Tag Archives: Ron Paul

George W. Bush Tells Jeb to ‘Run,’ Says Jeb vs. Hillary Would Make ‘Fantastic Photo’


George W. Bush Tells Jeb to ‘Run,’ Says Jeb vs. Hillary Would Make ‘Fantastic Photo’

Rick Klein

By Rick Klein

UNIVERSITY PARK, Texas — Former President George W. Bush says he isn’t interested in playing on the national political stage any longer. But for family, he’s making an exception.

Asked in an interview with ABC News’ Diane Sawyer whether he thinks his brother former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush should run for president in 2016, the ex-president was unequivocal.

“He’d be a marvelous candidate if he chooses to do so. He doesn’t need my counsel ’cause he knows what it is, which is ‘run,’ ” the elder Bush brother said about Jeb’s possible candidacy, in an interview that first aired Wednesday on “World News with Diane Sawyer.” “But whether he does or not, it’s a very personal decision.”

The former president even allowed himself to picture the potential 2016 matchup: Jeb Bush vs. Hillary Rodham Clinton. It would be a family rematch of the 1992 election, when George H.W. Bush lost to Bill Clinton.

“It’ll be a fantastic photo here. It would certainly eclipse the museum and the center,” Bush said on the eve of the formal opening of the George W. Bush Presidential Center at Southern Methodist University, just outside Dallas. “I’m interested in politics. I’m, you know, I’m fascinated by all the gossip and stuff that goes on. But the field won’t be become clear ’til after the midterms.”

Asked for a word of advice to the Republican Party, the former president struck an optimistic note amid rounds of GOP soul-searching: “You will exist in the future,” he said with a smile.

On several major issues, though, Bush made clear he’s staying away from day-to-day political battles.

With some Republicans calling for immigration reform to be slowed down in the wake of terrorist attack in Boston apparently carried out by two immigrants, the former president brought up his previous support for comprehensive reform but said he wouldn’t be commenting on specific legislation.

“I’m a strong advocate in reforming a broken system,” Bush said. “It’s a difficult issue for members of Congress to deal with. And they’re just gonna have to figure out how best to deal with a very complex issue. And I don’t know all the particulars of the bill. I do know the system is not working.”

Bush also took a pass on the issue of gun control and expanded background checks, which he voiced support for as president.

“There’s a lotta issues that people would like to get my opinion on, and I really decided to stay out of the public arena,” he said.

He took a similar tack on gay marriage, which Bush opposes — a position that puts him at odds with his former vice president, Dick Cheney; his 2004 campaign manager, Ken Mehlman; and his wife, Laura, and daughter Barbara.

“No, but thank you for trying,” Bush said when asked whether he’d like to explain his position in that fast-evolving debate. “I’m not weighing in on issues. … See, you’re either in or out.”
SOURCE

Democratic Rep: Amend Constitution To Allow Control Of Speech

Democratic Rep: Amend Constitution To Allow Control Of Speech

– A Democratic representative is calling for an amendment to the United States Constitution that would allow for some legislative restriction of freedom of speech.

“We need a constitutional amendment that would allow the legislature to control the so-called free speech rights of corporations,” Rep. Hank Johnson (D-GA) was quoted as saying by CNS News.

He reportedly made these comments while speaking at the Annesbrooks HOA candidate Forum held last month.

In a video obtained by the website, Johnson asserts that “corporations control … patterns of thinking.”

“They control the media. They control the messages that you get,” he added. “And these folks … are setting up a scenario where they’re privatizing every aspect of our lives as we know it. So, wake up! Wake up! Let’s look at what’s happening.”

Corporations and unions are protected under the First Amendment of the Constitution because of the ruling in “Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission,” which found that a state law prohibiting corporations from making political campaign contributions using their treasury funds was unconstitutional.

The ruling additionally stated that the spending was a form of political speech that is protected by the First Amendment, according to the official blog of the Supreme Court of the United States.

“These corporations, along with the people they support, other millionaires who they’re putting into office, are stealing your government,” Johnson was quoted as saying by CNS News. “They’re stealing the government and the U.S. Supreme Court was a big enabler with the Citizens United case.”

SOURCE

Sen. Paul proposes bill protecting Americans from drone surveillance

Sen. Paul proposes bill protecting Americans from drone surveillance

By Pete Kasperowicz –

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) on Tuesday introduced the Preserving Freedom from Unwarranted Surveillance Act, which would require the government to get a warrant before using aerial drones to surveil U.S. citizens.

More broadly, Paul’s bill is aimed at preventing “unwarranted governmental intrusion” through the use of drones, according to the lawmaker.

“Like other tools used to collect information in law enforcement, in order to use drones a warrant needs to be issued,” Paul said Tuesday. “Americans going about their everyday lives should not be treated like criminals or terrorists and have their rights infringed upon by military tactics.”

The bill, S. 3287, would require the government to obtain a warrant to use drones with the exception of patroling national borders, when drones are needed to prevent “imminent danger to life” or when there are risks of a terrorist attack.

The bill would also give Americans the ability to sue the government for violating the act. And, it would prohibit evidence collected with warrantless drone surveillance from being used as evidence in court.

While drone surveillance in the United States would undoubtedly prove controversial, the use of drones is currently a topic of international concern. Some Democrats have said the use of drones to disrupt terrorist networks is hurting America’s image overseas.

Additionally, the United Nations is considering an investigation into drone airstrikes inside Pakistan, which could focus on the rate of civilian casualties caused by these attacks.

Congress has ordered the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to move toward allowing drones to fly alongside commercial aircraft in U.S. airspace by 2015.

The FAA is planning a pilot program to test fly drones in six locations, but will not set the rules for what the unmanned aircraft can be used for.

Law enforcement agencies and state and local governments have expressed a strong interest in unmanned aircraft, and are being courted as potential customers by the booming drone industry.

There is opposition, however, from groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) that have raised concerns about the impact of the drones on privacy.

SOURCE

Kissinger Promises China… ‘Jeb Bush Will Be Next President’!

Kissinger Promises China… ‘Jeb Bush Will Be Next President’! A Must Read!!!

Bush Body Count

‘A shocking report prepared by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs for Prime Minister Putin on the just completed meeting between China’s Vice Premier Li Keqiang and former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger states that the Chinese were told that former Florida Governor John Ellis “Jeb” Bush , brother to the former US President and son of another, will be elected as the next American leader despite his currently not even being on the ballot.

Chinese Vice President Xi Jinping met with Jeb Bush yesterday at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing where both pledged to advance cooperation between their two countries and, this report says, agreed that once Bush had taken office a ‘new era’ would begin in US-China relations.

According to this report, Kissinger told Keqiang that the Republican Party election process to select their nominee to run against President Obama was “completely manipulated” to ensure that their 2012 Convention would be “deadlocked” thus allowing for Jeb Bush to be nominated as a “consensus candidate” and thus his parties leader.

The path to a deadlocked convention, this report says Kissinger told the Chinese, lies in neither current Republican frontrunners Governor Mitt Romney or Congressman Ron Paul having enough delegates to ensure their nomination on the first ballot after which their supporters will be free to nominate anyone they so choose.

In order to ensure a deadlocked convention, this report continues, Kissinger noted that Romney will obtain his delegates from what are called Primary States while Paul will receive his from those holding caucuses and “open” primaries, with neither of them receiving enough votes to secure their nominations.

Political analysis on the US election do, indeed, note that Paul’s path to the Republican nomination lies in the caucus and open primary States which shows what is called his “secret path to victory.”

Henry Kissinger

To the most shocking aspects of this report are the comments attributed to Kissinger that claim the entire American electoral system is under the control of their National Security Agency (NSA ) which controls the computers used in their elections and whose outcome is determined by their elites, not the citizens themselves.

In a dire move bolstering Kissinger’s claim of a rigged US election was yesterdays news that the giant global election firm SCYTL , which describes itself as the worldwide leader in secure electronic voting and electoral modernization, had purchased the United States most dominant election results reporting company thus insuring these people would never have true or total access as to who would actually win any of their elections.

Even worse, this report continues, the purchase by SCYTL of the private corporate site controlled by SOE software , which operates under the name ClarityElections.Com and controls the election results in over 525 US jurisdictions , was its being financed by the global investment giant Carlyle Group that was founded by the Bush and Bin Laden families nearly 25 years ago.

When queried by Chinese officials as to why Obama was allowed to be elected instead of Jeb Bush in the last US election, this report continues, Kissinger replied that the American public was not prepared for a continuation of the Bush-Clinton Dynasties that have, in fact, ruled the United States since the 1981 coup d’état staged against President Ronald Regan after he was nearly assassinated by the son of the then Vice President George H.W. Bush’s main business partner .

Kissinger further stated to the Chinese, this report says, that Obama was a “safe choice” to be an “interim leader” as besides his being a member of the Bush family (Obama is former President George W. Bush’s cousin by blood ) his mother, Ann Dunham/Soetoro , was a “prized” CIA asset who was dispatched from Hawaii to Indonesia in 1967, along with seven year-old Barack Obama, to infiltrate villages in Java to carry out a CIA survey of political leanings among the Javanese population and whose “handler ” was George H.W. Bush who a few years later became Director of the Central Intelligence Agency .

Kissinger added, this report says, that by putting Obama in office they were, also, able to secure the passing of draconian new laws in the United States that otherwise wouldn’t have been allowed to pass due to the overwhelming objections of American liberals and progressives, but who now are all but silent as the last vestiges of the US Constitution are being swept away.

Being ignored by these American liberals and progressives, however, are that the laws being passed by the Obama regime are intended to be used against them and include the power of the US President to designate anyone he so chooses as a “terrorist,” kill them without charges or trial, hold American citizens in prison, also without charges or trial, and, under a new law being pushed through the US Congress, would give the US government the power to strip Americans of their citizenship without being convicted of being “hostile” against the United States.

Though the claims made by Kissinger to China detailing how the election process in the United States has now been completely destroyed are beyond appalling, it does not, on the other hand, come as surprising from a “war criminal” who once boasted “It is not a matter of what is true that counts, but a matter of what is perceived to be true.”

To the American people themselves it remains to be seen if they will ever awaken to what is true…one can only hope they will, before all is lost…forever.’

youtu.be/qLOwTy5kOMU ; www.chinadaily.com.cn/usa/china/2012-01/18/content_14471730.htm ; www.whatdoesitmean.com/index1555.htm

SOURCE

Election Predictions and All That Rot

Why 2012 election predictions are rubbish: Fear the Black Swan!

You want to know who’s going to be the next president of the United States? Happy to oblige.

Just tell me who’s going to win Ohio. No Republican has ever won the White House without winning Ohio. And only one Democrat has done it—JFK by a whisker—in the past 50 years.

Or tell me what will happen to real personal income growth in the third quarter of 2012.

Or tell me what the jobless rate will be in the fall, since (all together now), no incumbent since FDR has been re-elected when the unemployment rate has been higher than 7.2 percent.

What’s that? You can’t do that because it’s only April?

That doesn’t stop an army of soothsayers — including ones at Yahoo! — from offering up formulas to calculate, with scientific precision, the shape of the November vote. As common-sense guides, they make sense: incumbents and incumbent parties suffer when the economy is bad; a deeply divided party has a hard time winning a general election. As “laws” with the predictive capacity of knowing when ice melts … not so much. (Back in 2000, the most trusted academic models of the election forecast a comfortable-to-overwhelming Democratic popular vote victory based on the glowing economy; what we got was an effective tie).

I received an early lesson in caution after boldly predicting that John Lindsay would win the White House in 1972. Even stronger lessons were provided over the years by the appearance of a hugely influential factor in Presidential elections: the Black Swan.

The term comes, not from that Natalie Portman ballet movie, but from a best-selling book in 2007 by Nassim Nicholas Taleb that examines our persistent “ability” to ignore the potentially huge effects of unlikely, random events. Given what happened a year later–when we woke up on a mid-September day to find the financial universe on the brink of collapse–the book seemed prescient. In political terms, “Black Swans” have shown up often enough to make even the boldest soothsayer hold his tongue.

Think back to 1960, when Republicans could still compete for the black vote, and when an influential figure like Martin Luther King Sr. endorsed Richard Nixon out of concern about a Catholic in the White House. Then, on October 25, King’s son was arrested on a bogus parole-violation charge and transferred to a rural state prison where, his family feared, his life might be endangered. After John Kennedy called King’s wife, and Robert Kennedy called the governor of Georgia (and after Richard Nixon’s efforts to have the Justice Department intercede were ignored), King was released, and his father announced he was transferring his “suitcase full of votes” to Kennedy. On Election Day, black voters were crucial to Kennedy’s razor-thin margins not just in Illinois (8,000 controversially counted votes), but also in Michigan, New Jersey and Missouri.

Or consider 1968, when Hubert Humphrey had closed the once-cavernous gap between himself and Richard Nixon. With days to go before Election Day, the United States and North Vietnam were very close to an agreement on peace negotiations. Thanks to the intervention by Anna Chennault, an unofficial but well-connected Nixon campaign emissary, the South Vietnamese government balked. Had that deal been concluded by the Lyndon B. Johnson administration, there’s good reason to think that Vice President Humphrey would have won the election.

Go back to the last days of the 2000 campaign, and the disclosure of a drunk-driving arrest of a young George W. Bush. Karl Rove maintained that the story cost Bush the popular vote by keeping a few million evangelicals away from the polls. And for Democrats, that butterfly ballot in Palm Beach County will always be a Black Swan of pterodactyl-sized proportions.

Or look again at the financial collapse of mid-September 2008. I’m skeptical of claims that John McCain could have won that contest under any circumstances, given the financial resources of Barack Obama’s campaign and the country’s unhappiness with President Bush. Without question, though, the fear of economic meltdown meant a shift in the tenor of the campaign, one that that redounded in Obama’s favor.

Not every late-breaking event changes the outcome of an election. John Kerry believed that the release of an Osama Bin Laden video just before the 2004 election cost him the White House; I lean more toward a superior get-out-the-vote operation in Ohio by the Bush campaign.

And it’s not that fundamental things don’t apply. If you think in terms of probabilities rather than predictive certainty, the fall economic data is a sound guide for placing bets.

But until someone can take a quick trip into the future and tell me how Ohio’s going to vote, I’ll say no sooth.

SOURCE

Obama Executive ‘Order’: Prelude to Martial Law? US can seize any person, any resource, any time

Obama Executive ‘Order’: US can seize any person, any resource, any time

by Carl Herman

“A mere demarcation on parchment of the constitutional limits (of government) is not a sufficient guard against those encroachments which lead to a tyrannical concentration of all the powers of government in the same hands.” – James Madison, Federalist Paper #48, 1788.

President Obama signed an Executive Order for “National Defense” yesterday that claims executive authority to seize all US resources and persons, including during peacetime, for self-declared “national defense.”

The EO claims power to place any American into military or “allocated” labor use (analysis here and here).

“American exceptionalism” is the belief that a 200+ year-old parchment in the National Archives has magical powers to somehow guarantee limited government from 1% tyranny, despite the specific and clear warnings of the US Founders, despite world history of repeated oligarchic/1% tyranny claiming to be for the “good of the people,” and despite US history’s descent into vicious psychopathy (short version here: US war history in 2 minutes) hidden in plain view with paper-thin corporate media propaganda.

I don’t know about you, but both my grandfathers were in the US military during the gruesome WW1. My father, father-in-law, and only uncle were in a brutal WW2. Both wars were functions of colonialism; a 1%’s vicious and rapacious greed.

Now, we’re all looking at WW3 that includes official policy and dark rhetoric for US first-strike use of nuclear weapons on Iran. This, after multiple current lie-started and treaty-violating wars surrounding Iran, increased US military preparations, multiple war-propagandizing US political “leaders,” and recent history of US overthrowing Iran’s democracy and 35 consecutive years of US war on Iran that killed over one million Iranians.

I don’t know about you, but I’m teaching the obvious crimes in war and money, destruction of Constitutional Rights rights (see specific links below), and asking students (of all ages) what they see to do about these clear facts. The first answer people see is to help people get over their “American exceptionalism” to recognize these massive crimes, and demand arrests of the obvious criminal “leadership.”

I don’t know about you, but I refuse to be silent in face of lying and criminal government policies that annually murder millions, harm billions, and loot trillions of the 99%’s dollars.

What will you do?

Here is the US government claiming it can Constitutionally assassinate Americans upon the non-reviewable dictate of the leader, as these criminals take psychopathic steps to murder Americans who expose their crimes.

Here is NDAA 2012 where US government claims it can Constitutionally disappear Americans and then appoint a tribunal with death sentence authority (unless unlimited detention is their choice). Here is the 2006 Military Commissions Act that says the same. This is fascist terrorism to silence Americans from communicating that the 1% are War Criminals to arrest NOW.

Here is US government claiming it can Constitutionally control-drown (waterboard) anyone they declare a “terrorist” as a 1% terror-tactic to silence Americans.

Again, what will you do?

SOURCE

The Federal Reserve’s Explicit Goal: Devalue The Dollar 33%

The Federal Reserve’s Explicit Goal: Devalue The Dollar 33%

The Federal Reserve Open Market Committee (FOMC) has made it official: After its latest two day meeting, it announced its goal to devalue the dollar by 33% over the next 20 years. The debauch of the dollar will be even greater if the Fed exceeds its goal of a 2 percent per year increase in the price level.

An increase in the price level of 2% in any one year is barely noticeable. Under a gold standard, such an increase was uncommon, but not unknown. The difference is that when the dollar was as good as gold, the years of modest inflation would be followed, in time, by declining prices. As a consequence, over longer periods of time, the price level was unchanged. A dollar 20 years hence was still worth a dollar.

But, an increase of 2% a year over a period of 20 years will lead to a 50% increase in the price level. It will take 150 (2032) dollars to purchase the same basket of goods 100 (2012) dollars can buy today. What will be called the “dollar” in 2032 will be worth one-third less (100/150) than what we call a dollar today.

The Fed’s zero interest rate policy accentuates the negative consequences of this steady erosion in the dollar’s buying power by imposing a negative return on short-term bonds and bank deposits. In effect, the Fed has announced a course of action that will steal — there is no better word for it — nearly 10 percent of the value of American’s hard earned savings over the next 4 years.

Why target an annual 2 percent decline in the dollar’s value instead of price stability? Here is the Fed’s answer:

“The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) judges that inflation at the rate of 2 percent (as measured by the annual change in the price index for personal consumption expenditures, or PCE) is most consistent over the longer run with the Federal Reserve’s mandate for price stability and maximum employment. Over time, a higher inflation rate would reduce the public’s ability to make accurate longer-term economic and financial decisions. On the other hand, a lower inflation rate would be associated with an elevated probability of falling into deflation, which means prices and perhaps wages, on average, are falling–a phenomenon associated with very weak economic conditions. Having at least a small level of inflation makes it less likely that the economy will experience harmful deflation if economic conditions weaken. The FOMC implements monetary policy to help maintain an inflation rate of 2 percent over the medium term.”

In other words, a gradual destruction of the dollar’s value is the best the FOMC can do.

Here’s why:

First, the Fed believes that manipulation of interest rates and the value of the dollar can reduce unemployment rates.

The results of the past 40 years say the opposite.

The Fed’s finger prints in the form of monetary manipulation are all over the dozen financial crises and spikes in unemployment we have experienced since abandoning the gold standard in 1971. The financial crisis of 2008, caused in no small part by the Fed’s efforts to stimulate the economy by keeping interest rates too low for, as it turned out, way too long is but the latest example of the Fed failing to fulfill its mandate to achieve either price stability or full employment.

The Fed’s most recent experience with Quantitative Easing also belies the entire notion that monetary manipulation can spur the economy. Between November 2010 and June 2011, the Fed tried to spur economic growth by purchasing $600 billion in Treasury securities, flooding the banking system with reserves and keeping interest rates low. In response the economy, which had been growing at a 3.4% annual rate, slowed to a 1% annual rate in the first half of 2011. Once, the Fed stopped supplying all of that liquidity, economic growth in the second half of the year accelerated to a 2.3% annual rate.

Second, the Fed does not use real time indicators of the price level. Instead, it views inflation through the rear view mirror of the trailing increases in the PCE. And, even when it had evidence of rising inflation — as it did in the first quarter of last year — it chose to temporize, betting that the spike in inflation would prove temporary.

This spike in inflation did prove temporary, as Fed Chairman Bernanke predicted at the time, but not for the reasons — a slack economy — that he cited. Instead, the growing debt crisis in Europe led to a massive shift in deposits out of the euro and into the dollar — an event totally out of the Fed’s control. Yet, this increase in the demand for dollars was far more important than any action taken by the Fed because it increased the value of the dollar and produced a slowdown in the inflation rate.

What we are left with is a trial and error monetary system that depends on the best judgment of 19 men and women who meet every six weeks around a big table at the Federal Reserve in Washington. At the end of a day and a half of discussions, 11 of them vote on what to do next. The error the members of the FOMC fear most when they vote is deflation. So, they have built in a 2% margin of error.

Given the crudeness of the tools the FOMC uses to set monetary policy, allowing for such a margin of error is no doubt prudent. For example, when the economy slowed in the first half of last year, inflation picked up, accelerating to a 6.1% annual rate during the second quarter. And, when the economic growth accelerated in the second half, inflation slowed. These results are the precise opposite of what the Fed’s playbook says are supposed to happen.

The best the Fed can do — an average debauch in the dollar’s value of 2% a year while producing recurring financial crises and a more cyclical economy — is demonstrably inferior to the results produced by the classical gold standard. Here’s just one example. The largest gold discovery of modern times set off the 1849 California gold rush and increased the supply of gold in the world faster than the increase in the output of goods and services. The price level in the U.S. did increase by12.4 percent over the next 8 years. That translates into an average of just 1.5% a year. The gold standard at its worst was better than the best the Fed now promises to do with the paper dollar.

The Fed’s best is hardly good enough. The time has arrived for the American people to demand something far better — a dollar as good as gold.
SOURCE

Ron Paul Placed Second in New Hampshire Presidential Primary……..The Democratic Presidential Primary

Ron Paul Placed Second in New Hampshire Democratic Presidential Primary

On January 12, the New Hampshire Secretary of State posted election returns on his web page from the January 10 presidential primary. It is the custom in New Hampshire to count write-ins in the Democratic presidential primary received by all candidates who appeared on the Republican presidential primary ballot, and vice versa. No tally is made for write-in candidates who were not on any party’s presidential primary ballot.

The returns for the Democratic primary can be seen here. Ron Paul received 2,273 write-ins in the Democratic presidential primary, so he placed second in that primary behind President Obama, and ahead of the other thirteen candidates whose names were printed on the Democratic ballot. No one will ever know how many write-ins Hillary Clinton received, since her votes weren’t tallied because she wasn’t on any 2012 primary ballot in New Hampshire. But, the total number of write-ins for people who weren’t on any primary ballot, in the Democratic race, was only 759, so obviously Clinton received a smaller number than 759. Mitt Romney placed third in the Democratic primary, with 1,808 write-ins. Thanks to Robbin Stewart for this news.

SOURCE

YOU are the Terrorist your President warned you about

Report: Federal Agents Demand Customer Lists From Food Storage Facility

Mac Slavo


“Just because I’m paranoid doesn’t mean they’re not out to get me.”

-Unknown

You may recall that the FBI, Department of Homeland Security and local law enforcement have regularly issued bulletins regarding domestic terrorist related activities that include suspicious purchasing habits to look for and how to recognize the 8 signs of terrorism. Federal training programs held for police departments across the country detail specific habits and characteristics of potential domestic terrorists including everything from homeschooling, leaning towards libertarian political philosophies, and holding strong religious views, to reading survivalist literature. It’s no secret that the government has been attempting to keep tabs on Americans who are acting outside of the status quo, warning those in the mainstream that any deviation in “normal” behavior should be construed as suspect and potentially dangerous – even your best pal could be a terrorist if he begins acting counter to his usual behavior.

The latest government effort to identify would-be terrorists and persons-of-interest comes to us from Tennessee, where federal agents have taken the need to acquire actionable intelligence to a whole new level. They are, by all accounts, no longer just sitting back and waiting for business owners like surplus store owners or the general public to provide them with suspicious activity reports, but rather, are taking matters into their own hands.

Oath Keepers has learned that federal agents recently visited a Later Day Saints (Mormon) Church food storage cannery in Tennessee, demanding customer lists, wanting to know the identity of Americans who are purchasing food storage from the Mormons.

This incident was confirmed, in person, by Oath Keepers Tennessee Chapter President, Rand Cardwell. Here is Rand’s report:

“A fellow veteran contacted me concerning a new and disturbing development. He had been utilizing a Mormon cannery near his home to purchase bulk food supplies. The man that manages the facility related to him that federal agents had visited the facility and demanded a list of individuals that had been purchasing bulk food. The manager informed the agents that the facility kept no such records and that all transactions were conducted on a cash-and-carry basis. The agents pressed for any record of personal checks, credit card transactions, etc., but the manager could provide no such record. The agents appeared to become very agitated and after several minutes of questioning finally left with no information. I contacted the manager and personally confirmed this information.”

“So on the one hand, government agencies both state and federal are urging you to be prepared and even checking up on you to see how prepared you are, and on the other hand, we now have federal agencies that are attempting to gather information on individuals that are following FEMA suggestions. What is the reasoning behind gathering this information? Are American citizens now being ‘listed’ by DHS if they are simply following FEMA guidance and purchasing bulk food and emergency supplies for their families? It appears as so.”

So why do federal agents want to know who is storing away long-term food storage? We suspect it is for the following reasons:

1. DHS/FEMA wants to know which Americans have food storage so the federal government can at some future point confiscate that food. Just as with lists of gun owners, compiling such lists is the first step toward future confiscation.

2. DHS wants to identify those Americans who are “switched on” and squared away enough to actually store food for coming hard times (such as during an economic collapse). That population of awake, aware, and prepared Americans poses a “threat” to whatever DHS and its masters have in store for the American people, and as Joseph Stalin so ably demonstrated, one of the easiest ways to subjugate defiant people is to confiscate their food and starve them into submission.

Clearly, in light of the above, if you purchase food storage, along with any other preparedness items, you should be concerned about those purchases being tracked and your name winding up on some government list. But don’t let that stop you from storing food and other essential supplies, and don’t let this disturbing incident keep you from using your local Mormon cannery to do so. You need to get prepared. But do it while following the advice of James Wesley, Rawles over at www.survivalblog.com, who repeatedly urges his readers to “think OPSEC!” – if at all possible, buy with cash and pick it up in person, just like the customers of this particular cannery did, which left the “agitated” agents empty handed and frustrated.

Source:
Oath Keepers (via a report by Oathkeepers Founder Stewart Rhodes)

If this report is accurate – and we have no reason to believe it’s not – then not only is government intrusion into the private and lawful activities of American citizens reaching unprecedented levels, but every individual who has ever taken the time to acquire bulk foods and supplies or even discuss preparedness related information on an internet message board is now a person-of-interest.

For many it may be impossible to “get off the grid,” and with so many nodes in the modern day police state there is a paper or digital trail for almost everything. As recommended by Oathkeepers’ Stewart Rhodes, while you may not be able to keep all of your personal activities private (highly ironic considering the principles on which this country was founded), you may be able to minimize your foot print:
****************************************************************************
ACTION ITEM
Assume everything you do is monitored and archived. Everything. Which means, chances are, you’ve already left a Sasquatch footprint in a Fusion center somewhere.

Use cash whenever possible. This is not always feasible, but is good practice, especially when buying hundreds of pounds of food at one time. You can also try temporary credit cards (available at your local grocery store or gas station) but even these provide only a thin level of security.

Don’t readily identify yourself as a preparedness minded individual

Be aware that when you say or do something, someone else may see something and report it

If you have like minded family and/or friends then make an effort to diversify your assets. Don’t keep all of your food and other supplies in any one location. Confiscation, as we saw in the aftermath of New Orleans, is the reality when martial law has been declared. If you are engaging in any of the “suspicious” activities and behaviors highlighted in this article, then you should assume that you will be targeted by agents of whatever authority is charged with protecting residents in a disaster or emergency area.

Consider preemptive contingency planning for the possibility of confiscation now. Obviously, someone is trying to get their hands on lists of names, and you must assume you’re on that list (regardless of how careful you think you’ve been). If they come, they will come at exactly the moment that you have nothing to spare. Designate one or two people to acquire goods, while others store those goods at your retreat or bug out locations. While not foolproof, this strategy may provide some level of protection.

Always have backups for your backups. Get a shovel, dig a hole. Store at least 60 – 90 days of emergency food and other supplies (you know which ones) in a location that is known only by you and your closest and must trusted family/friend(s). Also remember, as a prepper, you can never have enough holes dug (take that literally or figuratively)

You can call it paranoia. But it’s becoming increasingly clear that you’re justified in your thinking – and you’re not alone.

SOURCE

WARNING! Russia Prepares For War as Obama Issues Ron Paul “Kill Order”!

Russia Prepares For War as Obama Issues Ron Paul “Kill Order

Global Research
The European Union Times –

The Federal Security Service (FSB) is reporting today that the “secret letter” sent to Prime Minister Putin by Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda contains a warning that United States President Barack Obama has issued an executive-level “kill order” against US Congressman Ron Paul over fears this charismatic politician, who many believe could capture the Republican Presidential 2012 nomination, is about to expose to all Americans what can only be described as the largest mass theft in human history. The “kill order” is a metaphor for silencing down congressman Ron Paul in the mass media as if he doesn’t exist.

According to this report, Prime Minister Noda first became aware of this “kill order” after a private meeting with Obama at last weeks ASEAN Summit meeting in Indonesia when the American President expressed his “unconstrained joy” over the toppling of the Greek and Italian governments in bloodless coups by EU banksters who installed to run these countries unelected former Goldman Sachs executives.

Not known to many Americans is that the giant global investment firm Goldman Sachs put Obama into office by being its top donor and after winning the Presidency put so many of its former executives into the US government it is known as the “Wall Street Cabinet.”

The reason for Goldman Sachs, and other top American and European banksters, putting Obama into office, this report continues, was to loot the Americans taxpayers of an estimated $100 Trillion…nearly $30 Trillion of which went directly into the pockets of international banksters around the world and another $70 Trillion in lost home values, stock portfolios and pensions funds.

The main conduit of this massive theft was the US Federal Reserve System which during the 2008 Financial Crisis secretly doled out, without the American peoples knowledge, over $16 Trillion to European banks and companies and another nearly $8 Trillion in “secret loans” to the largest banks in the United States.

Causing Obama and his bankster allies to fear Ron Paul, this report continues, is the Congressman’s ability to hold US Congressional hearings on the $8 Trillion in secret loans to the largest banks in American without the pub

la repatriation

Venezuela brings home gold reserves

Up to 160 tonnes of gold, worth more than $11bn, is expected to be repatriated back to Venezuela

A shipment of gold has been deposited in Venezuela’s central bank in Caracas after President Hugo Chavez ordered the repatriation of most of the country’s bullion reserves from overseas banks.

Cheering crowds lined the streets on Friday as the shipment was escorted by armoured trucks to the bank from the Venezuelan capital’s Maiquetia airport, beginning a process that will eventually see up to 160 tonnes of gold, worth more than $11bn, brought home.

Chavez ordered the repatriation of 85 per cent of the country’s bullion, which has mostly been held in European and US banks, saying the move would protect Venezuela’s reserves from global economic turbulence.

“Here it’s going to be safe

– Nelson Merentes, Central Bank president, Venezuela

“It’s coming to the place it never should have left. … The vaults of the central bank of Venezuela, not the bank of London or the bank of the United States. It’s our gold,”
Chavez said on national television.

Nelson Merentes, the president of the central bank, said the gold had come from the UK but did not say how much was in the first shipment, citing security concerns.

‘It’s a guarantee’

The gold had been held abroad since the late 1980s as backing for loans requested from the International Monetary Fund by prior governments, he said.

Merentes called the repatriation of the gold a “guarantee” for the country.

“If there’s some problem in the international markets, here it’s going to be safe,” he said.

Chavez’s opponents have called the plan costly and ill-advised, while some suggested Chavez was acting out of fear that Venezuela’s overseas assets could one day be frozen by sanctions, as happened to those of his ally, the late Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi.

SOURCE

Ron Paul: I want to repeal Roe v. Wade

Ron Paul: I want to repeal Roe v. Wade

Republican Rep. Ron Paul of Texas told CBN’s David Brody that he wants to repeal the Supreme Court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, which upheld a woman’s right to an abortion until the fetus is viable outside the womb.

Paul, a presidential candidate and libertarian, has gained an enthusiastic following for his strong views on limited government, free market economics and non-interventionist foreign policy. Recently, he has become more vocal about socially conservative issues like abortion.

He said he disliked the idea of a pro-life constitutional amendment because he does not “like to see big government.”

“I see the attack on the unborn as an act of violence and it should be dealt with at the local level,” Paul said.

“What I want to do is repeal Roe v. Wade. And the best way to do that is to eliminate the federal jurisdiction. So, we could have done that 10 or 15 years ago. We should have done it when the right to life majority was in office.”

Paul said it wouldn’t have been a perfect solution, but it could have stopped abortions in many states.

Think of how many lives could have been saved that way.

Watch video, uploaded to YouTube, below:

SOURCE

Perry Proposes 20 Percent Flat Tax

Perry Proposes 20 Percent Flat Tax

Perry would keep popular deductions for mortgage interest and charitable gifts.

By Alex Roarty and Rebecca Kaplan

Republican presidential candidate Rick Perry unveiled a sweeping economic agenda Monday, highlighted by a plan to level a voluntary 20 percent “flat tax” on all taxpayers who will accept it in place of what they’re paying now.

The plan, outlined in a Wall Street Journal op-ed column a day before the Texas governor was set to announce it in South Carolina, also calls for capping federal spending at 18 percent of the country’s GDP while allowing younger earners to privatize their Social Security accounts — a controversial proposal that echoes President George W. Bush’s failed 2005 attempt to overhaul the retirement program.

But the most significant feature of Perry’s plan is his call for a flat tax rate of 20 percent. Taxpayers who don’t want to pay a 20 percent flat income tax, he said, can keep their current rate.Current marginal income tax rates range from 10 percent to 35 percent, depending on taxpayers’ income.

Perry offers several proposals that appear designed to sweeten the offer — and to counter criticism that the flat tax is regressive, taking a proportionally bigger bite from smaller incomes. His plan would preserve popular deductions for mortgage interest and donations to charity for households earning less than $500,000 a year. It would increase the standard deduction to $12,500.

But Perry would eliminate other tax breaks. He argues that a streamed-down tax code (so simple, he says taxpayers can file on a postcard), along with spending cuts and entitlement changes, will stimulate the economy.

“By eliminating the dozens of carveouts that make the current code so incomprehensible, we will renew incentives for entrepreneurial risk-taking and investment that creates jobs, inspires Americans to work hard and forms the foundation of a strong economy,” Perry writes.

Although critics deride it as unfair to lower-income Americans, the “flat tax” has long been a favorite of many fiscal conservatives. Businessman Steve Forbes, who endorsed the governor Monday, made it the hallmark of his presidential campaigns in 1996 and 2000, and it’s a favorite idea of many congressional Republicans.

For Perry, the tax overhaul represents an effort to return into the good graces of many conservatives disappointed with a series of stumbling debate performances and apostasies on immigration policy. On Monday, just 10 weeks before the Iowa caucuses, his campaign announced the hire of six new staffers and the start of an ad campaign in the Hawkeye State.

His economic agenda does appear to go farther than some of his rivals. Neither Romney nor former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman have called for a flat tax (Romney’s history with the flat tax is complicated), and Perry’s call for a 20 percent corporate tax rate is higher than Atlanta businessman Herman Cain’s proposed call for a nine percent rate (although Cain also calls for a nine percent national sales tax.)

Perry’s proposed cap on federal spending, 18 percent of GDP, is two points lower than Romney asked for in his own economic plan.

Calling his agenda “Cut, Balance and Grow” — a clear nod to congressional Republicans, who have proposed a “Cut, Cap and Balance” budget bill — Perry says his proposal is the best way to cure the nation’s ailing economy.

“Cut, Balance and Grow” strikes a major blow against the “Washington-knows-best mindset,” Perry said. “It takes money from spendthrift bureaucrats and returns it to families. It puts fewer job-killing regulations on employers and more restrictions on politicians. It gives more freedom to Americans to control their own destiny. And just as importantly, the Cut, Balance and Grow plan paves the way for the job creation, balanced budgets and fiscal responsibility we need to get America working again.”

Perry will formally announce his plan Tuesday at a high-tech plastics firm in Gray Court, S.C., outside of Greenville. Later in the day, he will travel to the statehouse in Columbia to announce endorsements from some state legislators.

SOURCE

Ron Paul Right For America

By DAN HIRSCHHORN |

Ron Paul’s opinions about cutting the budget are well-known, but on Monday, he’ll get specific: the Texas congressman will lay out a budget blueprint for deep and far-reaching cuts to federal spending, including the elimination of five cabinet-level departments and the drawdown of American troops fighting overseas.

There will even be a symbolic readjustment of the president’s own salary to put it in line with the average American salary.

During an afternoon speech in Las Vegas ahead of Tuesday’s debate, Paul will say that his plan for $1 trillion in cuts will create a balanced federal budget by the third year of his presidency.

“Dr. Paul is the only candidate with a plan to cut spending and truly balance the budget,” says an executive summary of the plan, which POLITICO obtained, along with detailed spending and taxation levels, ahead of its release. “This is the only plan that will deliver what America needs in these difficult times: Major regulatory relief, large spending cuts, sound monetary policy, and a balanced budget.”

Many of the ideas are familiar from Paul’s staunch libertarianism, as well as tea party favorites like eliminating the departments of education and energy. But Paul goes further: he’ll propose immediately freezing spending by numerous government agencies at 2006 levels, the last time Republicans had complete control of the federal budget, and drastically reducing spending elsewhere. The EPA would see a 30 percent cut, the Food and Drug Administration would see one of 40 percent and foreign aid would be zeroed out immediately. He’d also take an ax to Pentagon funding for wars.

Medicaid, the children’s health insurance program, food stamps, family support programs and the children’s nutrition program would all be block-granted to the states and removed from the mandatory spending column of the federal budget. Some functions of eliminated departments, such as Pell Grants, would be continued elsewhere in the federal bureaucracy.

And in a noticeable nod to seniors during an election year when Social Security’s become an issue within the Republican primary, the campaign says that plan “honors our promise to our seniors and veterans, while allowing young workers to opt out.”

The federal workforce would be reduced by 10 percent, and the president’s pay would be cut to $39,336 — a level that the Paul document notes is “approximately equal to the median personal income of the American worker.”

Paul would also make far-reaching changes to federal tax policy, reducing the top corporate income tax rate to 15 percent, eliminating capital gains and dividends taxes, and allowing for repatriation of overseas capital without tax penalties. All Bush-era tax cuts would be extended.

And like the rest of his GOP rivals, Paul would repeal President Barack Obama’s health care reform law, along with the Dodd-Frank financial regulatory reform law enacted last year. Paul, a longtime Federal Reserve critic, would also push a full audit of the central bank, as well as legislation to “strengthen the dollar and stabilize inflation.”

Read more: SOURCE