Skip to content

Alex Jones Debates David Duke – Debunking the Myth of Socialist “Success” in Scandinavia – FBI Evidence Points to Innocence of Accused Boston Bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev – Inflation and the Fall of the Roman Empire – Kayak Fishing for Sharks

August 25, 2015

The Troubling Truth Revealed by the Stock Market’s Nosedive

FBI Evidence Proves Innocence of Accused Boston Marathon Bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev

Uprising Against Autocrats Sweeps Latin America

Why Punish People for Speeding?

We Are The Government: Tactics For Taking Down The Police State

New Documents Reveal US Fear of Israel Deploying Nuclear Weapons

CNN Journalist ‘Governments Pay Us To Fake Stories’

BLOOD MONEY: Planned Parenthood Has Politicians Completely Paid Off, Media In Its Pocket

Microsoft Increases Secrecy; Expands Spyware to Windows 7 and 8

Anti-abortion video showed stillborn baby — not fetus

Judge Nap tells which part of Trump’s immigration plan is NOT Constitutional

Video: Cop Slams Old Man To The Concrete For Singing In Public






Tuesday, 25 August 2015

Debunking the Myth of Socialist “Success” in Scandinavia

Written by 

Supporters of Big Government and the nanny state everywhere have for decades glorified the imagined success of Scandinavia’s massive welfare states, citing Sweden, Norway, Denmark, and Finland as alleged proof that drastic restrictions on economic liberty can co-exist with prosperity. In the new book Scandinavian Unexceptionalism: Culture, Markets and the Failure of Third-Way Socialism, however, academic Nima Sanandaji, Ph.D., makes an iron-clad case showing that the Nordic nations’ relative success predates the welfare state. Indeed, the region actually provides bountiful evidence of the benefits of free markets and economic freedom, and of the harm wrought by Big Government.

With one of the leading 2016 U.S. presidential contenders, self-styled socialist Bernie Sanders, openly advocating the transformation of America into a Scandinavian-style welfare-state utopia on national television, the book’s message is timely indeed from an American perspective. But as the monograph explains, Sanders, whose campaign has recently surged past Hillary Clinton’s among voters in the key primary state of New Hampshire, is hardly alone in totally misunderstanding the lessons Scandinavia can offer Americans and the world. Left-wing celebrities, politicians, journalists, and ideologues worldwide have also been pointing to the Nordic nations for decades as a model to emulate.

As Sanandaji explains clearly in his meticulously sourced book, though, what most Big Government advocates see as desirable outcomes in Scandinavia — relative prosperity, high levels of income equality, long lifespans, good health, low levels of poverty, and more — all predate the welfare state. On life expectancy, for example, four out of the top five OECD nations were in Scandinavia in 1960, with Norway at the very top. On income, meanwhile, most of the shift toward “equality” happened between 1870 and 1950 — long before the welfare state took over. Ironically, the emergence of Big Government even put some of that at risk, along with the long-established cultural norms such as the Protestant work ethic, honesty, social trust, entrepreneurship, innovation, and more that made those advances possible to begin with.

Indeed, before the emergence of welfare-state policies beginning in the 1960s and 1970s, Sweden was among the most prosperous and fast-growing economies on the planet. Between 1870 and 1936, when Sweden was characterized by relatively free markets, the nation enjoyed the highest rate of growth in the industrialized world. Innovation and entrepreneurship flourished, making Sweden one of the richest countries on Earth. Then came the radical Social Democratic period characterized by an ever-larger and more expensive government. Between 1975 and the mid-1990s — marked by the radical, if short-lived, experiment in “Third Way” socialism — Sweden dropped from being the fourth richest nation in the world down to the 13th richest.

Fortunately for Swedes, as the giant welfare state’s harmful effects became increasingly obvious, the Swedish political class began to reverse course. From lowering taxes and government spending to deregulating and privatizing broad swaths of the economy, policymakers realized that the nation’s continued success depended on freer markets — not total government. Still, the damage was severe. As Sanandaji explains, citing his earlier research on the subject, the rate of business formation during the “third-way era” was “dreadful.” In 2004, none of the 100 largest firms ranked by employment were founded within Sweden after 1970. “Furthermore, between 1950 and 2000, although the Swedish population grew from 7 million to almost 9 million, net job creation in the private sector was close to zero,” he observed.

Today, Denmark, despite higher taxes, has more economic freedom than the United States. Sweden and Finland are both catching up, too. And interestingly, despite Sanders’ recent pronouncements on ABC News about Scandinavia having “more income and wealth equality,” Sweden still has a great deal more “wealth inequality” today than the United States, according to a study cited in the monograph.

To understand just how damaging the Scandinavian “third way” era was, Sanandaji cites a startling admission by Bo Ringholm, the Social Democratic finance minister of Sweden at the time. “If Sweden had had the same growth rates as the OECD average since 1970, our total resources would have been so much greater that it would be the equivalent of 20,000 SEK [$2,700] more per household per month,” Ringholm is quoted as saying in 2002. And as Sanandaji shows clearly and convincingly, often using government data, a major reason that Sweden’s economy did not grow at the rate of other OECD economies during that period was the lack of economic freedom.

Aside from the economic toll, the “third way” period in Sweden and other Scandinavian nations also led to a deterioration of what Sanandaji calls “social capital.” On this front, there are a lot of interesting examples provided in the book to make the case. Consider, for example, the remarkable shift in attitudes among Swedes on abusing the welfare system. In the 1981-1984 World Values Survey, 82 percent of Swedes agreed that it was never justifiable to accept welfare benefits one is not entitled to. Just three decades later, barely more than half of Swedes agreed. Examining sickness- and disability-related unemployment benefits, Sanandaji also shows that Scandinavian governments spend more than any others with the exception of the Netherlands — despite the overall excellent health of Scandinavians compared with people in other nations.

Scandinavian Unexceptionalism also focuses a great deal on the problems Scandinavian governments have in integrating immigrants — far more difficulties than, say, the United States or the United Kingdom. Non-Western immigrants in Scandinavia, both among the highly educated and those with lower levels of education, have drastically higher levels of unemployment than natives. Sanandaji, who immigrated to Sweden as a child from Kurdish Iran, attributes the phenomenon, citing a vast amount of evidence, to Big Government policies such as rigid labor-market regulations, generous welfare payments that distort incentives, and more. Despite  all of the government-backed “gender equality” programs that have proliferated across Scandinavia, meanwhile, Sanandaji makes a compelling case that bloated public sectors represent a major handicap to women’s success in the private sector. Even Eastern Europe has far more women in high corporate positions than Scandinavia.

Among the most fascinating and informative elements of the book is Sanandaji’s comparison between Scandinavians in Scandinavia and those who immigrated to the United States. The findings poke a major hole in arguments made by Big Government supporters who point to Scandinavia and confuse correlation with causation. “The descendants of Scandinavian migrants in the U.S. combine the high living standards of the U.S. with the high levels of equality of Scandinavian countries,” Sanandaji notes in a summary of his findings comparing the estimated 12 million Scandinavian-Americans with Scandinavians in Scandinavia, which are explored in an entire chapter dedicated to the topic. “Median incomes of Scandinavian descendants [in the United States] are 20 percent higher than average U.S. incomes.”

And even that number underestimates the real differences, because Norway’s phenomenal oil wealth (and small population) drastically skews the figures. Consider: Swedish Americans contribute 39 percent more to GDP per capita than Swedes in Sweden, while Finnish Americans contribute a stunning 47 percent more than Finns in Finland. “We cannot draw definitive conclusions from these figures, since household composition may differ, but there is prima facie evidence that Scandinavians who move to the U.S. are significantly better off than those who stay at home,” Sanandaji acknowledges. The book also shows that poverty rates among descendants of Nordic immigrants in the United States today are lower than the poverty rates of Scandinavians who did not cross the Atlantic.

“This suggests that pre-existing cultural norms are responsible for the low levels of poverty among Scandinavians rather than Nordic welfare states,” Sanandaji says. “The success of Nordic immigrants in the U.S. shows the pervasiveness of norms and low-level social institutions. The comparison with Scandinavian Americans suggests that the pursuit to create ‘social good’ through welfare state policies has hindered economic prosperity…. Thus, what makes Nordics uniquely successful is not the welfare states, as is commonly assumed. Rather than being the cause of these nations’ social strengths, the high-tax welfare state instead seems to have been made possible by the hard-won stock of social capital.”

Sanandaji’s excellent research strongly supports his overall conclusion that the Scandinavian welfare states hindered prosperity, economic growth, and rapidly contributed to the deterioration of the very cultures and social norms that even made the welfare states possible to begin with. “Many analyses of Scandinavian countries conflate correlation with causality,” he argues. “It is very clear that many of the desirable features of Scandinavian societies, such as low income inequality, low levels of poverty and high levels of economic growth, predated the development of the welfare state. It is equally clear that high levels of trust also predated the era of high government spending and taxation. All these indicators began to deteriorate after the expansion of the Scandinavian welfare states and the increase in taxes necessary to fund it.”

In other words: Americans, beware. In Scandinavia, with the partial exception of Norway which is able to coast along thanks to its gargantuan oil revenues, governments have started to learn the error of their ways and have drastically reversed course, expanding economic freedom across the board. (Personal freedom is another matter, of course). Those who seek to push Scandinavian-style Big Government in the United States are either misunderstanding the facts, or deliberately misleading you. And Scandinavian Unexceptionalism, a must-read for economic-policy wonks and anyone interested in understanding the region’s success, makes that abundantly clear.




Lincoln’s Tariff War: Thomas DiLorenzo – Jeb Bush Linked to Cartel Money Laundering While Serving CIA – Putin: New World Order Worships Satan – Is the Donald a Hillary Plant? – Anti-ISIS Coalition Built ISIS – J. Whitehead: The Illusion of Freedom in America

August 14, 2015

Exclusive: Jeb Bush Linked to Cartel Money Laundering While Serving CIA

Logistics 101: Where Does ISIS Get Its Guns?
EPA’s Toxic Mega-spill May Have Been Deliberate, Critics Suggest

Is Donald Trump a Hillary Plant?

Gutfeld Declares Trump Not a Conservative, Cites Breitbart

Trickle of Companies Leaving Illinois Turning Into a Flood

Hillary finally hands over her server—after it’s been professionally wiped clean

Vladimir Putin: The New World Order Worships Satan

Anti-ISIS Coalition Built ISIS (Video)

Virginia Bans Confederate Flag Plates, But Not Planned Parenthood Plates







Don’t Be Fooled by the Political Game: The Illusion of Freedom in America

  • Print The Alex Jones Channel Alex Jones Show podcast Prison Planet TV Twitter Alex Jones' Facebook Infowars store

John W. Whitehead
Rutherford Institute
August 11, 2015

“The shaping of the will of Congress and the choosing of the American president has become a privilege reserved to the country’s equestrian classes, a.k.a. the 20 percent of the population that holds 93 percent of the wealth, the happy few who run the corporations and the banks, own and operate the news and entertainment media, compose the laws and govern the universities, control the philanthropic foundations, the policy institutes, the casinos, and the sports arenas.”
—Journalist Lewis Lapham

Being a citizen in the American corporate state is much like playing against a stacked deck: you’re always going to lose.

The game is rigged, and “we the people” keep getting dealt the same losing hand. Even so, most stay in the game, against all odds, trusting that their luck will change.

The problem, of course, is that luck will not save us. As I make clear in my book, Battlefield America: The War on the American People, the people dealing the cards—the politicians, the corporations, the judges, the prosecutors, the police, the bureaucrats, the military, the media, etc.—have only one prevailing concern, and that is to maintain their power and control over the citizenry, while milking us of our money and possessions.

It really doesn’t matter what you call them—Republicans, Democrats, the one percent, the elite, the controllers, the masterminds, the shadow government, the police state, the surveillance state, the military industrial complex—so long as you understand that while they are dealing the cards, the deck will always be stacked in their favor.

Incredibly, no matter how many times we see this played out, Americans continue to naively buy into the idea that politics matter, as if there really were a difference between the Republicans and Democrats (there’s not).

As if Barack Obama proved to be any different from George W. Bush (he has not). As if Hillary Clinton’s values are any different from Donald Trump’s (with both of them, money talks). As if when we elect a president, we’re getting someone who truly represents “we the people” rather than the corporate state (in fact, in the oligarchy that is the American police state, an elite group of wealthy donors is calling the shots).

Politics is a game, a joke, a hustle, a con, a distraction, a spectacle, a sport, and for many devout Americans, a religion.

In other words, it’s a sophisticated ruse aimed at keeping us divided and fighting over two parties whose priorities are exactly the same. It’s no secret that both parties support endless war, engage in out-of-control spending, ignore the citizenry’s basic rights, have no respect for the rule of law, are bought and paid for by Big Business, care most about their own power, and have a long record of expanding government and shrinking liberty.

Most of all, both parties enjoy an intimate, incestuous history with each other and with the moneyed elite that rule this country. Don’t be fooled by the smear campaigns and name-calling. They’re just useful tactics of the psychology of hate that has been proven to engage voters and increase voter turnout while keeping us at each other’s throats.

Despite the jabs the candidates volley at each other for the benefit of the cameras, they’re a relatively chummy bunch away from the spotlight, presenting each other with awards (remember when Jeb Bush presented Hillary Clinton with a Liberty Medal for her service to the country), attending each other’s weddings (Bill and Hillary had front-row seats for Trump’s 2005 wedding), and embracing with genuine affection.

Trump’s various donations to the Clintons (he donated to Hillary’s Senate campaigns, as well as the Clinton Foundation) are not unusual. Remember, FOX News mogul Rupert Murdoch actually hosted a fundraiser for Hillary’s Senate reelection campaign back in 2006 and contributed to her presidential campaign two years later. In fact, FOX News has reportedly been one of Hillary’s biggest donors for the better part of two decades.

Are you starting to get the picture? It doesn’t matter who wins the White House, because they all work for the same boss: Corporate America. In fact, many corporations actually hedge their bets on who will win the White House by splitting their donations between Democratic and Republican candidates.

We’re in trouble, folks, and picking a new president won’t save us.

We are living in a fantasy world carefully crafted to resemble a representative democracy. It used to be that the cogs, wheels, and gear shifts in our government machinery worked to keep our republic running smoothly. However, without our fully realizing it, the mechanism has changed. Its purpose is no longer to keep our republic running smoothly. To the contrary, this particular contraption’s purpose is to keep the corporate police state in power. Its various parts are already a corrupt part of the whole.

Just consider how insidious, incestuous, and beholden to the corporate elite the various “parts” of the mechanism have become.

Congress. Perhaps the most notorious offenders and most obvious culprits in the creation of the corporate-state, Congress has proven itself to be both inept and avaricious, oblivious champions of an authoritarian system that is systematically dismantling their constituents’ fundamental rights. Long before they’re elected, Congressmen are trained to dance to the tune of their wealthy benefactors, so much so that they spend two-thirds of their time in office raising money. As Reuters reports, “For many lawmakers, the daily routine in Washington involves fundraising as much as legislating. The culture of nonstop political campaigning shapes the rhythms of daily life in Congress, as well as the landscape around the Capitol. It also means that lawmakers often spend more time listening to the concerns of the wealthy than anyone else.”

The President. With the 2016 presidential election shaping up to be the most expensive one in our nation’s history, with estimates as high as $10 billion, “the way is open for an orgy of spending by well-heeled interest groups and super rich individuals on both political sides.” Yet even after the votes have been counted and favors tallied, the work of buying and selling access to the White House is far from over. President Obama spends significant amounts of time hosting and attending fundraisers, having held more than 400 fundraising events over the course of his two terms in office. Such access comes with a steep price tag. It used to be that $100,000 got you an overnight stay at the White House. Now it will cost you $500,000 for four meetings a year with President Obama. Yet as Harvard professor Lawrence Lessig asks, “[H]ow does a man, as a person, run the nation when he’s attending 228 fundraisers? And the answer is not very well. It’s pretty terrible for your ability to do your job. It’s pretty terrible for your ability to be responsive to the American people, because—let me tell you—the American people are not attending 228 fundraisers. Those people are different.”

The Supreme Court. The US Supreme Court—once the last refuge of justice, the one governmental body really capable of rolling back the slowly emerging tyranny enveloping America—has instead become the champion of the American police state, absolving government and corporate officials of their crimes while relentlessly punishing the average American for exercising his or her rights. Like the rest of the government, the Court has routinely prioritized profit, security, and convenience over the basic rights of the citizenry. Indeed, law professor Erwin Chemerinsky makes a compelling case that the Supreme Court, whose “justices have overwhelmingly come from positions of privilege,” almost unerringly throughout its history, sides with the wealthy, the privileged, and the powerful. For example, contrast the Court’s affirmation of the “free speech” rights of corporations and wealthy donors in McCutcheon v. FEC, which does away with established limits on the number of candidates an entity can support with campaign contributions, and Citizens United v. FEC with its tendency to deny those same rights to average Americans when government interests abound, and you’ll find a noticeable disparity.

The Media. Of course, this triumvirate of total control would be completely ineffective without a propaganda machine provided by the world’s largest corporations. Besides shoving drivel down our throats at every possible moment, the so-called news agencies which are supposed to act as bulwarks against government propaganda have instead become the mouthpieces of the state. The pundits which pollute our airwaves are at best court jesters and at worst propagandists for the false reality created by the American government.

The American People. “We the people” now belong to a permanent underclass in America. It doesn’t matter what you call us—chattel, slaves, worker bees, drones, it’s all the same—what matters is that we are expected to march in lockstep with and submit to the will of the state in all matters, public and private. Through our complicity in matters large and small, we have allowed an out-of-control corporate-state apparatus to take over every element of American society.

Our failure to remain informed about what is taking place in our government, to know and exercise our rights, to vocally protest, to demand accountability on the part of our government representatives, and at a minimum to care about the plight of our fellow Americans has been our downfall.

Now we find ourselves once again caught up in the spectacle of another presidential election, and once again the majority of Americans are acting as if this election will make a difference and bring about change—as if the new boss will be different from the old boss.

When in doubt, just remember what comedian and astute commentator George Carlin had to say about the matter:

The politicians are put there to give you the idea that you have freedom of choice. You don’t. You have no choice. You have owners. They own you. They own everything. They own all the important land. They own and control the corporations. They’ve long since bought and paid for the Senate, the Congress, the state houses, the city halls. They got the judges in their back pockets and they own all the big media companies, so they control just about all of the news and information you get to hear. They got you by the balls. They spend billions of dollars every year lobbying. Lobbying to get what they want. Well, we know what they want. They want more for themselves and less for everybody else, but I’ll tell you what they don’t want. They don’t want a population of citizens capable of critical thinking. They don’t want well-informed, well-educated people capable of critical thinking. They’re not interested in that. That doesn’t help them. That’s against their interests.

They want obedient workers. Obedient workers, people who are just smart enough to run the machines and do the paperwork…. It’s a big club and you ain’t in it. You and I are not in the big club. …The table is tilted, folks. The game is rigged and nobody seems to notice…. Nobody seems to care. That’s what the owners count on…. It’s called the American Dream, ’cause you have to be asleep to believe it.



Harry Dent: Demographic Trends Call for a Global Economic Collapse – CDC Destroyed Vaccine Documents: Hid MMR-Autism Link – Killer Whales Chase Small Boat – Boy Scouts to Hire Homosexuals – US May Start Striking Syrian Forces

August 4, 2015

Chattanooga Shooting: Lieutenant Who Returned Fire to be Charged

US jets to begin striking Syrian forces if they target pro-US rebels

What Is Going To Happen In September 2015? Why Are So Many People Storing Food And Supplies?

Boy Scouts Will Now Hire Homosexual Males

Obama DACA Program Grants Amnesty to 664,607 Illegal Aliens

FBI Fabricates ISIS Terror Case From Scratch

Lawmakers Vote to Let Obama Take Your Passport Without Trial

New York Times Stealth-Edits Clinton Email Story at Her Command

CNET Top 5 – Phones with highest radiation

UN: Jail Parents Who Spank Their Children

Special Report: Spain Has Fallen to EU Tyranny

Hillview man arrested for shooting down drone; cites right to privacy






Bombshell: CDC destroyed vaccine documents, Congressman reveals

Bombshell: CDC destroyed vaccine documents, Congressman reveals; CDC whistleblower case is back

by Jon Rappoport

July 31, 2015

“…the [CDC] co-authors scheduled a meeting to destroy documents related to the [MMR vaccine] study. The remaining four co-authors all met and brought a big garbage can into the meeting room and reviewed and went through all the hard copy documents that we had thought we should discard and put them in a huge garbage can.” (William Thompson, CDC researcher)

On July 29, US Congressman Bill Posey made his last stand on the floor of the House. Granted five minutes to speak, he laid bare the lying of the CDC in a now-famous 2004 study that exonerated the MMR vaccine and claimed it had no connection to autism.

“No connection to autism” was the lie.

Congressman Posey read a statement from long-time CDC researcher William Thompson, one of the authors of the 2004 Pediatrics study designed to determine, once and for all, whether the Measles-Mumps-Rubella vaccine could cause autism.

Thompson saw and participated in violating the protocol of the study. He was there. He helped his co-authors destroy documents that would have shown an MMR-autism link.

You can see a rush transcript of Congressman Posey’s remarks here (on the website), which includes his reading of a statement from whistleblower Thompson.

Posey pleads with his colleagues for a Congressional investigation.

Of note: two of the CDC researchers on the infamous 2004 study, who according to Thompson, destroyed vital documents, are Coleen Boyle and Frank DeStefano. They are both high-ranking executives at the CDC in the area of vaccine safety.

This calls into question every single CDC study, under their tenure, that claims vaccines are safe.

CDC whistleblower Thompson’s statement, which Posey read on the House floor, includes this bombshell:

“However, because I [Thompson] assumed it [destroying the documents] was illegal and would violate both FOIA and DOJ requests, I kept hard copies of all documents in my office and I retained all associated computer files. I believe we intentionally withheld controversial findings from the final draft of the Pediatrics paper.”

Thompson has the smoking-gun documents. So does Congressman Posey. I believe others do as well.

So: publish them. Publish them now.

There are lawsuits to be filed. Eleven years have passed since the CDC committed its crime of concealing the MMR vaccine-autism connection. How many parents, never informed of the truth, have permitted their children to receive this vaccine? How many children have been struck down by the vaccine?

The lawsuits should be filed against the CDC and the individual authors of the 2004 study. Lawyers must depose every CDC employee who had knowledge of the crime.

And what about the fact that the MMR vaccine is one of the shots that has been mandated, by law, in California, in other states, and in Australia? Mandating neurological destruction of children is a crime that must be investigated and punished. If these states (and other countries) insist on keeping the MMR on their schedules, they are guilty parties.

Here, for background, are earlier articles I wrote about whistleblower Thompson, starting when the story broke in the summer of 2014.

Understand what we are dealing with here, in terms of public exposure: the author of a peer-reviewed and published study; the author who has worked for many years at the CDC; the author who participated in destruction of vital documents; the author has come forward and admitted his crime and the crime of his colleagues. This kind of confession never happens.

But it did happen.

And this story and what it means must not die, no matter how major media outlets try to spin it or ignore it.

Parents who are, in ignorance, allowing their children to receive the MMR vaccine, must be informed. They must know what is going on. They must know the danger to their children.

Australia, Canada, England, New Zealand, Germany, France, India, China, South Africa…wherever the MMR vaccine is given…parents must be made aware they’re gambling with their children’s lives.

Government officials anywhere in the world who make this continuing crime possible are liable.

So are manufacturers of the MMR.

Get busy. Expose the truth.

Jon Rappoport


An Expert That Correctly Called The Last Two Stock Market Crashes Is Now Predicting Another One

  • Print The Alex Jones Channel Alex Jones Show podcast Prison Planet TV Twitter Alex Jones' Facebook Infowars store

Michael Snyder
Economic Collapse
July 29, 2015

What I am about to share with you is quite stunning.

A well-respected financial expert that correctly predicted the last two stock market crashes is now warning that we are right on the verge of the next one.  John Hussman is a former professor of economics and international finance at the University of Michigan, and the information in his latest weekly market comment is staggering.  Since 1970, there have only been a handful of times when a combination of market signals that Hussman uses have indicated that a major market peak has been reached.  In 1972, 2000 and 2007 each of those peaks was followed by a dramatic stock market crash.  Now, for the first time since the last financial crisis, all four of those signals appeared once again during the week of July 17th.  If Hussman’s analysis is correct, this could very well mean that the next great stock market crash in the United States is imminent.

It was an excellent article by Jim Quinn of the Burning Platform that first alerted me to Hussman’s latest warning.  If you don’t follow Quinn’s work already, you should, because it is excellent.

When someone is repeatedly correct about the financial markets, we should all start paying attention.  Back in late 2007, Hussman warned us about what was coming in 2008, but most people did not listen.

Now he is sounding the alarm again.  According to Hussman, when there is a confluence of four key market indicators, that tells us that the market has peaked and is in danger of crashing.  The following comes from Newsmax

He cited the metric among the indicators that foreshadowed declines after peaks in 1972, 2000 and 2007:

*Less than 27 percent of investment advisers polled by Investors Intelligence who say they are bearish.

*Valuations measured by the Shiller price-to-earnings ratio are greater than 18 times.

*Less than 60 percent of S&P 500 stocks above their 200-day moving averages.

*Record high on a weekly closing basis.

The most recent warning was the week ended July 17, 2015,” Hussman said. “It’s often said that they don’t ring a bell at the top, and that’s true in many cycles. But it’s interesting that the same ‘ding’ has been heard at the most extreme peaks among them.”

It is quite rare for the market to set a new record high on a weekly closing basis and have more than 40 percent of stocks below their 200-day moving averages at the same time.  That is why a confluence of all these factors is fairly uncommon.  Hussman elaborated on this in his recent report

The remaining signals (record high on a weekly closing basis, fewer than 27% bears, Shiller P/E greater than 18, fewer than 60% of S&P 500 stocks above their 200-day average), are shown below. What’s interesting about these warnings is how closely they identified the precise market peak of each cycle. Internal divergences have to be fairly extensive for the S&P 500 to register a fresh overvalued, overbullish new high with more than 40% of its component stocks already falling – it’s evidently a rare indication of a last hurrah. The 1972 warning occurred on November 17, 1972, only 7 weeks and less than 4% from the final high before the market lost half its value. The 2000 warning occurred the week of March 24, 2000, marking the exact weekly high of that bull run. The 2007 instance spanned two consecutive weekly closing highs: October 5 and October 12. The final daily high of the S&P 500 was October 9 – right in between. The most recent warning was the week ended July 17, 2015.

The following is the chart that immediately followed the paragraph in his report that you just read…

Hussman Chart

When I first took a look at that chart I could hardly believe it.

It appears that Hussman’s signals are able to indicate major stock market crashes with stunning precision.

And considering the fact that we just hit a new “ding” for the first time since the last financial crisis, what Hussman is saying is more than just a little bit ominous.

According to Hussman this is not just a recent phenomenon either.  Even though advisory sentiment figures were not available back in 1929, he believes that his indicators would have given a signal that a market crash was imminent in August of that year as well

Though advisory sentiment figures aren’t available prior to the mid-1960’s, imputed data suggest that additional instances likely include the two consecutive weeks of August 19, 1929 and August 26, 1929. We can infer unfavorable market internals in that instance because we know that cumulative NYSE breadth was declining for months before the 1929 high. The week of the exact market peak would also be included except that stocks closed down that week after registering a final high on September 3, 1929. Another likely instance, based on imputed sentiment data, is the week of November 10, 1961, which was immediately followed by a market swoon into June 1962.

Of course the past is the past, and what has happened in the past will not necessarily happen in the future.

So is Hussman wrong this time?  With all of the other things that are happening in the financial world right now, I certainly would not bet against him.

Other financial professionals are concerned that a market crash could be imminent as well.  The following comes from a piece authored by Andrew Adams

More than 13% of stocks on the New York Stock Exchange are at 52-week lows, which is about 6 standard deviations above the average over the last three years (1.62%) and an extreme only seen one other time during said period (last October when the S&P 500 was percentage points away from a 10% correction).

This dichotomy has created what I believe to be the biggest question about the stock market right now – have we already experienced a stealth correction in the majority of stocks that will soon come to an end or will the market leaders finally succumb to the weight of the laggards and join in on the sell-off? The answer to this could end up being worth at least $2.2 trillion, which is how much money would essentially be wiped out of the stock market if we finally get the much-discussed 10% correction in the overall market(the total U.S. stock market capitalization was $22.5 trillion as of June 30, according to the Center for Research in Security Prices).

Sometimes, a picture is worth more than a thousand words.  I could share many more quotes from the “experts” about why they are concerned about a potential stock market collapse, but instead I want to share with you a “bonus chart” that Zero Hedge posted on Tuesday

Bonus Chart - Zero Hedge

Do you understand what that is saying?

In 2007 and 2008, junk bonds started crashing well before stocks did.

Now, we are witnessing a similar divergence.  If a similar pattern holds up this time, stocks have a long, long way to fall.

Like Hussman and so many others, I believe that a stock market crash and a new financial crisis are imminent.

The month of August is usually a slow month in the financial world, so hopefully we can get through it without too much chaos.  But once we roll into the months of September and October we will officially be in “the danger zone”.

Keep an eye on China, keep an eye on Europe, and keep listening for serious trouble at “too big to fail” banks all over the planet.

The next several months are going to be extremely significant, and we all need to be getting ready while we still can.


Smart Cities to Spy on You in New Ways – Marching to Zion Documentary – Crimes of Asset Forfeitures – Planned Parenthood Exec. Haggles Over Baby Parts – No Driver’s License Required in America – Inside a Tornado – Shark Attacks Pro Surfer

July 24, 2015


MSNBC Shills For Planned Parenthood As Second Damning Video Is Released

Social Security Disability Trust Fund Could Be Depleted by Late 2016

Republican Operatives Plot To Sabotage Trump – But That Could Turn Him Into Their Worst Nightmare

“Smart Cities” to Spy on You in Ways Orwell Never Imagined

Police Seek Others Involved in Black Confederate Activist’s Death

“Global Warming” Expedition Foiled by Record Ice

Top U.S. Warfighting Experts: Drones INCREASE Terrorism

Pornography a public health crisis, say experts

Your Smart TV Is Spying on You

Georgia No-knock Raid Indictment: Deputy’s Lie Led to Toddler’s Injuries

Family Threatened With Government Fine For Parking Cars in Their Own Driveway







Friday, 24 July 2015

Oklahoma DA Used Asset Forfeiture Money to Pay His Student Loan

Written by 

There are state government officials in Oklahoma paying off personal debts and partying with funds seized through the civil asset forfeiture process.

The examples of such deplorable and despotic behavior are shocking to the conscience of friends of liberty. Reason reports a couple of the abuses:

An assistant district attorney in the state of Oklahoma lived rent-free in a house confiscated by local law enforcement under the practice of asset forfeiture. His office paid the utility bills. He remained there for five years, despite a court order to sell the house at auction.

Another district attorney used $5,000 worth of confiscated funds to pay back his student loans.

Believe it or not, those are but a tiny sample of the reports of gross misconduct described in a recent hearing held in the Sooner State legislature looking to get to the bottom of this behavior.

Oklahoma Watch published a fuller exposé of the various violations of the law perpetrated by local law enforcement officials.

In several counties throughout Oklahoma, agents of state and local law enforcement — including lawyers working in the district attorney’s offices in the state — would confiscate property and then fail to report it or record it. Then, even worse, they would use the appropriated property to pay off personal debts.

One state lawmaker is fed up with the practice and wants to cut it off immediately.

“The more I learn about it, the more upset and outraged I get that we’ve allowed this process to get to where it’s at.” said State Senator Kyle Loveless, the sponsor of a bill that would clamp down on asset forfeiture. “Your property is considered guilty until proven innocent. It is up to the individual to petition the government after they’ve seized it to prove that it is innocent. To me, that, on its face, is un-American.”

He’s right.

Civil asset forfeiture is an assault on several of the most fundamental individual liberties.

The practice, as described by Oklahoma Watch: “Forfeiture involves law enforcement agencies seizing private property and money believed to have been used in drug trafficking or other crimes. After the assets are forfeited in court, authorities can keep the money or property even when the suspect is never convicted or charged.”

In an earlier statement, Loveless criticized this despicable miscarriage of justice. “Reform of civil asset forfeiture is not a partisan issue,” he explained. “It is a constitutional issue. Justice should be dealt out in a courtroom, not on the shoulder of a highway,” he said.

Civil forfeiture procedures are based on the premise that a person’s property can be complicit in the commission of a crime. This is laughable and legally unreasonable. The Constitution was specifically written to protect citizens from this and all other forms of unreasonable searches and seizures (Fourth Amendment), as well as to place due process protections between the governors and the governed (Fifth Amendment).

As is the frequent habit of those who participate in such practices, several law-enforcement officials and representatives of the district attorney’s general offices are criticizing Loveless and touting the necessity of asset forfeiture in the fight against crime.

Oklahoma Watch reports on the opposition:

Law enforcement officials counter that forfeiture is necessary to combat drug trafficking and say that abuses are rare. They say Loveless is hyping the issue and using scare tactics to push his bill.

“I’m very concerned that’s the line he’s taking in that,” said District Attorney Greg Mashburn, who represents Cleveland, Garvin and McClain counties and sits on the commission overseeing the Oklahoma State Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs. At the commission meeting Tuesday, he referred to statements that Loveless made Monday about forfeiture misuses during a  Garvin County Republican meeting.

“That may be something we need to address at our next quarterly (commission) meeting, just to stay on top of it, because it’s going to be an issue that we need to address and educate people on. They’re telling scary stories on the other side, and it’s just not accurate,” Mashburn said.

Yes, let’s kick the can down the road and discuss this at some future meeting. Meanwhile, money and property is illegally seized and spent by agents of the state government.

Some advocates of the current forfeiture culture weren’t quite as quibbling as Washburn.

As The New American reported in May, “Canadian County (Okla.) Sheriff Randall Edwards was especially vocal against the legislation introduced by Loveless, calling it the ‘most asinine and devastating bill I have ever seen for this state and local law enforcement.'”

Should Loveless’s bill become law, money and property seized would be forfeited only if the owner were found guilty of the crime of which he was accused.

It is telling that such a requirement should have to be specifically spelled out in the law and that a county sheriff would describe such a prohibition on property seizure as “asinine.”

What is perhaps the most revolting facet of the forfeiture tale is the unsurprising participation in the practice by the federal government.

As the Washington Post reports:

Since 2008, thousands of local and state police agencies have made more than 55,000 seizures of cash and property worth $3 billion under a civil asset forfeiture program at the Justice Department called Equitable Sharing.

The program has enabled local and state police to make seizures and then have them “adopted” by federal agencies, which share in the proceeds. It allowed police departments and drug task forces to keep up to 80 percent of the proceeds of adopted seizures, with the rest going to federal agencies.

With this kind of money up for grabs, it is little wonder that the plague of asset forfeiture has spread across the 50 states.

Paul-Martin Foss, president and executive director of the Carl Menger Center for the Study of Money and Banking, an Arlington, Virginia-based think tank dedicated to educating the American people on the importance of sound money and sound banking, wrote: “Hardly a week goes by without a mention of some innocent person who is arrested and/or imprisoned for violating an unconstitutional law, an arcane regulation, or simply being in the wrong place at the wrong time. For completely innocuous conduct, they find themselves at the mercy of an uncaring, unfeeling bureaucratic apparatus that chews them up and spits them out.”

As with so many of the other ongoing assaults on the vestigial liberty enjoyed by Americans, civil asset forfeiture is justified by its perpetrators as a means of keeping the people safe.

Senator Loveless told Oklahoma Watch that his bill should come up for an “interim study” sometime in September.

In the meantime, money and property will be subject to seizure. And, although the suspected “criminal” will be “free to go,” his money will have to stay behind.


Supreme Court Decision Brings Shame upon the Nation

July 21, 2015

By John K Rooney

Recently, the US Supreme Court stooped to new lows when activist justices Ginsberg, Breyer, Kagan, Kennedy and Sotomayer voted to cram homosexual marriage down the throats of the states. A practice that has, from the beginning of America’s history, been considered deeply immoral and illegal was recently celebrated with rainbow colors across the taxpayer-funded White House.

Not only did the court bring shame upon the United States, for which the whole world is witness, it again trampled over the US Constitution as if it were a piece of trash.  Nowhere in the document is there a provision enumerating the power to the US government to even touch the issue of the family or marriage.  Yet, in the wisdom of 5 ideologues, they found the nerve to advance the cultural Marxists’ goal to upend society as we have known it. Emerging from the Jewish dominated Frankfurt School on the 1920s, cultural Marxists (communists) merged the ideas of Marx and Freud into a scheme that might successfully bring the “workers’ revolution” to the US.  They believe cultural upheaval will precipitate the totalitarian takeover in which they have dreamed.

If the states do not nullify the court’s decision, and if Americans do not begin to take a stand for basic, common-sense morality, this will not end well. It cannot.  Partially at fault is the church in general, which to a large extent, has been relatively mute on the issue.  In an effort to gain earthly success, many pastors adopting a seeker-sensitive approach, have refused to proclaim the full counsel of God, expecting the Holy Spirit to do all the work.  Deluged under a tidal wave of pro-gay propaganda and entertainment, Christians have been cowed into going into their closets by the millions, fearing any talk against perversion might offend people. While the church hides in their closets, millions of sexually confused and demonically-enslaved homosexuals are coming out of theirs. Unfortunately, many who have resisted temptations here and there will decide to experiment, just to see if they like it. 

Special thanks must go to those African American churches that overwhelmingly supported Obama, regardless of his position on abortion and fondness toward aberrant lifestyles.  A quick search of Larry Sinclair and Obama should provide sound warning, however, it’s like the old 70’s song by Steely Dan, they’ll “go back jack and do it again.”  As much as I love the black churches, many have sponsored an incredible amount of evil upon the land in recent days.  Am I implying they should vote Republican?  Really, neither party deserves our commitment, and what I mean to say is exactly what I said. I only vote for oddball candidates outside the establishment, whom I think are truthful and committed to the Constitution and limited government, period.  In other words, in a majority of instances, I do not vote. There are brilliant black thinkers, top leaders in the liberty movement such as Walter E Williams and Thomas Sowell who should be followed, should be presidents, but they are wrongly portrayed as “Uncle Toms,” thus squandering the potential benefits of such great minds.

It is law that when a judge has a conflict of interest or bias, he or she must recuse themselves from the case. Two justices, Kagan and Ginsberg, had previously officiated over a same-sex marriages and should have recused themselves. It might also be of interest that 3 of the 5 voting for SS marriage are of a similar ethnic background.  Correlations like this are important in order to identify ideological agendas that may be un-American.

Finally, the court’s decision will encourage the brazenness of homosexuals, instead of encouraging them to repent from what was, until 1974, clinically labeled as a mental disorder.  Just a few days ago, a young man contacted me about a diamond ring that I had for sale.  In his inquiry, he mentioned that he might offer his body for the ring. I didn’t quite understand, this was the first time I’d heard such a thing. Then he asked me by text if I was into guys!  Folks, it will only get worse.  Be assured, there is no hatred here for the man. He is a victim of a deteriorating and ungodly society.  I kindly encouraged him to seek Jesus for deliverance and he confessed he had been considering this very thing.  This is just a small example of how destructive the SCOTUS decision was, including the following celebration at the White House.  Finally, pray especially for young people like the man I mentioned and shine your light!  Light is more powerful than darkness, so let it shine.  Let Congress, state reps and others know, we cannot tolerate government approval of perversions such as homosexual marriage.

John K Rooney

Tri-Cities Liberty Alliance


US Conspiring with Oligarchs to Overthrow Putin – Greece: Banksters Seize Sovereignty and Assets – Carl Medearis: Bringing Christ to Muslims – Freedom Index: How Does Your Congressman Rate? – Planned Parenthood Sells Baby Parts

July 16, 2015

 Texas Launches Gold-backed Bank, Challenging Federal Reserve

The Secret Bank Bailout

Freedom Index: Congressional Scorecard Based on the Constitution

U.S. Conspiring With Russian Oligarchs to Overthrow Putin, Says Duma Member

“We don’t believe it’s a symbol of racism,” Confederate flags fly downtown as President drives in

Black Market Profiteering: Planned Parenthood Sells Aborted Baby Parts

Okla. Gov. Defies State Court Order to Remove 10 Commandments Monument

How Student Loans Create Demand for Useless Degrees

House Republicans Fast-Track Bill to Prevent States from Labeling GMO Foods

Obama Readies a Transgender Military







What if you had to personally force people to participate in Social Security?

You may believe some good result makes Social Security a necessary exception to the Zero Aggression Principle, but please consider…

What if there were no armed tax collectors to compel people to participate in Social Security? What if you had to enforce participation yourself?

You would feel like a hero if you used force to stop a beating, burglary, or murder. But what if you had to point a gun at your friends, family, or neighbors to make them participate in Social Security against their will? Would you still feel you were doing something moral?

It’s easy to ignore moral principles when the violations are hidden from you, and when you don’t have to do the dirty work yourself. But does that mean no wrong has been done?

Stated differently…

Does initiating force against others become morally okay if you delegate the violence to someone else?

Shouldn’t you stop asking politicians to impose things on other people? Shouldn’t you allow people to opt out of Social Security, forgoing both the benefits and the taxes? Isn’t this Zero Aggression approach the moral position?

Does this argument influence your inclination? Use the slider to show your current stance.

Click the dot to activate the slider. Move the dot to your answer. Submit your answer. You’ll see how others responded. If you choose unsure, or some degree of support, you’ll be asked a new question, “Does Social Security really require the use of violence?” You can also use the form below at any time to sign a petition for or against mandatory Social Security.


Tuesday, 14 July 2015

The Great Greek Yard Sale

Written by 

The great capitulation by Greece’s Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras last weekend will shortly be followed by the great Greek yard sale. Calling it an agreement rather than an ultimatum, the Eurozone statement from its ministers spelled out in painful detail the degree to which Greece will have lost its sovereign powers if the country’s parliament agrees to it.

First, Greece must accomplish the following no later than midnight Wednesay, July 15:

• Reform Greece’s notoriously complex value-added-tax (VAT) by broadening its base and eliminating discounts currently allowed certain jurisdictions;

• Reform its overgenerous pension system to improve its “long-term sustainability”;

• Provide new rules that keep Greece’s statistical agency ELSTAT from fudging the numbers;

• Create an outside fiscal group with authority to inflict automatic budget cuts if certain targets are not met on time.

And that’s just the beginning. Market reforms (read: regulations) affecting Sunday shopping, the length of “sales periods,” rules on the sale of milk and baked goods, and the dispensing of pharmaceutical drug prescriptions must be immediately undertaken. Rules on collective bargaining, including dismissing of workers, must be completely revised according to standards imposed by the EU.

The EU parliament must be allowed to tell the Greek government how to run itself, including ridding the Greek parliament of the troublemakers that, in the EU’s view, precipitated the crisis in the first place. This is how the agreement reads: “The Greek authorities shall … modernize and … put in place a program, under the auspices of the European Commission … for de-politicizing the Greek administration.”

The EU will have veto power over all legislation even before it is presented to Greece’s parliament or to the citizens: “The government needs to consult and agree with the Institutions on all draft legislation … with adequate time before submitting it for public consultation or to Parliament.”

Rubbing salt in the wound, those “Institutions” are populated by the very people that Tsipras kicked out of his country a month ago: the European Commission, the European Central Bank, and the International Monetary Fund.

The agreement makes it clear that Greece is not allowed to demand a reduction in the amount it owes, while affirming that it will pay back every cent:

The Euro Summit stresses that nominal haircuts on the debt cannot be undertaken. The Greek authorities reiterate their unequivocal commitment to honor their financial obligations to all their creditors fully and in a timely manner.

Most telling, and chilling, is the declaration that national Greek assets no longer belong to the nation but must be sold off to pay down some of the debt:

Valuable Greek assets will be transferred to an independent fund that will monetize the assets through privatization and other means.

The monetization of the assets will be one source to make scheduled repayment of the [proposed] new loan … a targeted total of 50 billion euros.

As Jeroen Dijsselbloem, the president of the Eurogroup and the author of this part of the so-called “agreement,” told Bloomberg, the fund “is going to be an independent fund … [made up of Greece’s] airplanes, airports, infrastructure and most certainly banks.” He added that this is good for everybody:  “That is good for Greece but also good for us. We are, in the end, the ones from whom the money was borrowed.”

Anthony Fatola, writing in the Washington Post, called this a “fire sale” of Greek assets, much like the liquidation at auction of a farm that could no longer meet its financial obligations. It would include “even plots of land on its famed islands.”

Sources close to the Greek government say that Tsipras has successfully cobbled together a gaggle of members of parliament from both Left and Right sufficient to pass the “agreement,” an agreement that only “starts the negotiations with the Greek authorities.” Assuming that is true, by midnight Wednesday Greece will have passed into history as a sovereign nation and will begin its new status as a vassal or slave state, a mere inconvenient and formerly noisy province of the supranational European Union.

A graduate of an Ivy League school and a former investment advisor, Bob is a regular contributor to The New American magazine and blogs frequently at, primarily on economics and politics.



The Troika Swindle: The Greeks Owe Nothing – Jewish Tyranny at the Supreme Court – “We’re Training ISIL” Obama Slips Up – Seattle Schools Give IUDs to 11-Year-Olds – Kenneth E Hagin: How to Receive From God

July 7, 2015

Big Business Supports War Against Marriage, Family

‘We’re Training ISIL’: White House Website Corrects Obama’s Speech Blooper

Congress Should Protect Itself From The Executive Branch

To Avoid Prison, You Must Read This Before Taking Your Money Out of the Bank

Is Puerto Rico America’s Greece?

Seattle Schools Give IUDs to 11-year-olds Without Parents’ Consent

Jim Carrey condemns California Governor as ‘corporate fascist’ in Twitter rant over new vaccination law

More Proof People Are Moving From High Tax States

Confirmed: Secret U.S. Bases in Somalia, U.S. Boots on the Ground







The Troika Swindle: Greeks Owe Nothing

€245 billion debt was fraudulently dumped on the country
The Troika Swindle: Greeks Owe Nothing

by Kurt Nimmo | | July 6, 2015

In June the Greek “Truth Committee on Public Debt” established by Zoi Konstantopoulou the speaker of the Greek parliament “came to the conclusion that Greece should not pay this debt because it is illegal, illegitimate, and odious.”

The establishment media has hidden from view the facts behind the debt and has sided with the banks in declaring the population of Greece deserves austerity and its attendant poverty and misery because of the Greek government’s intransigence and refusal to accept the harsh conditions of the Troika, consisting of the IMF, European Commission and European Central Bank.

Left unsaid is the fact a large portion of the debt totaling about €245 billion was fraudulently dumped on the country in the course of huge bank bailouts in 2010 and 2012.

“And since the huge bank bailouts, ‘Greek debt’ exists only on the basis of the Wall Street practice for unpayable debt, known as ‘extend and pretend.’ Its interest and repayment terms have been so dramatically changed by the creditors — in a backhanded admission that it cannot be paid — that in debt-market terms, it is nearly worthless,” Paul Gallagher wrote in February.

Gallagher explains that the Greek debt swindle is similar to the TARP scam foisted on the American people following the subprime fiasco and a move by the Federal Reserve to print $4 trillion of new money to cover the gambling debt of the financial class. “Its political perpetrators are the same huge banks, and the European Central Bank working with the Federal Reserve,” he writes.

In the course of buying up toxic mortgage securities and derivatives from the United States, the European banks engaged in their own subprime scam and made unrepayable loans to governments in Greece, Ireland, Portugal, and Hungary.

“Big Wall Street banks were involved, particularly Goldman Sachs, which created ‘magic’ derivatives in 2001: Take a bank loan to Greece, make it look like a mere ‘currency swap’ rather than a debt — but turn it into a much bigger debt ten years later,” Gallagher points out.

But most of the loaned money did not stay in Greece. More than 90% went directly and immediately to Deutschebank, HSBC, JPMorgan Chase, “and their fellow sharks, with small amounts crumbling to the hedge funds swimming alongside.”

Former Greek Labor and Social Security Minister and chair of the National Bank of Greece Louka Katseli said Greece actually spent a meager 3% of the $275 billion loaned by the banksters.

“One of the reasons that everybody is so determined to keep Greece in the euro is so that the banks do not have to take a serious hit on their faulty lending policies,” Nigel Farage, Member of the European Parliament from the UK Independent Party, told RT in 2011. “It is almost as if there is an unholy alliance of politicians and bankers versus ordinary people.”


Chelsea Schilling is a news and commentary editor for WND and a proud U.S. Army veteran. She has a bachelor’s degree in journalism and also worked as a news producer at USA Radio Network and as a news reporter for the Sacramento Union.

Aaron and Melissa Klein were fined $135,000 for refusing to bake a cake for a same-sex wedding.

The Christian owners of a former bakery were officially ordered Thursday by the Oregon labor commissioner to pay $135,000 in fines to a lesbian couple after the bakers declined to bake a wedding cake for the couple due to their religious beliefs.

The ruling, issued by Oregon Labor Commissioner Brad Avakian, upheld an earlier finding by administrative judge Alan McCullough, who determined that Sweet Cakes owners Aaron and Melissa Klein had discriminated against the women based on their sexual orientation.

The Kleins said their Christian beliefs against same-sex marriage had prevented them from complying with the cake request. The Kleins were forced to close their storefront in Gresham, a suburb of Portland, Oregon, in 2013 shortly after the lesbian couple filed a civil rights complaint against them. At that time, same-sex marriage still wasn’t legal in Oregon.

The lesbian couple will receive the funds for “emotional, mental, and physical suffering.”

“This case is not about a wedding cake or a marriage,” Avakian wrote, according to the Oregonian. “It is about a business’s refusal to serve someone because of their sexual orientation. Under Oregon law, that is illegal.”

“Within Oregon’s public accommodations law is the basic principle of human decency that every person, regardless of their sexual orientation, has the freedom to fully participate in society. The ability to enter public places, to shop, to dine, to move about unfettered by bigotry.”

See the big list of “same-sex marriage” entrapment and Christian coercion

The Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries said, while the Oregon Equality Act of 2007 includes an exemption for religious groups and schools, it doesn’t allow business owners to deny service to customers.

Bureau prosecutors sought $75,000 for each woman – $150,000 total – during a hearing on damages in March. Under the commissioner’s ruling, Rachel Bowman-Cryer should collect $75,000 and her “wife,” Laurel Bowman-Cryer, will collect $60,000. The couple testified in March to the emotional stress they attributed to their experience with Sweet Cakes, including the glare of media attention that followed.

The Kleins are likely to appeal, according to their attorney, Anna Harmon.

“That’s up to our clients,” Harmon said, according to the Oregonian. “I believe at this point they are intending to preserve their constitutional rights as much as they can, and that would look like an appeal.”

In a statement through attorney Paul Thompson, the lesbian couple thanked the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries for “sending a clear message that discrimination will simply not be tolerated in our state.”

“This has been a terrible ordeal for our entire family. We never imagined finding ourselves caught up in a fight for social justice,” they said. “We endured daily, hateful attacks on social media, received death threats and feared for our family’s safety, yet our goal remained steadfast. We were determined to ensure that this kind of blatant discrimination never happened to another couple, another family, another Oregonian.”

Aaron Klein also testified that his family had suffered because of the case. Reporters came to his home, his company car was vandalized and broken into twice, and photographers and florists severed ties with the business.

As WND reported, a fundraiser was set up for the Kleins, but after the account had reached more than $109,000, the GoFundMe site shut it down.




Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 28 other followers