pages bg right

What Is Cancer?

What Is Cancer?

Conventional medicine defines cancer as a colony of malignant cells, or a tumor. If you have a tumor, then the conventional oncologist will try to cut or slash it out via surgery. After they cut you, then they typically recommend chemo to try to kill any remaining cancer cells with toxic poisons. And they will finish off with radiation, to burn whatever cancer cells remain.

This is why I, and many others, refer to “the Big 3” protocol as “Slash, Poison, and Burn.” Alternative medicine sees cancer as a multidimensional, systemic total body disease. The cancer tumor is merely a symptom and the purpose of the alternative cancer treatment is to correct the root causes of cancer in the whole body.

The fact is we develop cancer cells throughout our bodies throughout our lives.  Our bodies are normally able to find them, identify them and destroy them before they are able to grow uncontrollably.  It is a normal occurrence, which is constantly taking place in a healthy body.  It is only when the healthy body becomes unable to mount its normal defenses and the cancer cells are allowed to reproduce at an uncontrollable rate that cancer becomes life threatening.  This is a failure or breakdown of our normal immune system. The immune systems breakdown, and its cause, needs to be treated in conjunction with the cancer, in order to assure the best possible outcome for the patient.  Any treatment that does not address underlying causes for the breakdown of the immune system will be palliative at best, and life threatening at their worst.

It’s important to remember the basic physiology of all cancer cells. Whether it be breast, prostate, renal or lung, there are many facets of their physiology that will remain constant.  Glucose is taken in as a primary food; lactic acid is excreted from the cancer cells into the blood.  The blood carries the lactic acid to the liver, where it is converted back into glucose to feed the cancer cells.  This occurs in all known cancer cells.  It has been well documented in many studies, that, many years ago serum glucose levels were used to monitor the progress of the disease.  It was well established that as the disease progressed, serum glucose levels would rise.

Knowing this, the wisdom of removing simple carbohydrates and sugars from the diet becomes obvious.  The ignorant use of glucose I.V.’s in cancer patients also becomes painfully obvious.   The object is to make it difficult for cancer cells to reproduce.  Why fuel them with a primary requirement?  They are unable to efficiently use protein or complex carbohydrates for food.  The healthy cells of our body and immune system are able to use these as fuel and for repair.  Adapt the patient to a diet that includes protein and complex carbohydrates and eliminate the rest.  This is a simple change that can make a huge difference in the final outcome of the disease process.   It’s also important to remember that a large number of cancer cell types have receptor sites for opiates.  In other words, opiates used to fight pain will actually increase the cancer cell’s growth rate.

The quick shrinkage of tumors that is sometimes seen in chemotherapy or radiation therapy is not a sign of recovery from cancer.  It is a complete shutting down of the normal immune response.  This is as indisputable fact, yet the pharmaceutical companies are allowed to use it to get their chemotherapy approved.  Under optimal conditions, tumors will enlarge as they become engorged with CD-cells and macrophages.  These cells identify the cancer cells, kill them and then devour their remains.  This is an inflammatory response and results in the tumor growing slightly as it becomes engorged with these cells.  If the tumor shrinks quickly from chemotherapy or radiation therapy, the ideal healthy response of the body to controlling cancer does not have a chance to occur. 

Never confuse rapid tumor shrinkage with beating the cancer.  It is just the opposite.

CT scans and PET scan show inflammatory responses, not just cancer.  Since the normal and healthy body response are CD-cells infiltration and consuming of cancer cells is also an inflammatory response, they are often confused by radiologists untrained in cancer fighting agents that work with the immune system to facilitate both increases in CD-cells and at the same time being cytotoxic (selectively killing cancer cells).

Share
Why is my Doctor against Alternative Cancer Treatments?

Why is my Doctor against Alternative Cancer Treatments?

Your doctor is against these treatments because from the first day of medical school, doctors are brainwashed into believing that disease can only be treated with drugs. You can rest assured that your doctor has likely been convinced that the only viable treatments for cancer are chemo, surgery, and radiation.  Your doctor has also been lead to believe that there are no cures for cancer, when in reality there are. Most doctors have a tendency to believe that not only what they were taught in medical school must be true, but they also believe that what they were not taught must not be important!  As a result, most doctors are still thinking “inside the box” when it comes to cancer. Doctors who think “outside the box” and treat the actual cause of disease rather than the symptoms are labeled as “quacks.”

Share
The “Cancer Box” = Big Bucks

The “Cancer Box” = Big Bucks

The cancer “box” is largely the creation of multinational pharmaceutical companies…

…attempting to peddle their poisons (such as chemotherapy) in an effort to increase shareholder profits. Sadly, these profits are oftentimes generated at the expense (both monetarily and physically) of the dying cancer patient. The official “war on cancer” was declared by President Nixon in 1971, but the REAL war is being fought against alternative cancer treatments! Cancer patients deserve to know the truth and to make choices based upon this truth. And the truth is that the proven cancer prevention strategies and the real cures for cancer do not need a prescription nor do they require surgery or barbaric procedures like radiation or chemotherapy. But you might ask, “isn’t chemo a proven scientific treatment?” The answer is YES, it is!  It has been scientifically proven to fatally poison several hundred thousand people each and every year.  Did you know that the overall success rate for most cancers treated with the chemotherapy is a paltry 3%? In other words, chemotherapy has a 97% fatality rate! But, make no mistake, the Cancer Industry does NOT want you to know this information. You see, a couple of centuries ago in America, if you ran a plantation you wanted to make sure that your slaves remained obedient, submissive, and illiterate. If a slave had the nerve to disobey “the master,” then he was beaten within an inch of his life. Books weren’t allowed, thus slaves were unable to learn to read.  These steps were taken to insure that they would never have the boldness to venture off the plantation and the master would have a “slave for life.”

Share
The Truth About the “FED”

The Truth About the “FED”

January 1, 2012


The Truth about the”Federal” Reserve

 

In light of the recent financial and economic woes, the “bailout” of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the recent trillion dollar mortgage “bailouts”, the crash of the housing market, and the resulting huge swings in the stock market and the predicted runs on banks, I felt it would be appropriate to discuss The Federal Reserve System (aka “The Fed”) and its history.

I remember in 2008 when Congress was attempting to pass the $700 billion “bailout,” I was sitting in the San Antonio airport waiting for a flight to Nashville. I watched several “financial experts” express their opinions on the pros and cons of the bailout, and as I listened, it seemed that at least once per sentence someone would refer to “The Fed.” I had to chuckle to myself as these supposedly sophisticated people (representatives of our largest and most prominent financial institutions and “think tanks”) were obviously ignorant of the truth about “The Fed.”

You see, the simple truth is that The Federal Reserve System is neither “federal,” nor does it have any “reserves.” The Fed is a system of private banks, owned by rich foreign and American bankers. It is the biggest scam ever perpetrated upon the American people. The Fed is the reason we have inflation and an enormous national debt, which, by the way, will NEVER be paid off, since The Fed would rather have the interest on the loan (the national debt) than the principal, because they make trillions of dollars from the US being in debt.

But wait a minute! Doesn’t the US government control The Fed? Doesn’t the President appoint the Chairman of the Federal Reserve?” Well, yes, the President does appoint the Chairman…but NO, the US government does NOT control The Fed. Quite the opposite. The Fed actually controls the US government.  Baron M. Rothschild once wrote, “Give me control over a nation’s currency and I care not who makes its laws.” Well, The Fed not only controls the US currency, but it also controls our politicians.

THE MEETING AT JEKYLL ISLAND:

Back in 1910, Jekyll Island (an island off the coast of Georgia) was privately owned by a small group of millionaires from New York, including William Rockefeller and J.P. Morgan.  Their families would travel to Jekyll Island to spend the winter months. There was a brilliant structure there, the clubhouse, which was the center of their social activities. The island has since been purchased by the state of Georgia, converted into a state park and the clubhouse has been restored. If you were to visit the clubhouse and walk downstairs, you would come to a door with a plaque stating: “In this room the Federal Reserve System was created.

In November of 1910, Senator Nelson Aldrich sent his private railroad car to the railroad station in New Jersey.  From there, he and six other men traveled under the cloak of secrecy to Jekyll Island.  They were told to arrive separately at the railroad station, not to eat together, not to speak to each other, and to act like they were strangers.  They were told to avoid newspaper reporters since they were well-known people, and reporters would have wondered why these seven prominent men were all traveling together.

Once they got on board the train, the deception continued. They were told to use first names only, not to use their last names at all.   A few of the men used pseudonyms.  Once they arrived at Jekyll Island, they spent over a week hammering out the details of what eventually became the Federal Reserve System.  When they were done they went back to New York.

After the meeting at Jekyll Island, for several years, these men denied that there ever was a meeting.  It wasn’t until after the Federal Reserve System was established in 1913 that they then began to talk openly about their secretive trip and meeting at Jekyll Island. As a matter of fact, they wrote books, magazine articles, and gave interviews to reporters, so now it’s possible to go into the public record and learn exactly what happened there off the coast of Georgia.

WHO WERE THE SEVEN MEN?

Senator Nelson Aldrich, whom I have already mentioned, was a Republican Senator and was the chairman of the National Monetary Commission.   He was also the very important business associate of J. P. Morgan and was the father-in-law of John D. Rockefeller, Jr. and was the grandfather of Nelson Rockefeller.

Also in attendance at Jekyll Island was Abraham Andrew, who was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury.  Henry Davison, the senior partner of the J. P. Morgan Company, was in attendance, as was Charles Norton, the President of the First National Bank of New York.  Benjamin Strong, the head of J. P. Morgan’s Banker’s Trust Company, was at Jekyll Island, and in 1913, when the Federal Reserve Act was passed, Strong became the first head of The Fed.

Frank Vanderlip, the President of the National City Bank (NCB) of New York, was an attendee at Jekyll Island.  NCB just happened to be the largest of all of the banks in America representing the financial interests of William Rockefeller and the international investment firm of Kuhn, Loeb & Company.

Finally, there was Paul Warburg who was almost certainly the most important at the meeting because of his familiarity with banking as it was practiced in Europe.  Paul was one of the wealthiest men in the entire world.  He was a partner in Kuhn, Loeb & Company and was a representative of the Rothschild banking dynasty in France and England.  He maintained very close working relationships with his brother, Max Warburg, who was the head of the Warburg banking consortium in Germany and the Netherlands.

These were the seven men aboard that railroad car who were at Jekyll Island.  According to G. Edward Griffin, author of The Creature from Jekyll Island, as amazing as it may seem, they represented approximately 1/4 of the wealth of the entire world!   These are the men that sat around the table and created the Federal Reserve System.

WHY WAS SECRECY IMPORTANT?

You might ask, “What is the big deal about a group of bankers getting together in private and talking about banking?”  According to Vanderlip, “If it were to be exposed publicly that our particular group had gotten together and written a banking bill, that bill would have no chance whatever of passage by Congress.”  You see, the purpose of the bill was to break the grip of what was referred to as the “money trust,” which was the concentration of wealth in the hands of a few large banks in New York on Wall Street . . . and it was written by the money trust!  Had that fact been known from the beginning, the US would never have had a Federal Reserve System because as Vanderlip said, Congress would never have passed it.  It would have been like hiring the fox to install the security system at the henhouse.  This was why secrecy was so important.  The goal was to create a “central bank” much like those in existence in Europe for centuries.

How could they conceal that from the American people? Congress was already on record as saying they did not want a central bank in America.  Their challenge was to create a central bank that nobody would know was a central bank. This was their strategy:  first, they would give it a name and including the word “Federal” so that it appears to be an official government entity. Then they would add the word “Reserve” so that it would appear there were reserves somewhere.  Then, they would add the word “System” so that it would appear that there was a system of regional banks which would spread power over the entire country and remove the concentration of financial power from New York City. When you analyze it, you will realize that what they created there was not federal, there are no reserves, and it’s not a system at all in the sense of diffusion of power.  It was brilliant strategy.

CONVINCING THE PUBLIC:

The next thing was to “sell” The Fed to the public. The first draft of the Federal Reserve Act as it was presented to Congress was called the Aldrich Bill (named after the sponsor, Senator Nelson Aldrich).  However, since Aldrich was so identified with big business interests, the people were outraged and Congress voted it down.  But, just like Congress does today, they took the bill, rearranged the paragraphs, took Aldrich’s name off the bill and found a couple of Democrats (Carter Glass and Robert Owen) to sponsor the new bill. Since everybody “knew” that the Republicans represented big business and that Democrats represented the “common man,” this was a brilliant move. The Aldrich Bill had morphed into the Glass-Owen bill, and the new bill was perceived as being totally different from the Aldrich Bill.

The next step was for Aldrich and Vanderlip to give speeches and interviews to newspaper reporters condemning the Glass-Owen Bill. They would frequently state that the new bill would be “ruinous to banking and terrible for the country.”  By the time the American public would read that comment in the local newspaper, he would gullibly say, “Gee whiz, I reckon if the big bankers don’t like the bill very much then it must be pretty good.”

With this kind of expert tactics and deception, the public didn’t stand a chance.  It is no surprise that popular support was finally gained for the bill and on December 22, 1913 the bill was passed by Congress and the following day was signed into law by President Wilson.

As author G. Edward Griffin states, “the creature from Jekyll Island finally moved into Washington, DC.”  After the passage of the Federal Reserve Act, Congressman Charles Lindbergh stated:  “This Act establishes the most gigantic trust on earth….When the President signs this Act, the invisible government by the money power, proven to exist by the Money Trust Investigation, will be legalized….The new law will create inflation whenever the trust wants inflation….From now on, depression will be scientifically created.” That’s right, Lindbergh stated that future depressions would be “created” by the bankers.

Louis McFadden, Chairman of the House Banking Committee during the 1930s, said about the stock market crash of 1929: “It was not accidental; it was a carefully contrived occurrence. The international bankers sought to bring about a condition of despair so that they might emerge as ruler of us all.”  Since 1913, the Federal Reserve Act has been amended over 100 times, with each amendment expanding the power and reach of the Federal Reserve System to “create money out of nothing.”

THE “MANDRAKE MECHANISM” -  MONEY OUT OF NOTHING:

The passage of the Federal Reserve Act in 1913 was the beginning of the partnership between a cartel of private bankers and the US government.  This is VERY IMPORTANT.   Cartels often go into partnership with governments because they need the force of law to enforce their cartel agreement.  I have heard many economists refer to The Fed’s process of creating money from nothing as the “Mandrake Mechanism” named after the comic-book character of the 1940s, Mandrake the Magician, who could create something out of nothing.

Let’s take a simplified look and see how they create money through the Mandrake Mechanism. Here’s how it works.  It starts with the government side of the partnership, it starts in Congress which only knows how to spend, spend, spend.  Let’s say Congress needs an extra billion dollars today so it goes to the treasury and says “we need a billion dollars” and the Secretary of the Treasury says “you’re crazy, we’re plum out of money, we ran out of the tax money back in May.”   Congress then gets together and strolls down Constitution Avenue and stops at the local Kinko’s and prints off some “official” US Government bonds, which are really nothing more than fancy IOU’s.   After printing a billion dollars worth of these bonds, they offer them to the private sector (i.e. the American sheeple).  Well, tens of thousands of Americans are anxious to lend their money to the government, since they’ve been told by their trusted investment advisors that this is the most sound investment that you can make, since these bonds are backed by the “full faith and credit of the US government.”  They’re not quite sure what that means but it sure sounds good.

Now, after selling half a billion of US bonds, Congress still needs more money…after all, they’ve got a spending addiction. They’ve already milked the American public with the issuance of the bonds, so the next day they stroll down to the Federal Reserve building. The Fed has been waiting for them – that’s one of the reasons it was created. By the time they get inside the Federal Reserve building, the Fed officer is already opening up his checkbook, and he writes a check to the US Treasury for half a billion bucks.

WHERE DOES THE MONEY COME FROM?

You might be asking, “Where did The Fed get half a billion dollars to give to the US Treasury?” Did they have $500,000,000 in their account?  The startling answer is there is no money in the account at the Federal Reserve System.  NONE. In fact, technically, there isn’t even an account, there is only a checkbook.   That billion dollars springs into being at precisely the instant the officer signs that check and, if you remember in Economics 101, that is what the professor called “monetizing the debt.”   This is how the government gets its instant access to any amount of money at any time without having to go to the taxpayer directly and justify it or ask for it.  Otherwise, they would have to come to the taxpayer and say we’re going to raise your taxes another $7,500 this year.  Of course, if they did that, then the American taxpayer would vote them out of office quick, fast, and in a hurry.   No, Congress really likes the Mandrake Mechanism because it’s a “no questions asked” source of instant cash.

Now, this is where it really gets interesting.  Let’s go back to that half billion dollar check that the Fed official just wrote.  The Treasury official deposits the check into the government’s checking account and all of a sudden the computers indicate that the government has a billion dollar deposit.  So now the government can write a billion dollars in checks against that deposit, which Congress does very quickly, as they are going through withdrawals from not having enough money for their “spending sprees.”  For the sake of our simplistic analysis, let’s just follow $100 out of that half a billion.  Let’s say Congress writes a $1000 check to Johnny, who cuts the lawn at the White House.  He gets a check for $1000, completely clueless that only a day before, this money didn’t even exist, but he doesn’t care, so he deposits it into his bank account. Now, the bank manager sees that a $1000 deposit has been made he runs over to the loan window and opens it up and says “Attention, attention, we now money to loan.”  Everyone is thrilled since that’s one of the chief reasons that people go to banks, right? They want to borrow money.

Well, it just so happens that Freddie (Johnny’s neighbor) needs to borrow $900 for a home renovation.   The Federal Reserve System requires that the banks hold no less than 10% of their deposits in reserve, so the bank holds 10% of that $1000 in reserve ($100) and it loans Freddie the $900 he needs for his home renovation.   What do you think Freddie does with the $900? He wants to spend it so he puts it into his checking account. When he puts this $900 into his checking account, it’s considered a deposit, then the bank is only required to keep $90 in deposits and can turn around and loan out $810.  The next fellow also needs a loan, so he borrows the $810, deposits it into his checking account, and then the bank has more deposits which can, in turn, create more loans.  At the end of the day, the bank can eventually loan out $9000 based on the initial $1000 deposit, as a result of the 10% fractional reserve requirement.

Where did the $9000 come from?  The answer is the same as when the Fed officer wrote the check… there was no money. The money is “created” precisely at the point at which the loans are made.   Think about this for a minute. This money was created out of nothing and yet the banks collect interest on it which means that they collect interest on nothing. What a racket, huh?

MONEY SOUP:

But the story doesn’t stop there.  This newly created money goes out into the economy and it dilutes down the value of the dollars that were already out there.  My lovely wife Charlene cooks an amazing homemade chicken tortilla soup.  The broth is amazing.  Now, if I were to add a gallon of water to the cauldron, it would ruin the broth.  But this is analogous to what’s happening with the money supply.  Injecting this “money created from nothing” into the economy is like pouring water into a wonderful pot of soup.

So by throwing more and more money into the US “economic soup,” the money gets weaker and weaker and weaker and we have the phenomenon called inflation which is the appearance of rising prices.  But inflation is just the “appearance” of rising prices.  In reality, prices are not really rising.  Inflation is a result of our money falling in value, more commonly referred to as the “devaluation of the dollar.” If this dollar devaluation continues, our money will be more useful as toilet paper than as a medium of exchange.

And with the recent housing crisis, I’m sure that you are all familiar with the fact that, when you get that bank loan of money created out of nothing, the bank wants something from you.  It wants you to sign on the dotted line and pledge your house, your car, your inventory, your assets so that in case for any reason you cannot continue to make your payments they get your assets. The banks are NOT going to lose anything on this. Whether it’s expansion or contraction, inflation or deflation, the banks are covered and we like sheep go right along with it because we haven’t figured it out, we don’t know that this is a scam.

There you have in a condensed form a crash course on the Federal Reserve System.  I can assure you that you now know more about The Fed than you probably would if you enrolled in a four year course in economics because they don’t teach this in school.

CLOSING:

In closing, let’s hear from one of the most influential Founding Fathers of the United States:

So, in light of the recent financial chaos in America, I ask you this question: Will the private bankers who own The Fed help stabilize our markets?

I leave you with this thought: In the Bible, we learn that the debtor is a slave to the lender. That is the relationship of the USA to The Federal Reserve System. In essence, we are all slaves to the international private bankers who own The Fed.

If you want to learn more about the Federal Reserve System, I strongly recommend The Creature from Jekyll Island by G. Edward Griffin. It is the “magnum opus” of books on this topic.

 

Please help spread the word by sending this special report to at least 10 friends.

Thanks and God bless.

Share
Senate Bill 1867

Senate Bill 1867

December 5, 2011


Are YOU an “Enemy Combatant” or a “Terrorist”?

 

With so much information (and “disinformation”) floating around the internet regarding the passage of Senate Bill 1867 (the National Defense Authorization Act, or NDAA, for fiscal year 2012), I felt it necessary to post this article.  The NDAA regularly comes before Congress for changes and additions, but Senate Bill 1867 proves to be the most powerful one yet in trampling the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Let me ask you a question. Can the president use the military to arrest anyone he wants, keep that person away from a judge and jury, and lock him up for as long as he wants? According to Judge Andrew P. Napolitano, “In the Senate’s dark and terrifying vision of the Constitution, he can.”  Two weeks ago, during Thanksgiving week, while the typical American was comatose in front of the television, watching countless hours of football and recuperating from the gluttony that accompanies this holiday, Senators Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.) met in secret and drafted an amendment to the NDAA bill. This amendment was then passed in a closed-door committee meeting without any kind of hearing.

What was in this amendment?

In a nutshell, this amendment permits the President to use the U.S. military against American citizens in the USA. He would have the legal (not lawful) authority to arrest, detain, imprison, torture (or conduct “enhanced interrogation” if you prefer the government’s semantic work-around), and even kill ANYONE he wishes (including a U.S. citizen) without even charging him with a crime! And that person, under this disturbing bill, would have no recourse to a judge to require the President to either set him free or file charges against him. This would all be accomplished via military tribunal (rather than civilian court). Military tribunals are the complete antithesis of the civilian justice system, and putting American citizens through such a system would signal the death of everything the American justice system was built upon.

As far as I have seen, there are no detailed requirements set forth in the bill which have to be met before the military can indefinitely detain, and torture Americans and people around the world and here in the “homeland.”  For those of you American sheeple who are still wondering what “homeland” means, it’s a phrase borrowed from Nazi Germany (which is the source of much of this draconian legislation). If this bill is implemented, it is truly an end of our Republic. A recent ACLU study of the bill called it “the most unconstitutional legislation in modern history.” This bill virtually ends “Posse Comitatus” (which bars the military from domestic operations).

93 Treasonous Senators

On December 2, 2011, the U.S. Senate voted to pass Senate Bill 1867 by a vote of 93-7. In essence, the Constitution has been betrayed and undermined by its most solemnly sworn trustees! The only seven Senators who even deserve a chance of re-election are: Tom Coburn (R-OK); Tom Harkin (D-IA); Mike Lee (R-UT); Merkley (D-OR); Rand Paul (R-KY); Bernard Sanders (I-VT); Ron Wyden (D-OR).  McCain is a traitor. Levin is a traitor. The other 91 Senators who voted for this egregious bill are also traitors. At the very least they should be impeached. I personally believe they should be tried for treason, as these pathetic human beings are not only defying their oath of office in waging war on the U.S. Constitution, but they are also fighting to destroy the most critical rights we have in this country and in doing so are desecrating everything that our forefathers fought (and died) for. Senator Rand Paul argued against this atrocious bill stating, “Should we err today and remove some of the most important checks on state power in the name of fighting terrorism, well then the terrorists have won. [D]etaining American citizens without a court trial is not American.”

This bill is one of the final steps necessary in striking down any remaining Constitutional protections or rights, all under the phony war on terror” hoax, being perpetrated by our own government against its own citizens. This is not a right or left, Democrat or Republican plan……they are all in it together.   According to Mike Adams, “I don’t know if you’re all getting this through your heads yet, but Senate Bill 1867 –the National Defense Authorization Act– would openly “legalize” the U.S. government’s detainment and murder of OWS [Occupy Wall Street] protesters and the assassination of talk show hosts, bloggers, journalists and anyone who holds a so-called “anti-government” point of view. This is the open and blatant declaration of war against any who do not going along with TSA thugs reaching down your pants, the Goldman Sachs economic takeover of nations, the secret arrest and torture of American citizens, and other acts of outright tyranny waged by an out-of-control government. Those who have been burying their heads in the sand over the coming police state need to wake up and face the music. That U.S. Senators would knowingly and willfully attempt to pass a bill that legalizes the indefinite detainment, torture and killing of American citizens with no due process whatsoever – and on American soil! — is nothing less than a traitorous betrayal of the once-free American people. These are, our founding fathers would have said, acts of war against the People. They reveal the insidious plan to put in place a legal framework to end the Bill of Rights, murder protesters, and overrun America with total police state brutality.”

According to Charles Edward Lincoln III, who is running for the U.S. Senate in California, “Senate Bill 1867 represents nothing but Stalinist Communist Dictatorship at its worst.  This is Oriental Despotism installed and housed in America under the Flag of Our Fathers.  Did we fight the Kaiser, Hitler, and the Cold War only to institute such things as this at home?  Did we take in thousands of refugees from Vietnam after 1974-75 because we offered them a worse life than they would have had along the Mekong Delta?  I think not.  I defy and deny the right of any Senator who voted for this bill to call himself an American, much less a Patriot. All 93 Senators who voted for S.B. 1867 should be removed from office . . . and sent to Singapore to be prosecuted and punished as major Drug using narcotics-offenders for whatever kind of crack they’re smoking that makes them think this is all right, because it is not.   . . .  

What happened that even Mark Udall of Colorado voted for the bill after his amendments failed?  To HELL with Florida’s Marco Rubio, Louisiana’s David Vitter, Texas’ John Cornyn, and every other cowardly craven Senator who voted in favor of this bill, including every other Senator who ever pretended to be in favor of freedom or the Constitution.   These are the times that try men’s souls, and the trial of 93 Senators for Treason is way overdue to begin right now.  If I am elected to the United States Senate from California I swear on the graves of my grandparents, my father’s soul and my mother’s heart that I will fight to erase the past twenty years of freedom-suppressing legislation from the United States Statutes at Large and U.S. Code until no trace of them is left, either in those statutes or in the Code of Federal Regulations nor in any guidelines to law-enforcement officials having any force or effect on the construction or interpretation of the law.  To HELL with Lindsey Graham, Joe Lieberman, John McCain and Carl Levin and all the lot of other fakes and phonies.  To HELL with both of California’s Com(munist)-Symp(athizing) Senators who would turn America into one vast prison camp in the name of ‘Security’. Wow! I tell you what folks, if I lived in California, I would make sure that I voted for Charles Edward Lincoln III.

What is a “Writ of Habeas Corpus”?

A writ of habeas corpus is a judicially enforceable order issued by a court of law to a prison official ordering that a prisoner be brought to the court so it can be determined whether or not that prisoner had been lawfully imprisoned and, if not, whether he or she should be released from custody. The actual right to the writ of habeas corpus is not stated anywhere in the U.S. Constitution or the Bill of Rights. The authors of these documents apparently believed that habeas corpus was such a fundamental liberty that it needed no further guarantee in writing. The only mention of the writ of habeas corpus in the U.S. Constitution relates to when it can be taken away from judges. In Article I, Section 9, the U.S. Constitution states: “The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in causes of rebellion or invasion of the public safety may require it.” This is commonly known as the “Suspension Clause.”  It’s important to understand that the “Suspension Clause” only allows detention (not trial by military tribunal) and it also does not make it “legal” for the government to torture people, or summarily execute them. The Bill of Rights commands which prevent these actions are not suspended.

The “Suspension Clause” was never activated through the terms of the first 15 presidents. Then along came Abraham Lincoln. As the Civil War started, in the very beginning of Lincoln’s presidential term, a group of “Peace Democrats” proposed a peaceful resolution to the developing Civil War by offering a truce with the South, and forming a constitutional convention to amend the U.S. Constitution to protect States’ rights. The proposal was ignored by the Unionists of the North and not taken seriously by the South. However, the Peace Democrats, also called “copperheads” by their enemies, publicly criticized Lincoln’s belief that violating the U.S. Constitution was required to save it as a whole.  In 1862, when the “copperheads” began criticizing Lincoln’s violation of the U.S. Constitution, Lincoln suspended habeas corpus (without consulting Congress) and had many copperheads arrested under military authority because he felt that the state courts in the north would not convict war protesters. Lincoln boldly proclaimed that all persons who engaged in “disloyal” practices would come under Martial Law.

According to Oathkeepers’ founder, Stewart Rhodes, “During the Civil War, more than 13,535 Northern civilians were arrested by the military and at least 4,271 of these were tried before military tribunals, with some of them being executed. Typical charges were vague accusations of violating the laws and customs of war. In one such case, a man was found guilty of violations of the laws of war for letting rebels lurk in his neighborhood without reporting them. Others were accused of harboring rebels or engaging in guerilla warfare. This treatment of northern civilians as the enemy is what the Milligan Court ruled unconstitutional after the war.” See Ex Parte Milligan (1866).  It is vital that we see clearly that the Milligan Court rejected the argument that a U.S. citizen could ever be an “enemy.”

The Court affirmed the use of military jurisdiction over two categories of persons: 1) those in the U.S. military (and in the militia when called into service) and 2) the enemy. In summarizing this decision, Stewart Rhodes states, “The Court pointed out that Mr. Milligan was not in the military (the Union Army) and was not a resident of one of the rebellious states. This is really the same as saying he was not a citizen or resident of a foreign nation with which we were at war. It did not matter to the Milligan Court what Milligan had done, or what laws of war he might have violated. What counted was who he was. If he was a northern civilian, he could not be tried by tribunal for any actions nor held as a POW or “unlawful combatant” because he just was not in one of the two categories of people subject to the military. He was a northern citizen who was making war on his nation and aiding the enemy. The proper remedy for such is a trial for treason, or at least for violation of a statute, before a jury in an Article III court, not a military trial.

What the Milligan Court upheld is the Constitution’s separation of civilian and military jurisdiction. The Founders, and the people who ratified the Constitution, were very concerned about overreaching military power. In fact, prior to the Revolution, the colonists had even been upset about British soldiers being tried by tribunals, rather than civilian juries, for offenses committed off duty. The colonists considered such tribunals a violation of the rights of Englishmen. The Founders knew the sad English history of the abuse of special military and executive courts, such as the infamous Star Chamber, during England’s many upheavals and coups and endeavored to prevent their recurrence.”

After the Civil War, the Supreme Court had effectively put the “martial law genie” back into the bottle with the Milligan decision.  However, during World War II, FDR released the “genie” when he sent over 110,000 Japanese Americans to concentration camps in the USA!  Over 70,000 of these Japanese people were also American citizens! Citing the “doctrine of military necessity,” on February 19, 1942, FDR signed Executive Order 9066, giving the secretary of war the power to designate military areas from which “any or all persons may be excluded” and authorized military commanders to initiate orders they deemed advisable to enforce such action. Basically, FDR asserted went against the Milligan decision and stated that “who” they were (i.e. American citizens) did NOT matter.

Then along came Bush… President George W. Bush was perhaps the most anti-American President in our history. From the illegal and unconstitutional wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, to the insidious PATRIOT Act, to the Security Enhancement Act of 2003, to the Military Commissions Act of 2006, to the John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007, Bush committed dozens of war crimes (he has been convicted of such in other countries) and steadily moved our country closer and closer to martial law under a dictator (himself). He obliterated the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights. But that’s not surprising, in light of Bush’s 2005 outburst that the Constitution is “just a g*ddamned piece of paper!”

Now why, you might be asking, would anyone want to give the president of the United States the arbitrary authority to strip any US citizen of their citizenship with no evidence other than his/her belief that one of us is a terrorist, or supports terrorism, without the evidence supporting that contention, or being officially charged with a crime? According to Marti Oakley, “Hmmm.  Where to start on this one. Let’s go back to the redefining of prisoners of war (POW’s) as   “enemy combatants”. This change in terminology allowed the Bush regime, and now Obama, to by-pass the Geneva conventions on treatment of prisoners, including what has become our government’s proclivity for torture and avoided much of the international rules of war.   It didn’t seem like much at the time, but we know now that it was to redefine the individuals targeted; if we don’t call them prisoners of war we don’t have to abide by the rules.  Simple.

Next came Homeland Security’s determination that US citizens who oppose government policy, mention the Constitution, support third party candidates like Ron Paul and Chuck Baldwin, were to viewed as possible domestic terrorists along with social advocates, religious advocates and anyone who attended a rally or protest among many other things.  This was followed by the discovery of  Homeland Security documents describing who was to be viewed as a clear and present danger to the federal government (not the country) citing the use of REX84 black ops program along with Presidential Directive 51, that no one has been allowed to see, to conduct “Knock & Talk , Sneak & Peek, checkpoints; exigent search and seizure; meaning far more than what would be determined reasonable. Next came the launching of TSA which had been planned long before 9/11.  The unlawful detaining of legal US citizens with the accompanying exigent search and molestation continues to this day for no other reason than they are traveling.  HSD has compiled no-fly lists, suspect lists, black lists, suspected domestic terrorists list and a host of other lists  most of will never know we are on for reasons we will never actually know.   Originally called Total Information Awareness (TIA), the program was shut down in 2003. 

Like all things the government does, TIA never went anywhere but simply got parceled out to other agencies making it harder to track while the core program was simply renamed TSA. Most recently, Obama has approved a new program which allows him to authorize the targeted killing of people in foreign countries that the administration decides is a threat (to them) and includes targeting of  US citizens right here at home and abroad.  This program, which is nothing more than sanctified murder, is a violation of international laws which prohibit the killing of individuals outside of armed combat zones.  The program will allow the CIA or the military the unchecked authority to murder at will, US citizens and others, around the globe without any evidence of crime, threat or violent activity towards the United States, other than they said so.  The intent through all of these assaults on the Constitution and our protected rights has been to find the means to redefine any one of us as a non-military enemy combatant to facilitate the police state.  Once redefined, once the definitive description of who and what we are has been altered to suit the government agenda, it is open season on any one of us.”

Our founders made it clear that we should take up arms for the following government offenses:

  1. Denial of a jury trial for US citizens
  2. Attempt to make the military superior to civil power
  3. Take across the sea to trial

This is EXACTLY what is happening today, and Senate Bill 1867 is doing far worse than what our founders fought against!! One of the causes of the American Revolution was the denial of the right to jury trial, the use of admiralty courts (military tribunals) instead, and the application of the “laws of war” to the colonists. After that experience, and being well aware of the infamous Star Chamber in English history, the Founders ensured that the international laws of war would apply only to foreign enemies, not to the American people.

What was the Infamous “Star Chamber”?

England’s “Star Chamber” (you’ve probably seen the 1983 Michael Douglas movie with the same name) was an English court of law which was located at the royal Palace of Westminster. The Star Chamber witnessed the trials of royalty and nobility between 1487 and 1641. The primary function of the Star Chamber was to hear cases involving political libel, heresy and treason. Star Chamber sessions were secret (closed to the public) and became greatly feared. The Star Chamber court sessions were clandestine meetings which had no jury, there was no right of appeal, and there were no witnesses. The powerful Court of the Star Chamber evolved into a political weapon to use against any opponents of the policies of the monarch. Does this sound familiar? Who was it that said, “You’re either with us, or you’re with the terrorists”? In other words, if you dissent with the government, you may be considered to be a terrorist…

The most common Star Chamber crimes included:

  • High Treason
  • Blasphemy
  • Sedition
  • Spying
  • Rebellion
  • Murder

The punishment for most of the above crimes was death. There were various forms of execution. These terrible punishments included execution by beheading and burning. The terrible punishment for high treason was to be hung, drawn, and quartered.

A New Definition of “Terrorist” and “Enemy Combatant”

The UN-Patriotic PATRIOT Act redefined “terrorism” in Section 802. The “new” definition is basically ANY action that endangers human life that is a violation of federal law. In other words, virtually ANY crime could qualify you as a “terrorist.”  In Section 501 (Expatriation of Terrorists), the definition of “enemy combatant” is expanded to ALL American citizens who “may” have violated any provision of Section 802. Under Section 501, a U.S. citizen engaging in lawful activities can be grabbed off the street and thrown into a van never to be seen again. The Justice Department states that they can do this because the person “had inferred from conduct” that they were not a U.S. citizen. The PATRIOT Act defines domestic terrorism so broadly that it could potentially apply to an individual exercising his or her freedom of speech, expression, and assembly through acts of civil disobedience.

On November 22, 2011, Republican Presidential candidates Ron Paul and Newt Gingrich debated the merits of extending the Patriot Act to “secure the homeland.” Ron Paul was accurate when he stated, “The Patriot Act is unpatriotic because it undermines our liberty…Don’t be willing to sacrifice liberty for security. Today it seems too easy that our government and our Congresses are so willing to give up our liberty. I have a personal belief that you never have to give up liberty for security. You can still provide security without sacrificing our Bill of Rights…This is like saying we need a policeman in every house, a camera in every house…You can prevent crimes by becoming a police state. If you advocate the police state, yes, you can have safety and security, and you might prevent a crime, but the crime then will be against the American people and against our freedoms and we will throw out so much of what our revolution was fought for, so don’t do it so carelessly.

Gingrich, the former House speaker, added that he would look at strengthening the Patriot Act if elected.  Just in case anyone (like me) opposes Newt’s proposal for a half dozen or so new wars, Gingrich plays the standard neocon “ace-in-the-hole” strategy of quoting Abraham Lincoln. “We must think anew and act anew,” he quotes Lincoln as saying. I wonder if Newt knows that for the second year in a row, more US soldiers killed themselves (468) than died in combat (462). Suicide is a tragic but predictable human reaction to being asked to kill – and watch your friends be killed – for a war based on lies. Perhaps being forced to bag the mangled flesh of fellow soldiers could be another reason why some are committing suicide. Anyway, Newt praises Lincoln’s response to Fort Sumter (where not a single person was harmed, let alone killed). In response to the knocking down of some bricks at the fort, Lincoln responded with a full-scale invasion of all the Southern states, waging total war on the civilian population as well, and killing some 350,000 American citizens in those states. This of course was the very definition of “treason” under Article 3, Section 3 of the Constitution (the “Treason Clause”) which defines treason as only “levying war upon the states” or “giving aid and comfort to their enemies.” The Treason Clause provides the only constitutional trial remedy for those who make war against their own nation or give aid and comfort to its enemies. Under this article, there must be TWO witnesses to the supposed act of treason, and the accused is to be tried in CIVILIAN COURT. If the Founders had intended to give the military jurisdiction over such people, what was the point of the Treason Clause?

I must emphasize once again that our government considers even ideology and protest to be low-level acts of “terrorism,” so if you’re anti-war, pro-peace, pro-human rights, pro-justice, anti-corruption, or even worse, if you’re a Constitutional Christian, you very well might be labeled a terrorist. Every single square inch of the United States is now a war zone and you or I could easily be declared “soldiers” on the wrong side of the war and treated as such. And according to Senate Bill 1867, no proof, no charges, and no trial are required. They do not even have to draw spurious links to terrorist organizations in order to indefinitely detain you as they could easily declare the evidence as “critical to national security” and thus withhold it for as long as they deem “necessary” to protect “national security.”

For the first time in American history, military power is being put above that of civil authorities; a move many Russian intelligence analysts say can only be compared to the ending of freedoms in Russia under the Communists and Germany under the Nazis preceding both World Wars of the last century. Perhaps most disturbing are new reports emerging by “Obama-noids” who are warning that Christians are a “national security threat” because they place their belief in God above that of their government.

But these political whores are crafty like the Devil. They will use this legislation (initially) on turban wearing “brown people” to set a precedent, but then eventually, they will come for people like me and you. If we don’t stand up now against this tyranny, it may soon be too late. There is a famous statement attributed to pastor Martin Niemöller (who died in 1984) about the inactivity of Germans following the Nazi rise to power and the purging of their chosen targets, group after group. It’s called “First They Came…” – “First they came for the communists, and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a communist. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a Jew. Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me.”

If we Americans fail to heed these many warnings of tyranny (like Senate Bill 1867) we will soon awake to a reality described by George Orwell in his seminal work 1984 wherein he warned….“People simply disappeared, always during the night. Your name was removed from the registers, every record of everything you had ever done was wiped out, your one-time existence was denied and then forgotten. You were abolished, annihilated: vaporized was the usual word.”

The Phony “War on Terror”

The following section was excerpted from Mike Adams’ article entitled “Is the War on Terror a Complete Hoax?”

  What if there weren’t any real terrorists threatening America and the whole thing was just made up to justify a military agenda? A rational person might say that if we’re all going to give up our rights, and our Fourth Amendment, and have U.S. troops in the streets running checkpoints, then logically there should at least be some evidence that America has been infiltrated with terrorists, right? Or, more specifically, evidence from a reliable source that has not already been caught lying about terrorism, which would exclude the federal government, of course.

Look around you today: Do you see any terrorists? Any “towel heads” aiming guns at your family? Anybody walking around with a vest full of explosives? Nope.  Have you ever seen the TSA catch a terrorist at the airport? Ever read a news report of the TSA catching a terrorist? Ever heard of an Air Marshall stopping a terrorist in-flight? Nope. 

Seriously. Clear the cobwebs out of your head for a moment and think logically: Where are all these “terrorists” that we’re supposed to be afraid of and give up our rights for? Where are they?

Now, of course, the government can and will, from time to time, stage some sort of terrorist event to remind everyone to be afraid. That’s a given. In classic Orwellian protocol, any war that grants a government unlimited power will be indefinitely sustained.

This is why the “War on Terror” was declared against a tactic, not a nation or a person. That way, the so-called “war” can be carried out indefinitely. A war with no end. Perpetual tyranny. At first, if you remember, we were told we needed TSA agents at the airports because of Osama Bin Laden, remember? He was the “mastermind” who was going to cause airplanes to fall out of the sky. So what happened after he was killed and removed from the picture? The U.S. government announced the terror threat was now “even higher” because Bin Laden’s loyal supporters would now seek revenge!

Do you see how, under this brand of sick logic, the war on terror will go on indefinitely? They can always claim someone else is dangerous… there’s always a new boogeyman when it serves the interests of the state. That’s why it’s now obvious that this war has been entirely fabricated to achieve specific political and social agendas. This tactic is straight from the Nazi playbook.

The best article yet written on this subject was penned by none other than Paul Craig Roberts, former Assistant Secretary of the US Treasury and former associate editor of the Wall Street Journal. As Roberts explains: “The US government creates whatever new bogeymen and incidents are necessary to further the neoconservative agenda of world hegemony and higher profits for the armaments industry…If we look around for the terror that the police state and a decade of war has allegedly protected us from, the terror is hard to find. Except for 9/11 itself, assuming we accept the government’s improbable conspiracy theory explanation, there have been no terror attacks on the US. Indeed, as RT pointed out on August 23, 2011, an investigative program at the University of California discovered that the domestic “terror plots” hyped in the media were plotted by FBI agents. As there apparently are no real terror plots for this huge workforce to uncover, the FBI justifies its budget, terror alerts, and invasive searches of American citizens by thinking up “terror plots” and finding some deranged individuals to ensnare. For example, the Washington DC Metro bombing plot, the New York city subway plot, the plot to blow up the Sears Tower in Chicago were all FBI brainchilds organized and managed by FBI agents.”

Roberts goes on to explain the real motivation behind the war on terror. It’s not to fight terrorism, as has been publicly claimed, but rather to scare Americans into a state of blind obedience to a police state government.

The whole “if you see something, say something” campaign is a hypnosis script for mass paranoia. The airport security checkpoints are not designed to make flying safer but to make the American people more terrified. Every element of the so-called “war on terror” is a complete fabrication, just as the original war on Iraq was a total fabrication with its WMDs and fabricated yellowcake uranium claims which turned out to be utter falsehoods. “Terrorism” means, by definition, the use of fear tactics to achieve a political or social goal. There is no better example that fits the definition perfectly than the Department of Homeland Security itself, which is far more interested in figuring out how to INFECT people with fear rather than to PROTECT them from real terrorism.

You know who is carrying out the real terror in America today? It’s not the “towel heads” (to borrow a vulgar a highly inappropriate phrase from those who push this agenda). No, it’s the beer-bellied, white-faced, ego-driven, child-molesting TSA agents who terrorize tens of thousands of innocent air passengers every single day by stripping them down in those secret little rooms behind the security checkpoint naked body scanners — which are themselves another form of electronic strip searches that violate fundamental human rights.

And all the people out there who acquiesce to the tyranny, the in-your-pants searches by the TSA, the restrictions of free speech protests, and the coming “secret detainment” provisions just passed by the U.S. Senate, you are all fools and suckers who have been brainwashed into a state of irrational paranoia. It’s pathetic. And it’s the oldest trick in the government book, of course: Use the fear of terror to manipulate the public into supporting a police state agenda which concentrates power in the hands of the executive branch, which quickly becomes a military dictatorship. Read your history, folks, or you will stupidly repeat it.

If we Americans fail to heed these many warnings of tyranny (like Senate Bill 1867) we will soon awake to a reality described by George Orwell in his seminal work 1984 wherein he warned….”People simply disappeared, always during the night. Your name was removed from the registers, every record of everything you had ever done was wiped out, your one-time existence was denied and then forgotten. You were abolished, annihilated: vaporized was the usual word.”

Does the bill REALLY apply to US Citizens?

There are many of the “sheeple” who say this has nothing to do with United States citizens, as it plainly says in section 1032.  This section the “mandatory” military detention provision—i.e., the idea that a subset of detainable persons (“covered persons” in the lingo of the statute) are not just detainable in theory, but affirmatively must be subject to military detention.  Section 1032 then goes on, in subpart (b), to state expressly that US citizens are exempt from this “mandatory detention” requirement (though lawful permanent residents are not).

This obviously rules out the idea of a mandatory military detention for US citizens.  But note that it tends to rule in the idea that the baseline grant of detention authority in section 1031 does in fact extend to U.S. citizens.  Otherwise there would be no need for an exclusion for citizens in section 1032, since the 1032 category is a subset of the larger 1031 category.

Bottom line, YES, it has now been confirmed that the indefinite detainment and murder provisions do apply to American citizens on the streets of American cities. As Senator Lindsey Graham explained in plain language on the Senate floor: “…1031, the statement of authority to detain, does apply to American citizens and it designates the world as the battlefield, including the homeland.”

Where is the Outrage?

In the words of Mike Adams, “Right now, every history teacher in America should be absolutely outraged about all this, as they know what always comes next in the history of nations. Once any government “legalizes” the murder of its own citizens, it is inevitably followed by a mass-murder holocaust-style event. Tyrants, you see, always like to “legalize” their mass murder before they pull the trigger. Just read the history of Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, Mao and others. In every case, they worked diligently to put into place a legal framework for the mass murder that was about to be unleashes on their own citizens. That legal framework looks strikingly similar to Senate Bill 1867, which is about to be passed. This also brings to mind the mathematical reality that, statistically speaking, governments are orders of magnitude more deadly than terrorists. While terrorists sometimes success in taking out a few thousand people at a time, governments routinely murder tens of MILLIONS of people. It’s called GENOCIDE, and there’s a long and well-documented history of how governments have committed genocide year after year, one nation after another.

At the airports, We the People should be searching the TSA employees and checking them for illegal drugs, child pornography and stolen electronics. At government buildings, We the People should be searching all the government employees who come and go to make sure they don’t stage the demolition of their own buildings as a way to blame whatever convenient enemy they want to discredit — patriots, conservatives, “conspiracy theorists” or what have you.  It’s no longer a conspiracy theory, you see, that the government wants to have the legal right to openly murder U.S. citizens right on the streets of America. It’s written right into the Senate bill. It’s public record. So all those out there still clinging to their pathetic denialist “conspiracy theorists” rants can now clamp shut their pie holes and throw themselves off a cliff or something. It’s time to face the reality of the total police state tyranny that’s now written in black and white, plain as day. All of you who are still obsessed with your narrow world view of fashion, dancing with the stars, microwaveable processed food and fake mainstream news are about to be rocked out of your easy chairs and dumped into the cesspool of tyranny at your doorstep. Just know that when they come for you, there will be nobody left to speak for you, because you remained silent as all this was rolled out. And I won’t be there for you, either, because I’ll be holed up in Texas, handing out emergency food supplies to the local churches and performing emergency medicine procedures on those protesters wounded by U.S. government military attacks — the ones that are still alive, anyway.”

CONCLUSION

People, the Bill of Rights is the only thing keeping you alive right now, especially for the liberals who don’t usually own firearms to protect themselves. It’s the Republicans who are trying to destroy the Bill of Rights these days, don’t you get it? All the liberals and progressives reading this should be opposing McCain and the other treasonous Republican Senators who are pushing this “indefinite detainment of American citizens” tyranny. The whole point of the Bill of Rights was the limit government power so that it could not engage in secret arrests, torture, assassinations, indefinite detention and other tactics used by nations like North Korea, China and Cuba. But with Senate Bill 1867, the USA will become a lot like North Korea and China, both of which are filled with secret prisons. All the things we in the USA complain about other nations doing to their innocent citizens (illegal arrests, torture, etc.) will be LEGAL under U.S. law!  This traitorous bill is the equivalent to the Nazi Enabling Act and will spell the end of America as a free nation. Senate Bill 1867 makes it very apparent that “we the people” are the enemy as far as the rogue government is concerned. Ever since the “false flag” attacks of 9/11, our own government has done to the country what no terrorist or terrorist organization could have accomplished. All of the attacks on our Constitutional protections and rights have been perpetrated not by some terrorist in another country, but by terrorists HERE in the USA (our own government).

According to Marti Oakley, “It is our own government that has enabled the 17 or more spy agencies in the USA to unlawfully put the country under surveillance, to assemble dossiers on each and every one of us, to track us, film us, listen in on our conversations, read our email and snail mail, and to break into our homes performing illegal searches. It is our own government that has established Fusion centers for local spying and turned various corporate federal agencies into immediate threats to the country. It is our own government that allows TSA to harass and molest us as we travel. Ten years after 9/11 and we are still sitting by idly as bill after bill after bill comes out of this nest of pit vipers we call Congress.  We have become the thing we claimed we despised. All of the crimes we claim are being committed by other countries are crimes we are committing ourselves. We torture, kidnap, bomb, murder, intimidate, abuse and terrify all in the name of “national security.” We destabilize economies, deprive entire countries of food, medicines, even water for refusing to submit to what we want. We overthrow governments and assassinate their leaders and then install puppet governments to do our bidding. I have to wonder if at some point if other countries will band together and declare the US a terrorist organization, guilty of crimes against humanity, war crimes, human rights violations and a threat to world peace. If this should ever happen, possibly Carl Levin and John McCain could stand up and wave a copy of S.1867 at them and make them run away.”

We MUST resist this tyranny. As our Declaration of Independence  says: “But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government.” As George Washington said over 200 years ago… The time is near at hand which must determine if Americans are to be free men or slaves.”  And as Benjamin Franklin warned, “those who sacrifice liberty for safety deserve neither.”

Aleksandr Isayevich Solzhenitsyn was a Soviet and Russian novelist, dramatist, and historian. Through his writings he helped to make the world aware of the Gulag, the Soviet Union’s forced labor camp system.  In Gulag Archipelago, Solzhenitsyn  wrote:  “And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?… The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin’s thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt! If…if…We didn’t love freedom enough. And even more – we had no awareness of the real situation…. We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward.”

I leave you with these telling words from my colleague, Mike Adams, “So one day you call in to talk radio and express your discontent with the President, let’s say, and the next day a U.S. marine scout sniper sets up his .338 sniper rifle a couple hundred yards from your house, waits for you to sit down to watch Anderson Cooper vomit out the evening’s news propaganda, and then he pulls the trigger and blows your neck off, causing your head to land smack dab in that bowl of Kraft Macaroni and Cheese you were just trying to shovel down your threat because someone told you it was “food.” This will all be LEGAL under the new Senate Bill 1867 because they will claim you were a “terrorist collaborator” who questioned the wisdom of the executive leadership of America. Once due process is stripped away, anything can be justified by the government, including the open murder of its own citizens.

 

Please pray for our country!  And please help spread the word by sending this newsletter link (http://www.cancertruth.net/enemy-combatant/) to at least 10 friends.

Thanks and God bless.

Share

Premium Wordpress Themes