Obama Youth Brigades: “It’s about creating a One World”

Summary of videos and information pertaining to Obama’s National Service Plan.

We found a striking similarity to the Hitler Youth (or Hitler-Jugend, HJ).

"The HJ wore uniforms very like those of the SA, with similar ranks and insignia."[1]

City Year's uniform colors are red, black, white, tan.[2] The Nazi colors are red, black, white and the Nazi SA wore tan.

"The HJ was organized into local cells on a community level."[3]

"City Year’s signature program, the City Year youth service corps, unites 1,500 young people age 17-24 for a year of full-time community service, leadership development, and civic engagement."[4]

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitler_Youth#Doctrine
[2] http://www.cityyear.org/whatwedo.aspx
[3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitler_Youth#Organization
[4] http://www.cityyear.org/about.aspx

Billionaire club in bid to curb overpopulation

America's richest people meet to discuss ways of tackling a 'disastrous' environmental, social and industrial threat

SOME of America’s leading billionaires have met secretly to consider how their wealth could be used to slow the growth of the world’s population and speed up improvements in health and education.

The philanthropists who attended a summit convened on the initiative of Bill Gates, the Microsoft co-founder, discussed joining forces to overcome political and religious obstacles to change.

Described as the Good Club by one insider it included David Rockefeller Jr, the patriarch of America’s wealthiest dynasty, Warren Buffett and George Soros, the financiers, Michael Bloomberg, the mayor of New York, and the media moguls Ted Turner and Oprah Winfrey.

These members, along with Gates, have given away more than £45 billion since 1996 to causes ranging from health programmes in developing countries to ghetto schools nearer to home.

They gathered at the home of Sir Paul Nurse, a British Nobel prize biochemist and president of the private Rockefeller University, in Manhattan on May 5. The informal afternoon session was so discreet that some of the billionaires’ aides were told they were at “security briefings”.

Stacy Palmer, editor of the Chronicle of Philanthropy, said the summit was unprecedented. “We only learnt about it afterwards, by accident. Normally these people are happy to talk good causes, but this is different – maybe because they don’t want to be seen as a global cabal,” he said.

Some details were emerging this weekend, however. The billionaires were each given 15 minutes to present their favourite cause. Over dinner they discussed how they might settle on an “umbrella cause” that could harness their interests.

The issues debated included reforming the supervision of overseas aid spending to setting up rural schools and water systems in developing countries. Taking their cue from Gates they agreed that overpopulation was a priority.

This could result in a challenge to some Third World politicians who believe contraception and female education weaken traditional values.

Gates, 53, who is giving away most of his fortune, argued that healthier families, freed from malaria and extreme poverty, would change their habits and have fewer children within half a generation.

At a conference in Long Beach, California, last February, he had made similar points. “Official projections say the world’s population will peak at 9.3 billion [up from 6.6 billion today] but with charitable initiatives, such as better reproductive healthcare, we think we can cap that at 8.3 billion,” Gates said then.

Patricia Stonesifer, former chief executive of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, which gives more than £2 billion a year to good causes, attended the Rockefeller summit. She said the billionaires met to “discuss how to increase giving” and they intended to “continue the dialogue” over the next few months.

Another guest said there was “nothing as crude as a vote” but a consensus emerged that they would back a strategy in which population growth would be tackled as a potentially disastrous environmental, social and industrial threat.

“This is something so nightmarish that everyone in this group agreed it needs big-brain answers,” said the guest. “They need to be independent of government agencies, which are unable to head off the disaster we all see looming.”

Why all the secrecy? “They wanted to speak rich to rich without worrying anything they said would end up in the newspapers, painting them as an alternative world government,” he said.

Source

Archie Bunker on Gun Control

Norman Lear and the writers for All in the Family made Archie Bunker into reactionary stereotype. In the clip here, they attempt to extend that reactionary stereotype to gun control and the Second Amendment. In the process, the fictional character Archie Bunker speaks more truth than Lear and the writers probably intended.

Source

AmeriCorps Paramilitary Propaganda Ad

In the distinctly militaristic propaganda here, the AmeriCorps organization City Year adopts Obama’s “change” mantra and remixes it with clips of Mohandas Gandhi, the Rev. Martin Luther King, César Chávez, and Mother Teresa.

City Year’s pitch is obviously directed at middle school and high school students. In the ad, young people are assembled on a parade ground in bright red jackets. According to a Wikipedia write-up on the organization, “corps members start their day in an event called unity rally. One aspect of unity rally is PT or physical training. Some of the exercises may include jumping jacks and lunges. When PT is completed, Corps members read their sites official newspaper, called Daily or Weekly Briefings.” Comparisons to the Jungsturm Adolf Hitler and Stalin’s Komsomol are unmistakable, especially in regard to the regimented physical training aspects of City Year.

It should be noted that AmeriCorps is fully integrated into the homeland security apparatus. AmeriCorps VISTA (Volunteers in Service to America) is part of the Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS).

Frank Morales writes (Homeland Defense: The Pentagon Declares War on America):

In the wake of 9/11, CNCS was fully integrated into “homeland defense efforts”. In March 2002, the Corporation issued a “notice of availability of funds to strengthen communities and organizations in using service and volunteers to support homeland security.” With an emphasis on “public safety” and “freeing up police time”, the grants offered under the announcement “are to assist communities in getting involved in the war against terrorism on the home front.” In the area of “public safety” the grants “will help provide members to support police departments… in tasks and other functions that can be performed by non-sworn officers.” Now mind you, the volunteers “are not armed, nor can they make arrests, but they carry out vital tasks including organizing neighborhood watch groups…” They also “organize communities to identify and respond to crime and disorder problems…”

Obama has proposed arming these cadres. Recall his speech on July 2, 2008, when he said: “We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded” as the U.S. military.

“Since the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, the Corporation has made funding available to organizations whose focus includes homeland security,” declares the Virginia Commission for National and Community Service. “AmeriCorps engages more than 70,000 Americans each year in intensive service to meet community needs in education, the environment, public safety, homeland security, and other areas,” the IN.gov site states.

AmeriCorps NCCC (National Civilian Community Corps) is specifically tasked with homeland security, according to The United States Conference of Mayors. “AmeriCorps NCCC, a residential, team-based program, offers approximately 1,300 young people between the ages of 18 to 24 the opportunity to serve their country for ten months on various projects. The primary focus of these are assisting in responding disaster relief and homeland security,” reports Shannon Holmes. The NCCC “are well positioned to leverage existing community efforts,” according to the Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, and “can make significant contributions to homeland security activities in American communities.”

NCCC programs “may also meet homeland security needs, which the Corporation for National Service defines as engaging citizens and communities in preparedness and response to acts of terrorism and other disasters,” explains the AmeriCorps State Concept Paper Guidelines.

According to reports issued by the Department of Homeland Security, terrorism now stems from domestic “rightwing extremists,” not a far-flung al-Qaeda, and activities such as advocacy of the Second Amendment, pro-life activism, and the growing states’ rights movement threaten the fatherland.

As noted on Alex Jones’ Infowars and Prison Planet websites last week, Homeland Security has captured the heretofore non-political Boy Scouts and turned it into a paramilitary organization. As the New York Times notes, Boy Scouts are now training to disarm military veterans.

On April 21, Obama signed the “Serve America Act,” which will use $1.1 billion in earmarks from the 2010 budget to reauthorize and expand programs offered by the Corporation for National and Community Service. The “Serve America Act,” co-sponsored by Massachusetts Senator Edward Kennedy, intends to extend AmeriCorps membership from 75,000 to 250,000 by 2017.

“Although it’s likely that the recession and citizen goodwill have contributed to soaring numbers in national and international service organizations, it’s also just as likely that most people are just supporting a summoning from America’s new favorite man,” writes the OhMyGov website.

Source

The System is designed to exert Total Control over the Lives of Individuals

What impresses me in the current financial crisis is the near-total failure of so-called progressives to appreciate the magnitude of what is going on or the level of intelligence behind it. How many will say, for instance, that the crash was deliberately engineered by the creation, then destruction, of the investment bubbles of the last decade?

When the financial system creates bubbles it drives up the cost of assets far beyond their true value in producing or storing wealth. When the bubbles burst the value of the assets plummets. Those with ready cash then buy them up on the cheap. When the dust settles more wealth has been concentrated in fewer hands. The rich get richer, and ordinary people are left in a deeper condition of indebtedness, poverty, and pressure to perform to the liking of the financial masters.

Progressives think the system needs to be “reformed.” Maybe the banking system needs to be re-regulated or even nationalized. Maybe it should be possible for families facing loss of their homes to get a lower monthly payment from a bankruptcy court. Maybe the government instead of the private sector should administer student loans.

What we fail to acknowledge is that the system itself is totalitarian. This means that it is designed to exert total control over the lives of individuals. We are accustomed to use this label when thinking of anachronisms of history like communism or fascism. We do not understand that globalist finance capitalism and the government which protects, enables, or even regulates it are also totalitarian.

What has happened in the last year as the financial system has seemingly gone belly-up, and is coming back only through massive government bailouts, is part of a pattern that has been around for decades if not centuries. How the controllers work was laid out in 1967 when Dial Press published a leaked copy of The Report from Iron Mountain. This was a study put together by a team of academics and analysts who met at the underground facility in New York that was home to the Hudson Institute

The report began by identifying war as the central organizing principle of society. It stated, “War itself is the basic social system, within which other secondary modes of social organization conflict or conspire. It is the system which has governed most human societies of record, as it is today.”

The report said that, “The basic authority of a modern state over its people resides in its war powers.” It said that any failure of will by the ruling class could lead to “actual disestablishment of military institutions.” The effect on the system would be, the report said, “catastrophic.”

The appearance of the report caused a sensation when it came out at the onset of the Vietnam War. Officials within the government had no comment, and the report faded into history. But certain of its sections fit the situation in 2009 precisely.

This is because the report outlined the ways the civilian population of a developed nation could be controlled even in the absence of a large-scale war that disrupted their daily lives. One of these ways was defined as follows: “A…possible surrogate for the control of potential enemies of society is the reintroduction, in some form consistent with modern technology and political process, of slavery….The development of a sophisticated form of slavery may be an absolute prerequisite for social control….” (Cited in Rule by Secrecy by Jim Marrs, 2000.)

We see the development of such a “sophisticated form of slavery” today. What else can a system be called that subjects the population to skyrocketing personal and household debt, a widening gap between the rich and everyone else, constant warfare justified as necessary to fight “terrorism,” erosion of personal freedoms, constantly expanding power allocated to the military and police, pervasive electronic eavesdropping, complete lack of accountability by politicians for their dishonesty and crimes, a mass media devoted solely to establishment propaganda, etc.

None of this seems to be diminishing under the Barack Obama administration. Even the economic recovery Obama is attempting to engineer through massive Keynesian deficit spending is expected by economists to be another “jobless” one like that of 2002-2005. Of course the unemployed or those who fear unemployment are easy to control. And the permanent series of Asian land wars George W. Bush instigated for control of resources and geopolitical leverage against Russia and China continue unabated.

None of this is accidental. As The Report from Iron Mountain made clear four decades ago, it’s what has been planned all along.

Source

Bilderberg Wants Global Department Of Health, Global Treasury

Veteran investigative journalist Jim Tucker has uncovered Bilderberg’s 2009 agenda, which includes the plan for a global department of health, a global treasury and a shortened depression rather than a longer economic downturn.

Appearing on The Alex Jones Show, Tucker said that former Swedish Prime Minister and regular Bilderberg attendee Carl Bildt, “Made a speech advocating turning the World Health Organization into a world department of health, advocating turning the IMF into a world department of treasury, both of course under the auspices of the United Nations.”

Tucker noted that such moves would constitute giant steps toward the world government that Bilderberg has set about to achieve but has been frustrated in finalizing over the past 10 years.

Tucker said that Bilderberg are keen on stressing the problems caused by the economic crisis, as well as the threat of a disease pandemic, as a means of justifying centralization of power.

According to Tucker, Bildt also discussed global warming in the context of a global tax on carbon emissions, which has long been a part of Bilderberg’s agenda.

The global tax which will be paid directly to the UN will be introduced gradually, first of all as a barely noticeable tax at the gas pump, before being hiked up once it is in place, said Tucker.

Regarding the crucial Lisbon Treaty, which was struck down after Irish voters said no to its passage last year, Tucker said that Bilderberg were planning to privately send representatives to Ireland to talk to political leaders in an effort to push the treaty through. The EU requires all member states to ratify the treaty before it can be passed and Irish voters will again be asked to vote in a referendum later this year despite having already rejected the treaty last year.

Tucker said that a key component of this year’s Bilderberg Group meeting was an effort to get President Obama to, “Slip through ratification of the International Criminal Court treaty,” by forwarding it to the Senate to be voted on.

“Their tactics are this,” said Tucker, “Obama is to sweet talk the many left-wing Democrats in Congress who really want the International Criminal Court treaty, they’re just scared because people were so strongly opposed to surrendering sovereignty that they were afraid to vote for it - political cowards - so Obama’s going to sweet talk them and say don’t worry, we’ll have more liberals in the Senate after the 2010 elections so in January of 2011 when the new Senate is seated you can ratify it late on a Saturday night when it’s too late for Sunday morning papers and to re-plan the Sunday talk shows….there will be no political reprisals.”

Tucker confirmed the information first released by Daniel Estulin, that Bilderberg were discussing whether to sink the economy quickly or drag on a long agonizing depression. “Treasury Secretary Geithner and Carl Bildt touted a shorter recession not a 10-year recession….partly because a 10 year recession would damage Bilderberg industrialists themselves, as much as they want to have a global department of labor and a global department of treasury, they still like making money and such a long recession would cost them big bucks industrially because nobody is buying their toys….the tilt is towards keeping it short,” said Tucker.

Tucker concluded by noting that Bilderberg members seemed grim faced at this year’s meeting and that geopolitically, “Things are going bad for them, Americans are responding, Europeans are responding, and their program is being blocked.”

Source

Footage of a Pastor Attacked by Constitution Free Zone Thugs

Pastor Stephen Anderson insisted on his constitutional rights while driving in the Constitution-free Zone in Arizona and was assaulted by border patrol thugs. Anderson was told by a Border Patrol (a fascist subset of the Ministry of Homeland Security) thug he was under arrest for refusing to exit his vehicle and when he refused to comply — citing the Constitution and probable cause — the window of his vehicle was shattered and he was tased.

On May 23, a protest rally will be held at the internal Constitution-free zone Gestapo checkpoint. The check point is located within a few miles of mile marker 75 which is about 75 miles east of Yuma, AZ on Interstate 8.

This is the actual footage from Pastor Anderson’s camcorder as well as from the surveillance cameras at the Border Patrol Checkpoint.

Source

Top Nazis Planned EU-Style Fourth Reich

Influential economists and industrialists were ordered to preserve Nazi power by creating European common market, documents show

A writer who was collecting material for a fictional book based around the premise that top Nazis, seeking to preserve their power at the end of the second world war, conspired to create a Fourth Reich under the auspices of the European Union, actually discovered documents proving the plot to be true.

In a Daily Mail piece, Adam Lebor reveals how he uncovered US Military Intelligence report EW-Pa 128, also known as The Red House Report, which details how top Nazis secretly met at the Maison Rouge Hotel in Strasbourg on August 10, 1944 and, knowing Germany was on the brink of military defeat, conspired to create a Fourth Reich - a pan-European economic empire based around a European common market.

Top Nazi industrialists were ordered by SS Obergruppenfuhrer Dr Scheid to set up front companies abroad and pose as democrats in order to achieve economic penetration and lay the foundations for the re-emergence of the Nazi party.

“The Third Reich was defeated militarily, but powerful Nazi-era bankers, industrialists and civil servants, reborn as democrats, soon prospered in the new West Germany. There they worked for a new cause: European economic and political integration,” writes Lebor.

Wealthy Nazi industrialists like Alfried Krupp of Krupp Industries and Friedrich Flick, as well as front companies like BMW, Siemens and Volkswagen, set about the task of building a new pan-European business empire. According to historian Dr Michael Pinto-Duschinsky, an adviser to Jewish former slave labourers, “For many leading industrial figures close to the Nazi regime, Europe became a cover for pursuing German national interests after the defeat of Hitler….The continuity of the economy of Germany and the economies of post-war Europe is striking. Some of the leading figures in the Nazi economy became leading builders of the European Union.”

Banking titan Hermann Abs, who joined board of Deutsche Bank during the rise of Nazis, also sat on the supervisory board of I.G. Farben, the company that made the Zyklon B gas used to kill concentration camp victims. “Abs was put in charge of allocating Marshall Aid - reconstruction funds - to German industry. By 1948 he was effectively managing Germany’s economic recovery,” writes Lebor.

“Crucially, Abs was also a member of the European League for Economic Co-operation, an elite intellectual pressure group set up in 1946. The league was dedicated to the establishment of a common market, the precursor of the European Union.”

The European League for Economic Co-operation developed policies for European integration that almost mirrored those proposed by Nazis just years previously.

In his book “Europe’s Full Circle,” Rodney Atkinson provides a list of policies proposed by Nazis and their similarity to today’s European Union.

Europaische Wirtshaftsgemeinschaft
European Economic Community

European Currency System
European Exchange Rate Mechanism

Europabank (Berlin)
European Central Bank (Frankfurt)

European Regional Principle
Committee of the Regions

Common Labour Policy
Social Chapter

Economic and Trading Agreements
Single Market

“Is it possible that the Fourth Reich those Nazi industrialists foresaw has, in some part at least, come to pass?” asks Lebor.

“These three typewritten pages are a reminder that today’s drive towards a European federal state is inexorably tangled up with the plans of the SS and German industrialists for a Fourth Reich - an economic rather than military imperium.”

As we have highlighted in the past, Nazism and the EU have some very disturbing parallels. Indeed, the two are fundamentally intertwined and the origins of the EU can be traced directly back to the Nazis.

The foundations for the EU and ultimately the Euro single currency were laid by the secretive Bilderberg Group in the mid-1950’s. Bilderberg’s owned leaked documents prove that the agenda to create a European common market and a single currency were formulated by Bilderberg in 1955. One of the group’s principle founders was H. Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands, a former Nazi SS officer.

But the ideological framework for the European Union goes back even further, to the 1940’s when top Nazi economists and academics outlined the plan for a single European economic community, an agenda that was duly followed after the end of the second world war.

In his 1940 book The European Community, Nazi Economics Minister and war criminal Walther Funk wrote about the need to create a “Central European Union” and “European Economic Area” and for fixed exchange rates, stating “No nation in Europe can achieve on its own the highest level of economic freedom which is compatible with all social requirements…The formation of very large economic areas follows a natural law of development….interstate agreements in Europe will control [economic forces generally]…There must be a readiness to subordinate one’s own interests in certain cases to those of [the EC].”

Funk’s co-authors echoed his sentiments. Nazi academic Heinrich Hunke wrote, “Classic national economy..is dead…community of fate which is the European economy…fate and extent of European co-operation depends on a new unity economic plan”.

Fellow Nazi Gustav Koenig observed, “We have a real European Community task before us…I am convinced that this Community effort will last beyond the end of the war.”

In 1940, Minister of Propaganda Joseph Goebbels ordered the creation of the “large-scale economic unification of Europe,” believing that “in fifty years’ time [people would] no longer think in terms of countries.” Just 53 years later, the European Union in its current form was established.

Other top Nazis who called for the creation of a pan-European federal economic superstate include Ribbentrop, Quisling and Seyss-Inquart, who spoke of “The new Europe of solidarity and co-operation among all its people… will find…rapidly increasing prosperity once national economic boundaries are removed.”

Such rhetoric would not look out of place at a present day Bilderberg, Trilateral Commission or CFR confab.

The Nazis killed people who spoke out against the Third Reich, whereas the EU has implemented an altogether more efficient solution - simply kill their free speech instead.

A Dutch MP was recently refused entry to Britain because his political opinions were deemed offensive under EU laws. Euro MP’s have consistently attempted to ban the “dangerous and unregulated blogosphere” in an attempt to shut down free speech on the Internet. Under the 1999 ruling of the European Court Of Justice (case 274/99), it is illegal to criticize the EU and the EU is on a mission to outlaw any national political parties that do not pander to the European federal superstate agenda.

Most of the individuals who hold the reigns of power in the European Union are not Nazis, indeed, they probably believe themselves to be fair-minded liberals working for the “greater good”. However, the European Union by its very nature is totalitarian, because it seeks to remove power from national governments accountable to their electorate and centralize it into the hands of supra-national entities that are accountable to nobody but themselves. It also seeks to remove the right of free speech for anyone in a position of influence who criticizes this agenda.

The fact that the EU was a brainchild of top Nazi economists and industrialists, formulated as a means of preserving dictatorial power and then implemented by a former Nazi working under the auspices of the Bilderberg Group in 1955, proves that the entire European Union system is poisoned with a legacy and a raison d’être of totalitarianism.

This is becoming increasingly obvious in the 21st century as popular social movements across Europe rise up to oppose the blatant power grab being undertaken by the EU via the Lisbon Treaty, which will again be put before Irish voters later this year despite them already rejecting it in a national referendum, which prevented the treaty from being enforced.

Source

Police Investigate Man With Civil Liberties Sticker As Possible “Extremist”

Background checked for displaying an image as old as America itself

Louisiana police pulled over and detained a man for half an hour, believing him to be a possible “extremist” because of a bumper sticker on his car that read “Don’t Tread On Me”.

The man, who’s identity is undisclosed for privacy reasons, was reportedly subjected to a thorough background check after he purchased the iconic sticker from The Patriot Depot.

The details were related to Conservative website americanvision.org by the man’s sister-in-law Rosemarie, a resident of Ball, Louisiana.

The deplorable irony of this incident is almost too much to stomach given the origins of the image seen above.

The coiled rattlesnake and the defiant “Don’t Tread on Me” motto are taken from the Gadsden flag, named after American patriot Colonel Christopher Gadsden. The flag dates from around 1775 and was used by The United States Marine Corps as an early motto flag.

The rattlesnake was used to signify the fact that it only strikes after giving warning and if it feels under threat of attack.

The image of the rattlesnake even pre-dates the flag, and was regularly used as a symbol for the American colonies after Benjamin Franklin sketched a picture of a dismembered snake to symbolize the need for unity in defending the colonies during the French and Indian War.

Today the flag has been embraced by civil liberties movements, and is even still used by the US Navy.

The image is supposed to represent a symbol of shared American values, in particular the highest common value of freedom.

Of course, none of this matters to police forces that are specifically trained to look for bumper stickers and other paraphernalia associated with the Constitution, Libertarianism and freedom, and treat those who display them as possible “extremists”.

The Department of Homeland Security’s definition of an “extremist” is now someone who is concerned about the erosion of U.S. sovereignty or someone who questions the mainstream media.

It is now to be expected that you will be pulled over by police if you display Ron Paul bumper stickers, you may even be visited by the secret service for exercising your first amendment right.

Source

EU Calls for “Internet G12″ for Global Internet Governance

As the EU Observer reports, Information Society Commissioner Viviane Reding has called on President Obama to fully privatize the California based Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), which manages the web address system for the internet, and build a “multilateral forum for governments to discuss general internet governance policy and security issues.” The international group would in turn “make recommendations” with regards to global internet governance.

Reding is anticipating the expiration of the ICANN contract with the U.S. Department of Commerce in September of 2009, calling for a separation of ICANN from its U.S. ties, making ICANN an international organization. Reding states,

“The expiry of the agreement between ICANN and the US government “opens the door for the full privatisation of ICANN, and it also raises the question of to whom ICANN should be accountable.”

“In the long run, it is not defendable that the government department of only one country has oversight of an internet function which is used by hundreds of millions of people in countries all over the world,” Reding said.

Reding’s comments provide a window into a wider agenda to transform the internet. Reding stated in October of 2008 that, “The Internet of the future will radically change our society.” Ultimately, according to Reding, the EU is aiming to “lead the way” in the transformation to “Web 3.0.”

Media Kingpin Rupert Murdoch recently announced that “The current days of the internet will soon be over,” indicating the establishment’s move to radically transform the internet away from its current form. Paul Joseph Watson writes, “The establishment media is dying and advertising revenue has plummeted as people turn to blogs and the alternative media for their news in an environment of corporate lies and spin.”

Watson continues,

The corporate media monopoly has terminal cancer and they are losing their power, which is why they are aggressively supporting moves to phase out the old Internet altogether and replace it with “Internet 2,” a highly regulated and controlled electronic Berlin wall, where alternative voices will be silenced and giant corporate propaganda organs will dominate once again.”

The future of the internet, according to author and “web critic” Andrew Keen, will be monitored by “gatekeepers” to verify the accuracy of information posted on the web. The “Outlook 2009″ report from the November-December issue of The Futurist reports that,

“Internet entrepreneur Andrew Keen believes that the anonymity of today’s internet 2.0 will give way to a more open internet 3.0 in which third party gatekeepers monitor the information posted on Web sites to verify its accuracy.”

Keen stated during his early 2008 interview with The Futurist that the internet, in its current form, has undermined mainline media and empowered untrustworthy “amateurs”, two trends that he - and the establishment that he represents - wants reversed. “Rather than the empowerment of the amateur, Web 3.0 will show the resurgence of the professional,” states Keen.

Related articles from Old-Thinker News: EU Set to Move ‘Internet of Things’ Closer to Reality

Source

2nd Amendment Saves Lives: College Student Shoots, Kills Home Invader

A group of college students said they are lucky to be alive and they’re thanking the quick-thinking of one of their own. Police said a fellow student shot and killed one of two masked me who burst into an apartment.

“Apparently, his intent was to rape and murder us all,” said student Charles Bailey.

Bailey said he thought it was the end of his life and the lives of the 10 people inside his apartment for a birthday party after two masked men with guns burst in through a patio door.

The End of Free Speech? Criminalizing Criticism of Israel

On October 16, 2004, President George W. Bush signed the Israel Lobby’s bill, the Global Anti-Semitism Review Act. This legislation requires the US Department of State to monitor anti-semitism world wide.

To monitor anti-semitism, it has to be defined. What is the definition? Basically, as defined by the Israel Lobby and Abe Foxman, it boils down to any criticism of Israel or Jews.

Rahm Israel Emanuel hasn’t been mopping floors at the White House.
As soon as he gets the Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009 passed, it will become a crime for any American to tell the truth about Israel’s treatment of Palestinians and theft of their lands.

It will be a crime for Christians to acknowledge the New Testament’s account of Jews demanding the crucifixion of Jesus.

It will be a crime to report the extraordinary influence of the Israel Lobby on the White House and Congress, such as the AIPAC-written resolutions praising Israel for its war crimes against the Palestinians in Gaza that were endorsed by 100 per cent of the US Senate and 99 per cent of the House of Representatives, while the rest of the world condemned Israel for its barbarity.

It will be a crime to doubt the Holocaust.

It will become a crime to note the disproportionate representation of Jews in the media, finance, and foreign policy.

In other words, it means the end of free speech, free inquiry, and the First Amendment to the Constitution. Any facts or truths that cast aspersion upon Israel will simply be banned.

Given the hubris of the US government, which leads Washington to apply US law to every country and organization, what will happen to the International Red Cross, the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, and the various human rights organizations that have demanded investigations of Israel’s military assault on Gaza’s civilian population? Will they all be arrested for the hate crime of “excessive” criticism of Israel?

This is a serious question.

A recent UN report, which is yet to be released in its entirety, blames Israel for the deaths and injuries that occurred within the United Nations premises in Gaza. The Israeli government has responded by charging that the UN report is “tendentious, patently biased,” which puts the UN report into the State Department’s category of excessive criticism and strong anti-Israel sentiment.

Israel is getting away with its blatant use of the American government to silence its critics despite the fact that the Israeli press and Israeli soldiers have exposed the Israeli atrocities in Gaza and the premeditated murder of women and children urged upon the Israeli invaders by rabbis. These acts are clearly war crimes.

It was the Israeli press that published the pictures of the Israeli soldiers’ T-shirts that indicate that the willful murder of women and children is now the culture of the Israeli army. The T-shirts are horrific expressions of barbarity. For example, one shows a pregnant Palestinian woman with a crosshairs over her stomach and the slogan, “One shot, two kills.” These T-shirts are an indication that Israel’s policy toward the Palestinians is one of extermination.

It has been true for years that the most potent criticism of Israel’s mistreatment of the Palestinians comes from the Israeli press and Israeli peace groups. For example, the Israeli newspaper Haaretz and Jeff Halper of ICAHD have shown a moral conscience that apparently does not exist in the Western democracies where Israel’s crimes are covered up and even praised.

Will the American hate crime bill be applied to Haaretz and Jeff Halper? Will American commentators who say nothing themselves but simply report what Haaretz and Halper have said be arrested for “spreading hatred of Israel, an anti-semitic act”?

Many Americans have been brainwashed by the propaganda that Palestinians are terrorists who threaten innocent Israel. These Americans will see the censorship as merely part of the necessary war on terror. They will accept the demonization of fellow citizens who report unpalatable facts about Israel and agree that such people should be punished for aiding and abetting terrorists.

A massive push is underway to criminalize criticism of Israel. American university professors have fallen victim to the well organized attempt to eliminate all criticism of Israel. Norman Finkelstein was denied tenure at a Catholic university because of the power of the Israel Lobby. Now the Israel Lobby is after University of California (at Santa Barbara,) professor Wiliam Robinson. Robinson’s crime: his course on global affairs included some reading assignments critical of Israel’s invasion of Gaza.

The Israel Lobby apparently succeeded in convincing the Obama Justice (sic) Department that it is anti-semitic to accuse two Jewish AIPAC officials, Steven Rosen and Keith Weissman, of spying. The Israel Lobby succeeded in getting their trial delayed for four years, and now Attorney General Eric Holder has dropped charges. Yet, Larry Franklin, the DOD official accused of giving secret material to Rosen and Weissman, is serving 12 years and 7 months in prison.

The absurdity is extraordinary. The two Israeli agents are not guilty of receiving secrets, but the American official is guilty of giving secrets to them! If there is no spy in the story, how was Franklin convicted of giving secrets to a spy?

Criminalizing criticism of Israel destroys any hope of America having an independent foreign policy in the Middle East that serves American rather than Israeli interests. It eliminates any prospect of Americans escaping from their enculturation with Israeli propaganda.

To keep American minds captive, the Lobby is working to ban as anti-semitic any truth or disagreeable fact that pertains to Israel. It is permissible to criticize every other country in the world, but it is anti-semitic to criticize Israel, and anti-semitism will soon be a universal hate-crime in the Western world.

Most of Europe has already criminalized doubting the Holocaust. It is a crime even to confirm that it happened but to conclude that less than 6 million Jews were murdered.

Why is the Holocaust a subject that is off limits to examination? How could a case buttressed by hard facts possibly be endangered by kooks and anti-semitics? Surely the case doesn’t need to be protected by thought control.

Imprisoning people for doubts is the antithesis of modernity.


Source

Rupert Murdoch: “Internet Will Soon Be Over”

Corporate media forced to charged dwindling readership for news content as establishment propaganda organs wither and die while alternative media soars

Billionaire media mogul Rupert Murdoch gave a strange response when asked about plans for mainstream news websites to charge for content, declaring, “The current days of the internet will soon be over.”

He was making reference to the fact that corporate media websites cannot continue to survive under their current failing business model.

The establishment media is dying and advertising revenue has plummeted as people turn to blogs and the alternative media for their news in an environment of corporate lies and spin.

This has forced sectors of the corporate media to charge the dwindling number of loyal readers they have left for news content, a practice which is set to become widespread according to Murdoch. This will only send more people over to the alternative media as the old organs of de facto state-controlled propaganda wither and die.

“Asked whether he envisaged fees at his British papers such as the Times, the Sunday Times, the Sun and the News of the World, (Murdoch) replied: “We’re absolutely looking at that,” reports the Guardian. “Taking questions on a conference call with reporters and analysts, he said that moves could begin “within the next 12 months‚” adding: “The current days of the internet will soon be over.”

Murdoch’s newspapers and TV networks, which include Fox News and the Asian Star Network, have seen profits plummet from $216m to just $7m year-on-year. MySpace.com is also floundering despite a recent move to replace the company’s entire management staff.


It was all but over for the Boston Globe this week, following a threat to close the 137-year-old publication after net losses of $85 million this year alone. Only a last minute cost-cutting agreement on behalf of its owner, The New York Times Company, and The Boston Newspaper Guild, saved the newspaper.

But it’s not just establishment newspapers that are struggling to survive - social networking websites like Twitter and corporate online video giant You Tube are also deep in the red. Apparently, paying out millions in server fees for half the population of the planet to watch clips of cute puppies isn’t a sustainable business model.

This is why You Tube is being forced to pursue lucrative partnerships with giant production studios and broadcasters, at the expense of user generated content which has been relegated to a sub-section of its website, taking the “You” out of You Tube altogether. Content that may be deemed harmful to You Tube’s corporate agenda and its multi-million dollar partnership deals, like The Alex Jones Channel, is being systematically erased from You Tube’s website under the pretext of flimsy copyright infringement claims.

The jig is up for the corporate media. If they continue to allow free access to their content they will go out of business because there’s not enough advertising revenue coming in, whereas if they charge for content they will lose a huge chunk of their audience and their influence in shaping the news agenda will wane completely.

This is the price the corporate media has paid for lying, spinning and obfuscating on behalf of the virulently corrupt power elite and expecting the population to eat it up without question.

The corporate media monopoly has terminal cancer and they are losing their power, which is why they are aggressively supporting moves to phase out the old Internet altogether and replace it with “Internet 2,” a highly regulated and controlled electronic Berlin wall, where alternative voices will be silenced and giant corporate propaganda organs will dominate once again.

This what Murdoch is really getting at when he assures us that, “The Internet will soon be over” and it’s down to us to stop that agenda from being realized.

Source

Leaked Agenda: Bilderberg Group Plans Economic Depression

On the eve of the 2009 Bilderberg Group conference, which is due to be held May 14-17 at the 5 star Nafsika Astir Palace Hotel in Vouliagmeni, Greece, investigative reporter Daniel Estulin has uncovered shocking details of what the elitists plan to do with the economy over the course of the next year.

The Bilderberg Group meeting is an annual confab of around 150 of the world’s most influential powerbrokers in government, industry, banking, media, academia and the military-industrial complex. The secretive group operates under “Chatham House rules,” meaning that no details of what is discussed can ever be leaked to the media, despite editors of the world’s biggest newspapers, the Washington Post, the New York Times and the Financial Times, being present at the meeting.

According to Estulin’s sources, which have been proven highly accurate in the past, Bilderberg is divided on whether to put into motion, “Either a prolonged, agonizing depression that dooms the world to decades of stagnation, decline and poverty … or an intense-but-shorter depression that paves the way for a new sustainable economic world order, with less sovereignty but more efficiency.”

The information takes on added weight when one considers the fact that Estulin’s previous economic forecasts, which were based on leaks from the same sources, have proven deadly accurate. Estulin correctly predicted the housing crash and the 2008 financial meltdown as a result of what his sources inside Bilderberg told him the elite were planning based on what was said at their 2006 meeting in Canada and the 2007 conference in Turkey.

Details of the economic agenda were contained in a pre-meeting booklet being handed out to Bilderberg members. On a more specific note, Estulin warns that Bilderberg are fostering a false picture of economic recovery, suckering investors into ploughing their money back into the stock market again only to later unleash another massive downturn which will create “massive losses and searing financial pain in the months ahead,” according to a Canada Free Press report.

According to Estulin, Bilderberg is assuming that U.S. unemployment figures will reach around 14% by the end of the year, almost doubling the current official figure of 8.1 per cent.

Estulin’s sources also tell him that Bilderberg will again attempt to push for the enactment of the Lisbon Treaty, a key centerpiece of the agenda to fully entrench a federal EU superstate, by forcing the Irish to vote again on the document in September/October despite having rejected it already, along with other European nations, in national referendums.

“One of their concerns is addressing and neutralizing the anti-Lisbon treaty movement called “Libertas” led by Declan Ganley. One of the Bilderberger planned moves is to use a whispering campaign in the US media suggested that Ganley is being funded by arms dealers in the US linked to the US military,” reports CFP.

Daniel Estulin, Jim Tucker, and other sources who have infiltrated Bilderberg meetings in the past have routinely provided information about the Bilderberg agenda that later plays out on the world stage, proving that the organization is not merely a “talking shop” as debunkers claim, but an integral planning forum for the new world order agenda.

Indeed, just last month Belgian viscount and current Bilderberg-chairman Étienne Davignon bragged that Bilderberg helped create the Euro by first introducing the policy agenda for a single currency in the early 1990’s. Bilderberg’s agenda for a European federal superstate and a single currency likely goes back even further. A BBC investigation uncovered documents from the early Bilderberg meetings which confirmed that the European Union was a brainchild of Bilderberg.

In spring 2002, when war hawks in the Bush administration were pushing for a summer invasion of Iraq, Bilderbergers expressed their desire for a delay and the attack was not launched until March the following year.

In 2006, Estulin predicted that the U.S. housing market would be allowed to soar before the bubble was cruelly popped, which is exactly what transpired.

In 2008, Estulin predicted that Bilderberg were creating the conditions for a financial calamity, which is exactly what began a few months later with the collapse of Lehman Brothers.

Bilderberg has routinely flexed its muscles in establishing its role as kingmaker. The organization routinely selects presidential candidates as well as running mates and prime ministers.

Bill Clinton and Tony Blair were both groomed by the secretive organization in the early 1990’s before rising to prominence.

Barack Obama’s running mate Joe Biden was selected by Bilderberg luminary James A. Johnson, and John Kerry’s 2004 running mate John Edwards was also anointed by the group after he gave a glowing speech at the conference in 2004. Bilderberg attendees even broke house rules to applaud Edwards at the end of a speech he gave to the elitists about American politics. The choice of Edwards was shocking to media pundits who had fully expected Dick Gephardt to secure the position. The New York Post even reported that Gephardt had been chosen and “Kerry-Gephardt” stickers were being placed on campaign vehicles before being removed when Edwards was announced as Kerry’s number two.

A 2008 Portuguese newspaper report highlighted the fact that Pedro Santana Lopes and Jose Socrates attended the 2004 meeting in Stresa, Italy before both going on to become Prime Minster of Portugal.

Several key geopolitical decisions were made at last year’s Bilderberg meeting in Washington DC, again emphasizing the fact that the confab is far more than an informal get-together.

As we reported at the time, Bilderberg were concerned that the price of oil was accelerating too fast after it hit $150 a barrel and wanted to ensure that “oil prices would probably begin to decline”. This is exactly what happened in the latter half of 2008 as oil again sunk below $50 a barrel. We were initially able to predict the rapid rise in oil prices in 2005 when oil was at $40, because Bilderberg had called for prices to rise during that year’s meeting in Munich. During the conference in Germany, Henry Kissinger told his fellow attendees that the elite had resolved to ensure that oil prices would double over the course of the next 12-24 months, which is exactly what happened.

Also at last year’s meeting, former U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice formalized plans to sign a treaty on installing a U.S. radar base in the Czech Republic with Czech Foreign Minister Karel Schwarzenberg.

Rice was joined at the meeting by Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who reportedly encouraged EU globalists to get behind an attack on Iran. Low and behold, days later the EU threatened Iran with sanctions if it did not suspend its nuclear enrichment program.

There was also widespread speculation that Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama’s “secret meeting,” which was accomplished with the aid of cloak and dagger tactics like locking journalists on an airplane to keep them from tracking the two down, took place at the Bilderberg meeting in DC.

It remains to be seen what kind of mainstream media press coverage Bilderberg 2009 will be afforded because, despite the proven track record of Bilderberg having a central role in influencing subsequent geopolitical and financial world events, and despite last year’s meeting being held in Washington DC, the U.S. corporate media oversaw an almost universal blackout of reporting on the conference, its attendees, and what was discussed.

Once again, it will be left to the alternative media to fill the vacuum and educate the people on exactly what the globalists have planned for us over the coming year.

Source

Is Your Blog a Weapon?

Law prof Eugene Volokh blogs about a U.S. House of Representatives bill proposed by Rep. Linda T. Sanchez and 14 others that could make it a federal felony to use your blog, social media like MySpace and Facebook, or any other web media “To Cause Substantial Emotional Distress Through “Severe, Repeated, and Hostile” Speech.” Oh lordy, there goes 4chan.

Here’s the relevant text:

Whoever transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication, with the intent to coerce, intimidate, harass, or cause substantial emotional distress to a person, using electronic means to support severe, repeated, and hostile behavior, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.

["Communication"] means the electronic transmission, between or among points specified by the user, of information of the user’s choosing, without change in the form or content of the information as sent and received;

["Electronic means"] means any equipment dependent on electrical power to access an information service, including email, instant messaging, blogs, websites, telephones, and text messages.

Jacob Sullum at Reason thinks the proposed law is stupid, too.

It was bad enough that a grandstanding U.S. attorney successfully prosecuted Lori Drew, a Missouri woman who participated in a cruel MySpace prank that apparently precipitated the 2006 suicide of 13-year-old Megan Meier, under an anti-hacking law that clearly was not intended for this sort of situation. Now Rep. Linda Sanchez (D-Calif.) and 14 of her colleagues want to make such prosecutions easier through a breathtakingly broad bill that would criminalize a wide range of speech protected by the First Amendment.

The Megan Meier Cyberbullying Prevention Act would make it a felony punishable by up to two years in prison to transmit an electronic communication (”including email, instant messaging, blogs, websites, telephones, and text messages”) “with the intent to coerce, intimidate, harass, or cause substantial emotional distress to a person…to support severe, repeated, and hostile behavior.”

Source

There is One Type of Total Gun Ban that We Need, Jefferson Would Agree, and It’s the Key to Bringing Back 1776

What I have to say in this article may deeply anger or enrage many who read it. But what I have to say is no more than a rewording of this miraculous passage from Thomas Jefferson:

“[E]very able-bodied freeman, between the ages of sixteen and fifty, is enrolled in the militia… The law requires every militia-man to provide himself with the arms usual in the regular service.”

-Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, Quivery IX

I think that very few Americans have thought deeply about this passage, what it’s really saying, and thus very few understand the ramifications of this passage—even those in the heart of the Truth Movement may not have thought about this passage deeply enough to really see that this passage may be the key to everything.

How is it the key to everything? You might think it is by the way this passage promotes Second Amendment issues. That is true, but that is not what I am getting at here. We already all know that. What this passage really involves is actually a far bigger issue, one that I think very few of us have noticed, amazingly.

Jefferson says that it is the ordinary citizens who are the militia. Jefferson does not say that it is certain government-VIP groups, or any other government groups, who are members of the militia. (These VIP groups are the police and military, which are “standing armies”, if armed or maybe even if unarmed, when they are amassed on US soil; and they are groups like the FDA or USGS or NSA. These are groups that are given elevated status over the level of citizen by big government. From what I can tell, this basic issue is anti-Jeffersonian and/or unconstitutional.) That is the key: it is the citizens, and definitely not any (unconstitutional) government-favored special groups, who are the militia: who are the real homeland security.

Jefferson’s passage at the start of this article clearly lays this out, and it requires that almost all of us rearrange our thinking in order to get back to a 1776 mental framework. I sense that even listeners of the Alex Jones Show may have this thesis I am presenting here hit them with a shock, like a ton of bricks, as if it’s a radical thesis. But that just shows us how far we’ve come from 1776, and how subtly we’re all still under the trickery of the New World Order, even if we think we are so enlightened since we are Alex Jones listeners, guns owners, and members of the Patriot movement. Ok, with the thesis laid out, now let’s see how this Jeffersonian vision works…

So, what does this all mean? What would it mean if we had a total weapon and total gun ban for on-duty police and for military and post-Constitutional government entities? What would really happen in such a scenario? Well, it must be something quite good for the people that happens, since governments worldwide fight against this sort of a scenario almost more than they fight against anything. But more specifically, it means that it is against the law, against the Founders, and against 1776, for on-duty police, military, and for the aforementioned post-Constitutional government entities (FDA, CIA, EPA, Dept. of Education, etc.) to possess firearms (including any projectile weapon, such as non-lethal weapons [tasers, etc.] or crossbows or longbows, microwave guns, etc.), since these big-government-favored groups are not part of the militia. That’s the key issue, and this is all very important; so let’s get this down pat in more detail.

How are on-duty police, military, and for the aforementioned post-Constitutional government entities (FDA, CIA, EPA, Dept. of Education, etc.) not part of the militia, in Jefferson’s philosophy? Here’s how:

These big-government-favored groups are elevated in power above the status of being an ordinary citizen, but Jefferson says it’s only those of the status of ordinary citizen who are party of the militia (who are gun owners), thus if you fall outside of this ordinary citizen group you are breaking the law if you own a weapon!

That is what Jefferson’s comments lead to, and if we explore the ramifications of this (as I am going to next), you will perhaps agree that this is Jefferson’s greatest, largest, and most critical issue for preservation of the Constitutional Republic. So let’s figure out why this issue—gun ban for on-duty police and for military and non-Constitutional government entities—is really the single issue we should focus on perhaps more than any other.

There are so many issues we members of the Truth and Patriot movements have to grapple with. If we want our country back, if we want back what Jefferson, Washington, Adams, Henry, and the rest of the Founders set up for us, where on earth do we start when we are in such an incredible quagmire today, where we have strayed so unimaginably far from the Founders’ Republic? We have to deal with pandemic hoaxes, GM food plagues, FEMA holocaust, secret government, false flag terror, government robot weapons, attempts by big government to destroy inalienable rights, vaccine holocausts, depleted uranium, and all the rest that infowars.com patriots are all too familiar with. It is perhaps a daunting task when we consider how much we have to deal with. But what if we could reduce all these issues down to one, single issue—an issue that’s power-source of all the others—wherein we could focus in on that one issue, obliterate it, and ipso facto, 1776 would be restored? That is precisely what is at stake in the aforementioned issue of pushing for a gun ban for on-duty police and for military and non-Constitutional government entities. This is a simple issue, a clearly definable issue, one that could easily get huge amounts of support since already 70 percent (or more) of Americans are pro-Second Amendment (and this is growing fast). So, let’s see why if we won that single battle of removing weaponry from government, military, and on-duty police, that all other things would fall into place.

Yes, that’s right, we need one type of gun control. We need gun control for on-duty police and any military and government officials who are on US soil (excluding Congress, the President, and perhaps the members of the Supreme Court, since they may be members of the militia, in Jefferson’s vision). This would include any group that even loosely resembled a standing army (such as privatized military forces like Blackwater) since they are unconstitutional, except for the one Constitutional standing army: the militia. In other words, on-duty police should banned from possessing guns, as should any government people in the military, FDA, CIA, and any of the other post-Constitutional monstrosities that we Americans have permitted to come into existence and control every aspect of us down to our consciousness. The way this would happen peacefully is if members of these big-government-favored groups deprogrammed from their brainwashing and voluntarily put down their arms in order to join this Second Amendment Jeffersonian revolution. I think getting this to happen is doable.

What will be the net effect of this? It would have such tremendous ramifications that it would bring us right back to the America that the Founders established for us. Consider how this works.

If we had unarmed police and military, we would have police and military that would be no threat to any gun-owner (“one man with a gun can control a hundred without one”). I cannot underestimate the importance of this. Eventually the balance of power would shift to such a degree that government would be under the control of the gun owners (of the Jeffersonian militia). Why? Because anyone out there who is in any way fired up about the Second Amendment knows that the feeling of owning a gun, carrying a gun, is so safe, secure, and free, that the joy it brings just blossoms within you in such a way that you glue on to that feeling of freedom almost as tightly as you hug your child. So, in other words, the gun owners would thrive and unite in their euphoria of freedom and Constitutionalism, by the feelings they have inside from carrying the gun. I can see this in a lower-level form when I am at the shooting range, at the gun shop. I can see it in the eyes, feel it in the hearts, of my fellow pro-Second Amendment friends, and there are a lot of them. As Alex Jones has said, protecting our Second Amendment is the one thing that millions will lay down everything and fight for right now. This is because the gun owner knows, feels, how the peace-of-mind of holding the gun is the key to freedom, as Jefferson and many of the Founders did too. Jefferson describes the issue most clearly:

As to the species of exercise, I advise the gun. While this gives a moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise, and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball, and others of that nature, are too violent for the body, and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun, therefore, be the constant companion of your walks. Never think of taking a book with you. The object of walking is to relax the mind. You should therefore not permit yourself even to think while you walk; but divert yourself by the objects surrounding you. Walking is the best possible exercise. Habituate yourself to walk very far. –Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Peter Carr, August 19, 1785

It is the gun, the Second Amendment, that gives freedom. Without it we are slaves; with it we can be like Jefferson on his walks, with a mind clear and liberated, unworried and free to philosophize. The feelings of freedom that gun owners employ would overflow if there was a gun ban for on-duty police and for military and non-Constitutional government entities. This is because it would instantly be the case that

1. The citizens would not have a powerful military or police force to fall back on and be dependent upon, and thus they would have to assume those responsibilities for themselves, and they would become the police and military, they would assume those roles: fathers would become protectors instead of TV-watchers, grandfathers would again take their grandchildren to the range, women would again recognize the urgency to carry a pistol wherever they go, and women would walk through parking lots at night without a shred of fear (a woman empowered, without fear: a feminism the fake feminists will never know). Again, in the current state of TV-addicted-America, this sounds odd to many who think dialing 911 is the key to safety, but again, I am just rewording what Jefferson has already said when he told that what I am writing about in this article is real homeland security: “…our attention should be fixed on the safety of our country. For a people who are free, and who mean to remain so, a well-organized and armed militia [citizens] is their best security.” –Jefferson, Eight Annual Message, Nov. 8, 1888.

2. Without the illusion of “security” from the big government police and military forces, the citizens would not have a powerful military or police force to fall back on and be dependent upon, and thus they would feel that they have no protection—as if they are “naked in the wilderness”—citizens would in this case do what people always do: they would seek out protection, and the best protection, they would find, is the gun. There is already so much pro-gun fervor in America, that quickly after a disarming of on-duty police and of military and non-Constitutional government entities, there would be an overpowering zeitgeist in the air that the best protection is the gun (this zeitgeist already exists in America at a lower level, as it it’s just waiting to overflow). Consequently, those who are gun owners would amplify their devotion to their art, and those who are not would become passionate gun owners by the millions. We would quickly change from a helpless nation to a nation empowered.

Now, what I have described so far in this article is a blueprint for how we completely disempower the government, and radically empower the citizenry. And this all occurred from one little issue: institute a gun ban for on-duty police and for military and non-Constitutional government entities.

Notice: this is a single issue, not many issues. This is one issue that can solve all other issues. This is not like trying to do many things: it is not trying to reign in GM food, vaccines, and the Fed all at once. It’s a much simpler task: you just do one thing, which is disarm the big-government-favored groups. And if we all focused our energy on this one issue, we could get it done, and the rest of the 1776 cards would fall into place.

And here’s why this issue of disarming the big-government-favored groups is the issue that allows everything else about the New World Order to fall away, from vaccines to draft, to carbon tax, to ID chip. Here’s what America would look like with disarmed big-government-favored groups:

A. On the one hand, there would be the armed, patriotic America, which would consist of a mass of wide-eyed, passionate, happy gun owners (sort of like a vaster version of what I already see at a much smaller scale at the shooting range every Saturday), with confidence, character, and inner peace (as Jefferson described in a passage above), which would number in the hundreds of millions

B. And then on the other hand, there would be a completely unarmed government, numbering only a tiny fraction of those described in a.

The power is with A. And what about B? Well… B is, well, rather pathetic, isn’t it. We are, at any moment, incredibly close to this sort of a scenario, since there is only one thing we need to do to put this sort of a world in place: disarm on-duty police, disarm military on US soil (or maybe all military, at least for a time), and any other big-government-favored groups.

Just from this disarmament, A and B fall into place. Do you see what happens then, if A and B are in place? Government has no authority; gun owners are authority—they are government!

What do you think would happen if B tried to tell A that they can’t have a garden because they might plant pot in it? Yeah, I am laughing too! What do you think would happen if B told A that there was a draft, or that there were mandatory vaccinations for swine flu, or that Congress is being lobbied to “pass” a “bill” that robs the citizens blind (“bank bailout”)? Yeah, it’s a pretty funny scenario; almost like a zebra herd walking up to the lion prides to tell the lions to please stop eating them–or, almost like an American in the current situation, where the current American tries to “write their Congressman”. Even non-gun-owning (i.e., non-Constitutional) members of America are not really citizens, in this scheme of this article, and of Jefferson’s lawmaking, and they are at the wretched, disempowered level of B, more than they are of A.

So, in summary, there are so many issues we have to fight for, and we need to get more and more aware of all that is going on, but amid everything else we Truthers and Patriots are doing, we may want to think about launching a campaign, with more energy and persistence and passion than anything we have ever done, to fight for this one single issue: a gun ban for on-duty police and for military and non-Constitutional government entities, in order to have the chain of events outlined in this Jeffersonian treatise carry out. This is a doable project, since it is a single project, a clear and easy-to-understand project that will make all people feel as empowered as one of the Patriots in the Revolutionary War. Looking at our plight with this issue above all others can give us a means to win this victory against the satanic New World Order, and can give us hope, inspiration, drive, and rebirth, resembling the Minutemen of the Republic.

Source

YouTube’s Parent Google is a Corporate Member of the Council on Foreign Relations

As Paul Joseph Watson and Kurt Nimmo note today, Google is in bed with the CIA. In 2006, Robert David Steele, a 20-year Marine Corps infantry and intelligence officer and a former clandestine services case officer with the CIA, told Alex Jones as much. Steele went so far as to name Dr. Rick Steinheiser as the CIA’s liaison at Google.

But it is not simply the CIA. Google is high up on the elitist NWO pyramid, a fact pointed out by an Infowar’s reader and missed by the editors. As it turns out, Google is a corporate member of the Council on Foreign Relations. In late 2006, Google bought YouTube for US$1.65 billion in stock, so it is fair to say YouTube is also pushing the CFR’s one-world government agenda.

It also explains why YouTube is going after Alex Jones and why The Alex Jones Channel was scrubbed from the popular website.

“The CFR is the American Branch of a society which originated in England, and which believes that national boundaries should be obliterated, and a one-world rule established,” the late Carroll Quigley wrote in his book, “Tragedy & Hope.”

“The ultimate aim of the CFR is to create a one-world socialist system, and to make the U.S. an official part of it,” explained Dan Smoot, a former member of the FBI Headquarters staff in Washington, D.C.

“The CFR is the establishment,” writes Congressmen John R. Rarick. “Not only does it have influence and power in key decision-making positions at the highest levels of government to apply pressure from above, but it also finances and uses individuals and groups to bring pressure from below, to justify the high level decisions for converting the U.S. from a sovereign Constitution Republic into a servile member of a one-world dictatorship.”

CFR “members have run, or are running, NBC and CBS, ‘The New York Times’, ‘The Washington Post’, ‘The Des Moines Register’, and many other important newspapers. The leaders of ‘Time’, ‘Newsweek’, ‘Fortune’, ‘Business Week’, and numerous other publications are CFR members. The organization’s members also dominate the academic world, top corporations, the huge tax-exempt foundations, labor unions, the military, and just about every segment of American life,” write Jack Newell and Devvy Kidd.

The “pressure from above” mentioned by Rarick is being used to silence influential critics of the concept of a one-world dictatorship now in motion.

It is, however, too late for the control freaks and one-worlders to squash the opposition. Google’s YouTube may have swept The Alex Jones into the memory hole, but this will not prevent the message from reaching millions of people who now know the New World Order is determined to reduce the planet to a slave labor gulag run by the international bankers and their minions.

Source

WRAL 5 News Report On Boy Arrested Under the Patriot Act

Homeland agency caught pulling back extremism dictionary

WASHINGTON — The same Homeland Security Department office that categorized veterans as potential terrorists issued an earlier report that defined dozens of "extremists" ranging from black power activists to abortion foes. The report was nixed within hours and recalled from state and local law enforcement officials.

Whites and blacks, Christians and Jews, Cubans and Mexicans, along with tax-hating Americans were among several political leanings listed in the "Domestic Extremism Lexicon" that came out of the Office of Intelligence and Analysis (I&A) in late March.

The lexicon lists definitions for key terms and phrases used by Homeland Security analysts "that addresses the nature and scope of the threat that domestic, non-Islamic extremism poses to the United States," the report said.

Click here to download a PDF of "Domestic Extremism Lexicon"

Black separatism was defined as a movement that they said advocates the establishment of a separate nation within the U.S., and its members "advocate or engage in criminal activity and plot acts of violence directed toward local law enforcement" to advance their goals. Black power is a "term used by black separatists to describe their pride in, and the perceived superiority of the black race," the report said.

Under the listing "antiabortion extremism," the lexicon cites a movement that "advocates violence against providers of abortion-related services." It notes that some people in the movement "cite various racist and anti-Semitic beliefs to justify their criminal activities."

"The lexicon was not an authorized I&A product, and it was recalled as soon as management discovered it had been released without authorization," said Amy Kudwa, Homeland Security spokeswoman.

"This product is not, nor was it ever, in operational use," Ms. Kudwa said.

WASHINGTON — Rep. Peter T. King, New York Republican and ranking member of the House Homeland Security Committee, said the report "causes further concern that Congress needs to get to the bottom of exactly how DHS determines what intelligence products to distribute to law enforcement officials around the country."

"Although we have evidence that some of the groups described in this and other DHS intelligence products are an active terror threat to our nation, I would be interested in knowing why this lexicon mentioning left-wing extremist groups was deemed inappropriate by DHS and recalled, yet a similar report focusing on veterans, antiabortion activists and anti-illegal immigration activists was fit for distribution and sent out by DHS to law enforcement agencies across the country," Mr. King said.

The 11-page lexicon document lists terms from A through W, beginning with "aboveground," which is defined as extremist groups or people who "operate overtly and portray themselves as law-abiding," and ending with "white supremacist movement." The listing notes six categories of white supremacists: Neo-Nazi, Ku Klux Klan, Christian identity, racist skinhead, Nordic mysticism and Aryan prison gangs.

A "left-wing extremist" is described as someone who opposes war or is dedicated to environmental and animal rights causes, while a "right-wing extremist" is someone who is against abortion or for border enforcement.

The same "right-wing" definition appeared in a report last month that prompted an outcry in the veterans community for also suggesting that veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars were targets for extremist groups to recruit for attacks against the U.S.

That report was not recalled; however, the department said it has instituted changes to more carefully review these reports before they are sent to local law enforcement agencies.

"Since this happened prior to our last experience, our new internal protocols were obviously not in place," Ms. Kudwa said.

Roger Mackin, the head of the I&A responsible for the report that suggested veterans were being recruited to commit terrorist acts in the U.S., was replaced late last month. Ms. Kudwa said then that the personnel moves were categorically not related to the veterans-related story reported by The Washington Times in mid-April.

She also said Mr. Mackin would move outside Homeland Security, to the cybersecurity section at the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. The new detail for Mr. Mackin had been planned for several weeks and predated the April 7 report, Ms. Kudwa said at the time.

The latest report to become public, the lexicon on domestic extremism, stated that people involved with anti-immigration extremism "may have been known to advocate or engage in criminal activity and plot acts of violence and terrorism to advance their extremist goals."

"They are highly critical of the U.S. government's response to illegal immigration and oppose government programs that are designed to extend 'rights' to illegal aliens, such as issuing driver's licenses or national identification cards and providing in-state tuition, medical benefits, or public education."

"Cuban independence extremism" is defined as those who "do not recognize the legitimacy of the Communist Cuban Government and who attempt to subvert it through acts of violence, mainly within the U.S."

Mexican separatism defines those would advocate an armed struggle to take back Arizona, California, New Mexico and Texas, the report stated.

Environmental extremism is described as those "who use violence to end what they perceive as the degradation of the natural environment by humans."

And, the "tax-resistance movement" is described as "groups or individuals who vehemently believe taxes violate their constitutional rights."

The criteria in the listings are a willingness to advocate or engage in criminal activity or plot acts of terrorism.

The report lists traditional extremist groups, such as racist skinheads or lone terrorists who might plot against the U.S., as well as some obscure groups. Racial Nordic mysticism is listed as an ideology adopted by many white supremacist prison gangs "who embrace a Norse mythological religion, such as Odinism or Asatru."

Source