witness Video led to the dismissal of charges or the acquittal of some 400 protesters. This summer, New York City authorities subpoenaed I-Witness Video for tapes from the protests. In an interview with Democracy Now! on Aug. 1, Clancy discussed the group’s plans for the political conventions.

We’re going to bring a crew to both presidential conventions. It’s pretty exciting. I mean, one of the reasons we’re very interested in covering the conventions is (not) because we want … bad things to happen, but because the focus of the federal government, the law enforcement agencies and all that is very keenly directed at demonstrators. And when you cover these events completely, you’re able to see the patterns. The patterns emerge.

"I-Witness definitely does document things like police brutality and policing in general during situations of conflict," I-Witness member Emily Foreman, one of three members who managed to leave the house only to be followed by police and pulled over on their bikes, told a reporter with The Uptake after the raid, noting that that could make the group a target, "not because of anything illegal but because of our interest in upholding the law."

Nevertheless, the list of items police were looking for would suggest the activists were nothing short of terror suspects. "Packages and contents, firearms and ammunition, holsters, cleaning equipment for firearms, (and) weapons devices" were included in the warrant read by Whalen, who spoke to reporters shortly after his handcuffs were removed. Asked what connection he had to the I-Witness Video activists, he replied, "no connection," adding, "People needed a place to stay, and I support the work they do."

Series of Raids

All told, six raids took place in St. Paul in 24 hours, resulting in six arrests. (Read about the other raids here.) On Sunday, the Minnesota Chapter of the National Lawyers Guild sent out a press release announcing that it is "seeking prompt judicial review" of the "preventative detentions" of the six people arrested, all of whom remain on "probable cause holds" in the Ramsey County Jail. According to the press release: "In Minnesota, a probable cause hold can be ordered by a police officer without a prosecutor or a judge reviewing a criminal complaint. Due to the arrest occurring on a weekend holiday, all six citizens can be held until Wednesday, September 3, 2008, without the filing of a formal charge."

The extent of the federal involvement in the raids is not entirely clear. Although they were reportedly spearheaded by the Ramsey County Sheriff’s office, St. Paul Police coordinated them with the FBI. Furthermore, according to the Star Tribune, the raids were "aided by informants planted in protest groups." Indeed, as Glenn Greenwald reminded readers on Sunday, the Minneapolis Joint Terrorist Task Force spent months recruiting people to spy on activist groups planning to protest the RNC. On May 21, the Minneapolis City Pages ran a bizarre but chilling story titled "Moles Wanted," about the recruitment efforts by the task force — specifically, attempts to enlist people to "attend ‘vegan potlucks’ throughout the Twin Cities and rub shoulders with RNC protesters" in a mission to "investigate terrorist acts carried out by groups or organizations which fall within the definition of terrorist groups as set forth in the current United States Attorney General Guidelines."

"This is all part of a larger government effort to quell political dissent," attorney Jordan Kushner, told the City Pages at the time. "The Joint Terrorism Task Force is another example of using the buzzword ‘terrorism’ as a basis to clamp down on people’s freedoms and push forward a more authoritarian government."

With most of the subjects of the raids eventually released, the consensus among activists at the RNC in the wake of the raids is that the police actions are mainly meant to stop protests, lawful or not, before they start. "I think what they’re doing is trying to intimidate people," said Press. But even as the GOP plans to scale back its convention activities in the face of Hurricane Gustav, with multiple protests scheduled for the week, the actions of the police do not seem to be doing much to dissuade people from going forward with their plans.

The next day, a group of peaceful marchers organized by Veterans for Peace headed downtown. With armed police officers far outnumbering protesters, several marchers were discussing the raids. "It’s intimidation, absolutely," VFP member Leah Bolger said. "People are harassed to no end." Although veterans groups were not among the targeted organizations, word of the raids had spread quickly among the demonstrators. "I started this work as part of the peace movement," said Bolger, a 20-year veteran of the U.S. Navy. "But more and more it’s about civil rights. … When I hear about the raids, it’s just really upsetting and frightening," she said. But not necessarily surprising. In this era of the supposed "war on terror," she said, Americans have become used to trading civil rights for a perceived safety. "They’re willing to throw away their civil liberties."
Sad but true.

Dutch Intelligence Service: US to Bomb Iran within weeks

The Dutch intelligence service, the AIVD, has called off an operation aimed at infiltrating and sabotaging Iran's weapons industry due to an assessment that a US attack on the Islamic Republic's nuclear program is imminent, according to a report in the country's De Telegraaf newspaper on Friday.

The report claimed that the Dutch operation had been "extremely successful," and had been stopped because the US military was planning to hit targets that were "connected with the Dutch espionage action."

The impending air-strike on Iran was to be carried out by unmanned aircraft "within weeks," the report claimed, quoting "well placed" sources.

The Jerusalem Post
Meanwhile... The US. Carrier groups move around Iran with two more coming....
"With tensions in the Persian Gulf on the rise, the collapse in oil prices that we've been predicting may take longer than originally anticipated. There are three U.S. carrier groups within striking distance of Iran right now, and two more reportedly on the way. This is unprecedented, although you'd have to search the web and the newsletter world to find any mention of it. Gary North thinks that the news media have deliberately chosen not to report the naval build-up for fear of starting a panic that could push oil to $200-per-barrel, wrecking the already frail U.S. economy. But we think reporters have simply been too busy obsessing over the Olympics and the meaningless political spectacle in Denver to care about what is going on in the geopolitical world. Whatever the case, the build-up is big news, especially since President Bush has yet to even acknowledge it." (Read more here)

Is it the governments job to take care of you?

McCain goes and fakes concern and panders to those in the gulf coast while Ron Paul tells the truth.