US Attempts To Occupy the Whole World-What Happens if we Invade Iran?
by Brandon Dean
Thus Always To Tyrants
February 19, 2008
Being that Bush and Co. (not to mention Clinton, Obama, and McCain) all vocally plan on open war with Iran, I believe it is time to analyze exactly what may happen if we do invade Iran.
I think it's been succinctly proven we are under no imminent threat from Iran. Our sovereignty nor our freedom are threatened by Iran. So why all the talk of invading?
They keep bringing up that elements in Iran are "funding" and "aiding" their fellow "jihadists" (utterly ridiculous phrase which means nothing) in Iraq, thus justifying US incursions over the border into Iran. Al Qaida was originally funded by none other than the US GOVERNMENT in the 80's to help the Afghani "freedom fighters" fight off the Russian Invasion. The problem with that whole thing was: we were funding the Russians through "aid" and "grants" to do the very thing we were there to stop!! When will people wake up? Did any American believe that all our "aid moneys" were going to feed starving little Russian kids or something? Give me a god damn break...
So "we" (as in the rogue Central Intelligence Agency) started Al Qaida, and now we must invade every country in the Middle East to kill them all, or at least to kidnap them and take them to foreign countries where they can be tortured to death. We also (surprise of surprises) funded the Taliban originally in the 90's, and then all of a sudden they were "harboring a known fugitive" and we had to invade and "bring them down" under a "carpet of bombs." The arrogance of US statesmen never ceases to amaze me.
One of the side effects of the secularization of society (or rather, the declining control of dogmatic religious belief in favor of either abject apathy or a non-apathetic, personally discovered spirituality) in the west has been to make life seem much more precious to the secular person, whether it's because he's thought the matter through, or because his apathy dictates he not care about greater issues beyond himself. The religious person sees afterlife and heavenly glory as justification for fighting back, and even dying in the name of freedom or idealism. The thinking man, the rich man, or the politically apathetic man, finds life much more precious because it is much easier for him to make excuses for the oppression he feels. For these men, there is no heaven waiting to embrace martyrdom. Double-edged swords are fashioned out of more than just metal nowadays...
Have you ever noticed the more money someone has, the more they tend to think themselves worth, beyond just the financial aspect? All of a sudden their life has extra value, and their opinion somehow means something, because of their wealth. How long will people keep following the orders and advice of these people? In politics, the more popular a politician becomes, the harder it seems to be to remember what it was like to have no one listen to you. It actually works both ways for a celebrity actor/musician etc. They have money and popularity. But power breeds corruption, and absolute power corrupts absolutely, as was once so eloquently said...
Now, have you noticed that ALL of the people calling for war with Iran have nothing to lose (at least as far as their limited vision can show them) by sending US troops there? What about the people who want to keep us in Iraq? THEY ALL HAVE MORE MONEY THAN YOU OR I.
So are rich people evil? Hell, no. I am no communist, and I don't want their money. Like I've explained in so many words: it's their expectations of what money or power brings that is evil. Money is not evil, and neither are politics. A charlatan will exploit anything to further his cause. Objects or concepts can neither be inherently good nor inherently evil. A person cannot be inherently evil. But a person can act evil using inanimate objects or concepts in an evil way. What is evil? Anything you know is wrong in your heart. It doesn't take a supreme being to realize what is right and wrong. All it takes is not lying to yourself. If you do not lie to yourself, you are doing great! Keep it up...
And scam artists exploiting many causes is exactly what we are seeing happening with Iraq/Iran. A bunch of charlatans are trying to convince us that we for some reason need to stay in Iraq and keep killing people and keep getting killed. Why? Their main argument is that if we leave, chaos will ensue. Well, what about all over the rest of the Earth? There is chaos all over the place, but we need to keep killing people in Iraq because a little more chaos may ensue in Iraq? What about all over Africa, where (man-made) plague and ruthless dictators are killing off the populations of third world countries? What about in China, where there are millions of people estimated to be slaves in work camps, creating cheap crap for Wal-Mart and others to sell in America? What about North Korea, where tens of thousands of homeless children starve to death on the streets a year?
Hey! What about down the street from my house in Los Angeles, California, here in the united States, where homeless vets hang out on the street corners and ask for change because the Veterans' Administration hospitals can't afford to house them or even help them? We can spend 500 billion dollars a year on a useless war to create more disabled homeless veterans, yet it would cost only a couple hundred million dollars to feed and house them for an entire year. Why can't we carve just a little bit out of the war chest to take care of these poor, deceived souls?
So..... What will happen if we invade Iran?
First of all, Iran is not Iraq. Iraq is an already-defeated country who had a dictator "we" propped up in the first place---Saddam Hussein---and he was the guy we helped fight the Iranians in the 80's by selling him weapons technology, including the ingredients to make chemical weapons, which he used not against helpless villagers (as reported by the mass media to inject baseless anti Iraq sentiment before the first "Gulf War)," but against Kurds who were fighting for the Iranians, whom Iraq was at war with! Yet we condemn HIM for genocide... Has not the seller responsibility? Methinks he does...
Iraq was created after World War I by the British, when the British divided up the Middle East, creating Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Palestine, among others. It wasn't until WWII that Israel came into existence. My point is Iraq and these other newly formed, WESTERNIZED countries have no deep sense of nationality. Guess what? Iran does! They are one of the oldest surviving cultures and countries on the face of the Earth, and they are rather proud of it. The Iranians have been Iranian for hundreds of years, and before that they were Persians, but they were essentially the same people.
They have a strong sense of who they are, and they have not forgotten what "our" CIA did to them in the 1950's. The CIA overthrew the government of Muhammed Mosadeq, who was not only pro-USA, but also DULY ELECTED by his own people. He decided he wanted to control just a SMALL part of the oil profits flowing out of HIS country, and he was summarily deposed for it.
All the British and American "secret agents" (license to kill?) had to do was fool the Iranian people into believing Mosadeq was anti-Muslim--an atheist and a communist--which is not a popular sentiment in the Muslim world, to say the least... They spread leaflets supposedly made by Mosadeq saying "Down with Allah!! Up with Communism!!" When this didn't produce the desired effect, British and American agents actually went around dressed as Iranians SHOOTING and BOMBING civilians, claiming to represent Mosadeq.
Mosadeq spent the rest of his life in prison. Most of his cabinet were hung or beheaded, and the Shah of Iran was re-installed to continue his royal tendency of oppressing his own population. He was so ruthless against his own people that roughly twenty years later there was a religious coup, which overthrew the Shah's government. There is now an extreme theocracy which dictates rule in Iran instead of an elected leader, and it is related most assuredly to our meddling there (let's not of course forget British meddling).
So......... The Iranians are slightly pissed off about these FACTS, and they haven't forgotten. It was the MAIN cause cited for the Iranian hostage crisis of the late 70's, where Americans were kidnapped by Iranian students, and held until George Bush (former DIRECTOR of the CIA) worked a deal to get them released (the day Reagan was inaugurated).
So we as the "USA" have a long history of meddling in the affairs of Iran, and they are quite frankly sick of it. So there's that...
The other thing not discussed in the mainstream media is that WE DON'T HAVE THE STRENGTH OF TROOPS OR THE MONEY TO LEAD A GROUND INVASION OF IRAN. There will be an initial air strike aimed at taking out their infrastructure, but like always, an air campaign will need ground support to work. They will proclaim it is just an air war until they are ready to send in ground troops, who will become mired without funds or equipment long before they reach Tehran. Our troops are all over the world, fighting many stupid battles, or using up billions to do nothing other than sit and guard our corporate interests. We, as a country, have troops PERMANENTLY stationed in over 120 countries on the face of this Earth! Think about that!
Even if it weren't morally wrong to station our troops on foreign soil permanently, we simply do not have the funds to continue this occupation of the world. Our funds will be cut off by no choice of our own mid-invasion, should we invade Iran. What are we to do once this happens?
Oh, don't you worry. This will have been planned from the beginning. They will "have to" perform a tactical nuclear strike to "save our troops" once they become mired. Official US policy at this point provides that if the president feels a large enough amount of US troops face a large enough threat, he can authorize the use of nuclear weapons in a non-nuclear environment. Comforting, eh?
Do you think I'm crazy? Yes? Really? Well, if you would like a little corroboration from someone who should know, why not listen to Scott Ritter, who was our UN weapons inspector, and who told us Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction (which he didn't) before we invaded? Scott Ritter resigned when his news was ignored. Watch this short video clip to see exactly what I'm talking about. This man may not be an Albert Einstein, but he certainly has a more informed perspective on this matter than any of us can pretend to have:
Scott Ritter (from the video):
"So, for any Americans out there tonight who say 'you know what, taking on Iran is a good thing'-- I just told you, if we take on Iran, we're going to use nuclear weapons, and if we use nuclear weapons, the genie ain't goin' back in the bottle until an American city is taken out by an Islamic weapon in retaliation. So tell me you want to go to war with Iran----pick your city... Tell me which one you want gone! Seattle, LA, Boston, New York, Miami? Pick one, because at least one's going..."
Wow, I think I'll just leave it at that.
copyright Brandon Dean 2008
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
US Attempts to Occupy the Whole World--What Happens If We Invade Iran? by Brandon Dean
Labels:
iran,
iraq
0
comments
Terrorist Tactics Used By Government Against "We The People", by Dictator Hater
Summary: NBC Nightly News anchor Brian Williams stated that the Republicans "left the House chamber to protest the Democrats' refusal to renew the foreign intelligence surveillance law, which expires this week." In fact, the House voted on a measure to extend the law in question, the Protect America Act, for another 21 days, but all 195 Republicans who voted on the matter voted against it. Moreover, the "foreign intelligence surveillance law" doesn't expire this week; the Protect America Act, giving the president broad authority to intercept communications involving people in the U.S. without a warrant, expires. Even without its renewal, the government has the authority to conduct foreign intelligence surveillance. "
Friday, February 8, 2008
Ron Paul Vote "for the shredder" -Illinois Election Worker
Brandon Dean
Thus Always To Tyrants
February 8, 2008
The preceding video was made by an acquaintance of mine on Tuesday in Illinois. She wore her Ron Paul sweatshirt to the polling place, and was made to cover it up while inside, as advertising a candidate is illegal inside a polling place.
So after she was done voting, on her way out, one of the election officials quipped "There's another one for the shredder."
What I'm gathering here is it's illegal for a voter to walk in advertising a specific candidate (for fear of voter intimidation), yet it's perfectly fine for an election worker to condescend a voter by either warning her that her vote is going to be shredded, or betraying her biased opinion by making a joke which was not funny at all. Either way it can easily be construed as voter intimidation, just like the voter's sweatshirt can be construed in the same manner.
Now you tell me, which was more intimidating: an election official threatening to shred someone's vote, or a voter walking into a polling place with a specific candidate displayed prominently?
At this point, we've heard tales of old ladies stuffing ballot boxes in Colorado, New Hampshire's recount boxes were slit open when received by the people who were to count them, the Ron Paul campaign is demanding a recount in Louisiana, and in my home state of California, everyone who has re-registered Republican in the last six months apparently did not make it to the list, me being one of them. We all had to fill out provisional ballots. The election worker in my polling place showed me the list of the provisional votes cast in my district, and there were almost fifty names on the list by eleven o'clock in the morning...
In any case, this friend of mine, who goes by the online moniker Rattlesnake, was dissatisfied with the fact that she did not record the incident on video. She was also not sure which election worker made the quip, and wanted to know. So she goes back with a video camera, and the above video is the resulting confrontation.
The lady who made the "joke" obviously becomes very cordial in front of a camera. She admits to being the one who made the remark, and tries to explain that it was just a joke, and what she meant by "the shredder" was the "ballot box."
Ummm... ok.. So, now are we to understand the ballot box is equivalent to a shredder? Surely she couldn't have meant that? So what did she mean?
{flashback-old ladies stuffing ballot boxes in Colorado}
Am I implying this innocent looking old lady is capable of carrying through with her threat? Yes, yes I am.
In Arizona, a valiant cowboy stopped five or six McCain agents who were trying to actually take the ballot box out of the polling place by placing himself between them and the door, and daring them to go through it. They chose to run away.
In all likelihood, the old lady in this video was making a stupid condescending joke, but when I'm hearing reports of chicanery from all over the country, I take this seriously. Here on video, we have an election official admitting she made an intimidating remark to a voter in her district during polling hours, in an official polling place. It may seem minor to some, but maybe a compendium of all evidence of election fraud is in order...
copyright Brandon Dean, 2008
Thursday, February 7, 2008
we will be on NIWECS radio show tonight at 4:30-6pm PST
Please feel free to listen in as I and fellow researcher/Thus Always To Tyrants author FranG discuss the roots of fractional reserve banking and how it is at the root of the mess we find ourselves in today.
If you miss the broadcast, you can listen to the archive show whenever you want. the link to listen is here.
The call in number is 646=378-1445
Please listen if you have a chance...
Tonight is part one of a two part series FranG and I are doing on the history of economy and fractional reserve banking, which will be continued tomorrow night from 6-7:30pm PST at the same link...
NIWECS radio broadcasts once a week, every Thursday from 6pm-7:30pm. Today's 4:30 start time is due to technical difficulties...
thanks from Brandon Dean and FranG
Sunday, February 3, 2008
Global Warming Apparently Responsible for California Cold Snap
Global Warming Apparently Responsible for California Cold Snap
Brandon Dean
February 3, 2008
So the other night on the NIWECS radio broadcast, I mentioned that California has been experiencing an unusual cold snap for the last month. I just mentioned it, and I wanted to elaborate on it.
I live in Los Angeles, which is a very temperate zone. All "temperate climate" means is that the temperature does not vary much. Daytime highs in LA year-round range in the summer between 77-100 degrees with little humidity, to between 60-90 in the winters with alot of humidity, but not necessarily a lot of rain... It may seem like those are highly varying temperatures, but the reason it's temperate is because the changes between these conditions come so slow. The seasons here gradually show their faces, as opposed to most places where there are very defined seasons. There is green everywhere here in the winters. In fact, when it rains here, no matter what time of year, all of a sudden the hills are bright green with new growth within a day or two of the rain. When the first heavy rain comes, even if it's in December, that's when the new green of spring appears...
The reason is that after a cold period of a week and a half at the most, usually, it gets warm again, and you usually see temperatures in December and January up in the 80's for a couple days, then it cools off again.
First of all, it hasn't been above 80 degrees in LA since around the beginning of October, which is highly unusual, as it is now February, and we usually would have had at least two or three small heat waves since October by now. I'm 33 years old, and I've lived in LA for 28 of those years. I don't remember the last time we've had this cold of a winter.
So global warming's really doing a number on California this winter, all of which is experiencing a sever winter compared to the average winter.
What some may not realize is that California has some of the most extreme climates of any state in the union. A lot of folks tend to look at California as the sunny state, but in northern California they know what real winters are all about. Trust me, I spent a winter outside of Redbluff, California a few years ago, and there were several weeks of sub-zero temperatures. And we also have Death Valley, which, in the summers, gets up to the 140's...
{side note-when I was up there I also learned the truth about how the logging companies are supposedly killing off all our pine forests. I was a forest fire-fighter at the time, and let me tell you, to stand on top of a huge mountain with hundreds and hundreds of miles of forest all around you on every side gives you a new perspective. Because there, in the middle of the giant forest, was what appeared to be a tiny little patch of logged forest. It was miles away, and was probably a few thousand acres. We happened to fight a fire right there in the middle of the logging land (they have dirt roads out there for the logging companies already and the fire department uses them, so it's not too much of a coincidence...), and as we drove through it, I noticed the new forest gradually taking back over the previously logged forest as the logging company went along. It all seemed to make sense to me... Sorry, I've "digressed" as AJ would say...}
So now, in the last couple months it's been much colder on average than usual. I don't remember the temperature in the daytime getting above 68 degrees since the beginning of December, which is definitely unusual.
I thought I would just do my part to battle this false idea of global warming caused by humans by writing this. What the hell are they talking about? It just rained here for three weeks straight almost! That hasn't happened since I was a little kid here!
copyright Brandon Dean 2008
Saturday, February 2, 2008
Communist Grunt Organization MoveOn.org Endorses Obama
Brandon Dean
February 2, 2008
The second reason I cannot go to anti war protests any more is because they are always infested with communists, at least in Los Angeles where I live. I mean, it's out of control. You go to this march with your anti war sign, and all these propagandists come up to you (many of them, not just one) and try to "convert" you to communism.
It personally makes me sick. Of course I can't speak for anyone else, but I believe communism as a whole, in practice and in theory, to be the most atrocious idea for freedom I've ever heard. It makes sense if you already know the Illuminati were the ones responsible for communism in the first place. Karl Marx was a high level Freemason long after Freemasonry had been infiltrated by the Illuminati. He worked for the Illuminati bankers in New York City, where they taught him what he needed to do in Russia, then sent him on his merry way.
Anyhoo, MoveOn.org links to the US Communist Party on their website, which is, well, telling to say the least. They are funded partially by the Rockefeller Foundation. So now they're backing Obama, eh? Very decent and proper, I say... Anyone Rockefeller backs is true blue in my book...
So, joking aside, Obama's wife is the HEAD of the Chicago office for the Council on Foreign Relations. Anyone starting to see a pattern here? Supposedly Obama's chief advisor is none other than Zbigniew "genocide" Bresinski, who represents one of the powerful factions within the New World Order power structure. For the love of god, do we need any further proof Obama is a company man?
Anyway, the reason I brought up the protests and why I don't go to them any more is because any organized and funded protest is Rockefeller's protest---he paid for it... MoveOn is one of the organizers of protests all over the country. Where do they get the money for all these permits and promotions and employees, do you think? Do they have a constant money stream from sympathetic hippies all over the country which affords them all of this?
MoveOn is a doppleganger of the A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition, another Rcckefeller front group which funds protests all over the country.
The fact that socialists cannot seem to blame themselves for anything, but would rather blame others for everything (very similar to the equivalent fundamentalists on the right), is the chink in their idealistic armor. Passion does not sell arguments on either "side" of the spectrum. Facts and common sense sell arguments. It seems fundamentalists of any stripe cannot grasp this simple concept.
Oh well... Obama is a globalist middle-finger-puppet sent from the maw of the New World Order, and Hillary is an alien anomaly incapable of hissing the truth even for a sentence. McCain is an ex-POW who made propaganda tapes for the Viet Cong and blocked funding to find other POW's he served time with, while receiving special treatment from his captors. Romney is a slick dick with a phony smile, whose corporation just bought Clear Channel a couple weeks ago.
Ron Paul, anyone?
Obama endorsed by anti-war group
copyright Brandon Dean 2008
Voice Vote - The Coward's Secret Weapon, by Bossgator
by Bossgator
February 1st, 2008
With the advent of C-Span, I suspect most Americans have at least had a glimpse at the voting process in the House and Senate, but it may also be safe to say few have really taken the time to learn exactly how voting is done by our elected representatives. Until recently, I was counted among the many that have little understanding of the process. Now I know just how much I don’t know!
While researching various bills via the website GovTrack, http://www.govtrack.us/, I noticed something peculiar. When you look up a given bill, such as HR2640, The NICS Improvements Amendment Act of 2007, take a look at the section “Votes on Passage”, and you’ll see how each representative voted on this unconstitutional bill more infamously known as “The Veterans Disarmament Act”. See it?
That’s right! There was no record kept of the vote. Not only did the vote of each representative not get recorded in the Journal, but the total number of votes cast was not recorded either. How is that, you say? Are not our elected officials accountable for how they speak for their constituents? Well, it seems the cowards have found a secret weapon they can use to avoid documenting how they voted on all those controversial bills that they feel the public might not like. It’s called “voice voting.”
At first, I thought there was some kind of reasonable explanation for voting in such a manner, such as National Security, but once I started looking into this type of voting, the picture became rather murky at best. It seems this type of voting has been going on for as long as we’ve had the Constitution, and the history of voice voting dates back to long before our founding fathers set foot in the New World. You might say the concept has been around as long as humans have had an opinion.
Since this is not a lesson in history, I’ll stick to current affairs, and that is, my question “How in the world can our politicians legally vote in such a manner?” To attempt to find that answer, we need to take a look at the Constitution.
Constitutional Deception?
It seems to me that our focus should be on what Constitutional grounds do vice votes take place. In Article 1, Section 5, clause 3, we find the following…
“Each House shall keep a journal of its proceedings, and from time to time publish the same, excepting such parts as may in their judgment require secrecy; and the yeas and nays of the members of either House on any question shall, at the desire of one fifth of those present, be entered on the journal.”
Interesting how so many decisions pertaining to the actions of Congress are left up to its own members. This is nothing more than having the fox stand guard over the hen house. In theory, we would expect these elected representatives to honor their oath of office, and in most cases, they do. There are times though these same politicians feel an overwhelming need to cover their own ass, and find themselves interpreting the law to suit their own means. And if that isn’t enough, they write a law that fits.
The above quote from Section 5 at first glance sounds like a reasonable resolution to situations that may present themselves from time to time. The operative word is “may.” Until challenged in court, interpretation is a personal thing, widely open to speculation. No where else do we find within the Constitution any mention of authorization for secrecy. So, that being the case, one must assume that Congress decided that voice voting is authorized by Section 5. Let’s take a closer look at the exact wording.
It starts off with…”Each House shall keep a journal…” Okay, the wording here seems really straightforward. The Congress and Senate are mandated to keep a journal of their proceedings. They also are required to publish said journal, as in make public, periodically. The next question is, are there any exceptions to this rule?
Yes, the very next part clearly addresses one possible exception; when the representatives determine they “require secrecy.” But it does not say how they determine when secrecy is required. That’s the problem I feel we are facing today. Who or what determines what should be kept secret?
Before we determine who has the authority to withhold information from the public, we need to step back, because the initial question is still not answered. It’s subtle, and I overlooked it many times, till it finally hit me. The point is not whether the House and Senate should be voting by voice, it’s about the keeping of the journal. Clause 3 clearly states that the journal is to be kept, and then it says when ( why it should be secret is not addressed) information can be withheld as secret. The issue is of publishing the content of the journal, not if it should be entered into the journal.
This clause is tricky, and clearly can be interpreted in more than one way. I contend that all information is to be entered into the journal. Once that takes place, then a decision may be made not to publish certain journal content. But the information still must be entered. This is where the House and Senate have been fudging the law! They have decided for themselves that the Constitution gives them the authority to not enter information in the journal, when in fact it says everything is to be in the journal. At the same time, the House and Senate have the authority to withhold disclosure of what is in the journal that they deem secret. That does not relieve them of their duty to record ALL actions of the House and Senate.
Not all info really needs to be known by everyone in a fully open environment. However, while the public may not need to know, at the very least, there must be record for judicial oversight. Cops don’t tell the public everything, till after the case is over, but they have records none the less. It’s a matter of “need to know”. But somebody still needs to know, and if they don’t enter vote details in the journal via the voice vote, how can the judicial branch fully investigate misdeeds? Exactly...
This is blatant misuse and twisting of the Constitution yet again, especially when you understand how a voice vote takes place. For the exact legal process, you have to look at the House Rules Manual. [109th Congress House Rules - http://www.gpoaccess.gov/hrm/browse_110.html]
And for details on who is responsible for making up rules for the House, go here: http://www.rules.house.gov/
Once more, when looking at the House Rules, and I have read most of it, you see another example of legislative excess. Throughout government, there is all kinds of documentation and very specific procedural steps, and that is where cowards hide; in the vastness of legalese.
Part of the all-encompassing web of rules and laws, our representatives have apparently decided to use the law they wrote themselves to hide how they vote, or not vote, on a given bill. They do this under the guise of being allowed to keep secrets. When you take a look at bills that were passed by voice vote, many of them makes one wonder what could possibly be so important in that bill that they decided they must keep secret how the bill was voted on.
The bill is fully disclosed to the public, and is entered into the Congressional Record, yet who voted, and how they voted, and the number of votes cast, is not recorded. Now, granted there is a procedure in the House Rules Manual for contesting a call for a voice vote, but it appears that process is not easily accomplished, especially when you factor in time constraints due to the raw number of bills being churned out each day.
Voice Vote has been around a long time, and there are plenty of situations where this type of voting is purely innocent and expedient. Then there are those times when it appears that no record of how an official voted is nothing more than politically convenient.copyright Bossgator 2008
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
the american revolutionary war has never ended
the american revolutionary war was never truly won, because it hasn't truly ended...
by brandon dean
As in every other instance of digging through history to gain the clearest view possible of what might have actually transpired, we find some very interesting anomalies and proofs of things we may have expected all along. History records that the Revolutionary War was won through a feat of arms, yet international occult bankers have never ceased their attack on this country. If only the average person would become interested in the economic history of how this idea of a free republic was maligned from the beginning, they would see why bankers and multinational corporations are blamed for everything... Yet there were genuine heroes who fought these ideas of central power, black magic occultism and money manipulation, and they won many battles and lost many battles. The history of the united States has been a back and forth struggle between those who care about freedom (but have never really seemed to recognize the true demon overseeing everything) and those who wish to save themselves by enslaving the rest. Freedom is a constantly upward struggle, and it hurts sometimes as much as exhilarates...
In article 5 it states: "It is agreed that Congress shall earnestly recommend it to the legislatures of the respective states to provide for the restitution of all estates, rights, and properties, which have been confiscated belonging to real British subjects; and also of the estates, rights, and properties of persons resident in districts in the possession on his Majesty's arms and who have not borne arms against the said United States."
So the people who had just won the war were responsible by treaty for paying restitution to the crown and to "real British subjects" for the property they were seizing due to a war of independence! Unbelievable!
to read the text of the Treaty of Paris, click here
"I have heard much of the nefarious, and dangerous plan, and doctrines of the Illuminati," Washington declares. Despite accusations that Washington was a high-level Freemason, he denied that he was currently "...Presiding over the English lodges in this Country. The fact is, I preside over none, nor have I been in one more than once or twice, within the last thirty years. I believe notwithstanding, that none of the Lodges in this Country are contaminated with the principles ascribed to the Society of the Illuminati."
The Revolutionary War hadn't even subsided before the bankers had their backup plans for control set in motion. Washington had "heard much" about the Illuminati plan, and even wrote of them by name. To deny either their very existence or their attempted (and I believe accomplished) overthrow of Freemasonry is futile. This is a scan of the original letter:
To view the letter full size, click here
Rothschild wanted Britain to reconquer the united States, bringing back control of the colonies and their money supplies to British bankers such as himself. He is quoted as saying "Either the application for renewal of the Charter [of the first bank] is granted, or the United States will find itself in a most disastrous war."
The charter was not renewed, and Rothschild was quoted as telling the English parliament: "teach these impudent Americans a lesson. Bring them back to Colonial status."
The English army then invaded the US, and even sacked Washington DC, destroying many of our original legal documents. In 1814, the Second Bank of the United States was created, which lasted its twenty year charter until President Andrew Jackson destroyed it too...
It sure seems like whether Rothschild actually said those things or not, the war of 1812 was highly profitable for private bankers.
Discussion about the Civil War tends to revolve around slavery in the mainstream history, and Abraham Lincoln's faults in the alternative press. It is absolutely true that Abraham Lincoln cared not at all about slavery in terms of the Civil War. His primary drive was to preserve the union. In fact, at one point Lincoln proclaimed "My paramount objective is to save the Union, and it is not either to save or destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave, I would do it."
An early collaboration between English cotton merchants and cotton growers of the southern states had developed since the Revolution, and the international bankers saw this as the weak point in America's defenses. They used this financially important relationship to start the Civil War.
Industrialists in the north had passed protective tariffs which blocked European goods from reaching the south, forcing the south to buy Northern goods. European interests were angry, and cut off cotton imports from the south. The south was screwed. These were the outward reasons, but in reality the protective tariffs served international bankers, who were not happy about how Andrew Jackson had destroyed their private central bank 25 years before. They used these tensions to cause more tension than there already was between north and south.
Lincoln knew the bankers were behind the whole thing, or at least he eventually realized this. When he realized England and France had troops stationed along the northern and southern borders of the US and were poised to invade at the right moment, when the north was at its weakest, Lincoln sent a letter begging help from Czar Alexander of Russia.
Upon receiving this letter, the czar proclaimed "Before we open this paper or know its contents, we grant any request it may contain." That's how highly Alexander thought of Lincoln...
Without even taking the time to reply to the letter, the Russian Navy showed up in both New York Harbor and San Francisco Bay and the czar announced that any attack against the United States should be considered an attack on Russia herself! This saved the united States, like Lafayette of France had during the Revolutionary War.
The 14th Amendment to our Constitution is fondly remembered by history as the act that "freed the slaves," yet what the act truly accomplished was to have blacks sign over their lives to become "United States Citizens," a legal term created to give privileges, not rights, to freed slaves. If a freed slave wanted to own a gun, he had to go get a permit, or he had to get a license to marry a white woman, etc. It took a while, but eventually most Americans were fooled into signing their lives away in similar fashion. This is why you need a license or permit to do anything it seems nowadays.
The first sentence of the 14th Amendment says it all, if you know what you're reading legally:
"All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."
Thus, if you are "subject" (a slave) to the jurisdiction of the United States, then you are a citizen. A slave had to agree to being SUBJECT to the United States to become a citizen!! and guess what? SO DO YOU!
To read the text of the 14th amendment, go here
It also opened the floodgates for the US Code, which codifies the tyranny legalized by the 14th Amendment and the Act 1871.
To read the Act of 1871, also referred to as the "Ku Klux Klan Act,"go here
You don't want to read the US Code (it's pure crap) so I won't link to it, but it's easy enough to find with a google search.
This war against our free spirit is coming to a head in modern times, as our burgeoning awareness clashes with their methodical oppression. The same old battle ever fought, there are no higher stakes for mankind. We must overcome and maintain our freedoms.
In the same way that the free spirit is part of nature, and cannot be destroyed, it's time for us to face up to the fact that the same is true of the spirit of malice. It will not disappear in any foreseeable future, so we might as well just buck up and face it, and keep facing it.
A cowardly brute will take from you what you will give freely, but the moment you decide to stop giving and face the brute head on is the moment the cowardly brute questions himself, to your advantage...
copyright Brandon Dean, 2008
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
Wesley Snipes Has The Courage Many Of You Lack, by FranG
Wesley Snipes Has The Courage Many Of You Lack
"Tax deniers maintain that the law only appears to require payment of taxes. All their theories have been rejected by the courts, including the one invoked by Mr. Snipes, which is known as the 861 position, after a section of the federal tax code.
Adherents say a regulation applying the 861 provision does not list wages as taxable, though it does say that “compensation for services” is taxable. The courts have uniformly rejected all such theories, and eight people have been sentenced to prison after not paying taxes based on the 861 argument."
Wrong sir, the real crux of the 861 position argues that taxes are only valid in the Federal Zone United States; i.e., Washington D.C. and the territories under EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION of the United States. Anybody reading this that resides in a state of the union, the United States does not have EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION over you. The U.S. only has (very) limited jurisdiction inside the borders of the states of the union, although in recent times they have usurped the authority of the states and the states have just allowed them to do so like b****es.So Americans if you are reading my words, if you were not born in Washington D.C. or the territories of the United States (Puerto Rico, Guam, Virgin Islands, etc.) then your sources of income are not from "within the United States." It is important that people are aware of this scam, and many others that exist in the tax code. It is imperative that you as a Citizen serve on a jury and refute the spin that a sellout lawyer will try to place on your fellow Citizen standing up for his rights. Also note that the judge is a lawyer too, and a buddy of the prosecuting lawyer (and in most cases the defense lawyer; Pro Se is the best form of representation due to the current form of corrupt legal system). The legal profession is akin to a country club, or a college fraternity where members look out for their own kind.
You have to understand all of this; it is imperative. My words here haven't even scratched the surface so start researching this stuff. Your money is your property and it represents freedom more than anything else. Money is the root of all property and God has given the Earth to us all for all of our benefit. So what yours is yours and what's his (IRS) is his. If they take your property they rob you of your God given right to live and thus you become nothing more than a mere serf.
Learn the law and study history; that's what the Founding Fathers did. Turn your brain on and understand how history works, how people work, how systems work, etc. With knowledge, you can recognize game when somebody is trying to defraud you. Don't listen to these corrupt politicians who offer you quick fixes for problems that exist within our society. If a politicians words do not cause your brain to think as it never has before, then he's full of s***, and just telling you what you want to here. Google Ron Paul and see that he is no ordinary politician.
Wesley is a hero, but he needs the support of Patriots behind him. He needs public support in the media, a jury who has an understanding of history and definitely of the U.S. Tax Code (if nothing else, the section he is accused of violating should be spelled out CLEARLY), but most importantly he needs every Citizen to at least take control of their own life. Dion't be a coward and a punk. Many of you know the income tax is a fraud. You may not know the specifics of the fraud but your gut tells you that something is not right with it. Follow your gut. Don't let the bully take your lunch money even if he's bigger than you because that would make you a coward. Understand that if you have nothing that you will die for, then all things in live are valueless to you. And if all things are valueless, then the question becomes what will you live for? If there is nothing that you will die for, then what possible could be valuable enough worth living for. If you have nothing to live for, this makes you a WALKING ZOMBIE, alive in form but dead in substance (i.e., a robot). Don't be a zombie. Develop knowledge, as this generates confidence in you, which leads away from cowardice into courage. Remember that Ron Paul character that I mentioned earlier, guess what he wants to get rid of?
Support Wesley Snipes, and others who have the guts to stand up to criminals that want to extract their God given right to property illegally. If you don't, God help you when the bully makes his way down the line to your street.
(continued) ...to illustrate how programmed people are, I told a coworker about Wesley Snipes and how he needs our support:
Her response: "for what? I have to pay my taxes, he has to pay his"
My response: "Do you?"
Her response: "Yes"
My response: "Do you?"
Her response: "Well anyway, he has millions of dollars. He has no excuse. He can pay his taxes just like everybody else
And that people is exactly the problem. But unfortunately we have to come to grips with the fact that people will CHOOSE to be ignorant, CHOOSE to be hedonistic, CHOOSE to be scared, and CHOOSE to be a slave to their carnal emotions. Everything in and about life is a CHOICE, and many CHOOSE to be weak. Ironically this coworker is a proclaimed fiery Christian and servant of "the Lord." But to her I say it's this kind of reasoning which prove the words below to be prophetic:
"Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat. Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it. Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves." (Matt 7:13-15)
So to those of you who continue to CHOOSE to be sheep, the rest of us will be taking care of our business, much to your envy and dismay as you hide behind your false God of materialism and subservience to that and those which you falsely believe are greater than you. You Idiots! You have more power than anything on this Earth but CHOOSE not to acknowledge it because being a slave is easy. CHOOSE to be great yourself, instead of living vicariously through whomever you think is great.
Friday, January 25, 2008
lord save us from useful green idiots, by kurt nimmo
Lord Save Us from Useful Green Idiots
Kurt Nimmo
Truth News
January 24, 2008
From John D. Dingell of Michigan, chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, to ba-zillionaire mayor of New York City, Michael Bloomberg and now U2 frontman Bono, we endure calls for a carbon tax. So thick is the hype, so deep is the indoctrination, the New York Times went out of its way to declare that “everyone is using the atmosphere like a municipal dump, depositing carbon dioxide free,” in other words the very fact you are breathing is detrimental to the planet.
Al Gore has declared the discussion over, even though, as Paul Joseph Watson notes, “over 100 prominent scientists who have signed a letter slamming the UN move” toward a carbon tax “as a futile bureaucratic scheme” and “pointing out the results of a recent study in the International Journal of Climatology which concludes that climate change over the past thirty years is largely a result of solar activity and that attempts to reduce carbon dioxide emissions are irrelevant.”
Al Gore, Mr. Green himself, is an inch short of having these heretics flayed alive for the “eco crime” of disagreement based on reality-based science. Like the converso minority of yore, these scientists are to be persecuted for heresy. The only thing missing is the rack, although Al and the new Green bureaucrats — globalist autocrats to the man and woman — expect these enviro-criminals to engage in groveling fashion to the auto de fe, that is to say to ask for penance. Al is our Tomás de Torquemada reborn, the Inquisitor General of the Earth cult.
Enter the pathetic suck-up Paul David Hewson, aka Bono. “Having climate campaigner Al Gore round to your house is to open yourself to a self-flagellating guilt trip, Irish rock star Bono confessed Thursday,” reports AFP. “Sharing a stage with the former US vice president at the annual gathering of world movers and shakers in the Swiss ski resort of Davos, the U2 frontman joked that their friendship was a source of pressure on the domestic front” because “here’s the recycler Al, you know… I’ve got a posh car, but it runs on ethanol.”
Bono’s doing his part, playing the clown at Davos, and never mind that the grain required to fill a 25-gallon SUV gas tank with ethanol will feed one person for a year and the grain needed to fill that same tank every two weeks over a year will feed 26 people, as Lester Brown points out for the Globalist. “Simply put, the stage is being set for a head-on collision between the world’s 800 million affluent automobile owners and food consumers.”
But then starvation is not as problem for the one-world globalist types at Davos. For instance, Henry Kissinger, in attendance at the posh resort in Switzerland, basically stage managed talks between the NSC and the Club of Rome back in the mid 1970s. The Club of Rome, controlled by Europe’s nobility, “is the primary promotion agency for the genocidal reduction of world population levels,” writes Lonnie Wolfe. “This group drafted the Carter administration’s Global 2000 document, which calls for global population reduction.”
It takes a certain kind of sociopath and the occasional psychopath like Heinz Kissinger to come up with the peculiar idea that breathing is detrimental to the planet, an idea so common it is now telegraphed across the pages of the Gray Lady, the same venue used shamelessly to sell genocidal wars against distant people — in Iraq, a million dead bodies and counting — who unfortunately sit atop a lot of oil and generally follow a religion that preaches against the dictates of Wall Street and the City of London, i.e., never-ending and predatory usury and loan sharking, especially of the sort organized by the World Bank and the IMF, is a sin. Depleted uranium is required in such cases.
But back to our famous pagliaccio, Mr. Bono. “Acknowledging that a career in rock music was not always conducive to a green lifestyle, Bono compared a conversation with Gore to an act of religious contrition… ‘It’s like being with an Irish priest. You start to confess your sins,’ he said. ‘Father Al, I am not just a noise polluter, I am a noise-polluting, diesel-soaking, gulfstream-flying rock star… I’m going to kick the habit. I’m trying father Al, but oil has been very good for me — those convoys of articulated lorries, petrochemical products, hair gel.’”
Ha ha, big funny. But it is not funny. Because ultimately what we are talking about here is “sustainability,” and for the United Nations and the globalist elite, including minion Al Gore, this will come at a huge and miserable human cost. It’s part and parcel of the globalist control grid. “It should be noted that Agenda 21 sets up the global infrastructure needed to manage, count, and control all of the world’s assets,” writes Joan Veon.
Included are the forests, fresh water, agricultural lands, deserts, pastures, rangelands, farmers’ fields, oceans and inland waterways, marine environment, marine life, cities, housing, sewer and solid wastes, methods of production, air, pollution, biotechnology-every aspect of living-farming, production and manufacturing, research and medicine, etc., along with you and I. Today everything is sustainable: sustainable water, sustainable forests, sustainable markets, sustainable agriculture, etc.
In order to get all this “sustainability,” we’ll need a world government and that’s what the carbon tax — along with previous scams, such as a fuel use tax, a tax on currency transactions (the Tobin tax), an arms sales tax, a global lottery, and a tax on international airline travel, etc. — is all about. Of course, a breathing tax is near perfect — that is unless you plan on giving up the practice of breathing in short order.
Bono will be allowed to keep his lavish rock star lifestyle because he is a useful idiot for the elite.
And so will Al Gore with his 20-room mansion in Tennessee with its 221,000 kilowatt-hours of energy usage in 2006, more than 20 times the national average of 10,656 kilowatt-hours.
Minionhood for the global elite has its privileges.
Friday, January 18, 2008
Republican Primary Results Mean Absolutely Nothing Statistically
Republican Primary Results Mean Absolutely Nothing Statistically
by FranG
January 18, 2008
Intro
The primaries are up and running, and so far the results have raised both my eyebrows. Because of Congressman Ron Paul being in the race for President, this is truly my first political campaign where I have been truly paying attention, particularly on the Republican side. After three states, which is a small minority of the total, the results convey that we have three major contenders, and three minor contenders. The final numbers from the vote tally of these three states tell a story of inconsistency, and reveal that we in fact have no frontrunner in the Republican campaign; and that the nomination is up for grabs for the top six candidates. Also, because we only have three states officially in the can, statistical analysis among the several states will be nowhere near conclusive until a few more primaries are completed. Given that, let’s take a closer look at the candidates, and the associated numbers from the states of Iowa, New Hampshire, and Michigan.
Media Frontrunners
Mitt Romney
Mitt Romney, has just recently won the state of Michigan and is the current media darling and branded the Republican frontrunner despite Michigan being his only victory. Of the three states which voted for a candidate, Michigan is by far the most lucrative of the three with 60 of the tri-state total of 124 delegates to the campaign. Romney won Michigan with 40% of the vote; McCain and Huckabee trailed in second and third place with 30%, and 16% respectively. With all of the media attention given to Romney, it should be no surprise that his vote percentage numbers have increased steadily by 26% (25% in Iowa, 32% in New Hampshire, and 40% in Michigan) with each passing primary. Romney has an average primary percentage total of 32%, and this amount has a variance of 15 percentage points, or 45% of the average. This variance suggests that Romney could do as poor as 17% in the next primary, placing him on Huckabee’s level, or as high as 47%.
John McCain
John McCain’s victory came in the second primary, the state of New Hampshire, where he received 38% of the vote; the highest percentage total of any candidate in the primaries so far. This coming after a dismal 13% showing in Iowa; where his vote total matched those of the so called bottom tier candidates. But the mainstream media didn’t give up on McCain either. Despite Huckabee surprisingly winning in Iowa, the mainstream media could not stop talking about how McCain had to win New Hampshire or he was finished. And boy did McCain answer the call, by increasing his vote total by nearly 200% from that of Iowa’s. McCain’s numbers fell again in Michigan, but not to his Iowa levels. McCain vote percentage has increased by an average of 52% per primary, the most of any candidate. He like Romney, are the only two candidates with positive growth so far as the primaries progress. McCain’s average primary vote percentage is 27%, with a variance of 25 percentage points or 91% of his average. This variance implies that McCain could potentially score Duncan Hunter type numbers at the next primary but this is not likely though thanks to his mainstream backing.
Mike Huckabee
Mike Huckabee is the last major front runner, and he has Iowa to thank for this. Since winning Iowa with 34% of the vote, Huckabee’s numbers have declined significantly. Huckabee only scored 11% in Iowa, a drop off of about two-thirds, before rebounding slightly in Michigan with 16%. Huckabee’s numbers may be the akin to the fact that he did not receive as much media attention as Romney and McCain. Huckabee’s average vote percentage throughout the primaries is 21%, but with a variance of 23 percentage points between primaries from his average, Huckabee current showing, as with McCain, is totally meaningless.
Side Stream Candidates
Ron Paul
Ron Paul is by far the most notable of the second-tier candidates. Of all the candidates, his numbers are the most stable. Unfortunately for Paul, his numbers are on the decline despite receiving a slight increase in mainstream coverage. Ron Paul has so far been the only candidate implicated in a scandal in the mainstream media (the racial newsletter controversy), so I guess you can say that Ron Paul has received negative coverage. Since his respectable showing of 10% in Iowa, Paul’s numbers have steadily declined by 20% with each passing primary. But with an average vote percentage of 8%, and a variance of 4%, he is the most stable candidate in the field. Per the numbers, on the plus side Paul could receive 12% of the vote at the next primary. The front runners with wild variances in poll numbers from state to state, could very well perform poorly in a state that Paul does well in.
Fred Thompson
Fred Thompson, unlike Ron Paul, has received a fair amount of media attention, despite his vote numbers not warranting such attention. Thompson is currently in fifth place in the race for the Republican Presidential nomination with an average of 6% of state primary votes. But Thompson is also the most volatile of all candidates with a variance of 12 percentage points from his average of 6%. This is just about double his average; and as with Huckabee and McCain is totally meaningless. Thompson’s wild variance can be attributed to his respectable showing in Iowa of 13%, but followed up by a 1% finish in New Hampshire. Despite this, the Mainstream media stuck by Thompson and he was able to rebound slightly to 4% in Michigan. Thompson’s primary numbers indicate a decline of 47% for his average vote total with each passing primary.
Rudy Giuliani
Giuliani is by far the media darling of the second tier candidates, and receives about as much coverage as the top tier candidates. Giuliani is still America’s mayor, since he was the mayor who’s city was effected by the 9/11 attacks. Ironically with all the media coverage Giuliani has received, the media did not comment on the remarkable coincidence of his receiving 9.11% of the vote in three separate towns in New Hampshire (link). He was the only candidate to record such a number, and did it on three separate occasions. Giuliani, after finishing dead last in Iowa with 3% of the vote, rebounded to a respectable 9% in New Hampshire before returning to the familiar 3% number with his Michigan result. Giuliani is currently in last place with an average vote number of 4%. But with a variance of 6 percentage points, his numbers are also meaningless.
Conclusion
I have concluded that either this country is confused or extremely polarized among states, or something screwy is going on in the election process. The fluctuations are astronomically wild for most of the candidates, with the exception of Mitt Romney and Ron Paul. But of these two, one is at the top of the race, and one is at the bottom. And one receives favorable press coverage, while one receives unfavorable coverage. It seems that the media is driving these election results more than anything with the level and type of reporting that is given to candidates. A less likely, although highly probable possibility is outright vote reporting misrepresentation or fraud. As I said earlier, performing statistics on data from only three states will get you results nowhere near definitive. This goes for this entire analysis, but also the analysis and coverage that you have been afforded by the mainstream media. Basically all that has been shown is that this race is still anybody’s ballgame, and any six of the candidates listed above has a fair shot at getting the Republican nomination.
Source data for primary vote numbers are from ABCNews.com
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
Ron Paul and the Curse of the Stubborn Percentiles
by Brandon Dean
January 15th, 2008
So I've been paying attention while the Michigan results have been rolling in. Since one percent of precincts were reporting around 5:00pm PST, Dr. Paul has been stuck (held steady?) at six percent. He's in fourth place, which is better than fifth place for sure, but how does one stay exactly at six percent in Michigan all night, at exactly eight percent in New Hampshire all night, and at exactly ten percent in Iowa all night? It's uncanny, I tell's ya...
Am I to believe that as we progress through the primaries and caucuses, that each state, whether it divides its districts by town, county or parish, is so uniform throughout these towns, counties or parishes that the first district to report any votes is an absolute perfect reflection of the entire state? I've watched the same thing happen three times now. At this exact point, it is 7:00pm PST, and Dr. Paul has recorded 27,432 votes so far in the Michigan primary, holding six percent of the vote.
My problem is: I started watching the results roll in when they first started, and Paul held about 1200 votes at the time, starting firmly at six percent of the vote. I've been watching ever since (they started rolling in at about 5:00pm PST) and he's been perfectly, steadily rising at six percent, and forty-five percent of Michigan precincts are now reporting!
The same exact thing happened in both Iowa and New Hampshire. I didn't watch enough of Wyoming to say for sure, but I'm almost positive the same thing happened there. What, is there some sort of ceiling set which the dreaded baby-delivering Dr. Paul cannot breach for reasons of "NATIONAL SECURITY?"
How does CNN project a winner when less than ten percent of the precincts are reporting their results? Like I wondered earlier, is each county in Michigan so alike that the first county just so happens to perfectly reflect the rest of the state? Just like with Iowa and New Hampshire? Is this just coincidence?
It is 7:07 pm PST at the moment, and Ron Paul is still holding steady at six percent, now with 32,171 votes and fifty-four percent of precincts reporting. Correct me if I'm wrong (I'm sure someone will), but I think that puts Dr. Paul past the total number of votes cast for him in Iowa, Wyoming, and New Hampshire put together.
Interesting...
Updates to come later.
Prediction:
If Ron Paul finishes with either more than seven percent, or less than five percent, I will eat my boots with a vodka chaser...
Saturday, January 12, 2008
You're Already Dead
You're Already Dead,
lyrics by CRASS
ATTENTION. Fuck American power. Fuck Russian power. Fuck British power.
Fuck all power.
ATTENTION. These ignorant shits arm themselves for annihilation and call it world peace.
Bollocks!
Pacified. Classified.
Keep in line. You're doing fine.
Lost your voice? There ain't no choice.
Play the game. Silent and tame.
Be the passive observer, sit back and look
At the world they destroyed and the peace that they took.
Ask no questions, hear no lies
And you'll be living in the comfort of a fool's paradise.
You're already dead, you're already dead,
You're already dead, you're already dead.
If you're the passive observer, here's a message for you...
You're already dead, You're already dead.
Afraid to do what you know you should do...
You're already dead, You're already dead.
The world's at the edge of nuclear destruction,
But your too afraid to make the connection.
You still believe the system's there for your protection...
You're already dead, You're already dead.
You're already dead, you're already dead,
You're already dead, you're already dead.
By letting it happen without a fight...
You're already dead, You're already dead.
With your endless debates about wrong and right...
You're already dead, You're already dead.
Nothing's going to change if you're not prepared to act,
There's no point complaining after the fact,
Content to be a number, branded X and neatly packed...
You're already dead, You're already dead.
You're already dead, You're already dead,
You're already dead, You're already dead.
Four hundred thousand people marched for CND...
They're already dead, They're already dead,
Unless they're willing to act on what they can see...
They're already dead, They're already dead.
If each and every one of us was prepared to fight for more,
To stand against the system that creates the need for war,
The elite would have to run like it's never run before...
They're already dead, They're already dead.
They're already dead, They're already dead,
They're already dead, They're already dead.
We don't need organizing
Or politicians being patronizing.
We don't need their leadership,
Trendy lefties being hip.
We don't need their condescension
Or their back to roots pretension.
We've heard it all before,
Politicians saying "No more war",
Pulling wool across our eyes.
We don't need their dangerous lies.
We won't accept capitulation,
It's just manipulation.
They want the smooth without the rough,
But words and gestures aren't enough.
We've got to learn to reject all leaders
And the passive shit they feed us...
They're already dead, They're already dead,
They're already dead, They're already dead.
If you think moderation's going to pave the way to peace...
You're already dead, You're already dead.
What good is moderation 'gainst the army and police?
You're already dead, You're already dead.
We're not promoting mindless violence, keep that for the fools,
We're simply saying be prepared to break their laws and rules,
Let them know the bigger they come, the harder they will fall...
They're already dead, They're already dead.
They're already dead, They're already dead,
They're already dead, They're already dead.
If they're going to play it dirty, so are we...
They're already dead, They're already dead.
They can keep their lies about the land of the free...
They're already dead, They're already dead.
We've allowed them too often to use their iron fist,
But there's one little detail they appear to have missed...
You don't have to be PASSIVE just because you're a PACIFIST...
They're already dead, They're already dead.
They're already dead, They're already dead,
They're already dead, They're already dead.
They'll try to sell their system
Like it's some kind od age-old wisdom,
But we've been had like that before,
It's just the rich exploiting the poor.
Well here's an honest confession,
We think it's time they learnt a lesson.
They've tried to hold the people down,
But we've simply gone underground,
Moving in the darkness looking for the light,
Looking for a future and ready to fight.
Looking for the freedom that's been denied,
Fast to attack and fast to hide.
In a world where the people can't make it,
They've simply got to learn to break it,
And if the wealthy aren't prepared to shake it...
O.K., we'll simply have to take it...
You're already dead, You're already dead,
You're already dead, You're already dead,
You're already dead, You're already dead,
You're already dead, You're already dead...
Friday, January 11, 2008
Thoughts on the Vote Fraud in New Hampshire
Thoughts on the Vote Fraud in New Hampshire
Brandon Dean
January 11, 2008
Well, I have a few thoughts on the obvious vote fraud which has taken place in New Hampshire. This is directed at everyone, but especially those of you who have been struggling for truth for years now.
To those of you who finally started to see what all of us "kooks" have been screaming about for years since you've discovered Ron Paul in the last year or so, who have seen the truth in what Ron Paul says about government corruption, and have then witnessed the blacklisting of this one honest politician amongst a heap of drooling sycophants who call themselves the "media:" welcome to our world... We have been trying to wake folks like you up and it's been very difficult. Not so much to get through to folks logically, but to get people to care about something.
Something akin to the Ron Paul Revolution was necessary to wake a greater mass of people out of their apathy. We as strugglers for truth must not lose sight of what the greater power of this revolution is: loss of this apathy. it's more powerful than a presidency. Far more. When there is a massive wave of caring awareness, those abusing this system will scurry for cover for fear of exposure. As it stands, our system has been thwarted to award villainy.
To those of you who have been around longer than this last year: did you think the establishment would not do everything in its power to deflect Dr. Paul? Of course you knew, but like me you probably watched the first caucus and primary amid some vague dream outstretched in hope that just maybe it would be (somewhat) fair. Perhaps the powers-that-be should have considered changing Dr. Paul's 5th place status from Iowa to New Hampshire in the interest of succeeding at their farce?
In an unbelievable episode, the town of Sutton, New Hampshire, reported 0 votes for Dr. Paul. When a local Sutton family realized they had all voted for Ron Paul (5 total votes) yet NONE of these votes appeared on the official chart provided by Associated Press to all the networks, the information reached one Bev Harris of BlackBoxVoting.org. Bev Harris proceeded to call Sutton officials, who "discovered" that 31 votes had been cast for Ron Paul, but had "accidentally" been shuffled off to the "other" pool, and said they would "fix" it right away. I never saw any change in the charts however...
Hillary Clinton, the smoke-breathing demon-clone of Bill Clinton (who deserves A LOT more ire than he gets), also stole her win from Barack Obama, the CFR frontman whose wife is the head of the Chicago Council on Foreign Relations. This alone tells me the man is a globalist, besides the fact that he's a Democrat. Whatever; he was cheated and it ain't right. Entrance Straw Polls barely ever miss by 2 percent, but water turned to wine that night for Shillary Clinton. Somehow she turned a definite 14 point loss into a 10 point win! Miracle of miracles! Black became white (pun intended), up became down, and war became peace all in one night, and the sun didn't snuff out! Nope, the machinery of Media barely noticed. A few "wows" and "what the's" and voila! it's on to South Carolina! Woo Hoo!!
All of this is grievous and horrendously surprising to those who have discovered the gift of utter government corruption in the last year. It's unbelievable! WTF is going on? OMG!!! I am not ROTF right now!
To the rest of us, who probably know that every presidential election since 1960 has been a fraud, this better not surprise you. Time for a moment of tough love: Snap out of it! Stop living in a dream world! Even if Dr. Paul was elected somehow, how long do you think he'd last in office unless he completely compromised? And never forget lest ye are tempted to think of how long Kennedy lasted with delusions of grandeur: Kennedy was blackmailed. BOBBY Kennedy was incorruptible. John was corruptible, even though he remains our last true president, because he stopped letting himself be blackmailed and went to war with these vicious blood-thirsty monsters. So did Bobby, and he didn't even make it to the White House. It was in my hometown of Los Angeles, California that he was gunned down in front of dozens of witnesses after he won the 1968 California Democratic Primary.
But here is the good news: Ron Paul has already accomplished what he originally set out to accomplish, that which is more powerful than a presidency: the corrosion of apathy. God bless his soul for what he has done to wake people in this country up.
And if the elections are totally faked, and if Dr. Paul never gets close to the Oval Office, I say the more likely the chances of this young movement surviving its infancy. If Dr. Paul starts winning all the primaries, and they see no alternative but to kill him, will this freedom movement go the way of Bobby Kennedy's? Will the Ron Paul Revolution morph into a small little group of frothing violent-minded revolutionaries, completely missing the point of Paul's message? Will it just fade completely, like a beautiful song lost in a strong wind? I believe that is the strongest possibility, sadly enough.
But if Dr. Paul loses through fraud and corruption, proving out everything he's been saying, the only thing that will happen is he will gain more followers.
I cannot express my admiration of Dr. Paul for what he is doing for all of us. He has become one of the great American Heroes, and he deserves a seat next to Andrew Jackson, and Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, Samuel Adams, Abraham Lincoln, John F. Kennedy, Bobby Kennedy, and too many others to mention.
To have watched Dr. Paul's speeches in congress for years, to have written him letters to run for president at least four times in the last ten years, to have read his financial exposes and speeches, and then to see how huge his candidacy has become is a miracle I truly never expected to see. What has happened so far has so far exceeded my expectations because I, like Dr. Paul, had underestimated the malcontent of the American people. I am in awe of his support. The man has already won! The message is out! It's now far too late for the New World Order and I'm not sure if they realize it yet...
thus always to tyrants authors
Brandon Dean (splitbabyniblet)
FranG
Joshua Berry (tattoogeek)