AMERICAN MINUTE
Bill Federer

Sir Isaac Newton died MARCH 20, 1727. With his mother widowed twice, he had been raised by his grandmother before being sent off to grammar school and later Cambridge. Newton discovered calculus, the laws of gravity and built the first reflecting telescope. Using a prism, Newton demonstrated that a beam of light contained all the colors of the rainbow. President of the Royal Society from 1703 till his death, Sir Isaac Newton wrote in Principia, 1687: "This most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent Being...All variety of created objects which represent order and life in the universe could happen only by the willful reasoning of its original Creator, whom I call the Lord God." In Optics, 1704, Newton wrote: "God in the beginning formed matter." Regarding the Bible, Newton wrote: "The system of revealed truth which this Book contains is like that of the universe, concealed from common observation yet the labors of the centuries have established its Divine origin." In A Short Scheme of the True Religion, Sir Isaac Newton wrote: "Atheism is so senseless and odious to mankind that it never had many professors."
----------------------------

For News & Commentary from a Christian World View, visit Crosswalk.com.

U.S. Intelligence Official about Israel: “This is just the beginning”
U.S. Intelligence official “breaks silence” on Israel situation”31 December 2008: Northeast Intelligence Network director Doug Hagmann interviewed a highly-placed U.S. intelligence official late yesterday who not only confirmed rumors about escalated and more intensive Israeli military operations against the Muslim terrorists in Gaza, warned of the increasing probability of abandonment of Israel by the U.S. and other Western countries based on what he termed “malicious intelligence.”
“Remember that term,” advised this well-placed intelligence official, “you’ll be hearing it again.”
“This is just the beginning,” stated this intelligence official, who wished to remain anonymous. This official stated that the possibility for a much more protracted ground war is more likely today than at any other time in the past, adding that Israel is exercising her right to protect herself from her enemies in Gaza. But there is a catch, noted this official, and a big one at that: Israel could be about to lose the support of the United States.
“I have every reason to believe, based on what I’ve seen at my level of [security] clearance especially over the last several years, that Israel will soon be completely on their own… or worse.” When asked what could be worse than losing the support of the United States, he stated: “when our administration provides more support to Arab countries [with] financial and military aid, undercutting Israel’s defense efforts all while pushing Israel to succumb to the pressure of unreasonable demands designed to end with their political annihilation as a nation.”
According to this official, the U.S. has been slowly proceeding down this road. He cited the 2005 surrender of Gush Katif to the Palestinian Authority as one critical example of the slow dismantlement of Israel as a viable nation. “Despite critical intelligence outlining in every possible manner imaginable that this would be a disastrous move leading to the events we are seeing today, it was done anyway,” he stated.
“We are seeing the very scenario play out today that was outlined in intelligence briefs three and four years ago. Knowing that, there is something very wrong with this picture,” he stated.
He added that Western media is also playing a very big role in the current war in the Middle East, thanks, in part, to carefully worded statements prepared by political officials in Washington. Officials in the current administration, like some previous administrations, submit carefully crafted informational releases to a media that is controlled by those having special interests that are contrary to a legitimate peace in the Middle East.
“The game is rigged. At the highest levels of power in the U.S. and even by some in power in Israel, the game is rigged,” he emphasized.
The next obvious question in this interview was, of course, “how is it rigged?” followed by ”how are you in a position to know?”
This official responded by stating that he has spent the last two decades serving in “an unfortunate position where intelligence and politics meet and often collide.” Now, merely days away from retirement, he stated that he is looking forward to leaving his position after conducting over 20 years of intelligence work “that has been molded and massaged to advance the agendas of a select few.”
He continued: “When an intelligence work product that has been thoroughly and properly vetted is submitted to those in Washington, and I see a completely different and entirely inaccurate product intentionally submitted and aired in the media, only to be told ‘that is the way it must be,’ then I know it’s time for me to leave.”
“It is obvious to me that most Americans don’t understand or don’t care what is actually happening in the Middle East relative to Israel. People don’t understand history, or have been subjected to revisionist history based on lies and more lies. Add to that a media that fails to provide an accurate assessment of what is taking place in Israel, in Gaza, and you end up with a very bad situation for Israel,” stated this source. He added that the disinformation coming and going to and from Washington is getting worse, as is the media bias against Israel.
The events currently taking place in Israel are extremely perilous for Israel and especially perilous for the national security of the United States, according to this source. Contrary to the accepted assessments of “Middle East experts” in the news, our intelligence services have “ample evidence to prove active collusion and support between HAMAS and other terrorist organizations, both Sunni and Shite. Further, there is a level of Iranian complicity in this war that is not being talked about, or being dismissed out of hand because of the schism between the Sunni and Shia sects,” stated this source.
Coming next:
More from this interview, in addition to an interview arranged by this intelligence official with a high-ranking Israeli IDF official conducted on 31 December 2008.
The Coming War
Part II in a series based on an interview with a former, highly-placed U.S. intelligence official who breaks his silence on the increasing probability of abandonment of Israel by the U.S. and other Western countries based on what he termed “malicious intelligence.” (Click here for Part I).

By Douglas J. Hagmann, Director
10 March 2009: The Middle East will be the site of “the coming war,” and Israel will be at it’s epicenter. If we survive as a nation, the U.S. will not be on the side of righteousness in this war, instead turning our back to - or our guns against - our only true friend in the Middle East: Israel.
“Remember the phrase malicious intelligence?” asked the source during our latest interview. Well, Charles Freeman, appointed by Barack Hussein Obama to chair the National Intelligence Council can be presented as “exhibit 1.” Freeman, a former ambassador to Saudi Arabia during the first Gulf war and an obvious the benefactor of Saudi money in his position as head of the Middle East Policy Council, has shifted his public position on the “reasons” behind the attack of 9/11 and Israel as a U.S. ally as quickly as former UN weapons inspector Scott RITTER shifted his public position on weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
RITTER is referenced here not to digress from the primary topic, but is an integral part of the topic. He also illustrates how someone is apparently able to mentally reconcile and public embrace two starkly opposing viewpoints in a matter of a few short years without being medically diagnosed as a schizophrenic. In a most generic sense, many of the same factors involved in the about face done by Scott RITTER can be used as a template overlay for Charles Freeman, sans RITTER’s “alleged” search for contraband of a different type at a Burger King restaurant in Colonie, a suburb of Albany, NY. In a more specific sense, however, some of the “usual suspects” begin to emerge in both cases. While RITTER has been relegated to “shill status” for those “usual suspects” intent on implementing a “New World Order,” FREEMAN is being moved in as a key player.
RITTER, of course, was a United Nations weapons inspector from 1991 to 1998 and was an outspoken critic of Saddam Hussein. That was, of course, until Shakir al-Khafaji, a close contact of Saddam Hussein and an Iraqi-American businessman from Detroit reportedly provided RITTER with $400,000 to produce a documentary titled In Shifting Sands that was extremely critical of the U.S. led U.N. inspections. It should be noted that in 2004, Shakir al-Khafaji pled guilty to multiple felony charges for his role in the U.N. Oil-for-Food scandal and that RITTER, of course, staunchly denies being the benefactor of Iraqi money. In fact, when RITTER was questioned about how he would respond to accusations of a “quid pro Quo relationship” with Shakir al-Khafaji (about monetary allocations in his name), he was quoted by Dr. Laurie Mylroie, writing in the Financial Times, stating: “I’d say that person’s a f***ing liar…and tell him to come over here so I can kick his a**.” [Expletives deleted].
I experienced some of that same venom when I had the opportunity to question RITTER about his “epiphany” about Iraq when he appeared as a guest on the Pat Campbell Show a few years back. During that exchange, RITTER denied receiving any Iraqi money from al-Khafaji, but was less than concise when he attempted to explain the underwriting process of that pro-Saddam, anti-U.S. propaganda.
Now consider the Charles FREEMAN’s about-face regarding Israel as a friend and valuable ally of the United States, his more recent comments about the reasons behind the 9/11 attacks, and perhaps more importantly, his relationship with Saudi Arabia (including Citibank shareholder Prince Al-Waleed) through the prism of the RITTER affair. While both experienced their own individual epiphanies that share the same anti-Israeli roots, the difference here is that FREEMAN is about to assume a position of leadership with the National Intelligence Council, whose stated goal is to provide U.S. policymakers with unbiased information on issues of national security and global threats. He is on the inside, while RITTER, perhaps still searching for a method of “having it his way,” is presently out of the inner circle.
Both, however, appear to share the common public position that Israel and the U.S. pro-Israel lobby is to blame for everything from the impetus for the 9/11 attacks to our war against Islamic terrorists. Both share vicious criticism of Israel. Both seem to be at ease with Iran’s nuclear ambitions. In the case of Charles FREEMAN, however, such sentiments extend beyond propaganda and can influence – or become U.S. policy.
An article published today in the Wall Street Journal titled Obama’s National Intelligence Crackpot (What does the Jewish lobby have to do with China’s dissidents) does well to expose FREEMAN for who he is and the role he will play in our relationship with Israel and our war against Islamic terrorism. And if you want to follow the money and the globalist agenda, note that FREEMAN sits on the board of a major oil company owned by the Chinese government that is in the midst of a multibillion dollar deal with Iran, as reported by World Net Daily. So now we have the presumptive leader of the National Intelligence Council having ties to Iran via China, in addition to his financial ties to Saudi Arabia, the largest exporter of Wahabbism in the world - and the bankroll behind the Islamists inside the U.S.
How can any rational or sane person accept such a preposterous appointment? Well, it seems that many such appointments have been made that defy rationality, unless one can recognize that a larger agenda is at play here.
Intelligence for national security purposes must not be subjugated by politics or financial interests, otherwise it becomes malicious at the hands with those having agendas. If one chooses to argue that Iraq was the victim of big oil interests, than that same argument must extend to our relationship with Israel and opposing Arab countries. In other words, money talks – and it talks loudly, frequently drowning out the truth with political propaganda propagated by a media already influenced by Arab financial interests. And with money comes power and influence.
“Now you can see where intelligence and politics meet and often collide,” a reference made during my initial interview with this former U.S. intelligence official. Now this intelligence official explained that the Obama administration is being purposely filled with people who are truly anti-Israel, either because of their own financial interests or a larger globalist agenda that does not include Israel, or for that matter, the United States as a sovereign nation.
“Whatever the reason, the anti-Israel, pro-Islamist policy makers will be appointed or have already infiltrated nearly all levels of the U.S. government. These are the people who place anti-Semitic references in school textbooks, promote revisionist history regarding Islam, 9/11, and are the same people who allow or even promote the Islamic agendas in all aspects of Western society, especially the restrictions on speech against Islam. With regard to the latter, note that the United Nations is quite involved in forcing the restriction of “hate speech” and the implementation of global standards, some that have already been adapted by European nations.”
“Closer to home, there is an organized, concerted effort on the part of these individuals to foster an atmosphere of anti-Semitism throughout the West, and in particular within the United States. This is an important aspect of their global objectives, and includes blaming the Jews for our current financial crisis. The majority of Americans might not care about or even understand the situation with the Palestinians, Israel or the Middle East, but they certainly care about their own finances, especially when they see their retirement funds evaporating before their eyes. Now, they become afraid, anxious and angry.”
“Associate Israel or Jewish interests with global instability, Americans will become upset with the Jews and Israel. Blame them for being responsible for or contributing to the loss of their retirement and their economic problems, they will become angry. The objective is to erode support for the Jews and Israel in America, and is being done with the assistance of a media influenced and infiltrated by anti-Israel, pro-Palestinian, Arab and Muslim apologists. At the same time that the anti-Semitic undercurrent is perpetuated in America, world pressure against Israel will mount. Expect to see an increase in hostile acts against Jews in the U.S., Jewish synagogues and other Jewish assets,” stated this source.
Meanwhile, in order for the globalist agenda to succeed, the United States cannot remain a close ally of Israel. That relationship is being undermined from within, and the information being publicly disseminated is being manipulated from within - by a compromised and all-too-willing media.” According to this source, the groundwork to get to this point has been in the works for years, if not decades. “It was just placed on the fast track under Obama, who has promised his allegiance to the Arabs. If not already, this will become quite evident to even the most skeptical, much to the consternation of the majority of American Jews who voted for him.”
As for the coming war, it has already begun as a war for the minds, hearts and souls of the people in the West, and will manifest itself quickly to a physical war between Israel and her Arab neighbors. It will likely begin as it has in the past, with a missile or rocket fired by HAMAS, followed by a measured response from Israel. Then a good dose of propaganda from the media, who will portray the Jews as murderers of innocent men, women and children. Then outrage and condemnation from the international community, led by the United Nations, who will demand peace at the expense of Israel. This time, the U.N. will have the cooperation of the United States under the Obama administration.
We will send troops as part of a larger ‘peacekeeping mission,’ but they will most certainly not be there to help the Israelis. But first, America must be convinced that being an ally of Israel is not in our best interests, and they are the antagonists in this scenario. By electing who we have, and by the appointments already made and policies already implemented, they’re off to a pretty good start, don’t you think?”
Numerous people have questioned how a junior senator from Illinois - a virtual unknown - could rise from virtual obscurity to the leader of the free world in seven years. Many of the same people have asked how that same person could rise to power despite still-unanswered questionsof his eligibility, and a past checkered by questionable associates and associations.
The answers lie in the globalist agenda, one that has no place for Israel, beyond Israel being the catalyst for the implementation of a new world order.

The New Blacklist
Freedom of speech--unless you annoy the wrong people.
by Maureen Mullarkey
03/16/2009, Volume 014, Issue 25

Strange times we live in when it takes a ballot initiative to confirm the definition of marriage as the union of a man and a woman. Stranger still when endorsing that definition through the democratic process brings threats and reprisals.

In November, the San Francisco Chronicle published the names and home addresses of everyone who donated money in support of California's Proposition 8 marriage initiative. All available information, plus the amount donated, was broadcast. My name is on that list.

Emails started coming. Heavy with epithets and ad hominems, most in the you-disgust-me vein. Several accused me, personally, of denying the sender his single chance at happiness after a life of unrelieved oppression and second-class citizenship. Some were anonymous but a sizable number were signed, an indication of confidence in collective clout that belied howls of victimhood. New York's Gay City News asked for an interview because I was "one of only four New Yorkers who contributed more than $500."

I ignored the request, trashed the emails, and forgot about them. But the West Coast bureau chief of the New York Daily News did not forget.

One night in early February, I drove home to find two cars, two men, waiting for me, unannounced, in the dark. Reporters for the Daily News, they were publishing a story on me and Prop 8 the next day and wanted a live quotation. Serious interviews are arranged ahead of time. Besides, I had filed enough newspaper pieces on deadline to know that copy is well into the can at 7 P.M. This was intimidation, not fact-gathering.

Where is the story, I asked, if I have not said anything? The response was: "We have documents." Sound familiar? For half a second, I thought of saying that Prop 8 left intact all the legal advantages of civil union. It took nothing away. But I was too surprised by having been singled out. After a few heated words--none of them equal to what, in hindsight, I wish I had said--I went into the house.

Next day, I discovered in the Daily News that I am known as a painter of gays and lesbians; gay activists felt betrayed by my contribution. It was a sparse article. The only accurate quotation to appear was a sentence cribbed from my own website, which seems to be the "document" from which the story was spun. (The sentence, from an old interview about a gallery show of my paintings, referred to New York's gay pride parade as "an erotic celebration loosed for a day to keep us all mindful that Dionysus is alive, powerful and under our own porch.") Compensating for the interview that never took place, the reporter constructed an exchange over the question he obviously wanted to ask but never got the chance. The article reads:

When asked how she could have donated money to fight gay marriage after making money from her depictions of gays, she just said, "So?"

Set aside the non sequitur. The question was an undisguised indictment that triggered a barrage of virulent mail and threats of blacklisting. Suddenly, I was "a vampire on the gay community" who should be put out of business. As one note put it: "Your career is over, you nasty piece of s--. F-- off! WHORE!"

To make sense of this, backspace to the early '90s and a series of paintings I exhibited called Guise & Dolls. It was a singular body of work based on images from New York's annual carnival, the gay pride parade. I could have used a New Orleans Mardi Gras or Munich's Fasching, but Manhattan was closer. At times funny and poignant, the parade was also--in the age of AIDS--tinged with sexual danger. The spectacle of it made a splendid analogy to the medieval danse macabre.

Festive misrule and the politics of carnival, deeply rooted in cultural history, are a compelling motive for painting. Think of Bruegel the Elder's Fight Between Carnival and Lent. The flamboyant Dionysian heart of the gay pride parade was the subject of Guise & Dolls, not homosexuality itself and certainly not any policy agenda. A public event free for the watching, it is staged to provoke audience response. I responded with a suite of paintings; they bore no relation to my prior or subsequent work. All suggestion that I "make a living on the back of the gay community," as my mail insisted, was a hysterical fantasy brewed in the grievance industry's fever swamp.

But no matter. I was up there now with Halliburton and Big Oil, a class enemy. The brownshirts came out in force. Within 24 hours, the "story" spread from one gay website to another, even to Vancouver ("Typical greedy American bigot"), France, and Belgium. My home address and email were repeated in comment sections in which readers egged each other on to "make the bitch pay." Militants trawled for editors and gallerists I had worked with to warn them that "the Gay Community is looking at our adversaries and those who may support them." (One former editor blind-copied me his exchange with an aspiring storm trooper who threatened a boycott for those "having an association" with me.)

Reprimands flooded in, all based on the false premise that fat slices of proprietary gay imagery were being creamed off the urban spectacle for my personal profit:

You should apologize for your deceit. Stop using us as your subject matter in this incredibly exploitative manner. You must realize that your actions are no different than an artist depicting the black community contributing to white supremacist organizations.

How dare you use gay people as inspiration and then stab these people in the back by fighting to limit their rights. You are a disgusting, pitiful, opportunistic bitch.

Conceptual clarity is not mobthink's strong suit:

I don't understand why you would want to deny love in this world, no matter what form it takes. I can't imagine your motives, can't imagine your hate.

Our parades are not the only place you can fulfill your artistic vision. .  .  . You could visit the Hasidic community. You know, them? They wear "unusual" clothes, too. There are so very many freak shows you can enjoy in this world.

The prevailing mood was punitive:

Homosexuals rule the World of Creativity, and that is whom you just f--ed with!

You represent the most despicable type of artist and human being. I do hope that you feel the financial pain your actions will bring. May God bless you with financial ruin for your treacherous deed.

Because I love delusional bigots, I hope you never see another dime, bitch.

The president and CEO of an executive travel agency cc'd his message to a curator at the Brooklyn Museum: "You are a disgusting TURD of a woman to support Prop 8." One painter, whose work I had reviewed enthusiastically months before, rushed to her blog to broadcast an open letter exposing my perfidy to the New York gallery world:

The grave ungood you have done is not only to us, lesbians and gays who expect no less than full civil rights in our own country, but ironically to your own art career. Unless you don't mind showing at Reverend Rick's or perhaps at Brigham Young University.

A local paper followed up the Daily News piece. I submitted a brief statement to the reporter affirming the time-honored definition of marriage. I took care to note that regard for individual gay persons does not require assent to a politicized assault on bedrock social reality and the common good. The story disclosed other "suspect" donations of mine (to pro-life groups and, most damning, to the Swift Boat vets) and referred to my Catholicism. That prompted a fellow painter, and heretofore friendly colleague, to write:

At first I thought there should be a special place in hell for people like you. But then I thought, maybe purgatory! A dull, nothing kind of Catholic nowhere. Just like you!

The religious note struck various chords. Rick0564 wrote: "If God makes us Gay, then please let us love one another through marriage. It's what Jesus would do." Tina K inquired: "If I believed that Catholics should not vote, and managed to get a proposition passed to that effect, would that be fair to you?"

Ah, Tina, my opposition to same-sex marriage does not originate in the pew. However much sympathy, affection--indeed, love--I have for certain gay persons, "gay marriage" burlesques a primal institution rooted in nature. Marriage, as a unique bond between male and female, predates all politics and religious doctrines. And no one has to believe in God to see social anarchy, with children adrift in the wreckage, at the end of the same-sex marriage road.

But any semblance of moral reasoning is lost on a mob. The character and sensibility of the same-sex marriage brigades is told in their litany of sexual hostility:

Eat shit and die, c--.
Eat c-- and die, bitch.
You right-wing, heterosupremacist t--.
You are the moral equivalent of a Jewish Nazi. Roast in hell, you filthy c--.

It is one thing to read hate-filled mail on a computer screen. It is something else to have it in hand. At the end of the week, when it started coming to my house, I filed a police report.

Until now, donating to a cause did not open private citizens to a battery of invective and jackboot tactics. While celebrities sport their moral vanity with white ribbons, thousands of ordinary Americans who donated to Prop 8 are being targeted in a vile campaign of intimidation for having supported a measure that, in essence, ratified the crucial relation between marriage and childbearing. Some in California have lost their jobs over it; others worry about an unhinged stranger showing up at the door.

Who was it who predicted that if fascism ever came to the United States, it would come in the guise of liberal egalitarianism?

Maureen Mullarkey is a painter who writes on art and culture.

MISSOURI STATE POLICE THINK YOU AND I ARE TERRORISTS

By Chuck Baldwin
March 17, 2009
NewsWithViews.com

Thanks to a concerned Missouri state policeman, a nationally syndicated radio talk show host stated that he was alerted last week to a secret Missouri state police report that categorized supporters of Congressman Ron Paul, Bob Barr, and myself as "'militia' influenced terrorists." The report, he said, "instructs the Missouri police to be on the lookout for supporters displaying bumper stickers and other paraphernalia associated with the Constitutional, Campaign for Liberty, and Libertarian parties."

Ignoring the threat of Muslim terrorists, the Missouri Information Analysis Center (MIAC) report focuses on the so-called "militia movement" and "conflates it with supporters of Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin, Bob Barr, the so-called patriot movement and other political activist organizations opposed to the North American Union and the New World Order."

This report is not original, of course. During the Clinton administration, a Phoenix Federal Bureau of Investigation and Joint Terrorism Task Force explicitly designated "defenders" of the Constitution as "right-wing extremists." However, the MIAC report significantly expands on earlier documents and is the first known document to actually name names.

According to the MIAC, opposition to world government, NAFTA, federalization of the states, and restrictive gun laws are a potential threat to the police. The MIAC report also refers to Aaron Russo's film, "America: Freedom to Fascism."

The story exposing the MIAC report states, "The MIAC report is particularly pernicious because it indoctrinates Missouri law enforcement in the belief that people who oppose confiscatory taxation, believe in the well-documented existence of a New World Order and world government (a Google search of this phrase will pull up numerous references made by scores of establishment political leaders), and are opposed to the obvious expansion of the federal government at the expense of the states as violent extremists who are gunning for the police. It specifically targets supporters of mainstream political candidates and encourages police officers to consider them dangerous terrorists."

The Columbia Daily Tribune also carried the story last Saturday. It quoted Missouri resident Tim Neal of Miller County. "When Neal read the report, he couldn't help but think it described him. A military veteran and a delegate to the 2008 Missouri Republican state convention, he didn't appreciate being lumped in with groups like the Neo-Nazis.

"'I was going down the list and thinking, "Check, that's me,"' he said. 'I'm a Ron Paul supporter, check. I talk about the North American union, check. I've got the "America: Freedom to Fascism" video loaned out to somebody right now. So that means I'm a domestic terrorist? Because I've got a video about the Federal Reserve?'"

The Tribune's report also acknowledges, "The [MIAC] report's most controversial passage states that militia 'most commonly associate with third-party political groups' and support presidential candidates such as Ron Paul, former Constitutional [sic] Party candidate Chuck Baldwin and Bob Barr, the Libertarian candidate last year."

The Tribune report also said, "Neal, who has a Ron Paul bumper sticker on his car, said the next time he is pulled over by a police officer, he won't know whether it's because he was speeding or because of his political views."

See the Columbia Tribune report here:

I realize that there are people who will dismiss this kind of story as insignificant. They shouldn't. This is very serious and should be treated as such. Anyone who knows anything at all about history knows that before a state or national government can persecute--and commit acts of violence against--a group of people, they must first marginalize the group from society's mainstream and categorize it as dangerous.

Rome did exactly that to Christians, as did Mao's China; Hitler's Germany did the same thing to Jews; Stalin's Russia did the same thing to political dissenters, etc. That a State police agency in America would actually infer that people who supported Ron Paul, Bob Barr, or myself in a political campaign are somehow indistinguishable from violence-prone "militias" is beyond insulting: it is a smear campaign, and might should even be regarded as a hate crime!

Beyond that, the MIAC report paints with a very broad brush. In addition to supporting Ron Paul, Bob Barr, or myself, a review of the report reveals that opposition to any of the following risks someone being classified as a potential "domestic terrorist":

The New World Order
The United Nations
Gun Control
The violation of Posse Comitatus
The Federal Reserve
The Income Tax
The Ammunition Accountability Act
A possible Constitutional Convention (Con Con)
The North American Union
Universal Service Program
Radio Frequency Identification (RFID)
Abortion on demand
Illegal Immigration

Again, if you oppose any of the above, or if you supported Ron Paul, Bob Barr, or myself, you risk being labeled a "domestic terrorist," according to the MIAC.

Do you not see how dangerous this kind of slanderous labeling can become? It could affect your flight status when you try to board an airline. It could affect your application for sensitive jobs. It could affect your adjudication before a court or judge. It could make you a target for aggressive law enforcement strategies. It could affect your being able to obtain a passport. It could affect one's ability to purchase a firearm or receive a State concealed weapon permit.

This is very serious business! We are not talking about private opinions. We are talking about law enforcement agencies. And remember, most law enforcement agencies share these types of reports; therefore, how many other state police agencies have similar reports floating around? Probably several. Plus, how do we know that this report was not influenced by federal police agencies? We don't.

Rest assured, I do not plan to take this lying down. As one who is personally named in the above report, I demand a public retraction and apology from the MIAC and Missouri State Police. I can tell you that my family is extremely distraught that their husband, father, and grandfather would be labeled in such a manner. I am also not ruling out legal action. In addition, I am discussing an appropriate response with Ron Paul and Bob Barr. I will keep readers posted as to what comes of these discussions (as I am at liberty to do so, of course).

In the meantime, I encourage everyone who believes in the freedom of speech and who believes that the MIAC report is an egregious miscarriage of justice to contact the appropriate Missouri police officials. Here is the contact information:

Email address: Brandon.middleton@mshp.dps.mo.gov

Missouri Information Analysis Center
Division of Drugs & Crime Control
P. O. Box 568
Jefferson City, MO 65102-0568
Phone: 573-751-6422
Toll Free: 866-362-6422
Fax: 573-751-9950

And lest one thinks that none of this concerns him or her, I would like to remind you of the lament of Martin Niemoeller back in the days of Hitler's Germany. Niemoeller was a decorated U-Boat Captain and pastor of great distinction. An avid anti-communist, Niemoeller at first supported Hitler's rise to power and was hesitant to oppose the violations of civil rights against various groups he personally found distasteful. It did not take long, however, before Niemoeller realized that when laws protecting the rights of all were removed from some, no one was safe--including him. Unfortunately, he learned his lesson too late, as he, too, was persecuted and imprisoned by Hitler's State Police. Here is what Niemoeller said about his indifference:

"They came first for the communists, and I did not speak up-
because I was not a communist;
And then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak up - because I was not a trade unionist;
And then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak up because I was not a Jew;
And then they came for me-and there was no one left to speak up."

So, those of you who think you have nothing to fear because you did not vote for Ron Paul, Bob Barr, or me, or because you do not live in the State of Missouri need to think again. As I have repeatedly said, we either have freedom for all, or we have freedom for none. Truly, secret police reports such as the one above threaten the liberties of us all.

So, will you speak up now or wait until they come for you and no one is left to speak up?

*If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be made by credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link.

© 2009 Chuck Baldwin - All Rights Reserved

Lose your property for growing food?
Big Brother legislation could mean prosecution, fines up to $1 million

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: March 16, 2009
8:56 pm Eastern

By Chelsea Schilling

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WorldNetDaily

Some small farms and organic food growers could be placed under direct supervision of the federal government under new legislation making its way through Congress.

Food Safety Modernization Act

House Resolution 875, or the Food Safety Modernization Act of 2009, was introduced by Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., in February. DeLauro's husband, Stanley Greenburg, works for Monsanto – the world's leading producer of herbicides and genetically engineered seed.

DeLauro's act has 39 co-sponsors and was referred to the House Agriculture Committee on Feb. 4. It calls for the creation of a Food Safety Administration to allow the government to regulate food production at all levels – and even mandates property seizure, fines of up to $1 million per offense and criminal prosecution for producers, manufacturers and distributors who fail to comply with regulations.

Michael Olson, host of the Food Chain radio show and author of "Metro Farm," told WND the government should focus on regulating food production in countries such as China and Mexico rather than burdening small and organic farmers in the U.S. with overreaching regulations.

"We need somebody to watch over us when we're eating food that comes from thousands and thousands of miles away. We need some help there," he said. "But when food comes from our neighbors or from farmers who we know, we don't need all of those rules. If your neighbor sells you something that is bad and you get sick, you are going to get your hands on that farmer, and that will be the end of it. It regulates itself. "

The legislation would establish the Food Safety Administration within the Department of Health and Human Services "to protect the public health by preventing food-borne illness, ensuring the safety of food, improving research on contaminants leading to food-borne illness, and improving security of food from intentional contamination, and for other purposes."

Federal regulators will be tasked with ensuring that food producers, processors and distributors – both large and small – prevent and minimize food safety hazards such as food-borne illnesses and contaminants such as bacteria, chemicals, natural toxins or manufactured toxicants, viruses, parasites, prions, physical hazards or other human pathogens.

Under the legislation's broad wording, slaughterhouses, seafood processing plants, establishments that process, store, hold or transport all categories of food products prior to delivery for retail sale, farms, ranches, orchards, vineyards, aquaculture facilities and confined animal-feeding operations would be subject to strict government regulation.

Government inspectors would be required to visit and examine food production facilities, including small farms, to ensure compliance. They would review food safety records and conduct surveillance of animals, plants, products or the environment.

"What the government will do is bring in industry experts to tell them how to manage all this stuff," Olson said. "It's industry that's telling government how to set these things up. What it always boils down to is who can afford to have the most influence over the government. It would be those companies that have sufficient economies of scale to be able to afford the influence – which is, of course, industrial agriculture."

Farms and food producers would be forced to submit copies of all records to federal inspectors upon request to determine whether food is contaminated, to ensure they are in compliance with food safety laws and to maintain government tracking records. Refusal to register, permit inspector access or testing of food or equipment would be prohibited.

"What is going to happen is that local agriculture will end up suffering through some onerous protocols designed for international agriculture that they simply don't need," Olson said. "Thus, it will be a way for industrial agriculture to manage local agriculture."

Under the act, every food producer must have a written food safety plan describing likely hazards and preventative controls they have implemented and must abide by "minimum standards related to fertilizer use, nutrients, hygiene, packaging, temperature controls, animal encroachment, and water."

"That opens a whole can of worms," Olson said. "I think that's where people are starting to freak out about losing organic agriculture. Who is going to decide what the minimum standards are for fertilization or anything else? The government is going to bring in big industry and say we are setting up these protocols, so what do you think we should do? Who is it going to bring in to ask? The government will bring in people who have economies of scale who have that kind of influence."

DeLauro's act calls for the Food Safety Administration to create a "national traceability system" to retrieve history, use and location of each food product through all stages of production, processing and distribution.

Olson believes the regulations could create unjustifiable financial hardships for small farmers and run them out of business.

"That is often the purpose of rules and regulations: to get rid of your competition," he said. "Only people who are very, very large can afford to comply. They can hire one person to do paperwork. There's a specialization of labor there, and when you are very small, you can't afford to do all of these things."

Olson said despite good intentions behind the legislation, this act could devastate small U.S. farms.

"Every time we pass a rule or a law or a regulation to make the world a better place, it seems like what we do is subsidize production offshore," he said. "We tell farmers they can no longer drive diesel tractors because they make bad smoke. Well, essentially what we're doing is giving China a subsidy to grow our crops for us, or Mexico or anyone else."

Section 304 of the Food Safety Modernization Act establishes a group of "experts and stakeholders from Federal, State, and local food safety and health agencies, the food industry, consumer organizations, and academia" to make recommendations for improving food-borne illness surveillance.

According to the act, "Any person that commits an act that violates the food safety law … may be assessed a civil penalty by the Administrator of not more than $1,000,000 for each such act."

Each violation and each separate day the producer is in defiance of the law would be considered a separate offense and an additional penalty. The act suggests federal administrators consider the gravity of the violation, the degree of responsibility and the size and type of business when determining penalties.

Criminal sanctions may be imposed if contaminated food causes serious illness or death, and offenders may face fines and imprisonment of up to 10 years.

"It's just frightening what can happen with good intentions," Olson said. "It's probably the most radical notions on the face of this Earth, but local agriculture doesn't need government because it takes care of itself."

Food Safety and Tracking Improvement Act

Another "food safety" bill that has organic and small farmers worried is Senate Bill 425, or the Food Safety and Tracking Improvement Act, sponsored by Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio.

Brown's bill is backed by lobbyists for Monsanto, Archer Daniels Midland and Tyson. It was introduced in September and has been referred to the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Committee. Some say the legislation could also put small farmers out of business.

Like HR 875, the measure establishes a nationwide "traceability system" monitored by the Food and Drug Administration for all stages of manufacturing, processing, packaging and distribution of food. It would cost $40 million over three years.

"We must ensure that the federal government has the ability and authority to protect the public, given the global nature of the food supply," Brown said when he introduced the bill. He suggested the FDA and USDA have power to declare mandatory recalls.

The government would track food shipped in interstate commerce through a recordkeeping and audit system, a secure, online database or registered identification. Each farmer or producer would be required to maintain records regarding the purchase, sale and identification of their products.

A 13-member advisory committee of food safety and tracking technology experts, representatives of the food industry, consumer advocates and government officials would assist in implementing the traceability system.

The bill calls for the committee to establish a national database or registry operated by the Food and Drug Administration. It also proposes a electronic records database to identify sales of food and its ingredients "establishing that the food and its ingredients were grown, prepared, handled, manufactured, processed, distributed, shipped, warehoused, imported, and conveyed under conditions that ensure the safety of the food."

It states, "The records should include an electronic statement with the date of, and the names and addresses of all parties to, each prior sale, purchase, or trade, and any other information as appropriate."

If government inspectors find that a food item is not in compliance, they may force producers to cease distribution, recall the item or confiscate it.

"If the postal service can track a package from my office in Washington to my office in Cincinnati, we should be able to do the same for food products," Sen. Brown said in a Sept. 4, 2008, statement. "Families that are struggling with the high cost of groceries should not also have to worry about the safety of their food. This legislation gives the government the resources it needs to protect the public."

Recalls of contaminated food are usually voluntary; however, in his weekly radio address on March 15, President Obama announced he's forming a Food Safety Working Group to propose new laws and stop corruption of the nation's food.

The group will review, update and enforce food safety laws, which Obama said "have not been updated since they were written in the time of Teddy Roosevelt."

The president said outbreaks from contaminated foods, such as a recent salmonella outbreak among consumers of peanut products, have occurred more frequently in recent years due to outdated regulations, fewer inspectors, scaled back inspections and a lack of information sharing between government agencies.

"In the end, food safety is something I take seriously, not just as your president but as a parent," Obama said. "No parent should have to worry that their child is going to get sick from their lunch just as no family should have to worry that the medicines they buy will cause them harm."

The blogosphere is buzzing with comments on the legislation, including the following:

Obama and his cronies or his puppetmasters are trying to take total control – nationalize everything, disarm the populace, control food, etc. We are seeing the formation of a total police state.
Well ... that's not very " green " of Obama. What's his real agenda?
This is getting way out of hand! Isn't it enough the FDA already allows poisons in our foods?
If you're starving, no number of guns will enable you to stay free. That's the whole idea behind this legislation. He who controls the food really makes the rules.
The government is terrified of the tax loss. Imagine all the tax dollars lost if people actually grew their own vegetables! Imagine if people actually coordinated their efforts with family, friends and neighbors. People could be in no time eating for the price of their own effort. ... Oh the horror of it all! The last thing the government wants is for us to be self-sufficient.
They want to make you dependent upon government. I say no way! already the government is giving away taxes from my great great grandchildren and now they want to take away my food, my semi-auto rifles, my right to alternative holistic medicine? We need a revolution, sheeple! Wake up! They want fascism ... can you not see that?
The screening processes will make it very expensive for smaller farmers, where bigger agriculture corporations can foot the bill.
If anything it just increases accountability, which is arguably a good thing. It pretty much says they'll only confiscate your property if there are questions of contamination and you don't comply with their inspections. I think the severity of this has been blown out of proportion by a lot of conjecture.
Don't waste your time calling the criminals in D.C. and begging them to act like humans. This will end with a bloody revolt.
The more I examine this (on the surface) seemingly innocuous bill the more I hate it. It is a coward's ploy to push out of business small farms and farmers markets without actually making them illegal because many will choose not to operate due to the compliance issue.

It's going to be a very hot summer.
Posted: Saturday, March 14, 2009
- written by jerry golden

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Connie and I just returned from another trip to the Island of Cyprus, we thank God that all our goals for this trip was realized, we now must prepare for more trips to Turkey in the very near future. Much has been accomplished on these trips over the past few years, but still much needs to be done. More contacts are being set up for us and the ability to communicate is high on our agenda. On the top of our list is the need for the larger boat.

What you’re about to read may not be news to you but it needs to be said before going on to another subject. You don’t have to be terribly smart to know that it’s not only the US in trouble but the entire world. The global crisis could only be brought about by those who control the banking systems of the world, as it is often said money talks and (well you know the rest of it). As Believers we also know that even the powerful families who control the finances of the world are at the mercies of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Considering the above without going into all the details it becomes easy to realize that we have moved into the end times as prophesied in God’s Word. Possibly another way to look at it, God has removed His blessings and we now find ourselves faced with the evil around us as it closes in on the entire world.

We will find ourselves more in the survival mood as times goes on, with food shortages, bank foreclosures, crime and violence completely out of control, and people living in fear for their very lives. It will only be those who have God’s peace inside of them through the blood of Yeshua that will be able to face the coming crisis with the calmness that only comes through a personal relationship with God through the Messiah Yeshua. But even these Believers will suffer terrible carnal and natural hardships for they have been warned time and time again to prepare but still are listening to Pastors who refuse to preach the truth of God’s Word. Instead of being a witness in these days they will find themselves searching for food with the rest unable to share and witness of God’s love.

Daily now you are seeing your freedom taken away from you in ways that gives the Government more control over you lives, your movement and your finances. In the near future it will be very difficult to buy sell or move money without the approval of your banker who is already controlled by the Government. You are slowing being forced to accept ID chips in your driver’s license and passports but it won’t end there for the national ID card with a chip is being planned for the near future, then comes the dreaded implanted chip.

For those of you in the know already are aware that the CFR controls all the main line News and media. For in order for a Government to control the people they must control the information they receive.

Each of us has a calling as Believers, some are chosen, but there isn’t a Believer reading this that isn’t responsible to God for his or her works or the lack of them. You have been warned by many of God’s chosen ones and still many have not heeded that warning. You now have but a very short period of time to be responsible in all the areas of your life, to your family, to your lost friends and to your stewardship of the things God has given you. Where you invest your time and finances will tell a lot about what you truly believe in your heart. The worship of idols if it be money, or things can separate you from the Love of God. There is nothing wrong with money or things as long as God still has first place in your life. Your investments should be on eternal things not on the things that will perish in time.

This Ministry is doing all it possibly can with the resources given us to save as many Jewish lives as possible in the near future, their souls are of a great importance to us but you can’t introduce them to Yeshua after they have been killed so we first must save their lives. For once again a Holocaust is on the horizon throughout all of Europe and anti-Semitism is spreading and showing its ugly evil head throughout the entire world. We know we can’t save but a few, but we will be there to save the few we can. If we had a larger boat we’d be able to save more, but we will do what we can with the two 60-footers we now have.

There is still much groundwork to be done in Cyprus, Turkey, the Greek Islands and the word needs to be brought to the right people in Europe who can direct Jews to safety. As mentioned above we need to improve our emergency communication and we are working on that as quickly as we can.

Our safe houses in the above mentioned countries and the US are being coordinated by dedicated coordinators who are making large sacrifices and are very aware of the importance all this is to the heart of God.

Pray about investing in blessing the Apple of God’s Eye while your money still has some value.

Pray for the peace of Jerusalem, for our son Joel and all the IDF soldiers. Pray for this Ministry and your part in it.

Shalom, jerry golden

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Golden Reort
http://www.thegoldenreport.com/

shummer60 - Another government betrayal of our soldiers! Why should we serve???

The American Legion Strongly Opposed to President's Plan to Charge Wounded Heroes for Treatment
Mon Mar 16, 5:49 pm ET

To: POLITICAL EDITORS

Contact: Craig Roberts of The American Legion, +1-202-263-2982 Office, +1-202-406-0887 Cell

WASHINGTON, March 16 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The leader of the nation's largest veterans organization says he is "deeply disappointed and concerned" after a meeting with President Obama today to discuss a proposal to force private insurance companies to pay for the treatment of military veterans who have suffered service-connected disabilities and injuries. The Obama administration recently revealed a plan to require private insurance carriers to reimburse the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) in such cases.

"It became apparent during our discussion today that the President intends to move forward with this unreasonable plan," said Commander David K. Rehbein of The American Legion. "He says he is looking to generate $540-million by this method, but refused to hear arguments about the moral and government-avowed obligations that would be compromised by it."

The Commander, clearly angered as he emerged from the session said, "This reimbursement plan would be inconsistent with the mandate ' to care for him who shall have borne the battle' given that the United States government sent members of the armed forces into harm's way, and not private insurance companies. I say again that The American Legion does not and will not support any plan that seeks to bill a veteran for treatment of a service connected disability at the very agency that was created to treat the unique need of America's veterans!"

Commander Rehbein was among a group of senior officials from veterans service organizations joining the President, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel, Secretary of Veterans Affairs Eric Shinseki and Steven Kosiak, the overseer of defense spending at the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The group's early afternoon conversation at The White House was precipitated by a letter of protest presented to the President earlier this month. The letter, co-signed by Commander Rehbein and the heads of ten colleague organizations, read, in part, " There is simply no logical explanation for billing a veteran's personal insurance for care that the VA has a responsibility to provide. While we understand the fiscal difficulties this country faces right now, placing the burden of those fiscal problems on the men and women who have already sacrificed a great deal for this country is unconscionable."

Commander Rehbein reiterated points made last week in testimony to both House and Senate Veterans' Affairs Committees. It was stated then that The American Legion believes that the reimbursement plan would be inconsistent with the mandate that VA treat service-connected injuries and disabilities given that the United States government sends members of the armed forces into harm's way, and not private insurance companies. The proposed requirement for these companies to reimburse the VA would not only be unfair, says the Legion, but would have an adverse impact on service-connected disabled veterans and their families. The Legion argues that, depending on the severity of the medical conditions involved, maximum insurance coverage limits could be reached through treatment of the veteran's condition alone. That would leave the rest of the family without health care benefits. The Legion also points out that many health insurance companies require deductibles to be paid before any benefits are covered. Additionally, the Legion is concerned that private insurance premiums would be elevated to cover service-connected disabled veterans and their families, especially if the veterans are self-employed or employed in small businesses unable to negotiate more favorable across-the-board insurance policy pricing. The American Legion also believes that some employers, especially small businesses, would be reluctant to hire veterans with service-connected disabilities due to the negative impact their employment might have on obtaining and financing company health care benefits.

"I got the distinct impression that the only hope of this plan not being enacted," said Commander Rehbein, "is for an alternative plan to be developed that would generate the desired $540-million in revenue. The American Legion has long advocated for Medicare reimbursement to VA for the treatment of veterans. This, we believe, would more easily meet the President's financial goal. We will present that idea in an anticipated conference call with White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel in the near future.

"I only hope the administration will really listen to us then. This matter has far more serious ramifications than the President is imagining," concluded the Commander.

SOURCE The American Legion

Copyright © 2009 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.Questions or CommentsPrivacy PolicyTerms of ServiceCopyright/IP Policy