Friday, August 28, 2009

Weekend Assignment - H1N1

This from my friend Steve A. who has put this list together for your edification. This is your weekend assignment. Go through the links and educate yourselves. There may be info that is wrong, exaggerated, right on correct, misleading, completely factual, etc. You will never know unless you take personal responsibility for what you know to be true rather than what you believe to be true. Investigate for yourself! Use this as a springboard for better understanding of this issue so you can make an informed decision rather than a manipulated one.

8/27/09 *DO NOT TAKE THE SHOT 3…Pharmageddon?*

“All truth goes through three stages. First it is ridiculed. Then it is violently opposed. Finally, it is accepted as self-evident." - Schopenhauer

“Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.”-Martin Luther King

From ME…

If, at the end of the “Swine Flu Pandemic”, the World continues to spin as usual, with no mass casualties either from the flu, or more likely from the vaccine, no declaration of Martial Law (for “our safety”), no forced vaccinations (again, for “our safety”), and no forced quarantine (for the same reason), then I will accept the egg that will be on my face with pleasure, and will happily enjoy its taste.

But I’m getting a REALLY BAD feeling about all of this.

Let’s begin at the beginning, and ask ourselves a few questions


Would the CDC (admitted on their own website) dig up victims of the 1918 H1N1 flu (in the 90’s) and re-constitute a virus that had been absent from the Planet for so many decades… and one that had killed many millions when it was present?

Would a Patent application for an H1N1 vaccine be submitted BEFORE the outbreak took place (in 2007)?

Would a virus that had been absent from the Planet for almost a hundred years suddenly reappear in the population?

Would said prodigal virus consist of a combination of bird, human, and swine flu?

How did these three separate viruses combine?
*It’s impossible, unless you believe the ridiculous assertion of “re-assortment” that’s been given as the answer….literally that these three put together, shaken & stirred in a host body, would suddenly combine DNA & cleave to become a totally new organism…
This is kind of like saying if you put a dog & a monkey in the same room, they’ll mysteriously become a donkey…
The only way for these three to have become one is by the process of gene splicing, to create rDNA, which is Recombinant DNA, which is Re-Combined-DNA. *

Would the WHO declare a Level 6 pandemic, the most severe pandemic stage in existence, before 1000 people had died worldwide?
(Especially when “seasonal flu” kills 300-500 thousand worldwide each year…without these measures ever taking place)

Would the WHO then not impose A SINGLE RESTRICTION… no travel restriction, no school attendance restrictions, no border closings, no preventative measure precautions …Nothing???
Why propose or impose nothing to prevent the spread of this “Level 6” terror if it warranted “Level 6” status?

Would the WHO & CDC tell health agencies worldwide to stop testing for H1N1, & just assume that all flulike symptoms were H1N1?

Would BILLIONS be given to Big Pharma to create BILLIONS of doses of “vaccine” for a flu that had killed less than 1000 worldwide?
(Especially when “seasonal flu” kills 300-500 thousand worldwide each year…without these measures ever taking place)

Would that “vaccine” be needed so urgently and in such massive amounts as to warrant the addition of squalene & thimerisol, two known poisons, to the mix?
(The excuse is to increase the potency, & thus reduce the need for massive production amounts… because it’s an “emergency” & is needed immediately)

Would you put squalene, a known immune system hyper-stimulant, into a “vaccine” for a flu that kills primarily the young & healthy by over stimulating their immune systems & causing a “cytokine storm”?

Would the WHO “recommend” (so far) mandatory vaccinations to every member Country (including the U.S.) for a flu that had killed less than 1000 worldwide?

Would the U.S. Government pass laws making it impossible to hold Government representatives & Big Pharma accountable for any negative circumstances resulting from the vaccination?

Would the mass media be flooded with stories and hints of the Military being prepared to “assist” in the “pandemic”?

Would the mass media be continually mentioning (listen carefully… it’s literally “mentioning”) Martial Law in stories pertaining to the “pandemic”?

Would the Government be giving predictions of mass-deaths (90000 in the U.S. is the latest) for a flu that has killed, to date, just over 1100 worldwide?

AND WHY WOULD MASS GRAVESITES BE APPEARING FROM THE U.S. TO THE U.K.???? (See archived .doc editions attached) For a flu that has killed so few to date.


I don’t know.
But again, I have a REALLY BAD FEELING about all of this….
Be aware, cautious, skeptical, prepared, and protect yourselves…

The Articles

The H1N1 Swine Flu Pandemic: Manipulating the Data to Justify a Worldwide Public Health Emergency

by Michel Chossudovsky

"Over the course of the the next few months, with the assistance of our partners in the private and public sector and at every level of government, we will move aggressively to prepare the nation for the possibility of a more severe outbreak of the H1N1 virus. We will do all we can to plan for different scenarios. We ask the American people to become actively engaged with their own preparation and prevention. It’s a responsibility we all share." (US Government advisory, Vaccines, Vaccine Allocation and Vaccine Research )…
…Responding to the guidelines set by the WHO, preparations for the inoculation of millions of people are ongoing, in the Americas, the European Union, in South East Asia and around the World. Priority has been given to health workers, pregnant women and children. In some countries, the H1N1 vaccination will be compulsory.
In the US, the state governments are responsible for these preparations, in coordination with federal agencies. In the State of Massachusetts, legislation has been introduced which envisages hefty fines and prison sentences for those who refuse to be vaccinated. (See VIDEO; Compulsory Vaccination in America?)
The US military is slated to assume an active role in the public health emergency
Schools and colleges across North America are preparing for mass vaccinations. (See CDC H1N1 Flu | Resources for Schools, Childcare Providers, and Colleges)
In Britain, the Home Office has envisaged the construction of mass graves in response to a rising death toll. The British Home Office report calls for "increasing mortuary capacity" An atmosphere of panic and insecurity prevails. (See Michel Chossudovsky Fear, Intimidation & Media Disinformation: U.K Government is Planning Mass Graves in Case of H1N1 Swine Flu Pandemic)
[link to]

RISK: Squalene has been blamed for Gulf War syndrome
Sunday August 23, 2009
By Lucy Johnston

THE new swine flu vaccine ¬contains a deadly brain toxin linked to autism, Alzheimer’s and multiple sclerosis.
Mercury, a vaccine preservative, was withdrawn from childhood jabs five years ago after evidence linked it to brain damage.
However, the Sunday Express has discovered the pandemic ¬vaccine, to be rolled out across the country within weeks, contains the heavy metal.
It also contains a chemical called squalene, used to stimulate the immune system to respond to the vaccine. Some scientists believe squalene is linked to autoimmune illnesses including multiple sclerosis, rheumatoid arthritis and lupus.
Squalene was included in the anthrax jab given to British and US soldiers during the 1991 Gulf War. Many claim it caused them permanent neurological damage, known as “Gulf War syndrome”…
[link to]

Military planning for possible H1N1 outbreak
From Barbara Starr
CNN Pentagon Correspondent

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The U.S. military wants to establish regional teams of military personnel to assist civilian authorities in the event of a significant outbreak of the H1N1 virus this fall, according to Defense Department officials...
[link to]

Thousands of Uncounted Disease Samples Found at Army Biodefense Lab
Thursday, June 18, 2009
By Martin Matishak

Global Security Newswire
WASHINGTON -- A recently completed inventory at a major U.S. Army biodefense facility found nearly 10,000 more vials of potentially lethal pathogens than were known to be stored at the site (see GSN, April 23).
The 9,220 samples -- which included the bacterial agents that cause plague, anthrax and tularemia; Venezuelan, Eastern and Western equine encephalitis viruses; Rift valley fever virus; Junin virus; Ebola virus; and botulinum neurotoxins -- were found during a four-month inventory at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases at Fort Detrick, Md., according to Col. Mark Kortepeter, the center's deputy commander.
Kortepeter said yesterday it was "extremely unlikely" that any samples were smuggled out of the center's laboratories, noting that there are "multiple layers of security" that include random exit inspections and a personnel reliability program.
"I can't 100 percent say nothing [left the facility]”…
[link to]

This Company is making the “vaccine”…
Baxter: Product contained live bird flu virus
By Helen Branswell, THE CANADIAN PRESS

Last Updated: 27th February 2009, 3:26pm
The company that released contaminated flu virus material from a plant in Austria confirmed Friday that the experimental product contained live H5N1 avian flu viruses.
And an official of the World Health Organization’s European operation said the body is closely monitoring the investigation into the events that took place at Baxter International’s research facility in Orth-Donau, Austria.
“At this juncture we are confident in saying that public health and occupational risk is minimal at present,” medical officer Roberta Andraghetti said from Copenhagen, Denmark.
“But what remains unanswered are the circumstances surrounding the incident in the Baxter facility in Orth-Donau.”
The contaminated product, a mix of H3N2 seasonal flu viruses and unlabelled H5N1 viruses, was supplied to an Austrian research company. The Austrian firm, Avir Green Hills Biotechnology, then sent portions of it to sub-contractors in the Czech Republic, Slovenia and Germany.
The contamination incident, which is being investigated by the four European countries, came to light when the subcontractor in the Czech Republic inoculated ferrets with the product and they died….
[link to]

This Company is making the “vaccine”…

Bayer Sells AIDS-Infected Drug Banned in U.S. in Europe, Asia

Recently unearthed documents show that the drug company Bayer sold millions of dollars worth of an injectable blood-clotting medicine -- Factor VIII concentrate, intended for hemophiliacs -- to Asian, Latin American, and some European countries in the mid-1980s, although they knew that it was tainted with AIDS…
Unloading the Drug on the Unknowing
Records show that the company continued to sell the medicine overseas in an attempt to avoid being left with a large stock of a drug that was no longer marketable in the United States. The dangers of the drug had become well-known domestically, but the news was slower to reach other parts of the world.
However, Bayer also continued to manufacture the medicine for several months after pulling it from the market in the United States, because it was cheaper to produce than the new, safer product they were introducing as a replacement.
Although worldwide numbers are difficult to calculate, in Hong Kong and Taiwan alone, more than 100 hemophiliacs contracted HIV after using the medicine, and most have died.
FDA Collusion
FDA regulators helped to keep the continued sales hidden, asking the company that the problem be ‘‘quietly solved without alerting the Congress, the medical community and the public,‘‘ according to the minutes of a 1985 meeting.
[link to]

The Injection Business
How Safe Is the Swine Flu Vaccine?

Frank Ulrich Montgomery, the deputy head of the German Medical Association, finds the German approach surprising. "In a mass vaccination program like this, it is preferable to resort to proven methods and substances."
In fact, it would have been safer to use the conventional influenza vaccine, which has been used and proven safe millions of times, as the basis for the new swine flu vaccine. Instead, new production methods are also being tested. For the first time, flu vaccines that are not cultivated in chicken eggs but on cell cultures will be used on a large scale.
…. However, the rapid market introduction has sparked concerns, because the viruses used to make the Novartis vaccine grow on dog cells, which can cause tumors in animal experiments. Consequently, it is critical that these cells not enter the eventual vaccine.
Other concerns have been raised about GlaxoSmithKline's new pandemic vaccine, which is expected to be available first. The vaccine contains an adjuvant known as AS03, which is added to amplify the immune response so that fewer killed swine flu virus cells are needed.
"This means that more doses of vaccine can be produced with less material. In addition, the vaccine is designed to protect against other mutated H1N1 viruses," says PEI President Löwer, who is quick to add: "The safety data look good." However, the data are not as comprehensive is Löwer implies. Besides, adjuvants are by no means as harmless as the name would suggest. A 57-member World Health Organization (WHO) panel concluded in early June that the effects on young children and women in the early stages of pregnancy required further study. The panel also noted that there were no clinical experiences that made it possible to assess the risks and benefits of adjuvanted and non-adjuvanted H1N1 vaccines…
[link to]

Vaccinations: Deadly Immunity
"Government health agencies colluded with Big Pharma to hide the risks"

by Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

Global Research, July 23, 2009 - 2005-07-20
Global Research Editor's note

We bring to the attention of our readers this 2005 article by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. published by

The article sheds light on the collusion between Big Parma and the US government and the dangers associated with vaccines produced by major pharmaceutical companies. This article is of particular relevance to the current debate on the H1N1 swine flu virus and plans by the WHO, The Obama Administration and Big Pharma to develop a swine flu vaccine.

The article by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. documented "the government's efforts to conceal alarming data about the dangers of vaccines."

For a review of Global Research articles on the H1NI Swine Flu Pandemic, click here.

Michel Chossudovsky, July 23, 2009

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. investigates the government cover-up of a mercury/autism scandal
In June 2000, a group of top government scientists and health officials gathered for a meeting at the isolated Simpsonwood conference center in Norcross, Georgia. Convened by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the meeting was held at this Methodist retreat center, nestled in wooded farmland next to the Chattahoochee River, to ensure complete secrecy. The agency had issued no public announcement of the session -- only private invitations to fifty-two attendees. There were high-level officials from the CDC and the Food and Drug Administration, the top vaccine specialist from the World Health Organization in Geneva and representatives of every major vaccine manufacturer, including GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Wyeth and Aventis Pasteur. All of the scientific data under discussion, CDC officials repeatedly reminded the participants, was strictly "embargoed." There would be no making photocopies of documents, no taking papers with them when they left.
The federal officials and industry representatives had assembled to discuss a disturbing new study that raised alarming questions about the safety of a host of common childhood vaccines administered to infants and young children. According to a CDC epidemiologist named Tom Verstraeten, who had analyzed the agency's massive database containing the medical records of 100,000 children, a mercury-based preservative in the vaccines -- thimerosal -- appeared to be responsible for a dramatic increase in autism and a host of other neurological disorders among children. "I was actually stunned by what I saw," Verstraeten told those assembled at Simpsonwood, citing the staggering number of earlier studies that indicate a link between thimerosal and speech delays, attention-deficit disorder, hyperactivity and autism. Since 1991, when the CDC and the FDA had recommended that three additional vaccines laced with the preservative be given to extremely young infants -- in one case, within hours of birth -- the estimated number of cases of autism had increased fifteen fold, from one in every 2,500 children to one in 166 children…
[link to]

Readying Americans for Dangerous, Mandatory Vaccinations
by Stephen Lendman

At least three US federal laws should concern all Americans and suggest what may be coming - mandatory vaccinations for hyped, non-existant threats, like H1N1 (Swine Flu). Vaccines and drugs like Tamiflu endanger human health but are hugely profitable to drug company manufacturers.
The Project BioShield Act of 2004 (S. 15) became law on July 21, 2004 "to provide protections and countermeasures against chemical, radiological, or nuclear agents that may be used in a terrorist attack against the United States by giving the National Institutes of Health contracting flexibility, infrastructure improvements, and expediting the scientific peer review process, and streamlining the Food and Drug Administration approval process of countermeasures."
In other words, the FDA may now recklessly approve inadequately tested, potentially dangerous vaccines and other drugs if ever the Secretaries of Health and Human Services (HHS) or Defense (DOD) declare a national emergency, whether or not one exists and regardless of whether treatments available are safe and effective. Around $6 billion or more will be spent to develop, produce, and stockpile vaccines and other drugs to counteract claimed bioterror agents.
The Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP) Act slipped under the radar when George Bush signed it into law as part of the 2006 Defense Appropriations Act (HR 2863). It lets the HHS Secretary declare any disease epidemic or national emergency requiring mandatory vaccinations. Nothing in the Act lists criteria that warrant a threat. Also potential penalties aren't specified for those who balk, but very likely they'd include quarantine and possible fines….
The Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness Act (S. 3678) is the other worrisome law, effective December 19, 2006. It amended "the Public Health Service Act with respect to public health security and all-hazards preparedness and response, and for other purposes." Even its supporters worry about issues of privacy, liability, and putting profits over public health. Critics express greater concerns about dangerous remedies for exaggerated or non-existant threats as well as mass hysteria created for political purposes..
[link to]

Now Legal Immunity for Swine flu Vaccine Makers
by F. William Engdahl

The US Secretary of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius, has just signed a decree granting vaccine makers total legal immunity from any lawsuits that result from any new “Swine Flu” vaccine. Moreover, the $7 billion US Government fast-track program to rush vaccines onto the market in time for the Autumn flu season is being done without even normal safety testing. Is there another agenda at work in the official WHO hysteria campaign to declare so-called H1N1 virus—which has yet to be rigorously scientifically isolated, characterized and photographed with an electron microscope—the scientifically accepted procedure—a global “pandemic” threat?
The current official panic campaign over alleged Swine Flu danger is rapidly taking on the dimensions of a George Orwell science fiction novel. The document signed by Sebelius grants immunity to those making a swine flu vaccine, under the provisions of a 2006 law for public health emergencies..
[link to]

The Vaccine May Be More Dangerous Than Swine Flu
By Dr Russell Blaylock

"...Novartis, the second contender, also has an agreement with WHO for a pandemic vaccine. Novartis appears to have won the contract, since their vaccine is near completion. What is terrifying is that these pandemic vaccines contain ingredients, called immune adjuvants that a number of studies have shown cause devastating autoimmune disorders, including rheumatoid arthritis, multiple sclerosis and lupus.

Animal studies using this adjuvant have found them to be deadly. A study using 14 guinea pigs found that when they were injected with the special adjuvant, only one animal survived. A repeat of the study found the same deadly outcome.

So, what is this deadly ingredient? It is called squalene, a type of oil. The Chiron company, maker of the deadly anthrax vaccine, makes an adjuvant called MF-59 which contains two main ingredients of concern-squalene and gp120. A number of studies have shown that squalene can trigger all of the above-mentioned autoimmune diseases when injected…
[link to] vaccine-may-be-more-dangerous-than-swine-flu/

CNN Discusses New Martial Law Acts

[link to]

CNN Reports On Martial Law In US

[link to]
You can always put the vaccines in... But you can never take them out...
Revelation 18:8
"For this reason in one day her plagues will come, pestilence and mourning and famine, and she will be burned up with fire; for the Lord God who judges her is strong.”
Do you believe what you see on TV?
Have you ever seen the movie “Wag The Dog”?
Would you believe me if I told you that CNN, “The Most Trusted Name in News”,
FAKED coverage of The First Gulf War?
Watch This…

CNN’s Hoax on America
[link to]

Thursday, August 27, 2009

Retributive Justice for All

Why re-create the wheel? Larken says it well! One of the major moral, logical, and legal fallacies in western civilization is that "government" has the "only" legal, logical and moral right to a monopoly of the use of violence. It is time to go back to the "natural right" of retributive justice. (Oh boo-frakin-hoo and bleat you passive libertarian, minarchist woosies! Baa, baaa, baaaa!)

08-27-2009 Larken Rose Violence by Any Other Name...

Whenever I speak of forcible resistance against "government," some people respond with things like, "How can you be for violence?" And almost everyone who says that is both delusional and hypocritical.

I admit, compared to almost everyone else, my political views are very extreme. For example, I don't advocate that anyone ever be forced to fund something that they don't want to fund. I don't support robbery, even when the stolen loot is to be used for something supposedly noble or beneficial. No Democrat or Republican can honestly say that. Though they differ on how the politicians should spend the loot, every single one of them advocates that I be robbed, under threat of violence, to pay for things that I don't want. And, of course, they also advocate that you be robbed to pay for things that you don't want.

I don't. Ain't I extreme?

The trouble is, even though every Republican and Democrat advocates the initiation of violence against millions of people who haven't harmed anyone, the way people see reality is so warped by the "authority" myth that they can't see that what they advocate is coercion. They think that calling it "law" or "taxation" somehow makes it legitimate and disqualifies it as violence. And yet they know that anyone who doesn't pay the federal Mafia's extortion fees will be punished, with either extra robbery or imprisonment (or death if they continue to resist). It's not that they are unaware of the violence behind all "laws"; it's that they think it's automatically righteous when "government" does it, and so they don't call it violence.

The most bizarre example is the people who say, "I abhor violence, so I'm for gun control." Oh, really? And how, exactly, will this "gun control" be imposed? By friendly suggestion? By rational argument? By a group hug? Or by men with guns forcibly disarming the general public? "Gun control" is violence. Even worse, it is the initiation of violence against people whose only sin is having the ability to defend themselves. And using violence against someone merely because that person possessed the means to protect himself is violent, evil, hypocritical and insane.

And such lunacy is the direct result of the belief in "authority." If, for example, a burglar broke into someone's house, and the homeowner pulled out a knife and threatened to attack the crook if he didn't leave, how would most people judge that? Most would obviously see the invader as the bad guy, and the guy trying to chase him away as the good guy. But if the burglar happens to be called a "tax collector," and tries to forcibly rob someone, and his intended victim resists, nearly everyone would loudly condemn the victim of the extortion as being a nasty, "violent" criminal.

That is why, when I say that using force to defend against those who initiate violence--even when that violence is called "law" or "taxes," and even when the attackers call themselves "government" or "law-enforcement"--most people view me as the violent one. This is because almost everyone truly believes that when you make an actual crime (trespassing, robbery, extortion, assault, kidnapping, murder, etc.) "legal," it ceases to be a crime. They further believe that resisting a crime, when the crime has been "legalized," is a horrible thing to do.

Almost everyone in this country advocates constant, widespread violence, but they are too deluded to know it. Often the violence is fairly hidden, because the mere threat of authoritarian retaliation (for not paying "taxes," for building something without a "permit," for possessing an "illegal" weapon or an "illegal" substance, and so on) is often enough to coerce compliance. In those cases, statists can pretend that people obey "voluntarily," though that makes about as much sense as saying that someone "voluntarily" gave his car to a carjacker, in order to avoid being shot. But even when the government violence is overt and bloody, as with the "war on drugs," or foreign wars, or even some traffic stops these days, statists are still unable to see that what they are advocating is BRUTAL, BLOODY VIOLENCE. Worse yet, when I suggest that it would be justified to use whatever force it takes to stop such aggressive force, the statists see me as the "violent" one.

To illustrate this hypocrisy, I like to make the following offer, to anyone and everyone who considers himself peaceful and civilized: "I will never initiate violence against you myself, nor advocate that anyone else do so." When I ask if someone will do the same for me, he always says "yes." And almost no one who says that means it, as a simple follow-up question easily illustrates: "So you don't advocate that I be forced, via 'taxes,' to fund anything that I don't want to fund?" That's when they start to backpedal, make excuses, start to use vague euphemisms about one's "fair share," and so on. "Okay, so you won't promise to refrain from advocating the initiation of violence against me. That's good to know."

Here is a very simple principle that almost everyone understands: "Don't ever start a fight, but if someone attacks you, you have the right to defend yourself." And yet, because of the cult belief in "government," that simple rule sometimes turns completely upside-down: "It's okay to start a fight with everyone in the country (via 'taxes' and other 'laws'), and okay to violently crush anyone who tries to defend himself against your attack." Well, if such lunacy is considered to be an acceptable, civilized, mainstream attitude--which it is in this country, and throughout most of the world--then I'm happy to be "extreme."

Tuesday, August 25, 2009

Misc. News & Comments

Compulsory Vaccination in America? $1000 Per Day Fine & 30 Days In Jail For Refusing the Swine Flu Vaccine In Massachusetts

Fed Must Make Public Reports on Emergency Bank Loans

Bloomberg reports:
The Federal Reserve must make records about emergency lending to financial institutions public within five days because it failed to convince a judge the documents should be exempt from the Freedom of Information Act.

Manhattan Chief U.S. District Judge Loretta Preska rejected the central bank’s argument that the records aren’t covered by the law because their disclosure would harm borrowers’ competitive positions. The collateral lists “are central to understanding and assessing the government’s response to the most cataclysmic financial crisis in America since the Great Depression,” according to the lawsuit that led to the ruling.

The Fed has refused to name the borrowers, the amounts of loans or the assets put up as collateral under 11 programs, saying that doing so might set off a run by depositors and unsettle shareholders. Bloomberg LP, the New York-based company majority-owned by Mayor Michael Bloomberg, sued Nov. 7 on behalf of its Bloomberg News unit.

“When an unprecedented amount of taxpayer dollars were lent to financial institutions in unprecedented ways and the Federal Reserve refused to make public any of the details of its extraordinary lending, Bloomberg News asked the court why U.S. citizens don’t have the right to know,” said Matthew Winkler, the editor-in-chief of Bloomberg News. “We’re gratified the court is defending the public’s right to know what is being done in the public interest.”
You'll want to read the whole article.

10 Most Dangerous Celebrities To Search Online
Fox News

Thursday, August 20, 2009

Police Reject Candidate for Being Too Intelligent

This is not the first time I’ve seen a story like this, it is apparently typical hiring policy for police in many areas. Let’s face it, they want a dumbed-down police force that’s just smart enough to follow orders. We just can’t have our police thinking too much or questioning procedure!

This story says that the average I.Q. for a cop is 104, if that is accurate it means there are thousands of police with I.Q.’s in the 80-100 range. Is it any surprise then that incidents of police brutality and abuses upon citizens (as well as the Constitution) are now so frequent?

From Ananova:

A US man has been rejected in his bid to become a police officer for scoring too high on an intelligence test.

Robert Jordan, a 49-year-old college graduate, took an exam to join the New London police, in Connecticut, in 1996 and scored 33 points, the equivalent of an IQ of 125.

But New London police interviewed only candidates who scored 20 to 27, on the theory that those who scored too high could get bored with police work and leave soon after undergoing costly training.

Mr Jordan launched a federal lawsuit against the city, but lost.

The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York upheld a lower court’s decision that the city did not discriminate against Mr Jordan because the same standards were applied to everyone who took the test.

He said: “This kind of puts an official face on discrimination in America against people of a certain class. I maintain you have no more control over your basic intelligence than your eye color or your gender or anything else.”

He said he does not plan to take any further legal action and has worked as a prison guard since he took the test.

The average score nationally for police officers is 21 to 22, the equivalent of an IQ of 104, or just a little above average.

The New Underground Railroad

The New Underground Railroad
Posted by Stephan Kinsella on August 18, 2009 10:34 PM

I was chatting with my son tonight whilst reading Hucklebery Finn, when we came to the part where Huck and the slave Jim are trying to get to the Free States. My son mentioned that they could use the underground railroad.

It got me to thinking. The underground railroad “was an informal network of secret routes and safe houses used by 19th century Black slaves in the United States to escape to free states and Canada with the aid of abolitionists who were sympathetic to their cause”–was a network of people helping slaves to escape, to get away from oppressive regimes.

Now, slavery means legal ownership of another person. Legal ownership means the legal right to control. Although the antebellum form of slavery has been abolished (in the US at least), the state still maintains legal ownership over us: it claims some ownership rights in our bodies when it claims the right to conscript us, regulate us, jail us for using drugs or evading taxes. So there is still slavery, of another form. It’s partial slavery, perhaps, but it’s slavery–bureaucratic, inescapable, cloying, repressive, democratic slavery. (For more on this see my What Libertarianism Is.)

So, given that there is a modern analogue to chattel slavery, namely state taxation, fines, jail, conscription, regulation–what would the modern analogue to the underground railroad be? Maybe we ought to use that as a modern metaphor: refer to institutions and ways of fighting taxation as a modern Underground Railroad, or try to design a more carefully orchestrated one designed to help people evade state taxes, etc. For example, imagine a data farm on a little island nation, or some kind of banking secrecy system, that we promulgate as The New Underground Railroad–heping you escape tax slavery. Something like that. Any legs? I’m all for it. Maybe we need… The Underground Railroad Party…

Update: from readers:

  • You may want to take a look at Tim May’s Cyphernomicon, which he wrote in 1994; an adaption appeared in Vernor Vinge’s “True Names.”
  • The underground railroad ends in New Hampshire: that’s where liberty is taking its last stand. If it (the freestateproject) doesn’t work there, then all hope is lost.
  • It’s called expatriation, Stephan. That’s about the only route out of this Leviathan legally.
  • I brought an idea like this up when I attended [a libertarian seminar]. I said that there should be networks of nonviolent, civil disobedience that help conceal and defend tax evaders, etc before and after capture, respectively. I don’t know if the libertarian movement is strong enough yet to have an effective network, but that’s how the ball will role when the game really gets going.
  • Thank you for this excellent post and your suggestion for a new, modern Libertarian analogue. Well done! I’d like to recommend a companion analogue / battle cry: in the words of Butler Shaffer’s two year old grandchild, ”let’s break the cage.” – Onward and upward!

Tuesday, August 18, 2009

Law is a Fraud!!!

Law is nothing more than made up societal rules by "representatives" of the majority enforced by "true believers" in the system willing to deprive you of your life, liberty and property solely on the faith based (religion) belief that the will of the people is sacrosanct. It has NOTHING to do with morality (right or wrong, evil or good, truth or falsity) only with whether or not the "rules" can be interpreted to justify the actions and deprivations of the power majority. That is why this current system of "law" is a fraud by hypocritically representing itself in a host of media as "justice, truth and equality!"

Matthew 23 (Mit's Patriotic Standard Version)

23 Woe unto you, bureaucrats, judges, accountants and lawyers, hypocrites! for you pay tax on spices, water, food, shelter, and have left undone the weightier matters of the law, justice, and mercy, and faith: but these you ought to have done, and not to have left the other undone.
24 you blind guides, that strain out the gnat from your drink insisting that the poor, orphans, widowed, elderly pay their "fair share" and swallow the camel by forgiving debts to dictators, corporations, and moneylenders!
25 Woe unto you, bureaucrats,
judges, accountants and lawyers, hypocrites! for you cleanse the outside of the cup and of the plate, but within they are full from extortion and excess.
26 You blind keepers of the “law” of men, cleanse first the inside of the cup and of the platter, that the outside thereof may become clean also.
27 Woe unto you, bureaucrats,
judges, accountants and lawyers, hypocrites! for you are like unto white painted tombs, which outwardly appear beautiful, but inwardly are full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness.
28 Even so you also outwardly appear law keeping unto the people, but inwardly you are full of hypocrisy and law breaking.
29 Woe unto you, bureaucrats,
judges, accountants and lawyers, hypocrites! for you build the tombs of the founding fathers, and decorate the graves of the patriots who died in your wars,
30 and say, "If we had been in the days of our fathers, we should not have been Redcoats, servants of tyranny, partakers with them in the blood of the patriots."
31 Wherefore you witness to yourselves by your actions of these days, that you are sons of them that slew the patriots.
32 Fill you up then the measure of your fathers.
33 you serpents, you offspring of vipers, how shall you escape the retributive judgment of the people?

Scalia says there’s "nothing unconstitutional about executing the innocent."

Almost two decades ago, Troy Anthony Davis was convicted of murder and sentenced to die. Since then, seven of the witnesses against him have recanted their testimony, and some have even implicated Sylvester “Redd” Coles, a witness who testified that Davis was the shooter. In light of the very real evidence that Davis could be innocent of the crime that placed him on death row, the Supreme Court today invoked a rarely used procedure giving Davis an opportunity to challenge his conviction. Joined by Justice Clarence Thomas in dissent, however, Justice Antonin Scalia criticized his colleagues for thinking that mere innocence is grounds to overturn a conviction:

This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is “actually” innocent. Quite to the contrary, we have repeatedly left that question unresolved, while expressing considerable doubt that any claim based on alleged “actual innocence” is constitutionally cognizable.

So in Justice Scalia’s world, the law has no problem with sending an innocent man to die. One wonders why we even bother to have a Constitution.

Monday, August 17, 2009

Robert Kahre who paid in gold and silver coin found guilty of tax fraud by brain dead government zombies

The government consists of a gang of men exactly like you and me. They have, taking one with another, no special talent for the business of government; they have only a talent for getting and holding office. Their principal device to that end is to search out groups who pant and pine for something they can’t get and to promise to give it to them. Nine times out of ten that promise is worth nothing. The tenth time is made good by looting A to satisfy B. In other words, government is a broker in pillage, and every election is sort of an advance auction sale of stolen goods."
- H.L.Mencken

By Joan Whitely
Las Vegas (Nevada) Review-Journal
Saturday, August 15, 2009

A federal jury Friday found Las Vegas businessman Robert Kahre guilty of all 57 felony counts of evading taxes, failing to withhold taxes from workers' wages, and engaging in fraud during real estate transactions.

Three other defendants were found guilty of most but not all of their related charges.

Kahre had claimed he tried to legally avoid taxes by creating a cash payroll system that disbursed gold and silver coins, on the theory that recipients could go by the coins' face value for tax purposes.

Though the trial lasted almost three months, the jury took only a day and a half to deliberate.

As lengthy sheets of guilty verdicts were read, Kahre's longtime girlfriend Danille Cline sobbed, putting her head against him.

Three jurors were observed crying too. Some spectators, sitting on the defense side of the full courtroom, also were in tears.

After the verdicts were accepted, federal prosecutor J. Gregory Damm asked Judge David Ezra to order the two male defendants, Kahre and Alex Loglia, into immediate custody.

As Damm spoke, two law enforcement officers took positions in front of the spectator section, near the gate that separates the public from the rest of the courtroom.

But Ezra permitted all four defendants to remain free until their Nov. 17 sentencings.

The judge spoke to the 48-year-old businessman before denying the government's request to detain the two.

Ezra asked Kahre for his word that he would not flee the community, nor commit violence nor encourage a "fringe element" to commit violence.

Kahre nodded his head yes, that he would abide by the conditions.

"Your honor," Kahre said when he stood to answer, "This last 17 years of my life has been to get my issues" aired about taxation and the importance of a gold standard to back U.S. currency.

"My life is basically over," Kahre said,, indicating that before sentencing he wants to "spend time with family and tie up some loose ends."

He faces up to 296 years in prison and fines of up to $14 million, according to the U.S. attorney's office.

Kahre and co-defendant Danille Cline have four children, with the youngest born during Kahre's 2007 trial on similar charges. That trial, with nine defendants, ended with no convictions.

This time Kahre was convicted in the payroll conspiracy, along with his sister, Lori Kahre, who works for him.

But defendant Alex Loglia, who used to work for Kahre, was acquitted of his conspiracy charge.

Lori Kahre was acquitted of one count but she and Loglia were found guilty of multiple other counts of tax evasion.

Cline was acquitted of two counts of wire fraud in connection with two home purchases, but she was convicted of another count involving a third real-estate transaction.

Jurors accepted the prosecution theory that the couple bought themselves a series of homes in Cline's name and on the strength of her credit -- even though she had not worked outside the home in almost two decades -- in order to hide Kahre's income.

The two held a commitment ceremony but do not have a marriage license, although they did not make those choices for any tax benefit, Kahre's defense attorneys have said.

U.S. Attorney Gregory Brower said late Friday afternoon that he views the four acquittals as a sign that the jury carefully scrutinized each count.

"It certainly was not a rubber stamp of the government's case," Brower said. "I can't say enough about the extraordinary efforts of the investigators, the prosecutors, and the jury."

In order to convict, jury members had to decide that the defendants knowingly broke federal tax laws, with a criminal intent rather than out of good-faith ignorance.

Jurors rejected a recurring defense theme that the defendants sincerely believed Congress gave them the permission to go by the dollar amounts stamped into the coins by the U.S. Mint.

Certified public account Wayne Paul, brother of Texas congressman Ron Paul, testified that Congress created a dual monetary system when it authorized the gold and silver coins that currently circulate. That means, according to the accountant, that people can switch between coin and paper money, always going by the printed value.

Prosecutors at the Kahre trial showed that defendants selectively assigned a value of their coin income -- switching between face value and market value -- depending on whether they were trying to lower their tax liability or qualify for a home or car loan.

Jurors heard how the payroll system operated. When workers at Kahre's six businesses and more than 30 companies that were payroll clients went to pick up their pay, each received a tube containing coins.

Most immediately converted their coins to paper cash, in an amount equivalent to the coins' fair-market value.

Kahre did not withhold taxes, because he classified all the workers as independent contractors, who are responsible for doing their own taxes.

According to prosecutors, during the span of the payroll conspiracy, Kahre paid at least $25 million in untaxed wages to his workers and about $95 million to people who worked for client companies.

Kahre, or the defendants who worked for him, occasionally kept some pay in coin form. But prosecutors argued that the process of converting coin to paper money was a sham transaction, with no economic value, and was designed only to disguise tax evasion. As proof, prosecutors cited business records suggesting Kahre kept only $40,000 in coins in his business safe in one three-month period, during which he covered a payroll of about $8 million.

When William Cohan, Kahre's attorney, argued for his client's release until sentencing, Cohan disclosed that he and Lisa Rasmussen, Kahre's other attorney, are not being paid for their representation. Cohan also said Kahre is virtually bankrupt.

Federal and local law enforcement raided several Kahre business locations in 2003 to seize evidence in the tax investigation that culminated in Friday's verdicts. Since then those businesses have gone downhill, losing customers and workers.

Kahre wouldn't comment after the adjournment. He and Cline huddled with weeping relatives outside the courtroom. Then the two went to an office inside the courthouse to make arrangements for their pre-sentencing release.

Defense attorneys said they intend to appeal the verdicts.

“Then you will see the rise of the double standard—the men who live by force, yet count on those who live by trade to create the value of their looted money—the men who are the hitchhikers of virtue. In a moral society, these are the criminals, and the statutes are written to protect you against them. But when a society establishes criminals-by-right and looters-by-law—men who use force to seize the wealth of DISARMED victims—then money becomes its creators’ avenger. Such looters believe it safe to rob defenseless men, once they’ve passed a law to disarm them. But their loot becomes the magnet for other looters, who get it from them as they got it. Then the race goes, not to the ablest at production, but to those most ruthless at brutality. When force is the standard, the murderer wins over the pickpocket. And then that society vanishes, in a spread of ruins and slaughter.

“Do you wish to know whether that day is coming? Watch money. Money is the barometer of a society’s virtue. When you see that trading is done, not by consent, but by compulsion— when you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing—when you see that money is flowing to those who deal, not in goods, but in favors—when you see that men get richer by graft and by pull than by work, and your laws don’t protect you against them, but protect them against you—when you see corruption being rewarded and honesty becoming a self-sacrifice—you may know that your society is doomed. Money is so noble a medium that it does not compete with guns and it does not make terms with brutality. It will not permit a country to survive as half-property, half-loot.

“Whenever destroyers appear among men, they start by destroying money, for money is men’s protection and the base of a moral existence. Destroyers seize gold and leave to its owners a counterfeit pile of paper. This kills all objective standards and delivers men into the arbitrary power of an arbitrary setter of values. Gold was an objective value, an equivalent of wealth produced. Paper is a mortgage on wealth that does not exist, backed by a gun aimed at those who are expected to produce it. Paper is a check drawn by legal looters upon an account which is not theirs: upon the virtue of the victims. Watch for the day when it becomes, marked: ‘Account overdrawn.’

“When you have made evil the means of survival, do not expect men to remain good. Do not expect them to stay moral and lose their lives for the purpose of becoming the fodder of the immoral. Do not expect them to produce, when production is punished and looting rewarded." Ayn Rand on Money

Republic? What republic?

by Paul Bonneau

FROM: The Libertarian Enterprise

Sean Gangol wrote against the notion of a direct democracy, saying that "we are actually living in a republic."

I have heard this argument before, but find as the years go on, that it makes less and less sense to me.

So a direct democracy, the people of the city of San Francisco, voted to ban guns. So what? Are legislative bodies any less capable of insanity? How many billions in taxpayer dollars got sent to Wall Street not long ago, even though in a direct democracy they clearly wouldn't have?

This idea of a "representative republic" stands on the assumption that the people supposedly representing us, have more sense than the average Joe, and better morals. But what happens when the reverse is the case, as it so clearly seems to be? What happens when members of legislative bodies are actually, on average, our mental and moral inferiors? What happens when many if not most of them are actually psychopaths, without any conscience at all? Is being a representative republic such a great deal then?

To me, the phrase "representative republic" is just a euphemism for "oligarchy". Just another propaganda term thrown out there by the ruling class to pull the wool over our eyes. There is no sense in which the two senators and one representative of the State of Wyoming represent me. When someone represents me, that person does my bidding. The times I have bothered writing these so-called representatives, boiled down to my begging them not to do the opposite of what I want (I've mostly given up on the practice, as it is a waste of time). How can they represent me, when they don't even know what I want—assuming they cared (which they don't)? How can they represent me, when my neighbor whom they also represent, wants the opposite of what I want?

This is a very collectivist notion. They even have a propaganda term for it, "the will of the people". There is no such will, there is only many individual wills. Anyone who claims to know the will of the people, much less represent it, is a liar.

I'm not a collectivist. I prefer plain speech, not euphemisms. The "will of the people" is nothing but a will-o'-the-wisp! We don't have a representative republic; we have an oligarchy based on violence. And even if we did have such a thing as a representative republic, it would be no better than a direct democracy. People in Congress don't represent us; they represent themselves, and their cronies.

That's a civics lesson you will never hear in a government school.

Thursday, August 13, 2009

10 Questions to Ask at Healthcare Town Hall Meetings

From the Economic Policy Journal

By Robert Wenzel

The following questions are all written by me (Robert Wenzel, However, I couldn't have come up with them without the truly Herculean reading of the 1,000 plus page healthcare document by Peter Fleckstein, and also Russell Wilcox. When history books for this era are written, both these men's names should go down as heroes, for letting the public know what this so called, "healthcare" bill is really all about.

Question 1: Who actually wrote this bill? Congressman can you get us the names of the people that wrote this bill, so that we can understand their views on healthcare?

Question 2: If this bill is only about getting the poor insurance, why will the Secretary of Health as opposed to my doctor determine if I should be re-admitted to a hospital, as outlined on pages 284-288, SEC. 1151?

Question 3: Why, if I am happy with the type of health insurance I have, can you force me to get different insurance as outlined in pages 167-168, section 401 or force me to pay a penalty tax?

Question 4: Why is a simple catastrophic health insurance not allowed under this plan, when that is really what insurance should be about? Is this really happening in America? I reference pages 26-30, SEC. 122.

Question 5: Why will the Health Secretary have full say over all health payments as outlined on page 124, Sec. 223? Isn't this against the free market system and more in line with the thinking of Mussolini?

Question 6: Why does the healthcare bill on pages 195-196, SEC. 431 and on page 145, section 312 open up my tax information to federal employees, and force my employer to supply any information asked of him by the Health Choices Commissioner, the Secretary of Labor, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, and the Secretary of the Treasury?

Question 7: Why MUST any Doctor who orders durable medical equipment or home medical services be enrolled as a Medicare provider , as outlined on pages 719-720 Sec 1637?

Question 8: What are these so called home visitation programs by the government for families with young children & families expecting children, as outlined on pages 838-845?

Question 9: On page 936, this bill mentions a “Healthy People & National Public Health Performance Standards”. Does this mean you are going to try and tell me what I can and can't eat? Are you going to force manufacturers to stop making some foods?

Question 10: Most of the Healthcare Bill has little to do with providing health insurance to the poor, and a lot to do with controlling everyone. Why is this so? If I am happy with my health insurance why don't you just leave me alone?

Wednesday, August 12, 2009


Health Care Bill Would Allow Feds To Snoop in Your Checkbook

Congressman John Shadegg calls the language in the healthcare bill "pretty troubling."

Read Through The ENTIRE Obama Care Bill!

(KFYI News) Half of Congress is in recess, but debate continues over President Obama's health care program concerning privacy.

Section 163 of the bill states that the government would be allowed real-time access to a person's bank records - including direct access to bank accounts for electronic fund transfers.

Even-though the bill mentions privacy aspects, the fact remains that if approved, Obama's health care plan will give the government permission at any time to your personal bank records.

Arizona Congressman John Shadegg says people have the right to be concerned.

"It's pretty Orwellian, it certainly gets the government pretty darn deeply involved in private matters in our lives."


Tuesday, August 11, 2009

On Resisting Tyranny

About time the"big patriot" publications say what I've been saying for years....[1], [2], [3], ...better late than never... oh and boo hoo you pacifist libertarian pussies!

Gulag Archipelago Excerpt on resisting tyranny

Ernest Hancock
Date: 08-10-2009
Subject: Police State
Gulag Archipelago Excerpt on resisting tyranny
An excerpt from "The Gulag Archipelago" ... on how to resist fascism & tyranny. The lesson that is just as important today as it was half a century ago.

"During an arrest, you think since you are not guilty, how can they arrest you? Why should you run away? And how can you resist right then? After all, you’ll only make your situation worse; you will make it more difficult for them to sort out the mistake.

And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say goodbye to his family?

Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?

The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin’s thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt! We did not love freedom enough. Every man always has handy a dozen glib little reasons why he is right not to sacrifice himself."
The Gulag Archipelago (Paperback) by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

Wednesday, August 05, 2009

Freedom Shenanigan #40

Freedom Shenanigan #40


From The Militant Libertarian

In the old days, politicians who did what ours have been doing to us for years now were physically dragged from home or office, tarred and feathered and left on display to find their own humiliated way home.

Now? We write "letters of protest" and publish letters to the editor in our newspapers and get angry in private, carefully-said words at small gatherings. Anything more than that is "uncivilized" and "wrong."

I say that we should all be going to these town hall public meetings and doing exactly what those people these statists are denigrating did. SHOUT! YELL! TELL YOUR ELECTED MORON THAT HE OR SHE IS NOT YOUR REPRESENTATIVE. CALL THEM A DIRTY SOB, A POS (piece of $#!+), A WORTHLESS SUCKER, WHATEVER. TELL THEM LOUDLY AND PROUDLY THAT YOU HATE THEIR GUTS AND THE STOMACH THEY PACK THEM IN.

Take off the kid gloves, people. Be real men. Act like true women. Give the politicians what for. Let them know that if they keep doing what they're doing, they're going to get a lot more than they used to get from us.

ABOVE ALL, SHOW THE PRESS AND THE PEOPLE THAT THE ELECTED A-HOLES ARE NOT OUR REPRESENTATIVES. THEY'RE SHILLS, CON MEN, AND LYING SELLOUTS. If they don't represent us, they no longer have any power. All of their power lies in the fact that We the People are their "constituents." Show them that we aren't and they are powerless. Their entire structure depends on that illusion. Pull out the mirror and show the world the fakery!