Monthly Archives: May 2009

Reporters threatened with arrest for filming private Federal Reserve building

Jones Report | April 13, 2009

Reporters from INFOWARS.COM were harassed and threatened with arrest in downtown Kansas City, Missouri after filming the local branch of the private Federal Reserve building.

Security guards working for the bank approached the reporters at a city park that houses the National WWI memorial and demanded that they provide their names and disclose why they were filming the building.

After Aaron Dykes refused to provide his full name, he was told to leave public property immediately or face arrest because the bank was concerned about what he was filming– despite the fact that the female security guard repeatedly admitted he had done nothing wrong. In the face of Free Speech under the First Amendment, as well as common sense, the other reporter, Rob Jacobson was also told to leave despite complying with the request to provide his name.

“Officer Booth”, the female private security guard for the Federal Reserve, dared to pronounce that he was “guilty by association.”

When this reason was challenged, the stupefied “Officer Collins” told reporters that they were not to ask anymore questions and should in fact leave immediately. What jurisdiction they had– if any– is unclear, as the cameramen were approached on city property.

In some respects, this is hardly surprising in the same state that issued the secret MIAC report to police– instructing them to watch for “potential terrorists” who might be identified by their support for Ron Paul, bumper stickers of the USA flag or who hold sentiments against the Federal Reserve bank.

The Federal Reserve– who have branches at some 38 locations across the country– have repeatedly trampled on the rights of free speech and attempted to challenge anyone daring to film their building. It is clear they regard any press as a threat.

It happened to an unaffiliated cameraman outside the Washington D.C. location who was told no filming of any ‘federal’ buildings was allowed under any circumstances unless special clearance was given by the Fed’s press office.

We Are Change founder Luke Rudkowski was also challenged by a security officer outside of the Federal Reserve’s New York location who demanded to see what had been filmed under threat of arrest (as documented in his activist film ‘Dedicated’).

Shockingly, it has also been revealed that military intelligence spied on peaceful demonstrators who met simultaneously at “End the Fed” rallies across the country, including Alex Jones & Wayne Paul, brother of Congressman Ron Paul.

The stifling of free speech and the attempt to intimidate reporters and legitimate protesters is despicable.

The outrage over the privately owned bank has grown as more & more members of the public have realized that this entity– which has been given the power to print our money– is not a part of the U.S. government but a deception organization hiding behind the name “Federal.”

Rep. Ron Paul, among others, has led the effort to audit this unaccountable bank and end its ability to inflate the money supply, and ultimately to target its value.

Its chairman Ben Bernanke has refused to tell Congress who it has lent money to under the TARP bailout plan, and in what amount– despite its relevance to dealing with the current financial crisis.

The compounding acts of secrecy– at the ground level and in the halls of the U.S. government– should sound alarm bells for the sleeping American people that this bank must no longer control the economic policies of this nation.

9/11 Commission Counsel: Government Agreed to Lie About 9/11

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Tuesday, April 14, 2009

9/11 Commission Counsel: Government Agreed to Lie About 9/11 140409top

The senior counsel to the 9/11 Commission – John Farmer – says that the government agreed not to tell the truth about 9/11, echoing the assertions of fellow 9/11 Commission members who concluded that the Pentagon were engaged in deliberate deception about their response to the attack.

Farmer served as Senior Counsel to the 9/11 Commission (officially known as the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States), and is also a former New Jersey Attorney General.

featured stories   9/11 Commission Counsel: Government Agreed to Lie About 9/11
John Farmer
John Farmer

Farmer’s book about his experiences working for the Commission is entitled The Ground Truth: The Story Behind America’s Defense on 9/11, and is set to be released tomorrow.

The book unveils how “the public had been seriously misled about what occurred during the morning of the attacks,” and Farmer himself states that “at some level of the government, at some point in time…there was an agreement not to tell the truth about what happened.”

Only the very naive would dispute that an agreement not to tell the truth is an agreement to lie. Farmer’s contention is that the government agreed to create a phony official version of events to cover-up the real story behind 9/11.

The publisher of the book, Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, states that, “Farmer builds the inescapably convincing case that the official version not only is almost entirely untrue but serves to create a false impression of order and security.”

In August 2006, the Washington Post reported, “Some staff members and commissioners of the Sept. 11 panel concluded that the Pentagon’s initial story of how it reacted to the 2001 terrorist attacks may have been part of a deliberate effort to mislead the commission and the public rather than a reflection of the fog of events on that day, according to sources involved in the debate.”

The report revealed how the 10-member commission deeply suspected deception to the point where they considered referring the matter to the Justice Department for criminal investigation.

“We to this day don’t know why NORAD [the North American Aerospace Command] told us what they told us,” said Thomas H. Kean, the former New Jersey Republican governor who led the commission. “It was just so far from the truth. . . . It’s one of those loose ends that never got tied.”

Farmer himself is quoted in the Post article, stating, “I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described …. The [Norad air defense] tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public for two years…. This is not spin. This is not true.”

As we also reported in August 2006, released portions of NORAD tapes from 9/11, which were featured in a Vanity Fair article, do little to answer skeptic’s questions about the impotence of U.S. air defenses on 9/11 and if anything only increase focus on the incompatibility of the official version of events with what is actually known to have taken place on that day.

Make no mistake, Farmer is not saying that 9/11 was an inside job, however, Farmer’s testimony, along with that of his fellow 9/11 Commission members, conclusively demonstrates that, whatever really happened on 9/11, the official story as told to the public on the day and that which remains the authorities’ version of events today, is a lie – according to the very people who were tasked by the government to investigate it. This is a fact that no debunker or government apologist can ever legitimately deny.

Government, Big Pharma Push Bill to Drug America’s Mothers

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars
April 14, 2009

It’s called the Melanie Blocker Stokes MOTHERS Act and if passed it will turn countless women into lifelong customers for Big Pharma. It was killed in the Senate last year but it was reintroduced in January of this year. Democrat Senator Robert Menendez from New Jersey, home to a large number of drug companies, and Democrat Richard Durbin are the main sponsors of the bill in the Senate (S. 1375).

featured stories   Government, Big Pharma Push Bill to Drug Americas Mothers
John Farmer
Former actress and supermodel Brooke Shields supports the government and Big Pharma effort to convince women they need to be on dangerous psychotropic drugs.

In a March 30, 2009 speech on the House floor, the original sponsor of the bill, Illinois Democrat Bobby Rush claimed that “60 to 80 percent of new mothers experience symptoms of postpartum depression while the more serious condition, postpartum psychosis, affects up to 20 percent of women who have recently given birth.” In response to a House vote to pass the legislation on the same day, Rush said: “H. R. 20 will finally put significant money and attention into research, screening, treatment and education for mothers suffering from this disease.”

The bill was moved to the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pension Committee on March 30 where it will be “marked up” in the near future. The legislation is backed by the U.S. Senate H.E.L.P. committee, chaired by Senator Edward Kennedy, and supported by president Obama.

Evelyn Pringle, a columnist for Scoop Independent News, writes that the “true goal of the promoters of this Act is to transform women of child bearing age into life-long consumers of psychiatric treatment by screening women for a whole list of ‘mood’ and ‘anxiety’ disorders and not simply postpartum depression.” In short, the medical industry and Big Pharma want to deem pregnancy a mental illness and prescribe dangerous psychotropic drugs.

“The Mothers Act has the net affect of reclassifying the natural process of pregnancy and birth as a mental disorder that requires the use of unproven and extremely dangerous psychotropic medications (which can also easily harm the child). The bill was obviously written by the Big Pharma lobby and its passage into law would be considered laughable except that it is actually happening,” writes Byron Richards for NewsWithViews.

The act would mandate health care professionals indoctrinate pregnant women into mental health treatment “options” (prescribe dangerous drugs) for mild depression-like symptoms experienced during or following pregnancy.

“It is my understanding that the process of birth, the intimate bonding of mother and child, and the placing of significant responsibility on the father is all part of a healthy culture and the backbone of the fabric that makes strong families and consequently our great nation. I fail to see why we need laws that force health care professionals to emphasize the idea that the process is some type of mental illness affecting 80% of all women – what a bogus pile of crap,” Richards wrote last month.

The following members of Congress are on Kennedy’s H.E.L.P. committee:

Lisa Murkowski, AK (R) 202-224-6665
John McCain, (AZ) (R) 202-224-2235
Christopher Dodd (CT) (D) 202-224-2823
Johnny Isakson (GA) (R) 202-224-3643
Tom Harkin (IA) (D) 202-224-3254
Pat Roberts (KS) (R) 202-224-4774
Edward Kennedy (MA) (D) 202-224-4543
Barbara Mikulski (MD) (D) 202-224-4654
Richard Burr (NC) (R) 202-224-3154
Kay Hagan (NC) (D) 202-224-6342
Gregg Judd (NH) (R) 202-224-3324
Jeff Bingaman (NM) (D) 202-224-5521
Sherrod Brown (OH) (D) 202-224-2315
Tom Coburn (OK) (R) 202-224-5754
Jeff Merkley (OR) (D) 202-224-3753
Bob Casey (PA) (D) 202-224 6324
Jack Reed (RI) (D) 202-224-4642
Alexander Lamar (TN) (R) 202-224-4944
Orrin Hatch (UT) (R) 202-224-5251
Bernard Sanders (VT) (I) 202-224-5141
Patty Murray (WA) (D) 202-224-2621
Michael Enzi (WY) (R) 202-224-3424

Call and let them know pregnancy is not a mental illness and America’s mothers are not to be considered lifelong “customers” for Big Pharma.

Republicans and Democrats Determined to Turn Tea Parties into Circus Sideshow

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars
April 14, 2009

It’s not enough the disinfo operative Glenn Beck and the neocons posing as Republicans led by Fox News are attempting to undermine grassroots efforts to undermine and render politically correct — for milquetoast Republicans — the grassroots tea party movement. Now the sinister organization ACORN, funded to the hilt by the globalist George Soros and the one-world foundations, has piled on.

featured stories   Republicans and Democrats Determined to Turn Tea Parties into Circus Sideshow
John Farmer
Arianna Huffington will help the Republicans make the tea bag movement a circus sideshow.

“Some believe ACORN, which has been under scrutiny for accusations of voter fraud, is preparing to crash some of the tea parties. But ACORN says it is only helping to organize dozens of rallies on the same day in support of President Obama’s first budget,” reports Fox News.

ACORN spokesman Brian Kettenring pretends he lives in a vacuum where there is no corporate media. “This is the first we’ve heard of these so-called ‘tea parties.’ And, frankly, a bunch of small get-togethers by fringe conservative activists dedicated to simply saying ‘no’ is of little interest to us…. The idea that ACORN is out to disrupt these meet-ups of fringe activists is yet another conservative fantasy.”

On April 7, however, Jeff Poor, writing for the Business & Media Institute, mentioned Fox’s Neil Cavuto’s report on the plan to disrupt tea parties around the country. “Cavuto reported that the Tax Day tea party protests on April 15 will be ‘infiltrated’ by their political opponents and led by left-wing activist organizations. He specifically named Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN),” Poor wrote.

Arianna Huffington has set up a website for so-called citizen journalists to infiltrate the protests, according to Poor. Huffington is also connected to the one-worlder Soros through his Democrat “Shadow Party,” according to the neocon duo of David Horowitz and Richard Poe (Horowitz and Poe are not necessarily opposed to big money networks and political operatives, so long as the networks are comprised of neocons and big war machine government Republicans).

“The Huffington Post wants to have citizen journalists at as many of these events as possible,” writes Arthur Delaney for Huffpo.

It is reported followers of the wannabe CIA employee and Democrat operative Markos Moulitsas Zuniga and his Daily Kos crew will also “report” on (disrupt) tea parties around the country. Zuniga posted the following on his website on April 7 in yet another underhanded attempt to link the Fox News faux conservatives (neocons) to the murder of three cops in Pittsburgh:

Dear Conservatives,

If having hilarious tea bagging parties keeps you guys from shooting people up, then I heartily endorse them.

Hugs and kisses,

kos

It is unfortunate the tea party movement was hijacked by neocon Republicans and now serves as a punching bag instead of an anti-tax tea bag for the foundation liberals and the globalist minions of Soros. Fox News, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Newt Gingrich and the statist, one-worlder Republicans — who have no problem with government and the bankster debt expanding forever, so long as neocons are running the show — have effectively disarmed a movement originally created by the Libertarian Party of Illinois in 2008.

“Never mind that the original point of the Tea Parties, so far as I can tell, was completely libertarian in nature and was to be as much a protest of the Republicans as it was of the Democrats,” writes Mark Thompson. “Movement conservatives saw an opportunity to co-opt it — and they did.”

Thompson explains how Republicans have loaded up the tea party movement with their pet causes — “gay marriage, affirmative action programs in government hiring policies, and just about everything else that movement conservatives oppose even more vehemently now that they’ve been beaten — badly — in consecutive national elections.”

In fact, the Fox News and the Republican leadership have subverted the tea party movement because it represents an effective grassroots way to organize against the corporatist and bankster plan to increase the size of government and load-up on the federal debt.

Of course, the globalist bankers in control of both the Democrat and Republican parties are not about to let that happen.

On April 15, as demonstrations kick off around the country with Republicans in control and steering the show — and the ACORN, Kos, and Huffpo Democrats in opposition — the tea party movement will be reduced to an absurd and partisan politics circus sideshow of the kind the corporate media loves.

GIVE Mandatory Service Act Strips First Amendment of “Volunteers”

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars
March 24, 2009

On March 18, Rep. George Miller, a Democrat from California, tacked an amendment on H.R. 1388, entitled “Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act,” or GIVE (to government), Obama’s plan to require mandatory service for all able young people. Miller’s amendment will “prohibit organizations from attempting to influence legislation; organize or engage in protests, petitions, boycotts, or strikes; and assist, promote, or deter union organizing,” according to GovTrack.us, a site that tracks Congress.

featured stories   GIVE Mandatory Service Act Strips First Amendment of Volunteers
Obama’s call for a “Civilian Security Force” during a campaign speech in Colorado Springs, Colorado.

In other words, Obama’s “volunteer corps” act, passed by the House with a 321-105 margin and requiring the government to develop a plan for indentured servitude, would deny millions of people their right to oppose and organize against government legistation under the First Amendment. “This is as close to a sedition act, a violation of 1st Amendment rights, as has been proposed in recent history. A basic right as a part of our natural, inalienable rights, is to resist government. Our founders not only knew it was a right but it was a responsibility. This legislation begins to break that down significantly,” writes Gary Wood for the Examiner.

GIVE (up your rights) will conscript millions of young people, put them in uniforms and send them packing to 4-year “public service” academies where they will be indoctrinated and trained to become “public sector leaders.”

GIVE was passed by the House on March 18 by an overwhelming bipartisan vote of 321 to 105. “At this moment of economic crisis, when so many people are in need of help and so much needs to be done, this could not be more urgent,” said Obama. “It is up to every one of us to do his or her small part to make the world a better place.”

Under section 6104 of the bill, entitled “Duties,” in subsection B6, the legislation states that a commission will be set up to investigate, “Whether a workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people could be developed, and how such a requirement could be implemented in a manner that would strengthen the social fabric of the Nation and overcome civic challenges by bringing together people from diverse economic, ethnic, and educational backgrounds.”

Section 120 of the bill addresses the “Youth Engagement Zone Program” and states that “service learning” will be “a mandatory part of the curriculum in all of the secondary schools served by the local educational agency.”

H.R. 1388 not only reauthorizes programs under the National and Community Service Act of 1990 and the Domestic Volunteer Service Act of 1973, but also includes “new programs and studies” and is expected to be funded with an allocation of $6 billion over the next five years, explains Bob Unruh for WND.

“Many, however, are raising concerns that the program, which is intended to include 250,000 ‘volunteers,’ is the beginning of what President Obama called his ‘National Civilian Security Force’ in a a speech last year in which he urged creating an organization as big and well-funded as the U.S. military. He has declined since then to elaborate,” Unruh adds.

It appears Miller’s amendment is designed to strip members of this emerging “National Civilian Security Force” of their constitutional rights under the First Amendment.

The First Amendment reads as follows: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

According to GovTrack.us, the addition of the Miller amendment to GIVE was agreed to by voice vote.

On March 23, a similar bill was passed by the Senate on a 74 to 14 vote. “From President Kennedy’s days to the creation of Americorps by then President Bill Clinton, the notion of public service has become a rallying cry. Tonight’s vote, propelled by President Obama’s urging of an expansion, would mean a growth in such work from 75,000 community service jobs to 250,000,” reported the New York Times.

Missouri Apologizes to Paul, Barr & Baldwin Over MIAC Report

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Tuesday, March 24, 2009

State Apologizes to Paul, Barr & Baldwin Over MIAC Report 240309top

The uproar that ensued as a result of our original story about a document issued by the Missouri Information Analysis Center which smeared third party supporters as potential domestic terrorists has forced the Missouri Department of Public Safety to issue an apology to Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin and Bob Barr. However, references to people who are anti-abortion, anti-gun control, knowledgeable about the Constitution and even those who simply display political bumper stickers will remain.

As we revealed in our exclusive report two weeks ago, a leaked secret report distributed by the federal Missouri Information Analysis Center lists Ron Paul supporters, libertarians, people who display bumper stickers, people who own gold, or even people who fly a U.S. flag and equates them with radical race hate groups and terrorists.

The MIAC report specifically describes supporters of presidential candidates Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin, and Bob Barr as “militia” influenced terrorists and instructs the Missouri police to be on the lookout for supporters displaying bumper stickers and other paraphernalia associated with the Constitutional, Campaign for Liberty, and Libertarian parties.

The MIAC report ( PDF) does not concentrate on Muslim terrorists, but rather on the so-called “militia movement” and conflates it with supporters of Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin, Bob Barr, the so-called patriot movement and other political activist organizations opposed to the North American Union and the New World Order.

Even after an uproar ensued as a result of widespread media coverage of the report, Missouri Governor Jay Nixon had the temerity to stand behind the document despite its blatantly erroneous content and blasé defamation.

However, days after Paul, Baldwin and Barr signed a joint letter demanding that references to themselves and their affiliated political groups be removed from the report, along with a hint of legal action if this didn’t occur, the Missouri Department of Public Safety has issued a formal apology.

“Portions of that report may be easily construed by readers as offensive to supporters of certain political candidates or to those candidates themselves,” Department of Public Safety Director John Britt wrote in his apology letter ( PDF) to Paul, Barr and Baldwin. “I regret that those comments were ultimately included in the final report issued by the MIAC.”

“Unfortunately, in the course of preparing this report, some regrettable information was included in the report on militia groups in Missouri,” Britt wrote. “While the intent of the report was only to identify certain traits that are sometimes shared by members of militia organizations, this report is too easily misinterpreted as suggesting that militia members may be identified by no other indicator than support for a particular candidate or political organization.”

“I have ordered that the offending report be edited to excise all reference to Ron Paul, Bob Barr or Chuck Baldwin,” the letter concludes, without a promise to retract the report altogether, much to the chagrin of the multitude of other banal groups demonized as potential domestic terrorists.

Missourians United For Life, an anti-abortion group, has filed a complaint with the American Civil Liberties Union against Governor Nixon following his public support of the document.

“What Governor Nixon is telling Missourians is if you disagree with him on the issue of life or display a pro-life bumper sticker or wear a pro-life pin, you may subjected to action by state law enforcement or your personal information might be sent to a law enforcement analysis center,” said Ed Martin, President of Missourians United for Life. “This is a clear violation of Missourians civil rights. The only intent of such a report by Nixon’s Administration is to harass and intimidate the governor’s perceived political enemies and chill speech and open debate by those who disagree with Jay Nixon on public policy.”

State Rep. Shane Schoeller of Willard added his criticism to the furore, stating, “I don’t want to evolve into a society where people are watched just because they’re out participating in some freedom of speech activity.”

The fact that the bulk of the report, which equates pro-life groups, political activists and people knowledgeable about the Constitution with domestic terrorists like Timothy McVeigh and Eric Rudolph, will not be redacted, proves that the battle is not over.

Outrage over the wholesale defamation of some of the most patriotic and informed groups of American citizens and attempts to educate police that they should be treated as an “enemy” should not subside just because the state has issued a meek apology to Paul, Barr and Baldwin alone.

The entire report needs to be repudiated in order to create a precedent that educating police with this kind of garbage is an insult to the very oath that they swore by in the first place.

Paul, Baldwin, Barr Send Letter to Missouri Gov. in Response to MIAC Report

Infowars
March 23, 2009

Last week on the Alex Jones Show, former presidential candidate and Baptist minister Chuck Baldwin said he would co-author with former presidential candidate and House member Ron Paul and former federal prosecutor, former member of the United States House of Representatives and presidential candidate Bob Barr a letter ( see PDF) to the Governor of Missouri, Jeremiah Nixon, protesting the Missouri Information Analysis Center’s document designating Baldwin and his co-authors as terrorists.

Baldwin, Paul, and Barr “respectfully demand” the document in question “be immediately removed from any and all websites associated with or maintained by the state of Missouri or any agency thereof, including the MIAC.” In addition, they demand “said document no longer be circulated by the state of Missouri” and the state repudiate its references to Baldwin, Paul, and Barr.

The letter insists action be taken within three days of receipt.

On March 20, Prison Planet reported Missouri Governor Jay Nixon’s defense of the MIAC report. “Getting information, especially public information, out of our fusion center out to local law enforcement agencies is we do every day and we’re going to continue to do,” said Nixon. “Any way they take that information and can analyze what the threat levels are is important to make sure the public stays safe.” ConnectMidMissouri reported. In other words, Nixon will continue to permit MIAC to designate Baldwin, Paul, and Barr as terrorists.

In regard to the content of the MIAC report, see our Police Trained Nationwide That Informed Americans Are Domestic Terrorists, posted on the Infowars and Prison Planet websites on March 13.

After Alex Jones received the MIAC document and it was posted on his websites, the news story went viral and was covered by the Associated Press and other corporate media outlets (Alex Jones, Infowars, and Prison Planet did not receive attribution for breaking the story, however.)

Read the letter: Page One, Page Two, Page Three.

Chuck Baldwin discusses the MIAC report on the Alex Jones Show, March 19, 2009. Part 2.

The Fed Did Indeed Cause the Housing Bubble

Catherine Austin Fitts
Global Research
March 23, 2009

This text by Catherine Austin Fitts is a response to an article entitled “The Fed Didn’t Cause the Housing Bubble” by Alan Greenspan, former Chairman of the Federal Reserve, published in the Wall Street Journal

featured stories   The Fed Did Indeed Cause the Housing Bubble
Greenspan
Alan Greenspan is a liar. The Federal Reserve and its long standing partner, the US Treasury, engineered the housing bubble, including the fraudulent inducement of America as part of a financial coup d’etat.

In his article on your opinion page, “The Fed Didn’t Cause the Housing Bubble,” Alan Greenspan attributes the housing bubble to lower interest rates between 2002 and 2005. That’s amazing to me.

My company served as lead financial advisor to the Federal Housing Administration between 1994 and 1997. I watched both the Administration and the Federal Reserve aggressively implement the policies that engineered the housing bubble. These are described at my website and in my on-line book,Dillon Read & the Aristocracy of Stock Profits (http://www.dunwalke.com).

One story, for example, is the following:

“In 1995, a senior Clinton Administration official shared with me the Administration’s targets for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac mortgage volumes in low- and moderate-income communities. We had recently reviewed the Administration’s plans to increase government mortgage guarantees — most of these mortgages would also be pooled and sold as securities to investors. Even in 1995, I could see that these plans would create unserviceable debt loads in communities struggling with the falling incomes expected from globalization. Homeowners would default on mortgages while losses on mortgage-backed securities would drain retirement savings from 401(k)s and pension plans. Taxpayers would ultimately be hit with a large bill . . . but insiders would make a bundle. I looked at the official and said that the Administration was planning on issuing more mortgages than there were houses or residents. “Shut up, this is none of your business,” the official snapped back.”

From: “Sub-Prime Mortgage Woes Are No Accident” (http://solari.com/news/announcements/08-07-07/)

One of the dirty little secrets behind the housing bubble is the long standing partnership of narcotics trafficking and mortgage fraud and the use of the two in combination to target and destroy minority and poor communities with highly profitable economic warfare. This model is global. It is operating in counties throughout the world as well as in US communities.

Of all the actions that the Federal Reserve took to engineer this housing bubble, the one that I would note is Mr. Greenspan’s efforts to pacify Congresswoman Waters regarding allegations of government sponsored narcotics trafficking at a time when open Congressional hearings would have contributed to an important discussion of the operations engaging in mortgage fraud in minority communities. See, “Financial Coup d’Etat,” Chapter 16, Dillon Read & the Aristocracy of Stock Profits which was written in 2005 and published in April 2006, drawing from an article I first published in May 1999.

“On December 18, 1997, the CIA Inspector General delivered Volume I of their report to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence regarding charges that the CIA was complicit in narcotics trafficking in South Central Los Angeles. Washington, D.C. ’s response was compatible with attracting the continued flow of an estimated $500 billion–$1 trillion a year of money laundering into the U.S. financial system. Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan in January 1998 visited Los Angeles with Congresswoman Maxine Waters — who had been a vocal critic of the government’s involvement in narcotics trafficking — with news reports that he had pledged billions to come to her district. In February Al Gore announced that Water’s district in Los Angeles had been awarded Empowerment Zone status by HUD (under Secretary Cuomo’s leadership) and made eligible for $300 million in federal grants and tax benefits.”

Alan Greenspan is a liar. The Federal Reserve and its long standing partner, the US Treasury, engineered the housing bubble, including the fraudulent inducement of America as part of a financial coup d’etat. Our bankruptcy was not an accident. It was engineered at the highest levels.

Your publication of Greenspan’s breezy and bogus history of the housing bubble insults your readership.

China Voices Support For New Global Currency To Replace Dollar

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Monday, March 23, 2009

China Voices Support For New Global Currency To Replace Dollar 230309top

China has expressed support for Russia’s proposal to hand the IMF the power to create a new supra-national global currency in response to the call for an alternative to the U.S. dollar as the world reserve currency.

Last week the Kremlin called for the “creation of a supranational reserve currency to be issued by international institutions as part of a reform of the global financial system.”

The Russian proposal stated that the IMF should take the lead in establishing a “superreserve currency accepted by the whole of the international community.”

China today expressed support for the initiative and said it was ready to discuss the proposal at the upcoming G20 meeting in London on April 2.

Hu Xiaolian, vice governor of the country’s Central Bank, said that China, which holds about $2 trillion in foreign exchange reserves, was prepared to debate the issue as “the dollar’s dominance and U.S. economic woes could entail considerable currency fluctuations and affect the world financial situation,” reports RIA Novosti.

The creation of a new supra-national global reserve currency to supplant the U.S. dollar would likely lead to a complete collapse of the greenback, of which trillions are held in in foreign exchange reserves by foreign countries such as China and Japan.

As we have previously highlighted, the elite have exploited the problem that they created to push for increased regulation of the world economic system in the pursuit of a de-facto global financial dictatorship.

The swift and ruthless exploitation of the economic meltdown on behalf of globalists and central banks revolves around their drive to move towards a one world currency system and an unprecedented centralization of global financial power, a fact that financial analysts are finally beginning to realize.

Earlier this month, Ben Bernanke told an elite gathering at the Council on Foreign Relations that a new overarching financial authority should be created and empowered with sweeping new regulatory responsibilities.

British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, EU heads such as Joaquin Almunia and establishment media outlets like the Wall Street Journal amongst many others have all continually used the economic crisis as an excuse to argue for greater financial power, a “new world economic order” in which control is concentrated into fewer hands – with the IMF and the World Bank enjoying the spoils.

UK Business Secretary and top Bilderberg member Peter Mandelson has also pushed for a “Bretton Woods for this century,” to help build the “machinery of global economic governance”.

Former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Nicolas Sarkozy all made the same appeal at a conference in Paris on the future of capitalism earlier this year.

Merkel called for the creation of a new global economic body under the UN, similar to the Security Council, to judge government policy.

Sarkozy called for a “new world, new capitalism” during his speech, as he commented “In capitalism of the 21st century, there is room for the state.”

Meanwhile, Blair called for a new financial order which he said should be constructed upon “values other than the maximum short-term profit.”

The globalists’ call for a centralized global economic order has nothing to do with providing solutions to the crisis but everything to do with providing themselves with more power and control over the world’s financial system.

National Security Counsel Advisor Jones: “I Take My Daily Orders From Dr. Kissinger”

Infowars
March 23, 2009

Last week a caller to the Alex Jones Show mentioned a speech transcript posted on the CFR website where U.S. National Security Adviser Jones declared the following:

Thank you for that wonderful tribute to Henry Kissinger yesterday. Congratulations. As the most recent National Security Advisor of the United States, I take my daily orders from Dr. Kissinger, filtered down through Generaal (sic) Brent Scowcroft and Sandy Berger, who is also here. We have a chain of command in the National Security Council that exists today.

Jones made the remark at the 45th Munich Conference on Security Policy at the Hotel Bayerischer Hof on February 8, 2009.

Mr. Jones is basically telling us the National Security Council is run by Henry Kissinger. The NSC

is the principal forum used by Obama for considering national security and foreign policy matters. Biden, Clinton, Geithner, Gates, Mullen, Emanuel, Summers, and others are listed as participants, but not Henry Kissinger.

In 2006, the Associated Press reported that Kissinger advised Bush and Cheney, a fact included in Bob Woodward’s book “State of Denial.”

In other words, the Bush and Obama administrations — never mind the “change” rhetoric — receive the same advice (instructions) from the ruling elite.

Earlier this year, Kissinger went on the floor of the stock market to declare Obama had a chance to create a New World Order.

Said Kissinger:

He can give a new impetus to American Foreign policy, partly because the perception of him is so extraordinary around the world. I think his task will be to develop an overall strategy for America in this period when really a New World Order can be created — it’s a great opportunity, it isn’t just a crisis.

Kissinger — along with David Rockefeller, Paul Arthur Allaire, and Richard Holbrooke — directs the American Friends of Bilderberg. He is also connected to the globalist Aspen Institute, the Committee of 300, the Trilateral Commission, and sits on the advisory board of JP Morgan Chase.

“Kissinger has been patiently waiting since at least 1973 for his New World Order egg to hatch,” notes the August Review.

Kissinger earlier praised Obama’s picks for economic recovery, and why not?

Obama picked Trilateral Commission wonder boy Timothy Geithner to be Secretary of the Treasury. The rest of the team are protégés of Robert Rubin, also a Trilateral and former Treasury Secretary under Clinton.

Obama’s top foreign policy advisor has been Zbigniew Brzezinski, the co-founder of the Trilateral Commission with David Rockefeller.

Finally, before Obama was elected, Kissinger went on the Charlie Rose Show and talked about the New World Order:

But never mind. It’s all a crazy conspiracy theory, never mind another indication that the one-worlders control the president, this time admitted by top NSC honcho James Jones, who just so happens to be a member if the Trilateral Commission.

Remarks by National Security Adviser Jones at 45th Munich Conference on Security Policy

Published February 8, 2009

Speaker:
James L. Jones

U.S. National Security Adviser Jones gave these remarks at the 45th Munich Conference on Security Policy at the Hotel Bayerischer Hof on February 8, 2009.

“Thank you for that wonderful tribute to Henry Kissinger yesterday. Congratulations. As the most recent National Security Advisor of the United States, I take my daily orders from Dr. Kissinger, filtered down through Generaal Brent Scowcroft and Sandy Berger, who is also here. We have a chain of command in the National Security Council that exists today.

I think my role today is a little bit different than you might expect. Following the speech of the Vice President and the presence of our distinguished members from the U.S. House of Representatives, I thought that I would spend my time talking to you about how taking the President’s guidance and the Vice President’s comments yesterday, I would spend a few moments trying to discuss how the U.S. National Security Council intends to reorganize itself in order to be supportive. For decades, this conference in Munich has provided a truly exceptional forum for the kind of open dialogue and candid discussions that can only take place among close friends and allies. The Vice President’s attendance and his speech yesterday should send I think a very strong and sincere signal about the seriousness of our purpose when it comes to listening, engaging and building stronger partnerships with all of our friends and allies because the President feels that the transatlantic alliance is a cornerstone to our collective security.

As many of you know, I have been here coming to this conference since 1980 and I have been privileged to work and know many of you here. I would like to salute my military colleagues with whom I have not only a deep friendship but shared many of the issues that we are discussing in a positive way today. And I am delighted to be back in an altered state, so to speak.

I know there is great curiosity about President Obama among many here. And there has been wonderful enthusiasm and new energy with regard to his election from people all over the world. I would like to take just a moment to speak to you about his approach to national security and in fact international security and the role that I see the National Security Council playing. First and foremost the President’s strategic approach will be grounded in the real understanding of the challenges we face in the 21st century. We must simply better understand the environment that we are in. The President, if nothing else, is a pragmatist. He knows that we must deal with the world as it is. And he knows that the world is a very different place than it was just a few years ago. As he said in his inaugural address, the world has changed and we must change with it. And we certainly agree that the world is a multipolar place in the time frame of the moments we are in.

It is hard to overstate the differences between the 20th and the 21st centuries. We have already experienced many, many differences in the 21st century. When this conference first met, everything was viewed through the prism of the Cold War. And in retrospect, life was simpler then. It was certainly more organized. It was certainly more symmetric.

Year in and year out, the strategic environment was fairly consistent and predictable. Threats were “conventional.” The transatlantic security partnership was largely designed to meet the threats of a very symmetric world. It was reactive. The NATO partnership was conceived to be a defensive and fairly static alliance. And I spent a good deal of my career in uniform serving within this framework. But to move forward, we must understand the terms national security and international security are no longer limited to the ministries of defense and foreign ministries; in fact, it encompasses the economic aspects of our societies. It encompasses energy. It encompasses new threats, asymmetric threats involving proliferation, involving the illegal shipment of arms and narco-terrorism, and the like. Borders are no longer recognized and the simultaneity of the threats that face us are occurring at a more rapid pace.

And as the President has detailed, a comprehensive approach to our national security and international security in the 21st century must identify and understand that the wider array of existing threats that threaten us. To name a few:

-Terror and extremism has taken many lives and on many continents across the globe.

-The ongoing struggle in Afghanistan and the activity along the Pakistani border is an international security challenge of the highest order.

– The spread of nuclear and chemical biological and cyber-technologies that could upset the global order and cause catastrophe on an unimaginable scale is real. It is pressing and it is time that we dealt with it.

– The overdependence on fossil fuels that endangers our security, our economies, and the health of the planet.

– Protracted tribal, ethnic, and religious conflicts.

– Poverty, corruption, and disease stands in the way of progress and causes great suffering in many parts of the world.

– Narco-terrorism that provides the economic fuel for insurgencies.

– And an economic crisis that serves as the foundation of our strength.

This list is by no means exhaustive. The challenges that we face are broader and more diverse than we ever imagined, even after the terrible events of 9/11. And our capacity to meet these challenges in my view does not yet match the urgency of what is required. To be blunt, the institutions and approaches that we forged together through the 20th century are still adjusting to meet the realities of the 21st century. And the world has definitely changed, but we have not changed with it. But it is not too late, and this is the good news.

In our country, one of the institutions that is changing is the National Security Council, which like so much of our national and international security architecture was formed in the wake of World War II and during the Cold War. So let me say a few words about what the National Security Council does and how President Obama has asked that I approach my job as National Security Adviser. The President has made clear that to succeed against 21st century challenges, the United States must use, balance, and integrate all elements of national influence: our military and our diplomacy, our economy and our intelligence, and law enforcement capacity, our cultural outreach, and as was mentioned yesterday, the power of our moral example, in short, our values. Given this role, the NSC is by definition at the nexus of that effort. It integrates on a strategic sense all elements of our national security community towards the development of effective policy development and interagency cooperation. But to better carry out the president’s priorities, the National Security Council must respond to the world the way it is and not as we wish it were. And it must consider the fusion of our national priorities within the broader international context and interest. The NSC’s mission is relatively simple. It should perform the functions that it alone can perform and serve as a strategic center – and the word strategic is operative here – for the President’s priorities.

To achieve those goals we will be guided by several principles. As one of our great comedians in the United States, Groucho Marx, once said, “These are our principles. And if you don’t like them, we have others.”

First, the NSC must be strategic, as I mentioned. It is easy to get bogged down in the tactical concerns that consume the day-to-day conduct. As a matter of fact, it is much more enjoyable to be involved at the tactical level. But we won’t effectively advance the priorities if we spend our time reacting to events, instead of shaping them. And that requires strategic thinking. The National Security Council I think is unique in its ability to step back and take a longer and wider view of our American national security and our role in the shared context of our international security as well.

Second, the NSC must manage coordination across different agencies of the government – increasing numbers of agencies. We have learned the hard way that this has real implications, both in terms of how policy has developed in Washington and how it is in fact executed. The NSC must therefore function as a strategic integrator by doing several things. One, by ensuring that dissenting views are heard and considered throughout the policy-making process. Two, by monitoring policy implementation to ensure that agencies are coordinating effectively in the field, and that the President’s priorities are being carried out in practice. Third, the NSC must be transparent. We serve the President. We also serve other principal agencies of our government. And that’s why I am committed to managing a process that is as open as possible so that we forge policies that are widely understood throughout our government by our people and by our partners around the world. Fourth, the National Security Council must be agile. We face nimble adversaries and all of us will have to confront fast-moving crises – from conflict and terrorism to new diseases and environmental disasters. To keep pace, we will have to move faster in developing policy and priorities than did our predecessors. The world is a smaller place. Communications is more rapid. And therefore our reactions must be swifter. And we must be able to communicate rapidly throughout the government and around the world in order to effectively respond.

And finally, the National Security Council must adapt to evolving challenges. There are traditional priorities that we will manage. But we must also update our outlook and sometimes our organization to keep pace with the changing world. To give you just a few examples, the NSC today works very closely with President Obama’s National Economic Council, which is led by Mr. Larry Summers, so that our response to the economic crisis is coordinated with our global partners and our national security needs. The NSC has worked closely with the White House Counsel’s office as we implement the President’s orders to ban torture and close the detention center at Guantanamo Bay. The National Security Council is undertaking a review to determine how best to unify our efforts to combat terrorism around the world while protecting our homeland. And this effort will be led by Mr. John Brennan.

The National Security Council will be at the table as our government forges a new approach to energy security and climate change that demand broad cooperation across the U.S. Government and more persistent American leadership around the world. And the NSC is evaluating how to update our capacity to combat the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction while also placing a far higher priority on cyber security.

There is no fixed model that can capture the world in all of its complexity. What’s right today will have to be different four years from now or eight years from now. And that’s precisely the point. The NSC’s comparatively small size gives it a unique capacity to reinvent itself as required and to pivot on the key priorities of our time.

Just as we change our ways at home, so too must we change our international partnerships in order to adapt to the 21st century. Minister Jung just pointed out some very good examples of how NATO could change. If there is one overriding characteristic to the world we face, it is the truth that security is shared. And as President Obama has said time and again, we are strongest when we act alongside our partners.

I know there will be much discussion over the next few months as to the future of NATO, so I am not going to dwell on the topic, although I am passionate about it. I do know that the President looks forward to addressing the future of the alliance at the 60th anniversary summit in April. I have been a fan and a participant in NATO since I was a child, watching NATO during the Cold War as I was growing up and as a military commander, watching NATO troops patrol the streets of Kabul and elsewhere in Afghanistan and the Balkans and the skies and in the Mediterranean. And I can tell you this. NATO is as relevant to our common security in the first half of the 21st century as it was to our common defense in the second half of the 20th century. We know that NATO is a strong alliance, perhaps the strongest the world has ever known. Its capacity does not just come from the strength of its arms but from the enduring democratic values that bind our nations together. And from the iron-clad commitment that ensures our collective security. But I also know this. NATO must also change. It needs to become less reactive and more proactive. I think it needs to become less rigid and more flexible. It needs to become less stationary and more expeditionary. And it needs to become more, not less, essential to our collective security. Our Secretary-General has been a strong voice for developing a new strategic vision for the alliance; and judging from this conference, this has been one of the finest conferences I have attended in Munich; and judging from this conference, the time has come to do so.

There is no doubt that NATO’s involvement in Afghanistan poses an enormous task for NATO, but not just NATO, for indeed all international institutions located on the ground in an effort to bring this to a happy and satisfactory conclusion. Given the nexus of terror and extremism, drugs and proliferation, we cannot afford failure in Afghanistan. And that’s why the Obama Administration will work closely with NATO and with the Afghan and Pakistani Governments to forge a new comprehensive strategy to meet achievable goals. This will be a shared effort with our allies. Afghanistan is not simply an American problem, it is an international problem. And as we work to meet these short-term tests, we must show the same strategic vision that mark NATO’s founding six decades ago. Our predecessors had the vision to build institutions that were durable, that could meet the challenges of the day while adapting over the course of several decades. Now the world has changed, and history has called on us to change once more – and this, we must do. President Obama is committed to pursuing a national security strategy that is fully responsive to the challenges that we face. That means facing down current threats, while forging the lasting structures and capabilities that will protect our people and advance our interests well into the future. As part of that effort, we will take steps that I have outlined to be stronger at home and we will seek stronger partnerships with our friends abroad. Those partnerships will require continuous and rapid consultation. As part of that consultation, the Obama Administration will listen closely, be clear about what we are doing, and work hard to find common ground and develop common capabilities. I have no doubt that we are at another crossroads in history. Together we have fought wars and torn down walls of division and together I know that we can meet the challenges of this moment in history if we have the courage and the commitment to change with the times.

Thank you very much.”

Essential Documents are vital primary sources underpinning the foreign policy debate.

« Older Entries