Waterboard An A-rab for Jesus
avascript:void(0);  javascript:void(0);
By Laurence M. Vance

In a recent column, Eric Margolis labeled the Republicans as “America’s champion of war and torture.” Those are some harsh words - harsh but true.
The recent release of the Bush torture memos and the revelation that the CIA waterboarded Abu Zubaydah 83 times and Khalid Sheik Mohammed 183 times before Bush claimed that we don’t torture has elicited a predictable response from conservative Christians who think the Republican Party is the party of God: silence.
It is also no surprise that a new survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press shows that of four major religious traditions in the United States (white evangelical Protestant, white non-Hispanic Catholic, white mainline Protestant, and unaffiliated), white evangelical Protestants are more likely to believe that the use of torture against suspected terrorists can often or sometimes be justified. In fact, the more often people attended church, the more likely they were to justify torture.
A similar poll commissioned last year by Faith in Public Life and Mercer University reported that almost 60 percent of Southern evangelicals believed that torture was often or sometimes justified.
When the Spanish did it, it was torture. When the Japanese did it, it was torture. When the Germans did it, it was torture. When the Khmer Rouge did it, it was torture. But when waterboarding was done by Americans under a Republican administration, it suddenly became an “enhanced interrogation technique.”
Such has not always been the case. Waterboarding-like techniques used by American soldiers during the Philippine Insurrection and the Vietnam War were condemned. But that was before the “war on terror” where anything goes in the name of “national security.”
“Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was not waterboarded 183 times,” says a Republican hack at Fox News. That number is “highly misleading” and a “vast inflation” because “the much-cited figure represents the number of times water was poured onto Mohammed’s face - not the number of times the CIA applied the simulated-drowning technique on the terror suspect.”
Okay, so how many “pours” does take to be waterboarded? If a prisoner is removed from his cell, taken to an interrogation room, forced to endure one “pour,” and then taken back to his cell - can we not say he was waterboarded because he only suffered one “pour”?
And what about Abu Zubaydah? In addition to being waterboarded, he had a collar wrapped around his neck, was smashed against a wall, was forced to stay in a pitch-dark box for hours, was stripped naked, was suspended from hooks in the ceiling, and was deprived of sleep. Is it not torture if these things only happened one time?
The strict constitutionalist at Fox, Judge Andrew Napolitano, who actually read the 175 pages of torture memos, sees things differently from the defenders of the Bush regime at his network: “This is not rocket science and it is not art. Everyone knows torture when they see it; and no amount of twisted logic can detract from its illegal horror, its moral antipathy, and its attack at core American values.”
Who are these CIA operatives that engage in waterboarding and other forms of torture? What kind of a man does such a thing? The FBI does profiles of serial killers. How about a profile of a CIA agent who tortures prisoners, in the interest of national security, of course?
Are these men Christians? I suppose they are. The majority of Americans claim to be a Christian of some sort. Can a Christian waterboard an A-rab for Jesus?
For the Christian, there is no other way to do it. The Bible says: “And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him” (Colossians 3:17). It also says that whatsoever we do, we should “do it heartily, as to the Lord” (Colossians 3:23). We should do everything “to the glory of God” (1 Corinthians 10:31).
Can a Christian smash someone against a wall in the name of the Lord Jesus? Can a Christian heartily lock someone in a dark box for hours at a time? Can a Christian deprive someone of sleep to the glory of God? Can a Christian give thanks to God while he hangs someone from the ceiling?
Sure he can, but not without violating the whole tenor of the New Testament.
Christians are told to put off anger, wrath, and malice (Colossians 3: , to not render evil for evil (1 Thessalonians 5:15), to not give offense (1 Corinthians 10:30), to abstain from all appearance of evil (1 Thessalonians 5:22), to not be a brawler (Titus 3:2), and to abhor that which is evil (Romans 12:9). I think this rules out waterboarding.
Okay, but suppose the perpetrators of torture in the CIA do not claim to be Christians and don’t care what the New Testament says? Well, does that mean it is okay if Christians cheer them on? If not, then what should Christians do? Should they just be indifferent?
John the Baptist told Herod “It is not lawful for thee to have her” when he married his brother’s wife (Matthew 14:4). He also told Roman soldiers to “Do violence to no man” (Luke 3:14). Why aren’t Christians doing likewise?
Why aren’t Christians letting the CIA and the military know that waterboarding is torture and that torture is wrong? Could it be that these institutions are filled with Christians? Could it be that Christians respect these institutions? Could it be that Christians trust these institutions? I think all of the above are true.
Where is the outrage from the evangelical community over these torture memos? I’ll tell you where. It is in the same place as the outrage over the invasion of Iraq, the thousands upon thousands of dead Iraqis, the over four thousand American soldiers who died for a lie, the bloodbath that Iraq has become, the Guantanamo prison camp, the CIA secret prisons, the destruction of liberty in America due to the war on terror, and America’s evil foreign policy.
Christians should be leaving the Republican Party in droves. Christians should be crawling on broken glass as penance for blindly supporting the Republican Party. Christians should be repenting in sackcloth and ashes for thinking the Republican Party was the party of God.
Instead, even as more and more crimes of the Bush administration come to light, I fear that Christians who are outraged, and rightly so, at the crimes of the Obama administration and the Democrats will look in the next election to the Republicans as their savior instead of the champions of war and torture.
America needs more Christians like John the Baptist instead of John Hagee.

Obama Supports Treaty Outlawing Gun Possession

As Lou Dobbs notes here, Obama is in favor of the ratifying CIFTA, the Inter-American Convention Against Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms. On its face, the treaty sounds reasonable because it would “prevent, combat, and eradicate the illicit manufacturing of and trafficking in firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials” (emphasis added). However, upon reading the bill we discover the following:

Stressing the need, in peace processes and post-conflict situations, to achieve effective control of firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials in order to prevent their entry into the illicit market.

Active content removed Active content removed

Obama has promised Mexican President Felipe Calderon that he would urge the Senate to take up CIFTA. He is doing this under the cover of the drug cartel violence in Mexico. Obama and Calderon quoted a statistic echoed by the corporate media that 90% of the weapons seized in Mexican raids were purchased from U.S. gun shops and a reason why the U.S. needs to ratify this treaty. In fact, this is a lie — only a mere 17% of guns found at Mexico crime scenes have been traced to the U.S.

CIFTA would bury the Second Amendment under “pertinent resolutions of the United Nations General Assembly.” It would criminalize ammunition reloading (defined as explosives manufacture) and gun assembly (including firearm kits and presumably breaking down weapons for cleaning or transport).

Language contained in the CIFTA treaty insists it respects “the principles of sovereignty, nonintervention, and the juridical equality of states.” Not mentioned is the fact the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties has a superior rank to national laws. If the CIFTA treaty is ratified without exception, it would kill U.S. sovereignty and lead the way to destroying the Second Amendment.

It should be noted that only the Senate needs to ratify the treaty. Article II, section 2, of the Constitution states that the president “shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two-thirds of the Senators present concur.”

The United States was one of the first signatories to CIFTA in November, 1997. The Convention was transmitted to the Senate in June 1998 and to this day awaits the Senate’s advice and consent. 29 of the 34 OAS member states have ratified CIFTA. Only the US, Canada, the Dominican Republic, Jamaica and St. Vincent & Grenadines have yet to do so

State of North Carolina
Office of the Governor
Beverly Eaves Perdue
Governor
Office of the Governor · Phone 919)733-4240 · Fax 919)733-2120 · Email: governor.office@nc.gov

Fellow state employees,

As you know, families and businesses across North Carolina are facing the effects of the
national economic crisis. While I am confident that North Carolina can meet the
challenges ahead, the current crisis has not spared state government. Since I became
governor in January, I have taken aggressive steps to meet my constitutional obligation to
balance the budget.

This week I received information that the budget shortfall for the current fiscal year will
exceed $3 billion. This news forced me to implement measures I had hoped to avoid.
Today I signed an executive order announcing a flexible furlough plan for teachers and
state employees – a decision I made after careful thought and consideration of all the
options available to me for balancing the state’s budget.

All teachers’ and state employees’ compensation will be reduced by an annualized
amount equivalent to 0.5 percent for the remainder of the fiscal year. In return, each
employee will receive 10 hours of flexible time off. I have asked the General Assembly
to pass legislation ensuring that your unused leave, service credit and health and
retirement benefits are held harmless, as well as any longevity pay for which you may be
eligible.

The commitment and dedication you show every day to your agencies and to your state
are much appreciated. I regret that circumstances force me to make this difficult decision.
I will ensure that North Carolina continues to pay its bills and provide essential services
to our citizens. Working together, I know that we will get through these tough times and
position North Carolina for a bright future.

Sincerely,
Bev Perdue

These things I believe: That government should butt out. That freedom is our most precious commodity and if we are not eternally vigilant, government will take it all away. That individual freedom demands individual responsibility. That government is not a necessary good but an unavoidable evil. That the executive branch has grown too strong, the judicial branch too arrogant and the legislative branch too stupid. That political parties have become close to meaningless. That government should work to insure the rights of the individual, not plot to take them away. That government should provide for the national defense and work to insure domestic tranquillity. That foreign trade should be fair rather than free. That America should be wary of foreign entanglements. That the tree of liberty needs to be watered from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. That guns do more than protect us from criminals; more importantly, they protect us from the ongoing threat of government. That states are the bulwark of our freedom. That states should have the right to secede from the Union. That once a year we should hang someone in government as an example to his fellows….

The reason this country continues its drift toward socialism and big nanny government is because too many people vote in the expectation of getting something for nothing, not because they have a concern for what is good for the country. A better educated electorate might change the reason many persons vote. If children were forced to learn about the Constitution, about how government works, about how this nation came into being, about taxes and about how government forever threatens the cause of liberty perhaps we wouldn't see so many foolish ideas coming out of the mouths of silly old men.

The DHS report warns law enforcement to be on guard against anyone who opposes illegal immigration, same-sex marriage, "free trade agreements," gun control, the "New World Order," "One World Government," the outsourcing of American jobs, the "perceived" threat to U.S. sovereignty by foreign powers, abortion, "declarations of martial law," "the creation of citizen detention camps," "suspension of the U.S. Constitution," or the abridgement of State authority. Also branded are people who believe in "end times" prophecies, and who "stockpile" food, ammunition, or firearms.

I dare say that at least 75% (or more) of the American people have beliefs that fall into one or more categories of the above list. If you are one of them, DHS suspects you of being a "rightwing extremist." But there is more.

The DHS report specifically warns law enforcement to be on guard against "disgruntled military veterans," especially veterans returning from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. You read it right.

Well, if anyone has a legitimate reason to be disgruntled, it is America's veterans. After taking an oath to defend and support America and the U.S. Constitution, they were ordered to fight a preemptive war of aggression in Iraq; they were ordered to fight without a Declaration of War; they were ordered to put their lives on the line, not for the safety and security of the American people, but for international bankers, the United Nations, and the "global economy." Then they returned home to a Department of Veteran's Affairs that treats them as second-class citizens: VA hospitals are often dirty and out-of-date; medical treatments are postponed; medications often take months to arrive; and much of the promised care is never delivered at all. If anyone has a right to be disgruntled, it is a military veteran.

That said, where is the evidence in the DHS report to substantiate the necessity for American law enforcement to be on guard against potential violence committed by military veterans? It doesn't exist. It is a blanket charge without any substantiation whatsoever. The same is true for the rest of the report. Without documentation, substantiation, or annotation, the report broadly brushes a host of American citizens as being potential "extremists" simply because of their political opinions. This is the same kind of political profiling that we saw in the Missouri report.

Veterans groups nationwide are rightfully "up in arms" over the DHS report. Feeling the wrath of public opinion, DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano yesterday "apologized" for "offending" veterans.

Fox News reported, "American Legion National Commander David Rehbein, who blasted the report earlier this week as incomplete and politically-biased, said he was pleased with Napolitano's apology." But not all veterans groups share Rehbein's spirit of forgiveness.

Pete Hegseth, chairman of Vets for Freedom, snarled, "It wasn't an apology in my view. It was one of those non-apology apologies. She was sorry that veterans were offended. She should either apologize for the content of the report as it stands or they should rewrite the report and reissue it." Hegseth has it right!

Napolitano did not apologize for the report; she only said she was sorry that vets were "offended" by the report. There is a vast difference. This is the typical cow manure that we are accustomed to from non-elected bureaucrats, especially federal bureaucrats.

And please notice that Napolitano offered no "apology" to pro-lifers, proponents of the Second Amendment, constitutionalists, Christians, or anyone else. She couldn't care less if any of these folks were offended. She was only sorry that veterans were offended.

House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) also rightly blasted the DHS report, saying its portrayal of veterans was "offensive and unacceptable."

House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Lamar Smith (R-Texas) said, "The rightwing report uses broad generalizations about veterans, pro-life groups, federalists and supporters of gun rights. That's like saying if you love puppies, you might be susceptible to recruitment by the Animal Liberation Front. It is ridiculous and deeply offensive to millions of Americans."

Ladies and gentlemen, the American people must put a stop to this burgeoning political profiling that is currently being forced upon law enforcement. I urge every reader of this column to immediately contact your U.S. House member and two U.S. Senators, demanding that they put a stop to this right now!

In the meantime, I believe we can also assume that the source of all of these reports is either Morris Dees and his Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) or the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), or both. If this is true (and we desperately need some attorneys who are willing to file lawsuits in which evidentiary material may be gleaned during discovery to substantiate these assumptions), the SPLC and ADL--and those government bureaucrats who assist them--need to be exposed and held accountable. The days of political "witch-hunting" must come to an end. Furthermore, the days of radical leftwing organizations, such as SPLC and ADL, being allowed to use federal and state police agencies to demonize and terrorize private citizens because of their political beliefs must also come to an end.

Obviously, DHS is still stinging from the embarrassment and setback of the Missouri report, in which three of last year's Presidential candidates (Ron Paul, Bob Barr, and myself) were personally named. In essence, people who voted for and/or supported any one of us were directly labeled as being potential dangerous "militia members." This blatant and outlandish accusation resulted in a maelstrom of protest, which concluded with the report being completely withdrawn. And this is exactly what people should demand in the case of the DHS report: it should be immediately withdrawn!

The current DHS report does not include personal names, except the name of Timothy McVeigh, who is used as an example of what any "disgruntled military veteran" could become. It does, however, regurgitate the familiar themes of the Missouri report: the same groups; the same beliefs; the same generalizations; the same innuendoes; the same broad brushing; the same warnings; the same mischaracterizations; the same political profiling.

Constitution Party Meetups Everywhere!

 

Find one in your local area here: 

http://constitutionparty.meetup.com/all/

Would you like to see a state of the art  Constitution Party National Website?  Would you like to see more and better CP promotional materials? Would you like to see the Constitution Party on the ballot in every state? 

Then...Please Support the Constitution Party!

The Constitution Party strives to be a viable political solution to the crises our country is facing. We rely entirely on contributions from concerned citizens like you to continue our work to restore our liberties and our Republic.

Please select a method for contributing:

More people are living alone, more children are being raised by single parents and more grown-up children are living with their parents than ever before, according to the Office for National Statistics.

One expert said that the in-depth annual study was final confirmation that the nuclear family had become “a museum piece”.

The Social Trends report made clear, however, that the most radical changes had been to child-rearing and marriage.

Its figures showed that 30 per cent of women under 30 had given birth by the age of 25, while 24 per cent had married: the first time that having children had become the first major milestone of adult life, ahead of marriage. This was in sharp contrast to their parents’ generation. In 1971 three-quarters of women were married by 25, and half had given birth. The statistics also showed that:

Š the number of adults living alone doubled in a generation, from 6 per cent to 12 per cent, because of a combination of death, divorce and marrying at a later age;

Š single-parent households nearly tripled from 4 per cent of the total to 11 per cent between 1971 and 2008;

Š the percentage of households comprising the traditional nuclear family – a couple with children – fell from 52 per cent to 36 per cent over the same period;

Š the number of married couples hit the lowest level, in real terms, since 1895, with 237,000 marriages in England and Wales in 2006, down from a peak of 471,000 during the Second World War;

Š some 1.66 million children were being brought up by an unmarried couple, up from one million 10 years ago. The number brought up by married parents dropped from 9.57 million to 8.32 million.

The figures were published two months after official statistics showed that the annual rate of teenage pregnancy in England had risen to 42 in every 1,000, despite a £286 million government campaign to tackle the problem. The figures reinforced Britain’s position as the teenage pregnancy capital of Europe.

Dr Richard Woolfson, a leading family expert and child psychologist, said: “The nature of family life has changed significantly in the last 30 years. The traditional nuclear family of two parents and 2.4 children has become a museum piece.

“The single-parent family carried all sorts of social and moral judgments back then [in 1971]. That is just not the case any more.

“The couple who do not get married is now socially acceptable in a way that it never was before.”

Dr Woolfson said it was impossible to say if children raised outside the traditional family were unhappier, but he added: “You have to ask what sort of families will today’s children create. Where will they go?”

Iain Duncan Smith, the former Conservative leader and chairman of the Centre for Social Justice, said the figures “mattered hugely”. He added: “One in 12 children will experience their parents breaking up by the age of five if those parents are married. But that figure is one in two if the parents are cohabiting. Marriage is not just a piece of paper.”

Mr Duncan Smith called for the tax system to favour those who choose marriage over living together. “It is not our job, as politicians, to lecture, but the problem has been caused by successive UK governments centring on the child, and forgetting the parent,” he said.

“We now know that children suffer hugely if they don’t get the balance of two parents in their upbringing. Those with two parents are less likely to take drugs, more likely to do well at school, more likely to get jobs.”

The ONS figures also showed that a rise in the number of people going to university and a decade-long house price bubble had meant that 300,000 more people under the age of 34 lived at home than in 2001. In 2008, 29 per cent of men under the age of 34 lived at home with their parents, up from 27 per cent seven years earlier.

The ONS said the Divorce Reform Act of 1969, which made it easier to dissolve a marriage, was one of the main causes for the radical change in families.

Critics of the Government point out that the tax system has also been altered to the advantage of unmarried couples.

The last tax break for married couples, the married couples’ allowance, was abolished in 2000. State benefits, and especially Gordon Brown’s flagship tax credit system, pay more to single mothers than to two-parent families.

Patricia Morgan, the author of The War between the State and the Family, said: “There is discrimination on the one hand, but on the other there are major benefit incentives for a single woman to have children. It’s a mug’s game, getting married.”

However, the ONS figures suggested that those who got married were staying together for longer. An average marriage lasted 11.6 years in 2005, up from less than 10 years in the mid-1990s.

Sue Palmer, a child expert and author of Toxic Childhood, said many of the statistics relating to the breakdown in the traditional family were linked indirectly to separate figures showing that 30 per cent of girls and 31 per cent of boys were overweight or obese. She said: “The more parents work, the more the children stay at home and are not playing outside with their friends.”

A spokesperson for the Department for Children, Schools and Families said: “We know that the make-up of the family unit is changing but that doesn’t mean the family is breaking down. It is Government’s role to support families in all shapes and sizes, which is why our policies are aimed at empowering and advising parents to make the best choices for their children. We are investing £250 million in local services for parents, particularly those in challenging circumstances and last December the first ever Government relationship summit looked at what more we can do to support children and families and give extra help to families experiencing relationship breakdown.”

A Department for Work and Pensions spokesperson said: "We support all struggling families, giving them the real help they need. Modern families come in all shapes and sizes but every family with one child, where one adult is working full-time at minimum wage took home £292 a week in 2008 compared to £182 in 1999 – a real terms increase of 24 per cent.

"Child benefit, Tax credits and other benefits help all working familiies and through the welfare reform bill we are putting new expectations on workless parents to ensure they take up the support we offer."

Obama’s Followers: More Reprehensible than the Neocons

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars
April 17, 2009

It is bad enough that Keith Olbermann has lost any sense of objectivity when it comes to the Tea Parties, but it is far worse that he invited the scurrilous Janeane Garofalo on his show. Garofalo wasted precious little time (at 8.25 into the video here) dismissing millions of people opposed to Obama’s policies (that is to say the policies of Bush continued).

	Active content removed Active content removed
	Keith Olbermann and the reprehensible Janeane Garofalo slander the majority of Americans as racist.

Garofalo called all of us to the man and woman racist. Regrettably, Keith Olbermann agreed with her.

It should be obvious by now these people are worse — more rabid and mean-spirited and pathological — than the Bush neocons who managed to kill more than a million Iraqis and set the stage for what shall come under Obama by the premeditated whacking the underpinnings of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

Neocons rarely displayed such ugliness. Instead of abusing their enemies with foul epithets, they simply ignored them. Garofalo and Olbermann, however, seem to relish in such despicable attacks. Prior to inviting Garofalo on his show, Olbermann ticked off a series of adolescent insults directed at the “teabaggers” — meant in the pornographic sense, as eluded — that is to say anybody and everybody who believes cranking up the national debt to is a disaster in the making.

Olbermann and Garofalo are cheerleaders for more of the same. In fact, they are enemies of the people who they snidely dismiss as racists.

As John Stauber notes, the Obama administration has done a swell job hijacking the antiwar movement. MoveOn.org, Americans United for Change, USAction, and other so-called liberal organizations — so vociferous when Bush was running things — have uniformly failed to condemn Obama’s Afghanistan policy. Jon Soltz, the head of VoteVets, went so far as to come out in support of Obama’s Afghan strategy in an Op Ed with The Huffington Post. “Liberal groups don’t want to distract from passing Obama’s enormous domestic agenda,” Soltz declared. “And officials with some of these groups don’t want to lose inside influence with the White House.”

Incidentally, MoveOn, USAction, and VoteVets are all Soros operations.

They are no longer opposed to the slaughter of Afghan children now that the former cigar store Indian George Bush is out of office.

It is no coincidence Olbermann and Garofalo are calling those of us opposed to more of the same as racists at the same time a “leaked” DHS report warns of “rightwing extremism” (categorized by the SPLC and ADL as not merely extremism, but racist and white supremacist extremism).

It is no mistake the elite have decided to play the race card. It is a near perfect way to demonize the opposition and discount their arguments. Few will oppose marching said racists off to FEMA camps where they will be reeducated to accept the global elite’s master plan for worldwide slavery and misery — or short of that done away with.

For now, the fake liberals do not believe in the existence of FEMA camps anymore than the fake conservative Glenn Beck or his friends working in the Hearst empire do.

In the end, though, Olbermann and Garofalo and the foundation supported liberal Reichswehr will fall victim to a Night of the Long Knives because the global elite have about as much use for them as they do for the rest of us.

Our only hope is that we can awaken the American people to the scam in progress and turn the juggernaut around before it ends in disaster and a eugenics nightmare.

In the meantime we have no choice but to endure Olbermann’s smirk and Garofalo’s snide remarks.

Rick Perry’s Cynical Effort to Exploit the Tea Party Movement and States’ Rights

Texas Governor Rick Perry says the state may secede. Perry made the comment after a Tax Day Tea Party speech he delivered at the Austin City Hall.

	Active content removed Active content removed
	Gov. Rick Perry speaking to about 1,000 participants at the Austin Tea Party on April 15.

“An animated Perry told the crowd,” reports the Houston Chronicle, “that officials in Washington have abandoned the country’s founding principles of limited government. He said the federal government is strangling Americans with taxation, spending and debt.” He later told the media Texas might want to secede from the union. He then said, well, not really.

According to Politico, Perry’s theatrical rejection of Obama’s “stimulus” (debt to the bankers) money has “made him popular among the big government opponents who attended Wednesday’s ‘tea party’ events across the nation.”

Instead these opponents to the banker plan to stack up debt for the foreseeable future are unwittingly falling victim to Perry’s cynical brand of election politics. Perry is running against fellow Republican Kay Bailey Hutchison, who he bombastically defines as part of the Washington problem, not the Texas solution.

Part of his election strategy is to back House Concurrent Resolution 50 confirming the Tenth Amendment.

“I believe that our federal government has become oppressive in its size, its intrusion on the lives of our citizens, and its interference with the affairs of our state,” he declared on April 14. “That is why I am here today to express my unwavering support for efforts all across our country to reaffirm states’ rights affirmed by the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.”

“He’s all upset about the bailout money, TARP money, the stimulus money. This is great stuff,” gushed Rush Limbaugh, who then said the Department of Homeland Security had Perry in mind when it wrote the right-wing extremist paper posted on Infowars and then broadcast across the corporate media.

Active content removed Active content removed

Alex Jones critiques Rick Perry’s Tenth Amendment speech, April 15, 2009

Please. Rick Perry is a consummate insider who is merely exploiting the tea party movement for his own shrewd political ends. He was instrumental in the development of the Trans-Texas Corridor, part of the CFR’s plan to build a “North American Community.” He was at the center of a plan to privatize Texas Utilities and sell them off to global investment firms, including the bankster outfits Goldman Sachs and Credit Suisse First Boston (see Aaron Dykes, Gov. Perry Summoned to Bilderberg While Insider Trading Charges Mount in Related Texas Buyout). He also advocated subjecting Texans to the HPV vaccine.

“The NAFTA ’superhighway’ linking Mexico, the U.S. and Canada is already underway. A Texas legislator tried to stop this massive mile-wide structure, but Texas Gov. Rick Perry vetoed the bill. The governor is a Bilderberger with the same CFR viewpoint,” Don Snyder wrote for the Napa Valley Register.

Rick Perry attended the Bilderberg Group meeting in Istanbul, Turkey, in 2007. “Robert Black, the governor’s press secretary, said the governor was invited to attend and speak about state-federal relations,” the Dallas Morning News reported on May 31, 2007. It should be noted that state governors are often invited to Bilderberg meetings to be groomed for the presidency, as Bill Clinton was groomed at the Bilderberg meeting in 1991 held at Baden-Baden, Germany.

In June of 2007, Ron Paul said Perry’s elbow rubbing with the cabal of notorious Constitution-hating globalists and royalty should be investigated under the Logan Act. The Logan Act is a federal law that forbids unauthorized citizens from negotiating with foreign governments and is a felony punishable with imprisonment of up to three years.

The CFR, with Rick Perry’s help, is working to convert “the U.S. from a sovereign Constitution Republic into a servile member of a one-world dictatorship,” as Congressmen John R. Rarick once described it.

He is not a friend of the Constitution and the Tenth Amendment.

1. Majority Of U.S. States Join Sovereignty Movement, Assert 10th Amendment Rights
2. Texas Gov. Perry Favors Unconstitutional Checkpoints
3. The States Are Not Branches Of The Federal Government!
4. Does Perry’s Support Of 10th Amendment Bill Make Him A Dangerous Right-wing Extremist?
5. Eleven States Declare Sovereignty Over Obama’s Action
6. Rick Santelli: Chicago Tea Party in July
7. Bill Seeks To Withhold Highway Funds To States Who Don’t Comply With Real ID
8. Firestorm Brewing Between U.S. States and Federal Government
9. Tennessee Introduces Sovereignty Resolution
10. States Rediscover the Tenth Amendment
11. Ron Paul Is Third Party Ticket In Montana
12. Increasing Number of States Declaring Sovereignty

The “End the Fed” Protests are the (Secret) Road to World Government

Two recent Infowars.com articles (my article and the JustGetUsThere article) in the past few days have discussed how the mass media is hijacking the patriot and Truth movements by (1) attempting to take over the debates about the issues that the patriot groups have been discussing for decades by suddenly, all-at-once blasting them into the mass media in a twisted, vacuous, and manipulated way, and (2) by taking over the anti-Fed “revolution,” also by spotlighting it vacuously in the corporatist mass media. But we know that if the New World Order wants to hijack the patriot and Truth movements, they won’t just do it from these angles, and instead they (A) will attack it from many angles, and more importantly, they (B) will use their attack to, additionally, set up their Brave New World. This article is about (B), and what I want to suggest is that the New World Order is deliberately false-flag-attacking the Fed in order to ultimately destroy it, leaving the perception of a void in the financial world, wherein they will fill that void with THEIR choice of a new banking and money system: global currency, global bank, global governance/government. More specifically, here’s what I theorize is commencing:

1. The New World Order is using the corporatist mass media to co-opt the real anti-Fed revolt (originally started by WeAreChange), in order to blend it with a fake anti-Fed revolt that they are setting up, in order to incite a broad anti-Fed revolution among the US citizenry, which should hit high gear later this year, if not by summer.

2. The New World Order will use what I just stated in 1, and the pre-planned and staged problems with the increasingly weakening banks and US dollar (which will ultimately collapse fully), in order to modify or abolish the Fed and the current money system.

3. And the New World Order will present a specific solution to this pre-planned scenario I just stated in 2 in order to replace the current banking and money system with, they will tell us, a ‘better’ system: a world banking and money system

	The lies and contradiction of Obama are so stark, that even the fluoridated, TV-controlled, nearly illiterate Americans can’t help but see ‘the Obama deception,’ to use Alex Jones’s phrase.

(As a quick aside, let me say that abolishing the money system, as mentioned in 2, through hyperinflation — which is set to start any time – or other means, is critical to the New World Order’s set-up of the Brave New World, since abolishing the money system has the power to shock and clean-the-slate of the average citizen so profoundly that it will petrify the average citizen into doing literally whatever the New World Order slaughter-force wishes, just as we saw happened in Nazi Germany. This is the point of “shock doctrine”, to use Naomi Klein’s phrase from her book.)

Now let’s restate the issue as simply as possible so we understand it very clearly: The New World Order has not only hijacked the revolt against the Federal Reserve that WeAreChangers originally started, but furthermore, the New World Order is going to use it to bring in world government!

They can do this because the average citizen is not well-educated in the real issues going on like the WeAreChangers were when they first started the Fed revolt, and the average citizen is thus easily co-opted regarding this revolt against the Fed. There has never been a greater danger to the patriot and Truth movements than right now: we don’t have a citizenry that is fully awake, and thus we don’t have a citizenry that will see they are being tricked into revolt when they zombically watch Fox News, for example, talk about the anti-Fed protests. Given the present discontentedness of the citizenry over the state of the country, and their being glued to the TV, they will never figure any of this out, and in their frustration they will merely react unthinkingly, thus swarming into a New World Order controlled fake anti-Fed revolution. We are in danger of having them join the fake, vacuous revolt that is brewing with the words of the Beck’s, Coulter’s, and Hannity’s of the world, falling right into the trap like a hungry and desperate fox sticking his paw into the hunter’s trap. The New World Order wants to take over the patriot and Truth movements before the real movements can get to them first.

The mainstream corporatist media is interested in publicizing the Federal Reserve protests, and they are interested in merging and joining with these protests, because if the mass media can easily get an unawakened US citizenry to reactionistically and passionately hate the Federal Reserve, then the New World Order can come in and say, with a big smile: “Oh, you don’t like the Federal Reserve that has failed you, ok, then we will change it or abolish it for you, because we want to help you—after all, we are working for the people in this ‘democracy’.” It is clear that we are heading in this sort of a direction since the corporate press is publicizing this phony revolt as they are. If the mass media can take over the ant-Fed revolt, then they can fabricate an impetus to destroy the Fed? Why on earth would they want to do this when the Fed is the milk-and-honey of the US-arm of the New World Order? Answer: as stated, if you want to set up a world government based on a world banking and money system, you need to destroy or modify the old national system first. And to do that they will use the corporatist mainstream media to all-of-a-sudden tell the people how horrible the banking system and Federal Reserve are (as seems to be starting since last fall), watch the people react, and then the government can tell us they will give us a solution to the Fed system — where the solution is to change or destroy it, replacing it with a ‘more secure’ world government system. And just like in 1913, they will tell us that “it’s what the people want!”, and that setting up such a system is the way to prohibit anything like this from happening again. This is classic problem-reaction-solution, just like Alex Jones has talked about hundreds of times:

Problem: the Fed

Reaction: protest and revolt against the Fed

Solution: modify or destroy the Fed (i.e., replace it with a global reserve bank) — i.e., set up the New World Order.

So, in light of this scenario, it is the blind, unawake citizenry who will help set up the world government, if this scenario and this theory is correct and plays out. Isn’t this the way it always works, though? Luckily, we have a chance to notice this beforehand this time, in order to prevent it.

I theorize that this same sort of a problem-reaction-solution scenario could be implemented in other ways, too, such as with blending or replacing national governments with world government:

Problem: expose national government corruption and failures

Reaction: people protest and revolt against the national governments

Solution: either blend national governments by with world government, or destroy national governments in favor of world governments — i.e., set up the New World Order.

(As a side note, it is speculative to presume so, but it almost appears that the mass media is leading up to this sort of a problem-reaction-solution set-up in order to get the citizenry to finally say “enough is enough” with the government. For why else would ‘anti-war Obama’ bomb Pakistan within days of the Inauguration? The lies and contradiction of Obama are so stark, that even the fluoridated, TV-controlled, nearly illiterate Americans can’t help but see ‘the Obama deception,’ to use Alex Jones’s phrase. Another possibility is, however, that the New World Order could try to keep the current US system in place and put its puppet rebels into offices and make them appear to be part of the burgeoning revolution—this is sort of like what appears to be starting up now. The reader is left to theorize which is most likely the come to be.)

How many times have we seen this sort of pattern emerge? Answer: It is the story of history. For example, through the corporatists’ mass media that the average American keeps their mind glued to, they have been given the ‘problems’ of Hitler, Vietnam, Osama, and Saddam, and the ‘solution’ to these ‘problems’ that the corporatist mass media talked us into was war. Problem-reaction-solution again. Here’s another example: after World War II, Americans were told there was another problem: that sole cause of World War II was our supposed innate human madness and violence that led humanity to collectively lose their minds and create World War II (rather than the correct story: we were tricked into fighting), and the ‘solution’ Americans were presented with and were suckered into was to set up the now ultra-massive mental health industry. Over and over, problem-reaction-solution, and we are tricked into fighting for our own demise. Just like when we pay taxes and pay for the existence of the government all, in the end, in order to finance our FEMA camps. All this comes about through problem-reaction-solution, and we are currently living right in the middle the largest problem-reaction-solution operation ever: the one that is meant to set up the New World Order. And most importantly, as my last article pointed out, it is the rapidly-growing Truth and patriot movements that the New World Order is set to use in order to carry out this greatest-of-all problem-reaction-solution operation!

Does this mean we no longer protest New World Order monstrosities, such as the Fed? Of course not. It just means we have to adjust our minds more to the multi-dimensionality of the attack of the enemy –- know thy enemy — which is something we need to do now, not later, so it’s good we have these forewarnings.

Research related links