Home | Signs of the Time | 2010 Index | Subject Index |

Signs of the Time

A Sampling of 2010 news articles from The American Free Press
Subscribe to American Free Press    Become a Distributer and earn $$$

May 5, 2010

May 10, 2010

May 17, 2010

May 24, 2010

May 31, 2010

American Free Press     May 5, 2010

ADL Wants Tea Parties Gagged  

By Rev. Ted Pike

The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) says alleged racial slurs by Tea Party protesters against Congress members in March are "hate speech" and not protected by the First Amendment. According to ADL, Tea Party protesters "crossed the line" with racial slurs against black congressmen.

Such slurs, ADL head Abe Foxman contends, "are not constitutionally protected and require a strong legal response."

Really? Such slurs are socially repugnant—and often unconstitutionally prosecuted under ADL-inspired state and local hate crime statutes. But racial, "homophobic," and "anti-Semitic" slurs are protected by the First Amendment. Threat of imminent violence against a congressman is illegal.

But tolerance of slurs as well as profane, obscene and blasphemous speech is a necessary side effect of America's unique efforts to protect speech as much as possible. The government can't prosecute people for hurting others' feelings. Several months ago, Democratic leadership responded to North Carolina Republican Rep. Joe Wilson's public accusation that President Obama was a "liar" by severely limiting congressional members' freedom to criticize the president. If Republican and Democrat leadership take Foxman's advice and go a step further, they will criminalize perhaps offensive, yet constitutionally protected, speech by Tea Party participants as well.

How would this draconian speech ban be enforced? By ADL's ready made federal "hate crimes" law. The hate crimes law criminalizes not just violent crimes involving hatred but also "general bias crimes against persons or property." ADL considers public slurs against protected groups a hate crime in the dozens of hate crime bureaucracies it has created worldwide. If Congress follows its recommendations, the Justice Department could initiate test indictments for statements that are racially or sexually derisive.

In appeals courts, "liberal" judges would likely uphold "the federal interest," outlawing the bias and words that ostensibly lead to "crimes of prejudice." The hate law would thus morph into a full-blown speech crimes law. With such precedent the government could also criminalize much "seditious," "violence-inciting" and "terrorist" hate speech at Tea Party protests and online.

The hate law is also meant to "prevent" hate crimes. This suggests a federal mandate to discourage the biased thoughts and words the government views as causing hate crimes. The Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act is also meant to prosecute hate crimes "and for other purposes"—purposes known only to its framer, the ADL.

The ADL just produced a 20-page report, "Violent Voices: Anti-Government Extremism Takes on New Intensity." The report gives examples of "hate speech" now proliferating on the Internet and suggests these words will lead to violence.

Freedom of speech and conscience should mean that if Americans believe a member of Congress truly betrayed our nation and Constitution they have the right to say so. In the early 1950s, Americans demanded the execution of atomic spies Julius and Ethel Rosenberg. Today, they have the same right to the opinion that, following due process, execution of a treasonous public official is justified. A government guilty of treason also deserves a violent end. This last, desperate option is upheld by the Constitution, and millions now believe revolution may be publicly advocated lawfully.

Contrary to ADL's depiction of such verbal sentiment as hateful, this view springs primarily from patriotic conviction, not "hate." Although countless Americans may now hold this opinion, it does not mean they intend to imminently execute traitors. It is not in the same category as sending an email to one's congressman, threatening to kill him at his next town hall meeting.

Yet if the ADL is successful in making slurs indictable, soon all who "threaten" government officials through "uncivil" speech could be viewed as hate criminals. Several years ago, a Canadian angrily emailed his member of Parliament for permitting excessive immigration. The MP filed hate crime charges under the ADL's Canadian hate laws, and the charges were upheld. Since the number of Americans now uttering "seditious" sentiments is so large, the ADL is clearly beginning to condition the public to believe that sweeping legislative action and prosecution may be necessary to preserve order.

The vulnerability of Tea Party members to such prosecution is heightened by the efforts of the organized Jewish left to infiltrate Tea Party meetings with "agents provocateurs." These activists want to bring the Tea Party into disrepute through manufactured abuses.

What will keep these Jewish provocateurs, shouting slurs, from themselves being indicted under possible hate law enforcement? Simple. Attorney General Eric Holder made perfectly clear last spring in the hate bill's Senate Judiciary hearing that Jews are protected from indictment under the hate law. Meanwhile, indicted whites, Christians and conservatives face at least triple penalties. If the Tea Party and "far-right" activists and survivalist groups can retain self-control for the next six months, both the Senate and House can be restructured at midterms in November.

If the present populist revolt fails, America will probably plunge into the same fatalistic hopelessness. Is there hope? Yes, if we don't destroy ourselves.

Rev. Ted Pike is director of the National Prayer Network, a Christian conservative watchdog organization.

Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute - as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645 Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|

American Free Press     May 5, 2010

Death of Anti-NWO Polish President Raises Questions  

By Victor Thorn

Airplane crashes have historically been a favorite method of political assassinations, with Ron Brown and John F. Kennedy Jr. being two recent examples. Can we now add Polish President Lech Kaczynski and nearly his entire government to the list? Although motive doesn't need to be proved in a murder trial, plenty of motives certainly exist if we examine one primary set of culprits: those who head the European Union.

Writer James Buchanan provides an opening argument in an April 11 article.

"Whenever politicians die ‘accidentally,' it's worthwhile to see if the deceased politicians had been doing anything that may have angered the New World Order, which in Europe takes the form of the European Union (EU), whose main goals include forcing all European nations under its control to have a single currency and to allow an unlimited flood of immigrants from the Third World," wrote Buchanan.

Kaczynski fit this bill on numerous fronts. As a strong nationalist with conservative, pro-Catholic values who ran an anti-corruption, anti-homosexual campaign; he also sought to purge Poland of its former Communist elements. Kaczynski also believed in placing his home country's markets and economy ahead of the EU's collectivist, global agenda.

One move specifically infuriated the financial cabal. The National Bank of Poland and Kaczynski's Cabinet members agreed to weaken their currency, the zloty, in order to make goods exported to other EU trading partners less expensive, thereby directly benefitting their people. The following day, Kaczynski, the president of Poland's central bank, the Polish army's chief of staff, the deputy foreign minister, the parliament speaker, all military service chiefs and the intelligence director—in fact, 96 people total—died in Smolensk, Russia.

The "coincidence" is alarming, especially since Poland was the only EU member whose economy grew in an otherwise stagnant 2009 market. The reason for this growth can be traced to Kaczynski bucking the system in numerous ways. First, he and his central bank president, Slawomir Skrzypek, both harbored a great deal of distrust for the euro, and showed great resistance in adopting it. Similarly, unlike Greece and Spain, the Poles refused to take part in the EU's loan-shark operations, which essentially dictated that a nation's sovereignty would be surrendered to a gang of usurers.

As journalists Judy Dempsey and Diane Cardwell wrote on April 10, these policy decisions "frequently put Poland on a collision course with its European Union partners."

The bankers also didn't view Kaczynski as a "team player," because he balked at the Lisbon Reform Treaty, which would establish a long-term EU president, while also refusing to participate in the bailout of several insurance companies and lending institutions.

Another factor of great significance is the time and place of this plane crash. Kaczynski and nearly the entirety of his government were due to attend a 70th anniversary commemoration of the Katyn Forest Massacre.

During WWII, Stalin's death squads engaged in an atrocious slaughter. According to UK politician and European Parliament member Daniel Hannan, "70 years ago, almost to the day, 21,768 Polish army officers, intellectuals and senior civil servants were murdered by the Soviet NKVD in the forest near Katyn."

For decades, the Nazis were blamed for this genocidal act, in a cover-up perpetrated by the U.S. government. Tragically, Kaczynski's plane crashed only a few miles from where this original bloodbath occurred.

By honoring these war dead, both Kaczynski and Russia's Vladimir Putin highlighted the true monsters behind this carnage.

Writer Buchanan uses expert analysis in his article. "The trip to Smolensk was to honor the memory of Polish POWs murdered by the Communists during World War II," wrote Buchanan. "The Jews don't like any ‘competition' to their Holocaust."

He added, "Kaczynski was not only throwing a spotlight on a mass murder by Communists, he was throwing a spotlight on a mass murder by Communist Jews. Jews played a key role in Communism, and Jews were often the commissars who were shooting defenseless dissidents and POWs. President Kaczynski had promised to go after Communist murderers who had killed Poles during the long Communist occupation. Many of those war criminals were Jews, some of whom are still living in Israel or the United States."

Further, Kaczynski's two primary coalitions were strongly nationalistic, Catholic oriented and often described by critics as being "anti-Semitic." In this vein, it's clear why the blame game began so quickly, with an assortment of red herrings to divert attention away from those who saw Kaczynski as an enemy of the Zionist-EU cartel.

Victor Thorn is a hard-hitting researcher, journalist and the author of many books on 9-11 and the New World Order. These include 9-11 Evil: The Israeli Role in 9-11 and Phantom Flight 93.

Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute - as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645 Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|

American Free Press May 5, 2010

Judea Declares War on America's 44th President  

By Michael Collins Piper

Outspoken Israeli-born critic of Israel Gilad Atzmon put it bluntly in the title of his March 25 Internet essay: "Judea Declares War on Obama." Atzmon—whose candor is unswerving—was referring to the recent avalanche of bitter commentary unleashed at Barack Obama by powerful international Jewish organizations that perceive the president's Middle East policies to be less than supportive of the demands of Israel and the Jewish lobby in America.

While Israeli immigrant Orly Taitz—a hardline Arab- and Muslim-basher—beats the bushes in public forums all across America, questioning the legitimacy of Obama's citizenship and thus the very constitutional legitimacy of Obama's occupation of the White House itself, her ideological allies, at the higher levels—an amazing array of big-name Jewish leaders and organizations— have been openly damning the president in unprecedented terms.

Leading the pack, predictably, was the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), which conjured up a letter, signed by 76 members of the Senate and 333 members of the House, ordering the president and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to be more accommodating to Israel.

AIPAC—like other Jewish lobby voices—believes the president and Clinton are doing damage to the so-called "special relationship" between the United States and Israel.

Among other things—and at the focus of controversy between the Obama administration and Israel—the Jewish lobby groups uniformly condemn the Obama administration's open criticisms of Israel for working to expand the Jewish population of Jerusalem, which is a Holy City not only to Jews but to Christians and Muslims. In general, however, the Jewish lobby perceives Obama as the grand wizard behind a concerted reassessment (even redirection) of long-standing U.S. favoritism for Israel.

Not missing a beat, on April 15—the very day that American taxpayers are annually asked to "ante up" for billions of dollars in U.S. giveaways to Israel— the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) of B'nai B'rith issued a no-holds-barred broadside aimed at the president, proclaiming that "The Administration's Shift in Policy Toward Israel is a Faulty Strategy."

The ADL's national director, Abe Foxman, charged that Obama's policy was "dangerous thinking." He declared that the administration has issued a "blatantly disproportionate" number of statements in which the president and his advisors have allegedly asked too much from Israel in the effort to reach a settlement of the Arab-Israeli conflict, particularly the crisis surrounding the beleaguered Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza. Foxman asserted:

The significant shift in U.S. policy toward Israel and the peace process, which has been evident in comments from various members of the Obama administration and has now been confirmed by the president himself in his press conference at the Nuclear Security Summit, is deeply distressing. Saying that the absence of a resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict undermines U.S. interests in the broader Middle East and the larger issue of resolving other conflicts is a faulty strategy. It is an incorrect approach on which to base America's foreign policy in the Middle East and its relationship with its longtime friend and ally, Israel. ADL has long expressed its concern from the very beginning of the Obama administration about advisers to the president who see the ongoing Israeli- Palestinian conflict as a major impediment to achieving the administration's foreign policy and military goals in the wider region.

In tandem with the ADL, Ronald Lauder, billionaire president of the World Jewish Congress, issued an open letter to the U.S. president that was published in full-page advertisements in The Washington Post and other major media outlets. Declaring that "Jews around the world are concerned" about Iran and complaining that "the Jewish state is being isolated and delegitimized," Lauder excused the actions of what he described as "the Israeli housing bureaucracy" having made "a poorly timed announcement" (regarding the expansion of Jewish housing in Jerusalem) and expressed anger that the Obama administration had called the announcement an "insult" that reflected "the dramatic deterioration" of the relationship between the U.S. and Israel. Lauder's open letter laid bare the concerns of the global Jewish community:

Our concern grows to alarm as we consider some disturbing questions. Why does the thrust of this administration's Middle East rhetoric seem to blame Israel for the lack of movement on peace talks? . . . Another important question is this: What is the administration's position on Israel's borders in any final status agreement? Ambiguity on this matter has provoked a wave of rumors and anxiety. Can it be true that America is no longer committed to a final status agreement that provides defensible borders for Israel? Is a new course being charted that would leave Israel with the indefensible borders that invited invasion prior to 1967? . . .And what are America's strategic ambitions in the broader Middle East? The administration's desire to improve relations with the Muslim world is well known. But is friction with Israel part of this new strategy? Is it assumed worsening relations with Israel can improve relations with Muslims? History is clear on the matter: appeasement does not work. It can achieve the opposite of what is intended. And what about the most dangerous player in the region? Shouldn't the United States remain focused on the single biggest threat that confronts the world today? That threat is a nuclear-armed Iran. Israel is not only America's closest ally in the Middle East, it is the one most committed to this administration's declared aim of ensuring Iran does not get nuclear weapons.

Lauder closed his challenge to the president by saying that "it is time to end our public feud with Israel," but on the web site of the WJC publicly expressed opinions of the president were openly displayed with one WJC member saying that Obama "does not value the U.S. relationship with Israel and will willingly sacrifice Israel" in order to achieve its goals. Another Jewish leader declared that "There was ample evidence of this president's animosity toward the Jewish people before the election. He is an anti-Jewish bigot." And yet another charged that Obama and his administration are "friendly with Israel's enemies."

Holocaust industry professional Elie Wiesel took out his own full-page advertisements in The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal to blast the administration for its concerns about Israel's expansion of Jewish housing in Jerusalem. Referring to Wiesel's commentary, Erick Stakelbeck who writes on "terror" for Christian Zionist fanatic Pat Robertson's Christian Broadcasting Network, proclaimed:

"When famous Holocaust survivor, human rights activist, humanitarian and Nobel Prize winner Elie Wiesel drops the hammer on you over your Israel policy, you know you are doing something horribly wrong."

And Jennifer Rubin of the American Jewish Committee- associated Commentary magazine chimed in, noting that while Wiesel didn't mention Obama by name "his point could not be clearer: ‘Forget it, Mr. President'."

Ms. Rubin concluded in threatening AJC style: It is significant that it is Wiesel—a Jewish figure without peer and the embodiment of Holocaust memory—who writes this. It is as powerful a rebuke to an American president as any he can receive. It is not simply a geopolitical critique; it is an indictment of Obama's ignorance of and lack of sympathy with the Jewish people. It cannot be ignored. Rough times may well lie ahead for Barack Obama, who just recently was described as an "anti-Semite" by the brother-in-law of Israel's prime minister.

As AFP readers will recall, these trends point toward what AMERICAN FREE PRESS—alone among the media—reported on Dec. 1, 2008, just a month after Obama's election: the possibility that Obama could "pull a JFK" once in office and dare to challenge Israel.

Although many still are unable to comprehend why all of this is happening, considering the fact that two key members of his inner circle—Rahm Emanuel and David Axelrod—are Jewish (with Emanuel having held U.S.-Israeli dual citizenship and being the son of a former Jewish terrorist), even Emanuel and Axelrod have been attacked in Israel as "self-hating Jews."

Those familiar with the JFK administration will recall that although JFK had a number of Jewish advisors he still stood up to Israel on numerous fronts including Israel's effort to build nuclear weapons. Obama's fate remains to be seen.

A journalist specializing in media critique, Michael Collins Piper is the author of The High Priests of War, The New Jerusalem, Dirty Secrets, The Judas Goats, The Golem, Target Traficant and My First Days in the White House All are available from AFP.

Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute - as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645 Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|

American Free Press May 5, 2010

Activists See ‘Non-Compliance' as Challenge to Globalists  

By Mark Anderson

On April 14, on the eve of the "National Strike," an Oregon woman who pushed the concept was cautiously optimistic that the mid-April strike would see a respectable number of people cease to patronize "the system," or at least head in that direction.

When Karen Quinn-Tostado joined this AFP writer's weekly radio show on the Republic Broadcasting Network, this "kitchen table revolutionary" expressed a philosophy of noncompliance as an alternative to street protests. This is especially important now, amid new reports that the Army's 1st Brigade Combat Team/3rd Infantry Division, reportedly training at Fort Stewart, Ga., may be tapped to control anticipated "civil unrest" just before the 2010 mid-term elections.

Some observers allege the government fears that an economically ruined population—pushed against the wall by job losses, home foreclosures and an expected spike in interest rates—may express serious unrest, perhaps leading to an "uprising" of a broad cross-section of people, or "even violence."

In the 1960s, the authorities cracked down on some of the large protests mainly carried out by crowds of young people—mainly leftists.

But today, both the young and old, covering a much broader spectrum, are ready to hit the streets in protest. This is all against a backdrop of Wall Street bailouts for criminal corporations like Goldman Sachs. For the American people, it's been one slap in the face after another—virtually nonstop. Thus, the feds may think something bigger than 1960s-style protests is coming. They may even desire it.

"The government is trying to plant seeds in our minds," said Ms. Quinn-Tostado, "that there is going to be fighting."

Her husband Albert does not think the U.S. Army is bluffing, yet they both agreed that a sustained "pulling back" from the system and fewer open protests lowers the likelihood of a crackdown on unruly Americans.

"We need to educate ourselves . . . get storable food, get off the ‘grid' and not get involved in the big riots they are anticipating," she added.

The peaceful National Strike that occurred April 15 to April 18 now must continue and become a way of life, she said, so Americans can exercise a new, unified approach of "facing their oppressors."

People from about 80 nations have contacted her online, agreeing that the abused common people of the United States and many other nations must turn off their TV sets, stop buying mainstream newspapers, pull their money out of most banks and limit banking to local community banks or credit unions, or withdraw funds from banks altogether. Bartering also fits the bill.

Moreover, the strike means, as much as possible, not buying imports, forsaking companies that offshore American jobs, growing one's own food or cooperating with others who do so; and generally unplugging from "the matrix" of the global economy that elevates Wall Street over Main Street—step by step.

A Utah man called this writer's radio show and related how happy he is to have moved his family to a place where he can raise livestock and get by with far less from the corporate "global economy."

Americans indeed are indentured to a specific societal structure that enables what Ms. Quinn-Tostado calls the "dominant criminal minority," which runs the banking system and controls the big media and main political parties, to fleece the people and channel their money and labor into a system that keeps them locked in a maze and enriches the plutocratic ruling class.

This writer bounced the strike concept off unaware fellow church members April 18. One replied, "Stop buying imports? I can't survive without imports!"

However, the individual did cite a great place, the Little Store on the Prairie in rural Decatur, Mich., where you can buy a host of locally made items and cut one's dependence on big food corporations.

The strike concept has a certain resonance, but it's a question of how broadly and quickly it catches on. "This journey has just begun," Ms. Quinn-Tostado remarked. The strike, she said, also means promoting alternative media to displace the faltering corporate media. Yet the most fundamentally important thing to her is that "the idea of global noncompliance is out of the box." That, she says, means that an idea whose time has come cannot be stopped by anything—even Army divisions assigned to quell possible citizen unrest.

She stressed that the noncompliance option does not incite Americans toward a confrontation with their government, since such a clash could end badly and may be the very thing "the powers that be" are hoping for, so they have an excuse to crack down on an American populace that is waking up.

Ms. Quinn-Tostado said her favored vision is "empty streets," not big protests. She feels that standard protests with sign-carrying participants are fine but only go so far, especially in light of "tea party" demonstrations having been partly hijacked by the neo-conservative faction that plays a major role in pushing America's interventionist foreign policy and permanent wars that are bankrupting the nation.

"It costs a lot of money to be out there protesting," she noted. "I don't think you have to be ‘out there' to be heard."

Mark Anderson is a longtime newsman now working as the deputy editor for American Free Press. Together he and his wife Angie provide many photographs of the events they cover for AFP. Mark welcomes your comments and inputs as well as story leads. Email him at at truthhound2@yahoo.com.

Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute - as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645 Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|

American Free Press May 5, 2010

Witnesses Deny Official Federal OKC Explanation  

By Pat Shannan

On April 15, a news conference addressing "unanswered questions" related to the 1995 bombing of the Murrah federal Building was held in the public forum atrium of the Oklahoma State Capitol. This writer was honored to be the marquee speaker "because of unyealding and relentless pursuit of the truth in this case for the past 15 years."

Other speakers were bombing victim V.Z. Lawton, Grandmother and guardian of two children lost in the explosion Jannie Coverdale, and former federal grand jury member Hoppy Heidelberg, who was kicked off the grand jury for attempting to do his job. All have been keenly aware of the official cover-up since the beginning and have known that others were involved in the crime, including agents of the federal government.

Lawton was working for Housing and Urban Development on the eighth floor when the building began to shake. Believing, as many did that they were experiencing an earthquake, he had several seconds to dive under his desk for protection. The second blast knocked him our for an undetermined time. When he awoke, he was shocked to see the front of the building missing along with the desks where his former colleagues had been seated. He knew the official story of a single blast of ammonium nitrate and fuel oil, called "ANFO." was a lie as soon as he heard it.

"We want to know who blew up the building," Mrs. Coverdale said. "I was told to attend the trials in Denver and my questions would be answered. They were not."

Beyond a form letter from Gov. Brad Henry, which Mrs. Coverdale promptly tore into small pieces, state and federal politicians have ignored her calls for a true investigation into the bombing and the numerous anomalies surrounding it.

"My grandchildren died in ‘95. We lost a lot of babies that day. Not a day goes by that I don't thnk about those babies and wonder who killed them," Mrs. Coverdale said.

Heidelberg told once again of the grand jury folly, which was a mere charade, how he learned more from the newspapers and TV about the case than from the grand jury experiences, and his muzzling by Federal Judge David Russell.

Wendy Painting a graduate student and researcher from upstate New York, told the group that she has been thoroughly investigating, various aspects of the bombing. Noting the 1996 "suicide" of Oklahoma City Police Department Officer Terry Yeakey and the unsolved issues surrounding that case, Ms. Painting noted, "Questions can be mortally dangerous.

Oklahoma City private investigator and researcher Joe Cooley also spoke and said that after hearing about the Yeakey case he was "horrified." But he began digging and was soon subject to "surveillance" by people who did not want him to seek the truth.

Cooley said a source told him that Yeakey - who was found brutally murdered in a remote area in Canadian county - had been killed by "federal agents" but that the source could not say much more than that.

Chris emery, who has been working for several years on a documentary about the mysteries still hanging over the Oklahoma City bombing, reminded the press that those seeking the truth "have no political agenda" that this is simply "abut right and wrong."

Harmon Taylor, the Dallas, Texas-based attorney who was granted a 30-day stay of execution for McVeigh in May 2001 by Attorney General John Ashcroft, spoke of the legal transgressions and what the system did not do including the fact that the case should never have been transferred to Denver, where the trial was ultimately held. Article III, Section 2 clearly states that any crime must be tried in the state in which it was committed.

When this was ignored Taylor began to realize that the Constitution was no longer in force and began to question, "When did it go away?"

The local Electronic media covered the meeting briefly on the nightly news but carefully avoided presenting the many conspiracy facts with a thinly veiled portrayal that such a public presentation was merely more "conspiracy theory."
|Top|

American Free Press May 5, 2010

Prominent Senators from Arizona Want 3,000 National guard Troops on Border  

Both Republican Senators from Arizona want an additional 3.000 National Guard soldiers to be deployed to the U.S. border with Mexico in an effort to combat the rising violence and drug trafficking there.

As Part of a 10-point plan, Sens. Jon Kyl and John McCain are calling on the National Guard to send more troops to stop smugglers from sneaking drugs and illegal aliens across the border.

The two also want Congress to provide funds to add 700 miles more of steel fencing in Arizona. AFP's Deputy Editor Mark Anderson recently visited the massive U.S. fence along the border in Texas just across from Juarez, one of the mst violent cities in Mexico. The sheer size of the metal fence can be seen in video Anderson shot of his visit.

Arizona is one of the hot spots for drug and human traffickers seeking to move contraband across the border. According to published reports, of the 1 million people detained while attempting to cross the border in the past few years, 600,000 of them were stopped in that state. "Violence has dramatically increased over the last two years," McCain said at a joint press conference.

"People are fed up," added Kyl.
|Top|

American Free Press May 5, 2010

Inventing A Reason To Bomb Iran  

Starting wars for Israel still tops the agenda of the neo-conservative wing of the Republican Party, evidenced by top dog neocon Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who recently declared on national television that the United States should bomb Iran to stop the Persian country from developing a nuclear program.

On a cable talk show on April 18, McCain said Washington should force Russia and China into backing sanctions against Iran. What's his Plan? He wants to try to embarrass those leaders into supporting U.S. and Israeli plans to economically cripple Iran. In reality, McCain has it backwards. The only embarrassment so far has been how Washington and Tel Aviv continue to be ignored by Russian and Chinese officials.

Sen. McCain was responding to a Pentagon memo that had been leaked to the press. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates noted that the United States lacks a coherent plan to thwart Iran's nuclear ambitions. McCain wants to get Western Europe to impose sanctions on refined petroleum. He wants to try to mobilize a Western front and force the East into backing his goal.

Of course, the only way to enforce an embargo would be to use the Navy to prevent tankers from docking in Iran and to line Iran's land borders with checkpoints manned by U.S. troops.

Coming from the military. McCain should know than an embargo against a foreign power constitutes an act of war, which would force Iran's military to retaliate. And that is exactly what the neo-cons want - for Iran to strike back against the United States, handing them a phony casus belli for a full-scale war.

And it would certainly be another no-win war, the biggest of all of the nonsensical no-win wars in this country's history.

McCain may be a crafty politico and smart enough to repeat the words given him by his Israeli paymasters, but he is a third grade dunce when it comes to military strategy.

It has been proven over and over again that bombing alone cannot win a war. Churchill and Roosevelt proved that during what became known as World War II, thanks to their aggressive intent to aid Stalinist communism in every way they possibly could. Their carpet-bombing of German cities was a clear war crime, prohibited by the Geneva Conventions, but it did kill many civilians and virtually destroyed the German infrastructure, such as highways, railroads and complete cities. It took the invasion of American and British forces to create a two-front war for Germany and finally bring it to its knees.

This strategy was also proven to be a failure in Afghanistan when the U.S. military tried to carpet bomb Taliban fighters into submission. During the U.S. bombing campaigns, the Afghans would simply withdraw to deep caves within themountains to hide. It was only after U.S. military commanders sent tens of thousands of Afghan Northern Alliance foot soldiers into the mountains that the Taliban was eventually forced to retreat.

Should America resort to bombing Iran, it would kill many Persians but that is all. Iran has some 70 million inhabitants and can field an army of 10 million, if necessary. A successful invasion would take at least 12 million good soldiers, not girls and fairies.

The Logistics to support such a force would be far more than this already-bankrupt country could supply.

It would be the worst defeat for American arms in ourhistory, duncers like McCain to the contrary notwithstanding.
|Top|

American Free Press May 5, 2010

Landmark Immigration Law Passes in Arizona

By Mark Anderson

Arizona State Sen. Russel Pearce is making waves again, having authored an immigration law that evidently has some teeth - and various reports confirm the law is gnawing away at the comfort zone that illegal immigrants have been living in, getting public benefits as non-citizens.

"I have a hard time having compassion for criminals," Pearce told The Los Angeles Times. "It's about time people [criminals] started being afraid."

Pearce sponsored this law to combat the ongoing problem of large numbers f illegal aliens improperly receiving public benefits. His law, which took effect last November, makes it a misdemeanor for a public worker to fail to report illegally gotten benefits. More importantly, it also allows the taxpaying citizens who make much benefits possible to sue public agencies if they believe immigrants are receiving improper benefits.

"I want the law enforced," Pearce added. "Every time you pass something it becomes a toothless tager."

Passing laws with substance and enforcing them - in areas of legitimate government regulation such as immigration - may be seen by some as heavy handed, when the oversight of public benefits has been so lax that any real scrutiny may just seem too strict when it really is not. One is reminded of Hazelton, Pa. Mayor Lou Barletta, who, four years ago, boldly started cracking down on city employers hiring illegal aliens, among other measures. Barletta meant business and wanted real enforcement. He reasoned that since the federal government was failing to control the nation's borders, cities such as his had to step in and do what they could.

Pearce, who represents district 18, became well known as the architect of Arizona's Proposition 200 in 2004, which required proof of citizenship to register to vote, photo ID when voting and proof of eligibility to receive non-federal mandated public benefits. His new immigration law is a logical step for him to take, given his past.

Moreover, he is pushing legislation, SCR 103, "to eliminate affirmative action by government (all government discrimination)." It will be on the November 2010 ballot.

A little history is revealing. Pearce was a chief deputy for 23 years with the Maricopa county Sheriff's Office, the fourth largest sheriff's office in the nation, and was responsible for many innovations including a "tent city" for inmates that saved taxpayers millions of dollars in construction costs.

The Arizona law (SB 1070) passed the Senate April 19 and was expected to be signed by Gov. Jan Brewer (R). The Law makes it a state crime to be in the country illegally, requiring local law enforcement to determine an individual's legal status if there is reasonable suspicion that he or she is in the U.S. illegally. If suspected illegal aliens are not carrying a valid driver's license or identity papers, for example, police can arrest them.

Ironically, Arizona is doing what the federal government should do: protect our national borders. The U.S. has the military guarding the borders of 130 nations worldwide but not its own. The arms industry and big banksters celebrate huge profits. But taxpayers spend more than $7,000 a year for a family of illegal immigrants through free medical care and welfare.
|Top|

American Free Press May 5, 2010

Combat Brigade Prepares for Civil Unrest in America

By Mark Anderson

the battle-hardened 1st Brigade Combat Team/3rd Infantry Division, based in Fort Stewart, Ga, may be deployed as a crowd-control unit in anticipation of possible civilian unrest just before the 2010 midterm elections. The thinking is that the nation's severe economic downturn and uncertainty about the nation's economic and political status could spark rioting or large demonstrations.

This Army unit that has made several deployments to Iraq, but was assigned on Oct. 1, 2008 to the U.S. Northern Command (Northcom) based at Peterson Air Force Base in Colorado Springs. Thus, this division would be the main military force to carry out Northcom's stated mission. Northcom "plans, organizes and executes homeland defense and civil support missions," Northcom's web site states.

Northcom was actually established Oct. 1, 2002 in the wake of the 9-11 terrorist attacks for the express purpose of protecting the U.S. "Homeland" and to support local, state and federal authorities. Northcom is commanded by Gen. Victor R. Renuart Jr.

This marked the first time an active-duty unit had been given a dedicated assignment to Northcom. The force is known as Consequence Management Response Force. It is an "on call" federal response force for "terrorist attacks and other natural or manmade emergences and disasters," according to military sources.

"In October of this year, one month prior to the November midterm elections, a special army unit known as ‘Consequence Management Response Force' will be ready for deployment on American soil if so ordered by the president. According to The Army Times, they may be called upon to help with civil unrest and crowd control or to deal with potentially horrific scenarios such as massive poisoning and chaos in response to a chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear or high yield explosive, or CBRNE, attack," is how Conservative Examiner writer Anthony G. Martin stated the situation on April 13, 2010. He is among several sources, another being infowars.com, that have posted articles saying the Army seems more focused on domestic operations due to expectations of civilian unrest.

Due to the 1878 Posse Comitatus Act - a long-honored civil code that severely limits the use of the military in domestic law enforcement, mainly due to abuses experienced by Southern Americans from post-Civil War martial law during reconstruction - many concerned Americans wonder if the U.S. military will ever "cross the line" and break that act, ushering in militarized police state, temporarily or long-term. The Military commissions act of 2006 (MCA) is said to have watered down some of the acts restrictions, but the Supreme Court has challenged some MCA sections' constitutionality.

U.S. Army Major Mike Humphreys of Northcom explained to AFP a great deal from the military perspective, saying that "the Posse Comitatus Act is a civil code that we follow. We take that very seriously. We are citizens, too. All we can do is follow our orders and assist in defending the Constitution of the United states. I have faith in our Constitution."

Asked about soldiers behavior in the aftermath of the 2005 Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans - in light of video footage that shows GIs entering occupied homes and confiscating weapns that homeowners may have needed to deter looters - Humphreys replied that federal troops only entered those homes if accompanied by National guard troops that had not been federalized and answered to the state of Louisiana. That is how it worked, which could not be understood from watching the videos, he said.

He said he has heard talk of unrest near election time in 2010, dismissing it mostly as the concerns of "angry, disgruntled people," but he said there would have to be enough unrest for a state governor to ask the federal government for an emergency declaration. The president would then have to issue such a declaration. FEMA, with the permission of the state or states affected by the unrest, would enter the state as the lead federal agency for which military units assigned to Northcom would "assist," Humphreys said.

"Even FEMA is not in charge; the state governments still have responsibility," Humphreys added, pointing out that to technically violate Posse Comitatus, the U.S. military and Department of Defense would actually have to take control from the states.

"We did not violate Posse comitatus - U.S. forces, the U.S. military, was not in charge," he said, with respect to Katrina's aftermath. "FEMA took an active role. We assisted FEMA and other local authorities.

However, FEMA's policy of keeping droves of Katrina refugees holed up in the New Orleans Superdome, where many suffered deprivations and some died, received stinging criticism in many quarters, including from Fox News reporter Shepard Smith who's not normally critical of government operations.

AFP pressed Humphreys on whether Posse Comitatus is violated in spirit, through a backdoor approach following FEMA's lead, even though the military is not technically usurping control from the states. He denied that was the case.

He summarized that with FEMA taking the lead, "We set up a joint operations center" during emergency response operations, regardless of whether the reason is a manmade disaster, unrest, natural disaster or terrorist attack. The operations center is typically comprised of state emergency people, the National guard under the affected states, federal military under the defense Department, the Red Cross and various nonprofits.

There are, notably, online reports from military sources that confirm the existence of "nonlethal" directed-energy weapons that some military commentators have suggested for use during crowd control operations in the United States. Critics say the use of these weapons can cause severe burns.
|Top|

American Free Press May 5, 2010

How to End Health Insurance Mandate

By Rep. Ron Paul

I have introduced a very important piece of legislation that I hope will gain as much or more support as my "Audit the fed" bill. The End the Mandate Act (H.R. 4995) will repeal provisions of the newly passed health insurance reform bill that give the government the power to force Americans to purchase government-approved health insurance.

The whole bill is rotten, but this provision especially is a blatant violation of the Constitution. Defenders claim Congress's constitutional authority to regulate "interstate commerce" gives it the power to do this. However, as Judge Andrew Napolitano and other distinguished legal scholars and commentators have pointed out, even the broadest definition of "regulating interstate commerce" cannot reasonably encompass forcing Americans to engage in commerce by purchasing health insurance. Not only is it unconstitutional; it is a violation of the basic freedom to make our own decisions regarding how best to meet the healthcare needs of ourselves and our families.

The new law requires Americans to have what is defined as "minimum essential coverage." Some people may claim that the requirement to have "minimal essential coverage" does not impose an unreasonable burden on Americans. There are two problems with this claim:

First, the fery imposition of a health insurance mandate, no matter how "minimal," violates the principles of individual liberty upon which this country was founded.

Second, the mandate is unlikely to remain "minimal" for long. The experienced of states that allow their legislatures to mandate what benefits health insurance plans must cover hasshown that politicizing health insurance inevitably makes it more expensive. As the cost of government-mandated health insurance rises, Congress will likely respond by increasing subsidies for more and more Americans, adding astronomically to our debt burden. An insurance mandate undermines the entire principle of what insurance is supposed to measure - risk.

Another likely response to rising costs is the imposition of price controls on medical treatments and limits on what procedures and treatments mandatory insurance will have to reimburse. This is happening in other countries, where government is intrinsically involved in these decisions, and people suffer and die because of it.

This will only increase the bottom line of the very insurers the legislation was supposed to control. Meanwhile, alternate methods of healthcare delivery and financing, such as concierge doctors, alternative medicine or physician-owned hospitals will be greatly harmed, if not put out of business altogether, when the entire country is forced into the insurance model.

It will be difficult for families to come up with extra money to pay for alternative healthcare of their choice when their budget has been squeezed by this mandate to buy insurance. This will in turn reduce competition for healthcare dollars.

Health insurers, like many other corporations in other industries, have now used the legislative process anti-competitively to corner the healthcare market. Instead of calling this socialized medicine, we should call it corporatized medicine, since the reform is to force us all into being customers of these corporations, whether we like it or not.

Congress made a grave error by forcing all Americans to purchase health insurance. The mandate violates fundamental principles of individual liberty, and will lead to further government involvement in healthcare. It is time for legislation that fights back for the freedom of the people on this issue. It is time to End the Mandate.
|Top|

American Free Press May 12, 2010

SPLC, ADL Smear Patriots  

By Mark Anderson

Did you know that informing Americans about the often bitter truth about their nation and the world constitutes "hate"? Neither did we. But the Alabama-based Southern Poverty Law Center sees itself fit to list 512 American patriot groups in a special issue of its quarterly Intelligence Report and characterize them as "hate" groups—even while admitting, "The listing here does not imply that the groups themselves advocate or engage in violence or other criminal activities, or are racist," as the report states.

If these groups are not criminally inclined, then what's the problem? The problem from the SPLC's viewpoint is that many of these groups, whatever their imperfections, communicate pertinent information to a population that is increasingly indifferent to, or distrustful of, big media, misplaced or abused government authority and the rogue corporate structure.

Of course, not every group that made "the list" is always accurate in its views, nor does freedom of speech mean you must be accurate, nor does it exclude those who may say stupid things. It's not illegal to be eccentric, nor is it against the law to be angry or upset at what's going on. Most people are. Deal with it.

Corporate structure has colluded with government to impoverish the average person and bail out corporate titans to the tune of billions. Everybody knows this, except, it seems, the SPLC, which wants to tell Americans and law enforcement officials to distrust these citizen groups while those in the corporate world rob our nation and close down our industry.

If calling attention to corporate-government actions that threaten the future of every man, woman and child is "hate," then some groups listed by the SPLC stand "guilty as charged."

But observe that usually those who shout "hate" the loudest are themselves the "haters," for lack of a better word. It's the world's oldest trick: Accuse others of what you are guilty of, as a ploy to smear your perceived opponents. The SPLC seems adept at this. Good people in conservative groups are lumped in with obscure elements and lesser-known groups who would disagree with each other on many issues. But the SPLC makes it seem like they agree on most things, to broaden the smear.

Yet, it's not as if the SPLC is particularly important or credible. This whole thing has become a tiresome perennial exercise for the leftist SPLC, which sees anyone to the political "right" of its positions as "extremist"—another abused buzzword used to confuse the population. It's all a matter of perspective. If you are in a group as ultra-left wing as the SPLC, almost everyone else is automatically to the right of you. Then it becomes a question only of who to put on "the list."

Meanwhile, the SPLC speaks of illegal immigrants as if breaking U.S. immigration laws is unimportant. In other words, it's OK to enter the nation illegally, but it's not OK to protest it. Overall, the SPLC's work borders on slander and libel.

The biggest problem, however, is that the SPLC has the ear of the Department of Homeland Security, among other government agencies that troll for signs of "domestic terrorism" and may equate these American "extremist" groups with potential terrorism without justification.

Most Americans are a mixture of "right" and "left" views, if such labels must be used, and most people actually have much more in common than is usually assumed. For example, except for a minority of neoconservatives running our foreign policy (a breed of alleged conservatives who lust for empire and conquest), a sizable cross section of both liberals and traditional, constitutional conservatives want to stop fighting perpetual wars.

AFP reminds Americans that there are about 800 U.S. military bases in at least 120 nations and that our interventionist foreign policy is bankrupting our nation, maiming and killing our own soldiers who are not given winnable missions, and bringing untold agony and death on innocent foreign people. Is it hateful to report that?

And excuse us for noting that Israel does not need nor deserve exclusive U.S. protection and foreign aid. The Israeli army's slaughter of largely defenseless Palestinians in late 2008 showed the whole world what that rogue nation is all about.

Thus, hardly more need be said, except to say that just as Germany and other European nations can and should defend themselves without American taxpayers holding their hands, the same goes for Israel, which is perfectly capable, with some 200-400 nuclear weapons, of defending itself. This is not "anti-Semitism."

SPLC's Intelligence Report includes this general description: "Of these groups, 127 were militias . . . and the remainder includes ‘common-law' courts, publishers, ministries and citizen groups. Generally, patriot groups define themselves as opposed to the ‘New World Order,' engage in groundless conspiracy theorizing, or advocate or adhere to extreme anti-government doctrines."

The actual listing consists of John Birch Society, Oath Keepers, Constitution Party, American Independent Party and various other patriot-citizen groups and chapters in all 50 states. None gives any indication of being dangerous. There also is a Texas-based group to end the Federal Reserve's private central banking racket, which is tough to define as "hate." And Gary Franchi's principled Restore the Republic in Illinois is listed, when this writer can personally attest to Franchi's honesty and passion to report the truth and make America a better place.

Other, more obscure, groups are listed, too, whose status and intentions are unknown. Yet, they all have a right to their opinions and to engage in the political reform process.

Unless engaged in actual, provable crime, any person or group can say anything they want in the United States. May it always remain that way, regardless of attempts by some to reclassify free speech as hate speech and label concerned Americans as "enemies of the state."

Mark Anderson is a longtime newsman now working as a deputy editor for AFP. He and his wife Angie provide photographs and video of the events they cover for AFP. Listen to Mark's radio show at republicbroadcasting.org, Saturdays at 2. Email him at at truthhound2@yahoo.com.

Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute - as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645 Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|

American Free Press May 12, 2010

Child Exploitation Investigator Found Killed in Home  

By Victor Thorn

Child trafficking, pedophile rings, sexual exploitation, teenage pornography and even organ harvesting: These types of crimes make Washington politicians recoil in horror. But when these terrible acts involve some of their own, it also drives the elites to silence those who attempt to expose their dirty deeds.

Nancy Schaefer served two terms as a Georgia state senator, in addition to being a highly respected family rights advocate, founder of the Eagle Forum and Sunday school teacher. Mrs. Schaefer spoke out against abortion and sought legislation to display the Ten Commandments in public buildings.

On March 26, a sleeping Mrs. Schaefer was found shot to death from behind in her bed, along with her husband, who also perished after receiving a gunshot wound to the chest.

Local authorities immediately ruled it a "murder-suicide" instigated by her husband of 52 years, but there is much more to the story than law enforcement is telling. Initially, Georgia's Bureau of Investigation claimed the couple formed a death pact due to poor health and financial woes.

However, family members fervently disagreed with these attempts to create a motive by floating fabricated stories. Neither of the deceased had a terminal illness, their bank accounts were sound, and, as committed Christians, they opposed suicide.

During an April 22 interview with this writer, Ohio radio talk show host Paul Drockton presented a shocking alternative to the official version.

"I heard from a couple of different sources that Mrs. Schaefer was working on a documentary, and intended to go public by exposing a high-level pedophilia ring," said Drockton.

When asked if people would be familiar with the politicians named, Drockton replied in the affirmative, although he wouldn't divulge their identities. This writer assumed they were nationally known figures.

Drockton added, "Mrs. Schaefer was extremely nervous about being assassinated. On a recent trip to Washington, she booked three rooms at her hotel—one on each side of her own, for security purposes. Mrs. Schaefer also started using disposable cell phones because she felt her lines were being tapped."

In hindsight, these concerns most certainly appear justified. Over the past few years, Mrs. Schaefer engaged in a high-profile campaign against Georgia's Child Protective Services (CPS). During an April 14, 2009, presentation, Mrs. Schaefer called CPS "a protected empire built on taking children and separating families. It is one of the most evil and corrupt branches of government in America."

She also accused them of "legally kidnapping" the children of poor families who couldn't afford attorneys in order to fill bureaucratic quotas under Bill Clinton's Adoption and Safe Families Act.

Mrs. Schaefer provided the grisly details. "Cash bonuses are paid to the state for every child that is adopted out of foster care. Oftentimes, the amount is $4,000 to $6,000, with an extra $2,000 for special-needs children."

Mrs. Schaefer continued: "To make more money, they need more merchandise; and children equal merchandise. They also need a large selection of children for potential adoptions so that buyers have more to choose from."

CPS therefore acts as a facilitator, using the court system to snatch children from their parents, then feeding them into foster care for eventual adoption. Mrs. Schaefer cited numerous dangers to this corrupt arrangement. A 1998 study by the National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect stated that six times more youths die in foster care than in the general public. They are also more prone to sexual molestation by pedophiles in the foster care system. Many children simply disappear.

Considering the monetary incentives surrounding a business of trafficking in children by converting them into cash, did CPS open the floodgates to even more widespread wrong doing—one that resembled the notorious "Franklin Affair"?

Did powerful politicians operating a high-level child pedophilia ring clean house to prevent Mrs. Schaefer's film from seeing the light of day?

Online commentator Steven Erickson offered this response on April 2, noting that Mrs. Schaefer attended a special hearing in the Netherlands.

"Nancy was recently the victim of murder," wrote Erickson. "Her husband is said to have been the killer in a murder-suicide. Some may think it is a murder-for-hire, paid for by police or insiders in Georgia government allegedly involved in official kidnaping for federal tax dollars. Are children being trafficked for white slavery, sex exploitation, for bogus adoption, and to give political insiders six-figure salaries paid for with taxes? Are the police in some states involved in drug dealing, prostitution, racketeering, obstruction of justice, murder, rape, extortion and other crimes? Are American courts a scam? Nancy was pretty high profile, making serious allegations, and she ends up dead. Do the math."

The broader question remains: Did corruption end at the Georgia state level, or were Mrs. Schaefer's sights set even higher?

During her Netherlands World Congress of Families speech last year, Mrs. Schaefer specifically described U.S. government involvement in human trafficking.

Considering the huge amounts of bloodstained dollars at stake, not to mention the lengthy prison sentences awaiting each guilty party, it's clear she may have been a prime target for retaliation.

Washington politicians have long concealed a cesspool of child "call boys." A few names that come to mind include Paul Bonacci, who was kidnapedSPLC, ADL Smear Patriots and sold as a sex slave; Barney Frank's homosexual lover, who operated a prostitution service, Larry King of the Franklin Cover-Up; and Jeff Gannon, a planted White House "reporter" who operated a homosexual escort service. Then, of course, The Washington Times ran the following headline on June 29, 1989: "Homosexual Prostitution Inquiry Ensnares VIPs with Reagan, Bush."

Former Nebraska state patrolman Gary Caradori, during an investigation of the Franklin Cover-Up case, was murdered on June 11, 1990, after having his airplane sabotaged. Mrs. Schaefer seems to have suffered the same fate, except her cowardly killers used a bullet in her back to ensure her silence.

Victor Thorn is a hard-hitting researcher, journalist and the author of many books on 9-11 and the New World Order. These include 9-11 Evil: The Israeli Role in 9-11 and Phantom Flight 93.

Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute - as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645 Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|

American Free Press May 12, 2010

The Short, Hard Life of a Slave Laborer for China  

By Victor Thorn

With the actual U.S. unemployment rate teetering at around 20 percent, our lopsided "free trade" treaties with China must be seriously reexamined. Particularly interesting is a recent photo that surfaced, which American outsourcers don't want us to see.

On April 18, Liz Hull and Lee Surrell of the UK Daily Mail described KYE Systems, a "Chinese sweatshop where workers slumped over their desks with exhaustion." The message from this poignant picture is clear: Slave labor is alive and well in China, with corporate America acting as its enabler.

The horror stories emerging from these factories illustrate why the Communists hold such a competitive advantage. Earning a take-home pay of 52 cents an hour, these coolies—many of them young women—work 15-hour shifts, six days a week, making computer parts for Microsoft, Hewlett-Packard and Samsung, among others. With over 1,000 workers crammed into a 100-square-foot room with no air conditioning, many of them never even leave the premises.

Hull and Surrell write, "The workers also sleep on site, in factory dormitories, 14 to a room. They ‘shower' with a sponge and bucket."

What makes this appalling situation even more abysmal is that Chinese leaders are seeking even cheaper labor. In a Sept. 28, 2008 article entitled "How China Has Created a New Slave Empire in Africa," Peter Hitchens details the plight of Zambianminers paid three dollars a day. The employees "wash their cobalt and copper ore finds in cholera-infected streams full of human filth," and live in "diseased malarial slums."

When morally devoid Communists stridently push their imperialistic aims, it results in child slavery, kidnappings, widespread sexual harassment and thousands of injured or dead workers.

The BBC recently documented a Chinese slave ring in which police rescued mentally disabled men who were beaten and terrorized. Some "could not speak coherently, or clearly remember their names."

In Guangdong province, China, hundreds of rural teenagers were stolen from peasant farms by "employment agencies," then forced to stamp parts for electronic goods that will eventually be stocked in Wal-Mart stores.

To sidestep the few legitimate investigators in existence, journalist David Barboza reports, Chinese industrialists "evade scrutiny by providing fake wage and work schedule data." In addition, often the kidnapped, underage laborers have no identification cards and little or no money to escape their captors.

Hull and Surrell interviewed one indentured servant, who lamented, "We are like prisoners. It seems like we live only to work; we do not work to live. We do not live a life, only work."

In an April 19 article, representatives from the National Labor Committee (NLC) illustrated the inhumane conditions.

"There are not many people who can bear it for more than a year, and almost never past two years," concluded the NLC.

Once these slaves are used up and thrown away, others are forced to fill their spots. An authentic "evil empire" exists in the Pacific Rim; one that owns our debt, controls our manufacturing base and thrives on being the slave-labor capital of the world.

Victor Thorn is a hard-hitting researcher, journalist and the author of many books on 9-11 and the New World Order. These include 9-11 Evil: The Israeli Role in 9-11 and Phantom Flight 93.

Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute - as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645 Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|

American Free Press May 10, 2010

SPLC Publishes ‘Patriot Hit List' - and I'm On It  

By Chuck Baldwin

The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) profiled "36 individuals at the heart of the resurgent patriot movement." The SPLC, founded by Morris Dees, sees itself as America's guardian against "right-wing militias" and loves to label conservatives and libertarians that it doesn't like as "extremists." The SPLC is one of the most ultra-liberal organizations in the country and should be dismissed as a group of paranoid leftists, not worthy of thought or mention. The sad truth is, however, our federal government has chosen to exalt the SPLC to the position of being its "go to" source for information regarding "potential domestic terrorists" and similar characterizations. As a result, the information and reports disseminated by SPLC wind up in police reports and bulletins all over the United States.

As an example, the SPLC had its fingerprints all over the infamous Missouri Information Analysis Center (MIAC) report. One could even question whether the SPLC is merely a front organization for Big Brother.

Therefore, it is highly likely that the report negatively profiling 40 American patriots will find its way into Department of Homeland security (DHS) fusion centers and be distributed to police agencies all across the country. So, should the 40 people who find themselves targeted by SPLC expect some kind of government or police attention? (See the following "Top 40" list)

The SPLC, no doubt, sees each person on its "Top 40" list as being a leader of the"radical right," a "conspiracist" and "anti-government." But understand, the SPLC makes its living off of beg-government, leftist ideology. To say it is a shill for big government liberalism is an understatement. The SPLC is so radical it makes the ACLU look conservative.

Again, this SPLC report wold not even merit a mention, much less an entire column, except for the fact that the SPLC has become a source of information fueling anti-freedom hysteria for countless bureaucrats at the DHS. A disturbing trend is quickly developing: so-called right-wing anything is being targeted and demonized as a "public menace."

But the lists that you and I are not seeing are even more disturbing.

Joel Skousen quotes Radar magazine's Christopher Ketcham's The Last Roundup as asking if the federal government is "compiling a secret enemies list of citizens who could face detention." He goes on to say, "A number of former government employees and intelligence sources with independent knowledge of domestic surveillance operations claim the program that caused the flap between former assistant attorney general under John Ashcroft, James Comey and the White House was related to a database of Americans who might be considered potential threats in the event of a national emergency. Sources familiar with the program say that the government's data gathering has been overzealous and probably conducted in violation of federal law and the protection from unreasonable search and seizure guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment.

"A veteran CIA intelligence analyst who maintains active high-level clearances and serves as an advisor to the Department of defense in the field of emerging technology tells Radar that during the 2004 hospital room drama between former Chief of Staff Andrew card and Attorney general Ashcroft, in an attempt by Card to coerce a very ill Ashcroft to authorized President Bush's secretive domestic spying programs as his assistant - and acting - attorney general had refused to do so, former assistant attorney general James Comey expressed concern over how this secret database was being used to accumulate otherwise private data on non-targeted U.S. citizens for use at a future time."

The report further states, "According to a senior government official who served with high-level security clearances in five administrations, ‘There exists a database of Americans, who, often for the slightest and most trivial reason, are considered unfriendly, and who, in a time of panic, might be incarcerated. The database can identify and locate perceived ‘enemies of the state' almost instantaneously."

This database of Americans who are perceived to be potential "enemies of the state" goes by the code name "Main Core." And according to the report, "One knowledgeable source claims that 8 million Americans are now listed in Main Core as potentially suspect. In the event of a national emergency, these people could be subject to everything from heightened surveillance and tracking to direct questioning and possibly even detention.

"Officials at the Department of Homeland Security begin actively scrutinizing people who - for a tremendously broad set of reasons - have been flagged in Main Core as potential domestic threats [sound familiar?]. Some of these individuals might receive a letter or a phone call, others a request to register with local authorities. Still others might hear a knock on the door and find police or armed soldiers outside. In some instances, the authorities might just ask a few questions. Other suspects might be arrested and escorted to federal holding facilities, where they could be detained without counsel until the state of emergency is no longer in effect."

The report also noted that Comey had concluded that the use of that ‘Main Core' database compromised the legality of the overall NSA domestic surveillance project. ‘If Main Core does exist,' says Philip Giraldi, a former CIA counter terrorism officer and an outspoken critic of the agency, ‘the Department of Homeland Security is its likely home. If a master list is being compiled, it would have to be in a place where there are no legal issues - the DIA and FBI would be restricted by oversight and accountability laws so I suspect it is at DHS, which as far as I know operates with no such restraints.' Giraldi notes that DHS already maintains a central list of suspected terrorists and has been freely adding people who pose no reasonable threat to domestic security."

So, s there a secret list of 8 million "unfriendly" Americans kept by DHS? Does anyone reading this column doubt that our federal government is more than willing and capable of doing such a thing? All of us are quite familiar with the government's "no fly" or "flagged" airline passenger list. I can personally attest to the authenticity of this list, as airport officials in San Antonio, Texas, told me that I'm on it. I also made it to the "list of Three" that were named in the MIAC report. The other two were Ron Paul and Bob barr. And now, I am on the SPLC list of "patriots," not a compliment in the SPLC lexicon. Wow! I never realized how popular it was! With the exception of Paul, I'm probably on more lists than anyone in America.

Who would ever thought that the day would come in America when to speak up for freedom, constitutional government and the principles expressed by our Founding Fathers would land one on a government watch list?

Well, that day is here, my friend. No doubt, the major media and federal government - in order to further ostracize patriotic, god-fearing Americans - will use the SPLC patriot hit list as a vehicle to carry our country further down the road of oppression.

But what the radical left fear mongers at the Southern Poverty Law Center fail to realize is that the more they try to marginalize and ostracize American patriots such as you and me, the more they isolate themselves from America's future, because millions and millions of hard-working, God-fearing, liberty-loving Americans are not going to sit back and let Dees and his cabal of Big Government elitists destroy the principles of freedom.

Pople such as Dees can put us on as many lists as they like; we will never let liberty die. And the more they try to demonize us, the more people will want to join with us. You see, freedom burns deep and strong in the hearts of real Americans. And that's something the SPLC can't extinguish - no matter how many lists it makes.
|Top|

American Free Press May 10, 2010

The SPLC's ‘Top 40 Most Dangerous Patriots'  

Here are the 40 names that are targeted in the SPLC report (and guess who is listed at the very top - Columnist and activist Chuck Baldwin:

1. Chuck Baldwin, Pastor, Radio Broadcaster, Syndicated Columnist, 2008 Constitution Party presidential nominee.
2. Joe banister, former IRS special agent, tax protester.
3.Martin "Red" Beckman, tax protester.
4. Catherine Bleish, head of the Liberty Restoration Project.
5. Chris Broughton, Second Amendment advocate, member of "We The People."
6. Bob Campbell, head of American Grand Jury.
7. Robert Crooks, Army veteran, retired commercial fisherman, anti-illegal immigration proponent.
8. Joseph Farah, CEO of World Net Daily.
9. Gary Franchi, producer of Camp FEMA: American Lockdown, national director of Restore The Republic.com.
10. Al Garza, head of the Patriots Coalition, an anti-illegal immigration group.
11. Ted Gunderson, retired FBI agent.
12. John Hassey, "The public face of Alabama's militia movement in the late 1990." says SPLC.
13. Alex Jones, radio talk show host.
14. Devvy Kidd, prolific columnist, blogger and public speaker.
15. Larry Kilgore, telecommunications consultant, former U.S. Senate candidate from Texas, secession advocate.
16. Cliff Kincaid, syndicated columnist and author, editor of AIM Report (Accuracy in Media's publication), founder and president of America's Survival, Inc., a UN watchdog group.
17. Mark Koernke, associated with the Michigan Militia.
18. Richard Mack, former Graham County, Ariz. Sheriff, author and public speaker.
19. Jack McLamb, former Phoenix, Arizona police officer, author and public speaker.
20. John McManus, former member of the U.S. Marine Corps, president of the John Birch Society.
21. Daniel New, father of Michael New (the Army medic who refused to wear a UN uniform), author, public speaker.
22. Norm Olson, founder of the Michigan Militia.
23. Larry Pratt, executive director of Gun Owners of America.
24. Stewart Rhodes, Army veteran and Yale Law School graduate, founder of Oath Keepers.
25. Jon Roland, computer specialist, founder of the Constitution Society.
26. Luke Rudkowski, founder We Are Change.
27. Robert "Bob" Schultz, founder of We the People.
28. Joel Skousen, editor, World Affairs Brief.
29. Jim Stachowiak, Radio talk show host, "longtime militia organizer," claims SPLC.
30. John Stadmiller, founder, Republic Broadcasting.
31. Orly Tatz, California attorney, a leader in the push to make President Obama disclose his U.S. birth certificate.
32. Amanda Teegarden, executive director of Oklahomans for Sovereignty and Free Enterprise.
33. Mike Vanderboegh, anti-Obama healthcare activist..
34. Paul Venable, former candidate for the Idaho House of Representatives.
35. Edwin Viera, Jr., attorney, author, proponent of constitutional state militias, lecturer.
36. Michele Bachmann, U.S. Representative from Minnesota.
37. Glenn Beck, Fox News Channel TV host.
38. Paul Broun, medical doctor, U.S. representative from Georgia.
39. Andrew Napolitano, attorney, former state judge in New Jersey, Fox News Channel legal analyst, lecturer.
40. Ron Paul, former Member of the U.S. Air Force, Medical doctor, U.S. representative from Texas, 2008 Republican candidate for president.
|Top|

American Free Press May 10, 2010

Police State Smear Merchants at Work Again

By Michael Collins Piper

The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) of B'nai B'rith and the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) are raising millions of dollars this year from gullible Americans convinced by the two groups - working hand-in-glove with like-minded elements in the controlled media - that there is some sort of impending armed revolution in the making.

The two groups have hounded newspaper reporters and editors, funneled "intelligence" to local, state and federal government agencies, including the FBI, CIA, IRS, ATF and Homeland Security, and are doing everything in their considerable power to stir up public strife, charging that loyal citizens who are devoted to preserving America's sovereignty and fighting to salvage what remnants of the Constitution remain are actually "hate-filled bigots who want to seize control of the government by force" and disenfranchise - even exterminate - perhaps millions of Americans.

Although the ADL and the SPLC are perceived by many to be "evil twins" there are notable differences between the two: The ADL opposes racial quotas - even while it denounces other Americans who do likewise, calling them "racists" and "white supremacists" - whereas the SPLC is decidedly "liberal" in the realm of race and remains careful to avoid mentioning the fact that the ADL, for example, shares the traditional Ku Klux Klan view on quotas.

The ADL's primary concern is promoting the interests of Israel and the Jewish lobby in America. And despite its reputation as a "civil rights" group, what a lot of SPLC donors don't know is that former African-American SPLC employees sued the group alleging on-the-job discrimination against blacks.

All of this adds up to an interesting witches brew, inasmuch as the two groups have long been engaged in a lively competition with one another, seeking donations from essentially the same audience, claiming to potential donors that they - the ADL and the SPLC - are at the forefront of fighting the looming "danger' of a revolution by Americans fed up with special interest politics-as-usual.

For its part, the ADL recently took aim at American Free Press and The Power of Prophecy Ministries of Texas evangelist Texe Marrs. The ADL was incensed that AFP and Marrs convened a joint conference in Austin, Texas. The ADL proclaimed this gathering as "evidence of prominent anti-Semites attempting to exploit growing interest in the United States in anti-government conspiracy theories, and to use this interest as a way to spread hatred against Jews."

Ironically - despite its claim the conference was devoted to Jew hatred - the ADL was forced to admit that one of those who spoke at the conference was Peymon Mottahedeh, a proud American of Jewish heritage born in Iran. In its reckless fashion, for which it is known, the ADL reported that Mottahedeh echoed "right wing claims about the Federal Reserve."

In fact, what Mottahedeh said echoed precisely what two respected former liberal Democratic congressmen - Wroght Patman of Texas and Jerry Voorhis of California (a self-described "Christian Socialist") - both said for years about the Fed: that it was a privately owned oney monopoly dangerous to the interests of the nation; that the Fed should be audited and brought into line, absorbed (essentially nationalized) through constitutional means, into the American economy, bringing the power of the international bankers (who dominate the Fed) to heel.

The ADL skillfully mixes truth with clever linguistic misrepresentation in order to smear innocent people. For example, noting that AFP deputy editor Mark Anderson gave a speech blaming the Federal Reserve for "conquering our country" and being "the central barrier to freedom," the ADL gratuitously added that "the Federal Reserve is a frequent target for both anti-Semites and anti-government extremists," although Anderson's comments contained not one reference that could be perceived to the anti-Semitic or anti-government.

In fact, Anderson - like other critics of the Fed - believes that the federal government could do some good by abolishing the Fed or otherwise assuming management of this privately owned financial monopoly's manipulation of America's money system.

The ADL claimed that "most of the vitriol directed at Jews came from two prominent anti-Semites" naming Marrs and yours truly as those miscreants in question.

Claiming that "Piper has a long history of promoting anti-Semitic conspiracy theories," the ADL was distressed that my talk was entitled "Why the Fight Against Jewish Zionist Power is the Central political Issue of Our Time" and dared to reveal that the United Nations has been sidelined by the New World Order forces surrounding the Rothschild banking dynasty, which now use their financial power to control the mass media and thereby control America's electoral system for their own insidious purposes.

Marrs's offense - according to the ADL - was having stated qite factually that there are many Zionist Jews in positions of influence in the Obama administration and for daring to demonstrate historical facts that indicate that Zionist Judaism, the mercantile banking system and the communist social system are being used to dominate the world religiously, politically and economically.

But AFP and Power of Prophecy don't stand alone in the assault from the ADL, which has now begun a smear-and-fear campaign of defamation against the popular patriot rock band Poker Face, led by Paul Topete, a long time supporter of AFP.

Dredging up the fact that the Hutaree survivalist group of the Michigan area, now under fire from the federal authorities, had featured a Poker Face song on its own web site, the ADL Blasted Topete and used its influence in Topete's local community in southeastern Pennsylvania to arrange for publication in at least two newspapers of virtual reprints of the ADL smear.

What makes the ADL's attack on Topete so interesting is that the ADL claims Topete is some sort of racist who is "anti-immigrant." In fact, Topete's father is a legal immigrant from Mexico, a point that the ADL does not mention.

The ADL implies that Topete and his group are somehow condoning or even promoting violence, and it has used its assault on Topete to extend the smears to other patriots such as John Stadtmiller, founder of the popular Republic Broadcasting Network on Internet radio.

For facts - not lies - about Topete, see his web site at pokerface.com.

In the meantime, the Southern Poverty Law Center is making noises of its own about the "patriot" movement and has distributed a list of some forty law-abiding Americans that the SPLC says represent the face of danger to America.

What is particularly interesting is that the SPLC list includes two hard-line advocates of the Zionist agenda - Fox television celebrity Glenn Beck and Joseph Farah, a pro-Israel propagandist at World Net Daily who was one the recipient of an "outstanding journalism" award from the Zionist Organization of America - on its list.

Some have suggested this reflects an effort by the SPLC to give "cover" to Beck and Farah in order to preserve status for Beck and Farah among American patriots. This is something the SPLC has done in the past, actually naming some of its own undercover agents as "villains" for the benefit of public consumption. Others suggest naming beck and Farah simply reflects the SPLC's more blatantly "liberal" agenda.

The truth is, anything the ADL and SPLC say cannot be believed. A danger, however, is that both groups maintain deep and long-standing connections to high-level forces and have long been intertwined with elements of law enforcement in this country.

The ADL is known to have played a part in crafting the infamous "Patriot" Act and, like the SPLC has been responsible for causing good people in law enforcement at all levels to be suspicious of law-abiding patriots in America. And that is not a good thing.

The ADL and SPLC are part of a growing police-state apparatus aimed at those in America who dare to exercise their constitutionally guaranteed right to freedom of speech, religion and assembly - the foundation of our First Amendment that the ADL and SPLC find so dangerous.
|Top|

American Free Press May 10, 2010

Bilderberg Wants World ‘Leveled'  

By James P. Tucker, Jr.

The world economy must be leveled off so poor countries increase their living standards while industrialized countries contract, according to Robert Zoellick, president of the World Bank and a Trilateral-Bilderberg luminary.

A shift in voting power at the World Bank "recognizes that we need to consign outdated concepts like ‘Third World' to history, " Zoellick said during the annual meeting of the World Bank in Washington on April 25. "Today the world is moving toward a new, fast evolving multipolar economy."

Zoellick was referring to the World Bank's elevating Red China's voting power behind only the United States and japan in the 186-nation lending organization. Lifting China above such Western powers as Germany, France and Britain supposedly also gives poor countries more voice in how the bank operates and lends money.

Bank members also voted to increase the institution's capital by $3.5 billion to finance bigger giveaways to "developing" poor countries. It was the first increase in 20 years. China's voting power climbs from 2.78 percent to 4.42 percent. The United States, the world's largest economy and most generous donor, remains at 15.85 percent, followed by Japan at 6.84 percent.

The 15.85 percent vote effectively gives the U.S. veto power at the World bank, a fact often cited to reassure Americans that their money is safe. However, the United States constantly votes for the huge giveaways, chiefly financed by American taxpayers.

Throwing money at poor countries will be high on their agendas when the Trilateral Commission meets May 6-10 in Dublin, Ireland and the Bilderberg group meets June 4-7 in Spain. The Trilateralists will gather at the Four Seasons Resort. Bilderbergers will hide behind the sealed-off, guarded grounds of the Dolce Hotel in Sitges, about 20 miles from Barcelona.

Zoellick said the world bank has provided $105 billion in aid to members since the financial crisis began to hurt in July 2008. The capital increase "means that we will no longer face the possibility that we would have to cut back our lending later this year.

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, another Bilderberg -Trilateral luminary, said the bank "made a strong and compelling case" for the capital increase and he will seek approval for the U.S. shares - R117 million each year over five years - from Congress.
|Top|

American Free Press May 10, 2010

President Obama Is a Fascist, Not a Socialist  

by Rep. Ron Paul

Lately many have characterized this administration as socialist, or having strong socialist leanings. I differ with this characterization. This is not to say Mr. Obama believes in free markets by any means.

On the contrary, he has done and said much that demonstrates his fundamental misunderstanding and hostility toward the truly free market. But a closer honest examination of his policies and actions in office reveals that, much like the previous administration, he is very much a corporatist This in many ways can be more insidious and worse than being an outright socialist.

Socialism is a system where the government directly owns and manages businesses. Corporatism is a system where businesses are nominally in private hands, but are in fact controlled by the government. [This is fascism.-Ed.] In a corporatist state, government officials often act in collusion with their favored business interests to design polices that give those interests a monopoly position, to the detriment of both competitors and consumers.

A careful examination of the policies pursued by the Obama administration and his allies in Congress shows that their agenda is corporatist. For example, the healthcare bill that recently passed does not establish a Canadian-style government-run single payer healthcare system. Instead, it relies on mandates forcing every American to purchase private health insurance or pay a fine. It also includes subsidies for low-income Americans and government-run healthcare "exchanges." Contrary to the claims of the proponents of the healthcare bill, large insurance and pharmaceutical companies were enthusiastic supporters of many provisions of this legislation because they knew in the end their bottom lines would be enriched by "Obamacare."

Similarly, Obama's "cap-and-trade" legislation provides subsidies and special privileges to large businesses that engage in "carbon trading." This is why large corporations, such as General Electric support "cap and trade."

To call the president a corporatist is not to soft-pedal criticism of his administration. It is merely a more accurate description of the president's agenda.

When he is called a socialist, the president and his defenders can easily deflect that charge by pointing out that the historical meaning of Socialism is government ownership of industry; under the president's policies, industry remains in nominally private hands. Using the more accurate term - corporatism - forces the president to defend his policies that increase government control of private industries and expand de facto subsidies to beg businesses. This also promotes the understanding that though the current system may not be pure socialism, neither is it free market, since government controls the private sector through taxes, regulations, and subsidies, and has done so for decades.

Using precise terms can prevent future statists from successfully blaming the inevitable failure of their programs on the remnants of the free market that are still allowed to exist.

We must not allow the disastrous results of corporatism to be ascribed incorrectly to free market capitalism or used as a justification for more government expansion. Most importantly, we must learn what freedom really is and educate others on how infringements on our economic liberties caused our economic woes in the first place. Government is the problem; it cannot be the solution.
|Top|

American Free Press May 19, 2010

Pastor John Hagee: Is the Devil in Him?  

By Thomas L. McFadden

John Hagee, the megachurch televangelist, is approaching the Washington, D.C. area again, ready to land in his private jet on July 20. An army of politicians and wide-eyed believers will follow this professed "man of God" who outdoes, in a sinister way, televangelists Pat Robertson and the late Jerry Falwell combined. Although Falwell did receive a Lear jet from the Israeli government in 1979, he never had an 8,000-acre luxury ranch loaded with mansions, hotels, barns and a private landing strip. But Hagee, the "corpulent con man," as he is popularly known, does.

This Texas pirate is running a large number of organizations all geared toward spreading the word of the coming rapture and promoting war for Israel.

Cornerstone Church in San Antonio and John Hagee Ministries telecast his national radio and television ministry, carried in America on 160 TV stations, 50 radio stations and eight networks and are heard or seen weekly in 99 million homes. He is the founder of Christians United for Israel (CUFI).

Hagee spreads misery, destruction and greed wherever his Lear jet lands. He is pumping part of the cash he fleeces from the flock into the illegal settlements in the counterfeit state of Israel, while the child murderers there are aiming to dispose of the remainder of the Christians and Muslims in Palestinian villages with phosphorous bombs received free from America.

Regardless, just like for food, obese Hagee has a bottomless appetite for dead American kids as well, endlessly pushing for a war on Iran to satisfy his Zionist masters and strange followers who jump up and down like so many steroid-loaded basketball players waving their Israeli flags while the cash is collected. He is burning both ends of the candle manufacturing "moral support" for the endless flow of limbless and lifeless bodies that are flown and wheeled back to America to their parents from Iraq and Afghanistan.

But this is not enough for Hagee. At the last Washington conference he said: "It is time for America to embrace the words of Sen. Joseph Lieberman and consider a military pre-emptive strike against Iran to prevent a nuclear holocaust in Israel." Actually jetsetter Hagee and his gang were lobbying Congress for the territorial expansion of Israel and a genocidal American nuclear strike on Iran. These well-financed people seem to be living from holocaust to holocaust just for the excitement of it.

His group made a single donation of $9 million to Israel in December 2009 in the presence of no less a con man than Elie Wiesel. Hagee is in the ancient "the-end-of-the-world-is-coming-so-give-me-your-valuables" business. The private conversation in the conference halls is about good little Jews accepting Jesus Christ (instead of spitting on His servants) and all going home to Israel and the rapture and the angels with the trumpets and all the trimmings.

He claims to believe there are "10 biblical signs" verifying that the end is near and that we have to hand our assets all over to the state of Israel. The stated hope in the minds of the reverend and his followers is: If they support Israel, they actually promote the possibility of the Second Coming. Israel is viewed by them as a useful tool for achieving Armageddon and the killing of 2 billion of the world's people—except, of course, Hagee and his demented followers.

In reality, we are looking at an Israel-controlled scam for the rationalization of war after war for the Middle Eastern mini-state.

Hagee organizes around 30 meetings a month, and the creme de la scum is following him on the gravy train. Already in 2001 he gave himself a $1.2 million salary, but that was actually one of those lean years. By now his personal wealth is estimated at around $25 million, and he draws in, via his numerous businesses, around $25 million more per year. Hagee does better than a Goldman Sachs partner. The organization is saturated with "Christian" Jews—false flag operatives—like Nick Israel, campus coordinator, and Kara Silverman, public relations agent, and surrounded by an army of useful and well-paid activists and U.S. politicians like Lieberman, former Sen. Rick Santorum and former Rep. Tom "Rapture Ready" DeLay from the Coalition for a Conservative Majority all wanting to hand over America to their Israeli friends since the end is so near—a very touching story.

Also hanging around is Dore Gold, former Israeli ambassador to the U.S.
Hagee, at the July 2007 Washington conference of CUFI, actually stated that Christians should "support the Jewish people and the state of Israel today, tomorrow and forever until the Messiah comes."

This is a considerable, perhaps infinite, expenditure if we add up the direct and indirect U.S. spending for Israel, plus the cost of the wars we fight for it.

Hagee is also a frequent guest of Israel. Hemet Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu just recently, a day before Vice President Joe Biden arrived and was humiliated by the Israeli leader.

Hagee also receives extraordinary coverage from the U.S. media, publicity that could not be purchased for tens of millions of dollars. He even appeared as a guest writer for The Washington Post in January 2009 under the title: "My Hopes and Concerns for Obama."

This is a major PR drive to extend the useful life of the "Holocaust" and to serve the Zionist agenda in the United States. There are hundreds of millions of dollars donated by these Israel-worshipers.

How long can this trip for Hagee go on? As long as he serves Israel, no IRS agent will touch the wheels on his jet. His plane will be safely flown and serviced by the Israeli crew.

Should something go wrong with the operation, a 9.5 magnitude earthquake will be engineered for his psychopathic empire, and the golden walls will be crashing down on his degenerated behind just like they did on Jim Bakker so many years ago. Some already speculate that Hagee might end up like Bakker once he becomes useless for his Israeli handlers. The reader can be confident that the Israelis have the goods on Hagee, just in case.

There must be a few hundred people in this country who will stand with their signs in every city where Hagee shows up. And these signs should clearly state that Hagee is a child of the devil and should visit his father soon.

Hagee will be in Washington D.C. July 20-22 (Tuesday through Thursday), 2010.
|Top|

American Free Press May 19, 2010

In Defense of Arizona Immigration Policy  

By Chuck Baldwin

Open borders advocates are livid that Arizona has enacted a new law authorizing state law enforcement personnel to arrest illegal aliens. Rev. Al Sharpton is threatening to march. The mayor of San Francisco has declared Arizona off limits as a travel destination. The national government of Mexico has issued travel warnings. Barack Obama is contemplating bringing a federal lawsuit against the state. Some are calling for a boycott of the state. Why all the fuss?

Arizona is rightly sick and tired of the federal government's refusal to protect our nation—and the state of Arizona, specifically—from this foreign invasion that is commonly referred to as "illegal immigration." In other words, Arizona has said, if the federal government won't enforce the law, we will. I say, good for them.

Now the other border states—Texas, New Mexico and California—should do the same thing. Arizona has it right, and the vast majority of the American people know it.

As an aside, if you are considering a visit to the American Southwest this summer, why not support the brave legislators and governor of Arizona, and make a point to spend your leisure dollars in Arizona? And when you do, write a letter to the state capitol and tell them. Even more importantly, I suggest that everyone contact their state representative, senators and governor, and urge them to enact a similar law—to the one Arizona passed—in your state.

And since the national news media refuses to set the record straight on the subject of illegal immigration—one could even say that the national news media is deliberately covering it up—let's do that right now.

First, let's talk about numbers. Even though the Census Bureau (CB) estimates 11 million illegal aliens live in America, the real numbers are much higher. Even CB officials admit that many illegal aliens purposely avoid the census count. A more reliable count is provided by Bear Stearns. It puts the number of illegal aliens at around 20 million. Former U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.), who was chairman of the Congressional Immigration Reform Caucus, puts the number at over 18 million.

According to Tennesseans for Responsible Immigration Policies (TNRIP), 6,000 immigrants arrive in America every day. That equates to more than 2 million every year. In many communities in the Southwest, including Los Angeles and Houston, Hispanics now comprise a majority of the population. But numbers of illegal aliens are quickly beginning to mount in cities throughout the United States.

For example, TNRIP documents the fact that the Hispanic population grew in three Tennessee counties by more than 70 percent between 2000 and 2004. In one of those counties, Robertson, it grew over 95 percent during that time. In seven Tennessee counties, the Hispanic population grew by more than 40 percent. Tennessee can hardly be considered a "border state." The fact is, what is happening in Tennessee is happening all over the United States. And lest you think this is all harmless, think again.

According to TNRIP, the financial cost of this foreign invasion to U.S. taxpayers is staggering. Here is a breakdown of the annual cost to taxpayers unless it is borrowed and the cost deferred:

"Education": $22.5 billion; Bilingual Education: another $3.3 billion; Fed'l Aid to Families with Dependent Children: $2.4 billion; Social Security: $24.8 billion; Housing assistance: $2.6 billion; Criminal justice: $2.6 billion; Jobs lost by Americans: $10.8 billion; Other programs: $51.4 billion; Food stamps: $7 billion; Healthcare: $1.4 billion.

The first study of the net cost of illegal immigration to American taxpayers was conducted in 1997 by Dr. Donald Huddle, professor emeritus of economics at Rice University. This study concluded that from 1970 to 1997, illegal immigration had cost taxpayers over $69 billion. Obviously the financial numbers have exploded since.

Furthermore, during 1996 alone, more than 2.3 million American workers were displaced by aliens (mostly illegal). Harvard Prof. George Borjas estimates that today American workers lose $133 billion per year in wage depression and job loss.

Back in 2007 it was reported, "L.A. County Supervisor Michael D. Antonovich announced that a new report shows illegal aliens and their families collected over $35 million in welfare and food stamp allocations in July."

In the report, illegals are said to have "collected nearly $20 million in welfare assistance for July 2007 and an additional $15 million in monthly food stamp allocations for an estimated annual cost of $440 million.

"‘Illegal immigration continues to have a devastating impact on Los Angeles County taxpayers,' said Antonovich. ‘In addition to $220 million for public safety and $400 million for healthcare, the $440 million in welfare allocations bring a total cost to county taxpayers that exceeds $1 billion a year—this does not include the skyrocketing cost of education.' "

Consider, too, this recent report by Heritage Foundation's Robert Rector. According to writer Byron York, "Rector found that in 2004, the most recent year for which figures are available, low-skill households received an average of $32,138 per household—the great majority in the form of means-tested aid and direct benefits. (Rector excluded from that figure the cost of public goods and interest; with those included, he says, each low-skill household receives an average of $43,084.)

"Against that, Rector found that low-skill households paid an average of $9,689 in taxes. (The biggest chunk of that was the Social Security tax—$2,509—followed by state and local taxes, consumption taxes, property taxes, and federal income taxes, but Rector counted everything, including highway levies and lottery purchases.)

"In the final calculation, he found, the average low-skill household received $22,449 more in benefits than it paid in taxes—the $32,138 in benefits, excluding public goods, minus the $9,689 in taxes.

"Taking that $22,449, and multiplying it by the 17.7 million low-skill households, Rector found that the total deficit for such households was $397 billion in 2004.

‘Over the next 10 years the total cost of low-skill households to the taxpayer (immediate benefits minus taxes paid) is likely to be at least $3.9 trillion,' Rector writes. ‘This number would go up significantly if changes in immigration policy lead to substantial increases in the number of low-skill immigrants entering the country.' "

It has been noted that 75 percent of people on LA's most-wanted list are illegal aliens. Nearly 25 percent of all inmates in California prisons are here illegally, and roughly 30 percent of inmates in federal prisons are illegals.

In addition, the FBI reports half of all gang members in Los Angeles are most likely illegals from south of the border. According to Tancredo, gang membership by illegal aliens in many states is 50 percent, and in Phoenix, Ariz., illegal aliens constitute 34 percent of child-molestation and 40 percent of auto-theft cases.

Furthermore, illegal aliens murder, on average, 12 Americans every day, according to Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa). Plus, illegals who drive drunk kill another 13 Americans every day. That means illegal aliens kill more Americans every year than have been killed in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, in total.

Retired lawman Jim Kouri wrote, "According to Lt. Steve Rogers, a decorated cop and award-winning writer, there are tens of thousands of murderers, rapists, child predators, robbers and drug dealers who are illegally in the United States. One study shows over 200,000 criminal aliens are preying on U.S. citizens."

What the Arizona law does is authorize its law enforcement personnel to enforce the law. No one in Arizona is talking about racial profiling or violating citizens' constitutional rights. In fact, the new Arizona law actually mirrors already established federal law. But the federal government has hamstrung state and local police agencies in their attempts to arrest illegals for decades.

Now Arizona policemen can arrest illegals for being in Arizona illegally and have them deported, something they should have been doing—and have every right to do—all along. No wonder the vast majority of the American people—not to mention the citizenry of Arizona—supports the Arizona law.

But there is a greater issue here: the right of Arizona to protect, defend and govern itself. Yes, ladies and gentlemen, the state sovereignty movement is growing like wildfire. Whether it is Arizona, Montana, Idaho, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Georgia, Texas, Florida, Alaska or a couple dozen other states, legislators are beginning to awaken to the constitutional and moral responsibility of each state to govern itself. And when the central government in Washington, D.C., abridges or impedes that responsibility, it is the right and duty of states to resist.

This is why I tell people: "What is going on in your state is infinitely more important than anything that goes on in Washington. Without the approbation of the state, Washington's actions and attitudes are irrelevant."

This is why we need county sheriffs, state legislators, state judges, state attorneys general and governors who—along with their state's citizenry—understand the Constitution and are willing to courageously hold the line for freedom and constitutional government in their respective states. And by passing this anti-illegal alien bill, Arizona did just that.

Dr. Chuck Baldwin is a radio show host and columnist and was the Constitution Party's presidential candidate in the 2008 election. Readers can contact Dr. Baldwin at P.O. Box 37070, Pensacola, Fla. 32526 or search the web for more of Baldwin's writings. See http://ChuckBaldwinLive.com.

Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute - as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645 Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|

American Free Press May 19, 2010

AFP Editor Reports On Secret Gathering Of Trilats in Ireland  

By James P. Tucker, Jr.

DUBLIN, Ireland— AFP has learned that the advance staff of the Trilateral Commission (TC), appearing here at the Four Seasons resort in Dublin on May 6, appeared gloomy. In other years, they had shown a more festive mood as they prepared for the arrival of 300 high officials of Europe and North America and international financiers to plan the global economy behind closed doors.

An economic meeting in Brussels is just concluding, making it a convenient cover story for U.S. officials who want to attend the TC meeting without public knowledge.

Such summits, either just before or after TC and Bilderberg group meetings, are routine. Bilderberg will meet June 4-7 at the Dolce Hotel in Sitges, Spain, about 20 miles from Barcelona.

Senior TC staffers, who carry the papers, not the suitcases, were overheard saying the British Petroleum (BP) oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico off the Louisiana coast would have to be a "major and ticklish topic" during the session. That's because Big Oil is a major player at the TC and Bilderberg meetings. BP will have to pay for the spill with big bucks at a time when the TC is planning giant hikes in U.S. gasoline costs.

"It's like a dog trying to bark while biting his own tail," one said, somewhat irreverently.

Unfortunately, the BP disaster is likely to motivate these globalists to force prices up even more. The latest data from the Energy Information Association, the statistical arm of the Energy Department, shows that, as of mid-March, U.S. refiners were operating at 81 percent of capacity. There are 6 million barrels per day being deliberately left in the ground by the world's oil producers. There's nothing like a generated shortage to push prices up.

Meanwhile, the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries is not calling for enforcement of production quotas.

The TC was created in 1973 by David Rockefeller, among others, initially to link together the interests of the super-rich of North America, Europe and Japan. Along with the Council on Foreign Relations, the Atlantic Council, the Bilderberg group and related groups and think tanks, the TC helps forge long-term plans and policies, apart from elected officials.

AFP Editor James P. Tucker Jr. is a veteran journalist who spent many years as a member of the "elite" media in Washington. Since 1975 he has won widespread recognition, here and abroad, for his pursuit of on-the-scene stories reporting the intrigues of global power blocs such as the Bilderberg group.

Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute - as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645 Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|

American Free Press May 19, 2010

Democrat Leaders Renew Calls for National ID Card  

THE DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP is at it again, proposing to "reform" illegal immigration by saddling the country with privacy-robbing, onerous identification requirements. This time, top Democrats are unveiling yet another intrusive proposal they are calling the "BELIEVE System."

BELIEVE, which stands for "Biometric Enrollment, Locally-stored Information and Electronic Verification of Employment," would require all legal U.S. citizens seeking jobs to possess federally issued identification that retains personal information like fingerprints or retinal scans.

The insanity of this program goes something like this: Top Democrats do not want to deal with those who break the law by entering the United States illegally, because that would be politically incorrect.

Instead, they want the rest of America—those who are here legally—to pay the price by having to keep current with yet another form of identification that will include detailed, highly personal information on it.

The truth is, "BELIEVE" is just lipstick on the same pig that was already killed in previous sessions. As early as 1993, Washington proposed a national "Health Security" ID card that would have personal information embedded on it. That proposal never made it past the discussion phase.

Then, following the Sept. 11 attacks, Congress toyed with an idea to create a national drivers license, which would contain your Social Security number or some other unique identifier. When that never went anywhere, the mother of all national IDs was rolled out: The infamous REAL ID program of 2005.

Despite a massive public relations effort on the part of the federal government, that program was eventually killed following a huge outcry from citizens and privacy groups.

But D.C. is not going to let something like decades of failures and overwhelming resistance stop it.

Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) summed up how Americans have been cowed into submission through constant fear mongering on terrorism.

"The biometric identification card is a critical element here," Durbin said. "For a long time it was resisted by many groups, but now we live in a world where we take off our shoes at the airport and pull out our identification."

As much as many conservatives complain about the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the organization was the first out of the gate to criticize the plan.

"If the biometric national ID card provision of the draft bill becomes law," noted an ACLU release, "every worker in America would have to be fingerprinted."

If this is the type of "change" the Democrats want us to "believe" in, tell Congress they can keep it.

Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute - as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645 Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|

American Free Press May 19, 2010

Western Media Censors Iranian Leader's UN Speech  

By Mark Anderson

Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad made no discernable threats and candidly spoke about the need for peace and the high risks of nations owning nuclear weapons in his remarks to the UN on May 3, during a review summit concerning the 1970 Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Ahmadinejad spoke with considerable criticism of Western nations' large nuclear stockpiles amid continued international concern about Iran's alleged effort to build its first nuclear weapon. So while Iran does not possess a single nuclear weapon, he referred to the United States as the only nation having used atomic weapons, along with the unfairness of nuclear states dictating to Iran whether it can use nuclear energy even for making electricity.

Corporate media reports that focused on Western officials' anger toward Ahmadinejad's remarks observed that several national delegations walked out during his speech to the General Assembly - including delegates from the United States, Canada and several European nations. However, American Free Press obtained the speech's full text so readers can make up their own minds without media "spin."

Here are substantial excerpts:

Undoubtedly, this review conference of the Non-Proliferation Treaty [NPT] is one of the most important international meetings.

The production and possession of a nuclear bomb, under whatever pretext, is a very dangerous act, which first and foremost makes the country of production and stockpiling exposed. You may recall how perilous was the unintentional transfer of a nuclear-tipped missile with a bomber from one military base to another one in the United States and which became a mater of concern for the American people.

The sole function of nuclear weapons is to annihilate all living beings and destroy the environment. Its radiation would affect coming generations, and its negative impacts would continue for centuries. The nuclear bomb is a fire against humanity rather than a weapon for defense. The possession of nuclear bombs is not a source of pride; it is, rather, disgusting and shameful. And even more shameful is the threat to use or to actually use such weapons, which is not even comparable to any crime committed throughout history. Those who committed the first atomic bombardment are considered to be among the most hated in history.

For over 60 years, the UN, in particular the Security Council, has been unable to establish sustainable security and create the sense of security in international relations, and the current international circumstances seem to be far more challenging than those of the past decades.

Wars, aggression and above all the stockpiling of nuclear armaments and, worse than all, the policies applied by a few expansionist states have undermined the prospect of international security for everyone. Nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation have not come true, and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has not been successful in discharging its mandate.

From the perspective of the divine prophets and the righteous and according to all humane concepts, the supremacy, happiness and maturity of mankind is measured by his morality, piety, modesty and devotion to fellow human beings. Unfortunately, relying on the theory of struggle for survival, some states seek their superiority through the power of threatening and suppressing others, and sow the seeds of hatred, enmity and arms race in international relations. Their biggest mistake is their assumption that might makes right.

The first atomic weapons were produced and used by the United States. This seemed, apparently, to provide the United States and its allies with the upper hand in World War II. The United States became the main source of development and the spread of nuclear weapons by others and brought about the nuclear arms race. The production, stockpiling and qualitative improvement of nuclear armaments in a given country have served as the best justification for others to develop their own arsenals, a trend that has been sustained over the past 40 years in violation of the commitments set forth in the NPT.

This policy is the main cause of the escalation of the arms race, since deterrence requires having an edge on both quality and quantity of weapons, which itself fuels the nuclear race. There are reportedly more than 20,000 nuclear warheads worldwide, half of which belong to the United States. The other competing party also continues to develop nuclear weapons under the pretext of deterrence. Both of them constitute violations of obligations set forth in the NPT.

Regrettably, the government of the United States has not only used nuclear weapons, but also continues to threaten to use such weapons against other countries, including Iran. The Zionist regime, too, consistently threatens Middle Eastern countries.

Certain nuclear weapon states widely exploit these platforms aginst the non-nuclear-weapon states, contrary to the spirit of the NPT. This unjust practice, repeated over and over, has turned into a pattern.

So far, none of the non-nuclear weapon states has ever been able to exercise their legal rights for peaceful use of nuclear energy without facing pressures and threats. Resolutions have been adopted against non-nuclear weapon states under the pressure of the same states with the clear intention of denying them their recognized legal rights.

While the Zionist regime, which has stockpiled hundreds of nuclear warheads, has waged many wars in the region and continues to threaten the people and nations of the region with terror and invasion, it enjoys the unconditional support of the U.S. government and its allies and receives as well as necessary assistance to develop its own nuclear weapons program.

Nuclear energy is among the cleanest and cheapest sources of energy. Severe climate change and environmental pollution caused by fossil fuel has intensified the need to expand the use of nuclear energy. Almost 7 million barrels of oil are needed for the continual generation of 1,000 megawatts of electricity in a year, which by today's crude oil price, costs over $500 million, while the cost of generating the same capacity with nuclear energy is around $60 million. Generally, the investment needed to construct and utilize a nuclear power plant is far less than half the cost of a power plant operation with fossil fuels during its lifespan.

One of the gravest injustices committed by the nuclear weapon states is equating nuclear arms with nuclear energy. As a matter of fact, they want to monopolize both nuclear weapons and peaceful nuclear energy.

Not that you would get the unfiltered version of the speech from the regular media. For example, the FOCUS News Agency of Canada, with the headline "New Iran sanctions needed now: Canada," was typical in its focus on mere reaction to the Iranian leader's speech, instead of its content.

Ahmadinejad addressed this issue, saying:

No effective mechanism has been devised to address the actual threat of nuclear weapons, which must be in fact the most important mission of the International Atomic Energy Agency. All efforts in this respect have been only limited to talks that lack any binding force guarantee and effectiveness. The IAEA has been putting the most pressure on non-nuclear-weapons states under the pretext of proliferation risks, whilst those having nuclear bombs continue to enjoy full immunity and exclusive rights.

NOTE: See www.AmericanFreePress.net for videos of Ahmadinejad's entire speech, unedited, with a running English translation.
|Top|

American Free Press May 19, 2010

Police in Tennessee Cracking Down On Patriots Who Challenge Judiciary  

By Pat Shannan

Darren Huff is a member of the Oath Keepers and proudly displays the large insignia on the doors of his new pickup. When he drove it from his home in the Atlanta area to Madisonville, Tenn. On April 20, the mere sight of the truck was enough for police to pul him over outside of town and remove him at gunpoint.

Oath Keepers was founded a year ago to remind soldiers and law enforcement personnel of their oaths to the constitution taken at the time of employment and to invite all to join their membership. In its by-laws Oath Keepers has ten "we will nots," and No. 1 on its list is "We will not obey orders to disarm the American people." However, to law enforcement personnel in today's America, the Oath Keeper's truth is anathema.

At this roadside stop, Huff was respectful but firm. He refused to allow the requested search of his vehicle without a warrant. When asked if he had any weapons with him, he replied in the affirmative and also shoed his legal Permit to Carry issued by the State of Georgia. He was asked by police if he would surrender his weapons while he was in gown and retrieve them on his way out and he refused again. Finally, he was released without charges to attend the Walter Fitzpatrick hearing, which was reported in AFP's recent issues.

Ten days later, Huff was in Tennessee again attempting to affect another citizen's arrest on Gary Pettway, who has been illegally sitting as a court-appointed grand jury foreman since around 1983. Tennessee law makes it illegal for anyone to sit as foreman for more than one year, and Fitzpatrick had attempted to correct this on April 1 by arresting Pettway in the courtroom. Instead, Fitzpatrick was jailed for five days, and his case may go before the grand jury where Pettway still sits as foreman.

"You can't make this stuff up," says Fitzpatrick.

On April 30, while inquiring with county law enforcement regarding correct legal procedure to follow, Huff's name apparently was put in the computer and a federal warrant stemming from the April 20 roadside incident outside of Madisonville appeared.

He was arrested and jailed - charged with creating civil unrest and "inciting a riot," making it two men now who have attempted to lawfully proceed and are being prosecuted for doing so.

Furthermore, Tennessee law [39-17-301 thru 304] says that it is a Class A misdemeanor if one incites a riot but such an act requires that it involve an assemblage of three (3) or more persons which, by tumultuous and violent conduct, creates grave danger of substantial damage to property or serious bodily injury to persons or substantially obstructs law enforcement or other government function [39-16-601].

So why is Darren Huff charged with a crime that requires at least three people, and one in which the situation was obviously scrutinized by county deputies and the Tennessee Highway Patrol at the roadside stop before releasing Huff with his weapons and no criminal charges?

AFP asked two lawyers for their input and both agreed it was not likely that charges could be made to stick at the state level.

Therefore, federal charges were contrived to charge Huff with "carrying a weapon across a state line with the intent to create civil unrest and incite a riot." Hence, another thought crime is created from the good intentions of a law abiding citizen.

AFP has learned that FBI Special Agent Chuck Reed visited Huff on the evening of April 19. Huff told Reed that he was going to attend the Fitzpatrick hearing in Tennessee the next day. Federal agents then apparently followed him and alerted the Tennessee authorities of his arrival which led to the roadside stop. Huff was arraigned in federal district court in Knoxville on May 3 and placed under house arrest pending trial. The next day Monroe Country General Sessions Court Judge J. Reed Dixon found probable cause that Fitzpatrick had committed four Class A Misdemeanor offenses: Riot, Disorderly Conduct, Disturbing a public meeting and Resisting Arrest.

The question looming now is whether or not Gary Pettway will be illegally seated as grand jury foreman when it discusses Fitzpatrick's case on June 3.

Fitzpatrick, an Annapolis graduate and retired Naval officer, told AFP, "This charade is not about me or Darren. It is about protecting Obama from a lawful prosecution for treason and fraud. If people believe that the Constitution is still in effect or that their government is not corrupt at every level, they're delusional. From the Supreme court to your local courthouse, justice in America no longer exists.
|Top|

American Free Press May 17, 2010

State Legislator Defends Arizona Immigration Policy  

The following is a public letter from Arizona state Sen. Sylvia Allen, wherein the Republican legislator lays out her support for the recent law addressing unchecked illegal immigration in her state.

By Sylvia Allen

I want to explain S.B. 1070 which I voted for and was just signed by Gov. Jan Brewer. Rancher Rob Krentz was murdered by the drug cartel on his ranch a month ago. I participated in a Senate hearing two weeks ago on the border violence. Here are just some of the highlights from those who testified:

The people who live within 60 to 80 miles of the Arizonan-Mexican border have for years been terrorized and have pleaded for help to stop the daily invasion of humans who cross their property. One rancher testified that 300 to 1,200 people a day come across his ranch vandalizing his property, stealing his vehicles and property, cutting down his fences, and leaving trash. In the last two years he has found 17 dead bodies and two Korans.

Another rancher testified that, daily, drugs are brought across his rand, in a military operation. A point man with a machine gun foes in front; a half-mile behind are the guards, who are fully armed; a half mile behind them are the drugs, a half-mile behind the drugs are more guards. These people kill anyone who gets in their way.

This was not the only rancher we heard that day who talked about the drug trains.

One many told of two illegals who came upon his property, one shot in the back and the other in the arm by the drug runners who had forced them to carry the drugs and then shot them. Daily, they listen to gunfire. During the night, it is not safe to leave his family alone on the ranch, and the family can't leave the ranch for fear of nothing being left when they come back.

The Border Patrol is not on the Border. They have set up 60 miles away with checkpoints that do nothing to stop the invasion. They are not allowed to use force in stopping anyone who is entering. They run around chasing them. If they get their hands on them then they can take them back across the border.

Federal prisons have over 30 percent illegals, and 20 percent of Arizona prisons are filled with illegals. In the last few years, 80 percent of our law enforcement personnel killed or wounded were victimized by an illegal

The majority of people coming now are people we need to be worried about. The ranchers told us that they have seen a change in the people coming. They are not just those who are looking for work and a better life.

The federal government has refused for years to do anything to help the border states. We have been overrun, and once they are here we have the burden of funding state services that they use. Education costs have been over a billion dollars. The healthcare costs billions of dollars. Our state is broke, with a $3.5 billion deficit, and we have many serious decisions to make. One is that we do not have the money to care for any who are not here legally. It must stop.

The border can be secured. We have the technology. We have the ability to stop this invasion. We must know who is coming, and they must come in an organized manner, legally, so that we can assimilate them into our population and protect the sovereignty of our country.

We are a nation of laws. We have a responsibility to protect our citizens and to protect the integrity of our country, and the government under which we live.

I would give amnesty today to many, but here is the problem: We dare not do this until the border is secure. It will do no good to forgive them because thousands will come behind them, and we will be overrun to the point that there will no longer be the United States of America but a multicultural North American Union of open borders.

The leftist media has distorted what S.B. 1070 will do. The ACLU and the leftist courts will do everything to protect those who are here illegally. It was an effort to try and stop illegals from setting up businesses, getting jobs and receiving state services. We had to give local law enforcement the ability to determine if someone is here legally when there is probable cause like a traffic stop.

Federal law is very clear: If you are here on a visa you must have your papers on you at all times. That is the law. In Arizona all you need to show you are a legal citizen is to have a drivers license. MVD identification card, Native American Card or a military ID. This is what you need to vote or to get a hunting license. So nothing new has been added to this law. No one is going to be stopped walking down the street.

Maybe it is too late to save America. Maybe we are not worthy of freedom anymore. But as an elected official I must try to do what I can to protect our constitutional republic. Living in America is not a right just because you walk across the border. Being an American is a responsibility, and it comes by respecting and upholding the Constitution.
|Top|

American Free Press May 17, 2010

America Should Emulate Mexico's Stiff Immigration Laws  

After watching the federal government do little at great cost to stop the flow of illegal immigrants from Mexico into the United States, Arizona, a state highly invaded by illegals, took tough and decisive action.

On April 23, Gov. Jn Brewer®) signed S.B. 1070 into law. Among other things the new law requires residents to show proper identification to prove they are in the State legally. Clergymen and women of the major religious faiths decried the new law. And angry protesters stormed the state capitol in Phoenix.

Bishop John C. Wester of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops expressed concern for all immigrants in the United States and labeled the law "draconian." United Methodist Bishop Minerva Carcaño said that through their social services, schools, congregations and workplaces, religious leaders "witness the human consequences of an inadequate, outdated system." Episcopal Bishop Kirk Smith said the law "offends the dignity of all Arizonans. The tendency to scapegoat a vulnerable population for Arizona's economic stagnation and federal inaction on immigration issues is an unworthy and counterproductive response to the problems we face."

Gov. Brewer said that "racial profiling is illegal," and that the law stipulates police need not ask about residency status if it would impede the case. Robert Kuhn, a Phoenix resident who belongs to the Minutemen, a border watch group, said: "The federal government won't enforce the border, so states have to take it into their own hands." Kuhn added that he has seen drug and human smuggling. "Undocumented immigrants are dragging on our society. They have no right to do it."

While the U.S. southern border is wide open for those going into the United States from Mexico, those who wish to immigrate to Mexico are taken seriously.

The nationally syndicated columnist and author of the best seller Culture of Corruption Michelle Malkin paints a picture of the tough enforcement of Mexican immigration law compared to the wishy-washy American brand:

* The Mexican government will bar foreigners if they upset "the equilibrium of the national demographics."
* If outsiders do not enhance the country's "economic or national interests" or are "not found to be physically or mentally healthy," they are not welcome. Neither are those who show "contempt against national sovereignty or security."
* In addition, those seeking Mexican citizenship must have clean criminal histories, provide a birth certificate, a bank statement and pass anexam showing they will be able to provide for their healthcare.
*Illegal entry is a felony, punishable by two years imprisonment. Document fraud and alien marriage fraud are also subject to fine and imprisonment.
* Foreigners can be expelled from Mexico without due process of law. And reentry after expulsion merits 10 years imprisonment.
* All law enforcement officials must enforce immigration laws and deportations. The military must assist them, and native-born Mexicans can make citizen's arrests of illegal aliens and turn them in to authorities.
* The National catalog of foreigners tracks outside tourists and foreign nationals. A National Population Registry tracks and verifies the identity of every member of the population, and they must carry identity cards.

There is no public outcry in Mexico for "Comprehensive immigration reform," because pro-illegal alien speech by outsiders is prohibited. Non-citizens cannot "in any way participate in the political affairs of the country.

The Mexican Congress has severely limited foreign nationals and companies from the fields of investment, education, mining, civil aviation, electric energy and firearms. The Mexican government has severely abused illegal aliens from Central America.

The police are totally corrupt, and bribery has been extorted from illegal aliens there for years. Mexico has been demanding the United States grant illegal aliens amnesty, something its own government never does.

Mexican President Felipe Calderon has no right to accuse Arizona of intolerance, hate discrimination and abusive law enforcement when the record shows that he and his government are acting against people who are presumed guilty until proven innocent, which hardly ever happens.

The United States still has a Constitution with a Bill of Rights for everybody. Those foreigners who choose the United States are still among the most fortunate. And those who have chosen Arizona legally may be getting the best deal of all.
|Top|

American Free Press May 24, 2010

AngryTrilateralists Want More War  

By James P. Tucker, Jr.

DUBLIN, Ireland—Trilateral Commission (TC) members, angry over their failure to establish a world government and the economic crisis they generated, called for war with Iran when they gathered behind closed doors here in Dublin, Ireland May 7-10.

War plans were revealed by Mikhail Slobodovsici, a chief adviser to the Russian leadership, when he strolled off the grounds of the Four Seasons resort, where TC had hunkered down behind armed guards and locked doors. He thought he was talking to a TC colleague when speaking with Alan Keenan, who operates the web site WeAreChange.org.

"We are deciding the future of the world," Slobodovsici said. "We need a world government," he said, but, referring to Iran, said "we need to get rid of them."

Clearly, it was a TC war call. Many of the TC's billionaires and millionaires are heavily invested in manufacturing, and wars produce huge profits.

Suddenly, Slobodovsici noticed that Keenan's name tag was different from the TC label and said: "I can't talk—we operate under Chatham House rules."

Slobodovsici was ordered by the TC to order more apologies for the slaughter of an estimated 30 to 60 million inhabitants of the old Soviet Union by dictator Josef Stalin. Prime Minister Vladimir Putin had abjectly apologized on the anniversary of the Katyn Forest execution of 20,000 Polish soldiers. Putin admitted that the massacre was conducted by the Soviets, not by Germans, which the Communists had claimed for half a century. Nevertheless, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev apologized again the next day (May 9), denouncing Soviet citizens for tolerating the slaughter, saying they were fully aware of the bloodletting.

Never have the illustrious members of the TC been so depressed.

"It gets worse every year, not better," one said. "Why do we even bother to meet anymore?"

"We can't simply give up and quit," another responded. "Bilderberg expects us to have a plan outlined."

Much of their distress is due to the failure to establish a world government. In the 1990s, both TC and Bilderberg confidently predicted they would obtain a world government by the year 2000. A decade later, their goal is even further away. This they blame on detested "nationalists," who oppose surrendering sovereignty to international bodies.

Bilderberg will meet June 4 to June 7 in Sitges, Spain, a resort city about 20 miles from Barcelona to make final decisions on what to impose upon the world.

Bilderberg will seal off the entire grounds of the Dolce Resort with armed guards and private security. Bilderberg is composed of about 120 international financiers, heads of state from Europe and high officials of the White House, and the secretaries of the State and Commerce departments, among others.

The TC is the junior varsity, with slightly more than 300 participants. Bilderberg, the senior group in the wannabe secret world government, has slightly more than 100. The two groups have an interlocking leadership and common goal of a world government under their control.

Still, the TC attracts heads of state and other high officials in Europe and international financiers, including David Rockefeller and members of the Rothschild family. High officials of the Obama administration from the White House and departments of Treasury, State and Commerce will attend.

TC boys are upset they were unable to exploit the economic crisis they helped generate by creating a world "treasury department" under the UN. They blame "rising nationalism" and ask "how those people knew about this," according to witnesses inside the TC hotel. Still, the TC is charging ahead. In a commentary based on interviews with (or dictated by) TC leaders, economist Richard Douthwaite wrote May 7 in The Irish Times:

Economic growth cannot increase incomes reliably and quickly enough to deliver the desired result. The only possible remedy is inflation. This could be engineered by having the European Central Bank create money out of nothing to give all the euro zone countries to spend. . . . Another irrational obstacle is the feeling that money cannot be created out of nothing. . . .

In this column, Douthwaite calls for Europe's central bank to turn on the printing presses in the same way the privately owned and controlled Federal Reserve Bank has been flooding its cronies in the United States with dollars.

According to banking regulations in Europe, the European Central Bank is limited in how many euros it can release into the money supply through a 2-percent cap on inflation. Douthwaite, however, would like to see this hobble taken off the bankers.

In the United States, the Federal Reserve has been handing out free money to its member banks by lowering the discount rate to near zero. In Europe, Douthwaite writes, "this could be engineered by having the European Central Bank create money out of nothing to give to all the euro zone countries to spend."

The result, he notes, would be inflation, because more money would be in circulation for governments to pay their bills. But he doesn't see that as a bad thing.

However, as Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) notes, the problem with inflation is that it hurts the working class because it acts like an indirect tax.

"Simply put, printing money to pay for federal spending dilutes the value of the dollar, which causes higher prices for goods and services," says Paul. "Savers and those living on fixed or low incomes are hardest hit as the cost of living rises. Low- and middle-income families suffer the most as they struggle to make ends meet while wealth is literally transferred from the middle class to the wealthy."

The phony money idea was embraced by Gary Jenkins of Evolution Securities. He said the EU Central Bank may begin to print more money to dig itself out. "If we approach the brink, it may just be the only viable option left," Jenkins said. "Only the ECB can print euros to save the system."

For now, Jean-Claude Trichet, the president of the European Central Bank, denies that he will be turning on the printing presses. Trichet appears to be in the minority here, and pressure on the part of the globalists may eventually force him to increase inflation in an effort to stave off the inevitable collapse of the EU.

Ireland's prime minister, Brian Cowen, was invited to make a welcoming address at the TC confab, then get out. This is routine with TC and Bilderberg: The head of the host country speaks, then leaves. But Cowen resented being banished, so he deliberately appeared 35 minutes late—and TC boys are unaccustomed to being kept waiting.

Paul Volker, chairman of President Obama's Economic Recovery Advisory Board and a past Fed chairman, expressed his anger with hostile questions. Cowen had tried to distance Ireland's economy from that of Greece and other EU countries that are under attack for the economic crisis.

Volker told Cowen that while he had been "historically . . . very much attracted to the euro," it was now "challenged." Volker said: "You face some very difficult decisions here, but the general question of having an independent central bank, the common interest rate, the common currency . . . I'm just curious, in your mind, as to whether that does raise questions on the general governing structures of Europe.

"You're not in favor of more centralization, as I understand it, although other people are, but what does this crisis mean for how Europe moves ahead?" Volker asked.

Cowen conceded that the euro faced problems with its credibility. He said EU finance ministers would be reviewing "present arrangements" in the months ahead to see how they could be improved "in a way that would add credibility to the currency and in a way that would meet with wide popular agreement."

In other action, the TC plans to:

Raise gas costs in the United States. Europeans now pay $10 a gallon, Americans about $3. The TCers say Americans must pay $7.

Oil is being produced at only 81 percent of capacity to increase demand and, thus, prices. Many of the members were born to oil wealth.

They celebrate the healthcare legislation, which they believe will dramatically increase costs and reduce services. It is European style, and Obama is their boy. They look forward to the day when Americans pay at least 50 percent of their income in federal taxes, as is prevalent in Europe.

AFP editor James P. Tucker Jr. is a veteran journalist who spent many years as a member of the "elite" media in Washington. Since 1975 he has won widespread recognition, here and abroad, for his pursuit of on-the-scene stories reporting the intrigues of global power blocs such as the Bilderberg Group. Tucker is the author of Jim Tucker's Bilderberg Diary: One Man's 25-Year Battle to Shine the Light on the World Shadow Government. Bound in an attractive full-color softcover and containing 272 pages—loaded with photos, many never published before—the book recounts Tucker's experiences over the last quarter century at Bilderberg meetings. $25 from AFP. No charge for S&H in U.S.

Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute - as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645 Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|

American Free Press May 24, 2010

Feds Single Out IRS Tax Critic for Harsh Treatment  

By Mark Anderson

Sherry Peel Jackson, the former IRS agent who ended up in federal prison in early 2008 over challenging the legitimacy of the federal income tax, is inching toward her scheduled official release date of Aug. 8, 2011. But it's hard for her husband to shake the impression that prison authorities are making her suffer before she is released—even though it was a little less than a year ago that she became ill with a hyperactive thyroid, increased heart rate and chest pains.

Colin Jackson told AMERICAN FREE PRESS in an exclusive interview that she has been in solitary confinement for over five months straight—an unheard-of amount of time when hardened criminals with serious offenses typically get no more than 90 days in solitary.

But Mr. Jackson sees a ray of light in this troubling situation, even while he is disturbed that someone like Sherry—a certified public accountant and mother of two with no prior record, in prison over an alleged white-collar crime—would be given that much time in the bleak, claustrophobic confinements of such a cell.

"She has been granted an evidentiary hearing that is going to be coming up next month," Mr. Jackson said on May 8, during this writer's weekly radio show on the Republic Broadcasting Network. He also spoke to AFP off the air.

"From what I understand . . . evidentiary hearings are very rarely granted. Obviously the judge found that there is enough evidence . . . or points of interest, that Sherry needed to be heard again," Mr. Jackson said.

While he is not yet at liberty to get into details, the hearing will "focus on some of things that should have been presented and weren't. If this evidentiary hearing goes in our favor she could be home as early as this summer."

Thus, the evidentiary hearing would provide a way for presenting items that were never explored in court.

On Feb. 14, 2008, Mrs. Jackson was imprisoned after being found guilty in the Atlanta, Ga. federal court of "willful failure to file" federal income taxes. Since it appears she was convicted and imprisoned for her beliefs (and acting on them), many supporters see her as a political prisoner—something that many Americans assume is impossible in America, except for enemy combatants in military custody.

When AFP last spoke with Mr. Jackson in early January, he was shocked his wife had recently been placed in solitary. He can hardly believe she is still there after all this time.

"The reason she is in solitary confinement is, what I believe, in retaliation for the media attention the prison system got and that the representative [local congressman] got when she was ill," Mr. Jackson also said. The congressman is Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.).

"The prison system was operating much too slowly to give her medical attention, and she wrote a letter to Johnson letting him know that she was . . . severely ill and the prison system was not doing enough to help her physically," Mr. Jackson said, adding that his wife sent a copy of the same letter to him, and he sent copies to several supporters and friends.

"Well, it went viral and people literally from all over the world began to call, write—they tied up our congressman's phone line for two or three days. So I imagine the same thing happened to the prison system.

Shortly thereafter she was transferred to a solitary holding unit in Tallahassee, Fla. for what they say—and I have the letter from the prison system—for what they say is for her ‘protection.' "

This writer speculated in conversations with Mr. Jackson that perhaps prison authorities, in some form of twisted logic, wanted to make it seem like a strong showing of support would only make things worse for Sherry; thus they moved her from the Coleman, Fla. federal prison to the Federal Correction Institution in Tallahassee, Fla. because the Coleman facility does not have a solitary confinement cell and the other prison does.

"If these were her supporters writing and calling, what does she need to be protected from? The only people who have done her any harm in the past three years was our government," said Mr. Jackson, who feels that an aide to Rep. Johnson "tried to placate the situation," claiming the congressman's office lacked the authority to do anything to help.

Mr. Jackson's understanding is that one letter the prison received stated something to the effect of "we'll be watching you," though not necessarily those exact words. The prison system was looking into the letter, but now the FBI is investigating it. Even so, the prison is still accepting mail, though it's very closely screened. However, Sherry's subscription to AFP was denied by the prison, so she no longer receives this newspaper, Mr. Jackson said.

Those who want to write to the prison are asked to be brief, polite and to the point regarding Sherry's treatment and to urge for her expedited release after the evidentiary hearing. The address is still: Sherry Peel Jackson, FCI Tallahassee [inmate number 59085-019], 501 Capitol Circle, Tallahassee, Fla. 32301. Those who prefer to contact Mr. Jackson to share thoughts or ask that their letter be forwarded to Tallahassee can write to him at this address: 1560 Fieldgreen Overlook, Stone Mountain, Ga. 30088.

Another American in prison, mainly for acting on her beliefs about the income tax, Elaine Brown, is in Federal Medical Center/Carswell prison, located adjacent to a naval air base by that name, just outside Fort Worth, Texas. A persistent attempt by this writer to visit her in prison in early February was denied by the Bureau of Prisons office in D.C., which claimed AFP did not meet its "definition of news media."

Mrs. Brown is a former dentist who, with her husband Ed, was arrested for income tax and weapons charges. She was sentenced to a brutal 35 years in prison—a life sentence at her age of 68. The Browns were arrested in 2007 by U.S. marshals at their rural New Hampshire home after agents posing as allies infiltrated their residence.

The Bureau of Prisons lists an "Ed Brown" in the Talladega, Ala. federal prison with a 2017 projected release. Rumors circulated that he was in the Marion, Ill. pen, but a Marion spokesman earlier this year told AFP no one by that name is there.

Mark Anderson is a longtime newsman now working as a corresponding editor for American Free Press. Together he and his wife Angie provide many photographs of the events they cover for AFP. Mark welcomes your comments and inputs as well as story leads. Email him at at truthhound2@yahoo.com.

Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute - as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645 Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|

American Free Press May 24, 2010

Democratic Majority Leader Says No Immigration Reform This Year.  

In recent reports, American Free Press has detailed the violence and drug and human running on America's southern border. However, in spite of all the crying in Washington over Arizona's new law targeting illegal immigration, the Democratic leadership has refused to commit to addressing the issue on a national scale.

In an interview with the U.S. Spanish-language network Univision, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D Nev.) said "The Senate is not a body that is defined by time."

The Nevada Democrat should tell that to those Americans who live along the border and are victimized every day in their own homes by illegal aliens as well as heavily armed soldiers escorting drug runners.

Reid tried to pin the blame on Republicans, saying he would need some members from the other party to switch sides and support Democratic plans to deal with the wave of illegal immigrants coming across the U.S. border.

(See AFP's "Spotlight on Congress" in the May 17 edition for more on the latest National ID card that is being proposed by Democrats. - Ed.)

"We are committed to comprehensive immigration reform, the president supports us on that, but I tell everyone we can't do a bill unless we get some Republicans," he said.

The trouble, of course, is that Democrats have so far only proposed new onerous, privacy-robbing biometric identification cards for all Americans - something Republicans are right to oppose.

Reid is right about one thing, though. "Democrats and Republicans call all agree that our immigration system is broken," he added.

However, Reid cannot even get Democrats to support his pathetic immigration plan - especially during an election year.

In an interview with a national news outlet, Rep Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), the head of the House Homeland Security Committee, said: "Immigration is still a federal responsibility. We can't step away from it."

Thompson does not appear to be an advocate of weak reform. He is arguing for strong legislation that addresses the violence plaguing the Southwest.

"When the immigration debate takes off it will include border security, interior enforcement, as well as what equipment and manpower is necessary to support that," he said.

Democrats and Republicans should come together to address drug and human trafficking in the Southwestern United States. It is the federal government's responsibility to protect the nation's borders.

The quickest way to fix the troubles would be to start having armed U.S. soldiers patrolling the border. But that would be too obvious and easy a solution for Washington officials, who seem more intent on pandering to the Hispanic lobby for support than helping people in America's southern border states.
|Top|

American Free Press May 24, 2010

Genocidal ‘Guidestones' in Georgia  

Globalist ‘Stonehenge' provides NWO's 10 Commandments'?

By Mark Anderson

A huge granite monument with a pagan design has been atop one of the highest hills in Elbert County, Ga., bordering South Carolina, for 30 years.

The center cluster of the monument, known as the Georgia Guidestones - sometimes called the American Stonehenge - was finished in March 1980. Ever since, the Guidestones have preached the globalist gospel with "10 Guides," as if to replace the biblical 10 Commandments. This spring, interest in this mysterious monument has grown enormously, but many Americans remain unaware of its existence and significance.

The Guidestones, whose original sponsor is unknown, are infamous for the very first of these 10 Guides: To reduce the global population of some 7 billion people down to 500 million people and maintain that low level "in perpetual balance with nature" - meaning that 6.5 billion people would have to cease to exist and never be replaced.

How that would be done is not specified, but doing so inescapably suggests a contemplated genocide on a massive scale, since there would be no other means of achieving such a reduction.

The stones consist of 951 cubic feet of granite, with an overall weight of 119 tons. Each of the four main upright stones stands 16 feet. They weigh 42,437 pounds apiece. The center "Gnomon Stone" weighs just over 20,000 pounds. The 10 Guides are inscribed on the structure in eight modern languages, and a shorter message is inscribed at the top of the structure in four ancient scripts: Babylonian, Classical Greek, Sanskrit and Egyptian hieroglyphs.

Opinions on the stones vary widely. The Roadside America web site, a collection of tourist-oriented scribbling, sarcastically noted in 2008: "As far as we can tell the Georgia Guidestones, which have been sanding for 28 years, have been utterly useless at eliminating the human population," as if the stones themselves, instead of their sponsors, would contemplate or instigate genocide.

A more neutral site, GeorgiaGuidestones.com "which does not dismiss the stones' significance, claims the stones "were erected in honor of American revolutionary patriot Mr. Thomas Paine. "That site adds that Paine's religious skepticism is supposedly reflected in the stones' naturalistic philosophy that mankind has no creator and represents his own destiny. The site adds that "a small group of loyal Americans living outside Georgia who wished to remain anonymous forever" are behind the stones.

Notably, a stone plaque that is part of the structure reads, "Sponsors: A small group of men who seek the are of reason."

Apparently, humanity is supposed to forget that the "age of reason" was the stated goal of the criminal, communistic clique that fostered the bloody French Revolution. Robespierre and other malefactors behind the revolution entertained a very similar "humanist, naturalist world view."

That plaque also notes that there is a time capsule six feet under the structure "to be opened on...." - then no date is given for opening the capsule.

Read the 10 Guides and judge for yourself if "loyal Americans" were behind this thing: 1. Maintain humanity under 500,000 in perpetual balance with nature; 2. Guide reproduction wisely - improving fitness and diversity; 3. Unite humanity with a living new language'; 4. Rule passion - faith - tradition - and all things with tempered reason; 5; Protect people and nations with fair laws and just courts; 6. Let all nations rule internally resolving external disputes in a world court; 7. Avoid petty laws and useless officials; 8. Balance personal rights with social duties/ 9. Prize truth - beauty - love - seeking harmony with the infinite; 10. Be not a cancer on the Earth - leave room for nature.

Moeover, according to RadioLiberty.com: "The origin of that strange monument is shrouded in mystery because no one knows the true identity of the man, or men, who commissioned its construction. Al that is known for certain is that in June 1979, a well-dressed articulate stranger visited the office of the Elberton Granite Finishing company and announced that he wanted to build an edifice to transmit a message to mankind."

The same source added: "He identified himself as R.C. Christian, but it soon became apparent that was not his real name. He said that he represented a group of men who wanted to offer direction to humanity, but to date no one knows who R.C. Christian really was, or the names of those he represented.

(The Guidestones' address is 1065 Guidestones Rd., Nuberg, Ga.)
|Top|

American Free Press May 24, 2010

Was Gulf Oil Spill an Inside Job?

By Victor Thorn

Could the catastrophic Gulf of Mexico oil rig explosion be part of a larger scheme to "reform" the energy industry, just as the Obama administration has "reformed" healthcare, banking and automobile manufacturers?

The first red flag receiving virtually no attention is that Halliburton (of Dick Cheney fame) had finished a cementing process only 20 hours prior to Deepwater Horizon erupting in flames. Lawsuits have already been filed, with Reuters reporting on April 29, "Halliburton improperly and negligently performed its job in cementing the well, increasing the pressure at the well and contributing to the fire, explosion and resulting oil spill."

As a result, a high-pressure pocket of deep oil 30,000 feet beneath the ocean floor erupted with the force of a gigantic, non-stop fire hose. A surviving worker on the rig, John Kersey, said it sounded "like a war zone" as alarms were triggered, electricity shorted out, and flames shot 300 feet into the air. The inferno-like blaze could be seen 35 miles away.

CONNECTIONS

Suspicions arise when an ownership paper trail is followed. Halliburton subcontracted for a company named Transocean, which leased and operated Deepwater Horizon for British Petroleum (BP). Transocean is a subsidiary of Sonat Inc., which merged with the El Paso Corporation (EPC) in March 1999. Douglas Foshee, EPC's chairman, president and CEO, was hired away from Halliburton. The interim CEO prior to his arrival was Ronald Kuehn of Sonat.

Another previous CEO of EPC was William Wise, who served with Cheney on the influential National Petroleum Council EPC was the largest single contributor from Texas for Bush-Cheney's 2000 presidential campaign. Similarly, Wise helped Cheney raise $8 million for the National Republican Senatorial Committee.

These incestuous relationships aren't limited to the GOP. Barack Obama and his Chicago crime network expect to reap handsome profits in the future. Step No. 1 in this process began with Chicago's Joyce foundation, which had John Ayers (brother of terrorist William Ayers) on its board. Another board member was then-Illinois Sen. Barack Obama.

The Joyce Foundation created the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX), which in turn received financing from Franklin Raines, former head of Fannie Mae, a prime mover in our recent housing market collapse and economic recession.

(F vital importance is CCX's role as the sole "carbon trading system" under Obama's cap-and-trade bill. CCX would act as a quasi-stock market to buy and sell energy emission allowances. Richard Sandor, CCX founder, estimated a $10 trillion potential for this easily manipulated market.

BILDERBERG INFLUENCE

With that much money at stake, a host of high rollers enter the picture. Namely, one company with a huge ownership interest in CCX is generation Investment Management (GIM), whose chairman is former Vice President Al Gore. Four other GIM founders include Henry Paulson, David Blood, Mark Ferguson and Peter Harris - all of Goldman Sachs. Not surprisingly, Goldman Sachs purchased 10 percent of CCX in 2006. One other individual on CCX's board of directors is the controversial Maurice Strong, a New Age occultist with direct ties to the Rockefellers and the Rothschilds.

Since Goldman Sachs has now become part of the equation, we next need to examine its non-executive chairman, Peter Sutherland, who formerly filled the same role at BP, the company at the center of this debacle. As the third-largest global energy company in existence, BP has four direct links to Bilderberg: former CEO John brown, chairman Carl Henric Svanberg, chief executive Tony Hayward and Sutherland. In addition, Sutherland formerly served as the World Trade Organization's director general, EU commissioner and chairman of the European Trilateral Commission.

This background information is important because the top recipient of BP donations during the 2008 presidential campaign was Obama. Similarly, the second highest political action committee contributing to a political candidate in 2008 was Goldman Sachs. The beneficiary of their largess: Obama.

Undoubtedly, one of Obama's primary big government missions is to enact cap-and-trade legislation. To implement this plan, influential decision makers such as Robert Rubin, Larry Summers, Paul Volcker and Timothy Geithner are all members of the financial mafia. In this vein, David Mayer Rothschild stressed that last year's Copenhagen environmental summit was "an attempt to establish a world government.

Likewise, AFP editor Jim Tucker reported on March 24, 2007 that General Lord Guthrie, director of N.M. Rothschild & Sons, said political leaders should "address the global climate crisis with a single voice, and impose rules that apply worldwide."

The Rothschilds have spent huge amounts of money promoting the global warming hoax. Goldman Sachs is obviously an arm of their empire, whereas BP is among a host of companies in Nathan Rothschild's portfolio.

A TEAM EFFORT

Considering the nature of these prominent players, one factor binds them all together. Cap and trade, via the CCX, will tax carbon-dioxide emissions and generate trillions in revenue. Only a month ago, however, this legislation sat dead in the water with virtually no support from Congress of the American public. But now, with an environmental catastrophe at hand, could it be resurrected and enacted in a way that mirrored President Clinton's counter terrorism bill following the OKC bombing?

Ironically, big oil and global bankers are two of the most ardent supporters of climate change legislation. In this sense, seeming adversaries such as "environmentalist" Gore and BP are on the same team; as are Cheney's Halliburton, Goldman Sachs and Obama's CCX. It should also be noted that prior to their demise, the corrupt Enron Corporation lavished huge amounts of praise on cap and trade legislation.

Lastly, if gasoline prices surge this summer due to the Gulf of Mexico spill, one obvious benefactor will be the new green-friendly "smart cars" owned by GM (Government Motors).

As AFP goes to press, all containment efforts have failed as millions of gallons of oil continue to gush into the gulf of Mexico on a weekly basis.
|Top|

American Free Press May 24, 2010

Remote Control . . . The Battle for Your Mind  

By John Tiffany

If you go to the police and tell them you are "hearing voices," they may lock you up for psychiatric evaluation. And conceivably you really are crazy. But the trouble is, the government has been pursuing technology to implant voices in your head, even without any surgery to put a device inside your brain (although they are working on that, too).

"Can your opinions be changed at the push of a button?" asks Steve Lynch in his book Remote Control: The Battle for Your Mind. Can you be compelled to do a stranger's bidding at the twisting of a dial?

Just like in the old Soviet Union - the Evil Empire - psychiatry provides the cover that allows the state to incarcerate opponents.

Says Lynch, neuroleptics are still in use and can be the equivalent of a chemical lobotomy. Some call these drugs "anti-psychotics," but clearly they have their dangers - and their usefulness for nefarious types.

There has been much controversy about the role of pharmaceutical companies in marketing and promoting neuroleptics, including charges of downplaying or covering up adverse effects, among other possible crimes. Eli Lilly pleaded guilty to violating the law for over 10 years in regard to olanzapine (trade name: Zyprexa).

A company called Astrazeneca, which you may only know of as the source of annoying advertisements on TV, is facing about 9,000 personal-injury lawsuits from more than 15,000 former users of quetiapine (Seroquel). Olanzapine and quetiapine had become the biggest selling neuroleptica in 2008, with global sales of about $5.5 billion each. That's just the tip of the isberg.

As part of his book's documentation, Lynch lists a number of U.S. patents (of course these do not include the top-secret, classified devices). For example, there is a patent for an apparatus for remotely monitoring and altering brain waves; another device for monitoring your magnetic field; a multichannel, multifactorial method of controlling your nervous system; a methos if inducing mental, emotional and physical states of consciousness, including specific mental activity, in human beings ets. That is scary stuff.

In addition, Lynch tells the story of his own suffering at the hands of the mind controllers. He was a political dissident, which might explain why he was targeted. Yet he managed to prevail, which gives the book an upbeat tone.

Says Lynch, "Only he who gives up loses." the best personal defense is awareness, he advises.

Is it paranoia, or the Pentagon? There is certainly a lot of food for serious thought here.

Remote Control: The Battle for Your Mind by Steve Lynch (309 pp., softcover, $35, #RC) is available from First Amendment Books, 645 Pennsylvania Ave. SE. Ste 100, Washington, D.C. 20003. For even faster ordering call 1-888-699-NEWS to order by Visa, MasterCard, American Express or Discover.
|Top|

American Free Press May31, 2010

Shadowy Schemers Converge on Spain  

By James P. Tucker, Jr.

As the super-secret Trilateral Commission (TC) was meeting behind locked and guarded doors at the luxurious Four Seasons resort hotel in Dublin, Ireland May 8, participants were upset to learn that awareness of their evildoings was surging in the United States.

The same day, the Republican Party of Maine threw out its Establishment-approved platform and adopted a manifesto that denounced "efforts to create a one-world government," called for abolishing the Federal Reserve System and ridiculed global warming as a "myth." Each of these matters is dear to the hearts of members of the Trilateral Commission and its brother group, Bilderberg. Their traditional goal is world government, and these stateless plutocrats have exploited the hysteria over "global warming" for profit.

Maine's Republicans also praised the tea party movement and support Rep. Ron Paul (R-Tex.) and his son Rand Paul, who won the GOP Senate primary in Kentucky May 18. Maine's Republicans said, "Healthcare is not a right." They say, "Eliminate Motor Voter"; "Reject the UN Treaty on the Rights of the Child"; "Eliminate the Department of Education"; "Arrest and detain . . . anyone here illegally, and then deport him, period."

Similar demands are being made by a growing number of congressmen and other officials throughout the country, and this is distressing to the Trilateral-Bilderberg elite. The health control law proclaims a "right" to care and imposes an unconstitutional requirement that private citizens buy private healthcare or pay a fine. Yet the central government has no constitutional power to compel individuals to buy any product from a private party.

"Motor Voter" was imposed by President Bill Clinton in 1996 to register illegal aliens, mostly Hispanic, so they could illegally vote for him. The illegal immigrant would apply for a drivers license and be automatically registered to vote at the same time. Many were unaware they could vote until jerked off their porches on Election Day and shoved into a voting booth with a filled-out sample ballot in their fist.

Patriots, once educated on the issue, strongly oppose the UN's "child's rights" treaty. No, they don't hate children, as the internationalists shout. This treaty would allow UN bureaucrats to enter your home and bully you if your child (or a neighbor's child) complains. It is another attack on the family and national sovereignty by advocates of world government.

Former President Jimmy Carter, who was recruited into the Trilateral Commission as governor of Georgia by David Rockefeller, made the Department of Education a separate Cabinet-level entity in a payoff to the teachers union. Predictably, education went south as incompetent applicants got new teaching jobs. It is a goal of the internationalists to dumb down America, so living standards throughout the world will be equalized— equalized for us peons, not the plutocratic elite.

Federal law passed in 1952 requires that the border be sealed off and illegal immigrants thrown out. But internationalists consider themselves above the law and, of course, illegal immigrants reduce the U.S. standard of living. They also make great wage slaves to be abused by multinational corporations for the profits of top executives, many of whom are members of the TC and other globalist groups.
——
NOTE: Bilderberg will meet June 4-7 at the Dolce Hotel in Sitges, Spain, 12 miles from Barcelona.

AFP editor James P. Tucker Jr. is a veteran journalist who spent many years as a member of the "elite" media in Washington. Since 1975 he has won widespread recognition, here and abroad, for his pursuit of on-the-scene stories reporting the intrigues of global power blocs such as the Bilderberg Group. Tucker is the author of Jim Tucker's Bilderberg Diary: One Man's 25-Year Battle to Shine the Light on the World Shadow Government. Bound in an attractive full-color softcover and containing 272 pages—loaded with photos, many never published before—the book recounts Tucker's experiences over the last quarter century at Bilderberg meetings. $25 from AFP. No charge for S&H in U.S.

Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute - as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645 Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|

American Free Press May31, 2010

‘The United States of Arizona'  

By Jim Traficant

Our 50 states are to be the United States of America. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. And, to continue the freedoms we enjoy, our nation must be secured, protected from potential enemies and threats from within—and—without. Quite frankly, those lofty yet pragmatic goals and ideals are not possible without a secure border.

There is no national security without a secure border. Every military strategist knows that. I introduced legislation onto the House floor to secure our borders by relocating troops from overseas to our borders. My legislation provided 10,000 soldiers to be strategically placed and assigned to all our borders, both north and south.

My legislation was vehemently opposed by the Democratic Party. I was labeled a bigot, a racist, every name you can imagine.

I successfully passed the amendment in the House—but the "party" and the Senate killed it every year.

The truth is, the security of our borders was not politically expedient as much as the catering to and solicitation of a growing minority Hispanic vote. Both parties want to recruit this new political base, another minority vote, this time even bigger than the black vote. In fact, black Americans are once again pushed to the back of the bus.

Politics won out ever national security. Now Arizona is the target of all the "nobles" who claim to abhor the actions of Arizona.

What a bunch of phonies and hypocrites. I titled this column "The United States of Arizona" because Arizona is doing what the United States of America should be doing. Shame on you, Congress. Legislators should hide their faces. Americans are under attack and are being killed on our borders, and our government has not only turned its back, but is encouraging it by the failure to respond. Let's get off this immigration lingo, the key word here is "illegal"—not "immigration."

Who are these illegals? Are they simply "poor people" looking for a better life? Or are they drug smugglers, robbers, terrorists and freeloaders? The facts are clear: They are all of these. However, there's no way of knowing exactly who and what they are, because our border is wide open.

My God, America could be systematically penetrated by a sophisticated, powerful entity before we even knew it. This is insane and absolutely dangerous. Thank God Arizona has acted. I hope the officials there stand their ground. Arizona is helping the American people in every state, in spite of the scorn and ridicule it is facing.

Let's look at the facts that support the actions of Arizona:

There have been millions of illegals crossing our borders with little or no interdiction. Narcotics have flooded our borders. American landowners have faced costly damages and death.

The people who live within 75 miles of the Mexican border have been terrorized for years. They have pleaded with the federal government to help protect their lives and property, to no avail.

One rancher testified that "up to 1,200 illegal immigrants" go across his ranch every day. They steal his vehicles. They destroy his fences. They leave trash and destruction. He testified that he had "found 17 dead bodies," and nobody helped him.

Another land owner testified that drugs are daily shipped across his ranch in a sort of "military-type operation." He stated there's a "point man" with a machine gun in front with guards fully armed a half-mile behind guarding their rear. He stated that these "narcos" are violent and will kill anyone who gets in their way.

Another testified that two illegals came on his property who were forced to carry drugs. One was shot in the arm, but escaped after delivery. His "associate" wasn't as lucky—he was killed. These drug smugglers force "runners" to carry the drugs across the border, then often kill them to avoid detection.

It's gotten so bad that federal prisons are bulging with over 40 percent illegal immigrants. Think about it: Who's paying to feed them, clothe them, provide medical care? Are we crazy?

Some 80 percent of our law enforcement who are murdered are killed by illegal immigrants. These are violent terrorists. Get back at me!

James A. (Jim) Traficant, Jr. was born in Youngstown, Ohio on May 8, 1941. He received BS and MS degrees from the University of Pittsburgh. He also received an MS from Youngstown State University in 1976. From 1981-1985 he served as sheriff of Mahoning County, prior to his election to the U.S. Congress in 1984. He was re-elected by overwhelming margins every year up until 2002 when, following his conviction on trumped up corruption charges, he was expelled from the House of Representatives. Donations of support may be sent to Mrs. Tish Traficant, 429 Main Street, Poland, OH 44514. Listen to Jim's Saturday radio program from 1 p.m. to 4 p.m. Eastern Time on WTAM 1100 in Cleveland, Ohio. You can also view it on WTAM.com. Click on the web cam button.

Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute - as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645 Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|

American Free Press May31, 2010

Secret Arrests, Media Censorship Nothing New in ‘Democratic' Israel  

By Richard Walker

The secret arrests and imprisonment of journalists and human rights activists in Israel mirror a long-established policy that those deemed threats to the state should be denied legal and human rights.

Nothing illustrates that more than the recent admission by the Israeli authorities that they had prominent Arab-Israeli human rights figure Amir Makhoul in custody.

He had been dragged from his bed days earlier and spirited to a secret holding center. His arrest and detention were justified by a claim he had been spying for Hezbollah. It was a charge few believed outside Israel, where his role as director of a prominent Palestinian organization (Ittijah, the Union of Arab Community-Based Associations) was highly respected.

When he was removed from his home in the early hours of May 6, his wife was not told where he was being taken or the reason for his arrest. A computer and documents belonging to him were later seized from his home and office. The authorities only admitted he was in custody when they were pressured by his brother, a former Israeli parliamentarian, and human rights groups in Israel and in neighboring Arab countries.

Makhoul's case illustrates the willingness of the Israeli government to silence critics in its midst. He was a formidable advocate for Palestinian rights and a leading personality within Israel's Arab-Israeli community, which numbers 20 percent of the country's 7.5 million population. His brother claims Amir had become a thorn in the side of the Israeli leadership because he campaigned publicly to highlight how Arab-Israelis were being treated like second-class citizens. That was something Israel did not want the outside world to see, and in its efforts to silence him they banned him from traveling abroad.

Now, his fate is uncertain, and his community is missing a persuasive advocate. His loss to the human rights lobby is believed to be have been orchestrated by the Israeli government as part of an overall strategy to weaken and discredit critics of the state, many of whom are often labeled "anti-Semitic." That is a familiar tactic when Israel's government wants to silence legitimate opponents of the system.

But this is nothing new. In December 2009, a 23- year-old Israeli journalist, Anat Kamm, was arrested on charges of espionage and has been kept under house arrest ever since. She is not even permitted to leave her home to take some air, and her visitors have to be approved by the authorities.

She copied documents while in the Israeli Defense Forces and passed them to a journalist at the newspaper Haaretz. Her aim was to expose what she believed were war crimes, in particular the targeted killings of Palestinians, many of whom were not linked to terror and who could have been arrested safely. The documents she photocopied within IDF command headquarters also highlighted corruption within the higher ranks of the military. For nearly five months after her arrest no media outlet in Israel was permitted to mention her name under censorship rules enacted by the military.

Now, she finds herself facing a possible life sentence. Many Israeli journalists have taken the view she is a traitor and will get what she deserves. Those same journalists capitulated to a gag order denying the public the right to know about the recent arrest of Makhoul. Surveys in Israel confirm that a majority of the population, including a lot of journalists, think human rights bodies are a threat to the state and should not be allowed to function without very strict controls. This increasing lurch toward a policy that does not respect freedom has worried some Israelis, who have spoken out courageously on the issue.

In the Jewish journal Zeek, there have been a series of articles confronting the question of what Israel is steadily becoming. In an article entitled "Publish and Be Damned," Zeek journalist Mya Guarnieri described how she had to seek legal advice before writing about Ms. Kamm and how she eventually settled for a pseudonym when penning a piece for a foreign publication.

She condemned the media blackout during the invasion of Gaza and lamented the fact that Israel fell dramatically in the international rankings for countries that respected press freedom. Israel is now at 93rd place in those rankings, behind Lebanon and Kuwait. The rankings were established by the Reporters Without Borders, which placed Kuwait and Lebanon at 60th and 61st places respectively.

Richard Walker is the pen name of a former NY news producer.

Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute - as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645 Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|

American Free Press May31, 2010

Cellmate Reveals Bomber's Secrets  

By Pat Shannan

Why had staff of Morris Dees' Southern Poverty Law Center infiltrated the inside of the Elohim City Christian compound months prior to the Oklahoma City Bombing? When this was asked by a reporter in a 2003 public forum, Dees replied, "If I toldja, I'd have to kill ya!"

"The implications of the FBI and the SPLC working hand-in-glove were stunning," writes David Paul Hammer in his new book Deadly Secrets. Hammer met Tim McVeigh on death row in federal prison in 1997 and became his close friend and confidant. In 2004, he wrote of this association in Secrets Worth Dying For but without the investigative detail found in his new book.

For instance, Hammer sheds more light on the dubious "capture" of McVeigh, something that investigators have suspected since the beginning as being just a little bit too easy.

Why would someone who just single-handedly pulled off the biggest terrorist attack on American soil be stupid enough to zoom up the interstate with no license plates on his car? McVeigh told him that these were his orders and that long before that day, he had intentionally left a paper trail whenever necessary. "It had to be known that I hated the government," McVeigh said according to Hammer. "Even my own family had to believe my cover. Otherwise, I could have ended up dead before the mission was accomplished." McVeigh apparently realized that he, too, could be "collateral damage" at any time.

Hammer exposes, according to McVeigh, Richard Guthrie as the elusive "John Doe 2." Guthrie was the Midwest bank robber who was one of three tied to the bombing to later mysteriously die in his prison cell.

Hammer is on death row for murder. He killed a fellow prisoner during a fight and came within hours of execution before a last-minute appeal saved him. He writes in the final pages that two FBI agents came to visit him in September 2009 to tell him that if he would halt the publication of this book, the Justice Department would halt its efforts to seek the death penalty in his case.

"Otherwise," he quotes the FBI, "We will use the full might of the federal government against you." In other words, they offered him his life to shut up, but Hammer chose truth.

Deadly Secrets by David Paul Hammer (hardback, 228 pages, $30 #DH) is available from FIRST AMENDMENT BOOKS, 645 Pennsylvania Ave. SE, #100 Washington, D.C. 20003. For even faster ordering, call toll free at 1-8887-699-6397 to order by Visa, MasterCard, AmEx or Discover. No charge for S&H inside the U.S.

Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute - as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645 Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|

American Free Press May 31, 2010

Is Power Elite Planning New Third Party?  

Powerful Forces seem to be laying the ground-work for staging a "third party" rebellion under their control. Don't let them lead good patriotic Americans astray. Here's the story you need to know about. You won't read it anywhere else

By Michael Collins Piper

Grass-roots Americans - fed up with corrupt and incestuous Republican-and Democratic-politics-as-usual - would love to see a genuine "third" party or independent movement rise up to throw the rascas out and restore the constitution, bring back fiscal sanity and put an end to seneless imperial wars of conquest around the globe.

However, what many of those grass-roots Americans do not recognize is that there is - even now - a not-too-covert effort afoot to bring some sort of "new" party into being in time for the 2012 presidential election. The problem is that those working to conjure up this "new" movement are the very people responsible for the mess that America is in today.

In fact, elements working bhind the scenes - using the self-appointed "mainstream media" as their megaphone - seem to be setting the stage to spring some sort of "centrist," "bipartisan" or "coalition" -type opposition movement on the American people.

Americans will be told that this is the solution to the gridlock and partisan squabbling now plaguing Washington and that they finally gave a "real alternative" to those bickering Democrats and Republicans who've brought morass and malaise to the American system.

The recent rise of a "third" party in Britain - the Liberal Democrats - now part of a new coalition government in partnership with the Conservative (or "Tory") Party - is being hailed as an example Americans can follow, in the tradition of our so-called "Mother Country."

The American people do need an alternative to the Democrats and the Republicans. But right now they need to know that the "solution" being set in place is not a real solution at all.

Here's the story, one that you've never heard presented anywhere else before: an assembly of diverse material that demonstrates clearly that there is a work an effort to hoodwink people and lead tem into a trap that will ensure that the elite retain control in the face of expanding pub lic awareness that there's something wrong in Washington.

The truth is that one of the primary reasons that the mass media - including The Washington Post and The New York Times - on an almost daily basis has been hyping the so-called "tea Party" movement is that these wlite media posers want to keep the put boiling. That's evidently part of the bigger agenda in the campaign to create a new political movement that will be under the control of the big money interests.

In fact. Although few grass-roots tea party supporters know it, a major player behind the initial "from the top{ orchestration of the tea party phenomenon was Grover Norquist, a figure in high-level Republican and conservative circles who was recruited some years ago into the ranks of Council on Foreign Relations (CFR).

The CFR is the New York-based affiliate of the Royal Institute of International Affairs in London, the de facto foreign policy arm of the Rothschild banking dynasty whose tentacles reach into the privately owned money monopiky known as the Federal Reserve System, which controls the Americann economic system.

Likewise, another power behind the sudden burst of the tea party into national prominence was Fox News, the centerpiece of the global media empire of pro-Zionist hard-liner Rupert Murdoch, whose own rise to international influence cam as a result of the sponsorship of the Rothschild dynasty, a point explored in some depth in various aspects in this author's works The Judas Goats and The New Babylon.

So while there are many good people involved in the tea party, it might be said that there are somw suspicious elements at work, utilizing the movement for their own insidious purposes. And one of those purposes, it does appear, is the orchestrated "reform" of the two-party system. But real reform is not what these intriguers have in mind.

Why, some might ask, would the power elite - who have benefitted from a strangle hold on the traditional two-party system - want to bring it toppling down?

The answer is simple: The power elite recognize that there is widespread discontent among American voters, and those high-level manipulators want to ensure that they are able to contain and corral that discontent, channeling it into a "controlled opposition," even if that means setting up a new "centrist" party or movement to do it.

At the same time, of course, they want to be certain that they can direct the internal politics of both the Democratic and Republican parties, making certain that legitimate challengers to politics as usual are kept on the sidelines and marginalized.

That is why, for example, The Washington Post and its sister publication, Newsweek, which is now on the auction block, have been promoting the political fortunes of Sarah Palin, advancing her move toward the Republican presidential nomination in 2012.

Mrs. Palin is clearly perceived by the elite interests who control the Post as a "blocking candidate," who has the capacity to frustrate the ambitions of a genuine maverick Republican such as Ron Paul, whose refusal - unlike Palin - to endorse American imperial globalism and warmongering is considered a potential danger should he make further advances in the GOP arena.

So Sarah Palin is clearly being used as a shameless tool. Yet Paradoxically, should Mrs Palin capture the GOP nod, this would further the elitist aim of saying that the Republican Party was now fully in the control of "extreme" elements and that "middle of the road" GOP voters should begin looking elsewhere for a "centrist" alternative since, of course, most Republicans wold find it hard to stomach voting for Barack Obama or any other likely nominee of the hated socialists in the
Democratic Party.

One point that is little noticed and hardly mentioned regarding the "liberal" elements of the Democratic Party is the fact that many supporters of Israel within the tightly knit group of families and financial interests who control the major print and broadcast media in America are concerned that there is a growing opposition to Israel within the "left wing" of the Democratic Party. Polls consistently demonstrate that Republicans across the country are far more strongly in support of Israel than democrats, who for many years were considered the bedrock of support for Israel in the American political arena. Not so these days.

And now that all of the Key Jewish lobby organizations, including the World Jewish Congress, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the American Jewish Committee and the Anti-Defamation League, have loudly condemned the Obama administration for its perceived hostility and intransigence toward Israel, the concerns about Obama and the Democratic "left" have been exacerbated even further.

Polls show that 27 percent of Israelis consider Obama to be "anti-Semitic."

A hint that there were high-level forces pulling the rug out from under Obama and laying the groundwork for even more substantial political convulsions on the national level came when David S. Broder opined in The Washington Post on Jan. 21 that the election of Republican Scott Brown to succeed the late Edward M. Kennedy in the Massachusetts Senate race was "a vote of no confidence" for the president and "Democratic-controlled Washington." Broder concluded by saying that "Obama may recover, but it will take a significant change of direction to turn things around."

While most Americans have never heard of Broder (a longtime member of the CFR), it is no exaggeration to say that, "When David Broder speaks, people listen," Broder's Post column is considered "must" reading among establishment insiders in Washington. He is regularly hailed as the"dean" of America's political pundits.

While publicly identified as being the fiefdom of the Meyer-Graham publishing enterprise, the Washington Post Company, which is perceived to be a tightly held family concern, is actually an American extension- like the DFR - of the global empire of the Rothschild banking dynasty. Rothschild-connected holding companies and, in particular, longtime Rothschild family associate, Nebraska-based billionaire Warren Buffett, have a considerably greater stake in the Post Company than even the Meyer-Graham family.

All of this having been said, it is critical to understand that the Post, as one of the foremost media powers on American soil, has been in the forefront of propagating the theme that some sort of"centrist" challenge to the two-party system as now constituted is in order.

For example, on Feb. 25, the Rothschild-dominated Post featured a prominently placed item entitled "Washington rancor angers bipartisan town." The article proclaimed that even in Newtown, Pa. - one of the famed well-to-do " Mainline" suburbs of Philadelphia where so-called middle-of-the-road or centrist Democrats and Republicans alike have always competed on an even level in local, state and federal elections - disgust with partisan gridlock in Washington is growing steadily.

The Post asserted that the situation in Newtown is reflected all across the country in like-minded communities said by the Post to reflect "what political strategists consider the disaffected middle."

What this means, effectively, in the carefully crafted code words utilized by the Post, is that many people consider both the Democrats and the Republicans to be "too extreme" - the Democrats perceived to be "too left wing" and the Republicans to be "too right wing."

Putting aside the argument as to what constitutes either "left" or "right" politically, the point is that the Post is suggesting, as it has repeatedly in recent months, Joined by The New York Times, that Americans are looking for a "middle ground" or "centrist" alternative.

On May 2, the Post - which heretofore never had anything good to say abut relatively larger-scale "independent" or "third party" efforts, ranging from those of George Wallace, Ross Perot or Pat Buchanan to Ralph Nader - featured a lead item in its much-read Sunday opinion section raising the question: "Should the two party system be challenged?"

That the Post would even open up the question for discussion is very telling. While opinions, both pro - and con , were presented, the words of one commentator in particular, Dan Schnur, director of the University of Southern California's Unruh Institute of Politics, reflected precisely the tone of recent and notably repetitive Washington Post commentary and reportage regarding the issue.

Whil Schnur says that the emergence of a third party is unlikely "anytime soon," he suggests that "angry centrists" have "the best opportunity they've had in many, many years" over the next six months to begin laying the foundation for "the need for a new, centrist political entity that will free the country from the grip of liberal and conservative extremists." He points out that a bevy of "besieged middle-lf-the-road political figures could conceivable remake the American political landscape."

As examples, Schnur cites such figures as longtime liberal Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.), who is now actually being seriously challenged for renomination by a candidate perceived to be even more liberal than even Lincoln herself; Republican-turned-Democrat Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, who gave up running for renomination in the GOP primary facing a serious conservative challenge only to find his reelection endangered by a fight for renomination in the Democratic Party; and Florida Republican Gov. Charlie Crist, who, failing badly in his bid for the GOP Senate nomination against a conservative challenger, has now, to great fanfare in the "mainstream" media, announced his campaign as an independent.

And it's probably no coincidence that Schnur should be one echoing the Post's propaganda line in so many respects. In 2008, Schnur was the communications director for vaunted "maverick" Sen. John McCain, the GOP presidential nominee that year, who, just four years before, was being touted as a possible party-jumping running mate for Democratic presidential candidate Sen. John Kerry.

Perhaps not surprisingly, considering his own conflicts over the years with more "conservative" elements in his own party, McCain himself faces a renomination challenge - from the "right" - from former Rep. J.C. Hayward.

What is particularly interesting in that another featured commentator in the Post's give-and-take on the issue was former GOP House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who said that a third party challenge was "not a path America should follow."

What Gingrich did not say, however, was something that Washington insiders do know; the fact that Gingrich has been privately "mentioning" to figures in the capital city's power elite that he is considering picking retiring Democratic Sen. Evan Bayh of Indiana (who - like Gingrich - is another member of the CFR) as his running mate if he (Gingrich) manages to procure the Republican Party's 2012 presidential nomination. This is apparently the "Gingrich Solution" to partisan gridlock, some sort of"bipartisan, middle-of-the-road" approach.

And while Gingrich has not yet made any major formal steps toward running for the presidency, he maintains considerable influence in Washington.

That Gingrich should mention Bayh as a possible running mate is very interesting in the context of an orchestrated toppling of the two-party system by the powerful financial interests that control the mass media - the global money lords who are the forces dominating the federal Reserve System.

In fact, on the very day that The New York Times, another major voice for the barons of finance, featured a commentary by Bayh entitled "Why I'm Leaving the Senate," in which Bayh complained of"strident partisanship" and "unyielding ideology," former Republican Sen. Lincoln Chafee, one of those much-touted"centrists" who is now running as an independent for governor of Rhode Island, was also featured on that same page in the Times predicting: "Expect Democratic and GOP dysfunction to lead to a third party."

Chafee wrote of the fact that, in 2001, pollster John Zogby told the Republican Senate caucus that "There is a burgeoning centrist third party waiting to be formed." In Chafee's summary of Zogby's words, "Either party could make a strategic decision to capture the center or both could wait for a third party to full the vacuum." For his own part, Chafee wrote:

With our hopes for a post-partisan era still unmet, I say tosenator Bayh: Welcome to the club of independents who are looking for a better way to serve. Before long,we cintrists may even come together to define the third party that Mr. Zogby foresaw in 2001.

It has happened before. In 1856, my former party ran a credible presidential campaign just two years after its founding. Four years later, Abraham Lincoln won the White House under that new Republican banner. If my friend Evan Bayh can walk away from the United States Senate and not look back, more power to him. But my guess is, he has a modern-day reprise of the Lincoln victory in mind.

It may be no coincidence that Bay's name happens to be one of those popping up in the type of scenario discussed here. In 1999 Bayh was a participant in the Sintra, Portugal convocation of the annual meeting of the Bilderberg group, the secretive international policy-making power bloc created jointly in the mid -1950s by the combined forces of the Rothschild dynasty and their American satellites in the Rockefeller family network.

Is Bayh now slated with other key "centrists," who are said to be "fed up with partisan gridlock," to be part of a phony "third party" conjured up by the power elite? That question remains to be answered. But as the overview of the continuing propaganda campaign for a third party appearing in the controlled media demonstrates, it appears that something is definitely afoot.
|Top|

American Free Press May 31, 2010

U.S. Debt More Than Taxpayers Can Ever Pay Back  

By Rep. Ron Paul

The spotlight remains on the Greek sovereign debt crisis as the riots continue. The terms of the Greek bailout from the IMF and Euro zone countries remain contentious with citizens on all sides. Europeans have having their governments throw public money away as much as Americans do. The Greeks are not happy about having their taxes raised while their pensions and salaries are cut.

Meanwhile, it is rumored by news outlets that Greece may spend more than ti saves from austerity measures on arms deals with Germany, France and the United States as a potential condition of receiving bailout funds. If true, it is certainly not unprecedented for the global military-industrial complex to benefit from deals made by their friends in the central banking community. After all, war is the health of the state. The last thing big government proponents want is for peace to break out in the world.

This free flow of fiat money from around the globe to Greece will not really save Greece as much as it will grant a temporary reprieve to central bankers from the consequences of their mistakes. Sadly, this will come at the expense of the Greek people and taxpayers in Europe and America.

Taxpayers are of no consequence to either European or American central bankers. Even the mere desire for complete information on what they are up to in our name is rebuffed, as we saw last week in the senate with the failure of Louisiana Republican Sen. David Vitter's amendment containing my language to fully audit the fed. The hubris of powerful and secretive central bankers seems to know no bounds.

If someone incurred debts against you as an individual, without your knowledge or consent, you would call it identity theft. You would call your bank for a full accounting of the debts incurred in your name, and after some verification, those debts would be declared invalid and you would not be held responsible for them. Furthermore, if the culprit was found, they would be prosecuted and sent to jail.

Not so with governments and central banks. Governments that are supposed to be of the people and for the people routinely incur debts against the people. Some governments even borrow money to oppress their citizens, and then expect them to pay for their own oppression, with interest. With a fiat money system, the sky is the limit for how much debt a government can place on the backs of the people.

We have reached the point in the United States where the debt our government has accumulated against us is mathematically impossible to pay off. Harder times, likely due to a wave of hyperinflation, will eventually find its way to our streets, and I am fearfulof how Americans will react. My hope is that we will come together peacefully and help each other, and that enough of us will be aware that the blame rests securely on the shoulders of the Federal Reserve and the special interests. They should not be looked to for salvation. They should not be given more power. Rather, they should be stripped of the powers that allowed them to create this mess in the first place.

Resistance to public transparency regarding public debts should be denounced in the strongest of terms, and the central bankers that incurred them should be seen as no better than common identity thieves.
|Top|