Sunday, April 30, 2006


"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act."
~George Orwell.

Today I saw the initial screening of Aaron Russo's film America: From Freedom to Fascism in Greenville. Thanks go to Wes Drawdy for his invitation (I didn't even know about this screening until yesterday, having been buried under papers to grade and final exams to prepare).

This movie is scheduled for official release this summer. (Official website here; watch the official trailer here.) I cannot recommend it too highly. There will be another screening at Greenville Technical College Auditorium (S. Pleasantburg Rd.) this Tuesday at 7:30 p.m. If you are reading this, are living anywhere within driving distance of Greenville, South Carolina, and still care anything about the future of this country, I highly recommend the trip here.

One way or another, we are going to get the problems raised by the income tax, the Federal Reserve central banking system, the consolidation of wealth and power in this country and the emerging New World Order before the public. Frankly, Aaron Russo makes a powerful case that this exposing and stopping the international banking cartel is the only chance this society has for remaining free--with the final stage in the eradication of individual freedom beginning in May 2008 with the National ID (which some of us fought successfully in the late 1990s).

Wes Drawdy's comments:


Before seeing the movie for the first time today, I was a little bit reluctant to ask some of the people I know to come to the free showing that will be at the Verne Smith Auditorium at Greenville Tech on Tuesday night at 7:30 p.m.

I was afraid that they would be too dense or too intellectually self-suppressed to "get it". My fears were unfounded.

This movie is so powerful, so logical, so dead-on, that virtually everyone who sees it "gets it".

So now I am going to ask EVERYONE I KNOW WITH AN I.Q. OVER 100 to come to the screening. Even the ones who are in hopeless denial. It is that good. It is that

A very simple, two question litmus test can be used to determine whether or not to invite someone to this movie:

1) Do they have a brain?
2) Do they care about what happens to their family?

If both answers are "yes" then you should do all you can to get them to the movie.

This movie shows what HAS HAPPENED to the United States, and what IS GOING TO HAPPEN to the citizens of the United States if these monsters aren't stopped.

Yes that means WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN to your kids and grandkids....

This stuff is enraging, frightening, and true.

This movie "connects the dots" in a clear, accurate,
entertaining and understandable way.

This movie IS the *RED PILL*


Definition of THE RED PILL
in the movie THE MATRIX:

In "The Matrix", Neo, a computer hacker, has been searching for the answer to the question: "What is the Matrix?" During his search he is contacted by the legendary hacker, Morpheus.

Morpheus takes Neo to a room and offers him the choice between a "Red Pill" and a "Blue Pill". If he takes the Red pill he will find out the answer to the question, but his life will never be the same again. If he takes the blue pill he will forget all he has found out, and will return to his normal life.



“It is time for Congress to tell President Bush directly that he has no authority to go to war on Iran and to launch such a war would be an impeachable offense. If Congress lacks the courage to do its constitutional duty, it should stop whining about imperial presidents. Because, like the Roman Senate of Caesar's time, it will have invited them and it will deserve them.” –PAT BUCHANAN

SY again:

Our goals (this from the website):

Primary Objectives

* Stop the polarization of America
* Stop the domination of the Democratic and Republican parties over our political system
* Shut down the Federal Reserve system
* Return America's gold to Fort Knox and have it audited
* Have Congress and the IRS, in a public forum, reveal the law that requires Americans to pay a direct, unapportioned tax on their labor.
* Make computerized voting illegal in all 50 states
* Keep the internet free and out of the control of large institutions
* Rescind the law called the Real ID Act so Americans never have to carry a National ID Card
* Make it illegal to implant RFID chips in human beings
* Educate juries to the fact that they have the right to determine the law as well as the facts of a case
* Educate juries to the fact that they are not obligated to follow the instructions of a judge
* Stop Globalization because it is the path to a one world government
* Protect our borders
* Restore the environment
* Sign up millions of Americans so we can accomplish our objectives

Saturday, April 29, 2006

Bush: the Democratic Dictator

Bush may not yet be exercising dictatorial powers. At present he doesn't need to. But give him time. Particularly if any number of possible events threaten major disruptions on U.S. soil in the near future: (1) violent clashes between illegal aliens and any Americans who have decided to stand up to their bullying; (2) another "terrorist attack" on U.S. soil (given that the first one didn't terrify ordinary Americans sufficiently to make them give up their liberties); (3) a global economic disruption that sends gas prices soaring even higher (possibly born of an ill-advised attack on Iran), provoking a panicked reaction on the part of the public; (4) a collapse of the dollar in the face of other nations moving to the euro; (5) a staged bird flu "pandemic." I am sure readers can think of others.

A Democratic Dictatorship
by Jacob G. Hornberger, April 26, 2006

Given all the discussion and debate about whether President Bush will order his military forces to attack Iran, now would be a good time to review the state of liberty in America.

No one can deny that we now live in a country in which the ruler has the omnipotent power to send the entire nation into war on his own initiative. To use the president’s words, when it comes to declaring and waging war against another country, he’s the “decider.”

It wasn’t always that way. The Constitution brought into existence a government in which the powers to declare war and wage war were vested in two separate branches of the government. While the president had the power to wage war, he was prohibited from exercising it without a declaration of war from Congress.

The idea behind the Constitution itself was that a free society necessarily entails restrictions on the power of the government, especially its ruler.

Yet we now live in a nation in which the president has the omnipotent power to ignore all constitutional restraints on his power. That might not be the way the president and his legal advisors put it, but that is the practical effect of what they are saying to justify his powers. They effectively claim that the Constitution vests the president — as military commander in chief during the “war on terrorism” — with such extraordinary powers that he is able to ignore restraints on his powers imposed both by the Constitution and by Congress.

No restraints on declaring and waging war against other nations. No restraints on the power to secretly record telephone conversations of the American people. No restraints on the power to kidnap and send people into overseas concentration camps for the purpose of torture and even execution. No restraints on the power to take Americans into custody as “enemy combatants” and punish them — even torture and execute them — without due process of law and jury trials.

If all that isn’t dictatorship, what is?

“But President Bush is a good man. He’s trying to protect us. He’s waging war against the terrorists. He’s not evil like other dictators in history. He was elected. He can be trusted.”

People who say that are missing the point. The suggestion is not that Bush is an evil man. The point is simply that Bush now wields the same omnipotent, dictatorial powers that other dictators in history have wielded. That is not a small transformation in American life when it comes to freedom.

“Well, then, where are the mass round-ups, and where are the concentration camps?”

Again, people who ask that type of question are missing the point. The point is not whether Bush is exercising his omnipotent, dictatorial power to the maximum extent. It’s whether he now possesses omnipotent, dictatorial power, power that can be exercised whenever circumstances dictate it — for example, during another major terrorist attack on American soil, when Americans become overly frightened again.

Unless the American people figure out a way to reverse what has happened to their country — and have the will to do something about it — they will earn the mark of shame reserved for those people in history who voluntarily relinquished their freedom in exchange for the aura of security. Like all others in history who have chosen such a course, they will ultimately learn that they have lost both their freedom and their security.

Jacob Hornberger is founder and president of The Future of Freedom Foundation. Send him email.

Friday, April 28, 2006

Ron Paul on the 'Academic Bill of Rights'

I have long suspected that the struggle against political correctness on college and university campuses had been hijacked by the neocons, who have an agenda of their own that has little to do with traditional academics. This would explain why political correctness remains firmly in control, even as showmen like David Horowitz make appearances around the country. (Who is bankrolling this guy, anyway?) This was a battle we (the struggling white guys defending truth, genuine openness, and the use of one's mind) were not supposed to win. Clearly, the so-called 'Academic Bill of Rights' is not the right way to oppose political correctness. I do not want to see institutionalized repression of critics of, say, radical feminism and racial preferences replaced by institutionalized repression of critics of the Iraq War and of Bush Regime interventionist foreign policy generally. As is often the case, Ron Paul's reasoning is razor-sharp. (Original is here.)

The 'Academic Bill of Rights'

by Ron Paul

Before the U.S. House of Representatives, March 29, 2006

Mr. Speaker, anyone needing proof that federal funding leads to federal control should examine HR 609, the "College Access and Opportunity Act." HR 609 imposes several new federal mandates on colleges, and extends numerous existing mandates. HR 609 proves the prophetic soundness of warnings that federal higher education programs would lead to federal control of higher education.

Opponents of increased federalization of higher education should be especially concerned about HR 609's "Academic Bill of Rights." This provision takes a step toward complete federal control of college curricula, grading, and teaching practices. While the provision is worded as a "sense of Congress," the clear intent is to intimidate college administrators into ensuring professors' lectures and lesson plans meet with federal approval.

The "Academic Bill of Rights" is a response to concerns that federally-funded institutions of higher learner are refusing to allow students to express, or even be exposed to, points of view that differ from those held by their professors. Ironically, the proliferation of "political correctness" on college campuses is largely a direct result of increased government funding of colleges and universities. Federal funding has isolated institutions of higher education from market discipline, thus freeing professors to promulgate their particular views regardless of whether it benefits their students (who are, after all, the professors' customers). Now, in a perfect illustration of how politicians use problems created by previous interventions in the market to justify new interventions, Congress proposes to use the problem of "political correctness" to justify more federal control over college classrooms.

Instead of fostering open dialogue and wide-raging intellectual inquiry, the main effect of the "Academic Bill of Rights" will be to further stifle debate about controversial topics. This is because many administrators will order their professors not to discuss contentious and divisive subjects, in order to avoid a possible confrontation with the federal government. Those who doubt this should remember that many TV and radio stations minimized political programming in the 1960s and 1970s in order to avoid running afoul of the federal "fairness doctrine."

I am convinced some promoters of the "Academic Bill of Rights" would be perfectly happy if, instead of fostering greater debate, this bill silences discussion of certain topics. Scan the websites of some of the organizations promoting the "Academic Bill of Rights" and you will find calls for silencing critics of the Iraq war and other aspects of American foreign policy.

Mr. Speaker, HR 609 expands federal control over higher education; in particular through an "Academic Bill of Rights" which could further stifle debate and inquiry on America's college campus. Therefore, I urge my colleagues to reject this bill.

April 28, 2006

Dr. Ron Paul is a Republican member of Congress from Texas.

Ron Paul Archives

Thursday, April 27, 2006

May 1--Illegal Aliens Plan To March!

Here we go again! It's worthwhile to remember that the vast majority of these people are breaking our laws just by being here. I'm sure, however, that the power elite wants this thing to continue to escalate until--you guessed it!--martial law becomes necessary in America.


May 1 immigrant boycott aims to 'close' cities
Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:56 PM ET

By Dan Whitcomb

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Pro-immigration activists say a national boycott and marches planned for May 1 will flood U.S. streets with millions of Latinos to demand amnesty for illegal immigrants and shake the ground under Congress as it debates reform.

Such a massive turnout could make for the largest protests since the civil rights era of the 1960s, though not all Latinos -- nor their leaders -- were comfortable with such militancy, fearing a backlash in Middle America.

"There will be 2 to 3 million people hitting the streets in Los Angeles alone. We're going to close down Los Angeles, Chicago, New York, Tucson, Phoenix, Fresno," said Jorge Rodriguez, a union official who helped organize earlier rallies credited with rattling Congress as it debates the issue.

Immigration has split Congress, the Republican Party and public opinion. Conservatives want the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants classified as felons and a fence built along the Mexican border.

Others, including President George W. Bush, want a guest-worker program and a path to citizenship. Most agree some reform is needed to stem the flow of poor to the world's biggest economy.

"We want full amnesty, full legalization for anybody who is here (illegally)," Rodriguez said. "That is the message that is going to be played out across the country on May 1."

Organizers have timed the action for May Day, a date when workers around the world traditionally have marched for improved conditions, and have strong support from big labor and the Roman Catholic church.

They vow that America's major cities will grind to a halt and its economy will stagger as Latinos walk off their jobs and skip school.

Teachers' unions in major cities have said children should not be punished for walking out of class. Los Angeles school officials said principals had been told that they should allow students to leave but walk with them to help keep order.

In Chicago, Catholic priests have helped organize protests, sending information to all 375 parishes in the archdiocese.


Chicago activists predict that the demonstrations will draw 300,000 people.

In New York, leaders of the May 1 Coalition said a growing number of businesses had pledged to close and allow their workers to attend a rally in Manhattan's Union Square.

Large U.S. meat processors, including Cargill Inc., Tyson Foods Inc and Seaboard Corp said they will close plants due to the planned rallies.

Critics accuse pro-immigrant leaders of bullying Congress and stirring up uninformed young Latinos by telling them that their parents were in imminent danger of being deported.

"It's intimidation when a million people march down main streets in our major cities under the Mexican flag," said Jim Gilchrist, founder of the Minuteman volunteer border patrol group. "This will backfire," he said.

Some Latinos have also expressed concerns that the boycott and marches could stir up anti-immigrant sentiment.

Cardinal Roger Mahony of the Los Angeles archdiocese, an outspoken champion of immigrant rights, has lobbied against a walkout. "Go to work, go to school, and then join thousands of us at a major rally afterword," Mahony said.

And Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, who has long fought for immigrant rights, has said he expects protesters to be "lawful and respectful" and children to stay in school.

In Washington on Thursday, immigrant-rights activists brushed off talk of a backlash.

"This is going to be really big. We're going to have millions of people," said Juan Jose Gutierrez, director of the Latino Movement USA. "We are not concerned at all. We believe it's possible for Congress to get the message that the time to act is now."

(Additional reporting by Aarthi Sivaraman in Los Angeles, Dan Trotta in New York and Michael Conlon in Chicago)

© Reuters 2006. All rights reserved.

If You Are Over 35: Worry!


(Courtesy of Charlotte Iserbyt. Original here.)


Buyouts offered to those under 50
Ericsson seeks younger recruits
Apr. 26, 2006. 09:44 AM

Is 35 now over the hill?

Telecom giant LM Ericsson AB is offering buyouts to up to 1,000 of its employees in Sweden, a voluntary package that is only being offered to employees between the ages of 35 and 50.

The novel initiative is meant to clear the way for younger workers. Ericsson also announced plans to hire 900 new employees—only those under 30 need apply—over the next three years.

Ericsson, the world's biggest supplier of mobile phone equipment and networks, currently employs 21,300 people in Sweden and about 50,500 in 140 countries around the world.

"The purpose of this program is to correct an age structure that is unbalanced," Marita Hellberg, Ericsson's global head of human resources, told the Financial Times of London this week. "We would like to make sure we employ more young people in order not to miss a generation in 10 years' time."

It's a unique move, said professor Ronald Burke, who teaches organizational behaviour at the Schulich School of Business at York University in Toronto. "Clearly, it's rare to have a company even think along those lines."

Companies typically reserve buyout offers for those aged 45 or 50 and up—the thin-haired rank-and-file who have racked up a decade or two of minimum service.

That's because it's cheaper for the employer to fund a buyout worth a couple of years' salary than to keep someone on the payroll, at the top of the salary range, for several more years. Younger, less experienced staff, can often be hired for less pay.

And the value of long-service employees' company paid pensions can also increase steeply as they spend more years on the job.

For Ericsson, keeping its workforce young may be crucial to the company's ability to stay competitive in an industry built on offering consumers the latest gadgets and technology. For young people, especially, a cellphone isn't just a way to make a call—it's an Internet connection, a stereo, a camera, and a pocket-sized television
or camcorder.

"That's where they're hoping to attract the younger element in the market, with all of the stuff you do in addition to basic telephone calls," said Dan Ondrack, a professor of organizational behaviour at University of Toronto's Rotman School of Management.

Organizations that don't hire for a long time get into ruts, Burke said. "You get a lot of people who've been there together for such a long period."For Ericsson in Sweden, the average age of its workers is 41. Globally, the average age of its workforce is slightly less, at 39. At rival Nokia Oyj, the Finland-based mobile phone maker, the average age is 35.

It's difficult to say if Canadian companies may also start to offer voluntary buyouts to younger workers, Burke said. But certainly, restricting new hirings to those under 30 would be deemed discriminatory. "I'm not sure how (Ericsson) will defend that
particular initiative," he said.

So, does this really mean that 35 is over the hill? "That's the subtext, I would say," Burke said.

"I'd be worried if I was over 35, in terms of the subtle message that is being conveyed."

Wednesday, April 26, 2006

The Doors of Perception -- Or Is That, Deception?

This is the single best, most interesting and the most enlightening piece I've encountered on the Internet in weeks if not months! Check it out, and then check out the entire website! It asks that all-important question, How much of what you think you know is really true? Some of it is, in fact, manifestly false. Lesson: follow the money trail; learn who is paying the bills! (For reasons of both length and copywrite I am only posting the first few paragraphs here.)


- Tim O'Shea

Aldous Huxley's inspired 1954 essay detailed the vivid, mind-expanding, multisensory insights of his mescaline adventures. By altering his brain chemistry with natural psychotropics, Huxley tapped into a rich and fluid world of shimmering, indescribable beauty and power. With his neurosensory input thus triggered, Huxley was able to enter that parallel universe described by every mystic and space captain in recorded history. Whether by hallucination or epiphany, Huxley sought to remove all bonds, all controls, all filters, all cultural conditioning from his perceptions and to confront Nature or the World or Reality first-hand - in its unpasteurized, unedited, unretouched infinite rawness.

Those bonds are much harder to break today, half a century later. We are the most conditioned, programmed beings the world has ever known. Not only are our thoughts and attitudes continually being shaped and molded; our very awareness of the whole design seems like it is being subtly and inexorably erased. The doors of our perception are carefully and precisely regulated. Who cares, right?

It is an exhausting and endless task to keep explaining to people how most issues of conventional wisdom are scientifically implanted in the public consciousness by a thousand media clips per day. In an effort to save time, I would like to provide just a little background on the handling of information in this country. Once the basic principles are illustrated about how our current system of media control arose historically, the reader might be more apt to question any given story in today's news.

If everybody believes something, it's probably wrong. We call that


In America, conventional wisdom that has mass acceptance is usually contrived: somebody paid for it. [Read the rest of this absorbing essay here.]

Tuesday, April 25, 2006

Gas Shortages?

What if the whole thing is a hoax--one of many, with the overriding goal the "pooring of America"--or, at the very least, to get us all out of our automobiles and into mass transit, where we can be more easily controlled. (Presumably criteria for riding on mass transit will be introduced--like ID cards?)

This comes courtesy of Roger D. (thanks). More to follow in a few days, some on oil company profits--the kinds that enable an Exxon/Mobil to pay a retiring executive a $400 million pension!--and some on the possibility that the fossil-fuel theory of oil is scientifically wrong. After all, the Russians have been deep-drilling for at least a couple of decades now and are slowly becoming one of the world's largest suppliers--I believe the correct phrase is the deep hot biosphere. Stay tuned. In the meantime, this is most interesting.

The Proactive News Radio Show/Email Alert
Bill Brumbaugh


I have sent this out already, but here it is again.

Please spread the word.


I just think everyone should know... I am a tugboat sailor. The gas shortage is totally bogus. There are "fleets" all up and down the gulf coast that you don't know about. They consist of hundreds and thousands of tank barges that we tie up daily that are filled with millions of gallons of fuel. The big companies pump their fuel into the barges and as long as the fuel is in a barge it is considered offshore and not part of the reserve. So, there are millions of gallons of fuel tied up to spud barges all through the bays, intracoastal inlets, and canals all up and down the coast that the companies don't have to report. They fabricate the shortage by pumping their millions of gallons of fuel and hide them in these fleets creating the shortage so they can make their multi billion dollar gains while we can't afford the gas at the pump. I've never in my life asked anyone to forward anything, but this has me fuming. Accidental pun now intended. With many voices, we can put a stop to this.

James F. Ransdell


Our website is

To join our email message list, send “subscribe” to
which is also our contact email address:

Please support he Proactive News by send FRN's, check, or money to
the address below, or online through PAYPAL.

Proactive News
PO Box 375
Northport, WA 99157
Tel: (509) 732-4339

The Proactive News is now heard weekday mornings
6-8am pst, 7-9am mst, 8 to 10am cst, 9-11am est
on the web at and it's affiliates

Coming soon, the Proactive News on Shoutcast

Education for the New World Order

One of the goals of the New World Order is the destruction of the traditional American family as a unit capable of transmitting specifics regarding morality, etc. Families are too independent. Teaching elementary school students that homosexuality is normal while refusing an opt-out to worried parents is a means to this end. Another of its goals is to track every individual person. Tracking children through early childhood development programs is a means to this end. Along these lines, courtesy of Joan Masters (thanks), are the following reports from EdWatch:

"Issues and Action in Education"
April 24, 2006

"Issues and Action in Education" is an e-letter produced by EdWatch, a nonprofit organization.

Noteworthy Education News
1. Same sex marriage and the classroom
2. UN "Education for All" tracks US preschoolers
3. A Laptop on Every Desk
4. Supreme Court Allows Protecting Religious Speech In Public Schools
5. 7th Annual Freedom 21 Conference

1. Same sex marriage and the classroom
Last year, EdWatch noted (4/25/06) the impact on the schools of legalizing same-sex marriage -- normalizing homosexual behavior for all children. Such are the intentions of the homosexual lobby throughout the country. We stated last year:

Parents must consider the serious implications of this position [legalizing homosexual marriage] for our children and for the schools. The March 28th [2005] issue of National Review magazine features an article by David Frum entitled, "A New Word, A New Day," in which he describes a concept that will take hold in school curricula everywhere if same-sex marriage becomes the law of the land. The concept is called "Hetero-normative," and it means that words are homophobic if they imply "that standard sexual relationships are only between males and females."

Some pooh-poohed our concerns, but now that homosexual marriage is legal in Massachusetts, teachers read first and second graders stories of homosexual "families" and "unions," such as the book King and King about the wedding of two princes. Parents can't have their children opted out. According to a recent PABBIS press release, the Lexington Superintendent of Schools told The Boston Globe that, "Lexington is committed to teaching children about the world they live in, and in Massachusetts same-sex marriage is legal."

Advocates promote same-sex marriage as a simple issue of individual freedom. In fact, legalizing same-sex marriage publicly and legally redefines marriage for all people. No pretense of constraint will be possible in normalizing homosexuality in the classroom.

2. UN "Education for All" tracks US children in preschool
The United Nations tracks statistics on how many U.S. children are enrolled in formal early childhood programs. The Framework for Action was agreed to at the World Conference on Education for All (EFA), at which countries agreed to gather data for accountability to the UN agency UNESCO. The Indicators on Early Childhood are:

Indicator 1: Gross enrollment in early childhood development programs, including public, private, and community programs.
Indicator 2: Percentage of new entrants to primary grade 1 who have attended some form of organized early childhood development program.

When lawmakers tell us the state must assess all children and collect data on kindergarten readiness,and when children receive a child data ID at their first screenings that is used to upload their data to the federal National Center for Education Statistics, when childcare programs are certified and their child data collected, the data is used to report to the United Nations agencies over Education for All "accountability." Why is U.S. Early Childhood policy accountable to the United Nations?

3. A Laptop on Every Desk
Laptops for all. Textbooks of tomorrow. From Illinois to Georgia to Maine to Texas to Minnesota, the push is on to mandate laptops for every student at a price tag that runs into the billions for one state alone. A traditional textbook at $50 each lasts about five years compared to one state's $1500 for a laptop over five years. Yet no independent, long-term research exists to demonstrate that laptops actually increase academic achievement. There’s more to this picture, though. Read more.
Past Education blogposts can be viewed on WomanTalk here.
Family Policy blogposts with Karen Effrem, M.D. can be viewed on WomanTalk here.

4. Supreme Court Allows Protecting Religious Speech In Public Schools
Washington, D.C. - Today, the U.S. Supreme Court allowed the Second Circuit Court of Appeals ruling to stand which prohibits public schools from censoring the religious viewpoints of students in class assignments. Baldwinsville School District v. Peck involves a kindergarten student from Syracuse, New York, who drew a poster depicting Jesus kneeling on one knee with his hands open to the sky. The class artwork was later displayed at a school event. However, school officials blocked any view of Jesus by folding the poster in half. (Report from the Family Research Council.)

5. 7th Annual Freedom 21 Conference in July
EdWatch speakers will be featured at the 7th annual Freedom 21 National Conference
Michael Chapman, Allen Quist, Karen R. Effrem
Others: Henry Lamb, Michael Coffman, Tom DeWeese, Michael Shaw, Herb Titus, Kent Snyder and more.
July 20 - 22nd
Drawbridge Inn and Convention Center
Fort Mitchell, Kentucky (just outside of Cincinnati).
See Conference Program.

105 Peavey Rd, Suite 116, Chaska, MN 55318
952-361-4931 – -

EdWatch is entirely user-supported. The continuation of our research and distribution work is entirely dependent upon individual contributors. If you want to assure that our work continues, click here. If you want to subscribe or unsubscribe to this EdWatch e-mail service, mail to: Put "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" in the SUBJECT of the message. Resources of videos, books, and audiotapes are available on our shopping cart.

Monday, April 24, 2006

Dr. Madeleine Cosman: A Fitting Legacy

Dr. Madeleine Cosman passed away unexpectedly earlier this year of a rare disease called schleroderma; she had been scheduled to join Michael Shaw, Henry Lamb and myself on our Sustainable Development: The Hidden Threat to Liberty panel at the Mises Institute's Austrian Scholars Conference. The material below indicates the serious health hazards that have been created in this country by the one-worlders' policy of open borders.

Read Dr. Cosman's article archive here.

Dr. Madeleine Cosman's Legacy - A Harsh Warning:
Illegal Alien Legacy Of Disease And Death
One Reporter's Opinion
By George Putnam

It is this reporter's opinion that we American citizens have lost one of our greatest advocates in the illegal alien invasion battle. Seldom does a person with such impeccable credentials step forward to participate in the effort to reclaim America. I speak of Dr. Madeleine Cosman, Ph.D., J.D., M.A., B.A. a medical/legal genius.

Madeleine, a regular on this report, recently died of a rare progressive disease, scleroderma, that leads to hardening and tightening of the skin and connective tissues (the fibers that provide the framework and support for your body). Ironically, Dr. Cosman, a medical scientist who had dedicated her life to others in need, found herself afflicted by a disease for which there is no known cure. It is not considered contagious or cancerous, but in the case of Dr. Cosman, it has proved fatal.

In this report and on our radio show, Madeleine familiarized us all with such unfamiliar diseases as dengue fever, Marburg fever, Chagas disease and the re-introduction to our society of smallpox, polio, hepatitis, tuberculosis and leprosy, which is not common knowledge.

The good doctor was concerned in each public appearance and radio and television interview with the illegal aliens who cross our borders MEDICALLY UNEXAMINED. Said Madeleine, "We may know what illegal aliens carry in their BACKPACKS; we do not know what they carry in their bodies."

Said Dr. Cosman: "When grandpa came to America, he kissed the ground of New York's Ellis Island. Then he stripped naked and coughed real hard. Every legal immigrant before 1924 was examined for infectious diseases upon arrival and tested for tuberculosis. Anyone infected was shipped back to the old country. That was powerful incentive for each newcomer to make heroic efforts to appear healthy.

"Today, LEGAL immigrants must demonstrate they are free of communicable diseases and drug addiction to qualify for lawful permanent residency green cards. But ILLEGAL aliens stop at no medical checkpoint. Whoever walks through our GOLDEN DOOR comes in whether healthy or sick. If we catch and detain a sick illegal alien who proves to have a serious disease, we keep him. Our foolish compassion makes us fear that his home country has neither adequate medical resources nor modern wonder drugs.

"So we release sick illegal aliens to our American streets to infect others if their diseases are contagious, or we place them in our Medicaid program and pay for their expensive treatments."

Thus we see horrendous diseases that we long ago conquered in America are coming back to plague us. Let's take tuberculosis as an example. Ordinary T.B. can be cured in six months with four drugs that cost about $2,000. Serious M.D.R.-T.B. takes 24 months at a cost in expensive drugs at approximately $250,000. Each illegal alien with M.D.R.-T.B. coughs and infects numerous people who will not show symptoms immediately; the disease explodes later like a time bomb.

In "Hospital to the World Welcomes Illegals and Contagious Diseases" (April 25, 2005), Dr. Cosman informs us that:

* T.B. was virtually absent in Virginia until in 2002 it spiked a 17 percent increase.

* Not far from Washington, D.C., T.B. had a meteoric rise of 188 percent. Public health officials blame immigrants, traced to illegal aliens from Mexico.

* The Queens, New York, Health Department attributed 81 percent of new T.B. cases in 2001 to immigrants, with 42 percent of all new T.B. cases ascribed to the foreign born.

* Violent T.B. outbreaks afflicted schoolteachers and children in Michigan and adults and kids in Texas. The teachers and kids caught it at school from the coughing children of illegal aliens.

* In Minnesota, the police suddenly came down with M.D.R.-T.B. The cops caught it in their patrol cars when they arrested illegal aliens who coughed in their faces.

* T.B. erupted in Portland, Maine, and DelRay Beach, Florida, directly traced to illegals.

Dr. Cosman also told this reporter of other diseases brought back to us by illegals:

* She cited Chagas disease, which has no known cure and has the revolting nickname of "kissing bug disease." The bug has parasites that favor the lips and the face for infection and infects 18 million people in Latin America.

* She cites leprosy: Suddenly, in the past three years, America has more than 7,000 cases. Illegal aliens brought leprosy from India, Brazil, the Caribbean and Mexico.

* Next on the list: dengue fever. There was a recent outbreak in Webb County, Texas, on the border with Mexico.

* Polio was eradicated from America but now appears in illegal immigrants.

* Malaria was obliterated but is now emerging in Texas and other states.

* About 4,000 young children under age 5 have contracted a disease called Kawasaki, known as "strawberry tongue."

* And there's the deadly Marburg disease.

* And there's the ever-present and increasing Hepatitis A, B and C; an outbreak occurred near Pittsburgh, where 3,000 came down with it thanks to infected Mexico-grown scallions and illegal alien kitchen workers in Chi-Chi's restaurant. Two Americans died.

We can thank the late Dr. Madeleine Cosman for alerting us to what the illegal aliens bring to us as they cross our borders. Dr. Cosman was outstanding in the fields of law and medicine, and she provided constant updates on disease information we found nowhere else. She exposed the disease factors and the astronomical costs to the taxpayers for the medical services never reimbursed as well as the costs of "anchor babies." Madeleine knew that the wonderful nation left to us by our forefathers could be destroyed without constant vigilance.

Indeed, we are the GOLDEN DOOR Hospital to the World and we're paying for all of it. But, dear doctor, you've done us a great public service in keeping us informed. You, dear friend, will be sorely missed.

Originally published March 10, 2006

Introduction to "Suckernomics"

We're coming up on final exams here--been swamped for several days now grading student papers, which means swimming through a sea of misspelled words, poorly constructed paragraphs, etc. This all means that it has been, and for several more days will remain impossible to update this blog every day. (Already a few good things have gotten away from me.)

Yet Dennis Cuddy's newest piece is an instant keeper. He forgot a small handful of things, among them the phony unemployment statistics that leave out the discouraged worker and are designed to convince the sheeple that the U.S. economy is in better shape than it is. Count the discouraged worker, and the actual unemployment rate in America is somewhere around 12 percent. The point of "suckernomics": keep America's masses illiterate and misled, using whatever resources are necessary (government schools will do, and where those leave off, employ mainstream media misinformation, and then think tanks and research institutes to pump out bogus "studies" and other forms of disinformation). This so they will not ask too many questions of those with money and power. Keep the sheeple spending, spending, spending, so they will end up broke and dependent.

Original here.


By Dennis L. Cuddy, Ph.D.
April 24, 2006

In my previous article, I introduced the term "Suckernomics." The reception to this new term was very positive, so I have decided to expand upon its principles. Suckernomics is the process whereby the American public is made, and kept, economically ignorant. It begins even in elementary school, and the following is a list of some of its basic principles. The list is not meant to be exhaustive, and I am sure that you, the reader, will be able to add examples to it.

1, Don't teach students basic reading and math skills, so they will not be able to compete economically against those of other nations.

2, Convince Americans that more money is needed to solve our educational problems, even though a tremendous increase in educational funding has occurred over the past 4 decades, with negative results.

3, Teach children that petroleum products come from decayed fossils, even though there is no evidence of massive numbers of dinosaurs or massive amounts of vegetation in Middle Eastern desert regions or in the North Sea or near Alaska where large deposits of oil have been found. Don't let them know petroleum products are plentiful and come from methane derivatives, available through deep-drilling techniques used by the Russians for decades. Otherwise, they won't believe there's an oil shortage, and pay continuously rising prices.

4, Require Americans to pay about 40% of their annual income in taxes, but tell them that they are still better off than the serfs of feudal days who paid a smaller percent of their production to the nobles.

5, Persuade Americans that they should pay taxes for government programs which operate less efficiently than if run by private enterprise.

6, Entice Americans to purchase items on credit, even though that increases the cost of the goods by 10-20%.

7, Have Americans place a large percent of their paycheck into a Social Security "Trust Fund," which Congress then raids, leaving future senior citizens wondering what happened to their hard-earned money for retirement.

8, Allow the federal government to get away with posting an inflation rate that does not include increases in the price of food and fuel.

9, Give authority regarding trade decisions to the World Trade Organization, run by unelected bureaucrats overseas who can tell Congress it has to change our laws. Convince Americans that this is "free trade" when it is actually "managed trade," because many nations still have trade restrictions and subsidize industries in their own countries.

10, Dismiss calls for "fair trade," claiming American workers can compete against slave and child labor.

11, Persuade Americans there are still such things as "American corporations" as ownership increasingly goes overseas (e.g., 97% of sound recording industries, 65% of metal ore mining, 64% of motion picture and video industries, 63% of book publishers, etc.).

12, Have Americans believe that profits from American companies still stay in the U.S. (e.g., Amoco's profits go to England, Random House's and Chrysler's profits go to Germany, Gerber's profits go to Switzerland, TransAmerica's profits go to The Netherlands, etc.).

13, Convince Americans that government incentives for American companies to locate offices/jobs overseas will not harm the job prospects of American workers (even comedian Jay Leno said President Bush went to India to visit the American jobs that had relocated there).

14, Persuade Americans that NAFTA and GATT would bring high-paying high-tech jobs to the U.S., while increasing numbers of high-tech jobs are outsourced to India, etc., and while President Bush and Congress propose dramatically increasing (from 65,000 to 350,00 annually) the number of H-1B visas so that high-tech foreign workers can come to the U.S.

15, Convince Americans that increasing numbers of guest workers working for minimum wage (because they are placed, for example, 10 in a house and pay only 1/10th each for expenses) will not undercut American workers in many industries (e.g., fast foods, construction, hotel and motel, grass-cutting, carpet-cleaning, etc.) who have to pay 100% of their own expenses.

16, Persuade Americans increasingly to purchase cheap foreign-made products here, leaving them to wonder why they cannot find a good-paying American job anymore.

17, Convince Americans that they have still gotten their monies' worth purchasing cheap products from overseas even though they don't last as long as American-made products.

18, Have government severely regulate/limit the use of people's private property, but still require them to pay the full amount of taxes on their property.

19, Force/coerce people to turn over their private property to the government in the name of preserving a pristine environment, but then this same property is contracted out to developers/mining companies, etc., for exploitation.

20, Drastically reduce the United States manufacturing base, yet assure Americans that having missile parts, etc., made in Communist China or elsewhere will not compromise our national security at any time, especially during wartime.

21, Persuade Americans that building up the economy of Communist China via investment and trade will not strengthen their military with which they can threaten/attack us. Also convince Americans that giving the Communist Chinese advanced missile technology will not aid them militarily either, if they decide to attack the U.S., Taiwan, Japan, or some other nation in the future.

22, Assure Americans that genetically modified foods and animals are economically beneficial, even though the long-term health consequences of such genetic modification is unknown. In an experiment, half of a field was planted with unmodified soybeans and the other half of the field with genetically modified soybeans----geese refused to eat the genetically modified soybeans! Do they know something we don't know?

23, Spend millions of American tax dollars to build the Panama Canal and then hand it over to a Panamanian dictator who sells operation rights at either end of the canal to the Communist Chinese who could destroy it if in a war with the U.S. in the future.

24, Have millions of American tax dollars spent on political campaigns to oust Slobodan Milosevic as leader of Yugoslavia at the same time Americans are expressing outrage over Communist Chinese political campaign contributions to American candidates.

25, Spend millions of American tax dollars on textbooks teaching Afghan children jihad (holy war) against foreign invaders, causing the Afghans when grown to fight against the U.S. invasion.

, Americans give millions of dollars in foreign aid to countries that give large amounts of money to terrorists who want to destroy us (this is the "sell them the rope with which they'll hang us" principle).

The result of suckernomics will be a further withering of the middle class, resulting in a techno-feudal society ruled by an elite. Not only will this be a return to feudalism, but the "suckers" have also been conditioned to accept "futilism"----the idea that it is futile for them to resist dominance by a power elite intent upon synthesizing Western Capitalism and Eastern Communism into a World Socialist Government under the elite's control (an updated, indexed edition of my book, THE ROAD TO SOCIALISM AND THE NEW WORLD ORDER, will soon be published).

© 2006 Dennis Cuddy - All Rights Reserved

Order Dennis Cuddy's new book "Cover-Up: Government Spin or Truth?"

Dennis Laurence Cuddy, historian and political analyst, received a Ph.D. from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (major in American History, minor in political science). Dr. Cuddy has taught at the university level, has been a political and economic risk analyst for an international consulting firm, and has been a Senior Associate with the U.S. Department of Education.

Cuddy has also testified before members of Congress on behalf of the U.S. Department of Justice. Dr. Cuddy has authored or edited twenty books and booklets, and has written hundreds of articles appearing in newspapers around the nation, including The Washington Post, Los Angeles Times and USA Today. He has been a guest on numerous radio talk shows in various parts of the country, such as ABC Radio in New York City, and he has also been a guest on the national television programs USA Today and CBS's Nightwatch.

Thursday, April 20, 2006

Communist China: Prototype for the Emerging New World Order?

This is our Number One trading partner, to which the U.S. government gave Most Favored Nation status.

Original here.

China: New World Order Litmus Test
Can the police state crush widespread popular resistance?

Steve Watson & Alex Jones | April 18 2006

We have long documented how China is the New World Order Blueprint for a controlled Police State Surveillance Dictatorship.

The elite have even admitted, in their own documents, how they wish to emulate the chinese model and apply it in the Anglo-American Western block.

Sky News recently produced a segment which highlighted how, despite fierce anger and resistance amongst the people of China, the Communist Government has instilled such fear and has such control over the media that very few dare to stand up and speak out. Those that do are forcibly quashed.

The Government and its contractors are seizing people's land and homes and building their own developments on it, forcing the population into living lives of poverty and squalor.

The state controlled Chinese media does not cover this because they know they would be immediately shut down if they did. The only footage that comes out of China is shot by the people themselves or undercover foreign reporters.

These revelations should remind us of the fact that tyrannical governments, in order to succeed know they have to infiltrate the lives of their populations to every degree, not allowing any form of self sufficiency or independence to endanger their iron fist control.

In a startling reminder of how much closer we are to the Chinese model than we are distant from it, the US the Supreme Court has already decided that local governments can force property owners to sell out and make way for private economic development when officials decide it would benefit the public, even if the property is not blighted, and the new project's success is not guaranteed.

The true details of this situation were not picked up on by the mainstream media, just as they are not being reported in Communist China.

A recent Virginia training manual used to help state employees recognize terrorists even lists property rights activists as terrorists and includes binoculars, video cameras, pads and notebooks in a compendium of terrorist tools.

under section 802 of the Patriot Act any crime or misdemeanor that endangers human life can be considered terroristic. I guess protesting against the government grabbing your land can be included under this umbrella.

This is just one of many horror stories to emerge from the Communist Chinese police state in recent times. The total dehumanization in China is the elite model for a prison control grid across the planet.

Last year the London Guardian reported that Chinese cosmetics companies are using skin harvested from the corpses of executed convicts to develop beauty products for sale in Europe.

Stories of organ harvesting are widespread and confirmed by multiple mainstream sources, yet the state department, even contradicting it's own reports, suggested that it is an "urban myth"

China also still has a policy of public execution for dissidents. The country has flirted with mobile execution vans as it shifts away from the communist system's traditional bullet in the head, towards a more "civilized" use of lethal injection.

The issues of forced sterilization and forced abortion have also recently resurfaced in the Communist country. Despite withdrawing some funds for these policies, the Bush administration still bankrolls UNESCO projects which have had direct links to forced abortions and sterilizations.

Recently Dr Eric Pianka, a top University of Texas professor, advocated such policies when he said that China's one child policy, enforced by a brutal police state, was a good thing.

Censorship is widespread in China with, particularly since the advent of the internet. The state has introduced cartoon cyber cops in an attempt to make the totalitarian regime internet-user friendly. In reality the characters are there to warn the people that Big Brother is watching them.

The Internet police icons have been responsible for a 60% decline in the filtering of Internet postings for content challenging the political order.

The sites that cannot be patrolled are simply shut down. New rules have been issued banning Internet news services from inciting illegal assemblies, marches and demonstrations as well as prohibiting activities on behalf of unauthorized civil groups.

In a startlingly similar fashion, laws have been passed in both the UK and the US to impose "free speech zones" and bans upon any demonstrations that have not been okayed by the authorities beforehand.

The search engine company Google has also attracted controversy recently by pandering to the Communist police state and agreeing to install government search filters on its Chinese based search engine.

Not even the Rolling Stones could escape censorship when they toured in China. However, the Stones were censored TO A GREATER DEGREE when they played the Superbowl half time show in the US. I guess if its good for the totalitarian Chinese rulers, its good for the sweet Neocons.

Since 2003 China has recorded details of more than 96 percent of its population on a police database, supplementing Internet and other state-sanctioned surveillance. The state is also to issue 1.3 billion RFID identification cards.

Terrible you would agree, yet in Britain currently there is a program underway to add 100% of the population to a national database. The ID card act has been passed and, by 2008, anyone who requires a passport (and access to healthcare, education and the ability to buy or sell no doubt) MUST be registered and must carry an ID card.

In addition, Under current UK laws, if you are arrested for any recordable offence, police are allowed to take your fingerprints and a sample your DNA. Even if you are subsequently released and found innocent, police can still keep your DNA, which is added to a PERMANENT database.

Worse still, hundreds of thousands of children aged between 10 and 18 have had their DNA added to the database despite never being cautioned or charged for any offence.

When it's China our governments agree such policies are dehumanizing, demoralizing and degrading, yet when it happens in our own countries that's just fine and dandy.

Furthermore, in the leading police state regime in the world and the benchmark for the new world order control system, surveillance still lags behind that of the UK, with Chinese authorities learning lessons from the Orwellian surveillance capital of the world.

"In this regard we've taken particular note of England, where basically everyone lives under the electronic eye," Mayor Xu Zhongheng of Shenzhen has said, remarking how important surveillance cameras were in tracking down the perpetrators of attacks on the London transport system last year.

Were they important? Really? That's not what we were told. We were told that the cameras WERE NOT FUNCTIONING.

The Chinese model is the benchmark test for the prison planet, as the state becomes more powerful and the people there become more downtrodden, more controlled and less able to resist, we see the same policies being transferred to our own countries. In many cases our countries are now even preceding China in their police state tactics.

Furthermore our own economies and infrastructures are being systematically sold out to the Chinese government.

Recently the Associated Press reported that Hutchison Whampoa Ltd was given a no-bid contract by the US government to take over radiation detecting security just 65 miles away from Freeport in the Bahamas with no oversight. Hutchinson Whampoa is admittedly a holding of the Chinese navy and the People's Liberation Army.

In 1997 the Communist Chinese government took over the Long Beach Naval Air Base, the only major deep water port that can take large ships on the west coast. In 2000, the Communist Chinese, Hutchinson Whampoa which is run by the PLA, took over the Panama Canal and has stationed between 15,000 and 30,000 troops at the facility.

Topping even that, U.S. taxpayers are lending Westinghouse Electric Co. almost $5 billion to build nuclear power plants in China.

American tax money is directly funding the might of the Chinese Red Army despite the fact that we are told over and over that they are the future military threat and despite top Chinese generals continue to threaten nuclear attacks on America.

Alex Jones' first documentary film America: Destroyed By Design, made in 1997, warned Americans that the sell-out to the Chinese was the first step on the road to the sacking of the American economy and pulling the plug on key US infrastructure.

Click here to view a segment where Alex Jones discusses the Chinese sell-out.

It is a stated goal of the Bilderberg Group, the Trilateral Commission and the CFR to promote what they call 'interdependence' and to lobby governments to sell off key infrastructure such as roads, lakes, ports, and highways to international corporations so that corporations can grow to be bigger in size than government.

People everywhere are not just being robbed of their ability to create wealth, we are being robbed of our infrastructure, our land and our capacity to work the land. Our currencies, our futures and our sovereignties are systematically being dismantled, looted and sold to the highest bidder by the corrupt elite and the corporations and governments they control like chess pieces.

Tuesday, April 18, 2006

Now THIS Has All the Makings of a Hoax! (Duh!)

Just published, an account of a fairly amazing string of coincidences. And folks say we 'conspiracy theorists' are a bunch of nuts. That THIS could happen is what is nuts. Michael Rivero's comments are classic and worth reprinting in full.

Oh come ON, now!!!!!

A mix-up in Boston prevented the luggage from connecting with the plane that hijackers crashed into the north tower of the trade center. Seized by FBI agents at Boston's Logan Airport, investigators said, it contained Arab-language papers revealing the identities of all 19 hijackers involved in the four hijackings, as well as information on their plans, backgrounds and motives.

Okay, let me see if I have this right. A guy who is planning suicide thoughtfully packs a suitcase he expects he will never see again with all the evidence the FBI will need to figure out the crime if by some miracle that suitcase doesn't get onto the plane that the suicide hijacker expects will perish in a huge ball of flame.

Forget the bovine excrement meter on this one and go straight to building the Ark. - M. R

Here's the title and first two paragraphs:

An untold story of 9/11
Newsday Staff Writer

April 17, 2006

Former federal terrorism investigators say a piece of luggage hastily checked in at the Portland, Maine, airport by a World Trade Center hijacker on the morning of Sept. 11 provided the Rosetta stone enabling FBI agents to swiftly unravel the mystery of who carried out the suicide attacks and what motivated them.

A mix-up in Boston prevented the luggage from connecting with the plane that hijackers crashed into the north tower of the trade center. Seized by FBI agents at Boston's Logan Airport, investigators said, it contained Arab-language papers revealing the identities of all 19 hijackers involved in the four hijackings, as well as information on their plans, backgrounds and motives.

[Read the rest here. I can't stop laughing!]

Charley Reese

When Charley Reese goes wrong, he goes wrong terribly (as in a column on where he described the UN not just as worthless but as weak because it doesn't have its own army). But when he gets things right, he, too, hits the nail right on the head. Here are two Charley Reese columns, and old one and a new one. The old one is just plain common horse sense regarding the manipulation of the American public to produce unthinking sheeple. The new one revisits the saber-rattling between Iran and the "international community" (read: neocons, the UN crowd) which we've been neglecting here of late. What would the effects be of an attack on Iran by the U.S. military doing the bidding of the Israeli or Jewish lobby? It wouldn't exactly make us any more friends in the Middle East, and could well trigger World War III. (Possibly it will soon be time to revisit Albert Pike, the celebrated Freemason of the 19th century and his infamous "Three World Wars" letter to Mazzini which just might turn out to be authentic.)

Has anyone noticed how all the threats against Iran's nuclear program--which could be aimed at building a power station, for all anybody has proven or offered evidence for--is an assault on Iran's national sovereignty, just as "agreements" such as CAFTA and "partnerships" such as the SPP are assaults on U.S. sovereignty? National sovereignty is under attack the world over!


Monday, 08-Jan-01 01:21:59 writes:

by Charley Reese

The difference between true education and vocational training has been
cleverly blurred. Here are a few tips on how smart people can control
other people. If any of this rings a bell - Well, then wake up!

The first principle of people control is not to let them know you are
controlling them. If people knew, this knowledge will breed resentment
and possibly rebellion, which would then require brute force and terror,
and old fashioned, expensive and not 100 % certain method of control.

It is easier than you think to control people indirectly, to manipulate
them into thinking what you want them to think and doing what you want
them to do.

One basic technique is to keep them ignorant. Educated people are not as
easy to manipulate. Abolishing public education or restricting access to
education would be the direct approach. That would spill the beans. The
indirect approach is to control the education they receive.

It's possible to be a Ph.D., doctor, lawyer, businessman, journalist, or
an accountant, just to name a few examples, and at the same time be an
uneducated person. The difference between true education and vocational
training has been cleverly blurred in our time so that we have people
successfully practicing their vocations while at the same time being
totally ignorant of the larger issues of the world in which they live.

The most obvious symptom is their absence of original thought. Ask them
a question and they will end up reciting what someone else thinks or
thought the answer was. What do they think Well, they never thought about
it. Their education consisted of learning how to use the library and cite

That greatly simplifies things for the controller because with lots of
money, university endowments, foundations, grants, and ownership of
media, it is relatively easy to control who they will think of as
authorities to cite in lieu of doing their own thinking.

Another technique is to keep them entertained. Roman emperors did not
stage circuses and gladiator contests because they didn't have
television. We have television because we don't have circuses and
gladiator events. Either way, the purpose is to keep the people's minds
focused on entertainment, sports, and peripheral political issues. This
way you won't have to worry that they will ever figure out the real
issues that allow you to control them.

Just as a truly educated person is difficult to control, so too is an
economically independent person. Therefore, you want to create conditions
that will produce people who work for wages, since wage earners have
little control over their economic destiny. You'll also want to control
the monetary, credit, and banking systems. This will allow you to inflate
the currency and make it next to impossible for wage earners to
accumulate capital. You can also cause periodic deflation to collapse the
family businesses, family farms, and entrepreneurs, including independent
community banks.

To keep trade unions under control, you just promote a scheme that
allows you to shift production jobs out of the country and bring back the
products as imports (it is called free trade). This way you will end up
with no unions or docile unions.

Another technique is to buy both political parties so that after a while
people will feel that no matter whether they vote for Candidate A or
Candidate B, they will get the same policies. This will create great
apathy and a belief that the political process is useless for effecting
real change.

Pretty soon you will have a population that feels completely helpless,
and thinks the bad things happening to them are nobody in particular's
fault, just a result of global forces or evolution or some other
disembodied abstract concept. If necessary, you can offer scapegoats.

Then you can bleed them dry without having to worry overly much that one
of them will sneak into your house one night and cut your throat. If you
do it right, they won't even know whose throat they are cutting.

Charley Reese

Israel - The Dead Roach In America's Salad
By Charley Reese
4-18-6 (original here)

The Israeli lobby and the neoconservatives are beating the drums for war with Iran. I hope the president is not that dangerously stupid. The betting on whether he is that stupid is about even.

The neocons ­ who, being self-centered, seemingly have no concept of human nature ­ are advancing the premise that a military attack on Iran will cause the people to lose faith in their government and result in regime change.

A military attack on Iran will have the opposite effect. The people will rally to their government, and any hope of regime change will be dead. That people will rally around their existing leaders in the face of an attack by a foreign power is as certain as sunrise. Neither Israel nor the U.S. could do a greater favor for the ruling mullahs and Iran's president than to launch an attack. It would cement their hold on power.

The neocons' fallacious premise has already been disproved. In the first Gulf War, the first Bush administration confidently incited the Shi'ites and the Kurds to rebel after Saddam Hussein's forces were expelled from Kuwait. The administration thought that Saddam, embarrassed by a crushing military defeat, would fall from power in Iraq easily. Instead, he rallied his forces and crushed both the Shi'ites in the south and the Kurds in the north. Oops.

In the first place, it is not embarrassing for a Third World country with obsolete equipment to be defeated by the world's No. 1 military superpower. In the second place, the Sunnis, however much they might have disliked Saddam, disliked even more the thought of being ruled by Kurds or Shi'ites. In the third place, by President George H.W. Bush's decision to not go to Baghdad, Saddam could say he duked it out with the world's superpower and was still standing after the fight. That, in most eyes, could be counted as a victory.

Some months ago, an Iranian human-rights advocate pleaded with the current Bush administration to cease its rhetorical attacks on the Iranian government. She said, quite accurately, that such attacks make life impossible for Iranian reformers. Needless to say, the blockheads in Washington ignored her.

What did we do when the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were attacked? We rallied behind George W. Bush ­ Democrats and Republicans, liberals and conservatives. That's the natural reaction of normal human beings, and the Iranians are normal human beings. Attack their country and they will rally round the flag.

The Iranians still insist they are not seeking nuclear weapons, and there's not a scrap of evidence to contradict that claim. They still adhere to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. They have often called for a nuclear-free Middle East.

Once again, the dead roach in America's salad is Israel. The U.S. hypocritically opposes a nuclear-free Middle East because Israel has nuclear weapons. We hypocritically claim the Iranians are in violation of international law when, in fact, it is Israel that refuses to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and refuses international inspections. Given our craven obedience to Israel, we have exactly zero credibility in the Arab and Muslim world.

As I have said before, I don't care if the Iranians do develop nuclear weapons. My whole adult life was lived with 30,000 Soviet nuclear weapons aimed at me. I can certainly live with the six or seven Iran might be able to scrape together in the next five to 10 years. In the meantime, the U.S. government should kick the Israeli lobby out of the country and support Iran and the Arab League in pushing for a nuclear-free Middle East.

The Israeli lobby pushing America to fight yet another war for Israel reminds me of what the French ambassador to Great Britain said at a party: "Why does the world allow this (expletive deleted) little country to cause so much trouble?"

Why indeed? You should ask your politicians that question.

Monday, April 17, 2006

Tax Slavery Day

This year Tax Slavery Day falls on April 17, since April 15 fell on a Saturday. Some might frown at the use of the expression Tax Slavery Day. But what would we call the day in which people "voluntarily" fill out forms, pay sums of their hard-earned fiat money to the government, reflecting the fact that they in effect work for the government from January 1 until (at the very earliest) right around this time in April and (more probably) until sometime in May? If you work for someone else involuntarily, and that someone else will have you arrested and thrown in jail for refusing to work for them, is that not a form of legal slavery?

Neal Boortz isn't one of my favorite writers, and I sometimes find myself blatantly disagreeing with him (the Iraq War, which he defends, is an example). But when he hits the nail on the head, he nails it down good and hard! The below is an example, from his website.

From Boortz's Archive, dated April 14, 2006:


The Georgia Public Policy Foundation steered me to a rather interesting (though not shocking) facts on taxation in America. The source is an article by Michael K. Evans posted on Do you have any idea just how huge your total tax load is? Take a look at these facts.

First--and this fact is now beyond debate--all taxes are paid by individuals. All taxes are levied against wealth, and only individuals hold wealth. For those of you who attended government schools, and are thus a little slow on concepts like this, corporations are not wealthy. Corporate shareholders hold that wealth. Individuals. So ... for the sake of Evan's article, he says that the taxes are paid by employees or proprietors, the owners of small businesses. Now .. the tab:

Total federal income taxes collected last year: $932 billion. That works out to $6,650 per employee.

In addition to income taxes, the federal government collected another $1.286 trillion in taxes, mostly Social Security taxes.

The total state and local tax burden amounts to $1.14 trillion.

The grand sum here -- paid by employees and proprietors -- is $3.358 trillion.

That's $3,358,000,000,000.00

This works out to $24,000 per employee.

The total compensation earned by employees and individual proprietors last year was $8.2 trillion.

This means that 40% of income goes to taxes of some sort.

That rate, of course, is much higher for those earning higher incomes. Much lower for those in low income brackets.

Nice, huh?

Now ... grab this fact. Where did most of this money go? National defense? Homeland security? Hardly. In terms of Federal expenditures you have:

$495 billion for national defense.

$272 billion spent by the federal government for the purchase of goods and payment of employees

$1.69 trillion sent to someone else. $1.69 trillion in income redistribution.

This is just fine with those on the left who believe that income is distributed, not earned. For the rest of us? Well, I don't know about you, but I have a wee bit of a problem with all of this.

[Me, too--especially as one of those low-wage earners subsisting in the academic ghetto of adjunct faculty members, I need every penny I can get my hands on. The supposed lower tax, or tax credit, or whatever it is, for low-wage earners doesn't really help all that much. SY.]

Friday, April 14, 2006

Shadow Statistics - Your Government At Work

This isn't new--we've covered these matters before--but it all bears repeating. Courtesy of Joan Masters (thanks).

The Daily Reckoning PRESENTS: We all know to take what politicians have to
say with a grain of salt - but do you really know how trumped up the
"official government statistics" really are? Chris Mayer explores...

by Chris Mayer

"Listen," I interrupted, "what nationality are you?"

"I'm English," she replied. "That is, I was born in Poland, but my father
is Irish."

"That makes you English?"

"Yes," she said...

- Henry Miller, Tropic of Cancer

Ben Bernanke, Fed chairman, recently delivered an upbeat view of the U.S. economy. It was cheerful, optimistic...and delusional.

The official government statistics hide many warts on the face of the U.S economy. Like makeup dabbed on an aging film star, they are an attempt to cover the wrinkles and present a veneer of youth. To most people, this is no revelation. Like plastic surgery and tummy tucks, it is what stars do to keep up appearances.

However, few know the extent of the deceit. What if you learned that inflation were closer to 7% than to the official 3%? What if unemployment were closer to 12%, rather than the official 5%? What if the economy were actually contracting, as opposed to growing?

What follows is a partial peek at the economy - sans makeup. And, more importantly, what it means for you and your hard-earned dough.

It was the genius of writer George Orwell that he chose to build his dystopia on the foundations of language and information - how it is used to deceive, manipulate and control. His chilling novel 1984 stands out precisely because it is only a distortion of things that are happening now and that have always happened. Orwell's dystopia is a mirror in a funhouse, as you see enough of your own world in this disturbing reflection.

Thankfully, there are still some people doing the important work of getting at the truth behind the official statistics - piercing the veil of Newspeak, sweeping away the cobwebs of sham. John Williams is an economist dedicated to doing just that. His Shadow Government Statistics reveals the extensive rot under the floorboards of the U.S. economy.

Let's take the official inflation rate, tracked using the consumer price index, or CPI. The idea behind the CPI is to have a fixed basket of goods and track how the prices of these things change from year to year. It only gained prominence after World War II, as a way to adjust autoworkers' labor contracts, a practice that soon spread.

Over time, its importance grew and more people looked to it as a gauge of general price inflation - and, hence, to get a feel for the health of the economy.

The thing is, the way the CPI is calculated changed dramatically over the years. Politicians have figured out that these statistics are useful in winning elections. Ergo, nearly every administration has altered the calculation. And always, the changes made the CPI lower. Every effort to change the CPI, by design, aims to make the economy look "better" than it looked before the changes.

The accumulation of these changes creates a huge difference over time. It's like making a series of small changes to a ship's course in the midst of a long voyage. Soon, you wind up way off course, miles and miles from where you think you are. The chart below is from William's Web page. It shows the extent of the difference, which is just massive. The rate of inflation using only the pre-Clinton era CPI is closer to 7%!

The "Experimental C-CPI-U" is another innovation, introduced by the Bush administration to lower the CPI yet again, once again to paint a kinder portrait of the old hag known as the U.S. economy.

But it's about more than just making the economy look better. For example, since increases in Social Security payments link to the CPI, a lower CPI also saves the government money. According to Williams, if you used the CPI when Jimmy Carter was president, you'd get Social Security checks 70% higher than today's levels. Yes, 70% higher.

The government also duped all those people who thought it was such a great idea to buy TIPS (Treasury inflation-protected securities). Changes in the CPI determine the interest paid on these bonds. The higher the CPI, the more interest paid to bondholders. Some people loved the idea, figuring here was a bond that would keep pace with inflation. Given the government manipulates the CPI, you can be sure the interest rate paid will not keep pace with inflation - nor has it ever.

The manipulation of the CPI explains the great disconnect between what the man in the street feels when he pays his bills and what the confident, well-dressed Fed chiefs and politicians try to tell him. The cost of living is rising a lot more than they want you to believe. At a 7% annual rate of inflation, the cost of living would double in about 10 years. Looked at differently, the purchasing power of your dollar will fall in half.

What about unemployment? The government, since the time of the Kennedy administration, has been changing the definition of "unemployed."
Again, many small changes over time lead to dramatic end results. According to Williams, if you back out the changes, you get an unemployment number closer to 12%!

Let's look at the federal deficit - basically, the amount of money the government is losing every year. The official deficit for 2005 was $319 billion. However, this excludes unfunded Social Security and Medicare obligations. Throw them into the mix and calculate the deficit the way a business does in its financial statements - and you get an annual deficit around $3.5 trillion.

That's more than 10 times the so-called "official" deficit. By Williams' calculations, you could raise the tax rate to 100% - dump everyone's salaries into the U.S. Treasury - and still have a deficit.

Years of such deficits have created a mountain of obligations for the U.S. government. As Williams says, "The fiscal 2005 statement shows that total federal obligations at the end of September were $51 trillion; over four times the level of GDP." These debts are unsustainable. The bills must go unpaid. If the U.S. government were a private corporation, its bankruptcy
would be beyond dispute.

This is why Social Security and Medicare are not going to exist in the not-too-distant future. As Williams says, "There is no way the government can pay the Social Security or Medicare it has committed to."

Williams believes GDP is contracting now. The government reported only a 1.1% increase in the fourth quarter.
Even in an election year, and despite the government's best efforts to paint a pretty face, all it could muster was a measly 1.1%. More likely, the economy actually contracted 2% in the fourth quarter. This means we are in a recession NOW.

This is not conspiracy-theory stuff. As Williams points out, it's all disclosed in the footnotes in the government's reports. All he is doing is backing out many of the changes to more realistically compare these numbers with the numbers of the past.

The great H.L. Mencken, a scathing attack dog of idiocy in all its forms, wrote about "damning politicians up hill and down dale for many years as rogues and vagabonds, frauds and scoundrels." We need more Menckens. In the meantime, we'll have to make do with Williams and his cogent analysis of government skulduggery.

Oddly enough, these insights do not change our approach here in the pages of Capital & Crisis. In fact, Williams' work reinforces several things we've already covered in past letters. To wit:

Yields on real estate investment trusts (REITs) and utilities - to say nothing about the bond market - appear even more pathetic against an inflation rate of 7%. The yield for risks taken is simply not adequate. If the slumbering bond market awoke to the reality of a 7% inflation rate, there would be a sell-off the likes of which this country has never seen. Interest rates would bolt upward like a frightened cat.

And the U.S. dollar is a doomed currency over the long haul. Bernanke, the self-professed student of the Great Depression, accepts the mainstream view that the Fed's great mistake then was not to flood the system with dollars. He won't make that "mistake" again. Expect the printing presses to run day and night at full capacity when the trouble starts.

Trying to pin down the economy in precise numbers is futile anyway. It's too big, too complex. All macro statistics are severely flawed. This is why I seldom write about them. Investing using macro statistics is like trying to find the nearest post office with a globe. They are so vague as to be useless.

The basic idea I want to leave you with is this: The economy is far weaker than generally portrayed. Most investors ignore the rat's nest of risks and invest indiscriminately in stocks - without proper due diligence. As investors, we need to stick to our fundamentals more carefully than ever.


Chris Mayer
for The Daily Reckoning

Wednesday, April 12, 2006

Coming Internet War?

The power elite cannot control the Internet. It would be too obvious. So they may pursue the second best strategy--to use it as a disinformation tool, to confuse, disrupt, baffle, etc. Doubtless there are already sites with "information" on "conspiracies" that mixes truth with falsehood in ways intended to send us down false trails. With the technology steadily improving, the war for truth on the Internet may be just starting. It may be the power elite themselves doing this, or it may be just the neocons. Or it may be both.

America's war on the web

While the U.S. remains committed to hunting down al-Qaeda operatives, it is now taking the battle to new fronts. Deep within the Pentagon, technologies are being deployed to wage the war on terror on the internet, in newspapers and even through mobile phones. Investigations editor Neil Mackay reports

IMAGINE a world where wars are fought over the internet; where TV broadcasts and newspaper reports are designed by the military to confuse the population; and where a foreign armed power can shut down your computer, phone, radio or TV at will.

In 2006, we are just about to enter such a world. This is the age of information warfare, and details of how this new military doctrine will affect everyone on the planet are contained in a report, entitled The Information Operations Roadmap, commissioned and approved by U.S. secretary of defence Donald Rumsfeld and seen by the Sunday Herald.

The Pentagon has already signed off $383 million to force through the document’s recommendations by 2009. Military and intelligence sources in the US talk of “a revolution in the concept of warfare”. The report orders three new developments in America’s approach to warfare:

l Firstly, the Pentagon says it will wage war against the internet in order to dominate the realm of communications, prevent digital attacks on the US and its allies, and to have the upper hand when launching cyber-attacks against enemies.

l Secondly, psychological military operations, known as psyops, will be at the heart of future military action. Psyops involve using any media – from newspapers, books and posters to the internet, music, Blackberrys and personal digital assistants (PDAs) – to put out black propaganda to assist government and military strategy. Psyops involve the dissemination of lies and fake stories and releasing information to wrong-foot the enemy.

l Thirdly, the US wants to take control of the Earth’s electromagnetic spectrum, allowing US war planners to dominate mobile phones, PDAs, the web, radio, TV and other forms of modern communication. That could see entire countries denied access to telecommunications at the flick of a switch by America.

Freedom of speech advocates are horrified at this new doctrine, but military planners and members of the intelligence community embrace the idea as a necessary development in modern combat.

Human rights lawyer John Scott, who chairs the Scottish Centre for Human Rights, said: “This is an unwelcome but natural development of what we have seen. I find what is said in this document to be frightening, and it needs serious parliamentary scrutiny.”

Crispin Black – who has worked for the Joint Intelligence Committee, and has been an Army lieutenant colonel, a military intelligence officer, a member of the Defence Intelligence Staff and a Cabinet Office intelligence analyst who briefed Number 10 – said he broadly supported the report as it tallied with the Pentagon’s over-arching vision for “full spectrum dominance” in all military matters.

“I’m all for taking down al-Qaeda websites. Shutting down enemy propaganda is a reasonable course of action. Al-Qaeda is very good at [information warfare on the internet], so we need to catch up. The US needs to lift its game,” he said.

This revolution in information warfare is merely an extension of the politics of the “neoconservative” Bush White House. Even before getting into power, key players in Team Bush were planning total military and political domination of the globe. In September 2000, the now notorious document Rebuilding America’s Defences [see link on page--SY] – written by the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), a think-tank staffed by some of the Bush presidency’s leading lights – said that America needed a “blueprint for maintaining US global pre-eminence, precluding the rise of a great power-rival, and shaping the international security order in line with American principles and interests”.

The PNAC was founded by Dick Cheney, the vice-president; Donald Rumsfeld, the defence secretary; Bush’s younger brother, Jeb; Paul Wolfowitz, once Rumsfeld’s deputy and now head of the World Bank; and Lewis Libby, Cheney’s former chief of staff, now indicted for perjury in America.

Rebuilding America’s Defences also spoke of taking control of the internet. A heavily censored version of the document was released under Freedom of Information legislation to the National Security Archive at George Washington University in the US.

The report admits the U.S. is vulnerable to electronic warfare. “Networks are growing faster than we can defend them,” the report notes. “The sophistication and capability of … nation states to degrade system and network operations are rapidly increasing.”

T he report says the U.S. military’s first priority is that the “department [of defence] must be prepared to ‘fight the net’”. The internet is seen in much the same way as an enemy state by the Pentagon because of the way it can be used to propagandise, organise and mount electronic attacks on crucial U.S. targets. Under the heading “offensive cyber operations”, two pages outlining possible operations are blacked out.

Next, the Pentagon focuses on electronic warfare, saying it must be elevated to the heart of U.S. military war planning. It will “provide maximum control of the electromagnetic spectrum, denying, degrading, disrupting or destroying the full spectrum of communications equipment … it is increasingly important that our forces dominate the electromagnetic spectrum with attack capabilities”. Put simply, this means US forces having the power to knock out any or all forms of telecommunications on the planet.

After electronic warfare, the U.S. war planners turn their attention to psychological operations: “Military forces must be better prepared to use psyops in support of military operations.” The State Department, which carries out US diplomatic functions, is known to be worried that the rise of such operations could undermine American diplomacy if uncovered by foreign states. Other examples of information war listed in the report include the creation of “Truth Squads” to provide public information when negative publicity, such as the Abu Ghraib torture scandal, hits U.S. operations, and the establishment of “Humanitarian Road Shows”, which will talk up American support for democracy and freedom.

The Pentagon also wants to target a “broader set of select foreign media and audiences”, with $161m set aside to help place pro-US articles in overseas media.

02 April 2006

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?