Oathkeepers Protect US Constitution: Recall NDAA 2012 Voters

http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2011/12/25/oath-keepers-launches-national-effort-to-recall-andor-remove-members-of-congress-who-voted-for-ndaa-military-detention-merry-christmas-u-s-congress/

This is the shared goal of Silver Senator 2012...

Gratitude

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8rWFvrxeD8c&feature=player_embedded#! 3:04

Just The Facts M'am: 2012 A real Deusie

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2011/12/2011-catch-22-year-in-review.html

2011 – CATCH 22 YEAR IN REVIEW

Posted on December 30, 2011 by JimQ

“It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so.” - Mark Twain

I published my predictions for 2011 on January 3, 2011 in my article 2011 – The Year of Catch-22. Humans evidently enjoy being embarrassed by how pitiful they are at predicting the future, because we continue to do it year after year. The mainstream media pundits don’t dare look back at their predictions or the predictions of the Wall Street shills that parade on CNBC and get quoted in the Wall Street Journal, eternally predicting 10% to 15% stock market gains. The multi-millionaire Wall Street strategists like the spawn of the squid, Abbey Joseph Cohen, have used all of their Ivy League brain power to predict at least a 10% stock price gain every year since 1999. The S&P 500 stood at 1,272 on January 6, 1999. As of this writing it currently stands at 1,261. ZERO appreciation over the last twelve years.
The Wall Street mantra of stocks for the long run is beginning to get a little stale. If Abbey Joseph Cohen had been right for the last twelve years, the S&P 500 would be 4,000. For this level of accuracy, she is paid millions. Her 2011 prediction of 1,500 only missed by16%. The S&P 500 began the year at 1,258 and hasn’t budged. The lowest prediction from the Wall Street shysters at the outset of the year was 1,333, with the majority between 1,400 and 1,500.

The same Wall Street clowns are now being quoted in the mainstream media predicting a 10% to 15% increase in stock prices in 2012, despite the fact we are headed back into recession, China’s property bubble has burst, and Europe teeters on the brink of dissolution. They lie on behalf of their Too Big To Tell the Truth employers by declaring stocks undervalued, when honest analysts such as Jeremy Grantham, John Hussman and Robert Shiller truthfully report that stocks are overvalued and will provide pitiful returns over the next year and the next decade.
I will take my chances with a few predictions for 2012 after reviewing my lack of foresight regarding 2011. I declared 2011 the year of Catch-22 because no matter what happened, it would not translate into a positive result for the American people. This was my thesis:

The United States and its leaders are stuck in their own Catch 22. They need the economy to improve in order to generate jobs, but the economy can only improve if people have jobs. They need the economy to recover in order to improve our deficit situation, but if the economy really recovers long term interest rates will increase, further depressing the housing market and increasing the interest expense burden for the US, therefore increasing the deficit. A recovering economy would result in more production and consumption, which would result in more oil consumption driving the price above $100 per barrel, therefore depressing the economy. Americans must save for their retirements as 10,000 Baby Boomers turn 65 every day, but if the savings rate goes back to 10%, the economy will collapse due to lack of consumption. Consumer expenditures account for 71% of GDP and need to revert back to 65% for the US to have a balanced sustainable economy, but a reduction in consumer spending will push the US back into recession, reducing tax revenues and increasing deficits. You can see why Catch 22 is the theme for 2011.

My predictions for 2011 were as follows:

• The first half of 2011 is guaranteed to give the appearance of recovery. The lame-duck Congress ”compromise” will pump hundreds of billions of borrowed dollars into the economy. The continuation of unemployment benefits for 99 weeks (supposedly to help employment) and the 2% payroll tax cut will goose consumer spending. Ben Bernanke and his QE2 stimulus for poor Wall Street bankers is pumping $75 billion per month ($3 to $4 billion per day) directly into the stock market. Since Ben gave Wall Street the all clear signal in late August, the NASDAQ has soared 25%. Despite the fact that there are 362,000 less Americans employed than were employed in August 2010, the mainstream media will continue to tout the jobs recovery. The goal of all these efforts is to boost confidence and spending. Everything being done by those in power has the seeds of its own destruction built in. The Catch 22 will assert itself in the 2nd half of 2011.

The payroll tax cut, extension of unemployment benefits and Bernanke’s gift to Wall Street criminal banks did nothing to help real Americans in the real world. The government manipulated GDP has languished between 0.4% and 1.8% in the first three quarters of 2011. Using a true measure of inflation, as detailed by John Williams at www.shadowstats.com, GDP has remained at a recessionary level of -2% to -3%.

Easy Ben accomplished his goal of pumping up the stock market with his QE2 gift to Wall Street bankers during the first six months of 2011, with the S&P 500 peaking at 1,364 in late April. The market began to fall the second Ben stopped handing Jamie Dimon and his friends $4 billion per day, with the market dropping 18% in three months. The market has risen back near the breakeven level for the year based on Ben’s promise to keep interest rates at zero forever and the hope of QE3.

• A new perfect storm is brewing for housing in 2011 and will not subside until late 2012. You may have thought those bad mortgages had been all written off. You would be wrong. There will be in excess of $200 billion of adjustable rate mortgages that reset between 2011 and 2012, with in excess of $125 billion being the dreaded Alt-A mortgages. This is a recipe for millions of new foreclosures.

The brainless twits on CNBC will dutifully report the number of completed foreclosure sales plunged by 24% in 2011, giving the impression to their non-critical thinking viewership that all is well on the housing front. What they will fail to point out is that the number of foreclosures in process went up in 2011 and now stands 59% ABOVE the level in 2009 at the height of our recession. The reason that completed foreclosures have fallen is twofold. The criminal Wall Street banks can’t prove they hold the mortgage notes on hundreds of thousands of homes and they have a few legal issues related to the massive robo-signing fraud they committed. Kicking old ladies and Iraq War veterans out into the street using fraudulent documentation has caused the Wall Street Too Evil To Believe Banks some public relations issues. Secondly, the Wall Street Plutocrats have these mortgage loans valued at 100% on their balance sheets due to the FASB gift of mark to fantasy accounting rules. Foreclosing actually reveals their assets to be overvalued by at least 50%. This may explain why millions of Americans are still in their homes after not making a mortgage payment for two years, as detailed by economist Tom Lawler:

Given the number of loans either seriously delinquent or in the process of foreclosure at the beginning of the year, the number of completed foreclosure sales in 2011 is almost absurdly low, reflecting the complete screw-up of the mortgage servicing industry, and the resulting dramatic slowdown in foreclosure resolutions. As of the end of October, 2011 LPS estimated that there were 1.759 million seriously delinquent loans with the average number of days delinquent at 388 (compared to 192 days in January 2008), and there were 2.210 million loans in the foreclosure process that had been on average delinquent for 631 days.

Completed Foreclosure Sales And Short Sales/DILs (thousands, estimates)
	2008	2009	2010	2011(E)
Completed Foreclosure Sales	914	949	1,070	815
Owner-occupied	N.A.	N.A.	785	608
Non-owner-occupied	N.A.	N.A.	285	207
Short Sales/DILs	105	270	354	380
Foreclosures plus Short Sales/DILs	1,019	1,219	1,424	1,195
Outstanding first liens:	Jan-08	Jan-09	Jan-10	Jan-11
Seriously Delinquent (90+)	1,016	1,983	3,061	2,168
In Process of Foreclosure	860	1,386	2,110	2,203

The concerted effort to not complete foreclosures did nothing to slow the continued descent in home prices. As you can see in the chart below from http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/, real home prices will have fallen another 5% in 2011. Obama and his minions threw $50 billion of your tax dollars at the housing market in 2009 – 2010 with tax credits, loan modification programs, homebuilder tax loss carry-backs, and a myriad of other Keynesian claptrap solutions. They succeeded in pissing your tax dollars down the toilet as prices have declined another 12% in the last 18 months. Prices have fallen 42% nationally since 2006. I wonder who missed the boat on that development?

“We’ve never had a decline in house prices on a nationwide basis. So, what I think what is more likely is that house prices will slow, maybe stabilize, might slow consumption spending a bit.” – Ben Bernanke – July 2005

There are approximately 48.5 million homes with mortgages in the United States and 10.7 million of them have negative equity. Another 2.4 million have less than 5% equity. Considering it costs more than 5% in closing costs to sell a house that means 27% of home occupiers with a mortgage are trapped like rats in a cage. With 2.2 million foreclosures still in the pipeline and a looming recession, home prices will continue to fall another 10% to 20% over the next two years and one third of all home occupiers will be underwater. That sounds like a recipe for 10% to 15% stock market gains.

• Quantitative easing has benefited only Wall Street bankers and the 1% wealthiest Americans. The $1.4 trillion of toxic mortgage backed securities on The Fed’s balance sheet are worth less than $700 billion. How will they unload this toxic waste? The Treasuries they have bought drop in value as interest rates rise. Quantitative easing’s Catch 22 is that it can never be unwound without destroying the Fed and the US economy.

Bennie and his Inkjets did a bang up job in 2011. He was able to expand his balance sheet from $2.47 trillion to $2.95 trillion in twelve short months. According to Ben and his Federal Reserve friends, increasing your balance sheet by $480 billion isn’t really printing money out of thin air and handing it to their Wall Street owners for free, so they can prop up the stock market and enrich their executives. Ben is now leveraged 57 to 1. He should move to Europe, where this level of leverage is commonplace. In comparison, Lehman Brothers and Bear Stearns were leveraged 40 to 1 when they went belly up.

There is absolutely no way that Ben Bernanke could ever reduce the Federal Reserve balance sheet to the pre-crisis level without destroying the U.S. economy. He knows that and will never sell off those toxic mortgage assets. Not only won’t he reduce the Fed balance sheet, but by mid-2012 he will institute QE3 and buy another $600 billion of mortgage debt. His hubris knows no bounds, as his reckless illegal actions thus far have not driven interest rates sky high – YET. He has only destroyed the finances of senior citizens, savers and people who eat food and use gasoline. He will surely go down in history, but not the way he envisions.

• The rise in oil to $91 a barrel will not be a top. The Catch-22 of a declining dollar is that prices of all imported goods go up. If the dollar falls another 10%, the price of oil will rise above $120 a barrel and push the economy back into recession.

As Bernanke printed like a drunken sailor during the first six months of 2011, the USD fell by 9% and the price of oil did exactly as expected, rising to a peak above $125. The NATO “intervention” in Libya also added a few bucks to the price of a barrel of sweet crude.

DXY

The complete implosion of Europe and the ensuing weakness of the Euro have given the false impression that the U.S. dollar is a safe haven. The USD has regained its losses and will end the year exactly as it started versus a Euro heavy basket of world currencies. With annual deficits equaling 10% of GDP, a national debt now exceeding 100% of GDP, and Ben Bernanke in perpetual printing mode, the USD is destined to reach its intrinsic value of zero. With Brent crude still above $108 a barrel, employment still weak, and double digit food and energy inflation slowing consumer spending, the ECRI knows a recession during 2012 is baked in the cake.

• The imminent collapse of the European Union as Greece, Ireland, Portugal and Spain are effectively bankrupt. Spain is the size of the other three countries combined and has a 20% unemployment rate. The Germans are losing patience with these spendthrift countries. Debt does matter.

It seems I was wrong about Europe. It turned out to be much worse than anyone envisioned, with Italy now the likely fuse that blows the whole thing sky high. The ECB has made Ben Bernanke look like a lightweight by increasing their balance sheet by 44% to over $3.5 trillion in a futile effort to solve a debt crisis with more debt. It seems central bankers are programmed to print until the very end (see Weimar). The European Union will not survive 2012. Too many countries, too much government debt, too many zombie banks, too many bureaucrats, too much austerity rammed down the throats of citizens, and not enough honesty or reality based solutions.

• State and local governments were able to put off hard choices for another year, as Washington DC handed out hundreds of billions in pork. California will have a $19 billion budget deficit; Illinois will have a $17 billion budget deficit; New Jersey will have a $10.5 billion budget deficit; New York will have a $9 billion budget deficit. A US Congress filled with Tea Party newcomers will refuse to bailout these spendthrift states. Substantial government employee layoffs are a lock.

State and local governments have laid off 535,000 workers since 2008. With borrowed Federal government stimulus handouts evaporating into thin air during 2011 – 2012, this total will reach 800,000 by the end of the next year. The U.S. Postal Service will do their part by cutting 28,000 jobs in 2012, even though they need to cut 100,000. States and municipalities based their budgets on the revenues produced by the fake debt driven housing boom from 2003 – 2007. The tax revenue dried up, but the union jobs added are a gift that keeps on costing taxpayers billions. States and localities can’t print, so layoffs will continue.

• There is a growing probability that China will experience a hard landing as their own quantitative easing has resulted in inflation surging to a 28 month high of 5.1%, with food inflation skyrocketing to 11.7%. Poor families spend up to half of their income on food. Rapidly rising prices severely burden poor people and can spark civil unrest if too many of them can’t afford food.

According to official government statistics China’s economy continued to boom in 2011. But, of course Chinese government reports make the BLS look honest. The fact is the Chinese stock market has fallen 28% since April as the property bubble deflates. If their economy has truly grown at an annual rate of 8% to 10% over the last five years, why is their stock market down 62% from its 2007 high?

SHANGHAI INDEX

The price inflation in food and energy prices, along with the property bubble bursting has led to breakouts of civil unrest across China. China’s two biggest markets – Europe & the United States – are in or near recession and are buying less of their crap. They can only build so many vacant cities and shopping malls to create the appearance of growth. The hard landing is about to get harder in 2012.

• The Tea Party members of Congress are likely to cause as much trouble for Republicans as Democrats. If they decide to make a stand on raising the debt ceiling early in 2011, all hell could break loose in the debt and stock markets.

It seems I got the timing wrong on this prediction, but the August showdown was a doozy. The threat of a government shutdown resulted in the stock market collapsing by 18% in a matter of weeks in August. Our beloved politicians then came up with another bullshit non-solution by creating a commission which, after months of negotiations, failed to do anything. The $1.2 trillion of automatic spending cuts will never happen. The slime that inhabit the hallowed halls of Congress will pretend to cut, while actually increasing spending. And so it goes. The stock market has risen from its October low based on Easy Ben’s assurances to keep interest rates at zero forever and the anticipation of QE3 in the new year.

• Will the consensus forecast of a growing economy, rising corporate profits, 10% to 15% stock market gains, 2 million new jobs, and a housing recovery come true in 2011? No it will not. By mid-year confidence in Ben’s master plan will wane.

Corporate profits did rise, mostly due to Ben Bernanke providing free money to the Wall Street Mega-Banks so they could generate risk free profits on the backs of senior citizens getting .15% on their savings. It also helps when the same Wall Street banks can make accounting entries declaring that future loan losses will be minimal and the toxic mortgages on their books aren’t really worthless. Who knew accountants could do so much for America? Abbey Joseph Cohen only missed her stock market projection by a smidgeon. The S&P 500 is essentially unchanged for the year, while the NASDAQ and Russell 2000 will finish in the red.
The country did not add 2 million new jobs. It added 1.4 to 1.5 new jobs. Too bad the working age population went up by 1.7 million people. But our friends at the BLS, when they aren’t manipulating away the inflation that real people in the real world experience every day, have the gall to declare the unemployment rate has fallen from 9.8% to 8.6% in the last twelve months. How could this be you might ask, since the working age population went up by more than the number of people who found jobs. Easy if you are a BLS government drone. Everyone knows that things are so good out in the real world that 1.8 million Americans decided to kick back and enjoy the good life by leaving the workforce. It wasn’t because they gave up looking for the jobs that were shipped to the Far East by the mega-corporations making record profits and paying record bonuses to their executives. It’s just a rumor that those long lines at food banks around the country have a few of these “lucky” non-members of the workforce in them.
The housing recovery is just around the corner. Larry Yun, chief liar for the National Association of Realtors, assures us that it’s the best time to buy. We all know that the NAR is a bastion of honesty and truth. Just because they reported 3 MILLION more home sales than actually occurred between 2007 and 2010, you can’t scorn, ignore and treat everything they say as a bald faced lie. If Larry says the housing recovery has arrived, it must be true.

	Revised	Previous	% Change
2007	5,022,000	5,652,000	-11.1%
2008	4,124,000	4,913,000	-16.1%
2009	4,334,000	5,156,000	-15.9%
2010	4,182,000	4,907,000	-14.8%

When the pundits on CNBC sum up the year, they will not be touting the fact that gasoline prices went up 10% in the past year and the average price for a gallon of gas was the highest in U.S. history. They will not be proclaiming that even the government manipulated CPI shows food prices up 6% and clothing prices up 5% in the last year. I’m sure glad Ben Bernanke doesn’t see any inflation on his radar. Maybe he should ask his chauffer about his inflation. Lastly, the stocks for the long run crowd will not be yakking about the fact that gold finished up 10% for the year and has been up for TEN consecutive years. I wonder whether the numbskulls on CNBC can look at the chart below and figure out why gold is up ten years in a row. The national debt reaching $20 trillion by 2015 is a given. I wonder whether the price of gold will be higher. Maybe I’ll give Abbey Joseph Cohen a call and ask for her prediction.

Overall, my assessment of what would happen in 2011 wasn’t too far off. But, it was the things that I and virtually everyone on the planet missed that will reverberate in 2012 and for the next ten years. Our 20 year Crisis deepened, became more violent, and clearly revealed that the establishment will use all their power to put down protests and crush opposition to their corrupt crony capitalistic policies. The major developments I missed regarding 2011 included:

• The self-immolation of a young Tunisian man set off revolutions around the globe, toppling U.S. supported dictators in Tunisia and Egypt. Dictators attempted to retain power by killing citizens by the thousands. The self-immolation of a man in New Hampshire in front of a courthouse was completely ignored by the mainstream media. I wonder why.
• The Arab Spring has resulted in revolutions in Yemen, Bahrain, Syria and Libya. Depending upon how much oil was at stake, the U.S. has supported the dictator or the people whenever it suited them. This is called democratic principles.
• Young people across the U.S. were inspired by the Arab Spring and began to Occupy Wall Street and many other streets in 97 other U.S. cities this past Fall. The spirit of these protests was against Wall Street criminality, Washington corruption, and corporate malfeasance. Peaceful civil disobedience by citizens of this country was met with beatings, tear gas, mass arrests and bulldozing their encampments. Students were maced while sitting in front of a college building. Ultimately a Department of Homeland Security coordinated attack on all the protests squashed the movement. The American people were too distracted by Dancing With the Stars and the latest iGadget to notice. The corporate media did their part by spewing misinformation and propaganda about the Occupy Movement, while the Wall Street Elite giggled with delight from their NYC penthouse suites.
• Shockingly, no bankers were prosecuted despite clear unequivocal evidence of the greatest financial fraud in world history. The former head of Goldman Sachs, U.S. Senator, and NJ Governor continues to eat caviar and drink champagne in his glorious mansion after stealing $1.2 billion directly from customers’ accounts. These funds now reside in the pocket of Jamie Dimon and his upstanding JP Morgan institution.
• The Federal government methodically moved closer to a totalitarian regime by passing legislation that will enable them to imprison U.S. citizens without charges. The only remaining area that has allowed critical thinking Americans to find the truth – the Internet – is on the verge of being locked down by the Feds. Pending legislation will allow them to shut down any website that may inconvenience their agenda. We inch ever closer to Orwell’s vision of the future.
• No one in the MSM or government anticipated that the only truthful, honest, forthright politician in Washington D.C. – Ron Paul – could possibly win the Iowa caucus. His message of freedom, liberty, self reliance, and non-interventionism has struck a chord with young people and those capable of distinguishing between MSM propaganda and reality. The establishment is terrified of Ron Paul and is now on a mission to destroy him. What they don’t realize is their time is coming to an end. The existing social order will be swept away in a violent manner. The youth of this country will lead the charge. 2012 should be a real doozy.

I’ll take another shot at predicting the unpredictable with my next article: 2012 – The Year of Living Dangerously.

Honest Compassion, not Violent Racism

http://www.revolutionpac.com/2011/12/the-compassion-of-dr-ron-paul/


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Rv0Z5SNrF4&feature=player_embedded 2:13

Impeach Now, Recall or Dis-Elect Everyone who voted for 2012 NDAA Military Police Prison State Totalitarianism for America

Even Snopes says the 2012 NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act) allows "the US Military to arrest American citizens in their back yard without charge or trial." 

http://www.snopes.com/politics/military/ndaa.asp

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Defense_Authorization_Act_for_Fiscal_Year_2012

Here is the actual text of the law for remaining doubting Thomases:

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112s1867es/pdf/BILLS-112s1867es.pdf

No wonder 9 states, including Nevada, are acting on recalls of their Federal Representatives and Senators who voted for NDAA:

http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/316798

No wonder The White House Government Site had petitions to stop NDAA and SOPA government disruption of free flow of information, including MIT's internet course on how to stage a revolutiion. Of the two, only SOPA met the threshold by today's cutoff, some say because the NDAA petition was disappeared for some time:

https://wwws.whitehouse.gov/petitions#!/petitions

http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/history/21h-001-how-to-stage-a-revolution-fall-2007/

http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/history/21h-001-how-to-stage-a-revolution-fall-2007/syllabus/MIT21H_001F07_syllF10.pdf

In any event, Obama signed the destructive 2012 NDAA Act HR

http://www.politico.com/politico44/perm/0111/obama_signs_ndaa_377c1992-ed7a-4720-b6f7-3cab1fe76506.html

We are now under Martial Law Police Prison Totalitarian State by Federal Law:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NW-e7z7S6VI&feature=related 10:12 Must See

Yet every member of Congress, Courts and the Executive Branch of our government took an oath of office.

Here is the actual US Senate oath:

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God."

http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/Oath_Office.htm

It was indeed ominous when the Department of Homeland Security and FBI identified Americans who support our Constitution as terrorists:

http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/constitutional_terrorist.htm 

The two party candidates for 2012 Nevada Senate in 2012, if we can believe the same monopoly media who did not accurately report actual NDAA language and their voting record, are locked in a tight race:

http://www.politico.com/blogs/david-catanese/2011/12/nevada-senate-race-still-tight-108586.html

Here is the Berkley and Heller voting record on the US 2012 National Defense Authorization Act that violates habeas corpus and posse comitatus, by allowing indefinite military detention without a trial and deliberate assassination of anyone deemed a belligerent, American citizen or not:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habeas_corpus

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act

http://ice4safety.com/2011/12/freedom-ndaa/

Berkley NDAA vote Yea:

http://www.votesmart.org/bill/votes/37467

Heller NDAA vote Yea:

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=112&session=1&vote=00218


Why should We The People be concerned?

Here is the actual language of the 2012 NDAA bill:

Section 954 of the NDAA, entitled "Military Activities in Cyberspace," states:

Congress affirms that the Department of Defense has the capability, and upon direction by the President may conduct offensive operations in cyberspace to defend our Nation, Allies and interests subject to (1) the policy principles and legal regimes that the Department follows for kinetic capabilities, including the law of armed conflict; and (2) the War Powers Resolution."

In other words, the very same Patriot Act that defacto violated our American Bill of Rights was deliberately extended by NDAA to our Internet, allowing the Department of Homeland Security, FBI, NSA, TSA and US Military to not only eavesdrop, but block, arrest, imprison and kill American citizens without trial for the rest of their lives.

One would think Americans learned the lesson of government abuse of power with Martin Armstrong, an influential American Financier jailed on contempt of court 7 years without trial, by President Bush's cousin Judge John M Walker Jr, tortured by deadly force in a deliberate prison attack, then put in solitary confinement without proper medical care, forced to sign a guilty plea, then imprisoned four more years in the hole until Ron Paul stepped in:

http://www.inflateordie.com/files/Ron%20Paul%20Last%20Hope%2012-19-2011.pdf 

Every American who values their freedom should know exactly what is in the 2012 NDAA that codifies America as a Totalitarian Prison Police State with Martial Law:

The National Defense Authorization Bill 2012, unanimously backed by the Senate and passed in the House of Representatives Thursday, contains some language that allows the Pentagon to effectively wage a cyberwar on any domestic enemies of the state. The bill is a serious violation of First Amendment human and civil rights, including freedom of speech and freedom of the press, and the legislation could potentially hinder the movements of both Occupy Wall Street and the Tea Party campaign, as well as quash attempts from the whistleblowers in independent news media from exposing corruption from within the government.

Here is an excerpt from the bill:

"Congress affirms that the Department of Defense has the capability, and upon direction by the President may conduct offensive operations in cyberspace to defend our Nation, Allies and interests, subject to (1) the policy principles and legal regimes that the Department follows for kinetic capabilities, including the law of armed conflict; and (2) the War Powers Resolution."...

"I assured the president that we were working on additional assurances, that the concerns were not accurate," said Carl Levin, the Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman. "That we'd do everything we could to make sure they wre allayed, and met."

[Graham, Kerry, McCain and monopoly media said similar. Liar Liar, pants on fire.]


"The U.S. is vulnerable to sabotage in defense, power, telecommunications, banking," said Sami Saydjari, a former Pentagon cyber expert. "An attack on any one of those essential infrastructures could be as damaging as any kinetic attack on U.S. soil."

"If you shut down our power grid, maybe we will put a missile down one of your smokestacks," said one Pentagon official, prior to releasing its cybersecurity plan. 

In other words, the Pentagon is afraid that with the Internet's capability to disseminate information instantly, the spread of information or ideas "not consistent with U.S. government themes and messages" could be too powerful and dangerous to national security.

[This makes Big Brother Thought Control in 1984, Hillary Clinton's self-described favourite book, look mild.]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Rodham_Clinton


http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_paul_rog_080118_hillary_clinton_s_sl.htm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6h3G-lMZxjo 1:14

Writer Kurt Nimmo sums it up:

"After the NDAA is signed into law by Obama, he will have the authority to wage war against 'domestic terrorists,' defined by the Department of Homeland Security as 'rightwing extremists' and other anti-government types. As noted above, it will be the DHS that will 'direct the work' against enemies of the state. It will work with the Pentagon to militarily neutralize the threat posed by activists and the alternative media."

Since the protests began in September, Occupy protesters have been using cell phone cameras and Twitter to broadcast gross police misconduct. However, the sometimes-violent responses from police and other U.S. agencies makes it abundantly clear that government systems are in place because they want to suppress the movement, particularly its coverage.

"New York cops have arrested, punched, whacked, shoved to the ground and tossed a barrier at reporters and photographers," said Michael Powell, a writer for the New York Times. "Reporters with The Associated Press and The Daily News were arrested while taking notes. A radio reporter was arrested as she recorded several blocks from the park. All of this behavior 'allegedly' occurred 'on the streets of New York.'"

While the Internet has been rife with "hacktivism" and security breaches in 2011, some politicians still maintain that it's far more dangerous to let the NDAA bill pass.

"Our children deserve a world where they know the government will protect them, that it is not going to rule over them by invading their very thoughts," said representative Dennis Kucinich.

"What we are talking about here is that Americans could be subjected to life imprisonment," said Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.). "Think about that for a minute. Life imprisonment. Without ever being charged, tried, or convicted of a crime. Without ever having an opportunity to prove your innocence to a judge or a jury of your peers. And without the government ever having to prove your guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. I think that denigrates the very foundations of this country."

Internet "hactivist" group Anonymous will battle the new bill. The group has already targeted Sen. Robert Portman (R-Ohio), who was one of the many politicians to support the bill. Sen. Portman has received $272,853 from special interest groups that support the NDAA, which has helped him purchase about $1.7 million in real estate in Ohio...
 
If Obama signs the NDAA Bill and allows the military to take over such domestic operations, nothing will stop them from infringing on civil liberties and trashing the Constitution even further.

[Despite a petition calling for a veto to the White House Government website with over 4000 signatures, Obama signed the unconstitutional NDAA Bill just before Christmas recess, like the Fed/IRS legislation in 1913.]

http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/268638/20111216/ndaa-suppress-internet-freedom.htm

Here is the actual language of the final bill versus monopoly media political lies and myths:

Myth # 1: This bill does not codify indefinite detention
Section 1021 of the NDAA governs, as its title says, “Authority of the Armed Forces to Detain Covered Persons Pursuant to the AUMF.”  The first provision — section (a) — explicitly “affirms that the authority of the President” under the AUMF  ”includes the authority for the Armed Forces of the United States to detain covered persons.” The next section, (b), defines “covered persons” — i.e., those who can be detained by the U.S. military — as “a person who was a part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners.” With regard to those “covered individuals,” this is the power vested in the President by the next section, (c):

It simply cannot be any clearer within the confines of the English language that this bill codifies the power of indefinite detention. It expressly empowers the President — with regard to anyone accused of the acts in section (b) – to detain them “without trial until the end of the hostilities.” That is the very definition of “indefinite detention,” and the statute could not be clearer that it vests this power. Anyone claiming this bill does not codify indefinite detention should be forced to explain how they can claim that in light of this crystal clear provision.
It is true, as I’ve pointed out repeatedly, that both the Bush and Obama administrations have argued that the 2001 AUMF implicitly (i.e., silently) already vests the power of indefinite detention in the President, and post-9/11 deferential courts have largely accepted that view (just as the Bush DOJ argued that the 2001 AUMF implicitly (i.e., silently) allowed them to eavesdrop on Americans without the warrants required by law). That’s why the NDAA can state that nothing is intended to expand the 2001 AUMF while achieving exactly that: because the Executive and judicial interpretation being given to the 20o1 AUMF is already so much broader than its language provides.
But this is the first time this power of indefinite detention is being expressly codified by statute (there’s not a word about detention powers in the 2001 AUMF). Indeed, as the ACLU and HRW both pointed out, it’s the first time such powers are being codified in a statute since the McCarthy era Internal Security Act of 1950, about which I wrote yesterday.

Myth #2: The bill does not expand the scope of the War on Terror as defined by the 2001 AUMF
This myth is very easily dispensed with. The scope of the war as defined by the original 2001 AUMF was, at least relative to this new bill, quite specific and narrow. Here’s the full extent of the power the original AUMF granted:

(a) IN GENERAL- That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.

Under the clear language of the 2001 AUMF, the President’s authorization to use force was explicitly confined to those who (a) helped perpetrate the 9/11 attack or (b) harbored the perpetrators. That’s it. Now look at how much broader the NDAA is with regard to who can be targeted:

Section (1) is basically a re-statement of the 2001 AUMF. But Section (2) is a brand new addition. It allows the President to target not only those who helped perpetrate the 9/11 attacks or those who harbored them, but also: anyone who “substantially supports” such groups and/or “associated forces.” Those are extremely vague terms subject to wild and obvious levels of abuse (see what Law Professor Jonathan Hafetz told me in an interview last week about the dangers of those terms). This is a substantial statutory escalation of the War on Terror and the President’s powers under it, and it occurs more than ten years after 9/11, with Osama bin Laden dead, and with the U.S. Government boasting that virtually all Al Qaeda leaders have been eliminated and the original organization (the one accused of perpetrating 9/11 attack) rendered inoperable.

It is true that both the Bush and Obama administration have long been arguing that the original AUMF should be broadly “interpreted” so as to authorize force against this much larger scope of individuals, despite the complete absence of such language in that original AUMF. That’s how the Obama administration justifies its ongoing bombing of Yemen and Somalia and its killing of people based on the claim that they support groups that did not even exist at the time of 9/11 – i.e., they argue: these new post-9/11 groups we’re targeting are “associated forces” of Al Qaeda and the individuals we’re killing “substantially support” those groups. But this is the first time that Congress has codified that wildly expanded definition of the Enemy in the War on Terror. And all anyone has to do to see that is compare the old AUMF with the new one in the NDAA.

Myth #3: U.S. citizens are exempted from this new bill
This is simply false, at least when expressed so definitively and without caveats. The bill is purposely muddled on this issue which is what is enabling the falsehood.

There are two separate indefinite military detention provisions in this bill. The first, Section 1021, authorizes indefinite detention for the broad definition of “covered persons” discussed above in the prior point. And that section does provide that “Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect existing law or authorities relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States, or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States.” So that section contains a disclaimer regarding an intention to expand detention powers for U.S. citizens, but does so only for the powers vested by that specific section. More important, the exclusion appears to extend only to U.S. citizens “captured or arrested in the United States” — meaning that the powers of indefinite detention vested by that section apply to U.S. citizens captured anywhere abroad (there is some grammatical vagueness on this point, but at the very least, there is a viable argument that the detention power in this section applies to U.S. citizens captured abroad).
But the next section, Section 1022, is a different story. That section specifically deals with a smaller category of people than the broad group covered by 1021: namely, anyone whom the President determines is “a member of, or part of, al-Qaeda or an associated force” and “participated in the course of planning or carrying out an attack or attempted attack against the United States or its coalition partners.” For those persons, section (a) not only authorizes, but requires (absent a Presidential waiver), that they be held “in military custody pending disposition under the law of war.” The section title is “Military Custody for Foreign Al Qaeda Terrorists,” but the definition of who it covers does not exclude U.S. citizens or include any requirement of foreignness.
That section — 1022 — does not contain the broad disclaimer regarding U.S. citizens that 1021 contains. Instead, it simply says that the requirement of military detention does not apply to U.S. citizens, but it does not exclude U.S. citizens from the authority, the option, to hold them in military custody. Here is what it says:

The only provision from which U.S. citizens are exempted here is the “requirement” of military detention. For foreign nationals accused of being members of Al Qaeda, military detention is mandatory; for U.S. citizens, it is optional. This section does not exempt U.S citizens from the presidential power of military detention: only from the requirement of military detention.

The most important point on this issue is the same as underscored in the prior two points: the “compromise” reached by  Congress includes language preserving the status quo. That’s because the Obama administration already argues that the original 2001 AUMF authorizes them to act against U.S. citizens (obviously, if they believe they have the power to target U.S. citizens for assassination, then they believe they have the power to detain U.S. citizens as enemy combatants).

The proof that this bill does not expressly exempt U.S. citizens or those captured on U.S. soil is that amendments offered by Sen. Feinstein providing expressly for those exemptions were rejected. The “compromise” was to preserve the status quo by including the provision that the bill is not intended to alter it with regard to American citizens, but that’s because proponents of broad detention powers are confident that the status quo already permits such detention.

[A later Feinstein cosmetic amendment was passed.]

http://www.lawfareblog.com/2011/12/ndaa-passage-final-transcript-from-senate-floor/

In sum, there is simply no question that this bill codifies indefinite detention without trial (Myth 1). There is no question that it significantly expands the statutory definitions of the War on Terror and those who can be targeted as part of it (Myth 2). The issue of application to U.S. citizens (Myth 3) is purposely muddled — that’s why Feinstein’s amendments were rejected — and there is consequently no doubt this bill can and will be used by the U.S. Government (under this President or a future one)  to bolster its argument that it is empowered to indefinitely detain even U.S. citizens without a trial

(NYT Editorial: “The legislation could also give future presidents the authority to throw American citizens into prison for life without charges or a trial”;

Sen. Bernie Sanders: “This bill also contains misguided provisions that in the name of fighting terrorism essentially authorize the indefinite imprisonment of American citizens without charges”).


http://www.salon.com/2011/12/16/three_myths_about_the_detention_bill/singleton/

It is worth noting the objectionable HR 1540 and SB 1867 NDAA Sections allowing assassination of American Citizens without jury trial and violating habeas corpus and posse comitatus were changed from Section 1021 and 1022 to 1031 and 1032.


It is also worth noting in a preview of possible coming events in America, Argentina just passed a law for 15 years in prison for withdrawing bank funds and hanging for protesting the government:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/sns-rt-us-argentina-terrorismtre7br1bz-20111228,0,6549148.story

[After we linked to this story, our internet access went down.]

So there we have it. We are on official notice with the passage and Presidential approval of NDAA, and we will only have a better, brighter future if we recall those who passed it on violation of our Constitution, because the NDAA Bill 1867 Page 430, Section 1032, Paragraph 4, Line 1 specifically 
allows "Waiver for National Security."

So are we too busy to take care of ourselves?

Gun and ammo sales set a new record this Christmas.

Would we rather trust Bureaucratic Big Government and Lethal Military or ourselves to take care of US?

Cash and Silver donations to Recall US Senator Dean Heller:

Richard Charles 
POB 1018
Crystal Bay
Nevada  89402-1018

Encrypted communications:

silversenator@hushmail.com

Monopoly Media Mesmerism: NDAA, RP, SOPA

http://www.businessinsider.com/whys-the-media-shafting-ron-paul-and-ignoring-ndaa-and-sopa-dangers-2011-12

The Post Seen 'Round the World

Winds of Change.... Warren Buffet is supposedly asking each addressee to forward this email to a minimum of twenty people on their address list; in turn ask each of those to do likewise.

In three days, most people in The United States of America will have the message. This is one idea that really should be passed Around.

_*Congressional Reform Act of 2011*_1. No Tenure / No Pension.

A Congressman/woman collects a salary while in office and receives no
Pay when they're out of office.

2. Congress (past, present & future) participates in Social
Security.

All funds in the Congressional retirement fund move to the
Social Security system immediately. All future funds flow into
The Social Security system, and Congress participates with the
American people. It may not be used for any other purpose.

3. Congress can purchase their own retirement plan, just as all
Americans do.

4. Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise.
Congressional pay will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%.

5. Congress loses their current health care system and
Participates in the same health care system as the American people.

6. Congress must equally abide by all laws they impose on the
American people.

7. All contracts with past and present Congressmen/women are void
Effective 1/1/12. The American people did not make this
Contract with Congressmen/women.

Congressmen/women made all these contracts for themselves. Serving in
Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers
Envisioned citizen legislators, so ours should serve their
Term(s), then go home and back to work.

If each person contacts a minimum of twenty people then it will
Only take three days for most people (in the U.S.) to receive
The message. Don't you think it's time?

THIS IS HOW YOU FIX CONGRESS!

If you agree with the above, pass it on. If not, just delete.
You are one of my 20+ - Please keep it going, and thanks.

**********************************************

We note that these chain emails often have their facts wrong. 

For starters, Congress contributed to and participated in social security since 1983.

Mr Buffett, the only son of an isolationist, anti-New Deal, gold bug
Congressman Stockbroker, was a Wharton dropout, deducted his paper route
bicycle for $35 on his 1944 tax returns, fought and won a lawsuit
against the IRS.
He bought billions of tax credits/losses from corps
that couldn't use them since 1990 for pennies on the dollar:



http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/blcongress.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_Buffett

http://www.cnbc.com/id/33620547/Buffett_to_CNBC_Berkshire_Talking_to_5_Firms_About_Buying_Tax_Credits

Martin Armstrong on Ron Paul and DC NYC

"Ron Paul is our last hope before we go completely down the rabbit hole.
We have to turn politics on its head before it is too late.
It's the debt, and Goldman (Sachs) will fail (to) keep it rolling forever." 


http://www.inflateordie.com/files/Ron%20Paul%20Last%20Hope%2012-19-2011.pdf

Kingworld News Interview with MA re Buffett Silver, MF Global, conflict of interest regulators and his first Global Conference after being released from 11 years of prison, 7 of them a habeas corpus violation record for contempt from George Walker Bush's cousin, Judge John M Walker Jr, without fair jury trail, even though our Fifth, Sixth and Seventh Bill of Right Amendments include the right to jury in both civil and criminal trials:

http://kingworldnews.com/kingworldnews/Broadcast/Entries/2011/12/19_Martin_A._Armstrong_files/Martin%20Armstrong%2012%3A19%3A2011.mp3

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_trial

8 Signs

The Eight Marks of Fascist Policy

Lew Rockwell John T. Flynn, like other members of the Old Right, was disgusted by the irony that what he saw, almost everyone else chose to ignore. In the fight against authoritarian regimes abroad, he noted, the United States had adopted those forms of government at home, complete with price controls, rationing, censorship, executive dictatorship, and even concentration camps for whole groups considered to be unreliable in their loyalties to the state. After reviewing this long history, John T. Flynn proceeds to sum up with a list of eight points he considers to be the main marks of the fascist state. As I present them, I will also offer comments on the modern American central state. Point 1. The government is totalitarian because it acknowledges no restraint on its powers. This is a very telling mark. It suggests that the US political system can be described as totalitarian. This is a shocking remark that most people would reject. But they can reject this characterization only so long as they happen not to be directly ensnared in the state’s web. If they become so, they will quickly discover that there are indeed no limits to what the state can do. This can happen boarding a flight, driving around in your hometown, or having your business run afoul of some government agency. In the end, you must obey or be caged like an animal or killed. In this way, no matter how much you may believe that you are free, all of us today are but one step away from Guantanamo. As recently as the 1990s, I can recall that there were moments when Clinton seemed to suggest that there were some things that his administration could not do. Today I’m not so sure that I can recall any government official pleading the constraints of law or the constraints of reality to what can and cannot be done. No aspect of life is untouched by government intervention, and often it takes forms we do not readily see. All of healthcare is regulated, but so is every bit of our food, transportation, clothing, household products, and even private relationships. Mussolini himself put his principle this way: “All within the State, nothing outside the State, nothing against the State.” He also said: “The keystone of the Fascist doctrine is its conception of the State, of its essence, its functions, and its aims. For Fascism the State is absolute, individuals and groups relative.” I submit to you that this is the prevailing ideology in the United States today. This nation, conceived in liberty, has been kidnapped by the fascist state. Point 2. Government is a de facto dictatorship based on the leadership principle. I wouldn’t say that we truly have a dictatorship of one man in this country, but we do have a form of dictatorship of one sector of government over the entire country. The executive branch has spread so dramatically over the last century that it has become a joke to speak of checks and balances. What the kids learn in civics class has nothing to do with reality. The executive state is the state as we know it, all flowing from the White House down. The role of the courts is to enforce the will of the executive. The role of the legislature is to ratify the policy of the executive. Further, this executive is not really about the person who seems to be in charge. The president is only the veneer, and the elections are only the tribal rituals we undergo to confer some legitimacy on the institution. In reality, the nation-state lives and thrives outside any “democratic mandate.” Here we find the power to regulate all aspects of life and the wicked power to create the money necessary to fund this executive rule. As for the leadership principle, there is no greater lie in American public life than the propaganda we hear every four years about how the new president/messiah is going to usher in the great dispensation of peace, equality, liberty, and global human happiness. The idea here is that the whole of society is really shaped and controlled by a single will — a point that requires a leap of faith so vast that you have to disregard everything you know about reality to believe it. And yet people do. The hope for a messiah reached a fevered pitch with Obama’s election. The civic religion was in full-scale worship mode — of the greatest human who ever lived or ever shall live. It was a despicable display. Another lie that the American people believe is that presidential elections bring about regime change. This is sheer nonsense. The Obama state is the Bush state; the Bush state was the Clinton state; the Clinton state was the Bush state; the Bush state was the Reagan state. We can trace this back and back in time and see overlapping appointments, bureaucrats, technicians, diplomats, Fed officials, financial elites, and so on. Rotation in office occurs not because of elections but because of mortality. Point 3. Government administers a capitalist system with an immense bureaucracy. The reality of bureaucratic administration has been with us at least since the New Deal, which was modeled on the planning bureaucracy that lived in World War I. The planned economy — whether in Mussolini’s time or ours — requires bureaucracy. Bureaucracy is the heart, lungs, and veins of the planning state. And yet to regulate an economy as thoroughly as this one is today is to kill prosperity with a billion tiny cuts. This doesn’t necessarily mean economic contraction, at least not right away. But it definitely means killing off growth that would have otherwise occurred in a free market. So where is our growth? Where is the peace dividend that was supposed to come after the end of the Cold War? Where are the fruits of the amazing gains in efficiency that technology has afforded? It has been eaten by the bureaucracy that manages our every move on this earth. The voracious and insatiable monster here is called the Federal Code that calls on thousands of agencies to exercise the police power to prevent us from living free lives. It is as Bastiat said: the real cost of the state is the prosperity we do not see, the jobs that don’t exist, the technologies to which we do not have access, the businesses that do not come into existence, and the bright future that is stolen from us. The state has looted us just as surely as a robber who enters our home at night and steals all that we love. Point 4. Producers are organized into cartels in the way of syndicalism. Syndicalist is not usually how we think of our current economic structure. But remember that syndicalism means economic control by the producers. Capitalism is different. It places by virtue of market structures all control in the hands of the consumers. The only question for syndicalists, then, is which producers are going to enjoy political privilege. It might be the workers, but it can also be the largest corporations. In the case of the United States, in the last three years, we’ve seen giant banks, pharmaceutical firms, insurers, car companies, Wall Street banks and brokerage houses, and quasi-private mortgage companies enjoying vast privileges at our expense. They have all joined with the state in living a parasitical existence at our expense. This is also an expression of the syndicalist idea, and it has cost the US economy untold trillions and sustained an economic depression by preventing the postboom adjustment that markets would otherwise dictate. The government has tightened its syndicalist grip in the name of stimulus. Point 5. Economic planning is based on the principle of autarky. Autarky is the name given to the idea of economic self-sufficiency. Mostly this refers to the economic self-determination of the nation- state. The nation-state must be geographically huge in order to support rapid economic growth for a large and growing population. This was and is the basis for fascist expansionism. Without expansion, the state dies. This is also the idea behind the strange combination of protectionist pressure today combined with militarism. It is driven in part by the need to control resources. Look at the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya. We would be supremely naive to believe that these wars were not motivated in part by the producer interests of the oil industry. It is true of the American empire generally, which supports dollar hegemony. It is the reason for the planned North American Union. The goal is national self-sufficiency rather than a world of peaceful trade. Consider, too, the protectionist impulses of the Republican ticket. There is not one single Republican, apart from Ron Paul, who authentically supports free trade in the classical definition. From ancient Rome to modern-day America, imperialism is a form of statism that the bourgeoisie love. It is for this reason that Bush’s post-9/11 push for the global empire has been sold as patriotism and love of country rather than for what it is: a looting of liberty and property to benefit the political elites. 6. Government sustains economic life through spending and borrowing. This point requires no elaboration because it is no longer hidden. There was stimulus 1 and stimulus 2, both of which are so discredited that stimulus 3 will have to adopt a new name. Let’s call it the American Jobs Act. With a prime-time speech, Obama argued in favor of this program with some of the most asinine economic analysis I’ve ever heard. He mused about how is it that people are unemployed at a time when schools, bridges, and infrastructure need repairing. He ordered that supply and demand come together to match up needed work with jobs. Hello? The schools, bridges, and infrastructure that Obama refers to are all built and maintained by the state. That’s why they are falling apart. And the reason that people don’t have jobs is because the state has made it too expensive to hire them. It’s not complicated. To sit around and dream of other scenarios is no different from wishing that water flowed uphill or that rocks would float in the air. It amounts to a denial of reality. Still, Obama went on, invoking the old fascistic longing for national greatness. “Building a world-class transportation system,” he said, “is part of what made us an economic superpower.” Then he asked, “We’re going to sit back and watch China build newer airports and faster railroads?” Well, the answer to that question is yes. And you know what? It doesn’t hurt a single American for a person in China to travel on a faster railroad than we do. To claim otherwise is an incitement to nationalist hysteria. As for the rest of this program, Obama promised yet another long list of spending projects. Let’s just mention the reality: No government in the history of the world has spent as much, borrowed as much, and created as much fake money as the United States. If the United States doesn’t qualify as a fascist state in this sense, no government ever has. None of this would be possible but for the role of the Federal Reserve, the great lender to the world. This institution is absolutely critical to US fiscal policy. There is no way that the national debt could increase at a rate of $4 billion per day without this institution. Under a gold standard, all of this maniacal spending would come to an end. And if US debt were priced on the market with a default premium, we would be looking at a rating far less than A+. Point 7. Militarism is a mainstay of government spending. Have you ever noticed that the military budget is never seriously discussed in policy debates? The United States spends more than most of the rest of the world combined. And yet to hear our leaders talk, the United States is just a tiny commercial republic that wants peace but is constantly under threat from the world. They would have us believe that we all stand naked and vulnerable. The whole thing is a ghastly lie. The United States is a global military empire and the main threat to peace around the world today. To visualize US military spending as compared with other countries is truly shocking. One bar chart you can easily look up shows the US trillion-dollar-plus military budget as a skyscraper surrounded by tiny huts. As for the next highest spender, China spends 1/10th as much as the United States. Where is the debate about this policy? Where is the discussion? It is not going on. It is just assumed by both parties that it is essential for the US way of life that the United States be the most deadly country on the planet, threatening everyone with nuclear extinction unless they obey. This should be considered a fiscal and moral outrage by every civilized person. This isn’t only about the armed services, the military contractors, the CIA death squads. It is also about how police at all levels have taken on military-like postures. This goes for the local police, state police, and even the crossing guards in our communities. The commissar mentality, the trigger-happy thuggishness, has become the norm throughout the whole of society. If you want to witness outrages, it is not hard. Try coming into this country from Canada or Mexico. See the bullet-proof-vest- wearing, heavily armed, jackbooted thugs running dogs up and down car lanes, searching people randomly, harassing innocents, asking rude and intrusive questions. You get the strong impression that you are entering a police state. That impression would be correct. Yet for the man on the street, the answer to all social problems seems to be more jails, longer terms, more enforcement, more arbitrary power, more crackdowns, more capital punishments, more authority. Where does all of this end? And will the end come before we realize what has happened to our once-free country? Point 8. Military spending has imperialist aims. Ronald Reagan used to claim that his military buildup was essential to keeping the peace. The history of US foreign policy just since the 1980s has shown that this is wrong. We’ve had one war after another, wars waged by the United States against noncompliant countries, and the creation of even more client states and colonies. US military strength has led not to peace but the opposite. It has caused most people in the world to regard the United States as a threat, and it has led to unconscionable wars on many countries. Wars of aggression were defined at Nuremberg as crimes against humanity. Obama was supposed to end this. He never promised to do so, but his supporters all believed that he would. Instead, he has done the opposite. He has increased troop levels, entrenched wars, and started new ones. In reality, he has presided over a warfare state just as vicious as any in history. The difference this time is that the Left is no longer criticizing the US role in the world. In that sense, Obama is the best thing ever to happen to the warmongers and the military-industrial complex. As for the Right in this country, it once opposed this kind of military fascism. But all that changed after the beginning of the Cold War. The Right was led into a terrible ideological shift, well documented in Murray Rothbard’s neglected masterpiece The Betrayal of the American Right. In the name of stopping communism, the right came to follow ex-CIA agent Bill Buckley’s endorsement of a totalitarian bureaucracy at home to fight wars all over the world. At the end of the Cold War, there was a brief reprise when the Right in this country remembered its roots in noninterventionism. But this did not last long. George Bush the First rekindled the militarist spirit with the first war on Iraq, and there has been no fundamental questioning of the American empire ever since. Even today, Republicans elicit their biggest applause by whipping up audiences about foreign threats, while never mentioning that the real threat to American well-being exists in the Beltway. Regards, Llewellyn H. Rockwell Jr., for The Daily Reckoning Ed. Note: Lew Rockwell, former congressional chief of staff to Ron Paul and founder and president of the Ludwig von Mises Institute, is an opponent of the state, its wars and its socialism. He is the editor of The Irrepressible Rothbard, Speaking of Liberty, Man, Economy, and Liberty: Essays in Honor of Murray N. Rothbard and LewRockwell.com.

Wonderful Counsellor: The Prince of Peace

Happy Holy Days All:

Isaiah 6:9:

For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
7 Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end... to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever...

Red Dog Republicans, Independents and Crossovers: Ron Paul and Silver Senator Can Win America Back

The Nation: Why Do GOP Bosses Fear Ron Paul?

by John Nichols

Enlarge Jewel Samad /AFP/Getty Images In Paul We Trust? A supporter shows a coin with Republican presidential hopeful Ron Paul's face on it during a town hall meeting in Mt. Pleasant, Iowa, on Dec. 21, 2011.

Read Another Opinion On Ron Paul

text size A A A

December 22, 2011

John Nichols is the author of several books that examine the legacy of old-right conservatives such as Taft and Buffett, including Against the Beast: A Documentary History of American Opposition to Empire.
Ron Paul represents the ideology that Republican insiders most fear: conservatism.
Not the corrupt, inside-the-beltway construct that goes by that name, but actual conservatism.
And if he wins the Iowa Republican Caucus vote on January 3—a real, though far from certain, prospect—the party bosses will have to do everything in their power to prevent Paul from reasserting the values of the "old-right" Republicans who once stood, steadily and without apology, in opposition to wars of whim and assaults on individual liberty.
Make no mistake, the party bosses are horrified at the notion that a genuine conservative might grab the Iowa headlines from the false prophets. Already, they are claiming a Paul win won't mean anything. If Paul prevails, says Iowa Governor Terry Branstad, "People are going to look at who comes in second and who comes in third. If [Mitt] Romney comes in a strong second, it definitely helps him going into New Hampshire and the other states."
The party's amen corner in the media is doing its part. Republican-insider radio and television programs have begun to go after Paul, the veteran congressman from Texas who is either leading or near the top in recent polls of likely caucus goers. Rush Limbaugh ridicules Paul on his radio show, while Sean Hannity's Fox show has become a nightly Paul-bashing fest, with guests like former Education Secretary Bill Bennett trashing the congressman with lines like: "his notion of foreign policy is impossible."
Actually, Paul's notion of foreign policy is in line with that of conservatives used to believe. The congressman is often referred to as a libertarian, and he has certainly toiled some in that ideological vineyard. But the truth is that his politics descend directly from those of former Ohio Senator Robert "Mr. Republican" Taft and former Nebraska Congressman Howard Buffett—old-right opponents of war and empire who served in the Congress in the 1940s and 1950s and who, in Taft's case, mounted credible bids for the party's presidential nomination in 1940, 1948 and finally in 1952. In all three campaigns, Taft opposed what he described as the "Eastern establishment" of the party—the Wall Streeters who, he pointedly noted, had little in common with Main Streeters.
Taft was a steady foe of American interventionism abroad, arguing very much as Paul does today that it threatens domestic liberty. Indeed, just as Paul joined US Senator Russ Feingold in opposing the Patriot Act, spying on Americans and threats to freedom of speech and assembly in the first days of what would become an open-ended "war on terror," so Taft warned during the cold war that "criticism in a time of war is essential to the maintenance of any kind of democratic government."
"The maintenance of the right of criticism in the long run will do the country...more good than it will do the enemy," explained Taft, who challenged President Truman's attempts to use war powers as an excuse to seize domestic industries and otherwise expand what Dwight Eisenhower would eventually define as the military-industrial complex.
Buffett, the father of billionaire Warren, opposed military interventionism during the cold war era, declaring on the floor of the House: "Even if it were desirable, America is not strong enough to police the world by military force. If that attempt is made, the blessings of liberty will be replaced by coercion and tyranny at home. Our Christian ideals cannot be exported to other lands by dollars and guns. Persuasion and example are the methods taught by the Carpenter of Nazareth, and if we believe in Christianity we should try to advance our ideals by his methods. We cannot practice might and force abroad and retain freedom at home. We cannot talk world cooperation and practice power politics."
When the threat of increased US involvement in Vietnam arose in the early 1960s, the elder Buffett wrote in William F. Buckley's National Review: "When the American government conscripts a boy to go 10,000 miles to the jungles of Asia without a declaration of war by Congress (as required by the Constitution) what freedom is safe at home? Surely, profits of U.S. Steel or your private property are not more sacred than a young man's right to life."
Just as Ron Paul has consistently opposed free-trade deals and schemes to enrich government contractors, the elder Buffett railed against the crony capitalism of his day. "There are businesses that are being enriched by national defense spending and foreign handouts," Buffett warned in 1948. "These firms, because of the money they can spend on propaganda, may be the most dangerous of all. If the Marshall Plan meant $100 million worth of profitable business for your firm, wouldn't you Invest a few thousands or so to successfully propagandize for the Marshall Plan? And if you were a foreign government, getting billions, perhaps you could persuade your prospective suppliers here to lend a hand in putting that deal through Congress."
Buffett campaigned in 1952 to nominate Taft as the Republican candidate for president. That effort was opposed by the Wall Street speculators and banksters of the day, and it failed—although not without a serious fight that went all the way to the GOP convention.
After his defeat, Taft griped, "Every Republican candidate for President since 1936 has been nominated by the Chase National Bank."
That was the pure voice of old-right conservatism speaking.
It is echoed now by Ron Paul, who makes no secret of his high regard for Taft, Buffett and the old-right Republicans of the past, and of his disregard for the neocons and crony capitalists of today. Paul is running ads that propose to "drain the swamp," a reference to the insider-driven politics of a Washington where Republicans such as Gingrich maintain the sort of pay-to-play politics that empties the federal treasury into the accounts of campaign donors and sleazy government contractors.
Paul's ideological clarity scares the wits out of the Republican mandarins who peddle the fantasy that the interventionism, the assaults on civil liberties and the partnerships that they have forged with multinational corporations and foreign dictators represent anything akin to true conservatism.
The problem that Limbaugh, Hannity and other GOP establishment types have with Paul is that the Texan really is a conservative, rather than a neoconservative or a crony capitalist who would use the state to maintain monopolies at home and via corrupt international trade deals.
Paul's pure conservatism puts him at odds with a party establishment that has sold out to Wall Street and multinational corporations. But it has mad an increasingly iconic Republican with a good many of the grassroots activists who will attend the caucuss.
The disconnect between the disdain the establishment expresses with regard to Paul and his appeal to the base is easily explained.
The GOP establishment chooses partisanship over principle. The base does not necessarily do so.
In other words, while the party establishment and its media echo chamber reject the Main Street conservatism of the Taft's and Buffetts, there are many grassroots Republicans in Iowa towns like Independence and Liberty Center (where Paul campaign signs are very much in evidence) who find Paul's old-right conservatism quite appealing.
That is what frightens Republican party leaders. The notion that the Grand Old Party might actually base its politics on values, as opposd to pay-to-play deal-making, unsettles the Republican leaders who back only contenders who have been pre-approved by the Wall Street speculators, banksters and corporate CEOs who pay the party's tab—and kindly pick up some of the bills for the Democrats, as well.
What do the party insiders fear about genuine conservatism? Above all, they fear that a politics of principle might expose the fact that the Republican Party has for decades been at odds with the conservative values and ideals of Americans who do not want theirs to be a warrior nation that disregards civil liberties and domestic economics in order to promote Wall Street's globalization agenda.
Ron Paul is not a progressive. He takes stands on abortion rights and a number of other issues that disqualify him from consideration by social moderates and liberals, and his stances on Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and labor rights (like those of the author of the Taft-Hartley Act) are anathema to economic justice advocates. But Paul cannot be dismissed as just another robotic Republican. Indeed, he is more inclined to challenge Republican orthodoxy on a host of foreign and fiscal policy issues than Barack Obama. He does so as something that is rare indeed at the highest levels of American politics: a conservative.
And if he wins Iowa, he could begin a process of transforming the Republican Party into a conservative party.
That scares the Republican bosses who currently maintain the party concession on behalf of the Wall Streeters. But it, if the polls are to be believed, it quite intrigues the folks on Main Street who may be waking up to the fact that the "conservatism" of a Newt Gingrich or a Mitt Romney is a sham argument designed to make the rich richer and to make the rest of us pay for wars of whim and crony-capitalist corruption.

Related NPR Stories

Polls Show Ron Paul Rising In Iowa, Nationally As Gingrich Swoons Dec. 19, 2011

Ron Paul Surges In Iowa Polls Dec. 9, 2011

Ron Paul's 'Big Dog' Ad One Of GOP Race's Coolest Commercials Dec. 5, 2011

Enemy of the State?

Dr Paul was accurate many times in these last 35 years since he was first elected:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9UISMByupY&feature=related  5:35

The time has come for the power of these ideas to hold office...

Ron Paul Ahead With CNN Attacks

http://www.infowars.com/fein-on-ron-paul-american-people-the-enemy-police-brutality-nightly-news/print/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_zp6A-l-TwE&feature=related 6:11

The Heist: Are We Ready for the Reset Point?

How to break the trance and restore life, liberty, peace and prosperity.

http://divinecosmos.com/start-here/davids-blog/1022-lawsuit-end-tyranny-ii

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXNbpqc1gLE&feature=relmfu 2:31

http://www.lauralee.com/chi_pyr.htm

http://www.world-mysteries.com/mpl_pyramidsofchina.htm

The New Silver Financial System

Stay tuned here for Constitutional electronic legal tender: 

http://bit.ly/urg2Uo

It's Not Impossible

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P98hShLHzQQ 6:02

GMO Sugar MON Kills Bill

Monsanto Launches Phony ‘GMO Co-Existence’ Protests

Monsanto Admittedly Influences Colorado GMO Ban, Launches Phony ‘GMO Co-Existence’ Protests
Anthony Gucciardi
Infowars.com
December 22, 2011
Bloated biotech giant Monsanto has admitted to using their influence to block an initiative introduced by Boulder, Colorado to ban the growing of genetically modified crops on county soil. While county officials and farmers claimed that Monsanto influence had nothing to do with the blocking of the health conscious legislation, the company itself has admitted to being involved. Furthermore, Monsanto may have actually setup phony ‘GMO co-existence’ protests in order to voice phony public support against the bill. After the admitted involvement of Monsanto and the curious protests, the county commissioners changed their formerly anti-GMO tune.
Instead of banning GMO crops, the Boulder County commissioners voted unanimously on Tuesday to allow for the growing of some GMO crops on county-owned open land.
Pro-Monsanto Farmers Deny Admitted Monsanto Involvement, Pushed for GMO Crops
Paul Schlagel was one of the farmers who originally pushed for GMO sugar beets in Boulder, Colorado. That year Schlagel wrote a letter to the Parks and Open Space Department, asking for permission to plant crops resistant to Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide that has been known to cause cancer and pollute local water supplies. Citing claims fabricated by Monsanto that have proven to be false in the past such as a decrease in pesticide use, Schlagel urged country officials to allow for the planting of GMO crops.
Around this time, Monsanto was launching a major initiative to capture the sugar beet market, with 95% of sugar beets ultimately becoming Roundup Ready by the year 2009. Monsanto got their wish, thanks to pro-Monsanto farmers like Schlagel, and now Schlagel is denying any involvement with Monsanto or other biotech corporations in regards to the blocked GMO ban despite Monsanto actually admitting to influencing the decision.
Schlagel even responds to the accusations that Monsanto voiced by not only denying the claims, but also by issuing a strong response that would seem quite anti-Monsanto if you did not know the full story. ”Monsanto doesn’t own me,” Schlagel said in a statement to the press. Meanwhile, Thomas Helscher, the company’s director of corporate affairs, has stated their direct involvement through e-mail reported on by the Boulder, Colorado press.

“Monsanto is a stakeholder in these proceedings as our company name and our innovations have been repeatedly named in the public discussions, and the safety and benefits of those innovations has been questioned,” wrote Helscher. Therefore, we submitted official comments to the Commissioners and also testified at the Dec. 8 hearing. We also have answered questions asked of us by our Boulder County farmer customers during this public and open process.”

Is Monsanto Funding Phony ‘GMO Co-Existence Protests’?
As anti-GMO activists rage over the event, many informed Colorado individuals are questioning the peculiar ‘GMO co-existence’ protests that sprung up in Boulder, Colorado. Wearing hats with the slogan FAIR and parading around support for Monsanto, the group was well-organized and seemed to appear out of thin air. Even more telling is the fact that these individuals were not a result of a grassroots movement that any of the citizens were aware of, and seemed to have their agenda organized before hitting the streets in an orderly fashion.
Legitimate anti-GMO grassroots protests have also been ongoing in Boulder, voicing opposition against food tyrant Monsanto and Boulder officials. It is only a matter of time until revealing information regarding Monsanto’s full involvement is leaked to the media. Whether or not they will cover it is in question, but we sure will.
Please visit Anthony Gucciardi’s Natural Society for more great health news and vaccine information.

Similar/Related Articles

1. Feds Approve Monsanto Herbicide-Resistant Crops
2. Attack of the Monsanto Super-insects
3. Monsanto wants to start testing GM wheat
4. Hungary Destroys All Monsanto GMO Maize Fields
5. Judge: 2005 Approval of Monsanto GMO sugarbeets was illegal
6. Monsantopoly – A game pitting farmer against farmer that only Monsanto can win
7. USDA to allow Monsanto to perform its own GMO studies
8. GMO Crops Continually Banned Around the World in Display of Health Freedom
9. Monsanto to Sell Biotech Sweet Corn for U.S. Consumers
10. France Takes Stand Against GMOs, Monsanto Despite End of Ban
11. Monsanto trying to take over world seed supply, nation by nation
12. Monsanto-spawned superweeds growing 3″ daily, destroying farm equipment