Obama's Oil Spill Response: The Story Behind The Story

Robert Singer - I have received a number of emails about the environmental impacts of the BP oil spill. The size of the spill and the impacts on wildlife in the Gulf of Mexico ecosystems have prompted a number of readers to write:

“Bob, it looks like you are right, the environmental damage and pollution are the goal and not the unintended consequences.”

Others have noted the irony that the leak is believed to have started on Earth Day, April 22, when the Deepwater Horizon sank. [1]

Dana Milbank, at the Washington Post, appears to realize there is story behind the story of Obama’s bizarre behavior at his lengthy news conference yesterday at the White House.

“For eight years we had a president who refused to accept blame. Now we have one who seems to enjoy it.

He decorated the East Room with wuddas, cuddas and shuddas: “We should have busted through those constraints. . . . pre-deploying boom would have been the right thing to do . . . I do think our efforts fell short. . . . They should have pushed them sooner. . . . I think that it took too long. . . . Where I was wrong was in my belief that the oil companies had their act together.”

As I sat in the fourth row on Thursday, I was struck by the weirdly passive figure before me.

He delivered lawyerly phrases and spoke of his anger about the oil spill but showed none in his voice or on his face.

He was, presumably, there to show how aggressively he has handled the disaster, but he seemed cool, almost bloodless.

CBS’s Chip Reid asked about the resignation hours earlier of Elizabeth Birnbaum, head of the MMS, or Minerals Management Service. “I found out about her resignation today,” Obama replied. Interior Secretary “Ken Salazar has been in testimony throughout the day, so I don’t know the circumstances in which this occurred.”

That’s very clear, sir. But why not share some with the guys at BP who actually are responsible for the spill?”

The leak, instead of being 210,000 gallons of the Earth’s vital fluids being extracted, the Los Angeles Times is now reporting that BP admits “that the leak rate is around 2.5 million gallons a day.

In 2005, world oil-production alone (not including natural-gas) was an incomprehensible 80 — 100 million barrels of oil per day.

USGS coastal geologists understand these factors cannot be ignored as far as influencing earth crust stresses andconfirm the earth’s response to extracting by force 3,360,000,000 — 4,200,000,000 gallons of the planets vital fluids every single day: Earthquakes and tsunamis.

While disagreement abounds on this topic, scientists at the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) say that oil production at plate boundaries where hard, rocky slabs slide against each other to releases tremendous amounts of energy and could be the cause for the 2004 quake that triggered a deadly tsunami in Sumatra.

“Here’s how it works: With high-tech equipment, oil companies pinpoint oil-rich areas and use large drills to puncture the surface below the sea, sometimes as deep as 10,000 feet. As this pricey fluid gets sucked from the sediment pores, the surrounding rocks shift positions to fill in the newly vacated spaces. At a large scale, for example the volume displaced when millions of barrels of oil are produced, the land movement can actually cause a mini-seismic earthquake, said Robert Morton, a USGS coastal geologist.

During these various stages the globe of the earth is gradually being depressurized and cooled internally, causing contraction for both of these reasons. When objects cool down, they automatically shrink/contract in size. If you let high-pressure air or gas out of a cylinder, it forms ice around the outlet, and cools the entire cylinder. If you let some of the air out of a football, or basketball, the ball shrinks and goes badly out of shape.”

“Apply that to the Earth and you have earthquakes — simple common-sense — not rocket-science. A fact so simple that anyone who understands the oil-extraction process would understand, but, because they are insanely-blinded by their insatiable greed and avarice, they often overlook the obvious.”

Arizona's Immigration Law - A Good Thing For America?

J.T. Coyote - My reaction to the Arizona State law aimed at curtailing the endless flood of illegals crossing that state’s southern border, was initially one of apprehension — upon further reflection however, if this law were well crafted and properly implemented it would not only be constitutionally sound, but it would force the federal government to enforce it’s Article IV, section 4 constitutional mandate. That mandate being, ”… The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; …” This type of legislation by states would push the federal government to act on their long neglected responsibility, the enforcement of US border law.

However, the true federal intent was glimpsed recently in a series of news conferences and speeches, including one before Congress by Mexican President Felipe Calderon where he attacked Arizona’s decision to enforce immigration policy. He also called upon our nation’s lawmakers to re-enact the so-called ”assault weapons” ban in a bid to disarm the American people, as we are being forcibly integrated into the North American Union system. This amounts to nothing more than a take-over by foreign demographic relocation, and attempted Constitution tampering.
In a joint press conference on May 19, from the White House lawn, President Obama showing no qualm, unconstitutionally voiced support for Calderon’s message by proclaiming, “We are not defined by our borders,” a direct swipe at the Article IV clause and national sovereignty. In answer from the House floor, Rep. Tom McClintock of California said Calderon should, “Abide by the fundamental rules of diplomacy between civilized nations not to meddle in each other’s domestic debates.”

McClintock continued by saying, “Unlike Mexico’s immigration law — which is brutally exclusionary – the purpose of America’s law is NOT to keep people out. It is to assure that as people come to the United States, they do so with the intention of becoming Americans and of raising their children as Americans. Unlike Mexico, our nation embraces legal immigration and what makes that possible is assimilation.”

McClintock points out how far we have strayed in our border policy, the almost preferential treatment of illegals country wide, and the fact that many illegal immigrants see themselves as “re-claimers.” They subscribe to a racist liberation philosophy, not to assimilate as US Americans but to make the US into Mexico.

McClintock quoted President Theodore Roosevelt’s explanation of proper immigration policy, “In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person’s becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American… There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all.”

This issue is being used as fuel for “divide and conquer” tactics, that only require a quick look at the Constitution to resolve. Instead however, being mostly Constitution illiterate, it leads people into fighting one another rather than fighting together in maintaining our constitutional laws of Liberty and Inalienable Rights for all.

Other border and coastal states, should look closely at this Arizona Law. It may be the only way to force the government back into Constitutional line. The federal government should abide by the Constitution, or they should show their true colors — any guesses what those colors may be?

Bloggers Beware - Thery Are Coming After You Next

Rep. Tom Price (R-Ga.) - Just when you thought it was safe to start expressing your right to free speech, Democrats in Congress are gearing up for a vote on a new piece of legislation to blatantly undermine the First Amendment. Known as the DISCLOSE Act (HR 5175), this bill – written by the head of the Democrats’ congressional campaign committee – is their response to the recent Supreme Court ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. In short, the Supreme Court found that the government could not restrict the free speech rights of individuals or other entities wishing to participate in the political dialogue.

It is hard to see how establishing a level playing field for free speech – as our Founding Fathers did by making it a right under the Constitution and which the Supreme Court upheld – is a threat to our democracy. Nevertheless, the White House and their allies on Capitol Hill see honest criticism as a threat to forcing their big government, liberal agenda through Congress. So, there is no time like the present – namely five months before an election – to start putting the muzzle on those individuals and organizations not sticking to the Democrats’ talking points.

Under the DISCLOSE Act, certain incorporated entities would be restricted in how they can exercise their free speech rights. There is an exemption for some in the media sphere like newspapers, TV news, and the like. However, there is one driving force in today’s public debate that is NOT exempt. Bloggers will not have the same exemption provided to other media sources. Never mind that the Supreme Court’s opinion in the Citizens United case stated, “Differential treatment of media corporations and other corporations cannot be squared with the First Amendment.”

For many bloggers to exercise their free speech rights, they would have to jump through the same onerous new hoops as many businesses, nonprofit groups, and even such threats to democracy as your local chamber of commerce. If this sounds like an absurd overreach by one party in power, I invite you to take a look at their government takeover of health care, taxpayer-funded bailouts, and general hostility to private sector economic growth.

The Obama Administration and Congressional Democrats have not racked up a stellar record of transparency and openness. For a White House that touted its willingness to engage critics openly in hopes of staving off greater partisan rancor, Obama’s team has endorsed backroom deal-making, special giveaways to garner support for their agenda, and a closed-door decision-making process that has the American people more fed up with Washington. Now, under their brand of leadership, they stand ready to stifle free speech via legislative fiat.

Democrats should not be allowed to give themselves carte blanche to shut down the ability of those in the blogosphere or elsewhere to participate in our nation’s collective dialogue. That flies in the face of our most sacred rights as American citizens.

The United States Of Arizona'

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!

Obama's New Health Care Rationing Czar

There is an interesting article in CNSNews about Obama’s nominee to head the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Donald Berwick, who reveals his passion for central planning and all things socialized.The article links to a June 2009 interview with Berwick in Biotechnology Healthcare. Some snippets from the article:

In a June 2009 interview in Biotechnology Healthcare, Berwick was asked: “Critics of CER (Comparative Effectiveness Research) have said that it will lead to rationing of health care.”

He answered: “We can make a sensible social decision and say, ‘Well, at this point, to have access to a particular additional benefit [new drug or medical intervention] is so expensive that our taxpayers have better use for those funds.’ We make those decisions all the time. The decision is not whether or not we will ration care—the decision is whether we will ration with our eyes open.”

In the same interview, he also said, “The social budget is limited—we have a limited resource pool. It makes terribly good sense to at least know the price of an added benefit, and at some point we might say nationally, regionally, or locally that we wish we could afford it, but we can’t.”
Berwick also talked about his romantic view of Britain’s socialized health care system on page 213 of a report he wrote entitled, “A Transatlantic Review of the NHS at 60,” published on July 26, 2008.

“Cynics beware: I am romantic about the National Health Service; I love it,” Berwick wrote. “All I need to do to rediscover the romance is to look at health care in my own country.”

Lastly, in the 2008 report, Berwick wrote, “Any health care funding plan that is just, equitable, civilized, and humane must — must — redistribute wealth from the richer among us to the poorer and less fortunate.” Here is the 2008 speech where Berwick talks about the “darkness of private enterprise” and lauds a politically accountable system. He adds that “excellent health care is, by definition, redistributional.” Hat tip to Mark Fee for the article.

Coming To America: Canadian Government Pays Organization To Troll Political Forums

Prison Planet - The next time you struggle to comprehend how someone could spend their time trolling the Internet in order to defend and downplay whatever government cover-up or abuse is in the news this week, consider the fact that they may be on a government payroll.

The Canadian government has been caught paying a media group to monitor online political discussion and respond to “misinformation,” in order words to spread state-sanctioned propaganda, in the latest scandal to hit the Harper administration.

“Under the pilot program the Harper government paid a media company $75,000 to monitor and respond to online postings about the east coast seal hunt,” reports News1130.

“The government has a lot of power, that it feels the need to monitor public bulletin boards, or places where people express views and then to respond to that, seems to me going beyond a reasonable action the government should be taking,” said UBC Computer Science professor and President of the BC Freedom of Information and Privacy Association, Richard Rosenberg.

A poll carried on the News1130 website shows that the majority of respondents, 77 per cent, are not intimidated by the fact that the government is monitoring their online conversations, and would not regulate the information they post on the Internet.

Accusations that people who defend the seemingly indefensible in the aftermath of government atrocities, wars and scandals are in the pay of unscrupulous authorities, circulate on a regular basis. But the fact is that governments and transnational corporations have made a habit of using the Internet to spread propaganda by using individuals who pose as neutral observers.

The innovator of these “black propaganda” techniques was undoubtedly Monsanto, who as far back the late 90’s were creating “fake citizens” via their PR front company Bivings to post messages on Internet bulletin boards lauding the virtues and scoffing at the dangers of genetically modified food.

In the 21st century, governments try to harness the power of manufacturing fake consensus in order to dictate reality and justify their actions.

Last year, the Israeli government announced that it would be setting up a network of bloggers to combat websites deemed “problematic” by the Zionist state following a massive online backlash to Israel’s brutal bombing of Gaza.

Israel’s goal was to flood Internet message boards in English, French, Spanish and German with their own PR agents who would attempt to manufacture a contrived consensus that the IDF’s actions were justified.

Like Israel, the U.S. military industrial complex hires armies of trolls to spew propaganda in defense of the war on terror and in support of bombing whatever broken-backed third world country is being targeted next.

CENTCOM has programs underway to infiltrate blogs and message boards to ensure people, “have the opportunity to read positive stories,”presumably about how Iraq is a wonderful liberated democracy and the war on terror really is about protecting Americans from Al-CIAda.

In May 2008, it was revealed that the Pentagon was expanding “Information Operations” on the Internet with purposefully set up foreign news websites, designed to look like independent media sources but in reality carrying direct military propaganda.

More recently the New York Times published an exposé on how privately hired operatives were appearing on major US news networks promoting the interests and operations of the Pentagon and generating favorable news coverage of the so-called war on terror while posing as independent military analysts.

This operation was formally announced In 2006 when the Pentagon set up a unit to “better promote its message across 24-hour rolling news outlets, and particularly on the internet”.

Again, the Pentagon said the move would boost its ability to counter “inaccurate” news stories and exploit new media.

Last year, the US Air Force announced a “counter-blog” response plan aimed at fielding and reacting to material from bloggers who have “negative opinions about the US government and the Air Force.”

The plan, created by the public affairs arm of the Air Force, includes a detailed twelve-point “counter blogging” flow-chart that dictates how officers should tackle what are described as “trolls,” “ragers,” and “misguided” online writers.

Student Suspended In America For Wearing Rosary Beads

The mother of Raymond Hosier, 13, who was suspended for wearing rosary beads to school, met with school administrators Thursday.

They told her that they are standing by their policy which states that beads are not allowed to be worn out of concern they may be gang related.

She tells FOX23 News that administrators said if Hosier shows up to school Monday with the beads on - he will be suspended again.

Tonight on FOX23 News at 10 and 11 we’ll hear from her.

Raymond was suspended from school for wearing rosary beads

Raymond was suspended from school for wearing rosary beads
Raymond Hosier clinged to his rosary beads and he doesn't plan on taking them off.

"They're in honor of my brother and uncle and that's how it's gonna stay," he said.

Raymond said on Monday that the principal at Oneida Middle School told him to take off or hide his rosary per school policy. But he didn't and went back to school on Tuesday. When Raymond went in on Wednesday he was suspended.

District leaders tell FOX23 News and the school's policy states that students may not wear beads out of concern they may be gang related.

"I was just mad they were suspending me for rosary beads and I told them I wasn't in a gang. They just resemble my brother and uncle," said Hosier.

Raymond recently started wearing the religious symbol every day in rememberance of his older brother Joey who was struck and killed by car back in 2005 and for his uncle who died of cancer two weeks ago.

"I think it's not right to kick me out of school for wearing rosary beads," said Hosier.

"He's got rights as a citizen. He's got the right to demonstrate his religion," said Raymond's mother Chantal Hosier.

His mother says Raymond is not a trouble maker at all, in fact he does well in school and gets A's and B's.

But the death of Joey is still tough on the family.

"Honestly, there's some of my children that haven't even dealt completely with Joey's death and if this is their way than that's their way," said Chantal Hosier.

Raymond says he won't take off his rosary beads, hopeful the school has a change of heart.

"I just hope I can keep wearing them without getting in trouble or suspended from school," said Raymond Hosier.

A school spokeswoman says they cannot comment on cases involving suspended students.

Chantal Hosier plans on meeting with school administrators on Thursday.

Dr. Cass Sunstein Wants To Turn Off The Lights In America

Jerry Mazza - Paul Joseph Watson, a writer at Prison Planet whom I greatly respect, gave us a reminder Monday May 17th that Obama Czar Wants Mandatory Government Propaganda On Political Websites. The Big Brother Czar is also a Harvard Professor currently dishing up the pabulum for Obama’s White House that “conspiracy theories” should be banned from the Internet; so much for Harvard, Czar-Dr. Cass Sunstein and intellectual freedom.
Sunstein’s tonality is reminiscent of Joseph Goebbels New Years Address for 1939.

What’s more Sunstein wants to “legally force” Americans “to do what’s best for our society” and water down their free speech (granted by the US Constitution), by mandating websites with pop-up links to opposing government propaganda be “forcibly included on political blogs.” Could we have such pop-ups when the President is speaking, Henry Kissinger, Bibi Netanyahu, AIPAC, Larry Silverstein, NIST, Fox News, Lloyd Blankfein?

Coincidentally, the also Harvard educated Constitutional lawyer now President, Barack Obama, agrees with Sunstein and has knighted him “Head of Information Technology in the White House for ‘Conspiracy Theories,’” i.e. any political thought that doesn’t regurgitate establishment views, like Obama’s ties to the CIA at Columbia University and after. Those who talk truth to power will be taxed or banned. I hear the clicking of boot heels as Sunstein speaks and I write.

In fact, Sunstein’s “thinking” came from a rather sullied “White Paper,” in which he talks about countering “dangerous ideas” and “taking those who disseminate such theories” to where? Prisons like Hitler’s camps, Stalin’s Siberian gulags.

These dangerous ideas and/or theories would include “some held by the vast majorities of Americans,” such as the incredible body of facts that prove the JFK assassination was part of a wider plot, including the CIA, Big Oil, the Mafia, the defense industry, and a combination of assassins. Sunstein is such a patent ploy for the New World Order that he should wear an “NWO” armband, perhaps a skull and bones on his lapel.

Sunstein adds to his hit list that believing “global warming is a deliberate fraud” is another theory government censorship should stomp its black boot on. Frankly, whether you or I believe in global warming or not is our business and constitutional right, and not his. Sunstein calls “false and dangerous” the idea that exposure to sunlight is healthy, despite certain medical experts that agree prolonged exposure reduces risk of developing certain cancers. Again, whether it does or doesn’t is a matter for open discussion in a democratic society. Choices of credence should be made by individual physicians and lay people according to their patients and health.

Basically, this crypto-Nazi wants to write into law that government should dictate “the very nature of reality to Americans and that their opinions can only be voiced at best when accompanied by mandatory federal propaganda or at worst that Americans can be silenced entirely by federal decree,” as Watson writes. He also points out that our Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan argued “that the government can ban books and political pamphlets.” What’s going on there at Harvard (where Kagan served as law school Dean) that cries out for such repression? Tom Paine must be turning over in his grave.

Frankly, Sunstein’s tonality is reminiscent of Joseph Goebbels New Years Address for 1939. “This is Goebbels’… address to Germany, delivered on 31 December 1938. He reviews the past year, recalling repeatedly that Austria had been incorporated into Germany. Despite his claim that complainers are not worth dealing with, he devotes a major part of the speech to denouncing those who failed to share his faith in Adolf Hitler….”

The “complainers” that Goebbels was referencing were the intellectuals, writers, journalists, activists, the Internet bloggers and questioners of their day, who had criticized Hitler’s barbaric behavior, including the burning of the Reichstag, which Hitler and the Nazis blamed on the vision-impaired, Dutch left-wing radical Marinus van der Lubbe, who later was tried by them and beheaded. Or course, after successfully lying that the communists, not the Nazis under Goebbels direction did it, Hitler went on to create the “Enabling Act” which enabled the Nazis to strip away most of the civil rights of Germans, as did George Bush’s renewed PATRIOTACT for Americans, and which this author would like to see banned forever from our laws.

But after praising the “miracles” [read violence] that brought the Nazis to power, Goebbels goes on to say, “This ability to believe is rather weak in some circles, above all in those with money and education. They may trust more in pure cold reason than a glowing idealistic heart. Our so-called intellectuals do not like to hear this, but it is true anyway. They know so much that in the end they do not know what to do with their wisdom. They can see the past, but not much of the present, and nothing at all of the future. Their imagination is insufficient to deal with a distant goal in a way such that one already thinks it achieved.” I assume that distant, imagined goal was the fall of the Third Reich a decade later, leaving Germany in ruins, poverty and disgrace, a path on which the US may be dangerously in its pursuit to world hegemony.

Goebbels continues, “They [the complainers] were also unable to believe in the victory of National Socialism while the National Socialist movement was still fighting for power. They are as little able today to believe in the greatness of our national German future. They perceive only what they can see, but not what is happening, and what will happen.”

We perceive only what they see, like the red nanothermite dust in the ruins of Ground Zero, the high-powered aerosolized military explosive that took the towers down on 9/11. But then, we also see what has happened as a result, the creation of the War on Terror, blamed on the Muslim’s, Osama bin Laden and box-cutter carrying hijackers, which lies gave us the right to start our ongoing havoc, still running in Iraq, Afghanistan, now Pakistan, and all points south and east.

Returning to Goebbels, “That is why their carping criticisms generally focus on laughable trivialities. Whenever some unavoidable difficulty pops up, the kind of thing that always happens, they are immediately inclined to doubt everything [the administration’s 9/11 conspiracy theory] and to throw the baby out with the bath water [the truth out with blind belief]. To them difficulties are not there to be mastered, but rather to be surrendered to [lies are there to believed rather than questioned].

Goebbels adds, “One cannot make history with such quivering [sic questioning] people. They are only chaff in God’s breath. Thankfully, they are only a thin intellectual or social upper class, particularly in the case of Germany. They are not an upper class in the sense that they govern the nation, but rather more a fact of nature like the bubbles of fat that always float on the surface of things.” Bubbles of fat floating on the surface of things? Could that be the corpulent Goering? Today’s rotund Rush Limbaugh, Newt Gingrich? I’ll work on that one.

Ergo, on mindless blasts of rhetoric like those of Goebbels, the Third Reich, meant to last a thousand years, fell into dust and disgrace in 12. Alas and alack, for the sake of freedom, for the future of America, to all who would turn off the light of truth, professors or thugs, presidents or prelates, philosophers or fools, czars or czarinas, I wish you all a hard landing in reality, ASAP.

Rachel Maddow Sick Attempt To Potray Rand Paul As A Racist

MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow is a shill for big government. She uses Paul’s opposition to the federal government dictating to the states — specifically, civil rights legislation handed down by the feds — to insinuate that he is a racist.

This is the same argument constantly used by Chris Matthews and others to portray states’ rights advocates as racists. It is part of the effort by the corporate media and government to label all opposition to Obama as the hateful ranting of white supremacists.

The Correction On The Stock Market Is Coming And It Will Be A Bloodbath

The correction, soon to be crash, is here: the market had a bigger relative open to close move today than it did on May 6. We closed at the day’s lows on massive volume, despite definitive central bank intervention, regardless whether it was the SNB, the ECB, or the Fed. The central planners have lost control of the market, and all thanks to the inevitable collapse of hyper capitalist Keynesianism coming out of the formerly most communist country in the world. A day of ironies. And it’s not over. Futures are already down another 4 handles. The correction is coming, and it will be a bloodbath. The Fed can not push rates lower. It will print. It is inevitable. It is our destiny.

Obama Tells Mexican President Calederon "We Are Not Defined By Our Borders"

The following is another example demonstrating Obama is a one-world, NAU shill. He does not believe in borders and thus does not believe in the national sovereignty of the United States.

Woody Allen Believes Obama Should Be A Dictator

It is another example of the mindset of the Hollywood lib elite. Film director Woody Allen — who demonstrated his warped ethos a few years ago by marrying his adopted daughter — believes Obama would get more done if he declared himself dictator.
Woody Allen and his adopted daughter-wife.

“I am pleased with Obama. I think he’s brilliant. The Republican Party should get out of his way and stop trying to hurt him,” Allen said in an interview published by Spanish language monarchist newspaper La Vanguardia. “It would good… if he could be a dictator for a few years because he could do a lot of good things quickly.”

Sort of like Mussolini’s idea of making the trains run on time?

Allen is frustrated with American politics and pines for the simplicity of a dictatorship. As a member of the intellectual elite, Woody Allen has no patience for the political demands of the little people who are currently flocking in droves to the Tea Party movement and embracing the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

Allen’s comment that the Republican Party should get out of Obama’s way is a demand that the people sit down and shut up. Establishment Republicans do not oppose the Obama agenda of large government. Establishment Republicans are merely miffed they are not able to impose a neocon version of leviathan government. Republicans prefer bloated and grotesque military budgets to drive the nation into unsustainable debt owed to bankers while Democrats prefer social programs to accomplish the same objective.

There is essentially no difference between Democrats and Republicans, as the insider Carroll Quigley noted. Obama is run by the same Wall Street crowd and Goldman Sachs functionaries as his predecessor. Democrats and Republicans are interchangeable with minor cosmetic difference to fool the plebs.

Socialist intellectuals invariably end up advocating and supporting totalitarianism. They are viscerally opposed to classical liberalism — the ideal of limited government and liberty of individuals including freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly, and free markets. Socialist intellectuals have nothing but contempt for the fact individual rights are natural, inherent, inalienable, and exist independently of government. Government is everything for the socialists, including the Hollywood limo lib variety of socialist. History is riddled with intellectuals who have supported communism and fascism, both derived from Marxist theory. Both strive for statist absolutism. Both end up in mass slavery and misery.

The comic director Woody Allen should take heed. Dictators invariably turn on their faithful ideologues and slogan chanting supporters. Hitler had his Night of the Long Knives and Stalin his endless purges that terminated in execution and disappearance into gulags.

Coming To America: Parents Of Under 5 Years Old Face Nanny State Home Inspections To Keep Children Safe

Mail Online - Parents of children under five are to get home checks to ensure they are keeping their youngsters safe.

Inspectors will check whether families have installed smoke alarms, stair gates, locks on medicine cupboards, windows and ovens, and fitted temperature controls to stop bath water getting too hot.

Guidelines for inspections have been drawn up on the instructions of the Department of Health in a bid to prevent injuries among under-15s in the home.

More than two million children visit casualty departments with such injuries each year, says the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (Nice) which has developed the guidelines.

In 2008, 208 under-15s in England and Wales died as a result.

But the scheme is being condemned by critics as a breach of privacy and a nanny state intrusion into family life.

The draft guidelines issued yesterday call for all families to have the option of home safety inspections by trained staff from the NHS or local councils. Health and safety organisations are told to identify homes where children are thought to be most at risk of accidents and ‘offer home risk assessments’.

In some cases, the offer will come after GPs or school nurses have raised the alarm because a child has been to hospital repeatedly for emergency treatment.

‘A home risk assessment involves systematically identifying potential hazards in the home, evaluating those risks and proving information or advice on how to reduce them,’ says the guidance.

Mike Kelly, Nice’s public health excellence centre director, said: ‘Our aim is not to promote a nanny state.

‘It’s a normal part of growing up for children to sometimes hurt themselves in day-to-day life, but we also need to prevent serious injuries from happening. These can have a profound effect on a young child right through to adult life, as they could be permanently disabled.’

Simon Davies of the Privacy International pressure group said he was particularly concerned over the additional powers that would go to state officials.

He added: ‘This is a landmark expansion of government intervention in home life. It must be regarded with great concern.

‘If the database identifies you but you are unco-operative or you refuse to comply, the next step will be your door broken down at five in the morning. That will happen as surely as night follows day.’

Patricia Morgan, a researcher on the family, said: ‘This is a nightmarish prospect. It is a major step towards total state control.

'When state intervention creeps into your home, where does it end? Will you have to have cameras in your house?’

A spokesman for NICE said all parents could take advantage of the scheme.

She added: ‘It’s optional, it’s not mandatory. Even if your GP suggests a home inspection because there have been a number of unintentional injuries, it must take place with consent.’

Conn. Senate Hopeful Richard Blumenthal Lied About Vietnam Service

Chris Cillizza - The New York Times reported Monday night that Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal has claimed on numerous occasions that he served in Vietnam, even though he obtained at least five military deferments and avoided ever going to war.

Blumenthal (D) is a candidate for the U.S. Senate seat now held by Christopher J. Dodd (D), and he has held a commanding lead in the race since he entered it. But the Times report has the potential to fundamentally reshape the contest in the Nutmeg State.

Eric Schultz, communications director for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, blamed Republicans for the report. In particular, he said, former World Wrestling Entertainment executive Linda McMahon, one of several Republicans running for the seat.

"It's no surprise Republicans would want to smear Dick Blumenthal, considering all of the debauchery at [WWE] under Linda McMahon's watch," Schultz said.

Ed Patru, a spokesman for McMahon, responded, "It's become increasingly clear to us over the past weeks and months, as we've researched Mr. Blumenthal, that there are some very troubling discrepancies between what he's been saying and the truth."

Blumenthal has served as the state's top cop since 1988, and national Democrats spent months ensuring that he was ready to run if and when Dodd decided not to seek reelection.

When Blumenthal entered the race, his poll numbers were stratospheric: He held massive leads over McMahon and Rob Simmons, a former congressman. Even as Democrats celebrated, however, some warned that Blumenthal had not been tested in a serious campaign in more than two decades and that once punched -- as he inevitably would be in a high-profile race like this one -- he would collapse.

"He's popular, but for no particular reason," said one senior Democratic strategist, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to be candid. "No one really knows him, and this fills in the blanks in a pretty devastating way."
ad_icon

The strategist added that Connecticut remains strongly Democratic, which works in Blumenthal's favor, but, he acknowledged, "It's a race now."

Blumenthal faces only nominal primary opposition at the moment, although the state's filing deadline isn't for another week. That week is going to be the toughest of Blumenthal's career.

The Times reported that Blumenthal obtained deferments from 1965 to 1970, then joined the Marine Reserve in 1970 and was based in Washington through the end of the war. The newspaper added that the deferments allowed Blumenthal to complete his studies at Harvard and serve as a special assistant to The Washington Post's publisher, Katharine Graham.

He told the Times on Monday that he misspoke about his service in one 2008 event and might have misspoken on other occasions. "My intention has always been to be completely clear and accurate and straightforward, out of respect to the veterans who served in Vietnam," he said.

GULF OIL SPILL: WHAT A LIE

J. Speer-Williams - Spill? The corporate media continues to call the volcano of continuous gushing oil, in the Gulf, a spill. How insulting. A volcano that shoots out a million gallons of crude oil a day, or a week, is hardly a spill.
How long will the Monetary Cartel’s media insist on calling a continuous gusher a mere spill or a leak?

The common definition of a spill is the liquid that fell out of a container, a one time occurrence, not a massive flow that has no known end. An oil tanker can spill oil; but not Mother Earth, who has been, and still is, continuously gushing oil from 35,000 feet from within her bowels.

The Exxon Valdez oil spill, of about 10.8 million gallons of crude, on the 24th of March 1989, in the Prince William Sound of Alaska, is considered by many to be the most devastating humanly-caused environmental disaster ever to occur in history.

Currently, the oil gusher in the Gulf produces an Exxon Valdez disaster about every four days to a week.

The definition of “gush” is to flow forth suddenly and violently. What we are faced with in the Gulf of Mexico is a continuous and monster gusher of crude oil that has no known termination point.

How long will the Monetary Cartel’s media insist on calling a continuous gusher a mere spill or a leak?

Will it still be a spill/leak when millions of people in Louisiana, Texas, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, and Florida are losing consciousness from the stench in the air, that will not dissipate?

Will people have to convulse and hemorrhage from their internal organs and lungs before the corporate media will show at least a modicum of truthfulness?

Soon, the stench might be overwhelming, on the Gulf Coast, and perhaps it won’t go away. The air itself might kill because crude oil is composed of polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons, xylenes, hyrogensulfide, benzene, toluene, ethlbenzene, trimethylbenzene, and the various combinations of those chemicals.

According to the Federal Register and OSHA these are all extremely hazardous substances.

Exposure can cause the following health effects: eye and skin irritation, narcoses, and/or chemical pneumonitis.

High concentrations of hydrogen sulfide can cause headaches, dizziness, unconsciousness and/or death.

More worrisome yet is hurricane season is coming. And a Gulf hurricane that hits any part of our Gulf Coast, this summer, could produce unheard of destruction, sickness, and death.

Even in the face of all these obvious facts “our” “free,” “unbiased” media insists on calling a continuous volcanic gusher of toxic crude oil a spill.

Has there ever been more evidence that the International Monetary/Banking Cartel, that own the major oil companies, also own “our,” “free,” and “unbiased” media?

Beware The Recent Situation In Greece: It Will Happen Here!

Gary D. Barnett - The current situation in Greece should be well studied and watched carefully. Rioting, property destruction and even murder, the absolute wrong way for citizens to react to this government-caused debacle, has begun in earnest. While this should not surprise anyone, it should serve as a warning to other countries; most especially America. As I write this, another massive bailout is occurring; and of course the U.S. taxpayer is once again on the hook for billions of dollars. This time though, it is going overseas. If current U.S. government policy remains in place; that is inflation, bailouts, excessive spending, increased taxation, higher deficits, etc., this causing even more unemployment, then not only in my opinion will rioting and civil unrest occur here, but it will dwarf anything seen recently in Greece.

While some may doubt that this can happen in America, I would warn that this thinking is devoid of reality and downright naïve. Not only could it happen here, but the level of government intervention and government control of the citizenry should it happen here, could very well be widespread, aggressive and rights-destroying at a level not seen in the past. I have written about here and here the probability of Martial Law, and about the U.S. government’s plans to arrest and incarcerate, and hold without charge or trial, those not abiding by or adhering to unconstitutional government mandates. My belief and opinion is that if things get out of hand, and the citizenry practices any form of real dissent, that the government response will be aggressive and brutal. Don’t automatically put this aside, as not only is this scenario possible but probable considering the turmoil that is sure to come.

In Greece, the people have been protesting against spending cuts, when in fact the exact opposite should be the case. Not only do they seem to want the bailout cash (and apparently have now secured it), but they want it used to perpetuate the same spending and socialist programs that helped get them into so much economic trouble in the first place. They should not take any bailout money; money that only adds to debt, and instead should default and start anew. Of course this would be temporarily very harmful, but the alternative is much worse. The so-called “harsh austerity measures” proposed by the Greek government should have happened long ago if the current bankruptcy was to be avoided. A dependent welfare society like that of Greece will have to have a change of ways, and a much more self-reliant attitude if they are going to survive economically; even if the recent bailout plans go forward. If however, the bailout of Greece is completed, what incentive will they have to curb spending in the future? And why would they, given that governments of other countries are willing to steal from their own citizens in order to bail them out? This sounds like a recipe for perpetual economic obsolescence to me!

The U.S. is currently in the same position, only it is a much larger problem than that of Greece. Who will bail out the U.S. when the trough runs dry? While the U.S. has massive debt, it is constantly adding fuel to the fire by continuing deficit spending, continuing unwarranted and expensive wars, and by adding new and expensive welfare schemes like Obamacare; schemes that can only exacerbate an already very tenuous economic predicament. The immediate consideration should be to demand that government implement very “harsh austerity measures” here, effectively cutting spending at every level, and the people of this country should accept nothing less. Will this happen? I don’t think there is a chance in Hades that this proper response will occur, but without it things will continue to worsen.

Careful consideration by the American people is now mandatory if a non-violent and positive outcome to the impending economic downfall is expected. The first thing that Americans should demand is to abolish the Fed! This would stop the unending government money-pumping machine in its tracks! Given the recent Senate vote (62–37) against even auditing the Fed, ending it has now become much more difficult. The last thing Americans should consider is unprovoked violence, rioting, looting and uncontrolled mob behavior. This will only escalate the situation and guarantee the government force machine’s deployment of state thugs. The U.S. government has been and is currently preparing for just this type of situation, and has the plans and manpower to deploy those under state and federal government control; the National Guard, Reserves, local and state police and even active military combat squads attached to the Northern Command (see here), to respond to any civil unrest situation. This needs to be understood by those willing to stand up to the mighty State!

Dissent and non-violent revolt are proper ways to stand against a tyrannical government, but once those involved in any kind of dissent begin to practice unwarranted violence against their fellow man; rioting, destroying property and physically harming others, which has happened in Greece recently, then they have become that same monster which they desire to destroy. This has been a normal result of many revolutionary activities throughout history, but this kind of behavior simply negates any other legitimate action by the people.

Real and appropriate revolt should be leveled only toward an out-of-control government, and should only be advanced in a non-violent manner unless of course one’s life is in-excusably threatened or harmed by an act of aggression by the state. Then, and only then, would self-defense to protect one’s life and property become necessary and moral. With this approach, the citizenry will always be on the side of right, instead of being an enemy of the state or of the people at large. Regardless of the state’s position, the citizen who practices non-violent dissent and legitimate self-defense is practicing a proper method against tyranny.

As I have said many times, I don’t believe our economic and political dilemma will be solved by the use of the political process. In fact, I think our current political process a major part of the problem. While I wish I was wrong, I think it is far too late to expect such a complex problem to be solved politically; especially since political solutions most always fail and are normally corrupt and compromised. And given that self-reliance has all but disappeared in this country, and that today real and pure libertarian ideology is mostly absent (with the notable exception of the principled few, of course), why expect a “political” fix? Look where that route has taken us so far! I think attitudes are slowly changing for the better, but much more popular support for freedom and free markets is necessary before the federal government will be forced to accept our terms. While I will remain cautiously optimistic, especially considering current public resistance, I think some sort of economic collapse or other major debacle will have to occur before enough Americans wake up and face the fact that our once beloved country is in the midst of total decline.

What will you do when the streets of America become filled with angry protestors bent on causing violent havoc and destruction? What will you do when mandatory curfews are put into place in your town? And what will you do when Martial Law is declared by this already corrupt and totalitarian government? What will you do when the response to an event such as this by “your” government is one of massive and violent force against normal citizens?

Waiting for a disaster to happen is not the answer. The time to act is now before a situation like that in Greece takes place. We have the ability to make this happen peacefully, but once riots are the rule of the day, it will be much more difficult to rein in this runaway federal government.

One of my neighbors approached me the other day and thanked me for writing and fighting for freedom. He said “There are many more than you know who agree with you, but they are a silent majority.” My comment to him was: “It is no longer a time to be silent; everyone should speak out against tyranny.” Will you remain passive and content, oblivious to the very real and dangerous situation at hand, while your life, liberty, and property are at stake, or will you speak out? I say enough is enough, and none of us should take it anymore!

Racist Illegal Immigration Film 'Machete" Produced with Taxpayers Funds

Infowars - ‘Machete‘ has fallen into controversy, and it’s still months away from its September release. 20th Century Fox, which won a ‘bidding war’ to distribute the film, pulled Rodriguez’ fiery “Illegal” trailer from the web shortly after its special “Cinco de Mayo” message created a storm of controversy and fueled attacks, including one from its sister subsidiary Fox News. Fox News, in turn, pulled the critical article from circulation, entitled “Violent Movie Declares War on Arizona for Immigration Law.”

Worst of all, Robert Rodriguez’ incendiary race film ‘Machete‘ was made, in part, with help from tax incentives and location access provided by the Texas Film Commission, a division of Governor Rick Perry’s Office. A spokesperson from the organization confirmed that Rodriguez has indeed applied for funding.

The film, originally based on a largely satirical mock-trailer inserted into Rodriguez & Taratino’s Grindhouse, has expanded into full production, and developed a message that many have criticized as glorifying a race war. Among those critics are two anonymous crew members from the production– who happen to be Hispanic– that came forward to warn Alex confidentially about the upsetting script. Further, two individuals who were privy to early screenings of ‘Machete’ have warned that the film is far more racially inflammatory than either the trailer or leaked script have indicated.

By contrast, films like Waco were denied taxpayer-funded resources for fears that it cast Texas in a ‘bad light.’ Attempting to shed the light of truth on one of Texas’ most infamous and controversial episodes is bad, but stoking the fires of racial conflict somehow does Texas “good”?

Yet, no issue has been made of using Texas Film Commission resources to fund Rodriguez’ racist treatise. Why does such a production warrant the support of the people of the State of Texas? Will people standby as as tax breaks and other valuable resources– such as shooting access at the State Capitol, which likely required closing it off from the public– are poured into the creation of divisive, reductive and ultimately offensive portrayal of Mexicans and Americans alike, whether white, black, brown or otherwise.

In addition to state funds, Robert Rodriguez has long had use of the state & city funded studios based at the former Austin airport. His Troublemaker Studios utilizes the Austin Studios facilities, which is managed by the Austin Film Society. Are racial-revenge fantasies the intended use of such publicly and community supported institutions?

Let the Texas Film Commission and other related entities know whether or not you support taxpayer funds going towards the production of ‘Machete’ and other films like it:
http://www.governor.state.tx.us/film/

United States Posts 19 Straight Monthly Budget Deficit

(Reuters) - The United States posted an $82.69 billion deficit in April, nearly four times the $20.91 billion shortfall registered in April 2009 and the largest on record for that month, the Treasury Department said on Wednesday.

Greece

It was more than twice the $40-billion deficit that Wall Street economists surveyed by Reuters had forecast and was striking since April marks the filing deadline for individual income taxes that are the main source of government revenue.

Department officials said that in prior years, there was a surplus during April in 43 out of the past 56 years.

The government has now posted 19 consecutive monthly budget deficits, the longest string of shortfalls on record.

For the first seven months of fiscal 2010, which ends September 30, the cumulative budget deficit totals $799.68 billion, down slightly from $802.3 billion in the comparable period of fiscal 2009.

Outlays during April rose to $327.96 billion from $218.75 billion in March and were up from $287.11 billion in April 2009. It was a record level of outlays for an April.

Department officials noted there were five Fridays in April this year, which helped account for higher outlays since most tax refunds are issued on that day.

But for the first seven months of the fiscal year, outlays fell to $1.99 trillion from $2.06 trillion in the comparable period of fiscal 2009, partly because of repayments by banks of bailout funds they received during the financial crisis.

Receipts in April -- mostly from income taxes -- were $245.27 billion, up from $153.36 billion in March but lower than the $266.21 billion taken in during April 2009.

Receipts from individuals, who faced an April 15 filing deadline for paying 2009 taxes, fell to $107.31 billion from $137.67 billion in April 2009.

The U.S. full-year deficit this year is projected at $1.5 trillion on top of a $1.4 trillion shortfall last year.

White House budget director Peter Orszag told Reuters Insider in an interview on Wednesday that the United States must tackle its deficits quickly to avoid the kind of debt crisis that hit Greece.

Food Stamp Tally Almost 40 Million, Sets a New Record

(Reuters) - Nearly 40 million Americans received food stamps -- the latest in an ever-higher string of record enrollment that dates from December 2008 and the U.S. recession, according to a government update.

Food stamps are the primary federal anti-hunger program, helping poor people buy food. Enrollment is highest during times of economic distress. The jobless rate was 9.9 percent, the government said on Friday.

The Agriculture Department said 39.68 million people, or 1 in 8 Americans, were enrolled for food stamps during February, an increase of 260,000 from January. USDA updated its figures on Wednesday.

"This is the highest share of the U.S. population on SNAP/food stamps," said the anti-hunger group Food Research and Action Center, using the new name for food stamps, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). "Research suggests that one in three eligible people are not receiving ... benefits."

Enrollment has set a record each month since reaching 31.78 million in December 2008. USDA estimates enrollment will average 40.5 million people this fiscal year, which ends Sept 30, at a cost of up to $59 billion. For fiscal 2011, average enrollment is forecast for 43.3 million people.

Mexican Students Disrespect and Attack Other Students With American Flags

Infowars - Last week several Morgan Hill, California, students were sent home on Cinco de Mayo for wearing U.S. flag apparel that offended Latino students. The following day, on May 6, several Latino students walked out of school in response and held a rally in a nearby park.

“We want respect,” the students chant. In the video below, a group of students in a pickup truck drive past the marching Latino students waving American flags. “What followed was an angry confrontation in which both groups of students shouted obscenities at each other,” Brian Shield writes for KRON 4. “No one was arrested and there are no reports of injuries.”

It has yet to be explained by school authorities or the Latino students how wearing or waving American flags “disrespects” them. KRON 4 does not offer an explanation as to why the Latino students decided to walk out of school and march.

“The incident on May 5 at Live Oak High School is extremely unfortunate,” a school administrator explains in a statement. “While campus safety is our primary concern and administrators made decisions yesterday in an attempt to ensure campus safety, students should not, and will not, be disciplined for wearing patriotic clothing. This matter is under investigation and appropriate action will be taken.”

It appears the Latino students walked out of classes because the students wearing patriotic clothing were not disciplined.

Obviously, the Latino students do not consider themselves Americans. In the above video, the students wave Mexican flags and chant that displaying the American flag is disrespectful of their heritage and sense of Mexican nationalism.

Why is the American flag offensive to Latino students? More than likely because their elders have taught them that California is not part of the United States. It is part of Mexico. It was stolen by the gringos.

The students probably do not realize (or do their parents and relatives) that their nationalism is inappropriate outside of Mexico. The belief that the Southwest United States is part of Mexico and must be reconquered plays right into the hands of the globalists.

The Ford Foundation supports La Raza. The global elite, however, are not interested returning the Southwest to Mexico or anybody else, least of all a faction of racist Marxists. The global elite are playing a game of divide and conquer. After an American Union is established, the national identities of Mexico, the United States, and Canada will be eradicated. Revolutionary Marxists will be dealt with in the same manner all independence minded factions are dealt with by authoritarian regimes.

The corporate media and public education reaffirm the politically correct fantasy that the American Southwest is the long lost land of Aztlán once populated by Aztecs who are superior to “frail” white people.

In fact, what is now the American Southwest became an ungovernable territory after the Spanish conquistadors planted a flag and eventually went back to Spain. The region was ungovernable until the United States domesticated the Apaches and other fierce tribes that ran the Mexicans off the land for centuries. Only Catholic missionaries and traders dared traverse the territory.

Latino students marching and demanding respect — tribal gang-bangers often make the same demand — will only serve to further polarize the issue and set the stage for race riots and violence. Nobody will benefit from violence, hated, and racial polarization but the global elite who are endeavoring to socially balkanize the country and exploit divisions to further their agenda of world government.

New Immigartion Film 'Machete Envokes Race War'

Infowars - Director Robert Rodriguez’ new film ‘Machete‘ has created controversy after a promotional trailer released online makes provoking comments about Arizona– namely its new immigration laws– before depicting a machete-wielding vigilante who leads an uprising and massacre against Texas authorities. The filmmakers called it a ’special’ Cinco de Mayo message to Arizona, inviting viewers into a violent on-screen race war with red-saturated 70s exploitation violence and endless killing.

While some critics have praised this “message to Arizona” as being “most eloquent” on the immigration issue, others have become concerned about the message truly sent by a bloody and racially-charged film.

ALEX JONES WARNS ABOUT THE MESSAGE CONTAINED IN ‘MACHETE’

Alex Jones explains how the unsettling film, currently in production here in Austin, Texas, had upset two of its crew members, both of whom happened to be hispanic, enough to contact him about its fiery message. Though they could not give details due to their contractual agreements, the industry insiders were concerned that the film had gone too far, voicing their fears that it could cause a cultural backlash and do harm to the otherwise positive image of the hispanic community.

Racial strife is often exacerbated unnecessarily by globalists forces who, though seeking to integrate North America regionally, divide & conquer the population by playing upon ethnic tensions. For a violent film to use such a backdrop to glorify and potentially incite violent attacks on white Americans over the immigration issue is very dangerous, and Alex urges the film’s director to carefully consider the impact such an extreme statement could have. Though the movie screen is an escapist dimension where sex & violence are commonplace, ‘Machete‘ ties it into a racially motivated issue spurned by anti-illegal immigration rhetoric– and that may be taking things a bit too far.

RELATED: L.A. Teacher Calls for Mexican Revolt in the U.S.

MACHETE’S “ILLEGAL” TRAILER – A ‘CINCO DE MAYO MESSAGE TO ARIZONA’
(Warning: Extreme Violent, Offensive Language and Message — Sensitive Viewers Be Cautioned)

The trailer insinuates that the film’s lead is hired to assassinate a Texas senator rallying so hard against illegal immigrants that he calls their very presence on United States soil “terrorism.” However, ‘Machete‘ realizes he’s been betrayed, and instead set-up as a patsy for a failed-assassination attempt to be blamed on what is termed crudely by the film’s villains to be “Mexicans” and “cucarachas.” From there, he develops a taste for revenge and initiates an out-and-out killing spree, recruiting an angry mob along the way, whose leader decries “We didn’t cross the border, the border crossed us” in downtown Austin. The trailer shows a crowd all holding up machetes in preparation for battle. As the film is not scheduled for release until September, we cannot say whether the film will be as violent and over-the-top as the trailer implies, but if the wary crew members are any indication, this film could be an unwanted wedge of racial anger that no one wants unleashed.

Curiously, FOX, who is ‘Machete’s’ distributor, blasted the film in a May 6 articled entitled, “Violent movie declares war on Arizona for immigration law.” However, the article was pulled and deep-sixed. The URL pulled up a ‘page not found.’ Talking Points Memo blasts the fact in their article, “Fox News Scrubs Article Criticizing Fox’s Robert Rodriguez Film “Machete” as “Racist” & Declaring “War on Arizona.” Clearly, Rupert Murdoch & co. are playing both sides of a potentially explosive cultural-political issue. FOX won a ‘bidding war’ for the film, which grew out of a parody trailer spliced into the 70s-cult throwback “Grindhouse,” a double-header release featuring works by Robert Rodriguez and Quentin Tarantino, both notable for their excessive and stylistic violence.

It has been established that the Ford Foundation and other top organizations have funded and influenced groups like MEChA and La Raza. Border enforcement is lax because big businesses take advantage of the low wage labor; meanwhile, the same NAFTA, WTO and CAFTA visionaries ship jobs overseas and gut the industrial base in America. The clash of cultures is then pressured further by fiery rhetoric, mythically-driven liberation theology, perceived job opportunities, language barriers and political issues. For ‘Machete’ to call for such violence and glorify killings in relation to such a sensitive political topic is potentially criminal if it caused people to act out in real life.

So what of the role of cinema and television cultural products in the larger picture of shaping the opinions and habits of our increasingly naive and shallow population? One need only read between the lines, flip through the channels in a critically-evaluating way (rather than a hyponotic, dreamy way) and read the statements of the ruling elite, who have made sport of pushing our buttons. Public relations ‘founder’ Edward Bernays makes some very naked admissions about “controlling” and “steering” the public in his book Propaganda:

Those who manipulate the unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized… In almost every act of our lives whether in the sphere of politics or business in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires that control the public mind.

Propaganda is the executive arm of the invisible government. If we understand the mechanism and motives of the group mind, it is now possible to control and regiment the masses according to our will without them knowing it.

British aristocrat Bertrand Russell also makes some very compelling statements about the intentional manipulation of public thought in his seminal The Impact of Science on Society:

“I think the subject which will be of most importance politically is mass psychology. Mass psychology is, scientifically speaking, not a very advanced study… This study is immensely useful to practical men, whether they wish to become rich or to acquire the government. It is, of course, as a science, founded upon individual psychology, but hitherto it has employed rule-of-thumb methods which were based upon a kind of intuitive common sense. Its importance has been enormously increased by the growth of modern methods of propaganda. Of these the most influential is what is called ‘education’. Religion plays a part, though a diminishing one; the Press, the cinema and the radio play an increasing part.”

“We now know that limelight and a brass band do more to persuade than can be done by the most elegant train of syllogisms.”

Threats and different types of attacks have already taken place by pro-illegal immigration protesters, particularly those incensed over the Arizona issue. Scares and potential threats have been made against political figures, including some “white powder” feared to be anthrax mailed to now Arizona Governor Jan Brewer. Surely Rodriguez does not mean to tie in fantastical acts of racial violence with the very contentious issues that many immigrants are angry enough to act upon?

Divide & Conquer is an age old tactic, employed with skill by the British Empire’s “Great Game” strategists, who frequently pitted one tribe or nation against another to maintain control over their colonies and to expand their conquest into other territories. Leaders have been caught up in racial divide in the history of Mexico & Texas, despite a long history of co-mingling and harmony among white and hispanic populations in that era. ‘Machete‘ proves all too evocative of the infamous 1915 Plan of San Diego one of the most insulting episodes in history, where a plan was made to kill all white males and use an all-out race war to re-conquer the Southwest. More recently, the CIA has been known for writing & disseminating racially & religiously-charged textbooks to places like Afghanistan– a seed that grew well to destabilize the region.

Alex Jones has spoken out against this frightening trailer because it appears like political dynamite likely to incite real violence, riots or killings. He hopes to diffuse its possible effect before anyone is hurt, injured or worse. To the Hollywood creators of our un-reality, please do not use your powerful weapon of film as a wedge against the people or to suggest that we turn inwardly, violently against ourselves. ‘Machete‘ projects a dangerous image, and it is only fair to warn against its potential.

Director Robert Rodriguez should recognize the problem of potentially inciting real violence, and clarify his intentions with this film. Perhaps the controversy will drive the publicity and box office sales of this film, but I doubt he wants to have blood on his hands. Let’s hope the trailer is a poor indicator of the film’s message..

Plan For Audits Of The Federal Reserve Dies In Senate

Last-minute maneuvering in the Senate allowed the Federal Reserve to sidestep legislation that would have exposed its interest-rate decision-making to congressional auditors.

Pressure from the Obama administration led Senate lawmakers to alter a provision pushed by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I., Vt.) that was gaining momentum despite opposition from the Treasury and the Fed. It would have largely repealed a 32-year-old law that shields Fed monetary policy from congressional auditors.

The compromise, endorsed by Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd (D., Conn.) and the Treasury, would require the Fed to disclose more details about its lending during the financial crisis. It would also require a one-time audit of those loans and a one-time review of Fed governance. A formal vote was pushed back until next week.

Thursday's Senate showdown came after senators on the left and right joined forces to support Mr. Sanders' provision.

"At a time when our entire financial system almost collapsed, we cannot let the Fed operate in secrecy any longer," Mr. Sanders said. "The American people have a right to know."

But Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke, while insisting on a commitment to "openness" at the Fed, said in a letter to Congress the Sanders measure would "seriously threaten monetary policy independence, increase inflation fears and market interest rates, and damage economic stability and job creation."

Deputy Treasury Secretary Neal Wolin, in a statement, endorsed the revisions to the Sanders provision, saying they would provide a comprehensive audit of the Federal Reserve Board's operations in response to the financial crisis, "while preserving the existing protections of the Federal Reserve's independence with respect to monetary policy."

A House bill sponsored by Rep. Ron Paul (R., Texas) that passed in December contains a proposal similar to the original Sanders measure. If the Senate bill passes, it will need to be reconciled in a conference committee. That keeps the pressure on the Fed alive for the coming months.

The original Sanders measure stated that it shouldn't be "construed as interference in or dictation of monetary policy." But the Fed and administration warned that would allow auditors to interview Fed policy makers and staffers about monetary policy, thereby allowing congressional critics to pressure the Fed and undermine its independence.

Like most other capitalist democracies, U.S. politicians have given the central bank considerable latitude to control interest rates on the theory that elected politicians are prone to keep rates too low to get more growth during their terms at the cost of more inflation later. Although sponsors of legislation insisted that wasn't their intent, the Fed and its allies said otherwise.

"It's a chilling kind of circumstance," former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker, an Obama adviser, said in an interview. "The more you have no clear boundaries about what's appropriate and what's inappropriate, you castrate the decision-making process. That's true for any organization, but it's particularly true when you get into the sensitivities of monetary policy that can generate speculative waves in financial markets and speculation in people's minds," said Mr. Volcker, who also urged lawmakers to eliminate the audit provision.

Anil Kashyap, an economist at the University of Chicago's Booth School of Business, stressed that independent central banks need to be insulated from politics and make decisions several months ahead of expected trends.

"There are times when you have to start raising interest rates before the economy's recovering. If you're going to get audited while you do that, you know you're going to be slower—meaning we're going to tolerate higher inflation."

Before the last-minute compromise, the Fed's foes appeared to be winning, and got a major boost when Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.) said he would side with Mr. Sanders.

Mr. Bernanke, meanwhile, returned to Washington Thursday afternoon after a morning speech in Chicago to continue pressing for changes to the Sanders bill. In the past few days, Mr. Bernanke has spoken to at least a half-dozen senators to argue the Fed's case that the bill would deeply damage the Fed's credibility and ability to make tough decisions about interest rates.

At least half a dozen Obama administration officials joined the blitz, including Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner—a former Fed official—and Rahm Emanuel, the White House chief of staff. Administration aides credited Mr. Dodd with pushing back against the original amendment and developing an acceptable alternative.

New York Fed President William Dudley also advocated to scale back the scope of the auditing. He was among those arguing that ongoing reviews of the Fed's regular lending to financial institutions would stigmatize the program and cripple the Fed's role as the nation's lender of last resort.

The Senate beat back another amendment with populist tinges, defeating 61-33 a provision that would have put strict caps on the size of the nation's banks. Offered by a bloc of liberal Democrats, it would have capped at 10% the limit on the nation's total insured deposits any single bank holding company could carry. It would have also set a 6% leverage limit for banks and capped their non-deposit liabilities at 2% of U.S. gross domestic product.Last-minute maneuvering in the Senate allowed the Federal Reserve to sidestep legislation that would have exposed its interest-rate decision-making to congressional auditors.

Pressure from the Obama administration led Senate lawmakers to alter a provision pushed by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I., Vt.) that was gaining momentum despite opposition from the Treasury and the Fed. It would have largely repealed a 32-year-old law that shields Fed monetary policy from congressional auditors.

The compromise, endorsed by Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd (D., Conn.) and the Treasury, would require the Fed to disclose more details about its lending during the financial crisis. It would also require a one-time audit of those loans and a one-time review of Fed governance. A formal vote was pushed back until next week.

Thursday's Senate showdown came after senators on the left and right joined forces to support Mr. Sanders' provision.

"At a time when our entire financial system almost collapsed, we cannot let the Fed operate in secrecy any longer," Mr. Sanders said. "The American people have a right to know."

But Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke, while insisting on a commitment to "openness" at the Fed, said in a letter to Congress the Sanders measure would "seriously threaten monetary policy independence, increase inflation fears and market interest rates, and damage economic stability and job creation."

Deputy Treasury Secretary Neal Wolin, in a statement, endorsed the revisions to the Sanders provision, saying they would provide a comprehensive audit of the Federal Reserve Board's operations in response to the financial crisis, "while preserving the existing protections of the Federal Reserve's independence with respect to monetary policy."

A House bill sponsored by Rep. Ron Paul (R., Texas) that passed in December contains a proposal similar to the original Sanders measure. If the Senate bill passes, it will need to be reconciled in a conference committee. That keeps the pressure on the Fed alive for the coming months.

The original Sanders measure stated that it shouldn't be "construed as interference in or dictation of monetary policy." But the Fed and administration warned that would allow auditors to interview Fed policy makers and staffers about monetary policy, thereby allowing congressional critics to pressure the Fed and undermine its independence.

Like most other capitalist democracies, U.S. politicians have given the central bank considerable latitude to control interest rates on the theory that elected politicians are prone to keep rates too low to get more growth during their terms at the cost of more inflation later. Although sponsors of legislation insisted that wasn't their intent, the Fed and its allies said otherwise.

"It's a chilling kind of circumstance," former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker, an Obama adviser, said in an interview. "The more you have no clear boundaries about what's appropriate and what's inappropriate, you castrate the decision-making process. That's true for any organization, but it's particularly true when you get into the sensitivities of monetary policy that can generate speculative waves in financial markets and speculation in people's minds," said Mr. Volcker, who also urged lawmakers to eliminate the audit provision.
Who's Who in the Senate Financial Overhaul

Anil Kashyap, an economist at the University of Chicago's Booth School of Business, stressed that independent central banks need to be insulated from politics and make decisions several months ahead of expected trends.

"There are times when you have to start raising interest rates before the economy's recovering. If you're going to get audited while you do that, you know you're going to be slower—meaning we're going to tolerate higher inflation."

Before the last-minute compromise, the Fed's foes appeared to be winning, and got a major boost when Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.) said he would side with Mr. Sanders.

Mr. Bernanke, meanwhile, returned to Washington Thursday afternoon after a morning speech in Chicago to continue pressing for changes to the Sanders bill. In the past few days, Mr. Bernanke has spoken to at least a half-dozen senators to argue the Fed's case that the bill would deeply damage the Fed's credibility and ability to make tough decisions about interest rates.

At least half a dozen Obama administration officials joined the blitz, including Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner—a former Fed official—and Rahm Emanuel, the White House chief of staff. Administration aides credited Mr. Dodd with pushing back against the original amendment and developing an acceptable alternative.

New York Fed President William Dudley also advocated to scale back the scope of the auditing. He was among those arguing that ongoing reviews of the Fed's regular lending to financial institutions would stigmatize the program and cripple the Fed's role as the nation's lender of last resort.

The Senate beat back another amendment with populist tinges, defeating 61-33 a provision that would have put strict caps on the size of the nation's banks. Offered by a bloc of liberal Democrats, it would have capped at 10% the limit on the nation's total insured deposits any single bank holding company could carry. It would have also set a 6% leverage limit for banks and capped their non-deposit liabilities at 2% of U.S. gross domestic product.

Real Unemployment Rate Jumps To 17.1%

Business Insider - Nonfarm payroll employment rose by 290,000 in April, the unemployment rate
edged up to 9.9 percent, and the labor force increased sharply, the U.S.
Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Job gains occurred in manufactur-
ing, professional and business services, health care, and leisure and hospi-
tality. Federal government employment also rose, reflecting continued hiring
of temporary workers for Census 2010.

Household Survey Data

In April, the number of unemployed persons was 15.3 million, and the unem-
ployment rate edged up to 9.9 percent. The rate had been 9.7 percent for the
first 3 months of this year.

Among the major worker groups, the unemployment rate for whites (9.0 percent)
edged up in April, while the rates for adult men (10.1 percent), adult women
(8.2 percent), teenagers (25.4 percent), blacks (16.5 percent), and Hispanics
(12.5 percent) showed little or no change. The jobless rate for Asians was
6.8 percent, not seasonally adjusted.

The number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks and over) con-
tinued to trend up over the month, reaching 6.7 million. In April, 45.9 percent
of unemployed persons had been jobless for 27 weeks or more.

Among the unemployed, the number of reentrants to the labor force rose by
195,000 over the month.

In April, the civilian labor force participation rate increased by 0.3 percent-
age point to 65.2 percent, as the size of the labor force rose by 805,000. Since
December, the participation rate has increased by 0.6 percentage point. The em-
ployment-population ratio rose to 58.8 percent over the month and has increased
by 0.6 percentage point since December.

The number of persons employed part time for economic reasons (sometimes refer-
red to as involuntary part-time workers) was about unchanged at 9.2 million in
April. These individuals were working part time because their hours had been cut
back or because they were unable to find a full-time job.

About 2.4 million persons were marginally attached to the labor force in April,
compared with 2.1 million a year earlier. (The data are not seasonally adjusted.)
These individuals were not in the labor force, wanted and were available for work,
and had looked for a job sometime in the prior 12 months. They were not counted
as unemployed because they had not searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding
the survey.

Among the marginally attached, there were 1.2 million discouraged workers in
April, up by 457,000 from a year earlier. (The data are not seasonally adjusted.)
Discouraged workers are persons not currently looking for work because they be-
lieve no jobs are available for them. The remaining 1.2 million persons marginal-
ly attached to the labor force had not searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding
the survey for reasons such as school attendance or family responsibilities. (See
table A-16.)

In April, nonfarm payroll employment rose by 290,000. Sizable employment gains oc-
curred in manufacturing, professional and business services, health care, and in
leisure and hospitality. Federal government employment increased due to the hiring
of temporary workers for Census 2010. Since December, nonfarm payroll employment
has expanded by 573,000, with 483,000 jobs added in the private sector. The vast
majority of job growth occurred during the last 2 months.

Manufacturing added 44,000 jobs in April. Since December, factory employment has
risen by 101,000. Over the month, gains occurred in several durable goods indus-
tries, including fabricated metals (9,000) and machinery (7,000). Employment also
grew in nondurable goods manufacturing (14,000).

Mining added 7,000 jobs in April, with most of the increase in support activities
for mining. Since last October, mining has added 39,000 jobs.

In April, construction employment edged up (14,000), following an increase of 26,000
in March. Over the month, nonresidential building and heavy construction added 9,000
jobs each.

Employment in professional and business services rose by 80,000 in April. Temporary
help services continued to add jobs (26,000); employment in this industry has in-
creased by 330,000 since September 2009. Employment also rose over the month in ser-
vices to buildings and dwellings (23,000) and in computer systems design (7,000).

In April, health care employment grew by 20,000, including a gain of 6,000 in hospi-
tals. Over the past year, health care employment has increased by 244,000.

Employment rose by 45,000 in leisure and hospitality over the month. Much of this
increase occurred in accommodation and food services, which added 29,000 jobs. Food
services employment has risen by 84,000 over the past 4 months, while accommodation
has added 18,000 jobs over the past 3 months.

Federal government employment was up in April, reflecting the hiring of 66,000 tem-
porary workers for the decennial census.

Over the month, employment changed little in wholesale trade, retail trade, informa-
tion, and financial activities.

Employment in transportation and warehousing fell by 20,000 in April, reflecting a
large decline in courier and messenger services.

In April, the average workweek for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls increased
by 0.1 hour to 34.1 hours. The manufacturing workweek for all employees increased by
0.2 hour for the second straight month to 40.1 hours, and factory overtime was up by
0.1 hour over the month. The average workweek for production and nonsupervisory em-
ployees on private nonfarm payrolls increased by 0.1 hour to 33.4 hours in April.


Average hourly earnings of all employees in the private nonfarm sector increased by
1 cent to $22.47 in April. Over the past 12 months, average hourly earnings have in-
creased by 1.6 percent. In April, average hourly earnings of private-sector production
and nonsupervisory employees increased by 5 cents to $18.96.

The change in total nonfarm payroll employment for February was revised from -14,000
to +39,000, and the change for March was revised from 162,000 to 230,000.