The Safe Hut

2-10-2010 update

View previous topic View next topic Go down

2-10-2010 update

Post  surf on Wed Feb 10, 2010 6:13 pm

Major world changes are clearly close on the horizon
February 8, 2010



Major world changes are clearly close on the horizon


Major world changes are clearly close on the horizon. This past weekend saw a G7 Finance Minister’s summit near the North pole, a BIS central bank governor’s summit in Australia and a gathering of the world’s military leaders (including Nato, Russia and China) in Germany. All of this is a sign of preparation for some major public announcements almost certainly related to the new financial system.

The Federal Reserve Board has been actively buying up all its old bonds, notes and Treaty of Versaille boxes at 1% of their face value, according to a Black Dragon Society member with esoteric banking connections. The Bank of Japan has also been buying up all of its bonds owned by non-Japanese. These are some other indications a big announcement is imminent.

The most likely scenario, according to our sources, is that the 90% of US dollars owned by non-Americans will be renamed Hong Kong dollars and backed by the Renminbi. There are conflicting plans for the US as we write but our latest information is that a gold-backed Amero will replace the Mexican peso as well as the US and Canadian dollars to form a North American region currency. In preparation for such an event the Pentagon, the Canadian mounted police and Mexican Federales are said to be prepared to deal with civil unrest in the US, according to our sources.

The Amero will have a lot less purchasing power (30 to 50% less) internationally than the US dollar has now so many Americans will be understandably angry when the change is announced. The un-escapable fact though, is that Americans have been living beyond their means for the past 30 years.

Nonetheless, it is still not clear if the Washington D.C. criminal establishment will be ousted and replaced by an interim government until the US can return to constitutional law and hold new elections. There is still infighting going on as we write and a final showdown has yet to be seen.

It remains to be seen if the US falls into civil war but Pentagon sources believe this can be avoided if the military takes legal steps to remove the criminal corporate government in Washington D.C.

Meanwhile, the military summit in Munich revealed some major geo-political changes that may be related to this. Basically, there was talk of Russia joining Nato with, among others, Polish delegates making this suggestion. This coincides with arm sales by the US and the EU to Taiwan as well as military exercises in Thailand involving Thai, Japanese, Indonesian and Singaporean troops. All of these moves are clearly aimed at telling China not to overstep itself and assume it can form a China centric world dictatorship.

Of course the Chinese delegate in Munich made it very clear that China had no such ambition. Senior Chinese sources in fact did tell me earlier that China did want to rule the world but of course now that they have been confronted with all of these forces they have had to scale back their ambitions.

The center of world financial and intellectual gravity will nonetheless shift to China over the coming decades but it will do so in an organic fashion that does not alienate or endanger anybody.

The only way for the West to prevent this from happening would be for them to purge their financial and political systems of the criminal element that took over the highest echelons of power.

There are many signs that such a purge has already begun and will continue for a long time.

First of all the financial industry has seen thousands of bankers arrested and hundreds murdered. Eventually, the ring-leaders of the 911 attacks will be arrested if not executed. This only a matter of time now.

Secondly, the pharmaceutical industry is going to see a major purge as the criminal element that deliberately manufactured diseases in order to sell cures continues to be exposed. Cures are already available for most diseases so that industry will have to retool itself towards the creation of life, ability and pleasure enhancing substances.

The application of free energy technology to replace petroleum will also begin in earnest. In order to prevent social disruption the oil, nuclear and other industries will undergo an orderly transformation. Early use of free energy technology will be restricted to such things as turning deserts green.

The political class is also going to see a major purge and many government are expected to fall over the coming year. Regime change is likely in Canada, England, Germany and the US.

It is not clear if all of these changes will be made with big public announcements or if they will just be phased in over time. Hopefully there will be a truth commission set up.

Meanwhile, right wing elements in Japan are busy plotting the creation of a nationalist party to compete with the ruling Democratic Party of Japan. They are trying to get right-leaning members of the DPJ to defect to a new party.

They have also forced the DPJ to distance itself a bit from China and take a more balanced diplomatic approach.

Overall, there is a lot of confusion in government circles in most Western countries as well as in Japan because the political class was mostly unaware of the existence of a secret government above them that ruled via control of the financial system.

There may not be any big public announcements this week. However, a date to watch for is February 15th. This Chinese new year is a special once in 60 years year of the tiger and it begins on February 14th. That is a Sunday so the first day markets will open after that will be the 15th. Since many Chinese believe in numerology and Chinese astrology and, even if they don’t, it would be logical to announce the new financial system at the beginning of the Chinese new-year.

http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message984450/pg1

surf
Admin

Posts : 122
Join date : 2009-09-02
Location : USA

http://safehut.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: 2-10-2010 update

Post  surf on Wed Feb 10, 2010 6:14 pm

Another Conspiracy Theory ... Maybe, Maybe Not ...
February 14th, 2010 - New Moon ~
Iraq ~ Sunday, February 14, 2010 at 5:52 AM



India Nuke Already Deployed


February 9, 2010


Other Than Working For The Same Bosses, What Do These Men Have In Common?

Answer: None Of Them Is Osama Bin Laden.

How can you tell if an Osama Bin Laden tape is a fake?

Easy! It says Osama Bin Laden on it.

Digging all the way back to 9-11 we’ve examined countless audio and video tapes from Al Qaeda leaders of various stripe and to put it bluntly, every single one of them is a fake. That’s right. There has never been a real one. Not even one.

We know this because all the Al Qaeda actors present us with clear reversed speech in English. In most cases (definitely not all) it is distinctly American English. Of course, reversed speech is a natural and unconscious process that can’t be controlled; otherwise they would stop it. Without going into a lot of detail, English is their native language because their unconscious thoughts are in English even while they are reading a speech in some other language.

The reason we are talking about Osama Bin Laden is that within two days of the time that Wall Street and the Medical Monopoly had to give up their mysterious Health Care Reform package and signal the Oil Cartel that they could proceed once again with the Armageddon Plot, a Bin Laden audio tape appeared claiming a connection with the Underwear Bomber.

You know the Underwear Bomber. Somewhere in Yemen there’s a CIA guy who is still laughing about selling the kid a bomb that wouldn’t work. But of course in Washington the Bomber is worth his weight in gold. Most recently the unfortunate Nigerian has become the focus of a new educational campaign about human rights. It seems that in America, human beings have no rights until a cop gives them some. This occurs when they are “Mirandized” by the policeman. Then they suddenly have some rights, thanks to the policeman’s magical powers.

Nothing could be more repugnant to our Constitution or the American way of life, yet CNN, FOX, and even NPR have broadcast this concept several thousand times in the last week without the slightest quibble. Even Glenn Beck had no objection.

But let’s get back to that Bin Laden tape because it tells us more about the nuclear weapon that India’s Prime Minister sold to the Nimmers. Since the first of January, all U.S. propaganda networks have been broadcasting the name “Al Qaeda” four to five hundred times a day. It seems you can’t rob a tea shop in Karachi these days without being described on the CNN news ticker as “Al Qaeda Linked.” We even have new fantasy Al Qaeda organizations popping up fully staffed and ready to go. Make no mistake, this is a MAJOR psychological campaign. Why? Yemen has OIL. So, after we nuke Iran, we are going on to Yemen to fight more imaginary terrorists there.

Since no one believes that the wily old Osama Bin Laden is to be found in Yemen, he has outlived his usefulness. He has to be minimized. Made irrelevant. Or perhaps redundant, as they say in Britain.

And that’s exactly what happened. I was watching FOX on cable when the new Bin Laden tape was announced. It was described as not-yet-authenticated, but the oh-so-slick Shepard Smith jumped in to say that all the Al Qaeda tapes FOX had ever shown were genuine, so this one would be also. This is the second time he’s done this, so I’d say surveys must be showing that people are wising up. But it was then only a few hours before virtually all news sources were saying that Bin Laden had nothing to do with the Underwear Bomber, and was a washed-up has-been just trying to grab some meager publicity. That, of course, was the purpose of the tape in the first place.

So that’s how we got a Bin Laden tape. But those who produce these audio and video wonders still don’t realize that with reversed speech we can walk right into their compound, slip silently into their studio, and learn what the actor is hearing, seeing and thinking at that time and location. In this case, he was hearing, seeing, and thinking about Prime Minister Singh’s atomic bomb.

Reversed Speech

The Bin Laden / Underwear Bomber tape is only one minute long. In that minute we found thirty-five unvoiced thoughts (speech reversals) that bounce around from one subject to another before settling on THE BOMB. On the right is a screenshot from my Sound Forge software with a listing that represents those first thirty seconds or so. As I mark different segments with the text of what I am hearing, that text shows up on this list.

Many reversals show up with no other reference, so I record them in case they appear somewhere else. Sometimes, though, you can still build up a picture which may not be totally correct, but will do as a working theory. As an example, I might suspect that this man is working in a compound in Iraq, attached to a communications unit. His language skills or his intelligence training may have him coordinating an “Iran Network” which might be a radio net of agents undercover in Iran. I don’t know what sort of organization L.E.F. is, but I wrote it down in case I run across it again. The next time our guy makes a Bin Laden tape I may learn more.

Following this period of seemingly random thoughts we find the reversals shown below.

The bomb left the compound on January 23 or 24 (depending on when the tape was made) and was traveling by road. Since it will not be delivered by missile, it must be hidden somewhere and detonated at the right time by remote control. He’s glad to see it go! By observing how the bomb is traveling, he suspects that the target is PROBABLY LOCAL.

MANHATTAN is an obvious memory association with the Manhattan Project, which developed the first atomic bombs. Linking with THE FLASH makes it clear that we are dealing with a nuke.

We can certainly conclude that the bomb is in place now, and ready to go.

When the GAMBIT false-flag attack plan was reformulated for Israel instead of Texas, it had a second objective beyond triggering the invasion of Iran. All versions have included two or more nukes going off in Iraq. We learned this from General David Petraeus in late 2007. The public will be told that these were Iranian missiles shot at U.S. bases in Iraq, but the missile guidance systems weren’t very good. The nukes will actually be detonated in areas where Iraqi resistance elements still threaten to block access to oil reserves. The unfortunate town of Falluja, sitting on top of an oil field, was a target at one time, and may still be one. U.S. bases will not be that far away, though, so we can expect some U.S. casualties.

We don’t know if one of the Russian nuclear artillery shells the SEALs obtained for this purpose has failed a test, or there is simply an additional Iraqi target that Houston would like neutralized. However, this clarifies somewhat the motivation of India’s PM Manmohan Singh who provided the new bomb. Apparently he didn’t care where the bomb would be used, as long as it would be part of the plot to destroy militant Islam.

The most interesting part of this reversal set is THEY’LL HAVE NEW MOON. The New Moon is the time of maximum darkness at night, and U.S. forces rely heavily on darkness to take advantage of their stealth and night vision capabilities. When the nuke left the compound to be deployed the New Moon was long past, having occurred on January 15. In fact, the Full Moon was only a week away.


So I believe this man is telling us that GAMBIT will be scheduled so the Iran invasion can begin on or near the next New Moon, which comes on Saturday, February 13th.

We have one more set of reversals that followed what you heard above. They simply reinforce what we already know:

From whatever briefings this man has been given, he clearly understands that the plans are set and won’t be changing. Unless something goes completely wrong, Armageddon could be only a few days away.



visit site @
http://www.ken-welch.com/Reports2/IndiaNukeDeployed.html

surf
Admin

Posts : 122
Join date : 2009-09-02
Location : USA

http://safehut.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: 2-10-2010 update

Post  surf on Wed Feb 10, 2010 6:16 pm

Patriot or Terrorist ~ Law Passed in South Carolina ~ SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITIES REGISTRATION ACT
"The state’s “Subversive Activities Registration Act” is now officially on the books and mandates that “Every member of a subversive organization, or an organization subject to foreign control, every foreign agent and every person who advocates, teaches, advises or practices the duty, necessity or propriety of controlling, conducting, seizing or overthrowing the government of the United States … shall register with the Secretary of State.”



"Somebody posted this on the social networking site. Wouldnt this make the tea party, 911 truthers, continental congress, 912ers, Ron Paulers, et al... ciminals?


"Subversive Activities Registration Act"
watch video~

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Twyjc5N8iGU&feature=player_embedded#


SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITIES REGISTRATION ACT

Paul Joseph Watson

Feb 8, 2010

Subversives who think government is corrupt and should be controlled by the people face 10 years in prison and a $25,000 dollar fine if they fail to register with authorities in South Carolina, in another chilling example of how free speech and dissent is being criminalized in America.
The state’s “Subversive Activities Registration Act” is now officially on the books and mandates that “Every member of a subversive organization, or an organization subject to foreign control, every foreign agent and every person who advocates, teaches, advises or practices the duty, necessity or propriety of controlling, conducting, seizing or overthrowing the government of the United States … shall register with the Secretary of State.”

Of course, the right to overthrow a government that has become corrupt, abusive and completely unrepresentative of its electorate is enshrined in the Declaration of Independence – that’s how America came to be a Republic in the first place – advocating or teaching that the people should “control” the government via their elected representatives is a basic function of a democratic society, but this law effectively makes it a terrorist offense.

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness,” states the Declaration of Independence.

Under the sweeping terms of the law, members of tax protest organizations, the Tea Party movement and the States’ Rights movement based in South Carolina are all domestic terrorists if they fail to register their dissent with the authorities.

It is important to stress that the notion this law somehow only applies to “Islamic terrorists” is completely at odds with the fact that federal and state authorities now consider the main terror threat to be from informed American citizens exercising their constitutional rights in opposition to the big government agenda they are being subjected to.

As we saw with the MIAC report and a plethora of similar training manuals which were leaked over the last decade, police are being trained that libertarians, gun owners, Ron Paul supporters and anyone who is mildly political is a domestic extremist and a potential terrorist – these people are the real target of the subversives list in South Carolina.

The infamous Phoenix Federal Bureau of Investigation manual (page one, page two) produced in association with the Joint Terrorism Task Force listed “defenders of the U.S. constitution” and “lone individuals” as terrorists. Will anyone in South Carolina who defends the Constitution, the very bedrock of what America stands for, have to register with the authorities unless they want to be locked up for a decade?

Of course, since nobody is going to register as a “subversive” with South Carolina authorities, their failure to “comply” with the regulation will later be used against them as a means of eliciting criminal charges, in what represents a clear end run around the First Amendment.

The government isn’t going to just come out all guns blazing and ban free speech, they are simply going to make anyone who refuses to register for permission a criminal for failing to adhere to a separate mandate.

Just like people in places such as New York and Chicago were told that they had to get a license to purchase a gun – at first the process was a mere inconvenience but now the licensing process means they have to jump through 200 flaming hoops and the second amendment has effectively been outlawed in these cities.

They won’t hesitate to pull the same tricks with the First Amendment, and it’s already happening with calls to license Internet users and force them to get government permission to run a website.
___________________________

South Carolina Code of Laws

(Unannotated)

DISCLAIMER
The South Carolina Legislative Council is offering access to the unannotated South Carolina Code of Laws on the Internet as a service to the public. The unannotated South Carolina Code on the General Assembly's website is now current through the 2009 session. The unannotated South Carolina Code, consisting only of Code text and numbering, may be copied from this website at the reader's expense and effort without need for permission.

The Legislative Council is unable to assist users of this service with legal questions. Also, legislative staff cannot respond to requests for legal advice or the application of the law to specific facts. Therefore, to understand and protect your legal rights, you should consult your own private lawyer regarding all legal questions.

While every effort was made to ensure the accuracy and completeness of the unannotated South Carolina Code available on the South Carolina General Assembly's website, the unannotated South Carolina Code is not official, and the state agencies preparing this website and the General Assembly are not responsible for any errors or omissions which may occur in these files. Only the current published volumes of the South Carolina Code of Laws Annotated and any pertinent acts and joint resolutions contain the official version.

Title 23 - Law Enforcement and Public Safety

CHAPTER 29.

SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITIES REGISTRATION ACT
SECTION 23-29-10. Short title.

This chapter may be cited as the "Subversive Activities Registration Act."

SECTION 23-29-20. Definitions.

For the purposes of this chapter the following words, phrases and terms are defined as follows:

(1) "Subversive organization" means every corporation, society, association, camp, group, bund, political party, assembly, body or organization, composed of two or more persons, which directly or indirectly advocates, advises, teaches or practices the duty, necessity or propriety of controlling, conducting, seizing or overthrowing the government of the United States, of this State or of any political subdivision thereof by force or violence or other unlawful means;

(2) "Organization subject to foreign control" means every corporation, society, association, camp, group, bund, political party, assembly, body or other organization, composed of two or more persons, which comes within either of the following:

(a) it solicits or accepts financial contributions, loans or support of any kind directly or indirectly from, or is affiliated directly or indirectly with, a foreign government or a political subdivision thereof, an agent, agency or instrumentality of a foreign government or political subdivision thereof, a political party in a foreign country or an international political organization or

(b) its policies, or any of them, are determined by or at the suggestion of, or in collaboration with, a foreign government or political subdivision thereof, an agent, agency or instrumentality of a foreign government or a political subdivision thereof, a political party in a foreign country or an international political organization;

(3) "Foreign agent" means any person whose actions, or any of them, are determined by or at the suggestion of, or in collaboration with, a foreign government or political subdivision thereof, an instrumentality or agency of a foreign government or political subdivision thereof, a political party in a foreign country or an international political organization; and

(4) "Business" includes, but is not limited to, speaking engagements.

SECTION 23-29-30. Effect on freedom of press or speech.

Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to authorize, require or establish censorship or to limit in any way or infringe upon freedom of the press or of speech as guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States and no regulation shall be promulgated hereunder having that effect.

SECTION 23-29-40. Organizations exempt from application of chapter.

The terms of this chapter do not apply to any labor union or religious, fraternal or patriotic organization, society or association, or their members, whose objectives and aims do not contemplate the overthrow of the government of the United States, of this State or of any political subdivision thereof by force or violence or other unlawful means.

SECTION 23-29-50. Registration by subversive and foreign-controlled organizations.

Every subversive organization and organization subject to foreign control shall register with the Secretary of State on forms prescribed by him within thirty days after coming into existence in this State.

SECTION 23-29-60. Registration of members of subversive and foreign-controlled organizations.

Every member of a subversive organization, or an organization subject to foreign control, every foreign agent and every person who advocates, teaches, advises or practices the duty, necessity or propriety of controlling, conducting, seizing or overthrowing the government of the United States, of this State or of any political subdivision thereof by force or violence or other unlawful means, who resides, transacts any business or attempts to influence political action in this State, shall register with the Secretary of State on the forms and at the times prescribed by him.

SECTION 23-29-70. Forms and schedule for filing information.

Every organization or person coming within the provisions of this chapter shall file with the Secretary of State all information which he may request, on the forms and at the times he may prescribe.

SECTION 23-29-80. Promulgation of rules and regulations.

The Secretary of State may adopt and promulgate any rules and regulations, not inconsistent with the terms of this chapter, which may be necessary to carry out the provisions of this chapter and may alter or repeal such rules and regulations.

SECTION 23-29-90. Penalties.

Any organization or person who violates any of the provisions of this chapter shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished by a fine of not more than twenty-five thousand dollars or imprisonment for not more than ten years, or by both fine and imprisonment.

http://www.scstatehouse.gov/code/t23c029.htm

related article ~

Obama Quietly Backs Renewing Patriot Act Surveillance Provisions

Fight for Freedom - Legally and with Good Intention -

surf
Admin

Posts : 122
Join date : 2009-09-02
Location : USA

http://safehut.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: 2-10-2010 update

Post  surf on Wed Feb 10, 2010 6:25 pm

Yes, America is Still in an Official State of Emergency
Text size
Washington’s Blog
February 10, 2010

A reader asked whether the U.S. is still in an official state of emergency, and if so, what that means.




A declared state of emergency has continued in full force and effect from 9/11 to the present.

The answer is yes, we are still in a state of emergency.

Specifically:

On September 11, 2001, the government declared a state of emergency. That declared state of emergency was formally put in writing on 9/14/2001:

“A national emergency exists by reason of the terrorist attacks at the World Trade Center, New York, New York, and the Pentagon, and the continuing and immediate threat of further attacks on the United States.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, I hereby declare that the national emergency has existed since September 11, 2001 . . . .”

That declared state of emergency has continued in full force and effect from 9/11 [throughout the Bush administration] to the present.

On September 10 2009, President Obama continued the state of emergency:

The terrorist threat that led to the declaration on September 14, 2001, of a national emergency continues. For this reason, I have determined that it is necessary to continue in effect after September 14, 2009, the national emergency with respect to the terrorist threat.

Does a State of Emergency Really Mean Anything?

Does a state of emergency really mean anything?

Yes, it does:

The Washington Times wrote on September 18, 2001:

“Simply by proclaiming a national emergency on Friday, President Bush activated some 500 dormant legal provisions, including those allowing him to impose censorship and martial law.”

Is the Times correct? Well, it is clear that pre-9/11 declarations of national emergency have authorized martial law. For example, as summarized by a former fellow for the Hoover Institution and the National Science Foundation, and the recipient of numerous awards, including the Gary Schlarbaum Award for Lifetime Defense of Liberty, Thomas Szasz Award for Outstanding Contributions to the Cause of Civil Liberties, Lysander Spooner Award for Advancing the Literature of Liberty and Templeton Honor Rolls Award on Education in a Free Society:

In 1973, the Senate created a Special Committee on the Termination of the National Emergency (subsequently redesignated the Special Committee on National Emergencies and Delegated Emergency Powers) to investigate the matter and to propose reforms. Ascertaining the continued existence of four presidential declarations of national emergency, the Special Committee (U.S. Senate 1973, p. iii) reported:

“These proclamations give force to 470 provisions of Federal law. . . . taken together, [they] confer enough authority to rule the country without reference to normal constitutional processes. Under the powers delegated by these statutes, the President may: seize property; organize and control the means of production; seize commodities; assign military forces abroad; institute martial law; seize and control all transportation and communications; regulate the operation of private enterprise; restrict travel; and, in a plethora of particular ways, control the lives of all American citizens.”

(Most or all of the emergency powers referred to by the above-quoted 1973 Senate report were revoked in the late 1970’s by 50 U.S.C. Section 1601. However, presidents have made numerous declarations of emergency since then, and the declarations made by President Bush in September 2001 are still in effect).

It is also clear that the White House has kept substantial information concerning its presidential proclamations and directives hidden from Congress. For example, according to Steven Aftergood of the Federation of American Scientists Project on Government Secrecy:

“Of the 54 National Security Presidential Directives issued by the [George W.] Bush Administration to date, the titles of only about half have been publicly identified. There is descriptive material or actual text in the public domain for only about a third. In other words, there are dozens of undisclosed Presidential directives that define U.S. national security policy and task government agencies, but whose substance is unknown either to the public or, as a rule, to Congress.”

As former United States congressman Dan Hamburg wrote in October:

While … Congress and the judiciary, as well as public opinion, “can restrain the executive regarding emergency powers,” nothing of the sort has occurred.

Under the 1976 National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601-1651), Congress is required to review presidentially declared emergencies. Specifically, “not later than six months after a national emergency is declared, and not later than the end of each six-month period thereafter that such emergency continues, each House of Congress shall meet to consider a vote on a joint resolution to determine whether that emergency shall be terminated.” Over the past eight years, Congress has failed to obey its own law, a fact that casts doubt on the legality of the state of emergency.

As far as public opinion is concerned, how many Americans are even aware that a state of emergency even exists. For that matter, how many members of Congress know? …

The Obama administration is essentially arguing that the United States is currently in a state of resisting foreign invasion a full eight years after the attacks of 9/11!

This is ludicrous. [Dr. Harold C. Relyea, a specialist in national government with the Congressional Research Service (CRS) of the Library of Congress] argues that Congress and the judiciary, as “co-equal branches of constitutional government,” serve as a check on the executive power. As we have seen, Congress has either been shut out of this process, or, as in so many cases, it has capitulated. Dr. Relyea then offers that public opinion can restrain the executive. But the public doesn’t even know they’re living under a state of emergency. The media doesn’t report it, and the government is certainly not in the business of providing information that might raise the hackles of real Americans.

It’s time for the American people to rise to this challenge. Write your member of Congress, and your senators. Tell them to obey their own laws. Tell them to end this phony and treacherous state of emergency that imperils the freedom of us all.


A d v e r t i s e m e n t

Hamburg’s must-read article also discusses the suspension of Possse Comitatus, the operation of Northcom inside the U.S., and the refusal of the Department of Homeland Security to provide information on the state of emergency to Congress or even to Congress members on the Homeland Security committee with the highest security clearances.

The Affect of a State of Emergency on the Economy and Business

The continuous state of emergency in effect from September 2001 to the present may have had a substantial affect on the economy and business.

For example, as Reuters noted last week:

U.S. securities regulators originally treated the New York Federal Reserve’s bid to keep secret many of the details of the American International Group bailout like a request to protect matters of national security, according to emails obtained by Reuters.

The national security claim may seem outlandish, but it is nothing new.

As Business Week wrote on May 23, 2006:

President George W. Bush has bestowed on his intelligence czar, John Negroponte, broad authority, in the name of national security, to excuse publicly traded companies from their usual accounting and securities-disclosure obligations.

In other words, national security has been discussed for years as a basis of keeping normal accounting and securities-related disclosures secret. While “national security” and a state of “national emergency” may not be exactly the same, they are variations of a single theme – an existential threat to our nation – which has dominated American since September 11.

Similarly, Congressman Brad Sherman, Congressman Paul Kanjorski and Senator James Inhofe all say that the government warned of martial law if Tarp wasn’t passed.

Last year:

• Senator Leahy said “If we learned anything from 9/11, the biggest mistake is to pass anything they ask for just because it’s an emergency”

• The New York Times wrote:

“The rescue is being sold as a must-have emergency measure by an administration with a controversial record when it comes to asking Congress for special authority in time of duress.”

***

Mr. Paulson has argued that the powers he seeks are necessary to chase away the wolf howling at the door: a potentially swift shredding of the American financial system. That would be catastrophic for everyone, he argues, not only banks, but also ordinary Americans who depend on their finances to buy homes and cars, and to pay for college.

Some are suspicious of Mr. Paulson’s characterizations, finding in his warnings and demands for extraordinary powers a parallel with the way the Bush administration gained authority for the war in Iraq. Then, the White House suggested that mushroom clouds could accompany Congress’s failure to act. This time, it is financial Armageddon supposedly on the doorstep.

“This is scare tactics to try to do something that’s in the private but not the public interest,” said Allan Meltzer, a former economic adviser to President Reagan, and an expert on monetary policy at the Carnegie Mellon Tepper School of Business. “It’s terrible.”

Most of the Fed and Treasury’s looting of America to funnel trillions in bailouts, loans, guarantees, and other favors to the too big to fails was done under the justification of an “emergency”.

I don’t know whether the official declaration of a “state of emergency” in effect from September 2001 to today was directly used for financial looting. But again, the fear of an existential threat to our country was used to justify the looting.

Congress Has the Power to Revoke the State of Emergency

A note to Congressional staffers: Congressman Hamburg is right. Congress does have the power to revoke the state of emergency.

Specifically, the National Emergencies Act, 50 U.S.C. Sections 1601-1651 (passed in 1976), gives Congress the power to countermand a presidential declaration of national emergency. Indeed, in 1976, Congress rescinded all of the declarations of national emergency made since World War II, as many of them had been on the books for years and were giving the executive unrestricted powers which were undermining the Constitution.

In 1983, the Supreme Court struck down a portion of Congress’ power to countermand a declaration of national emergency. But Congress got around that ruling by amending the National Emergencies Act in 1985 to confirm Congress’ power to countermand – through a joint resolution between the House and Senate – a declaration of emergency by the president (see this).

Moreover, in 2007, the Bush Administration tried to ignore the National Emergencies Act by issuing National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive 51. But that dog won’t hunt. The Constitution does not allow the president to unilaterally cut Congress out of the picture.

surf
Admin

Posts : 122
Join date : 2009-09-02
Location : USA

http://safehut.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: 2-10-2010 update

Post  surf on Wed Feb 10, 2010 6:41 pm

Many of the world’s central bankers are meeting in Sydney today, at a secret location, to coordinate their drive to force draconian austerity measures on nations, in order to prop up their failed monetary system.

That’s why they are meeting in secret—if the people understood that the central bankers are working out how many people they’ll need to kill to save the banking system, the people might object to them being here.

Consider the chronology of how the world got to this point:

In July 2007, after a decade of warnings by American physical economist Lyndon LaRouche that the world financial system would disintegrate, the U.S. sub-prime crisis triggered the global financial collapse (Bear Sterns), which by September 2008 turned into a full-blown meltdown of the $1.4 quadrillion global derivatives bubble (Lehman Brothers, AIG).
In August 2007, LaRouche proposed the Homeowners and Bank Protection Act: to keep people in their homes; to preserve the functionality of the banking system by putting it into bankruptcy protection, to write off their unpayable derivatives and bad debts; and to return the system to Glass-Steagall regulations.
LaRouche’s solution was rejected, and instead in October 2008, the very central banks which created the crisis, led by the U.S. Federal Reserve, the Bank of England, and the European Central Bank, dictated a $24 trillion global bail-out of the system by national governments. In Australia, Kevin Rudd implemented the bank guarantee, stimulus spending and the first homebuyers grant, and the Future Fund was put at the disposal of the banks to prop them up.
By July 2009, it was obvious the bail-out had transferred the bankruptcy of the banking system onto the governments which were propping it up. LaRouche forecast that by October the bankruptcy of national governments would trigger the final meltdown.
In October 2009, Dubai defaulted on debts of US$59 billion; it was bailed out by Abu Dhabi, but 13 other default risks quickly emerged, including the PIGS in Europe—Portugal, Ireland, Greece and Spain—Great Britain, and the biggest danger of all, the U.S.
2010: on 17th January, Sunday Telegraph economics writer Ambrose Evans-Pritchard revealed advanced plans by the European Central Bank (ECB) to enforce draconian austerity measures on the PIGS, dictating massive cuts to wages, pensions and social services so those nations avoided debt default to save the euro. The ECB intoned sovereignty is a “largely obsolete concept” as it declared it would impose a “permanent limitation” on the PIGS. The chief economist of the IMF, Olivier Blanchard, has since called for the PIGS to impose wage cuts to save the euro. Vicious austerity is on the agenda in other places too: In Australia, Kevin Rudd is blaming the deficit on old people living too long, and in the U.S., Barack Obama is slashing Medicare for the elderly to rein in the U.S. deficit.
The world’s central bankers meeting in Sydney are unaccountable powerbrokers, disguised as “independent”, who have replaced accountable governments as managers of the economy, and globalised the financial system under private control. Through them, the financier oligarchs in the City of London, and its satellites in Wall Street, Amsterdam and Zürich etc., are in charge of the financial system—not elected governments.

Just like in the 1930s, the austerity measures planned by the central bankers cannot be implemented through democratic means, because people tend to object to being killed. To save their system in the Great Depression, the leading central bankers in the Bank of England and the Bank for International Settlements, backed the rise of Hitler and Europe’s other fascist régimes to impose their austerity program.

What is Sydney’s secret central bank gathering planning to do this time?

surf
Admin

Posts : 122
Join date : 2009-09-02
Location : USA

http://safehut.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: 2-10-2010 update

Post  surf on Wed Feb 10, 2010 7:34 pm

Global bank tax near, says Brown
By George Parker and Lionel Barber

Published: February 10 2010 23:22 | Last updated: February 10 2010 23:22

Gordon Brown said on Wednesday the world’s leading economies were close to agreeing a global bank tax, amid hopes in Downing Street that a deal can be concluded at the G20 summit in Canada in June.

Mr Brown believes that opinion has shifted decisively in favour of a globally co-ordinated tax after President Barack Obama’s move last month to raise $90bn (£57.7bn) from a US bank levy.

EDITOR’S CHOICE
Statesman ready for a street fight - Feb-10PM says Tories have not let go of Thatcherism - Feb-10G7 warms to idea of bank levy - Feb-06John Kay: Why ‘too big to fail’ insurance is the worst of all worlds - Feb-02The tax could cost the financial services sector tens of billions of pounds a year.

The prime minister has strongly advocated some kind of charge on banks. “I’m interested in the way support is building up for international action,” he said in an interview with the Financial Times.

Last year, Mr Brown mooted a tax on bank transactions – a so-called Tobin tax – as one of a number of options to make sure the “contribution banks make to society is properly captured”.

The US immediately shot down that option, but the International Monetary Fund has been looking at other ideas.

Mr Brown believes that the IMF will endorse a global bank levy before its April meeting in Washington.

Downing Street hopes an agreement in principle can then be agreed by world leaders at the G20 summit in June, although the implementation of the levy and the detail of how it would work could take longer.

“People are now prepared to consider the best mechanism by which a levy could be raised,” Mr Brown said.

He thought the IMF would propose a method that would be “somewhat different” from the tax on wholesale funding proposed by Mr Obama.

Other options would be for a tax on bank profits, turnover or remuneration. But the IMF is expected to shy away from branding the levy as “an insurance scheme” because doing so might encourage banks to think they would automatically be covered by the taxpayer if they ran into trouble again.

Mr Brown insisted he was not attacking banks or their wealthy employees for ideological reasons. On the new 50p top rate of tax, he said: “We didn’t want to raise the top rate of tax.” He added: “We have no desire to have a tax rate that is higher than necessary.”

The prime minister said those with the “broadest shoulders” should pay more, and insisted that the tax would raise “a substantial amount of additional money”. He admitted: “It’s not as high as you would like it to be because of avoidance.”

In a wide-ranging interview, Mr Brown appeared focused on economic summits that will take place after the expected May 6 election, confirming the impression of aides that he still believes he can overturn a 10-point poll deficit.

He confirmed there would be a Budget before the election and insisted there was “no disagreement” with Alistair Darling, chancellor, on the pace of cutting the £178bn deficit: the plan is to halve borrowing over four years.

The prime minister again suggested that Mr Darling might be able to increase planned spending in some areas, if debt interest and benefit spending were lower than expected, or growth higher.

“If anything, we’ve shown ourselves to be better than people expected in most of these areas,” he said.

“That leaves the chancellor free to make decisions that he will make at the time of the Budget.”
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2010. You may share using our article tools. Please don't cut articles from FT.com and redistribute by email or post to the web.

surf
Admin

Posts : 122
Join date : 2009-09-02
Location : USA

http://safehut.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: 2-10-2010 update

Post  Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum