Archive

Archive for February, 2012

Obama Issues ‘Policy Directive’ Exempting American Citizens From Indefinite Detention: Skeptics fear future administration could still incarcerate US citizens under NDAA

February 29, 2012 2 comments

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Wednesday, February 29, 2012

Despite the fact that it was his administration that specifically demanded the controversial ‘indefinite detention’ provisions of the NDAA be applied to Americans, President Obama has issued a ‘Presidential Policy Directive’ that forbids the law from being used against US citizens.

A “fact sheet” released by the White House last night contains details of a “Presidential Policy Directive” which explains that the administration will not seek to use the so-called ‘kidnapping provision’ of the National Defense Authorization Act to incarcerate American citizens without trial.

“Section 1022 does not apply to U.S. citizens, and the President has decided to waive its application to lawful permanent residents arrested in the United States,” states the White House fact sheet (PDF).

Obama’s PDD contains a number of other circumstances in which people would be exempt from indefinite detention, but the language concerning American citizens states that to be exempt, a US citizen must be “arrested in this country or arrested by a federal agency on the basis of conduct taking place in this country,” meaning Americans arrested abroad could still be kidnapped and held without trial.

The NDAA bill, which was signed into law by President Obama under the radar on New Years Eve while he was on vacation in Kailua, hands the federal government the power to “allow the military to indefinitely detain terror suspects, including American citizens arrested in the United States, without charge.”

There’s no doubt that this represents a victory for civil libertarians on both sides of the political spectrum, but skeptics will be keen to stress that just because the Obama administration, which could be out of office by this time next year, has indicated it will not indefinitely detain Americans under the NDAA, doesn’t necessarily mean that future administrations will also refrain from doing so.

Indeed, if the administration was so concerned about the indefinite detention provisions, why did it specifically lobby for them to be applied to American citizens in the first place?

As we documented at the time, shortly before the bill was signed into law, Senator Carl Levin revealed that it was the administration which demanded the removal of language that would have protected Americans from the ‘kidnapping’ provisions of the NDAA.

“The language which precluded the application of Section 1031 to American citizens was in the bill that we originally approved…and the administration asked us to remove the language which says that U.S. citizens and lawful residents would not be subject to this section,” said Levin, Chairman of the Armed Services Committee.

Don’t expect Obama’s PDD to be the end of the matter. Senators John McCain (Ariz.), Lindsey Graham (S.C.) and Kelly Ayotte (N.H.) have already indicated that they will argue against exempting American citizens from indefinite detention.

“Although we have not been able to fully examine all the details of these new regulations, they raise significant concerns that will require a hearing in the Senate Armed Services Committee,” they said in a joint statement. “We are particularly concerned that some of these regulations may contradict the intent of the detainee provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act passed by Congress last year.”

In issuing the policy directive, Obama is attempting to head off a potential states’ rights rebellion against the federal government. With Virginia already having passed a bill in the House and Senate that nullifies the indefinite detention provisions of the NDAA, Utah has introduced a resolution with the ultimate intention of doing the same, along with several other states.

Goodbye, First Amendment: ‘Trespass Bill’ will make protest illegal

February 29, 2012 4 comments

RT.com/USA
February 29, 2012

Washington: US park police detains a Christian religious activist during a pro-life demonstration in front of the White House in Washington on February 16, 2012. (AFP Photo/Jewel Samad)

Just when you thought the government couldn’t ruin the First Amendment any further: The House of Representatives approved a bill on Monday that outlaws protests in instances where some government officials are nearby, whether or not you even know it.

The US House of Representatives voted 388-to-3 in favor of H.R. 347 late Monday, a bill which is being dubbed the Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011. In the bill, Congress officially makes it illegal to trespass on the grounds of the White House, which, on the surface, seems not just harmless and necessary, but somewhat shocking that such a rule isn’t already on the books. The wording in the bill, however, extends to allow the government to go after much more than tourists that transverse the wrought iron White House fence.

Under the act, the government is also given the power to bring charges against Americans engaged in political protest anywhere in the country.

Under current law, White House trespassers are prosecuted under a local ordinance, a Washington, DC legislation that can bring misdemeanor charges for anyone trying to get close to the president without authorization. Under H.R. 347, a federal law will formally be applied to such instances, but will also allow the government to bring charges to protesters, demonstrators and activists at political events and other outings across America.

The new legislation allows prosecutors to charge anyone who enters a building without permission or with the intent to disrupt a government function with a federal offense if Secret Service is on the scene, but the law stretches to include not just the president’s palatial Pennsylvania Avenue home. Under the law, any building or grounds where the president is visiting — even temporarily — is covered, as is any building or grounds “restricted in conjunction with an event designated as a special event of national significance.”

It’s not just the president who would be spared from protesters, either.

Covered under the bill is any person protected by the Secret Service. Although such protection isn’t extended to just everybody, making it a federal offense to even accidently disrupt an event attended by a person with such status essentially crushes whatever currently remains of the right to assemble and peacefully protest.

Hours after the act passed, presidential candidate Rick Santorum was granted Secret Service protection. For the American protester, this indeed means that glitter-bombing the former Pennsylvania senator is officially a very big no-no, but it doesn’t stop with just him. Santorum’s coverage under the Secret Service began on Tuesday, but fellow GOP hopeful Mitt Romney has already been receiving such security. A campaign aide who asked not to be identified confirmed last week to CBS News that former House Speaker Newt Gingrich has sought Secret Service protection as well. Even former contender Herman Cain received the armed protection treatment when he was still in the running for the Republican Party nod.

In the text of the act, the law is allowed to be used against anyone who knowingly enters or remains in a restricted building or grounds without lawful authority to do so, but those grounds are considered any area where someone — rather it’s President Obama, Senator Santorum or Governor Romney — will be temporarily visiting, whether or not the public is even made aware. Entering such a facility is thus outlawed, as is disrupting the orderly conduct of “official functions,” engaging in disorderly conduct “within such proximity to” the event or acting violent to anyone, anywhere near the premises. Under that verbiage, that means a peaceful protest outside a candidate’s concession speech would be a federal offense, but those occurrences covered as special event of national significance don’t just stop there, either. And neither does the list of covered persons that receive protection.

Outside of the current presidential race, the Secret Service is responsible for guarding an array of politicians, even those from outside America. George W Bush is granted protection until ten years after his administration ended, or 2019, and every living president before him is eligible for life-time, federally funded coverage. Visiting heads of state are extended an offer too, and the events sanctioned as those of national significance — a decision that is left up to the US Department of Homeland Security — extends to more than the obvious. While presidential inaugurations and meeting of foreign dignitaries are awarded the title, nearly three dozen events in all have been considered a National Special Security Event (NSSE) since the term was created under President Clinton. Among past events on the DHS-sanctioned NSSE list are Super Bowl XXXVI, the funerals of Ronald Reagan and Gerald Ford, most State of the Union addresses and the 2008 Democratic and Republican National Conventions.

With Secret Service protection awarded to visiting dignitaries, this also means, for instance, that the federal government could consider a demonstration against any foreign president on American soil as a violation of federal law, as long as it could be considered disruptive to whatever function is occurring.

When thousands of protesters are expected to descend on Chicago this spring for the 2012 G8 and NATO summits, they will also be approaching the grounds of a National Special Security Event. That means disruptive activity, to whichever court has to consider it, will be a federal offense under the act.

And don’t forget if you intend on fighting such charges, you might not be able to rely on evidence of your own. In the state of Illinois, videotaping the police, under current law, brings criminals charges. Don’t fret. It’s not like the country will really try to enforce it — right?

On the bright side, does this mean that the law could apply to law enforcement officers reprimanded for using excessive force on protesters at political events? Probably. Of course, some fear that the act is being created just to keep those demonstrations from ever occuring, and given the vague language on par with the loose definition of a “terrorist” under the NDAA, if passed this act is expected to do a lot more harm to the First Amendment than good.

United States Representative Justin Amash (MI-03) was one of only three lawmakers to vote against the act when it appeared in the House late Monday.

U.S. Representative Justin Amash

Explaining his take on the act through his official Facebook account on Tuesday, Rep. Amash writes, “The bill expands current law to make it a crime to enter or remain in an area where an official is visiting even if the person does not know it’s illegal to be in that area and has no reason to suspect it’s illegal.”

“Some government officials may need extraordinary protection to ensure their safety. But criminalizing legitimate First Amendment activity — even if that activity is annoying to those government officials — violates our rights,” adds the representative.

Now that the act has overwhelmingly made it through the House, the next set of hands to sift through its pages could very well be President Barack Obama; the US Senate had already passed the bill back on February 6. Less than two months ago, the president approved the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012, essentially suspending habeas corpus from American citizens. Could the next order out of the Executive Branch be revoking some of the Bill of Rights? Only if you consider the part about being able to assemble a staple of the First Amendment, really. Don’t worry, though. Obama was, after all, a constitutional law professor. When he signed the NDAA on December 31, he accompanied his signature with a signing statement that let Americans know that, just because he authorized the indefinite detention of Americans didn’t mean he thought it was right.

Should President Obama suspend the right to assemble, Americans might expect another apology to accompany it in which the commander-in-chief condemns the very act he authorizes. If you disagree with such a decision, however, don’t take it to the White House. Sixteen-hundred Pennsylvania Avenue and the vicinity is, of course, covered under this act.

Anonymous Openly Declares War on the United States Government: “Operation V”

TRANSCRIPT
____________

To the Citizens of the United States and the United States Government.
We are Anonymous.

In the past few months, our collective has been organizing the operation known as Operation Blackout. Part of the operation’s purpose was to alert the people of the coming bill that was to be called the Stop Online Piracy Act.

This Act would give Congress the power to censor any internet website they wish without consent from the Citizens of the United States. This act would’ve also had the power to jail any person who infringed on its new copyright law for an equivalence of five years. This copyright law would’ve had the power to destroy social networking sites such as Facebook and YouTube. Video gameplay and free movies would cease to exist.

However, Operation Blackout was a success. As a collective, we’ve managed to spread the word and alert the masses. Internet giants such as Google, Wikipedia, and Reddit became hand-in-hand with us as we all managed to make an impact on the decisions of our, “free government”. But as we’ve seen with Megaupload, the government may not need a bill to be passed to get their way. Other operations we’ve conducted over this time period have awaken the people to the nightmare that is the United States Government. Sections 1031 and 1032 of the National Defense Authorization Act have been ratified. Yet we face new threats.

The United States Government is seeking to pass the Cyber Security Act of 2012. This act is as Orwellian as it sounds; it will endanger our collective and we will not stand by and watch while this government of lies prepares to take away our freedoms. The National Security Agency insists on labeling us as a leaderless, terrorist organization. The question is, “who do we terrorize?”. Can it possibly be that the United States government is truly scared of us? Nevertheless, The time for action is now.

Our collective has realized, along with many United States citizens, that the current government is no longer functional. Our economy is unstable, our representatives uncooperative, and our system, destroyed.

We are not calling upon the collective to deface or use a distributed denial of service attack on a United States government agency website or affiliate. We are not calling upon the people to occupy a city or protest in front of a local building. This has not brought on us any legislative change or alternate law. It has only brought us bloodshed and false criticism. For the last 12 years, voting was useless. Corporations and lobbyists are the true leaders of this country and are the ones with the power to control our lives. To rebuild our government, we must first destroy it.

Our time for democracy is here.
Our time for real change is here.
This is America’s time, to have its own revolution.

Therefore, Anonymous has decided to openly declare war on the United States government. This is a call to arms. We call upon the Citizens of the United States to stand beside us in overthrowing this corrupted body and call upon a new era. Our allegiance is to the American people, because they are us, and we are them.

Operation V, engaged.

We are Anonymous.
We are Americans.
We never Forgive.
We never Forget.
To the United States government, it’s too late to expect us.

REVOLUTION is here.
twitter.com/theanonmessage

Hello ACTA, SOPA, PIPA and NDAA; Anonymous and Occupy are coming for you

February 28, 2012 4 comments

FreakOutNation
February 28, 2012

In a stunning move Occupy and Anonymous have joined forces in what’s called, “OUR POLLS” – A new joint effort  to hold politicians accountable to We the People. The blatant disregard of our politicians from both sides of the aisle is mind boggling — so now, they’re being called out for giving into deep-pocketed lobbyists and passing laws to boost corporate profits, all at the expense of our individual liberty.

This is not the first time Anonymous has targeted officials over their support for the NDAA. The ubiquitous group of activists dumped a massive amount of information on each elected official supporting the invasive Act.

Their statement reads:

Our Senators and Representatives showed how little they cared about personal freedoms when they voted overwhelmingly to pass the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). The NDAA allows for the indefinite detention of individuals based merely on a suspicion or allegation of sympathizing with questionable groups or causes. This act is a prominent threat to the inalienable due process rights of every US citizen as laid out in the Constitution. It allows the military to engage in civilian law enforcement, and to suspend due process, habeas corpus or other constitutional guarantees when desired. Our congressmen passed one of the greatest threats to civil liberties in the history of the United States. Will we hold them accountable on election day?

Will we hold our elected officials accountable for supporting rigid Internet censorship laws such as SOPA, PIPA, HR 1981 and the ACTA treaty? The Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the Protect IP Act (PIPA) aimed to crack down on copyright infringement by restricting user access to websites that hosted or helped facilitate pirated content. SOPA and PIPA’s ambiguous, broad wording would have cast a wide censorship net around most of the Internet, thus creating questions of due process, burden of proof, and privacy violations. The proposed laws were lobbied and paid for by Hollywood, RIAA, MPAA and other massive media companies and would safeguard entertainment industry profits at the expense of essential freedoms, the Internet and constitutional civil liberties . Even if the goal was to merely regulate pirated content, the ambiguous wording demonstrates that the authors and supporters of SOPA and PIPA have little-to-no understanding of the Internet’s architecture or the frightening implications of the legislation.

What can you do? You are one person. You have one vote. Use that vote on November 6 to hold your elected official accountable for supporting bills such as NDAA, SOPA and PIPA.

We are calling on voters, activists and keyboard warriors under all banners to unite as a single force to unseat the elected representatives who threaten our essential freedoms and who were so quick to minimize our individual constitutional rights for a quick corporate profit.

Follow @OurPolls and @AnonPAC for updates, news, leaks, and calls to action.

Below we have a couple lists for you to consider:

(1) All US Senators up for reelection in 2012 who voted to support the NDAA and who still support PIPA

(2) All US Representatives up for reelection in 2012 who voted to support the NDAA and who still support SOPA

** Note: ALL 435 seats in the US House of Representatives are up for reelection in November 2012

(1) US Senators Up For Reelection Who Supported NDAA and/or PIPA

Sen. Daniel Akaka [D, HI] ^

Sen. John Barrasso [R, WY] ^

Sen. Jeff Bingaman [D, NM] ^ *

Sen. Scott Brown [R, MA] ^

Sen. Sherrod Brown [D, OH] ^

Sen. Maria Cantwell [D, WA] ^

Sen. Thomas Carper [D, DE] ^

Sen. Robert Casey [D, PA] ^ *

Sen. Kent Conrad [D, ND] ^

Sen. Bob Corker [R, TX] ^ *

Sen. Dianne Feinstein [D, CA] ^ *

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand [D, NY] ^

Sen. Orrin Hatch [R, UT] ^

Sen. Dean Heller [R, NV] ^

Sen. Kay Hutchison [R, TX] ^

Sen. Amy Klobuchar [D, MN] ^ *

Sen. Herbert Kohl [D, WI] ^ *

Sen. Jon Kyl [R, AZ] ^ *

Sen. Richard Lugar [R, IN] ^

Sen. John Manchin [D, WV] ^

Sen. Claire McCaskill [D, MO] ^

Sen. Robert Menedez [D, NJ] ^

Sen. Ben Nelson [D, NE] ^

Sen. Bill Nelson [D, FL] *

Sen. Olympia Snowe [R, ME] ^

Sen. Debbie Ann Stabenow [D, MI] ^

Sen. John Tester [D, MT] ^

Sen. Jim Webb [D, VA] ^

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse [D, RI] ^ *

Sen. Roger Wicker [R, MS] ^

^ = Supported/voted for NDAA

* = Still support PIPA and similar law

(2) US Representatives Up For Reelection Who Supported NDAA and/or SOPA

Rep. Gary Ackerman (NY-5) ^

Rep. Sandy Adams (FL-24) ^

Rep. Robert Aderholt (AL-4) ^

Rep. Todd Akin (MO-2) ^ †

Rep. Rodney Alexander (LA-5) ^

Rep. Jason Altmire (PA-4) ^

Rep. Mark Amodei (NV-2) *

Rep. Robert E. Andrews (NJ-1) ^

Rep. Steve Austria (OH-7) ^ †

Rep. Joe Baca (CA-43) ^ *

Rep. Spencer Bachus (AL-6) ^

Rep. Tammy Baldwin (WI-2) ^ †

Rep. John Barrow (GA-12) ^ *

Rep. Roscoe Bartlett ^

Rep. Joe Barton (TX-6) ^

Rep. Charles Bass (NH-2) ^ *

Rep. Dan Benishek (MI-1) ^

Rep. Rick Berg (ND, at-large) ^ †

Rep. Shelley Berkley (NV-1) ^ †

Rep. Howard Berman (CA-28) ^ *

Rep. Judy Biggert (IL-13) ^

Rep. Brian Bilbray (CA-50) ^

Rep. Gus Bilirakis (FL-9) ^

Rep. Sanford Bishop Jr. (GA-2) ^

Rep. Rob Bishop (UT-1) ^

Rep. Timothy Bishop (NY-1) ^

Rep. Diane Black (TN-6) ^

Rep. Marsha Blackburn (TN-7) ^

Rep. Jo Bonner (AL-1) ^

Rep. Mary Bono Mack (CA-45) ^ *

Rep. Dan Boren (OK-2) ^ †

Rep. Leonard Boswell (IA-3) ^

Special Thanks to the following in coordinating this on-going action:

@OccupyKC

@Occupy_DC

@OccupytheNation

@OccupyProv

@OccupyPdx

@OccupyBaltimore

@Ghostpickles

@AnonyOps

@AnonymousIRC

@Anonops

@Tw1tt3rart

@AnonyOps_

@GardenSlayer

@OperationLeakS

@YourAnonNews

Well done. Vote ‘em out. Did our elected officials believe they would not be held accountable?

The Secret Media War of 2012

February 28, 2012 8 comments

Ron Holland
Daily Bell
Tuesday, February 28, 2012

“See this room? Two-thirds of us laid off when Ron Paul is president.” – A hot microphone picked up a reporter attacking Ron Paul recently before a Pentagon briefing began.

"Establishment" Media is losing the Info War

We are currently in the middle of the long war of the Internet Reformation, although the press will never mention this. Effectively, there has been an ongoing war between the non-controlled alternative media and the establishment media since the inception of LewRockwell.com in 1999. Since then many quality alternative media websites have been added to the competition while the elite media’s credibility, reach and ability to manipulate debate and public opinion has been declining. The Internet Reformation is slowly winning and to date, this has been shown most clearly with the 2012 Ron Paul presidential campaign.

The GOP neocon puppet-masters are terrified, especially when Republican crowds at televised debates cheer Ron Paul’s non-interventionist foreign policy remarks because this threatens their control over US foreign policy in what was formerly their secure home turf. Try as they might the media has not been able to destroy the Ron Paul Campaign.

Is the Great Establishment Media Purge Beginning?

“They can’t be afraid of me…I’m not going to be President of the United States. They are afraid of the ideas we express because they’re afraid of the people.” – Pat Buchanan

Back in the old Soviet Union, Joseph Stalin created the “Great Purge” of political repression and persecution during 1936 to 1938. Stalin was paranoid and very fearful of individuals he considered enemies of the people and counter-revolutionary because these dissenters threatened his dictatorial control and authority over the nation.

It appears the mainstream media elites in the US may also worry about their

future ability to control public opinion and elections in America. In the last week we have seen MSNBC, on the left, purge Pat Buchanan from the network and Fox News, on the right, eliminate Judge Andrew Napolitano’s “Freedom Watch” after both expressed opinions and views that threaten the political institutions, control and goals of the power elite. The first question asked must be: Why now rather than later as, after all, both men have expressed their anti-establishment views for years without repercussions?

I believe the answer is the growing power of alternative media and the successful educational effort of the Ron Paul Campaign, both of which use the Internet to get their freedom message out. The establishment media primarily exists to defend the establishment; the growing readership of alternative news and opinion sites are making their job increasingly difficult. When you add in the growing numbers of Paul Campaign supporters who appear to now be effectively immune to the power elite propaganda, the media elites have a real problem.

Today’s Media Establishment is an Anachronism and Relic of the Past

Throughout the heyday of print media and radio and recently, even cable news, the job of the press has been to manipulate and control public opinion as well as voting blocks. The elites bought and controlled most media outlets and developed and promoted a controlled political opposition, on both the left and the right, that allowed them to set the parameters for discussion and debate. America has effectively been a one-party state for 100 years with power elites controlling the major political parties using American-style democracy both as their cover and to convey legitimacy of their behind-the-scenes rule.

The real battle today is not the ongoing GOP presidential primary; rather, it is the media elites opposing the Ron Paul Campaign and alternative, Internet-based media where growing numbers of Americans are getting news and information to form their opinions.

This year’s the run-of-the-mill campaigns by all of the GOP presidential candidates other than Ron Paul and their rhetoric are nothing new; it has been the same old story and false paradigm on display every four years for almost 100 years. Our legitimate government and rule by the people was overthrown in 1913 by banking interests who created the Federal Reserve and Federal Income Tax.

Ron Paul has Brilliantly Turned the Tables on the Political Establishment

Paul’s campaign is using the closed two-party control structure and their media gatekeepers, previously utilized to control public opinion and elections, against them. For example, the state presidential primary and caucus system, televised debates and related campaign news coverage was formerly a GOP establishment monopoly. Today, thanks to the Internet it has become the Trojan horse used by Paul’s campaign and liberty supporters to get inside the closed walls of the GOP to educate millions of Americans about freedom and free-market ideas.

The establishment news media has been powerless to stop this infiltration. The real battle in 2012 isn’t the visible political campaign but rather the hidden impotence of the media elites to protect establishment control. This is why the media so hates and fears Ron Paul. His campaign is the new road map for how pro-liberty candidates and forces, together with the alternative media, can and will eventually defeat the power elites’ main protectors and gatekeepers, which is the media establishment.

The February 22nd GOP presidential debate could well have been the last in this campaign cycle. In fact, it could be the last GOP presidential debate in your lifetime if future freedom candidates follow the Ron Paul model of turning a major campaign into an educational effort against the GOP establishment.

The existing closed political system will not survive another GOP presidential nomination campaign in which the truths and views of a major candidate like Ron Paul are repeated in numerous debates night after night to a voting public armed with Google search and the alternative media. Traditional campaigns and managed elections with predetermined outcomes are over as the media establishment can no longer control the debate, limit information flow and defend the political establishment.

This 2012 GOP presidential nomination campaign ritual (that actually began in early 2011) is coming to a close. Historically, presidential campaigns and the pre-approved chosen-ones battle in the arena of democracy, with the candidate finally chosen by the false holy sacrament of democracy through a controlled electoral process, is designed to convey a measure of legitimacy to those who rule over us and nothing more. It is pure entertainment, just like the old Roman circuses, coliseum diversions and free bread during the latter days of the Roman Empire to calm the public while their empire fell and their wealth and liberties were destroyed.

Contrary to the lies from rightwing radio, leftwing experts and most political party hacks and leaders, most elections are fraudulent and a waste of time for voters. I suggest readers research campaign promises from Wilson and Roosevelt on keeping us out of war to modern-day presidents like Bush II, Obama, etc. and you’ll see their campaign promises are literally never kept. Yet after each election, the press almost never mentions this fact of modern-day political life. It is an inside establishment joke and the job of the establishment press is to protect, defend and advance the interests of the establishment.

Voting and Campaigns Have Been an Exercise in Futility Since 1913

What has passed as majority rule is nothing more than a deception forced on manipulated voters, fraud filled voting, caucuses and primaries and run by insider party elites. This deception has worked historically because the media establishment has always controlled, commented on and manufactured public opinion so the power elite candidates backed financially by big banks, Wall Street and a few extremely wealthy families could maintain the false illusion of government by the people.

Yes, the front men and political parties will change places from time to time so we the people can direct our support or disgust in following elections but policies change little and the real power elite and special interests who determine foreign and domestic polices and bail out their banking friends continue as before.

This is just an every-four-years ritual and deception designed to convince the citizens that they somehow govern themselves and their nation. The truth about representative democracy is that this form of government at a national level, when compared to decentralized confederation government and/or direct democracy, is the easiest way for elites to fool voters. It allows politicians to act and legislate always in their best interests rather than for the good of the nation or the people.

The 2012 Election Really is Different

This election will not be different because the defeat of Barack Obama or the election of a Romney, Santorum or Gingrich will change the direction of the nation. The banks will still get bailed out, the federal budget will not be balanced and our national debt will continue to grow, the neocons will still determine foreign policy and the Federal Reserve will continue to create money out of nothing for a few special interests and industries.

I believe the 2012 presidential election will be the final death rattle for the American political, financial and media establishment and their ability to control the voting public through the news and opinions used to create public opinion. This is what really makes the 2012 election different.

The growth in alternative media readership, as well as independent political

Alternative news sources ask the public to "Question More"

and economic thought from the Ron Paul Campaign educational effort, have almost reached the tipping point, thus making the public control function of the media establishment a lost cause. Adding together the alternative media readership numbers and Paul’s GOP vote percentages, primarily from younger voters, spells disaster for the establishment.

They may hold back the freedom forces for one more national election but in four more years of Obama or GOP establishment leadership I forecast the floodgates of political and economic change will burst open and the liberty revolution will advance on Washington, Wall Street and the central bank cartel.

The outcome of the 2012 election is difficult to forecast but it is clear that eventually the media establishment will lose the war! Notwithstanding the results of the 2012 election and how many free-market commentators are repressed, banned, blacklisted or fired, the media elites will lose because of the Internet.

Even if those who rule over us use a false-flag operation like in the past to

Alternative news broadcasts are becoming popular

create a war or national emergency to control the Internet, curtail opposition viewpoints and end our liberties and access to alternative views and news – this will only work for a very short time.

The internet has become a necessity for business and commerce and today’s global market means real history and the truth about financial manipulation, central banking cartels, free-market solutions and political controls will get through their restraints and continue to challenge the establishment propaganda outlets.

They cannot kill the Internet without destroying the American economy in a very competitive world. The US is the most important economic host to these power elite parasites as they benefit from both confiscating our wealth and enslaving our children as cannon fodder for their wars.

The truth about our history, political system and our own enslavement has been best shown by Judge Andrew Napolitano. Every American should demand answers to the questions he put forward in his recent editorial, What If Democracy Is Bunk?

The search for answers to his 33 questions about American style democracy may well set the stage for the restoration of legitimate government and a free society in the United States. He has given us the questions to ask and all we need to do is to research, discover and publicize the answers.

Yes, the establishment will counter-attack and use any means to remain in power and control but their days are numbered. Like Goebbels and the Berlin propaganda in early 1945, they can still issue proclamations, enact decrees and frighten the citizens but soon a large enough percentage of the electorate will know the truth. The emperor has no clothes and the rulers as well as the power elites hiding behind the scenes are frightened.

In 2013, the United States will have been occupied, ruled and looted by an elite that claimed to know what was best for them, the nation and the American people. They weren’t evil like the Nazis or violent like the Stalin and the communists but in the end they destroyed our liberties and have looted most of our property and wealth. Personally I think one hundred years is long enough. What do you think?

When a plurality of Americans can understand Judge Napolitano’s 33 questions and the answers, then the game is up and the truth just might yet set us free.

CIA Director Admits Manipulating US News; CBS Confirms

YouTube
Monday, February 27, 2012

This is an old clip from 1975 that shows the CIA admitting that they use the “mainstream media” to manipulate the thoughts and ideas of American citizens in the USA. This tactic of molding public opinion is still happening today.

Poll: Ron Paul Strongest Against Obama In Head To Head Matchup – Also named most truthful GOP candidate in separate study

February 28, 2012 1 comment

Steve Watson
Prisonplanet.com
February 27, 2012

GOP presidential candidate Ron Paul is leading the incumbent president in a hypothetical matchup, according to a newly released poll from respected pollster Rasmussen.

Paul scores 43% over 41% for Obama in the poll, with 10% saying they would vote for some other option, a figure that includes 17% of Republicans.

Paul also picks up 15% of the vote from self-identified liberals, according to Rasmussen.

Mitt Romney is the only other candidate to lead Obama in the poll, scoring 45% to Obama’s 43%. Paul polls the strongest, however, given that he drives the president’s numbers down further than Romney.

A hypothetical Paul nomination also drives the undecided voters up significantly.

Senator Rick Santorum trails the president nationally by two percentage points, 45% to 43%. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich trails even further behind when pitted against Obama, with a ten point deficit, 49% to 39%.

Paul has regularly emerged as the strongest contender in other polls when matched head to head with Obama. This is the first time, however, that he has done so in a Rasmussen poll.

The poll shows a significant drop in approval ratings for Obama, who has seen a recent bounce in the polls throughout the first two months of the year.

Forty-two percent (42%) now Strongly Disapprove of the way that Obama is performing as president. His overall approval rating is down six points since mid February, according to Rasmussen.

In a separate study by The Houston Chronicle, Ron Paul was named the most truthful of the GOP contenders.

Ron Paul “had 58 percent accuracy from 33 statements that were evaluated on their honesty and truth.” The Chronicle’s ‘Texas on the Potomac’ blog explained. “Paul’s true and mostly true categories were the most plentiful, tied with seven statements in each.” the report continued.

The Chronicle used fact checking site PolitiFact to analyze statements from each of the candidates and assign accuracy values.

Ron Paul was also found to have had the lowest percentage of ‘half truths’, according to the study, with 18 percent. Newt Gingrich was found to be the most untruthful candidate, with just 42 accuracy points.

Over the weekend, Paul delivered a rousing keynote speech to hundreds of supporters in Michigan. Watch the speech in full below:

——————————————————————

Report from Tokyo: 6.5 microSv/h at Japan’s busiest train station — Equal to 57 millisieverts per year, “10 times Chernobyl evacuation levels — Near Imperial Palace”

Tokyo Japan
Sunday February 26, 2012

Twitter users in Japan are logging higher radiation levels than that of the Chernobyl disaster back in 1986

On 2/21~23/2012, a Twitter user measured the radiation level at Tokyo station and it turned out to be 2.94~6.5 microSv/h. [...]

1m height from the ground : 6.5~4.8 microSv/h

1.8m height from the ground : 3.0~4.2 microSv/h

The reason of this high level of contamination is assumed to be because hot particles are brought from Fukushima or North Japan by the shoes of passengers.

@bien1321 This dosimeter to detect γ-rays every 10 seconds in about 5 minutes from start to finish measurement. 6.5μ ~ 4.8μSv 1m3 times height measurements. Was 3.0μ ~ 4.2μSv 1.8m3 times height measurements. The image is part of a total of six times.

Via ABC Australia: “After Chernobyl anyone likely to be exposed to more than 5 millisieverts a year was evacuated, and those in areas of 1-5 mSv were offered relocation and bans were placed on eating locally produced food.”

“nohobear”

Despite the Tepco lies, despite the coverups, the news blackouts, the truth is emerging. Unfortunately, by the time the full magnitude of this creeping death is apparent to the Japanese people, the elites responsible will have long fled Japan. Tokyo goes down, so does Japan. And sadly, the same coverup is going on in Hawaii and the West Coast. Musn’t hurt tourism or big agriculture. What’s a few thousand (or tens of thousands) lives anyway?

I guess “atoms for peace” and “electricity too cheap to meter” can be added to the trash heap of history. “Destroyer of worlds” we can keep.

Related Posts

  1. Fukushima radiation detected 400 miles away in Pacific Ocean:Levels 1,000 times higher than previous readings (Naturalnews.com)

  2. How Much Radiation Is Too Much? Particle Sizes and Their Effects: (destructionist.wordpress.com)

  3. Five more reports of high radiation levels in Tokyo’s Adachi ward — Over 20 millisieverts per year at school, above evacuation level

  4. School playground staircase has radiation at 70 times maximum allowed, far from evacuation zone — Equal to 69 millisieverts per year

  5. “It was shocking”: .378 µSv/hr at train station in Greater Tokyo Area (VIDEO)

  6. 42.85 microSv/h detected in Koriyama — 15.5 microSv/h outside NHK broadcasting station (VIDEO)

U.S. Agencies See No Move by Iran to Build a Bomb

By and

WASHINGTON — Even as the United Nations’ nuclear watchdog said in a new report Friday that Iran had accelerated its uranium enrichment program, American intelligence analysts continue to believe that there is no hard evidence that Iran has decided to build a nuclear bomb.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

Recent assessments by American spy agencies are broadly consistent with a 2007 intelligence finding that concluded that Iran had abandoned its nuclear weapons program years earlier, according to current and former American officials. The officials said that assessment was largely reaffirmed in a 2010 National Intelligence Estimate, and that it remains the consensus view of America’s 16 intelligence agencies.

At the center of the debate is the murky question of the ultimate ambitions of the leaders in Tehran. There is no dispute among American, Israeli and European intelligence officials that Iran has been enriching nuclear fuel and developing some necessary infrastructure to become a nuclear power. But the Central Intelligence Agency and other intelligence agencies believe that Iran has yet to decide whether to resume a parallel program to design a nuclear warhead — a program they believe was essentially halted in 2003 and which would be necessary for Iran to build a nuclear bomb. Iranian officials maintain that their nuclear program is for civilian purposes.

In Senate testimony on Jan. 31, James R. Clapper Jr., the director of national

James R. Clapper Jr., the Director of National Intelligence, stated explicitly that American officials believe that Iran is preserving its options for a nuclear weapon, but said there was no evidence that it had made a decision on making a concerted push to build a weapon.

intelligence, stated explicitly that American officials believe that Iran is preserving its options for a nuclear weapon, but said there was no evidence that it had made a decision on making a concerted push to build a weapon. David H. Petraeus, the C.I.A. director, concurred with that view at the same hearing. Other senior United States officials, including Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta and Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, have made similar statements in recent television appearances.

“They are certainly moving on that path, but we don’t believe they have actually made the decision to go ahead with a nuclear weapon,” Mr. Clapper told the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.

Critics of the American assessment [in Jerusalem] and some European capitals point out that Iran has made great strides in the most difficult step toward building a nuclear weapon, enriching uranium. That has also been the conclusion of a series of reports by the International Atomic Energy Agency’s inspectors, who on Friday presented new evidence that the Iranians have begun enriching uranium in an underground facility.

Once Iran takes further steps to actually enrich weapons grade fuel — a feat that the United States does not believe Iran has yet accomplished — the critics [in Israel] believe that it would be relatively easy for Iran to engineer a warhead and then have a bomb in short order. They also criticize the C.I.A. for being overly cautious in its assessments of Iran, suggesting that it is perhaps overcompensating for its faulty intelligence assessments in 2002 about Iraq’s purported weapons programs, which turned out not to exist. In addition, Israeli officials have challenged the very premise of the 2007 intelligence assessment, saying they do not believe that Iran ever fully halted its work on a weapons program.

President Ahmadinejad inspects Iran's Nuclear Enrichment Program

President Ahmadinejad inspects Iran's Nuclear Enrichment Program

Yet some intelligence officials and outside analysts believe there is another possible explanation for Iran’s enrichment activity, besides a headlong race to build a bomb as quickly as possible. They say that Iran could be seeking to enhance its influence in the region by creating what some analysts call “strategic ambiguity.” Rather than building a bomb now, Iran may want to increase its power by sowing doubt among other nations about its nuclear ambitions. Some point to the examples of Pakistan and India, both of which had clandestine nuclear weapons programs for decades before they actually decided to build bombs and test their weapons in 1998.

“I think the Iranians want the capability, but not a stockpile,” said Kenneth C. Brill, a former United States ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency who also served as director of the intelligence community’s National Counterproliferation Center from 2005 until 2009. Added a former intelligence official: “The Indians were a screwdriver turn away from having a bomb for many years. The Iranians are not that close.”

To be sure, American analysts acknowledge that understanding the intentions of Iran’s leadership is extremely difficult, and that their assessments are based on limited information. David A. Kay, who was head of the C.I.A.’s team that searched for Iraq’s weapons programs after the United States invasion, was cautious about the quality of the intelligence underlying the current American assessment.

“They don’t have evidence that Iran has made a decision to build a bomb, and that reflects a real gap in the intelligence,” Mr. Kay said. “It’s true the evidence hasn’t changed very much” since 2007, he added. “But that reflects a lack of access and a lack of intelligence as much as anything.”

Divining the intentions of closed societies is one of the most difficult tasks for American intelligence analysts, and the C.I.A. for decades has had little success penetrating regimes like Iran and North Korea to learn how their leaders make decisions.

Amid the ugly aftermath of the botched Iraq intelligence assessments, American spy agencies in 2006 put new analytical procedures in place to avoid repeating the failures. Analysts now have access to raw information about the sources behind intelligence reports, to help better determine the credibility of the sources and prevent another episode like the one in which the C.I.A. based much of its conclusions about Iraq’s purported biological weapons on an Iraqi exile who turned out to be lying.

Analysts are also required to include in their reports more information about the chain of logic that has led them to their conclusions, and differing judgments are featured prominently in classified reports, rather than buried in footnotes.

When an unclassified summary of the 2007 intelligence estimate on Iran’s nuclear program was made public, stating that it had abandoned work on a bomb, it stunned the Bush administration and the world. It represented a sharp reversal from the intelligence community’s 2005 estimate, and drew criticism of the C.I.A. from European and Israeli officials, as well as conservative pundits. They argued that it was part of a larger effort by the C.I.A. to prevent American military action against Iran.

Another attempt by the U.S. at invading yet another country...

Our country invaded Iraq in 2003 because President Bush and his Administration concocted stories that Iraq had Weapons of Mass Destruction and sold that idea to the American people. Those in power today are now trying to start yet another war, but this time, using Iran as the enemy by claiming that they are feverishly working on a nuclear bomb. (What's that old saying: "...Fool me once, shame on you, but fool me twice, shame on me?")

The report was so controversial that many outside analysts expected that the intelligence community would be forced to revise and repudiate the estimate after new evidence emerged about Iran’s program, notably from the United Nations’ inspectors. Yet analysts now say that while there has been mounting evidence of Iranian work on enrichment facilities, there has been far less clear evidence of a weapons program.

Still, Iran’s enrichment activities have raised suspicions, even among skeptics.

“What has been driving the discussion has been the enrichment activity,” said one former intelligence official. “That’s made everybody nervous. So the Iranians continue to contribute to the suspicions about what they are trying to do.”

Iran’s efforts to hide its nuclear facilities and to deceive the West about its activities have also intensified doubts. But some American analysts warn that such behavior is not necessarily proof of a weapons program. They say that one mistake the C.I.A. made before the war in Iraq was to assume that because Saddam Hussein resisted weapons inspections — acting as if he were hiding something — it meant that he had a weapons program.

As Mr. Kay explained, “The amount of evidence that you were willing to go with in 2002 is not the same evidence you are willing to accept today.”

Related Stories

ANONYMOUS – JOIN US IN OPERATION “BLACK MARCH”

February 26, 2012 2 comments

JOIN US IN OPERATION "BLACK MARCH"

With the continuing campaigns for Internet-censoring litigation such as SOPA and PIPA, and the closure of sites such as Megaupload under allegations of ‘piracy’ and ‘conspiracy’ the time has come to take a stand against music, film and media companies’ lobbyists.

The only way is to hit them where it truly hurts….

 - Their profit margins -

March 2012 is the end of the 1st quarter in economic reports worldwide.

Starting Thursday March 1st, 2012:

“Do not buy a single record. Do not download a single song, legally or illegally. Do not go to see a single film in cinemas, or download a copy, Do not buy a DVD in the stores. Do not buy a video game. Do not buy a single book or magazine.

Wait the 4 weeks to buy them in April: see the film later, etc. Holding out for just 4 weeks, maximum, will leave a gaping hole in media and entertainment companies’ profits for the 1st quarter, an economic hit which will in turn be observed by governments worldwide as stocks and shares will blip from a large enough loss of incomes.”

This action can give a statement of intent:

“We will not tolerate the Media Industries’ lobbying for legislation which will censor the internet.” Regarding Black March: If you want to do something that makes a statement, consider shifting your money not only away from corporate media but to independent media. Buy comics published by someone other than DC and Marvel. Buy books from small and independent presses. Support independent production companies who fight to stay independent and fan-focused. Better yet, buy things directly from creators and artisans. Support independent retailers. Don’t just blanket punish media producers and distributors—refocus those resources into supporting the ones who espouse and depend on free exchange of information and ideas. Because those are the people preserving intellectual freedom. Those are the people creating work of substance. And those are the people struggling to make a living, because they aren’t bankrolled by the Corporate Elite lobbying for SOPA, PIPA and ACTA.

All New Windows 8 Computers to Have Remote Kill Switch

Jordan Robertson
Bloomberg Businessweek
Friday, February 24, 2012

Windows 8 computers will have "kill switches"

With the rollout of the Windows 8 operating system expected later this year, millions of desktop and laptop PCs will get kill switches for the first time. Microsoft (MSFT) hasn’t spoken publicly about its reasons for including this capability in Windows 8 beyond a cryptic warning that it might be compelled to use it for legal or security reasons. The feature was publicized in a widely cited Computerworld article in December when Microsoft posted the terms of use for its new application store, a feature in Windows 8 that will allow users to download software from a Microsoft-controlled portal. Windows smartphones, like those of its competitors, have included kill switches for several years, though software deletion “is a last resort, and it’s uncommon,” says Todd Biggs, director of product management for Windows Phone Marketplace.

Microsoft declined to answer questions about the kill switch in Windows 8 other than to say it will only be able to remove or change applications downloaded through the new app store. Any software loaded from a flash drive, DVD, or directly from the Web will remain outside Microsoft’s control. Still, the kill switch is a tool that could help Microsoft prevent mass malware infections. “For most users, the ability to remotely remove apps is a good thing,” says Charlie Miller, a researcher with the security company Accuvant.

The history of kill switches on smartphones and e-readers suggests they’re double-edged swords for the companies that wield them. In 2009, Amazon reached into users’ Kindles to delete e-book copies of George Orwell’s 1984 and Animal Farm that had been sold by a publisher without the necessary rights. The ensuing backlash caused Amazon Chief Executive Officer Jeff Bezos to call the move “stupid, thoughtless, and painfully out of line with our principles.”

Full story here.

Report: U.S. bolsters defenses in Gulf amid Iran tensions

Haaretz
February 25, 2012

In an effort to counter any Iranian effort to close the strategic Strait of Hormuz waterway in the Persian Gulf, the U.S. is increasing both its sea- and land-based defense assets in the area, the Wall Street Journal reported.

According to the report, the U.S. military has informed Congress of plans to preposition new mine-detection and clearing equipment and expand surveillance capabilities in the area of the Strait of Hormuz.

U.S. defense officials were also quoted as saying that the military wants to modify weapons systems on ships so they can used against Iranian fast-attack boats and shore-launched cruise missiles.

Iran has said it could close the Strait of Hormuz, through which a fifth of the world’s crude oil passes, to shipping in response to Western sanctions over its nuclear program. The United States has vowed to keep the waterway open.

Full article here

President Obama Plays Race Card and Calls on African-Americans to Support Campaign

February 24, 2012 2 comments

When I voted for Barack Obama back in 2008, it wasn’t because he was African-American.  I voted for him because he told “We the People” that he would work to change the epidemic of corruption now infecting Washington D.C. and that he would ensure transparency where there was none.

But once he was elected into office, he did an “about face” and began to dismantle the liberties and constitutional rights of ALL AMERICANS (Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, Green-partiers, Occupiers, Tea-partiers, Blacks, Whites, Hispanics, etc…you name it…)

President Obama signed into law the National Defense Authorization Act (Section 1021): wherein any American citizen can be detained, convicted, and imprisoned without trial or representation – and based merely on the presumption (or suspicion) of wrongdoing.

I guess, if we were all looking for “change,” we got it!  Americans now have less rights and freedoms than they had when President Bush [...shudder...] was in office.

Unfortunately many of my fellow peace-loving and free-thinking Americans are swallowing, hook-line-and-sinker, President Obama’s rhetoric in his attempt to get re-elected and to wrestle away even more of our freedoms in the name of  “corporate globalism” for the “New World Order.”

Even more unfortunate than this, is the fact that many African-Americans will re-elect this traitor back into office, based on their ignorance of his political record, or solely on the color of his skin.

“…When I voted for Barack Obama back in 2008, it wasn’t because he was African-American.  I voted for him because he told “We the People” that he would work to change the epidemic of corruption now infecting Washington D.C. and that he would ensure transparency where there was none.”

Whatever your race or religion, don’t fall for President Obama’s political ad campaign!  He is hoping that we are all ignorant enough to fall for his lies again.  If we do that, it’ll be tantamount to believing that Iraq actually had weapons of mass destruction and that going to war on false pretenses was the right thing to do…

Insider Says Talk of Paul-Romney Alliance is “Establishment Trick”: Lew Rockwell – “Rhetoric is a political ruse to make Ron Paul appear as a sell out”

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Friday, February 24, 2012

Former Ron Paul staffer Lew Rockwell says that talk of an alliance between Mitt Romney and Ron Paul is an “establishment trick” to smear Paul by making him appear as a sell out.

Rockwell, who served as Ron Paul’s congressional chief of staff from 1978 to 1982 and remains close to Paul and several campaign insiders, told the Alex Jones Show that rhetoric about a potential partnership wherein Ron Paul would be granted a VP slot was merely a political ruse to “make Ron Paul supporters like Romney”.

The controversy received fresh impetus earlier this week when Rick Santorum and his campaign manager claimed Paul and Romney were in cahoots to shoot down Santorum’s candidacy. The talking point has subsequently been pushed by the mainstream media, including a Washington Post article today that speculates on whether the alliance is genuine.

Rockwell said that although Romney may be a pleasant person, his political positions are anathema to Ron Paul given the fact that he is a globalist, a big government advocate and a warmonger.

Lew Rockwell

Lew Rockwell

“Just because he looks good in a suit doesn’t mean that he’s not one of the top creeps, otherwise he wouldn’t be supported by the Republican establishment and by the establishment in general, so no we don’t want anything to do with him except to oppose him,” said Rockwell.

“They would never let Ron Paul be Vice President…the idea that the regime would invite him into office is just science fiction,” said Rockwell, explaining that the only way for Paul to be on the Republican ticket would for for his supporters to vote him in.

Rockwell explained that the motivation behind the rhetoric was founded in the establishment’s fear of Ron Paul gathering enough delegates to influence the Republican convention.

“They want to diminish him, they want to smear him, this is smear number 185 and I’m sure they’ll be others to come, it’s just another trick, they’re not going to ask him to become vice president, it’s just not going to happen,” said Rockwell, adding that the risk of Ron Paul using the office of vice president to derail a Romney administration was too big a risk to take for the establishment.

As we highlighted in our previous article, considerations of a political alliance with Romney, if they exist at all, are likely coming from misguided advisors within the Paul campaign and are not embraced by Paul himself.

Cindy Sheehan sued by the IRS

February 24, 2012 1 comment

Rt News/USA

Anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan takes part in a rally in front of the White House in Washington

Anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan takes part in a rally in front of the White House in Washington

War activist Cindy Sheehan says giving America her son was enough of a sacrifice and hasn’t paid federal taxes since he was killed in Iraq in 2004.

Now the Internal Revenue Service is suing Ms. Sheehan for her financial records so they can begin begging for back taxes.

Only recently did Sheehan, 54, find out that the IRS was intending to take her to court over her past financial history. It was a revelation she only discovered with Sacramento, California network News10 sprang it on her during a recent interview.

“Isn’t it nice of the IRS to tell the media where to ambush me before they tell me that the US Attorney is suing me?”

Sheehan writes on her blog. She addressed the issue this week by commenting under the headline, “Surprise, the US Attorney Has Filed a Law Suit Against You!”

“I paid my taxes for, you know, what- 30 years before my son was killed?” she tells News10. “I feel like I gave my son to this country in an illegal and immoral war and I’ll never get him back,” adds the activist.

Sheehan has openly acknowledged in the past that she has skipping doing her annual tax work since 04 when her son, Casey, was killed overseas. In the aftermath of her son’s death, Sheehan became an advocate for ending the War in Iraq and continues to campaign against US military actions today. And while she regularly attends anti-war rallies and has written two books on the topic, Sheehan’s refusal to file tax returns serves as another form of protest.

“Let’s cut through all the bullshit,” reads a recent blog post from Sheehan. “There is no monetary value large enough that can be placed on a human life or the love of a mother for her child.”

“I consider that my debt to this country was paid in full when my son, Casey, was recklessly with no regard for his safety…murdered for the lies of a regime, whose members … roam around the world free and unfettered by threatening prosecutions or persecutions after committing war crimes, crimes against humanity, crimes against the peace and high crimes and misdemeanors against our own Constitution,” she writes.

“If they can give me my son back then I’ll pay my taxes and that’s not going to happen.”

Sheehan says she won’t budge over the issue and warns the US government that they will have a worthy adversary in her if they attempt to continue with their lawsuit.

“The Feds have thrown down the gauntlet against someone who has absolutely not one ounce of fear of them, and when it’s over, they’ll know they have been in a fight,” she says.

Report: More Than 100,000 Americans Are Domestic Terrorists: Concerns over martial law in America on a par with Islamic extremism

February 24, 2012 1 comment

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
Friday, February 24, 2012

Troops for Ron Paul March on the White House (Does believing in our freedoms and upholding the U.S. Constitution now make us "extremists"?)

An L.A. Times report which characterizes the Sovereign Citizen movement as “a major threat” on a par with Islamic extremism infers that “more than 100,000 Americans” are domestic terrorists as a result of their affiliation with the group.

The article, entitled ‘Sovereign citizen’ movement now on FBI’s radar, frames the belief that “the U.S. is essentially under martial law,” along with support for reintroducing the gold standard, as political views indicative of violent extremism.

The report quotes Mark Potok of the Southern Poverty Law Center, who in one fell swoop demonizes “more than 100,000 Americans” as domestic terrorists.

“This is a movement that has absolutely exploded,” said Mark Potok, a senior fellow at the Southern Poverty Law Center, a nonprofit organization based in Montgomery, Ala., that tracks domestic terrorists and hate groups. More than 100,000 Americans have aligned themselves with the sovereign citizens, the center said.

Potok specializes in seizing upon tragedies to push his organization’s political agenda. Immediately after the shooting of US Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, Potok took to the airwaves to blame the attempted assassination on the “radical right,” when the shooter, Jared Loughner, was described by those who knew him as a “left-wing pothead”.

Potok has been described as “the Boy Who Cried Right-Wing Terrorist” because of his obsession with exploiting almost every act of violence to impugn conservatives.

“The fact that he is consistently wrong about, well, just about everything — from the political views of the supposed right wingers to the supposedly violent nature of conservative groups to the mere presence of violent crime — does not seem to dissuade Old Media from using him to smear conservatives,” explains Lachlan Markay.

The SPLC makes tens of millions of dollars every year demonizing politically active Americans as domestic terrorists, making it the most profitable “civil rights charity” in America, and yet the establishment media continues to treat the organization and its mouthpieces like Potok as impartial observers.

Of course, any political group with such a substantial membership is bound to contain a smattering of crazies – the report claims members of the Sovereign Citizen movement have killed six police officers over the course of the last 12 years – but to demonize over 100,000 Americans as violent terrorists on a par with Al-Qaeda because they express concerns about the militarization of law enforcement is clearly asinine.

Unfortunately, it’s now par for the course.

Despite the fact that the federal government was forced to back down on framing Ron Paul supporters, libertarians, people who display bumper stickers, people who own gold, or even people who fly a U.S. flag, as terrorists under the infamous MIAC report, the rush to denounce legitimate political beliefs as thought crimes, or even mundane behaviors, by insinuating they are shared by terrorists, has accelerated in recent months.

Under the FBI’s Communities Against Terrorism program, the bulk purchase of food is labeled as a potential indication of terrorist activity, as is using cash to pay for a cup of coffee, and showing an interest in web privacy when using the Internet in a public place.

As we have documented on numerous occasions, the federal government routinely characterizes mundane behavior as extremist activity or a potential indicator of terrorist intent. As part of its ‘See Something, Say Something’ campaign, the Department of Homeland Security educates the public that generic activities performed by millions of people every day, including using a video camera, talking to police officers, wearing hoodies, driving vans, writing on a piece of paper, and using a cell phone recording application,” are all potential signs of terrorist activity.

What If Democracy Is Bunk?

February 24, 2012 3 comments

Andrew Napolitano
Infowars.com
Friday, February 24, 2012

What if you are only allowed to vote because it doesn’t make a difference? What if no matter how you vote, the elites get to have it their way? What if “one person, one vote” is just a fiction created by the government to induce your compliance? What if democracy is dangerous to personal freedom? What if democracy erodes the people’s understanding of natural rights and the foundations of government, and instead turns elections into beauty contests?

What if democracy allows the government to do anything it wants, as long as more people bother to show up at the voting booth to support it than to oppose it? What if the purpose of democracy is to convince people that they could prosper not through the creation of wealth but through theft from others? What if the only moral way to acquire wealth – aside from inheritance – is through voluntary economic activity? What if the government persuaded you that you could acquire wealth through political activity? What if economic activity included all the productive and peaceful things we do? What if political activity included all the parasitical and destructive things the government does?

What if governments were originally established to protect people’s freedom, but always turn into political and imperialist enterprises that seek to expand their power, increase their territory and heighten their control of the population? What if the idea that we need a government to take care of us is actually a fiction? What if our strength as individuals and durability as a culture are contingent not on the strength of the government but on the amount of freedom we have from the government?

What if we’re seeing civil unrest around the world precisely because government is out of control? What if the cocktail of big government and democracy brings dependence and destruction? What if big government destroys people’s motivations and democracy convinces them that the only motivation they need is to vote and go along with whatever the government does?

What if the Republican primaries we’re seeing unfold aren’t actually as democratic as they may appear to be? What if the results you have seen from the states that have voted thus far don’t match the composition of the delegates those states send to the Tampa convention this summer because the polls aren’t what counts, but what counts are the secret meetings that come after the voting? What if Joe Stalin was right when he said the most powerful person in the world is the guy who counts the votes?

What if the greatest tyrant in history lives among us? What if that tyrant always gets its way, no matter what the laws are or what the Constitution says? What if that tyrant is the majority of voters? What if the tyranny of the majority in a democracy recognizes no limits on its power?

What if the government misinforms voters so as to justify anything the government wants to do? What if the government bribes people with the money it prints? What if it gives entitlements to the poor, tax breaks to the middle class and bailouts to the rich just to keep all of us dependent upon it? What if a vibrant republic requires not just the democratic process of voting, but also informed and engaged voters who understand first principles of limited government and free-market economics, and the divine origin of natural rights?

What if we could free ourselves from the yoke of big government through a campaign of education and information and personal courage that leads to a revolutionary return to first principles? What if the establishment doesn’t want this? What if the government remains the same no matter who wins elections?

What if because of Ron Paul‘s presidential campaign, because he isn’t campaigning just for votes as his competition is, because he is educating the population and winning the hearts and minds of a once free people and inspiring them to fight for their freedom once more, freedom wins? What if we can be free again? What will it take to make that happen?

Ron Paul Highlights from 2/22/2012 Debate

CNN
Thursday, February 23, 2012

All of Ron Paul’s answers from the last GOP debate before Super Tuesday.

FBI might shutdown the Internet on March 8

February 23, 2012 1 comment

RT.com/USA

FBI might temporarily end the Internet. (AFP Photo / Sonny Tumbelaka)

Millions of computer users across the world could be blocked off from the Internet as early as March 8 if the FBI follows through with plans to yank a series of servers originally installed to combat corruption.

Last year, authorities in Estonia apprehended six men believed responsible for creating a malicious computer script called the DNSChanger Trojan. Once set loose on the Web, the worm corrupted computers in upwards of 100 countries, including an estimated 500,000 in America alone. The US Federal Bureau of Investigation later stepped up by replacing the rogue Trojan with servers of their own in an attempt to remediate the damage, but the fix was only temporary. Now the FBI is expected to end use of those replacement servers as early as next month and, at that point, the Internet for millions could essentially be over.

When functioning as its creators intended, the DNSChanger Trojan infected computers and redirected users hoping to surf to certain websites to malicious ones. Traditionally, DNS, or Domain Name System, servers translate alphabetical, traditional website URLs to their actual, numeric counterpart in order to guide users across the World Wide Web. Once infected by the DNSChanger Trojan, however, websites entered into Internet browsers were hijacked to malicious servers and, in turn, directed the user to an unintended, fraudulent site.

In coordination with the arrests in Estonia, the FBI shut down the malicious DNSChanger botnet network, and, additionally, replaced them with surrogate servers to correct the problem. Those servers, however, were installed “just long enough for companies and home users to remove DNSChanger malware from their machines,” according to the court order that established them. That deadline is March 8, and those surrogate servers are expected to be retired then. At that point, computers still infected with the Trojan will be essentially unable to navigate the Internet.

Who, exactly, will be affected? Security company IID (Internet Identity) believes that half of all Fortune 500 companies and more than two dozen major government entities in the US are still currently infected with the worm as of early 2012. Unless they take the proper steps to eradicate the Trojan from their systems, millions of users worldwide will be left hog-tied, helplessly attempting to navigate to nonexistent servers and, in effect, without the Web.

“At this rate, a lot of users are going to see their Internet break on March 8,” Rod Rasmussen, president and chief technology officer at Internet Identity, cautions Krebs On Security.

Currently, both the computer industry and law enforcement are working together through a coalition they’ve established called the DNSChanger Working Group. That group has been tasked with examining the options in phasing out the surrogate servers set up by the feds, but unless an alternative plan is agreed on, a great port of the Web will go dark next month.

“I’m guessing a lot more people would care at that point,” Rasmussen adds. While infected users are cautioned to correct the problem now, millions internationally are still believed to be infected. “It certainly would be an interesting social experiment if these systems just got cut off,” he adds.

Greek Students and the Unemployed Shut Down the Public Toll Collection System in Response to Bankster Imposed Austerity Measures

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
February 22, 2012

[I love seeing people fighting for their rights!  Our Greek and European friends are still giving it "their best" to retain their rights, liberties, and freedoms in this banker austerity mess entitled, "the European Union."]

In the above video, we see students and unemployed workers shutting down public transportation toll collection. It’s called the “I Won’t Pay” movement. It began last year in Greece and has spread to other locales on the continent, including Spain and Sweden.

Thousands of Greeks are now refusing to validate their public transit tickets following well-publicized protests by leftists and communists in response to ticket price hikes by the government.

Some believe this sort of civil disobedience is ineffective and merely theatrical, but it is a good way for people to make a point – they are opposed to the state acting as an enforcer for the IMF, the World Bank and the international bankers.

Maybe Texans outraged by the Trans Texas Corridor and proposed toll roads should think about following the lead of Greek leftists.

Anonymous attacks WSJ page hours after story warning group is getting more powerful

February 22, 2012 1 comment

Elizabeth Flock
The Washington Post
February 22, 2012

"Well Done!"

A number of Wall Street Journal Facebook pages were the subject of a comment flashmob Tuesday, claimed by Anonymous, just hours after the Journal published a report that warned the hacker group was getting more powerful.

The Anonymous Kollektiv, believed to based in Germany, told participants to copy the following message on Journal sites:

“Dear editors of the German Wall Street Journal, You equated Anonymous with al-Qaeda in your February 2012 article and the related coverage. With this type of coverage you may be able to stir up fear in the United States, but not in the land of poets and thinkers! With this comment, we would like to oppose the deliberate dissemination of false information and express our displeasure with your lobby journalism. We are Anonymous. We are millions. We do not forgive. We do not forget. Expect us!”

The Wall Street Journal report, which cited a number of security officials, warned that the hacker group could take down the U.S. power grid within a couple of years. One official quoted also said that the U.S. should be wary of a foreign government or al-Qaeda trying to hire the hackers to mount a cyber attack.

Read more…

Globalists Seek a New Line of Attack in effort to Control the Internet through the International Telecommunication Union (ITU)

February 22, 2012 2 comments

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
February 22, 2012

Popular outrage over SOPA and PIPA has forced the globalists to seek a new line of attack in their effort to control the internet. On February 27, they will engage in a “diplomatic process” that will hand over to the United Nations unprecedented control over a free and open internet.

Numerous countries are pushing for United Nations governance over the internet by the end of the year, including Russia and China. Russian PM Vladimir Putin said last year his goal is to impose “international control over the Internet” through the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), a treaty-based organization under the auspices of the UN.

The ITU is working to globalize the radio spectrum, latest-generation

International Telecommunication Union (ITU)

wireless technologies, aeronautical and maritime navigation, radio astronomy, satellite-based meteorology along with the internet. It is positioning itself to control next-generation networks, the technology that will replace the current free and open internet.

Authoritarian China and Russia want to renegotiate the 1988 treaty that deregulated and decentralized the internet and paved the way for its fantastic success and popularity. The 1988 treaty, the Wall Street Journal notes, “insulated the Internet from economic and technical regulation and quickly became the greatest deregulatory success story of all time.”

The ITU treaty negotiated at the behest of the United Nations will radically modify the internet and bring it under control of the global elite. In addition to imposing cyber security mandates, it will outlaw peer-to-peer technologies and impose unprecedented economic regulations such as mandates for rates, terms and conditions. It will allow transnational corporations to charge fees for “international” internet traffic possibly on a “per-click” basis for certain web destinations.

The ITU will also end the nonprofit status of multi-stakeholder internet governance entities such as the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers – in other words, UN bureaucrats answering to the globalists will control who is allowed to establish a presence on the internet. They will also control the Internet Engineering Task Force, the Internet Society and other multi-stakeholder groups that develop and configure engineering and technical standards for the internet.

The Wall Street Journal notes that governments are “threatened by popular outcries for political freedom that are empowered by unfettered Internet connectivity. They have formed impressive coalitions, and their efforts have progressed significantly.”

In addition to political activism, the internet allows for the free dissemination of information and alternative news that effectively counters the dinosaur establishment media. In order to realize their one-world authoritarian agenda, the global elite will need to make sure websites like Infowars.com do not have a presence on a next-generation internet now under development.

Following overwhelming opposition to SOPA and PIPA, the globalists will now push the ITU. They understand that it will much more difficult for people to oppose and defeat an international treaty beyond the reach of their national governments and politicians and this is how they will eventually implement their control freak agenda over the internet.

TSA Questioning Body Scanner Opt-Outs: Refusing to be irradiated treated as suspicious behaviour

Steve Watson
Prisonplanet.com
February 22, 2012

Instances of TSA agents demanding to know why travelers are “opting out” of walking through x-ray firing body scanners, and treating the action as suspicious, continue to be reported.

Traveler Ryan Alford told Lew Rockwell.com

“I travel weekly for work and always choose to opt out of the naked body scanners. (I don’t know what’s worse, the pat down or radiation exposure, but there’s something liberating about saying “opt out.”)”

“Anyway, this week I was asked by an agent, ‘Why did you opt out?’ to which I replied, ‘Am I required to answer?’ He mumbled a bit and continued groping and poking. He then asked, ‘Where are you traveling to?’ and again I replied, ‘Am I required to answer?’” Mr Alford explained.

“It wasn’t long before a supervisor appeared, accompanied by a man in a suit (who was sporting a cross-shaped lapel pin clad in the American flag…sigh). He repeated the minion’s same question and my answer again remained unchanged.” Mr Alford added.

“After a hushed conversation between the two busybodies, I was finally allowed to go on my way, smiling with my head held high. Perhaps sometimes it’s just the small acts of defiance that leave one so fulfilled. Thank you so much for all you do. Keep up the great work.”

As we have previously reported, the TSA has warned that expressing any kind of dissatisfaction at having to be prodded, groped or forced through a radiation firing naked body scanner, will be treated as suspicious behaviour.

When someone declines to walk through a body scanner, TSA agents are trained to shout “OPT OUT!” and to conduct pat downs in full view of other passengers in security lines, to deter others from resisting.

At the height of the revolt against the TSA, it was admitted that the goal of making the pat down procedure tantamount to sexual molestation was to psychologically coerce people into using dangerous radiative body scanners, colloquially known as “Dick Measurers” amongst TSA agents.

The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg was told by a TSA agent directly that pat downs were made increasingly invasive not for any genuine security reason, but to make the experience so uncomfortable for the traveler that they would prefer to use the body scanner, despite the fact that scientists at Columbia University and the Inter-Agency Committee on Radiation Safety, along with other scientific bodies, have all warned that the devices increase the risk of developing cancer.

I asked him if he was looking forward to conducting the full-on pat-downs. “Nobody’s going to do it,” he said, “once they find out what we’re going to do.”

In other words, people, when faced with a choice, will inevitably choose the Dick-Measuring Device over molestation? “That’s what we’re hoping for. We’re trying to get everyone into the machine.” He called over a colleague. “Tell him what you call the back-scatter,” he said. “The Dick-Measuring Device,” I said. “That’s the truth,” the other officer responded.

Accounts from other travelers have described TSA agents forcing passengers to walk through body scanners even after they have opted out, purely as a psychological ploy to coerce subservience out of others. Agents have reportedly told passengers the devices would be turned off as they walked through them, but that they had to do so, as well as submit to a pat down,  in order to get through security lines.

In one incident last June, Texas state officials recounted disturbing stories that highlight how the TSA is using forceful pat-downs as a form of punishment to those who opt out of the full body scanners.

As a TSA anti-groping bill was being debated in the state, officials recounted an admission by a TSA supervisor that aggressive body searches were being employed as retribution against those who refused to walk through radiation firing scanners.

No terror threat, be it genuine or contrived, can justify the federal government treating American citizens with less respect than farmyard animals. Since TSA workers openly admit that the sexual molestation of travelers is about forcing them to use the scanner and has nothing to do with security, this underscores the fact that the groping procedure and the scanner are both tools of oppression that have no place in a free society.

——————————————————————

Steve Watson is the London based writer and editor for Alex Jones’ Infowars.net, and Prisonplanet.com. He has a Masters Degree in International Relations from the School of Politics at The University of Nottingham in England.

Florida Drivers Shelling Out Nearly $6 A Gallon At Some Gas Stations

February 22, 2012 3 comments

By Matthew L. Higgins
February 22, 2012

TAMPA (CBS Tampa) — Talk about pain at the pump! Some Florida drivers are spending nearly $6 a gallon to fill up their gas tanks.

A gas pump displays a sale of $58.74 at a gas station in Miami Beach, Fla. (credit: Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

According to GasBuddy.com, motorists are shelling out $5.89 for a gallon of regular gas at a Shell station in Lake Buena Vista, topping out at $5.99 a gallon for premium. It doesn’t get better at a Suncoast Energy station in Orlando, where drivers are paying $5.79 for a gallon of regular.

“Prices over in the Disney World area are much higher than any other place in Florida,” Jessica Brady, AAA spokeswoman, told CBS Tampa, adding that people regularly complain about gas prices in that area.

The Sunshine State is opening up its wallet, paying an average of $3.67 a gallon of unleaded gas, 12 cents more than the national average. And it’s only expected to go up.

“It doesn’t look like we will have relief at the pump anytime soon,” Brady told CBS Tampa. “I do think we will see prices surpass $4 a gallon. I think we will see that closer to spring time.”

One reason for the high prices is the conflict with Iran over the Strait of Hormuz. Iran has threatened to disrupt oil shipments through the waterway due to the European Union sanctions leveled against the country over its nuclear program, causing the price of crude to skyrocket. Trading on a barrel of crude today is a little over $106.

Another reason for the high gas prices: positive economic news. The drop in the unemployment rate and improved housing market numbers have caused gas and oil prices to rise.

“I know it frustrates quite a few consumers why positive news will lead to higher prices,” Brady told CBS Tampa. “It really just comes down to speculation.”

A third culprit behind the gas price boom is Greece. The EU’s bailout for the indebted country only adds to the global fuel demand.

And because of these reasons, Brady believes that Florida and the rest of the U.S. could see historical gas prices.

“I think this year we will see much higher highs.”

Believe it or not, those prices aren’t the highest in the nation. According to GasBuddy.com, motorists in Alaska are paying a whopping $6.34 for a gallon of regular at some gas stations. The cheapest gas can be found in Wyoming at $2.75 a gallon.

Ron Paul Is Being Cheated Out of the Republican Nomination: The GOP establishment has resorted to vote fraud in almost every state

February 22, 2012 3 comments

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Wednesday, February 22, 2012

Despite his runaway success in terms of straw poll victories, campaign contributions and grass roots energy, a plethora of evidence strongly indicates that Ron Paul is being cheated out of winning any of the Republican caucuses, with the GOP establishment desperate to prevent the Texan Congressman from building any kind of momentum that the likes of Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum have been afforded.

Even the establishment media is now being forced to report that “Ron Paul Might Have Won Maine,” with evidence of potential vote fraud targeted against Ron Paul prompting the state’s GOP chairman Charles Webster to ask for a recount.

With just 84 per cent of the votes being counted, and with many towns and counties showing strong support for Ron Paul having not yet cast their votes, the media along with the Republican establishment brazenly declared Mitt Romney to be the winner, despite him having just a 194 vote lead over Ron Paul.

Erroneous reports of a snowstorm were cited as a pretext to cancel the caucus in Washington County, an area heavily dominated by Paul supporters, delaying the vote for a week. Voters in the county are still waiting to cast their ballots.

“That’s right. A prediction of 3-4 inches–that turned into nothing more than a dusting–was enough for a local GOP official to postpone the caucuses just so the results wouldn’t be reported tonight,” spokesman Gary Howard wrote in an E-mail to supporters, adding that even the local Girl Scouts’ meeting survived the weather.

Local reporters in Maine also revealed how the vote for most Waldo County towns was entered as “0”, as if no one had turned out to vote.

Rachel Maddow expanded on the reports in a feature on MSNBC, pointing out that when one town in Waldo attempted to call in its results, State officials said they already had results from the town showing Romney had won, when in reality that wasn’t the case and in fact Ron Paul had won.

The controversy in Maine follows the admitted mistake in Iowa where Mitt Romney was announced as the winner and yet a later recount found that Rick Santorum had actually beaten him. The kind of momentum Santorum was allowed to build as a result of that revision is unlikely to be afforded to Ron Paul in Maine.

The vote in Iowa was labeled by one observer as the “biggest fraud since Kennedy stole the West Virginia Primary”.

Before the vote took place, in a state where pre-primary polling showed Ron Paul in with a good chance of taking top spot, Republican strategist Dee Dee Benkie told a radio show that GOP insiders had resolved to prevent Ron Paul from winning the primary.

“They’re not going to want him to get number one, it’s very bad for Iowa, it’s terrible,” said Benkie, confirming the host’s claim that Iowa District Chairmen are organizing voting blocks to sabotage Paul’s chances by offering them sweetheart deals in return for voting against Paul.

After votes were counted at a secret undisclosed location, it was announced that Ron Paul, despite pre-primary polls showing the Congressman was in with a good chance of winning, had finished third.

The debacle in Nevada also clearly indicates that Ron Paul was cheated out of victory in the SIlver State. Despite results from every other state primary showing Ron Paul at least doubling his vote tally compared to 2008, for example climbing from 16,000 to 78,000 votes in South Carolina, In Nevada Paul received just a few hundred more votes than he achieved in 2008, leaving him with a third placed finish.

“Ron Paul who took second in Nevada in 2008 with 6,087 votes, only increased his support by 1.4% to just 6,175 in the 2012 results, despite all of the excitement, all the money spent, which was a lot more,” reports Money Trends Research. “In fact, the Paul campaign had brochures and volunteers almost knock on every door in Nevada this time around. Nevada is also very fertile ground for a candidate like Ron Paul, many people in Nevada just want to be left alone by the government, Ron Paul opposes taxing tips, seeing that they are not really income, but gifts, you would think this would go over real well in Las Vegas.”

As we documented before the Nevada primary, Paul’s campaign, after having finished second in the state behind Mitt Romney in 2008, poured huge amounts of energy and funding into the 2012 race, whereas Romney hardly had any ground campaign at all, and yet Romney ended up taking the state by a landslide.

Massive evidence of vote fraud subsequently emerged. News networks had announced Romney as the landslide winner before votes from Clark County – the largest county in Nevada representing more than 60 percent of the state’s voters – had even been counted. When CNN aired live footage of the votes being counted from one of the caucuses in Clark County, it was clear that Ron Paul had handily defeated Romney, and this in a “precinct full of Jewish and extremely Christian voters, two of Ron Paul’s worst demographics.”

“For five minutes, CNN sat in silence as the Republican precinct captain shouted out each vote while dozens of tabulators sat nearby keeping track,” wrote Mark Wachtler. Unfolding one sheet at a time, the man yelled, “Ron Paul, Ron Paul, Mitt Romney, Ron Paul, Ron Paul, Mitt Romney, Mitt Romney, Ron Paul, Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul, Ron Paul, Ron Paul, Mitt Romney, Mitt Romney, Ron Paul, Ron Paul, Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul, Ron Paul, Mitt Romney, Ron Paul, Ron Paul, Ron Paul, Ron Paul.”

Read More…

Aimee Allen – Ron Paul “Revolution” Anthem

Monsanto’s Bt GMO corn to be sold at Wal-Mart with no indication it is genetically modified

February 21, 2012 4 comments

Ethan A. Huff
Natural News
Tuesday, February 21, 2012

Most of the genetically-modified (GM) corn products forced on American consumers today are hidden in processed foods in the form of high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS), corn oil, corn starch, and various other corn-based additives. But soon to be available at a Walmart near you is Monsanto’s Bt sweet corn, the agri-giant’s first ever GM corn product made available to consumers as whole ears right on the cob in the produce section– and like with all other GMOs, neither Walmart nor Monsanto has any intention of labeling this new “Frankencorn.”

Monsanto first unveiled this new variety of GM sweet corn back in August, which rivals Syngenta’s GM sweet corn that has already been on the market in limited form for the past ten years, claiming that it would be available to farmers for planting during Fall 2011. Now, the corn appears set to make its debut in Walmart stores across the country as early as Summer 2012, unless massive public outcry is able to convince the multinational retailer to scrap the corn, or at least voluntarily label it.

Read More…

Establishment Media Ignores Massive Ron Paul Veterans March

Prisonplanet.com
Tuesday, February 21, 2012

Coverage from the Veterans For Ron Paul march on the White House yesterday.

“Mainstream News” Attacks Ron Paul; Considers him “Unelectable” as Thousands of Military Veterans and American Supporters March to The White House for Ron Paul

February 20, 2012 10 comments

In a sickening display of ignorance and indifference to the American people, (just after the Military and thousands more marched in support of Ron Paul in Washington D.C.) the Associated Press decides to pen an article entitled, “Paul Looks for Delegates, Respect in Caucus States.”

Below is the scathing news article in question:

Current Military and Veterans bow their heads in prayer for all those killed in war during the Obama Regime

WASHINGTON (AP) — Ron Paul may not win the Republican nomination for president — he has yet to win a single state — but his strategy of trying to amass delegates in caucus states could land him a prominent role at the party’s national convention this summer.

Imagine this: A prime time speech at the GOP convention in which Paul criticizes American military action overseas and condemns the war on terror as an overreach of government authority at home. It’s enough to make some Republicans cringe.

But they may have little choice if they want to placate Paul’s supporters and keep them from becoming a distraction at an event designed to promote party unity and showcase the nominee, whoever it is.

“Paul is fascinating because good ol’ Ron will say just about anything he wants to say at any particular time,” said Dennis Goldford, a professor of politics at Drake University in Des Moines, Iowa. “And the last thing you want somebody doing is going off message in primetime at a convention.”

With the exception of Maine, the Texas congressman hasn’t come close to winning the popular vote in any of the first nine states to vote. However, campaign aides say their knowledge of caucus rules combined with the enthusiasm of Paul’s supporters gives them a unique ability to take advantage of a process that could take several months to sort out.

Paul’s campaign manager, John Tate, said he is unsure how many delegates Paul has amassed in caucus states. But, he boldly predicted: “We are confident that when all is said and done and some of these caucus states finish their process that we will end up with either a good plurality or a majority of the delegates out of Maine, Iowa, Minnesota, Nevada, possibly Colorado.”

Paul echoed Tate’s prediction for Iowa and Maine in a broadcast interview Sunday. “The bottom line is, who is going to get the delegates and we think we’re doing pretty good,” Paul said on CNN.

Five caucus states have voted so far. In The Associated Press delegate count, Paul isn’t projected to win any national delegates in Iowa, Colorado or Minnesota. He got five out of 28 in Nevada and 10 out of 21 in Maine.

Romney leads the overall race for delegates with 123, followed by Santorum at 72, and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich at 32. Paul is in fourth place, according to the AP count, with 19 delegates. It takes 1,144 delegates to win the Republican nomination for president.

Most primaries and some caucuses are binding, meaning delegates won by the candidates are pledged to support that candidate at the national convention this summer. Political parties in many caucus states, however, use a multistep process to award national delegates.

In those states, The AP uses results from local caucuses to project the number of national delegates candidates would win if they are able to maintain the same level of support throughout the process. Those projections, however, can change because local caucuses are just the first step.

In Iowa, for example, more than 120,000 caucus goers attended local caucuses on Jan. 3. At those caucuses, they voted in a straw poll for president in which Rick Santorum eked out a 34-vote win over Mitt Romney. Paul finished third, about 3,000 votes behind.

The national media focused almost entirely on the straw poll results, but the real work was just beginning. After the straw poll was over, caucus-goers elected delegates to county conventions scheduled for March. Those conventions will elect delegates to congressional district conventions in April and the state GOP convention in June.

Delegates to the GOP national convention in Tampa, Fla., will be selected at the congressional district and state conventions, and the outcome may look very different from the results of the Jan 3 vote.

In most years, it doesn’t matter because the party nominee is obvious by then, so the presumptive nominee gets all the delegates, regardless of who won in January.

Paul’s supporters, however, plan to promote their delegates at every level of the process, regardless of what happens in the national campaign, Tate said.

“The ultimate goal is obviously still to win, to get enough delegates there to win the nomination,” Tate said in an interview. “I think there’s lot of secondary goals, to make sure that our and Dr. Paul’s views are represented at the convention, represented in the platform.”

“We want to make sure that the Republican Party understands that we are a major part of the Republican Party,” Tate added. “We’re not to be overlooked; we’re not to be taken for granted.”

It is not unusual for some losing candidates to have a role at the party’s national convention. Hillary Rodham Clinton got a prominent speaking spot at the Democratic convention in 2008. But Clinton had waged an epic primary battle with then-candidate Barack Obama, and her speech was designed to help unify the party.

Many of Paul’s libertarian views dovetail nicely with mainstream Republican ideas on limited government and low taxes. But Paul breaks with much of his party when he talks about American intervention abroad and government efforts to fight terrorism at home.

“Following the Constitution, don’t police the world, don’t participate in all this nation-building, cut spending, cut taxes, cut deficits — these are traditional Republican principles,” said David Fischer, vice chairman of Paul’s campaign in Iowa. “I consider the view of these Republicans who want to simply grow the size and scope of the government, that’s outside of Republican mainstream.”

There is precedent for Paul winning delegates in caucus states where he lost the initial vote. In 2008, during Paul’s first campaign for president, he finished a distant second in the Nevada caucuses, which Romney won with more than half the vote. At the GOP state convention three months later, Paul had so many supporters that he was poised to win some of Nevada’s national delegates when party leaders abruptly shut down the convention.

Later, the party’s executive committee tried to appoint its own delegation to the national convention and Paul’s supporters sued. The lawsuit failed but the two sides eventually reached a compromise that gave Paul some delegates to the national convention in St. Paul, Minn.

Paul, however, didn’t attend the 2008 convention. Instead, he held a rival rally in nearby Minneapolis.

This year, it might be better to accommodate Paul and his supporters rather than try to shut them out, said Rich Galen, a GOP strategist and former Gingrich aide who is neutral in the 2012 race.

Galen thinks Paul is guaranteed a speaking spot at the convention, and maybe a few concessions in the party platform, as long as they don’t deviate too much from mainstream Republican positions.

And what if Paul gets up at the convention and talks about slashing the military or repealing the Patriot Act?

“That’s just Ron Paul being Ron Paul,” Galen said. “It would make the next morning’s papers, but who cares..?”

Historic Veterans for Ron Paul march on the White House

Live Streaming Video – Veterans for Ron Paul March on The White House Monday February 20, 2012 (12 p.m. EST)

Ron Paul is the Choice of the Troops - Click image to watch live streaming coverage of the march on The White House beginning at 12 pm (EST) today.

Watch live streaming video of our military troops as they march on the White House for Ron Paul, stand in formation, then turn their backs on the White House (and President Barack Obama) as they salute the American flag while doing a silent prayer for all those who have died in war during Obama’s tenure in office.

http://www.ustream.tv/channel/wearechange (WeAreChange)

http://www.ustream.tv/channel/megmclain

http://www.adamvstheman.com/blog/ron-paul-is-the-choice-of-the-troops-livestream (AdamvstheMan.com)

http://www.ustream.tv/channel/veterans4ronpaul

http://www.prisonplanet.com/live-video-troops-march-on-white-house-in-support-of-ron-paul.html

http://www.ustream.tv/channel/megmclain#utm_campaign=ss-post-backlink&utm_source=9093086&utm_medium=social (Ustream.tv)

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 202 other followers