More Smoking Gun Evidence of a 9-11 Cover-up: Flight 93

This is a great video. I've been looking for some good research on flight 93 for a long time, and my search has finally proven to not be in vain. here we have yet another smoking gun which eviscerates the official story of 9-11.
In the following video is a satellite photo of Shanksville Pennsylvania previous to September 11th, 2001, which shows the same airplane-shaped crater in the supposed "crash." it is now obvious a bomb was dropped directly in the middle of a pre-existing crater.
what a joke this whole thing has turned out to be! Did they really think folks wouldn't be inquisitive enough to figure this shit out, or did they pull this whole thing off so sloppily to rout out the folks who would be inquisitive about it, who would become so incensed by the depravity and brazenness of the act(s) that they would speak out and therefore expose themselves as potential threats to the New World Order?


Let me know what you think...

Brandon

job market 2009 - funny funny...

I don't know whether to laugh or cry about this:

how to respond to "chicken-necked" 9/11 official story believers, by Alex Jones

Well, I certainly have my issues with Alex Jones, but I've never thought the guy was himself an "inside job" or a company man. I just think his ego's gotten the better of his reportage in the last couple years. Self-promotion carves away time spent on the facts, Jack...
In any case, he still knows how to compound large subjects into succinct and far-reaching statements of observations. And every once in a while, he delivers truth entertainment which draws out the emotions and fury in any freedom loving soul, like this response to a condescending caller:


--Brandon

WTC Architect says Bin Ladens asked him where to place demos

Freeman interviews Paul Laffoley, one of the WTC architects, who claims the bin laden construction company approached him and asked where the best place to place explosives in the WTC would be. this is pretty incredible...
why the hell is this clip not known to the world, or at least the truth movement?
---brandon

They Were White and They Were Slaves

They Were White and They Were Slaves
Brandon Dean
Thus Always to Tyrants
April 1st, 2008

this is a great video.
something the politically correct, propagandized masses can't seem to grasp is that there were millions of white-skinned slaves in early America, in what history euphemistically refers to as "indentured servitude." supposedly white-skinned slaves were given preferential treatment over black slaves, and only "served" for 4-7 years before, as the man in the video puts it, paying off their debt and then "going back to the business of oppressing black people." that's the official story.
the real story is there was no difference between black "slavery" and white "indentured servitude." few indentured servants ever made it out of servitude, and worked in factories 14 hours a day till the day they died. in fact, one can truthfully state that many of the white slaves in the North lived under WORSE conditions than alot of black slaves in the South.
watch this video. please realize that history is written by the victors and the manipulators, who have found it convenient to label white slaves as "indentured servants" instead of slaves. why might you ask? well, it's obvious if you think about it...
whites and blacks suffering equally does not fit the agenda of dividing the common folk into little subsets and cliques in opposition to each other. therefore, the whites "had to be treated better" according to history so the blacks have that much more reason to "rise up" against their "white oppressors" instead of rising up against their real oppressors, who are the same oppressors of the whites---the bankster elite illuminati jesuit zionist corporate communists who control our money supplies.
note that the host of this program is "holocaust revisionist" Ernst Zundel, who is currently in prison for daring to question the official version of the holocaust (how dare he investigate history?):

part one:

Link


part two:

Link


part three:

Link


one more thing I'd like to add is that the officially sanctioned oppression of the Mormon people in the early 1800's represents another example of an historical fact which has been played down in the school texts because the sufferers were white.
the Mormons represent the third most oppressed group in American history, after the Native Americans and the blacks. in fact, some Mormons claim the Mormons are the SECOND most oppressed, before blacks. I personally believe whites have been just as exploited by the elite as anyone else, but in any case, listen to this:
if by chance you weren't aware, in their early days, thousands of Mormon men were hung, drawn and quartered, or otherwise tortured to death in our very own USA, for the horrible defect of practicing freedom of religion.
In Missouri, the fucking GOVERNOR proclaimed all Mormon males were open season, and even paid a price for their dead bodies, as if there were a rabbit infestation which had to be depopulated. have you ever heard of this? probably not - I found out because my family is Mormon, and Mormons remember, especially the older families like mine.
I know it's true because I read the diary of my great great great great grandfather, who was one of the original Mormons who crossed the wilderness to Utah, and he describes these things in detail... if you're interested in more detail, ask me and I'll be glad to tell - I just didn't want to take away from the topic of the videos...
I love truth like a junkie loves heroin, like a politician loves power, like a bankster loves fucking over other banks....

copyright Brandon Dean 2008

VICTORY (at least for now)! SUPREME COURT BACKS 2ND AMENDMENT!

they have not given up on regulating firearms of course, but this is reassurance of the fact that the NWO are scared shitless of american gun owners. PERIOD.
I was just getting ready to find a number to call, but apparently there was no need. I honestly did not think the supreme court would dare rule against the individual's right to bear arms. it's sacred territory, and they were just putting their toes in the water with all the media attention over this. they got their motherfucking answer when hundreds of people showed up at the courts to show their solidarity with OUR second amendment!!! freedom!
--brandon

Supreme Court Majority Appears To Back Gun Rights
By Robert Barnes
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, March 18, 2008; 2:27 PM

A majority of the Supreme Court today seemed to clearly indicate that the Second Amendment provides an individual right to possess a firearm and several justices appeared skeptical about whether the District of Columbia's handgun ban could be considered a reasonable restriction on that right.

Two justices cleanly framed the issue confronting them after about 90 minutes of intense arguments that took a trip back to the English Bill of Rights and the founding of a new nation on this continent.

Justice Stephen G. Breyer noted the number of people killed by handguns and asked if it was unreasonable for a "city with a very high crime rate to say 'no handguns here.' "

From the other side, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. asked: "What's reasonable about a total ban on possession?''

The justices peppered lawyer Walter Dellinger, who represented the District, about whether the law provided any adequate measure for residents to own and use a firearm for self-defense.

"Is there anything to show the District considered self-defense?" asked Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. Dellinger said laws that allowed residents to own rifles and shotguns were an adequate provision.

Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, often seen as the deciding vote on the divided court, immediately made it clear he did not accept the District's arguments -- and the views of a vast majority of federal appeals courts -- that the Second Amendment provided only a collective right to gun possession in furtherance of military purpose.

The amendment states: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Kennedy said he thought the much-debated first clause was simply "reaffirming" the importance of the Constitution's militia clause and that it clearly stated "there is a right to bear arms'' that is separate.

But a finding of an individual right means the court must decide what kind of restrictions would be proper for legislation to impose and under what standard a court should judge them.

Solicitor General Paul D. Clement told the justices that too strict a standard would imperil the federal government's efforts to restrict machine guns or "plastic" guns meant to avoid metal detector screening.

The right to bear arms, Clement argued, "always coexisted with reasonable regulations of firearms.''

Alan Gura, representing those challenging the District law, said he agreed that the "government can ban arms that are not appropriate for civilian use," but he said handguns clearly are not included in such a restriction.

The District, shortly after receiving home rule, passed the gun law in 1976, essentially banning private handgun ownership and requiring that rifles and shotguns kept in private homes be unloaded and disassembled or outfitted with a trigger lock. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit declared the law unconstitutional last year, becoming the first appeals court to overturn a gun-control law because of the Second Amendment.

The Supreme Court's last examination of the amendment was in 1939, when it ruled in U.S. v. Miller that a sawed-off shotgun transported across state lines by a bootlegger was not what the amendment's authors had in mind when they were protecting arms needed for military service.

But several justices seemed to suggest that decision was not binding on the current court. Roberts said during his 2005 confirmation hearings that Miller left the Second Amendment "very much an open issue.'' Kennedy during arguments today called it "deficient."

The court could rule in District of Columbia v. Heller at any point before its adjournment in late June.

source

Heroes of the Generational Freedom Movement, Part 3: Smedley Butler

Heroes of the Generational Freedom Movement, Part 3: Major General Smedley D. Butler
One Who Actually Frightened the New World Order
Brandon Dean
Thus Always to Tyrants
March 16, 2008

"I spent 33 years and 4 months in active service as a member of our country's most agile military force--the Marine Corps. I served in all commissioned ranks from second lieutenant to Major General. And during that period I spent most of my time being a high-class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and for the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer for capitalism. I suspected I was part of a racket all the time. Now I am sure of it. Like all members of the military profession I never had an original thought until I left the service."

-Smedley Butler

"For a great many years, as a soldier, I had a suspicion that war was a racket; not until I retired to civil life did I fully realize it. Now that I see the international war clouds gathering, as they are today, I must face it and speak out."
-Smedley Butler, from War is a Racket

Meet Smedley Butler, the New Boss, not the same as the Old Boss

United States Marine Corps Major General Smedley Darlington Butler was a force to be reckoned with. He started his military career at the age of 16 at the outbreak of the Spanish American War. He lied about his age, and was commissioned as a second lieutenant. When he retired, he was the most decorated Marine in history up to that point. Among his many commendations were the Marine Brevet Medal and the Medal of Honor, twice. [note-there is only one other Marine in history to win the Medal of Honor twice, whose name was Dan Daly.]
Butler was born to a Quaker family in West Chester, Pennsylvania, on July 30, 1881. His father's name was Thomas Butler, and he was a lawyer, judge, and 16 term congressman. During the administrations of Calvin Coolidge and Warren Harding, Thomas Butler served as Chairman of the House Naval Affairs Committee.
Butler was a highly intelligent man who always thought things through. He was known for his steady glare, which itself demanded authority. He had almost bloodshot eyes, through which one could see his suffering and experience, and also his compassion for man. He eventually realized that he had, in all the wars and battles and confrontations he had been involved with, been the dupe of international bankers. He wrote a pamphlet titled "War is a Racket," which was the first well known writings to expose the military industrial complex, or the New World Order. He traveled the country giving the essay as a speech, and became fervently anti-war, attempting to keep the US out of any further foreign wars, and other conflicts. He also exposed an attempted coup of the US government in 1933 to the congress. More about that later...

Butler, the genuine hero
"And let us not forget the bankers who financed the great war. If anyone had the cream of the profits it was the bankers. Being partnerships rather than incorporated organizations, they do not have to report to stockholders. And their profits were as secret as they were immense. How the bankers made their millions and their billions I do not know, because those little secrets never become public -- even before a Senate investigatory body."
-from War is a Racket

Butler was twice wounded fighting in the Boxer Rebellion. He earned his Brevet Medal during the battle of Tientsin, when he dragged a severely wounded soldier back into the trench. While he was out of the trench himself, he was shot in the thigh, but continued to help the wounded man to medical attention before being attended to himself. After he was shot, another soldier attempted to help both of them, and was himself shot...
After the Boxer Rebellion, Butler was stationed in Honduras and Nicaragua, guarding US corporate interests.
His first medal of honor was earned when he was sent to Vera Cruz, Mexico, during the US occupation in 1914 (the US has been busy down in South and Central America for a long time, haven't they?). However, the prestige was slightly maligned by the fact that 56 soldiers won the Medal of Honor during the same battle: one Army soldier, nine Marines, and 46 Navy sailors.
In fact, now Major Butler actually tried to RETURN his Medal of Honor, explaining that he felt he did not deserve it! He was told by his superiors that he would keep it and wear it...


Major Smedley Butler, second from right, during the Vera Cruz campaign

In 1915, Butler was sent to Haiti to help fend off the Cacos rebels. This was perhaps the most intense period of Butler's military career. He was a warrior and a master at warfare, and he apparently had no fear. He even led his men into battle once while suffering from a 104 degree fever. The man was pretty much unstoppable.
Butler was on patrol in Haiti with a mounted force of 44 marines, when a Cacos force of about 400 rebels ambushed them. Things were definitely looking grim, but Butler held them together. They held their perimeter from penetration throughout the night. In the morning, the marines managed a full frontal attack from three sides, surprising and scattering the rebels. It was an amazing feat, and Sergeant Major Dan Daly (the only other Marine to ever win two Medals of Honor, remember) won his second Medal of Honor in the process.
Butler won his second Medal of Honor a few months later. The Cacos rebels had been sequestered to Fort Riviere, an old French fort. It sat high on a rocky mountain, surrounded on three sides by cliffs, and only reachable by a dangerous rocky slope. Despite superiors wanting to send a whole regiment backed by artillery to take the fort, Butler convinced the commanding colonel to let him attack with only four companies of 24 men each and a couple machine gun squads. Butler and his men took the fort, and he won his second Medal of Honor. He also won the Haitian Medal of Honor for the same assault.


D.J. Neary, "The Capture of Fort Riviere" pictured are Butler, Sgt Iams, and Pvt. Gross (USMC art collection)

During World War I, Butler was not detached to the front, but was promoted to Brigadier General, and given command of Camp Pontanezen in France. He vastly improved the unsanitary conditions there, and still managed to get a Distinguished Service Medal, and the French Black Star. He did this by lugging a duckboard, used to line trenches, four miles uphill to lay on the muddy ground under the tents of his men. Butler was well known for this, and his men called him "Old Duckbill." General John Pershing even commissioned a patch of a duckboard for Butler's units...
His superiors knew how courageous Butler was, and they knew he was a great leader, but they also considered him reckless, which is probably why he was not given command at the front during the war.

After World War I, Butler became commander of Fort Quantico until 1924, when he became Director of Public Safety for the city of Philadelphia. In this capacity, he was in charge of running the Police and Fire Departments of the city.
Butler couldn't even be held back in civilian life. Within days of taking office, Butler raided over 900 speakeasies. Soon afterward, he hit the hangouts of the elite of Philadelphia-the Ritz Carlton, and the Union League!!
Within days of raiding these elite speakeasies, Butler was fired! hahaha!! Of the whole affair, Butler was quoted as saying: "cleaning up Philadelphia was worse than any battle I was ever in."

No More War for Gen. Butler
"So much for the dead -- they have paid their part of the war profits. So much for the mentally and physically wounded -- they are paying now their share of the war profits. But the others paid, too -- they paid with heartbreaks when they tore themselves away from their firesides and their families to don the uniform of Uncle Sam -- on which a profit had been made. They paid another part in the training camps where they were regimented and drilled while others took their jobs and their places in the lives of their communities. They paid for it in the trenches where they shot and were shot; where they were hungry for days at a time; where they slept in the mud and the cold and in the rain -- with the moans and shrieks of the dying for a horrible lullaby."
-from War is a Racket


Butler at a speaking engagement in the 1930's

Butler had many civilian enemies, but almost no military enemies. He was heavily revered within the Corps, to the ire of his civilian enemies... His father the congressman also held much sway. But Butler was an outspoken man, and he would publicly criticize the powers that be, in a way which severely upset those powers. He spoke publicly of Italian Dictator Mussolini at a politically tense moment, publicizing the fact, among other things, that Mussolini had recently ran over a small child in his car, yet sped off in a hit-and-run.
One of his political enemies was President Hoover, who hated Butler, and brought him up on courts-martial over the blunder. Butler was forced to publicly apologize (remember what happened to Patton during WWII?), and thus the courts-martial was reduced to a reprimand. But the General himself was not amused...
After he was passed up as Commandant of the Marine Corps in 1931, though he was senior, Butler became seriously disenchanted with politics. His father was dead by the then, and Butler no longer had strong political protection from his enemies, which he richly deserved and needed. He retired soon after the insult, and gradually became more and more upset about the situation in this country. Eventually, he became obsessed with stemming the tide of war, and I'm here to tell you--he did stop one in 1933.

The White House Putsch, or the "Business Plot"
"Looking back, Woodrow Wilson was re-elected president in 1916 on a platform that he had "kept us out of war" and on the implied promise that he would "keep us out of war." Yet, five months later he asked Congress to declare war on Germany.
In that five-month interval the people had not been asked whether they had changed their minds. The 4,000,000 young men who put on uniforms and marched or sailed away were not asked whether they wanted to go forth to suffer and die.
Then what caused our government to change its mind so suddenly?
Money."
-from War is a Racket

By virtue of being the most decorated Marine in history, and possibly the most beloved and respected high level officer in all the US armed forces at that time [not to mention he had been involved in a number of coups in foreign nations (thus having experience)], a group of international industrialists and bankers approached Butler in 1933 with a proposal to overthrow the US government by leading a force of 500,000 soldiers against Washington, D.C. They obviously had no clue who they were dealing with. Butler replied that he would get his own army of 500,000 of his own and annihilate the insurgents. He was a little more subtle when he appeared before the McCormack-Dickstein Committee, exposing the plot:

[BUTLER:] I said, "The idea of this great group of soldiers, then, is to sort of frighten him, is it? Cause if so, well gee golly gosh I wouldn't want to be on that end of the pole. We're not in Kansas anymore!"

"No, no, no; not to frighten him. This is to sustain him when others assault him."

I said, "Well, I do not know about that. How would the President explain it?"

He said: "He will not necessarily have to explain it, because we are going to help him out. Now, did it ever occur to you that the President is overworked? We might have an Assistant President, somebody to take the blame; and if things do not work out, he can drop him."

He went on to say that it did not take any constitutional change to authorize another Cabinet official, somebody to take over the details of the office-take them off the President's shoulders. He mentioned that the position would be a secretary of general affairs-a sort of a super-secretary.

CHAIRMAN: A secretary of general affairs?

BUTLER: That is the term used by him-or a secretary of general welfare-I cannot recall which. I came out of the interview with that name in my head. I got that idea from talking to both of them, you see [MacGuire and Clark]. They had both talked about the same kind of relief that ought to be given the President, and he [MacGuire] said: "You know, the American people will swallow that. We have got the newspapers. We will start a campaign that the President's health is failing. Everybody can tell that by looking at him, and the dumb American people will fall for it in a second." Archer, Jules (1973), p. 155.

General Butler accused not only MacGuire and one Bill Doyle of being his contacts for the plotters, but claimed the financiers of the plot were to be US Steel, Standard Oil (Rockefeller), Chase Manhattan Bank, and Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company. A BBC documentary in 2003 called "The White House Coup" even had evidence pointing to the omnipresent Prescott Bush, progenitor of both Bush presidents later to come, as having been involved in the financing of the plot.


Four legendary Marines and Medal of Honor winners. Sergeant Major John Henry Quick, Major General Wendell Cushing Neville, Lieutenant General John Archer Lejune, Major General Smedley Darlington Butler. (Marine Corps Archives.)

Butler was told that the half million troops would march to D.C. and publicly declare that President Roosevelt's life was in danger, and they were there to protect him. Butler was to be declared the "supersecretary" (as stated above), to be controlled, of course, by the "powers-that-be." The bankers had 30 million dollars with which to finance the affair, and when all was said and done Butler's would be the highest power. Butler was not stupid, of course, and he was a patriot, so he didn't fall for it. He marched right to congress. He put his life on the line, and apparently didn't even think twice about it.
Of course, all those implicated by Butler denied any sort of involvement. Congress treated it seriously enough (at least at first), but the press dismissed it, as you might have guessed. The only real media coverage he got was scathing.

War is a Racket
" The chief aim of any power at any of these conferences has not been to achieve disarmament to prevent war but rather to get more armament for itself and less for any potential foe."
--from War is a Racket


Major General Smedley Darlington Butler, USMC

Needless to say, this set of events affected him greatly. He wrote a book/pamphlet entitled War is a Racket--for which he is now well known in the alternative political spectrum--in 1933-35, to inform the American public of their peril. He traveled around the country giving various versions as a lecture. He was affilliated with various anti-war organizations, including one I'm not sure I approve of, called The American League Against War and Fascism. Many people considered it a communist front, playing the left card off the right, which is possible (and Butler was more of a liberal than a conservative politically, possibly due to his father's influence), yet Butler served only as a spokesperson, and was definitely not one of the organizers.

*

The fact of the matter is that the White House Putsch was nothing more than a ploy. The New World Order controllers never planned to carry it out. They were obviously going to have it fail, using Butler as the scapegoat, to bolster Roosevelt's image as the man who crushed a rebellion. An ancillary benefit for the New World Order would be to instill paranoia in the American public, in an attempt to drive America into Communism, not Fascism.
So in that sense I believe Butler to have been naive politically. He was very vocally anti-fascist, having somewhat socialist and liberal views.
But his political beliefs matter not at all when you consider the love of humanity this man obviously had. Please read War is a Racket (linked below) to understand how much nerve this man actually had. He had many dangerous enemies, and he knew it. He just failed to see the global game being played. And despite these powerful and dangerous enemies, Butler would not shut up, and many people believe that he was murdered on June 21st, 1940. The cause of death was vague--possible cancer in the gastro-intestinal tract, but no tumors were found. Many believe he was poisoned, much like General George Patton five years later.
In any case, the man showed unbelievable courage which few others have shown in this nation's history. He was one of the true heroes of the generational freedom movement which battles on today, and I revere his memory for that.

"Yes, the soldier pays the greater part of the bill. His family pays too. They pay it in the same heart-break that he does. As he suffers, they suffer. At nights, as he lay in the trenches and watched shrapnel burst about him, they lay home in their beds and tossed sleeplessly -- his father, his mother, his wife, his sisters, his brothers, his sons, and his daughters.
When he returned home minus an eye, or minus a leg or with his mind broken, they suffered too -- as much as and even sometimes more than he. Yes, and they, too, contributed their dollars to the profits of the munitions makers and bankers and shipbuilders and the manufacturers and the speculators made. They, too, bought Liberty Bonds and contributed to the profit of the bankers after the Armistice in the hocus-pocus of manipulated Liberty Bond prices.
And even now the families of the wounded men and of the mentally broken and those who never were able to readjust themselves are still suffering and still paying."
--from War is a Racket


Smedley Butler at his retirement ceremony

{note--part four of the Heroes of the Generational Freedom Movement series will be about Hunter S. Thompson}

copyright Brandon Dean 2008



links:

amazing audio documentary about Smedley Butler at informationclearinghouse.com

War is a Racket, by Smedley Butler

the Smedley Butler Society

short biography of Smedley Butler

books by Smedley Butler

learn more about Butler's post-retirement activites

Excerpts from The Plot to Seize the White House, 1973, by Jules Archer

Banks Lose to Deadbeat Homeowners as Loans Sold in Bonds Vanish

ok folks! here is the answer to the mortgage crisis! we need to get this information out. this is probably the best thing I've heard so far this year. simply take the mortgage owners to court! apparently most of them do not hold the original note on the original mortgage that you may have signed, being third, fourth, or even eighth generation mortgage owners... this is amazing!
---Brandon

Banks Lose to Deadbeat Homeowners as Loans Sold in Bonds Vanish
By Bob Ivry


Feb. 22 (Bloomberg) -- Joe Lents hasn't made a payment on his $1.5 million mortgage since 2002.

That's when Washington Mutual Inc. first tried to foreclose on his home in Boca Raton, Florida. The Seattle-based lender failed to prove that it owned Lents's mortgage note and dropped attempts to take his house. Subsequent efforts to foreclose have stalled because no one has produced the paperwork.

....If you're going to take my house away from me, you better own the note,'' said Lents, 63, the former chief executive officer of a now-defunct voice recognition software company.

Judges in at least five states have stopped foreclosure proceedings because the banks that pool mortgages into securities and the companies that collect monthly payments haven't been able to prove they own the mortgages. The confusion is another headache for U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson as he revises rules for packaging mortgages into securities.

....I think it's going to become pretty hairy,'' said Josh Rosner, managing director at the New York-based investment research firm Graham Fisher & Co. ....Regulators appear to have ignored this, given the size and scope of the problem.''

More than $2.1 trillion, or 19 percent, of outstanding mortgages have been bundled into securities by private banks, according to Inside Mortgage Finance, a Bethesda, Maryland-based industry newsletter. Those loans may be sold several times before they land in a security. Mortgage servicers, who collect monthly payments and distribute them to securities investors, can buy and sell the home loans many times.

Housing Boom

Each time the mortgages change hands, the sellers are required to sign over the mortgage notes to the buyers. In the rush to originate more loans during the U.S. mortgage boom, from 2003 to 2006, that assignment of ownership wasn't always properly completed, said Alan White, assistant professor at Valparaiso University School of Law in Valparaiso, Indiana.

....Loans were mass produced and short cuts were taken,'' White said. ....A lot of the paperwork is done in the name of the original lender and a lot of the original lenders aren't around anymore.''

More than 100 mortgage companies stopped making loans, closed or were sold last year, according to Bloomberg data.

The foreclosure rate, at 1.69 percent of all U.S. homeowners, is the highest since the Mortgage Bankers Association began tracking it in 1993. The foreclosure rate for subprime borrowers, who have bad or incomplete credit and whose mortgages typically are securitized by private banks rather than government-sponsored entities Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, is at a four-year high, according to the mortgage bankers.

750,000 Homeowners

More than 1.5 million homeowners will enter the foreclosure process this year, said Rick Sharga, executive vice president for marketing at RealtyTrac Inc., the Irvine, California-based seller of foreclosure information. About half of them, 750,000, will have their homes repossessed, Sharga said.

Borrower advocates, including Ohio Attorney General Marc Dann, have seized upon the issue of missing mortgage notes as a way to stem foreclosures.

....The best thing to do is to keep people in their homes and for everybody to take steps necessary to make that happen,'' said Chris Geidner, an attorney in Dann's office. ....These trusts are purchasing these notes, and before they even get the paperwork, they foreclose on people. They become foreclosure machines.''

Lost-Note Affidavits

When the mortgage servicers and securitizing banks that act as trustees of the securities fail to present proof that they own a mortgage, they sometimes file what's called a lost-note affidavit, said April Charney, a lawyer at Jacksonville Area Legal Aid in Florida.

Nobody knows how widespread the use of lost-note affidavits are, Charney said. She's had foreclosure proceedings for 300 clients dismissed or postponed in the past year, with about 80 percent of them involving lost-note affidavits, she said.

....They raise the issue of whether the trusts own the loans at all,'' Charney said. ....Lost-note affidavits are pattern and practice in the industry. They are not exceptions. They are the rule.''

State laws generally make it difficult to foreclose because they favor the homeowner, said Stuart Saft, a real estate lawyer and partner at the New York firm Dewey & LeBoeuf LLP.

....All these loan documents are being sent to the inside of a mountain in the middle of America and not being checked very carefully,'' Saft said. ....The lenders can't find the paper. We're dealing with a lot of paper produced in a mortgage closing.''

..Waste of Time'

Requiring banks to produce the paperwork at a foreclosure hearing is a nuisance, said Jeffrey Naimon, a partner in the Washington office of Buckley Kolar LLP.

....It's a gigantic waste of time,'' Naimon said. ....The mortgage may have transferred five, six, eight times. It's possible that you don't have all the pieces of paper, but it was enough to convince the next guy in the chain. There's no true controversy over whether the owner owns the loan.''

Judges are becoming increasingly impatient with plaintiffs who produce no more proof of ownership than a lost-note affidavit or a copy of the note, said Michael Doan, an attorney at Doan Law Firm LLP in Carlsbad, California.

....Things are heating up,'' Doan said.

In Ohio, where RealtyTrac reported an 88 percent jump in foreclosures last year, Dann, the attorney general, is now arguing 40 foreclosure cases that challenge ownership of mortgage notes, according to his office.

..Cavalier Approach'

U.S. District Judge David D. Dowd Jr. in Ohio's northern district chastised Deutsche Bank National Trust Co. and Argent Mortgage Securities Inc. in October for what he called their ....cavalier approach'' and ....take my word for it'' attitude toward proving ownership of the mortgage note in a foreclosure case.

John Gallagher, a spokesman for Frankfurt-based Deutsche Bank AG, said the bank had no comment.

Federal District Judge Christopher Boyko dismissed 14 foreclosure cases in Cleveland in November due to the inability of the trustee and the servicer to prove ownership of the mortgages.

Similar cases were dismissed during the past year by judges in California, Massachusetts, Kansas and New York.

....Judges are human beings,'' said Kenneth M. Lapine, a partner at the Cleveland law firm Roetzel & Andress LPA. ....They no doubt feel the little guy needs all the help he can get against the impersonal, out of town, mega-investment banking company.''

Warning Plaintiffs

U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Samuel L. Bufford in Los Angeles issued a notice last month warning plaintiffs in foreclosure cases to bring the mortgage notes to court and not submit copies.

....This requirement will apply because developments in the secondary market for mortgages and other security interests cause the court to lack confidence that presenting a copy of a promissory note is sufficient to show that movant has a right to enforce the note or that it qualifies as a real party in interest,'' the notice said.

Quick foreclosures benefit communities because properties in default lose value and homeowners in financial distress don't maintain their houses or pay real estate taxes, said Saft of Dewey & Leboeuf.

Painted as the Enemy

....When banks originally made the loans they used people's money from pension funds and savings accounts and they should be allowed to foreclose the loan as quickly as possible before the property depreciates in value any more,'' Saft said. ....The mortgage industry has been painted as the enemy when all they did was make loans to enable people to buy homes. Now there's less money available for new borrowers to buy homes and that's what's causing the value of homes to go down.''

Lents is former CEO of Investco Inc., a Boca Raton, Florida-based developer of voice recognition software. In 2002, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission sanctioned Lents and others for stock manipulation, according to the SEC Web site. He lost his job, was fined and his assets were frozen. That's the reason he couldn't pay his mortgage, he said.

....If the homeowner doesn't object to the lost-note affidavit, the judge rubber-stamps it,'' Lents said. ....Is it oversight, or are they trying to get around the law?''

Washington Mutual spokeswoman Geri Ann Baptista said the bank had no comment.

Looking for Loopholes

....I can't believe the handling of notes is worse than it was five years ago,'' said Guy Cecala, publisher of Inside Mortgage Finance. ....What we didn't have back then were armies of attorneys out there looking for loopholes. People are challenging foreclosures and courts are paying a lot more attention to foreclosures than they ever did before.''

American Home Mortgage Investment Corp., the Melville, New York-based lender that filed for bankruptcy last August, said it was paying $45,000 a month to store loan paperwork and petitioned U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Christopher Sontchi in Wilmington, Delaware, for the right to toss it all. Sontchi ruled last week that American Home Mortgage could charge banks from $3 to $13 a file to retrieve documents.

The home-loan industry has had a central electronic database since 1997 to track mortgages as they are bought and sold. It's run by Mortgage Electronic Registration System, or MERS, a subsidiary of Vienna, Virginia-based MERSCORP Inc., which is owned by mortgage companies.

No Tracking Mechanism

MERS has 3,246 member companies and about half of outstanding mortgages are registered with the company, including loans purchased by government-sponsored entities Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and Ginnie Mae, said R.K. Arnold, the company's CEO.

For about half of U.S. mortgages, there is no tracking mechanism.

MERS rules don't allow members to submit lost-note affidavits in place of mortgage notes, Arnold said.

....A lot of companies say the note is lost when it's highly unlikely the note is lost,'' Arnold said. ....Saying a note is lost when it's not really lost is wrong.''

Lents's attorney, Jane Raskin of Raskin & Raskin in Miami, said she has no idea who owns Lents's mortgage note.

....Something is wrong if you start from what I think is the reasonable assumption that these banks are not losing all of these notes,'' Raskin said. ....As an officer of the court, I find it troubling that they've been going in and saying we lost the note, and because nobody is challenging it, the foreclosures are pushed through the system.''

To contact the reporter on this story: Bob Ivry in New York at bivry@bloomberg.net .
Last Updated: February 22, 2008 00:03 EST

source: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aejJZdqodTCM

Won't Be Coming Around For To Kill Your Snakes No More...

Won't Be Coming Around For To Kill Your Snakes No More...

Brandon Dean
Thus Always to Tyrants
February 25, 2008

Donovan Leitch was a 1960's singer/songwriter from Scotland. He wrote one of the more insightful and prophetic songs of the entire decade, called "Riki Tiki Tavi." The bold/italic words in this article are the lyrics of this song.

Many people seem to believe that all those involved in the rock n' roll scene of the 1960's were pacifist hippies/flower children who thought shouting "peace" and "love" would change the world alone. Many other people believe that all of the youthful, vocal leaders of the time worked for the New World Order. True, the Beatles were groomed at the Tavistock Institute, Timothy Leary handed out acid for the CIA, and the head of security for the Black Panther Party, when they were brought down, was actually an FBI agent. But the New World Order does not invent anything--they only distort and manipulate. The 60's cultural revolution itself was in no way created by the New World Order. They merely infiltrated and destroyed it.
The reason they needed to infiltrate and destroy the burgeoning cultural scene of the 1960's was that they were wandering into dangerous waters from the perspective of the status quo. In other words, they threatened the status quo. Take this verse, for instance:

Better get into what you gotta get into
Better get into it now, no slacking please
United Nations ain't really "united"
And the organization ain't really organized...

This is an anti-globalist song. Donovan is clearly anti-United Nations, and clearly somewhat anarchist, given the last line. If you haven't noticed, most of the ex-hippies did not turn into anarchists, yet they do tend to make up the extreme left in this country. The extreme left in this country are responsible for allowing the New World Order to implement its communist policies of social programs and anti-gun legislation of the last forty years. The typical ex-hippie leftist supports the United Nations. Even conservatives in this country now support the United Nations. Yet here we have a supposed "hippie leftist" from the sixties who is anti-globalism, and obviously not a leftist or a rightist.

Riki Tiki Tavi mongoose is gone
Won't be coming around for to kill your snakes no more, my love
Riki Tiki Tavi mongoose is gone

Everybody who read the Jungle Book knows that Riki Tiki Tavi's a
mongoose who kills snakes
When I was a young man I was led to believe there were organizations to kill my snakes for me...
ie: the church, ie: the government, ie: the school
But when I got a little older I learned I had to kill them myself

Donovan is explaining here that social programs do not work. He names the Church, the Government, and the School as distractions meant to placate you. As children, we are taught to depend on government, schools, and the church to protect us. We are not influenced in public life to rely on ourselves and trust in ourselves. We are persuaded rather to depend on police to protect us, and on religions to explain things to us. To depend on schools to teach us the truth.

Riki Tiki Tavi mongoose is gone
Won't be coming around for to kill your snakes no more, my love
Riki Tiki Tavi mongoose is gone

Growing up can be jarring to most people - you are forced to accept responsibility for your actions, which can seem impossible for some. When Mommy and Daddy force them out of the nest, they look for another Mommy and Daddy, and they find it in the nanny state. The New World Order would ask nothing more of you than to rely on them.

People walking around-they don't know what they're doing
They've been lost so long, they don't know what they're looking for
Well, I know what I'm looking for, but I just can't find it
I guess I gotta look inside of myself some more...

The answer is within us. We all must look inside ourselves for our answers. The government will not protect you; religions will advise you to follow their rote and ritual; schools will teach you what they want you to know. People wander in a haze of terror and forgetfulness, and have no true vision of where they should be, or why they should be there. Those of us who are seeking the truth of the lies cannot look externally for philosophical answers. We must review ourselves internally, to see how and why our actions have contributed to where we're at now. You must look externally for what happened, and internally for why it happened. We allow ourselves to be torn apart by conflicting emotions, or worse yet, we allow emotions to control us. We somehow find relief in others choosing for us, when it should be us choosing freely. To relinquish responsibility for your own destiny is to die a living death...
Like I've already stated, the New World Order does not create anything; it merely warps existing things to its own purpose. It warps anything and everything malignant to its goals. The CIA and FBI were very busy during the 1950's-60's infiltrating movements of all kinds.
They've seemingly killed the rebellious spirit of popular music, and the artists have traded it in for diamonds and pearls, cast about the necks of swine, from the pilfered treasuries of other, more vicious swine... A "look" or an "attitude" now replaces talent and rebellion.
I abhor the attitude in the alternative world of the whole thing being a NWO hoax. Anyone who believes this never listened to the words, or felt the underlying rhythm, of true music.

oh oh oh inside of myself some more
oh oh oh inside of myself some more

Riki tiki tavi mongoose is gone

copyright Brandon Dean 2008

Lady Liberty and Lady Justice Meet For Coffee At Starbucks , by Dictator Hater

Lady Liberty and Lady Justice Meet For Coffee At Starbucks - Part One: the Beginning

Dictator Hater
NIWECS
February 25, 2008

Lady Liberty leapt from her pedestal and slogged through the harbor. Once on dry land, she shook the water from her robes and hurried to the coffee shop to meet Lady Justice. They had plenty to talk about.

As she rounded the corner, the familiar Starbucks symbol came into view. She sighed. Everything had changed so much since she first arrived in New York. She used to stand for something... Now she just... stands.

Lady Justice had removed her blindfold and she raised a hand in recognition when Lady Liberty entered the coffeeshop. She winced as if in pain.

Lady Liberty adjusted her damp robes and sat down across from Lady Justice and frowned. Speaking with a slight French accent, she asked, "What's wrong, Dear? Is your arm hurting?"

Lady Justice smiled wanely and said, "Yes, holding up those scales all day long is really giving my arthritis fits these days. There was a time, though, when I wouldn't have complained, no matter how much it hurt. It was worth it. But now..." Her voice trailed off and she twisted the blindfold she had laid in her lap with nervous fingers.

Lady Liberty shook her head, then rubbed her shoulder. "I know what you mean, there was a time when I would have kept holding that torch without complaint. Back when it use to mean something."

Lady Justice rose gracefully and swished across the room to order their lattes. A strikingly beautiful sight to behold, she turned every head in the place, male and female.

When she returned to the table, Lady Liberty said, "I see you've not lost your touch. Everyone loves you, you know. You're so lucky not to have had a sculptor like mine who couldn't decide whether I was male or female and turned me into an androgynous looking... thing. All I've had going for me was what I represented and even now that is gone. This war on terror and this Bush Administration... Congress going along with whatever he wants! What a shame the people have forgotten what it really means to be free, much less fight for what they have lost."

Lady Justice blushed at the compliment and took a sip of her latte. She sat the styrofoam cup on the table in front of her and ran her finger around the rim, seemingly lost in thought. She looked up and her eyes were wet with tears that threatened to spill over. "It's so hard for me, too. Day after day, I stand in the courtroom, hearing all the injustices that are compounded by unfair decisions. The courts are stacked, you know. Some of these judges are just an extension of the Bush Administration, their puppets. And that attorney general, Gonzales! Thank goodness he's gone, but the new one isn't much better. The court is the last bastion of the common man's justice... or was and now that is gone. You should have been there when the Supreme Court handed over the presidency! I almost dropped my scales!"

"I know what you mean. I see all kinds of things from my perch and you wouldn't believe it! The whole city of New York has been militarized, you couldn't tell the policemen from the military. The uniforms they wear are frightening! All that body armour. And don't get me started on how they have checkpoints everywhere. It's basically a free-for-all out there." Lady Liberty paused to take a sip of her latte, then continued. "Sometimes, I just want to scream at them when I see how this country is being destroyed. I always knew it would be from the inside out, not the outside in."

Lady Liberty looked around the room. People were engaged in lively conversation and laughter filled the air. The people seemed Stepfordlike, all dressed the same, drinking the same coffee and laptops galore. If only they understood what was going on around them, they would be out in the streets protesting, she thought. Or not.

Lady Justice followed her gaze and said, "I know what you're thinking. You're thinking they'd fight for their rights if they knew what was happening to them."

"Don't tell me, I know it's wishful thinking." Lady Liberty watched as a man pulled out a cigarette and then returned it to his pocket. He must have forgotten that cigarettes were forbidden in Starbucks.

"Nine Eleven got them everything they wanted, didn't it? And now, I have been relieved of very important duties with these Military Tribunals! What a disgrace! They won't even let me in, I guess Lady Justice is not to be trusted in this Brave New World we have."

"Brave. That's a laugh. But there is some hope." Lady Liberty's eyes twinkled with mischief.

"What do you mean?" For a moment, hope flashed in Lady Justice's face. Then it died like a flame extinguished.

Lady Liberty put a hand on hers and said, "Haven't you heard of the Truth Movement? And there's We Are Change."

Lady Justice shook her head no. "Tell me about them! What are they? Who are they?"

"They're a bunch of people who have woken up to what is happening and their numbers are growing daily." Lady Liberty smiled radiantly. "They might just succeed, if they are not squashed by laws that threaten their freedom of speech. There are plenty of efforts to shut them up, label them as terrorists instead of the True Patriots that they are. Anything that threatens the status quo is viewed as negative by the Powers That Be. But these people... they have a fire in their gut that won't be put out easily."

"Really? And just how do they expect to stop the Powers That Be?" Lady Justice looked skeptical.

"By informing others of what is going on and forming peaceful groups that are demanding justice. You should see those We Are Change guys in action. They are not afraid of anyone! They'll go right up to them and stick a microphone in their faces and ask them the questions that the mainstream media whores will not ask!" Lady Liberty's hand flew to her mouth. "Oops! I'm sorry, I didn't mean to swear. There are other groups, too. If they ever combine their efforts and all come together, all these groups who are fighting for the same thing... woe be to those who would tear this country apart."

Lady Justice grinned. "That's all right. It's about time everyone swore. ...Swore to uphold their Constitution and their Bill of Rights."

The Beginning

copyright DictatorHater, 2008

US Attempts to Occupy the Whole World--What Happens If We Invade Iran? by Brandon Dean

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

Terrorist Tactics Used By Government Against "We The People", by Dictator Hater

Terrorist Tactics Used By Government Against "We The People"

by Dictator Hater
NIWECS
February 18, 2008

Don't think that the Democrats in the House of Representatives have necessarily done a good thing by allowing the Protect America Act to expire without a vote because this is not what happened at all. There was a vote and most of the Democrats voted to allow a 21 day extension of the bill in its current form.

This report from Media Matters clears up a lot of the confusion:

http://mediamatters.org/items/200802150012

"NBC falsely suggested House Democrats refused to extend expiring FISA amendments

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. "

Furthermore, any ongoing investigations under the auspices of the Protect America Act can be carried out for twelve months, so Bush's claim that Americans are in danger if this bill is not made permanent immediately is total bunk and the House knows it.

Media Matters makes further clarification of what really happened during the Republican walk out on February 14 as stated here:

" Additionally, Nightly News did not report the full reason for the Republican decision to walk off the House floor. As The Washington Post reported, House Minority Leader Rep. John Boehner (R-OH) led a Republican walkout just before the House was set to vote on "contempt citations against White House Chief of Staff Joshua B. Bolten and former White House counsel Harriet E. Miers over their refusal to cooperate with an investigation into the mass firings of U.S. attorneys." In calling for the walkout, Boehner stated: "We have space on the calendar today for a politically charged fishing expedition, but no space for a bill that would protect the American people from terrorists who want to kill us. ... Let's just get up and leave." The House then approved the citations by a vote of 223-32. Neither ABC nor NBC reported on the contempt citations, consistent with a pattern on the part of both networks to ignore developments relating to the U.S. attorney scandal in their nightly news broadcasts."

And GovTrack gives a glaring picture of how the members of the House of Representatives voted on February 13 here:

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2008-54

Aside from that, if it were so important to protect America with this Protect America Act, why is Bush threatening a veto against any bill that doesn't contain immunity for telecommunications companies and why are House Republicans voting against the 21 day extension of this oh-so-important piece of legislation? Does this not make Bush and certain members of Congress the ones who are not protecting America now, according to their own standards?

Are we going to end up with more unconstitutional spying on Americans once Congress returns from their vacationing as well as immunity for the telecommunication companies? Just like Bush wants. We shall all see.

It must be mentioned here too, that what the Senate did, in handing the Bush Administration a victory with their vote to make the Protect America Act with immunity included for the telecommunication spies permanent is nothing short of straight-up fascism. Every Senator who voted yea should be immediately thrown out of office and banned permanently from ever holding office again. If the House returns from vacation and does the same thing, as far as I am concerned, what's sauce for the goose is also sauce for the gander, kick them all out on their collective rear ends.

In giving immunity to the telecommunication companies, members of the Senate who voted yea are effectively negating the lawsuits currently pending against these companies for spying on Americans illegally. But another more insidious reason for the push to immunize telecoms against lawsuits has not graced the pages of any mainstream media article I have read so far.

Think of it this way, the telecommunication companies surely didn't just wake up one day and say to themselves, "I think we should spy on Americans without warrants and give the Bush Administration this information because we love our country so much. It doesn't matter if we're breaking the law. We're Patriots and we love America."

Let's get real here. No, these corporate bloodsuckers do nothing for God or Country as the White House Spokeswoman Dana Perino would try and have us believe in her statement here: http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2008/02/20080212-2.html

"MS. PERINO: The telephone companies that were alleged to have helped their country after 9/11 did so because they are patriotic and they certainly helped us and they helped us save lives."

They really do think we are stupid little children and they are our Mommies and Daddys don't they? Does this insult of your intelligence if not outrage you? Well, it certainly should.

It doesn't take a wild-eyed conspiracy theorist to deduce that the telecommunications companies involved in this must have either received some secret lucrative contracts from the NSA or did so in exchange for political favors. And this amounts to collusion between the telecoms and the U.S. Government to illegally wiretap and spy on Americans, if it can be proven. I want to know exactly who they are, don't you?

What the Bush Administration, the Senate and the telecoms have done is Corporatism in the raw. What you are looking at is the merger of Corporations and the State against the best interests of the American people and against the Rule of Law, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. We shall see if the House of Representatives follows suit and makes this law a permanent part of our lives when they return from their vacation. I'll certainly be watching to see how this mess turns out.

This nonsense has got to stop right now or we might as well just give up and allow a Dictatorship to replace this Republic. How low do we have to go before the people march on Washington D.C. and demand the rule of law be restored to this country?

The worst part of it is that the Bush Administration and Congress use terrorist tactics on We The People in order to force their will upon us. If you had not realized yet that this is the same tactic that has been used for every other unconstitutional piece of legislation passed prior to this since September 11, 2001, then this debacle should practically blind you with the brilliance of truth of what government has been doing all along shining in your eyes. They might as well be screaming, "If you don't let us steal your civil liberties and invade your privacy we're all going to die!" Actually, that is what they are doing and darn near daily. Someone change the record, please, this one is really starting to sound scratchy.

Call your Representatives and demand that this law be left to languish in the musty halls of Congress and tell them that you want not only the telecoms held up to the rule of law, but there needs to be a full investigation into the Bush Administration, NSA and any other government entitiy (including members of Congress) involved in the illegal spying on Americans without a warrant.

Have the meaning of the word accountability, a copy of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights ready to read out loud to them when you make that call because it appears none of our dear leaders seem to know or care about the meaning of the word freedom these days.

Ron Paul Vote "for the shredder" -Illinois Election Worker

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

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

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

Communist Grunt Organization MoveOn.org Endorses Obama

Communist Grunt Organization MoveOn.org Endorses Obama
Brandon Dean
February 2, 2008

What I am about to say probably resonates with alot of people who are against fascist government wars, especially those who are active, or have been active, in fighting whichever cause they believe in. I've become severely cynical about protesting, for instance, for a couple reasons. First, the police show up and film you and take your picture and it's generally intrusive on your privacy. They already know who I am, and they're not learning anything new by filming me several different times. That's one thing, but I learned to get past that. Certain privacies apparently must be discarded to show public support for peace and freedom...
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