© 2009 WorldNetDaily

Just 12 months after voting by a 53-47 margin to put Barack Obama in the White House, only 43 percent of voters today would re-elect him, according to a new Zogby Internaional–O’Leary Report Poll.

“Most voters don’t trust the president on the number one issue of the day: job creation. On top of that, a surprising plurality of voters, and Independent voters in particular, don’t side with President Obama on the number one issue to him: whether or not he should be president,” said Brad O’Leary, a former NBC Westwood One talk show host and publisher of the O’Leary Report.

He’s also written “Shut Up America: The End of Free Speech.”

The pollsters on Nov. 10-12 surveyed 2,879 Americans who had voted in the 2008 presidential election. The results have a margin of error of plus-or-minus 1.9 percent.

The poll asked: If the presidential election were held next month, would you vote to re-elect President Obama or would it be time for someone new in the White House?

The poll showed only 43 percent of Americans who voted in the 2008 presidential election say they would vote to re-elect Obama – a reduction by 10 percent in the votes Obama received on election day last year.

Forty-five percent say they want someone new to be president. Eleven percent say that their vote for or against Obama would depend on who is running against him, and 1 percent are not sure.

Significantly, the poll revealed that only 37 percent of independent voters would vote to re-elect Obama. Forty-six percent say they would like to see someone new. Seventeen percent said they would want to know the opposition first.

Additionally, the poll asked: Please tell me how much you trust the Obama administration to pass federal legislation to create jobs in 2010?

“Not at all” was the response from 42 percent of the voters. Another 11 percent said they do not trust Obama “much.” Only about 1 voter in four said they trusted the president “very much,” and 18 percent admitted they trusted him “somewhat.”

“President Obama’s popularity with the voting public has been eroding for some time, but these numbers really drive home

the point,” O’Leary said.

WND reported only weeks ago a majority of Americans also are alarmed over attempts by the White House to stifle dissent or suppress free speech.

By Bob Unruh
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

A video explaining the dangers of a U.N. treaty proposal promoted by President Obama that critics say would lead to a world government has received more than 3.5 million views since WND broke the story on the ominous possibilities, and now there is word from the Obama administration the plan might not be going so smoothly.

In the video, Lord Christopher Monckton, a former science adviser to British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, asserts the real purpose of the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen Dec. 7-18 is to use concern over “global warming” as a pretext to lay the foundation for a one-world government.

At the U.N. Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen “this December, weeks away, a treaty will be signed,” Lord Christopher Monckton told a Minnesota Free Market Institute audience at Bethel University in St. Paul.

According to the Minnesota Free Market Institute, the video, as originally posted, has collected 2.2 million views and almost 700 pages of comments, but there also are more than 100 other cloned versions of Monckton’s comments on YouTube and the aggregate views exceed 3.5 million.

The video helped launch a national petition drive opposing the Copenhagen treaty at NoCapAndTrade.com, with its more than 135,000 messages to Congress opposing the plan. It’s been discussed by Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Laura Ingraham and Michelle Malkin, among others.

Now there are indications the light of information being spread about the potential problems is casting shadows on the proposal.

“The more people learn about the supposed issue of ‘climate change’ and how green extremists intend to control our lives, the more skeptical they become,” said Jeff Davis, president of the Minnesota Majority.

Get “The Sky’s Not Falling! Why it’s OK to chill on global warming”

Further, Michael Froman, deputy national security adviser for international economic affairs, said in a Bloomberg report today the latest word on Copenhagen is an “assessment by the leaders that it was unrealistic to expect a full, internationally legally binding agreement to be negotiated between now and when Copenhagen starts.”

Davis said the impact of Monckton’s warning is becoming apparent in other ways. He cited a decision just days ago by key U.S. Senate Democrats who confirmed it is unlikely there will be any additional action on climate-change legislation this year. Obama had hoped to pass a cap-and-trade energy taxation plan before the Copenhagen conference.

Bloomberg’s report confirmed leaders from Asia have admitted a binding global-warming accord isn’t likely next month.

Obama attended a meeting

of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation forum in Singapore in which leaders proposed a two-stage approach to follow up the failed Kyoto Protocol, which sought to manage emissions worldwide but never earned the support of several of the world’s leading energy-consuming nations.

Danish Prime Minister Lars Rasmussen told Bloomberg there may be no “legally binding instrument,” although a political agreement is possible.

The 1997 Kyoto plan is scheduled to expire in three more years, but years of talks already held have failed to produce agreement on energy restrictions.

Instead, Rasmussen has suggested an agreement to cut greenhouse gases, with an outline for a political agreement that would be the subject of further negotiations.

At the Examiner, a blogger concluded, “The credibility of global warming theories (and sanctimonious theorists) and any international climate controls are fading with each passing day.”

Monckton warned in the video that Obama supports the idea and is ready to sign on the dotted line.

“Your president will sign it. Most of the Third World countries will sign it, because they think they’re going to get money out of it. Most of the left-wing regimes from the European Union will rubber-stamp it. Virtually nobody won’t sign it,” Monckton told the audience of some 700 attendees.

“I read that treaty and what it says is this: that a world government is going to be created. The word ‘government’ actually appears as the first of three purposes of the new entity.”

He has warned the proposal would cede U.S. sovereignty, mandate a massive wealth transfer from the United States to pay reparations for “climate debt” to Third World countries and create a new “world government” to enforce the treaty’s provisions.

Davis also warned that while the apparent uncertainty over the treaty has bought some time, it’s not enough.

“Green extremists will be back in force trying to advance both domestic cap-and-trade legislation and an international climate treaty that will rob us of our liberties and grant government more control over our lives,” he said.

Monckton’s lecture can be viewed online and his slides also can be accessed on the Internet.

Either the guy in the following video is a complete and utter bald faced liar or he is telling the TRUTH that he is a “devout” Muslim.   The Liberty Tree Lantern reports, YOU DECIDE, IF HE IS LYING:

Now are you prepared to call President Obama a complete bald faced liar or do we have a MAJOR deadly PROBLEM in The White House?  And, what about THE MEDIA and both major political parties?

Weren’t people just about shot, before his election, for just mentioning his middle name because it “insinuated” that he was a Muslim?

Islam is a part of promoting “peace”?   You have GOT to be kidding me!  Hasn’t he read the Koran like a good Muslim?  Like the “devout” Muslim did, that just massacred thirteen “Infidel” American Soldiers and maimed over twenty more of our Son and Daughter heroes at Fort Hood, TX?  All “devout” Muslims follow the meaning and intent of the Koran, WORD FOR WORD.  That means, therefore, that they believe in “The Caliphate”; a religious theocracy that is to grow and expand through either conversion of all peoples to Islam or Murdering the rest who they call “Infidels”; such as the ones who worked in the World Trade Towers shown in the video.  Those are the marching ORDERS in the Koran.  Now that being said there are some Muslims who do not follow those bad henious parts of the Koran and I believe they are good peaceful people.  But they are NOT “devout” in the pure definition of the word.  Obama, according to his own words, however, is “devout”.  And if he get his way, WE ALL WILL BE SOON as he said;”we are a nation of Muslims.”  (Or was he lying?)

I wonder if Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, the “devout” Fort Knox Caliphate murdering  Muslim,  is disappointed that he hasn’t gotten to greet Muhammed yet with his 72 Virgins in tow?  Wouldn’t it be terrible if America graciously arranged the meeting for him, in a couple of weeks or so, and this happened:

Pardon me but the above video of facts and truth about where President Obama’s loyalties lie and regards to his deep ”devout” faith and “guidance”" really PISSES ME OFF.  How many Americans knew this BEFORE they elected him? 

I shed more than a few tears during the televised funeral of our Fort Hood patriots today who defend our Constitution, our freedom, liberty and individual unalienable rights, from enemies both foreign and domestic,  who that DAMN “devout” Muslim killer murdered in cold defenseless blood on our own American Army base where our Sons and Daughters should feel completely free and secure from any harm!

I have had it with Political Correctness, OVER Tolerance and Multiculturalism.  Either you are an “American”, and subscribe and immerse yourself in our UNIQUE “American” Culture like all of the immigrant families used to do when they came to America or you should be free to leave WITHOUT citizenship!  PERIOD.  If ANY PERSON in AMERICA can’t COMPLETELY and FULLY and DESIREOUSLY appreciate “MERRY CHRISTMAS!”, for ONE example, and The Christian Life and Character of the Civil Institutions of the United States as written by Benjamin F. Morris in his 1864 book hot linked here, then they should be shipped out; Or, with regards to politicians for treasonous activities against the Constitution and the God given rights of each individual American, hung.  I have had it with the destruction of our country and our AMERICAN principles by Political Correctness of the Socialist / Communists in academia, media and The US Government itself.

People, how long are we going to be playing around with these Democrats and Republicans who treasonously destroy the principles of the Declaration of Independence and The Constitution and contemptuously usurp power on a daily or hourly basis and foment divisions amongst us through the deceit of multiculturalism and OVER tolerance in lieu of assimilation like all immigrants used to do?  WAKE UP, PEOPLE!

Boy, I am really hot on this one.  Remember how almost the entire Main Stream Media kept on covering up Obama’s deep “devout” Muslim heritage and faith, with truth conflicting report over truth conflicting lying report before the election?  This is MADNESS!  Isn’t it interesting that the Republican Party didn’t point these events, clearly shown on the video above, out to us during the election process? And why didn’t the Republican Party with all of their financial resources check out Obama’s eligibility?   What the hell was up with that????    I DO NOT trust them either!  Something is going on and I smell a RAT…

I shall endeavor to vote for The Constitution Party, like I did the last time, at every opportunity!  Republicans are just better liars who perform the same function of Marching our fellow Americans  into utter dependency on the path to the Socialist BIG BROTHER police welfare State.  According to reports the Republican Health Care bill isn’t much better than the Democrat one.  Either way the American public becomes “ENSLAVED” and individually IDENTIFIED and MARKED with NO PRIVACY, and ultimately, I submit, NO FREEDOM.

We THE PEOPLE have to get our COUNTRY BACK.  One Way or THE OTHER.  The RULE OF LAW, as WE wrote, established and ordained on our Federal Government, in The Constitution, MUST BE ENFORCED in its entirety!  That foreign born alien has got to go.  Perhaps it is time for America to arrange a little visit with Allah for this man who isn’t a liar (or do you think he was lying in the video above?).  Finally a Constitutionally supported action, defending the Constitution, our heroes and our fellow countrymen against domestic enemies, that I will gladly “volunteer” (as it states in the IRS code), to pay taxes for.

I noticed that a very “devout” Muslim, who by his own admission in the video above strongly believes in and is “guided by” the Koran and Muslim faith, who apologies at every nation stop and place he goes to for our unique “American” culture and our prosperity, spoke at the funeral of murdered American soldiers.  Wasn’t that Special?   Speak of ironic  juxtaposition to the max!  Remember; “Not God Bless America, God Damn America!” 

ALLAH AKBAR!

Are you still wondering why President Obama hasn’t sent  in more troops and equipment into Afghanistan, to fight the Caliphate “devout” Muslims while our soldiers on the battlefield get needlessly killed due to lack thereof,  by now?  How many of our own died over there, in the last few months, while our honorable Generals and commanders wait on Obama’s decision? Hasn’t Obama got in enough golf games and gallivanting around the world with Oprah Winfrey pitching for the Olympics to come to Chicago and such important things as that, to make a decision by now?  

ONE MORE QUESTION – - -  HOW LONG WILL “FREE SPEECH LAST” before Youtube is coerced into pulling this video of TRUTH?

And, just as importantly or more so, how many Tories are there amongst us who want it pulled?  You should ask the people around you what they think of this video so that you can ascertain who are the Tories who live in your community, who your family needs to be aware of. 

The time of choosing is soon at hand folks.  It is a choice none of us can avoid with the advent of the coming collapse of “The MATRix” (our economy that only exists in our minds which have been Mass Behavior Modified to believe that FEDERAL RESERVE “NOTES” are worth 100 cents, when they are only worth 2 – 3 cents in the ‘real’ world of reality).  The question becomes; Will you choose individual rights, freedom, liberty and OUR GOD, or will you choose the “Godless” – “green” hybrid of Socialism, Communism and Fascism that all three branches and both major parties of our Federal Government has in store for us as “The MATRIX” is soon to collapse? 

If you choose Liberty, you sure better know who the Tories are around you.  And, beware of them, when the time of choosing arrives, when Barack Obama gives us “The Final Ultimatum” between Liberty and the security of a ONE WORLD CURRENCY which comes with the final destruction of the Constitution and our “God Given” unalienable rights.

Anybody who wants to keep the truth from you, is NOT your friend or a patriot, but a Tory.

Lord, save our country!   - – -   Our ‘FREE’,,,    Country!

Plaintiffs promise appeal of ruling protecting Obama

Posted: October 29, 2009
2:02 pm Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

 

A California judge has dismissed a complaint challenging President Obama’s eligibility to be president citing the “birth certificate from the state of Hawaii” that apparently refers to an Internet image of a “Certification of Live Birth” released during Obama’s campaign.

The ruling came this morning from Judge David Carter who as WND reported last night apparently recently hired a law clerk out of the law firm that has been paid nearly $1.7 million to defend Obama from eligibility challenges.

A Wikipedia page has been cited by dozens of bloggers after it listed Siddarth Velamoor as one of the newest law clerks for Carter – who today released his ruling dismissing the complaint in the Barnett v. Obama case in the Central District, Southern Division Court in Santa Ana, Calif.

Velamoor is also listed in the Martindale lawyer database as an associate of international law firm Perkins Coie, the same law firm of Robert Bauer – top lawyer for Obama, Obama’s presidential campaign, the Democratic National Committee and Obama’s Organizing for America – and the same Washington, D.C., lawyer who defended President Obama in lawsuits challenging his eligibility to be president.

As WND has reported, Federal Election Commission records for “Obama for America” show that the lobby organization has paid Perkins Coie $1,666,397.01 since the 2008 election.

Gary Kreep of the United States Justice Foundation confirmed immediately that his clients – two of about four dozen in the case – would be filing an appeal. California attorney Orly Taitz, representing the rest of the clients, also promised not only an appeal of the decision but of future cases that will be filed.

“This [opinion] looks like it was written by the defense,” she told WND.

She described the fight against Obama as “very tough.”

“He has more power than anybody, unlimited financial resources, and a lot to hide,” she said.

“Plaintiffs argue that despite the fact that President Obama has produced a birth certificate from the state of Hawaii, there is evidence to show that the president was actually born in Kenya, thus making him ineligible to be president,” Carter wrote.

However, Obama’s long-form original birth certificate has remained under seal. The image posted by his campaign on the Internet is a different document, a “Certification of Live Birth,” that apparently is computer generated and has been challenged by a number of critics over its authenticity.

In fact, the authenticity of the “Certification of Live Birth” has been a focal point of numerous court challenges to Obama’s eligibility, and Taitz earlier submitted to Carter a copy of what purported to be a Kenyan birth certificate for Obama, asking for permission to verify its authenticity.

WND has reported on dozens of legal challenges to Obama’s status as a “natural born citizen.” The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, states, “No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President.”

Some of the lawsuits question whether he was actually born in Hawaii, as he insists. If he was born out of the country, Obama’s American mother, the suits contend, was too young at the time of his birth to confer American citizenship to her son under the law at the time.

Other challenges have focused on Obama’s citizenship through his father, a Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of his birth, thus making him a dual citizen. The cases contend the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from qualifying as natural born.

Further, others question his citizenship by virtue of his attendance in Indonesian schools during his childhood and question on what passport did he travel to Pakistan three decades ago.

Adding fuel to the fire is Obama’s persistent refusal to release documents that could provide answers and the appointment – at a cost confirmed to be at least $1.7 million – of myriad lawyers to defend against all requests for his documentation. While his supporters cite an online version of a “Certification of Live Birth” from Hawaii as his birth verification, critics point out such documents actually were issued for children not born in the state.

The ultimate questions remain unaddressed to date: Is Obama a natural born citizen, and, if so, why hasn’t documentation been provided? And, of course, if he is not, what does it mean to the 2008 election or the U.S. Constitution if it is revealed that there has been a violation?

WND also has reported that among the documentation not yet available for Obama includes his kindergarten records, Punahou school records, Occidental College records, Columbia University records, Columbia thesis, Harvard Law School records, Harvard Law Review articles, scholarly articles from the University of Chicago, passport, medical records, files from his years as an Illinois state senator, his Illinois State Bar Association records, any baptism records and his adoption records.

Because of the dearth of information about Obama’s eligibility, WND founder Joseph Farah has launched a campaign to raise contributions to post billboards asking a simple question: “Where’s the birth certificate?”

“Where’s The Birth Certificate?” billboard at the Mandalay Bay resort on the Las Vegas Strip

 

The campaign followed a petition that has collected more than 475,000 signatures demanding proof of his eligibility, the availability of yard signs raising the question and the production of permanent, detachable magnetic bumper stickers asking the question.

The “certification of live birth” posted online and widely touted as “Obama’s birth certificate” does not in any way prove he was born in Hawaii, since the same “short-form” document is easily obtainable for children not born in Hawaii. The true “long-form” birth certificate – which includes information such as the name of the birth hospital and attending physician – is the only document that can prove Obama was born in Hawaii, but to date he has not permitted its release for public or press scrutiny.

Oddly, though congressional hearings were held to determine whether Sen. John McCain was constitutionally eligible to be president as a “natural born citizen,” no controlling legal authority ever sought to verify Obama’s claim to a Hawaiian birth.

Carter’s dismissal revolved around his determination that the plaintiffs lacked “standing” to bring the complaint, including those plaintiffs who were third-party candidates in the 2008 presidential election.

“The court is troubled by the idea that a third party candidate would not have standing to challenge a major party candidate’s qualifications, while the opposing major party candidate may be able to establish standing because he or she has a better chance of winning the election,” he said.

He warned, “Defendants’ argument encourages the marginalization of the voice of a third party in what is a dominantly two-party political system and would require the court to pass judgment that plaintiffs are such unlikely candidates that who they are running against would not make a difference.

“This argument also ignores the tremendous effect that a third-party candidate can have on the presidential election. In 2000, many political commentators opined that should Green Party candidate Ralph Nader not have run for presidential office and received less than three percent of the popular vote, Al Gore would have won the election instead of President George W. Bush. Even when third-party candidates themselves may not have a chance of winning, which candidates they compete against can certainly have an effect on the election results,” he said.

But he also said once Obama was sworn into office on Jan. 20, the question no longer was over a potentially ineligible candidate but of the removal of a sitting president.

Obama took the oath of office on Jan. 20, hours before the complaint was filed. However, Obama also took the oath of office the next day, on Jan. 21, after the complaint was filed, because he stumbled over the words during the Jan. 20 event.

“In order to cure plaintiffs’ perceived injury, the court would need to wade deep into the waters of the president’s official duties – in fact, it would have to declare that the president could no longer perform any official duties. The separation of powers concerns implicated by this request are grave,” Carter wrote.

He also cited the separation of powers doctrine and the Constitution’s assignment of the power of impeaching a sitting president to Congress.

Carter cited Kreep’s arguments that Obama never met the constitutional requirements to run for president.

“There may very well be a legitimate role for the judiciary to interpret whether the natural born citizen requirement has been satisfied in the case of a presidential candidate who has not already won the election and taken office. However, on the day that President Obama took the presidential oath and was sworn in, he became president of the United States. Any removal of him from the presidency must be accomplished through the Constitution’s mechanisms for the removal of a president, either through impeachment or the succession process set forth in the Twenty-Fifth Amendment.”

WND reported several days ago on a separate challenge to Obama’s eligibility that also was taken to the appellate level.

]]>

By Sen. Tom Coburn

The day after White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel’s Clintonesque plan to triangulate and divide Republicans and doctors failed a major newspaper published this headline: “Democrats Lose Big Test Vote on Health Legislation.” The title was so fair and balanced many media obsessed White House advisers could have attributed it to Fox News. Yet, it was the New York Times that captured in a well-written, fair and subtle story the depth of the challenge the White House faces in its push to enact major health care reform legislation.

As the Times reported, “[Majority Leader Reid] needed 60 votes to proceed. He won only 47. And he could not blame Republicans. A dozen Democrats and one independent crossed party lines and voted with Republicans …”

Bottom of Form

The first lesson for the White House in this defeat is that public concern about the deficit is real, not manufactured. Twelve Democrats opposed the Emanuel strategy not just on principle but sound political judgment. Senate Democrats understand that voters, by a two to one margin, want Congress to address the deficit first, then health care. They knew that the effort to spend a quarter of a trillion dollar outside of the reform process was shameless and fiscally irresponsible. As Ron Wyden (D-WA), one of the “no” votes, said in the Times article, “On the eve of a historic debate on health care, it’s essential to show a commitment to real reform,” which includes fiscal responsibility.

The Washington Post – not Fox News – went farther and blasted the Emanuel/Reid triangulation strategy, calling it “nonsensical” and “sleight of hand.” As the Post wrote: “The political imperative is twofold: to make certain that Republicans don’t use the physician payment issue to bring down the larger bill and to placate the American Medical Association … A president who says that he is serious about dealing with the dire fiscal picture cannot credibly begin by charging this one to the national credit card, with no concern for the later generations who will have to pay the bill.”

The nation’s doctors also understood the strategy and weren’t impressed by Emanuel and Reid’s plan to manipulate them into backing off of their support for tort reform. A poll on Sermo.com – a Facebook-like site which represents 110,000 real world physicians who sacrifice their own time to participate in a serious public debate about health care (in contrast to the American Medical Association, which represents itself and its Washington lobbying shop) included troubling results for the Democrats negotiating in secret. Sixty-five percent of nearly 1,000 respondents said they were “very concerned” about the Senate passing a fix for their own profession that was not offset, and 77 percent said they were “very unsatisfied” or “unsatisfied” with the substance of the so-called fix.

If the first lesson is to get serious about the deficit, the second lesson for the White House is to go back to first principles and conduct this effort with more maturity and less partisanship.

When Barack Obama launched his campaign in 2007 he said, “… it’s not the magnitude of our problems that concerns me the most. It’s the smallness of our politics … We have to change our politics, and come together around our common interests and concerns as Americans.”

Why then, on the eve of the most important domestic policy debate in a generation, are the President’s advisers talking about Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh and Fox News? Is this really a common interest and concern among Americans? Would the average voter consider this form of politics to be big or small?

By spending time on juvenile and crass partisan strategies the President’s advisers triangulated the wrong target – their own allies. Their tone and tactics united Republicans (all 40 voted against the doctor fix) and caused 12 key allies to fall away.

The Barack Obama I know and worked with in the Senate (through his initiation) is capable of so much more. America needs that Barack Obama to change the tone and go back to attacking problems rather than personalities.

If he does, he’ll find plenty of friends ready to work with him – old and new. Every Republican wants to enact comprehensive health care reform that lowers costs, improves quality and increases choice. No matter how often our motives are questioned we will be ready to discuss plans like the Patients’ Choice Act, which I’m sponsoring with Senator Burr (R-NC) and Representatives Paul Ryan (R-WI) and Devin Nunes (R-CA), that cover more people than the Democrat plans without pushing our economy off a cliff.

Yes, elections have consequences. The White House certainly has the right to continue its clever partisan strategy. Yet, history shows this process will succeed only if it is truly bipartisan. The doctor fix debate showed that partisanship is the far riskier road.

Posted: October 23, 2009
11:15 pm Eastern

By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

NEW YORK – The integration of the United States with Canada and Mexico, long deemed by many as little more than a fanciful “conspiracy theory,” was actually an idea promoted by the Council on Foreign Relations and sold to President Bush as a means of increasing commerce and business interests throughout North America, according to a top Canadian businessman.

Thomas d’Aquino, CEO and president of the Canadian Council of Chief Executives – the Canadian counterpart to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce – confirmed in an interview recently published in Canada the accuracy of what WND first reported over three years ago: namely, that the Council on Foreign Relations was the prime mover in establishing the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America, or SPP.

Published by the Metropolitan Corporate Counsel Oct. 4, the d’Aquino interview verifies that the creation of the SPP was not a “conspiracy theory” but a well-thought-out North American integration plan launched by his organization, the Canadian Council of Chief Executives, along with the Council on Foreign Relations in the United States.

 According to d’Aquino, President Obama wants to continue North American integration under the renamed North American Leaders Summit, provided the North American Competitiveness Council can be recast to include more environmentalists and union leaders.

In the interview, d’Aquino traced the origin of SPP to his concerns, following the terrorist attacks on 9/11, that “there was a pressing need to keep the border open for commerce while simultaneously addressing the security needs of the United States and North America as a whole.”

Get “America for Sale: Fighting the New World Order, Surviving a Global Depression, and Preserving USA Sovereignty” at the WND Superstore now.

With this goal in mind, d’Aquino explained that the CCCE by 2003 had “launched an agenda that we called the North American Security and Prosperity Initiative, or NASPI.”

As WND reported in July 2007, the term “Security and Prosperity” was first used by the Canadian Council of Chief Executives in a January 23, 2003, report titled “Security and Prosperity: Toward a New Canada-United States Partnership in North America.”

Then, in 2003, d’Aquino brought the idea to Richard Haass, president of the Council on Foreign Relations.

“I helped convince Richard Haass at the Council on Foreign Relations that we should put together a trilateral task force to look at the future of North America,” d’Aquino said. “We recruited John Manley on Canada’s side, along with William Weld, former governor of Massachusetts, and Pedro Aspe, the former Mexican economy minister, who had been so influential in promoting NAFTA.”

The result was a CFR Task Force on the Future of North America created on Oct. 15, 2004, and chaired by Manley, Weld and Aspe, precisely as d’Aquino had recommended to Haass.

The CFR Task Force on the Future of North America issued an executive summary, titled “Creating a North American Community,” that was issued March 14, 2005, just days before the March 23, 2005, trilateral summit at Waco, Texas, in which President George W. Bush, then-Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin and then-Mexican President Vicente Fox declared the Security and Prosperity Partnership on their own authority, without any approval from the U.S. Congress.

The final task force report, titled “Building a North American Community,” was issued in March 2005, immediately following the Waco summit. (Read highlights of the controversial 59-page CFR report – including calls for increased financial aid to Mexico, the creation of a security border perimeter around all of North America, a reduction in border security between the U.S. and Mexico, and the creation of a new North American tribunal to settle disputes.)

D’Aquino agrees that the Council on Foreign Relations task force was instrumental to the trilateral summit in Waco during which the SPP’s existence was declared, saying in the interview: “The result of all these efforts [by the CFR Task Force on the Future of North America] was that in 2005, Prime Minister Martin, President Bush and President Fox decided to sign what they called the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America – the SPP.”

WND has consistently reported that the two reports issued by the CFR Task Force on the Future of North America constituted the “blueprint” for the SPP unveiled at the Waco summit meeting.

The final CFR report included on page xvii a concise statement of purpose: “The Task Force’s central recommendation is establishment by 2010 of a North American economic and security community, the boundaries of which would be defined by a common external tariff and an outer security perimeter.”

D’Aquino also confirmed, as WND had previously reported, that the North American Competitiveness Council was hand-picked by the Chambers of Commerce in the three countries, without any legislative approval from any of the three nations.

“At their next summit meeting, in 2006, the three leaders invited leading members of the CEO communities in the three countries to provide private-sector input on issues related to competitiveness,” he continued. “From that idea, the North American Competitiveness Council (NACC) was born, to be composed of 10 frontline CEOs from each of Canada, the United States and Mexico.” That plan was implemented.

“We produced 10 of our most senior CEOs while the Americans established an executive committee of 15 representing a broad range of large companies with rotating memberships. The Mexicans produced some heavy-duty people – many names you know well.”

As WND reported at the time, the North American Competitiveness Council dominated the third annual SPP summit meeting held in Montebello, Quebec, in Aug. 2007, a fact confirmed by the interview with d’Aquino.

“The first meeting of the NACC with the three leaders took place in Montebello, Quebec, in 2007,” d’Aquino acknowledged. “Our Mexican and American counterparts graciously asked us to write the first NACC report. It was very well received, albeit heavily criticized by unions on the left and others as elitist: ‘Why did these people have access to the national leaders while everyone else was left out?’”

The NACC continued to advise SPP leaders behind closed doors at the fourth annual SPP summit meeting held in New Orleans, in April 2008, as WND reported and as d’Aquino now confirms: “The second meeting of the NACC with the three leaders took place at their summit in New Orleans in 2008 – we were in the room with the leaders for a full hour and a half.”

Whereas Bush was sold on the SPP initiative as a means of enhancing business and commerce in North America, d’Aquino explained, Obama would continue with the SPP only if more environmentalists and union leaders were included in the private advisory group that had consisted entirely of business leaders under the aegis of the NACC.

“When President Obama came to power, he faced a lot of pressure to shelve the SPP and not follow through with the NACC because his advisers were looking for an institution that would also involve environmentalists, union leaders, et al.”

D’Aquino argued that the NACC should continue, and, as WND has reported, the Obama administration is continuing the previous administration’s pursuit of North American integration.

“But at the North American Leaders Summit in Guadalajara this summer, President Calderon and Prime Minister Harper both told President Obama that the NACC was very useful,” d’Aquino said. “In fact, the Canadian NACC group met with our prime minister and his key ministers for an hour and a half on the eve of his departure for the Guadalajara summit. He said that, regardless of whether the NACC continues formally on a trilateral basis, he welcomes our advice on trilateral issues.”

WND has regularly reported that the unannounced goal of the SPP was to create a North American Union, similar to the European Union, by advancing the trade integration realized in NAFTA into continental political integration through the creation of some 20 trilateral bureaucratic working groups and the North American Competitiveness Council, composed of 30 North American business executives hand-picked, 10 each by the Chambers of Commerce of the three countries.

The Obama administration is continuing the SPP initiative under the “rebranded” and “refocused” banner of the less controversially renamed North American Leaders Summit that first met with Obama in Guadalajara, Mexico, last August.

By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

Attacking Fox News and defending President Barack Obama

is a family affair for Anita Dunn, the White House communications director who has blasted Fox as an arm of the Republican Party and talked about “controlling” the news media.

She’s married to Robert Bauer, the chief of the political law group at Perkins Coie, the Seattle law firm hired by the White House to defend President Obama in court cases challenging his “natural born” citizenship status in the United States and thus, his eligibility under the U.S. Constitution to be president.

Dunn is targeting Fox News with criticisms emanating from the administration that it isn’t even a news network , while Bauer has done his best to prevent the American public from seeing a wide range of President Obama’s records that could prove, or disprove, his eligibility to occupy the Oval Office under the Constitution’s requirement that the president be a “natural born” citizen.

Documents concerning Obama that the White House has refused to release to the public include his long-form birth certificate and his passport records, as well as other records that may possibly be relevant, such as records regarding Obama’s possible adoption by his Indonesian stepfather or college application and tuition financial aid records which would reveal whether Obama was ever registered as a foreign student .

Read “The Audacity of Deceit: Barack Obama’s War on American Values”

Anita Dunn

WND previously has reported that Federal Election Commission records show

 $1,352,378.95 in payments were made by Obama for America to Perkins Coie while the law firm was representing President Obama in various court cases which have sought to obtain the president’s long-form birth certificate to determine if he is a “natural born” citizen under Article Two, Section 1 of the Constitution.

Obama for America, Obama’s 2008 political campaign, merged with the Democratic National Committee in January and is now known as Organizing for America. This grassroots army that some refer to as “Obama 2.0″ continues to solicit financial contributions on the BarackObama.com website.

Bauer, a Democratic Party partisan, has a long history of defending Democratic Party presidential hopefuls.

A biography for Bauer posted on the Perkins Coie website indicates he was general counsel to the Democratic National Committee during the presidential campaign of Sen. John Kerry and that he served as counsel to Sen. Tom Daschle, the Democratic leader in the impeachment trial proceedings of President Bill Clinton.

During the 2008 presidential campaign, Bauer functioned as an “attack lawyer,” threatening with FEC complaints groups wanting to run anti-Obama television ads.

Also during the 2008 presidential campaign, Bauer as counsel for the Obama campaign wrote letters to television station managers and to Department of Justice Assistant Attorney General John Keeney arguing that airing an anti-Obama ad pointing to the known association between Obama and Weather Underground radical Bill Ayers would violate federal election rules.

Also during the 2008 campaign, Bauer intervened on behalf of Obama to block the California-based American Leadership Project from running a television ad campaign over support from unions, including the Service Employees International Union.

Again, Bauer filed a complaint with the FEC alleging that the union-funded television campaign the American Leadership Project planned to run in Indiana against Obama was illegal under federal election laws.

In addition to representing Obama on eligibility cases, Bauer also is hired as legal counsel to represent the president in the criminal probe going on into the activities of former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich.

Last year Bauer was at the center of the controversy over Obama’s decision to reverse course on his promise to accept pubic financing for his presidential campaign after a meeting with Sen. John McCain’s attorney, Trevor Potter, when Bauer claimed McCain did not want to reach a compromise on the issue.

The McCain campaign sharply criticized Bauer’s characterization of the meeting.

It was in June 2007 when Bauer authored a piece in Huffington Post regarding Vice President Dick Cheney’s aide, Scooter Libby, arguing that liberals should not oppose a White House pardon because a pardon would draw President George W. Bush directly into the case, with the potential the “presidential fingerprints” could become politically explosive.

WND previously reported on Dunn’s statements that Obama’s presidential campaign focused on “making” the news media cover certain issues by controlling messages through videos produced and distributed by David Plouffe.

•  
  “We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.“   [Emphasis added]
  “Citizenship is not an entitlement program. It comes with responsibilities…. Everybody—somewhere between the ages 18 and 25—will serve three months of basic training and understanding in a kind of civil defense. That universal sense of service—somewhere between the ages of 18 and 25—will give Americans, once again, a sense of what they are to be American and their contribution to a country and a common experience.“   [Emphasis added]

Starting in 1933 with FDR’s Civilian Conservation Corps, progressive Democrats have had a long history of promoting the idea of “National Service” in this country. Barack Obama continued that tradition during his campaign with proposals for one hundred hours of community service in exchange for a $4,000 college tuition tax credits coupled with fifty hours per year of mandatory service to be demanded from every middle and high school student. While this particular plan has yet to be implemented, on April 21, Obama did sign the Serve America Act which transfers six billion dollars of taxpayer money to the government’s Corporation for National and Community Service, to be used to expand the existing AmeriCorps organization, adding 175,000 additional people to the government payroll. He also signed a bill which takes the audacious step of redesignating September 11th as a “National Day of Service“!President Obama has stated:

And Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel has said:

And notice that Emanuel’s plan is not just for training, but for understanding, which can only mean indoctrination into the government’s view of what it means to be a “good and useful citizen”!

These quotes, along with the actions of this administration, make it very clear that Barack Obama believes that the citizens of America owe a duty to their country, and that they should be compelled to meet this obligation through mandatory service. This is nothing less than a push to make every citizen and indentured servant to the state, which of course, inverts the proper relationship of the government and its citizenry while violating the Thirteenth Amendment.

United We Slave

•  
  “pledge to be a servant to our president and to all mankind …“.
  “write letters to themselves about what they can do to help the president“
  “to engage in a discussion about what ‘the president wants us to do’ “
  “Because when you give up on yourself, you give up on your country.“
  “What will a president who comes here in twenty or fifty or one hundred years say about what all of you did for this country?“
  “So don’t let us down—don’t let your family or your country or yourself down.“

While working to push mandatory service legislation through Congress, the White House has created an organization called United We Serve, which acts as a clearinghouse for initiatives all across the country where individuals can volunteer for public service in their communities.Now, if this were an activity undertaken by a private organization, there would be nothing wrong with publicizing such opportunities and allowing people to freely volunteer their time, effort or money to promote actions which they judged to be beneficial and were therefore eager to support. But the government is not like any other private organization. It is a repository and instrument of force. While we may freely choose whether or not to associate with any given private organization without fear of reprisal, the government operates through coercion, compelling us to follow its mandates under the threat of fines or incarceration, and it is this simple fact which renders the government’s involvement in promoting activities like these wholy inappropriate.

It might be argued that, in and of itself, United We Serve appears to be completely benign, without a hint of threat or coercion associated with any of the activities being promoted, — but this is not true. The implication of force always accompanies any governmental action. We already know from this administration’s own statements that it desires to make national service a requirement of citizenship, so an organization such as this, which uses public funds to register information on all “projects”, and aids in matching “volunteers” to those projects, can easily be seen as just a first step towards the ultimate goal of mandating participation from all citizens in the future.

But don’t take my word for it. Many of Obama’s Hollywood supporters understand exactly what the President requires of them. For example, in this video ad, Ashton Kutcher and Demi Moore make it all explicit when they:

Now, some might argue that these are just a few actors who have completely misinterpreted the President’s meaning. So instead, let’s look at what the administration is proposings in its own words. In preparation for Obama’s September 8th speech to school children all across the country, the government originally made the following “suggestions” to teachers of pre-K through sixth grade, to have the students:

In response to the public outcry at such blatant tactics of indoctrination, these guidelines were changed, but the intent and the message is clear. Students, too young to fully grasp the principles involved, are being subtly encouraged to see themselves as subservient to the President and to learn to place the government’s desires or society’s goals ahead of their own. With the release of the text of his speech to students, we see this mind-set in action:

So, the message to the students is that they should stay in school and study hard, not strictly for the benefits of creating more opportunities and achieving a better life for themselves, but principally so that they can become good, productive citizens and contribute to solving the countries myriad problems.

 

“Don’t let your country down!   Meet your obligation and commit to serving the common good.” This is not the credo of freedom, but instead a call to slavery.

Individualism versus Self-Sacrifice

•  
  “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the consent of the governed …“   [Emphasis added]
  To create a society where free people may pursue their own individual goals and dreams—in other words, their happiness—while living in peace and harmony with others.

What is insidious about the push for National Service is how it so totally violates the concept of individualism, which is the bedrock principle underlying the U.S. Constitution. The purpose of the Constitution was to: (1) recognize the unalienable rights of each individual; (2) establish a governmental framework for protecting those rights; and (3) place strict limits on the power and scope of government so that it could not abuse its mandate and itself become an instrument for the violation of individuals’ rights. As the Declaration of Independence states: 

This statement very clearly established the hierarchical relationship between a citizen and their government. The existence of the rights of the individual, and the need to protect those rights, are the sole justification for the creation of government. A government is not a sovereign entity with any inherent rights or privileges of its own, but instead, only acquires it legitimacy from the voluntary consent of its citizens, and only insofar as it adheres to its constitutionally prescribed function of protecting its citizen’s rights. The existence of government is not an end we strive for, but simply a means to a different end:

 

Barack Obama’s incessant call for sacrifice by US citizens is an affront to the Constitution. Free individuals are not a resource to be called upon to serve at the behest of the President for the government’s grand designs. Instead, it is the government, which has been instituted for the explicit purpose of serving the needs of its citizens in protecting their rights. By elevating the purpose and value of “government” or “society” above that of the the citizen, Obama perverts the fundamental principle of the Constitution, substituting collectivism in place of individualism.

 

The Morality of Altruism

•  
  1: unselfish regard for or devotion to the welfare of others
  2: behavior by an animal that is not beneficial to or may be harmful to itself but that benefits others of its species
  “Power, Petey. I want to rule.
  Whom…?You. The world. It’s only a matter of discovering the lever. If you learn how to rule one single man’s soul, you can get the rest of mankind. It’s the soul, Peter, the soul. Not whips or swords or fire or guns. That’s why the Caesars, the Attilas, the Napoleons were fools and did not last. We will. The soul, Peter, is that which can’t be ruled. It must be broken. Drive a wedge in, get your fingers on it—and the man is yours. You won’t need a whip—he’ll bring it to you and ask to be whipped. Set him in reverse—and his own mechanism will do your work for you. Use him against himself. Want to know how it’s done? See if I ever lied to you. See if you haven’t heard all this for years, but didn’t want to hear, and the fault is yours, not mine.There are many ways. Here’s one. Make man feel small. Make him feel guilty. Kill his aspiration and his integrity. … Kill man’s sense of values. Kill his capacity to recognize greatness or to achieve it. … Kill by laughter. …Here’s another way. This is most important. Don’t allow men to be happy. Happiness is self-contained and self-sufficient. Happy men have no time and no use for you. Happy men are free men. So kill their joy in living. Take away from them what they want. Make them think that the mere thought of a personal desire is evil. Bring them to a state where saying ‘I want’ is no longer a natural right, but a shameful admission. Altruism is of great help in this. Unhappy men will come to you. They’ll need you. They’ll come for consolation, for support, for escape. Nature allows no vacuum. Empty man’s soul—and the space is yours to fill.I don’t see why you should look so shocked, Peter. This is the oldest one of all. Look back at history. Look at any great system of ethics, from the Orient up. Didn’t they all preach the sacrifice of personal joy? Under all the complications of verbiage, haven’t they all had a single leitmotif: sacrifice, renunciation, self-denial? Haven’t you been able to catch their theme song? ‘Give up, give up, give up, give up’? Look at the moral atmosphere of today. Everything enjoyable, from cigarettes to sex to ambition to the profit motive, is considered depraved or sinful. Just prove that a thing makes men happy and you’ve damned it. That’s how far we’ve come. We’ve tied happiness to guilt. And we’ve got mankind by the throat. …

  The world of the future. The world I want. A world of obedience and of unity. A world where the thought of each man will not be his own, but an attempt to guess the thought of the next neighbor who’ll have no thought—and so on, Peter, around the globe. Since all must agree with all. A world where no man will hold a desire for himself, but will direct all his efforts to satisfy the desires of his neighbor who’ll have no desires except to satisfy the desires of the next neighbor, who’ll have no desires—around the globe, Peter. Since all must serve all. A world in which man will not work for so innocent an incentive as money, but for that headless monster—prestige. The approval of his fellows—their good opinion—the opinion of men who’ll be allowed to hold no opinion. An octopus, all tentacles and no brain.

  ”

   

   

   

  “You won’t need a whip—he’ll bring it to you and ask to be whipped.
  Set him in reverse—and his own mechanism will do your work for you.
  Use him against himself.“
  • Child and Adult Care Food Program
  • Earned Entitlements for Railroad Employees
  • Federal Housing Assistance
  • Food Stamps
  • Head Start
  • Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program
  • Medicare & Medicaid
  • Nationalized Health Care [Proposed]
  • School Lunch and Breakfast Programs
  • Social Security
  • Special Supplemental Nutrition Program
  • State Children’s Health Insurance Program
  • TARP Funds
  • Temporary Assistance for Needy Families
  • The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation
  • Title XX Social Services Block Grant Program
  • Trade Adjustment Assistance
  • Veterans Benefits and Services
  • Workers’ Compensation
  • Workforce Investment Act
  • ……

Individuals are turned into sacrificial animals, only by accepting the moral code of altruism, which is defined as: 

Only by first convincing someone that their personal hopes, dreams, desires, feelings, goals and lives are of less importance when compared to those of another person, group, or even possibly to an abstract ideal, do you prepare them for slavery and sacrifice. Growing up in Soviet Russia during the aftermath of its revolution, the philosopher, Ayn Rand, watched first hand as the morality of altruism played itself out, writ large across an entire country’s population. The lesson she learned was that altruistic dogma applied only to those destined to be ruled by an elite leadership that was not subject to the same standards. Or as the character Ellsworth Toohey from The Fountainhead puts it, when asked by Peter Keating as to what he is really after:

 

Can you hear the voice of our politicians in these words?

When you read the phrase:

 

isn’t it ominously suggestive of the video by Ashton Kutcher and Demi Moore, pledging to be servants to the President and all mankind?

While the concept of National Service is particularly vicious, it is only one program of many that the government imposes, or attempts to impose, upon us under the justification of self-sacrifice and service to others. All social programs that declare that some individual or group is entitled to goods and services by right, also involve some other party that is then made responsible for providing those goods and services at their expense. Some of these include:

 

Each recipient benefiting from these programs abdicates responsibility for their own life and casts themselves into the role of ward of the state. And, for each of these government programs to operate, other individuals are required to work, producing value in the marketplace, only to have the product of their labor taken from them by force and redistributed to “the wards” against their will, while receiving no direct benefit themselves. The proper term for this arrangement is slavery.

It is the morality of altruism that makes all of this possible, and it is altruism that must be stopped.

The Antidote: A Personal Declaration of Independence

•  
  “Reason is man’s only proper judge of values and his only proper guide to action. The proper standard of ethics is: man’s survival qua man—i.e., that which is required by man’s nature for his survival as a rational being (not his momentary physical survival as a mindless brute). Rationality is man’s basic virtue, and his three fundamental values are: reason, purpose, self-esteem. Man—every man—is an end in himself, not a means to the ends of others; he must live for his own sake, neither sacrificing himself to others nor sacrificing others to himself; he must work for his rational self-interest, with the achievement of his own happiness as the highest moral purpose of his life.“  — Any Rand   [From the Ayn Rand Institute]
  “I swear by my life, and my love of it, that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine.“
  In other words, you are stating that you are neither a ward nor a slave of the state.

Click here to take The John Galt Pledge  This country is at a crossroads. We can either continue the move towards the form of collectivism that is being actively pursued by the current administration, abdicating more and more responsibility for our own lives while placing ourselves in servitude to others and agreeing to be ruled by the elite in Washington D.C. — or we can change direction and move back towards the principles of freedom and individual rights embodied in The Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution. And as Ayn Rand identified it in the quotes above, this is a battle for nothing less than one’s very soul.The antidote is to adopt a morality of rational self-interest: 

In the novel, Atlas Shrugged, the essence of this morality was encapsulated in the following pledge that was taken by every person who wished to reside in the haven of Galt’s Gulch:

 

This pledge, which one makes to oneself, is an expression of individualism, and a Personal Declaration of Independence from the shackles of both society and the state.

The first half of the pledge is a recognition that no others have a claim, by right, to your life, whether they be an individual, a group, or the government, and you assert your freedom and independence.

The second half of the pledge indicates a recognition that you are a self-sufficient adult, prepared to take responsibility for the conduct of your own life, and, respecting the rights of others, you have no intention of forcing them to fulfill that responsibility for you.

 

If you agree with this, then you qualify to take the John Galt Pledge. Click on the image below and add your name to a growing list of individuals demanding that the government respect and defend their personal autonomy and restore their lost constitutional rights.

Blog

The blog page contains updates, announcements and additional discussions explaining the intent behind this initiative, as well as ideas and suggestions from readers.

Click here for the  John Galt Pledge  Blog

Contact

I am very interested in receiving feedback and suggestions regarding this project, and I would enjoy hearing any ideas you may have for related activities. Please send me an e-mail message sharing your thoughts. Interesting ideas and suggestions will be added to this site in the future.I wish you all the best and I truly appreciate your participation in the fight for freedom, in whatever form you choose to express it.In Liberty,
–
C. Jeffery Small

 Also See:
• Civilian National Security Force
• For What Purpose IS Obama Building an Immense Civilian Defense Force?
• Marines, Marine Special Forces, Navy Seals, Navy, Army Rangers and Sheriffs Around the Country Refuse to Attack Americans or Their Rights

Michael Hilton of American Police Force

We have been watching with fascination the story out of Montana about a mysterious security company called American Police Force that was slated to take over operation of a never-used jail in the town of Hardin.

Click here for links to earlier stories.

Earlier postings noted some of the twists and turns, including word that one of the front men for the APF, Michael Hilton, had a criminal record in California, that the company had changed its name to American Private Police Force, that one company SUV showed up bearing a decal that said “City of Hardin Police Department. ”

Equally interesting, no one seemed to be able to say what the company would be doing at the jail or, where it would get prisoners to fill it. All of which was enough to prod the Montana attorney general to begin looking into the deal.

Now it appears that the whole thing is unraveling. Greg Smith, the executive director of Two Rivers Authority, the Hardin economic development arm that signed the original deal, has now resigned reports the Billings Gazette. No reason was given for his departure. The TRA lawyer who structured the deal is also being replaced.
 
“We won’t move forward,” says Gary Arneson, president of the TRA, which owns the jail. “I don’t think any of us want to be on the chopping block.”

In another twist, the AP reports that an international security executive that local officials were told would run the jail, says that’s not true, that he only had cursory conversations with Hilton about the position.

As for Hilton, the the San Jose Mercury News reports that a California judge has ordered him to appear in court later this month over an outstanding judgment in a fraud lawsuit. Stay tuned.

(Photo by Matthew Brown, AP)

The Liberty Tree Lantern asks, who hired and who is paying this “American Police Force” and for what purpose?  Is this just the start of a program that is totally sponsored by the U.S. Government?   WHOSE IDEA WAS IT to hire these professionally trained mercenaries and give them a huge jail?  Perhaps the IRS AGENTS of “The MATRIX”, so that We The People are better forced to comply with the hugely massive increase in taxes will hit the middle class blue collar working men and women after the next election, incrementally rising to 80% of earnings, just to pay for the Social Security and Medicare anti-Constitutional Socialist programs ALONE which are hand to mouth UNFUNDED Liabilities amounting to $99 TRILLION DOLLARS over the infinite horizon?  Where d0 you think they are going to get that money from people? 

WAKE  UP AND  SMELL THE   green “hybrid” of  SOCIALISM,  COMMUNISM,  AND   FASCISIM  people!  How long are you going to take living on only 20% of your earnings?  You better think about that, because in less than two years that will be the reality, unless you decide to talk about these things with your neighbors, friends, family, relatives and whenever you venture out of your home with everyone you meet.  And learn what the Declaration of Independence and The Constitution of the United (but independent and sovereign) States of America says.

Do you suppose that this American Police Force of professional highly trained mercenaries might be the ones who train our 18 – 25 year old children conscripts who are soon being compelled by the U.S. Government to join the Civilian National Security Force?  You children, after and with continued indoctrination of “green” Socialist, Communist, Fascist, multicultural, politically correct Obamasonian ways may well find themselves going to Fort Hardin for training one of these days in the very near future.  How else will our Government and the IRS be able to collect this level of income and other taxes on the average common American and keep us under CONTROL?

If you are just beginning to wake up with regards to all of this I would highly recommend that you start learning about all of these things that are directly impacting your life, employment, and personal financial affairs by reading all of the articles on this blog.  If you are just beginning to realize the seriousness of what is happening, you have a lot of catching up to do.  I have been researching these things and the associated economics resultant from incremental Constitutional contempt by both houses of the U.S. Congress, several Administrations and even the Judicial branch, of both political parties, of the U.S. Government, that has been occurring since 1913, for about 26 years now.  These tyrants and scofflaws have really put us in a bind.  But, there is a solution.  Unfortunately the medicine is going to be very bitter and result in about five years of financial horror because we MUST allow The MATRIX, our economy that only exists in our minds our prison formed by The Federal Reserve and our U.S. Government, so that we can be truly free and thereby rebuild our economy through hard work using real AMERICAN money, gold and silver coin as per the LAW in The Constitution under Article 1 Section 8, and not FEDERAL RESERVE “NOTES”.

Perhaps the APPF is just a screwup by a con-man?

NLPC

The only good thing that can be said about JPMorgan Chase is that, like Arvedlund, it was perceptive enough to smell the Madoff rat. But unlike Arvedlund, who tried to sound the alarm, JPMorgan Chase kept quiet and tried to protect itself.

Arvedlund explains:

In 2006, JPMorgan Chase developed a derivative product for its wealthy clients. It was linked to the Fairfield Sentry Fund offered by the Madoff feeder Fairfield Greenwich. The bank offered investors — mostly in Europe — a note that paid three times the earnings, or returns, of the Sentry Fund. The note matured in five years. To hedge its risk on the derivative product, the bank invested in the Sentry Fund itself. This way, if the Sentry Fund did well, the bank’s returns would offset its obligation on the notes.

By the summer of 2008, JPMorgan Chase had deposited $250 million with the Sentry Fund. With the financial meltdown on Wall Street and around the world in full swing, most of the markets were down 30% or more, and yet the Sentry Fund reported gains of 5%. JPMorgan Chase began to grow suspicious.

As a result:

In September 2008, JPMorgan Chase quietly liquidated its entire $250 million position in the Sentry Fund, even though it remained liable on the derivatives it had sold to the wealthy clients. At the time, the Fairfield Sentry investment notes were showing a 5% gain for the year. The bank had concluded Madoff was a phony, and the only way to protect itself was to liquidate anything connected with Madoff.

When JPMorgan Chase bought what was left of Bear Stearns last year, it inherited a relationship with Madoff that is also sure to raise more questions about its ethics. According to Arvedlund:

Brokers who traded at Bear Stearns used the firm’s automated equity order system to buy and sell stocks. A broker would enter the stock symbol and the number of shares he or she wanted to trade. The system was supposed to do the rest: work to find the best counterparty to trade with from among the many market makers that traded with Bear Stearns. However, for Nasdaq stocks, Bear Stearns had an unwritten code: the system automatically defaulted to trade with Madoff.

Madoff reportedly paid Bear Stearns substantial fees for this default setting on their equity order system, and he may have paid other customers to do the same as well. Between 2000 and 2008, Bear Stearns’ 400 or so brokers all used this system, and all their Nasdaq trades defaulted to Madoff. It was a big source of revenue for Madoff, and it vaulted Bear Stearns to a position as the largest counterparty trading with Madoff. The arrangement was in place when Bear Stearns went under in early 2008, and it continued under JPMorgan Chase.

JPMorgan Chase and/or the JPMorgan Chase Foundation are major funders of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) and related organizations. ACORN is a network of as many as 360 organizations, structured to escape accountability, a network far more complicated than anything Madoff ever constructed.

ACORN has had its own embezzlement scandal. Dale Rathke, the brother of ACORN founder Wade Rathke, stole nearly $1 million in 1999 and 2000. ACORN treated the crime as an internal matter and did not even notify its board. A whistle-blower made it public. Dale Rathke remained on ACORN’s payroll until June 2008.

According to its 2007 tax return (the most recent available), the JPMorgan Chase Foundation made a million-dollar gift to ACORN Housing, Inc. that year. This donation is likely the tip of the iceberg of the bank’s total support of ACORN. JPMorgan Chase is one of ACORN largest corporate backers, if not the largest. JPMorgan Chase can take a step toward accountability by disclosing the specifics of its support for ACORN.

Last fall, JPMorgan Chase accepted $25 billion in taxpayer TARP funds. In 2008, the top 200 bonus recipients at JPMorgan Chase received $1.12 billion. The firm had 1,144 employees who received a bonus of least $1 million last year, more than any other Wall Street firm.

You would think with all these millionaires walking around the company, there would be at least a passing acknowledgement of the wealth generation potential of a free economy. Not a chance.  CEO Jamie Dimon sneers at free market advocates. The firm funds a variety of anti-business activists, ACORN being just the most dramatic example.

Dimon is apparently not self-conscious either about ACORN’s role in the residential mortgage crisis, much of it driven by subprime lending. Starting in the Seventies, ACORN saw the big banks as shakedown targets. The weak-kneed executives at these institutions were pretty easy pickings.

ACORN screamed “racism.” It accused mortgage lenders of “redlining,” or denying credit to borrowers in certain areas. It picketed the homes of bank directors in leafy suburbs.
A way out was offered to the banks. They could make contributions to ACORN and/or they could “invest” in ACORN Housing, which made loans to “underserved” borrowers.

They also could back off from opposition to a law called the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 that required banks and thrifts to lend more money from areas where they took deposits. It meant more loans to “underserved” communities, and a loosening of lending standards.

Of course, many of ACORN’s “deserving” borrowers were not deserving at all. Increasingly, the banks dumped the loans on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which were under pressure by Congressmen like Barney Frank (D-MA) to make more loans to the “underserved.”

The result was the mortgage meltdown that nearly took down our entire financial system, providing the justification for the massive bailouts of the banks. But Dimon acts like JMorgan Chase has no culpability because of its “solid” balance sheet.

According to Arvedlund, there are already civil suits against JPMorgan Chase by investors whose funds were acccepted into Madoff’s account at the bank after it had concluded that Madoff was a fraud. Of course, this may also be criminal, but there is no word that the bank is the target of a criminal investigation.

During the campaign, Dimon was a vocal supporter of Barack Obama. On July 18, the New York Times called Dimon “Obama’s favorite banker.” Dimon may hope that this relationship will insulate his firm from prosecution in the Madoff case. In any event, JPMorgan Chase’s culture must be questioned, along with Dimon’s credibility and leadership.

The Liberty Tree Lantern analysis and commentary on the above article: 

J.P. Morgan Chase Bank is one of the 12 Banking concerns that own The Federal Reserve “System”.  See: OWNERSHIP OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE.  This bank is one of the programmers of The MATRIX, our economy that only exists in our minds because our minds have been programmed to believe that a small piece of paper with green ink on it is worth 100 cents, when in the real world, outside of The MATRIX, outside of our minds, they are really only worth 2 – 3 cents each. So you have never been even close to fully paid for your labor and you have never paid for anything your mind believes you paid for.  In essence nothing, IN A FINANCIAL SENSE, you can see, touch or smell really exists because it was paid for with almost worthless pieces of paper with ink on it.  How can you buy a car or a refrigerator with nothing more than  pieces of paper with almost nothing backing it up, that is printed out of thin air on glorified computer printers at a Federal Reserve office?  If this is possible then how come only these super rich bankers can print out this Monopoly money, you have a computer printer too, why can’t you print your own?  The Banking cartel of twelve privately owned banks, do it almost every single day.  Now the question that will really blow your mind is; if you didn’t really pay for anything you have, because you used dollars that in the real world was only worth about 4 cents or less each, than who really owns it?  Someday soon we may all find out and it isn’t going to be pretty.

In any case this MATRIX is going to collapse, by something known as hyper-inflation, which is actually the revaluation of the dollar to its true value by the entire world, in less than three years.  Welcome this nightmare folks, because without the total collapse of the MATRIX we will never be free or have liberty, or ever be individually wealthy.  The MATRIX was created to imprison our minds and enslave us for the power and wealth of the power hungry megalomaniacs of the world; the forty owners of The Federal Reserve “System” and their cronies in the U.S. Government and in ‘certain’ BIG Corporations. 

Pray for the temporary horror of the utter collapse of The MATRIX, our economy, because if we each INDIVIDUALLY BUT UNITED fight for and   PERSONALLY   ENFORCE  the rule of LAW that we wrote, established and ordained in The Constitution upon our U.S. Government, word for word, in spirit and intent, as it WAS meant on the day it was ratified, then the vast majority of our common average working men and women will, through very hard work and the blessings of God, become wealthy with REAL money from our creator. 

So pray people, pray for the end of our economy, THE MATRIX, our prison of the mind, which now uses each and every one of us as though we are utter slaves of “the system” being controlled and manipulated through usurpation, Constitutionally illegal legislation, tyranny, oppression, taxation and so-called tax credits where they first STEAL our earnings, before we even get them, in the form of Federal, FICA, and Medicare ”withholding” and payroll taxes that we would have otherwise received from our employers on our paychecks, and then they say they will give us a “little fraction” of what they stole out of our paychecks IF we cow tow to their DEMANDS and mandates. 

What gives them the right to hold us in such utter contempt, when it was We The people who ‘borrowed’ them SEVENTEEN enumerated items in Article 1 Section 8 of The Constitution as further supported by the 9th and 10th Amendments in The Bill of Rights, certain authorities that we individually received from our creator,  for the ‘privilege’ of handling for us.    How dare they?

READ THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE   and the dovetail CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED (but independent and sovereign) STATES OF AMERICA, today, so you know what you must fight for.  Also read the numerous writings of our founding fathers.   And be sure to read The 5000 Year Leap which will greatly facilitate the meaning, spirit and intent of the Declaration and the Constitution so that you understand both of them perspicuously. 

Also see: One World Order to Come After Economic Boom Leads to Black Friday