Skip to content

US Policies Purged Christians from the Middle East – Civil Forfeiture Laws Legalize Government Theft – FBI Manipulated Crime Stats – Ed Yardeni: Markets are all Rigged – Generals March to a Neocon Tune

March 26, 2015

 

Expert: FBI Manipulated Crime Stats to Show Increase in Mass Shootings

N.J. First State to Ban Police Militarization Without Local OK

Feds Urge Banks to Call Cops on Customers Who Withdraw $5,000 or More

CNN fakes location report after Brian Williams discussion

10 Charts Which Show We Are Much Worse Off Than Just Before The Last Economic Crisis

Common Core Rebellion to “Opt Out” of Tests Spreads Nationwide

Feds Preparing to Invade Texas

Why We Can’t Kill a Useless Government Agency

Ed Yardeni: The markets are all rigged

——————————————————————

Civil Forfeiture Laws Legalize Government Theft

—————————————————————

—————————————————————–

—————————————————————–

—————————————————————-

—————————————————————-

The Best Place To Live In The United States? Here Are 9 Maps To Consider

     

United States Fun Map - Public DomainIf you could live anywhere in America during the tumultuous years ahead, where would it be?  This is a topic that is hotly debated, and the truth is that there is not a single right answer.  If you have a very strong family support system where you are, it might not be right to try to move 2000 miles away and start a new life from scratch.  And for many Americans, moving is out of the question in the short-term because they are completely and totally dependent on employment in their local areas.  But in recent years we have seen an increasing number of Americans strategically relocate to another region of the country.  They can see our society breaking down and they can see the storm clouds on the horizon and they want to do what they can to prepare themselves and their families for what is ahead.  So is there a “best place to live” in the United States?  Are there some areas that are preferable to others?  The following are 9 maps to consider…

#1 Population Density

When the U.S. economy crashes and civil unrest starts erupting in our cities, ideally you will want to be living in an area with low population density.  In other words, the fewer people around the better.  The map below represents population density with a series of yellow dots.  As you can see, the west coast and the eastern half of the nation are generally very crowded.  So if you are looking for an area with lots of “breathing room”, the area between the Mississippi River and the west coast is a good place to look.

Population Density - Moonshadow Mobile

#2 Average Precipitation

Unfortunately, the western half of the nation is also generally very dry.  So if you are planning to grow your own food during a time of economic and social turmoil, that is something to keep in mind.  There are a few areas between the Mississippi River and the west coast that do get plenty of rainfall (northern Idaho for example), but those areas are few and far between.

Average Precipitation United States - Public Domain

#3 Drought

The latest national map from the U.S. Drought Monitor is the next map that I have shared.  The multi-year drought in the state of California is already the worst drought in the recorded history of the state, and many scientists believe that it could stretch on for many more years.  But it isn’t just California that has been suffering.  There are other areas in the Southwest that are starting to resemble the Dust Bowl days as well.  So obviously these areas are not ideal if you plan to be self-sufficient and grow much of your own food during a time of great crisis.

March 17 2015 US Drought Monitor

#4 Average Snowfall

If you don’t like cold and snow, you will want to avoid the colored areas on this next map.  And if you do plan to live in an area that gets plenty of cold and snow, you will want to have a solid plan for heating your home if the electrical grid goes down and is not available for an extended period of time.

Average Annual Snowfall

#5 Average Homicides

In the years ahead, crime in the United States is likely to rise dramatically.  If you are looking for somewhere safe, the areas that have relatively low crime rates right now will probably be better than areas that have relatively high crime rates right now.  In general, rates of violent crime are higher in our major cities and in the Southeast.

Homicides Per 100,000 Population - Photo by Delphi234

#6 Taxes

For a lot of people, tax rates are extremely important when choosing a place to live.  This next map shows the states where the state income tax rate is zero.  But please keep in mind that there are other reasons why some of these states may be undesirable during an emergency situation.

No Income Tax - Photo by Lokal_Profil

#7 Nuclear Power Plants

We have all seen what a single nuclear power plant disaster can do in Japan.  Well, in a future disaster scenario, we could potentially be facing multiple “Fukushimas” all at once here in the United States.  The map below shows where nuclear reactors are located throughout America.  You might want to think twice before moving in right next door to one.

Nuclear Power Plants - Public Domain

#8 Tornadoes

A single giant tornado can absolutely shred the best laid plans of any family.  There are some that feel completely and totally comfortable living right in the heart of “Tornado Alley”, and there are others that very much would like to avoid any area that is at high risk for tornadoes.  As you can see from the map below, the highest risk areas are generally in the Southeast part of the nation.

Tornado Watches Per Year - Public Domain

Of course tornadoes are far from the only natural disaster to consider when choosing a place to live.  For much more on all of this, check out these articles…

-“The New Madrid Earthquake That Will Divide The United States In Half

-“East Coast Tsunami: If It Happens, MILLIONS Of Americans Could Die

-“Why The Earthquake Near San Francisco Is Just The Start Of The Shaking In California

-“Yellowstone Supervolcano Alert: The Most Dangerous Volcano In America Is Roaring To Life

#9 Politics

For many Americans, moving to a politically-compatible area of the country is extremely important.  The map below uses red and blue to represent the average margin of victory in recent presidential elections.  The states that are very red voted very heavily for Republican candidates.  The states that are very blue voted very heavily for Democratic candidates.  The states that are purple were in the middle.  But it is important to remember that there are areas within each state that tend to be more conservative or liberal than the state overall.

Presidential Victory Margins - Photo by Ninjatacoshell

I noted more thoughts for each individual state in my previous article entitled “What Is The Best Place To Live In America? Pros And Cons For All 50 States“.  But wherever you go, the truth is that no place is going to be perfect.  The following is how Joel Skousen, the author of “Strategic Relocation: North American Guide to Safe Places“, put it in one of his recent articles

The more rural you are, the higher the cost of building, maintaining equipment and commuting to civilization—and, the higher your expenses for services including utilities, alternate energy and internet connectivity.  The more your priorities emphasize closeness to a community, the higher your risks will be during a social meltdown, and the more precise must be your preparations to bug out to a separate retreat. So, as you see, there are always compromises in life, no matter if you spend $50,000 on your property or millions, there is no perfect property that will meet all your criteria. Focus on what’s most important for you, your family and/or group.

That was very well said.

No matter what other people are doing, you have to make the choices that are right for you and your family.

So what is your perspective on all of this?

What do you think is the best place to live in the United States?

——————————————————————

 

Mainstream Media and the Manufacturing of Consent

March 20, 2015
By John K Rooney

In 1917, Congressman Oscar Calloway entered into the Congressional Record that in March of 1915, JP Morgan interests hired 12 top news agents to select the most influential newspapers in order that they might, “control generally the policy of the daily press.”  They found it was necessary to purchase the control of only 25 of the greatest papers.  “An agreement was reached; the policy of the papers was bought … an editor was furnished for each paper,” said Calloway.  Among the interests of the purchasers was the goal to get the US into WWI.
.
.
Since that time, all major news media and much of the entertainment industry has functioned as propaganda. Considering the many choices on cable, satellite, radio and print one would think a free press for news and ideas is flourishing through the big outlets.  This is not the case.  About 90% of all large media companies are owned by 6 giant corporations.  All these companies are members of, or have top executives who are members of the globalist organization called the Counsel on Foreign Relations (CFR).  “The invisible government … CFR aims to make the United States a socialist province of a socialist one world,” explained Dan Smoot, former member of FBI Headquarters staff in DC.
.
In 1991, top globalist and CFR kingpin David Rockefeller thanked the Washington Post, New York Times, Time Magazine and other publications saying, “It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years.”
.
Practically every political initiative and viewpoint pushed by the mainstream media’s “experts” or government’s talking heads should be viewed with great suspicion.  In fact, I usually tend to assume the truth to be more likely the opposite from whatever spin is being served.  It is wise to be skeptical about anything broadcasted regarding Syria, Russia, Iran, Israel, Libya, legislation, terror attacks, all foreign policy matters or really, any domestic news issue.   When fresh news is released, I usually wait until more information surfaces in the alternative media on the topic before forming an opinion.  Sometimes news is just news, but more often than not, there is a hidden, sinister side to the coverage such as gun-grabbing efforts or war propaganda.  Big media are experts at manipulating our “feelings” toward a predetermined viewpoint.  Beware of the emotional card.  The mainstream media also ignore felonies of government officials such as false flags, conspiracies, war crimes or Western support of terrorism.  They besmirch those who question the motives of government.  Another common indoctrination tactic is the use of lopsided coverage promoting, for instance, fake science (global warming-evolution) or policies favoring certain nations.  How many reports have you seen on massive climate fraud that was exposed in 2009 in the UN Climate Research emails?
.
Much of what we Americans believe or understand related to politics, history and even morality is inaccurate.  A great deal of what we think we know about modern history or current events, for instance, is quite different from reality.  We tend to assume our views and political inclinations are from personal analysis while actually, most originate from pre-packaged propaganda streaming from every station, TV, major newspaper and entertainment source.  It’s simple, garbage in, garbage out.  If we tune in, how can we not be deluded after thousands of hours of exposure?   Every establishment narrative should be questioned.  Everything should be re-examined.  Neither Democrats, Republicans nor Libertarians are exempt.  These media giants, in conjunction with our educational system have been promoting un-American agendas for a very long time and the country has accepted these things as benign.  Consequently, America is headed for a train wreck.  Talking points and arguments for each diabolical position are carefully crafted by working groups to bring about manufactured consent to big government schemes; schemes we would normally reject.  You Tube: Office of Special Plans.
.
Aldous Huxley, author of Brave New World, said in a 1958 interview, the new propaganda would bypass the rational part of man and appeal to subconscious emotions and the physiological, “making him actually love his slavery.”  Do you love your slavery?  He went on to say that people would be happy under the new regime, but in a way that they ought not to be happy.  Cultural Marxist sociologists called it the “long march” to socialism, a deliberate, methodical overturning of traditions, faith in God, morals and the family structure through propaganda and collectivist-controlled education.  This wholesale gutting of values is for preparation of the all-controlling superstate.
.
(See 11 minute mark) I wouldn’t buy into the overpopulation argument.
.
Take notice of the talking heads on CNN, MSNBC, Fox, etc.  The muckety-mucks with the solutions are usually marketing Trojan Horse programs and fake solutions straight from think tanks associated with the CFR.  Jot down their names and look them up in the CFR membership list.  Even Fox News parades these internationalists day in and day out to a gullible public.  Recently, Charlie Rose (CFR) interviewed former Reagan speechwriter and CFR member Peggy Noonan after a Netanyahu speech.  The charming Noonan is much loved by Republicans, but her answers were in line with the policies of the Jewish dominated CFR in that she gave approval of Bibi’s speech, who aspires to engage America in a war with Iran.  You will also find an astounding number of CFR globalists supporting Marxist positions on network news and major print media.  What often feels like well-intentioned solutions to  nagging problems are almost always direct threats to freedom and Constitutional standards.  While not all big, media personalities are in the CFR, most fear to stray into politically incorrect areas.  Despite this, smaller, local papers still tend to provide good regional news coverage.
.
We’ve observed various fabrications from news personalities like Dan Rather, Brian Williams and Anderson Cooper, but there are many other ways big news distorts stories in order to manufacture consent.  Watch Behind the Big News on You Tube for more details.  Often, news reports that are accurate may not be repeated if the content does not fit with the establishment’s version.  Thousands of these articles from major media can be located on the Internet.  Most effective truth documentaries rely on mainstream news articles and whistleblowers on the Internet who are shut out by the media.  Ignored events like the collapse of 46 story Building 7 that fell symmetrically into its own footprint on 9-11, won’t be in the 9-11 Commission report nor replayed on CBS Evening News.  Stories like these help to form the complete picture of what really happened.  Most people are confused with current events, and rightly so, because the official narratives don’t seem to fit.  To the relief of many, these “memory holed” segments of information are available on the Internet and they form a continuity that finally makes sense of the world.
.
We are told we cannot trust anything on the Internet.  Obviously, that is a lie. The Internet is a gigantic library with good and bad material.  This is where the alternative media, the real free press is exploding, hence the FCC’s power-grab to control it.  Here are some caveats: stay away from kooky space aliens, Planet X and reptilian garbage on the web.  Also, what is taboo in the mainstream media often indicates the censoring of critical information that should be researched on the Web.  Be suspicious of sites that are strongly Republican or Democratic, while constantly bashing the opposing side.  They pose as alternative media, but most are propaganda outlets.  They may speak your language and tell some truth, but you will never free yourself from deceptive propaganda if you trust them.  Make a decision to treasure truth.  Value it above all else and it will come to you.  Then, study the New Testament and the Constitution.  Tri-Cities Liberty Alliance offers a Constitution course every year.
.
Infowars.com and Drudge.com are helpful, but even these avoid certain sensitive areas.  That’s why there is a CUTDC.  Type a query in your search engine and start your adventure.  You will soon find yourself in company with multitudes of like-minded people.
—————————————————————-

 

No-Fault Divorce: A National Catastrophe – Milton Friedman: Roots of the Welfare State FCC Internet Takeover: More Details – Vaccine Nation – Kent Hovind Trial Verdict Ron Paul: Iran fighting ISIS – CFR Advocates Support for al-Qaeda

March 17, 2015

 Already 45 Beheadings in 2015 – Saudi Arabia on Pace to Easily Beat 2014’s Decapitation Level

Milton Friedman – Roots Of The Welfare State

FCC to Seize Entire Internet, Cable Spectrum Under 400-Page “Rules”

How To Cut America’s Divorce Rate in Half

Kent Hovind discussion after trial verdict

Most terrorists are false flag terrorists or are created by our own security services

Iraqi govt urged to probe killing of 22 soldiers, US-led airstrikes blamed

American Millennials Score Poorly Against Other Nations in Skills Assessment

Lindsey Graham Meets With Terrorist, Threatens to Overthrow U.S. Government

CFR: Support Al Qaeda to Defeat ISIS

——————————————————————-

——————————————————————

—————————————————————–

—————————————————————-

—————————————————————

No-Fault Divorce: A National Catastrophe

  • S. Michael Craven Center for Christ & Culture
  • 2006 21 Jul

No-Fault Divorce: A National Catastrophe

This past week I had the privilege of sitting in for Kerby Anderson on Point of View, the nationally syndicated radio program founded by the late Marlin Maddoux.

To be honest, “sitting in” may be an overstatement as I fall far short of Kerby’s ability and intellect when it comes to addressing today’s most pressing issues, especially in the context of a live radio broadcast. Kerby along with co-host Carmen Pate do an exceptional job of raising the level of discourse on the major topics of our day. I strongly recommend this program to anyone who wants to understand relevant cultural and political issues from a learned biblical life and worldview.

While I always enjoy being on Point of View the subject of this program was of particular interest to me and I learned some things that I really did not realize about No-fault divorce.

I along with many others have long argued that the adoption of No-fault divorce, beginning in 1969, has served to increase family dissolution rates and undermine the institution of marriage itself, perhaps more so than any other single factor in history.

Constitutional and family law attorney, J. Shelby Sharpe who was a guest on last week’s program said, “No-fault is national catastrophe. Anything which overturns the order or systems of things whereby families are destroyed and the whole of society adversely affected is by definition a catastrophe.”

It may surprise you to learn that the efforts to advance No-fault divorce legislation were underwritten, in large part, by Hugh Hefner through the Playboy Foundation, which financed an “army of young lawyers” working to eliminate the legal protections previously afforded women and children. Alfred Kinsey also played an instrumental role in reducing these legal protections by falsely reporting that adultery was commonplace in most marriages. This reduced the stigma associated with adultery and ultimately served as the basis for eliminating all laws against adultery. Hefner and Kinsey both saw marriage as the final barrier to sexual freedom and thus determined to remove its inhibiting influence upon unrestrained sexual liberty.

Prior to No-fault divorce, the party seeking divorce was required by law to demonstrate guilt or cause on the part of the other party prior to dissolving the marriage, dividing the family’s assets and destroying the two-parent structure essential for children. These measures provided strong legal protections primarily to women and children who might otherwise find themselves abandoned by husbands and fathers who simply no longer wanted to satisfy their familial responsibilities. (You might think me overly hard on men and unfairly sympathetic to women. Granted both men and women can be guilty of abandoning marriages, however, statistically speaking women and children are most often the victims.) In the cases of adultery the offending spouse risked losing everything. Today under No-fault divorce law adultery is not even considered relevant and therefore bears no relationship in the Court’s decision.

Additionally, under the previous Fault system the state was limited in its actions and intrusion into the private affairs of family except in those cases where one of the parties committed a legally recognized offense against the other. In the wake of No-fault divorce the state has been given unprecedented access into and unconstitutional authority over what was previously sacrosanct: the family. Common law tradition in this country has historically treated the family as a preserve of privacy that was largely off-limits to the government. It was as Supreme Court Justice Byron White (1962-1993) called the “realm of family life which the state cannot enter.”

This is what was most surprising to me; the constitutionality or lack thereof related to No-fault divorce. A retired Circuit Court judge writes, “To the characterization of No-fault divorce laws as both ungodly and inhumane I would add unconstitutional as well.” Attorney Sharpe was confident that if a case involving No-fault divorce was ever brought before the U.S. Supreme Court it would no doubt be ruled unconstitutional and No-fault divorce abolished.

One of the principal protections afforded in the U.S. Constitution is the right to Due Process. Due Process encompasses the rules and principles for our legal system for the enforcement and protection of private rights. It gives the right to be heard regarding issues of life, liberty, or property. This means that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, property or of any right granted him by statute, unless the matter involved is first adjudicated or ruled against him at trial.

No-fault divorce completely usurps the defendant’s right to Due Process. In the case of my other guest, Judith Brumbaugh, her husband of twenty years had an adulterous affair, formed a relationship with the other woman and decided that he no longer wanted to be married. Under the No-fault procedure he was able to file for divorce claiming that their marriage was “irretrievably broken.” Judith contested this claim hoping to preserve her marriage however the No-fault procedure ultimately gave her husband and the Court the right to deny her Due Process. She was in essence charged with a crime, found guilty and sentenced without ever being heard. The marriage contract was unilaterally dissolved.

Judith lost her home, her children and her husband; she was left nearly destitute from legal expenses and utterly without recourse – an act which is legally impossible related to every other contractual obligation in this country. And yet in the most important contractual obligation in society the plaintiff, under No-fault divorce, is able to break his or her contractual obligation without the right of Due Process being given to the other party in the contract. The defendant’s life can be ruined, their liberty restrained in countless ways and their property taken away by the Courts.

This is a travesty of justice that affects more than a million families each and every year with an annual related cost to taxpayers of more than $48 billion. This, of course, doesn’t even begin to consider the secondary societal effects of family dissolution, so easily achieved, upon crime rates, welfare rolls, as well as the emotional and psychological effects upon the children of divorce. No-fault divorce has created an easy divorce culture which according to Maggie Gallagher “demotes marriage from a binding relation into something best described as cohabitation with insurance benefits.”

No-fault divorce is both a social and legal atrocity that needs to be abolished for the sake of families and children that have, for too long, been subjected to the tyrannical actions of family courts and has encouraged, through law, radical selfishness on the part of narcissistic spouses and parents.

This article originally posted in July 2006. Copyright S. Michael Craven 2006

 ——————————————————————

China’s Persecution of Christians – Feminism Fraud – Obama/Netanyahu Fallout is Theater – Persecution of Creationist Kent Hovind: Trial – Iraq Arrests ISIS Advisors Including Americans and Israelis – Danny Macaskill: Amazing Bicycle Action

March 9, 2015

Iraq Arrests ISIS Advisors, US and Israelis Held

Insider Alan Greenspan Warns of Explosive Inflation: “Tinderbox Looking For a Spark”

Persecution of Kent Hovind: Trial Updates

The Netanyahu Speech: A 10-point deconstruction

Feminism Fraud – The Myth of Male Privilege and Gender Inequality Exposed

Video: Militarized Cops Train To Storm Houses In Illinois

 CPS Helps Bring Recruits for Sex Traffickers

Breaking News: New York Moves Forward with GMO Labeling Bills

Obama to Expand Federal Control Over State, Local Police

CIA Asset Joins Islamic State in Libya

 ————————————————————

————————————————————

————————————————————

————————————————————–

Great move of God in China – 2010

—————————————————————

Obama-Netanyahu “Fallout” is Theater – Planned in 2009

US and Israel attempting to establish feigned “diplomatic row” to justify “unilateral” Israeli attack on Iran.March 2, 2015 (Tony Cartalucci – LD) – In a 2009 US policy paper published by the corporate-financier funded Brookings Institution, it was made clear that the US was determined to provoke Iran into a conflict and effect regime change at any cost – up to and including an outright military invasion and occupation of Iran with US troops.

However, before it came to that, the Brookings Institution’s policymakers explored other options including fomenting US-backed political unrest coupled with covert, violent force, the use of US State Department listed foreign terrorist organizations to carry out assassinations and attacks within Iran, and limited airstrikes carried out by either the US or Israel, or both.

In retropspect, 6 years on, all of these tricks have not only been attempted to one degree or another in Iran, but have been demonstrably employed in neighboring Syria to diminish its strength – which according to Brookings – is a necessary prerequisite before waging war on Iran.

And of particular interest – considering what appears to be a growing diplomatic row between the United States and Israel – is just how precisely the US planned to covertly back what would be made to appear as a “unilateral” Israeli first strike on Iran – an attack that appears to be in the process of being justified through a carefully orchestrated propaganda campaign now unfolding.

From the Mouths of US Policymakers Themselves 

The Brookings Institution’s 2009 policy paper titled, “Which Path to Persia? Options for a New American Strategy Toward Iran,” makes clear that negotiations with Iran over its nuclear program is merely theater, and that it will be used to give the world the impression that the United States explored all possible “peaceful” options before resorting to violent regime change.  The report states specifically that:

…any military operation against Iran will likely be very unpopular around the world and require the proper international context— both to ensure the logistical support the operation would require and to minimize the blowback from it. The best way to minimize international opprobrium and maximize support (however, grudging or covert) is to strike only when there is a widespread conviction that the Iranians were given but then rejected a superb offer—one so good that only a regime determined to acquire nuclear weapons and acquire them for the wrong reasons would turn it down. Under those circumstances, the United States (or Israel) could portray its operations as taken in sorrow, not anger, and at least some in the international community would conclude that the Iranians “brought it on themselves” by refusing a very good deal.

Of course, Iran – as admitted to by Brookings themselves – is not governed by irrational leadership, and would not turn down a genuinely “superb offer.” The Brookings Institution admits openly that the US pursues a dual track foreign policy – one for public consumption (making “superb offers”) and another aimed at ensuring Iran looks as unreasonable as possible.

At one point in the policy paper, Brookings would state:

The truth is that these all would be challenging cases to make. For that reason, it would be far more preferable if the United States could cite an Iranian provocation as justification for the airstrikes before launching them. Clearly, the more outrageous, the more deadly, and the more unprovoked the Iranian action, the better off the United States would be. Of course, it would be very difficult for the United States to goad Iran into such a provocation without the rest of the world recognizing this game, which would then undermine it. (One method that would have some possibility of success would be to ratchet up covert regime change efforts in the hope that Tehran would retaliate overtly, or even semi-overtly, which could then be portrayed as an unprovoked act of Iranian aggression.)

Here, Brookings policymakers openly conspire to undermine global peace by “goading” another nation into a war it neither wants nor will benefit from. Provoking a nation that poses no threat to the national security of the United States is a clear violation of international law – with the Brookings paper serving as a literal signed confession.

Yet despite this open admission, conspiring against world peace, what is of more interest is the United States’ plans to disavow any responsibility for an attack it would use its regional proxy, Israel, to carry out in its place. It states specifically under a chapter titled, “Allowing or Encouraging an Israeli Military Strike,” that:

…the most salient advantage this option has over that of an American air campaign is the possibility that Israel alone would be blamed for the attack. If this proves true, then the United States might not have to deal with Iranian retaliation or the diplomatic backlash that would accompany an American military operation against Iran. It could allow Washington to have its cake (delay Iran’s acquisition of a nuclear weapon) and eat it, too (avoid undermining many other U.S. regional diplomatic initiatives). 

To no one’s surprise the British Daily Mail now reports in an article titled, “President Obama threatened to shoot down Israeli jets if they attacked Iranian nuclear facilities last year, claim sources,” that:

President Obama is alleged to have stopped an Israeli military attack against Iran’s nuclear facilities in 2014 by threatening to shoot down Israeli jets before they could reach their targets, according to reports to emerge from the Middle East at the weekend

The threat from the U.S. forced Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to abort a planned attack on Iraq, reported Kuwaiti newspaper Al-Jarida.

Netanyahu will be in Washington for an address to Congress on Tuesday aimed squarely at derailing Obama’s cherished bid for a diplomatic deal with Tehran. 

Here, the Daily Mail repeats a growing narrative that dovetails neatly into long-standing US foreign policy described by the Brookings Institution’s report in 2009 – down to the letter. In fact, the prospect of “shooting down” Israeli planes was discussed as one of many props used in this geopolitical theater.

The US, as prescribed by Brookings, is portrayed as desperately trying to hammer out an almost unreasonably accommodation with Iran, while “mad dog” Israel seeks to unilaterally attack Iran – thus giving the US the plausible deniability it openly claimed it would disingenuously attempt to create ahead of any Israeli attack on Iran. It should be noted that the summation of Israel’s military might is a result long, extensive, and continuous US military support meaning that Israeli military operation is even possible without it.

Also of interest is Israel’s habitual, belligerent, serial acts of inhumanity against both its own people and the Palestinians whose land Tel Aviv has seized and continues to occupy. The nature of these acts is not one of self-preservation, but of intentional provocation – creating predictable political divides across the West easily manipulated particularly at times like these where a “regrettable” attack made upon Iran, a nation the West has thus far failed to topple with terrorism, US-backed sedition, sanctions, and covert provocations, is now in the cards.

It is also clear that the 2009 “Which Path to Persia?” policy paper still represents a vivid window into a much deeper and well-entrenched doctrine still to this day being used to reorder the Middle East into alignment with Western special interests.  It is a signed confession of a now evident conspiracy against global peace and stability. It should be read, in full, before the United Nations Security Council  before those who wrote it and the corporate-financier interests who sponsored it are brought to international justice.

Anything less proves that the United States and its regional proxies, not Iran, are the rogue states, working against global peace and stability, with many standing examples already of their atrocities on display, and more – apparently – still to come.

——————————————————————-

James Perloff: Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion – Net Neutrality: Beginning of the End of the Internet? – IRS Persecution of Dr Kent Hovind – Rand Paul at CPAC – Dr. Tenpenny: Heading Toward Total Medical Tyranny – New Research Underscores Dangers of Fluoride

February 28, 2015

FREE KENT HOVIND & PAUL HANSEN NOW!

Net Neutrality: Beginning of the End of the Internet?

The disappeared: Chicago police detain Americans at abuse-laden ‘black site’

Internet, RIP?

Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion

Author James Perloff on the Protocols of the Elders of Zion (27 min. mark)

Modern Crusaders Fighting ISIS

The Entire Case for Sanctions Against Russia Is Pure Lies

Conservative activist Phyllis Schlafly assails GOP establishment for trying to coronate Jeb Bush

Conservative Centers Quietly Invading U.S. Universities

—————————————————————

Information packed interview starts at the 27 minute mark. Perloff is an author and former writer for the New American Magazine.

—————————————————————-

 

—————————————————————-

—————————————————————-

—————————————————————-

—————————————————————-

IRS vs. Kent Hovind: Imprisoned Evolutionary Foe Now Facing New Charges, Life Behind Bars

HovindPENSACOLA, Fla. – An imprisoned creation science evangelist and Baptist minister who refuted evolutionary theory and who has served eight years of a ten-year prison sentence is now fighting a new charge that would put him behind bars for life.

Kent Hovind, the founder of Creation Science Evangelism out of Pensacola, Florida, has been incarcerated since 2007 over 58 federal counts that largely center on alleged tax evasion. Hovind, who traveled the nation presenting talks about science and the Bible, had considered his ministry to be a church and considered himself to be a minister. Churches are not required to file taxes and are automatically exempt under the law.

But an official with Pensacola Christian College reported Hovind to the IRS, which concluded that those at Creation Science Evangelism did not technically consider the ministry to be their church. The government likewise did not believe Hovind when he said that those who served with him were missionaries but not employees. Hovind also stated that he did not receive any personal compensation from the ministry.

The IRS subsequently ordered Hovind to pay taxes as it would not permit Creation Science Evangelism to be classified as a church, and since it was not registered as a non-profit organization with the government entity.

In 2004, Hovind’s home was raided by IRS agents, and tax liens were placed against his property in the amount of  $504,957.24. He filed three separate lawsuits against the government in an attempt to stop the proceedings, which he viewed as harassment, but was unsuccessful.

In 2006, the case went to trial, and a jury convicted him on all 58 counts. His wife, Jo Delia, was convicted on 44 counts. In January 2007, he was sentenced to 10 years in prison, and remains incarcerated to this day.

Public opinion about the matter has been mixed, as some state that Hovind was wrongfully imprisoned or that his punishment was too severe. An online effort simply known as “Free Kent Hovind” exists to help seek the release of the evolutionary foe.

But those behind the effort are once again stepping up their call to support Hovind as he is now being accused of mail fraud for using the prison mail system to contest the lien that was placed on his personal property. If convicted, reports state that he could face an additional 20-100 years behind bars, thus equating to a life sentence for Hovind.

His trial has been set from Feb. 9 through March 2 before Judge Margaret Casey Rodgers, who presided over his original trial in 2006.

“Judge Rodgers has exhibited an anti-Christian bias, having issued a court order to a school district to refrain from allowing religious activity in the form of prayer at school events,” states Rudy Davis with the Free Kent Hovind effort. “Dr. Hovind also claims Judge Rodgers stated his crimes were ‘worse than rape,’ or words to that effect at his January 2007 sentencing and he has several affidavits from others in the courtroom who claim to have heard Judge Rodgers make this statement as well.”

Wiley Drake, pastor of the First Southern Baptist Church in Buena Park, Calif., has also organized an event called “Boots on the Ground for Kent Hovind” from Feb. 5-10 at the Red Roof Inn in Pensacola, Fla. The event is said to involve a prayer rally and march in support of Hovind.

—————————————————————–

Tuesday, 24 February 2015

New Research Underscores the Dangers of Fluoride

Written by 

Scientists in England have found that fluoride could be causing depression and weight gain and have urged councils to stop adding it to the drinking water. The new findings directly contradict a report released by Public Health England last year that called fluoride a “safe and effective” way of improving dental health.

According to a study of 98 percent of GP practices in England, high rates of underactive thyroid were 30 percent more likely in areas of the greatest fluoridation. The Telegraph reports that up to 15,000 people are needlessly experiencing thyroid problems, which include depression, weight gain, pain, and fatigue.

Approximately 10 percent of the population in England live in areas with a naturally or artificially fluoridated water supply, according to the Telegraph. Researchers from the University of Kent suggest that the number of cases of underactive thyroid was higher in areas such as the West Midlands and the North East of England. Professor Stephen Peckham of the Centre for Health Service Studies, lead author of the study, asserts that the findings should be particularly disconcerting for those who reside in those regions.

“The difference between the West Midlands, which fluoridates, and Manchester, which doesn’t was particularly striking,” Peckham noted. “There were nearly double the number of cases in Manchester.”

Advocates of fluoridation contend it helps to fight tooth decay by making enamel more resistant to bacteria; however, studies have shown that the adverse effects of fluoridation far outweigh any purported good it does.

The University of Kent study found that fluoride inhibits the production of iodine, which is necessary for the health of the thyroid gland, resulting in an underactive thyroid, or hypothyroidism.

“Underactive thyroid is a particularly nasty thing to have and it can lead to other long term health problems,” stated Professor Peckham. He added, “I do think councils need to think again about putting fluoride in the water. There are far safer ways to improve dental health.”

And other studies have found the effects of fluoridation to be equally troublesome for differing reasons.

A 2014 study at Harvard suggested that fluoride can be connected to reductions in the IQ of children.

“A meta-analysis of 27 cross-sectional studies of children exposed to fluoride in drinking water, mainly from China, suggests an average IQ decrement of about seven points in children exposed to raised fluoride concentrations,” noted the authors, Dr. Philippe Grandjean of the Harvard School of Public Health and Dr. Philip Landrigan of New York’s Icahn School of Medicine.

What’s worse is that the levels of fluoride analyzed in that study were less than four milligrams per liter, less than the amounts permitted to be used in water fluoridation by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

“Our very great concern is that children worldwide are being exposed to unrecognized toxic chemicals that are silently eroding intelligence, disrupting behaviors, truncating future achievements and damaging societies, perhaps most seriously in developing countries,” added the authors, who also warned of additional problems associated with exposure to these kinds of substances, including autism.

As a result of those findings, a 2014 report in the medical  journal The Lancet labelled fluoride a dangerous developmental neurotoxicant, placing it alongside other toxins such as lead, mercury, and arsenic.

Critics have seized upon the various findings against fluoride to call for a complete end to water fluoridation.

“In light of the new classification of fluoride as a dangerous neurotoxin, adding more fluoride to Americans’ already excessive intake no longer has any conceivable justification,” declared Fluoride Action Network Executive Director and retired chemistry professor Dr. Paul Connett in a statement. “We should follow the evidence and try to reduce fluoride intake, not increase it.”

The John Birch Society has opposed fluoridation of the water supply for more than half a century. In addition to health concerns, the Society has stood against the forced-medication implications of the practice, noting that fluoride is added to the water supply to treat people, not make the water safer, and warning many decades ago that some environmentalists supported putting sterilants in the water supply (with the government rationing the antidote) to regulate the desired population size.

And now President Obama’s own “Science” Czar John Holdren has proposed that very thing: adding birth control to the water supply for the purpose of regulating population size.

In 1992, libertarian icon Murray Rothbard wrote a scathing critique of the practice that appeared in The New American, questioning the reasoning behind fluoridation.

Rothbard explained that the case for fluoridation rests wholly on the assertion that it reduces cavities in children aged five to nine, and that there are no claimed benefits for anyone over the age of nine. What’s more, studies reveal that the same children aged nine to 12 have more cavities, revealing that the cavity benefits disappear at the age of 12.

Meanwhile, as fluoridation advocates embraced studies that revealed fluoride reduced cavities among children aged five through nine, those same advocates ignored indications that fluoride also created even more significant health concerns. Rothbard wrote:

During the 1940s and ’50s, when the successful push for fluoridation was underway, fluoridation proponents touted the controlled experiment of Newburgh and Kingston, two neighboring small cities in upstate New York, with much the same demographics. Newburgh had been fluoridated and Kingston had not, and the powerful pro-fluoridation establishment trumpeted the fact that ten years later, dental cavities in five- to nine-year-old kids in Newburgh were considerably lower than in Kingston (originally, the rates of every disease had been about the same in the two places).

OK, but fluoride opponents raised the disquieting fact that, after ten years, both the cancer and the heart disease rates were now significantly higher in Newburgh. How did the Establishment treat this criticism? By dismissing it as irrelevant, as kooky scare tactics.

Later studies also found correlations between a fluoridated water supply and cancer rates. In the 1970s, Dr. Dean Burk, former chief of cytochemistry at the National Cancer Institute for 30 years, reported that fluoride increases the cancer death rate based on a study that compared the 10 largest U.S. cities with fluoridation and the 10 largest without.

Ultimately, Rothbard concluded, “Compulsory mass medication is medically evil, as well as socialistic.”

Despite evidence to the contrary, advocates for fluoridation continue to claim that it is safe.

Dr Sandra White, director of dental public health at Public Health England, has said, “Public Health England regularly reviews the evidence base for water fluoridation. The totality of evidence, accumulated over decades of research, tells us that water fluoridation is a safe and effective public health measure, and shows no association with reduced thyroid function.”

But now, the latest findings out of the University of Kent should provide cause to reconsider these statements.

—————————————————————–

Feds Persecute Creationist Kent Hovind – Dinosaurs and the Bible – Obama Helps Jihadists With Airstrike Capability – US Drones Target Innocents in Yemen – Backyard Luge Course

February 20, 2015

The U.S.-Backed Government In Ukraine Is Starting To Lose The Civil War

Italy Puts Troops on the Street in Response to Islamic State Threat

Obama to Give Jihadists the Ability to Order Airstrikes

Mentally Ill Man Waves Broom, Cops Shoot Him Dead And Cuff Him

Global-warming Skeptics Know More Climate Science, Study Shows

U.S. Falls Again in World Press Freedom Index – Now Ranked #49 Globally

EXCLUSIVE: Sheriff Stands Up to IRS, Cancels Land Sale

BBC airs Maidan fighter admitting he fired on police before Kiev massacre

—————————————————————

Trial has been postponed until early March.

————————————————————–

————————————————————–

————————————————————–

DHS Nazis – Illegal Search, Detainment

————————————————————-

————————————————————-

 

Kent Hovind: Political Prisoner?

By Chuck Baldwin
February 19, 2015
NewsWithViews.com

Kent Hovind is a creation-science evangelist and Baptist minister who has already served eight years of a ten-year prison sentence for alleged tax evasion. Kent has a master’s degree in education. He founded and operated Creation Science Evangelism and has traveled extensively presenting creation-science lectures. He has debated evolutionists in over one hundred debates across the country. Kent also operated Dinosaur Adventure Land in Pensacola, Florida. This was a very popular creation-science museum/theme park. Kent also produced scores of videos on the subject of creation-science that have circled the globe and been translated in over thirty languages. Many people affectionately refer to Kent as “Dr. Dino.” He and his wife have three children; and all three of their children (all grown) worked alongside of him in the ministry.

Kent and I were college classmates for one year in Michigan. I was a sophomore when Kent transferred to the school from Illinois. I transferred colleges after that year. Kent stayed and graduated from the college in Michigan. After graduation in 1975, my wife and I moved to Pensacola, Florida, to begin our ministerial work. Some years later, Kent and his family also moved to Pensacola. So, I’ve known Kent a long time.

Kent considered his ministry a church and the people who worked for him as missionaries. He did not incorporate under the 501c3 non-profit organization status. Of course, the Internal Revenue Code states that churches are not required to do so; that, as a church, they automatically have tax-exempt status. Accordingly, Kent believed his ministry was tax-exempt.

Nevertheless, in 2004, IRS agents raided Kent’s home and ultimately brought multiple counts of tax-evasion-type charges, including “structuring,” against him. “Structuring” means deliberately making cash deposits or withdrawals of just under the supposed reporting level of ten thousand dollars. (Egad! God forbid that the IRS not know the details of our banking transactions.) In 2006, Kent went to trial and was convicted on all counts and sentenced to ten years in federal prison. He has been there ever since.

But now the story gets bizarre. Federal prosecutors are currently bringing charges of mail fraud against Kent for using the mail system from inside prison to challenge the lien that the IRS placed upon his property. And, are you ready for this? They want Kent to serve an additional twenty to one hundred years in prison. Obviously, even if he received twenty years, this amounts to a life sentence.

See this report: IRS vs. Kent Hovind: Imprisoned Evolutionary Foe Now Facing New Charges, Life Behind Bars

By contrast, the Rev. Al Sharpton is reported to owe nearly $1.5 million in overdue taxes and penalties from many years ago. But our federal government doesn’t put Mr. Sharpton in the Big House; it invites him to the White House instead.

See the report: Sharpton Owes Nearly $1.5 Million In Back Taxes

Regardless of where one comes down on the whole tax-exempt status issue for churches and non-profit organizations, here is a very relevant fact: the average time spent behind bars for tax “crimes” is between two to five years. For instance, Pete Rose served five months; Chuck Berry served four months; Aldo Gucci served one year; Sun Myung Moon served eighteen months; and Leona Helmsley served four years. Kent has already served much more time than any of those people did.

To help put it in perspective even further, the infamous Chicago gangster, Al Capone, was released after eight years in prison. And, as everyone knows, the only reason the government put him prison for tax evasion was because they couldn’t obtain the evidence they needed to convict him of murder, racketeering, bribery, etc. Yet, our federal government wants to keep a Christian minister–who never committed an act of violence against anyone–in prison for the rest of his natural life. In truth, there are thousands of people who have been convicted of some form of homicide who have not spent as many years in prison as Kent has already.

Back in 2001, restaurant owner, fisherman, and ship builder, Frank Patti (also of Pensacola, Florida) was indicted on 24 counts of tax evasion of more than $12 million. He was sentenced to 79 months in prison and released after serving but 39 months. Kent has already served almost 100 months.

After witnessing the Frank Patti case, I wrote this in 2002: “The prospect of local businessman Frank Patti spending 8 years in federal prison for tax evasion causes me to once again reflect upon the justness of throwing people in jail for nonviolent crimes.

“I believe it is past time for America to examine its practice of locking people up for nonviolent crimes. Even though the United States is far from being the most populous country in the world, we incarcerate more people than any other nation. According to recent reports, there are more than two million people behind bars in U.S. jails and prisons [now the number exceeds six million]. Many of these people are there for crimes in which no one was physically injured or killed and, therefore, pose little or no threat to society.

“Furthermore, it seems that this infatuation with locking people up serves more the interests of ever-burgeoning government bureaucracies than the interests of justice. A breadwinner behind bars means more welfare, more food stamps, and more dependence upon government, not to mention more government jobs, of course.

“With the federal government increasingly encroaching into the area of crime and punishment and with an exploding number of new laws continually being created, more and more people are losing their freedom over crimes that have more to do with offending the powers of government than injuring the lives of innocent people. Such a system hardly promotes justice.”

These comments do not even take into account the question as to whether refusing to pay personal income taxes to Uncle Sam should even be regarded as a crime at all. The income tax was initially sold to the American people as being a “voluntary” tax, remember? Regardless, the federal government treats the income tax as obligatory and most jurors have the attitude, “If I have to pay taxes, so does this defendant,” which is why most juries never acquit folks charged with tax evasion.

In Kent’s case, the argument was that his ministry was a church and as such should have been automatically tax exempt.

What Kent’s case does show is that the IRS can make its own decisions as to who and what owes taxes, the 501c3 non-profit organization status for churches notwithstanding. Charges of tax evasion are very subjective to the whims of the IRS–as Al Sharpton proves. And let’s not forget the Lois Lerner version of selective tax enforcement that targeted conservative organizations. And there is nothing new about that. The federal government has been using the IRS to intimidate or silence individuals or groups it does not like for many, many years under both Republican and Democrat administrations.

While I will not elaborate on this issue here (I’ve done so many times already in this column), this is just another example of the danger of the 501c3 tax exempt status for churches. With the way the IRS can subjectively interpret and enforce the tax code with impunity, a church or so-called non-profit organization that accepts tax-exempt status, can literally be “damned if you do and damned if you don’t.” It’s mostly to do with politics. Remember, it is the IRS–NOT THE CHURCH–that ultimately defines whether an organization is qualified to be tax-exempt. What the Internal Revenue Code stipulates about churches being automatically tax-exempt means NOTHING to the IRS. You must remember that!

In the case of Kent Hovind, one has to wonder if he is actually being treated as a political prisoner. A life sentence for tax evasion? Whoever heard of such a thing?

Then again, I am reminded of the way our government treated former Idaho Congressman George Hansen. His book “To Harass Our People” (about the IRS) should be regarded as a must-read for every lover of liberty. Then, after you read the book, find out how our federal government railroaded him into a prison sentence and how it mercilessly tortured him afterward. It will make your hair stand on end.

Then, after reading what our federal government did to one of its own congressmen, try to convince yourself that our federal government would NOT do almost anything to anyone. And if this is true for American citizens (and it is) imagine how our federal government (CIA, military Dark Ops, etc.) treats foreign governments–even those it once befriended. Come on, folks. Turn off FOX News long enough to start thinking for yourself a little bit.

If you would like to sound off regarding the obvious injustice being committed against Kent Hovind, there is a website set up for that purpose.

See it here: Free Kent Hovind

If enough people rally to Kent’s defense, the IRS might rethink its attempt to keep him in prison for the rest of his life. Like most dark forces, the IRS loves darkness and hates light. Whether you think Kent is guilty or not, eight years is enough! Please help spread a little light for Kent Hovind.

——————————————————————

John Stossel: Gov. Vs Martha Boneta – Citizens United is Breaking up Corporate Dominance of Elections – Ron Paul on the Neoconservatives – Police Execute Man with His Hands Up – Judge Rules Interstate Handgun Transfer Ban Unconstitutional

February 12, 2015

Obama’s Force Authorization is a Blank Check for War Worldwide

Farcical 9/11 “Trial” Halted Again As It Is Revealed Translator Is A CIA Torture Agent

Federal Judge Rules Interstate Handgun Transfer Ban Unconstitutional

ISIS Faked Jordanian Pilot Burning; Voice of Israel Guest

Family Asks Cops To Check In On Sick Veteran; Cops Break Into House, Kill Him

Farage: If the Greeks stand firm, the free world will applaud them

Indian Man Visits Family In Alabama, Cops Paralyze Him For Walking Around Neighborhood

Net Neutrality Is a Trojan Horse Virus Infecting the Internet

Citizens United Is Breaking Up Corporate Dominance of Elections

America’s Colleges Have Become Political Correctness Indoctrination Centers

—————————————————————-

—————————————————————

————————————————————–

—————————————————————-

—————————————————————-

—————————————————————–

Why I’m Not Breaking Up with America This Valentine’s Day

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

John W. Whitehead 
Rutherford Institute
February 10, 2015

“I love America and I hate it. I’m torn between the two. I have two conflicting visions of America. One is a kind of dream landscape and the other is a kind of black comedy.”― Bono

Almost every week I get an email from an American expatriate living outside the country who commiserates about the deplorable state of our freedoms in the United States, expounds on his great fortune in living outside the continental U.S., and urges me to leave the country before all hell breaks loose and my wife and children are tortured, raped, brutalized and killed.

Without fail, this gentleman concludes every piece of correspondence by questioning my sanity in not shipping my grandchildren off to some far-flung locale to live their lives free of fear, police brutality, and surveillance.

I must confess that when faced with unmistakable warning signs that the country I grew up in is no more, I have my own moments of doubt.

After all, why would anyone put up with a government that brazenly steals, cheats, sneaks, spies and lies, not to mentionalienates, antagonizes, criminalizes and terrorizes its own citizens and then justifies it in the name of safety, security and the greater good?

Why would anyone put up with militarized police officers who shoot first and ask questions later, act as if their word is law, and operate as if they are above the law?

Why would anyone put up with government officials, it doesn’t matter whether they’re elected or appointed, who live an elitist lifestyle while setting themselves apart from the populace, operate outside the rule of law, and act as if they’re beyond reproach and immune from being held accountable?

Unfortunately, not only do we put up with a laundry list of tyrannies that make King George III’s catalogue of abuses look like child’s play, but most actually persist in turning a blind eye to them, acting as if what they don’t see or acknowledge can’t hurt them.

The sad reality, as I make clear in my book A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State, is that life in America is no bed of roses. Nor are there any signs that things will get better anytime soon, at least not for “we the people,” those of us who belong to the so-called “unwashed masses”—the working class stiffs, the hoi polloi, the plebeians, the rabble, the riffraff, the herd, the peons and the proletariats.

For instance, we’re still being spied on by our own government. Incredibly, while the British courts recognize that mass government surveillance of cellphone and online communications is not only illegal but violates human rights, the U.S. courts and politicians continue to pander to the government’s whims, whether or not they run afoul of the rule of law. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) actually wants to make the NSA’s mass surveillance a permanent practice.

Not only is the government unapologetic about spying on its citizens, but government agencies are using their collective surveillance data to carry out Orwellian pre-crime programs that attempt to nab “criminals” before they ever commit a crime. To do so, they have to study our social media posts, our buying habits, and where we travel to and from, and on and on.

We’re still being treated like serfs working for an overlord, with little actual rights when it comes to our property, our bodies, our children or our welfare. It doesn’t really matter what the justifications are for such taxes, regulations, prohibitions and fines if they result in us having little-to-no control over how we live our lives. In Seattle, for example, evenone’s trash is subject to government regulation. Residents who fail to separate out their food waste for composting are fined for each violation.

We’re still bartering our freedoms away for the phantom promise of security, and we’re no safer and much less freer than we were two decades ago. First, it was the Patriot Act, which continues to sanction all manner of government intrusions into our lives, from the government tracking what cold medicine we use and how we spend our money to what we read and with whom we communicate. Then it was whole-body scanners in the airports, which were expensive, invasive and ineffective. Most recently, we’ve been subjected to a song-and-dance number about the need for body cameras on police officers to rein in abusive cops, with little said about how these surveillance cameras will be used to identify and track those in their range, or how difficult the footage will be to acquire if needed for our own defense.

We’re still being fooled into thinking that politics matter and that there’s a difference between the Republicans and Democrats, when in fact, the two parties are exactly the same. As one commentator noted, 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.

Our communities are still being held hostage by militarized police. Despite the fleeting attention paid to the transformation of community police into extensions of the military, the transfer of military equipment from the federal government to localities continues unabated, with more than $28 million worth of tactical equipment distributed in the last quarter of 2014. The federal government, in conjunction with local police, has created a standing army on American soil—something those who drafted our Constitution believed would devastate our freedoms.

We’re still exchanging one set of wars for another, to the delight and profit of the military industrial complex. We’ve gone from waging war against Iraq and Iran to sounding the war drums against North Korea, Syria and ISIS wherever it happens to rear its head.

Every once in a while, we get tossed a bone to satisfy that gnawing, nagging hunger for something that looks and tastes like freedom, democracy and free enterprise. Political elections, town-hall meetings, awards ceremonies, sports spectacles, high-dollar lotteries, reality TV shows, morning news programs and patriotic-themed blockbuster movies: these are all the trappings of a so-called free nation without the substance (what Shakespeare referred to as a “tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing”). Indeed, Big Business, in conjunction with Big Government, have become very adept at distracting the citizenry so that “we the people” often have no clue as to the real nature of the political game being played.

Temporarily assuaged, easily distracted and suffering from an appalling case of public amnesia, we fall right back into our complacency and compliance, content to turn a blind eye to blatant abuses, forgive past transgressions, and forget all of the reasons why we should be mad as hell about the state of our nation.

So why do I stay? Why do any of us continue to put up with the gut-wrenching, soul-sucking, misery-drenched, demoralizing existence that is America today?

Perhaps I stay because I was raised to believe that anything worth having is worth fighting for, and I believe with every fiber of my being that freedom matters. In fact, I come from a long line of Americans who understood that there is a price to be paid for freedom, whether that means standing up to the British military, sitting down in a bus seat reserved for “whites only,” or pushing back against corporations who pollute our waters and pillage our lands for profit.

Perhaps I soldier on because I remember what it was like to grow up at a time when the only surveillance I had to worry about were the neighbors who reported back to my mother whenever I did something wrong, and I desperately want my grandchildren to experience that kind of carefree existence. I want them to know that there’s more to life than metal detectors, lockdowns, random searches and pre-crime units trying to nab them for a crime if they dare step out of line.

Perhaps I persevere because I know that there are genuinely concerned Americans out there, including some good cops, honest politicians and pragmatic idealists, who want to pitch in and turn things around for the better. As long as there is this small but vocal minority who cares enough to stand up and speak out, then all is not completely lost.

Perhaps I stick it out because I know that surveillance, overcriminalization, militarized police, power-hungry politicians and greedy corporations are not exclusive to America, and there’s nowhere you can escape to where tyranny cannot follow. No matter what you think of Ronald Reagan and his politics, he was right when he warned that, “If we lose freedom here, there is no place to escape to. This is the last stand on earth.”

Most of all, perhaps I keep fighting on because I’m just not ready to give up on America. At least, not yet.

In the words of that revolutionary firebrand Patrick Henry:

Gentlemen may cry, peace, peace — but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! — I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!

—————————————————————-

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 28 other followers