We Refuse!

Michael Boldin
Tenth Amendment Center
April 19, 2010

The following is based off a speech given at the Palm Desert Tax Day Tea Party on April 15, 2010

Until we address the absolute fact that the federal government has too much power, things will never change.

There are a few core beliefs that guide me in everything I do as the founder of the Tenth Amendment Center

• Rights are not “granted” to us by the government – they are ours by our very nature, by our birthright.

• ALL just political authority is derived from the people – and government exists solely with our consent!

• We the people of the several states created the federal government – not the other way around!

• The Tenth Amendment defines the total scope of federal power as being that which has been delegated by the people to the federal government in the Constitution – and nothing more.

• The People of each State have the sole and exclusive right and power to govern themselves in all areas not delegated to their government.

• A Government without limits is a tyranny!

• When Congress enacts laws and regulations that are not made in Pursuance of the powers enumerated in the Constitution, the People are not bound to obey them.

These seven items are about sovereignty, which is something we hear about quite a bit lately – but few really understand. Sovereignty is defined as “final authority.” All through history, this final authority was in the hands of just one or two people – a king, a queen, or even just a small cabal of elites at the top of the food chain.

But the founders and ratifiers gave us something unique in history – a first, really. They created a system where the average people – you and I – held final authority. We the people are sovereign. We the people hold final authority. We the people are in charge. And, they the government work for us!

The Tenth Amendment codifies in law this principle of popular sovereignty – that “We the People” of the several states created the federal government to be our agent for certain, enumerated purposes – and nothing more. But unfortunately, that’s not how things have been working, and very little that the government does is actually authorized by the constitution. And, this is a problem that didn’t just start in January 2009 – it’s been going on a long, long time.

Question – What do we do about it?

• Do we call and email our representatives in Congress and ask them to limit their own power?

• Do we march on D.C. and demand that the government limit its own power?

• Do we sue them in their own courts and ask their judges to limit their power?

• Do we vote the bums out in 2010, or 2012 – and ask new politicians to limit their own power?

Thomas Jefferson and James Madison both warned us that if the federal government ever became the sole and exclusive arbiter of the extent of its own powers – that power would endlessly grow…regardless of elections, separation of powers, courts, or other vaunted parts of our system.

Guess what – they were right. For a hundred years, we the people have been suing, and marching, and lobbying, and voting the bums out – but yet…year in and year out, government continues to grow and your liberty continues to diminish – and it doesn’t matter who is the president, or what political party controls congress – the growth of power in the federal government never stops.

The problem we face today is not about personalities or political parties – it’s about power. Until we address the absolute fact that the federal government has too much power, things will never change.

Question – What do we do about it?

Jefferson and Madison gave us the answer. In response to the unconstitutional attacks on liberty that were the Alien and Sedition Acts, they secretly authored the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions of 1798. Here are a few excerpts that really define exactly how things are supposed to work when two or more branches of the federal government conspire against the constitution and your liberty.

the several States composing the United States of America, are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their General Government

whensoever the General Government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force.

where powers are assumed [by the federal government] which have not been delegated [by the Constitution], a nullification of the act is the rightful remedy

So while it might be important to call, petition, demand, march, sue and vote bums out, because they’re all bums, there’s much more we’re supposed to do. When the federal government violates your rights, you’re not supposed to wait four years for new politicians in the hope that they’ll fix it. You’re not supposed to wait two, or four, or more years for some black-robed judge to pronounce that they’ve violated your rights. You are supposed to resist those violations of your liberty as they happen – and it is your state’s solemn duty to do the same.

NEW MOVEMENT

While such a task might seem daunting, it’s something that’s already happening today, and has been growing in recent years too.

In 2007, one state rep in Maine introduced a non-binding resolution opposing the REAL ID Act.

In 2008, one state rep in Oklahoma introduced a simple non-binding resolution reaffirming the Constitution as defined by the 10th amendment,.

In 2009, one state rep in Montana introduced a bill to nullify some federal gun laws and regulations.

In 2009, one state rep in Arizona introduced a state constitutional amendment to effectively ban a national health care plan in that state.

These simple, single acts by courageous people have grown into a state-level resistance to unconstitutional federal acts the likes this country has possibly never seen.

• Already a dozen states have passed 10th amendment resolutions reaffirming the Constitution as the founders and ratifiers gave us.

• 25 states have passed laws and resolutions nullifying the Real ID act – stopping it dead in its tracks in most of the country.

• 7 states have passed Firearms Freedom Acts – nullifying some federal gun laws and regulations in their states.

• 14 states have now passed laws nullifying unconstitutional federal laws on marijuana

• 3 states have already passed Health Care Freedom Acts to ban federal health care mandates in their states.

• Other states are considering nullification laws on cap and trade, the misuse of state national guard troops, monetary policy and much more.

Here at the Tenth Amendment Center we have released model legislation for you to give to your state reps to demand that they stand with you and refuse to comply with unconstitutional acts from Washington D.C. Our latest? The Federal Health Care Nullification Act.

This Act is not over 1000 pages. It’s not 500 pages. It’s not a dozen, or even two. It’s one single page to nullify now.

Here’s a majority of what it says:

The Legislature of the State of _______________ declares that the federal law known as the “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act,” signed by President Barack Obama on March 23, 2010, is not authorized by the Constitution of the United States and violates its true meaning and intent as given by the Founders and Ratifiers, and is hereby declared to be invalid in this state, shall not be recognized by this state, is specifically rejected by this state, and shall be considered null and void and of no effect in this state.

And it adds some much-needed ‘teeth’ too:

Any official, agent, or employee of the United States government or any employee of a corporation providing services to the United States government that enforces or attempts to enforce an act, order, law, statute, rule or regulation of the government of the United States in violation of this act shall be guilty of a felony and upon conviction must be punished by a fine not exceeding five thousand dollars ($5,000.00), or a term of imprisonment not exceeding five (5) years, or both.

They want to fine us or put us in jail for not buying insurance from some corporation. What’s next – fining us for not buying a Chevy? Well, it’s time that we turn this thing around – and in the federal health care nullification act – we fine THEM for violating our rights!

While this may seem difficult to accomplish – or even insurmountable – if we do nothing, or if we even do the same things we’ve been doing, we’re doomed to failure. But if we do what’s right, we will succeed! Samuel Adams put it best: “It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people’s minds.”

Question: What do we do about it?

Step one is to sign on in support the Federal Health Care Nullification Act. WeRefuse.com is a new website (and the only one that I’m aware of) dedicated solely to nullifying national health care on a state level. Join us in our first goal of 100,000 to stop national health care “laws” today!

Let’s make this work and then we can use it as a model for every other constitutional violation coming out of D.C.

Source: Tenth Amendment Center

Get Ready, Inflation Is On The Way

Giordano Bruno
April 19, 2010



In the professional financial world, the term “inflation” has many inferences, consequences, supposed benefits, and definitions. One Wall Street economist may have an entirely different interpretation of the word than another Wall Street economist working in the same building. This lack of a common orientation to the issue creates serious confusion for the everyday investor and the average American only looking for the fundamentals, so that they may better protect their livelihood. In fact, it is not unusual to see two financial analysts discussing inflation in the MSM, only to completely fumble over each other because they do not share a mutual idea of what it actually means.

The last time a major western power was thrust into the nightmare of hyperinflation, we ended up with the Third Reich.

Some consider inflation as the expansion of markets, some the expansion of profit margins, others the unbalanced increase in productivity versus demand. These are all marginal inflationary concerns compared to REAL inflation; the inflation of prices due to a devaluation of the dollar.

Since the current economic crisis officially began in 2007, we and others have been warning about the inherent danger of dollar collapse in the face of unprecedented liquidity creation by the private Federal Reserve, as well as the continued collapse of the Treasury Bond market, and the massive increase in our national debt caused by unchecked spending by the government under both Republican and Democratic administrations. While we are well aware that the mainstream media, for the most part, has shrugged off the possibility, and are currently in sing-song over our supposed “recovery”, we believe the threat has grown to substantial levels over the past three years, and that recent signals indicate that inflationary effects will soon be widely visible to the general public.

Unchecked inflation, or “hyperinflation”, is perhaps the most devastating economic circumstance in existence. Inflation not only disrupts the mechanics of a financial system, it also evaporates the buying power of currency; the very basis of trade, decimating the savings of an entire nation in one fell swoop. The United States has been on this path for quite some time. The ill-conceived (and likely engineered) journey is quickly coming to an end…

Treasury Yields Signal Approaching Dollar Plunge

By now, most Americans, even those with little interest in economic affairs, are aware of the disintegrating Treasury bond market. Foreign investment in long term U.S. debt is almost non-existent. Without a continuous flow of foreign funds to support our deficit spending free-for-all, our economy WILL collapse, along with the Dollar. It is only a matter of time. In order to delay this collapse, the Federal Reserve (in tandem with certain government officials) has been creating fiat money en masse to buy our own debt, thus monetizing it further, and setting the groundwork for a major devaluation of the Dollar. I believe that this process is nearing completion, and that treasury yields are a prominent indicator of an approaching bond bubble burst. You can track the activity in Treasury auctions here:

http://treasuryauctionwatch.blogspot.com/

Treasury yields have spiked to startling levels in the past two months, flirting with 4%, for 10 year notes and poised to increase further. Some may argue that yields have been at the same level and much higher in the past. The problem is that this did not occur while interest rates were being artificially held at zero by the Federal Reserve.



Without going into a ten page synopsis on the intricacies of the Treasury price vs. yield relationship, essentially, when yields are up, it means bond prices are going down. When bond prices go down, especially when they go down dramatically, this indicates dollar devaluation and the possibility of inflation. Yields often rise when the government cannot generate enough investment in our debt, which is exactly what has happened. Responses to bond auctions over the past year have been dismal:

http://www.businessinsider.com/us-treasury-crisis-2010-4

The MSM has skirted the issue of yields and inflation, claiming that rising yields only show that the economy is improving and that people are pulling money away from bonds and throwing it back into riskier assets such as stocks. This interpretation would make sense under normal circumstances. However, our situation is far from normal. Yields should remain relatively low while interest rates are kept close to zero, but they have not remained low, and this is cause for concern. The Federal Reserve has lowered interest rates to zero and stated clearly that they intend to keep them there for much longer than most thought they would, yet they still can’t generate enough investment in the U.S. Dollar to support our national debt, and have thus allowed yields to spike to lure in new buyers. We are practically giving away bonds, and no one wants them! This signals to me that Treasury markets could conceivably tank in the near future, and we would either be facing a sovereign debt crisis like Greece, or (more likely), the Fed will become the one and only buyer of U.S. debt with money printed out of thin air, and presto! Hyperinflation!

http://www.dailymarkets.com/economy/…

This article from 2007 is rather prophetic:

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN2431420620071224

Interestingly, while this development will hurt almost everyone, certain people will benefit, mainly the international banks, which stand to make incredible profits because they borrow short and lend long, if they lend at all. This might explain why banks who received bailout cash have so far refused to begin pumping it back into the real economy, and why credit markets have remained chilly. It is possible they invested a large portion of this money into treasuries, tightened credit, and are now sitting back making a tidy profit on the rising treasury yields. This would keep stimulus dollars wrapped up in the banking sector and perhaps the stock market, which explains how companies like Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan Chase are currently making huge profits and the Dow Jones can produce a historical rally while the rest of the economy lays down in the gutter. Of course, this can only last while the Dollar still holds some value, which may not be for much longer.

Reading The Signs In Gold And Silver

Precious metal markets are manipulated through naked short selling, and have been for decades. Anyone who researches their operations in-depth knows this is a fact. Why would corporate and central banks keep the value of PM’s down? There are a number of reasons, the primary one being that gold and silver, if allowed to function in markets normally, would compete with the Greenback and other fiat currencies, perhaps surpassing them as the currency of choice because of the fraudulent nature of paper money. The scheme dwarfs the subprime derivatives fraud that Goldman Sachs is currently being sued for by the SEC. Exposing this reality to the general public though presents mind-boggling difficulty.

The U.S. Commodity Futures and Trading Commission (CFTC), is supposed to monitor and investigate market manipulation and monopoly, and punish those corporations that would subvert precious metals for their own gain. The CFTC has failed completely in this task, either deliberately (most likely), or through pure stupidity. I have heard it said in the past that it would take nothing short of a currency crisis to bare the fraud in metals markets. Apparently, that moment has arrived…



Investors in gold and silver have been voicing their suspicions quite loudly in the past year over banker deception in PM securities. One would expect that the inflationary program instituted by the Federal Reserve would have a greater effect on Gold’s value than it has, and silver has been struggling to break the $20 an ounce mark ever since the bailouts began, which is outlandish considering the circumstances involved. Enter Andrew Maguire, former employee of Goldman Sachs and trader in PM markets. Maguire has exposed the blatant fraud in the silver trade by using inside information on the JP Morgan signals for short sellers to predict EXACTLY how the market would move before it did so!

Maguire took his concerns and evidence to the CFTC and was ignored. In response, he approached Kingworld News and GATA, and exposed the information to the world. Below, Bill Murphy of GATA confronts the CFTC board with the Maguire situation once again (keep in mind, he is speaking quickly because his presentation is on a time limit):



It would seem that the meltdown in Treasuries is beginning to boil over, creating a domino effect that has finally brought the truth of PM’s to the light of day. This is good news and bad news. Good, because the lie of fiat currency and banker suppression of gold and silver (real money) is finally being revealed to the wider public. Bad, because it also indicates that the Dollar is on the verge of crumbling. Despite manipulation, gold in particular has held very strong around the $1100 an ounce mark. Most mainstream talking head economists were predicting its downfall months ago. Not even the temporary strength of the Dollar due to trouble in the Eurozone has phased gold. This tells me that inflation is about to commence. But where will we see it first?

Oil Highly Sensitive To Inflation

Because the Greenback is the world reserve currency (for now), and oil is traded primarily in Dollars, it is certain that oil will be the first commodity to reflect inflation when it is triggered. As I discussed in previous articles, I believe that the meteoric rise in oil to $150 a barrel in early 2008 was purposely engineered by an organized group of corporate speculators, not for the purpose of profit (as the MSM claims), but to condition Americans to accept the idea of doubling gas prices in preparation for inevitable inflation in 2010-2011.

Oil is now holding near the $85 a barrel mark, and appears poised to make another jump this summer. The media will once again blame “speculation”, but this time it will not be speculators but a dissolving Dollar that is causing the increase in gas prices. It is a clever ruse to delay the public’s realization that their currency is dying. Already, the MSM is attempting to attribute current high prices to “supply shortages”, a patently false claim considering OPEC nations have not drastically changed their output, and U.S demand has remained low:

http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90001/90777/90856/6923254.html

Watch for oil prices to show steady increases this summer followed by a surprising spike sometime late fall or early winter. This time, prices will not retreat as they did in 2008. Keep in mind that this prediction does not factor in a widening conflict in the Middle East, which could activate gas spikes sooner. In truth, escalation of war in oil producing areas such as Iran could also be used as a proxy crisis designed to hide inflationary effects on gas prices, and distract from a Dollar collapse.

China Ready To Decouple From U.S.

Nearly every piece of data I have seen on China in the past six months leads me to believe that they are ready to drastically change their trade relationship with the U.S. to our detriment, or, they are ready to cut off from their interdependency with us completely, and they are ready NOW. What they are waiting for is open to debate, but I suspect they are holding back until the IMF is able to fully circulate SDR’s (Special Drawing Rights), until SDR’s are rooted enough to replace the Dollar as world reserve currency.

As we have covered in great detail in recent articles, China has frozen investment in long term U.S. Treasuries and begun dumping those they already own. Their interest in short term treasuries has been mediocre at best. That means the U.S. can no longer count on China to invest in our debt. This alone is enough to assure an eventual Dollar implosion, however, there is more…

Talk of a Yuan de-peg from the Greenback has accelerated as we predicted it would over a month ago. A lot of melodrama has been fabricated in the media over this issue, leading Americans to believe that the U.S. government and the Chinese are at odds over Yuan appreciation. It’s mostly a facade. China has been ready to de-peg for at least half a year now, and likely has been planning to all along. Why? Because they no longer need American export markets to survive.

Much has been written about China’s sudden explosion in growth since the first phase of the collapse waned. China produced its own stimulus and bailout programs, cut millions of migrant workers off payrolls without counting them on their unemployment numbers, and helped to finalize the ASEAN trading block, which is obviously the first step towards a kind of “Asian Union”. This has caused an incredible rebound in their overall exports. Western economists often attribute the rise in Chinese exports to improving conditions in the U.S. That is to say, they think we are spending again like we used to in 2007. But, if one examines the import statistics of the U.S. over the past year, they would find that imports have been rather stagnant, and that American spending has had only minor improvement:

http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/statistics/historical/goods.pdf

http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/statistics/historical/gands.pdf

U.S. exports and imports are down on average 20% to 25%, while Chinese exports grew by 8% in 2009 and are projected to grow another 10% this year. What this shows is that indeed, China’s exports are recovering, but not because the U.S. is buying. They have replaced U.S. markets with others, including ASEAN, and are moving to deal more in African trade as well. China no longer needs the U.S. to sustain growth, so there is no reason for them to continue pegging the Yuan to the Dollar.

Mainstream economists have argued that a rise in the Yuan will allow U.S. companies to export more to China, and in turn improve our economy. This is a naïve assumption. China has cheap labor, extensive industrial capacity, and new trading partners, which means they will have little demand for products from the U.S. The Corporate Elite here in the states have almost completely dismantled our industrial capacity and shipped it overseas, which means we do not have the ability to sustain our economy on exports and won’t for many years to come. Some argue that the U.S. is one of the largest producers of goods in the world, but this is only half true. We do utilize capital to produce many goods, but most of the factories we use to do the actual work are in China, Indonesia, and South America. The factories are not on OUR soil, which means we do not have true industrial capability in the event of a monetary breakdown.

Once the Yuan has been de-pegged from the Greenback, China will probably increase their dumping of U.S. Treasuries even more than they already have, which will devalue our currency if not destroy its reserve status entirely. One consequence of a Yuan appreciation that many people do not consider is import price increases to the U.S. Most of our goods are made in China. If the Yuan is allowed to increase, this will make it more expensive for Americans to buy Chinese made products. Now, this price boost may not be extreme, but it does offer another opportunity for our government to hide the devaluation of our currency. I guarantee, when prices start to rise exponentially, you will hear the MSM blame the Yuan de-peg, instead of the real cause, inflation and dollar collapse.

Caught In A Lie? Lie Bigger!

Americans are not happy with the current state of affairs in this country. Obama’s approval rating has plummeted to one of the lowest levels on record for any president at this point in a term. This is due in large part to his continuance and acceleration of Bush era economic policies:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100414/…

The numbers are no better for Congress as a whole. Rather efficiently, the current government has sullied itself beyond repair in the minds of most citizens. If you know your history, then you know that times like this are the most culturally precarious. Our political leadership and the Globalists who shadow them have a knack for creating terrible distractions when they become the primary focus of the people’s ire. Wars, terrorist attacks, financial disasters, tend to strike in curious fashion whenever the establishment is directly under the magnifying glass. Of course, this could just be “coincidence”, but I’m not one to take that simplistic explanation too seriously.

Inflation, when it occurs, will lead directly back to the private Federal Reserve, the core source for most of the problems in this country. They will do everything in their power to hide it, divert the blame, and cause upheaval in other areas of society to draw our attentions away from it. The non-stop propaganda on our supposed “recovery” is only the beginning. My greatest concern is that they will use the advent of a new war or terrorist attack as a phantom target, a scapegoat for the hyperinflationary breakdown that was going to occur anyway. My greatest fear is that the majority of Americans will fall for the ruse.

If I am wrong, then we have nothing to worry about, the “green shoots” are in full bloom, the Dollar is still king, and China is still happily making our sneakers and paper umbrellas. Good for us. But if I am right, and you find one day soon that hyperinflation is ravaging our currency and our economy, remember well that it was not Iran, Russia, Pakistan, or China that caused our pains. It was not Al-Qaeda or those rambunctious “Homegrown Terrorists” that we keep hearing about. None of these countries or groups are the primary trigger of the Dollar failure.

The MSM will claim that we were on the verge of a financial resurgence; that things were getting back to normal. This will be a grand lie. The master lie. The meltdown was going to happen regardless of that war in Iran, or that dirty bomb attack on the East Coast, and the culpability for it will lay squarely in the hands of the Federal Reserve, and certain key players in our own government. If they institute martial law, or the dissolution of civil liberties in response to structural failure, it will be they who are responsible, not some devious outside menace.

Laughably, in the end some will eventually argue that inflation is a “good” thing, because it “forces Americans to spend their money before it is devalued”! Sound absurd? The article below makes this exact statement!

http://finance.yahoo.com/tech-ticker/…

No matter what happens in the next couple of years, we cannot allow ourselves to forget who the real enemy is, and we cannot allow others to forget either. The last time a major western power was thrust into the nightmare of hyperinflation, we ended up with the Third Reich. Let us learn from history instead of repeating it. Let us not see a fourth…

Source: Giordano Bruno

Psychiatric Drugging of Infants and Toddlers in the US

Evelyn Pringle
NaturalNews
Friday, April 23rd, 2010

The United States has become the psychiatric drugging capital of the world for kids with children being medicated at a younger and younger age. Medicaid records in some states show infants less than a year old on drugs for mental disorders.

The use of powerful antipsychotics with privately insured children, aged 2 through 5 in the US, doubled between 1999 and 2007, according to a study of data on more than one million children with private health insurance in the January, 2010, “Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry.”

The number of children in this age group diagnosed with bipolar disorder also doubled over the last decade, Reuters reported.

Of antipsychotic-treated children in the 2007 study sample, the most common diagnoses were pervasive developmental disorder or mental retardation (28.2%), ADHD (23.7%), and disruptive behavior disorder (12.9%).

The study reported that fewer than half of drug treated children received a mental health assessment (40.8%), a psychotherapy visit (41.4%), or a visit with a psychiatrist (42.6%) during the year of antipsychotic use.

“Antipsychotics, which are being widely and irresponsibly prescribed for American children–mostly as chemical restraints–are shown to be causing irreparable harm,” warned Vera Hassner Sharav, president of the Alliance for Human Research Protection, in a February 26, 2010 InfoMail.

“These drugs have measurable severe hazardous effects on vital biological systems, including: cardiovascular adverse effects that result in shortening lives; metabolic adverse effects that induce diabetes and the metabolic syndrome,” she wrote. “Long-term use of antipsychotics has been shown to result in metabolic syndrome in 40% to 50% of patients.”

The lead researcher on the study above, Columbia University psychiatry professor Mark Olfson, told Reuters that about 1.5% of all privately insured children between the ages of 2 and 5, or one in 70, received some type of psychiatric drug in 2007, be it an antipsychotic, a mood stabilizer, a stimulant or an antidepressant.

Psychiatric drugs bathe the brains of growing children with agents that threaten the normal development of the brain, according to Dr Peter Breggin, founder of the International Center for the Study of Psychiatry and Psychology (ICSPP), and author of about 20 books, including “Medication Madness.”

The drugs themselves are causing severe disorders in millions of children in the US, he warns. “Substances like antidepressants, stimulants, mood stabilizers, and antipsychotic drugs cause severe, and potentially permanent, biochemical imbalances.”
An American Phenomenon
A number of presentations at the annual meeting of the American Psychiatric Association in May 2009, addressed the diagnosis of bipolar disorder, including one titled, “Pediatric Bipolar Disorder: A Critical Look at an American Phenomenon,” at which Dr Peter Parry, a consultant child & adolescent psychiatrist, and senior lecturer at Flinders University in Australia, presented a survey on, “Australian and New Zealand’s Child and Adolescent Psychiatrists’ Views on Bipolar Disorder Prevalence and on Rates of Pediatric Bipolar Disorder in the USA.”

Dr Parry and his colleagues conducted a survey of child and adolescent psychiatrists in Australia and New Zealand. Of the 199 psychiatrists who responded to the survey, 90.5% thought pediatric bipolar disorder was overdiagnosed in the US.

In an October 1, 2009 article titled, “Medicating Our Children,” Dr Parry reports that since “the mid-1990s in the USA, some researchers have claimed that Paediatric Bipolar Disorder (PBD) frequently starts prior to puberty.”

One of PBD’s main proponents, Harvard University’s Professor Joseph Biederman, stating onset “is squarely in the preschooler age group,” he notes.

Parry explains that “PBD has been created by moving the diagnostic goalposts away from traditional concepts of bipolar disorder.”

“In children,” he says, “episodes were redefined to last hours instead of days or weeks and, instead of manic elation, severe anger in children sufficed as mania.”

“Unlike diagnoses like ADHD or depression, or simply accepting a child has serious emotional and behavioural problems in reaction to various stressors, PBD implies a lifelong severe mental illness requiring of strong psychiatric medication,” Parry warns.

“In the USA,” he says, “the public is furthermore exposed to direct pharmaceutical advertising that can feed the natural desire parents of distressed and aggressive children have for a quick solution by suggesting a simple medication fix.”

“The medicating of America’s children has become intensely controversial, highlighted by the tragic case of Rebecca Riley, a four-year-old Boston girl diagnosed at 28 months old with ADHD and PBD,” he points out.

On April 7, 2009, the author of the book, “Shyness: How Normal Behavior Became a Sickness,” Christopher Lane, featured an interview on his Psychology Today blog, “Side Effects,” with journalist, Philip Dawdy, the creator of the popular website, Furious Seasons, and discussed the rising number of children being diagnosed with bipolar disorder.

“As for bipolar disorder in kids (meaning pre-teens and younger), it’s simply not an issue in the rest of the world,” Dawdy told Lane. “The bipolar child is a purely American phenomenon.”

“The pharma companies and the Harvard crew worked hand-in-hand to bring America a generation of ADHD kids and bipolar children, and their profound influence can be seen in the millions of children and teens who now carry lifetime diagnoses and take gobs of psychotropic drugs each day, often to their detriment,” he advised.

Lane asked for Dawdy’s opinion on a recent report in the St Petersburg Times that found 23 infants less than one-year-old had been prescribed antipsychotics in Florida in 2007, as well as the drug overdose death of 4-year-old Rebecca Riley in Massachusetts. “How is it possible for psychiatrists to continue prescribing to infants in such numbers without more oversight?” Lane asked.

“What’s gone on with antipsychotics prescribed to infants and toddlers is simply inexplicable to me,” Dawdy said. “The drugs are known to cause huge problems in adults, so why the heck would a doctor give them to little kids, especially infants? It boggles my small mind.”

“I’m no fan of bans or restrictions,” he told Lane, “but this does strike me as a situation where there needs to be a serious rethinking of what we are doing — and maybe there should be a ban on the use of these drugs in kids under, say, 6 years of age.”

An October 2007 report by the University of South Florida found the most common diagnosis for antipsychotic use with children in Florida’s Medicaid program, between July and December 2005, was ADHD. Roughly 54%, or 1,372 cases, involved prescriptions for children five and under and the total number of antipsychotic users in this young age group was 2,549, with all disorders combined, according to the report.
Increased Prescribing to Poor Children
Federally funded research published online in December, 2009, revealed that children covered by Medicaid were prescribed antipsychotics at a rate four time higher than children with private insurance. The data showed that more than 4% of children in Medicaid fee-for-service programs received antipsychotics, compared to less than 1% of privately insured youth. The study found Medicaid kids were more likely to receive antipsychotics for unapproved uses such as ADHD and conduct disorders than privately insured children.

The researchers examined records for children in seven states for the years 2001 and 2004, chosen as representative of the US Medicaid population. But more recent data through 2007 indicates that the disparity has remained, said Stephen Crystal, a Rutgers professor who led the study, according to the December 11, 2009, New York Times.

Antipsychotics were the top selling class of drugs in both 2008 and 2009. With sales of $14.6 billion in 2009, they brought in more than the $13.6 billion earned by both heart burn and cholesterol medications. Antidepressants ranked fourth with sales of $9.9 billion, according to data by IMS Health. In 2008, the drug makers took in $11.3 billion from antiseizure drugs and $4.8 billion from ADHD drugs.

In a new book titled, “Anatomy of an Epidemic: Magic Bullets, Psychiatric Drugs, and the Astonishing Rise of Mental Illness in America,” Robert Whitaker reports that the number of children on government disability rolls due to severe mental illness has increased more than 35-fold since 1987.

The book explores the question of whether the epidemic rise in people disabled by mental illness, among all age groups in the US over the past 20 years, could have been fueled by a drug-based paradigm of care.

It also explores what is happening to children over the long-term who are placed on psychiatric drugs. “Once again, science tells a very clear story, and, as you might imagine, it is one that — when you think of the millions of children so affected — makes you want to weep,” Whitaker stated in a March 26, 2010, notice for the book’s release on the Beyond Meds Website.

Of all the harmful actions of modern psychiatry, “the mass diagnosing and drugging of children is the most appalling with the most serious consequences for the future of individual lives and for society,” warns the world-renowned expert, Dr Peter Breggin, often referred to as the “Conscience of Psychiatry.”

“We’re bringing up a generation in this country in which you either sit down, shut up and do what you’re told, or you get diagnosed and drugged,” he points out.

Breggin considers the situation to be “a national tragedy.” “To inflict these drugs on the growing brains of infants and children is wrong and abusive,” he contends.

The kids who get drugged are often our best, brightest, most exciting and energetic children, he points out. “In the long run, we are giving children a very bad lesson that drugs are the answer to emotional problems.”

Dr Nathaniel Lehrman, author of the book, “Coming Off Psychiatric Drugs,” believes that giving infants and toddlers “powerful, brain-effecting psychiatric medication is close to criminal activity.”

“Giving them these drugs,” he says, “has no rationale, and ignores the basic fact that youngsters are very sensitive to their environments, both social and chemical, with the juvenile brain easily damaged by the latter.”
Inventing Disorders
During an interview on ABC Radio National in August 2007, Dr David Healy, the noted British pharmacology expert, and author of the book, “Mania: A Short History of Bipolar Disorder,” told reporter Jane Shields: “Just to give you a feel for how crazy things have actually got recently, it would appear that clinicians in the US are happy to look at the ultrasounds of children in the womb, and based on the fact that they appear to be more overactive at times, and then possibly less active later, they’re prepared to actually consider the possibility that these children could be bipolar.”

On April 9, 2009, Christopher Lane, author of the book, “Shyness: How Normal Behavior Became a Sickness,” published an interview on his Psychology Today blog with Dr Healy. In the interview, Healy explained the history behind the drastic rise in the sale of anticonvulsants and antipsychotics as “mood stabilizers,” and the diagnosis of bipolar disorder.

“The key event in the mid-1990s that led to the change in perspective was the marketing of Depakote by Abbott as a mood stabilizer,” Healy tells Lane, and further explains:

“Mood stabilization didn’t exist before the mid-1990s. It can’t be found in any of the earlier reference books and journals. Since then, however, we now have sections for mood stabilizers in all the books on psychotropic drugs, and over a hundred articles per year featuring mood stabilization in their titles.

“In the same way, Abbott and other companies such as Lilly marketing Zyprexa for bipolar disorder have re-engineered manic-depressive illness. While the term bipolar disorder was there since 1980, manic-depression was the term that was still more commonly used until the mid-1990s when it vanishes and is replaced by bipolar disorder. Nowadays, over 500 articles per year feature bipolar disorder in their titles.”

“As of 2008, upwards of a million children in the United States — in many cases preschoolers — are on “mood-stabilizers” for bipolar disorder, even though the condition remains unrecognized in the rest of the world,” Healy points out.

“But there is no evidence that the drugs stabilize moods,” he says. “In fact, it is not even clear that it makes sense to talk about a mood center in the brain.”

“A further piece of mythology aimed at keeping people on the drugs,” he reports, “is that these are supposedly neuroprotective — but there’s no evidence that this is the case and in fact these drugs can lead to brain damage.”

Healy says the FDA’s decision to add a black-box warning about suicide to SSRIs likely had little to do with the switch to prescribing antipsychotics as safer for children. What “was quite striking was how quickly companies were able to use the views of the few bipolar-ologists who argued that when children become suicidal on antidepressants it’s not the fault of the drug,” he points out.

“The problem, they said, stems from a mistaken diagnosis and if we could just get the diagnosis right and put the child on mood stabilizers then there wouldn’t be a problem,” he explains.

“There is no evidence for this viewpoint, but it was interesting to see how company support could put wind in the sails of such a perspective,” he says.

Because having just one label was very limiting, Healy says, child psychiatry “needed another disorder — and for this reason bipolar disorder was welcome.”

He reports that the same thing is happening to children labeled with ADHD. “Not all children find stimulants suitable,” he advises, “and just as with the SSRIs and bipolar disorder it has become very convenient to say that the stimulants weren’t causing the problem the child was experiencing; the child in fact had a different disorder and if we could just get the diagnosis correct, then everything else would fall into place.”

A report titled, “Adverse Events Associated with Drug Treatment of ADHD: Review of Postmarketing Safety Data,” presented at the FDA’s March 22, 2006, Pediatric Advisory Committee meeting bears witness to Healy’s explanation by stating in part: “The most important finding of this review is that signs and symptoms of psychosis or mania, particularly hallucinations, can occur in some patients with no identifiable risk factors, at usual doses of any of the drugs currently used to treat ADHD.”

Between January 2000, and June 30, 2005, the FDA identified nearly 1,000 cases of psychosis or mania linked to the drugs in its own database and those from the drug makers themselves.

The antipsychotics are just as dangerous as the SSRI antidepressants, Healy says. “Long before the antidepressants were linked with akathisia, the antipsychotics were universally recognized as causing this problem,” he explains in the Lane interview. “It was also universally accepted that the akathisia they induce risked precipitating the patient into suicidality or violence.”

“They also cause a physical dependence,” Healy states. “Zyprexa is among the drugs most likely to cause people to become physically dependent on it.”

“In addition,” he points out, “these drugs are known to cause a range of neurological syndromes, diabetes, cardiovascular problems, and other problems.”

“It’s hard to understand how blind clinicians can get to problems like these, especially in youngsters who grow obese and become diabetic right before their eyes,” Healy tells Lane.

As for what he calls the “medicalization of childhood,” in the radio interview, Healy points out that “children always have been unhappy, they always have been nervous, but that’s actually part and parcel of being a child.”

“You have to go through these things,” he said. “This is how we learn to cope with the problems of life.”

Children can best be helped in the safest way, he says, “if they’re just seen and if they actually have the opportunity to talk about their problems, and if they get basic and sensible input about how to perhaps help them cope with these problems.”

Healy said it’s important to remember that severe mental illness is rare in children and that most children with a mental health problem do not need medication. Children are being picked up and put on pills “who really don’t need to be on these pills and who are going to be injured by them,” he warned.

“I think possibly 10 to 15 years up the road,” he told Shields, “we’re going to be looking at a generation of children who will have been seriously injured by the treatments that they appear ever-increasingly likely to be put on now.”

But the administration of multiple drugs at once complicates the situation so that it may be impossible to determine which drugs are most responsible for the adverse reactions children experience, according to Dr Breggin.

“Because so many doctors and so many drug companies will share the blame for mistreating these children, they will be unable to seek redress against individual perpetrators through the courts when they grow up,” he explains.

Source: NaturalNews

MSM: Japanese scientists develop thought-controlled machines

Posted by sakerfa on April 23, 2010

(Telegraph) – Japan is developing a new generation of consumer electronics devices that can read a user’s mind and respond to their wishes automatically.
A consortium of Japanese companies, research institutes and the government is working on the gadgets, which could be on the market in as little as a decade, according to Tomoo Yamauchi, director of the Research and Development Division of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications.

The devices would use advanced versions of existing brain-machine interface technology, he said, and would allow a person to change a television channel by thinking or send a text message composed through thought.

“We already have BMI machines through which an operator can make a robot carry out an action, such as moving an arm or lifting a leg,” said Mr Yamauchi. “We also have the technology for a person to think of a number and that number be recorded by the machine.”

“The challenge now is to simplify the existing systems and make the equipment smaller before it can be made commercially available,” he said.

Work on brain-machine interfaces dates back to the 1970s, but has taken off in recent years. The technology uses sensors within a helmet to monitor a person’s brain waves and the flow of blood in the brain that is stimulated by thought. By identifying the person’s wish, the robot can then carry out the action.

Taking the technology a step further, the system would be able to sense when a person is to hot or cold and adjust the heating in a room, Mr Yamauchi said, and there is even the possibility that a car navigation system in the future will be able to recognise the driver’s hunger pangs and plot a course to the nearest restaurant.

“In the early stages of this technology, we believe that we will be able to help elderly people or the physically challenged, those with problems walking or using their hands,” he said. “But to make a system that is commercially acceptable, we need to simplify the system dramatically and try to find a way to do without the helmet.”

Source: Telegraph

Video: OKC Bombing Survivor Jane Graham Reveals Gov. Prior Knowledge on Alex Jones

Source: infowars.com

Video: Freedom Watch – What Will You Do To Stop The Continued Erosion Of Your Natural Rights?

Source: Dprogram.net

Murder of the Internet and the Free Market

Cassandra Anderson
Infowars.com
April 19, 2010

The Internet is an effective source of information for many Americans, therefore, the attack on the free Internet is in full force, from numerous angles. Unless people wake up and demand freedom, it will be lost. As usual, the collectivists are using fear in order to sway the public to embrace their predetermined outcome.



Last week, freedoms began to be threatened when the news came out about “cyberthreats” to the Internet, using the tired excuse of terrorism, despite the many years without any serious attacks.(1) Their solution, of course, is to take control over the Internet. The Senate is considering a law to allow the military to seize control over the Internet and content on personal computers, by way of comandeering America’s privately operated power grids.

The Cybersecurity Bill is another way that those in power are trying to take over the Internet, using the all-purpose excuse of terrorism again. Those who want to control what information you read, write and share are doing so under the guise of protecting the critical U.S. network infrastructure. Senator Jay Rockefeller, the driving force behind this bill, has publicly stated that it would have been better if the Internet had never existed. Perhaps this is because so many people have awoken to the truth of the Rockefeller family’s involvement in creating the fraudulent Federal Reserve System. Why is this guy still in office?

As of late March, the Cybersecurity Act bill has passed the House and made is still pending before the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs (it is my opinion that it will pass through this committee with ease). Many in the Senate are rushing the enactment of this bill, and are trumpeting the necessity for “safety”. It is safe to presume that they are not acting in the interests of the individual. Further, Public- Private Partnerships (PPP) are planned as part of the takeover.(2) More people need to become aware of the true nature of the PPP (a tool used to implement fascism within the Agenda 21 paradigm), which, simply put, is the structure for a profit driven entity to couple with the government, who can impose regulations and create monopolies. Joan Veon explains the machinery of the PPP in this excellent video.(3)

‘Net Neutrality’ is bad and a tool for control. Recently, a federal court of appeals judge ruled against the FCC, ruling that the it was operating outside of its powers. The case involved Comcast, who was sued for charging higher prices to some internet users, and the FCC stepped in and regulated the charges, under the banner of protecting the public from price gouging and private companies shutting down service. However, Comcast focused charges on a few individual users who were sharing gigantic files and clogging the broadband system. If someone requires more from a provider, why shouldn’t they pay for it? This is simple free market economics. In a free market, the public enjoys competitive lower pricing, and fewer, if any regulations. Remember that J.D. Rockefeller, the monopoly mastermind, said that competition was a sin.

Several groups circulated petitions pleading for support of ‘Net Neutrality’- often just looking at a website of a campaign reveals the people and intention behind it.(4) Expansion of the federal government has proven to be detrimental. A letter in G. Edward Griffin’s Unfiltered News, provides a detailed analysis about how ‘Net Neutrality’ is a scam and the names of its supporters.(5) Google supports ‘Net Neutrality’ because it gets a free ride off of the companies that paid for the infrastructure.

Since the ruling in favor of Comcast and freedom, and against the FCC for overstepping its authority, the FCC has reacted by making a power grab to control broadband. This is being carried out despite the judges’ ruling that the FCC has no authority to control the Internet.(6) Further, the FCC may reclassify the Internet, in the same category as phones, in order to regulate it. The FCC is forging ahead, despite the ruling, toward controlling broadband, under support from Congress in gaining more power.

The CIA seems to covertly “influence” commercial ISP firms. The OSS (later the CIA) infiltrated the major media during WWII, under the guise of “protecting” us, and still controls it.(7) Because the Internet provides many sources for independent media that is not controlled, there is an attack on independent media.

David Rockefeller confirms control over the media in this quote:

“We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years.”

“It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries.”

The efforts to manipulate the public into a state of fear are for the purpose of rushing in new restrictions. Why? When people have information and become organized, the collectivists’ endless plots start to unravel; a fine example of this is the growing number of people who question 9/11, which ushered in The War on Terror, and is the justification for oppression of the American people and censoring information. If people become as organized as the opposition, with our own freedom campaigns and making the truth go viral, there is a chance to stop the encroachment of the federal government.

Massive public outcry can slow the collectivist takeover plan, but the only real way to insure a truly open Internet is to bring the federal government under control:limit the power and funding of the Pentagon,abolish Homeland Security, limit the FCC and put it in its cage, and support independent media that does tell the truth. Therefore, education and support of the free market are the first steps toward saving the Internet and limiting the federal government.

InfoWars and G. Edward Griffin’s Unfiltered News (http://www.realityzone.com/currentperiod.html) weekly newsletter are a good sources for truth amongst the many tangled, complicated and intentionally misleading issues that bombard us daily.

Source: infowars.com

Bankers Prepare To Assault Americans With VAT, Transaction Taxes

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Thursday, April 22, 2010

The global banking elite are preparing to assault Americans with two huge new tax increases as President Obama contradicts the assurances of White House aides and his own campaign trail promise by asserting that a VAT tax is still on the table, as the IMF outlines a new tax on financial transactions that is being hailed as a blow to the banks yet represents another stealth tax on the people.

“President Barack Obama suggested Wednesday that a new value-added tax on Americans is still on the table, seeming to show more openness to the idea than his aides have expressed in recent days,” reports the Associated Press.

Obama’s signal that he may embrace a European-style VAT tax follows former Fed chairman Paul Volcker’s call for a value-added tax. In response, the U.S. Senate passed a nonbinding “sense of the Senate” resolution labeling any such move, “a massive tax increase that will cripple families on fixed income and only further push back America’s economic recovery.”

Not happy with hitting Americans with a roughly 20% increase in living costs that a VAT tax would impose, Volcker also called for a carbon tax in the name of solving the widely discredited scam of man-made global warming, a new levy that is already being introduced at the state level.

Despite the fact that White House aides dismissed the prospect of a national sales tax only on Monday, Obama’s u-turn once again contradicts his pre-election promise that he would not raise taxes for American families earning under a quarter of a million dollars a year.

During a speech on the campaign trail, Obama promised, “No family making under $250,000 dollars a year will see any form of tax increase.”



However, the VAT tax is a flat rate levy that applies to everyone, and it will dramatically increase the cost of living for Americans already laboring under the greatest financial meltdown since 1929. As CNS News highlights, VAT is also labeled “consumption tax, because it applies to items at every stage of production. Such a tax would affect purchasers at all income levels.”

Obama’s failure to keep his promise that families would not “see any form of tax increase” has force him to lie in public addresses and claim that he only ever promised not to increase income tax on families earning under $250,000.

“And one thing we have not done is raise income taxes on families making less than $250,000,” Obama said on April 10. “That’s another promise we’ve kept.”

As CNS News’ Fred Lucas points out, in addition to any future VAT tax, “The $1-trillion health care overhaul bill contains at least 12 taxes and fees that will affect households earning less than $250,000.”

In our special report on tax increases contained in the Obamacare bill, we identified dozens of tax increases, most of which would apply to families making under $250,000 a year.

While the Obama regime plans to whack Americans with a whopping new VAT tax, international bankers are busy preparing their own financial assault by readying a new tax on all financial transactions, a tax that would inevitably be passed down to consumers but one which globalists and the corporate media are stealthily introducing under the illusion that its aim is to target large banks and financial institutions.

Publications like the London Guardian are hailing the new IMF “FAT tax” as a necessary move that will “rein in banks” by taxing their profits and bonuses. However, what they’re less keen to stress is that this new “FAT tax” will also be accompanied by a financial stability contribution (FSC), “Which should be paid by all financial institutions, not just banks, and used to bail out weak and failing firms.” (Emphasis mine).

In other words, every single financial institution, including local credit unions, mom and pop’s car showroom business, small local banks, local student loan unions, and any company that offers small loans, will be forced to pay another slice of whatever meager sum they have left after the VAT tax, the carbon tax and the myriad of new health care taxes, directly to the G20 and the IMF, who will then dole it out to their Goldman Sachs buddies or whichever other giant financial megalith that is suddenly in need of a bailout.

A tax on financial transactions, even if it is introduced in the name of pegging back banker bonuses, will inevitably be passed on to all consumers, not just the wealthy. This will mark the end of free bank accounts, you will be forced to pay a monthly tax simply to have a checking account, paying bills, cashing checks, paying employees, every financial transaction imaginable will be subject to this new tax because the big banks will merely pillage the consumer to cover the costs of the “FAT tax” being imposed on them by the IMF.

“Clearly what this appears to say is very wide ranging and covers much more of the financial services sector than the industry expected. Taxation is not without consequences and additional taxation is not without additional consequences,” said Angela Knight, chief executive of the British Bankers’ Association, clearly implying that the costs will be passed on to everyone.

As the Guardian reports separately, the IMF plan “Is ambivalent about how governments spend the billions in revenue it would raise.” In other words, this will be nothing more than another slush fund directed straight into the coffers of the IMF and World Bank to fund the global government now being set up to boss this new infrastructure.

Guardian writer Dan Roberts states that under the FAT tax, “Taxing bank profits and bonuses in a globally co-ordinated way potentially makes more sense than taxing transactions because it stands less chance of simply being passed straight onto customers,” while failing to acknowledge that the FAT tax will be accompanied by an FSC tax that will do precisely that.

It’s abundantly clear that the global elite and the international offshore banking cartels that control our national governments are preparing another round of looting, but God forbid should Americans be expected to do anything other than lie back and meekly accept the raping they are about to suffer.

Being angry about massive tax increases that our leaders promised us would never happen in the midst of a massive economic downturn is unacceptable according to the manufactured consensus being spewed by the establishment media and the authorities, who have labeled all dissent and opposition to tax hikes as extremism and even domestic terrorism.

According to hate groups like the ADL and the Southern Poverty Law Center, whose material is used to train police and federal authorities in America on who to target, getting upset about the fresh onslaught of pillaging you are about to suffer as it is openly announced means you’re an extremist, a racist, and possibly even a terrorist who should be silenced.

Source: Prison Planet.com

When False Flags Don't Fly

Source: The Corbett Report

Police State 4: the Rise of Fema

Source: Prison Planet.tv

Savage: Obama Regime Will Stage Violence To Crush Dissent

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Tuesday, April 21, 2010

Popular talk show host Michael Savage has warned that the “illegitimate” Obama regime is planning to use agent provocateurs to stage violence or acts of terror in order to frame Tea Party members as violent extremists and crush free speech in America.

Savage’s rant was in response to Council on Foreign Relations member and Time Magazine journalist Joe Klein, who told Obama attack dog Chris Matthews during an MSNBC interview that some of the rhetoric coming from Tea Party members borders on sedition.

Savage also made reference to BIll Clinton’s comments to CNN’s Wolf Blitzer last week in which the former President implied that rising anger directed towards the federal government could cause another domestic terror attack on the scale of the Oklahoma City bombing to take place, which is nothing less than a veiled threat as anyone who has investigated the OKC bombing in any depth will understand.

Savage labeled Klein and his ilk “horses arses” for attempting to charge 80 per cent of Americans with sedition for dissenting against the government, stating that the majority of Americans see the Obama administration as an “illegitimate government”.

Savage said that it was Obama and not the American people who was committing sedition against the constitution by forcing policies upon the American people that they had never voted for.

“You want us to be arrested for speaking out against the President? Kiss my behind Joe Klein, how’s that for sedition?” proclaimed Savage.

Savage warned Americans not to be provoked into taking the bait and committing violence.

“They have probably sent agent provocateurs in there with guns – I can guarantee you that this government is going to do something along those lines,” said Savage, adding, “It doesn’t take a genius to know what this illegitimate band of gangsters is going to do next,” saying that a violent action somewhere in America will be conducted by an agent provocateur “that they sent into the crowds”.

“The October surprise that they have in mind for this world is not to be imagined,” continued Savage, “As we speak the enemies of freedom are planning their next move if it hasn’t been done already, they’ve already planted the agent provocateurs in the Tea Parties and they’re only waiting to set them off like the sleeper cells that Al-Qaeda allegedly had in the United States of America.”

“Mark my words, I would hazard a guess, knowing how politicians have worked who don’t have the interests of the people at heart….that the agent provocateurs have been planted like sleeper cells inside the Tea Parties and they’re gonna let them go off all at once, make no mistake about it they want that to happen, they want the flashes to go off, and they will be behind it in my estimation,” said Savage, adding that if action is not taken to stop it, “The iron heel fascism of the left will have crushed free speech in America.”

With the media ceaselessly hyping the inevitability of violence by obsessing about stories like “Jihad Jane” and the Hutaree raid, and then connecting it with libertarians, constitutionalists, tea party members and basically anyone who expresses dissent, the groundwork is clearly being prepared for some kind of false flag that will be used to frame the most vociferous critics of the Obama administration.

Listen to Savage’s rant below.



Source: Prison Planet.com

Southern Poverty Law Center Publishes Patriot Hit List

Chuck Baldwin
April 21, 2010

In a report on its web site dated April 2010, entitled “Meet The Patriots,” the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) profiled “36 individuals at the heart of the resurgent [patriot] movement.” (In reading the list, I counted only 35 “patriots” and 5 “enablers” for a total of 40. I’m not really sure how the SPLC came up with “36.” Perhaps their ability to count is commensurate with their ability to appreciate patriotism and liberty.) The SPLC (founded by Morris Dees) sees itself as America’s guardian against “right wing militias” and loves to label conservatives and libertarians that it doesn’t like as “extremists.” The SPLC is one of the most ultra-liberal organizations in the country and should be dismissed as a group of paranoid leftists, not worthy of thought or mention.

Millions and millions of hard-working, God-fearing, liberty-loving Americans are not going to sit back and let Morris Dees and his cabal of Big Government elitists destroy the principles of freedom in our land.

The sad truth is, however, our federal government has chosen to exalt the SPLC to the position of being its “go to” source for information regarding “potential domestic terrorists” and similar characterizations. As a result, the information and reports disseminated by SPLC wind up in police reports and bulletins all over the United States. As an example, the SPLC had its fingerprints all over the infamous MIAC report. One could even question whether the SPLC is merely a front organization for Big Brother.

Therefore, it is highly likely that the report negatively profiling 40 American patriots will find its way into Department of Homeland Security (DHS) fusion centers and be distributed to police agencies all across the country. So, should the 40 people who find themselves targeted by SPLC expect some kind of government/police attention? Are we really that close to Nazi-style persecution in America? If the SPLC has its way, the answer seems to be a definite yes.

I remind readers that in the book, Nazi Justiz: Law of the Holocaust (page 3), there were five steps to Hitler’s plans for the destruction of European Jews. Step 1: Identification/registration of the targeted group as a public menace. Step 2: Ostracism of the targeted persons. Step 3: property confiscation. Step 4: Concentration of members into geographical locations. Step 5: Annihilation. In this latest report, SPLC seems quite willing to accomplish steps 1 and 2.

Here are the 40 names that are targeted in the SPLC report (and guess who is listed at the very top? Yours truly):

1. Chuck Baldwin, Pastor, Radio Broadcaster, Syndicated Columnist, 2008 Constitution Party Presidential nominee.

2. Joe Banister, former IRS special agent, tax protester.

3. Martin “Red” Beckman, tax protester

4. Catherine Bleish, head of the Liberty Restoration Project.

5. Chris Broughton, Second Amendment advocate, member of “We The People” group.

6. Bob Campbell, head of American Grand Jury.

7. Robert Crooks, Army veteran, retired commercial fisherman, anti-illegal immigration proponent.

8. Joseph Farah, CEO of World Net Daily

9. Gary Franchi, producer of “Camp FEMA: American Lockdown,” national director of RestoreTheRepublic.com.

10. Al Garza, head of the Patriot’s Coalition, an anti-illegal immigration group.

11. Ted Gunderson, retired FBI agent.

12. John Hassey, “The public face of Alabama’s militia movement in the late 1990s,” says SPLC.

13. Alex Jones, Radio Talk Show host.

14. Devvy Kidd, “prolific columnist, blogger, and public speaker.”

15. Larry Kilgore, telecommunications consultant, former US Senate candidate from Texas, pro-secession advocate.

16. Cliff Kincaid, syndicated columnist and author, editor of AIM Report (Accuracy in Media’s publication), founder and president of America’s Survival, Inc., a UN watchdog group.

17. Mark Koernke, associated with the now-defunct Michigan Militia.

18. Richard Mack, former Graham County, Arizona, Sheriff, author, and public speaker.

19. Jack McLamb, former Phoenix, Arizona, police officer, author, and public speaker.

20. John McManus, former member of the US Marine Corps, president of the John Birch Society.

21. Daniel New, father of Michael New (the Army medic who refused to wear a UN uniform), author, public speaker.

22. Norm Olson, founder of the now-defunct Michigan Militia.

23. Larry Pratt, executive director of Gun Owners of America.

24. Stewart Rhodes, Army veteran and Yale Law School graduate, founder of Oath Keepers.

25. Jon Roland, computer specialist, founder of the Constitution Society.

26. Luke Rudkowski, founder We Are Change.

27. Robert “Bob” Schultz, founder of We The People.

28. Joel Skousen, editor, World Affairs Brief.

29. Jim Stachowiak, Radio Talk Show host, “Longtime militia organizer,” claims SPLC.

30. John Stadtmiller, founder, Republic Broadcasting Network.

31. Orly Taitz, California attorney, a leader in the push to make President Obama disclose his US birth certificate.

32. Amanda Teegarden, executive director of Oklahomans for Sovereignty and Free Enterprise.

33. Mike Vanderboegh, anti-Obama health care activist.

34. Paul Venable, former candidate for the Idaho House of Representatives.

35. Edwin Vieira, Jr., attorney, author, proponent of constitutional State militias, lecturer.

36. Michele Bachmann, US Representative from Minnesota.

37. Glenn Beck, Fox News Channel TV host.

38. Paul Broun, medical doctor, US Representative from Georgia.

39. Andrew Napolitano, attorney, former State judge in New Jersey, Fox News Channel legal analyist, lecturer.

40. Ron Paul, former member of the US Air Force, medical doctor, US Representative from Texas, 2008 Republican candidate for President.

See the SPLC report here.

The SPLC, no doubt, sees each person on the above list as being a leader of the “radical right,” a “conspiracist,” and “antigovernment.” But understand, the SPLC makes its living off of big-government, leftist ideology. To say it is a shill for Big Government Liberalism is an understatement. The SPLC is so radical it makes the ACLU look conservative!

Again, this SPLC report would not even merit a mention (much less an entire column) except for the fact that the SPLC has become a source of information fuelling anti-freedom hysteria for countless bureaucrats at the DHS. Add this to the previously exposed MIAC and DHS reports, and the Army major’s report blaming “millennialist” Christians for much of the ills of the world, and a disturbing trend is quickly developing: so-called right-wing ANYTHING is being targeted and demonized as a “public menace.”

But the lists that you and I are not seeing are even more disturbing.

Joel Skousen quotes (Radar Magazine’s) Christopher Ketcham’s The Last Roundup as asking if the federal government is “compiling a secret enemies list of citizens who could face detention?” He goes on to say, “A number of former government employees and intelligence sources with independent knowledge of domestic surveillance operations claim the program that caused the flap between [former assistant attorney general under John Ashcroft, James] Comey and the White House was related to a database of Americans who might be considered potential threats in the event of a national emergency. Sources familiar with the program say that the government’s data gathering has been overzealous and probably conducted in violation of federal law and the protection from unreasonable search and seizure guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment.

“A veteran CIA intelligence analyst who maintains active high-level clearances and serves as an advisor to the Department of Defense in the field of emerging technology tells Radar that during the 2004 hospital room drama [between former Chief of Staff Andrew Card and Attorney General Ashcroft, in an attempt by Card to coerce a very ill Ashcroft to authorize President Bush's secretive domestic spying programs as his assistant--and acting--attorney general had refused to do so], James Comey expressed concern over how this secret database was being used ‘to accumulate otherwise private data on non-targeted U.S. citizens for use at a future time.’”

The report further states, “According to a senior government official who served with high-level security clearances in five administrations, ‘There exists a database of Americans, who, often for the slightest and most trivial reason, are considered unfriendly, and who, in a time of panic, might be incarcerated. The database can identify and locate perceived “enemies of the state” almost instantaneously.’” At this point, Skousen noted, “And that is precisely why the census bureau took a GPS coordinate on every front door in America, secretly linking this to dissidents and their known addresses.”

This database of Americans who are perceived to be potential “enemies of the state” goes by the code name “Main Core.” And according to the report, “One knowledgeable source claims that 8 million Americans are now listed in Main Core as potentially suspect. In the event of a national emergency, these people could be subject to everything from heightened surveillance and tracking to direct questioning and possibly even detention.

“Officials at the Department of Homeland Security begin actively scrutinizing people who–for a tremendously broad set of reasons–have been flagged in Main Core as potential domestic threats [sound familiar?]. Some of these individuals might receive a letter or a phone call, others a request to register with local authorities. Still others might hear a knock on the door and find police or armed soldiers outside. In some instances, the authorities might just ask a few questions. Other suspects might be arrested and escorted to federal holding facilities, where they could be detained without counsel until the state of emergency is no longer in effect.”

The report also noted that former Assistant Attorney General James Comey “had concluded that the use of that ‘Main Core’ database compromised the legality of the overall NSA domestic surveillance project. ‘If Main Core does exist,’ says Philip Giraldi, a former CIA counterterrorism officer and an outspoken critic of the agency, ‘the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is its likely home. If a master list is being compiled, it would have to be in a place where there are no legal issues–the CIA and FBI would be restricted by oversight and accountability laws–so I suspect it is at DHS, which as far as I know operates with no such restraints.’ Giraldi notes that DHS already maintains a central list of suspected terrorists and has been freely adding people who pose no reasonable threat to domestic security.”

So, is there a secret list of 8 million “unfriendly” Americans kept by DHS (if there is, dear reader, you are probably on it!)? Does anyone reading this column doubt that our federal government is more than willing and capable of doing such a thing? All of us are quite familiar with the government’s “no fly” or “flagged” airline passenger list. I can personally attest to the authenticity of this list, as airport officials in San Antonio, Texas, told me that I’m on it. I also made it to the “list of three” that were named in the MIAC report (the other two were Ron Paul and Bob Barr). And now I am on the SPLC list of “patriots” (not a compliment in the SPLC lexicon). Wow! I never realize how popular I was! (With the exception of Ron Paul, I’m probably on more lists than anyone in America.)

Who would ever have thought that the day would come in America when to speak up for freedom, constitutional government, and the principles expressed by our Founding Fathers would land one on a government watch list? Well, that day is here, my friend! No doubt, the major media and federal government–in order to further ostracize patriotic, God-fearing Americans–will use the SPLC patriot hit list as a vehicle to carry our country further down the road of oppression.

But what the radical left fearmongers at the Southern Poverty Law Center fail to realize is that the more they try to marginalize and ostracize American patriots such as you and me, the more they isolate themselves from America’s future, because millions and millions of hard-working, God-fearing, liberty-loving Americans are not going to sit back and let Morris Dees and his cabal of Big Government elitists destroy the principles of freedom in our land.

So, people such as Morris Dees can put us on as many lists as they like; we will never let liberty die! And the more they try to demonize us, the more people will want to join with us. You see, freedom burns deep and strong in the hearts of real Americans. And that’s something the SPLC can’t extinguish–no matter how many lists it makes!

Source: Chuck Baldwin

The Slippery Definition of Extremism

James Bovard
Campaign For Liberty
Wednesday, April 21st, 2010

Americans are once again hearing of the perils of extremism. But the definition of this offense is slippier than a politician’s campaign promise. The definition of extremism has continually been amended to permit government policies that few sober people previously advocated.

Prior to 2000, anyone who asserted that the Census Bureau was deeply involved with the roundup of Japanese-Americans for internment camps in 1942 was considered an extremist. The Census Bureau spent 60 years denying its role but finally admitted its culpability ten years ago after academics uncovered undeniable proof. Regardless of the Census Bureau’s past abuses or perennial deceit, only extremists believe that their answers to this year’s census could ever be used against them.

Prior to September 2001, anyone who suggested that the U.S. government lead a crusade to “rid the world of evil” would have been labeled both an extremist and a loon. But when George W. Bush promised exactly that three days after 9/11, the media cheered and his approval ratings soared.

Prior to November 2001, anyone who suggested that the president had the power to suspend the right of habeas corpus and perpetually detain anyone he accused of serious wrongdoing would have been considered an extremist. But Bush’s executive decree on enemy combatants made this the law — or at least the policy — of the land.

Prior to 2002, anyone who suggested that the U.S. government create a Total Information Awareness database of personal information on tens of millions of Americans would have been considered an extremist. But federal spy agencies rushed forward with exactly such plans, and the feds have stockpiled far more data on citizens.

Prior to April 2004, anyone who asserted that the U.S. military was torturing detainees in Iraq and Afghanistan was seen as an anti-American extremist. The leaking of the Abu Ghraib photos and official reports on abuses at Guantanamo and elsewhere proved that the extremists’ worst fear had become national policy. And when Congress effectively ratified Bush’s torture policies in the 2006 Military Commissions Act, “extremists”came to connote people who believed that American democracy had utterly disgraced itself.

Prior to the war on terror, anyone who advocated using tortured confessions in judicial proceedings would have been considered an extremist and perhaps also a medievalist. But the Justice Department and Pentagon effectively claimed a right to use confessions regardless of how they were acquired.

Prior to late 2005, anyone who asserted that the National Security Agency was routinely and massively illegally wiretapping Americans’ phone calls and email without a warrant was considered paranoid — as well as an extremist. Within weeks of the New York Times’ exposing the government’s warrantless surveillance apparatus, Republican congressmen stood and cheered during Bush’s State of the Union address when he boasted of his intrusions.

Prior to recent years, anyone who suggested that Uncle Sam should be able to take naked snapshots of all airline passengers would have been considered a lunatic, as well as an extremist. But the Transportation Security Agency, with its Whole Body X-ray systems, is doing exactly that in many airports around the nation. And the TSA’s promises that such photos will not be stored or abused are as credible as TSA’s earlier promises that no one would be delayed more than 10 minutes waiting in airport checkpoint lines.

Prior to the post-9/11 era, if someone suggested that the federal government should bloat its Terrorist Watch List with more than a million names, the person would have been considered a fool and an extremist. But this is exactly what the feds have done — and that is part of the reason why the watch lists have become almost useless as well as a peril to scores of thousands of innocent Americans.

Prior to this decade, only extremists believed that the president should be permitted to order the assassination of American citizens — with no attempt to arrest or try the suspected wrongdoer. Yet, President Obama recently officially made this the national policy.

Time and again, the U.S. government has adopted policies that only extremists advocated a few years earlier. And yet, no one is supposed to think that the government has become the biggest extremist of them all.

Source: Campaign For Liberty

Domestic terrorists as big a threat as al-Qaeda, says FBI head Robert Mueller

Giles Whittell
London Times
April 17, 2010

Fifteen years after the Oklahoma City bombing, the spectre of domestic terrorism has returned to haunt the Obama Administration, with a warning from the FBI that “home-grown and lone-wolf extremists” now represent as serious a threat as al-Qaeda and its affiliates.

The warning, from the FBI Director, Robert Mueller, came as the former President Clinton drew parallels between the Oklahoma City tragedy and a recent upsurge in anti-government rhetoric, while American television audiences heard Timothy McVeigh, the Oklahoma City bomber, describe the “absolute rage” that drove him to plan an attack that killed 168 men, women and children.

An FBI spokesman told The Times yesterday that Mr Mueller was referring to right-wing extremist groups and anti-government militias, as well as American Islamists, in his testimony to the Senate committee that must approve the FBI’s $8.3 billion (£5.4 billion) budget.

Last month federal agents arrested nine members of a Christian militia based in Michigan, calling itself the Hutaree. They have been charged with plotting to murder local police with a stash of guns, knives and grenades.

Source: The London Times

You Can’t Vote with Your Feet without the 10th Amendment

Shane Musgrove
Campaign For Liberty
April 17, 2010

The will of the people, the power of the states

Some say that you can “vote with your feet” — a phrase popularized by Ronald Reagan (most often taken out of context) in 1976 and a philosophy some attribute to Ayn Rand which was alluded to in Atlas Shrugged. Nevertheless, taken for only the meaning of the phrase in itself, it is questionable whether that philosophy exists today or if it is even plausible. Others say, “All politics are local,” a catchphrase quote from Democrat Thomas O’Neill. However catchy these phrases might be, they are hardly true if we stare realism in the face.

Evidence of this can be seen in the back room dealings, the handling of legislation of the House and Senate, and the constant push against the will of the people. Last week, I watched a live vote on C-Span of the health-care reform bill and was appalled by the remarks, demeanor, and the political bribes that surrounded this legislation. Who was it that said “transparency?” That is a joke – nothing more than a campaign ad to gain power along with the slogan of change and hope. Pelosi, Reid and Obama have no such knowledge of the meaning of transparency. What they do know better than anything is “agenda.” For all the Democrats that are waiting to come after me, let me go ahead and say the Republicans have shown the same tactics, so the matter is not unprecedented on either side.

So, the votes were cast — just a little over enough for a win. Slightly fishy, as I am sure Pelosi knows who is up for a tough race for their seat and who is not. This is an obvious sign that this bill is highly unpopular. I would love to say all this came as a surprise, but it doesn’t — not now, not in this era. The federal government voting against the will of the people in order to fulfill their own wishes and desires is now the common trend. Whether you believe this legislation is right or wrong, you cannot negate the fact that an overwhelming majority of the public was against it.

Are there problems with our health care system? Yes, absolutely. Did the majority of people believe this was the answer? The answer: simply no. Argue with the data, not me. Therefore, the trust in our federal government dwindles and again the approval rating of the Congress drops even lower. As stated last week, give them all ten points of standard deviation and they are viewed as an utter failure by the majority.

They cannot run a Social Security program, the US Postal Service, Medicaid, Medicare, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, yet they can run a health care system? To the non-believers — do you not love paying Social Security taxes every two weeks? And to what end? Long ago a promise was made that this money would be placed in a trusted fund; not so — spent, disappeared, and we have still racked up a massive debt. China is on its way to owning the United States. Wherever you stand on the aisles of politics, common logic should say you cannot spend what you do not have no matter how good you think it might be. If the money is not there, it simply is not there. Bluntly speaking, the money is not there unless you want to steal from the rich and possibly the middle class, which is simply socialism. If you have doubts that it is socialism, read Marx. The underlying tenant of Marx’s political philosophy: redistribution of wealth from beginning to end. Simply stated, stealing what people have worked hard for because others feel that they are entitled to something. Hope for a utopian society? Not in this life.

Maybe you want this and maybe you do not. My assumption is that the many hard working American’s do not. Why would they? Another assumption: those who do not want to work and earn want things handed to them on a silver platter as if they are due to be paid something. Any reasonable person should know that no one in this life is entitled to anything. What do we deserve? At most, we should embrace charity and help those in need – not mandates from an ever increasing federal government.

What is next? No one knows with certainty, but I believe the smiles on Obama’s, Pelosi’s, and Reid’s face will soon change. Yet, another power monger will step in to fill their shoes no matter what party wins the favor of the people. That is, unless we can truly say, “All politics are local.” However, this requires the will of the people and the power of the states and a certain degree of boldness regarding state rights.

Thomas Jefferson once had the fortitude to stand against this and established the doctrine of nullification as he opposed an overreaching federal government in the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions of 1798. A profound statement by Jefferson: “I consider the foundation of the Constitution as laid on this ground that all powers not delegated to the United States, by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states or to the people. To take a single step beyond the boundaries thus specially drawn around the powers of Congress is to take possession of a boundless field of power, no longer susceptible of any definition.”

Therefore, a line is drawn in the sand between the Congress, the States, and the will of the people. Of course, men of valor comparable to Jefferson must be elected at the state level and this solely depends on the people and a gallant effort to bring power back to the states. To this end, it might be plausible that soon we can all confidently say, “All politics are local” and you may truly have the ability to “vote with your feet.” If the majority of a state wants it, let it be — let them say yes. If they do not, let it be — let them say nay and adopt the doctrine of nullification. Only then will power rest in the hands of the states and the people, which happens to be their diminishing tenth amendment constitutional right.

This diminishing tenth amendment right is a breaking point that we undoubtedly reached long ago. And to that I quote, “Whensoever the General Government assumes un-delegated powers, its acts are un-authoritative, void, and of no force.” — Thomas Jefferson

Source: Campaign For Liberty