spiritsoup's Blog

McCain, Obama...two sides of the same coin.



Why should you think twice before casting your vote for either of these two?
Because if you want to know what they are about you need to look at two things.

1) Who funds them.

2) What political groups they belong to.

The first is far more research then I would even want to get into but the second is an easier route and in my opinion is a far better insight into what policies they believe in.
And it just so happens that both are members of the CFR (Counsil on Foreign Relations)



Most Americans have no idea that this group exists let alone what they stand for.
So I thought that I might just enlighten you all on the views that seem to proliferate though out this organization, best explained by a documented speech given by the son of one of the original founders of the CFR, David Rockefeller. (I placed the more disturbing statements in bold print)

"We are grateful to the Washington Post, the New York Times, Time magazine and other great publications, whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost 40 years.
It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years.
But the world is more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government.
The super-national sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries."

Well, how nice of you, Mr. Rockefeller.

To make such an important decision on our behalf, not that we should even speak to our betters...you pompous arrogant ass.

Unbelievable...

Yet these are the views of those running in 2008. They see themselves as royalty and us as the peons and surfs.

It rings through out their leadership and hints (In other speeches) of mass eugenic policies, the very same policies practiced by the Nazi regime.

Neither, McCain or Obama looks to secure Americas future or the livelihood of us, the citizenship of this nation.

What both seek is to place themselves above reproach, just as the Bush Administration has wontedly done, not only for themselves but for the corporations that have assisted them in crimes against us and our nation.

Until we become educated on the doctrines of what Rockefeller calls, the "intellectual elite" we are bound to end up not only a number, a dollar sign...but willing slaves in a world designed by the wealthy for the wealthy whilst the rest of us will be left out to struggle and die in FEMA camps.

Yet the sheep actually think these are the saviors of our nation, that they will bring change.

The only change these globalists are bound to bring is the end of U.S. sovereignty and personal gun ownership and the demonic birth of the North American Union.

The death of the statutes of freedom granted us by whats left of our Constitution and the beginning of an out right reign of a tyranical entity that will be far worse then the Crown could have ever have sought to have wrought on the original colonies.

Time to stop falling for the Right, Left paradigm.

They are not out for our best interest, but the interest of the so called "intellectual elite and the world banker" cartels which I assure you, none of us are apart of...in their eyes any way.

It's no wonder the world looks upon us in disgust, Hell I look upon our nations lazy mind numbed, debt slaves in disgust myself, and I ask...if America fails, who then will stop this monster from being spawned?

McCain is also a member of The Project For A New American Century, in which one of their documents actually suggest that this nation needs another Pearl Harbor event to move the appropriate legislation forward.

This is what we are represented by?

They DON"T represent my views nor do I believe they represent this nations best interests or the worlds for that matter.

We are beginning to see what happens when the Central Banks are given the keys to the Nation, they leave it in disarray and shambles, which is exactly what they want.

To ruin our dollar to the point that it is on par with the Peso, which it nearly is I might add, so they can come in with their Amero as the savior to our economic woe's, which they orchestrated through their unjust, unconstitutional wars and over inflation.

Problem, Reaction, Solution.

They create a problem, to garner a reaction, to implement their solution.

It's as old a formula as divide and conquer, but then again that one still works on us today.

Any distraction to blind us from the truth their end game...the total control of the worlds population for their twisted inbred amusement.

These aren't conspiracy theories.

They are documented conspiracy facts.

Yet more Government infringement on our on-line privacy. Setting prescient for further invasions of on-line privacy
Friday July 4, 7:52 am ET
By Anick Jesdanun, AP Internet Writer


Dismissing privacy concerns, a federal judge overseeing a $1 billion copyright-infringement lawsuit against YouTube has ordered the popular online video-sharing service to disclose who watches which video clips and when.

U.S. District Judge Louis L. Stanton authorized full access to the YouTube logs after Viacom Inc. and other copyright holders argued that they needed the data to show whether their copyright-protected videos are more heavily watched than amateur clips.

The data would not be publicly released but disclosed only to the plaintiffs, and it would include less specific identifiers than a user's real name or e-mail address.

I find it hard to believe that Viacom will allow  You Tube subscribers to get away with posting copy written materials on You Tube without seeking to prosecute them.  You can bet a worthless Federal Reserve note on that.

Lawyers for Google Inc., which owns YouTube, said producing 12 terabytes of data -- equivalent to the text of roughly 12 million books -- would be expensive, time-consuming and a threat to users' privacy.

The database includes information on when each video gets played, which can be used to determine how often a clip is viewed. Attached to each entry is each viewer's unique login ID and the Internet Protocol, or IP, address for that viewer's computer.

Stanton ruled this week that the plaintiffs had a legitimate need for the information and that the privacy concerns are speculative.

Stanton rejected a request from the plaintiffs for Google to disclose the source code -- the technical secret sauce -- powering its market-leading search engine, saying there's no evidence Google manipulated its search algorithms to treat copyright-infringing videos differently.

The court has yet to rule on Google's requests to question comedians Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert of Viacom's Comedy Central.

Viacom is seeking at least $1 billion in damages from Google, saying YouTube has built a business by using the Internet to "willfully infringe" copyrights on Viacom shows, which include Comedy Central's "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart" and Nickelodeon's "SpongeBob SquarePants" cartoon.

The lawsuit was combined with a similar case filed by a British soccer league and other parties.

Together, the plaintiffs are trying to prove that YouTube has known of copyright infringement and can do more to stop it, a finding that could dissolve the immunity protections that service providers have when they merely host content submitted by their users.

Though Google said giving the plaintiffs access to YouTube viewer data would threaten users' privacy, Stanton referred to Google's own blog entry in which the company argued that the IP address alone cannot identify a specific individual.

In a statement, Google said it was "disappointed the court granted Viacom's overreaching demand for viewing history. We are asking Viacom to respect users' privacy and allow us to anonymize the logs before producing them under the court's order."

Google did not say whether it would appeal the ruling or seek to narrow it.

Stanton's ruling made only passing reference to a 1988 federal law barring the disclosure of specific video materials that subscribers request or obtain.

Kurt Opsahl, a senior staff attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, said Stanton should have considered that law along with constitutional free-speech rights, including a right to read or view materials anonymously.

He said a user's ID can sometimes include identifying information such as a first initial and last name.

Viacom said it isn't seeking any user's identity. The company said any data provided "will be used exclusively for the purpose of proving our case against YouTube and Google (and) will be handled subject to a court protective order and in a highly confidential manner."

Sure we believe you,

This is not the first time Google has fought the disclosure of user information it had been stockpiling. While gathering evidence for a case involving online pornography, the U.S. Justice Department subpoenaed Google and other search engines for lists of search requests made by their users.

After Google resisted, a federal judge ruled that Google was obliged to turn over only a sample of Web addresses in its search index, not the actual search terms requested.

FBI probe just more bad news for Detroit.




FBI probe of sludge recycling contract is latest setback for beleaguered Detroit DETROIT (AP) -- Auto industry cutbacks, double-digit unemployment and one of the nation's highest home foreclosure rates have left Detroit with a dreary economic future.

Now, a mayoral text-messaging sex scandal, federal investigation into a City Council-approved $47 million sludge recycling deal, and poorly run and deficit-plagued public school system have dashed inroads toward respect and reopened Detroit to outside ridicule.

"When we're out doing business and trying to get customers we sometimes get asked 'You're from Detroit? What's going on there?'" Compuware Corp. senior vice president Jason Vines said. "As taxpayers and residents, it has to be disheartening. When your city is used as a public joke, it's not good."

Like most major cities, Detroit is no stranger to scandal. Former City Council members, and even a police chief, have been indicted, arrested or imprisoned.

But the current political crisis threatens to bury the city deeper in an economic grave.

While the mayoral text-messaging scandal has been going on since the end of January, the past week alone has brought a new round of bad news for the city.

On Monday, the same day the sludge contract probe was making headlines, the City Council voted down a plan that would have led to the sale of Detroit's half of the Detroit-Windsor commuter tunnel and averted layoffs of 1,300 city workers. On Tuesday, the council did an about-face and approved the plan to set up a tunnel authority to run the U.S.-Canada border crossing. The city will get $65 million under the deal to fill its budget deficit.

This is just another victory for Cintra, the Spanish owned transportation company that is now placing tolls on existing roads throughout Texas and Illinois and is setting it's greedy eyes on Ohio and now they have Michigan in it's pocket.

(For more information on Cintra see Super NAFTA, Cintra, and the Security and Prosperity Act )

Also on Monday, the Detroit Board of Education approved a school district budget that calls for laying off 518 teachers and 900 other staffers this summer. The 106,000-student district gave pink slips to 300 other teachers earlier this year.

Monday also was the day Council President Ken Cockrel Jr. told colleagues he had been questioned in the sludge contract probe. Federal authorities are looking into a contract with Houston-based waste hauler Synagro Technologies that the City Council approved by a 5-4 vote last November.

The Detroit Free Press, citing people with knowledge of the investigation that it didn't name, has reported that the investigation involves four council members, staffers, City Hall employees and people outside city government. No one has been charged, but Cockrel's chief of staff resigned last week. The Free Press and The Detroit News said he was videotaped accepting cash from a now-suspended Synagro official.

The probe into the sludge deal only adds to investor skepticism about Detroit, Mackinac Center for Public Policy analyst Michael D. LaFaive said.

"It's got to raise the question: Where will the next curve ball come from?" LaFaive said. "Reports suggest this is an expanding corruption investigation. So where will it expand next?"

The U.S. attorney's office and FBI officials won't comment on the probe, but one other council member and a former consultant to another say they have met with investigators.

Political consultant Sam Riddle Jr. said he met with the FBI at the agency's request in early June. Riddle had been a spokesman for Council President Pro Tem Monica Conyers.

Councilwoman Sheila Cockrel voluntarily met with investigators Monday. She and Ken Cockrel have said they are not targets of the probe. Riddle said he has done nothing wrong.

"With the body slams this city has taken over and over and over again, this is really profoundly unfortunate," Sheila Cockrel told The Associated Press.

Less than two years ago, Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick -- basking in the glow from Detroit's impressive hosting of Major League Baseball's 2005 All-Star Game and the 2006 NFL Super Bowl -- seemed to be a rising political star in the Democratic party. He proudly announced planned upscale condo developments along the long-neglected riverfront and updates to downtown buildings.

But in late January, excerpts of sexually explicit text messages were published by the Free Press and pointed to an extramarital relationship between Kilpatrick and then-Chief of Staff Christine Beatty. Those messages left on Beatty's city-issued pager contradicted testimony the two had given during a 2007 police whistle-blowers' trial.

Kilpatrick and Beatty were charged in March with perjury, misconduct and obstruction of justice. They are accused of lying about having an intimate relationship and about their roles in the firing of a police official. Both have denied any wrongdoing.

A fractured City Council then went on the offensive against the beleaguered mayor, accusing Kilpatrick of violating the city charter by not revealing a confidentiality agreement linked to an $8.4 million settlement in the whistle-blower case. The council has asked Gov. Jennifer Granholm, a fellow Democrat, to remove Kilpatrick for misconduct and is continuing its own forfeiture of office efforts.

Even Granholm appears weary of Detroit's embarrassments.

"Detroit is our big city. And to the extent that it's facing these tremendous challenges ... it's not good for Michigan," she told reporters this week.

And the Synagro deal is only one of at least two federal investigations into public corruption.

Authorities also have been delving into $45 million in unauthorized contracts through the school district's risk management office.

The district has filed suit to get that money back, school board member Joyce Hayes-Giles said.

"It has taken many years for the district to get in the shape it's in now," she said. "We are trying to fix what is wrong.

"Lately in our city and schools, people are looking for people to blame, and the politicians have a lot to bear when it comes to being accountable for what is happening here.

Something Big is going on!

Ron Paul’s Campaign for Liberty
June 3, 2008

The following statement is written by Congressman Paul about the pending financial disaster. He will introduce this statement as a special order and insert it into the Congressional Record next week. Fortunately, we have the opportunity to debut it first on the Campaign for Liberty blog. It reads as follows:

I have, for the past 35 years, expressed my grave concern for the future of America. The course we have taken over the past century has threatened our liberties, security and prosperity. In spite of these long-held concerns, I have days—growing more frequent all the time—when I’m convinced the time is now upon us that some Big Events are about to occur. These fast-approaching events will not go unnoticed. They will affect all of us. They will not be limited to just some areas of our country. The world economy and political system will share in the chaos about to be unleashed.

Though the world has long suffered from the senselessness of wars that should have been avoided, my greatest fear is that the course on which we find ourselves will bring even greater conflict and economic suffering to the innocent people of the world—unless we quickly change our ways.

America, with her traditions of free markets and property rights, led the way toward great wealth and progress throughout the world as well as at home. Since we have lost our confidence in the principles of liberty, self reliance, hard work and frugality, and instead took on empire building, financed through inflation and debt, all this has changed. This is indeed frightening and an historic event.

The problem we face is not new in history. Authoritarianism has been around a long time. For centuries, inflation and debt have been used by tyrants to hold power, promote aggression, and provide “bread and circuses” for the people. The notion that a country can afford “guns and butter” with no significant penalty existed even before the 1960s when it became a popular slogan. It was then, though, we were told the Vietnam War and a massive expansion of the welfare state were not problems. The seventies proved that assumption wrong.

Today things are different from even ancient times or the 1970s. There is something to the argument that we are now a global economy. The world has more people and is more integrated due to modern technology, communications, and travel. If modern technology had been used to promote the ideas of liberty, free markets, sound money and trade, it would have ushered in a new golden age—a globalism we could accept.

Instead, the wealth and freedom we now enjoy are shrinking and rest upon a fragile philosophic infrastructure. It is not unlike the levies and bridges in our own country that our system of war and welfare has caused us to ignore.

I’m fearful that my concerns have been legitimate and may even be worse than I first thought. They are now at our doorstep. Time is short for making a course correction before this grand experiment in liberty goes into deep hibernation.

There are reasons to believe this coming crisis is different and bigger than the world has ever experienced. Instead of using globalism in a positive fashion, it’s been used to globalize all of the mistakes of the politicians, bureaucrats and central bankers.

Being an unchallenged sole superpower was never accepted by us with a sense of humility and respect. Our arrogance and aggressiveness have been used to promote a world empire backed by the most powerful army of history. This type of globalist intervention creates problems for all citizens of the world and fails to contribute to the well-being of the world’s populations. Just think how our personal liberties have been trashed here at home in the last decade.

The financial crisis, still in its early stages, is apparent to everyone: gasoline prices over $4 a gallon; skyrocketing education and medical-care costs; the collapse of the housing bubble; the bursting of the NASDAQ bubble; stockmarkets plunging; unemployment rising;, massive underemployment; excessive government debt; and unmanageable personal debt. Little doubt exists as to whether we’ll get stagflation. The question that will soon be asked is: When will the stagflation become an inflationary depression?

There are various reasons that the world economy has been globalized and the problems we face are worldwide. We cannot understand what we’re facing without understanding fiat money and the long-developing dollar bubble.

There were several stages. From the inception of the Federal Reserve System in 1913 to 1933, the Central Bank established itself as the official dollar manager. By 1933, Americans could no longer own gold, thus removing restraint on the Federal Reserve to inflate for war and welfare.

By 1945, further restraints were removed by creating the Bretton-Woods Monetary System making the dollar the reserve currency of the world. This system lasted up until 1971. During the period between 1945 and 1971, some restraints on the Fed remained in place. Foreigners, but not Americans, could convert dollars to gold at $35 an ounce. Due to the excessive dollars being created, that system came to an end in 1971.

It’s the post Bretton-Woods system that was responsible for globalizing inflation and markets and for generating a gigantic worldwide dollar bubble. That bubble is now bursting, and we’re seeing what it’s like to suffer the consequences of the many previous economic errors.

Ironically in these past 35 years, we have benefited from this very flawed system. Because the world accepted dollars as if they were gold, we only had to counterfeit more dollars, spend them overseas (indirectly encouraging our jobs to go overseas as well) and enjoy unearned prosperity. Those who took our dollars and gave us goods and services were only too anxious to loan those dollars back to us. This allowed us to export our inflation and delay the consequences we now are starting to see.

But it was never destined to last, and now we have to pay the piper. Our huge foreign debt must be paid or liquidated. Our entitlements are coming due just as the world has become more reluctant to hold dollars. The consequence of that decision is price inflation in this country—and that’s what we are witnessing today. Already price inflation overseas is even higher than here at home as a consequence of foreign central bank’s willingness to monetize our debt.

Printing dollars over long periods of time may not immediately push prices up–yet in time it always does. Now we’re seeing catch-up for past inflating of the monetary supply. As bad as it is today with $4 a gallon gasoline, this is just the beginning. It’s a gross distraction to hound away at “drill, drill, drill” as a solution to the dollar crisis and high gasoline prices. Its okay to let the market increase supplies and drill, but that issue is a gross distraction from the sins of deficits and Federal Reserve monetary shenanigans.

This bubble is different and bigger for another reason. The central banks of the world secretly collude to centrally plan the world economy. I’m convinced that agreements among central banks to “monetize” U.S. debt these past 15 years have existed, although secretly and out of the reach of any oversight of anyone—especially the U.S. Congress that doesn’t care, or just flat doesn’t understand. As this “gift” to us comes to an end, our problems worsen. The central banks and the various governments are very powerful, but eventually the markets overwhelm when the people who get stuck holding the bag (of bad dollars) catch on and spend the dollars into the economy with emotional zeal, thus igniting inflationary fever.

This time—since there are so many dollars and so many countries involved—the Fed has been able to “paper” over every approaching crisis for the past 15 years, especially with Alan Greenspan as Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board, which has allowed the bubble to become history’s greatest.

The mistakes made with excessive credit at artificially low rates are huge, and the market is demanding a correction. This involves excessive debt, misdirected investments, over-investments, and all the other problems caused by the government when spending the money they should never have had. Foreign militarism, welfare handouts and $80 trillion entitlement promises are all coming to an end. We don’t have the money or the wealth-creating capacity to catch up and care for all the needs that now exist because we rejected the market economy, sound money, self reliance and the principles of liberty.

Since the correction of all this misallocation of resources is necessary and must come, one can look for some good that may come as this “Big Even” unfolds.

There are two choices that people can make. The one choice that is unavailable to us is to limp along with the status quo and prop up the system with more debt, inflation and lies. That won’t happen.

One of the two choices, and the one chosen so often by government in the past is that of rejecting the principles of liberty and resorting to even bigger and more authoritarian government. Some argue that giving dictatorial powers to the President, just as we have allowed him to run the American empire, is what we should do. That’s the great danger, and in this post-911 atmosphere, too many Americans are seeking safety over freedom. We have already lost too many of our personal liberties already. Real fear of economic collapse could prompt central planners to act to such a degree that the New Deal of the 30’s might look like Jefferson’s Declaration of Independence.

The more the government is allowed to do in taking over and running the economy, the deeper the depression gets and the longer it lasts. That was the story of the 30's and the early 40's, and the same mistakes are likely to be made again if we do not wake up.

But the good news is that it need not be so bad if we do the right thing. I saw “Something Big” happening in the past 18 months on the campaign trail. I was encouraged that we are capable of waking up and doing the right thing. I have literally met thousands of high school and college kids who are quite willing to accept the challenge and responsibility of a free society and reject the cradle-to-grave welfare that is promised them by so many do-good politicians.

If more hear the message of liberty, more will join in this effort. The failure of our foreign policy, welfare system, and monetary policies and virtually all government solutions are so readily apparent, it doesn’t take that much convincing. But the positive message of how freedom works and why it’s possible is what is urgently needed.

One of the best parts of accepting self reliance in a free society is that true personal satisfaction with one’s own life can be achieved. This doesn’t happen when the government assumes the role of guardian, parent or provider, because it eliminates a sense of pride. But the real problem is the government can’t provide the safety and economic security that it claims. The so-called good that government claims it can deliver is always achieved at the expense of someone else’s freedom. It’s a failed system and the young people know it.

Restoring a free society doesn’t eliminate the need to get our house in order and to pay for the extravagant spending. But the pain would not be long-lasting if we did the right things, and best of all the empire would have to end for financial reasons. Our wars would stop, the attack on civil liberties would cease, and prosperity would return. The choices are clear: it shouldn’t be difficult, but the big event now unfolding gives us a great opportunity to reverse the tide and resume the truly great American Revolution started in 1776. Opportunity knocks in spite of the urgency and the dangers we face.

Let’s make “Something Big is Happening” be the discovery that freedom works and is popular and the big economic and political event we’re witnessing is a blessing in disguise.

Did Bear Stearns melt down — or was it murdered?




Did Bear Stearns melt down — or was it murdered?

That is one of the big questions that Bryan Burrough, who co-wrote the best-selling 1990 book “Barbarians at the Gate,” tries to answer in a lengthy article in the August Vanity Fair magazine.

Mr. Burrough spoke with many Bear executives and board members who described in vivid detail the events that unfolded that fateful week in March when Bear Stearns was ultimately forced to sell itself to JPMorgan Chase for a pittance.

According to Mr. Burrough’s account, Bear did not have a liquidity problem, at least at first. In fact, he said it had more than $18 billion in cash to cover its trades when the week began. There were no major withdrawals until late in the week, after rumors flew that the company was in trouble.

A top Bear executive told Mr. Burrough, “There was a reason [the rumor] was leaked, and the reason is simple: someone wanted us to go down, and go down hard.”

Bear executives frantically tried to find the source of the rumors, but failed to do so. They have their suspicions, and they have turned over the names to federal authorities that are investigating the matter.

Two possible sources named in the article — albeit with few supporting details — are hedge funds: Chicago-based Citadel, run by Ken Griffin, and SAC Capital Partners of Stamford, Conn., run by Steven Cohen. The third was one of Bear’s main competitors, Goldman Sachs.

All three firms denied any involvement in spreading the rumor, according to the article.

Several Bear executives also told Mr. Burroughs that an individual may have been spreading rumors about the firm that week — Jeff Dorman. Mr. Dorman briefly served as global co-head of Bear’s prime brokerage business until resigning to take a similar position at Deutsche Bank. One Bear executive said, “We heard Dorman was saying things last summer […] At the time we reached out to Deutsche Bank and told them he better stop it.”

But the rumors caused a run on the bank and depleted Bear’s capital base. Alan Schwartz, the firm’s chief executive, then reached out to his counterpart at JPMorgan, James Dimon, for help. Mr. Schwartz called Mr. Dimon, who was eating dinner with his family, celebrating his 52nd birthday.

Mr. Burrough described the call this way:

Dimon stepped outside onto the sidewalk. Schwartz quickly explained the depth of Bear’s plight and said, ‘We really need help.’ Still irked, Dimon said, ‘How much?’ ‘As much as 30 billion,’ Schwartz said. ‘Alan, I can’t do that,’ Dimon said. ‘It’s too much.’ ‘Well, could you guys buy us overnight?’ ‘I can’t — that’s impossible,’ Dimon replied. ‘There’s no time to do the homework. We don’t know the issues. I’ve got a board.’

Mr. Dimon then called the New York Federal Reserve and worked out a deal where the government would lend the money to JPMorgan, which would then lend it to Bear Stearns. Bear would live another day — but just a few more. Bear executives thought they had 28 days to pay the money back. The article recounts a conversation that Mr. Schwartz had with federal officials informing him that he had far less time than he thought:

Schwartz’s phone rang. It was Tim Geithner of the Fed, with the Treasury secretary, Hank Paulson. Paulson came right to the point. ‘You’ll recall I told you when we cut this facility [that] your fate was no longer in your hands,’ he told Schwartz. ‘Well, we don’t plan on being here on Sunday night like we were last night. You’ve got the weekend to do a deal with J.P. Morgan or anyone else you can find. But if you’re not done by Monday, we’re pulling the plug.’ And, like that, Bear’s 28-day cushion evaporated. The Fed’s credit line was good only till Sunday night.”

The news came as a shock to Bear executives.

When Bear’s chief financial officer, Sam Molinaro, heard the news from Mr. Schwartz he said, “You’ve got to be kidding me.” The firm was eventually forced to sell itself to JPMorgan to avoid a bankruptcy filing.

Go to Article from Vanity Fair »

Super NAFTA, Cintra, and the Security and Prosperity Act




So what do all these things have in common? That was the question I asked my self.
Having kept my eye on the formation of the North American Union when I first heard of it in1990, around the time of the 1st Gulf action, I can't bring myself to call it a War, because it was never Declared by Congress as to be a War.

How ever, I had over a long span of years heard; along with most of the Detroit area, about the proposed leasing out, or the out right sale of our toll bridges to Canada and thought it to be a very unwise decision to make. I remember at the time I thought, "Who cares anyway?" Because I was young and bullet proof ; or so I thought, I didn't have enough knowledge of the art of warfare, the history of the Roman Empire or the workings of politics to piece any thing together.

But that was 18 years ago, and things have changes...and not for the better.

We have all witnessed the fall of our Towers, our Liberties, and now, our Dollar...in that order.

And good people sit idly by and do nothing. Still members of the bullet proof mentality of a teen ager, we have grown accustomed to  the prosperity we have had over the years riding high the wave of our Fiat currency.

And while we have been content with our televisions and PS3's, and all the shinny little B. S. we are told we "Need"...to, "CHASE, what matters" our nations roads and ports have been sold out from under our feet.

We all remember the News of this and Congress putting a halt to selling of American Ports to China. Well China, ends up buying in Mexico.

Now how does that tie in with Cintra? Here's a little crash course in Cintra.

The company has over 35 years' experience and a business strategy based on growth. Cintra presently manages 21 toll highways (more than 2,000 km) in Spain, Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Chile, Canada and USA. In this country, Cintra is strategic partner of the State of Texas in the design and planning of the Trans-Texas Corridor and has been selected as preferred bidder for a 75-year concession to maintain and operate the Indiana Toll Road (ITR). [quoted from www.cintra.es 13 Dec 2006]

Which in lawyer speakmeans, they hold the rights to charge what ever they chose to drive on their system.

Headquartered in Madrid, Spain, with subsidiaries on three continents, Cintra is one of the world’s largest private-sector developers of transport infrastructure, with committed equity investments of more than $2.1 billion. Cintra is a publicly held company listed in Madrid’s Stock Exchange. More than 60 percent of Cintra is held by the Madrid-based Grupo Ferrovial, founded as a construction company in 1952. Ferrovial is now a diversified and stable group that ranks among the top five construction groups by market capitalization in Europe. Its subsidiary, Ferrovial Agroman, has completed construction projects in more than 40 countries and forms, together with Zachry, the construction arm of the team. [quoted from "Cintra/Zachry Team Fact Sheet," 11 Mar 2005]

Cintra is a publicly traded company based in Madrid, Spain. Cintra has a market capitalization of approximately $5 billion. The company has years of successful transportation experience, including major investment and operating interests in the Chicago Skyway, the 407 ETR highway in Toronto, Canada, and highway investments in Spain, Ireland, Chile and Portugal. Cintra is also the leader in the parking lot business in Spain, currently managing more than 200,000 parking slots. [quoted from "Cintra/Zachry Team Fact Sheet," 11 Mar 2005]

Jose Maria Lopez de Fuentes is Cintra's U.S. manager.

407 ETR was operated and maintained by the Ontario Government from the time it was opened in 1959 until the 407 International, Inc. was awarded a 99-year operating concession. This was the first privatization of an existing toll road in Canada. 407 International, Inc. is a partnership between Cintra, S.A. of Madrid, Spain; Macquarie Infrastructure Group (MIG) of Sydney, Australia; and, SNC Lavalin of Canada.

And just coincidentally the former mayor of New York, Giuliani tends to make huge profits in this venture to sell America out, but we already knew that, seeing how fast he shipped away the evidence of the WTC wreckage to a foreign country to be disposed of.

The sell-off of American highways to private companies coupled with the controversial plan to build the "NAFTA Superhighway" has become an explosive political subject in many states. The influx of foreign companies involved in becoming owners of public assets has further enraged the public, as have details about their financial ties with some of the country's most well-known politicians.

One of the biggest whoppers in the whole debate about political patronage and the sell-off of public infrastructure concerns the $100-million buyout of the firm owned by Republican presidential contender Rudy Giuliani by Macquarie, the big Australian investment banking firm.

Macquarie Infrastructure has partnered with the Spanish firm Cintra Concesiones de Infraestructuras de Transporte in the controversial purchase of the Indiana Toll Road. The two companies are also part of a major political uprising in Texas concerning the privatization of State Highway 121 outside of Dallas. A Macquarie division has spent $110 million buying up 42 local newspapers along the Trans-Texas Corridor (the NAFTA Superhighway corridor).

Get the whole article at Manufacturing and Technology News

http://www.manufacturingnews.com/news/07/061
5/art2.html

So as you can see...Cintra is the Main player in this game for our land and rights to tax us the American to fund Mexico's infrastructure.

Which is explain quite well by Rep. Marcy Kaptur of Ohio.

This is an all too real truth, regardless if you know nothing about it.

This is what's at stake here.

The whole sale of American road ways into hands of Foreign companies thus giving them taxation power through tolls, and the power to tax is the power to control.

Add this reality to the fact that our Dollar is worth less and less everyday due to inflation from Helicopter Ben and the Den of Thieves at the Federal Reserve and an Empire building mentality sweeping the Neo-Con Agenda for the last ummm say 60 years this nation will be reduced to the plight of third world nations, alts the while our political and manufacturing elite are pulling up shop in the States and heading to sunnier shores.

Ford Motor has invested 9.2 billion in their Mexico operations...so where does that leave us...clinging to a pension from them based in a worthless currency, Well thank you very little, Ford Motor.

Now being into Roman history (like most males), I understand how important the road way systems are for:

A) deploying troops

B) suppling said troops

C) controlling commerce

D) Controlling Migration

E) But most importantly, Taxation.

You can forget about the Government thinking about how we might use the roads.

It's all based in a fear based mentality...that is how our systems work now. Out of fear. About evacuation routes and deployment routes. We have all heard it already. On the news, in the papers, but did you listen to what was said.

What is the Security and Prosperity Act?

The Security and Prosperity Act actually gives the rights (Though never voted on by Congress or the House) to Canadian and Mexican military forces to police our population here in the U.S. And if you really need to read more about this huberistic Contitutional abortion just Google the Act and read for days about it.

Through out history, road ways have been the key to military success and control of a geographical locale. They have been used to tax and to control the masses.

It's time we stop buying the lies.

To own up to the fact that we were willfully ignorant.

Wake up to the truth, we wanted to be lied to so we wouldn't feel accountable or have to actually get involved in our own governing.

"Evil prospers when good men and women do nothing."

Truth Rising: Part I of the 9-11 chronicles. 

The first documentary that gives the First Responders a platform to tell their stories of what happened on that fateful day that has changed the face of our rights.

After the Prison Planet premier, I'm sure this will be on Google video in no time.  If you haven't actually watched a movie from award winning documentary film maker Alex Jones or have only heard about it from someone else whether good or bad, I suggest you take a open minded look at one for your self.  There are plenty of them out on Google and yahoo etc.  Take a look into C.I.A. documentation he sites, past news footage from the MSM,  interviews, research the info your self and you will find what I found... (to my dismay) they all exist

9/11 Chronicles: Part One, Truth Rising is a testament to free speech, an endangered commodity in post September 11, 2001 America. Alex Jones’ latest documentary is a vivid testament standing in complete and defiant opposition to former White House press secretary Ari Fleischer’s admonishment that “nowadays you have to be careful what you say and do,” as if the orchestrated events of that horrible day have nullified the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. In Jones’ latest documentary, filmed in cinéma-vérité style — an appropriate technique, as the phrase translates from the French as “cinema of truth” — we witness repeated instances of police insisting the First Amendment is a dead letter and citizens no longer have the right to speak their minds in public, especially citizens going up against the imposed political orthodoxy and Fleischer’s counsel.

We Are Change activist Luke Rudkowski at Ground Zero.

Truth Rising also reveals that it is not only New York City’s militarized police who believe the First Amendment is moribund, but many citizens do as well. “You ain’t American,” insists one such fine specimen at Ground Zero, angry over the possibility that somebody would actually dare contest the official version of events and ask questions and demand answers. Others fling mindless and obscene epithets and swipe at the camera, as if incapable of tolerating, let alone understanding and respecting the First Amendment, an absolute freedom that occupies a preferred position in the pantheon of our liberties. In post-9/11 America, the exercise of free speech is relegated to government mandated “free speech zones” and to insist the whole of the country is a free speech zone casts one in dark suspicion along with the likes Osama and the manufactured enemies of America.

The World in 2025, According to the National Intelligence Council

Daniel Taylor / Old Thinker News | June 27, 2008

Life extension technology, artificial intelligence, and an expansive "internet of things" are just a few of the topics that the latest report from the National Intelligence Council, "Disruptive Civil Technologies - Six Technologies with Potential Impacts on US Interests out to 2025".

Earlier reports from the CIA and the United Kingdom’s Ministry of Defense have carried similar themes. The December 2000 CIA report, Global Trends 2015 stated that nation’s borders would weaken in the process of globalization, with an elite reaping the benefits,

"Scenario Two: Pernicious Globalization Global elites thrive, but the majority of the world’s population fails to benefit from globalization… migration becomes a major source of interstate tension… Internal conflicts increase, fueled by frustrated expectations, inequities, and heightened communal tensions…"

The MoD strategic trends 2007-2036
report covers life extension technologies, stating that a divide may rise between those who can afford to extend their lifespan, such as dictatorial rulers,

"Developments in genetics might allow treatment of the symptoms of ageing and this would result in greatly increased life expectancy for those who could afford it. The divide between those that could afford to ‘buy longevity’ and those that could not, could aggravate perceived global inequality.

Dictatorial or despotic rulers could potentially also ‘buy longevity’, prolonging their regimes and international security risks."

The National Intelligence Council’s
latest report outlines trends in technology that will shape the world to come in 2025. Among the technologies covered is the development of the Internet of Things. The Internet of things, also often referred to as "ubiquitous computing" is currently being tested and showcased in South Korea, where the technology developers admit that there are less expectations of privacy. The Internet of Things (IoT) will enable the tracking and tracing of everyday objects
and people in a vast network similar to the internet. Ultimately, the "U-City" model of South Korea will be exported world-wide. PR campaigns for the U-City are already underway in the United States.

Watch this ABC News clip as the "convenience" of the technology is emphasized:

The NIC report on the internet of things states that by 2010, the ability for "Teleoperation and telepresence: ability to monitory and control distant objects" will be achieved. Among the various goals of the Internet of Things technology developers include:

"Sensor networks need not be connected to the Internet and indeed often reside in remote sites, vehicles, and buildings having no Internet connection. Smart dust is a term that some have used to express a vision of tiny, wireless-connected sensors; more recently, others use the term to describe any of several technologies that range from the size of a pack of gum to a pack of
cigarettes, and that are widely available to system developers.

Ubiquitous positioning describes technologies for locating objects that may reside anywhere, including indoors and underground locations where satellite signals may be unavailable or otherwise inadequate.

Biometrics enables technology to recognize people and other living things, rather than inanimate objects. Connected everyday objects could recognize authorized users by means of fingerprint, voiceprint, iris scan, or other biometric technology."

The use of RFID tags embedded in everyday objects is the standard approach to achieving the internet of things vision. But, perhaps ominously, technology is being developed that would actually eliminate the need for RFID tags, while still allowing for the tracking of objects and people with the same efficiency. "Machine Vision", as the NIC report states, "…could be a channel for delivering the same type of information that RFIDs enable."

"Machine vision is
an approach to the IoT that can monitor objects having no onboard sensors,
controllers, or wireless interfaces. For example, some developers propose
that cameras on typical cell phones can capture images of objects; using
image-processing algorithms, distant servers can identify such objects
and report information about them. In other words, machine vision could
be a channel for delivering the same type of information that RFIDs
enable."

The surveillance element of this
technology will allow for "…everyday objects to be channels for
surveillance, consumer surveys, measuring environmental-quality benchmarks,
and any other continuously changing dimension of the world that people
find valuable to track."

There can be little doubt
that a surveillance grid has been erected and is expanding every day.
The next upgrade to this tracking grid will undoubtedly be spun with a
"consumer convenience" approach.

Grand Illusion: The Cost of gas is NOT going up...the worth of our dollar is falling.




If you have any economic education at all, the real reason as to why gas prices have jump so drastically is as plain as a nose on a face.

However if you are ignorant to what gives the paper money that the Federal Reserve issues our government (at interest I might add, which is where the national debt comes from) it's worth then you will believe that it is a matter of supply and demand.

Though it is true that supply and demand plays a roll in the cost, it isn't the major contributer to this problem.

The worth of our dollar is based on how much of our currency is in the world economic system.

NOT on the gold and silver backing it because there isn't any gold or silver backing it.



The gold and silver standard was ended during the Nixon administration, although the beginning of the end to sound money was the National gold seizures during the first term of the Roosevelt administration.

That was when the personal gold holdings of the citizenships were all but stolen, ( each ounce of gold was bought at $42.38 per troy ounce less then half it's worth on the market at that time) and was handed over to the Federal Reserve by using the propaganda of pulling the nation out of the Depression (that the Fed created by deflating the currency after the stock market crash) in which Roosevelt's father was an original board member of.

And twice since the worth of our dollar was stolen, we have had large scale gas crunches.

The Gas rations of the seventies; which I recall, and the high prices today which I wish I didn't.

Sure the politicians come on the Corporate own MSM and "him and haw" and blame
this and that and gnash their teeth, and say we need more government to alleviate the situation.

The Right siting supply and demand to vaildate their corporate cronies making huge profits.

And the Left, balli-whoing environmental issues such as the global warming lie trying their best to shove their carbon credit program down our throats(which in reality is yet another unconstitutional tax on the American)

They tell us every thing but the real reason.

The real reason is our dollar is being thrown into the toilet by a spend happy, banker family funded, war mongering administration and government as a whole.

Wars are the largest reason for inflating a nations currency and as it is inflated by the central fiat banking system, the buying power of that currency falls exponentially.

And seeing how nothing inflates a nations money supply more then war...it's no wonder the cost of gas is sky rocketing. Along with just about every thing else, if you haven't noticed, with maybe the exception of housing. But that's only because the Fed is trying to gain regulator authority over our nations mortgage institutions. But as soon as they do you can bet the prices will double over night like gas has. But that's another article all together.)

We have over 60 Trillion in owed benefits in the next coming 20 years as the baby boomer grow old, not to mention funding multiple empire-building campaigns through out the world it is only going to get worse, and every dollar the Federal reserve prints adds more to that debt due to the interest on top of the actual cost of the dollar printed.

Sure the price of oil has risen...in the cost of Fed notes,our current money standard.

But the price of oil in comparison of weight of oil for gold or silver has remained the same, that is if it hasn't actually gone down not gone down slightly.

This clip explains it quite well.

It's not until you learn, then understand just how bad the fiat system really is and exactly how it works to steal the earnings of the general public to place in the coffers of the wealthy, that you will truly know that gas has not gone up at all, only the Banksters greed.

To learn more about the birth of the Federal Reserve I recommend these two books.


It's the lack of PROPER education that has blinded us, get informed, let's gain some power back for ourselves.

Bush and Cheney feeling the breath of Impeachment on their necks.

Raise your hand if you feel that the current Administration should face impeachment proceedings?



And if I could have found one with Kucinich raising his hand I would have posted that one too, because today the Ohio Rep. and former Democratic presidential nominee was on Syndicated Radio today (The Alex Jones Show) disguising his House article HR 1258 which calls for the impeachment of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.

He delivered his 35 articles on the House floor for hours, explaining in detail each article of impeachment.

Though I don't agree with Mr. Kucinich on a number of issues such as the Global warming lie, or more government hand outs such as Nationalized health care (and seeing how the Federal Government has done such bang up job with our education system how anyone can think it'll work in heath care is beyond me), their are plenty of issues that I do agree with; those being the loss of our personal liberties, the shady dealings of 9-11 and of course this...the impeachment of both Cheney and Bush.

To date their are 27 co-sponsors for the impeachment of Cheney and due to the weekend break and the time that the vote came up there are only 3 for the impeachment of Bush, but the Congressman assured the listening audience that their will be plenty more co-sponsors on the Bush impeachment by the end of next week.

He also stated that if the House fails to act on his articles of impeachment, or if the articles are sabotaged in committee, he will come back with 60 articles.

Sorry Georgie and company...no matter how much you wish or manipulate the media...this isn't going away.

It's about time that these criminals are brought to justice for their international war crimes and their out right lies, not only to the American public but the American way of life.

This isn't about one lie as in Water Gate, nor is it about the wandering lusts of an individual such as we had with Clinton, but a multitude of deceptions to forward personal agendas and a lack of upholding their Constitutional oath to protect this Republic from enemies foreign and domestic. The foreign being the U.S. funded Al Qada, the domestic being the Neo-Cons that fund them.

The Congressman suggests that every one should read these Articles in full on his web site, to become conversed in them, and then to urge your Representatives and Senators to read the Articles and not to be lemmings in this action.





Asked on the Alex Jones Show if he fears retaliation for going up against Bush and the Neo-Cons, Kucinich said he really has no choice and he is guided by his faith and motivated by outrage over what Bush and his criminal crew have done to the Constitution and the republic.

“Thirty days from now, if there is no action, I will be bringing the resolution up again, and I won’t be the only one reading it. We’ll come back and many of us will be reading this [on the House floor], and we’ll come back with 60 articles, not 35,” Kucinich told the Washington Post. “Leadership wants to bury it, but this is one resolution that will be coming back from the dead.”

Mr. Kucinich’s impeachment effort came a week after a report by the Senate Intelligence Committee concluding that Bush, vice president Cheney and the Neo-Cons “knowingly exaggerated available intelligence and over-stated the Iraqi threat in building their case for war,” as the Voice of America reported Wednesday.

In other words, Bush and the Neo-Cons lied the nation into the invasion and occupation of Iraq, thus far resulting in the murder of over a million Iraqis and an under-reported number of U.S. soldiers.

Mr. Kucinich agreed that the crimes enumerated above make those committed by Richard Nixon during the Watergate era pale by way of comparison.

I have here the Articles that Rep. Kucinich read before the House of Reps. they are indeed lengthy but well written and very descriptive.

ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT FOR PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH

Resolved, that President George W. Bush be impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors, and that the following articles of impeachment be exhibited to the United States Senate:

Articles of impeachment exhibited by the House of Representatives of the United States of America in the name of itself and of the people of the United States of America, in maintenance and support of its impeachment against President George W. Bush for high crimes and misdemeanors.

In his conduct while President of the United States, George W. Bush, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has committed the following abuses of power.

_____________

ARTICLE I

CREATING A SECRET PROPAGANDA CAMPAIGN TO MANUFACTURE A FALSE CASE FOR WAR AGAINST IRAQ

In his conduct while President of the United States, George W. Bush, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty under Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution "to take care that the laws be faithfully executed," has both personally and acting through his agents and subordinates, together with the Vice President, illegally spent public dollars on a secret propaganda program to manufacture a false cause for war against Iraq.

The Department of Defense (DOD) has engaged in a years-long secret domestic propaganda campaign to promote the invasion and occupation of Iraq. This secret program was defended by the White House Press Secretary following its exposure. This program follows the pattern of crimes detailed in Article I, II, IV and VIII. The mission of this program placed it within the field controlled by the White House Iraq Group (WHIG), a White House task force formed in August 2002 to market an invasion of Iraq to the American people. The group included Karl Rove, I. Lewis Libby, Condoleezza Rice, Karen Hughes, Mary Matalin, Stephen Hadley, Nicholas E. Calio, and James R. Wilkinson.

The WHIG produced white papers detailing so-called intelligence of Iraq’s nuclear threat that later proved to be false. This supposed intelligence included the claim that Iraq had sought uranium from Niger as well as the claim that the high strength aluminum tubes Iraq purchased from China were to be used for the sole purpose of building centrifuges to enrich uranium. Unlike the National Intelligence Estimate of 2002, the WHIG's white papers provided "gripping images and stories" and used "literary license" with intelligence. The WHIG's white papers were written at the same time and by the same people as speeches and talking points prepared for President Bush and some of his top officials.

The WHIG also organized a media blitz in which, between September 7-8, 2002, President Bush and his top advisers appeared on numerous interviews and all provided similarly gripping images about the possibility of nuclear attack by Iraq. The timing was no coincidence, as Andrew Card explained in an interview regarding waiting until after Labor Day to try to sell the American people on military action against Iraq, "From a marketing point of view, you don't introduce new products in August."

September 7-8, 2002:

NBC’s “Meet the Press”: Vice President Cheney accused Saddam of moving aggressively to develop nuclear weapons over the past 14 months to add to his stockpile of chemical and biological arms.

CNN: Then-National Security Adviser Rice said, regarding the likelihood of Iraq obtaining a nuclear weapon, "We don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud."

CBS: President Bush declared that Saddam was "six months away from developing a weapon," and cited satellite photos of construction in Iraq where weapons inspectors once visited as evidence that Saddam was trying to develop nuclear arms.

The Pentagon military analyst propaganda program was revealed in an April 20, 2002, New York Times article. The program illegally involved "covert attempts to mold opinion through the undisclosed use of third parties.” Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld recruited 75 retired military officers and gave them talking points to deliver on Fox, CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, and MSNBC, and according to the New York Times report, which has not been disputed by the Pentagon or the White House, "Participants were instructed not to quote their briefers directly or otherwise describe their contacts with the Pentagon."

According to the Pentagon's own internal documents, the military analysts were considered "message force multipliers" or "surrogates" who would deliver administration "themes and messages" to millions of Americans "in the form of their own opinions.” In fact, they did deliver the themes and the messages but did not reveal that the Pentagon had provided them with their talking points. Robert S. Bevelacqua, a retired Green Beret and Fox News military analyst described this as follows: "It was them saying, 'We need to stick our hands up your back and move your mouth for you.'"

Congress has restricted annual appropriations bills since 1951 with this language: "No part of any appropriation contained in this or any other Act shall be used for publicity or propaganda purposes within the United States not heretofore authorized by the Congress."

A March 21, 2005, report by the Congressional Research Service states that "publicity or propaganda" is defined by the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) to mean either (1) self-aggrandizement by public officials, (2) purely partisan activity, or (3) "covert propaganda."

These concerns about "covert propaganda" were also the basis for the GAO's standard for determining when government-funded video news releases are illegal:

"The failure of an agency to identify itself as the source of a prepackaged news story misleads the viewing public by encouraging the viewing audience to believe that the broadcasting news organization developed the information. The prepackaged news stories are purposefully designed to be indistinguishable from news segments broadcast to the public. When the television viewing public does not know that the stories they watched on television news programs about the government were in fact prepared by the government, the stories are, in this sense, no longer purely factual -- the essential fact of attribution is missing."


The White House's own Office of Legal Council stated in a memorandum written in 2005 following the controversy over the Armstrong Williams scandal:

"Over the years, GAO has interpreted 'publicity or propaganda' restrictions to preclude use of appropriated funds for, among other things, so-called 'covert propaganda.' ... Consistent with that view, the OLC determined in 1988 that a statutory prohibition on using appropriated funds for 'publicity or propaganda' precluded undisclosed agency funding of advocacy by third-party groups. We stated that 'covert attempts to mold opinion through the undisclosed use of third parties' would run afoul of restrictions on using appropriated funds for 'propaganda.'"

Asked about the Pentagon's propaganda program at White House press briefing in April 2008, White House Press Secretary Dana Perino defended it, not by arguing that it was legal but by suggesting that it "should" be: "Look, I didn't know look, I think that you guys should take a step back and look at this look, DOD has made a decision, they've decided to stop this program. But I would say that one of the things that we try to do in the administration is get information out to a variety of people so that everybody else can call them and ask their opinion about something. And I don't think that that should be against the law. And I think that it's absolutely appropriate to provide information to people who are seeking it and are going to be providing their opinions on it. It doesn't necessarily mean that all of those military analysts ever agreed with the administration. I think you can go back and look and think that a lot of their analysis was pretty tough on the administration. That doesn't mean that we shouldn't talk to people."

In all of these actions and decisions, President George W. Bush has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and Commander in Chief, and subversive of constitutional government, to the prejudice of the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States. Wherefore, President George W. Bush, by such conduct, is guilty of an impeachable offense warranting removal from office.

ARTICLE II

FALSELY, SYSTEMATICALLY, AND WITH CRIMINAL INTENT CONFLATING THE ATTACKS OF SEPTEMBER 11, 2001 WITH MISREPRESENTATION OF IRAQ AS AN IMMINENT SECURITY THREAT AS PART OF A FRAUDULENT JUSTIFICATION FOR A WAR OF AGGRESSION.

In his conduct while President of the United States, George W. Bush, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty under Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution "to take care that the laws be faithfully executed," has both personally and acting through his agents and subordinates, together with the Vice President, executed a calculated and wide-ranging strategy to deceive the citizens and Congress of the United States into believing that there was and is a connection between Iraq and Saddam Hussein on the one hand, and the attacks of September 11, 2001 and al Qaeda, on the other hand, so as to falsely justify the use of the United States Armed Forces against the nation of Iraq in a manner that is damaging to the national security interests of the United States, as well as to fraudulently obtain and maintain congressional authorization and funding for the use of such military force against Iraq, thereby interfering with and obstructing Congress's lawful functions of overseeing foreign affairs and declaring war.

The means used to implement this deception were and continue to be, first, allowing, authorizing and sanctioning the manipulation of intelligence analysis by those under his direction and control, including the Vice President and the Vice President's agents, and second, personally making, or causing, authorizing and allowing to be made through highly-placed subordinates, including the President's Chief of Staff, the White House Press Secretary and other White House spokespersons, the Secretaries of State and Defense, the National Security Advisor, and their deputies and spokespersons, false and fraudulent representations to the citizens of the United States and Congress regarding an alleged connection between Saddam Hussein and Iraq, on the one hand, and the September 11th attacks and al Qaeda, on the other hand, that were half-true, literally true but misleading, and/or made without a reasonable basis and with reckless indifference to their truth, as well as omitting to state facts necessary to present an accurate picture of the truth as follows:

(A) On or about September 12, 2001, former terrorism advisor Richard Clarke personally informed the President that neither Saddam Hussein nor Iraq was responsible for the September 11th attacks. On September 18, Clarke submitted to the President's National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice a memo he had written in response to George W. Bush's specific request that stated: (1) the case for linking Hussein to the September 11th attacks was weak; (2) only anecdotal evidence linked Hussein to al Qaeda; (3) Osama Bin Laden resented the secularism of Saddam Hussein; and (4) there was no confirmed reporting of Saddam Hussein cooperating with Bin Laden on unconventional weapons.

(B) Ten days after the September 11th attacks the President received a President's Daily Briefing which indicated that the U.S. intelligence community had no evidence linking Saddam Hussein to the September 11th attacks and that there was "scant credible evidence that Iraq had any significant collaborative ties with Al Qaeda."

(C) In Defense Intelligence Terrorism Summary No. 044-02, issued in February 2002, the United States Defense Intelligence Agency cast significant doubt on the possibility of a Saddam Hussein- Al Qaeda conspiracy: "Saddam's regime is intensely secular and is wary of Islamic revolutionary movements. Moreover, Baghdad is unlikely to provide assistance to a group it cannot control."

(D) The October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate gave a "Low Confidence" rating to the notion of whether "in desperation Saddam would share chemical or biological weapons with Al Qaeda.” The CIA never informed the President that there was an operational relationship between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein; on the contrary, its most "aggressive" analysis contained in Iraq and al-Qaeda-Interpreting a Murky Relationship" dated June 21, 2002 was that Iraq had had "sporadic, wary contacts with al Qaeda since the mid-1990s rather than a relationship with al Qaeda that has developed over time."

(E) Notwithstanding his knowledge that neither Saddam Hussein nor Iraq was in any way connected to the September 11th attacks, the President allowed and authorized those acting under his direction and control, including Vice President Richard B. Cheney and Lewis Libby, who reported directly to both the President and the Vice President, and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, among others, to pressure intelligence analysts to alter their assessments and to create special units outside of, and unknown to, the intelligence community in order to secretly obtain unreliable information, to manufacture intelligence or reinterpret raw data in ways that would further the Bush administration's goal of fraudulently establishing a relationship not only between Iraq and al Qaeda, but between Iraq and the attacks of September 11th.

(F) Further, despite his full awareness that Iraq and Saddam Hussein had no relationship to the September 11th attacks, the President, and those acting under his direction and control have, since at least 2002 and continuing to the present, repeatedly issued public statements deliberately worded to mislead, words calculated in their implication to bring unrelated actors and circumstances into an artificially contrived reality thereby facilitating the systematic deception of Congress and the American people. Thus the public and some members of Congress came to believe, falsely, that there was a connection between Iraq and the attacks of 911. This was accomplished through well-publicized statements by the Bush Administration which contrived to continually tie Iraq and 911 in the same statements of grave concern without making an explicit charge:

(1) “[If] Iraq regimes [sic] continues to defy us, and the world, we will move deliberately, yet decisively, to hold Iraq to account…It's a new world we're in. We used to think two oceans could separate us from an enemy. On that tragic day, September the 11th, 2001, we found out that's not the case. We found out this great land of liberty and of freedom and of justice is vulnerable. And therefore we must do everything we can -- everything we can -- to secure the homeland, to make us safe." Speech of President Bush in Iowa on September 16, 2002.

(2) "With every step the Iraqi regime takes toward gaining and deploying the most terrible weapons, our own options to confront that regime will narrow. And if an emboldened regime were to supply these weapons to terrorist allies, then the attacks of September 11th would be a prelude to far greater horrors.” March 6, 2003, Statement of President Bush in National Press Conference.

(3) "The battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on September the 11, 2001 -- and still goes on. That terrible morning, 19 evil men -- the shock troops of a hateful ideology -- gave America and the civilized world a glimpse of their ambitions. They imagined, in the words of one terrorist, that September the 11th would be the 'beginning of the end of America.' By seeking to turn our cities into killing fields, terrorists and their allies believed that they could destroy this nation's resolve, and force our retreat from the world. They have failed." May 1, 2003, Speech of President Bush on U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln.

(4) "Now we're in a new and unprecedented war against violent Islamic extremists. This is an ideological conflict we face against murderers and killers who try to impose their will. These are the people that attacked us on September the 11th and killed nearly 3,000 people. The stakes are high, and once again, we have had to change our strategic thinking. The major battleground in this war is Iraq.” June 28, 2007, Speech of President Bush at the Naval War College in Newport, Rhode Island.

(G) Notwithstanding his knowledge that there was no credible evidence of a working relationship between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda and that the intelligence community had specifically assessed that there was no such operational relationship, the President, both personally and through his subordinates and agents, has repeatedly falsely represented, both explicitly and implicitly, and through the misleading use of selectively-chosen facts, to the citizens of the United States and to the Congress that there was and is such an ongoing operational relationship, to wit:

(1) "We know that Iraq and al Qaeda have had high-level contacts that go back a decade. Some al Qaeda leaders who fled Afghanistan went to Iraq. These include one very senior al Qaeda leader who received medical treatment in Baghdad this year, and who has been associated with planning for chemical and biological attacks. We've learned that Iraq has trained al Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases." September 28, 2002, Weekly Radio Address of President Bush to the Nation.

(2) "[W]e we need to think about Saddam Hussein using al Qaeda to do his dirty work, to not leave fingerprints behind." October 14, 2002, Remarks by President Bush in Michigan.

(3) "We know he's got ties with al Qaeda.” November 1, 2002, Speech of President Bush in New Hampshire.

(4) "Evidence from intelligence sources, secret communications, and statements by people now in custody reveal that Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of al Qaeda. Secretly, and without fingerprints, he could provide one of his hidden weapons to terrorists, or help them develop their own.” January 28, 2003, President Bush's State of the Union Address.

(5) "[W]hat I want to bring to your attention today is the potentially much more sinister nexus between Iraq and the al Qaeda terrorist network, a nexus that combines classic terrorist organizations and modern methods of murder. Iraq today harbors a deadly terrorist network…” February 5, 2003, Speech of Former Secretary of State Colin Powell to the United Nations.

(6) "The battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on September the 11, 2001 — and still goes on. . . . [T]he liberation of Iraq . . . removed an ally of al Qaeda.” May 1, 2003, Speech of President Bush on U.S. S. Abraham Lincoln.

(H) The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence “Report on Whether Public Statements Regarding Iraq By U.S. Government Officials Were Substantiated By Intelligence Information,” which was released on June 5, 2008, concluded that:

(1) "Statements and implications by the President and Secretary of State suggesting that Iraq and al-Qa'ida had a partnership, or that Iraq had provided al-Qa'ida with weapons training, were not substantiated by the intelligence."

(2) "The Intelligence Community did not confirm that Muhammad Atta met an Iraqi intelligence officer in Prague in 2001 as the Vice President repeatedly claimed."

Through his participation and instance in the breathtaking scope of this deception, the President has used the highest office of trust to wage of campaign of deception of such sophistication as to deliberately subvert the national security interests of the United States. His dishonesty set the stage for the loss of more than 4000 United States service members; injuries to tens of thousands of soldiers, the loss of more than 1,000,000 innocent Iraqi citizens since the United States invasion; the loss of approximately $527 billion in war costs which has increased our Federal debt and the ultimate expenditure of three to five trillion dollars for all costs covering the war; the loss of military readiness within the United States Armed Services due to overextension, the lack of training and lack of equipment; the loss of United States credibility in world affairs; and the decades of likely blowback created by the invasion of Iraq.

In all of these actions and decisions, President George W. Bush has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and Commander in Chief, and subversive of constitutional government, to the prejudice of the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States. Wherefore, President George W. Bush, by such conduct, is guilty of an impeachable offense warranting removal from office.

ARTICLE III

MISLEADING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AND MEMBERS OF CONGRESS TO BELIEVE IRAQ POSSESSED WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION, SO AS TO MANUFACTURE A FALSE CASE FOR WAR

In his conduct while President of the United States, George W. Bush, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty under Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution "to take care that the laws be faithfully executed," has both personally and acting through his agents and subordinates, together with the Vice President, executed instead a calculated and wide-ranging strategy to deceive the citizens and Congress of the United States into believing that the nation of Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction in order to justify the use of the United States Armed Forces against the nation of Iraq in a manner damaging to our national security interests, thereby interfering with and obstructing Congress's lawful functions of overseeing foreign affairs and declaring war.

The means used to implement this deception were and continue to be personally making, or causing, authorizing and allowing to be made through highly-placed subordinates, including the President's Chief of Staff, the White House Press Secretary and other White House spokespersons, the Secretaries of State and Defense, the National Security Advisor, and their deputies and spokespersons, false and fraudulent representations to the citizens of the United States and Congress regarding Iraq's alleged possession of biological, chemical and nuclear weapons that were half-true, literally true but misleading, and/or made without a reasonable basis and with reckless indifference to their truth, as well as omitting to state facts necessary to present an accurate picture of the truth as follows:

(A) Long before the March 19, 2003 invasion of Iraq, a wealth of intelligence informed the President and those under his direction and control that Iraq's stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons had been destroyed well before 1998 and that there was little, if any, credible intelligence that showed otherwise. As reported in the Washington Post in March of 2003, in 1995, Saddam Hussein's son-in-law Hussein Kamel had informed U.S. and British intelligence officers that "all weapons—biological, chemical, missile, nuclear were destroyed.” In September 2002, the Defense Intelligence Agency issued a report that concluded: "A substantial amount of Iraq's chemical warfare agents, precursors, munitions and production equipment were destroyed between 1991 and 1998 as a result of Operation Desert Storm and UNSCOM actions… [T]here is no reliable information on whether Iraq is producing and stockpiling chemical weapons or whether Iraq has-or will-establish its chemical warfare agent production facilities.” Notwithstanding the absence of evidence proving that such stockpiles existed and in direct contradiction to substantial evidence that showed they did not exist, the President and his subordinates and agents made numerous false representations claiming with certainty that Iraq possessed chemical and biological weapons that it was developing to use to attack the United States, to wit:

(1) "[T]he notion of a Saddam Hussein with his great oil wealth, with his inventory that he already has of biological and chemical weapons . . . is, I think, a frightening proposition for anybody who thinks about it." Statement of Vice President Cheney on CBS's Face the Nation, March 24, 2002.

(2) "In defiance of the United Nations, Iraq has stockpiled biological and chemical weapons, and is rebuilding the facilities used to make more of those weapons." Speech of President Bush, October 5, 2002.

(3) "All the world has now seen the footage of an Iraqi Mirage aircraft with a fuel tank modified to spray biological agents over wide areas. Iraq has developed spray devices that could be used on unmanned aerial vehicles with ranges far beyond what is permitted by the Security Council. A UAV launched from a vessel off the American coast could reach hundreds of miles inland.” Statement by President Bush from the White House, February 6, 2003.

(B) Despite overwhelming intelligence in the form of statements and reports filed by and on behalf of the CIA, the State Department and the IAEA, among others, which indicated that the claim was untrue, the President, and those under his direction and control, made numerous representations claiming and implying through misleading language that Iraq was attempting to purchase uranium from Niger in order to falsely buttress its argument that Iraq was reconstituting its nuclear weapons program, including:

(1) ""The regime has the scientists and facilities to build nuclear weapons, and is seeking the materials needed to do so." Statement of President Bush from White House, October 2, 2002.

(2) "The [Iraqi] report also failed to deal with issues which have arisen since 1998, including: . . . attempts to acquire uranium and the means to enrich it." Letter from President Bush to Vice President Cheney and the Senate, January 20, 2003.

(3) "The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." President Bush Delivers State of the Union Address, January 28, 2003.

(C) Despite overwhelming evidence in the form of reports by nuclear weapons experts from the Energy, the Defense and State Departments, as well from outside and international agencies which assessed that aluminum tubes the Iraqis were purchasing were not suitable for nuclear centrifuge use and were, on the contrary, identical to ones used in rockets already being manufactured by the Iraqis, the President, and those under his direction and control, persisted in making numerous false and fraudulent representations implying and stating explicitly that the Iraqis were purchasing the tubes for use in a nu