Archive for April, 2013


Fossil Fuel – or is it?

Oil, not a fossil fuel

A study was recently published in Science Magazine that presented new evidence supporting the abiotic theory for the origin of oil, which asserts oil is a natural product the Earth generates constantly rather than a “fossil fuel” derived from decaying ancient forests and dead dinosaurs. If you don’t read Science Magazine then you would not have known this. The oil barons of the world don’t want you to know their pricing it like it’s going to run out by 2020.
The report goes on to say that oil is created within the mantle of the earth then seeps up through bedrock to deposit in sedimentary rock, where it can be retrieved. Another source attributes the percolation of oil toward the surface from the rotation of the earth.

The White Tiger oil field off the coast of Vietnam is roughly 3 miles deep, 2.5 miles which is fractured granite basement. The “fossil fuel” theory can’t explain discovering oil at these depths in granite rock. The Russians have teamed with Vietnam to make this discovery. It appears the Russians are well aware that oil is abiotic in nature.

According to the Energy Information Administration of the U.S. Department of Energy worldwide oil production in 1980 was 645 billion barrels. That certainly is a lot of oil being pumped out of the earth, wouldn’t you think at that rate oil would have been depleted in a relatively short time? No, by 2005 worldwide production was at 1.28 trillion barrels.

Even with the increase of oil production the cost of energy keeps increasing due to the fact that we aren’t refining any more than in 1976. The last refinery built in the U.S. was 1976. Build more refineries and we could produce more gas and consequently the price would decrease. But the powers that be wouldn’t have such a thing; profits at all cost must be maintained. So even though there is more than enough oil don’t expect price per barrel to go down anytime soon.

Petro Dollar

In the early 70’s President Nixon and Kissinger made a deal with Saudi Arabia, after Nixon took the U.S. off the gold standard, to use only USD to purchase oil. From that monopoly on the all-important oil trade the US dollar slowly but surely became the reserve currency for global trades in most commodities and goods. Substantial demand for US dollars ensued, pushing the dollar’s value up beyond its true value. We know where that situation led – to an US government suffocating in debt while its citizens face stubbornly high unemployment (due in part to the high value of the dollar); a failed real estate market; record personal-debt burdens; a ballooned corrupt banking system; which is ready to pop and a swaying economy. In addition, countries stored their excess US dollars savings in US Treasuries, giving the US government a vast pool of credit from which to draw. Because of this oil price has to remain high to back the USD. Of course to do this oil has to be made to appear scarce. If oil prices drop the USD value drops, putting the U.S. in a perilous predicament. If oil prices drop to low this would be the nudge that would have the U.S. economy truly falling over the cliff and the end of our current system. Not that the whole fiat currency system won’t collapse in the near future anyway.

We have to ask ourself was the BP oil blowout caused purposely to maintain low drilling output which in turn would keep oil prices high? There are stories out there pointing to deep horizon being torpedoed. Personally I wouldn’t doubt anything the evil SOB’s do to keep themself in power and wealth.

vtfree2

Good source of information: Black Gold Stranglehold, the myth of scarcity and the politics of oil

PS: I want to know how the dinos and plants got 5-10 miles below the surface and how some of the earliest dinosaur’s died in tar (oil) pits.

although this is a virtual presidential speech it says a lot. If this were real I’m sure some of the gun grabbers in the audience would have tackled this guy and dragged him out of the room by the hair. Theres one thing our elite politicians hate, TRUTH. The meaning of Freedom is not being coerced into doing something against your will. We as state citizens are constantly being made to do things against our will. Even though there are things that people should not do out of goodness toward fellowmen/women and commonsense, we still are not rightfully free.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I have to bump this back to the top, did the person that wrote this article happen to see my compulation? Because it certainly looks familiar with its deduction analysis. They expressed it better but, about the same.

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/05/11/false-flag-theater-boston-bombing-involves-clearly-staged-carnage/

 

Boston Bomb Update

I’ve taken this info from numerous blogs and sites and compiled it here. There is much more out there if you do a search. Don’t use Google, try ixquick as an alternative.

This is just the other side of the coin but, do your own research. Then come to a personal conclusion. Things are not always what they appear to be.

______________________________________________________________

Boston Bombing Actor

This is the stuff they don’t want us to see. Please share this information with everyone you know.
(Warning, some of these pictures are gruesome at first glance. I assure you though that the blood and gore is all fake, I can prove it simply by informed medical observation.)

I’ve studied and graduated EMT-B certification with the state of Oregon. I’ve been on calls with heavy arterial bleeds, internal bleeding, fatalities, doa’s. I am speaking from direct personal experience with severe trauma.

Here is a telling photograph of the amputee actor. I encourage readers to view the photo side by side with my analysis.

(picture below-wheelchair)

If you loose both your legs from explosive trauma half your blood is gone in one minute via the femoral arteries, youre dead after two. Bleeding out is worse with blunt force trauma (like shrapnel) because flesh is torn rather than cut, exposing more arterial and vascular tissue. The human body holds 5 to 6 LITERS of blood. If that really happened you would see blood EVERYWHERE, the guy would be drenched in it. You would also see what’s called arterial spurtting from the injury. Most likely he would vomit after turning ghost white from shock, then turning delirious or passing out. As for the “tourniquet”…

Its not even tied off, its suspended via gravity, which would literally do nothing to an arterial sever. There’s no pressure applied. There’s no knott with a turn stick for leverage. You can clearly see a gap in the nonexistent wrap job on his left inner thigh (left anterior proximal for you experts) His hands have no blood on them. There’s no blood on the ground. The color in his hands and lips shows good circulation.

This is an actor. This is staged. How did they pull it off though? I can show you.

Here in frame six on the left we see the  man with a hood setting up the fake leg wound prosthetics. His attention and hands are right there. The woman is acting as a shield covering what’s happening.
Frame 6

bm 1             

Here in frame eight the prosthetics are in place. Amidst all this chaos seconds after the explosion the hooded man takes the time to put on his sunglasses which is a signal.
Frame 8

bm2

Here in frame nine with sunglasses now on the hooded man and the woman make eye contact, signal received.
Frame 9

bm3

In frame eleven after recieving the go signal the woman makes an open hand gesture the direction both of them are looking, signaling the staged injuries are in place for cameras. The prone amputee raises his left prosthetic injury into the air over the woman’s shoulder. No blood is present. The bone is dry, no blood on his leg above the knee, no blood on the woman, no arterial spurt, nothing.
Frame 11

bm4

Here in frame fourteen the woman turns her head right but is still holding up that open palm signal with her left hand. The hooded man again busies himself pouring fake blood on the pavement behind the woman. The amputee has both fake injuries in the air now. There is still no blood on his legs, his skin above the injury is clean and dry.
Frame 14

bm5

Frame twenty, the fake blood and prosthetics are in place. The amputee gives an open hand gesture along with the woman to bring the cameras in. We’re now twenty frames in and still not a drop of fresh blood from a double leg amputation. His legs are dry, the woman is dry and unscathed. Both are making the same hand gesture.
Frame 20

bm6

These are actors. This is staged. It was flash powder. There was no crock pot nail bomb. There are no bombers, only patsy. If your looking for a gunman look at the Army in the streets of Boston. Share this knowledge with everyone.

Can you see something strange in the picture below??????? Look how calm the guy in the hood is and the women sitting with the torn sleeve and no blood. This just doesn’t make sense. Worked at Sandy Hook and it worked here as well.

bm7

Why would they put this guy (amputee actor) in a wheelchair and not on a gurney? Also he would have been dead in about a minute and one tourniquet around both legs.

bm8 chair

Why would they trash the fence?

  1. Right after the blast

bm9 fen

  1. Next shot. Who are these people?

bm10 fen

  1. Fence and flags down. Giving the appearance of a bigger blast. Look at the guy in the red shirt & jeans, next to the cop which is healping, walks directly over to the police.

bm11 fen

These types of events are called “Hyper Realistic Trauma Productions”. At least more realistic than what Hollywood produces due to the live audience.

Here’s one that was interesting.

Just added: This vid describes alot of the preperations and process

Unlike 911 the authorities are taking more time in pinning the blame of this horrible event by pointing the finger at some group or individual(s). With 911 they knew who was to blame almost as it was happening, without evidence. Who will be the ultimate felon of the BM race event? Will it be middle east or middle america that will be the accused? If this was a foreign terror group I would think the bomb would have been much more devastating. Who ever they pin this bombing on we will undoubtedly have more rights and liberties trashed. I’m sure every state in the union will bring more laws to the floor thinking they can make this all better. And don’t forget the fear factor, is this a “problem – reaction – solution” event? Where some shady group creates the problem then waits for the reaction from the public and then they come up with a solution that increases their power and maintains the status quo.

 

                                  I really like the wit and satire in this short artical.

 

_____________________________________________________

By: Tom Chatham

Commentators are always quick to link guns and emergency stores to dangerous  and paranoid actions that they consider to be tell tale signs someone is going to commit a crime. They always focus on these areas because it is a trait mostly seen in conservatives that know enough to question the governments’ ability to take care of every problem that emerges. In short, if you are not a Liberal that needs the government to make all of your decisions for you and care for you on a daily basis then there must be something wrong with you.

Any deviation from the norm of unpreparedness is a danger sign to these people that you are out of control and need to be stopped, detained and heavily medicated to assure compliance. Only when you are obedient to the state are you normal and safe. So what signs do you look for in a person or group that should make you suspicious?

The purchase of bullets by the thousands

If a person or group feels the need to purchase thousands of rounds of ammo in the belief they may need this to protect themselves and their family from some type of uncontrolled chaos in the future they are obviously troubled individuals. They need to be more sensible like the U.S. government that only buys 1.5 billion rounds of ammo, give or take a few million, that is only the bare minimum necessary for waging a 24 year war.

The purchasing of weapons by the dozen

If a person or group feels the need to have one firearm to protect themselves or their family due to lack of police protection, this is just irrational. And to have a dozen guns is bordering on paranoia. They need to be more like the U.S. government that only has 165.000 armed federal employees, give or take several thousand, and have several thousand automatic rifles on order as well as two million dollars worth of sniper rifles on order from Remington.

The storing of dehydrated and freeze dried foods for several months

If you perceive the potential need for stored food because of distribution problems or social chaos, having food stores for several months is just promoting the panic. You need to be more like the federal government and buy a billion dollars worth of freeze dried foods for “disaster relief operations”.

The building of underground bunkers for several people

The need for hiding underground in a bunker with several people is a clear sign that you are disturbed and very anti social and may be unbalanced. You need to have “shelters” like the U.S. government does that house at least a thousand people, and number no less then 150 nationwide to be considered normal.

Conclusion:

Never order ammo in amounts less than one billion rounds

Never buy weapons in quantities of less than one thousand

Never buy less than one billion dollars worth of freeze dried food

Never build underground shelters that hold less than one thousand persons

Anyone who prepares with less than these amounts should be considered a dangerous and paranoid doomsday prepper by government standards. Any amounts over this are government sanctioned and considered appropriate measures for normal persons to take.  http://projectchesapeake.wordpress.com/

Someday we’ll have to face the facts, this empire will fall like corrupt Rome did, much, much harder. The USD is globally connected and this is going to hurt and hurt bad. It’s not a matter of if, its a matter of when. I would stronglly advocate being prepared. I’v been purchasing physical silver sence 2005, if my memory serves me correct it was about 7.25 per oz. maybe less. I still buy it today at 28+/- when I get a few extra USD’s in my pocket. At least I’m turning something with no value into something that maintains and increases its value. I have been prepping for about the same amount of time and even if I don’t need it at least I’ll have it if I do. Not only that but I feel better about the imminent collapse because it’ll give me  time to find alternative solutions.

______________________________________________________________

This week, I had a series of very sobering discussions with my highly-placed source within the intelligence world. The information he provided hit me like a proverbial tons of bricks. It connects everything we are seeing play out across the world, from the economic problems in Europe to the U.S. DHS ammunition acquisition orders and even the “gun control” debate. If you’re like me, you’re looking for clarity, context and focus with regard to all of the events we’re constantly hearing about but seem to lack legitimate explanation. I believe this report will provide the context and clarity we are all seeking, but I must warn you that the picture is not pretty.

posted at: http://canadafreepress.com/

The economic agenda: In plain sight

Some might be surprised to learn that the fate of America’s economy has already been determined, verified and announced by the Obama White House. Yet, it has received scant attention from the corporate media. In 2011, economist Kyle Bass interviewed a senior member of the Obama administration about its planned solutions for fixing the US economy and trade deficit[ia].

Among the questions he asked was about U.S. exports and wages, but the question itself was not nearly as important as the response he received from this senior administration official. In fact, this single, seven word response clarifies everything, explains everything, and leaves little else to discuss: “We’re just going to kill the dollar.”

There it is, the entire agenda in one short sentence. It explains everything we’ve been seeing domestically and globally. That one statement makes every other question irrelevant, or otherwise answers all economic questions and explains everything. Nothing else matters. I urge you to ponder that statement and all that it implies. Doing so will provide you with the clarity to understand not only what is taking place today, but what is yet to come.

Murder & High Treason

It is important to note the specificity of the word “kill.” Stated in the active voice, it means an unambiguously intentional and deliberate act. The murder of our national currency, the United States Dollar (USD), is the ultimate agenda to be implemented under Obama. To “kill” our national currency will subvert the United States and destroy it from within. This begs a number of questions, including what type of Americans would actually have, as their objective, the destruction of our national currency? To whom do they hold their allegiance, if not to the American people whose life’s work as well as the toil of our ancestors is represented in the form of wealth held in U.S. dollars? Does this make any sense to us, as Americans? The answer of course is “no.”

By its very definition, to kill our national currency is an act of high treason by those engaged in this activity. It undermines the very sovereignty and survival of our nation, and will have a life-changing impact on every citizen in the U.S. It will also impact every nation and the people of every nation on the planet, as the USD is presently the world’s reserve currency. It is an act that should result in the filing of criminal charges against the conspirators, a trial of their peers and if convicted, a death sentence. It’s that serious.

According to my source, we are past the point of no return. We will not be able to stop what is coming, but must be wise enough to prepare and “get out of the way.” The murder plot involving the death of the dollar did not begin with Obama, but he and other conspirators have accelerated the plans, plots and schemes for its demise.

The ultimate objective

The ultimate objective is to implement an international currency in tandem with a system of global governance. The problem is that most people are not thinking large enough, nor do they understand the magnitude of the lie. They are not seeing the larger picture as their focus is diverted elsewhere. For example, they focus on various tentacles of the octopus such as the gun confiscation initiative, the DHS armament acquisitions and economic woes as independent and unrelated events. They are not.

Meanwhile, others continue to adhere to, or even perpetuate the dual party meme of governance, holding dearly to the notion that there is a practical difference between the Republican and Democrat parties. Have we not seen sufficient evidence that they are now of one party acting in concert with each other? They cannot see the collusion and backroom deals, and continue to hope that the next election will finally change the unchangeable continuity of agenda.

Most of the elected officials are onboard with the subjugation of the United States to a global system of governance. Some are actively facilitating this agenda, while others are making nominal objections on the stage of political theater while hoping to earn a seat at the global table. It’s entertainment for the globalists, distraction of the masses, and diversionary fodder for the talking heads in the media.

America has become a captured operation – captured from within. Think of the Vichy French, internal collaboration with the enemy, or softening the ground for a full takeover from within. The takeover of America has already happened, the collaborators have already been installed, and we are now on a path to complete subjugation of a larger global system of governance. If you continue to doubt this, how else would you explain the numerous examples of our dual-party governmental acquiescence of self destruction?

“Signs, signs, everywhere signs…”

Those who are pleased about the new record setting stock-market highs and various other manipulated statistics that indicate our economy is improving will be the most vocal critics of this report and who will attempt to discredit the validity of the information offered here. The more intellectually astute will look beyond the statistics offered for mass consumption not only to identify the deliberately manipulated data, but to understand what is actually driving these false hopes, figures and data. It is a magic show, and many are still captivated by the magicians’ many diversions, failing to realize that we are engaged in a global war while being simultaneously hobbled by enemy infiltrators from within.

One reason we are seeing new stock market highs is the rush to the dollar from other currencies, especially in the Eurozone. Another reason is the monetization of our debt by the Federal Reserve, despite the previous denials of Ben Bernanke and others.

Simply put, the plan by the globalists, or the central bankers and those behind them, is to create this rush to the USD like passengers from sinking ships to lifeboats. Once the lifeboats are filled to capacity, they will be sunk, and the United States Dollar will be completely worthless. As in such a scenario, many will not make it. Many will die from what is coming. The level of evil behind this plan is incomprehensible to the normal human mind.

Russia, China, Syria and Iran

As I detailed in my multiple reports about Benghazi, we are at war with Russia. After removing Qaddafi from power in Libya, the Obama-Clinton black-ops plan was immediately put into action. Benghazi was the logistics hub for arming the anti-Assad terrorists by our own State Department covert operatives who were shipping millions of tons of weapons to Syria via Turkey and other staging areas. Russia was aware of our actions, and through the attack at the CIA operations center in Benghazi by proxy forces, exposed this operation to the world while putting a stop to this operation. It seems that everyone except the Western media reported what had taken place.

The “dirty little secret” that explains why we have not been told the truth about Benghazi is quite simple. The efforts to overthrow Assad from power are continuing, except the arms and munitions shipments are now originating primarily from Croatia. Overthrowing Assad would pose a direct threat to Russia, both militarily and economically. Are we to expect Russia’s Putin to simply accept this without response? No. So what is Russia doing to subvert our efforts? He is waging war against America, striking at the weak underbelly of our economy which is the “oil backed” dollar as identified in Michael Reagan’s article, Building on a Kernel of Truth.

Sadly, the Obama regime is doing nothing to protect us from this asymmetrical war. It’s as if they are allowing it to take place.

Although it was reported in The New York Times, few have paid attention to last week’s meeting between Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow, but it was an extremely important event in terms of the planned murder of the U.S. dollar. An alliance is being forged between Russia and China to replace the USD as the reserve currency, already severely weakened by the policies of those in power, with a gold backed currency. Russia and China are hoarding gold to levels never before seen, while the U.S. issues worthless paper and digital currency backed by… nothing, save for the “oil-backed” scenario.

While reports do exist that cite the hoarding of gold by China and Russia, they are purposely under reporting their collective reserves. Meanwhile, Americans can’t even get honest answers to the amounts of our own gold reserves held in Fort Knox or the Federal Reserve. Don’t people find this reluctance for audit and inspection a bit curious if not outright suspicious?

The battle is being waged not only by military might but by a currency war. We are “being played” through our military involvement in the Middle East, including our covert operations against Syria at the behest of Saudi Arabia. Unlike Iraq, the war in Syria will explode, turn hot, and we will be engaged in an ominous battle that will quickly expand and turn deadly. Weakened militarily through the policies of the Obama regime, coupled with an already weakened economy, the U.S. will suffer consequences unlike anyone might imagine or is willing to address. It is a recipe for disaster planned and initiated by the global elite behind the central banking system, including those in our own government. We have been set up from within, lied to, and now, we are about to see exactly what this globalist system has in store for not only the United States, but every nation of the world.

It is critical to understand that the take-down of the U.S. will be the result of an asymmetrical war that includes the weakening of our military, our economy, and a direct assault on our ability to keep the dollar as the world reserve currency and protect the free flow of oil and energy to the United States.

Within the last week, China held a surprise naval exercise in the South China Sea. Meanwhile, Russia displayed their resurgent military night in the Black Sea. These exercises were conducted as U.S. military forces are spread thinly across many areas in the world. Is anyone paying attention here?

Just as certain a collapse of the dollar is coming, so will be chaos on the streets of America caused by this plan “to kill the dollar.” The central bankers and the leaders selected to govern each country have effectively used the Hegelian Dialectic[ii] to implement their agenda. Just as stated by George H.W. Bush on September 11, 1990, their predetermined solution of a “New World Order” is being formed before our very eyes. They’ve told us what they are doing, but we have chosen not to listen or failed to understand what was being said.

The U.S. has always been the firewall against the globalists. By their persistence, infiltration of global elitists into our government, and covert subversion from within, we are being led to slaughter. A view from space, looking at the larger picture of events for which many have questions, a clearer picture emerges. There will be some who dare to resist the pillaging of our bank accounts, the erosion of our rights, and the enslavement that comes with the dismantling of America.

The dust clouds visible on the far horizon that watchmen have been reporting for decades can now be seen as an attacking army of barbarians, whose fighters are now on the ladders and cannons are breaching our empire’s outer walls. Who knows how long the inner walls of our empire will survive the next wave of their coming attack.

Perhaps Ernest Hemmingway said it best in referencing John Donne from his novel of the same name… “And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; It tolls for thee.”

[ia] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5V3kpKzd-Yw&feature=youtu.be

On this date in 1865 the war ended and a new war began.

There was even more to “The War Between The states” then meets the eye. The states united changed drastically during and shortly there after. Prior to this war of aggression each state was it’s own country as determined by thats states constitutions. What we as Americans live in now as a country is not what you think it is. The people have been dumbed down to preserve our situation as what it is not. We are slaves to the bankers and will remain as such un til we decide and learn that the so-called money we use is nothing more than pieces of worthless paper. All wars are banker wars. The central bankers don’t fight in these wars, they finance both sides and let their slaves die for the riches they acquire. Those riches are then used to develop more power and control of vast amounts of people and their labor. Creating more wealth and power. We have to ask ourselves, what does the average person accomplish in their life time? We work most of our better years of life, raise families that will do the same giving much of their small wealth to the bankers and governments. It seems with every passing generation we lose more and more of self and well-being, to become controlled carbon forms of life and labor. It’s a sad time we live in.

The Victors Write the War History but Should Their Lies be Immortal?

Posted at: http://www.veteranstoday.com/

[Editors Note: I was 46 before I learned that Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation did not free a single slave anywhere. We are re-running Steve’s article for Confederate Heritage Month – April, 2013, because it is a classic ….Jim W. Dean]

                 … by  Steve Scroggins

The most persistent and pernicious Big Lie regarding the so-called “Civil War”— more properly called the “War to Prevent Southern Independence”— is this:

Noble and saintly Yankees fought the war to abolish slavery; evil Confederates fought to preserve it.

The historical record incontrovertibly refutes this Big Lie and yet it lives on, repeated incessantly by many who know better, and by many, many more who accept without challenge what they were taught in government schools.

The proverbial phrase “the victors write the history” was well-known well before the war.

In fact, General Patrick R. Cleburne, arguing for freeing slaves in exchange for military service, warned what would happen should the South’s bid for independence fail:

“… Every man should endeavor to understand the meaning of subjugation before it is too late. … It means that the history of this heroic struggle will be written by the enemy; that our youth will be trained by Northern school teachers; will learn from Northern school books their version of the War, will be impressed by all influences of history and education to regard our gallant dead as traitors, our maimed veterans as fit objects for their derision. …to establish sectional superiority and a more centralised form of government, and to deprive us of our rights and liberties.” –Major General Patrick Cleburne, C.S.A. (Jan. 2, 1864)

Cleburne’s warning was indeed prophetic. The Big Lie is the official myth taught in virtually every public school in the country. Jim Dean noted this above, and he even went to a fancy prep school for two years in Massachusetts.

It is the myth believed and repeated incessantly by most Americans who never looked any deeper than the textbook they were issued in junior high history class. And when FDR’s New Dealers migrated from government service to academia in Southern universities, they made sure the Big Lie was taught down here in the South.

The facts and the historical record, which we will review below, are widely and easily available, but unfortunately most Americans don’t see it as their duty to understand American history in more depth than was offered in the superficial, comic-book summary they heard in government schools.

“It is a testament to the effectiveness of 140 years of government propaganda that a 308 page book filled with true facts about Lincoln could be entitled “The Lincoln No One Knows.” It is not a matter of a poorly-performing government education system but quite the opposite:

The government schools have performed superbly in indoctrinating generations of American school children with a pack of lies, myths, omissions, and falsehoods about Lincoln and his war of conquest.

As Richard Bensel wrote in Yankee Leviathan, any study of the American state should begin in 1865. The power of any state ultimately rests upon a series of government-sponsored myths, and there is none more prominent than the Lincoln Myth.” –Thomas DiLorenzo, from The Unknown Lincoln

The Sons of Confederate Veterans has as its mission statement what is commonly called “The Charge,” issued by General Stephen Dill Lee, who was then the Commander General of the United Confederate Veterans.

The Charge is a reflection of Cleburne’s warning above, and a stated desire to keep alive the memory of the Confederate soldier’s true history and motivation and the founding principles he fought to defend.

” To you Sons of Confederate Veterans, we submit the vindication of the cause for which we fought; to your strength will be given the defense of the Confederate soldiers’ good name, the guardianship of his history, the emulation of his virtues, the perpetuation of those principles he loved and which made him glorious and which you also cherish.

Remember, it is your duty to see that the true history of the south is presented to future generations.” —Lt. General Stephen Dill Lee, Commander General, United Confederate Veterans, New Orleans, Louisiana, 1906

______________________________________

First, let’s establish HOW the war was started, then we’ll proceed to WHY.

South Carolina seceded December 20th, 1860. Major Robert Anderson, commanding U.S. forces in Charleston, moved the garrison in Fort Moultrie (Sullivan’s Island across the harbor East of Charleston proper) –which he deemed indefensible– to Fort Sumter in Charleston harbor. He made this move in stealth in the middle of the night on December 26th.

South Carolina officials were understandably infuriated, but Anderson refused to evacuate Sumter. President Buchanan was a lame duck; he didn’t want a war started on his watch, but refused to issue orders either way.

South Carolina officials made clear that the U.S. Army staying in Sumter was NOT an option and that resupply or reinforcements would be viewed as a hostile act.

On January 9th, an unarmed steamer, the Star of the West, approached Charleston harbor intent on reinforcing Sumter with more troops and ammunition (see diagram below). Charleston batteries fired warning shots near the ship and the Star of the West turned and fled.

By February, South Carolina had joined six other states in the Confederate States of America. Confederate officials pressed for the evacuation of Fort Sumter and Fort Pickens (Pensacola, FL). Buchanan stonewalled and the crisis escalated. Lincoln would inherit the crisis March 4th.

“[T]he Union … will constitutionally defend and maintain itself… In doing this there needs to be no bloodshed or violence, and there shall be none unless it be forced upon the national authority.

The power confided to me will be used to hold, occupy, and possess the property and places belonging to the Government and to collect the duties and imposts; but beyond what may be necessary for these objects, there will be no invasion, no using of force against or among the people anywhere.” –Abraham Lincoln, from inaugural address, March 4, 1861.

Lincoln essentially declared war in his inaugural address March 4th in which he promised not to invade or attack any one EXCEPT…EXCEPT to hold the forts and property of the U.S. government for the purpose of collecting tariffs. In essence, he was denying the right of secession and promising to invade the southern states and force them back into the Union.

Lincoln refused to meet with Confederate emissaries sent to negotiate full payment for U.S. properties now within the jurisdiction of the C.S.A. Secretary of State Seward gave mixed signals, suggesting that evacuation of the forts was likely — in fact, all senior U.S. military officers recommended immediate evacuation to Lincoln.

Instead, Lincoln ordered a flotilla of war ships with additional troops and supplies to Charleston, then advised Confederate officials that it was coming to “resupply” Sumter, “by force if necessary.”

Rather than wait for war ships and the greater likelihood of loss of life on both sides, the Confederates decided to force a surrender before they arrived. Anderson was given a final chance to evacuate Sumter, given a deadline and told when the bombardment would commence. He replied that he would not evacuate.

The bombardment commenced on April 12th and Anderson surrendered on April 14th due to fears the magazine (with powder and ordnance) would ignite. No one was killed during the bombardment and Anderson’s garrison was allowed to peacefully leave the fort .

Though he made force necessary, Lincoln had succeeded in provoking the Confederates to fire the first shots and it had the desired effect: it incited a war fever in the North. On April 15th, Lincoln called for 75,000 volunteers to invade the southern states to force their return to the Union, or as he phrased it, to quell “a rebellion.”

As a result of Lincoln’s call for a coercive force, four more states seceded in protest to join forces with the C.S.A. Virginia seceded April 17th and North Carolina, Arkansas and Tennessee followed in short order.

The stealthy taking of Fort Sumter was an act of war. The stated intention to insert more men and ammunition BY FORCE was another act of war. The bombardment of Fort Sumter to force its surrender was an act of war, but it was NOT the first act of war in the conflict.

________________________________________

Now, let’s review the WHY of the war.

There would have been no war if Lincoln had not ordered invasions and naval blockades of southern states. The southern states made known they wanted a peaceful separation. The answer to WHY the southern states fought the war is painfully obvious: Self Defense. Duh! Because their country was being invaded!

In the same Inaugural Address (March 4th, 1861) in which Lincoln promised to use force to collect the tariffs (protect U.S. tax revenues), Lincoln reiterated his previous statements that he had no intent, no lawful right and no inclination to interfere with slavery where it existed.

He went on to say that he supported the proposed Constitutional Amendment (the Corwin Amendment) that would constitutionally enshrine slavery beyond the reach of the U.S. Congress.

The proposed amendment reads as follows:

“No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State.”
As noted earlier, Lincoln called for troops to launch an invasion April 15th. He ordered a naval blockade, and made various preparations for war beginning April 15th without a Congressional declaration of war. When Congress finally convened in July, it basically rubber-stamped his actions thus far.

But Congress also approved the Crittenden-Johnson Resolution on July 25th, specifically stating the purpose of the war was to reunite the southern states into the U.S.A. It was clearly stated the war’s purpose was to “preserve the Union” and NOT to overthrow or interfere with “the rights or established institutions of the states” (slavery). This unequivocal statement from Congress and Lincoln’s unequivocal support for the Corwin Amendment directly contradict the official Big Lie. But there’s more. As you’ll see below, Lincoln’s stated purpose remains the same 16 months into the war.

At this point (July 1861), it seems clear that if the Confederate States’ purpose was merely to “preserve slavery,” then its best option would have been to end hostilities and rejoin the Union. It was independence the South was committed to maintain and it was Southern Independence that the North intended to prevent by force if persuasion failed.
“My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that.
What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union.” –Abraham Lincoln, from letter to Horace Greeley, Aug. 22, 1862
___________________________________

Horace Greeley

Over 16 months after the war began (Aug. 22, 1862), Lincoln wrote to Horace Greeley of The New York Tribune, an open letter in response to a Greeley editorial, in which Lincoln essentially said that slavery was not relevant to the war.
He stated that his “paramount object” was to “preserve the union,” and that slavery had no bearing on the war effort.

This was just days before the Emancipation Proclamation extended the offer, once again, to preserve slavery if the southern states would simply lay down their arms and return to the Union.

The Emancipation Proclamation didn’t free any slaves in any territory controlled by the U.S. government. It was generally seen as a farce by both Americans and the British press.
“We show our sympathy with slavery by emancipating slaves where we cannot reach them and holding them in bondage where we can set them free.” —Secretary of State William Seward

“The Union government liberates the enemy’s slaves as it would the enemy’s cattle, simply to weaken them in the conflict. The principle is not that a human being cannot justly own another, but that he cannot own him unless he is loyal to the United States.” –London Spectator, 1862

Right up to very near the end of the war, the South could have saved slavery simply by returning to the Union. Independence was the southern goal.

General John B. Gordon, in his book Reminiscences of the Civil War (p. 19) summarized it this way:

General John B. Gordon

“But slavery was far from being the sole cause of the prolonged conflict. Neither its destruction on the one hand, nor its defense on the other, was the energizing force that held the contending armies to four years of bloody work.

I apprehend that if all living Union soldiers were summoned to the witness-stand, every one of them would testify that it was the preservation of the American Union and not the destruction of Southern slavery that induced him to volunteer at the call of his country.

….No other proof, however, is needed than the undeniable fact that at any period of the war from its beginning to near its close the South could have saved slavery by simply laying down its arms and returning to the Union.” —General John B. Gordon, from Reminiscences of the Civil War, page 19

The North’s primary purpose was to prevent southern independence. It’s the North that betrayed the Founding principle of “consent of the governed” from that celebrated secession document, the Declaration of Independence.
How can any American deny the right of secession and at the same time celebrate Independence Day and the principle it embodies? As Greeley put it in his editorial in the New York Tribune December 17th, 1860:

If the Declaration of Independence justified the secession of 3,000,000 colonists in 1776, I do not see why the Constitution ratified by the same men should not justify the secession of 5,000,000 of the Southerners from the Federal Union in 1861…

We have repeatedly said, and we once more insist that the great principle embodied by Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence that government derives its power from the consent of the governed is sound and just, then if the Cotton States, the Gulf States or any other States choose to form an independent nation they have a clear right to do it…

And when a section of our Union resolves to go out, we shall resist any coercive acts to keep it in. We hope never to live in a Republic where one section is pinned to the other section by bayonets.” —Horace Greeley, NewYork Tribune, Dec. 17, 1860.

In December of 1860 and January of 1861, many newspapers across the North and Midwest echoed Greeley’s sentiments to “let the South go in peace.” But the bankers, railroads and shippers soon informed the press of the financial implications of southern independence.

The editorial tune changed dramatically in February and March of 1861 to “No, we must NOT let the South go,” and “what about our shipping?” and “what about our revenue?” As the New York Times noted on March 30th, “We were divided and confused until our pockets were touched.” [ See Northern Editorials on Secession, Howard C. Perkins, ed., 1965 — See Sample editorials here. ]

All the powder keg needed was a spark to ignite a war. Lincoln sent the war ship flotilla to Charleston and it was on. Lincoln had his excuse.

There you have it. The North prevented southern independence because it threatened their financial interests. The South wanted independence for its own best interests, in the tradition of the American Founders. It sought peaceful separation, but fought in self-defense when invaded and blockaded.

The current best estimate for death toll of the war is 750,000 American soldiers and at least 50,000 southern civilians. Adjusted to current population, that’s the equivalent today of 8 million Americans dying in four years.

The Official Big Lie was created and maintained to obscure the overthrow of the Founding Principles, and the true motivations that resulted in tragic and unnecessary death on an epic scale.

Editing:  Jim W. Dean

The United Confederate Veterans – Reunion Time

Some reply fromthe author:

Steve Scroggins

Obviously, the war could have been worse.  Had the powers followed the Sherman plan, every last southern man, woman and child would have been wiped out.  Sherman famously said that “the only good Indian is a dead Indian.”  He wrote more or less the same thing about the southern people and it’s documented in The Offical Record of the Rebellion published by the U.S. Government.  Of course, the survivors would have scattered to the hills and a decades long guerilla war would have ensued.

Lincoln’s stated objective was to “preserve the Union” but his true objective (achieved!) was to effect a “total transformation” to borrow an Obama phrase.  He converted a decentralized republic of republics into a centralized empire ruled from D.C. that controlled the money and banks, that set about building the transcontinental railroad with taxpayer subsidy and established a police state mentality.  Trampling the Constituion at will, Lincoln shut down or destroyed newspapers at the drop of a hat.  He had thousands of northern citizens imprisoned without trial, at the nod of a head or snap of the fingers from the king’s men.  He had thousands of southern civilians bombarded, looted, burned out and left to starve.  He revelled in stories of their suffering; Sherman and Grant both noted that he always asked to hear such stories.

Lincoln was a tyrant in every way and yet modern Americans consistently rank him among the “greatest” presidents.  THAT is an indication of the staying power of the Lincoln Myth.  Adolf Hitler also warmly approved of Lincoln’s conduct and centralizing policies… Lincoln inspired Hitler and Marx.  The evidence is in Mein Kampf.  http://www.lewrockwell.com/dilorenzo/dilorenzo20.html

Socialism and centralization were the rage in Europe during our war and many refugees from the failed German revolution ended up in the U.S. Army.  The grandson of Francis Scott Key (author of the Star Spangled Banner), Francis Key Howard, was a Baltimore newspaper editor held as a political prisoner in Fort McHenry… and wrote of a Union officer with a thick German accent lecturing him on what it means to be a “good American.”  Howard was arrested for criticizing Lincoln in an editorial (Baltimore Exchange) — specifically he was criticizing Lincoln’s suspension of the Writ of Habeas Corpus (See Ex Parte Merryman).   Most of the Maryland legislature were also arrested to prevent their voting on secession.

What Americans hear in government schools, of course, is of Lincoln the “Great Emancipator” and Lincoln the “humanitarian.”

Steve Scroggins

In 1871, most southern states were still under military occupation, that happy time known as “Reconstruction.”  The years immediately after the war was the time when the southern states did not have “state” status… at least not until they ratified the “Reconstruction Amendments” at the point of a bayonet.  So how exactly can a state that is not really a state ratify anything?  The 14th Amendment was declared ratified when in fact it never met the requirements (3/4 of the states).  The 14th Amendment is often cited as the authority for all manner of trampling on state’s rights.

Incidentally, 1871 was the year when Nathan Bedford Forrest testified before Congress that he was not a member or founder, nor was he ever a leader of the Ku Klux Klan.  These members of Congress (Sherman, et al) were not friends of Forrest, but they were satisfied with the testimony.  That myth about Forrest lives on.

It was 1913 when the 16th Amendment to introduce an income tax was allegedly ratified.  Then the U.S. government designated the Federal Reserve Bank as the controller of U.S. currency and money supply.  Southerners had fought the establishment of central banks for decades after the founding, but after 1913, a cartel of international bankers were inside the henhouse.

This makes perfect sence, anything that the politicians deem illegal becomes more available through underground blackmarket sources. Where I live you can go to a flea market and buy a firearm off a vendor table. And, no permits are required for concealed carry. But we also have one of the lowest crime rates in the US. Then you also have to ask what if our court system is bought and paid for, will it vote the same way?

What should be included in his list of terrorist: -people that believe the fiat dollar is a worthless piece of paper.

 

Friday, April 05, 2013

defense_statue_warlong-320x235[1]

by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/039795_gun_control_Supreme_Court_Constitution.html#ixzz2Pbh0Gj56
NaturalNews) Gun control zealots currently think they are winning. Connecticut has just passed a wildly unconstitutional new gun control law, and it was preceded by New York’s similarly-outrageous assault on private gun ownership liberties. Colorado, Maryland and California are all either working on gun control bills or have already passed various measures that are blatantly illegal in America.
What gun grabbers do not yet realize is that there are three powerful reasons why their gun control laws will soon be null and void:
Reason #1) Many laws will be struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court The U.S. Supreme Court already has a track record of striking down the several key gun control laws that have been put in place by cities or states.
For example, in District of Columbia v Heller, the Supreme Court struck down a D.C. law that criminalized the possession of guns in the home for the purpose of self defense.
In McDonald v. City of Chicago, the Supreme Court further confirmed that the Second Amendment right to “keep and bear arms” is guaranteed to individuals under the Due Process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. In other words, any law that denies a citizen the right to keep and bear arms is simultaneously a denial of their Fourteenth Amendment rights… and is therefore unconstitutional and illegal in America.
These two landmark decisions, if correctly interpreted by the Supreme Court when challenges rise from recent gun restrictions in New York, Connecticut and elsewhere, will cause those laws to also be struck down as unconstitutional.
Reason #2) A Supreme Court decision would expose the illegitimacy of the court and reveal the outright criminality of the federal government If, somehow, the U.S. Supreme Court finds these new state gun restrictions laws to be “constitutional,” such a decision would be equivalent to a declaration that the court has openly abandoned its only real duty, which is to halt overreaching laws that violate the individual rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution and its Bill of Rights.
At this point, there would be widespread realization that the judiciary is an occupying enemy force acting in violation of their sworn oaths of office. If such a scenario unfolds, I theoretically predict, but do not condone, the likelihood that disgruntled individuals, having been stripped of their freedoms by a clearly illegal and unconstitutional judiciary, would take it upon themselves to assassinate U.S. Supreme Court justices who violated the Constitution as well as key high-level members of the federal government. Again, I’m not condoning this nor advocating it, because I do not believe violence is the appropriate path to a long-term solution in all this. However, I cannot deny the possibility of a decentralized, spontaneous armed response to the “long train of abuses” that liberty-loving Americans continue to suffer under today.
Any decision by the U.S. Supreme Court to nullify the Second Amendment would be seen by millions of Americans as nothing less than an outright declaration of war… and may spark an armed revolt against the tyranny. This may be precisely why DHS has purchased over 2 billion rounds of ammunition, many of which are hollow point rounds intended solely to cause maximum tissue damage against human targets on the streets of America.
Reason #3) A civil war may be underway before any of this makes it to the courts At some point, the law-abiding citizens of America, when repeatedly oppressed, provoked and denied justice under law, will reluctantly decide that “following the law” is irrelevant. They will take up arms and begin to physically fight for the liberties that are being incrementally stolen from them by tyrants at both the state and federal level.
Globalists appear to be attempting to trigger precisely this reaction. The gambit is to see if a small reactionary group of “terrorists” (i.e. anyone with a gun who fights against oppression) can be cajoled into committing acts of violence that would justify the declaration of Martial Law and a nationwide gun confiscation domestic military action. If such an act of resistance cannot be provoked, it can always be engineered and pulled off by the FBI which is already well-practiced at staging terrorists attacks in the USA, then recruiting hapless stooges to frame as “terrorist masterminds” to be arrested.
This is where the “stuff” really hits the fan, because we’ll see all-out war between various factions of gun grabbers vs. gun defenders. Big-city police will attempt to shoot and murder sheriffs. Patriot groups within the U.S. military will mutiny and take over entire units to protect and defend the Constitution. A military coup might target top administration officials in Washington D.C. Regional wars might break out between urban (gun control) and rural (gun rights) communities. And the big kicker? Obama might call in the United Nations to aid in “halting the terrorists,” setting off an international war against America and the Constitution. (This may be Obama’s ultimate end game.)
During war, you are not bound by laws During all of this, gun laws are irrelevant. If things degrade to a point where otherwise law-abiding citizens feel no choice but to pick up a rifle and start killing tyrants, then they are way past the point of politely following laws written on paper.
Furthermore, once the state declares you a “terrorist” — which the federal government has seemingly already done with veterans and gun owners — there is really no point in attempting to abide by any laws whatsoever because the government already claims to right to murder you without due process thanks to the NDAA and Obama’s “kill lists” of Americans to assassinate.
DHS specifically defines “terrorists” in America as: (SOURCE)
– Americans who believe their “way of life” is under attack

– Americans who are “fiercely nationalistic”

– People who consider themselves “anti-global”

– Americans who are “suspicious of centralized federal authority”

– Americans who are “reverent of individual liberty”

– People who “believe in conspiracy theories that involve grave threat to national sovereignty and/or personal liberty.”
Thus, at least half the U.S. population has already been deemed “terrorists.” According to the White House, this means they have no right to due process.
In a scenario when resistance fighters realize they will not be offered anything resembling due process, they will only fight harder and become even more aggressive in their tactics and stance. After all, if you are cornered but offered a fair trial that you can genuinely trust to be fair, you might simply surrender and avoid the risk of death. But if you are cornered by a regime that has already announced it’s going to call you an “enemy combatant” and claims to right to secretly kill you without any due process whatsoever, there is no additional risk in fighting to the death. You are dead anyway, logically speaking.
Even more, there is no moral hesitation against people in such a position resorting to tactics that would otherwise be scorned such as targeting family members of specific enemy targets. Even, imaginably, mass public suicide bombings would be an inevitable behavior of people who exist under extreme oppression with seemingly no recourse. This is the logic behind the mass bombings in Israel, of course. Whether right or wrong, the suicide bombers feel they have no recourse and have already been placed on government murder lists anyway.
By signing the NDAA and creating kill lists of Americans to murder with drones, Obama has actually radicalized whatever resistance might someday rise up in America if government oppression worsens. He has put laws and executive orders in place that have essentially pre-announced to gun owners and veterans, “You will not be given a fair trial. You will be named an enemy combatant and murdered by your own government.” This action by Obama is extremely irresponsible, arrogant and dangerous. It is precisely the kind of stance that could provoke a violent response that’s wildly multiplied far beyond what might have otherwise been attempted.
“If you make peaceful revolution impossible you make violent revolution inevitable.” – John F. Kennedy
Keep in mind that in the recent Rand Paul filibuster in the U.S. Senate which sought answers to whether the President believed he had the power to kill Americans on U.S. soil using military drones, the official answer that was eventually received still claimed Americans who were “actively engaged” in anti-government activities could be killed without due process.
“Actively engaged” could mean anything, including blogging on the web or taking photographs of government buildings. Thus, the White House already claims the power to kill practically any American at any time, without due process or even producing a single shred of evidence against the person.
War is the absence of civility War is, philosophically, the complete absence of civil law. Although the UN has tried to set “rules of war,” the U.S. government routinely and habitually violates those rules in numerous ways… torture, for example, as well as the use of weapons of mass destruction (depleted uranium).
A breakout of war means all attempts at civility have failed and one or both parties believes they are left with no other option but attempted violence to achieve their goals.
That’s how America was born, by the way: by the desperate actions of a determined minority of colonists deciding they had endured enough suffering and oppression. They made a joint decision to flat out start killing (British) tyrants, realizing this was their last remaining option for achieving liberty.
Due to this application of strategic violence for a noble cause, the British empire was eventually forced to withdraw because it could not physically commit a sufficient level of violence to achieve lasting control over the colonies. Importantly, even though the British won most of the military battles, they still lost the war for numerous tactical and sociological reasons. This is important because it indicates that military might does not equal military victory when people are defending their lives, their liberties and their core beliefs. (Just ask the Afghans.)
Delusional members of the radical left think they can suppress freedom by writing words on paper The reason all this really matters is because the radical left is wildly delusional on all this, believing that if certain gun control words and phrases can be written on paper and ratified by members of government, then those words become a reality and all the privately-held guns, ammo and freedoms simply vanish from existence.
This is precisely the same sort of delusional thinking offered up by the left’s advocacy of signs that say things like “gun free zone,” ridiculously believing that words on a sign will magically alter reality.
They think the same thing about words on paper held at the state capitol. But history has shown that words are fleeting, but liberty lives forever. While gun control zealots may temporarily succeed in creating artificial constructs of their favorite words (i.e. “laws”), all that’s really happening in the physical world is that gun owners are burying their guns and ammo while mentally preparing to retrieve them when necessary to defend the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic.
Gun prohibition will fail just like marijuana prohibition Guns do not disappear simply because they are banned. They go underground. Everyone on the left should easily understand this point because most of them smoke illegal pot from time to time, and they know how easy it is to purchase marijuana even though the substance is criminalized according to federal law. Once guns are added to the list of banned objects, they will only become even easier to acquire through off-the-books networks of distributors and resellers, none of whom will pay taxes or report any purchases through government “background checks” systems.
The best way to drive guns into the hands of criminals is to criminalize guns. Gun grabbers on the left are almost mentally retarded when it comes to anticipating the real-world impacts of their laws. Their intention is to eliminate guns, but intentions do not drive reality: economics does. Economics is the study of human decision making and behavior, by the way, not the study of money.
Driving guns into the underground economy will effectively construct a huge infrastructure of underground gun production, distribution and delivery, allowing anyone who can buy pot right now to be able to buy guns in the near future. Gun shops that presently follow federal laws for background checks will be put out of business and replaced by underground gun smugglers who follow no laws whatsoever.
In response, the federal government will multiply the budget of the ATF and declare a “war on guns” that will be roughly as successful as today’s miserable “war on drugs” — a police state fiasco that has done nothing more than fill the prisons with innocent victims while justifying the outrageous growth of police state agencies like the DEA.
Leftists who advocate gun control are really advocating a massive expansion of the police state while invoking the organic, spontaneous economics of underground trade. The state cannot stop people from getting what they really want. The failed war on drugs proves that. It’s far smarter for the state to decriminalize the trade, regulate it and tax it — and that’s where gun sales are right now, before any new gun control laws are put in place.
Conclusions My conclusion in all this is straightforward: The best “gun control” (from the perspective of those wanting more gun control) is to keep guns legal and readily available through legal retail shops that abide by government background checks and are licensed by the ATF. In this manner, gun sales are taxed and tracked, and it avoids the rise of underground gun-running gangs.
The worst form of gun control is to criminalize guns and drive the entire gun economy into the underground, where no sales are tracked or taxed and consumer demand will inevitably drive the spontaneous creation of a massive underground “gun gang” distribution network. This will have the effect of making guns far easier for criminals to acquire, and the net effect of that will be more violent crimes committed with guns, which is exactly what the gun control zealots claim they wish to prevent.
Thus, the outcome that is desired by gun control advocates will be the exact opposite of what actually unfolds. Such is the nature of “unforeseen consequences.”
The road to Hell is paved with good intentions, my friends. Try to make sure you are not blindly running down it.

Mr. Roberts, if you don’t already know was assistant treasury secretary in the Reagan regime. So this is not one of your run of the mill puppet spokes people. I would wager he has a pretty good handle on the current affairs of todays concerning subjects. Listen close.

 

 

 

Does this not sound like your average black op zio banker plan of “Problem, Reaction, Solution” scenario? I can see merit in such a plan by TPTB to create a condition where the outcome would warrant U-N/N-A-T-O forces to control a civil unrest situation. What would wanna be free people do if living in a metro/urban area when they can not get to $$ and food was scarce while a suppressive regime was taking control of their lives? Wait a sec, isn’t that happenening now one step at a time? All wars are banker wars and we all work for the bankers.

 

Monday, 01 April 2013 05:35 Tom Chatham

military police

This article was written by Tom Chatham and originally published at Project Chesapeake

The past several years the federal government has  embarked on a strategy of militarizing the local law enforcement  agencies around the country. They have provided the money and equipment  to give these agencies the appearance of small military units that act  in a manner far removed from the community service of days past. This  has pushed many local departments away from the friendly approach they  utilized in the past to serve the public interest.

I have seen it myself in the local department  where I live. In a county with less than 20,000 people we now have a  police force with almost 50 officers and the sheriff wants at least 100  more auxiliary police officers. What all of these police are for in this  sparsely populated area has yet to be answered. The sheriff has also  made it a point to hire deputies from outside the county to ensure there  is no close connection between the police and the local community.

This is exactly what the federal government  wants, to ensure the local police will not be in a position to side with  locals if anything happens. It is in the governments’ best interest to  drive a wedge between the communities and law enforcement. The  government is apparently designing a confrontation between citizens and  the government and they are using local agencies to assist.

A recent purchase of shooting targets by DHS  met with outrage by the population when the pictures on them were  discovered to be pregnant women, children and old people. It is now  known that the designs were not from the target maker but in fact came  from law enforcement. This is how you desensitize people to kill others.  You reduce the enemy to nothing more than a paper target to prevent  hesitation when the time comes to shoot them.

If there is a financial crisis that shuts  down the banks for any period of time and prevents the use of plastic  forms of money, there will almost certainly be chaos nationwide. There  will eventually be riots and looting as people who are dependant on the  state for basic necessities start taking what they need. The first line  of defense in cases like this are the local law enforcement officers.  They will have the task of maintaining order in a quickly deteriorating  situation. Many of these confrontations will be violent and require  deadly force.

What happens if chaos breaks out and the  police have very little or no ammo to use in the preservation of order?  Will officers be willing to go out into hostile crowds with little or no  weapons to protect themselves? What will violent criminals and gangs do  if they realize police have no ammo to shoot them with? Will officers  show up to work in circumstances like this if they know they may get  killed with little in the way of protecting themselves?

With the support of federal funds and  equipment, and with ever more instruction from DHS, many local agencies  have become distant and even hostile to the local populations. If  something chaotic happens these locals will be less inclined to assist  local police and hostile actions will become more likely. This will  ultimately lead to the failure of local law enforcement to maintain  order in a deteriorating situation. So what would this lead to?

DHS has ordered a great deal of ammo in  recent months. Much more than is needed in normal operations. This has  helped to dry up the ammo market preventing not only civilians from  buying ammo but also police departments nationwide. Since many law  enforcement agencies around the country use the same calibers, the  massive DHS purchases have led to the shortages in the local agencies.  If DHS were really working with local agencies to insure the peace they  would be willing to make some of this government stockpile available to  local agencies for normal operations.

If chaos breaks out and local agencies are  left to their own demise they may run out of ammo early in the game. In  some instances it is likely that criminal elements will provoke gun  fights with police with the sole purpose of expending their limited  supplies of ammo. After several weeks of a slowly developing crisis,  many departments may indeed run out of ammo. This would cause an  explosion of violence and criminal activity. It would eventually cause  people to call on the intervention of federal forces to regain order  when local agencies fail.

This is what some have stated the federal  government wants to do. Allow chaos to spiral out of control until  citizens scream for government control and the government will be  waiting on the sidelines with the men and equipment to move in and take  charge. After the failure of the local departments the federals will be  seen as saviors and nothing they do initially will be questioned.

With the local agencies rendered impotent the  federal government will have complete control. This could be one reason  for the massive ammo purchases by DHS. If the ammo shortage in the law  enforcement community continues and DHS makes no attempt to bolster  local supplies then it will be a good indication of their intentions. At  some critical time DHS may offer the local agencies full access to ammo  but only if the agencies relinquish their authority and are absorbed  into DHS. Local agencies that have subverted their local community  support will find it difficult to maintain order since the bonds between  law enforcement and community have been broken. All of the actions now  being taken by law enforcement nationwide will ensure violence if a  crisis arises and the probable failure of local agencies. The people  should be prepared for that eventuality.