The Indoctrination of Youth by Justin Brown
Today we are honored to have a guest blogger with us at Soldier For Liberty: Justin Brown is a freelance writer whose current profession is an Active Duty Infantryman. He has served three tours to Iraq in the last five years and continues to study the inner workings of politics, looking to further educate himself and others on the truth that lies behind the guise of the misleading main media.
The Indoctrination of Youth
By: Justin Brown
Skeptics will state that there is no such thing as the implementation of indoctrinating the children of the United States of America; however from the mouths of government officials, agencies, and past Presidents’, this shows to be far from the actual truth. Do not get me wrong; am I by no means talking down upon the teachers in our education system. I am simply stating that many of us in society are willingly being used to implement the work of those behind the scenes that wish to impose power much greater than the average citizen can even begin to fathom. They do this through television, our educational system, sports, the media, etc. I’d like to place before you just one of the means by which such is and has been implemented for quite a long time. It is known as ideological subversion.
Ideological subversion is a four step plan that has been implemented upon the people for so long that even those teaching such doctrine to our kids, for the most part are unaware that they’re willingly brainwashing our youth. This goes along with them having already been indoctrinated themselves. In instances such as criminal court trials, evidence must be presented; please allow me to show you, the reader, exactly why this is to be very much true. This is but a small piece to a very much larger picture.
Ideological Subversion begins with demoralization. Demoralization begins and is approximately a fifteen to twenty year process. That is approximately the allotted time it takes to educate one generation of students. The agenda of this step is to expose your enemy to your ideology; which in this case is a conglomeration of Marxism/Leninism/Socialism/Fascism made into one single ideology. History has shown that one in and of itself hasn’t been sufficient enough to hold true and rule over a society, but there are strong points to each ideology. Take out the weak and implement the strong points; then, and only then, can you subvert a true government that can overcome the masses, or so the thought goes. According to former KGB Agent Yuri Bezmenov who worked in the field of subversion stated to the effect; you need to pound it (the enemy’s ideology) into the soft heads of at least three generations of American students without being challenged; neither by any outside sources nor against the basic ideology that is essentially Americanism or American Patriotism. There are many quotes from prominent sources as to educating and manipulating the youth.
In 1919, United States Communist Party stated “Give us one generation of small children to train to manhood and womanhood and we will set up the Bolshevist form of the Soviet Government.” (“National Republic,” Volume 32, p. 35) Hitler went even further by stating to Hermann Rauschning in 1933 about his youth, “I’m beginning with the young. We older ones are used up… We are rotten to the marrow. We have no unrestrained instincts left. We are cowardly and sentimental. We are bearing the burden of a humiliating past, and have in our blood the dull recollection of the serfdom and servility. But my magnificent youngsters! Are there finer ones anywhere in the world? Look at these young men and boys! What material! With them I can make a new world.” (Hitler’s Children, The Hitler Youth and the SS,” by Gerhard Rempel, pp. 1-2) Again in 1939 Hitler again boldly declared, “When an opponent declares ‘I will not come over to your side,’ I calmly say, ‘your child belongs to us already. What are you? You will pass on. Your descendants, however, will stand in the new camp. In a short time they will know nothing else but this new community.’ ” (“The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich: A History of Nazi Germany,” by William Shirer, p. 249)
Our greater implementation of indoctrinating the youth came more in force through the Department of Education, which was created in 1980 to make school systems Federally run and regulated, thus taking the power from the states and the people respectively as our Constitution states. The guise is stating that they are state regulated, but with some research, this will show that if implementations aren’t being met on the Federal level than changes will and do occur.
How do we truly know the true nature by which the government has helped at such a feat and that this truly is what they want for the American people? One such quote of proof comes from former President Nixon when he “declared the first five years of a child’s life to be a period of special and specific federal concern.” (“Nixon, the First Year of His Presidency,” by Congressional Quarterly, p. 108) Even looking back further to the Fall of 1970, we can see how serious our government was about this indoctrinating when six children were removed from their parents and placed in a foster home because the parents refused to send them to public school teaching “sex education” in conflict with their religious beliefs. (“The Unseen Hand,” by Ralph Epperson, p. 391) In 1985 Yuri Bezmenov again stated that this had already been completed in the United States and had been going on for 35 years already. Imagine how far we really are now. Mr. Bezmenov states, “Most of it is done by Americans to Americans, thanks to lack of moral standards… Exposure to true information does not matter anymore. A person, who is demoralized, is unable to assess true information; truth and facts tell nothing to him…even if I take him by force to the Soviet Union and show him concentration camp, he will refuse to believe it until he, he is going to receive a kick in his fat bottom.”
Another huge step in our indoctrination was through the new found thought (at the time) of global disaster by which human’s were to be made responsible. This implementation is known as Agenda 21; a 40 chapter document delineating the plan for literally taking over the world. It was signed into United States acceptance in 1992 through the United Nations for a Brave New World. One such implementation of this is a principle known as the “Cautionary Principle” by which you’re guilty until proven innocent. We can now see the full initiative of this through the International Criminal Court Association. This will flow through the Transnational United Nations by which our Federal Government wants very much to be a part of. Sanctions are being opened up once again for this by President Obama after President Bush surprisingly took it off the table, worried that we troops would fall under this while fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Another principle through Agenda 21 is Sustainable Development. Some things that aren’t sustainable according to this document include fossil fuels, private property, golf course, ski lodges, consumerism, farmlands, pastures, grazing of livestock, the family unit, etc. In order to initiate such a feat, you must first indoctrinate the young to believe that they are the cause of all of this; once you’ve initiated such than you can work at ridding such thoughts from societies mind into believing it must be done for the better good. Just how involved is our government in wanting this. One such statement from Bush Sn. says it all. At the U.N. Conference for the implementation of Agenda 21 he stated, “It is the sacred principles enshrined in the United Nations Charter to which the American people will henceforth pledge their allegiance.” (“Controlled Chaos,” by Michael London, p. 292) After Bush Sn. Brought this back to America, Bill Clinton; then by Executive Order, without Congressional approval established the Presidents Council for Sustainable Development for exactly this. (“Environmental Policy and Politics: Toward the Twenty-First Century,” by Michael Kraft, p. 192)
Further specifics on how they’ve used this document occur by those who help implement the curriculum in our school systems. Agenda 21 has been studied closely; the government then implements it in our school systems and the slow indoctrination of how they train us up as puppets begins (or began so long ago). Goals within Agenda 21 include the end to National Sovereignty (Copenhagen Agreement), the end of Private Property, the Restructure of the Family Unit (Using Darwinism/Humanism in schools as a stepping stone which takes spirituality out and implements the carnal nature of animal in its place), and increasing restrictions on freedoms and mobility by which there is an opportunity to advance in one’s life.
Humanism is very much in our Educational systems as well; this along with Communism are the planks by which it functions. In fact one of the 34 signers of this Humanist Manifesto was none other than John Dewey who is also known as the “Father of Progressive Education.” In fact Mr. Dewey was polled for the most influential educator over the last 50 years, from 1924 to 1974. One quote about Mr. Dewey and his influence on education states, “No individual has influenced the thinking of American educators more.” The Humanism Manifesto II was then published in 1974 and states the Humanist agenda is “the building of a world community,” predicated upon, “the development of a system of world law and a world order based upon transnational federal government.” (“The Unseen Hand,” by Ralph Epperson, pp. 378-381)
The next step is destabilization. This takes approximately the next two to five years. The essentials that are at stake include economy, foreign relations, and defence systems. The economy must be brought to the verge of crisis; this is the third step by which after crises you then have normalization as the final step. This step could last forever, or so the thought goes. At the brink of these crises, the mass must be promised all kinds of things whether they’ll be fulfilled or not. This is to eliminate the compromise of a free market economy (Bail Outs) and to put a big brother government in Washington D.C. (The Patriot Act).
Looking further into the third step; crises we can see some interesting details from history. Much like our Bail Out, with another one soon to follow; Mussolini did this in 1935. He bailed out Auto Manufacturer Alfa Romero and then supplanted the government to control such, thus taking away much of the free market economy. We’ve done this Fascist feat here in America and have taken it a step further by adding in the banks; while many ignorant (unknowledgeable) American’s applaud at such an Unconstitutional agenda. Big brother is very much in control now too, with the implementation of the Patriot Act so long ago. The only changing aspect to this is that it continues to get more and more pervasive within the confines of our everyday lives. This again happened in Germany with the burning down of the Reichstag Parliamentary Building, by which the Enabling Act of 1933 was enacted just like ours of today over the tragic 9/11. The Enabling Act gave Hitler and the once Democratic government total control over the people much like our Patriot Act already has today; sadly while many applaud at such a thing, believing it’s for the greater good of protecting the people against a war on a military tactic.
Mr. Bezmenov also added in 1985, civil rights movements are instrumental in the destabilization process of a nation; though after complete takeover they’re no longer needed because they know too much. History shows this has also again happened in Germany with the SA (Storm Troops). Before 1933, both the HJ (Hitler’s Youth) and the SS (The Elite Echelon) were involved, creating viable political organizations within the much larger confines of the SA until 1934. During the summer of this year Himmler and the SS were used as assassins to rid the regime of high officials in the SA, these men of course that had worked with Hitler to his grand rising. This was known specifically as the “Blood Purge” and the SA were prevented specifically by the aid of Himmler from every attaining nearly the amount of power as they had before this “Blood Purge.” (“The SS, Alibi of a Nation,” by Gerald Reitlinger, p. 71)
Much like the political organizations that were created back then are used in the same sense today; so as to further subvert the minds of Americans throughout with false Marxist/Leninist/Socialist/Fascist ideology, amalgamated into looking toward this now very apparent One World Government/Ideology. Those in power study such events feverishly in an attempt to resubvert such a thing in America so as to bring upon this One World Government, which they’re now publicly stating we’re about to have. Sadly, with the creation of television this has been made quite easy. Not only can the elite enjoy the comfort at knowing the mass of children are being indoctrinated at school; they can further enjoy the reality that the average child in America now spends an average of five hours a day watching television once they get home.
The final step will soon be upon us unless people begin further awaking to what’s going on; normalization of people. This last phase will ultimately result in the One World Government. The crisis was 9-11 and began there; these other crisis such as unemployment, health care, false flag war on a military tactic, and the global warming hoax, are all serving the respective purposes. Once we’re in normalization, we’ll either become a part of this new Regime or we’ll be exterminated; at least that’s what history tells us along with people that work in high places like John Holdren, David Rockefeller and many others that incorrectly state killing us off is a necessity if we’re to keep this planet alive. This will further subvert us into the ultimate slavery with the promise of change and hope. Sadly, we’re fast tracking such a feat, at a level that the elites cannot even believe.
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 2 so far )Council of Foreign Relations- Complicit in the Death of US Sovereignty
The Council on Foreign relations makes no secret of propelling us headlong and on purpose toward the end of our sovereignty. I have presented here items taken from their website. It is of the utmost importance you make yourself familiar with their agenda and the names of members who have taken us to this place and time. Members here are government officials, past and present, as well as business leaders, media figures, and many you do not know. Watchdogs will find this list valuable. After studying Agenda 21, Bilderburg, Trilateral Commission, and now Council on Foreign Relations, I can tell you without hesitation it is a David and Goliath battle for our freedom and our liberty. It’s us against them with no time to spare. Please call your representatives and senators and tell them you know and you will not permit them to give our sovereignty away. The joke is on us. It seems while we were working to be good citizens and good parents, they were laughing at us and plotting behind our back. The problem is we are now on the brink and about to fall into the crevasse of one world order.
Items of interest found on their website:
Crisis Guide:Global Governance Monitor
The link above includes a short, but interesting, video telling us the challenge of global governance has never been more imperative. We need to adapt current institutions or develop new ones, integrating new players. It says the interactive player will show you how they are doing in advancing the cause of global governance.
The Program on International Institutions and Global Governance (IIGG) at the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) is supported by a generous grant from the Robina Foundation. It aims to identify the institutional requirements for effective multilateral cooperation in the twenty-first century. The program is motivated by recognition that the architecture of global governance-largely reflecting the world as it existed in 1945-has not kept pace with fundamental changes in the international system. These shifts include the spread of transnational challenges, the rise of new powers, and the mounting influence of nonstate actors. Existing multilateral arrangements thus provide an inadequate foundation for addressing many of today’s most pressing threats and opportunities and for advancing U.S. national and broader global interests.
Given these trends, U.S. policymakers and other interested actors require rigorous, independent analysis of current structures of multilateral cooperation, and of the promises and pitfalls of alternative institutional arrangements. The IIGG program meets these needs by analyzing the strengths and weaknesses of existing multilateral institutions and proposing reforms tailored to new international circumstances.
The IIGG fulfills its mandate by:
· Engaging CFR fellows in research on improving existing and building new frameworks to address specific global challenges-including climate change, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, transnational terrorism, and global health-and disseminating the research through books, articles, Council Special Reports, and other outlets;
· Bringing together influential foreign policymakers, scholars, and CFR members to debate the merits of international regimes and frameworks at meetings in New York, Washington, DC, and other select cities;
· Hosting roundtable series whose objectives are to inform the foreign policy community of today’s international governance challenges and breed inventive solutions to strengthen the world’s multilateral bodies; and
· Providing a state-of-the-art Web presence as a resource to the wider foreign policy community on issues related to the future of global governance.
The attached concept note summarizes the rationale for the program on global governance, describes potential areas of research and policy engagement, and outlines the envisioned products and activities. We believe that the research and policy agenda outlined here constitutes a significant contribution to U.S. and international deliberations on the requirements for world order in the twenty-first century.
Other interactive video programs through the Council on Foreign Relations you will find equally as interesting are:
Crisis Guide:The Global Economy
Council on Foreign Relations Official Documents for your personal library:
United Nations Climate Change Science Compendium, 2009
G20: Present at the Creation of a New Economic Order
UN Security Council Resolution 1887, Non-proliferation
http://www.cfr.org/about/membership/
Corporate Membership
The Council on Foreign Relations is a national membership organization. There are two groups of members, life and term members. Term members must be between the ages of 30 and 36 at the time of their application, and term memberships are limited to five years. Here is a summary of the membership process:
- A candidate for life membership must be nominated in writing by one Council member and supported by a minimum of three other individuals (maximum of four supporting letters). The supporting letters do not need to be from Council members, but letters from members are strongly encouraged.
- A term membership candidate must be nominated by one Council member and supported by a minimum of two other individuals (maximum of three supporting letters). Candidates applying for the November 1, 2009 deadline must be between the ages of 30 and 36 on January 1, 2010.
- Prospective candidates should contact the Membership Office to receive a link to the online application program, where they can enter biographical information and a curriculum vitae or chronological resume.
- Each candidate will be prompted to enter the email addresses of his or her nominator and supporters. All nominators and supporters will be emailed a link to the website where letters can be posted securely and will only be visible to the Membership Committee. Letters will also be accepted via applications@cfr.org.
- Membership is restricted to U.S. citizens (native-born or naturalized) and permanent residents who have applied to become citizens. If foreign born, a candidate must submit a statement that he or she has been naturalized or is a permanent resident who has made formal application for citizenship.
- Deadlines for receipt of all materials for prospective life members are March 1 and October 1. For prospective term members, the deadline is November 1.
Members of the Council’s Board of Directors and Membership Committee are precluded from nominating, seconding, and writing supporting letters on any candidate’s behalf.
Life Membership
Quality, diversity, and balance are the key objectives sought by the Council in the composition of its membership. New members are named twice a year by the Board of Directors, which invites individuals to join based on recommendations by the Membership Committee. To be considered by the Membership Committee, candidates must be nominated for membership by a Council member. Please contact the Membership Office for a roster of current members.
In each round of membership selection, the Membership Committee considers significantly more candidates than there are vacancies; therefore, it is inevitable that the names of some candidates will appear before the committee on several occasions. Given the high level of the competition, some candidates may never be elected even though they may exemplify the individual qualifications outlined below.
For further information about applying for life membership, please contact Scott Bradbury, Program Coordinator, Membership Affairs, +1-212-434-9484 or sbradbury@cfr.org.
Term Membership
The Stephen M. Kellen Term Member Program encourages promising young leaders to engage in a sustained conversation on international affairs and U.S. foreign policy. The program allows younger members to interact with seasoned foreign-policy experts and participate in a wide variety of events designed especially for them. Each year a new class of term members, between the ages of 30 and 36, is elected to a five-year membership term. Committees of term members in New York and Washington, DC, advise the Council leadership on the programs that are of particular interest to younger members.
The term members enjoy a full range of activities, including events with high-profile speakers, an annual Term Member Conference, roundtables, trips to financial and governmental institutions around the country, and one week-long study trip abroad every two years.
For further information about applying for term membership, please contact M. Kristy Clark, Program Associate, Membership Affairs, +1-212-434-9491 or mclark@cfr.org.
Application Requirements
- Completion of online application (nominee information and curriculum vitae or chronological resume).
- Letter of nomination from a Council member.
- Three supporting letters (two supporting letters for term membership applications).
- The Membership office will accept letters through the online application program as well as via applications@cfr.org. Emailed letters must include electronic signature/letterhead or must be supplemented with a signed hardcopy sent via mail or fax.
Rules and Regulations to Keep in Mind
A candidate’s nominator bears the chief responsibility for seeing to it that filing deadlines for a candidacy are met and that all required documents are submitted to the Council’s Membership Office in a timely manner. Candidates and/or their nominators are responsible for securing seconding letters within the content guidelines below. Council members are advised to commit themselves to supporting a candidacy only when they can fairly meet the requirements of the process and the expectations of the candidates who depend on them for assistance. Please also note:
- Council membership is restricted to United States citizens or permanent residents of the United States who have made application to become citizens. If foreign-born, the candidate must submit a statement that he or she has been naturalized or is a permanent resident who has made a formal application for citizenship.
- Members of the Council’s Board of Directors and Membership Committee are precluded from nominating, seconding, and writing supporting letters on any candidate’s behalf.
- A member who is a spouse, close relative (such as parent, brother or sister, cousin, etc.) or near in-law of a candidate may not nominate or second that candidate for membership in the Council. Members should also refrain from writing on behalf of clients.
- Members should write only in support of candidates whom they know well. Additionally, members are encouraged to make comparative judgments about candidates, where appropriate. The Membership Committee also advises members to write no more than two letters per round (either one nominating letter and one seconding letter, or two seconding letters).
- Council visiting fellows are prohibited from applying for membership until they have completed their fellowship tenure.
- The seconding letters do not need to be from Council members, but letters from members are strongly encouraged. It is recommended that at least one letter from a current or former professional colleague be included.
We would like to salute the Australian website Biblebelievers for compiling the following list of members: The list can be found at:
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )The Dots Are Now Connected
- The best way to understand what Sustainable Development actually is can be found by discovering what is NOT sustainable.
- According to the UN’s Biodiversity Assessment Report, items for our everyday lives that are NOT sustainable include: Ski runs, grazing of livestock, plowing of soil, building fences, industry, single family homes, paved and tarred roads, logging activities, dams and reservoirs, power line construction, and economic systems that fail to set proper value on the environment (capitalism, free markets).
- Maurice Strong, Secretary General of the UN’s Rio Earth Summit in 1992 said, “. .. Current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class — involving high meat intake, use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and work air-conditioning, and suburban housing are not sustainable.”
- Are you starting to see the pattern behind Cap and Trade, the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, and all of those commercials you’re forced to watch about the righteousness of Going Green? They are all part of the enforcement if Sustainable Development.
- And one of the most destructive tools they use to force it on us is something called the “precautionary principle.” That means that any activities that might threaten human health or the environment should be stopped — even if no clear cause and effect relationship has been established — and even if the potential threat is largely theoretical.
- That makes it easy for any activist group to issue warnings by news release or questionable report and have those warnings quickly turned into public policy — just in case.
- In short, it’s all about wealth redistribution. Your wealth into a green rat hole.
- Now they have taken this and wrapped it all in a nice green blanket, scaring us with horror stories about the human destruction of the environment — and so we are now throwing our liberties on the bon fire like a good old fashioned book burning — all in the name of protecting the planet.
- Free trade, social justice, consensus, global truth, partnerships, preservation, stakeholders, land use, environmental protection, development, diversity, visioning, open space, heritage, comprehensive planning, critical thinking, and community service are all part of our new language.
- Rather than good management of resources, Sustainable Development has come to mean denied use and resources locked away from human hands. In short, it has become a code word for an entire economic and social agenda…
- The Sustainablists insist that society be transformed into feudal-like governance by making Nature the central organizing principle for our economy and society. As such, every societal decision would first be questioned as to how it might effect the environment. To achieve this, Sustainablist policy focuses on three components; land use, education, and population control and reduction...
- Sustainable Development’s Social Equity plank is based on a demand for “social justice.” …
- Under the Sustainablist system, private property is an evil that is used simply to create wealth for a few. So too, is business ownership….
- Sustainable Development’s economic policy is based on one overriding premise: that the wealth of the world was made at the expense of the poor. It dictates that, if the conditions of the poor are to be improved, wealth must first be taken from the rich. Consequently, Sustainable Development’s economic policy is based not on private enterprise but on public/private partnerships…
- Sustainable Development policy is redefining free trade to mean centralized global trade “freely” crossing (or eliminating) national borders. It definitely does not mean people and companies trading freely with each other…
- “Nature has an integral set of different values (cultural, spiritual and material) where humans are one strand in nature’s web and all living creatures are considered equal. Therefore the natural way is the right way and human activities should be molded along nature’s rhythms.” from the UN’s Biodiversity Treaty presented at the 1992 UN Earth Summit. (hello, can anyone say Cass Sunstein??…are we ‘getting it’ yet?)…
- Under Sustainable Development there can be no concern over individual rights — as we must all sacrifice for the sake of the environment. Individual human wants, needs, and desires are to be conformed to the views and dictates of social planners. The UN’s Commission on Global Governance said in its 1995 report: “Human activity… combined with unprecedented increases in human numbers… are impinging on the planet’s basic life support system. Action must be taken now to control the human activities that produce these risks”Under Sustainable Development there can be no limited government, as advocated by our Founding Fathers, because, we are told, the real or perceived environmental crisis is too great. Maurice Strong, Chairman of the 1992 UN Earth Summit said: “A shift is necessary toward lifestyles less geared to environmentally-damaging consumption patterns. The shift will require a vast strengthening of the multilateral system, including the United Nations.”…
- The politically based environmental movement provides Sustainablists camouflage as they work to transform the American systems of government, justice, and economics. It is a masterful mixture of socialism (with its top down control of the tools of the economy) and fascism (where property is owned in name only — with no control). Sustainable Development is the worst of both the left and the right. It is not liberal, nor is it conservative. It is a new kind of tyranny that, if not stopped, will surely lead us to a new Dark Ages of pain and misery yet unknown to mankind.
In walks Obama: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_cqN4NIEtOY
Fundamental Change:
While Americans clearly voted for change in the last election, I am not sure this is the change they meant. No matter, they are hoisting it up on us like a speeding bullet ! Change is almost here. All it will take is “Cap and Trade”, “Health Care Reform” and “Card Check” to pass. Please do a search on my site if you would like to know any more about these PENDING bills.
This started many years ago- and yes, it takes about 20 years for fundamental change to take place. While it started with the GATT agreement of 1947, it moved on from there. Slowly at first, but then under George Bush, Sr., then President Clinton, things started moving more quickly. NAFTA, WTO, First they made it possible for our manufacturing to move away. While we were all screaming ” Why isn’t our government securing our jobs? … Why are they making trade regulations so unfair to American workers?.. Why do corporations moving jobs overseas still get tax breaks”.. Well, all these years later, our worst fears are being realized. Now the only large scale manufacturing left is owned by the Government. The rest will soon follow or die.
Then, the started ebbing away at our 401K plans. Black Monday, October, 1987. Then over-valuation that caused the “Internet bubble”, and on from there to where we are now with much of the citizen’s wealth deteriorated to the point where many have to work years later than anticipated. But, that was not enough. We still had our homes. About twenty years ago, even after the Savings and Loan Crisis, they started making it easier for money to be lent. It was like giving candy to a baby. No longer did we all attempt to pay off our homes in 30 years. They made it easy for us to roll consumer debt into our mortgages. This went on for several years until it became more prevalent that most did not own their homes outright nor even hold the majority equity. Even though Appraisers were screaming about the abuses that were going on in the marketplace – no one would listen. I believe that is because it was part of the plan all along. Let’s not forget the “Progressive Agenda” started to rear it’s ugly head against our Constitution under Teddy Roosevelt. Eventually, in 1921, the Council for Foreign Relations was formed (see previous articles on my site) and real “progress” began. It was slow enough so we would not put the pieces together. Until Obama. They are so close now, they feel comfortable wearing their arrogance on their sleeve. To get a very good feel for how we got here, allow me to recommend another article by Henry Lamb. http://www.pushhamburger.com/morenews12.htm
Make NO mistake. This is a GLOBAL INITIATIVE. Much of the wealth lies here and so does the legacy of the Founding Fathers. We are a tough nut to crack, so they must use code, back door allegiances, and a bit of magic. There’s so much going on now it is hard for anyone that must work to pay attention. It is my personal belief that the whole “women’s rights” movement of the 1970’s was also a part of the plan. Why would they want mothers in schools watching them indoctrinate our children? Why would they want mothers home all day so they could pay attention to what is going on in the neighborhood or Washington DC. So, what better way than to say to women.. you are not equal, let’s make you equal. We were equal all along, it was they that treated us unequally. But instead of changing themselves (which is not what it was about), they FUNDAMENTALLY changed this country… with our help. They made us feel bad if we CHOSE to stay home with our kids, then they made it all but impossible. Another reason to allow debt to be built up. We would have to occupy ourselves with work outside the home, in addition to the work inside the home and the children. No time to go over every little spec of instructional material they were cramming down our children’s throat. No time to find out they were not teaching our children about the Constitution or the Founding Fathers any longer. No time to realize the UN and the Teachers Union were implementing a whole new agenda. (Give your kids and Grandkids a copy of The 5000 Year Leap by W. Cleon Skousen and ask them to read it )
Our Government now owns our banks, too, right? Well, actually the banks own the government. That is a whole set of novels unto itself. However, this all started with the implementation of the FED. A very good book on this subject is “The Creature from Jekyll Island” by G.Edward Griffin. This has been going on since the progressives took over the country in 1913, under Wilson, with the institution of the Fed giving the banks the ability to manipulate the money supply. Catapulted further under FDR, who gave up tying our money supply to the gold standard in 1933. Then paper money no longer became backed by silver under Johnson, meaning it was purely a fictional piece of paper we could pretend was actual money. This gave the FED power to print away with nothing to stop them from manipulating the money supply at their whim. Now today we see, they can print money hand over fist without answering to anyone. The only one paying any attention today is China. Why, because they see where first Bush and now Obama are leading us. By printing money without limit, by running up the deficit to levels which can never be paid back, by devaluing our currency and instituting hyper-inflation (coming soon to a neighborhood near you), they thereby initiate another CRISIS, causing us to have no other choice but to leave our dollar for a world wide currency. This is already being discussed by Europe and the UN. That will spell the end of our sovereignty. We are already funding the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. Your tax dollars hard at work, just not for you.
The United Nations is heavily involved and is leading the crunch against America. Most of their current agenda surrounds Global Governance, or put another way – death to American Sovereignty. I would like to direct your attention to a small piece of that – The Marrakech Process- by reading The Marrakech Memorandum. This was discussed in the article I mentioned earlier at RecycleWashington.com . You can find out more about it’s TEN YEAR PLAN to global governance at their website: http://esa.un.org/marrakechprocess/
So, what could possibly get in their way? Well, citizens, of course. That’s why they had to poke fun of the Townhallers and the Tea Party participants. Why they GROSSLY underestimated attendance at the March on Washington DC a few weeks ago. Why the media can not report it. Why no real journalist can talk about it (even OReilly). Most of the media belongs to the Council on Foreign Relations, by the way. It’s all part of the gig and the media is in on it. That’s why they have worked for years on fine tuning the Martial Law regulations, and, not to sound crazy, but why they are currently hiring internment specialists (really- I saw the ad). Not all the politicians are in on it, but many are. Long term Senators especially. That is why they have to go! The sooner the better! We MUST have term limits, too! NOW!
What else stands in their way? Oh, yeah, THE INTERNET! TALK RADIO! That is why the FCC is attempting an agenda currently to control both. An agenda already in progress. Do NOT let it happen. Pay attention. If they get us there, we’re done. Do not let anything pass in Congress. NOTHING. They are leaving everything open to interpretation, and the interpreter is Cass Sunstein. You may wish to make his acquaintance as well (search prior articles on my site).
While space will not allow every detail, perhaps I have connected enough of the dots for your to see the big picture. All of the stuff that does not make sense, all the trashing of our Constitution, all of the freaks being appointed to high positions… it’s all for the end game. The end game is doing away with any meaningful sovereignty for the US. We are now at a crossroads. If you condone the New World Order/ One World Order thing that puts the crackpots at the UN in charge of you and all you’ll ever be – do nothing. If this seems like a nightmare to you, then you need to get involved NOW! Right NOW! They almost have it. I beg you. Do NOT let them win.
I have recently posted lists of tools you can use to root out the bad guys (located in the Citizen Tools category on right). The trick is to follow the money and watch the regulations. Please give up a few nicities, like watching television a few hours a week or reading that fiction novel. We need all hands on deck. We have been asleep so long they almost have it in the bag. We need to make up for lost time. We need to mobilize and fight back NOW. They are way ahead of us. They have armies and systems in place. Our only saving grace is there are, I believe, more of us than them. This reminds me of a time in our country’s history. How ironic.
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 8 so far )News for 09/05/2009- Parents Who Object Aren’t Smart Enough To Raise Kids and Other Affronts to American Citizens
http://www.eyeblast.t…
(1.5 min video)Liberal media blasts parents objections- says parent’s who object are not smart enough to raise children.
Why Parents Don’t Trust the Educator-in-Chief and His Comrades from Michelle Malkin for CNS News
http://cnsnews.com/ne…
They think we’re crazy. “They” are the sneering defenders of Barack Obama who can’t fathom the backlash against the president’s nationwide speech to schoolchildren next Tuesday. “We” are parents with eyes wide open to the potential for politicized abuse in America’s classrooms.
Ask moms and dads in Farmington, Utah, who discovered this week that their children sat through a Hollywood propaganda video promoting the cult of Obama. In the clip, a parade of entertainers vow to flush their toilets less, buy hybrid vehicles, end poverty and world hunger, and commit to “service” for “change.” Actress Demi Moore leads the glitterati in a collective promise “to be a servant to our president.” Musician Anthony Kiedis pledges “to be of service to Barack Obama.” The campaign commercial crescendos with the stars and starlets asking their audience: “What’s your pledge?” http://www.youtube.co… (here is the video in question)
This same “Do Something” ethos infected the U.S. Department of Education teachers guides accompanying the announcement of Obama’s speech—until late Wednesday, that is, when the White House removed some of the activist language exhorting students to come up with ways to “help the president.” Education Secretary Arne Duncan had disseminated the material directly to principals across the country—circumventing elected school board members and superintendents now facing neighborhood revolts. O’s bureaucrats can whitewash offending language from the Sept. 8 speech-related documents, but they can’t remove the taint of left-wing radicalism that informs Obama and his education mentors. A spokesman maintained that the speech is “about the value of education and the importance of staying in school as part of his effort to dramatically cut the dropout rate.” But the historical subtext is far less innocent.
The Green “Trojan Horse” from Investors Business Daily
http://www.ibdeditori…
Van Jones, a special adviser to the president, revealed his Trojan-horse strategy during a 2008 interview on leftist Uprising Radio in Los Angeles. “The green economy will start off as a small subset” of a “complete revolution” away from “gray capitalism” and toward “redistribution of all the wealth,” he said. “And we are going to push it and push it and push it until it becomes the engine for transforming the whole society.” A self-described “communist,” Jones caught heat recently for calling Republicans “a**holes.” He’s also a 9/11 “truther” as it turns out, one of many red flags in a radical past that, remarkably, didn’t disqualify him from shaping domestic policy in this White House. Jones apologized for his “inappropriate” remarks concerning Republicans while distancing himself from the nutty people calling for an investigation of the Bush administration for bombing the Twin Towers on 9/11. Jones signed a petition pushing for such a witch hunt, even though the Ivy League lawyer claims he didn’t know what he was signing. But he hasn’t been made to answer for his communist beliefs, which are even deeper than first thought.
Trying to change the subject, Jones insisted his work at the White House is “entirely focused on one goal: building clean-energy incentives which create 21st century jobs that improve energy efficiency and use renewable resources.” That doesn’t tell the full story. As the president’s “green-jobs czar,” it’s clear Jones has a hidden agenda. Judging from his own words, his environmental concerns appear to be a front for creating a massive new welfare program — complete with paid job training and counseling — for criminals. Jones has a shockingly soft spot for felons. Before joining the White House, he agitated against “the punishment industry,” which he claims profits from a “racist war” against people of color. He has called U.S. prisons “slave ships on dry land” and has served on panels calling for an end to prisons and the freeing of all inmates. The former Oakland, Calif., community organizer has said he wants to “build a pipeline from the prison economy to the green economy,” including hiring parolees to weatherize homes and offices. He secured grants to start a Green Job Corps in Oakland.
In his 2006 memoir, President Obama proposed government-subsidized green jobs “to hire and train ex-felons on projects” such as “insulating homes and offices to make them energy-efficient.” Labor Secretary Hilda Solis, who worked with Jones in California as a congresswoman, has already put such plans in motion. Jones’ “green jobs, not jails” program is but a “radical kernel” of what Jones says he wants to reap. He intends to use the green movement as a Trojan horse to socialize the entire economy. “Right now we say we want to move from suicidal gray capitalism to ‘eco-capitalism’ where at least we’re not fast-tracking the destruction of the whole planet,” Jones said. “Will that be enough? No, it won’t be enough. We want to go beyond the systems of exploitation and oppression altogether.”
Beyond our system of capitalism to communism, is what he means. Though Obama’s father was a Marxist, there’s no indication the president subscribes to Jones’ vision. But Obama and Jones share a common background in the same Marxism-steeped faith: Black Liberation Theology, which we first warned voters about years ago. The father of the movement — James Cone — believes that by merging Marxism with the Gospel, African-Americans will be liberated. “Together,” Cone said, “black religion and Marxist philosophy may show us a way to build a completely new society.” Cone mentored Obama’s longtime preacher, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, a big fan of Marxist regimes. Wright has made a number of comments over the years that have been described as anti-capitalist and anti-American, and that suggest he believes deep conspiracies drive American politics. We also warned that it’s dangerous for a presidential aspirant to surround himself throughout his career with a coterie of radicals. They could wind up in the White House making policy. Van Jones is Exhibit A.
Obama Regulation Czar Advocated Removing People’s Organs Without Explicit Consent from CNS News
Cass Sunstein, President Barack Obama’s nominee to head the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), has advocated a policy under which the government would “presume” someone has consented to having his or her organs removed for transplantation into someone else when they die unless that person has explicitly indicated that his or her organs should not be taken. Under such a policy, hospitals would harvest organs from people who never gave permission for this to be done.
Outlined in the 2008 book “Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness,” Sunstein and co-author Richard H. Thaler argued that the main reason that more people do not donate their organs is because they are required to choose donation. Sunstein and Thaler pointed out that doctors often must ask the deceased’s family members whether or not their dead relative would have wanted to donate his organs. These family members usually err on the side of caution and refuse to donate their loved one’s organs. “The major obstacle to increasing [organ] donations is the need to get the consent of surviving family members,” said Sunstein and Thaler. This problem could be remedied if governments changed the laws for organ donation, they said. Currently, unless a patient has explicitly chosen to be an organ donor, either on his driver’s license or with a donor card, the doctors assume that the person did not want to donate and therefore do not harvest his organs. Thaler and Sunstein called this “explicit consent.” They argued that this could be remedied if government turned the law around and assumed that, unless people explicitly choose not to, then they want to donate their organs – a doctrine they call “presumed consent.” “Presumed consent preserves freedom of choice, but it is different from explicit consent because it shifts the default rule. Under this policy, all citizens would be presumed to be consenting donors, but they would have the opportunity to register their unwillingness to donate,” they explained.
The Trouble With Textbooks- a look at how Textbook Publishers are Shaping America by Incorrectly Reporting History from Fox News
http://www.foxnews.co…
Hard-edged propaganda now suffuses America’s history textbooks. A thorough cover-to-cover reading of almost any high school history text leaves you with the impression that the United States is at best embarrassing, and at worst a menace to world peace.Did shielding children from scary words like “mailman” turn them into better students? Compare the test scores in your kids’ school district to those from 1960, and judge for yourself. Or consider this: When asked about the Vietnam War recently, almost a quarter of students described it as a conflict between North and South Korea.
Yet even flat ignorance is better (and certainly more amusing) than the hard-edged propaganda that now suffuses history textbooks. A thorough cover-to-cover reading of almost any high school history text leaves you with the impression that the United States is at best embarrassing, and at worst a menace to world peace. The internment of Japanese-Americans during World War Two gets almost us much emphasis as the American liberation of Europe. Non-American cultures, by contrast, receive every benefit of every doubt. Try to find a high school textbook that even mentions the widespread practice of slavery among American Indians. Good luck. Even September 11, an event hardly shrouded by the haze of time, gets a rewrite. In Prentice Hall’s textbook on contemporary American history, for instance, the 19 hijackers are not identified as Islamic extremists. Students are left to guess why they did it.
Don’t take my word for it. Make a pledge to yourself to look through your children’s textbooks this year. Take a look at what’s there, but also at what’s missing. If you find bias or distortions, don’t be silent. Raise holy hell. Someday your kids will thank you for it. Check out the Fox Special: “FOX News Reporting: Do You Know What Textbooks Your Children Are Really Reading?” on Friday, September 4 from 9 – 10 p.m. ET on FOX News Channel. The special re-air throughout the weekend including on Saturday at 4 and 10 p.m. ET and again on Sunday at 1 a.m., 3 and 9 p.m. and 2 a.m. ET.
The Constitution and American Sovereignty by Mr. Black at WeThePeople
“WOULD WE be far wrong,” President Lincoln asked in a special message to Congress in 1861, “if we defined [sovereignty] as a political community without a political superior?” Maybe that’s not exhaustive, but it comes on good authority. And notice that for Lincoln, sovereignty is a political or legal concept. It’s not about power. Lincoln didn’t say that the sovereign is the one with the most troops. He was making a point about rightful authority….
The Constitution provides for treaties, and even specifies that treaties will be “the supreme Law of the Land”; that is, that they will be binding on the states. But from 1787 on, it has been recognized that for a treaty to be valid, it must be consistent with the Constitution—that the Constitution is a higher authority than treaties. And what is it that allows us to judge whether a treaty is consistent with the Constitution? Alexander Hamilton explained this in a pamphlet early on: “A treaty cannot change the frame of the government.” And he gave a very logical reason: It is the Constitution that authorizes us to make treaties. If a treaty violates the Constitution, it would be like an agent betraying his principal or authority. And as I said, there has been a consensus on this in the past that few ever questioned. Let me give you an example of how the issue has arisen. In 1919, the United States participated in a conference to establish the International Labour Organization (ILO). The original plan was that the members of the ILO would vote on labor standards, following which the member nations would automatically adopt those standards. But the American delegation insisted that it couldn’t go along with that, because it would be contrary to the Constitution. Specifically, it would be delegating the treaty-making power to an international body, and thus surrendering America’s sovereignty as derived from the Constitution. Instead, the Americans insisted they would decide upon these standards unilaterally as they were proposed by the ILO. In the 90 years since joining this organization, I think the U.S. has adopted three of them.
Today there is no longer a consensus regarding this principle of non-delegation, and it has become a contentious issue. For instance, two years ago in the D.C. Court of Appeals, the National Resources Defense Council (NRDC), an environmental group, sued the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), claiming that it should update its standards for a chemical that is thought to be depleting the ozone layer. There is a treaty setting this standard, and the EPA was in conformity with the treaty. But the NRDC pointed out that Congress had instructed the EPA to conform with the Montreal Protocol and its subsequent elaborations. In other words, various international conferences had called for stricter emission standards for this chemical, and Congress had told the EPA to accept these new standards as a matter of course. The response to this by the D.C. Court of Appeals was to say, in effect, that it couldn’t believe Congress had meant to do that, since Congress cannot delegate its constitutional power and responsibility to legislate for the American people to an international body. This decision wasn’t appealed, so we don’t yet have a Supreme Court comment on the issue.
The delegation of judicial power is another open question today. There’s no doubt that the U.S. can agree to arbitrations of disputes with foreign countries, as we did as early as the 1790s with the Jay Treaty. But it’s another thing altogether to say that the rights of American citizens in the U.S. can be determined by foreign courts. This would seem to be a delegation of the judicial power, which Article 3 of the Constitution says “shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.” This became an issue last year in the case of Medellin v. Texas, which considered an International Court of Justice ruling that Texas could not execute a convicted murderer, because he had not been given the chance to consult the Mexican consulate before his trial, as he had the right to do under an international treaty. The Supreme Court, after much hand-wringing, concluded that it didn’t think the Senate had intended to give the International Court of Justice the power to decide these questions of American law as applied by American courts. I would go further and say that no matter what the Senate intended, this is not a power which can be delegated under the Constitution. But it is no longer clear that a majority on the Supreme Court would agree.
Or consider the Spanish judges who want to arrest American politicians if they venture into Europe, in order to try them for war crimes. This is preposterous. It is akin to piracy. And not only has our government not protested this nonsense, but it has contributed to building up an international atmosphere in which this sort of thing seems plausible—an atmosphere where the old idea of a jury of one’s peers and the idea of Americans having rights under the Constitution give way to the notion of some hazy international standard of conduct that everyone in the world can somehow agree upon and then enforce on strangers….
It is important to think about these issues regarding sovereignty today, because it is possible to lose sovereignty rather quickly. Consider the European Union. The process that led to what we see today in the EU began when six countries in 1957 signed a treaty agreeing that they would cooperate on certain economic matters. They established a court in Luxembourg—the European Court of Justice—which was to interpret disputes about the treaty. To make its interpretations authoritative, the Court decreed in the early 1960s that if the treaty came into conflict with previous acts of national parliaments, the treaty would take precedence. Shortly thereafter it declared that the treaty would also take precedence over subsequent statutes. And in the 1970s it said that even in case of conflicts between the treaty and national constitutions, the treaty would take precedence. Of course, judges can say whatever they want. What is more remarkable is that all the nations in the EU have more or less grudgingly accepted this idea that a treaty is superior to their constitutions, so that today whatever regulations are cranked out by the European Commission—which is, not to put too fine a point on it, a bureaucracy—supersede both parliamentary statutes and national constitutions. And when there was eventually a lot of clamor about protection of basic rights, the court in Luxembourg proclaimed that it would synthesize all the different rights in all the different countries and take care of that as well…..
News for 08/27/2009- The Great Liberal Narrative, ACLU Spies, The Storm Upon Us
MSNBC & The Great Liberal Narrative: The Truth About The Tyranny of Political Correctness from PJTV
http://www.pjtv.com/v…
Wow! This video (13 min) is a must see video with points that will leave you thinking. This is phenominal! Well worth your investment of time. Pass it along to your friends.
Mike Rogers (MI) Statement to Congress on Healthcare
http://www.youtube.co…
This guy is awesome! I couldn’t have said it better myself! Thanks, Mike!
http://www.youtube.co…
Here he is on a recent interview on Fox News
Testimony of illegal alien care from 1 Florida hospital
http://www.youtube.co…
A must see video about the financial drain of Illegals on our health care system. (3 min)
ACLU: Spying for America’s Enemies by Michelle Malkin
http://cnsnews.com/ne…
For once, the American Civil Liberties Union has nothing bad to say about the latest case of secret domestic surveillance — because it is the ACLU that committed the spying. Last week, The Washington Post reported on a new Justice Department inquiry into photographs of undercover CIA officials and other intelligence personnel taken by ACLU-sponsored researchers assisting the defense team of Guantanamo Bay detainees. According to the report, the pictures of covert American CIA officers — “in some cases surreptitiously taken outside their homes” — were shown to jihadi suspects tied to the 9/11 attacks in order to identify the interrogators. The ACLU undertook the so-called “John Adams Project” with the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers — last seen crusading for convicted jihadi assistant Lynne Stewart. She’s the far-left lawyer who helped sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman, convicted 1993 World Trade Center bombing and N.Y. landmark bombing plot mastermind, smuggle coded messages of Islamic violence to outside followers in violation of an explicit pledge to abide by her client’s court-ordered isolation. The ACLU’s team used lists and data from “human rights groups,” European researchers and news organizations that were involved in “(t)racking international CIA-chartered flights” and monitoring hotel phone records. Working from a witch-hunt list of 45 CIA employees, the ACLU team tailed and photographed agency employees or obtained other photos from public records. And then they showed the images to suspected al-Qaida operatives implicated in murdering 3,000 innocent men, women and children on American soil. Where is the concern for the safety of these American officers and their families? Where’s the outrage from all the indignant supporters of former CIA agent Valerie Plame, whose name was leaked by Bush State Department official Richard Armitage to the late Robert Novak? Lefties swung their nooses for years over the disclosure, citing federal laws prohibiting the sharing of classified information and proscribing anyone from unauthorized exposure of undercover intelligence agents.
The Storm Upon Us from Canada Free Press
http://canadafreepres…
“Find out just what the people will submit to, and you have found out the exact amount of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them; and these will continue until they are resisted with either words or blows, or with both.” — Frederick Douglass, civil rights activist, (circa 1818-1895) One of three possible scenarios is currently being played out in the United States.
The first option, is simply that the Obama Administration is the most corrupt, dishonest, and inept Administration that America has ever been burdened with. That is the “best case” scenario. Unfortunately, this is the option that I think least likely. The second option, is that the Obama Administration despises individual freedom, capitalism, free-enterprise, and is hell-bent on transforming the United States into a fascist/communist collective—a regime that will be run by a venal, ruthless, power-hungry elite.That actually sounds more plausible to me. The third option is, that the Obama Administration is part of a global restructuring process (New World Order), in which the world will be turned into a fascist/communist collective—run by a venal, ruthless, power-hungry elite. My guess is—take your pick between options two and three. If you’re surprised by my analysis, then you haven’t been paying attention to what has happened, and is happening, to the United States. Let me roll out some facts and figures for you. The SEIU (Service Employees International Union) is run by Andy Stern, a militant Far-Left thug, and Anna Burger, another Far-Left radical. The SEIU has increased its size and power through, arm-twisting intimidation tactics, and other nefarious means. Two years ago Obama said before an SEIU rally, “I’ve spent my entire adult life working with SEIU.” That is not good news. Once you’ve looked into the corruption, ruthlessness, and Far-Left agenda of the SEIU leadership, you will know that it is not good news at all. Obama has appointed two stalwart friends of SEIU to high level positions: Kathleen Selibus (D-Kansas) as head of the Department of Health and Human Services, and Hilda Solis to head the Department of Labor. The SEIU currently has over 2 million members. most of them are essentially unwilling inductees, but many are “true believers.” Let’s discuss ACORN. Wade Rathke, who “cut his teeth” in the Far-Left radical group SDS in the 1960s, founded ACORN, and also SEIU Local 100. These and numerous other Far-Left groups under the Rathke “umbrella” are funded by our taxpayer dollars. According to the “Sweetness and Ligh” website: “ACORN claims more than 400,000 dues-paying member families, and more than 1,200 chapters in 110 U.S. cities.” And lets not forget the hundreds of “advocacy groups” connected with Acorn: groups such as the WFP (Working Families Party),—which, according to an Associated Press report, was created in 1998 to help push the Democratic Party toward the left.” Many of our taxpayer dollars are funneled to various Far-Left organizations which, after the “bosses” get their cut, distribute the money among hundreds, possibly thousands, of groups which advocate the destruction of the United States as a free republic, and the installation of a welfare collective. That’s not hyperbole folks. It’s a con game that is going on, and has been going on for years—with the assistance of radical leftist foundations like Arca, and the Tides Foundation. Some deal, huh? Collect the money earned by some bourgeois chump, and then spend your time trying to destroy the system that enabled the chump to make the money in the first place. Sweet! My point here is that there are already a number of available thugs in place, should the Obama Administration need them. And we shouldn’t forget AmeriCorp, and the other paramilitary groups getting ready to “muscle up.” Although I’ve been talking exclusively about the Far-Left influence, I don’t want to be remiss, and forget to mention that greed, corruption, and duplicity are non-partisan vices. The right-wing has its share of snakes in the grass as well.
In Honor of 09/11, Please Fly the Flag
On Friday, September 11th, 2009, an American flag should be displayed outside every home, apartment, office, and store in the United States. Every individual should make it their duty to display an American flag on this eighth anniversary of one of our country’s worst tragedies. We do this to honor those who lost their lives on 9/11, their families, friends and loved ones who continue to endure the pain, and those who today are fighting at home and abroad to preserve our cherished freedoms. In the days, weeks and months following 9/11, our country was bathed in American flags as citizens mourned the incredible losses and stood shoulder-to-shoulder against terrorism. Sadly, those flags have all but disappeared. Our patriotism pulled us through some tough times and it shouldn’t take another attack to galvanize us in solidarity. Our American flag is the fabric of our country and together we can prevail over terrorism of all kinds.
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )News for 08/21/2009- Free Speech, Health Care Freedom Plan, Proof Obama Lies, GE Buys Influence
Here’s a Video YOU Just Have To See!
It’s pretty bad when Air America calls the President a liar. Here is what he said about big pharma in the campaign and what he DID last week. Amazing!
SUPPORT “WHOLE FOODS” STORES IF YOU LOVE FREE SPEECH from Fox News
http://www.foxnews.co…
18,000 people on Facebook are calling for a boycott of the nationwide grocery store chain Whole Foods. It has to do with the debate over health care. Now, apparently, the CEO of Whole Foods who says we do need health care reform is not as liberal as some of his progressive clientele. John Mackey, who is the CEO of Whole Food who has been running the company, started the company in Austin Texas, about 30 years. In an op-ed in the WSJ, he said here are eight ideas as a successful CEO that I have, including tort reform, allowing insurers cross state lines, self-directed ideas. And yet he is vilified by some of the more liberal followers out there of the president’s plan. The individuals who signed up to boycott are waging war against Whole Foods. They are calling him a right-wing zealot.
Mackey, CEO of Whole Foods, in 2007,said he had enough money to live comfortably, cut his salary down to $1 a year, and donated all of the proceeds from his stock option to charity. This does not sound like a guy who wants to stick it to the poor when it comes to health care. He had a different idea, and that was what was in the “Wall Street Journal.” He is a self-described libertarian. And I do not know if that was angered some people. Not only was he taking $1, but he pushed this through, Greta, a $100,000 need-based fund for Whole Foods workers. Heretofore this has been considered a relatively progressive company. Now he comes out and says the government-run plan is not the way to go. And he is absolutely being slaughtered on the left side of the blogosphere. He employs thousands of people. So I propose a reverse boycott. Everyone go to Whole Foods.
If you would like to support Mr. Mackey, or free speech, sign up on the support Whole Foods Facebook page at http://www.facebook.c…
Jim DeMint’s Health Care Plan – This should be what we are discussing! Write your reps today!
All Americans should have a health insurance plan that they can afford, own, and keep – that government can never take over or take away. No American should be forced into a government-run system that limits their choices and rations their care.” – Sen. Jim DeMint
The Health Care Freedom Plan would allow every American access to health insurance and according to a study by the Heritage Foundation, would cover 22.4 million currently uninsured Americans within the five years.
Click here for the press release.
Click here for a one-page summary of the bill.
Click here for a letter of support from Americans for Tax Reform, “This will likely be the best free-market alternative to government health care offered this Congress, and I would encourage all senators to co-sponsor this excellent legislation.”
Click here to read Senator DeMint’s Op-Ed “Let’s Cut the Health Care Red Tape” from Forbes.com
The Health Care Freedom Plan:
Protects the right of Americans to keep their employer-based plan if they so choose.
Provides Americans without employer-based health insurance with vouchers of $2000 for individuals and $5000 for families to purchase health insurance.
Allows Americans with Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) to use their HSA funds to pay for insurance premiums, encouraging employers to contribute to their employees’ HSAs.
Creates a national market for health insurance by allowing individuals to purchase health insurance plans in any state.
Provides block grants to states to develop innovative models that ensure affordable health insurance coverage for Americans with pre-existing health conditions.
Reduces predatory and frivolous malpractice lawsuits against physicians and hospitals.
Assures that every health care consumer has access to price information prior to treatment so they can make informed decisio about their care.
Repeals financial bailouts (TARP) to fund health care vouchers.
Cap and Trade: Organized Crime’s Best Friend from Financial Times
http://www.ft.com/cms…
Fraud investigators arrested nine people on Wednesday over a suspected £38m carbon credit trading scam in one of the clearest signs yet of criminals targeting international schemes to combat climate change. More than 100 Revenue & Customs officers raided dozens of properties in the south of England over an alleged cross-border fraud to evade value added tax, just weeks after the Treasury imposed emergency rules in an effort to curb the problem. Trading in carbon credits – allowances for companies to produce greenhouse gases – has been dogged by problems, from legal but ethically dubious practices to alleged scams involving fictitious products. Anand Doobay, a partner at Peters & Peters, a City-based law firm specialising in financial crime, said the ethereal nature of the fast-expanding multi-billion dollar international market in carbon credits had made them an attractive target for graft: “There is an increasing amount of fraud connected with them as a commodity. It’s trading with something that’s intangible, and that isn’t regulated in the way some other commodities are.”
Forging a “New World Order” Under a One World Government by Global Research
http://www.globalrese…
This is a lengthy article that is intelligent and enlightening. Readers are encouraged to click on the link above. The article talks about global governance, how the powers that be have gotten us almost there.. a few more tweeks, already being discussed, and it’s goodbye to soveriegnty. Anyone that cares about the US as a country (or any other country for that matter), our consitution and our freedom should take a few moments to read this article.
GE seeks support for GE-minded politicians
http://canadafreepres…
GEPAC issued the following letter to GE employees soliciting contributions so that it can support politicians who make money for the company, including with respect to the Waxman-Markey climate bill, financial services reform and military spending.
…The intersection between GE’s interests and government action is clearer than ever. GEPAC is an important tool that enables GE employees to collectively help support candidates who share the values and goals of GE. While we must continue to engage elected officials to help them better understand our various businesses and how legislation affects our Company and our customers, we must also make sure that candidates who share GE’s values and goals get elected to office.
Health Care Reform That Actually Works from American Thinker
http://www.americanth…
“Where’s the Republican plan?” It’s one of the red herrings that apologists for Obamacare pull out of their bag of cliched talking points when pressed to justify Democrats’ attempt to grab control of 18% of the nation’s economy.
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )News for 07/11/2009-Gore Says Cap & Trade Brings Global Governance
Al Gore: U.S. Climate Bill Will Help Bring About ‘Global Governance’ by Marc Morano at Climate Depot
http://www.climatedep…
Former Vice President Al Gore declared that the Congressional climate bill will help bring about “global governance.”
“I bring you good news from the U.S., “Gore said on July 7, 2009 in Oxford at the Smith School World Forum on Enterprise and the Environment, sponsored by UK Times. “Just two weeks ago, the House of Representatives passed the Waxman-Markey climate bill,” Gore said, noting it was “very much a step in the right direction.” President Obama has pushed for the passage of the bill in the Senate and attended a G8 summit this week where he agreed to attempt to keep the Earth’s temperatures from rising more than 2 degrees C. Gore touted the Congressional climate bill, claiming it “will dramatically increase the prospects for success” in combating what he sees as the “crisis” of man-made global warming. “But it is the awareness itself that will drive the change and one of the ways it will drive the change is through global governance and global agreements.”
Warning: Cap and Trade Bubble Ahead By Stephen Lendman at Global Research
http://www.globalrese…
On May 15, Cap & Trade was introduced in the House purportedly “To create clean energy jobs, achieve energy independence, reduce global warming pollution and transition to a clean energy economy.” In fact, it’s to let corporate polluters reap huge windfall profits by charging consumers more for energy and fuel as well as create a new bubble through carbon trading derivatives speculation. It does nothing to address environmental issues, yet on June 26 the House narrowly passed (229 – 212) and sent it to the Senate to be debated and voted on.
On July 1, Catherine Austin Fitts’ Solari.com blog headlined “The Next Really Scary Bubble” in stating:
“If you think the housing and credit bubble diminished your financial security and your community, or the bailouts, or the rising gas prices did as well, hold on to your hat” for what’s coming. “Carbon trading is gearing up to make the housing and derivative bubbles look like target practice.”
She quoted Rep. Geoff Davis calling it “a scam,” Rep. Devin Nunes saying it’s a “massive transfer of wealth” from the public to polluters and Wall Street, Rep. James Sensenbrenner stating “Carbon markets can and will be manipulated using the same Wall Street sleights of hand that brought us the financial crisis,” and Dennis Kuchinich citing “The best description to date (to) be found in Matt Taibbi’s….’The Great American Bubble Machine: From tech stocks to high gas prices, Goldman Sachs (GS) has engineered every major market manipulation since the Great Depression – and they are about to do it again.’
Editors Note: This brings to mind an email I recently recieved from a friend of mine with some Real World Experience in Cap and Trade. The email follows:
Thought I’d take some time and share some real world experience I had with Cap and Trade when I worked at DTE Energy. Keep in mind, this is from real experience which did not involve me performing research on the rules and regulations set forth by the government. At one time, within the last 10 years or so, the government once again studied the affects coal burning plants have on our atmosphere. As a result, the EPA regulations were tightened. The utilities have a very strong PAC (political action committee) and lobbyist so before any laws could be passed, negotiations took place regarding the new EPA regulations. In a nutshell the main concern was the amount of money it would require to upgrade the plants so the new emission standards could be met. Both the government and the utilities acknowledged this was not a sound business decision, so a graduated timeline was constructed to meet the new standards. Part of the graduated timeline included giving each electric utility credits (tokens) which essentially pardoned them for not meeting the new standards. The thought was the utility can use the credits during the graduated timeline so no penalty fees would be issued by the government. This sounded practical from both parties and the law was set. The kicker was, as I was told by several DTE employess AND the CEO, the number of tokens issued to a utility was based on the total amount of electricity generated at each plant, not just coal burning plants. In DTE’s case, they were issued credits for the nuclear power plant in Monroe which already met the new standards. So what really occurred over the subsequent years? The credits were sold to other utilities that needed them to avoid any fines. As stated in one management meeting, DTE made huge sums of money as a result of selling the tokens. So, a natural thought on my behalf was the money that was made would be used to upgrade the coal burning plants to meet the new standards. Logical but not good business sense. This money was thrown into multiple budgets and used at will. To make matters worse, at least for me, I just read in the paper about a month ago that DTE was approaching the Michigan Public Service Commission (MPSC) requesting a rate hike to consumers. The reason for the rate hike? DTE just spent millions of dollars upgrading only 1 stack at a coal burning plant in Monroe. The upgrade brought that stack up to 80% of the new emmission standards. When DTE approached the MPSC for the rate hike that will be applied now, they also informed the MPSC that next year they will complete the upgrades to the stack that was started this year and begin upgrading the second stack as well. And oh, by the way, that effort will require another rate hike next year. When DTE approached the MPSC for the rate hike that will be applied now, they also informed the MPSC that next year they will complete the upgrades to the stack that was started this year and begin upgrading the second stack as well. And oh, by the way, that effort will require another rate hike next year. So, does cap and trade work? Oh yeah, you can make a lot of money in that market then turn around and get rate hikes to pay for things.
Obama Missile Defense Plan Puts America at Risk by Baker Spring at Heritage Foundation
http://www.heritage.o…
On February 2, 2009, Iran successfully launched a satellite into orbit using a rocket with technology similar to that used in long-range ballistic missiles. On May 20, 2009, Iran test-fired a 1,200-mile solid-fueled ballistic missile. North Korea attempted to launch a satellite on April 6, 2009, which, while failing to place the satellite in orbit, delivered its payload some 2,390 miles away in the Pacific Ocean. This was followed by a North Korean explosive nuclear weapons test on May 25, 2009. The ballistic-missile threat to the U.S. and its friends and allies is growing. Under these circumstances, common sense would dictate that the Obama Administration support full funding for the U.S. missile defense program.
What does the Administration do? On April 6, 2009, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates announced that the Obama Administration’s fiscal year (FY) 2010 broader defense budget would reduce the ballistic-missile budget by $1.4 billion. …
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )
Soldier For Liberty 