WAKEUP We the People with George Stephenson........It's TIME to wakeup our family, friends, and neighbors ..... Week of 1/9/2012 ... HAPPY NEW YEAR ... Let's Take Back Our Country!

TOP STORY ... Law abiding Texans under attack by U.S. Justice Dept - Unconstitutional Tax Prosecution: John Green, Constitutional Attorney, co-defendant with Tom Selgas who advocates and teaches Gold & Silver as Sound Money

... U.S. $15 Trillion Debt - No Stopping the Insanity: Dr Tim Kane, (ret) Professor of Economics, University of Texas Tyler

... Propaganda Campaign - Islam is Peaceful & Charitable: Stephen Blanton, Author, The Heart of Islam  www.stephenblanton.com

... Defending The Constitution & The Bill of Rights: KrisAnne Hall, Constitutional Attorney & National Teacher  www.krisannehall.com

... A Balanced Life - How To Achieve Success in Every Area of Your Life: Anis Blemur, Author 

Remember Lee  Iacocca, the man who rescued Chrysler Corporation from its death  throes?  He's now 82 years old and has a new book, 'Where  Have All The Leaders  Gone?'.

Lee Iacocca  Says:
'Am I the only  guy in this country who's fed up with what's happening? Where  the hell is our outrage with this so called president? We should  be screaming bloody murder! We've got a gang of tax cheating  clueless leftists trying to steer our ship of state right over a  cliff, we've got corporate gangsters stealing us blind, and we  can't even run a ridiculous cash-for-clunkers program without  losing $26 billion of the taxpayers' money, much less build a hybrid car. But instead of getting mad, everyone sits around and  nods their heads when the politicians say, 'trust me, the economy  is getting  better..'  Better? You've  got to be kidding. This is America , not the damned 'Titanic'.  I'll give you a sound bite: 'Throw all the Democrats out, along  with Obama!'

You might think  I'm getting senile, that I've gone off my rocker, and maybe I  have. But someone has to speak up. I hardly recognize this  country  anymore..

The most famous  business leaders are not the innovators but the guys in  handcuffs.. While we're fiddling in Afghanistan , Iran is  completing their nuclear bombs and missiles and nobody seems to  know what to do. And the liberal press is waving 'pom-poms'  instead of asking hard questions. That's not the promise of the  ' America ' my parents and yours traveled across the ocean for.  I've had enough. How about  you?

 I'll go a step  further. You can't call yourself a patriot if you're not  outraged. This is a fight I'm ready and willing to have. The  Biggest 'C' is Crisis! (Iacocca elaborates on nine C's of leadership, with crisis being the  first.)

 Leaders are  made, not born. Leadership is forged in times of crisis. It's  easy to sit there with thumb up your ass and talk theory. Or  send someone else's kids off to war when you've never seen a  battlefield yourself. It's another thing to lead when your world  comes tumbling  down.

 On September 11,  2001, we needed a strong leader more than any other time in our  history. We needed a steady hand to guide us out of the ashes. A  hell of a mess, so here's where we stand.

  We're immersed  in a bloody war now with no plan for winning and no plan for  leaving..  But our soldiers are dying  daily.

  We're running  the biggest deficit in the history of the world, and it's  getting worse every  day!

  We've lost the  manufacturing edge to Asia , while our once-great companies are  getting slaughtered by health care  costs.

Gas prices are  going to skyrocket again, and nobody in power has a lucid plan to  open drilling to solve the problem.  This country has the  largest oil reserves in the WORLD, and we cannot drill for it  because the politicians have been bought by the flea-hugging  environmentalists.

   Our schools  are in a complete disaster because of the teachers'  union.

   Our borders are  like sieves and they want to give all illegal's amnesty and free  healthcare.

   The middle class  is being squeezed to death every  day.

   These are times  that cry out for  leadership.

   But when you  look around, you've got to ask: 'Where have all the leaders  gone?' Where are the curious, creative communicators? Where are  the people of character, courage, conviction, omnipotence, and  common sense? I may be a sucker for alliteration, but I think  you get the  point..

   Name me a leader  who has a better idea for homeland security than making us take  off our shoes in airports and throw away our  shampoo?

   We've spent  billions of dollars building a huge new bureaucracy, and all we  know how to do is react to things that have already  happened.

   Everyone's  hunkering down, fingers crossed, hoping the government will make  it better for them.  Now, that's just crazy.. Deal with  life.

   Name me an  industry leader who is thinking creatively about how we can  restore our competitive edge in manufacturing. Who would have  believed that there could ever be a time when 'The Big Three'  referred to Japanese car companies? How did this happen, and  more important, look what Obama did about  it!

   Name me a  government leader who can articulate a plan for paying down the  debt, or solving the energy crisis, or managing the health care  problem. The silence is deafening. But these are the crises that  are eating away at our country and milking the middle class  dry.

   I have news for  the Chicago gangsters in Congress. We didn't elect you to turn  this country into a losing European Socialist state. What is  everybody so afraid of? That some bonehead on NBC or CNN news  will call them a name? Give me a break. Why don't you guys show  some spine for a  change?

   Had Enough? Hey,  I'm not trying to be the voice of gloom and doom here.  I'm  trying to light a fire. I'm speaking out because I have hope - I  believe in America .. In my lifetime, I've had the privilege of  living through some of     America 's greatest moments.  I've also experienced some of our worst crises: The 'Great  Depression,' 'World War  II,' the 'Korean War,' the  'Kennedy Assassination,' the 'Vietnam War,' the 1970's oil  crisis, and the struggles of recent years since  9/11.

   Make your own  contribution by sending this to everyone you know and care  about. It's our country, folks, and it's our future. Our future  is at  stake!!

National Inflation Association reports........

1) With Republicans taking over the House, is there any chance of the Republicans drastically cutting spending to avoid a currency crisis?

No, there is zero chance of the Republicans cutting spending in any meaningful way. We will have exploding budget deficits in the years ahead. Republicans always talk like Libertarians but act like Democrats once in office. Bush expanded the government and raised spending more than any previous President in history. Bush destroyed the name of the free market so now the average American thinks more government is the solution and has become dependent on entitlement programs. The only way government spending cuts could make enough of a difference to prevent a currency crisis is if we cut unemployment benefits, food stamps, social security, medicare, medicaid, etc. None of this is going to happen until we do have a currency crisis and the government is forced to end these programs.

2) During a hyperinflation event, in retrospect, how much purchasing power will 35 to 40 ounces of silver have regarding commodities and assets?

We expect silver to gain about 3 1/2 times in purchasing power in terms of gold and oil. However, we expect many agricultural commodities to rise in price faster than gold and oil. Therefore, in terms of silver, we conservatively expect silver's purchasing power for food to approximately double. Therefore, if it costs $150 per week or 6 ounces of silver to feed your family today, we expect it to cost 3 ounces of silver per week to feed your family in the future.

In terms of Real Estate, the median U.S. home costs 6,550 ounces of silver today. We expect to be able to buy a median U.S. home in the future for below 1,000 ounces of silver and possibly as low as 500 ounces of silver.

To put it into perspective, if you stopped feeding your family today and saved all of that money, it would probably take 21 years of you saving that money to be able to pay for your house at its current price.

In the future, if you stopped feeding your family and saved all that money for just 3.2 years, that money would be enough to buy your house.

The point we are trying to make is, the cost of feeding yourself is about to rise dramatically compared to the cost of putting a roof over your head. No matter what, the best way to survive this upcoming crisis is by accumulating as much silver today as possible.

3) Some writers have included the Federal Government's unfunded liabilities in calculating the total U.S. debt. These unfunded liabilities are not debts at this time, but are just future estimates. I believe that they should not be included because they are distorting present reality. Am I correct?

The Federal Government's unfunded liabilities are very real because Americans getting ready to retire are very much depending on Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, just to survive. For 2/3 of Americans getting ready to retire, Social Security will be more than 50% of their income and for 22% of upcoming retirees, Social Security will be their only income.

NIA believes that not only should unfunded liabilities be included when we calculate our country's total debts, but increases in our unfunded liabilities should be included in our budget deficit. While our fiscal year 2010 cash budget deficit may have been $1.3 trillion, once you include increases in our unfunded liabilities, our real 2010 budget deficit was actually over $4 trillion.

All U.S. publicly traded corporations must include increases in their liabilities when calculating their net losses, so why shouldn't the U.S. government as well? The government only follows its own rules, when it suits them.

The truth is, if the U.S. wants to prevent hyperinflation and restore confidence in the U.S. dollar, it will have to default on its entitlement programs like Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. But, we all know the government will simply print the money to pay these benefits because if it decided to default on them, Americans will march to Washington with pitchforks and there will be nationwide rioting, looting, and civil unrest that our nation will never be able to recover from.

4) My husband is 57 and has been working at ATT for 35 years. He currently makes $32 per hour and will receive a $400k lump sum for retirement. We can only buy $30,000 in gold and silver now but could buy more with the retirement money. Should he retire now or keep his job?

He should retire now and use the money to buy gold, silver, and possibly gold and silver mining stocks. The longer he waits to retire, the more purchasing power his retirement money will lose in the hands of ATT.

$400k invested today into silver might actually have the purchasing power of $1.6 million 5 years from now. However, if he waits 5 years to retire, there is a chance that $400k will only have $100k in purchasing power.

$1.6 million in purchasing power will be more than enough for him to remain retired for the rest of his life. If he keeps working and doesn't buy more gold and silver until it is too late, there is a chance he will never be able to retire.

5) Do you have any suggestions for a small business owner to prepare to survive hyperinflation?

Without knowing the type of business you are in, you should try to get your expenses down as low as possible, as soon as possible. Imagine today what would happen if your revenues declined by 50% instantaneously. Would your business be able to survive? It is likely that the majority of American business owners will see a 50% or more decline in their revenues this decade, when priced in terms of real money (gold).

If you are in the restaurant business or a type of business that relies on the purchasing of a commodity, your costs are about to rise dramatically but you will find it very difficult if not impossible to pass these costs on to your customers. Therefore, try to factor in not just a 50% decline in your real revenues, but a 50% decline in your profit margins as well.

Start cutting back on your number of employees right away and give each of the employees that you keep more responsibilities. Explain to them that if the business is going to survive hyperinflation, it is going to be a team effort. Everybody is going to have to work a lot harder and give extra effort in order to survive hyperinflation.

6) Is there any reason not to take advantage of a 401k where your employer matches every dollar you put in, meaning you are receiving an automatic 100% return? What if I kept the money in a safe fixed rate of return fund?

If the price of gold quadruples over the next few years (which NIA believes is very possible), it will mean the U.S. dollar has declined by 75% in terms of real money. Even if your employer matches your 401k contributions by 100%, your money will still have lost 50% of its purchasing power overall in terms of gold.

Therefore, it is probably not worth contributing to your 401k even with your employer matching your contributions. If we experience hyperinflation before you are able to withdraw your 401k money, your employer's matches won't matter at all as you will be left with nothing.

In our opinion, you will be much better off buying some gold every month, or if your stomach can handle some volatility and you want to substantially increase your purchasing power - silver. One thing you should consider (if you already have a lot of money in your 401k) is borrowing against it at a fixed interest rate and using that money to accumulate gold and silver.

7) Just prior to the dollar collapsing, with hyperinflation in full swing and everyone in a mad rally out of the dollar and into gold/silver, who would be buying gold or silver at these new, enormous and unprecedented levels?

All Americans will be buying gold and silver with their dollars. The average American currently thinks gold is expensive at $1,350 per ounce and they are more likely to be a seller of gold at this time. As crazy as it sounds, when gold hits $5,000 or $10,000 per ounce, the average American's mindset will change and they will desperately want to own gold no matter what price it is at.

The world is currently flooded with dollars and for the most part these dollars are being hoarded. When Americans wake up to how rapidly the Federal Reserve is expanding the money supply and to the monetization of our exploding budget deficits that is ahead, nobody in their right mind is going to want to own dollars.

No American is going to want to be the last American out of the dollar. Americans who get out of the dollar and into precious metals the soonest will keep the most of their purchasing power. Those who wait the longest will see their savings completely wiped out.

8) You say that gold should make up 25% of world financial assets. Could you please explain how this should be, not just in history but today?

From 1921 to 1981, gold and gold mining shares made up 25% of the world's financial assets and today they make up less than 1%. We currently live in a fiat world gone insane. Gold is real money, but the world has been brainwashed into believing pieces of paper backed by nothing are money.

When the world wakes up and realizes how fast fiat currencies are being debased, the world will lose trust in fiat currencies and will demand sound money. Gold would have to rise to $31,000 per ounce for gold assets to make up 25% of the world's financial assets and $10,000 if non-gold assets fell by 2/3 in value.

Gold has been recognized as real money for thousands of years. These past few decades have been the exception. All central banks are battling to devalue their currencies. The current fiat currency experiment is going to end in a complete disaster. Bernanke is going to create quantitative easing all the way to hyperinflation.

9) Wouldn't the Federal Reserve be able to curb hyperinflation by raising interest rates?

The Federal Reserve has held interest rates near 0% for two years. NIA estimates the real rate of U.S. price inflation to currently be around 5%. In order for the Federal Reserve to stop price inflation it would need to immediately raise interest rates above 5%, which would destroy our so-called "economic recovery" and send the U.S. economy into the next Great Depression.

If the Fed slowly raises rates to 5%, by the time they get there we are sure real price inflation in the U.S. will be in the double-digits. If we saw double-digit interest rates, just the interest payments on our national debt would immediately explode to over $1 trillion per year and we will have multi-trillion dollar budget deficits.

Because of the size and scope of our national debt, raising interest rates to a level that is higher than the real rate of price inflation will be nearly impossible, unless it is done now. We expect interest rates to remain negative in real terms until the U.S. dollar is worthless.

10) Ever since the Fed announced QE2, the U.S. dollar has rallied. Why is this? Could Europe's banking system be collapsing again, which would send money into the dollar?

Investors sold off the U.S. dollar in the months leading up to the Fed's announcement because they knew QE2 was coming. NIA was the first to predict QE2 back in July, before the market began to price it in. NIA members could have made a lot of money by positioning themselves properly for QE2 before it leaked out in the media that QE2 was coming.

Interest rates have been near 0% for nearly two years so there is already a ton of excess liquidity out there. This excess liquidity drove commodity, precious metal and stock prices up in anticipation of the Fed's announcement. Because the announced QE2 was about what people were expecting, the U.S. dollar was overdue for a small short-term bounce.

Europe's banking system has been collapsing for years. Just because the media chose to stop focusing on Europe for a while and is now focusing on Europe again, doesn't mean things are all of the sudden getting worse in Europe. All it means is Wall Street has finished taking their positions so now they have their friends in the media focus on whatever will help their short-term trades become profitable.

Europe at least has been implementing tough austerity measures while the U.S. continues to print money and tries to spend its way out of the crisis. The fundamentals for the Euro have been slightly improving vs. the U.S. dollar and we anticipate the Euro will be higher vs. the U.S. dollar one year from now, compared to where it is now. However, both the Euro and the U.S. dollar are miserable currencies. They will both continue to decline in terms of gold and silver, despite the short-term noise and volatility.

By Chris Isidore, senior writerNovember 12, 2010: 8:11 AM ET

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Ben Bernanke has had his hands full since his first day on the job as Federal Reserve chairman nearly five years ago. It's about to get even tougher.

His harshest critic on Capitol Hill, Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, is about to become one of his overseers.

With the Republicans coming to power, Paul, who would like to abolish the Fed and the nation's current monetary system, will become the chairman of the House Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary Policy.

If you've never heard of the committee before, you're not alone. But Paul promises you'll be hearing a lot more from it.

"It's basically been a committee that's dealt with commemorative coins. I'm going to deal with monetary policy," he said.

Paul doesn't think he'll be able to move his proposal to eliminate the Fed, or to allow Americans to use gold instead of paper money as currency. But he said he does intend to use his new position as "a mini-bully pulpit" to criticize Fed policy and call more attention to what he sees as its negative consequences. And he's confident that American voters are ready to delve into those monetary policy questions.

"Five years ago they wouldn't have listened. Now they will," he said. "We've gained a lot of credibility in making the Federal Reserve an issue since the market collapse."

And Paul vows to try again to authorize Congressional audits of the Fed's decisions on the economy, a proposal that passed the House last year but was essentially gutted from the final version of the financial regulatory overhaul legislation.

"It will never be easy; the Fed has a lot of influence," he said of the audit legislation. "But there's a lot of life to it. We got further along than I ever expected."

One way that Paul will bring pressure on Bernanke and his Fed allies is to hold hearings to give greater voice to Fed members -- like Kansas City Fed President Thomas Hoenig -- who disagree with the current monetary policy.

"Just getting someone there willing to discuss their viewpoint and why they might dissent, I think that would be interesting," Paul said.

A Fed spokesman did not respond to a request for comment for this story.

Some economists worry that Paul having that kind of pulpit will hurt the Fed, and diminish its ability to fix an economy that still needs help.

"From Ron Paul's standpoint, the Fed can't do anything right," said Lyle Gramley, a former Fed governor who is now senior economic advisor to the Potomac Research Group. "He can cause the Fed to lose a lot of public support. But it needs public support to do what it needs to do."

While the Fed policymakers will try to resist pressure from Paul, they won't be able to ignore it, said John Silvia, chief economist for Wells Fargo Securities. And he said there's a potential for that pressure to influence Fed policy.

"The Fed has a more balanced, nuanced position on its dual mandate to promote growth and keep prices stable," he said. "Ron Paul probably doesn't."

But other Fed watchers say Bernanke already faces plenty of criticism and doesn't have too much to worry about from Paul having control of an oversight committee.

"I think that Bernanke has been pretty cool under fire up to now. I can't imagine Ron Paul being someone who could shake him up," said Michael Bordo, a professor of economics at Rutgers University.

Paul also rejects the idea that he's Bernanke's greatest concern.

"He probably just thinks I'm a nuisance rather than a nightmare," he said.

And Paul doesn't think he'll be able to reverse Fed policy or force Bernanke to resign, as much as he would like to.

"I think psychologically, Bernanke is incapable of changing his mind," he said. "It's probably unlikely [Bernanke will resign] under today's circumstances. But you don't know what it will be like a year or two from now."

Paul argues the Fed is making a serious mistake by pumping more money into the economy to try to spur more spending and growth. He predicts it will only lead to further declines in value of the dollar, inflation and higher interest rates rather than the lower rates the Fed is shooting for.

Paul thinks that will bring about another economic crisis that will eventually force Bernanke to resign from office.

"That's more likely to happen than for Bernanke to think, 'Well, I guess I made a mistake for 35 years. I've misunderstood the Depression, and I'm going to change my policy.'" 

Report from National Inflation Association

October 6, 2010

One of the Federal Reserve's original stated purposes was to manage the nation's money supply through monetary policy that provides for stable prices without inflation or deflation. Shocking just about the whole world except for NIA members, the Federal Reserve this past week shifted its purpose from being an inflation fighter to now being an inflation advocate. Charles Evans, President of the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, is now saying that inflation in the U.S. is too low and the Federal Reserve needs to publicly declare a new goal of having inflation that is much higher than its informal 2% target. William Dudley, President of the New York Federal Reserve, is calling current low levels of U.S. inflation "a problem" because "it means slower nominal income growth".

Dudley believes "slower nominal income growth" is unacceptable because it "means that less of the needed adjustment in household debt-to-income ratios will come from rising incomes. This puts more of the adjustment burden on paying down debt." In other words, he wants to monetize our debts by printing so much money that all Americans are earning enough income to pay back their debts. NIA fears that one of the unintended consequences of such a policy will be an insurmountable currency crisis; this will lead to a U.S. societal collapse with class warfare, millions of Americans starving to death, and a return to a barter based system that will last until we can come up with a new form of workable government based on sound money that is backed by gold and silver.

When our government creates inflation with the goal of generating higher incomes, the real incomes of Americans always decline dramatically. Inflation never creates wealth, but instead misallocates resources that would have went towards productive purposes if the free market was allowed to operate. During periods of high inflation, no matter how fast incomes rise nominally, they never keep pace with rising gold prices. (Try to picture Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe trying to keep pace in a race against Olympic gold medalist Usain Bolt.)

Back in 1970, the median family income in the U.S. was $9,870. During the next decade, the U.S. government created unprecedented amounts of inflation, which led to the median family income rising in 1980 to $21,020 for a gain of 113%. Gold was only $35 per ounce in 1970, but rose to a high in 1980 of $850 per ounce for a gain of 2,329%. One year of income in 1970 would have bought 282 ounces of gold, but one year of income in 1980 would have only bought 25 ounces of gold. Priced in gold, families saw their real incomes decline during the 1970s by 91%.

On July 19th of this year, with everybody in the mainstream media warning Americans about the threat of deflation, NIA predicted that the Federal Reserve was, "quietly getting ready to implement 'The Mother of All Quantitative Easing'". NIA said that, "come this October, Bernanke is likely to shoot up his largest ever dose of quantitative easing." Then on July 28th with gold down to $1,158 per ounce and silver down to $17.63 per ounce, NIA sent out an alert entitled, "Gold and Silver Capitulation is Near" in which we said, "The sentiment on gold and silver has abruptly changed to the negative like nothing we have ever seen before and to us this means the big move to the upside is right around the corner."

NIA called the bottom on gold and silver perfectly. Since July 28th, gold and silver have both risen 34 out of 49 days, with gold rising by 16% and silver rising by 30%. Many people are asking us when precious metals are going to dip. Although gold and silver will make many dips in the years to come, NIA is never going to make an attempt to predict these short-term, temporary dips. It is far too risky and dangerous to sell gold and silver with the hope of buying back on a dip. Those who actively trade gold and silver, usually go long the U.S. dollar while they are waiting for a dip. There will come a time when the U.S. dollar crashes, with gold rising hundreds or even thousands of dollars in a day, and silver potentially doubling or tripling in value in a day. Trust us, you do not want to be on the wrong side of the trade on that day. NIA is focused on the long-term risk of hyperinflation and is not concerned about short-term volatility.

NIA believes that if the Federal Reserve doesn't reverse course immediately, we are on a direct path to all Americans becoming billionaires by the year 2020, if not much sooner. Being a billionaire in dollars won't mean anything. The wealth of Americans later this decade will be calculated based on how much gold and silver they own. We are at the beginning stages of a massive worldwide rush out of the U.S. dollar and into gold and silver.

Gold, at a new all time high of $1,344 per ounce, is still very undervalued. If gold's total bull run from its 2001 low of $256 per ounce equals a percentage gain of 2,329% (just like the 1970s) we will see a gold price of $6,218 per ounce. Silver, at a new 30-year high of $23 per ounce, is still an absolute steal. Just like NIA predicted, the gold/silver ratio has declined in recent months from 70 down to 58, but is still well above the historical average of 16. In our opinion, because silver has been undervalued for so long with artificially high gold/silver ratios, once JP Morgan is forced to cover their naked short position in silver we could see the ratio decline to an artificially low level as low as 8. Therefore, if we see $6,218 per ounce gold, we wouldn't be surprised to also see $777.25 per ounce silver.

Dudley's solution to our current economic crisis is to "find ways to increase the amount of stimulus we currently provide via our balance sheet." This is pure insanity. Bush's $200 billion stimulus sent oil prices to $147 per barrel, Obama's $800 billion stimulus prevented massive price deflation (that would have made cost of living in America a lot more affordable) during a period of rapidly rising unemployment, and now the Federal Reserve believes even greater stimulus will fix our economy. Dudley is calling for the Federal Reserve to purchase $500 billion in bonds, but the Federal Reserve's real quantitative easing will be much greater. Dudley doesn't want to steal the show from Bernanke. He must allow Bernanke to be the one who first suggests the "genius" idea of having quantitative easing of $1 trillion or more.

The truth is, the exact amount of the Federal Reserve's short-term purchases is absolutely meaningless. Keep your eyes on the big picture and remember that if the Federal Reserve's treasury purchases aren't enough to create massive price inflation in the short-term, they will continue to unleash even larger doses of quantitative easing. Our gut feeling is that we are practically at the point where the U.S. economy is about to overdose on any further quantitative easing. A "Meltup" is currently taking place, exactly like NIA predicted in our documentary 'Meltup' that was released on May 13th (it has now been viewed by over 808,000 people).

We may be forced to soon change our hyperinflation forecast from the years 2014-2015 to as soon as the year 2012. NIA has long been predicting ever since its first documentary 'Hyperinflation Nation' that besides gold and silver, we would see inflation most in agricultural commodities. During the month of September alone we saw huge gains in agricultural commodities like soybeans +9.5%, rice +10%, corn +12%, orange juice +13%, cotton +17.5%, and sugar +19.3%.

All countries are now in a war with each other to have the weakest currency, with the false belief that having a strong currency destroys their export markets. When history looks back to the time period we are currently in, our world leaders (especially our elected representatives in Washington) will be considered the most incompetent and corrupt in world history. NIA's new documentary being released later this month will expose the U.S. societal collapse from a perspective that has never been addressed before by anybody in the media. NIA's co-founders are currently on their way to Kingston, NY, to interview Gerald Celente, the most accurate trends forecaster of all time. His interview in 'Meltup' was widely considered to be the most insightful and eye-opening economic interview to ever be a part of any documentary and his interview in our new documentary promises to be even better.

It takes a lot to spook the solid old gold market. But when it emerged last week that one or more banks had lent 380 tonnes of gold to the Bank of International Settlements in return for foreign currencies, there was widespread surprise and confusion.

By Garry White and Rowena Mason  Published: 11 Jul 2010     www.telegraph.co.uk

The news that a mystery bank has just pawned the family jewels gave traders a jolt - nervous about the sudden transfer of almost 20pc of the world's annual gold production and the possibility of a sell-off.

In a tiny footnote in its annual report, the bank disclosed its unusually large holding of gold, compared with nothing the year before. The disclosure was a large factor in the correction of the gold price this week, which fell below $1,200 for the first time in more than a month.

Concerns hinged on whether the BIS could potentially sell on this vast cache of bullion in the event of a default, flooding the market with liquidity. It appears to have raised $14bn for whoever's been doing the swapping - small fry on the currency markets, but serious liquidity in the gold market.

Denominated in euros, gold has fallen 8pc since the beginning of the month and is now trading at a seven-week low of €937 per troy ounce.

The big gold exchange traded funds (ETFs) - having peaked at record inflows in May - have also been showing net outflows over the past few days.

Meanwhile, economists and gold market-watchers were determined to hunt down which bank is short of cash - curious about who is using their stash of precious metal for what looks suspiciously like a secret bailout.

At first it looked like the BIS was swapping gold with a troubled central bank. After all, the institution is the central bankers' bank and its purpose to conduct transactions with national monetary authorities.

Central banks in the troubled southern zone of Europe were considered the most likely perpetrators.

According to the World Gold Council, central banks in Greece, Spain and Portugal held 112.2, 281.6 and 382.5 tons of gold respectively in June - leading analysts to point fingers at Portugal, or a combination of the three.

But Edel Tully, an analyst from UBS, noted that eurozone central banks would be severely limited with what they could do with the influx of extra cash - unable to transfer it straight to governments or make use of the primary bond markets.

She then listed the only other potential monetary authorities with enough gold as the US, China, Switzerland, Japan, Russia, India and Taiwan - and the International Monetary Fund.

This led to musings that the counterparty was the IMF, making sense because the lender of last resort is historically prone to cash shortages and has been quietly selling off gold in the first half of the year.

Renowned gold expert Jim Sinclair adopted this explanation. The panic came when people mistook a lease for a swap, he argues. Far from being a big release of gold into the market, it is simply a commercial arrangement between the IMF and BIS with a favourable rate of interest paid for the foreign currency.

"Gold swaps are usually undertaken by monetary authorities," he writes on his industry blog, MineSet. "The gold is exchanged for foreign exchange deposits with an agreement that the transaction be unwound at a future time at an agreed price.

"The IMF will pay interest on the foreign exchange received. Historically swaps occur when entities like the IMF have a need for foreign exchange, but do not wish to sell the gold. In this case, gold is a leveraging device for needed currency to meet requirements.

"The many reports that characterise the large IMF gold swap as a sale of gold into the markets do not understand the difference between a swap and a lease."

However, the day after original reports about the swaps, BIS emailed a statement saying that the swaps had not been conducted with monetary authorities but purely with commercial banks.

This did nothing to quell the sense of mystery surrounding the deal or deals. It is almost inconceivable that a single commercial bank could have accumulated so much gold alone. And cynics have suggested that the whole affair still looks like a secretive European bailout that a single country wants to keep quiet.

In this case, one or more of the so-called bullion banks - which act as wholesale market-makers and include Goldman Sachs, Deutsche Bank, JP Morgan, HSBC, Barclays, UBS, Societe Generale, Mitsui and the Bank of Nova Scotia - would have agreed to act on behalf of a monetary authority.

This would add an extra layer of anonymity. "So the BIS swaps look like a tripartite transaction," writes Adrian Douglas of the Gold Anti-Trust Association. "The commercial bank or banks made a swap with a central bank or banks and then the commercial bank or banks made a swap with the BIS."

Analysts for Commerzbank note that in the meantime, "The price of gold is tending weaker at present."

Baltic Dry Index still falling

The Baltic Dry Index, a measure of commodity shipping costs, has fallen for the longest period in nine years, due to lower volumes of iron ore being shipped to China.

Surplus steel means manufacturers are relying on stockpiles, rather than shipping in iron ore from abroad.

The index of freight rates on international trade routes fell 38 points, or 2pc, to 1,902 points on Friday in its 31st straight decline.

Charter rates for all types of ships fell.

Buyers angry at 'excessive' cocoa speculation

European cocoa buyers are so concerned about potential speculation in the market that they have written to the London commodities exchange threatening to move their trade to America.

Talks between industry participants and Liffe, the London exchange operator, will take place this week, following concerns about the price spike in June.

Futures hit a 32-year high, amid lower production due to diseased crops in Africa and higher demand.

Those who signed the letter claim there has been excessive speculation by hedge funds and want greater transparency about who is buying what and how much.

Become Citizen Plaintiffs Against ObamaCare ... Learn Why & How

NO Friday GAWTP Call To Action Lunch Meeting This Week

Before Glenn Beck's Town Hall Meeting this Saturday at 7:30pm on April 24...Special Call To Action Meeting at 4pm at the Oil Palace in Tyler, TX, FREE admission for the 4pm meeting.

Learn why and how you can become one of 10,000 citizen plaintiffs against ObamaCare. GAWTP has teamed up with The Justice Foundation to take this lawsuit ALL the way to the Supreme Court.

Clayton Trotter from The Justice Foundation will explain the process and the long term commitment. Citizens must take a stand. This is YOUR opportunity to stand up and be counted. COME & LEARN. FREE Admission at the 4pm Special Meeting at the Oil Palace.

Also...patriotic and stirring messages from Pastor C.L. Bryant, featured speaker at last year's 9/12 March on Washington, and Pastor Stephen Broden, Republican Elect for U.S. Congress, Dist 30 (Dallas area). Both have spoken at GAWTP in the past.

Lots of Patriotic Music.

GAWTP is Advancing Freedom on ALL fronts. Become a member of GAWTP today!

By STEPHEN OHLEMACHER, Associated Press Writer Stephen Ohlemacher, Associated Press Writer - Mon Mar 15, 7:57 am ET

PARKERSBURG, W.Va. - The retirement nest egg of an entire generation is stashed away in this small town along the Ohio River: $2.5 trillion in IOUs from the federal government, payable to the Social Security Administration.

It's time to start cashing them in.

For more than two decades, Social Security collected more money in payroll taxes than it paid out in benefits - billions more each year.

Not anymore. This year, for the first time since the 1980s, when Congress last overhauled Social Security, the retirement program is projected to pay out more in benefits than it collects in taxes - nearly $29 billion more.

Sounds like a good time to start tapping the nest egg. Too bad the federal government already spent that money over the years on other programs, preferring to borrow from Social Security rather than foreign creditors. In return, the Treasury Department issued a stack of IOUs - in the form of Treasury bonds - which are kept in a nondescript office building just down the street from Parkersburg's municipal offices.

Now the government will have to borrow even more money, much of it abroad, to start paying back the IOUs, and the timing couldn't be worse. The government is projected to post a record $1.5 trillion budget deficit this year, followed by trillion dollar deficits for years to come.

Social Security's shortfall will not affect current benefits. As long as the IOUs last, benefits will keep flowing. But experts say it is a warning sign that the program's finances are deteriorating. Social Security is projected to drain its trust funds by 2037 unless Congress acts, and there's concern that the looming crisis will lead to reduced benefits.

"This is not just a wake-up call, this is it. We're here," said Mary Johnson, a policy analyst with The Senior Citizens League, an advocacy group. "We are not going to be able to put it off any more."

For more than two decades, regardless of which political party was in power, Congress has been accused of raiding the Social Security trust funds to pay for other programs, masking the size of the budget deficit.

Remember Al Gore's "lockbox," the one he was going to use to protect Social Security? The former vice president talked about it so much during the 2000 presidential campaign that he was parodied on "Saturday Night Live."

Gore lost the election and never got his lockbox. But to illustrate the government's commitment to repaying Social Security, the Treasury Department has been issuing special bonds that earn interest for the retirement program. The bonds are unique because they are actually printed on paper, while other government bonds exist only in electronic form.

They are stored in a three-ring binder, locked in the bottom drawer of a white metal filing cabinet in the Parkersburg offices of Bureau of Public Debt. The agency, which is part of the Treasury Department, opened offices in Parkersburg in the 1950s as part of a plan to locate important government functions away from Washington, D.C., in case of an attack during the Cold War.

One bond is worth a little more than $15.1 billion and another is valued at just under $10.7 billion. In all, the agency has about $2.5 trillion in bonds, all backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government. But don't bother trying to steal them; they're nonnegotiable, which means they are worthless on the open market.

More than 52 million people receive old age or disability benefits from Social Security. The average benefit for retirees is a little under $1,200 a month. Disabled workers get an average of $1,100 a month.

Social Security is financed by payroll taxes - employers and employees must each pay a 6.2 percent tax on workers' earnings up to $106,800. Retirees can start getting early, reduced benefits at age 62. They get full benefits if they wait until they turn 66. Those born after 1960 will have to wait until they turn 67.

Social Security's financial problems have been looming for years as the nation's 78 million baby boomers approached retirement age. The oldest are already there. As that huge group of people starts collecting benefits - and stops paying payroll taxes - Social Security's trust funds will shrink, running out of money by 2037, according to the latest projection from the trustees who oversee the program.

The recession is making things worse, at least in the short term. Tax receipts are down from the loss of more than 8 million jobs, and applications for early retirement benefits have spiked from older workers who were laid off and forced to retire.

Stephen C. Goss, chief actuary for the Social Security Administration, says the crisis has been years in the making. "If this helps get people to look more seriously at that in the nearer term, that's probably a good thing. But it's only really a punctuation mark on the fact that we have longer-term financial issues that need to be addressed."

In the short term, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projects that Social Security will continue to pay out more in benefits than it collects in taxes for the next three years. It is projected to post small surpluses of $6 billion each in 2014 and 2015, before returning to indefinite deficits in 2016.

For the budget year that ends in September, Social Security is projected to collect $677 million in taxes and spend $706 million on benefits and expenses.

Social Security will also collect about $120 billion in interest on the trust funds, according to the CBO projections, meaning its overall balance sheet will continue to grow. The interest, however, is paid by the government, adding even more to the budget deficit.

While Congress must shore up the program, action is unlikely this year, said Rep. Earl Pomeroy, D-N.D., who just took over last week as chairman of the House subcommittee that oversees Social Security.

"The issues required to address the long-term solvency needs of Social Security can be done in a careful, thoughtful and orderly way and they don't need to be done in the next few months," Pomeroy said.

The national debt - the amount of money the government owes its creditors - is about $12.5 trillion, or nearly $42,000 for every man, woman and child in the country. About $8 trillion has been borrowed in public debt markets, much of it from foreign creditors. The rest came from various government trust funds, including retirement funds for civil servants and the military. About $2.5 trillion is owed to Social Security.

Good luck to the politician who reneges on that debt, said Barbara Kennelly, a former Democratic congresswoman from Connecticut who is now president of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare.

"Those bonds are protected by the full faith and credit of the United States of America," Kennelly said. "They're as solid as what we owe China and Japan."

Politico.com by Glenn Thrush  3-8-10

Whatever he has done or not done, I will miss Eric Massa, for no other reason than his gift with a phrase.

In an amazing, far-ranging interview/monologue with a Rochester-area radio station, Massa admits making an off-color, sexual comment to a young staffer -- but still claims Democratic leadership ratted him out to kill a health care "no" vote.

That brought him to the subject of Rahm Emanuel and arm-twisting:

"Rahm Emanuel is son of the devil's spawn," Massa said, according to City Hall. "He is an individual who would sell his mother to get a vote. He would strap his children to the front end of a steam locomotive."

Later in the interview, Massa -- who sits down with Glenn Beck for a one-hour interview on Tuesday -- tells a bizarre story about Emanuel accosting him in the House gym -- in the buff:

"Let me tell you a story about Rahm Emanuel," Massa started. "I was a congressman in my first eight weeks, and I was in the congressional gym, and I went down and I worked out and I went into the showers...I'm sitting there showering, naked as a jaybird and here comes Rahm Emanuel not even with a towel wrapped around his tush, poking his finger in my chest, yelling at me because I wasn't going to vote for the president's budget. Do you know how awkward it is to have a political argument with a naked man?"

Massa has never enjoyed a particualrly close relationship with Emanuel, who was chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee when Massa first ran for unsuccessfully, without much DCCC support, in 2006.

Massa's near defeat of incumbent Randy Kuhl that year -- he lost by 6,033 votes -- attracted the attention of Emanuel's successor Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), who helped Massa defeat Kuhl in a nail-biting rematch in '08.

The relationship between Massa and House leadership has been in the dumps for months, and only got worse after he bucked leadership on the health reform vote last fall -- earning him the enmity of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her ally Emanuel.

Few tears have been shed over Massa's departure on the Hill. Other member descibe him as volatile, argumentative and the antithesis of the a team player.

The Republican campaign has been a grudge match between Gov. Rick Perry and Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, but a little-known activist named Debra Medina has emerged as a key factor.

By Mark Z. Barabak, Los Angeles Times   February 16, 2010

Reporting from Victoria, Texas - Debra Medina isn't calling for Texas to secede from the union. She thinks the state should simply ignore federal laws that Texans can't abide.

"You get [the Environmental Protection Agency] off the backs of Texas agriculture, energy and manufacturing, we won't have an economic crisis," the gubernatorial hopeful says.

She doesn't advocate bloodshed, though Medina believes it may be inevitable "if we don't stand up and start to defend this free, great nation and get it back to . . . constitutional principles."

At another time, in another place, Medina might be a mere curiosity, peddling unconventional ideas -- replacing property taxes with a bigger sales tax, encouraging every citizen to be armed -- from the political fringe. But as early voting starts Tuesday in the March 3 primary, Medina has emerged as a key factor in a Republican race once seen as a battle between two titans, Gov. Rick Perry and U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison.

Although sparsely funded, Medina, a small business owner and "tea party" activist, could draw enough support to force an April runoff. (Former Houston Mayor Bill White is the likely Democratic nominee.)

Until a recent stumble -- during a radio interview, Medina wouldn't rule out the notion that the government was behind Sept. 11 -- she was well positioned to slip past Hutchison in the first round of balloting.

Very little, it seems, is far-fetched in this angry election season.

The grudge match between Perry and Hutchison has built for years, ever since the governor supposedly reneged on a private pledge to step down after 2010 to clear the way for Hutchison. Perry says he made no such promise.

Still, the candidates' mutual contempt is obvious. Between them, Perry and Hutchison are expected to spend about $50 million scratching and clawing, and more if there is a runoff. (Medina has raised less than $700,000, using her credit card for such expenses as air travel.)

Perry, the longest-serving governor in Texas history, relentlessly assails Hutchison as "a Washington-establishment type who has voted for bailouts, wild spending and skyrocketing debt." Hutchison, a three-term senator, portrays Perry as lazy and corrupt, saying he has rewarded his political cronies but done little else. "It's time we had a governor whose record is as good as the rhetoric," she says in one TV spot.

On most issues, they are closer than either lets on. Both take a tough stance on illegal immigration. (Each accuses the other of being all talk.) Both promise to keep taxes low and foster a business-friendly climate. Perry has backed off an unpopular toll road plan. Hutchison said she would make sure the plan is really, truly dead.

Perry, 59, is the better campaigner -- he is an avid gripper and grinner, where Hutchison is prim and aloof -- and she has suffered by dividing her time between Washington and Texas. Although Hutchison, 66, has spoken of stepping down to campaign full time, her failure to set a date has contributed to a less-than-decisive image. (Her convoluted stance on abortion hasn't helped. Hutchison said at one point that she opposed reversal of Roe vs. Wade because overturning the decision legalizing abortion could lead to more abortions.)

As often happens in three-way contests, Medina has been the beneficiary of all the mud-heaving.

"It seems the longer people are in office, whether it's Washington or Austin, the more out of touch they get," said Mannon Mints, 65, a retired state law officer, who came to see Medina last week at the Victoria Country Club. "They need to go up there and spend a few years and then come home."

Medina's breakthrough came in January, after two strong debate performances. "She was the one who came across, to judge from polls and reaction afterward, as more forthright, better prepared, quite calm and confident," said the University of Texas analyst Bruce Buchanan. "She was seemingly more gubernatorial than her opponents in some respects."

However, success has brought greater scrutiny, and Medina, 47, has not always handled it well. Last week, on Glenn Beck's radio show, she was asked whether she thought the federal government was involved in the Sept. 11 attacks. "Some very good questions have been raised in that regard," she said, declining to take a position. (Medina also questions whether President Obama is an American citizen.)

She quickly issued a follow-up statement disavowing any 9/11 conspiracy, but Perry and Hutchison pounced. An "insult" to Americans who lost their lives, said Perry. An "affront" to America's soldiers, said Hutchison.

Still, Medina has already achieved far more than might have been expected. Failing a successful run for governor, she may be a strong candidate to replace her congressman, Republican Ron Paul, whenever he steps down. Paul, who built a strong anti-establishment following in his quixotic 2008 presidential run, is a Medina supporter.

mark.barabak@latimes.com

Copyright © 2010, The Los Angeles Times

January 20, 10:36 AMDC Independent ExaminerJames Simpson

Scott Brown's stunning electoral victory in Massachusetts yesterday confirms to the world what we have known all along: patriotism and common sense are alive and well. Real Americans remain a majority in this country, and the massively-funded, corrupt Democrat machine, engorged with our tax dollars, radical billionaire money and lock-step union support, cannot buy elections, even in hardcore Democrat states, once the sleeping giant has awoken.

And make no mistake about it: we are wide awake!

The Democrats were certainly hamstrung by choosing an impossibly bad candidate. Martha Coakley made a fool of herself repeatedly, yet throughout it all carried herself with an astonishing sense of conceited entitlement, seemingly contemptuous of even having to campaign at all. Meanwhile, her campaign took on an air of ugly thuggishness. Two scenes captured on video during this short campaign say it all. Everyone has seen the first one, where a reporter is pushed to the ground by a Coakley supporter while she does nothing. Remember, she is the Massachusetts attorney general. The second one, reproduced below, has received less attention, but is even more telling: a female reporter getting thrown out of a Coakley campaign office with shouts of "Nazi." Someone even used the "F" bomb. What class acts.

The real problem is that Coakley defines what the Democrat Party has become today: arrogant, boorish, incomprehensibly ignorant and downright thuggish. Former Vermont Governor and Presidential candidate Howard Dean, for example, reacted to Brown's victory by saying that now Democrats have to get tough, and not "deal with Republicans anymore." Stunning. So that's what we've been witnessing all year, with Democrats violating Senate rules, holding closed-door meetings, locking Republicans out of discussions, rejecting outright any Republican proposals and violating their own promises of "transparency." But they haven't been tough enough. Simply amazing.

Scott Brown's election was certainly about healthcare. Massachusetts already has its own expensive plan. They don't need or want even more government intrusion. It was also about national security. Brown's own internal polling convinced the campaign this was true. People feel insecure with this President and his administration, and with good reason.

But it was even more than that. People have had enough. We have had enough of bald-faced lies from Democrats. We have had enough of big spending bills being disingenuously presented as "deficit reducers." We have had enough of massive government programs guaranteed to cripple the economy and lose jobs. We have had enough of ever more intrusive government attempting to take over every aspect of our daily lives. We have had enough of blatant corruption and coddling of terrorists. We have had enough of radicals attempting to ram their virulently anti-American agenda down our throats and calling us "domestic terrorists" for objecting.

This election is a game changer. Make no mistake about it. Not only is the U.S. Senate in play for Republicans in November, but so is the House of Representatives, state legislatures and governor's mansions. Last night, Sarah Palin said to Greta Van Susteren on Fox News "We just witnessed a wicked political pivot... This is a tidal wave sweeping the country..." She is right.

Now, Republicans have an uncanny ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. We have seen it time and again and that is a real danger here. So let me tell you what this victory is not. It is not about getting Republicans a seat at the Democrat table. Let me repeat that.

This election is not about getting Republicans a seat at the Democrat table.

If nothing else has become clear over the past year, Republicans have to have at least realized this: Democrats don't share. Any effort to use this victory to give Republicans a better "negotiating position" on Democrat-sponsored bills will simply make it easier for Democrats to pursue their reckless agenda, only now they will have "bipartisan" support. Come November, voter contempt for Republicans will be as palpable as it is now for Democrats. Republicans will lose. 

Going along to get along is out. Compromise is out. And if Republicans don't get it they will be repeating the mistakes that put them back into the minority in the first place.

The reason We The People are in open revolt is because we finally clearly recognize that the entire Democrat agenda is willfully destructive. Republicans need to get this through their heads. We are not merely dealing with a Party of "opposing views." We are dealing with an international movement that will destroy our Republic by snatching our freedoms, our wealth and our independence, with the ultimate goal of, as Barack Obama said, "fundamentally transforming" our Constitutional Republic into a socialist dictatorship.

Republicans have no excuse to be supporting or even compromising with that agenda. Their job should be prevent Democrats from imposing this nation-wrecking agenda, while convincingly articulating their reasons for doing so and offering superior alternatives.

As for Martha Coakley, good riddance and don't let the door smack you on the rear on the way out.

The Atlantic Magazine

Jan 4 2010, 8:00AM by Andrew Cohen

The Politicians Are Nearly Done; Here Come The Lawyers

In the middle of vicious debate over health care reform, one marked by cheap partisan tricks and apocalyptic warnings, the Office of Legal Counsel issued a legal memorandum for the Attorney General entitled: "Constitutionality of Health Care Reform."

The report's conclusions, offered by eminent Administration scholars, were up at the top of the very first page. In italics, they read: The proposed health care reform legislation "is well within the authority of the Congress under the Commerce Clause, and it does not violate Tenth Amendment or other principles of federalism.  The proposal contains no unconstitutional takings of private property or infringement of liberty interests.  The proposed delegation of administrative authority is not an impermissible delegation of legislative authority."

If you are a glutton for self-abuse and want to dive into the legal debate over health care reform, a debate which minimizes the substance of the legislation while focusing upon the constitutionality of its many moving parts, then the above memo, given to Attorney General Janet Reno on October 29, 1993, is as good a place as any to start. Written by Walter Dellinger and H. Jefferson Powell, the brief tracks in a broad way the legal arguments we are almost certain to see from White House and Justice Department lawyers as they discern the intent and defend the language of the federal statutes that will be altered by the new measure.

Many of the same Supreme Court cases Dellinger and company cited nearly two decades ago will be used by Eric Holder's attorney-soldiers as they march into federal courthouses all over the country to try to save health care reform. On the right, lawyers and "experts" of varying stripes of sanity are licking their chopsdo in court--perhaps at the Supreme Court--what they were unable to achieve either at the ballot box or through their Congressional representatives. In fact, the Internet is jammed with chatter about how the federal courts will save conservatives (or Republicans) by voiding the new health care laws.
waiting to

Look, there are a thousand unknowns about the efficacies of the looming new federal health care reform program. But one of them shouldn't be the coming litigation over its many nooks and crannies. The dozens (hundreds?) of lawsuits that are coming will take years to fully resolve. Some arguments from conservatives --say, the Commerce Clause one -- will be stronger than others -- say, the Tenth Amendment one. Judges in 2010 are almost certainly going to have to decide whether the new measures may be enforced during the pendency of litigation over their constitutionality or whether they must be blocked immediately.

I'd be surprised if vast portions of the new federal law ultimately are deemed unconstitutional. But I also said that about the Child Online Protection Act, which was initially passed in 1998 and which still hasn't been given the rubber-stamp by the federal judiciary. Born before my son, the COPA saga (at least from Congress' point of view) looks unlikely to be resolved by the time he reaches high school. Like it or not, the same can be said of the new health care legislation.

'55 rich white men drafted Constitution to protect their class - slaveholders'

Posted: December 14, 2009   By Drew Zahn   2009 WorldNetDaily

Hollywood celebrities and education gurus have teamed together to distribute to schools across the country a dramatic new curriculum that casts American history as an epic march of victims seeking to shrug off the shackles of the warmongering, racist, capitalist, imperialist United States.

The History Channel's airing of the "The People Speak" last night marks the public coming-out party of a movement that has been in place since last year to teach America's school children a "social justice" brand of history that rails against war, oppression, capitalism and popular patriotism.

The television special featuring performances by Matt Damon, Benjamin Bratt, Marisa Tomei, Don Cheadle, Bruce Springsteen and others condemns the nation's past of oppression by the wealthy, powerful and imperialist and instead trumpets the voices of America's labor unions, minorities and protesters of various stripes.

The accompanying curriculum guide for schools that show "The People Speak" in classrooms, for example, highlights an 1852 reading from abolitionist Frederick Douglass:

What, to the American slave, is your 4th of July? I answer; a day that reveals to him, more than all other days in the year, the gross injustice and cruelty to which he is the constant victim. To him, your celebration is a sham; your boasted liberty, an unholy license; your national greatness, swelling vanity; your sounds of rejoicing are empty and heartless; your denunciation of tyrants brass fronted impudence; your shout of liberty and equality, hollow mockery; your prayers and hymns, your sermons and thanksgivings, with all your religious parade and solemnity, are to him, mere bombast, fraud, deception, impiety, and hypocrisy - a thin veil to cover up crimes which would disgrace a nation of savages. There is not a nation on the earth guilty of practices more shocking and bloody than are the people of the United States, at this very hour.

The program and discussion guide is the most ambitious resource among many offered to America's schools by the Zinn Education Project, a collaboration of Rethinking Schools and Teaching for Change, as part of a push to encourage history instruction based on educator Howard Zinn's 1980 tome exposing the abuses of America's past, "A People's History of the United States."

The project states its goal is to "introduce students to a more accurate, complex and engaging understanding of United States history than is found in traditional textbooks and curricula. ... Zinn's 'A People's History of the United States' emphasizes the role of working people, women, people of color and organized social movements in shaping history. Students learn that history is made not by a few heroic individuals, but instead by people's choices and actions, thereby also learning that their own choices and actions matter."

The History Channel, furthermore, touts "The People Speak" as a program that "gives voice to those who spoke up for social change throughout U.S. history, forging a nation from the bottom up with their insistence on equality and justice. ... 'The People Speak' illustrates the relevance of these passionate historical moments to our society today and reminds us never to take liberty for granted."

The celebrities featured in "The People Speak" claim the stories of bold protesters and oppressed minorities and workers are "inspiring," while Zinn himself has stated that casting history as a people's movement toward change offers hope.

Critics of the Zinn Project, however, warn that the curriculum is more about pushing Zinn's admitted pacifist and socialist agenda on the next generation.

Michelle Malkin blasts "The People Speak" as an effort to promote "Marxist academic Howard Zinn's capitalism-bashing, America-dissing, grievance-mongering history textbook, 'A People's History of the United States.' ... Zinn's work is a self-proclaimed 'biased account' of American history that rails against white oppressors, the free market and the military."

For complete story .... click here

'Sex acts between preschoolers' among subjects of books backed by openly 'gay' Obama adviser

Posted: December 04, 2009
By Bob Unruh    © 2009 WorldNetDaily

A new report is raising alarms that the Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network, a homosexual advocacy organization founded by Kevin Jennings, now head of the U.S. Office of Safe Schools for the Obama administration, is recommending XXX-rated sex writings for children as young as preschoolers.

"We were unprepared for what we encountered. Book after book after book contained stories and anecdotes that weren't merely X-rated and pornographic, but which featured explicit descriptions of sex acts between preschoolers; stories that seemed to promote and recommend child-adult sexual relationships; stories of public masturbation, anal sex in restrooms, affairs between students and teachers, five-year-olds playing sex games, semen flying through the air," said the report.

"One memoir even praised becoming a prostitute as a way to increase one's self-esteem. Above all, the books seemed to have less to do with promoting tolerance than with an unabashed attempt to indoctrinate students into a hyper-sexualized worldview," it advised.

The report was posted online by Jim Hoft at the Gatetway Pundit blog after it was obtained from Breitbart.tv co-founder Scott Baker, who said the recommended children's reading assignments need attention.

Get the new "Marketing of Evil" audiobook on 4 CDs now.

The team whose members assembled the report said a handful of books from the more than 100 titles on GLSEN's recommended reading list for school children were picked randomly. Writings were reviewed with titles such as "Queer 13," "Being Different," "The Full Spectrum," "Revolutionary Voices," "Reflections of a Rock Lobster," "Passages of Pride," "Growing Up Gay/Growing Up Lesbian," "The Order of the Poison Oak," "In Your Face," "Mama's Boy, Preacher's Son" and "Love & Sex: Ten Stories of Truth."

"What we discovered shocked us. We were flabbergasted. Rendered speechless," the report said.

For more ... click here 

16. Nov, 2009  by Josh Eboch

Before government can guarantee provision of a specific good or service to any one individual, thus creating a so-called "positive right," it must first take by force the means of producing that very good or service from someone else.

Health care is no different. Whether by forcibly appropriating and redistributing the money to purchase care for those who lack it, or by arbitrarily devaluing the time and effort of those who provide it, once a government mandate supplants voluntary exchange, coercion must be used to exercise that "right" to health care.

But how can taking what belongs to another person (their money, time, or effort) through legislative force be a right?

Is that not the very essence of slavery?

The truth is that the only rights actually guaranteed to Americans by the Constitution are those that protect freedom of action.

They are "negative rights," which do exactly the opposite of their positive counterparts. Rather than initiate and rely on the use of force to produce a specific reward or outcome, negative rights allow individuals to act or not act in the absence of coercion, so long as they do not hinder the freedom of others to do the same.

For instance, it is the right of people in this country to vocalize unpopular opinions, associate with unpopular people, practice unpopular religions, and even carry unpopular weapons. Thanks to our negative rights the government cannot, without due process, take the life, liberty, or property of any American.

But nowhere in the Constitution does it say that, in order to exercise their rights, each citizen must at birth be given a microphone, a bible, or a gun.

That was no accident. For more than two hundred years, the freedom and responsibility to determine one's own future has been the foundation of America's unparalleled success. But the critical role played by our negative rights has become less and less clearly understood over time.

Many of this country's most celebrated leaders have manipulated that ignorance, redefining rights as unearned rewards for politically favored groups; payoffs thinly veiled in the pious rhetoric of social justice.

FDR himself was among the worst. The abject failure of the New Deal notwithstanding, FDR proposed to codify his authoritarian progressive agenda in a constitutional amendment, known as the "Economic Bill of Rights."

It reads like a list that could just as easily have flowed from the pen of Karl Marx:

The right to a useful and remunerative job...

The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition...

The right of every family to a decent home;

The right to adequate medical care...

The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;

The right to a good education.

Besides being, as any citizen of the former Soviet Union can attest, economically disastrous and utterly impossible to define or achieve, the biggest problem with FDR's list was that it sought to make America into a nation of serfs.

The logic is inescapable. Once something has been deemed a right by those in government, the ability of every person who produces or consumes that good or service to engage in voluntary transactions with the fruit of their own labor is stolen. Their labor is then owned and administered by agents of the collective.

Again, I ask: Is that not the very essence of slavery?

There is no doubt that freedom entails risk, and America has not always lived up to the promise of her founding. But when certain people or groups pervert the notion of rights, harnessing the power of government to take by force what they desire but have not earned, then negative freedom becomes a positive tyranny.

Let us hope that more Americans, before it is too late, learn how to tell the difference.

Josh is a proud "tenther", freelance writer, and activist originally from the Washington, D.C. area.

November 09, 2009 6:30 PM ... from Sunlen Miller:

During an exclusive interview with ABC News' Jake Tapper today, President Obama said that penalties are appropriate for people who try to "free ride" the health care system but stopped short of endorsing the threat of jail time for those who refuse to pay a fine for not having insurance.

"What I think is appropriate is that in the same way that everybody has to get auto insurance and if you don't, you're subject to some penalty, that in this situation, if you have the ability to buy insurance, it's affordable and you choose not to do so, forcing you and me and everybody else to subsidize you, you know, there's a thousand dollar hidden tax that families all across America are -- are burdened by because of the fact that people don't have health insurance, you know, there's nothing wrong with a penalty."

Under the House bill those who can afford to buy insurance and don't' pay a fine. If the refuse to pay that fine there's a threat - as with a lot of tax fines - of jail time. The Senate removed that provision in the Senate Finance Committee.

Mr. Obama said penalties have to be high enough for people to not game the system, but it's also important to not be "so punitive" that people who are having a hard time find themselves suddenly worse off, thus why hardship exemptions have been built in the legislation.

"I think the general broad principle is simply that people who are paying for their health insurance aren't subsidizing folks who simply choose not to until they get sick and then suddenly they expect free health insurance.  That's -- that's basic concept of responsibility that I think most Americans abide by," Mr. Obama said, "penalties are appropriate for people who try to free ride the system and force others to pay for their health insurance."

The President said that he didn't think the question over the appropriateness of possible jail time is the "biggest question" the House and Senate are facing right now.

GAWTP WatchDog Group In The News … Tyler Morning Telegraph, Tyler, TX … August 30 & September 1, 2009

Posted on
Sunday, August 30, 2009

Commissioners Court Expecting To Adopt 2010 Budget

During its regular meeting, the court also will address several recommendations presented by Grassroots America - We The People, a nonprofit watchdog group.

Read full article   http://www.tylerpaper.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090830/NEWS08/908290376/0/NEWS01

Posted on
Tuesday, September 01, 2009 (front page article)

Citizens Express Concerns As Court OKs Budget

Grassroots group members made their presence known during the Smith County Commissioners Court's final public budget hearing to ensure accountability for taxpayer green.    Grassroots America -- We The People President George Stephenson commended the court's work during the budget process but warned officials that anger toward the federal government is "spilling over into the local levels." "Before we take care of Washington, we have to take care of local government," he told the court. "It's our responsibility."                                                                                                                                  Read full article   http://www.tylerpaper.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090901/NEWS01/909010315

Posted on
Tuesday, September 01, 2009

Commissioners Weigh Advice From East Texas Grassroots Group

The Smith County Commissioners Court discussed several recommendations Monday made by a conservative political action group seeking fiscal responsibility and transparency at the local level.   During the previous public meeting Grassroots America - We The People President George Stephenson asked that the court discuss several items, including implementation of a hiring freeze, adding fiscal notes to agenda items, limiting "pay-go" projects and real estate purchases and seeking a long-range infrastructure planning study by an independent entity.                                                                  Read full article   http://www.tylerpaper.com/article/20090901/NEWS01/909010306

From: Huffington Post.com

Hannity Draws Crowd At Tyler Appearance By KELLY GOOCH
Staff Writer, Tyler Morning Telegraph

An estimated 3,000 people gathered at the Oil Palace Friday night to hear conservative political commentator and author Sean Hannity.

Event organizer Jim Couch said Hannity was invited to speak because they felt like it would be an honor to have him in Tyler.

"We needed something in this area. The conservative people in this area are looking for a leader," he said.

Before Hannity stepped up to the podium, George Stephenson, with Grassroots America-We The People, addressed the crowd.
Stephenson told audience members about Grassroots America-We The People and encouraged them to get involved in their precinct neighborhoods.

"We can't take care of Washington if we can't take care of Smith County," he said. "... We have to put God back into the United States of America."

Cheers erupted from the audience as Rep. Leo Berman, R-Tyler, and U.S. Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, each stepped up to the podium.

Rep. Berman talked about the Founding Fathers, along with college tuition for illegal immigrants, while Rep. Gohmert discussed health care.

After hearing from both representatives, attendees waived flags and listened to the Singing Men of Tyler perform patriotic music such as "Yankee Doodle" and "This Land Is Your Land."

Perhaps the real highlight of the evening was when Hannity took the stage.

Hannity talked about the "Obama mania" that is going on the country and what he would like to see from the Republican Party.

"I think the Republican Party needs to stand with a bold vision for the future," he said. "... I want the Republicans to be the party of fiscal responsibility ... I want the Republican Party to be the party that balances the budget."

DEADLY DOCTORS

OBAMA ADVISORS WANT TO RATION CARE

By Betsy McCaughey,  founder of the Committee to Reduce Infection Deaths and a former New York lieutenant governor. For more information on the status health care legislation, visit www.defendyourhealthcare.us

July 24, 2009 --

THE health bills coming out of Congress would put the decisions about your care in the hands of presidential appointees. They'd decide what plans cover, how much leeway your doctor will have and what seniors get under Medicare.

Yet at least two of President Obama's top health advisers should never be trusted with that power.

Start with Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, the brother of White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel. He has already been appointed to two key positions: health-policy adviser at the Office of Management and Budget and a member of Federal Council on Comparative Effectiveness Research.

Emanuel bluntly admits that the cuts will not be pain-free. "Vague promises of savings from cutting waste, enhancing prevention and wellness, installing electronic medical records and improving quality are merely 'lipstick' cost control, more for show and public relations than for true change," he wrote last year (Health Affairs Feb. 27, 2008).

Savings, he writes, will require changing how doctors think about their patients: Doctors take the Hippocratic Oath too seriously, "as an imperative to do everything for the patient regardless of the cost or effects on others" (Journal of the American Medical Association, June 18, 2008).

Yes, that's what patients want their doctors to do. But Emanuel wants doctors to look beyond the needs of their patients and consider social justice, such as whether the money could be better spent on somebody else.

Many doctors are horrified by this notion; they'll tell you that a doctor's job is to achieve social justice one patient at a time.

Emanuel, however, believes that "communitarianism" should guide decisions on who gets care. He says medical care should be reserved for the non-disabled, not given to those "who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens . . . An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia"  (Hastings Center Report, Nov.-Dec. '96).

Translation: Don't give much care to a grandmother with Parkinson's or a child with cerebral palsy.

He explicitly defends discrimination against older patients: "Unlike allocation by sex or race, allocation by age is not invidious discrimination; every person lives through different life stages rather than being a single age. Even if 25-year-olds receive priority over 65-year-olds, everyone who is 65 years now was previously 25 years" (Lancet, Jan. 31).

The bills being rushed through Congress will be paid for largely by a $500 billion-plus cut in Medicare over 10 years. Knowing how unpopular the cuts will be, the president's budget director, Peter Orszag, urged Congress this week to delegate its own authority over Medicare to a new, presidentially-appointed bureaucracy that wouldn't be accountable to the public.

Since Medicare was founded in 1965, seniors' lives have been transformed by new medical treatments such as angioplasty, bypass surgery and hip and knee replacements. These innovations allow the elderly to lead active lives. But Emanuel criticizes Americans for being too "enamored with technology" and is determined to reduce access to it.

Dr. David Blumenthal, another key Obama adviser, agrees. He recommends slowing medical innovation to control health spending.

Blumenthal has long advocated government health-spending controls, though he concedes they're "associated with longer waits" and "reduced availability of new and expensive treatments and devices" (New England Journal of Medicine, March 8, 2001). But he calls it "debatable" whether the timely care Americans get is worth the cost. (Ask a cancer patient, and you'll get a different answer. Delay lowers your chances of survival.)

Obama appointed Blumenthal as national coordinator of health-information technology, a job that involves making sure doctors obey electronically delivered guidelines about what care the government deems appropriate and cost effective.

In the April 9 New England Journal of Medicine, Blumenthal predicted that many doctors would resist "embedded clinical decision support" -- a euphemism for computers telling doctors what to do.

Americans need to know what the president's health advisers have in mind for them. Emanuel sees even basic amenities as luxuries and says Americans expect too much: "Hospital rooms in the United States offer more privacy . . . physicians' offices are typically more conveniently located and have parking nearby and more attractive waiting rooms" (JAMA, June 18, 2008).

No one has leveled with the public about these dangerous views. Nor have most people heard about the arm-twisting, Chicago-style tactics being used to force support. In a Nov. 16, 2008, Health Care Watch column, Emanuel explained how business should be done: "Every favor to a constituency should be linked to support for the health-care reform agenda. If the automakers want a bailout, then they and their suppliers have to agree to support and lobby for the administration's health-reform effort."

Do we want a "reform" that empowers people like this to decide for us?

Betsy McCaughey is founder of the Committee to Reduce Infection Deaths and a former New York lieutenant governor. For more information on the status health care legislation, visit www.defendyourhealthcare.us