Free newsletter

Site Manager

Tami Dickson

Follow Us

Follow Unittus

Custom Search
Whistle Blower
Benjamin Fulford Asia Report! Dec 3/13 Print E-mail
Monday, 02 December 2013 21:17

Benjamin Fulford Asia Report! Dec 3/13

December 2, 2013

Based on high level contacts being made to the White Dragon Society, it is clear there is a growing consensus that the old dollar system be used to start a $700 trillion campaign to end poverty and stop environmental production, without impeding the continuation or start-up of alternative financial systems. However, as the world waits impatiently for the campaign to be announced, ongoing high level geopolitical negotiations, with a bit of saber rattling as a back-drop, are continuing to delay implementation, according to multiple high-level sources.

The main sticking points to world peace and the start of a new golden age are now the ancient Shia/Sunni political divide in the Islamic world, Israel and a few unresolved issues in East Asia, notably the Korean Peninsula and the Okinawan archipelago.

In Asia, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has met with Russian President Vladimir Putin four times and the heads of all the ASEAN countries in a campaign to build a coalition to contain China. The Pentagon, worried about continued financing, secretly supports this as it is keeping the war card as its last big negotiation leverage.

The Chinese, for their part, are strong enough now to insist on resolving some historical injustices before they agree to support the $700 trillion campaign. In particular, they resent the fact that all the Islands near China have been taken away from them by superior imperialist navy forces.

The Chinese have a strong card to play, which is to use their vastly superior ground military forces to force the unification of the Korean peninsula and derive the United States of its South Korean tributary vassal state.

The White Dragon Society has made the following suggestion to both sides as a way of breaking the stalemate. First of all return Okinawa to its historical status as an independent kingdom and a neutral meeting point between Japan and China. In such a deal China and Japan would each pay 50% of the costs of US troops there in order to ensure the Islands remain neutral. The Okinawan archipelago could then become a duty free and fun meeting and resting place.

As mentioned before, Northern and Southern Korea could be united by making Kim Jon-un a symbolic emperor of Korea and leaving the Southern Korean families in charge of the economy. In such a deal the newly united Korea might agree to keep US forces in central Korea as a guarantor of Korean independence.

The alternative to agreeing to the above proposals will be the inevitable bankruptcy of the US, an abrupt withdrawal of US forces from the region and subsequent chaos.

Also last week, some unidentified entity calling itself the Bank of New York (but not the Bank of New York, Mellon) has been buying majority stakes in many major Japanese corporations, according to the Black Dragon Society. One US government agency source suspects Goldman Sachs to be behind this but it may also be a cyber-attack on Japan’s economic infrastructure. The Japanese authorities have been advised to make sure human beings carrying physical stock certificates be produced and if the “Bank of New York” cannot do that, then the systems at the Tokyo Stock Exchange may have to be temporarily shut down.

Also, two missile launchers were found outside the US Yokota airbase in Tokyo last week. This was a warning by the gnostic Illuminati that they will destroy the Kanto plain with a nuclear weapon hidden in a tunnel system near the base unless the new financial system is announced, according to a gnostic illuminati grandmaster.

The P2 Freemason lodge honcho Marco Di Mauro also made some statements last week that were straight out of the X-files. He said that 24 “encantadores,” or magicians, had started work on building a new continent in the South Pacific. Normally, I would not report such statements but after he told me this, news reports appeared saying Mount Etna in Italy was blowing smoke rings and that 35 volcanoes around the Pacific rim had started erupting simultaneously.

This could be some sort of propaganda but it is clear the Vatican and the P2 still have a lot of real geopolitical influence. Last week Vladimir Putin met with Pope Francis to discuss the Middle East. Putin now has real influence on the ground in the Middle East while the Pope has religious influence. According to news reports, they were discussing ways to ensure peace in that region.

The White Dragon Society has suggested that the only way to really calm the region down would be for the world as a whole to force the Sunni and Shia branches of Islam to resolve their ancient split by selecting a Caliph. In such a scenario, as suggested before, Israel could become a Jewish autonomous zone in the region. However, once the Jews learn how much they have been lied to and brainwashed by their own leaders, many may well decide to return to their ancestral European homes.

Meanwhile, back in the US, we are getting credible reports that US special forces are getting ready to move on Washington.

With support for Congress running at 6% and so many people wondering why mass arrests have not taken place, we sure hope it is true this time. To help compile the list of who to arrest, I will conclude this week’s report with an open letter to Jim Stone of Jim Stone freelance, a genuine NSA whistleblower who has done so much to alert the world about the Fukushima mass murder and terror war crime attack.

Mr. Stone,

First of all, thanks for your courageous and ground breaking work on uncovering the Fukushima mass murder and terror operation. I am writing this e-mail to provide you with forensic evidence that I have gathered on what the 311 tsunami attack was about and exactly who was involved.

My sources for what I am about to write include Japanese military intelligence, former Prime Minister Naoto Kan (whom I have known personally for many years), members of the crew that smuggled the nuclear weapons used in the attack into Japan, members of both the French and British branches of the Rothschild family, senior CIA agents and a member of the team that actually drilled the nuclear weapons into the seabed before the 311 attack.

The first thing you need to know is that the attack was planned many years before it happened. The Japanese business magazine Zaikai Tembo, citing a CIA report, wrote in February of 2007 that the US had decided that Japan was getting too much of its energy from nuclear power and that if that trend continued, Japan would no longer be dependent on US controlled oil and thus would no longer have to obey the US. The conclusion of the report was that the best way to ensure Japan remained a colony would be to destroy the Tokyo Electric Power company, the people who run the Fukushima plant.

Senator J. Rockefeller, whose family controls (through foundations) General Electric, the manufacturers of the plant, was deeply involved in this operation. As a preliminary to destroying Japan’s nuclear power generation capability, Westinghouse and General Electric sold their nuclear power plant manufacturing businesses to Toshiba and Hitachi. This was insider trading at the highest level and Hitachi and Toshiba should sue.

Vaccine & Monsanto Lies ! Dec 1/13 Print E-mail
Sunday, 01 December 2013 01:34

Vaccine & Monsanto Lies ! Dec 1/13

Cdsapi's Added Comment:  As we become bombarded with ever more of the constant propaganda "to VACCINATE, VACCINATE, VACCINATE" to protect the "HERD IMMUNITY",  with punitive treats hanging over our heads for refusal, here are a few facts that you might want to consider and research. 
We live in an era of "official lies" – and protecting ourselves with the FACTS is absolutely essential.  Pay special attention to “definitions”,  and also the research on "the adjuvants".

I am attaching once again the article of a contemporary of Dr. Jenner  - which clearly shows how the whole vaccine program, way back then, was founded on lies, cover-ups and political chicanery.

The Current Vaccine Reality: Disinformed Consent

We are living in the age of disinformed consent.  Parents assume their doctors and their public health authorities are providing them with all relevant vaccine information, and nothing could be further from the truth.

Obviously, if vaccines can kill and cause serious and debilitating lifelong damage – which they can, and do – the vaccine administrator must provide that information to the client, in unambiguous fashion, regardless of the estimated size of the risk.  It’s an ethical mandate that must be fulfilled, but it never is. There is a fundamental reason: medical schools don’t teach the history and nature of vaccine damage and death; nor do nursing and pharmacy schools.  Yet doctors, nurses, and, these days, pharmacists, are the very ones who administer vaccines, and upon whom we rely for full information.  Somewhere there is made a conscious decision to exclude the reality of serious vaccine damage from the curricula.

Most of the many doctors who have witnessed vaccine damage – thankfully, not all – lack the professional integrity to follow up with curiosity, let alone research.  This is the most troubling of the array of vaccine contradictions;  trained to observe, they nevertheless appear blind to even the possibility of causal relation.

There is a reason the CDC didn’t announce to the American public in 1999 the direct correlation between the amount of mercury in vaccines and the incidence of speech and learning disorders and autism it found in its own in-house study: a conscious, intolerable decision. [1]

There’s a reason Dr. Viera Scheibner’s cotwatch studies, which decades ago found a compelling link between vaccinations given to infants and the incidence of cot death – SIDS – is never mentioned by public health officials: a conscious decision. [2]

There is a reason the CDC never mentions that it was the radical changes they made to the definition and diagnosis of polio, right after the vaccine was introduced, that eliminated most cases of the disease, not the vaccine: a conscious decision to manipulate the public in their vaccine decisions.  
Nor do they mention that once the vaccine was licensed, the CDC pulled all remaining diagnoses close to the vest, disallowing for automatic inclusion in annual polio statistics cases reported by private medical practices or local public health departments, and declaring that only they, the CDC, after ostensible thorough review and lab analysis, could officially validate a case. [3]

There is a reason that, concomitant with the diagnostic and labeling changes made, a radical change was made as well to the definition of a polio epidemic, from 20 cases in 100,000 to 35, potentially cutting almost in half the likelihood that any subsequent outbreaks would be so labeled – a change that seems totally haphazard, except for the effect of painting polio as somehow and suddenly less severe, or less contagious, or more contained: a conscious decision, to boost the illusion of vaccine effectiveness. [3]

There’s a reason the mainstream media in general will give no meaningful column space to truthful information about vaccine pitfalls and dangers: the conscious decision of the publishers.

There is a reason the vaccine industry does not discuss the fact that for years adjuvants like those used in most vaccines have been injected into lab animals to trigger rheumatoid arthritis and other autoimmune diseases: a conscious decision to keep the public ignorant of the ethical dilemma of then recommending their use for injection into newborns, infants, and toddlers, as a macabre tradeoff for acute, temporary diseases.  This same adjuvantal effect in humans has been established by immunologists, as well. [4, 5]

There is a reason that every doctor or scientist who has ever spoken out publicly against vaccines has been branded a quack, regardless of their unblemished reputation up to that point: a conscious campaign to maintain the myth of vaccine safety, effectiveness and necessity.

There is a reason the AAP over the last three decades has been sliding down the hellhole of castigation of parents who refuse vaccines, initially espousing acceptance, to occasionally endorsing statements labeling such parents as irresponsible and a threat to the vaccinating masses;  a reason they provide vaccine refusal documentation for parent’s signature that speaks not a whit to the potentially catastrophic consequences of vaccinating, despite, again, being well aware of the record: a conscious decision.

There’s a reason Dr. Paul Offit personally reviewed and approved for publication on the website of The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia an article on the value of the chicken pox vaccine that states the shot is perfectly safe, despite the post-marketing reports of catastrophic reactions on the vaccine insert, including anaphylactic shock, encephalitis and Guillain-Barre, and the availability of the VAERS record: a conscious decision. [6-8]

There is a reason that nowhere in the mainstream have we seen mentioned the fact that when the team of doctors at the Royal Free Hospital treated the twelve Lancet kids for their bowel inflammations, their symptoms of autism were greatly alleviated – a dynamic and heartening bit of information that should have been trumpeted in headlines globally: a conscious decision, to support the claim that there is no connection between the novel bowel syndrome described by the team – now corroborated by pediatric gastroenterologist Dr. Arthur Krigsman – and autism. [9, 10]

There is a reason the vaccine industry will not respond to the disclosure that among the 50,000 unvaccinated clients of Homefirst Health Clinic in Chicago, the staff is aware of only a few cases of autism, and virtually no asthma, allergies or diabetes – poignant statistics all, with obvious, staggering implications.  In a general population of the same size we’d expect to see 250 or 300 cases of autism or more, and thousands of incidents of the other mentioned autoimmune disorders. [11]

Likewise, there is a reason CDC doctors appear before a Congressional committee on autism ostensibly so ill-prepared to answer direct questions as to be farcical, and in such repeated fashion over the years that, in days of aulde, they’d have been booted out for contempt and tarred and feathered by the thousands of parents who have watched helplessly as their kids took their obvious first steps down the road of developmental regression to ultimate diagnosis of autism, immediately following a round of vaccinations: an obvious, conscious directive to remain obtuse. [12]

And there’s a reason the CDC will never respond to pleas to compare the health of the fully vaccinated against the never vaccinated;  that they will claim it unethical to conduct such a study as double-blind, because it will deny the protection of the vaccine to the control group, when the rationale is circular, since it’s the very safety and effectiveness of vaccines at question, and when all that is really necessary is to analyze the available data on the million or more Americans who are not vaccinated at all, out of personal choice: a conscious decision to avoid ferreting out and revealing the truth.

The behavior of the vaccine industrygovernment, manufacturers, much of the medical establishment, and the mainstream media, devoid of investigative journalism when it comes to vaccines is reprehensible.  
Their calling cards are statistical manipulation, deception and fear.  Well aware of the catastrophic damage done by vaccines, they steadfastly deny the reality and suppress the information, while knowing it is essential to every parent’s vaccine decisions.

Conscious denial of critical information is disinformation.

About the author: Shawn Siegel has enough common sense to recognize a con game when he sees one, thus was compelled to begin researching after discovering that immediately following the release of the polio vaccine the CDC radically changed the definition of the disease.  He now hosts a weekly radio/internet show, The Vaccine Myth: An Issue of Trust, on the Logos Radio Network.


  1. David Kirby, Evidence of Harm, 2005, pp 127 – 131.
  8. , do the following: Click on Request Form; group results by Event Category; under vaccine products, select Varcel; at number 5, select All Locations; and click Send.
  9. The first ten minutes of the following interview with Dr. Andrew Wakefield:
  11. Start at 14:00 into the interview with Dr. Mayer Eisenstein:
  12. Video of the first segment of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform hearing on autism, November 29,2012:

"The great tragedy of Science - the slaying of a beautiful hypothesis by an ugly fact."   - 
(Thomas Huxley, 1825-1895)

“I fear the day that technology will surpass our human interaction.  The world will have a generation of idiots.” -  Albert Einstein

dsapi’s Added Comment:  Most members of the public regard “publications in professional journals” as reliable resources for accurate scientific information. 
The article below wields a death blow to that assumption.  These corrupt research and publishing practices are not new, but the degree to which they now dominate the release of scientific information attacks the very foundation of Science – it is not only unprecedented, but devastating to the structure of our society and the decisions that are being made based on falsified science reports – most often to the detriment of the population, while satisfying the vested interests of Corporations and the Wall Street financial casino game.  We are living in an era of “pseudoscience” and “science corruption” that is unequalled in history.
It is clear that “Sconce” has become - not what evolves from authentic research - but what Corporate vested interests demand it to be -  “Science by Declaration” – devoid of substantiating research data – lies and deception elevated to the throne of “defacto Fact”..
Are we rapidly descending into an academic dungeon in which honest researchers don’t have a hope in hell of surviving either academically or professionally?  Can a functional society survive when honesty and integrity in science are vanquished, punished and buried?

It is obvious that Monsanto’s genetically engineered foods will remain ‘”officially declared safe” as long as Monsanto can “buy control” over the scientific research and what is permitted to be published.

It also does not say much about our society when it produces from within its ranks so many people who are prepared to sell their souls, to lie and pervert –to willingly serve the evil agendas of evil corporations like Monsanto.

It will change when WE, the public reject this perverted “Science by Declaration”  =  when we stop swallowing the falsehoods, and start openly supporting and giving credibility to the independent researchers who have no vested interest other than the pursuit of truth.   
“He who pays the Piper, calls the tune”.  Monopoly corporations can no longer be permitted “to call the scientific tune”!

Monsanto Targets the Heart of Science: The Goodman Affair

Posted on: Friday, November 29th 2013

Written By: by Claire Robinson and Jonathan Latham, PhD

Richard Smith, former editor of the British Medical Journal, has jested that instead of scientific peer review, its rival The Lancet had a system of throwing a pile of papers down the stairs and publishing those that reached the bottom. On another occasion, Smith was challenged to publish an issue of the BMJ exclusively comprising papers that had failed peer review and see if anybody noticed. He replied, "How do you know I haven't already done it?"

As Smith's stories show, journal editors have a lot of power in science – power that provides opportunities for abuse.  The life science industry knows this, and has increasingly moved to influence and control science publishing.

The strategy, often with the willing cooperation of publishers, is effective and sometimes blatant.  In 2009, the scientific publishing giant Elsevier was found to have invented an entire medical journal, complete with editorial board, in order to publish papers promoting the products of the pharmaceutical manufacturer Merck.  Merck provided the papers, Elsevier published them, and doctors read them, unaware that the Australasian Journal of Bone and Joint Medicine was simply a stuffed dummy.

Fast forward to September 2012, when the scientific journal Food and Chemical Toxicology (FCT) published a study that caused an international storm (Séralini, et al. 2012).  The study, led by Prof Gilles-Eric Séralini of the University of Caen, France, suggested a Monsanto genetically modified (GM) maize, and the Roundup herbicide it is grown with, pose serious health risks. The two-year feeding study found that rats fed both suffered severe organ damage and increased rates of tumors and premature death.  Both the herbicide (Roundup) and the GM maize are Monsanto products.  Corinne Lepage, France's former environment minister, called the study "a bomb".

Subsequently, an orchestrated campaign was launched to discredit the study in the media and persuade the journal to retract it. Many of those who wrote letters to FCT (which is published by Elsevier) had conflicts of interest with the GM industry and its lobby groups, though these were not publicly disclosed.

The journal did not retract the study.  But just a few months later, in early 2013 the FCT editorial board acquired a new "Associate Editor for biotechnology", Richard E. Goodman.  This was a new position, seemingly established especially for Goodman in the wake of the "Séralini affair".

Richard E. Goodman is professor at the Food Allergy Research and Resource Program, University of Nebraska.  But he is also a former Monsanto employee, who worked for the company between 1997 and 2004.  While at Monsanto he assessed the allergenicity of the company's GM crops and published papers on its behalf on allergenicity and safety issues relating to GM food (Goodman and Leach 2004).

Goodman had no documented connection to the journal until February 2013.  His fast-tracked appointment, directly onto the upper editorial board raises urgent questions.  Does Monsanto now effectively decide which papers on biotechnology are published in FCT?  And is this part of an attempt by Monsanto and the life science industry to seize control of science?

To equate one journal with "science" may seem like an exaggeration.  But peer-reviewed publication, in the minds of most scientists, is science.  Once a paper is published in an academic journal it enters the canon and stands with the discovery of plate tectonics or the structure of DNA.  All other research, no matter how groundbreaking or true, is irrelevant. As a scientist once scathingly said of the "commercially confidential" industry safety data that underpin approvals of chemicals and GM foods, "If it isn't published, it doesn't exist."

photo: Richard E Goodman, University of Nebraska

Goodman's ILSI links
The industry affiliations of FCT's new gatekeeper for biotechnology are not restricted to having worked directly for Monsanto.  Goodman has an active and ongoing involvement with the International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI).  ILSI is funded by the multinational GM and agrochemical companies, including Monsanto.  It develops industry-friendly risk assessment methods for GM foods and chemical food contaminants and inserts them into government regulations.

ILSI describes itself as a public interest non-profit but its infiltration of regulatory agencies and influence on risk assessment policy has become highly controversial in North America and Europe.  In 2005 US-based non-profits and trade unions wrote to the World Health Organization (WHO) protesting against ILSI's influence on international health standards protecting food and water supplies.  As a result, the WHO barred ILSI from taking part in WHO activities setting safety standards, because of its funding sources.  And in Europe in 2012, Diana Banati, then head of the management board at the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), had to resign over her undisclosed long-standing involvement with ILSI (Robinson et al. 2013).

Pentagon Piracy & Facebook Spying! Nov 30/13 Print E-mail
Friday, 29 November 2013 21:26

Pentagon Piracy & Facebook Spying! Nov 30/13

US govt caught using pirated software for military, settles for $50mn

Published time: November 28, 2013 02:28
Edited time: November 28, 2013 05:03

Get short URL

Reuters / Rick Wilking

Share on tumblr

The Obama administration has agreed to pay Apptricity US$50 million for pirating the company’s logistics software the US Army used beyond contracted parameters.

While the Obama administration’s has launched efforts against intellectual property theft - including the Joint Strategic Plan run by Vice President Joe Biden that aims to curb copyright infringement - the US Army was concurrently using pirated Apptricity enterprise software that manages troop and supply movements. The company sued the government, accusing the US military of willful copyright infringement.

The Administration settled with the company, it was recently announced, agreeing to pay US$50 million, though Apptricity originally called for over four times that amount to cover unpaid licenses, TorrentFreak reported.

In 2004, Apptricity agreed with the US Army to license the troop-movement software, allowing the government to use it on five servers and 150 standalone devices. Despite the deal, the Army has used the software worldwide.

“The Army has used Apptricity’s integrated transportation logistics and asset management software across the Middle East and other theaters of operation. The Army has also used the software to coordinate emergency management initiatives, including efforts following the January 2010 earthquake in Haiti,” the company said.

The improper installation of thousands of unlicensed copies of software was discovered incidentally, when the US Army Program Director said during Strategic Capabilities Planning 2009 that thousands of devices had Apptricity software.

Ultimately, 93 servers and over 9,000 standalone devices of the Army had the unlicensed software. Apptricity figured it was owed US$224 million based on usual fees of US$1.35 million per server and US$5,000 per device.

Apptricity filed a lawsuit at the US Court of Federal Claims, alleging the government of willful copyright infringement, all while concealing the illegality.

“The Government knew or should have known that it was required to obtain a license for copying Apptricity software onto each of the servers and devices,” the company told the court, asking for at least US$224,543,420.80 in damages, equal to what it lost in licensing fees.

The government went on to admit the illegal use and entered into lengthy negotiations with Apptricity to settle.

“After Alternative Dispute Resolution proceedings, the parties agreed to settle for $50 million. The figure represents a fraction of the software’s negotiated contract value that provides a material quantity of server and device licenses for ongoing and future Department of Defense usage,” Apptricity announced.

Banker Employer Break Laws & Ben Fulford report! Nov 26/13 Print E-mail
Monday, 25 November 2013 22:15

Banker Employer Break Laws & Ben Fulford report! Nov 26/13

More illegal complicity to violate our rights by the sheeple people! T

Bank info... reservation of rights.... pdf file

UCC 1-207 Review

It's so important to know and understand the meaning of "Without Prejudice, UCC 1- 207," in connection with your signature, that we should go over this once more. It's very likely that a judge will ask you what it means. So please learn and understand and be able to explain it carefully:

The use of "Without prejudice UCC 1-207," in connection with my signature indicates that I have reserved my Common Law right not to be compelled to perform under any contract that I did not enter into knowingly, voluntarily, and intentionally. And furthermore, I do not accept the liability associated with the compelled benefit of any unrevealed contract or commercial agreement.

Once you state that, it's all the judge needs to hear. Under the Common Law, a contract must be entered into knowingly, voluntarily and intentionally, by both parties, or it can be declared void and unenforceable. You are claiming the right not to be compelled to perform under any contract that you did not enter into knowingly, voluntarily and intentionally. And you do not accept the liability associated with the compelled benefit of any unrevealed contract or agreement.

The compelled benefit is the privilege to use Federal Reserve Notes to discharge your debts with limited liability rather than to pay your debts with silver coins. It's a compelled benefit, because there are no silver coins in circulation. You have to eat, and you can only buy food with the medium of exchange provided by the government. You are not allowed to print your own money, so you are compelled to use theirs. This is the compelled benefit of an unrevealed commercial agreement. If you have not made a valid, timely and explicit reservation of your rights under UCC 1-207, and you simply exercise this benefit rendered by government, you will be obligated, under an implied agreement, to obey every statute, ordinance and regulation passed by government, at all levels - federal, state and local.

See UCC 1-201. General Definitions (3) "Agreement" means the bargain of the parties in fact as found in their language or by implication from other circumstances including course of dealing or usage of trade or course of performance..."


Let us briefly discuss the issue of the employee providing a Social Security number to the employer. We must take a practical and constitutional approach to this issue.

What possible reason could there be for the employer to require the NON-TAXPAYER employee to furnish a Social Security number? The average payroll clerk would claim the number was needed so the employer would withhold Social Security taxes, undoubtedly.But if the employee's job description does not involve any revenue taxable activity,he is not subject to any of these indirect taxes under any circumstances. The right to lawfully contract one's own labor to engage in innocent and harmless activities for lawful compensation cannot be (and therefore has not been) taxed for revenue purposes. Surely, the free exercise of such a constitutionally secured right cannot be limited only to those individuals who furnish a number. Surely there can be no act of Congress which would require such a number to be furnished by a NON-TAXPAYER.

"Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them." Miranda vs. Arizona, 384 U. S. 436, 491. The Internal Revenue Code does indeed contain sections requiring a Social Security number from those who ARE subject to an internal revenue tax, but the NONTAXPAYER is without the scope of the revenue laws.

Many people in the "freedom movement" have tried to obtain jobs without giving a Social Security number, only to have the employer quote a section from the Internal Revenue Code. This, of course, is not a valid reason in the case of a non-taxpayer because the revenue laws relate only to "taxpayer(s)" as defined. If an employer believes there is requirement for a non-taxpayer to furnish a Social Security number, the burden of proof rests with the employer - NOT the NON-TAXPAYER. The employer will have a difficult time here because the number can only be required from those subject to the tax (WHICH ALMOST NONE OF YOU REALLY ARE!!). Even if the employee provided a number to the employer, it still does not make the employee subject to the tax. The furnishing of a number does not change a non-taxable activity into a taxable activity. It's the nature of the activity that creates the liability.

Let us look back to the Helvering Case now. After discussing Title VIII in the Helvering Case, the U. S. Supreme Court next discusses Title II of the act. "Title II has the caption 'Federal Old-Age Benefits.' The benefits are of two types, first, monthly pensions, and second, lump sum payments, the payments of the second class being relatively few and unimportant.

"The first section of this title creates an account in the United States Treasury Account -201. No present appropriation, however, is made to that account. All that the statute does is to authorize appropriations annually thereafter... Not a dollar goes into the Account by force of the challenged act alone, unaided by acts to follow."

It's now obvious, that none of the money collected from the so-called Social Security taxes goes directly into any special account. The only way money gets into the above mentioned account is when Congress appropriates money from the general Treasury. When the public is told that the Social Security account is depleted, it's only because Congress has not appropriated sufficient funds from the general Treasury to keep the account solvent.

Money collected in so-called Social Security taxes goes into the general Treasury fund, and, no longer being identifiable, is spent along with the rest of the moneys collected. Pay attention to the arguments from the politicians regarding the status of the Social Security System and REALLY hear what it is they are quarreling about. If Congress chooses to appropriate funds for Social Security benefits, it can. However, if there is no legal claim that can be made upon the funds by the "taxpayer(s)" (as defined) who have paid the so-called Social Security taxes. The payment of taxes into the general Treasury is completely separable from Congress's choice in how and where public funds are to be spent.

Congress may impose taxes on all legitimate subjects of taxation. If it's a direct tax, it shall be apportioned. If it is an indirect tax (duty, impost or excise), it shall be uniform. HOWEVER, and here is another one I bet you didn't think of, CONGRESS CAN LAWFULLY ONLY SPEND MONEY FOR PURPOSES AUTHORIZED BY THE U. S. CONSTITUTION!!!

"The Congress shall have Power to Lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States." - U. S. Constitution, Article I, sec. 8, cl. 1.

Providing the spending is deemed to be for the common defense and/or the general welfare of the nation, such spending is within the bounds of the Constitution. On the other hand, if the spending is deemed to be for the welfare of specific persons, as opposed to the general welfare of the nation, then the spending is not within the bounds of the Constitution, and therefore the spending is unconstitutional.

If such spending of public funds for the so-called Social Security benefits is deemed to be for the general welfare of the nation, then such spending is within the bounds of the Constitution. The recipients are entitled to the benefits provided by congressional appropriations, regardless of the sources of revenue from which the general Treasury obtained the taxes.

The tax paid into the Treasury is exactly that; a tax. Moneys appropriated from the general Treasury and subsequently spent on general welfare is exactly that; general welfare. The point being that it's actually frivolous for a person to say that because he paid so-called Social Security taxes, he has the right to Social Security benefits. The two are separable, which was one of the main purposes of the separability clause in the Social Security Act, at - 1103.

Unfortunately, the common misunderstanding of Social Security by the American working men and women is of such magnitude that there will be many who will not believe what they have read here and will not want to believe it even if they go to a law library and get copies of the court cases cited. I KNOW this because this information has already been available since at least 1986. Further, for a much longer time it has been available in other formats which work from a different standpoint, but nonetheless do work. YOU ARE CONTROLLED BY LIES AND FEAR - NOT BY THE

CONSTITUTIONAL LAWS OF YOUR LAND. There will, however, be Americans who are researching the court cases in an attempt to get to the bottom of the "taxing" problems and lies facing the American working men and women. Will it not be wondrous when the day of profound lies and enactment through force will be put behind us as a nation and people?

Before appropriating any public funds, Congress is to judge if the spending is for the general welfare of the nation. As you read the various court cases, you will find that the courts will not interfere with Congress's judgment if by any reasonable possibility the spending is for general welfare.

If providing Social Security checks every month to retired millionaires is deemed to be for the general welfare of the nation, then such spending is indeed lawful and constitutional. If, on the other hand, such spending is deemed not to be for the general welfare of the nation, then such spending is an unlawful and unconstitutional conversion of public funds, and, most surely constitutes criminal behavior. But then, didn't the millionaire also probably contribute to that account? Can anyone in the possession of even a portion of their proper faculties honestly contend that this type of spending is for the general welfare of the nation?

It would appear, however, that the questions as to the constitutionality of the spending of public funds for the particular purposes are NOT being directly raised before Congress or the courts. When the fundamental principles of constitutional taxation and constitutional spending are better understood by the American working men and women, these issues will then, and only then, be properly raised by the citizens to Congress in addition to being raised profoundly in the courts.

Great numbers of people want to do away with Social Security because they see that it is wrong, badly managed and the ones presently paying the costs will likely not have benefits later. Others, of course, want to keep the programs because of their well justified fear that many of the elderly and poor would not otherwise have any resources of funds with which to sustain themselves. Look carefully, though, for you can see from the Supreme Court cases, the taxing provisions are completely separate from the provisions for appropriating public funds for general welfare.

Stated differently, Congress can lawfully appropriate funds for the general welfare of the nation if they so choose - and have done so constantly without your even taking note. It also can tax all lawful subjects of taxation - and you who are not subject to the taxation have somehow convinced yourselves to donate (voluntarily contribute) according to the rates provided plus penalties for not donating enough.

Congress can even utilize its power to direct taxation, which it has not implemented in over 100 years, I suppose because all of you NON-TAXPAYERS keep donating and contributing so freely according to their needs and rates. I can find no other reason for sending your money and filling out forms, etc., for actually you do so most unlawfully when you are not even "eligible" as a "taxpayer."

While it's obvious that millions of working folks are having money withheld from their wages under the guise, pretext, sham and subterfuge of withholding so-called Social Security taxes, this unlawful, unconstitutional deprivation of property can come to an abrupt halt without jeopardizing the welfare of the truly needy. Congress will still have the power to obtain sufficient revenue from the lawful subjects of taxation and the needs of the nation can still be met quite constitutionally and you the people can keep total tabs on it.

It's glaringly apparent that you must take action for all of the programs which are for general welfare, along with those where spending is done under the mere guise of general welfare, need to be fully reconsidered and the programs totally overhauled. However, the American people will not be able to give clear and meaningful instructions to their public servants in Congress until the American people themselves have an understanding of the constitutional principles of taxation and the constitutional principles which apply to the use of "public" funds.

Much needs to be done to stop the illegal acts of those employers who are willfully,knowingly, corruptly and unlawfully withholding part of their employee' wages under the guise, pretext, sham and subterfuge of "withholding taxes" in the cases where the employee's job descriptions do not involve any revenue taxable activity (which is the category within which almost ALL of you belong). The employers must know that the revenue laws only apply to those who are engaged in revenue taxable activities; i. e., unlawful, harmful and non-innocent. They must know

that the withholding of ANY funds under the guise of taxation from those who are NON-TAXPAYERS and are not subject to the tax is totally and blatantly illegal. It's only because of lack of knowledge on the part of the working men and women that this CRIME continues on and on and on, unabated.

We will point out another point of interest to these employers: THEY WILL FIND
QUITE EMPHATICALLY THAT THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE WILL NOT COME TO THEIR AID WHEN THEY ARE SUED BY THE DAMAGED NONTAXPAYER EMPLOYEE; providing such nontaxpayer presents himself as a nontaxpayer as described in the Economy Case, and not as a "taxpayer" as defined in the Internal Revenue Code.

USA TPP & Pentagon Actions Nov 24/13 Print E-mail
Saturday, 23 November 2013 23:33

USA TPP & Pentagon Actions Nov 24/13

Wednesday, November 13, 2013

House Pushing Back on Trade Deal; More Detail on How Secret Arbitration Panels Undermine Laws and Regulations

Wow, this is amazing. Word has apparently gotten out even to Congressmen who can normally be lulled to sleep with the invocation of the magic phrase “free trade” that the pending Trans Pacific Partnership is toxic. This proposed deal among 13 Pacific Rim countries (essentially, an “everybody but China” pact), is only peripherally about trade, since trade is already substantially liberalized. Its main aim is to strengthen the rights of intellectual property holders and investors, undermining US sovereignity, allowing drug companies to raise drug prices, interfering with basic operation of the Internet, and gutting labor, banking, and environmental regulations.

The update from the New York Times:

The Obama administration is rushing to reach a new deal intended to lower barriers to trade with a dozen Pacific Rim nations, including Japan and Canada, before the end of the year.

But the White House is now facing new hurdles closer to home, with nearly half of the members of the House signing letters or otherwise signaling their opposition to granting so-called fast-track authority that would make any agreement immune to a Senate filibuster and not subject to amendment. No major trade pact has been approved by Congress in recent decades without such authority.

Two new House letters with about 170 signatories in total — the latest and strongest iteration of long-simmering opposition to fast-track authority and to the trade deal more broadly — have been disclosed just a week before international negotiators are to meet in Salt Lake City for another round of talks…

Many members have had a longstanding opposition to certain elements of the deal, arguing it might hurt American workers and disadvantage some American businesses. Those concerns are diverse, including worries about food safety, intellectual property, privacy and the health of the domestic auto industry.

Others say that they are upset that the Obama administration has, in their view, kept Congress in the dark about the negotiations, by not allowing congressional aides to observe the negotiations and declining to make certain full texts available.

This development is more significant than it might appear. “Fast track” authority limits Congress’s role in trade negotiations. The Administration presents a finished deal, and individual members have only an up or down vote. At that point, because the pending agreements have been misleadingly presented as “pro trade,” dissenters will be depicted as anti-growth Luddites.

But the loss of fast track authority would substantially undermine America’s ability to bully the other parties in the negotiations. Our Japanese-reading regular Clive parsed an article in the Asahi Shinbun as saying that the Japanese were positioning themselves to resist the US onslaught:

The pretty clear subtext of this Japanese newspaper feature is, this is supposed to be an agreement – a negotiation. If a negotiation stalls, it’s because of intransigence on behalf of one or more parties. Let’s count [in the graphic accompanying the article] the flags of the countries who have gone along with things in the TPP proposal… Look-ee there, there’s two Japanese flags. Let’s count the flags of the countries who are opposing things… that’s two – yes, dear Asahi Shinbun readers, T-W-O please note – star spangled banners. So don’t blame us (Japan). It doesn’t actually come right out and hit readers on the head with that editorial, but, in classic Japanese passive aggressive fashion, it is, by the standards of Japanese journalism, sticking a chop stick up Uncle Sam’s behind.

Shortform: Japan to the US “If this is supposed to be a negotiation, be prepared to come and negotiate. You’ll put stuff in the TPP we don’t like. If you expect Asia to swallow it, you’d better be prepared to have to accept things you’re not too keen on. If you don’t, then it’ll be a case of Yankee Go Home from some countries. PS. If it all ends in tears, Japan is completely blameless, it’s all those other countries at fault.”

So the TPP was already in danger of going pear-shaped, independent of well-warranted Congressional opposition.

Let’s give more detail on how heinous this deal and its ugly sister, the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, aka the Trans Atlantic Free Trade Agreement, are. They would extend the authority of secret arbitration panels to hear cases against governments and issue awards. Mind you, the premise of these panels is that some of the signatory nations have banana republic legal systems that might authorize the expropriation of assets, like factories, so foreign investors need recourse to safe venues to obtain compensation. This is a ludicrous proposition to most of the signatories, not only to signatories of the Atlantic agreement (all advanced economies with mature legal systems) as well as potential signatories like Singapore, Japan, Canada, and Australia (and while America’s judicial system leaves a lot to be desired, it can hardly be accused of being unfriendly to commercial interests).

A post in Triple Crisis by Martin Khor gives a good overview:

In the public debate surrounding the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA), an issue that seems to stand out is the investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) system. It would enable foreign investors of TPPA countries to directly sue the host government in an international tribunal.

In most US free trade agreements (FTAs) with investor-state dispute provisions, the tribunal most mentioned is the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), an arbitration court hosted by the World Bank in Washington.

ISDS would be a powerful system for enforcing the rules of the TPPA, which is currently being negotiated by the US and 11 other Pacific Rim countries. Any foreign investor from TPPA countries can take up a case claiming that the government has not met its relevant TPPA obligations.

if the claim succeeds, the tribunal could award the investor financial compensation for the claimed losses. If the payment is not made, the award can potentially be enforced through the seizure of assets of the government that has been sued, or through tariffs raised on the country’s exports.

ISDS is related to relevant parts of the TPPA’s investment chapter. One of the provisions is a broad definition of “investment” which includes credit, contracts, intellectual property rights (IPRs), and expectations of future gains and profits. Investors can make claims on losses to these assets.

Under the “national treatment” provision, a foreign investor can claim to be discriminated against if the local is given preference or other advantage.

Under the clause on fair and equitable treatment, which is contained in many existing trade and investment treaties, investors have sued on the ground of non-renewal or change in the terms of a licence or contract and changes in policies or regulations that the investor claims will reduce its future profits.

Finally, investors can sue on the ground of “indirect expropriation”. Tribunals have ruled in favour of investors that claimed losses due to government policies or regulations, such as tighter health and environmental regulations.

Even though no one has seen the exact language of the text, since it is being kept under wraps, both deals are believed to strengthen and extend investor rights, which means give them easier access to the courts. Consider this description from a July presentation by Public Citizen:

What is different with TAFTA [pending Trans Atlantic Free Trade Agreement] (and TPP) is the extent of “behind the border” agenda

• Typical boilerplate: “Each Member shall ensure the conformity of its laws, regulations and administrative procedures with its obligations as provided in the annexed Agreements.” …

• These rules are enforced by binding dispute resolution via foreign tribunals with ruling enforced by trade indefinite sanctions; No due process; No outside appeal. Countries must gut laws ruled against. Trade sanctions imposed…U.S. taxpayers must compensate foreign corporations.

• Permanence – no changes w/o consensus of all signatory countries. So, no room for progress, responses to emerging problems

• Starkly different from past of international trade between countries. This is diplomatic legislating of behind the border policies – but with trade negotiators not legislators or those who will live with results making the decisions.

• 3 private sector attorneys, unaccountable to any electorate, many of whom rotate between being “judges” & bringing cases for corps. against govts…Creates inherent conflicts of interest….

• Tribunals operate behind closed doors – lack basic due process

• Absolute tribunal discretion to set damages, compound interest, allocate costs

• No limit to amount of money tribunals can order govts to pay corps/investors
• Compound interest starting date if violation new norm ( compound interest ordered by tribunal doubles Occidental v. Ecuador $1.7B award to $3B plus

• Rulings not bound by precedent. No outside appeal. Annulment for limited errors.

And that’s alarming in light of some of the cases already brought before these panels in existing trade agreements like NAFTA. For instance:

Eli Lilly is suing the Canadian government for not having the same extremely pro-drug-company patent rules. It is seeking $500 million in damages for two drugs that Canada approve to be sold as generics. If Eli Lilly prevails, other drug companies are sure to follow suit.

Vattenfal, a Swedish company, is a serial trade pact litigant against Germany. In 2011, Der Spiegel reported on how it was suing for expected €1 billion plus losses due to Germany’s program to phase out nuclear power:

According to Handelsblatt, Vattenfall has an advantage in seeking compensation because the company has its headquarters abroad. As a Swedish company, Vattenfall can invoke investment rules under the Energy Charter Treaty (ECT), which protect foreign investors in signatory nations from interference in property rights. That includes, according to the treaty’s text, a “fair and equitable treatment” of investors.

The Swedish company has already filed suit once against the German government at the ICSID. In 2009, Vattenfall sued the federal government over stricter environmental regulations on its coal-fired power plant in Hamburg-Moorburg, seeking €1.4 billion plus interest in damages. The parties settled out of court in August 2010.

LG TV Surveillance & Sheeple Problem! Nov 23/13 Print E-mail
Friday, 22 November 2013 20:18

LG TV Surveillance & Sheeple Problem! Nov 23/13

More crimes against humanity by manufacturers and retailers! Tami

LG Electronics Inc. has confirmed that some of its smart TVs send information on home viewing habits back to the company without consent and says it will fix the problem, BBC News reports.

The company began investigating after Jason Huntley, a 45-year-old IT consultant in Britain, detailed in his blog how his LG smart TV logged the channels he was watching and sent the data to LG.

He said the company continued to collect which channel he was watching even after he disabled the information collection feature.

"The (LG) server acknowledges the successful receipt of this information back to the TV," he said in an email. The information appeared to be sent to LG unencrypted, he said.

In a statement to BBC News, later on Thursday LG confirmed:"We have verified that even when this function is turned off by the viewers, it continues to transmit viewing information, although the data is not retained by the server ... A firmware update is being prepared for immediate rollout that will correct this problem on all affected LG Smart TVs so when this feature is disabled, no data will be transmitted."

However, the company is still investigating the alleged problem to determine its "relevance to our Canadian customers," said a statement emailed to CBC News by LG Canada.

In his blog post, Huntley reported that in addition to data about viewing habits, also collected were the names of files saved in an external USB hard drive plugged into the TV as well as the TV's unique identification information.

Customer directed to retailer

The world's second-largest TV maker said Thursday that customer privacy is its top priority and takes the issue very seriously.

However, when Huntley asked LG about the data collection last week, the company blamed a TV retailer for not disclosing the company's terms and conditions when he made the purchase.

LG introduced an ad platform to target its smart TV users in 2012. The LG Smart AD lets advertisers reach target audiences by utilizing device information, location and details such as age and gender, LG says on its website. (REUTERS)

"As you accepted the Terms and Conditions on your TV, your concerns would be best directed to the retailer," LG said in an email to Huntley that outlined the response from the company's U.K. head office.

LG introduced an ad platform to target its smart TV users in 2012. The LG Smart AD lets advertisers reach target audiences by utilizing device information, location and details such as age and gender, LG says on its website.

However it was not immediately clear which features in LG's smart TVs were triggering the data monitoring.

"All we can be sure of is that the information is being sent," Huntley said.

He said was "very surprised" at the amount of attention he received with the blog post.

"This indicates that privacy issues are becoming increasingly important to people everywhere, as we are so dependent on technology in our everyday lives."

Separately, Samsung Electronics Co. said it does not collect information on files in USB hard drives connected to its smart TVs. But it did not respond to a question about whether it logs users' viewing habits. Samsung is the world's largest TV maker.

With a file from CBC News

Sheeple: Why You Should Feel Sorry For Them


Sheeple to me are all government and gov agencies, military, college and university staff with exception to a few. Some more are all bankers and staff, corporate leaders and staff, media and staff except for a few globally. As well as all Satanists world wide as well as religious flocks except for a few. Some university trained environmentalist, pharmaceutical medical personnal and light of the darkness trained new agers and channels except for a few. I pray they all wake up soon! Tami

It is often said there only two kinds of people in this world: those who know, and those who don’t. I would expand on this and say that there are actually three kinds of people: those who know, those who don’t know, and those who don’t care to know. Members of the last group are the kind of people I would characterize as “sheeple.”

Sheeple are members of a culture or society who are not necessarily oblivious to the reality of their surroundings; they may have been exposed to valuable truths on numerous occasions. However, when confronted with facts contrary to their conditioned viewpoint, they become aggressive and antagonistic in their behavior, seeking to dismiss and attack the truth by attacking the messenger and denying reason. Sheeple exist on both sides of America‘s false political paradigm, and they exist in all social “classes”. In fact, the “professional class” and the hierarchy of academia are rampant breeding grounds for sheeple; who I sometimes refer to as “intellectual idiots”. Doctors and lawyers, scientists and politicians are all just as prone to the sheeple plague as anyone else; the only difference is that they have a bureaucratic apparatus behind them which gives them a false sense of importance. All they have to do is tow the establishment line, and promote the establishment view.

Of course the common argument made by sheeple is that EVERYONE thinks everyone else is blind to the truth, which in their minds, somehow vindicates their behavior. However, the characteristic that absolutely defines a sheeple is not necessarily a lack of knowledge, but an unwillingness to consider or embrace obvious logic or truth in order to protect their egos and biases from harm. A sheeple’s mindset is driven by self centered motives.

So-called mainstream media outlets go out of their way to reinforce this aggressive mindset by establishing the illusion that sheeple are the “majority” and that the majority perception (which has been constructed by the MSM) is the only correct perception.

<< Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next > End >>

Page 10 of 54