NO QUARTER FOR CORRUPTION (Focussing on The Fed./FRBS)

[Vexari]

this has been going on for quite some time

most follow canned news exclusively here in the us, they don't have a clue (which is still the majority)

not even a footnote is mentioned


Wonder who's paying him off?

probably the same entity controlling our media..

[mbc]

The whole GM issue is out of control worldwide. They should be destroyed completely and totally. No reason at all to have them around except for profit to Monsanto.

From the article, this is the 'duh' moment..

According to Preslav Borissov, deputy minister for agriculture and foods, banning GM crops in Bulgaria would hurt the country’s competitiveness, as other European countries are already making considerable progress with GM food production. "I also do not want my children to eat GM foods, but I do not think this is a reason to stop GM foods," he added in a statement to the Bulgarian news agency BTA.

Wonder who's paying him off?

[Vexari]

Document shows Goldman Sachs made deals that destroyed AIG and was "secretly" bailed out by the Fed under direction of Geithner.

This is worse than Geithner's backdoor bailout to Wall Street because it shows extreme favoritism to Sachs.

He will not be punished because he is a team player for the banks, and they are in control..


Secret AIG Document Shows Goldman Sachs Minted Most Toxic CDOs


http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=ax3yON_uNe7I

By Richard Teitelbaum


Feb. 23 (Bloomberg) -- When a congressional panel convened a hearing on the government rescue of American International Group Inc. in January, the public scolding of Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner got the most attention.

Lawmakers said the former head of the New York Federal Reserve Bank had presided over a backdoor bailout of Wall Street firms and a coverup. Geithner countered that he had acted properly to avert the collapse of the financial system.

A potentially more important development slipped by with less notice, Bloomberg Markets reports in its April issue. Representative Darrell Issa, the ranking Republican on the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, placed into the hearing record a five-page document itemizing the mortgage securities on which banks such as Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Societe Generale SA had bought $62.1 billion in credit-default swaps from AIG.

These were the deals that pushed the insurer to the brink of insolvency -- and were eventually paid in full at taxpayer expense. The New York Fed, which secretly engineered the bailout, prevented the full publication of the document for more than a year, even when AIG wanted it released.

That lack of disclosure shows how the government has obstructed a proper accounting of what went wrong in the financial crisis, author and former investment banker William Cohan says. “This secrecy is one more example of how the whole bailout has been done in such a slithering manner,” says Cohan, who wrote “House of Cards” (Doubleday, 2009), about the unraveling of Bear Stearns Cos. “There’s been no accountability.”

CDOs Identified

The document Issa made public cuts to the heart of the controversy over the September 2008 AIG rescue by identifying specific securities, known as collateralized-debt obligations, that had been insured with the company. The banks holding the credit-default swaps, a type of derivative, collected collateral as the insurer was downgraded and the CDOs tumbled in value.

The public can now see for the first time how poorly the securities performed, with losses exceeding 75 percent of their notional value in some cases. Compounding this, the document and Bloomberg data demonstrate that the banks that bought the swaps from AIG are mostly the same firms that underwrote the CDOs in the first place.

The banks should have to explain how they managed to buy protection from AIG primarily on securities that fell so sharply in value, says Daniel Calacci, a former swaps trader and marketer who’s now a structured-finance consultant in Warren, New Jersey. In some cases, banks also owned mortgage lenders, and they should be challenged to explain whether they gained any insider knowledge about the quality of the loans bundled into the CDOs, he says.

‘Too Uncanny’

“It’s almost too uncanny,” Calacci says. “If these banks had insight into the underlying loans because they had relationships with banks, originators or servicers, that’s at the least unethical.”

The identification of securities in the document, known as Schedule A, and data compiled by Bloomberg show that Goldman Sachs underwrote $17.2 billion of the $62.1 billion in CDOs that AIG insured -- more than any other investment bank. Merrill Lynch & Co., now part of Bank of America Corp., created $13.2 billion of the CDOs, and Deutsche Bank AG underwrote $9.5 billion.

These tallies suggest a possible reason why the New York Fed kept so much under wraps, Professor James Cox of Duke University School of Law says: “They may have been trying to shield Goldman -- for Goldman’s sake or out of macro concerns that another investment bank would be at risk.”

Poor Performers

Goldman Sachs spokesman Michael DuVally declined to comment.

Schedule A also makes possible a more complete examination of why AIG collapsed. Joseph Cassano, the former president of the AIG Financial Products unit that sold the swaps, said on a December 2007 conference call that his firm pulled back from selling swaps on U.S. subprime residential CDOs in late 2005. The list shows that the $21.2 billion in CDOs minted after 2005, mostly based on prime and commercial mortgages, performed as badly as or worse than the earlier subprime vintages.

A lawyer for Cassano declined to comment.

As details of the coverup emerge, so does anger at the perceived conflicts. Philip Angelides, chairman of the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, at a hearing held by his panel on Jan. 13, questioned how banks could underwrite poisonous securities and then bet against them. “It sounds to me a little bit like selling a car with faulty brakes and then buying an insurance policy on the buyer of those cars,” he said.

‘Part of the Coverup’

Janet Tavakoli, founder of Tavakoli Structured Finance Inc., a Chicago-based consulting firm, says the New York Fed’s secrecy has helped hide who’s responsible for the worst of the disaster. “The suppression of the details in the list of counterparties was part of the coverup,” she says.

E-mails between Fed and AIG officials that Issa released in January show that the efforts to keep Schedule A under wraps came from the New York Fed. Revelation of the messages contributed to the heated atmosphere at the House hearing.

“What date did you know there was a coverup?” Republican Congressman Brian Bilbray of California demanded of Geithner. Lawmakers used the word coverup more than a dozen times as they peppered Geithner with questions.

Geithner said that he wasn’t involved in matters of disclosure and that his former colleagues did the best they could. In a Jan. 19 statement, the New York Fed said, “AIG at all times remained responsible for complying with its disclosure requirements under the securities laws.”

The government has committed more than $182 billion to AIG and owns almost 80 percent of the company.

Document Withheld

In late November 2008, the insurer was planning to include Schedule A in a regulatory filing -- until a lawyer for the Fed said it wasn’t necessary, according to the e-mails. The document was an attachment to the agreement between AIG and Maiden Lane III, the fund that the Fed established in November 2008 to hold the CDOs after the swap contracts were settled.

AIG paid its counter­parties -- the banks -- the full value of the contracts, after accounting for any collateral that had been posted, and took the devalued CDOs in exchange. As requested by the New York Fed, AIG kept the bank names out of the Dec. 24 filing and edited out a sentence that said they got full payment.

The New York Fed’s January 2010 statement said the sentence was deleted because AIG technically paid slightly less than 100 cents on the dollar.

Paid in Full

Before the New York Fed ordered AIG to pay the banks in full, the company was trying to negotiate to pay off the credit- default swaps at a discount or “haircut.”

By March 2009, responding to a request from Christopher Dodd, chairman of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs, AIG released the names of the counterparty banks. In a filing later that month, AIG included Schedule A, showing bank names while withholding all identification of the underlying CDOs and the amounts of collateral each bank had collected. The document had more than 800 redactions.

In May 2009, AIG again filed Schedule A, this time with about 400 redactions. It revealed that Paris-based Societe Generale got the biggest payout from AIG, or $16.5 billion, followed by Goldman Sachs, which got $14 billion, and then Deutsche Bank and Merrill Lynch. It still kept secret the CDOs’ identification and information that would show performance.

‘Right to Know’

“This is something that belongs in the public domain because it was done with public money,” Issa says. “The public has the right to know what was done with their money and who benefited from it.” Now, thanks to Issa, the list is out, and specific information about AIG’s unraveling can be learned from it.

At the Jan. 27 hearing, the New York Fed was still arguing that the contents of Schedule A shouldn’t be fully disclosed. Thomas Baxter, the New York Fed’s general counsel, testified that divulging the names of the CDOs could erode their value: “We will be hurt because traders in the market will know what we’re holding.”

Tavakoli calls that wrong. With many CDOs, providing more information to the market will give the manager a greater chance of fetching a realistic price, she says.

Jack Gutt, a spokesman for the New York Fed, declined to comment, as did AIG’s Mark Herr.

Bad to Worse

Tavakoli also says that the poor performance of the underlying securities (which are actually specific slices or tranches of CDOs) shows they were toxic in the first place and were probably replenished with bundles of mortgages that were particularly troubled. Managers who oversee CDOs after they are created have discretion in choosing the mortgage bonds used to replenish them.

“The original CDO deals were bad enough,” Tavakoli says. “For some that allow reinvesting or substitution, any reasonable professional would ask why these assets were being traded into the portfolio. The Schedule A shows that we should be investigating these deals.”

Among the CDOs on Schedule A with notional values of more than $1 billion, the worst performer was a tranche identified as Davis Square Funding Ltd.’s DVSQ 2006-6A CP. It was held by Societe Generale, underwritten by Goldman Sachs and managed by TCW Group Inc., a Los Angeles-based unit of SocGen, according to Bloomberg data. It lost 77.7 percent of its value -- though it isn’t in default and continues to pay.

SocGen spokesman James Galvin and TCW spokeswoman Erin Freeman declined to comment.

Documentation Needed

Ed Grebeck, CEO of Tempus Advisors, a global debt market strategy firm in Stamford, Connecticut, agrees that more digging is necessary. “You need all the documentation and more than that, all the e-mails,” he says. “That would allow us to understand what went wrong and how to fix it going forward.”

Neil Barofsky, the special inspector general for the Troubled Asset Relief Program, who delivered a report on the AIG bailout in November, says he’s not finished. He has begun a probe of why his office wasn’t provided all of the 250,000 pages of documents, including e-mails and phone logs, that Issa’s committee received from the New York Fed.

Schedule A provides some answers -- and raises questions that need to be tackled to avoid the next expensive bailout.

To contact the reporter on this story: Richard Teitelbaum in New York at [e-mail]

Last Updated: February 23, 2010 00:01 EST

[Vexari]

Public pressure forces the government of Bulgaria

to place a 5-year ban on genetically modified crops

and

to prohibit even testing them near organic fields and beehives..


http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=50411

BULGARIA: Govt Forced Down on Genetically Modifed Crops
By Claudia Ciobanu

BUCHAREST, Feb 21, 2010 (IPS) - Campaigning by environmental groups and the general public has weakened the determination of the Bulgarian government to allow the cultivation of genetically modified (GM) crops in this country.

In January 2010, the Bulgarian parliament voted, on a first reading, legislation allowing the release of GM organisms into the environment. But as the law awaited final passage, the Environmental Parliamentary Committee came under public pressure to accept a five-year moratorium on GM cultivation and a ban on testing near organic fields and beehives.

Environmentalists are now pushing for the new legislation to be dropped completely, rather than pass it with a five-year moratorium.

Bulgaria already has a 2005 law regulating GM crops, but national authorities recently declared it too restrictive and contradictory to European Union (EU) legislation to be competitive in the internal European market.

According to the law, "the deliberate release into the environment and the placing on the market" of GM tobacco, vine, cotton, damask rose, wheat, and all vegetable and orchard crops was prohibited.’’ The same prohibition holds for GM organisms that have been refused consent by EU member countries and places restrictions on their release.

In January, the Bulgarian parliament declared itself in favour of amendments to the 2005 act which would increase the number of types of GM crops for which testing is allowed and diminish the distances permitted between trial areas and naturally protected sites or organic farms.

According to Preslav Borissov, deputy minister for agriculture and foods, banning GM crops in Bulgaria would hurt the country’s competitiveness, as other European countries are already making considerable progress with GM food production. "I also do not want my children to eat GM foods, but I do not think this is a reason to stop GM foods," he added in a statement to the Bulgarian news agency BTA.

But Bulgarian environmentalists fear that the amendments will allow for increased contamination of food and animal feed with GM organisms, especially since the country has very poor labelling legislation. Such contamination has already happened, largely before the 2005 act was passed, but also afterwards in the case of GM crops for which testing was allowed (most notoriously, hybrid maize).

According to tests conducted by the Bulgarian Food Safety Agency between 2004 and 2009, seven percent of Bulgarian foods were found to contain over 0.9 percent GM content without being labelled appropriately.

According to a report published by the European Greens in the European Parliament in September 2009, GM contaminated food products are likely already on the market in Bulgaria. ‘’Most of the GM maize harvested in 1999 and 2000 was probably used for animal feed and thus entered the human food chain, via meat and dairy products. The GM maize was not kept separate from the conventional crop,’’ the report said.

Svetla Nikolova, director of Agrolink - a national organisation promoting organic and sustainable farming – and author of the European Greens report for Bulgaria, opines that the country is ‘’just a pawn in the corporate biotech war, caught between the corporate seed producers, like Monsanto and Pioneer, and the corporate food processors and commodity traders who want to buy GM-free products for the EU market."

Belgian and British importers of maize from Bulgaria have already warned that they would stop purchases unless strict measures are taken to avoid contamination between GM maize and the crops they import.

Bulgarian environmentalists, however, are calling for a complete ban on MON810, the type of hybrid maize proposed by the United States giant Monsanto to Bulgarian farmers. They say the risk of contamination of organic crops is too great.

"After 13 years of GM crop cultivation there is categorical evidence for the impossibility for the joint existence of GM and non-GM crops," warns national environmental network For the Nature (FN).

According to this group, "harmonisation with EU legislation can’t be an end in itself and cannot be a justification for one-sided decisions which will bring about the irreversible pollution of Bulgarian agricultural land and nature." FN believes Bulgaria should follow the example of the six EU countries that have already banned MON810, even though the cultivation of this seed is permitted in the EU.

Agrolink and FN have been few of the organisers of several anti-GM protests taking place in January and February in capital Sofia and several other cities around the country.

According to Agrolink, over 8,000 people have signed anti-GM petitions. A 2008 Eurobarometer survey showed that 43 percent of Bulgarians were against GM and 16 percent in favour. Five Bulgarian municipalities have declared themselves GM-free areas following public consultations.

Hundreds of people marched in Sofia and four other big towns on Feb. 11, while the Environmental Parliamentary Committee was evaluating changes to existing law. Public pressure and direct negotiations with NGOs have led the parliamentary committee to accept the five-year moratorium and the increase of distance between GM testing fields and organic farms.

"After big pressures from society, they decided to change their intentions about modifying the law," Nikolova told IPS. "Let us see what the parliament will vote. We are still negotiating."

"Even though Bulgarian politicians are using EU legislation to push GM, the leading parties are split on the issue," she added.

Indeed, the main political parties are divided on GM: while the centre-right government is a proponent of relaxing the GM act, the two main opposition forces - the Socialists and the Movement for Rights and Freedoms -are sceptical.

"Seventy percent of arable land in Bulgaria is suitable for organic agriculture, while only five percent of the soil in other countries is clean enough," said Lyutvi Mestan, the deputy leader of the Movement for Rights and Freedoms, considered the voice of Bulgarian Turks. "We should not waste such a resource because of an absurd law."

A large proportion of Bulgarian Turks cultivate tobacco in southeastern Bulgaria. Fears that GM tobacco testing might be allowed in Bulgaria has in the past resulted in big tobacco producers such as Phillip Morris threatening they would halt their purchases from Bulgarian farmers.

(END)

[mbc]

Farmers, Others Sue USDA Over Monsanto GMO Alfalfa
Date: 17-Feb-06
Country: USA
Author: Carey Gillam


Opening another front in the battle over genetically modified crops, the lawsuit contends that the US Department of Agriculture improperly is allowing Monsanto Co to sell an herbicide-resistant alfalfa seed while failing to analyse the public health, environmental, and economic consequences of that action.

"The USDA failed to do a full environmental review when they deregulated this genetically engineered alfalfa," said Will Rastov, an attorney for Center for Food Safety, one of the plaintiffs. "They're going to wreak untold dangers into the environment."

The lawsuit asks the federal court in San Francisco to rescind the USDA's decision until a full environmental review has been completed.

The suit asserts that the genetically modified alfalfa will probably contaminate conventionally grown alfalfa at a fast pace, ultimately forcing farmers to pay for Monsanto's patented gene technology whether they want the technology or not.

The group says biotech alfalfa would also hurt production of organic dairy and beef products as alfalfa is a key cattle feed. And the suit claims farmers could lose export business, valued at an estimated $480 million per year, because buyers in Japan and South Korea, major importers of US alfalfa, have indicated they would avoid buying US alfalfa once the genetically engineered variety is released.

Plaintiffs also said Monsanto is marketing the herbicide-tolerant crop in a way that encourages far greater applications of chemicals than alfalfa typically requires.

Alfalfa is the fourth most widely grown crop in the United States, behind corn, soybeans, and wheat.

South Dakota alfalfa farmer Pat Trask, one of the plaintiffs, said Monsanto's biotech alfalfa would ruin his conventional alfalfa seed business because it was certain his 9,000 acres would be contaminated by the biotech genes.

Alfalfa is very easily cross-pollinated by bees and by wind. The plant is also perennial, meaning GMO plants could live on for years.

"The way this spreads so far and wide, it will eliminate the conventional alfalfa industry," said Trask. "Monsanto will own the entire alfalfa industry."

Monsanto has a policy of filing lawsuits or taking other legal actions against farmers who harvest crops that show the presence of the company's patented gene technology. It has sued farmers even when they have tried to keep their own fields free from contamination by biotech plants on neighbouring farms.

"It's the desire of Monsanto to pursue global control and total control over the American alfalfa seed industry," said Trask.

Monsanto spokeswoman Mica DeLong said the company had no comment on the issue and referred inquires to USDA. Monsanto received regulatory clearance to begin selling the biotech alfalfa last summer.

The suit names Secretary of Agriculture Mike Johanns, Animal Plant Health Inspection Service Administrator Ron Dehaven and Environmental Protection Agency administrator Steve Johnson as defendants.

APHIS spokeswoman Karen Eggert said the agency had no immediate comment. EPA also declined to comment and a spokeswoman for USDA could not be reached immediately.

In addition to the Center for Food Safety and the Trask family, the plaintiffs include the National Family Farm Coalition, Sierra Club, Dakota Resources Council, and other farm, environmental and consumer groups.

© Thomson Reuters 2006 All rights reserved
http://www.planetark.com/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/35154/story.htm

[NYBob]

Markopolos: The SEC Is A Bunch of Idiots

Harry Markopolos, who warned the SEC years ago that Bernie Madoff was a scammer, is out with a new book, "No One Would Listen,"

Thus, he is cranking up the noise level.

According to HuffPo:

Markopolos, who avoids the limelight and tends to hang up on reporters, is lashing out at the new leadership of the Securities and Exchange Commission....Asked about SEC chair Mary Shapiro and her stated determination to catch fraud on Wall Street, Markopolos tells the upcoming New York Times magazine that "she has the wrong staff. They're a bunch of idiots there." In particular, he criticizes the five commissioners of the SEC, who are securities lawyers, claiming that they don't understand finance and that the agency is over-lawyered.

He also was not impressed with Schapiro when he met with her last year, calling her "coldly polite" and saying that her general counsel David Becker "was getting ready to come across the coffee table and strangle me."

The SEC has no chance against the evil ones that try to get close to the agency. They are much smarter and slicker than the SEC, and really run circles around them. That's probably how it goes at most agencies, except that at the SEC it's obvious.

Outside of posing for the media in a few high profile, but dubious cases, the SEC does nothing. The entire concept of the SEC as watchdog of the markets is a joke.

They are a major hindrance to small companies attempting to raise capital. That's it.

If the agency was closed down and all the employees ended up as taxi cab drivers, The economy would probably grow by an extra 5% annually, given the SEC wouldn't be around to harass small, non-politically connected companies.

Posted by Robert Wenzel at 10:12 AM 4 Comments

http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2010/02/markopolos-sec-is-bunch-of-idiots.html

http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/

[toddao]

HISTORY

What did Hoover, Truman, and Eisenhower have in
common?

Here is something that should be of great
interest for you to pass around.
I didn't know of this until it was pointed out to me.

Back during The Great Depression, President Herbert
Hoover ordered the deportation of ALL illegal aliens
in order to make jobs available to American citizens that
desperately needed work..

Harry Truman deported over two million Illegal's
after WWII to create jobs for returning veterans.

And then again in 1954, President Dwight Eisenhower deported 13 million
Mexican Nationals! The program was called
'Operation Wetback'.. It was done so WWII and Korean
Veterans would have a better chance at jobs.

It took 2 Years, but they deported them!

Now....if they could deport the illegal's back then - they could sure do it today?


lf you have doubts about the veracity of this information,
enter Operation Wetback(Eisenhower) into your favorite
search engine . For Hoover and Truman usewww.armchairgeneral.com/forums <http://www.armchairgeneral.com/forums>; .


Reminder:
Don't forget to pay your taxes...
12 million Illegal Aliens are depending on you.

[toddao]

Climate Change


http://imva.info/index.php/2010/02/new-dawn-in-climatology/

[Vexari]

Demand an Audit in 2010

By Michael Beitler
Published 02/22/10
http://www.campaignforliberty.com/article.php


My Concerns about the Fed

I am often asked, "Why do you feel so strongly about the Fed?" As the Chief Financial Officer of a bank for ten years, I had an up-close look at the Federal Reserve; it was very disturbing. As a CPA, I know the value of an independent audit; if there is nothing to hide, there is nothing to fear.

As a taxpayer, I want to know how federal government programs (from welfare to warfare) are being financed; the role of the central bank should be transparent.

As a parent, I am concerned about the financial obligations my children and their generation will be responsible for. I want my generation, the baby boomers, to serve all generations of Americans responsibly.

As a patriot, I love my country. I want America to be financially strong. I want the financial system and central bank to be transparent.

The Federal Reserve has operating in secrecy since its inception in 1913. One hundred years of behind-closed-doors dealing should make you nervous.

We only see the consequences of Federal Reserve interventions in our economy: skyrocketing debt, an inflated currency, artificially low interest rates, wildly swinging business cycles, asset bubbles, markets manipulated by the Federal Open Market Committee, and worried Americans who don't know what to expect next.

Is the Fed independent? Obviously it's not. The Fed Chairman is appointed by the President of the United States. President Obama's team worked the phones to make sure Chairman Bernanke was reappointed.

Will the money be available for the next welfare or warfare project? Yes. The Fed will create it out of thin air.

What's wrong with the Federal Reserve System? In a word—everything. It produces fiat currency (backed by absolutely nothing) in unlimited quantities. You do not need advanced training in accounting, finance, or economics, to know that isn't right.

It is time for all Americans (Libertarians, Republicans, Democrats, and Independents) to support Congressman Ron Paul's bill to audit the Fed. It is time for all Americans to use their power (the vote) to demand that their federal representatives (in both the House and Senate) support Dr. Paul's bill.

An audit of the Fed will lead to demands to end the Fed. Demand an audit in 2010.

[jawmoke]

Update: Citigroup Says Feds Ordered 7 Day Restriction On Bank Withdrawals


A new advisory being sent by America’s third largest bank to its account holders has stoked fears that major financial institutions could be preparing for old fashioned bank runs if the economy takes a turn for the worse.

Originally reported by John Carney over at the Business Insider website, Citigroup is sending the following information to customers along with their bank statements.

“Effective April 1, 2010, we reserve the right to require (7) days advance notice before permitting a withdrawal from all checking accounts. While we do not currently exercise this right and have not exercised it in the past, we are required by law to notify you of this change.”

articles continues....

http://www.prisonplanet.com/citigroup-warns-customers-it-may-refuse-to-allow-withdrawals.html

[toddao]

I think you would find this interview with the former East/West editor of Forbes Magazine about the fall of the Rockefeller faction very interesting. I sure did!

http://divinecosmos.com/index.php/start-here/davids-blog/807-fulford-interview-exclusive

The MP3 button for the audio interview is half-way down the scroll bar. The printed interview is kind of a prologue.

[toddao]

JFK Assassination Video: John F. Kennedy

http://www.personalgrowthcourses.net/video/jfk_assassination_video_john_kennedy

[mbc]

Food Stamps Create Jobs… in India
Several States With High Unemployment Are Outsourcing Food Stamp Services

By SCOTT MAYEROWITZ
ABC NEWS Business Unit
April 29, 2009

Michele Brown has seen Americans' struggles with jobs first hand. She lives in hard-hit Florida, spent 20 years in the real estate business and recently had her days as a nanny cut back after her boss had his own hours reduced.

Several states with high unemployment rates are outsourcing their food stamp services to call centers in India, angering many residents. Michele Brown learned about Florida's outsourcing when she called regarding a problem with her benefits.
(ABC News Photo Illustration)But nothing prepared her for what happened one day when she called a toll-free line to inquire about her food stamps.

"The woman who answered the phone -- it's not like she wasn't nice or anything -- but it was kind of evident that she wasn't in the States," Brown said.

It turns out the woman was at a JP Morgan Chase call center in India.

"That really put me over the edge," said Brown, 52, of Jupiter, Fla. "It's not right because we need the work here. People are in a bad way here."

Americans have never liked the idea of jobs going overseas. But for many, it's more offensive when taxpayer dollars -- including those in the federal stimulus plan -- go to create those jobs. And when those jobs deal with food stamps, unemployment insurance and other public benefits, well forgot irony, to many it's just downright plain insulting.

Unemployment in Florida is now 9.7 percent.

"Why is the state of Florida sending these jobs away?" Brown asked. "The thing that really iced it for me, I knew that JP Morgan had gotten bailout funds."

So she called her local politicians and then she reached out to her local newspaper, the Palm Beach Post. The paper did a story two weeks ago about the $50 million Florida paid JP Morgan in the last three years to administer the food stamps distribution.

Those services include 24-hour customer-service call centers. Some of those calls were answered in Bangalore and Gurgaon, India. Others were taken at two U.S. call centers.

The next day the head of the state's Department of Children and Families said something needed to change.

"I don't want any calls going to India," he said. "We need to take care of this."

Click Here for the Latest Business Stories From ABC News

The state now has a commitment from JP Morgan to move all of its calls to the United States, according to Judi Spann, a spokeswoman for the Department of Children and Families.

Florida isn't alone in sending its customer service calls overseas.

There are three major companies that provide debit cards to food stamp recipients: JP Morgan Chase; eFunds, which is now part of Fidelity National Information Services; and Affiliated Computer Services or ACS.

read the rest here...
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/Economy/story?id=7452561

[mbc]

South Carolina Lawmaker Seeks to Ban Federal Currency

Posted by Brian Montopoli 375 comments Share3326

(scstatehouse.gov)South Carolina Rep. Mike Pitts has introduced legislation that would mandate that gold and silver coins replace federal currency as legal tender in his state.

As the Palmetto Scoop first reported, Pitts, a Republican, introduced legislation this month banning "the unconstitutional substitution of Federal Reserve Notes for silver and gold coin" in South Carolina.

In an interview, Pitts told Hotsheet that he believes that "if the federal government continues to spend money at the rate it's spending money, and if it continues to print money at the rate it's printing money, our economic system is going to collapse."

"The Germans felt their system wouldn't collapse, but it took a wheelbarrow of money to buy a loaf of bread in the 1930s," he said. "The Soviet Union didn't think their system would collapse, but it did. Ours is capable of collapsing also."

The lawmaker believes that a shift to an economy based on gold and silver coins would give the state a "base of currency" should that collapse come. As one expert told the Scoop, however, his bill would likely be ruled unconstitutional because it "violates a perfectly legal and Constitutional federal law, enacted pursuant to the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution, that federal reserve notes are legal tender for all debts public and private."

In addition, since gold and silver regularly fluctuate in value, they could not easily function as stable currency.

But Pitts maintains that his state is better off with something he can hold in his hand and barter with as opposed to federal currency, which he described to the Scoop as "paper with ink on it." He says he resents what he considers the federal government's intrusions on states' rights.

Though he did not offer a timeframe, Pitts told Hotsheet that he anticipates a nationwide economic collapse "if our federal government continues the course it's been traveling under the previous administration and this administration."

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2010/02/17/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry6217403.shtml

[toddao]

How Israel's Lobby Challenges US Rule Of Law

http://sabbah.biz/mt/archives/2010/02/17/how-israels-lobby-challenges-rule-of-law-in-america-video/#more-5655

[toddao]

Bill would ban federal currency in SC

http://www.palmettoscoop.com/2010/02/17/bill-would-ban-federal-currency-in-sc/

I like it :>)

[eaglesurvivor]

Vexari: no, the regions haven't been constant, but the concept has. The governors seems to be an adjustment or merely now revealing part of the hidden plan.

[Vexari]

regional points as in federal circut court regions?



http://www.uscourts.gov/courtlinks/




http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=46736641


that doesn't fit..


have these regions remained constant since the 30's?

who were the last council of governors?

[eaglesurvivor]

Vexari: actually, the ten regions go back, at least, to the mid '30s. I have the then drawn out map of the regions for that time period. The feral gumit has operated out of regional points for some time. I've believed that The NAU was a tweak.

[Vexari]

In the UK, Secret paper from 2000 reveals government implemented a social engineering program to deliberately create multi-culturalism through massive immigration.

It was kept secret, because the public would not have approved.


How Labour threw open doors to mass migration in secret plot to make a multicultural UK

By James Slack
Last updated at 4:32 PM on 10th February 2010

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1249797/Labour-threw-open-doors-mass-migration-secret-plot-make-multicultural-UK.html


Labour threw open the doors to mass migration in a deliberate policy to change the social make-up of the UK, secret papers suggest.

A draft report from the Cabinet Office shows that ministers wanted to ‘maximise the contribution’ of migrants to their ‘social objectives’.

The number of foreigners allowed in the UK increased by as much as 50 per cent in the wake of the report, written in 2000.

Melting pot: Labour's diversity drive is exposed in secret papers

Labour has always justified immigration on economic grounds and denied it was using it to foster multiculturalism.
But suspicions of a secret agenda rose when Andrew Neather, a former government adviser and speech writer for Tony Blair, Jack Straw and David Blunkett, said the aim of Labour’s immigration strategy was to ‘rub the Right’s nose in diversity and render their arguments out of date’.

Mr Neather said he helped to write the 2000 report which outlined a strategy to ‘open up the UK to mass migration’.
The document was not published in its original format over fears of an adverse public reaction. Instead it was released a year later as a research document on the economic benefits of migration.


THE UNEDITED DOCUMENT

The highlighted text below was contained in the original draft of the document drawn up in 2000 for a discussion on immigration policy - but deleted from the version published in 2001.

1) The emerging consensus, in both the UK and the rest of the EU, is that we need a new analytical framework for thinking about migration policy if we are to maximise the contribution of migration to the Government's economic and social objectives.

2) Indeed, over the medium to longer term, migration pressures will intensify in Europe as a result of demographic changes. But this should not be viewed as a negative - to the extent that migration is driven by market forces, it is likely to be economically beneficial. On the other hand, trying to halt of reverse market-driven migration will be very difficult (perhaps impossible) and economically damaging.

3) Chapter 4, focusing on the Government's aim to regulate migration to the UK in the interests of social stability and economic growth, argues that it is clearly correct that the Government has both economic and social objectives for migration policy.

4) The more general social impact of migration is very difficult to assess. Benefits include a widening of consumer choice and significant cultural contributions. These in turn feed into wider economic benefits.

5) In practice, entry controls can contribute to social exclusion, and there are a number of areas where policy could further enhance migrants' economic and social contribution in line with the Government's overall objectives.

6) It is clear that migration policy has both social and economic impacts and should be designed to contribute to the government's overall objectives on both counts. The current position is a considerable advance on the previously existing situation, when the aim of immigration policy was, or appeared to be, to reduce primary immigration to the 'irreducible minimum' - an objective with no economic or social justification.


Mr Neather’s claims last October were denied by ministers, including Justice Secretary Jack Straw, who said they were nonsense.

A draft of the original Cabinet Office report has now been published following a freedom of information request by Migrationwatch.

It contains six references to social policy, all of which were removed from the later, published version.

One deleted paragraph said a framework was needed to ‘maximise the contribution of migration to the Government’s social and economic objectives’.

Another says that migration pressures will intensify because of demographic changes across Europe but that this ‘should not be viewed as a negative’.

It states: ‘The entry control system is not closely related to the stated policy objectives.

'This is particularly true in the social area, where in the past the implicit assumption has largely been that keeping people out promotes stability.’

Also cut out was a statement that ‘in practice, entry controls can contribute to social exclusion’.

Damian Green, Tory immigration spokesman, said: ‘This is a very significant finding because it would mean that Labour’s biggest long term effect on British society was
based on a completely secret policy.

‘This shows Labour’s open-door immigration policy was deliberate and ministers should apologise.’

Mr Neather’s claims were made in a column for the London Evening Standard. He said Labour’s relaxation of immigration controls was a deliberate attempt to engineer a ‘truly multicultural’ country and plug gaps in the jobs market.

He remembered ‘coming away from some discussions with the clear sense that the policy was intended – even if this wasn’t its main purpose – to rub the Right’s nose in diversity’.
Whitehall research shows that the number of foreigners arriving in the UK rose from 370,000 in 2001 to 510,000 in 2006.

The figures for net foreign immigration– the number of non-British citizens arriving, less the number leaving – are even more dramatic.

In 2001, this figure stood at 221,000 but by 2007 it had risen as high as 333,000 – up 50 per cent.

The number fell to 250,000 in 2008 mainly because of a decline in arrivals from Eastern Europe.

It had already emerged that the Cabinet Office report was censored to remove details of possible links between immigration and organised crime, street fights and begging.

One of the sections missing from the final report said: ‘There is emerging evidence that the circumstances in which asylum seekers are living is leading to criminal offences, including fights and begging.’

A second section warned: ‘Migration has opened up new opportunities for organised crime.’

Last night, immigration minister Phil Woolas said there was ‘no open door policy on migration’.

He said the draft report made clear that migration was ‘not a substitute for Government policies on skills, education and training of British citizens – which the Government has invested in over the past decade’.


Paying the price for a decade of deception

COMMENTARY By Sir Andrew Green Chairman of MigrationWatch and former British Ambassador to Syria and Saudi Arabia

Last updated at 4:32 PM on 10th February 2010

So there was indeed a Labour conspiracy to change the nature of our society by mass immigration.
New evidence confirms claims made by a Labour political adviser last October which
he subsequently tried to recant.
In an article for the Evening Standard, Andrew Neather revealed that ‘it didn’t just happen: the deliberate policy of ministers from late 2000 until at least February last year ...was to open up the UK to mass migration’.
Community spirit: Today's Britain is multicultural
He went on to describe a Government policy document which he had helped to write in 2000.
He said that ‘drafts were handed out in summer 2000 only with extreme reluctance: there was paranoia about it reaching the media’.
The paper eventually surfaced as a purely technical product of the research department of the Home Office but earlier drafts that he saw ‘included a driving political purpose: that mass immigration was the way that the Government was going to make the UK truly multicultural’.
We in Migrationwatch have now obtained an earlier draft of that policy paper, circulated in October 2000.
It had already been censored but it was to be neutered still further. In the executive summary, six of eight references to ‘social’ objectives were cut from the version later published.
What could have been meant by social policy in the context of immigration, especially as it was dressed up as combating social exclusion?
This must surely have been code for increasing the numbers substantially, as Mr Neather revealed. If not, why all the secrecy?
Why the censorship that has now been laid bare? Reading between the lines of these
documents it is clear that political advisers in Number 10, its joint authors, were preparing a blueprint for mass immigration with both economic and social objectives.
None of this was in the Labour manifesto of 1997 or 2001. One passage in the report that the political censors failed to cut was a prediction about foreign immigration from outside the European Union.
This had it climbing from 142,000 in1998 to nearly 180,000 in 2005 (in fact, it reached nearly 200,000 by that date).
But what this shows is that ministers were clearly warned about a continuing rise in immigration which, even leaving aside the East Europeans, has been even greater than expected.
Tony Blair: Labour wanted to use immigration to make the UK multicultural
So what can we deduce from all this? Mr Neather later withdrew some of his remarks but examination of the texts shows that he had, in fact, blurted out the truth.
It seems there was a project led by Downing Street political advisers to introduce
a secret policy of mass immigration.
Their economic arguments surfaced in an obscure research document but the social objective of greatly increased diversity was entirely suppressed for fear of public reaction – especially from the white working class.
These are the very people who are now paying the price for a decade of Labour deception. What the Government now fears is that they will take their revenge on election day.
Why on earth should they have taken such a risk with their traditional supporters? Was it pure ideology or were there other factors at play?
One point to consider is the impact on the electorate. It is not generally realised that
Commonwealth citizens legally in Britain acquire the right to vote in general elections
as soon as they put their names on the electoral register.
In Labour years we have now seen an additional 300,000 from the Old Commonwealth and about one million from the New Commonwealth.
They may well have been conscious that they have much stronger support among the ethnic communities than their Conservative rivals.
Given that mass immigration is heavily in Labour’s electoral interest, they may have thought that they could get away with it.
The trades unions have been silent despite the concerns of their members. And they
may have calculated that anyone who opposed it could be silenced by accusations of racism.
They have not succeeded but we are left with a tale of betrayal which has generated a very dangerous current of extremism which could yet come to haunt us.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1249797/Labour-threw-open-doors-mass-migration-secret-plot-make-multicultural-UK.html#ixzz0foglvlvh


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1249797/Labour-threw-open-doors-mass-migration-secret-plot-make-multicultural-UK.html#ixzz0fogm3KyC

[Vexari]

Beware.. 10 federal regions now have their Governors.

Although Obama denies it, it appears that states are being positioned as mere sub-sub-divisions of the federal government ~

which, itself, is to become a sub-division of the North American Union ~

which is to become a sub-division of the UN.

The New World Order keeps growing..

http://www.examiner.com/x-24054-Sioux-Falls-Conservative-Examiner~y2010m2d8-SD-Governor-accepts-new-position-appointed-by-Obama



SD Governor accepts new position appointed by Obama.
February 8, 6:13pm


In a previous article, I sounded the alarm regarding some of Obama's most dangerous Executive Orders signed this year. In this case, I am referring to the formal creation of a Governors Council and their role in the very possible further demise of States' Rights. Although according to Obama it has been fluffed-up and sugar-coated as nothing more that an Advisory council of 10 Governors to meet on various issues. Let us look at the geographic locations of these Governors and its relevance to the bigger picture.

Let me start out by stating that I have never and will never believe in coincidences. I don't believe that it is any coincidence that decades ago our Federal Government agreed to a mandate by the United Nations to consolidate from 50 States into 10 Federal Regions. It is no wonder in the process that has been going on behind the scenes that our 50 states have lost most of their once Constitutionally sovereign power over the intrusion of federal authority. Now as we find ourselves in the full-blown execution phase of the UN's plans for our country that we behold a Presidential Executive Order to appoint 10 Governors to a new Council that has been formalized.

Let me further illustrate the significance of these 10 appointments to this Council of Governors as it relates to the known 10 Federal regions which were originally created by yet another Executive Order #11647 by President Richard Nixon back on Feb. 14, 1972. We can first look at these 10 regions and the appointment of these particular 10 Governors that were chosen and see how it all fits in with the geography.



Photo: epa.gov

Here are the 10 picks for this new Council of Governors. With only one exception, they have been chosen from different federal regions.

Governor James H. Douglas of Vermont - Region 1

Governor Luis Fortuna of Puerto Rico - Region 2

Governor Robert McDonnell of Virginia - Region 3

Governor Beverly Eaves Purdue of North Carolina - Region 4

Governor Brad Henry of Oklahoma - Region 6

Governor Jeremiah Nixon of Missouri - Region 7

Governor Mike Rounds of South Dakota - Region 8

Governor Janice Brewer of Arizona - Region 9

Governor Chris Gregoire of Washington - Region 10

Governor Martin O'Malley of Maryland - Region 3

Could it be by accident that almost all of those nominated happen to come from different federal regions?

Perhaps we should all call our "good" Governors listed above and have them explain to us the exact need and purpose of their new appointments. Maybe it is better for South Dakota that Mike Rounds is not running for re-election. It seems he will be busy Governing on a Federal "Regional" level instead of one of our 50 sovereign United States.

For a different angle on this story and the additional recognized danger of this Council as it pertains to the transferring of all authority to the Federal Government of our States' National Guard units, please see full article on World Net Daily. I would also like to give them credit for publishing which 10 Governors have been appointed.

[toddao]

FREE Symptom Solver

http://www.betterhealthusa.com/public/department5.cfm

[toddao]

Dr. Tennant’s Story

this is an incredible dotor/story

http://www.jtennantmd.com/TIIM_MAC/Dr._Tennants_Story.html
Dr. Tennant did the majority of the research for the excimer laser for VISX that is used for LASIK surgery. He did about 1000 cases in the U.S. and about 2000 cases abroad.


What wasn't known was that the laser wouldn't kill viruses in the cornea. As seen in the photo, the laser would strike the eye releasing viruses. They came upward through Dr. Tennant's mask, into his nose, and into his brain. He developed encephalitis and a bleeding disorder. This resulting in his being unable to remember how to write a prescription and in spastic movements. Three viruses were found in his brain and he was told nothing could be done to help him. He was forced to retire from ophthalmology on November 30, 1995.


This is how he spent the next 6-7 years, sleeping about 16 hours per day. He had 2-3 hours a day in which he could think clearly enough to understand a newspaper. Then, like a light switch, the brain would shut off and he couldn't understand what he was reading.


Note that the dogs seemed to sense the problems. One would lay on the head (encephalitis) and one near the stomach (spleen). Since he is well, they no longer do this.


During the time he could think, he realized he would have to find a way to get himself well since modern American medicine could not do so. He began to read cellular biology books with the idea that if he could get one cell to work correctly, they would all work correctly.


Each cellular biology book gave passing notice to the fact that cells require a narrow range of pH, but little more was discussed on the subject. He began to look at pH and discovered that it is a measurement of the voltage in a solution. It is measured with a sophisticated voltmeter. If the solution is an electron donor, a minus sign is placed in front of the voltage. If the solution is an electron stealer, a plus sign is placed in front of the voltage. The measured voltage is then converted to a logarithmic scale from 0-14 with zero corresponding to +400 millivolts of electron stealer to -400 millivolts corresponding to a pH of 14. Cell are designed to run at about -20 millivolts (pH 7.35). Dr. Tennant began to understand that cells must have enough voltage to work and that chronic disease was associated with loss of voltage. Next he had to find out how to measure the voltage and then how to correct it. This is how he was able to heal himself!

[Vexari]

It is interesting to note

while the President selects the Chairman of the Federal Reserve

he cannot fire him..






United States monetary policy is controlled by the Federal Reserve System which is a banking cartel formed for the purpose of bettering the interest of the banks.

It’s a classic case of the fox guarding the hen house.

If you remember, the first recipients of Federal Bailout Funds were the banks. And guess who’s going to be stuck with the bill? That’s right, you and me.

It’s interesting to note that while the President selects the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, he cannot fire him.

Small wonder then that Congressman Ron Paul introduced legislation to audit the Federal Reserve System.





G. Edward Griffin has spent much of his life studying, and is one of the foremost authorities on, the Federal Reserve System. Recently he commented on this legislation.







So here we stand on the brink of a financial precipice through no fault of our own. But if we look at the stated purpose of the Federal Reserve (as described in their own words) we begin to see who’s pulling the puppet strings.


1. Conduct the nation’s monetary policy by influencing monetary and credit conditions in the economy.

2. Supervise and regulate banking institutions to ensure their safety and soundness.

3. Maintain stability of the financial system and contain systemic risk

4. Provide financial services to depository institutions, the U.S. government, foreign official institutions and operate the United States payment system.





Given the current state of the economy and how we got here leaves us with only three possible causes:


1. The Fed did a horrible job.

2. The Fed is run by stupid people.

3. The Fed has us exactly where they want us.


The reality is that a private banking cartel, with no real allegiance to the United States, has devalued the dollar through relentless printing of trillions of them.

The parallels to the Weimar Republic and its hyperinflation are significant

Now that the foreign investors have woken up to the fact that the dollar is no longer sound,

the United States is running out of “suckers” to finance our continued overspending

Meanwhile, it’s full speed ahead on the printing presses.





Part 4/10 “The FED, Root Of All Evil?”
A write-up in ten parts on “The Fall of America and the Western World”
November, 2009 - Jimmie Rivers

http://www.thefallofamerica.net/

[Vexari]

making the world seem like a small community

will endanger the community


when control overtakes individualism

personality then becomes

as one..

[Vexari]

inbreeding?

[jawmoke]

some great quotes there... and sad also... where do they get a mindset like that...

[Vexari]

democracy, which began by liberating man politically

has developed a dangerous tendency to enslave him

through the tyranny of majorities

and the deadly power of their opinion..


~ Ludwig Lewisohn ~ (1883-1955)

Source.. The Modern Drama, 1915

[Vexari]

telling quotes

Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 02:18:34 -0700
From: Patricia Neill <[e-mail]>

From: http://www.jbs.org/vo13no12.htm#Times


Times Change, But Collectivist Message Remains Constant


We must organize all labor, no matter how dirty and arduous it may be, so
that every [citizen] may regard himself as part of that great army of free
labor.... The generation that is now fifteen years old must arrange all
their tasks of education in such a way that every day, and in every city,
the young people shall engage in the practical solution of the problems of
common labor, even of the smallest, most simple kind.

~ Vladimir Lenin ~


Imagine an army of 100,000 young people restoring urban and rural
communities and giving their labor in exchange for education and
training.... [National Service] will harness the energy of our youth and
attack the problems of our time. It literally has the potential to
revolutionize the way young people all across America look at their country
and feel about themselves.

~ Bill Clinton ~


[T]here is the great silent, continuous struggle; the struggle between the
State and the individual; between the State which demands and the
Individual who attempts to evade such demands. Because the individual, left
to himself, unless he be a saint or a hero, always refuses to pay taxes,
obey laws, or go to war.

~ Benito Mussolini ~


I'm here because I want to redefine the meaning of citizenship in
America.... f you're asked in school, "What does it mean to be a good
citizen?" I want the answer to be, "Well, to be a good citizen, you have to
obey the law, you've got to go to work or be in school, you've got to pay
your taxes and - oh, yes, you have to serve...."

~ Bill Clinton ~


All the people I know who are driving for a form of national service,
primarily want it to be compulsory. They realize that's a terrible problem
politically, so they're not willing to say it. It is endangerment of
freedom and the potential for indoctrination that skeptics do not like in
the national service concept. However benign the program, some think it
will not succeed on any meaningful scale unless it is compulsory.

~ Martin Anderson ~
Senior fellow at the Hoover Institution Boston Globe, November 29, 1992


In his April 5 radio address outlining the goals of the summit, the
President endorsed compulsory volunteerism - and even called for extending
it to middle schools. In other words, the man who so famously avoided the
dangerous duty of fighting in Vietnam as a young man now proposes drafting
a new generation
of young people to perform a different set of difficult tasks.

- New York Post editorial, April 27, 1997


Fascism finds it necessary, at the outset, to take away from the ordinary
human being what he has been taught and has grown to cherish the most:
personal liberty. And it can be affirmed, without falling into
exaggeration, that a curtailment of personal liberty not only has proved to
be, but necessarily must be, a fundamental condition of the triumph of
Fascism.

~ Mario Palmieri ~
The Philosophy of Fascism (1936)


[W]hen we got organized as a country and we wrote a fairly radical
Constitution with a radical Bill of Rights, giving a radical amount of
individual freedom to Americans, it was assumed that the Americans who had
that freedom would use it responsibly.... [However, now] there's a lot of
irresponsibility. And so a lot of people say there's too much freedom. When
personal freedom's being abused, you have to move to limit it.

~ Bill Clinton ~


Before they have their own families, the young can make a unique
contribution to the family of America. In doing so, they can acquire the
habit of service, and get a deeper understanding of what it really means to
be a citizen. That is the main reason, perhaps, why we are here.

~ Bill Clinton ~


Family ~ see Fascist State.

~ Benito Mussolini's Fascist dictionary


We're here for the first President's Summit for America's Future - to
mobilize every community and challenge every citizen and to ask our young
people to become citizen-servants, too.

~ Bill Clinton ~


According to Fascism, a true, a great spiritual life cannot take place
unless the State has risen to a position of pre-eminence in the world of
man. The curtailment of liberty thus becomes justified at once, with this
need of raising the State to its rightful position.

~ Mario Palmieri ~


What they're trying to do is enslave our society by taking our children's
rights away. Young people who go through these [mandatory community
service] programs learn to submit, and later on they won't mind giving up a
few more of their rights when the government says it's necessary.

~ Thomas Moralis ~
(father of two students denied high school diplomas for
not complying with a mandatory service requirement)


When an opponent says, "I will not come over to your side," I calmly say,
"Your child belongs to us already.... What are you? You will pass on. Your
descendants, however, now stand in the new camp. In a short time they will
know nothing else but this new community."

~ Adolf Hitler ~


We need a national-corporate commitment to public service to look after
[the elderly]. We aren't able to provide resources unless the young pay
something for their patrimony through public service.

~ William F. Buckley Jr. ~
in Mother Jones magazine


We will not recognize [American Fascism] as it rises. It will wear no black
shirts here. It will probably have no marching songs. It will rise out of a
congealing of a group of elements that exist here and that are the
essential components of Fascism....

It will be at first decorous, humane, glowing with homely American
sentiment. But a dictatorship cannot remain benevolent. To continue, it
must become ruthless. When this stage is reached we shall see that appeal
by radio, movies, and government-controlled newspapers to all the worst
instincts and emotions of our people. The rough, the violent, the lawless
men will come to the surface and into power. This is the terrifying
prospect as we move along our present course.

- John T. Flynn
Writing in the American Mercury, February 1941


http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=7520439

[jawmoke]

no, this is not liberty or the land of the free, neither here or
anywhere else... better hidden here...

what's that quote ..

no one is more hoplessly enslaved than they who believe they are free?

[jawmoke]

an ace up the sleeve just in case it's needed to address
a thorn in the side

[Vexari]

this is what we call liberty

just how free are we?

lens just went out of focus..

[jawmoke]

we own nothing really, we may possess certain items as long as
"they" allow it.

you certainly can't own real estate, we only rent... all one has to
do is not pay their real estate tax and they will learn who owns it.

we are really like ants in an ant farm... completely subject to the
whims of our masters..

slaves who can not even barter their services/labor without the
government making a claim on our efforts..

personal possessions we may have until the tax man comes...

eminent domain, etc, etc..

[Vexari]

seems they are covering all the bases

now it will be left to interpretation

on a case by case basis


the odds still favor the house..

[Vexari]

what amazes me is

what do we really own?

in it's purest form..


ownership has many perspectives and truths

all blurred together

for none to see..

[jawmoke]

it's speaking out of both sides of one's mouth to

on the one hand say,
we are going to take a stand against the federal government

and on the second hand say,
we are going to make it a crime to take a stand against the federal government

[Vexari]

they are not both true

why would that have to be so?

[jawmoke]

a new beginning?

the owners don't want to start over this time..

underground living, seed vaults, etc..

they want to pick right back up where they left off

[Vexari]

pure unadulterated pacification

words have no meaning without action

and action never seems to match the words

all of it seems to be splintered

end game?

whatever it is

yes, getting close

however

so is armageddon

or the religious equivalent

have been waiting thousands of years..

[jawmoke]

yes.... they are not both true...

am thinking it to be a diversion along with the posturing by
some states taking a stance against the federal government's
abuse of power...

it sounds like

end game..

getting close..

just a little more diversion to get the populace thinking that
things will take care of themselves, no need for action, it's
being handled..

what do you think?

[Vexari]

interesting to note the similarity

between John F. Kennedy's Executive Order 11110, which required the Treasury Department to start printing and issuing silver certificates for the silver then remaining in the US Treasury

and

South Carolina General Assembly 118th Session, 2009-2010

Summary: Silver and gold coins

Section 1 1 1110

which states that The South Carolina General Assembly finds and declares that the State is experiencing an economic crisis of severe magnitude caused in large part by the unconstitutional substitution of Federal Reserve Notes for silver and gold coin as legal tender in this State.

The General Assembly also finds and declares that immediate exercise of the power of the State of South Carolina reserved under Article I, Section 10, Paragraph 1 of the United States Constitution and by the Tenth Amendment, is necessary to protect the safety, health and welfare of the people of this State, by guaranteeing to them a constitutional and economically sound monetary system.


http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=46500306


in what seems like a total contradiction in


South Carolina passing a law declaring any group that advocates controlling the government must register as a "subversive" organization

That means anyone who thinks people should control their government and government should serve the people could be classified as an enemy of the state..


http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=46567499


wonder if this serves as a backdrop to insure no outside competition?

this is a good piece

scroll down to the bold paragraph

dr paul talks about liberty services, the creators of the liberty dollar

The second step to reestablishing competing currencies is to eliminate laws that prohibit the operation of private mints.

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=46505534



any thoughts?

[jawmoke]

do you think the bill to issue currency backed by gold or silver
is a distraction?

if true, it casts a shadow on all the postering by other states
regarding giving notice to the federal government that they've
overstepped their authority....

[Vexari]

one is a distraction

the other

a tool..

[jawmoke]

doesn't add up... associative identity disorder?

seems to me that THEY need to register..

trying to subvert the government's monetary system and all..

[Vexari]

South Carolina passes law declaring any group that advocates controlling the government must register as a "subversive" organization

That means anyone who thinks people should control their government and government should serve the people could be classified as an enemy of the state

Fraternal and "patriotic" groups are exempt

but any organization that dissents from government policies certainly will be considered as neither fraternal nor patriotic..


No joke: South Carolina now requires ’subversives’ to register

http://rawstory.com/2010/02/south-carolinas-subversive-activities-registration-act-force/ for embedded links

Five-dollar registration fee for persons planning to overthrow US government

Terrorists who want to overthrow the United States government must now register with South Carolina's Secretary of State and declare their intentions -- or face a $25,000 fine and up to 10 years in prison.

The state's "Subversive Activities Registration Act," passed last year and now officially on the books, states that "every member of a subversive organization, or an organization subject to foreign control, every foreign agent and every person who advocates, teaches, advises or practices the duty, necessity or propriety of controlling, conducting, seizing or overthrowing the government of the United States ... shall register with the Secretary of State."

There's even a $5 filing fee.

By "subversive organization," the law means "every corporation, society, association, camp, group, bund, political party, assembly, body or organization, composed of two or more persons, which directly or indirectly advocates, advises, teaches or practices the duty, necessity or propriety of controlling, conducting, seizing or overthrowing the government of the United States [or] of this State."

A PDF of the registration form can be found here, courtesy of FitsNews.

The law also gives subversive organizations "subject to foreign control" 30 days to register with the state after setting up shop in South Carolina.

While the intention of the law is apparently aimed at Islamic terrorists, it's unclear in the law's wording whether it can be applied to right-wing militias, some of whom have reputedly called for the overthrow of the US government. The law states that "fraternal" and "patriotic" groups are exempt from the law, but only if they don't "contemplate the overthrow of the government."

While the law is clearly redundant -- there are plenty of statutes at the state and federal level through which terrorists can be prosecuted -- it reflects a not-uncommon pattern in some states of "doubling down" against particular crimes.

For instance, South Carolina is among those states which require drug dealers to declare their illegal income, or face additional criminal penalties on top of the already established penalties for buying, possessing and selling drugs.

The South Carolina blog FitsNews describes the new law as "bureaucracy for terrorists."

"In the long and storied history of utterly retarded legislation in South Carolina, we may have finally found the legal statute that takes the cake for sheer stupidity, which we think you’ll agree is saying something," the unsigned blog posting scathingly commented.

[jawmoke]

pictures taken about 30 mins ago

http://www.patrioticrevelations.com/images/chemtrails1.jpg

http://www.patrioticrevelations.com/images/chemtrails2.jpg

http://www.patrioticrevelations.com/images/chemtrails3.jpg

[mbc]

The government has your baby's DNA

By Elizabeth Cohen, CNN Senior Medical Correspondent
February 4, 2010 -- Updated 1411 GMT (2211 HKT)

http://edition.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/02/04/baby.dna.government/index.html?hpt=C2

Anne Brown worries that someone could gain access to the DNA sample from her daughter Isabel with Isabel's name attached.STORY HIGHLIGHTS
Genetic testing for newborns started in the 1960s
Specimens are often given to outside researchers
Scientists have said the collection of DNA samples is a "gold mine" for doing research


(CNN) -- When Annie Brown's daughter, Isabel, was a month old, her pediatrician asked Brown and her husband to sit down because he had some bad news to tell them: Isabel carried a gene that put her at risk for cystic fibrosis.

While grateful to have the information -- Isabel received further testing and she doesn't have the disease -- the Mankato, Minnesota, couple wondered how the doctor knew about Isabel's genes in the first place. After all, they'd never consented to genetic testing.

It's simple, the pediatrician answered: Newborn babies in the United States are routinely screened for a panel of genetic diseases. Since the testing is mandated by the government, it's often done without the parents' consent, according to Brad Therrell, director of the National Newborn Screening & Genetics Resource Center.

In many states, such as Florida, where Isabel was born, babies' DNA is stored indefinitely, according to the resource center.

Many parents don't realize their baby's DNA is being stored in a government lab, but sometimes when they find out, as the Browns did, they take action. Parents in Texas, and Minnesota have filed lawsuits, and these parents' concerns are sparking a new debate about whether it's appropriate for a baby's genetic blueprint to be in the government's possession.

"We were appalled when we found out," says Brown, who's a registered nurse. "Why do they need to store my baby's DNA indefinitely? Something on there could affect her ability to get a job later on, or get health insurance."

According to the state of Minnesota's Web site, samples are kept so that tests can be repeated, if necessary, and in case the DNA is ever need to help parents identify a missing or deceased child. The samples are also used for medical research.



Video: Government has your baby's DNA Art Caplan, a bioethicist at the University of Pennsylvania, says he understands why states don't first ask permission to screen babies for genetic diseases. "It's paternalistic, but the state has an overriding interest in protecting these babies," he says.

However, he added that storage of DNA for long periods of time is a different matter.

"I don't see any reason to do that kind of storage," Caplan says. "If it's anonymous, then I don't care. I don't have an issue with that. But if you keep names attached to those samples, that makes me nervous."

DNA given to outside researchers

Genetic testing for newborns started in the 1960s with testing for diseases and conditions that, if undetected, could kill a child or cause severe problems, such as mental retardation. Since then, the screening has helped save countless newborns.

Over the years, many other tests were added to the list. Now, states mandate that newborns be tested for anywhere between 28 and 54 different conditions, and the DNA samples are stored in state labs for anywhere from three months to indefinitely, depending on the state. (To find out how long your baby's DNA is stored, see this state-by-state list.)

Brad Therrell, who runs the federally funded genetic resource consortium, says parents don't need to worry about the privacy of their babies' DNA.

"The states have in place very rigid controls on those specimens," Therrell says. "If my children's DNA were in one of these state labs, I wouldn't be worried a bit."

The specimens don't always stay in the state labs. They're often given to outside researchers -- sometimes with the baby's name attached.

According to a study done by the state of Minnesota, more than 20 scientific papers have been published in the United States since 2000 using newborn blood samples.

The researchers do not have to have parental consent to obtain samples as long as the baby's name is not attached, according to Amy Gaviglio, one of the authors of the Minnesota report. However, she says it's her understanding that if a researcher wants a sample with a baby's name attached, consent first must be obtained from the parents.

More Empowered Patient news and advice

Scientists have heralded this enormous collection of DNA samples as a "gold mine" for doing research, according to Gaviglio.

"This sample population would be virtually impossible to get otherwise," says Gaviglio, a genetic counselor for the Minnesota Department of Health. "Researchers go through a very stringent process to obtain the samples. States certainly don't provide samples to just anyone."

Brown says that even with these assurances, she still worries whether someone could gain access to her baby's DNA sample with Isabel's name attached.

"I know the government says my baby's data will be kept private, but I'm not so sure. I feel like my trust has been taken," she says.

Parents don't give consent to screening

Brown says she first lost trust when she learned that Isabel had received genetic testing in the first place without consent from her or her husband.

"I don't have a problem with the testing, but I wish they'd asked us first," she says.

Since health insurance paid for Isabel's genetic screening, her positive test for a cystic fibrosis gene is now on the record with her insurance company, and the Browns are concerned this could hurt her in the future.

"It's really a black mark against her, and there's nothing we can do to get it off there," Brown says. "And let's say in the future they can test for a gene for schizophrenia or manic-depression and your baby tests positive -- that would be on there, too."

Brown says if the hospital had first asked her permission to test Isabel, now 10 months old, she might have chosen to pay for it out of pocket so the results wouldn't be known to the insurance company.

Caplan says taking DNA samples without asking permission and then storing them "veers from the norm."

"In the military, for instance, they take and store DNA samples, but they tell you they're doing it, and you can choose not to join if you don't like it," he says.

What can parents do

In some states, including Minnesota and Texas, the states are required to destroy a baby's DNA sample if a parent requests it. Parents who want their baby's DNA destroyed are asked to fill out this form in Minnesota and this form in Texas.

Parents in other states have less recourse, says Therrell, who runs the genetic testing group. "You'd probably have to write a letter to the state saying, 'Please destroy my sample,'" he says.

He adds, however, that it's not clear whether a state would necessarily obey your wishes. "I suspect it would be very difficult to get those states to destroy your baby's sample," he says.

[IxCimi]

LOL! Jackasses!

"It is error alone which needs the support of government. Truth can stand by itself."

[jawmoke]

Edit:

that doesn't fit with..

No joke: South Carolina now requires ’subversives’ to register

Daniel Tencer
Raw Story
Monday, February 8th, 2010

Five-dollar registration fee for persons planning to overthrow US government

Terrorists who want to overthrow the United States government must now register with South Carolina’s Secretary of State and declare their intentions — or face a $25,000 fine and up to 10 years in prison.

The state’s “Subversive Activities Registration Act,” passed last year and now officially on the books, states that “every member of a subversive organization, or an organization subject to foreign control, every foreign agent and every person who advocates, teaches, advises or practices the duty, necessity or propriety of controlling, conducting, seizing or overthrowing the government of the United States … shall register with the Secretary of State.”

There’s even a $5 filing fee.

By “subversive organization,” the law means “every corporation, society, association, camp, group, bund, political party, assembly, body or organization, composed of two or more persons, which directly or indirectly advocates, advises, teaches or practices the duty, necessity or propriety of controlling, conducting, seizing or overthrowing the government of the United States [or] of this State.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/no-joke-south-carolina-now-requires-%E2%80%99subversives%E2%80%99-to-register.html

[IxCimi]

That would be terrific! WOW!

But do they mean it?