Archive for January, 2011

Don’t Waste Time To Fix the Corporate Government

Why? I have found the best explanation of this by Michael-Donald from Assemblies Union Post and I couldn’t have said it any better myself! (Please note the bottom paragraph in white). Here it is:

Martial Law was declared by Lincoln April 24th, 1863 by General Order number 100. Under martial law authority Congress and the President implemented continuous martial law by ordering the states (people) to either conscribe troops or provide money in support of the federalist North or be recognized as enemies of the nation; this condition is still in effect.

The agenda of the North was to invert federalism. To do this they had to get the Southern States (anti-federalist and States rights advocates) to secede in order to fail to make a quorum and adjourn sine die (without a day, Ltn.); thereby, vacating the de jure Constitutional government. This left no civilian government in place and created the need for military enforcement in lieu.

The conscription act is the foundation of Presidential Executive Orders authority. It was enhanced in 1917 by the Trading with the Enemy Act (Public Law 65-91, 65th Congress, Session1, Chapters 105, 106, October 6, 1917), and further enhanced in 1933 with the Emergency War Powers Act, ratified almost every year by Congress. Together these acts address the people of the United States as the enemy, not the sovereigns of the United States of America. These “people” are 14th amendment citizens.

The District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871 created a “municipal corporation” to govern the District. If one considers the fact that the municipal government was actually incorporated in 1808, an “organic act” (original) using the phrase “municipal corporation” in 1871 can only refer to a private corporation owned by the municipality—U.S. Corp, if you will. It trademarked the name, “United States Government” referring to it, or themselves. This act placed Congress in control as a Board of Directors of the corporation whose purpose is to act as a governing body over the municipality. This facilitated directing business under martial law and permitted corporate abilities where the Constitution prohibited such activity. Congress could then pass any law to apply jurisdictionally within the ten square miles of the District of Columbia.

Next, this act called for the adoption (taking ownership of something that does not belong to the taker) of a constitution (U.S. Corp’s) curiously identical the Constitution of the United States of America less the original 13th amendment (titles of nobility); then renumbering the 14th, 15th and 16th as 13, 14, and 15 respectively. Now attorneys could run “government” since they were prohibited under the original 13th amendment, how convenient! Notice how under corporate rules policy is simply dictated, not ratified.

Debts through bonds were generated. These became due the banking cartel as holders in 1912, but could not be paid. The cartel accepted all the assets of U.S. Corp and the assets of the Treasury of the United States of America as payment.

In 1913 U.S. Corp had no operating capital for their “government.” It approached the cartel for money, but the cartel denied the request based upon its inability to pay. By design the cartel created a private corporation named, Federal Reserve Bank; which is not federal, has no reserves and is not a bank. U.S. Corp contracted to transact business via notes rather than real money.

Note: This bilateral contract is between two private corporations with no relationship to government.

Simultaneously, (1913) U.S. Corp. adopts (implements a corporate policy) its own 16th amendment. Of course, the States had not ratified the new 16th amendment; therefore, it does not apply to the men and women of the Republic or the organic Constitution. In fact, the supreme court ruled did not expand powers to tax, but simply clarified the right of U.S. Corp. to tax corporations and employees of U.S. Corp (Brushaber v. Union Pacific R.R. Co., 240 U.S. 1 (1916).

Next (1913) a new 17th amendment allowing senators to be elected by the people was “ratified.” From 1787 until 1913, the Constitution of the United States of America specified that state legislatures would elect U.S. senators. Article 1, Section 3, reads:

The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the Legislature thereof, for six Years; and each Senator shall have one Vote.
In giving the elective power to the states, the framers of the Constitution hoped to protect state independence. The framers were suspicious of majority rule and sought to restrain what they regarded as the potentially destructive forces of democracy. Thus, while providing for direct election to the House of Representatives, they countered this expression of the people’s will by allowing legislatures to select members of the Senate. At the Constitutional Convention, the proposal for state election of senators aroused no controversy. Only one proposal for senatorial election by popular vote was offered, and it was soundly defeated. The states were receptive and did not protest when the Constitution was sent to them for ratification. Nor, over the next decades, did the system incur more than occasional criticism.

In 1914 The de jure seats of the Senators were left vacant as the De facto seats were occupied. Neither the State legislatures nor governors elected Senators as prescribed by the organic Constitution.

In 1916 Woodrow Wilson was reelected by an Electoral College that was not confirmed by a constitutionally set Senate. The only confirmation was a corporate one; therefore, Wilson was not confirmed into office as President of the United States of America, but instead was confirmed as U.S. Corp’s president.
At which point U.S. Corp served in lieu of the original jurisdiction as it was vacated by virtue of the fact that the people had no opportunity to elect any de jure governmental officers.
Note: Wilson retained the title Commander-in-Chief as it is not bound to the Presidency. As demonstrated by Adam’s appointment of Washington as Commander-in-Chief.

The Trading with the Enemies Act was passed in 1917 as WWI commences.

Around 1935 Americans engaged in a relationship with the Social Security Administration (SSA). The purpose is to generate funds for the General Trust Fund. The SSA creates an entity with a name that sounds like one’s own name, except it is written in the Roman/Military form of all Capital letters. It is associated with an account number (SS#). SSA gives everyone a card that does not belong to them. They are to hold it and endorse it, thus giving it consciousness and physical reality (v. fictional capacity). This acceptance makes one a fiduciary (trustee capacity) for the cards actual owner. Now the holder of the card is in a trust—oops!

The Bretton Woods Agreement in 1944 arranged for the International Monetary Fund (a foreign corporation) to quit claim U.S. Corp.

In 1962 The organic and State Constitutions forbid operating in business with foreign currency (federal reserve notes) so they became sub-corporations of U.S. Corp.; again identified as the STATE OF X in all capital letters. Immediately they began adopting U.S. Corp uniform codes and licensing to exercise control of the people—not permitted under the organic Constitution. Government only governed itself and corporations. People were self-governed; such is the nature of the Constitutional Republic.

BY 1971 every State in the union of States had formed private corporate STATES and constitutionally seated government officers were no longer elected on the state level as well.

Note: When speaking of these entities (fictions) understand they are private foreign corporations, not your government. It is not yours so do not waste time fixing “government”; simply repopulate the original jurisdiction Republic on which you stand. This is why we assemble; this is why we convened our delegates.
When the Republic is reseated demands may be made on these foreign corporations to pay back the money they stole. They will not be able to do so; which is the leverage they wish to avoid.
Our conduct must be as that of the sovereign that the Father created in His image. It is time to follow truth, repent and become moral and honorable men and women.
This is a spiritual battle that cannot be won with conventional methods or dropping out of the system and staying under the radar. Sovereigns must unite under the King of kings with truth to lawfully and peacefully repopulate the Republic.

Advertisements

Our Patriotic Charge

Excerpts from Upshur on the Federal Government, 1868
Reprinted by St. Thomas Press, Houston
Compiled by michael-donald

It is truly and wisely remarked by the Federalist, that “a power over a man’s subsistence is a power over his will.” As little as possible of this power should be entrusted to the Federal Government, and even that little should be watched by a power authorized and competent to arrest its abuses.

That power can be found only in the States.

In this consists the great superiority of the federative system over every other. In that system, the Federal Government is responsible, not directly to the people en masse, but to the people in their character of distinct political corporations. However easy it may be to steal power from the people, governments do not so readily yield to one another.

Under a federative system, the people are not liable to be acted on…by those influences which are so apt to betray and enslave them, under a consolidated government.

The right of interposition belongs, not to the people in the aggregate, but to the people in separate and comparatively small subdivisions. And even in these subdivisions, they can act only through the forms of their own separate governments.

These are necessarily slow and deliberate, affording time for excitement to subside, and for passion to cool. Having to pass through their own governments, before they reach that of the United States, they are forbidden to act until they have had time for reflection, and for the exercise of a cool and temperate judgment. Besides, they are taught to look, not to one government only, for the protection and security of their rights, and not to feel that they owe obedience only to that. Conscious that they can find, in their own State governments, protection against the wrongs of the Federal Government, their feeling of dependence is less oppressive, and their judgments more free. And while their efforts to throw off oppression are not repressed by a feeling that there is no power to which they can appeal, these efforts are kept under due restraints, by a consciousness that they cannot be unwisely exerted, except to the injury of the people themselves. It is difficult to perceive how a Federal Government, established on correct principles, can ever be overthrown, except by external violence, so long as the federative principle is duly respected and maintained. All the requisite checks and balances will be found, in the right of the States to keep their common government within their common sphere; and a sufficient security for the due exercise of that right is afforded by the fact, that it is the interest of the States to exercise it discreetly.

Our character is not homogeneous, and our pursuits are wholly different. Rightly understood, these facts should tend to bind us the more closely together, by showing us our dependence upon each other; and it should teach us the necessity of watching, with the greater jealousy, every departure from the strict principles of our union.

It is a truth, however, no less melancholy than incontestable, that if this ever was the view of the people, it has ceased to be so. And it could not be otherwise.

So far as our own government is concerned, I venture to predict that it will become absolute and irresponsible, precisely in proportion as the rights of the States shall cease to be respected, and their authority to interpose for the correction of federal abuses shall be denied and overthrown.

(My note: he was unfortunately dead right!)

It should be the object of every patriot in the United States to encourage a high respect for the State governments. The people should be taught to regard them as their greatest interest, and as the first objects of their duty and affection. Maintained in their just rights and powers, they form the true balance-wheel, the only effectual check on federal encroachments.

As [the] Constitution was formed by sovereign States, they alone are authorized, whenever the question arises between them and their common government, to determine, in the last resort, what powers they intended to confer on it. This is an inseparable incident of sovereignty; a right which belongs to the States, simply because they have never surrendered it to any other power. But to render this right available for any good purpose, it is indispensably necessary to maintain the States in their proper position.

If their people suffer them to sink into the insignificance of mere municipal corporations, it will be in vain to invoke their protection against the gigantic power of the Federal Government.

This is the point to which the vigilance of the people should be chiefly directed. Their highest interest is at home; their palladium is their own State governments. They ought to know that they can look nowhere else with perfect assurance of safety and protection. Let them then maintain those governments, not only in their rights, but in their dignity and influence. Make it the interest of their people to serve them; an interest strong enough to resist all the temptations of federal office and patronage. Then alone will their voice be heard with respect at Washington; then alone will their interposition avail to protect their own people against the usurpations of the great central power.

Jeff Foxworthy on New England

(Got this in an email and LMBO! TNX Ann!)
Forget Rednecks… here’s what Jeff Foxworthy has to say on New Englanders:

If you consider it a sport to gather your food by drilling through 36 inches of ice and sitting there all day hoping it will swim by, you might live in New England.

If you’re proud that your region makes the national news 96 nights each year because Mt. Washington is the coldest spot in the nation, and Boston gets more snow than any other majority in the US, you live in New England.

If your local Dairy Queen is closed from September through May, you live in New England.

If you instinctively walk like a penguin for six months out of the year, you live in New England.

If someone in a Home Depot store offers you assistance, and they don’t work there, you live in New England.

If you’ve worn shorts and a parka at the same time, you live in New England.

If you’ve had a lengthy telephone conversation with someone who dialed a wrong number, you live in New England.

YOU KNOW YOU ARE A NEW ENGLANDER WHEN:

“Vacation” means going anywhere south of New York City for the weekend.

You measure distance in hours.

You know several people who have hit a deer more than once.

You have switched from “heat” to “A/C” in the same day, and back again.

You can drive 65 mph through 2 feet of snow during a raging blizzard without flinching.

You install security lights on your house and garage, but leave both unlocked.

You carry jumper cables in your car and your girlfriend/wife knows how to use them.

You design your kid’s Halloween costume to fit over a snowsuit.

Driving is better in the winter because the potholes are filled with snow.

You know all 4 seasons: almost winter, winter, still winter, and road construction .

Your idea of creative landscaping is a statue of a deer next to your blue spruce.

“Down South” to you means Philadelphia.

Your neighbor throws a party to celebrate his new shed.

Your 4th of July picnic was moved indoors due to frost.

You have more miles on your snow blower than your car.

You find 10 degrees “a little chilly.”

You actually understand these jokes, and forward them to all your New England friends.

Maine’s New AG Says Congress Can’t Make Us Buy Insurance

Tonight on channel 6, WCSH Portland, Maine… during a report about the possibility of Maine joining Florida in a suit against the US Government challenging the constitutionality of “Obama Care”, our new state attorney general, William Schneider said that the US Congress does not have the right to force the American public to have to buy a commercial product, such as health insurance.

Then PLEASE, tell me why the state of Maine’s congress has the right to force us Maine Citizens to have to buy a commercial product such as car insurance? I do not understand the difference. And we the people have been saying this ALL along that the government, no matter at WHAT level, has absolutely NO RIGHT to dictate to us in having to purchase anything! It is OUR RIGHT TO CHOOSE, period! It’s about time, someone up on Capital Hill is finally agreeing with us! Now the question is, will anyone else up there listen and actually do something about it?

The Best and Easiest Explanation of Foreclosure Fraud

This is absolutely the best and easiest to understand explanation of the foreclosure fraud I’ve found! This will definitely get you to not only understand what the banks & mortgage companies have done to you, but also will be able to help you articulate it for your court case so the judge will know that YOU know what has happened as well!
This was written by rondaben on “The Tree of Liberty” site.

“With the Massachusetts Supreme Court ruling on the securitized mortgage/foreclosure cases I thought it would be helpful to lay out in an easy to understand way what happens when you get a mortgage. Most of the mortgages taken over the last decade in particular were formed by this method. It is intentionally complex for a very good reason. You will be able to see the clear fraud that is inherent in the system and the legal underpinnings of the “produce the note” movement.
First, let’s look s how mortgages have been handled for forever.

Bank A issues a mortgage to a Joe to purchase a house. Two documents are produced, a promissory note and a trust deed. The trust deed is essentially the title of the property that is held in trust until the promise to repay the loan (promissory note) is satisfied. Once the loan is paid in full Bank A releases its claim on the Trust deed and ownership passes in full to Joe.

That is what most of us believe happens in mortgages because you are not informed as to what happens after the paperwork is signed and how it impacts the title and promissory note you are obligated to. This is intentional, and represents the entire scheme that allows securitization occur. If the process that is now used is too complex it can be used as a justification to allow the shenanigans that occur during a foreclosure process to happen while the judges and juries believe that the process described above is what is actually happening. Lets look next at the basics of securitization.
Banks became aware that though profitable, mortgages were less than ideal in the ability to generate revenue. A large amount of money was tied up for 15-30 years and converted to a stream of monthly payments of principle and interest. Fees were only a minor portion of the entire profitability of mortgages. The idea then arose that more money could be made if mortgages that were illiquid (tied up for 30 years inside a mortgage) could be made liquid and tradeable. This would allow the bank to make the mortgage and then sell off interest in the mortgage and recoup the investment immediately. This allowed for the bank to then take that money and fund new mortgages right away. Fees became a key source of revenue as mortgages were no longer a long term relationship with a borrower but were in fact a new volume business. The idea of securitization was born.

The problem initially was the IRS. When interest in a mortgage was sold into a trust taxes had to be paid. When certificates (stock or bonds) in the mortgage were sold by the trust to investors THEY had to pay taxes. All of these taxes ate into profit and made securitization less attractive. The 1986 tax reform allowed for a new possibility called a REMIC (Real Estate Mortgage Investment Conduit). This removed many of the tax liabilities and allowed for full blown securitization to proceed. Here is how it works:

Once the mortgage has been formed between Joe and Bank A, Bank A wants to get rid of it as fast as possible and recoup its funds. To take advantage of this and the tax benefits of securitization it has to form what is called a SPV, a special purpose vehicle. Think of it as a shell company. This protects the mortgage if something happened and Bank A went out of business. The mortgage would still exist. It also theoretically reduces the liability of Bank A to the mortgage default.
It is important to realize one important thing here…the two documents that Joe signed (the promissory note and the title deed) are now SEPARATED. The trust deed remains with its trustee. The promissory note—the asset that pays money—is SOLD to the SPV. The original note is paid off by the SPV and the stream of payments becomes the property of the SPV. Bank A has its money in full and no longer has ANY interest in the mortgage.

Now, the SPV forms a new trust entity. This trust entity is defined by the IRS as a REMIC and must adhere to the laws regarding such a trust. The benefit of doing this is that when the SPV transfers the mortgages into the Trust NO TAXES MUST BE PAID ON THE TRANSFER. This makes the trust a much more efficient and profitable vehicle for investors. REMICs, in turn, CAN NOT retain any ownership interest in any of the underlying mortgages. The Trust, then, is as its name states a Conduit where money flows in from the person who pays their mortgage and out to the investor as a payment. The right to receive those payments was purchased when the security (stock or bond) to the trust was purchased. Proceeds from that went back to the SPV who used them to purchase the mortgages from Bank A. It is a giant figure 8 circular flow of money with the Trustee coordinating it all.

This is all well in good, but how does it effect you, the person paying the mortgage?

Lets see who OWNS the mortgage then.

The first owner was Bank A who took interest in the property as collateral on its loan to Joe. Simple enough.
When Bank A sold the mortgage to the SPV it’s interest was extinguished. Ownership of the promissory note should have been transferred (the note passed to the SPV) who would then be interest holder in the property. The VAST amount of the time this was NEVER DONE because taxes would have had to been paid on the transfer of the asset. Many states are attacking this from the point of tax avoidance at this and subsequent stages. In any event, if the note WAS transferred lets assume the SPV is now the note holder.

When the SPV forms the REMIC trust and transfers the note into the trust it irrevocably changes the nature of Joe’s mortgage. Once again, the SPV must transfer the note and pay taxes on the transfer. The mortgage now in the trust becomes for all purposes a blended group of monthly payments. These payment streams become the source of funds that the trustee pays out to investors. In essence the trustee—when certificates, stocks or bonds to the trust are sold—sells a beneficial interest in the mortgage. That is not ownership of any portion or any segment of the revenue stream but rather is simply a security—just like a share of IBM or Google doesn’t entitle you to any of the assets of the company. But who owns the note?

Because of the tax exemption of the REMIC it is PROHIBITED from retaining any ownership of the underlying assets it no longer holds any ownership to the note on the day it is formed. The investors in the trust do not hold any interest in the note either, they only hold the security which was sold to them.
So what happened to ownership of the note? It was EXTINGUISHED when it entered into the trust in order to obtain the flow of cash back to the original lender and the tax-preferred investment proceeds to the investors. The REMIC, in essence, is a black whole from which money spits forth.
So, who does Joe owe the money to? Who has authority to release the deed to Joe when his ‘mortgage’ has been satisfied? The answer? No one.
The trust is set up and cannot take an active role in the collection of the funds. It is a shell entity ONLY. Therefore it appoints a servicer to collect the payments every month, contact Joe if he is late and serve as its agent should the ‘mortgage’ go into default.

This servicer is a hired agent of the trustee and receives a small cut from each mortgage payment it collects as well as any fees that it can generate from servicing the mortgage (late fees, fees for lost payments, fees for records, etc.) To Joe, all representations are made and he is explicitly told that the servicer ‘owns’ his mortgage. This is not only incorrect but is impossible under the law.

So what happens when Joe defaults? How is his property foreclosed upon?

First, the servicer will enter into a collections mode with Joe. This is typically a way to generate MASSIVE fees and fines on the payment of the mortgage. Eventually the servicer will start a foreclosing proceeding.

In this proceeding the servicer presents documents to the court (or the trustee of the deed in a non-judicial foreclosure state) that state that THEY are the owner of the note and have a legal standing to foreclose. THIS IS NOT TRUE, IS NOT LEGALLY POSSIBLE, AND IS FRAUDULENT. The servicer is the agent of the Trust and will use that to claim that they are foreclosing on behalf of the trust. The problem? The TRUST ITSELF CANNOT HOLD OWNERSHIP OF THE NOTE because of its tax-preferred REMIC status! What about if they state that they are representatives of the investors? THE INVESTORS HAVE NO OWNERSHIP INTEREST IN THE UNDERLYING MORTGAGES, they only have ownership interest in the securities that were issued to fund the trust!

This is crux…no one has an ownership interest in the trust. No one has a standing to initiate a foreclosure proceeding. And worse, no one has the standing to extinguish the lein placed on the property from the initial mortgage.

That’s it from Joe’s perspective. But lets see how that effects the broader market.

Investors who purchased the securities are seeing losses from the sheer number of defaults in the underlying revenue streams stopping. The trustee has no funds so these are realized losses to the investor. They will scream that the security they sold was fraudulent because it was not made up of what was stated in the prospectus. They will push for a refund of their investment, effectively stuffing the securities back onto the trust.

This will destroy the securitization instrument and the SPV that was created to manage the whole scheme.

The banks feel that they will be insulated from this because the mortgages were sold into the SPV as a method of controlling their liability. The problem was that because they never actually transferred the note (and if they did, why didn’t they pay taxes, hmmm?) so the whole creation of the SPV was fraudulent. Bank A is now looking at the choice of either tanking the entire portfolio back onto their books at MASSIVE losses (it would break the bank) or explaining to the states and IRS why trillions of dollars of taxes were not paid. Bankruptcy or jail? “

My 2nd Amendment Constitutional Right

Due to the tragic shooting in Tuscon, the debate of gun control and right to own is in the forefront once again. And once again, the liberals want to take away the right to own a gun or restrict & control gun ownership by law to such a degree that the right to own firearms is just about zero anyways.
Well, here are my thoughts on this issue.
1st, the 2nd Amendment is clear. We the people have the right to bear arms, period.
2nd, It is NOT more control or laws we need. There are too many now as it is.
3rd, what we need to do is to concentrate on the person who buys the firearms. Now, here it does get to be a wee bit tricky because of privacy rights, etc. But I submit this, if you are a sane, law-abiding Citizen, then what is a little hassle in letting someone check you out? If it means that there is a chance to catch someone else who shouldn’t be wielding a firearm (such as a convicted bank robber or murderer for example), then IMHO it’s worth the wait. So, background check away!
4thly, I’m REALLY tired of the liberals saying that the gun is the issue. Like it or not liberals, it is not the GUN that kills. It is only the weapon of choice. It is the PERSON that does the killing.
5thly, It shouldn’t be a stigma to actual own a weapon and carry it. If there had been a responsible person with a weapon at the scene of the Tuscon shooting AT THE TIME of the shooting (instead of afterwards), the carnage would have been dramaticly lessened.
So, let’s leave the liberal gun banning rhetoric out of this and let’s find better ways to keep undesriable characters from being able to acquire firearms and leave responsible law-abiding people’s constitutional rights intact and alone!

Was the Federal Judge The REAL Target in the Tuscon Shooting?

“The mass media jumped to the conclusion that seriously wounded Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords was the target of last Saturday’s shootings in Tucson , AZ.
Nevertheless, the article below, circulating in the Kremlin, as well as other interesting circumstances suggest that the primary target may have been federal District Judge John Roll.
In addition to what is copied below, 1] one news article each declared that, one hour before attending the political rally and presumably, before attending Mass, the Judge received a telephone call alerting him to the Giffords rally and asking him to come; and 2] that Judge Roll was the first person shot in the melee.
A news service can easily check the allegations made in the first two paragraphs below. If true, they would be a strong indication of motive.” – unknown Author

Posted by EU Times on Jan 9th, 2011

A Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) report circulating in the Kremlin today states that the top US Federal Judge for the State of Arizona was assassinated barely 72-hours after he made a critical ruling against the Obama administrations plan to begin the confiscation of their citizen’s private retirement and banking accounts in order to stave off their nations imminent economic collapse, and after having the US Marshals protecting him removed.

According to this SVR report, Federal Judge John McCarthy Roll was the Chief Judge for the United States District Court for the District of Arizona who this past Friday issued what is called a ‘preliminary ruling’ in a case titled United States of America v. $333,520.00 in United States Currency et al: [Case Number: 4:2010cv00703 Filed: November 30, 2010] wherein he stated he was preparing to rule against Obama’s power to seize American citizens money without clear and convincing evidence of a crime being committed.

The case being ruled on by Judge Roll, this report continues, was about bulk cash smuggling into or out of the United States that the Obama administration claimed was their right to seize under what are called Presidential Executive Orders, instead of using existing laws. The Obama administration used as support for their claim before Judge Roll, the SVR says, the seizing of all American citizens’ gold, in 1933, by President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s signing of Executive Order 6102, which was ruled at the time to be constitutional.

Should the Obama administration win their argument to seize their citizen’s money by Executive Order without having to abide by the law was made more chilling this past week when reports emerged from the US stating that President Obama and his regime allies were, indeed, preparing to rule America by decree since their loss this past November of their control over the US House of Representatives, and in the words of the Washington Posts columnist Charles Krauthammer: “For an Obama bureaucrat … the will of the Congress is a mere speed bump” .

Since taking office in early 2009, Obama has completely overturned the once free United States through his use of Executive Orders that asserts his power to put anyone he wants in prison without charges or trial forever and his right to assassinate any American citizen he deems a threat.

The most chilling of these powers Obama has asserted for himself, however, are contained in Executive Order 13528 he signed nearly a year ago (January 10, 2010) creating a Council of Governors he has hand-picked to rule over the United States in place of its elected representatives when their next “disaster†strikes and orders them to begin “synchronization and integration of State and Federal military activities in the United States; and other matters of mutual interest pertaining to National Guard, homeland defense, and civil support activities”.

Going from the chilling to the outright scary, about whatever ‘disaster†the American regime is preparing their people for, is Obama’s Homeland Security Department, through their Ready.Govorganization, beginning to air this past week a public service television commercial titled “World Upside Down” that shows a typical family sitting in their home suddenly losing all of its gravity and warning all who watch it to begin preparing.

Note: In our previous reports US Descends Into Total Police State As 2012 ‘Solar Chaos’ Fears Grow,Pole Shift Blamed For Russian Air Disaster, Closure Of US Airport and Poisonous Space Clouds Slamming Into Earth Cause Mass Bird And Fish Deaths we had detailed some of fears the US government are most worried about, but which they still will not be truthful to their citizens about.

Job Scams Exposed

Interesting to note about the assassination of Judge Roll is that it is being blamed on a “lone gunman” said to be mentally unstable (aren’t they all) said directed at a US Congresswoman named Gabrielle Giffords, who survived this mass killing, and that killed at least 5 other innocent people, including a 9-year-old girl named Christina Taylor Green “curiously”born on September 11, 2001 (9/11).

Equally interesting to note about the assassin, a 22-year-old man named Jared Loughner, is that he is being described by the propaganda media organs in the US as an “anti-government” type individual who prior to this mass killing is said to have left “crazed rantings” on the Internet, but whose “handler”, described as a white male between 40-50 years old with dark hair, is still being sought after.

The circumstances surrounding Judge Roll’s assassination by Loughner, also, mirror those of Farouk Abdulmutallab (aka The Underwear Bomber) who “used cash to buy a one-way ticket to the United States at the last minute while carrying no luggage and being on a terrorist watch list. Incredibly, his father had communicated to the US Embassy in Nigeria in November that Abdulmutallab had been radicalized and may be planning a terrorist attack.”

At least one witness ‘passenger Kurt Haskell’claimed that a well-dressed Indian man had escorted Abdulmutallab to the ticket counter and told a ticket agent that Abdulmutallab didn’t “have a passport but needed to get on the plane.”

To if this Loughner is able to join the long list of CIA/US Military “mind controlled” assassins there appears to be no doubt as his actions, past, present and future, shows his fitting the “profile” of these maniacs as detailed in the massive lawsuit currently wending its way through the US Federal Court system [United States District Court Northern District Of California, San Francisco Division Case: CV-09-0037] filed against the US government by hundreds of veterans, and as we can read as reported by the Raw Story news service:

“It’s well known that the CIA began testing substances like LSD on soldiers beginning in the 1950s but less is known about allegations that the agency implanted electrodes in subjects. A 2009 lawsuit claimed that the CIA intended to design and test septal electrodes that would enable them to control human behavior. The lawsuit said that because the government never disclosed the risks, the subjects were not able to give informed consent.”

To if the American people will ever be told the truth about Loughner and his assassination of Judge Roll there seems little doubt as the Obama regime is fighting with everything it has to keep the information on these “mind controlled” assassins secret, and as we can read as reported by the Courthouse News service:

“The Central Intelligence Agency in January (2011) will argue for dismissal of Vietnam veterans’ claims that the CIA must provide them with information about the health effects of chemicals used on them during Cold War-era human experiments. The CIA also claims it is not obligated to provide the veterans with medical care for side effects of the drugs. It’s the CIA’s third attempt to get the case dismissed.

“In a 2009 federal lawsuit, Vietnam Veterans of America claimed that the Army and CIA had used at least 7,800 soldiers as guinea pigs in “Project Paperclip.” They were given at least 250 and as many as 400 types of drugs, among them sarin, one of the most deadly drugs known to man, amphetamines, barbiturates, mustard gas, phosgene gas and LSD.

Among the project’s goals were to control human behavior, develop drugs that would cause confusion, promote weakness or temporarily cause loss of hearing or vision, create a drug to induce hypnosis and identify drugs that could enhance a person’s ability to withstand torture.

The veterans say that some of the soldiers died, and others suffered grand mal seizures, epileptic seizures and paranoia. The veterans say the CIA promised in the 1970s to compensate those who were made guinea pigs, but the 2009 complaint states that the government “never made a sincere effort to locate the survivors.”

In its 32-page motion to dismiss the group’s third amended complaint, the CIA claims it has no legal obligation under the Administrative Procedures Act to provide the veterans with notice of the drugs ‘health effects and that the veterans’ notice claim “rests solely on state common-law duty.”

The CIA claims that the law on which the veterans base their claim for health care compensation stems from the Department of Defense and Army regulations, “which do not purport to have a binding affect on the CIA.” And it claims that the Defense Department “never intended nor committed to providing medical care for service member participants in the test programs.”

Based upon the CIA’s assertion that the US Defense Department “never intended nor committed to providing medical care for service member participants in the test programs” clearly shows their knowing of the existence of these “mind control” assassins, like Loughner, leading one to wonder how many more of them are out there, and even worse, when they will strike next.

One can only hope that there is some ‘power’ in America today able to stop the madness currently taking over that once great nation before all is truly lost, we hope it is much sooner than later for all of the worlds sake.

Forclosure Info That Should Win Your Case For Fraud Against MERS!

I have been collecting a LOT of info about the foreclosure fraud by mortgage companies, banks and others. I will be sharing it in sections, as there is a lot and I don’t want you to miss anything because of a long list. So I will start with the TWO most important pieces of evidence that should settle your case immediately. PERIOD! And that is because it is MERS, in their OWN words, saying that they are NOT the holder of the note OR deed and are only the nominee. Piece number one is MERS OWN submission of appeal to a Nebraska court. Submit this appeal in it’s entirety with your defense, it is very powerful. The second piece is again, in MERS OWN words and believe it or not, it’s a handbook telling the banks who want to foreclose on how to do it using MERS name! And it lists how to do this for each state! Submit this, with MERS appeal in your defense (along with anything else you might have to prove fraud) and this should give the judge enough reason to dismiss your case!

It appears to me that the defendant in Taylor, as in so many other cases failed to get into the record the single piece of evidence that almost universally defeats MERS. That is the Appellant’s Brief in MERS v Nebraska Dept. of Banking, wherein MERS judicially admits that it NEVER has any interest in the promissory note or any pecuniary interest in the alleged mortgage indebtedness.

Appellate Courts continue to rule in favor of MERS based upon false facts! Defendants need to get the CORRECT FACTS into evidence.
– William A. Roper, Jr.

To read more about this from Roper, CLICK HERE.
To download the MERS APPEAL document, CLICK HERE.
The MERS Foreclosure Handbook. Just CLICK HERE to download it!

Good luck and please make sure to share this info with others! We need to bring these fraudsters to their judgement day, and make them pay for their greedy crimes!

Go here for the next section of information.

Obama’s Itty Bitty Reducing the Debt Plan

I too said, BIG DEAL! Trying to find a way to take a $100 MILLION from our $3+ TRILLION debt! But a college student SHOWS you quite well exactly how that doesn’t even start to put a dent in the out of control spending by just those 545 legislators who are to blame for it in the 1st place!

Watch this college student’s video.

Congress Is To Blame For Mental Illness in Americans

Remember my post… 545 vs 300,000,000 where it states that only those 545 legislative members on Capitol Hill are to blame for the bad economy and the state of the nation as they are the only ones who vote for and make law? Well, in light of this tragic shooting in Tuscon,  let’s shine a bright spotlight on how these 545 legislative members on Capitol Hill own actions have helped bring this mental illness condition to be so much of a prominent problem here in America. Here is a very good article from Natural News. This is yet another VERY good reason why we need to do away with the congress’s so-called “food safety” bills and keep our sovereign rights to safe food and water and keep the federal government out of it!

Congress bears a tremendous responsibility for creating those psychos in the first place, and that’s where this story takes a turn for the ugly. How could such a claim be true? Read on…

It is Congress that has allowed the FDA to continue censoring the science behind nutritional supplements while pushing psychiatric drugs on children, for example. Did you know that vitamin D deficiency promotes schizophrenia?

Did you know that most of the school shootings in the United States involve young males with a history of psychiatric drug use?

Did you know that SSRI drugs (antidepressants) often promote violent thoughts, especially in young males?

I have very high confidence that a blood test of Loughner would reveal striking nutritional deficiencies combined with blood sugar imbalances. His photo reveals pale white skin, for example — a common indicator of chronic vitamin D deficiency.

Did you know that the vast majority of violent criminals currently serving time in U.S. prisons suffer from blood sugar imbalances caused by a lifetime of junk food consumption? (Sodas, processed sugar, etc.)

These are all issues on which Congress could have made a positive impact over the last several decades but refused to because corporate interests were at stake. The junk food, pharmaceutical and sick-care industries all have powerful lobbyists influencing the votes of members of Congress, and very few members of Congress have ever taken any real action to reduce the exposure of American children and teens to dangerous foods, additives, medications and chemicals that actually promote mental illness.

Brain-damaging chemicals remain legal in America
When it comes to brain-damaging chemicals, Congress has also stood by and done virtually nothing to protect the American people from fluoride, brain-damaging adjuvants in vaccines, mercury dental fillings, dangerous chemicals in personal care products and mind-damaging chemicals in home construction materials (wanna live in a FEMA trailer, anyone?)

While decrying the terrible health crisis facing America today — which includes mental health — Congress has stood by and done absolutely nothing to actually improve the fundamental health of the American people. No, the Obama health care reforms don’t count, because all they do is grant a monopoly over sick-care to the conventional medical industry while completely ignoring disease prevention, nutrition and other natural therapies that can often reverse chronic disease. If anything, Obama’s health care reforms would make mental illness worse because, by forcing Americans to purchase conventional health insurance, they deny Americans the discretionary income they might normally spend on nutritional supplements, organic foods or other natural therapies that can help prevent mental illness.

Instead of actually improving the health of the American people, Congress has jumped in bed with the pharmaceutical industry and handed Big Pharma a monopoly over sick-care, written into law with Obama’s health care reform (and also backed by the Bush administration before that).

Notably, this decision was aggressively promoted by the Democrats and even Gabrielle Giffords herself, who voted for Obamacare. (Do not twist this into an interpretation that I blame Giffords for Loughner’s actions. She deserves no such blame. Congress as a whole, however, has played an important role in allowing mental illness to fester in America while suppressing nutritional therapies and cures that could help end that particular epidemic.)

The illusion of mental health “treatment” in America
Only a very small number of congressional members have ever done anything to support nutritional therapies or health freedoms that would genuinely improve the physical and mental health of the American people. Rep. Ron Paul, notably, has offered a Health Freedom Protection Act for several years now, but that bill never has enough support by other members of Congress to even make it to the floor for a debate. Rep Dennis Kucinich, on the Democratic side, is a supporter of natural health, and he deserves credit for trying to carry such concepts into his actions there, too.

Aside from a few exceptions, Congress has, by and large, has done nothing to support any improvement in the mental health of the American people. And funding more conventional “mental health screening” doesn’t count because, as intelligent observers well know, mental health “screening” is merely a profit-driven patient recruiting scheme used by pharmaceutical companies to put more people on psychiatric drugs, many of which actually promote violent thoughts as a common side effect.

So now we have members of Congress essentially being violently assaulted by the very people they have historically abandoned with their Big Pharma favoritism and refusal to embrace health freedom in America. It remains illegal in America, for example, for an Omega-3 supplement manufacturer to tell the truth that omega-3 supplements work as well or better than antidepressants at reducing the symptoms of depression.

The FDA considers such a claim, even if backed by links to scientific studies, to be a criminal act. And the Congress has never bothered to exercise oversight with the FDA to prevent such outlandish oppression of scientific speech about nutrition that could really work to reduce mental illness in America. – by Mike Adams

For MORE of this article on the effects of nutrition on our mental health, the epidemic of mental illnes in America and what Congress has to done to only make it worse, CLICK HERE.

Next entries » · « Previous entries