MCViewPoint

Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »

Erie Times E-Edition Article – Harris pick is a win for America

Posted by M. C. on August 14, 2020

The Erie Times-News supported Barack Obama – Marxist parents, communist mentor in Frank Marshall Davis.

Harris’ father an avowed Marxist professor at Berkley(!)

The Times is nothing if not consistent.

One wonders if the Mead family envisioned this.

The attacks, of course, began immediately. In Erie, Vice President Mike Pence’s nephew during a Wednesday campaign stop decried Harris — a career prosecutor — as a leftist radical. Absurd on its face, the charge also reprises a regrettable style of disingenuous, inflammatory politics that undermines the gravity and substance of voters’ deliberations.

We shall see.

https://erietimes-pa-app.newsmemory.com/?publink=05e311c7f

For all of the profound promises implicit in our country’s founding documents, the journey for all Americans to participate fully in them has been long, arduous and often deadly.

And it is not over. There remain many who seek either explicitly or through more opaque legal and political strategies to thwart the advance of civil rights and justice for all. Not just a matter of dark hearts and minds, the immense power at stake animates.

It was fitting that presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden and his newly chosen running mate, California Sen. Kamala Harris, appeared for the first time together Wednesday on the anniversary of and in repudiation of white supremacist violence that erupted in Charlottesville, Virginia, three years ago.

Harris, born in California, daughter of an Indian scientist and Jamaican professor, is the first woman of color and only the third woman in the history of the country to be chosen by a major party to run for the vice presidency, a heartbeat away from the presidency.

Considering Harris’ readiness — California’s former top prosecutor and now a sitting U.S. senator — and indeed that of so many other women Biden vetted, it should not come as a surprise. As Erie County Assistant District Attorney Khadija Horton told reporter Matthew Rink, Harris “deserved this.”

That reality only serves to underscore the damage the historic barriers to women, people of color, and others long oppressed have caused — not just to them, but the nation as a whole in the human capital squandered. Each advance of inclusion only makes us richer and stronger.

Biden on Wednesday rightly said America could be summed up in a word: “possibilities.” With Harris’ pick, that is what Erie political organizer Martha “Marty” Nwachukwu sees, young girls of color liberated to imagine new horizons for their lives and potential.

It is an affirmation, as Horton said, that “we really matter,” which is not a nicety in a country working to overcome an enduring legacy of enslavement, racial terror and systemic discrimination.

The attacks, of course, began immediately. In Erie, Vice President Mike Pence’s nephew during a Wednesday campaign stop decried Harris — a career prosecutor — as a leftist radical. Absurd on its face, the charge also reprises a regrettable style of disingenuous, inflammatory politics that undermines the gravity and substance of voters’ deliberations.

It also sullied this historic moment, which should be celebrated by every American, regardless of party or ideology.

Harris’ pick represents payment on a sorely overdue debt to Americans who, for generations remained barred —by law, violence and prejudice — from participating fully in American greatness, even as they worked so hard to establish, defend and perfect it.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Watch “Herd Immunity Deniers Can’t Bear Sweden’s Truth” on YouTube

Posted by M. C. on August 13, 2020

Across the United States authoritarians are clamoring for a return to lockdown over what they claim is a resurgence of coronavirus infections. Despite the data not supporting that conclusion, they want to shut the economy down and further destroy life in the US. They point to Europe’s success with lockdowns – even as there appears to be a resurgence of cases in Europe. What is most shocking and striking is that no one in authority in the US is calling for us to emulate the one country that appears to have beat the virus thus far: Sweden. Why can’t they even utter the word “Sweden”?
Please help the Liberty Report to keep holding their feet to the fire by making a tax-deductible contribution to the Ron Paul Institute: http://www.RonPaulInstitute.org/support

 

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Comments Off on Watch “Herd Immunity Deniers Can’t Bear Sweden’s Truth” on YouTube

Kamala Harris Is Basically Obama-Clinton 2.0, but Worse | Mises Institute

Posted by M. C. on August 13, 2020

On foreign policy, for instance, Harris is not significantly different from Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Susan Rice, Joseph Biden, or other high-ranking US officials who have been happy to perpetuate endless wars across the globe in recent decades. According to her official campaign site, no region of the globe is off-limits to US intervention so long as the US intervenes multilaterally. It’s just the Clinton-Obama doctrine yet again. In usual Washington doublespeak fashion, she says she is in favor of ending the war in Afghanistan but insists that the US must maintain a presence there to prop up the Afghani regime. She has advocated continued military intervention in Syria. 

Harris is very much an advocate of the conspiracy theory that Russians “hacked” the 2016 election and remain a major threat to US security.

On the environment, she supports a “Green New Deal,” which we would today expect from any Democrat running for the White House. This means immense amounts of new subsidies for “green energy,” paid for with new taxes and a host of new regulations on private businesses. It means global management of carbon emissions in line with international agreements like the Paris accords.

On economic policy, it’s the usual interventionist slate of policies. She wants to “empower” labor unions, more heavily regulate employers, and aggressively prosecute businesses for a variety of “crimes” that run afoul of the intricate labyrinth of federal laws managing the financial sector. Fiscal policy is sure to be what we’ve come to expect from both Republicans and Democrats: endless deficit spending.

Harris has lauded federally imposed mandates like “forced busing,” in which federal courts dictate public schools’ enrollment policies in the name of racially desegregating schools.

https://mises.org/power-market/kamala-harris-basically-obama-clinton-20-worse?utm_source=Mises+Institute+Subscriptions&utm_campaign=dd0d73cb0f-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_9_21_2018_9_59_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_8b52b2e1c0-dd0d73cb0f-228343965

Ryan McMaken

Listen to the Radio Rothbard version of this article.

Presidential candidate and former vice president Joseph Biden announced Kamala Harris as his running mate today. Harris is currently a US senator from California and the former attorney general for the state. Biden’s choice brings her back to the fore of the 2020 race after having dropped out as a presidential candidate in early December.

In many ways, Harris dropped out because she had trouble setting herself apart from other candidates such as Biden, representing the mainstream of the Democratic Party. While Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders represented in many respects the far left of the Democratic coalition, Harris was just one of several establishment Democrats in the race, and competed for many of the same fundraising dollars as Biden and Amy Klobuchar.

By picking Harris, Biden—or whoever is making these decisions for Biden—will likely placate the Obama-Clinton power brokers in the party who privately oppose lawmakers like Warren and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who are viewed by establishment Democrats as candidates who often alienate middle-class Middle American voters. At the same time, Harris is likely to satisfy—or at least silence—critics on the party’s left wing, who have long called for a black woman on the presidential ticket.

In 2020, the choice of a vice-presidential candidate is especially high-stakes, because many believe Biden will be either unwilling or unable to run for president in 2024. This sets Harris up as the heir-apparent leader of the party. Because Biden will be the oldest man to ever enter the presidency, and because he is clearly not in excellent health, it is known that Harris has a good chance of succeeding him directly in case he dies or becomes seriously ill.

But although Harris is “demographically correct” for the party’s left wing, she remains basically a social climber who is very well ensconced in the mainstream of the party—although the party’s mainstream has itself moved considerably to the left in recent years.

On foreign policy, for instance, Harris is not significantly different from Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Susan Rice, Joseph Biden, or other high-ranking US officials who have been happy to perpetuate endless wars across the globe in recent decades. According to her official campaign site, no region of the globe is off-limits to US intervention so long as the US intervenes multilaterally. It’s just the Clinton-Obama doctrine yet again. In usual Washington doublespeak fashion, she says she is in favor of ending the war in Afghanistan but insists that the US must maintain a presence there to prop up the Afghani regime. She has advocated continued military intervention in Syria.

Harris is very much an advocate of the conspiracy theory that Russians “hacked” the 2016 election and remain a major threat to US security.

On the environment, she supports a “Green New Deal,” which we would today expect from any Democrat running for the White House. This means immense amounts of new subsidies for “green energy,” paid for with new taxes and a host of new regulations on private businesses. It means global management of carbon emissions in line with international agreements like the Paris accords.

On economic policy, it’s the usual interventionist slate of policies. She wants to “empower” labor unions, more heavily regulate employers, and aggressively prosecute businesses for a variety of “crimes” that run afoul of the intricate labyrinth of federal laws managing the financial sector. Fiscal policy is sure to be what we’ve come to expect from both Republicans and Democrats: endless deficit spending.

Harris has lauded federally imposed mandates like “forced busing,” in which federal courts dictate public schools’ enrollment policies in the name of racially desegregating schools.

In all of this, we don’t find very much at all that differs from the eight years of the Obama administration. It’s the usual center-left policy agenda we’ve seen since at least the 2008 election.

What is especially dangerous now, however, is that the political context has changed considerably. Both major US parties have adopted far more interventionist stances in terms of fiscal policy, monetary policy, and in terms of domestic police power. What’s more, the presidency has slowly been moving toward a rule-by-decree model for decades, in which the president essentially rules through executive orders and Congress only intervenes on occasion. The Trump administration has only accelerated this trend.

This is likely music to Kamala Harris’s ears. Harris, after all, as a former prosecutor and as a presidential candidate has never shied away from aggressive use of executive power.

As Tyler Curtis has noted:

Over the course of her campaign, she has repeatedly promised to bypass Congress and take unilateral action on a whole host of intensely divisive issues. On immigration, she has vowed to issue an executive order granting citizenship to “Dreamers” (migrants brought to America illegally by their parents). On the environment, she says she will declare a “state of water emergency” and force the country to re-join the Paris Climate agreement. She also wants to ban the use of fracking.

Many observers have noted how dictatorial these statements sound, and rightly so. To follow through on any one of these proposals would be deeply suspect, but the sheer number of them, coupled with Harris’ brazenly peremptory attitude, must leave no doubt as to her authoritarian ambitions.

For Harris, Congress is at best merely an advisory body. As a kindly gesture, the President may ask Congress for permission to do something, but he or she does not really require their assent.

Harris has even said she would do an end run around Congress on gun control:

upon being elected, I will give the United States Congress 100 days to get their act together and have the courage to pass gun safety laws. And if they fail to do it, then I will take executive action. And specifically what I’ll do is put in place a requirement that for anyone who sells more than five guns a year, they are required to do background checks when they sell those guns.

These are the words of a politician who views the role of the president as an elected dictator. Many presidents, of course—including Donald Trump—have likely viewed things this way, but it’s now easier than ever for a president to carry out these “promises” in which presidents don’t wait for Congress to pass duly enacted laws. That’s the old way of doing things. The new way is to follow Barack Obama’s strategy of using “a pen and a phone” to issue diktats without the inconvenience of involving an elected legislature.

No doubt, many of Harris’s detractors will call her radical or a tool of the far left. The reality is actually far more alarming. Radicals have a tendency to lose political battles, because they often stand on principle. Harris is unlikely to have that problem. She is very much a savvy player who fits in well within the party’s mainstream and who will carry on the center-left political program as we’ve come to expect it from the likes of Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama. There’s not much here that’s new. What has changed, however, is that we live in a country where presidents are ever more rapidly becoming unrestrained in taking unilateral action to do what they want. In ages past it might have been reasonable to assume the Congress might effectively intervene to restrain a president’s less popular and more radical proposals. That vision of the US regime is looking more unrealistic than ever.

 

Be seeing you

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Gold Prices Show There’s a “Big Short” Going on in Official Currencies | Mises Wire

Posted by M. C. on August 13, 2020

However, it is not only the rising gold price that indicates that the purchasing power of fiat currencies is on the decline. Basically, all other goods prices go up as well, most notably asset prices—the prices of stocks, bonds, housing, and real estate. This means that you can buy fewer and fewer stocks, bonds, and houses with a given official currency unit. From this perspective, you can rightfully conclude that a broad-based debasement is going on as far as the world’s major official fiat currencies are concerned.

https://mises.org/wire/gold-prices-show-theres-big-short-going-official-currencies?utm_source=Mises+Institute+Subscriptions&utm_campaign=43525d04f4-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_9_21_2018_9_59_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_8b52b2e1c0-43525d04f4-228343965

On August 4, 2020, the price of gold surpassed $2,000 per ounce, currently trading around an all-time high of $2,050 per ounce. While one may say that the price of gold is on the rise, it would actually be more meaningful to say that the purchasing power of the world’s fiat currencies vis-à-vis gold is on the decline, because this is what a rising price for gold and silver in, say, US dollars, euros, Chinese renminbi, Japanese yen, or Swiss francs really stands for: The higher the price of this precious metal, the lower the exchange value of official currencies.

Gold isn’t just a good like any other. It is special: it is the “ultimate means of payment,” the “base money of civilization.” Monetary history bears this out: whenever people were free to choose their money, they went for gold. Indeed, gold has all the physical properties that make for sound money: gold is scarce, homogenous, easily transportable, divisible, mintable, durable, and, last but not least, has a relatively high value per unit of weight. Even though officially demonetized in the early 1970s, people haven’t stop appreciating gold’s “moneyish” qualities.

However, it is not only the rising gold price that indicates that the purchasing power of fiat currencies is on the decline. Basically, all other goods prices go up as well, most notably asset prices—the prices of stocks, bonds, housing, and real estate. This means that you can buy fewer and fewer stocks, bonds, and houses with a given official currency unit. From this perspective, you can rightfully conclude that a broad-based debasement is going on as far as the world’s major official fiat currencies are concerned.

Of course, this is not what most people would wish for, as they prefer to hold a kind of money that doesn’t go down in value, money that actually preserves or even increases its purchasing power over time. Actually no one who is in his right mind would wish to hold inflationary money. Unfortunately, however, central banks have been debasing their official fiat currencies over the last decades. To make things even worse, the monetary debasement is gathering speed due to the consequences of the politically dictated lockdown crisis.

Central banks around the world print up ever greater amounts of fiat currencies to make up for lost income and profits. It is against this background that the rise of goods prices in terms of official currencies can be interpreted in a meaningful way: the rise in the quantity of money will, as an economic law, cause the exchange value of the money unit to go down—either in absolute terms or in relative terms (that is by keeping money prices at a higher level when compared to a situation in which the quantity of money has not been increased).

In view of central banks‘ expansion of the quantity of fiat currency, people increasingly seek to hold assets, such as, say, stocks, housing, real estate, and commodities, that are considered to be “inflation protected.” As they exchange fiat currencies for other goods, the money prices of these goods are bid up, and higher money prices are equivalent to a decline in the purchasing power of fiat currencies. Of course, financial market traders will be among the first to react and benefit, while those less informed will get the shaft.

In a world in which central banks not only ramp up the quantity of fiat currency but also push market interest rates to zero, people get hit particularly hard. Saving in traditional instruments (bank deposits, money market funds, etc.) is made impossible. The artificially lowered interest rates also contribute to asset price inflation: the prices of stocks and real estate are driven upward. Those holding fiat currencies suffer losses as far as their purchasing power is concerned, while people who hold assets that gain in price are on the receiving end.

Unfortunately, an end to central banks’ inflationary policies is not in sight. There is the widespread and deeply entrenched belief among people that an increase in the quantity of fiat currency would make the economy richer, and that it would help overcome financial and economic crises. This is, however, a serious mistake, for all an increase in the stock of money does is make some richer at the expense of many others. And an inflation policy can cover up economic and financial problems only for so long.

Ludwig von Mises wrote:

The collapse of an inflation policy carried to its extreme—as in the United States in 1781 and in France in 1796—does not destroy the monetary system, but only the credit money or fiat money of the State that has overestimated the effectiveness of its own policy. The collapse emancipates commerce from etatism and establishes metallic money again.1

Mises’s words should help us to better understand why the appreciation of gold (and lately also silver) vis-à-vis the fiat currency universe has been underway for quite some time now.

  • 1. Ludwig von Mises, The Theory of Money and Credit, trans. J.E. Batson (1953; repr., Auburn, AL: Ludwig von Mises Institute, 2009), p. 230.
Author:

Thorsten Polleit

Dr. Thorsten Polleit is Chief Economist of Degussa and Honorary Professor at the University of Bayreuth. He also acts as an investment advisor.

Be seeing you

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

10 Ways the Communist Manifesto has Infiltrated the USA

Posted by M. C. on August 13, 2020

Did you ever think about property tax like in No. 1?

I suspect 2, 3, 5, 8 & 9 will make themselves obvious depending on how the election pans out. Obvious as in they are already here but they will get worse.

https://www.thedailybell.com/all-articles/news-analysis/top-10-goals-in-the-communist-manifesto-accomplished-in-america/

By Joe Jarvis

If you can’t handle one little arbitrary political abduction at the hands of secret government police, socialism may not be for you.

Socialists protesting in Portland are learning that “The worst thing that can happen to a socialist is to have his country ruled by socialists who are not his friends.” -Ludwig von Mises

See, you might not realize it, but the USA is already heavily influenced by the socialist/ communist philosophy of Karl Marx.

Socialism is more of an umbrella term, meaning centralized control of the means of production– like factories and farming– in the hands of the state.

Communism is more extreme, with complete abolishment of private property, and a dictatorial government that allegedly attempts to distribute wealth “to each according to his need,” and extract labor “from each according to his ability.”

The two are related enough to use them interchangeably for our purposes.

Karl Marx was born over 200 years ago. And despite the utter failure of his communist philosophy in practice, the cult lives on. Still people want to try again… this time they will get it right.

Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels originally published The Communist Manifesto in 1848. It laid out the beliefs and action plan of the Communist Party. The goal was to get communists of every nationality to rise up and unite to overthrow their “capitalist oppressors.”

Little did they know their words would be used by the likes of Stalin and Mao as justification for over 100 million murders all in the name of a great leap forward for society.

In America, the goals of the communists have crept their way into society with little fanfare. Many people have no idea that public schools, the graduated income tax, and even a central state-controlled bank (like the Federal Reserve) were tenets of the Communist Manifesto.

In one section The Communist Manifesto boils down to a list of ten main goals.

Here are those goals, in Marx and Engels’ own words, followed by some discussion about of how deeply they have seeped into the United States government.

“1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.”

Also known as property taxes.

Can you really say you own land if you must pay the government every year in order to keep it? Fail to pay your rent, and they will eventually confiscate “your” land. This money is then used for “public purposes” like public schools (just wait for #10) and police, who will remove you from the government’s land if you fail to pay your rent.

And if the local government can fine you for keeping a front yard garden, or backyard chickens, do you really own the land anyway? The proletariat simply trades capitalist oppressors for government oppressors.

The federal government owns outright 28% of all land in the United States, 640 million acres. This includes the Bureau of Land Management’s 248 million-acre turf used to control and oppress political dissidents like Cliven Bundy.

“The BLM is also responsible for subsurface mineral resources in areas totaling 700 million acres.” That means they control almost three times as much land as they own.

Each state government owns an average of 8.7% of its state’s land. Another source claims the feds own over 31% of the U.S. landmass, which brings the combined state and federal total ownership to almost 40% of all land in the USA.

And let’s not forget about eminent domain, where the government can just take your land for “public use” (or public benefit) with “just compensation.”

If you don’t feel that the compensation was fair, simply take the most powerful government on Earth to court– courts that they own. I’m sure you will be treated fairly.

“2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.”

Even after the latest tax cuts, the federal income tax rates range from 10% to 37%. You pay more if you earn more. That’s what a graduated income tax means.

According to the Wall Street Journal, the top 20% of income earners in the U.S. paid 87% of all income taxes in 2018. These people who earn $150,000 or more account for 52% of the income earned in the USA, but will pay almost all of the income taxes.

The top 1% of earners– the evil bourgeoisie making over $730,000 per year–actually paid over 43% of all income taxes in 2018.

So 1% of earners who make 16% of the country’s total income will pay 43% of the total income tax.

It sounds like way more than their “fair share” to me. But the communists won’t be satisfied until everything is owned by the state.

“3. Abolition of all right of inheritance.”

They want to fleece the rich one more time when they die, even though all that wealth was taxed already as income or capital gains.

There is a hefty exemption to the estate tax (AKA death tax)–the first $11 million or so is not taxed. But every dollar over that is taxed at 40%. (State-level estate taxes add additional costs, often with lower exemptions.)

When you think about it, $11 million is not so much money when you are talking about a business that might be passed down through inheritance.

If a business is worth $15 million, the family of the deceased would owe $1.4 million. If they don’t have $1.4 million in cash hanging around, they could have to dismantle the business in order to pay the taxes. That could mean a loss of good proletariat jobs and a hit to the economy.

The same could happen to a piece of land or estate that has been in the family for generations.

The socialists would say, “Aww boo-hoo, screw the rich,” because they are hateful and greedy for other people’s wealth. But understand that they never stop with the rich.

Eventually the middle-class is gutted by the socialists, when they realize all the confiscated wealth of the rich won’t last a year in government spending.

“4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.”

Let’s start with the Exit Tax.

Why don’t you just move out of America if you don’t like the taxes?

Well, America taxes its citizens worldwide, even if they do not live or work in the USA.

Why not renounce your citizenship then?

That is one option. But it’s actually not free. In fact, the U.S. confiscates a serious percentage of property from emigrants.

It is called the Exit Tax. It gets complicated, but basically, the government is going to tax you on your net worth, as if you just sold all your assets.

If you don’t have the liquid cash to cover that, you would actually have to start selling assets–property, stocks, etc.–in order to pay the Exit Tax. Of course, you would be taxed on the income or capital gains first, and then have to pay the exit tax with what is left over.

But again, a big part of being a communist is hating rich people. People with a net worth of less than $2 million are much less affected by the exit tax, and only have to pay a few thousand dollars to divorce Uncle Sam.

So let’s turn to confiscation of rebels’ property that affects the poorest proletariat… civil asset forfeiture.

This is often used against poor people who cannot afford to defend themselves in court. The police simply steal property or cash that they “suspect” was involved in some type of crime, without having to prove anything.

They don’t even have to charge you with a crime, let alone convict you. And you have to prove your innocence if you want your car, house, or cash back.

For example, police seized over $50,000 from a Christian Rock band that had collected donations for an orphanage, because they couldn’t prove they got the money through legal means.

Between 2001 and 2016, “more than $2.5 billion in cash seizures had occurred on the nation’s highways without either a search warrant or an indictment.”

And that’s not even counting the more than $3.2 billion the DEA has seized since 2007 without filing civil or criminal charges.

Just having cash is a pretty low bar to be considered a rebel. Then again, what should we expect from a communist doctrine?

“5. Centralisation of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.”

I wonder if today’s communists are aware of this one. They can’t possibly think the Federal Reserve helps the proletariat, yet that is exactly what the manifesto describes.

Some people might disagree that the Federal Reserve is state-owned. Technically it has a private board, although board members are appointed by politicians.

But the government granted the Federal Reserve dictatorial control over the economy. The government refuses to audit it, and the government protects its monopoly. It is without a doubt a feature of a centralized state.

The Fed sets the interest rates, prints money, and finances much of the debt of the United States government.

It centralizes capital, and lets the government decide how to use it. They usually use it to bail out banks, wage wars, and steal more value from the people through inflation.

The Federal Reserve also makes it easier for the state to confiscate rebel property. With a government monopoly, it can simply freeze accounts at home, and bully banks abroad into accepting the will of the US government.

“6. Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.”

FCC, FTC, DOT, FAA, TSA, CBP–oh it’s an alphabet soup of communications and transport regulators.

They regulate the phone lines, the roadways, air traffic, rails, mail and package delivery.

This is nothing new.

Around the same time Karl Marx was writing The Communist Manifesto, Lysander Spooner was doing something productive with his time.

Spooner started the American Letter Mail Company to compete with the U.S. Postal Service. He undercut their prices and provided better customer service, but was fined and cited for breaking laws which protected the government monopoly. He was forced out of business in 1851.

The government doesn’t quite have control over the internet, but they did create the conditions to allow a handful of companies to control access to the internet.

The NSA monitors every communication. Customs and Border Protection performs unconstitutional searches at the border, whether you are an American or foreign.

There is even a bill in Congress that would outlaw encrypted communications, so the government could know absolutely everything you communicate via text, call, or online messaging.

And of course, you can’t go out in public without running the risk of being harassed by local, state, and federal police. You don’t have the right to travel without justifying every action to a police officer.

“7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.”

The state has certainly dabbled in factory ownership, like the GM bailout. They control utilities like water and power. And they have certainly subsidized their fair share of business from oil and solar panels to sugar and corn.

We can refer back to #1 to see how much land the government controls, often under the auspices of improving soil and protecting wastelands.

Then there are plenty of government contractors which are basically the same thing as a government-owned company. If 100% of their revenue comes from the government, they are not a private company. This is especially prominent in the defense industry, which is where the term military-industrial-complex comes from.

The government spends about 34% of the GDP every year— in 2020 it will be closer to 50%. That is a significant percentage of the economy which the government owns or controls.

And let’s not forget about everyone’s favorite socialist, Franklin D. Roosevelt, whose New Deal programs like the Tennessee Valley Authority did just this.

Of course this power means sometimes the government poisons an entire river for thousands of miles, like the EPA did to the Colorado River in 2015.

“8. Equal liability of all to labour. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.”

Yes, the Communist Manifesto proposes enslaving all those unwilling to work.

Now, it might not seem like the U.S. government forces people to work. But you have to make money just to park your ass on a plot of land. Local governments want property taxes, which means you must make a certain amount of money just to have a place to live.

People bitch about landlords, but at least they are providing a place to live. Try building yourself a little cottage on government land and they’ll throw you in prison. (So in that sense, they will provide a home to anyone.)

Without the socialist government, you could settle an unused a piece of land, and make your own way in the world.

And the fact that the government claims the authority to tax you on everything you earn basically means you have a liability to labor for the government if you want to labor at all.

This is the antithesis of right to the pursuit of happiness the founders of the USA talked about. That was synonymous with property rights, because working, building, and creating is how most people pursue a fulfilled life.

In fact, they are required for life itself. You can’t stay alive without someone working to feed you, for example.

Therefore, most of us cannot go through life without earning something to pay for necessities. But we can’t just earn what we need, we must earn way more than we need because the government will take a huge chunk of our income.

We tend to think about taxes as a percentage of our income. But what about as a percentage of our time?

The government forces you to work as its slave from about January through April every year. In a typical career, you will spend in total more than 14 full years working as a slave for the government.

“9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equable distribution of the population over the country.”

The government helped create factory farming by regulating all the small-scale producers out of business.

Reason reports that USDA regulations have forced small slaughterhouses to close in favor of large factory-style slaughterhouses. This might sound like a good idea at first. But consider that when one infected animal makes its way to a slaughterhouse, it can contaminate so much more meat.

Having many slaughterhouses distributed across the U.S. meant that any infections were localized, and affected far fewer people. Plus when the slaughterhouse is local, it is easier to know the owners and see the conditions for yourself.

The animals are raised closer to home, requiring less logistics and a more secure supply chain from farm to table.

The U.S. government has long subsidized large crop producers centralizing them, and making it that much harder for small farms to compete.

It started with the Farm Bill in 1933 and continues to this day.

What we get is cheap, but unhealthy products. And even though the products on the shelf look cheap, we already paid for them with our tax dollars through subsidies.

You may not want to buy unhealthy foods loaded with high fructose corn syrup. But your money will pay for that crap whether you like it or not.

As for the second part, the US federal government does all it can to destroy the autonomy of towns and states across the USA. It does this with the carrot– giving money to governments that do its bidding; and the stick– using federal money and agents to enforce its laws, however unjust.

“10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children’s factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production.”

This may be tenth on the list, but it is number one in ensuring all the rest fall into place.

American communists got this goal in place just four years after the Communist Manifesto was published, with Massachusetts enacting the first compulsory public education law in 1852. After that, it was only a matter of time until the population was indoctrinated to believe whatever the government taught them.

The book Teen 2.0: Saving Our Children and Families from the Torment of Adolescence delves in depth into the history and injustice of compulsory schooling.

It was designed so that the state and corporations could work together to train an obedient workforce, with the public footing the bill.

The point was not open minds and a desire to learn. The aim of the education was setting students up for whatever mediocre to low paying jobs the industrialists wanted them to fill.

The communists succeeded in getting exactly what they wanted out of American schools. And today we see the growing gap between what people learn in school, and what skills they actually need for good jobs. The communists have got the American education system stuck in a stagnant philosophy of industrial labor.

Of course, they did it with supposedly the best intentions. Sounds like a good idea to save kids from dangerous work. But in the process, they also robbed children and young adults of their autonomy and choice. They forced kids against their will into a government institution and set the course for their entire lives.

With childhood education infiltrated by the communists, it was only a matter of time until the US became a socialist country.

And I’d say we are basically there.

That’s why it is so absurd that people think “socialism” would be a radical change for the US. It would be more of the same, a doubling down on every failure you can think of from the last century.

What the socialists being arrested in Portland by other socialists might not realize is that Obama signed the NDAA which is now being used by Trump/ federal troops to kidnap protesters in Portland.

The Republicans and Democrats are different heads of the same beast, just like Socialists versus the National Socialists. The labels hardly matter.

They are authoritarians first, and then break down into factions of communist, socialist, fascist, etc. Each grows the power of the federal government, and hands that power off to the next faction when the tides turn.

A truly radical experiment would actually be trying a real free market for once.

Never let a good crisis go to waste is the mantra of the elites.

In tumultuous times, their tactics have extra potency. They reach for more power.

But this is also when the elite are most vulnerable.

By studying their tactics, you will be more prepared to guard against, and counter-attack the enemy.

The current crisis is being used to exploit the masses. But it also presents tremendous opportunity to take the power back, and reshape this world.

Society is entering a new period of transition, a struggle that will reveal the elites of the next generation.

Now is the time to seize your power if you intend to be among their ranks.

Subscribe to THE DAILY BELL and immediately receive TWO FREE BLACKPAPERS:

1. Four Ways The Elite Control You in a Crisis

     And how to flip the script to seize their power now

2. The Trojan Horse: How (and Why) to Join the Ranks of the Elite

Be seeing you

 

 

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | 1 Comment »

Residents Band Together To March ‘Antifa Commie B******* Out of the Neighborhood’

Posted by M. C. on August 13, 2020

Those Fort Collins citizens better watch out! Unlike Antifa tactics, defending yourself will get you arrested. Like in the UK.

Fortunately for us, Fort Collins in the US.

https://www.westernjournal.com/residents-band-together-march-antifa-commie-b-neighborhood/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=PostBottomSharingButtons&utm_campaign=websitesharingbuttons&fbclid=IwAR1GL–Xd4ENUXFlQ47aGmy34GpmHWPI_ObcvYUN7o9QJPZKfxASgIjcX8M

Jack Davis
Contributor, News
Summary

More Info Recent Posts Contact

Jack Davis is a freelance writer who joined The Western Journal in July 2015 and chronicled the campaign that saw President Donald Trump elected. Since then, he has written extensively for The Western Journal on the Trump administration as well as foreign policy and military issues.

Fort Collins, Colorado, residents made their stand Saturday as black-clad demonstrators beat a retreat after dueling marches collided.

The pushback began with a flag-bedecked “Back the Blue” rally.

Supporters of the police waved “Thin Blue Line” flags and held signs reading, “Defend the Police,” according to The Rocky Mountain Collegian.

“We have to defend the police and the role that they play in society for keeping law and order and keeping citizens safe,” pro-police demonstrator Sonya Beeson told the outlet.

The pro-police group, however, was confronted by counterprotesters, some of whom wore the masks and black attire associated with antifa radicals.

TRENDING: Scientists Reveal Certain Masks May Be More Dangerous Than Wearing None At All

It’s not clear what started the fracas, but the supporters of the police ended it, as seen in a video of the confrontation posted on Twitter.

The video shows the pro-police residents of Fort Collins purposefully driving the counterprotesters away from the spot they had been holding.

WARNING: The following video contains vulgar language that some viewers may find offensive.

“We are currently marching the antifa commie b——s out of the neighborhood,” a speaker said in the video. “Because nobody wants antifa in the neighborhood. Nobody wants them here. So we’re marching them out.”

As the demonstrators retreated, one of the neighbors called out, “Bye-bye, commie scum. Bye-bye. Go home.”

During a scuffle, the voice called out a warning to the neighbors: “Commie girl with a knife. Commie girl with a knife.”

“You guys came to the wrong city, boys and girls,” the voice called out, later adding, “Aw, commies go home.”

RELATED: Benches Clear After MLB Player Charges Opposition’s Dugout

One voice on Twitter blamed antifa for starting problems.

“Antifa assaulted someone in a wheelchair. That’s what set off the beat down from residents. Police were on the scene to arrest the commies,” Ian Miles Cheong tweeted.

Some said the Fort Collins incident was a lesson for violent demonstrators across the country.

Three people were arrested, according to the Fort Collins police.

All three were charged with disorderly conduct. One individual faced an additional charge of possession of an illegal weapon. Another person was also charged with resisting arrest.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Defund the Pentagon – The Future of Freedom Foundation

Posted by M. C. on August 13, 2020

“Economist Robert Higgs has showed that “the total amount of all defense-related spending greatly exceeds the amount budgeted for the Department of Defense.” He calculated — ten years ago — that real defense spending was more than a trillion dollars a year. It is certainly not a penny less now.”

https://www.fff.org/explore-freedom/article/defund-the-police/

by

Many liberals and progressives in the Democratic Party have been loudly calling for the defunding of police departments around the country after the tragic death of a black man, George Floyd, at the hands of a white Minneapolis police officer. While defunding the police — not to be confused with disbanding the police — means different things to different people, most advocates propose redirecting a portion of city and county police budgets to social programs, mental health intervention, combating homelessness, and affordable housing programs.

Conservatives and Republicans have generally pushed back against calls to defund the police. They typically maintain that the level of police misconduct is overstated, that police departments just need to be reformed, and that violent crime and property crime will increase if police department budgets are cut. In response to some major cities calling for defunding the police, Donald Trump simply said, “We won’t be defunding our police. We won’t be dismantling our police. We won’t be disbanding our police. We won’t be ending our police force.” Certainly the president knows that funding levels for police departments are decided on the local level without any input whatsoever from the federal government?

There is, however, one area of government spending that liberals, conservatives, Democrats, and Republicans are united on that they don’t want defunded. Even though it is one of the largest expenditures of the federal government and is unnecessary and destructive in so many ways, these groups from across the political spectrum don’t want to defund the military in any way. And of course, Trump has pushed for higher military budgets ever since he was elected.

The Democratic-controlled House (H.R.6395) and the Republican-controlled Senate (S.4049) each just passed their own version of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for fiscal year 2021 (Oct. 1, 2020–Sept. 30, 2021). The bipartisan votes in the House and Senate were 295 to 125, and 86 to 14.

According to the Congressional Research Service’s publication Defense Primer: Navigating the NDAA, “Unlike an appropriations bill, the NDAA does not provide budget authority for the Department of Defense (DOD). Instead, the NDAA establishes or continues defense programs, policies, projects, or activities at DOD and other federal agencies, and provides guidance on how the appropriated funds are to be used in carrying out those authorized activities.” Budget authority is provided in subsequent appropriations legislation.

The House and Senate bills authorize FY2021 appropriations and set forth “policies for Department of Defense (DOD) programs and activities, including military personnel strengths.”

Specifically, both bills authorize appropriations to the DOD for:

• Procurement, including aircraft, weapons and tracked combat vehicles, shipbuilding and conversion, and missiles
• Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation
• Operation and Maintenance
• Working Capital Funds
• Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction
• Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities
• The Defense Inspector General
• The Defense Health Program
• The Armed Forces Retirement Home
• Overseas Contingency Operations;
• The Space Force
• Military Construction

Both bills also authorize personnel strengths for active duty and reserve forces and set forth policies regarding:

• Military personnel
• Acquisition policy and management
• International programs
• National Guard and Reserve Forces facilities
• Compensation and other personnel benefits
• Health care
• DOD organization and management
• Civilian personnel matters
• Matters relating to foreign nations
• Strategic programs, cyber, and intelligence matters

The bills also authorize appropriations for base realignment and closure activities and maritime matters, and authorize appropriations and set forth policies for Department of Energy national security programs, including the National Nuclear Security Administration and the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board.

Both the House and Senate versions of the NDAA would fund defense for fiscal year 2021 at the obscene amount of $740.5 billion.

Politico recently ran two opinion pieces on defunding the Pentagon: the conservative case and the liberal case.

The conservative case was made by Andrew Lautz of the National Taxpayers Union and Jonathan Bydlak of the R Street Institute’s Fiscal and Budget Policy Project:

With resources more limited than ever, areas of the budget that were off-limits for years should now be more closely scrutinized. At the top of that list should be the single largest part of the federal discretionary budget, an entire category of spending that has long been off the table: the Pentagon.

Republicans in Congress need to start tackling the Pentagon budget just as boldly as they do other areas of discretionary spending. Doing so would put our nation on a better fiscal path and create opportunities for unlikely political alliances. Conservative figures like Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and former Rep. Mick Mulvaney (R-S.C.) for years advocated restraint at the Pentagon; two of the most recent efforts to restrain the Pentagon’s budget in the coming year come from staunchly progressive members of Congress: Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.).

The liberal case for defunding the Pentagon was made by Senator Sanders. Addressing directly the NDAA, he said,

Under this legislation, over half of our discretionary budget would go to the Department of Defense at a time when tens of millions of Americans are food insecure and over a half-million Americans are sleeping out on the street.

Moreover, this extraordinary level of military spending comes at a time when the Department of Defense is the only agency of our federal government that has not been able to pass an independent audit, when defense contractors are making enormous profits while paying their CEOs outrageous compensation packages, and when the so-called War on Terror will cost some $6 trillion.

If the horrific pandemic we are now experiencing has taught us anything it is that national security means a lot more than building bombs, missiles, nuclear warheads and other weapons of mass destruction. National security also means doing everything we can to improve the lives of tens of millions of people living in desperation who have been abandoned by our government decade after decade.

Sanders introduced an amendment to the NDAA that would “reduce the military budget by 10 percent and use that $74 billion in savings to invest in communities that have been ravaged by extreme poverty, mass incarceration, decades of neglect, and the Covid-19 pandemic.” It didn’t pass.

Conservatives at the Heritage Foundation — who seem to have never seen a defense budget that was high enough — took notice of the Politico articles. Writing in “What the ‘Defunding the Pentagon’ Articles Don’t Tell You,” Thomas Spoehr, who “serves as director of Heritage’s Center for National Defense where he is responsible for supervising research on matters involving U.S. national defense,” says that “both pieces lack some information that would contribute to a richer, more informed discussion of this critically important topic.” His article’s three key takeaways are:

1. National defense now consumes the smallest portion of the U.S. federal budget in a hundred years — 15% — and continues to shrink.
2. Our defense responsibilities include security commitments to NATO, Japan, South Korea, international sea lanes, and other areas.
3. If the nation is going to effectively counter China, Russia, and others, continued military rebuilding following years of budget cuts is necessary.

It is no surprise that “prior to joining Heritage, Spoehr served for more than 36 years in the U.S. Army, attaining the rank of Lieutenant General.”

Spoehr’s first point is a typical conservative smokescreen to justify higher defense budgets. By talking about the defense budget in terms of a percentage of something (GDP, the total federal budget, prior years, et cetera) instead of absolute numbers, conservatives can deflect attention from the obscene level of defense spending. And even worse, defense spending is actually much higher than the budgeted amount. Economist Robert Higgs has showed that “the total amount of all defense-related spending greatly exceeds the amount budgeted for the Department of Defense.” He calculated — ten years ago — that real defense spending was more than a trillion dollars a year. It is certainly not a penny less now.

Spoehr’s second point is certainly true. The concern that he never raises is “Why?” Why should the U.S. Department of Defense, funded by U.S. taxpayers, and charged with defending the United States, have “security commitments to NATO, Japan, South Korea, international sea lanes, and other areas”?

Spoehr’s third point assumes that the United States needs to counter “China, Russia, and others.” That is only because U.S. foreign policy is reckless, belligerent, and meddling instead of being a Jeffersonian foreign policy of neutrality, nonintervention, peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations — entangling alliances with none. And it is simply not true that there have been years of defense budget cuts. All one has to do is look up the figures. Because of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, defense spending rose from $470.55 billion in 2001 to the obscene level of $849.87 billion in 2010. It declined in 2011, 2012, 2013, and 2014; basically stayed level in 2015, 2016, and 2017; and then rose in 2018 and 2019.

Because the Department of Defense functions as the Department of Offense, it is the Pentagon that needs to be defunded.

Laurence M. Vance is a columnist and policy advisor for the Future of Freedom Foundation, an associated scholar of the Ludwig von Mises Institute, and a columnist, blogger, and book reviewer at LewRockwell.com. He is the author of Gun Control and the Second Amendment, The War on Drugs Is a War on Freedom, and War, Empire and the Military: Essays on the Follies of War and U.S. Foreign Policy. His newest books are Free Trade or Protectionism? and The Free Society. Visit his website: www.vancepublications.com. Send him e-mail.

Be seeing you

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Kamala Harris Will Cost Biden The Election For The Same Reason She Lost The Democratic Primaries – The Burning Platform

Posted by M. C. on August 13, 2020

The vast majority of voters have already made up their mind for who they will cast their vote for in November. In states where gun advocacy is staunchest – such as Florida and Ohio – Harris will only hurt Biden. In Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan, she likely won’t be of any benefit on the ticket either.

https://www.theburningplatform.com/2020/08/12/kamala-harris-will-cost-biden-the-election-for-the-same-reason-she-lost-the-democratic-primaries/

Author Duane Norman

Tuesday afternoon, Joe Biden officially announced his running mate for his 2020 Presidential campaign – naming Kamala Harris his vice president. Although not the worst choice, seeing as how Stacey Abrams and Susan Rice were rumored contenders for the spot, Harris certainly no longer has that “new car” shine that Obama did in 2008.

In fact, one must wonder why Biden decided on Harris – amidst widespread calls from the left to defund the police – with Harris’ record of “backing the blue”. This is especially pertinent considering the sheer number of “Settle for Biden” voters who are essentially voting for the VP given Biden’s mental acuity (or lack thereof):

This is a major problem considering Harris’s political career. As Attorney General of California, Harris fought against the release of a man who had been acquitted and had his conviction overturned. Daniel Larsen, who spent 13 years in prison for possession of a concealed knife, had not produced evidence of his innocence in a timely enough fashion.

Also as Attorney General, Harris challenged a ruling ordering California to release some of its prisoners after the Supreme Court decided that the state’s overcrowded prisons was cruel and unusual punishment. As District Attorney of San Francisco, Harris oversaw the city’s corrupt crime lab, where a judge ultimately ruled that the D.A.’s office ignored calls to take responsibility for the labs mismanaging and hid information about a technician who had been stealing cocaine.

Of note, Harris didn’t endorse prison sentencing reform which was a measure on ballots in both 2012 and 2014.

In 2014, a federal judge in California ruled that the state’s application of the death penalty was unconstitutional – with Harris fighting against that ruling as well. For her first run for Attorney General in 2010, one law enforcement group endorsed her with the rest upset that she had not sought the death penalty for an alleged cop killer. By 2014, almost 50 police groups endorsed her re-election campaign. Harris’ record also shows she is an advocate of the war on drugs and has opposed efforts to legalize marijuana. As Attorney General, she suggested expansions of the state’s efforts to track prescription drug users.

Harris has even defended – and laughed at – her choice to lock up the parents of children who were more than 3 days truant from school in California.

[wp_ad_camp_1]

[wp_ad_camp_2]

In a 2009 op-ed, Harris boasted about the lower level of truancy rates she achieved through her authoritarian practices. Eileen DeNino, a mother in Pennsylvania, died in jail after been imprisoned for not paying fines for her children’s absences. According to a lawsuit filed by her family, they allege jail staff knew DeNino had uncontrolled high blood pressure but denied her access to medication. This policy not only championed, but created, by Harris has seen the death of a mother; the very embodiment of the “little guy” Biden posits Kamala will help fight for as VP.

Not to mention, previous reporting by FMShooter has also pointed out Harris’ spotty record.

In January of 2019:

Most recently, Democrat Kamala Harris also announced her run for President in 2020 – but it’s exceedingly obvious where Harris’ funding is coming from…

WarnerMedia, Alphabet Inc, and 21st Century Fox all gave hand-over-fist to Harris up to 2018 to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Notably, WarnerMedia owns CNN; Alphabet owns Google and Youtube; 21st Century Fox owns Fox News and its subsidiaries – the Establishment media has been funding and seemingly prepping for Harris’ 2020 run.

A month later, in February of 2019:

With Kamala Harris making her 2020 Presidential candidacy official, and the mainstream media doing their absolute best to paint her in the most favorable possible light, she has quickly become the front-runner in a very crowded field of Democrat candidates… The DNC has already demonstrated that they will rig the primary for whoever they think has the best shot at winning… Harris’s very questionable political history includes using an extramarital affair to launch her career, as well as her near-constant funding by the same big tech and media conglomerates she claims she will regulate…

As previously covered by FMShooter, the states that will decide the 2020 election are Florida, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania… Florida is by far the most pivotal of these states – the 2018 Senate/Gubernational elections in the state were won by 32,000/10,000 votes respectively… Florida is routinely referred to as the “gunshine” state due to the large contingent of pro-gun voters living there.

Harris has a lengthy political (and prosecutorial) career where she peddled an “assault weapons” ban, universal background checks, ERPOs, and a number of other anti-gun positions that are not conducive to a winning platform in Florida… Her gun control platform is equally unpopular in rust belt states… She just doesn’t offer… a decisive pathway to victory in key swing states.  

[wp_ad_camp_1]

[wp_ad_camp_2]

The vast majority of voters have already made up their mind for who they will cast their vote for in November. In states where gun advocacy is staunchest – such as Florida and Ohio – Harris will only hurt Biden. In Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan, she likely won’t be of any benefit on the ticket either.

The 2020 election will come down to 1) turnout, and 2) swing voters in swing states.  When it comes to turnout – who is really excited to go vote for a Biden/Harris ballot, especially during the coronavirus pandemic?  As for swing voters in swing states, what could Harris possibly do to sway the opinions of the small number of voters in swing states still undecided between Trump and Biden?

Given Kamala Harris’s political record, it is far more likely that her presence will ultimately do more harm than good – which may very well be the difference in a potentially tight 2020 presidential election.

Emigrate While You Still Can!
Be seeing you

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Is treasonous FBI running BLM riots? Photos, videos appear to capture FBI agents playing roles of armed rioters – NaturalNews.com

Posted by M. C. on August 13, 2020

Check out the video.

The claims are based on the comms worn by the “protesters” and their “FBI stance”.

I can believe the FIB will do anything to keep the fear alive.

What do you think?

https://www.naturalnews.com/2020-08-11-is-treasonous-fbi-running-the-blm-riots.html

(Natural News) We already know the FBI, under James Comey, was a treasonous, criminal enterprise engaged in masterminding more terror plots across America than any other group, including radical Islamic terrorists.

Under Comey, the FBI engaged in a treasonous coup attempt against President Trump. FBI officials altered 302 interview records, lied to the FISA court and later lied to the United States Senate under sworn testimony. For at least eight years under Obama — and probably much longer — the FBI was acting like a lawless criminal cartel, terrorizing America for political gain. And even under current Director Wray, the FBI continues to stonewall investigations into the deep state in a criminal conspiracy in order to cover up the crimes of the FBI under Obama and Comey.

See story, “New York Times openly admits domestic terror plots masterminded by the FBI.”

Now, it appears the FBI may be actively participating in Black Lives Matter terrorism by dressing up FBI agents as “protesters” and instigating criminal violence across America.

The following video appears to show armed FBI agents threatening civilian vehicle drivers during riots, using their FBI training to carry out acts of terrorism in the United States of America, according to the video narrator:

One of the photos mentioned in that video appears to depict trained FBI agents wielding pistols against civilian vehicle drivers. Note the “low ready” pistol position and the stance of the gun holders, both of which resemble FBI training for its agents. Are these really FBI agents, or is it just coincidence? You decide:

Photos have also emerged of individuals who appear to be government operations dressing up like Antifa or BLM protesters while attempting to hide their comms gear:

You can clearly see the earpiece in this zoomed-in photo. This earpiece would obviously connect to a radio:

The FBI claims Antifa is a “peaceful” group that does no harm

In addition, the FBI has gone out of its way to absurdly declare Antifa to be completely innocent of any violent acts, claiming Antifa is a peaceful organization. Big League Politics carries the story, “FBI Spooks Cover for ANTIFA Terrorists:”

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) is claiming that there is “no intelligence” indicating that ANTIFA had a role in fomenting riots that have gripped the country… The FBI’s Washington D.C. field office reportedly claims that they have “no intelligence indicating ANTIFA involvement/presence” in the riots. They also claim that “CHS [Confidential Human Source] canvassing, open source/social media partner engagement, and liaison” absolve ANTIFA from any blame.

Meanwhile, AG William Barr has correctly described BLM and Antifa terrorists as the terrorists they are, saying, “The violence instigated and carried out by ANTIFA and other similar groups in connection with the rioting is domestic terrorism and will be treated accordingly.” Barr also describes the tactics of BLM terrorists are “urban guerrilla warfare.”

Is it possible a rogue branch of the FBI is involved in running these terrorism attacks in the United States?

Why did the FBI kneel to Black Lives Matter, a terrorist organization that’s receiving smuggled full-auto weapons upgrade parts from China?

If the FBI had any loyalty to America, these agents would be saluting the American flag, not kneeling to a known terrorist organization that’s waging violent, physical assaults on law enforcement offers and federal agents across the country.

The FBI kneeling before BLM shows they are surrendering their authority to BLM, and they take orders from BLM. That appears to be who’s driving the FBI now: A radical Marxist terrorist organization whose goal is the overthrow of the United States government.

Doesn’t that mean, then, that the FBI is engaged in acts of sedition and treason against America?

Christopher Wray has some ‘splainin to do…

Let me guess: Once caught, the FBI will claim they had to “act like terrorists to catch terrorists.” But how many violent acts of BLM terrorism never would have happened if not for undercover FBI agents spearheading the violence in the first place?

About the author: Mike Adams (aka the “Health Ranger“) is a best selling author (#1 best selling science book on Amazon.com called “Food Forensics“), an environmental scientist, a patent holder for a cesium radioactive isotope elimination invention, a multiple award winner for outstanding journalism, a science news publisher and influential commentator on topics ranging from science and medicine to culture and politics. Follow his videos, podcasts, websites and science projects at the links below.

Mike Adams serves as the founding editor of NaturalNews.com and the lab science director of an internationally accredited (ISO 17025) analytical laboratory known as CWC Labs. There, he was awarded a Certificate of Excellence for achieving extremely high accuracy in the analysis of toxic elements in unknown water samples using ICP-MS instrumentation. Adams is also highly proficient in running liquid chromatography, ion chromatography and mass spectrometry time-of-flight analytical instrumentation. He has also achieved numerous laboratory breakthroughs in the programming of automated liquid handling robots for sample preparation and external standards prep.

The U.S. patent office has awarded Mike Adams patent NO. US 9526751 B2 for the invention of “Cesium Eliminator,” a lifesaving invention that removes up to 95% of radioactive cesium from the human digestive tract. Adams has pledged to donate full patent licensing rights to any state or national government that needs to manufacture the product to save human lives in the aftermath of a nuclear accident, disaster, act of war or act of terrorism. He has also stockpiled 10,000 kg of raw material to manufacture Cesium Eliminator in a Texas warehouse, and plans to donate the finished product to help save lives in Texas when the next nuclear event occurs. No independent scientist in the world has done more research on the removal of radioactive elements from the human digestive tract.

Adams is a person of color whose ancestors include Africans and American Indians. He is of Native American heritage, which he credits as inspiring his “Health Ranger” passion for protecting life and nature against the destruction caused by chemicals, heavy metals and other forms of pollution.

Adams is the author of the world’s first book that published ICP-MS heavy metals analysis results for foods, dietary supplements, pet food, spices and fast food. The book is entitled Food Forensics and is published by BenBella Books.

In his laboratory research, Adams has made numerous food safety breakthroughs such as revealing rice protein products imported from Asia to be contaminated with toxic heavy metals like lead, cadmium and tungsten. Adams was the first food science researcher to document high levels of tungsten in superfoods. He also discovered over 11 ppm lead in imported mangosteen powder, and led an industry-wide voluntary agreement to limit heavy metals in rice protein products.

In addition to his lab work, Adams is also the (non-paid) executive director of the non-profit Consumer Wellness Center (CWC), an organization that redirects 100% of its donations receipts to grant programs that teach children and women how to grow their own food or vastly improve their nutrition. Through the non-profit CWC, Adams also launched Nutrition Rescue, a program that donates essential vitamins to people in need. Click here to see some of the CWC success stories.

With a background in science and software technology, Adams is the original founder of the email newsletter technology company known as Arial Software. Using his technical experience combined with his love for natural health, Adams developed and deployed the content management system currently driving NaturalNews.com. He also engineered the high-level statistical algorithms that power SCIENCE.naturalnews.com, a massive research resource featuring over 10 million scientific studies.

Adams is well known for his incredibly popular consumer activism video blowing the lid on fake blueberries used throughout the food supply. He has also exposed “strange fibers” found in Chicken McNuggets, fake academic credentials of so-called health “gurus,” dangerous “detox” products imported as battery acid and sold for oral consumption, fake acai berry scams, the California raw milk raids, the vaccine research fraud revealed by industry whistleblowers and many other topics.

Adams has also helped defend the rights of home gardeners and protect the medical freedom rights of parents. Adams is widely recognized to have made a remarkable global impact on issues like GMOs, vaccines, nutrition therapies, human consciousness.

In addition to his activism, Adams is an accomplished musician who has released over fifteen popular songs covering a variety of activism topics.

Click here to read a more detailed bio on Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, at HealthRanger.com.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | 1 Comment »

The Biggest Threats to Your Personal and Financial Freedom Today

Posted by M. C. on August 13, 2020

International Man: In the US, and much of the West, most people are willingly handing over their dwindling freedoms for the promise of safety or security.

Is there any hope that something will reverse this trend?

Doug Casey: Again, trends in motion tend to stay in motion. Until they stop.

But what generally stops them? Something big. Usually, a crisis or a collapse.

https://internationalman.com/articles/the-biggest-threats-to-personal-and-financial-freedom/

International Man: The world has become increasingly unfree. Recently, the global pandemic has justified all kinds of draconian measures by governments.

How do you see this trend evolving?

Doug Casey: It’s clearly a worldwide trend. The only exceptions are obscure places like North Macedonia, Belarus, and Nicaragua—and they have plenty of other, much more serious problems—and of course, Sweden, which is almost unique among advanced countries in not falling victim to the mass hysteria. Life there has gone on more-or-less normally since March as a result.

It’s not just the national governments, which are bad enough. States, provinces, cities, and counties have taken advantage of the hysteria to “do something” and lock down. For example, New York Mayor Bill de Blasio is putting armed guards around main entrances to New York to keep people out.

Numerous cities around the world, like Melbourne, Australia, have actually turned themselves into police states. This virus scare has gotten quite out of control. The average person thinks we’re living in a Steven King novel.

If it were just a matter of politics, people would be more apt to resist because people recognize the arbitrariness of political opinions. Interestingly, the hysteria also breaks along political lines. Conservatives tend to view it as overblown or even a scam. Liberals tend to see it as a crime if you aren’t masked up and locked down. The virus is a psychological litmus test.

Power mongers are using biology and medicine as excuses to take charge in the name of science. They’re saying that you don’t have a choice because you are affecting the health of others, not just yourself. Minor bureaucrats like Fauci and second string politicians like de Blasio have jumped on it, fanning the flames of a panic. It’s made them into “big men.”

Like the global warming scare, the COVID hysteria is corrupting the idea of science and the credibility of scientific methodology in the eyes of the average man. And incidentally, the overlap between those who want the State to “do something” about global warming, and “do something” about the virus is extremely high.

It’s actually quite insane. COVID as a disease is only serious if you’re elderly or obese or have other serious conditions, which is why the average age of a COVID victim is about 80.

In fact, the deaths from COVID are probably not going to be much greater than they are from a bad annual flu, especially accounting for the fact that many deaths from things like motor accidents are often counted as COVID if the victim also had COVID. Like most things that become politicized, it’s hard to believe anything. The statistics are completely unreliable. What we’re dealing with is mass hysteria, similar to what happened in Salem in the late 17th century.

The matter should be just between you and your doctor. This is how the vastly more serious flu epidemics of the late 1960s and the late 1950s were dealt with. In the big scheme of things, they were non-events, as COVID should be.

This time is different. Your doctor doesn’t count. It’s the doctor with political connections, that counts.

How do I see this trend evolving?

Toward more centralized power, of course. The trend has been in motion for over 100 years, starting with World War I. It’s been in motion for a long time, and it’s accelerating at this point. Trends in motion tend to stay in motion until they reach a crisis point.

The powers that be have discovered that a medical emergency is almost as effective as an actual war to get people used to doing as they’re told. It’s quite amazing how anxious the average American is to act like a whipped dog, roll over on his back, and wet himself. Those who don’t wear their masks—which serve little or no medical purpose; they’re basically virtue-signaling devices—are bullied and shamed. It’s gotten quite out of hand. The woke SJWs are in charge.

International Man: Let’s talk about one of the biggest threats to financial freedom—the Federal Reserve and every other central bank.

The currency printed by these institutions isn’t real money. That is to say, it wasn’t a result of a market process of people voluntarily coming to the conclusion to use a specific good as money. Government decrees, laws, and regulations made central bank currency money.

How can individuals protect themselves from this enormous swindle?

Doug Casey: It’s not just the US government. Every central bank in the world is printing up currency units not just by the billions, but by the trillions.

What you have to do is figure out where that money is going to go, and try to get there first. In this environment, rational investing is becoming increasingly impossible. The economy and society will become more chaotic. It has become foolish to have a long-term horizon, and to make other than hit-and-run-style investments. You’re forced to be a speculator.

I would point out that in a normal free market society, speculators would be chronically unemployed. Why? Speculating, more than anything else, is capitalizing on politically caused distortions in the market. There would be very few in a true free market.

But now, as powerful as governments are, distortions and politically caused misallocations of capital are everywhere. With regulations and tons of money being thrown at the markets, you’re forced to speculate. It’s too bad because speculation is not productive in itself; it’s a zero sum game. It’s very different from investing, which is allocating capital to create more wealth through innovation and production.

However, we don’t make the rules. That, unfortunately, is something our betters have arrogated to themselves. We’re just playing the game. If you don’t want to get hurt, it’s important to learn to play the game successfully.

That means orienting your mindset to that of a speculator. Most people will confuse speculating with gambling, however, and they’ll wind up losing everything. They’ll wind up much worse off by treating the stock market like a casino.

The simplest thing you can do at this point—other than watching where the money is going and getting there first—is continuing to buy gold and silver and setting them aside. At a minimum, that will preserve your capital.

Unfortunately, neither metal is no longer a giveaway bargain. On the other hand, the trend is clearly in motion, and it’s accelerating. They’re going much higher. Gold would have to go to about $3000 to equal—in real terms—it’s peak of $800 back in 1980. And the situation is vastly more precarious now than it was then. I expect the current bull market to take it much higher.

Right now, the best speculations are mining companies. They have done extremely well, but relative to the gains in the underlying metals, they’re lagging.

That’s true because none of the big fund managers own gold stocks. Why not? They don’t understand gold. They think that it’s a pet rock.

But at some point, soon, they’re going to pile into these mining stocks. They’re now hugely profitable and becoming more so. Even the biggest ones are relatively small-cap companies in today’s world. Most miners are not just small-cap, and they’re not even micro caps. They’re nano caps. The market caps of every gold producer in the world adds up to around $200 billion. That’s only a bit more than the cash that Apple alone has in its treasury.

These things could be more explosive than they have ever been in the past. To use a phrase, I coined to describe past gold-stock bull markets: It’s going to be like trying to funnel the contents of Hoover Dam through a garden hose.

It’s really a pity that the average American is being swindled by the Fed, and the government in DC, and a pity that almost nobody owns gold or silver physically, and many fewer own mining stocks. But let’s try to take advantage of the unfortunate reality.

International Man: In the US, and much of the West, most people are willingly handing over their dwindling freedoms for the promise of safety or security.

Is there any hope that something will reverse this trend?

Doug Casey: Again, trends in motion tend to stay in motion. Until they stop.

But what generally stops them? Something big. Usually, a crisis or a collapse.

Here’s an example. You would have thought that the trends in Venezuela and Zimbabwe would have stopped years ago. You’d think those people could see how bad things were getting and say, “Wait a minute, we’re going down the wrong path.” But that’s not the case.

Neither Venezuela nor Zimbabwe is going to turn around until there’s a complete and utter collapse followed by serious violence. That’s the case almost everywhere—trends in motion stay in motion until they reach a crisis. I don’t think you can reverse the trend with half measures, like voting.

Why don’t I think you can reverse the trend?

It’s because, over the last roughly three generations, almost everybody has gone to college. Meanwhile, colleges have been transformed from places where you received an education, something useful, to institutions of mass indoctrination. The tenets of cultural Marxism, socialism, and statism have filtered down to high schools and even grade schools.

When people are at a crucial time in their life, late teens and early twenties, and they’re taught something. It’s very hard for them to unlearn it. It’s very much like when I started playing polo. I thought I knew how to ride a horse because I could stay on when it went faster than a walk.

As a result, I picked up all kinds of bad habits and cost myself years, having to unlearn bad habits. Whereas, if I just learned the proper way to do things to start with, I would have been far ahead in the game.

That’s the problem with kids going to college and high schools, and even grade schools, today. They’re hit with instruction that’s often not just wrong, but the opposite of the truth. It’s very hard for them to unlearn it.

As Will Rogers liked to say, the problem isn’t even what people don’t know. It’s what they think they know that just ain’t so.

It’s reinforced by ads that corporations put on television, and the huge amounts of money they give to left-wing organizations. You’d think they’d be interested in defending capitalism—but that’s incorrect. Lenin was correct when he commented that the capitalists were so stupid that they’d sell him the rope he’d use to hang them.

That’s on top of Hollywood, the propaganda coming out of thousands of NGOs, and mostly everything that politicians say.

I don’t think the trend is going to turn around. In fact, it’s accelerating, and it’s going to continue accelerating until we reach a nasty crisis.

Editor’s Note: As these trends continue to accelerate, what you do right now can mean the difference between coming out ahead or suffering crippling losses.

That’s exactly why bestselling author Doug Casey and his team just released a free report with all the details on how to survive an economic collapse.

It will help you understand what is unfolding right before our eyes and what you should do so you don’t get caught in the crosshairs.

Click here to download the PDF now.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »