We Got One That Can See: Former Obamanoid Reveals Truth on Fox News

It was a remarkable moment in the annals of corporate media television. During a Fox News segment on the staggering unemployment rate among the young, a former Obamanoid manages to sneak in the truth — there is no difference between Clinton, Bush and Obama, they are all puppets for elite bankers.

“Obama is an illusion of change,” said the former supporter. “He is a lot like Bush in many ways. It is a fallacy to believe he really cares about unemployment when he hired an economic team comprised of Volcker, Geithner… these men were in the last three administrations and they don’t really care for the poor and working class of this nation.”

Obama’s administration, of course, is packed like a sardine can with globalists from the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission and the Bilderberg group. Following Obama’s election win, he named 14 top cabinet selections and nine of them were affiliated with the Bilderberg group, ten were affiliated with the Council on Foreign Relations and five hailed from the Trilateral Commission.

Geithner, in addition to working for the Federal Reserve, is associated with the CFR, Trilateral Commission and the Bilderbergers. Ditto the former Fed boss Volcker.

Indeed, Obama, Geithner, Volcker, and the rest don’t care about the poor and working class. The CFR, Trilateralists, and members of the once secretive Bilderberg cabal are working stealthily toward a one-world government that will require a large serf class of impoverished slaves.

In 1980, Holly Sklar wrote in her book Trilateralism: The Trilateral Commission and Elite Planning for World Management, that according to bankster David Rockefeller’s Trilateralists “the people, governments, and economies of all nations must serve the needs of multinational banks and corporations” and the “owners and managers of global corporations view the entire world as their factory, farm, supermarket, and playground. The Trilateral Commission is seeking to strengthen and rationalize the world economy in their interest,” not in the interest of the workers or anybody else.

“If you wish to establish national monopolies, you must control national governments,” writes Gary Allen. “If you wish to establish international monopolies or cartels, you must control a world government.”

Fresh food that lasts from eFoods Direct (Ad)

Obama’s task was to sell the globalist snake oil under the misleading label “change.” Fortunately, the young lady above seems to understand this, at least on a rudimentary level. It is heartening that people — especially former Obamanoids — are coming around to the reality of the situation.


Source

Kagan: Pro-State Shill

As noted in the N.Y. Times piece Court Affirms Ban on Aiding Groups Tied to Terror, the Supreme Court’s “conservatives,”

In a case pitting free speech against national security, … on Monday upheld a federal law that makes it a crime to provide “material support” to foreign terrorist organizations, even if the help takes the form of training for peacefully resolving conflicts.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., writing for the majority in the 6-to-3 decision, said the law’s prohibition of providing some types of intangible assistance to groups the State Department says engage in terrorism did not violate the First Amendment.

In dissent, Justice Breyer said the majority had drawn a false analogy between the two kinds of assistance.

“Money given for a charitable purpose might free up other money used to buy arms,” Justice Breyer said from the bench. But the same cannot be said, he continued, “where teaching human rights law is involved.”

But even though the decision is disturbing, even the conservative majority did not go as far as Solicitor General—and now Supreme Court nominee—Elena Kagan, wanted:

Chief Justice Roberts said the government had advanced a position that was too extreme and did not take adequate account of the free-speech interests at stake.

“The government is wrong,” the chief justice wrote, “that the only thing actually at issue in this litigation is conduct” and not speech protected by the First Amendment. But he went on to say that the government’s interest in combating terrorism was enough to overcome that protection.

In his written dissent, which was joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor, Justice Breyer said the majority had been too credulous in accepting the government’s argument that national security concerns required restrictions on the challengers’ speech and had “failed to insist upon specific evidence, rather than general assertion.”

The common assertion by democrats, and even by some libertarians who buy into the left-right paradigm, that liberals are better on civil liberties is obviously mistaken. (For more: see Liberals on Free Speech and Finance Campaign Laws; Slate Liberals: ‘Let’s see your scrotum if you want to get on an airplane,’ ha ha; Re: War and Civil Liberties Under Obama.)


Source

Obama’s Shadow Government

How many of these names do you recognize?

Adolfo Carrion, Aneesh Chopra, Ear; Devamey, Kenneth Feinberg, Carol Browner, Ed Montgomery, Todd Stern, Cass Sunstein, Ron Bloom, and John Brennan. If none of them ring a bell, it is because they and others are all part of a shadow government of some thirty “czars”; advisers to President Obama who did not submit to the Senate confirmation process and are exempt from Congressional oversight.

Article 2, Section 2, U.S. Constitution, an excerpt: He (the President) shall have power, by and with the advice and Consent of the Senate, to make treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate shall appoint ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, judges of the Supreme Court, and all other officers of the United States whose appointments are not herein provided for, and which shall be established by law: but the Congress may by law vest the appointment of such inferior officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the courts of law, or the heads of departments.”

The Constitution creates two types of positions in the executive branch: principal officers and inferior officers. The first of these are nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate. The latter are not subject to this process.

The Obama administration began with a series of nominations that were found to be tax cheats and forced to withdraw before Senate confirmation. One of them, Van Jones, put in charge of “green jobs” was forced to resign when it became known that he was a self-identified communist. Carol Browner, responsible for environmental and energy issues, was on the board of the Commission for a Sustainable Society, the action arm of the Socialist International.

In the case of “special envoys” George Mitchell, Richard Holbrooke, and Dennis Ross, they all engage in ambassadorial duties, representing the nation to foreign entities and are responsible only to the president. Key elements of the nation’s foreign policy, particularly as regards the Middle East, remain hidden from the public, except in terms of the president’s public pronouncements.

All of the president’s cabinet secretaries in charge of various departments and agencies of the government are vested with administrative powers and all must be confirmed by the Senate. By virtue of the Administrative Procedure Act, these offices must hold public hearings and maintain records when decisions are made, thus creating a paper trail. All of these offices must have separate lines in Congress’s annual appropriations bills.

The bulk of the president’s czars are exempt from such oversight. They advise and answer directly to the president and a number of them exercise control over the decisions made by cabinet secretaries and agency directors, most of whom have been reduced to a role of carrying out their decisions, their agenda.

The U.S. government is being run out of the White House by a cohort of czars/advisers who do not answer to the American people and operate in the dark. This is part of the warning issued in “The Blueprint: Obama’s Plan to Subvert the Constitution and Build an Imperial Presidency.” The authors, Ken Blackwell and Ken Klukowski, are both attorneys with extensive knowledge of the Constitution. Blackwell has been an ambassador.

These czars are essentially unconstitutional and illegal.

All presidents have had advisers, but none prior to Obama have had so many and none have been delegated vast powers. They represent a violation of the separation of powers essential to a democratic republic and all violate the need and expectation of transparency and accountability.

Some have demonstrated in their past publications and present statements that they are wholly incompetent to hold such power. The regulations czar, Cass Sunstein, has said that animals should have the same legal rights as humans. The science adviser, John Holdren, has advocated putting chemicals in the drinking water or requiring devices that would neutralize fertility, including compulsory abortion.

John Brennan, the terrorism czar, responsible for homeland security, downplayed the near disaster of the Christmas “underpants bomber” and claimed that all possible intelligence that could be secured from him had been in less than an hour after his arrest!

All these czars function in direct contradiction of the long history of such advisers to presidents and in contradiction to the framework of the U.S. Constitution designed to ensure that the executive branch is answerable to Congress.

The function (or lack of it) of elected senators and representatives is ugly enough as seen in the failure of Congress to exercise caution in the passage of bills that affect the economy and the lives of all Americans. The U.S. debt has increased to levels not seen since World War Two. Obamacare was an ugly process of bribery and closed-door deals that resulted in a straight party line vote that was a repudiation of the will of the people.

No one knows what these unelected and unsupervised czars are doing, but you can be sure they all are loyal advocates and agents of the socialist transformation of America.


Source

Obama Administration admits rationing panels exist in ObamaCare

Sarah Palin was right! Of course, when she mentioned it liberals went nuts claiming that she was fear-mongering. Now, President Obama’s Budget Director is heralding the cost cutting measure.

Just a reminder from the Governor:

Last weekend while you were preparing for the holidays with your family, Harry Reid’s Senate was making shady backroom deals to ram through the Democrat health care take-over. The Senate ended debate on this bill without even reading it. That and midnight weekend votes seem to be standard operating procedures in D.C. No one is certain of what’s in the bill, but Senator Jim DeMint spotted one shocking revelation regarding the section in the bill describing the Independent Medicare Advisory Board (now called the Independent Payment Advisory Board), which is a panel of bureaucrats charged with cutting health care costs on the backs of patients – also known as rationing. Apparently Reid and friends have changed the rules of the Senate so that the section of the bill dealing with this board can’t be repealed or amended without a 2/3 supermajority vote. Senator DeMint said:


“This is a rule change. It’s a pretty big deal. We will be passing a new law and at the same time creating a senate rule that makes it out of order to amend or even repeal the law. I’m not even sure that it’s constitutional, but if it is, it most certainly is a senate rule. I don’t see why the majority party wouldn’t put this in every bill. If you like your law, you most certainly would want it to have force for future senates. I mean, we want to bind future congresses. This goes to the fundamental purpose of senate rules: to prevent a tyrannical majority from trampling the rights of the minority or of future congresses.”

In other words, Democrats are protecting this rationing “death panel” from future change with a procedural hurdle. You have to ask why they’re so concerned about protecting this particular provision. Could it be because bureaucratic rationing is one important way Democrats want to “bend the cost curve” and keep health care spending down?

Source

The Shadow Government’s Healthcare Bill Rules

I recently wrote what I had hoped was a satirical article, poking fun at the fact President Obama could not feasibly have read all the legislation he has signed into law, centering on the on the mammoth 2,700 page Healthcare Reform Bill. And although some people appreciated the article, a couple of readers did not.

One lady reader condemned the piece as being negative, with no discernible point; while, she invested no more of her own thought in it than that. A male reader (who showed some thought) bought the truth that while Obama probably didn’t read the Healthcare bill – due to time constraints – he was certainly briefed with a detailed summary of it, highlighting the bill’s major points.

This gentleman, like many others, does not see the absurdity of legislation that is so long it could take weeks or months to read; after all, our Constitution was handwritten on about four or five pages.

Our Declaration of Independence was handwritten on one sheet of paper.

Our lawmakers and president should not be briefed on proposed laws, they should scrutinize every line, of every proposed law, as it is that important to the American people. And the American public should be given the opportunity to do the same, as President Obama promised.

Our presidents should veto any bill they cannot comfortably read and understand in one sitting. In fact, if there are legislative passages the average, literate Americans cannot understand, those too should be vetoed. Convoluted, long passages in legislation is simply an effort to hide tyrannical intentions. And with “voice votes” becoming popular, in congress, we are even denied the knowledge of knowing just who supports tyranny.

All points of legislation should be debated in Congress, by senators and representatives, not given “talking points” by unseen agents of the International Monetary/Banking Cartel, to memorize and parrot to the corporate media.

In response, I asked the gentleman, above, who seemed to think a briefing was adequate, to consider what a colossal briefing Mr. Obama would have to have had to cover all 2,700 pages of just that one bill – the mislabeled Healthcare “Reform” Act.

If Mr. Obama was briefed in detail on the steady stream of hundreds of thousands of legislation pages proposed in congress, he’d be spending every waking moment being briefed, without doing any of it real justice.

Divinity students spend years in college studying the detailed summaries that highlight the major points in the 1,300 page Bible, and still not cover it all. Does the gentleman really think Obama can be briefed on something the size of ten novels, or two Bibles, in a month or so, especially considering all the other thousands of pages of Executive Orders (written for him) that he signs, or the thousands of pages of regulations that are annually issued by Executive Branch agencies?

Sadly, Mr. Obama – and our lawmakers – do no more than read (from teleprompters) or repeat “talking points” given to them by shadowy sources -the minions of the Shadow Government, that are beholden to the International Monetary/Banking Cartel.

Mr. Obama, and most all other politicians, avoid the subjects of who reads or writes the thousands of pages of legislation, regulations, directives, and executives orders that pour out of Washington annually, as they do not know who writes it all, and do not want to have to admit they don’t read much of any of it in any case. With one exception.

That exception, that was probably read by Obama, et al, was written into the Healthcare Reform Act as a loophole for the privileged: The president, his staff and family, Joe Biden’s staff and family, Nancy Pelosi’s staff, Harry Reid’s staff, and many other insiders are all exempted from the mandates of Obamacare. How nice, they’ve given it all to us taxpaying Americans to have, to hold, and to pay for.

It would seem to me that if most of the tenets of the world-wide Christian religion are contained within 1,300 pages of the Holy Bible, America does not need 900,000 to millions of pages of legislation, orders, directives, and regulations to be governed. How can we obey those laws if we don’t even know what they are?

But, the critical questions all thinking Americans will ask themselves run along the lines of who wrote the hundreds of thousands of pages of US legislation, orders, directives, and regulations that so severely affect our lives. That Madame and Sir was the point of my satirical piece, and is the important point of this article.


Source

Dick Cheney backs Rand Paul’s NeoCon opponent in Kentucky

On Trey Grayson’s campaign site today is a quote from former Vice President Dick Cheney:

“I’m a lifelong conservative, and I can tell the real thing when I see it. I
have looked at the records of both candidates in the race, and it is clear to me
that Trey Grayson is right on the issues that matter – both on fiscal
responsibility and on national security.”

Indeed, Cheney– the man who helped construct the lies that sold the Iraq War, who endorses perpetual conflict and endless spending in order to maintain over 700 military bases overseas, and who still delusionally calls himself a “conservative”– came out in support of Trey Grayson, one of Rand Paul’s primary opponents.

As odd as it might seem that in modern America Dick Cheney, (or anyone from the Bush administration), might still have any credibility left to anyone after the ruinous legacy that they left behind, the Grayson campaign has proudly seized the endorsement, attempting to paint Rand Paul as weak on terrorism in the same way that the Neocon establishment tried to do to his father during the 2008 presidential election.

Last week Grayson’s campaign released an ad that stated:

“Paul thinks it’s not a problem if Iran has a nuclear bomb”

Nine years after 9/11, candidates are still exploiting fear for their own political gain, painting non-interventionism as isolationism and pushing the debunked myth that Iran is close to developing a nuclear bomb when our own CIA said that Iran halted its nuclear weapons program back in 2003.

During his term as Vice President, Cheney ”ordered“ the media to “sell” a war with Iran to the American people, believing it needed only 35-40 percent of public support to do so. Even under the Obama administration the drumbeat to attack Iran has continued. Afraid that the American right might realize once again that the concept of pre-emptive war is not a conservative one, Cheney has thrown himself back into the picture, attempting to steer voters towards candidates who will continue the American pursuit of empire in the Middle East and Eurasia, and create new wars for his cronies to profit from.


Source

World Mourns As Communist Darkness Falls Upon America

In what is being described as one of the most astounding power grabs in modern history by newspaper headlines around the World, President Obama has succeeded in his audacious plan to remake America into a full fledged godless communist empire barely one year into his term with the enactment into law by the US Congress of his mammoth health care plan innocuously named H.R. 3200-Americas Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 and described by one Kremlin legal expert as having “nothing at all to do with health, but everything to do with control.”

To fully grasp the full and grim implications of Obama’s power grab over the American people with his Nationalization of the United States entire health care industry and student loan programme accomplished with the passing of this new law, it must be remembered that since taking office on January 20, 2009 he has also taken over their automobile, mortgage, and banking industries too with the Internet said being next “in his sights”.

More insidious than these takeovers that have been destroying America’s once vibrant capitalistic system is the new regime these once free peoples are now destined to live under, and where under their new health care law will require all of them to carry a National ID card (page 58) and allow their government unlimited access to all of their bank accounts and personal records (page 159).

And in a chilling instance of the ancient prophecies for these time of “The Mark of the Beast” becoming reality, the National ID card all of the American people will now be required to possess (regardless of age) is to be combined with their new government ID card under their upcoming new immigration laws allowing them to work and is biometrically designed to “read” the backs of their hands.

[Note: According to the Christian Bibles Book of Revelations, the ancients warned of a future time when everyone, both small and great, rich and poor, free or slave, would receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads which without they would not be able buy or sell anything.]

Though many have tried to warn these Americans about the plans for their Nations destruction at the hands of the Obama backed communist forces who have taken over their country [including our March 2nd report “Russia Warns US Communist Threat Endangering Entire World”] the propaganda organs in the United States have rendered silent nearly all opposition and dissident views from reaching them and they remain asleep to the true dangers soon to come upon them.

The same, however, cannot be said about the rest of the World where during this past week alone, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon signed a cooperation agreement with a Russia-led security group of ex-Soviet Nations as a counterbalance to the US led NATO forces (who are currently expanding their wars against the Muslim Nations to steal their vast oil and gas wealth) and one of China’s top military officers called for his Nation to build the World’s strongest military and move swiftly to topple the United States as the Global “champion.”

To how ignorant the American people have become to the yoke of communist oppression being pressed upon them by Obama’s forces we can glimpse from a report in today’s Los Angeles Times that says “The Democratic administration of Barack Obama, who denounced his predecessor, George W. Bush, as the most secretive in history, is now denying more Freedom of Information Act requests than the Republican did.”

And as to why Obama and his communist forces would seek to keep from the American people what is really being done to them we had, also, previously warned about in our February 12th report “The “End Of Days” Are Upon Us, Warns Russian Patriarch” and wherein we had stated:

“Patriarch Cyril warns in his report though that the Motherlands efforts to halt the West’s godlessness “may be too late” as evidenced by the rising use among their political, military, banking and celebrity elite classes of the ancient Babylonian “Sign of the Horns” [formed by extending the index and little fingers while holding the middle and ring fingers down with the thumb, see photo bottom left] honoring the ancient god Marduk (Sumerian spelling in Akkadian: AMAR.UTU meaning “solar calf”).”

Now most important to remember about these ancient enemies of our human race Obama and his communist forces have aligned themselves with is how truly predictable they are; including the United States passing of their health care bill during the 2010 Vernal (Spring) Solstice [when daytime and nighttime are equal length] as a “celebration” to the ancient goddess Ēostre whose name was given to the Christian festival of Easter but whose origins stretch back into the mists of time to the mystery religions of Rome where the Cybele cult preformed their child sacrifices on what was then known as Vatican hill, but today is known as the home of the Pope.

And in these monsters predictability by aligning themselves with the ancient dates and ceremonies of old also comes the most secure protection from their destructive plans; such as the United States March 4, 2001 airing of the Lone Gunman television programmes pilot episode where an American government plot to fly remotely controlled planes into the World Trade Center was discovered, and which was exactly 6 months and 7 days from when the actual attack occurred.

It goes without saying, of course, that the propaganda media organs beholden to their godless communist masters will never inform their peoples about these things, and for those of us who do there is always great danger. But as the events in the United States are now showing to even those most in denial about what is truly happening, the time nears when hard choices will have to be made by everyone if freedom for our human race is to be saved.


Source

Is Biden’s Terror Attack Warning Related to a Possible Assassination Attempt on Obama?

VP Joe Biden is not worried about a concerted al-Qaeda attack against the United States. He is concerned about a lone individual. “Am I less worried about an attack? No, I’m worried. Am I less worried about a catastrophic event? Yes,” Biden told CBS News.

“We have made more progress in dismantling the hierarchy of Al-Qaeda central. … and evidence of that is, now they’re going to lone bombers as the means to get there. … I’m more worried about, and harder to detect, and I’m very concerned about a terrorist attack in the United States along the lines of the ‘Christmas Day bomber.’ You get a disgruntled student, someone who has some relationship with the United States who is — able to be recruited quickly, able to be indoctrinated quickly. And they say, basically, ‘Here’s a bomb. Go do it,’ as opposed to the kind of planning that’s needed to pull off — a very complicated 9/11,” explained Biden.

Earlier this month, top intelligence officials in the U.S. warned al-Qaeda will attack within three to six months. “Al Qaeda remains a significant threat to the U.S., the officials said, and the group’s recent evolution in tactics includes dispatching individuals who can enter the U.S. without arousing suspicion, such as the man accused of attempting the Christmas Day attack,” The Wall Street Journal reported on February 3, 2010.

MI5, infamous for creating terrorists and would-be terrorist patsies, knew Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab was connected to so-called Islamic terrorists in Britain.

It is said U.S. officials did not know about the underwear bomber until he was on the plane and en route to Detroit. “U.S. border security officials learned of the alleged extremist links of the suspect in the Christmas Day jetliner bombing attempt as he was airborne from Amsterdam to Detroit and had decided to question him when he landed,” The Los Angeles Times reported on January 7, 2010.

In fact, not only did the U.S. know about an impending terror attack, it had specific details. “The US was aware that ‘a Nigerian’ in Yemen was being prepared for a terrorist attack — weeks before an attempted bombing on a US plane,” the BBC reported on December 30, 2010.

In addition, an Israeli company allowed Abdulmutallab to board the plane. “A Haaretz investigation has learned that the security officers and their supervisor should have suspected the passenger,” the Israeli newspaper reported on January 10, 2010.

The Israeli company, ICTS, also allowed the dim-witted shoe bomber, Richard Reid, to board a plane and handled security at Logan International Airport, from which two of the supposed 9-11 hijacked planes departed.

Coincidence? Ineptitude? Or a covert intelligence operation?

Earlier this week, Prison Planet’s Paul Joseph Watson warned that Obama may be the target of a staged false flag assassination attempt that will be blamed on either the “extreme” right or left, in order to silence dissent in America and blackmail Obama into launching a military assault on Iran.

The corporate media, Watson points out, and its operatives like Glenn Beck on the phony right-wing side and establishment liberals on the phony left were busy manufacturing ready-made patsies upon which the false flag would be blamed.

Beck has said al-Qaeda will “work with anybody” in order to attack America, including white supremacists and 9/11 truthers (see video below). Beck has consistently characterizes the 9/11 truth movement as a dire threat to the United States. He claims truthers are ensconced in the White House and will attack Obama.

It remains to be seen if Joe Biden’s warning is merely more hyper-inflated propaganda and terror attack mongering for political purposes. It is worth noting that he believes the next attack will be carried out by a lone wolf and not al-CIA-duh proper.



Recall Biden’s hysterical warning during the election that Obama would be tested by an international crisis within six months of becoming president. “Watch. We’re going to have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy. And he’s going to need help . . . to stand with him. Because it’s not going to be apparent initially; it’s not going to be apparent that we’re right.”

No such international crisis occurred within Biden’s time-frame.


Source

Geithner Told To Quit After E Mails Reveal Involvement In AIG Cover-up

John Mica slams Treasury Secretary’s “lame excuses” during fiery hearing

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner’s denial that he played any role in the AIG cover-up is contradicted by emails which confirm that both Geithner and the New York Federal Reserve were both intimately involved in keeping details about payments to banks including Goldman Sachs from the public.

Geithner told lawmakers today that he had no involvement in withholding information about the bailout of AIG, much to the chagrin of House Oversight Committee Ranking Member Darrell Issa, who wasn’t buying it for a second.

“He has asserted complete ignorance of the Fed’s efforts to cover up the bailout details,” said Issa, R-Calif. “Many Americans, including members of this Committee, have a hard time believing that Secretary Geithner entered an absolute cone of silence on the day that his nomination was announced.”

John Mica of Florida went further, calling for Geithner to quit as a result of the scandal.

“Why shouldn’t we ask for your resignation?” Mica asked Geithner. “We’re not getting the whole story, we’re getting the blame story. You’re either incompetent on the job or you knew what was taking place and you tried to conceal it, and I think that’s grounds for your review.”

Mica characterized Geithner’s denials as “lame excuses” as the Treasury Secretary became visibly angry.

In November and December 2008, The Federal Reserve Bank of New York, headed up by Geithner, instructed the bailed out AIG to hide from the public details regarding payments the insurance giant made to banks, including Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Societe Generale SA.

Using Fed secured taxpayer bailout money, AIG paid several banks 100 percent of the face value of credit-default swaps, as other financial institutions were negotiating deep discounts for the unregulated paper assets that do not have to be backed by cash.

The decision to pay the banks in full may have cost AIG, and therefore taxpayers, at least $13 billion over the odds.

The “backdoor bailout” of the banks, as it has been dubbed was exposed in March 2009 after the SEC challenged AIG’s filing, however, e-mails obtained by Representative Darrell Issa, ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, reignited the situation after they conclusively exposed a collusion between AIG and the Fed to deceive the public.

The e-mails between company and regulator show that The New York Fed crossed out reference to the payments and that AIG also omitted the details when the Securities and Exchange Commission filing was made public on Dec. 24, 2008.

The emails, the content of which are highlighted in this Bloomberg News article, also show that the Fed wanted numerous other details about the AIG bailout withheld or delayed from public oversight.

“It appears that the New York Fed deliberately pressured AIG to restrict and delay the disclosure of important information,” said Issa, adding that taxpayers “deserve full and complete disclosure under our nation’s securities laws, not the withholding of politically inconvenient information.”

Geithner’s denial that he, even as President of the New York Fed, had no involvement with the AIG case is contradicted by fresh revelations this week in a new report issued by Issa that show Geithner was “at a minimum, engaged personally in reviewing what information about the AIG bailout would be revealed to Congress and the public.”

On November 6, 2008 Geithner received an email from Sarah Dahlgren, the FRBNY’s lead staff member in AIG’s operations, seeking Geithner’s approval for a proposed statement regarding AIG’s upcoming equity capital raise. The fact that Geithner’s approval had to be obtained merely for putting out statements concerning AIG clearly indicates that he was deeply involved in the matter.

On November 13, Geithner was sent a report on AIG’s restructuring that would be sent to Congress. Sophia Allison, a staff member of the Federal Reserve’s Board of Governors, asked that Geithner point out any information that he believed should not be “publicly disclosed”.

In addition, records of who Geithner met with during his tenure as President of the FRBNY “show that he was regularly engaged with top AIG officials and the FRBNY officials directly responsible for AIG’s disclosures to the SEC. Geithner’s schedule shows that he had at least six formal meetings with top FRBNY staff members about AIG-related issues between November 4, 2008, and November 21, 2008.”

Watch the clip from today’s hearings where Mica demands Geithner’s resignation.

Source

Obama Extends Power over Governors

As Kurt Nimmo wrote in his article Obama Expands Federal Power Over the States with Executive Order, "The order, signed on January 11 2010, further diminishes the sovereignty of the states and builds on a framework for possible martial law. The executive order was completely ignored by the corporate media."

Ten Governors are required to meet whenever called. What if they refuse?
As the executive orders mandates, The Council shall meet at the call of the Secretary of Defense or the Co-Chairs

This authorizes the federal government, whenever they wish, to round up ten Governors. What if they refuse? Will they be arrested or taken by force?

An abuse of power
George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and all the Founding Fathers would be furious past the boiling point over this Unconstitutional, self-authorizing expansion of executive power.

Given too much power, the Founding Fathers knew an abusive President would turn against the citizens and their states, so they granted specific, limited powers to the Executive Branch and established barriers to halt unauthorized expansions of power.

Ten Governors to be outnumbered and outgunned
Once assembled, Governors are no longer protected by their bodyguards, executive protection or state militia. They are subject to intimidation, interrogation, bullying, and personal threats. Would anyone exclude torture?

Under the false pretense of meeting to "exchange views, information, or advice," ten Governors will be forced to meet with top military commanders including:

The "Secretary of Defense; the Secretary of Homeland Security; the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counter terrorism; the Assistant to the President for Intergovernmental Affairs and Public Engagement; the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense and Americas' Security Affairs; the Commander, United States Northern Command; the Chief, National Guard Bureau; the Commandant of the Coast Guard; and other appropriate officials of the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Defense, and appropriate officials of other executive departments or agencies as may be designated by the Secretary of Defense or the Secretary of Homeland Security"

Governors—You will do as commanded
The Founding Fathers knew that freedom and liberty is always destroyed from domestic enemies, and during the final stages of converting a republic to fascism, an attack is pretended and enemies or terrorists are blamed.

This Council of Governors, like Hitler's staff, may be told it is their duty to impose martial law to quell rebellions or arrest terrorists, who are just Constitution-loving citizens on the government's massive terrorist list, and they may be compelled to carry out such orders.

What if Governors are commanded to disregard the Bill of Rights, arrest innocent citizens and take them to FEMA detention camps?

The President serves the people; the people do not serve the President
The President serves the people and states, and must stand accountable. It is the duty of the Governors, Congress and Supreme Court to check his every act against the Constitution and Bill of Rights, to thwart the Executive Branch from amassing tyrannical powers, and to nullify any bills, executive orders or presidential signings their states do not support.

State governments are not extensions of the federal government. Governors do not serve the Executive Branch. This executive order is completely wrong, is exactly what the Constitution was established to prevent, and must not be accepted.

Council of Governors can be used to bully other Governors
Will acts against these Governors be used an example for non-compliance of federal mandates? Will Governors be persuaded to declare that state sovereignty is irrelevant?

If Governors are bullied, who will protect the people?
Citizens are protected by their states, each led by a state Governor. Governors have the power to organize and assemble militias to defend citizens against domestic and foreign enemies, including despots, dictators, the President, and totalitarian government.

Now the President can conveniently demand meetings at all the wrong times
What if Governors had scheduled a meeting to nullify executive powers, dissolve the Executive Branch or plan succession? The Founding Fathers established separate branches of government to balance power representing citizens and states. The Constitution was designed to protect citizens against an all-powerful President who grants himself sweeping powers over Governors and the citizens they are sworn to defend.

If Governors decide to protect their states against a run-away Executive Branch, they must not be kept from their duties.

The Constitution and Bill of Rights are roadblocks against tyranny, not Hallmark Greeting Cards
The Founding Fathers studied history and the rise and fall of nations. They knew that whenever an abusive King, President or Executive Branch gets too much authority, they practice unrighteous and unlawful dominion, so they created a Constitution to protect people against their government, not to protect government against the people. By controlling Governors by their earlobes, the Executive Branch is seizing unprecedented state control under the disguise of exchanging, "views, information, or advice."

While some say this is just the formation of an advisory council, this unlawful presidential executive order is another attack against freedom and liberty. Governors may be our last defense against executive abuse, and states nullifying Unconstitutional bills our last hope. Those who seek to complete the overthrow of the United States of America know this very well.

Tyranny and abuse always begin with what first seems to be harmless acts of legislation. Phone your state Governors today and demand your voice be heard.


Source

George W. Obama: After his first year, Obama shows his true face

Before President Obama, it was grimly accurate to write, as I often did in the Voice, that George W. Bush came into the presidency with no discernible background in constitutional civil liberties or any acquaintance with the Constitution itself. Accordingly, he turned the "war on terror" over to Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld—ardent believers that the Constitution presents grave obstacles in a time of global jihad.

But now, Bush’s successor—who actually taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago—is continuing much of the Bush-Cheney parallel government and, in some cases, is going much further in disregarding our laws and the international treaties we’ve signed.

On January 22, 2009, the apostle of "change we can believe in" proclaimed: "Transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of my presidency." But four months into his first year in command, Obama instructed his attorney general, Eric Holder, to present in a case, Jewel v. National Security Agency, a claim of presidential "sovereign immunity" that not even Dick Cheney had the arrant chutzpah to propose.

Five customers of AT&T had tried to go to court and charge that the government's omnipresent spy, the NSA, had been given by AT&T private information from their phone bills and e-mails. In a first, the Obama administration countered—says Kevin Bankston of Electronic Frontier Foundation, representing these citizens stripped of their privacy—that "the U.S. can never be sued for spying that violated federal surveillance statutes, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or the Wiretap Act."

It is one thing, as the Bush regime did, to spy on us without going to court for a warrant, but to maintain that the executive branch can never even be charged with wholly disregarding our rule of law is, as a number of lawyers said, "breathtaking."

On the other hand, to his credit, Obama's very first executive orders in January included the ending of the CIA "renditions"—kidnapping terrorism suspects off the streets in Europe and elsewhere and sending them for interrogation to countries known to torture prisoners. However, in August, the administration admitted that the CIA would continue to send such manacled suspects to third countries for detention and interrogation.

Why send them to a foreign prison if they're not going to be tortured to extract information for the CIA? Oh, the U.S. would get "guarantees" from these nations that the prisoners would not be tortured. That's the same old cozening song that Condoleezza Rice and George W. Bush used to sing robotically.

President Obama also solemnly pledged to have "the most open administration in American history." Nonetheless, his Justice Department lawyers have already invoked "state secrets" to prevent cases brought by victims of the CIA renditions from being heard.

In February, in a lawsuit brought by five graduates of CIA "black sites" before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, one of the judges, visibly surprised at hearing the new "change" president invoking "state secrets," asked the government lawyer, Douglas Letter, "The change in administration has no bearing on this?"

The answer: "No, your honor." This demand for closing this case before it can be heard had, he said, been "thoroughly vetted with the appropriate officials within the new administration, [and] these are authorized positions."

Said the torture graduates' ACLU lawyer, Ben Wizner: "Much is at stake in this case. If the CIA's overboard secrecy claims prevail, torture victims will be denied their say in court solely on the basis of an affidavit submitted by their torturers."

Barack Obama a torturer? Not exactly. In this particular case, the torture policy had been set by George W. Bush. President Obama is just agreeing with his predecessor. Does that make Obama complicit in these acts of torture? You decide.

What is clear, beyond a doubt—and not only in "rendition" cases, but in other Obama validations of what Dick Cheney called the necessary "dark side" of the previous administration—has been stated by Jameel Jaffer. Head of the ACLU's National Security Project, he is the co-author of the definitive evidence of the Bush-Cheney war crimes that Obama is shielding, Administration of Torture (Columbia University Press).

After the obedient Holder rang the "state secrets" closing bell in the San Francisco case, Jaffer described the link between the Bush and Obama presidencies: "The Bush administration constructed a legal framework for torture, but the Obama administration is constructing a legal framework for impunity."

It's become an Obama trademark: reversing a vigorous position he had previously taken, as when he signed into law the FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) Amendments Act that, as a senator, he had vowed to filibuster as a protest against their destruction of the Fourth Amendment. And now he's done it again. His government is free to spy on us at will.

For another example of the many Obamas, the shifting president had supported the release of photographs of Bush-era soldier abuses of prisoners in Iraq and Afghanistan. (The Second Circuit Court of Appeals in New York had approved the publication of these "intensive interrogations.") But Obama changed his mind, and Defense Secretary Robert Gates flat-out censored the photos. Not surprisingly, the Roberts Supreme Court agreed with Gates and Obama and overruled the Second Circuit.

[Continue @ source]

Source

The Decade Of Tyranny

Loss of basic freedoms has spurred a mass awakening, next decade will be defined by restoration of liberties

During the first nine years of the new millennium we have been witness to a rapid erosion of freedom. Our basic liberties have been systematically denigrated and diluted by a vast expansion of coordinated global tyranny.

The decade is not over yet, there is still another year to go, however, given that the mainstream media is obsessively compiling it’s own decade lists, we felt it necessary to draw up our own to highlight the major events that have shaped the world we now live in and the future we face.

It is important to stress the fact that while we have indeed experienced a decade of tyranny, we have also seen a mass awakening, an expansion of knowledge and an exponential increase in opposition to the agenda we have come to know as the new world order.

Here in chronological order, follow’s Prisonplanet.com’s defining moments of the decade.

2001 – 9/11

9/11 was the precursor for everything that followed during the decade of tyranny. The immediate invasion of Afghanistan saw the U.S. go to war without a formal declaration.

The passage of the USA PATRIOT Act overnight, with members of Congress not even being afforded time to read it, paved the way for a decade of freedom stripping government legislation.

The expansion of the phony war on terror as justification for big government, a domestic police state and an interventionist foreign policy also stemmed directly from 9/11.

Over the past decade we have ceaselessly exposed the lies behind 9/11. We have seen the 9/11 truth movement blossom from the efforts of a select few individuals to encompass the work of thousands.

While there is no doubt 9/11 is the decade of tyranny’s defining moment, exposing the truth behind it has also led to to an equally influential awakening that is still ongoing.

2002 – Creation Of The Department of Homeland Security

The fallout of 9/11 led to a re-alignment of power in the U.S., with the shadow government stepping out into the open and implementing elements of a long term agenda to subvert Constitutional freedom.

After the passage of the PATRIOT Act in late 2001, the next major step toward tyranny came with the expansion of the federal government through the creation of the DHS.

The DHS has played the role of the domestic police state enforcer agency, encompassing every major law enforcement agency in the nation under one single office.

With multiple subsequent reports and video productions fingering the American people as potential terrorists, the Orwellian titled agency has proven it has nothing to do with security and everything to do with limiting the freedoms of people all over the country.

2003 – Invasion Of Iraq

The March 2003 invasion of Iraq was a war based on a mountain of lies and deceit, and yet at the time the public swallowed the propaganda with wanton bloodlust. The constant invocation of a link between 9/11 and Saddam Hussein was repeatedly debunked both before and after the invasion, but the course for war was set.

The invasion was an illegal attack based on a wholly contrived pretext and the war was not approved by Congress. This set the precedent for unconstitutional global pre-emptive strikes in the name of the war on terror. Conservative estimates put the death told as a result of the invasion at around 655,000, but this number is far higher when the previous years sanctions are taken into account. Upon U.S. occupation of the country, Iraq was turned into one giant gulag, with hundreds of thousands detained and held in internment camps for the most menial offenses.

The occupation of Iraq provided the opportunity to build hundreds of military bases to be used as launch pads for future pre-emptive wars in the key geopolitical region of the Middle East.

2004 – The Abu Ghraib prison abuse scandal

The Abu Ghraib torture scandal was shocking for two primary reasons. The first being the treatment of the prisoners themselves, the vast majority of whom were innocents caught up in random sweeps who had nothing to do with insurgents or terrorism whatsoever. However, the photographs that were broadcast around the world only scratched the surface of the the true horror of what happened not just at Abu Ghraib, but what happened and continues to occur at dozens of U.S. torture camps around the world where suspects are illegally kidnapped and imprisoned on a whim via a process euphemistically labeled “rendition”.

The second most disturbing aspect to the story was how the media covered it and how the public’s reaction was carefully manipulated. By only showing the most mild examples of torture, which in reality were disgusting but to a public immersed in violent movies and television were seen as tame, the true depth of the scandal, as revealed in the Taguba military report, was disguised. Abu Ghraib was also about inoculating the public against the idea that torture was something only history’s despotic regimes engaged in. To many who have been completely brainwashed by this tyranny – torture is now as American as Mom and apple pie.

Low-level culprits in the scandal were burned while their superiors who ordered them to torture in complete violation of both the U.S. constitution and the Geneva Conventions were protected by the Bush administration and continue to be protected by Obama who has failed to fulfil his election promise that they would be prosecuted and that similar detention sites like Guantanamo Bay would be closed.

2005 – Hurricane Katrina Fallout

The disaster in New Orleans provided the federal government with the perfect opportunity to wargame a martial law takeover.

Emergency preparedness legislation and FEMA executive orders that have been in effect for decades, were suddenly put into use at the expense of basic freedoms.

The Posse Comitatus Act was overturned as active duty military paraded the streets and aided police in confiscating firearms and implementing mandatory evacuation orders.

The precedent has now been set for natural disasters to constitute broad sweeping changes to ancient laws and rights, overturning and replacing basic liberties with repressive mechanisms of government control.

2006 – Liquid Bombing Scam

The biggest story of 2006 was undoubtedly the staged liquid bomb plot, which led to tighter restrictions on carrying fluids aboard airliners and heralded a new wave of invasive technologies to be implemented in airports and eventually introduced on a day-to-day basis.

Despite the fact that the alleged terrorists involved in the plot to explode multiple airliners were closely tracked for months beforehand, added to the fact that they didn’t have flight tickets or even passports, it was announced on August 10th that authorities had busted the plot amidst a wave of propaganda about continuing the war on terror, similar to what we are hearing in the aftermath of the Christmas Day bombing attempt.

According to news reports the British government and MI5 wanted to wait at least a week before busting the liquid terror cell that their agents had fully infiltrated, including planting a mole within the bomb squad. From the acknowledged timeline and admission that the real attack was scheduled for August 16th – little else can be deduced but the shocking fact that MI5 wanted the bombings to go forward – arresting the perpetrators only after the attack.

A deluge of fearmongering and paranoia ensued, with ridiculous measures hastily enforced in airports which remain with us to this day, such as mothers being forced to drink their own bottled breast milk to prove it is not an explosive liquid.

2007 – Ron Paul Revolution, The Rise Of The Resistance

After years of endless war, economic decline and suppression of basic freedoms, 2007 saw a mobilization of resistance amid a clamor for change.

With a presidential election looming, Congressman Ron Paul, a public representative with an immaculate record, emerged as an icon of counteraction against the growth of big government and the erosion of liberty.

Beginning as an underground phenomenon driven by grassroots activists, the Ron Paul Revolution soon became a mainstream talking point and the Congressman was propelled to the forefront of the debate over America’s future.

Of course, big money and the monopoly of power eventually won out, so the 2008 election saw a new new world order puppet installed in the shape of Barack Obama.

However, Ron Paul’s incredible efforts throughout 2007 and 2008 during his presidential campaign provided a platform for the restoration of liberty and proved that the electoral process has not been completely usurped by those who have shown they have no allegiance to we the people.

2008 – The Bailout Heist

In October 2008, the central banks that own the U.S. government set the course for the most egregious looting of the American public in history with the passage of the TARP “bailout” legislation.

The bailout merely increased the severity of the financial downturn and allowed the same elite to exploit the crisis as a pretext for centralizing control of the world economic system and creating a new world order and a single global currency.

Henry Paulson, one of the chief architects of the bailout and the man who committed financial terrorism by threatening the Congress with martial law and food riots if they didn’t pass the initial TARP package, brazenly pocketed $200 million in Goldman Sachs profits tax free while handing out billions in ill-gotten gains to his bankster buddies, all this after he pulled a bait and switch by changing the entire focus of the bailout from buying up toxic debt to giving money directly to financial institutions.

Following the election of Barack Obama in November 2008, the new President’s actions made it abundantly clear that he would pick up where the Bush administration left off, increasing the looting exponentially to a figure well over $24 trillion by the latest estimates, which don’t even account for the last 6 months.

2009 – Acceleration of World Government

2009 represents the year that the agenda for a world government was both openly announced and the acceleration of its implementation reached breakneck speed as globalists exploited both the engineered financial crisis and the contrived global warming scam to move to finalize total dictatorial control over the planet.

In an October New York Times editorial entitled “We Can Do It,” Ki-moon wrote that efforts to impose restrictions on CO2 emissions “Must include an equitable global governance structure.”

New EU President Herman Van Rompuy said in a December press conference that the Copenhagen conference was, “The first step towards the global management of our planet.”

Similarly, Al Gore said in a speech earlier this year that attempts to regulate CO2 emissions would be driven through “global governance and global agreements.”

Although it failed to ram through a large portion of the global government agenda, the Copenhagen agreement laid the foundation for the introduction of a global transaction tax which would be paid to the World Bank, representing a massive transfer of wealth to the new world government now being primed for total takeover.

Ten years ago, people who warned about a coming new world order bossed by a global government were called paranoid conspiracy theorists. Is the march towards a one world government still a conspiracy theory, even as its architects openly announce its implementation?

The Decade of Freedom?

The battle between tyranny and freedom is a long term game of brinkmanship, however, as we move into 2010, we are reaching a crucial time in modern history. Humanity must decide whether to engage in a battle for freedom or accept a future under the rule of tyranny.


Source

Report: U.S. Responsible for Dramatic Expansion of Afghan Opium Trade

As United States President Barack Obama and his advisors debated future troop levels for Afghanistan - which resulted in the decision to send an additional 30,000 troops - a new report by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) muddied the water on one of the most important issues in the debate - the effects of Afghanistan's drug production.

The report, entitled "Addiction, Crime, and Insurgency: The Transnational Threat of Afghan Opium," gives the false impression that the Taliban are the main culprits behind Afghanistan's skyrocketing drug production. It also implies that drugs are the main reason why the Taliban are gaining in strength, absolving the United States and North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) of their own responsibility in fomenting the insurgency.

In fact, the United States and its Afghan allies bear a large share of responsibility for the drug industry's dramatic expansion since the invasion. Buried deep in the report, its authors admit that reduced levels of drug production would have little effect on the insurgency's vigor.

The following annotation rebuffs some of the report's main assertions, puts in perspective the Taliban's role in the opium economy and highlights US/NATO responsibility for its expansion and potential reduction.

Taliban insurgents draw some US$125 million annually from drugs, which is more money than 10 years ago, [and as a result] the perfect storm of drugs and terrorism, that has struck the Afghan/Pakistani border for years, may be heading towards Central Asia. A big part of the region could be engulfed in large-scale terrorism, endangering its massive energy resources.

These claims are supposed to make us shudder in the face of an impending narco-terrorist seizure of a large chunk of the world's energy resources. UNODC states that a decade ago the Taliban earned $85 million per year from drugs, but that since 2005 this figure has jumped to $125 million. Although this is pitched as a significant increase, the Taliban play a more minor role in the opium economy than UNODC would have us believe and drug money is probably a secondary source of funding for them. Indeed, the report estimates that only 10-15% of Taliban funding is drawn from drugs and 85% comes from "non-opium sources".

The total revenue generated by opiates within Afghanistan is about $3.4 billion per year. Of this figure, according to UNODC, the Taliban get only 4% of the sum. Farmers, meanwhile, get 21%.

And the remaining 75%? Al-Qaeda? No: The report specifies that it "does not appear to have a direct role in the Afghan opiates trade," although it may participate in "low-level drugs and/or arms smuggling" along the Pakistani border.

Instead, the remaining 75% is captured by government officials, the police, local and regional power brokers and traffickers - in short, many of the groups now supported (or tolerated) by the United States and NATO are important actors in the drug trade.

The New York Times recently revealed that Ahmed Wali Karzai, President Hamid Karzai's brother, has long been on the Central Intelligence Agency's (CIA's) payroll, in addition to his probable shady dealings in drugs. But this is only the tip of the iceberg, as US and NATO forces have long supported warlords, commanders and illegal militias with a record of human-rights abuses and involvement in narcotics. A former CIA officer said, "Virtually every significant Afghan figure has had brushes with the drug trade." According to a New York University report, General Nazri Mahmad, a warlord who "control[s] a significant portion of the province's lucrative opium industry," has the contract to provide security for the German Provincial Reconstruction Team.

UNODC insists on making the Taliban-drugs connection front-page news while not chasing with the same intensity those supported by Washington. The agency seems to be acting as an enabler of US/NATO policies in Afghanistan.

When I asked the UNODC official who supervised the report what percentage of total drug income in Afghanistan was captured by government officials, the reply was quick: "We don't do that, I don't know."

Instead of pointing a finger directly at the US/NATO-backed government, the report gives the impression that the problem lies mostly with rotten apples who threaten an otherwise well-intentioned government.

But the roots of Afghanistan's upsurge in drug production since 2001 are directly related to US policies and the government that was installed in the wake of the invasion. The United States attacked Afghanistan in 2001, in alliance with anti-Taliban warlords and drug lords, showering them with millions of dollars and other forms of support. The empowerment and enrichment of the warlords with whom the US allied itself enabled them to tax and protect opium traffickers, leading to the quick resumption of opium production after the hiatus of the 2000 Taliban ban.

To blame "corruption" and "criminals" for the state of affairs is to ignore the direct and predictable effects of US policies, which have simply followed a historical pattern of toleration and empowerment of local drug lords in the pursuit of broader foreign policy objectives, as Alfred McCoy and others have documented in detail.

Impunity for drug lords and warlords continues: a US Senate report noted in August that no major traffickers have been arrested in Afghanistan since 2006, and that successful prosecutions of significant traffickers are often overturned by a simple bribe or protection from above, revealing counter-narcotics efforts to be deficient at best.

Identifying drugs as the main cause behind Taliban advances absolves the US/NATO of their own responsibility in fomenting the insurgency: their very presence in the country, as well as their destructive attacks on civilians account for a good deal of the recent increase in popular support for the Taliban.

In fact, buried deep in the report, its authors admit that reducing drug production would have only "minimal impact on the insurgency's strategic threat". The Taliban receive "significant funding from private donors all over the world", a contribution which "dwarfs" drug money. Although the report will be publicized by many as a vindication of calls to target the opium economy in order to weaken the Taliban, the authors themselves are not convinced of the validity of this argument.

Of the $65 billion turnover of the global market for opiates, only 5-10% ($3-5 billion) is estimated to be laundered by informal banking systems. The rest is laundered through legal trade activities and the banking system.

This is an important claim that points to the enormous amounts of drug money swallowed by the world financial system, including Western banks.

The report says that over the last seven years (2002-2008), the transnational trade in Afghan opiates resulted in worldwide sales of $400-$500 billion (retail value). Only 5-10% of this is estimated to be laundered by informal banking systems (such as hawala). The remainder is laundered through the legal economy, and importantly, through Western banks.

In fact, Antonio Maria Costa was quoted as saying that drug money may have recently rescued some failing banks: "Interbank loans were funded by money that originated from drug trade and other illegal activities", and there were "signs that some banks were rescued in that way". "At a time of major bank failures, money doesn't smell, bankers seem to believe," he wrote in UNODC's 2009 World Drug Report (emphasis in original).

Afghanistan has the world monopoly of opium cultivation (92%), the raw material for the world's deadliest drug - heroin, [which is] causing up to 100,000 deaths per year.

Tobacco is the world's deadliest drug, not heroin, and kills about five million people every year. According to the World Health Organization, if present tobacco consumption patterns continue, the number of deaths will increase to 10 million by the year 2020. Some 70% of these will be in developing countries, which are the main target of the tobacco industry's marketing ploys. So why does the Taliban get more flak than tobacco companies?

The report estimates there are 16 million opiate users across the world, with the main consumer market being Europe, valued at $20 billion. Europeans are thus the main source of funding for the Afghan drug industry and their governments share a significant part of responsibility for failing to decrease demand and provide more treatment services within their own borders. Lowering drug use in Europe would contribute significantly to reducing the scale of the problem in Afghanistan.

Moreover, the report notes that NATO member Turkey is a "central hub" through which Afghan opiates reach Europe. Perhaps NATO should direct its efforts towards its own members before targeting the Taliban.

Some Taliban networks may be involved at the level of precursor procurement. These recent findings support the assertion that the Taliban network is more involved in drug trafficking than previously thought.

Yes, the Taliban surely take a cut out of the precursor trade (the chemicals needed to refine opium into products like heroin and morphine).

However, Western countries and some of their allies are also involved: The report identified "Europe, China and the Russian Federation" as "major acetic anhydride sources for Afghanistan". For instance, 220 liters of acetic anhydride were intercepted this year at Kabul airport, apparently originating from France. In recent years, chemicals have also been shipped from or via the Republic of Korea and UNODC's 2008 Afghan Opium Survey pointed to Germany as a source of precursors.

It is unclear what the total value of the Afghan trade in chemical precursors is, but from the report's data it can be inferred that the retail value of just one precursor, acetic anhydride, was about $450 million this year. Part of that money goes back to Western chemical corporations in the form of profits. Tighter safeguards should be in place on these products.

Areas of opium poppy cultivation and insecurity correlate geographically. In 2008, 98% of opium poppy cultivation took place in southern and western Afghanistan, the least secure regions.

UNODC associates drugs with the Taliban by pointing to the fact that most poppy cultivation takes places in regions where the Taliban are concentrated. Maps show "poppy-free" provinces in the north and a concentration of cultivation in the southern provinces, linking the Taliban with drugs.

It is true that cultivation is concentrated in the south, but such maps obscure the fact that there is plenty of drug money in the north, a region over which the Afghan government has more control. For instance, Balkh province may be poppy-free, but its center, Mazar-i Sharif, is awash in drug money. Nangarhar was also poppy-free in 2008, although it still remains a province where a large amount of opiates is trafficked.

Some Western officials are now implying that political elites in northern Afghanistan are engaging in successful counter-narcotics while the southern drug economy expands. But the fact is that although the commanders who control northern Afghanistan today may have eliminated cultivation, none have moved against trafficking. Most of them continue to profit from it, and some are believed to have become millionaires.


Source

Climategate: Barack Obama’s rule by EPA decree is a coup d’etat against Congress, made in Britain

Who needs tanks on the lawn when you have the Environmental Protection Agency? Barack Obama’s use of the EPA to pressurise the Senate to pass his climate change Nuremberg Decrees shows his dictatorial mentality. He wants to override Congress, which is hostile to his climate gobbledegook because it is representative of the American electorate, and sideline the nation’s elected Senators by ruling by decree, courtesy of the EPA. This is a coup d’état.

And what is the justification for this undemocratic action? The allegedly imminent threat from “Anthropogenic Global Warming”. There is always a supposed threat, when tyrants take the stage. The President of the United States has just reduced his moral authority to the level of any Third World dictator heading a “Government of National Emergency”. Fortunately, the world’s leading democracy, which he is trying to subvert, has guarantees of liberty so deeply embedded in its Constitution that US citizens are well placed to fight back.

In the first place, regulation can be challenged in a way that laws cannot. So the EPA’s proposed ruling on so-called “Greenhouse Gases” can be opposed extensively with litigation, to the point that the ruling might not yet be in force when Obama demits office. In the second place, the EPA is funded by Congress. So, if the Agency is being used to bypass or neuter Congress, why should legislators not play hardball and retaliate by cutting off its funding? The EPA may look formidable, but its situation is rather as if Rommel were buying the fuel for his tanks from the Allies.

But what is of compelling interest on this side of the pond is the way in which the bullets to shoot down American democracy were made in Britain. The trail is not hard to follow. When the EPA published its “Endangerment Finding” on greenhouse gases and proposed rule, back in April, almost every paragraph of the text (Federal Register, April 24, 2009, pp 18886-18910) cited as authority the IPCC’s 2007 Report, which the Agency acknowledges it “relies on most heavily”. And whence came the main input on climate change to that report?

Yes, that’s right! You’ve got it: from Phil Jones, Michael Mann and the rest of the lads at the CRU, East Anglia. From the innovative, creative “scientists” who wanted to “beat the crap” out of a climate change sceptic; who “just completed Mike’s Nature trick”; who “can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t”; who deleted e-mails in the interests of science; who tried to prevent publication of dissenters’ views; who coined the historic phrase “hide the decline”.

Those jokers are the main authority for the extravagant claims in the IPCC report and, by extension, for the EPA’s “Endangerment Finding”. That is the authority that is being invoked to overturn the principles of 1776 in the United States. The Protocols of the Elders of Norwich are the justification for EPA tyranny. It is with that weighty evidence at his back that Barack Obama is going to Copenhagen to sell out American taxpayers to Third World subsidy junkies, profiteering “green” corporations and the ever entrepreneurial Al Gore. This is the steal of the millennium: forget the Great Train Robbery and the Brinks Mat caper – these hoodlums are targeting $45 trillion.

Obama hates America and, increasingly, that sentiment is being reciprocated. This is a socialist, World Government putsch. Have the American people the resolution to resist it? We shall soon know.


Source

“Police Youth Corps” Confronted at Florida Parade

Civilian youth Police caught roaming the streets during a Christmas parade in St. Petersburg FL, We are Change Tampa confront them with questions, when we ask them they are extremely secretive about their association with the local police department and try to hide their badges and jackets that clearly say POLICE on them.

They were apparently part of the Boy Scout’s Explorer unit, who the New York Times reported, were trained to fight terrorism, including the fear of returning vets.

Scouts Train to Fight Terrorists, and More
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/14/us/14explorers.html?_r=4&hp

President Obama Signs Landmark National Service Legislation
http://www.nationalservice.gov/about/newsroom/releases_detail.asp?tbl_pr_id=1301


Source