The State of the Nation: I am afraid

By John W. White­head
Pres­i­dent, The Ruther­ford Institute

“As I look at America today, I am not afraid to say that I am afraid.” – Bertram Gross, Friendly Fas­cism: The New Face of Power in America

Some of our collective problems – WW~

Over taxation is an arduous burden for most Americans.

Americans booed Obama's plans for their healthcare

Government is attacking our heritage and our collective history

Americans are losing their homes at an alarming rate and end up in tent cities.

Illegals and their racist propaganda - white Americans now strangers in own country

Paramilitarized Police Units enforce unconstitutional laws - they no longer serve the people.

This one is the biggie!  If we can't criticize Israel, then there is no further discussion on the influence of the Israel Lobby, Jewish control over media, corporations, academia, healthcare and just about everything that matters!

This problem effectively muzzles free speech!

Omi­nous devel­op­ments in America have been a long time coming, in part pre­cip­i­tated by “we the people” – a cit­i­zenry that has been asleep at the wheel for too long. And while there have been wake-up calls, we have failed to heed the warnings.

Just con­sider the state of our nation:

We’re encased in what some are calling an elec­tronic con­cen­tra­tion camp. The gov­ern­ment con­tinues to amass data files on more and more Amer­i­cans. Every­where we go, we are watched: at the banks, at the gro­cery store, at the mall, crossing the street. This loss of pri­vacy is symp­to­matic of the growing sur­veil­lance being car­ried out on average Amer­i­cans. Such sur­veil­lance grad­u­ally poi­sons the soul of a nation, trans­forming us from one in which we’re pre­sumed inno­cent until proven guilty to one in which everyone is a sus­pect and pre­sumed guilty. Thus, the ques­tion that must be asked is: can freedom in the United States flourish in an age when the phys­ical move­ments, indi­vidual pur­chases, con­ver­sa­tions and meet­ings of every cit­izen are under con­stant sur­veil­lance by pri­vate com­pa­nies and gov­ern­ment agencies?

We are meta­mor­phosing into a police state. Gov­ern­mental ten­ta­cles now invade vir­tu­ally every facet of our lives, with agents of the gov­ern­ment lis­tening in on our tele­phone calls and reading our emails. Tech­nology, which has devel­oped at a rapid pace, offers those in power more inva­sive, awe­some tools than ever before. Fusion cen­ters – data col­lecting agen­cies spread throughout the country, aided by the National Secu­rity Agency – con­stantly mon­itor our com­mu­ni­ca­tions, every­thing from our internet activity and web searches to text mes­sages, phone calls and emails. This data is then fed to gov­ern­ment agen­cies, which are now inter­con­nected – the CIA to the FBI, the FBI to local police – a rela­tion­ship which will make a tran­si­tion to mar­tial law that much easier.

We may very well be one ter­rorist attack away from seeing armed forces on our streets – and the Amer­ican people may not put up much resis­tance. According to a recent study, a greater per­centage of Amer­i­cans are now willing to sac­ri­fice their civil lib­er­ties in order to feel safer in the wake of the failed crotch bomber’s attack on Christmas Day.

We are plagued by a fal­tering economy and a mon­strous finan­cial deficit that threatens to bank­rupt us. Our national debt is more than $12 tril­lion (which trans­lates to more than $110,000 per tax­payer), and is expected to nearly double to $20 tril­lion by 2015. The unem­ploy­ment rate is over 10% and growing, with more than 15 mil­lion Amer­i­cans out of work and many more forced to sub­sist on low-paying or part-time jobs. The number of U.S. house­holds on the verge of losing their homes soared by nearly 15% in the first half of last year alone. The number of chil­dren living in poverty is on the rise (18% in 2007).

As his­tory illus­trates, author­i­tarian regimes assume more and more power in trou­bled finan­cial times.

Our rep­re­sen­ta­tives in the White House and Con­gress bear little resem­blance to those they have been elected to rep­re­sent. Many of our politi­cians live like kings. Chauf­feured around in lim­ou­sines, flying in pri­vate jets and eating gourmet meals, all paid for by the Amer­ican tax­payer, they are far removed from those they rep­re­sent. What’s more, they con­tinue to spend money we don’t have on pork-laden stim­ulus pack­ages while run­ning up a huge deficit and leaving the Amer­ican tax­payers to foot the bill. And while our rep­re­sen­ta­tives may engage in a show of par­tisan bick­ering, the Wash­ington elite – that is, the Pres­i­dent and Con­gress – moves for­ward with what­ever it wants, paying little heed to the will of the people.

We are embroiled in global wars against ene­mies that seem to attack from nowhere. Our armed forces are pushed to their limit, spread around the globe and under con­stant fire. The amount of money spent on the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq is nearing $1 tril­lion and is esti­mated to total some­where in the vicinity of $3 tril­lion before it’s all over. That does not take into account the rav­aged coun­tries that we occupy, the thou­sands of inno­cent civil­ians killed (including women and chil­dren), or the thou­sands of Amer­ican sol­diers who have been killed or irreparably injured or who are com­mit­ting sui­cide at an alarming rate. Nor does it take into account the fam­i­lies of the 1.8 mil­lion Amer­i­cans who have served or are cur­rently serving tours of duty in Iraq and Afghanistan.

America’s place in the world is also under­going a drastic shift, with China slated to emerge as the top economy over the next decade. Given the extent to which we are finan­cially beholden to China, their influ­ence over how our gov­ern­ment car­ries out its affairs, as well as how it deals with its cit­i­zens, cannot be dis­counted. As of July 2009, China owned $800.5 bil­lion of our debt – that’s 45% of our total (for­eign) debt – making them the largest for­eign holder of U.S. for­eign debt. Little wonder, then, that the Obama admin­is­tra­tion has kow­towed to China, hes­i­tant to overtly chal­lenge them on crit­ical issues such as human rights. The most recent example of this can be seen in the Obama administration’s ini­tial reluc­tance to con­front the Chi­nese gov­ern­ment over its reported cyber­at­tacks on Google and other Amer­ican tech­nology companies.

As national bor­ders dis­solve in the face of spreading glob­al­iza­tion, the like­li­hood increases that our Con­sti­tu­tion, which is the supreme law of America, will be sub­verted in favor of inter­na­tional laws. What that means is that our Con­sti­tu­tion will come increas­ingly under attack.

The cor­po­rate media, increas­ingly acting as a mouth­piece for gov­ern­mental pro­pa­ganda, no longer serves a pri­mary func­tion as watch­dogs, guarding against encroach­ments of our rights. Instead, much of the main­stream media has given itself over to mind­less, celebrity-driven news, which bodes ill for our country. It doesn’t matter whether you’re talking about tabloid news, enter­tain­ment news or legit­i­mate news shows, there’s very little dif­fer­ence between them any­more. Unfor­tu­nately, most Amer­i­cans have bought into the notion that what­ever the media hap­pens to report is impor­tant and rel­e­vant.

In the process, Amer­i­cans have largely lost the ability to ask ques­tions and think ana­lyt­i­cally. Indeed, most cit­i­zens have little, if any, knowl­edge about their rights or how their gov­ern­ment even works. For example, a national poll found that less than one per­cent of adults could name the five free­doms pro­tected in the First Amendment.

Finally, I have never seen a country more spir­i­tu­ally beaten down than the United States. We have lost our moral com­pass. A growing number of our young people now see no meaning or pur­pose in life. And we no longer have a sense of right and wrong or a way to hold the gov­ern­ment account­able. We have for­gotten that the essen­tial premise of the Amer­ican gov­ern­mental scheme, as set forth in the Dec­la­ra­tion of Inde­pen­dence, is that if the gov­ern­ment will not be account­able to the people, then it must cer­tainly be account­able to the “Creator.”

But what if the gov­ern­ment is not account­able to the people or the Creator?

As Thomas Jef­ferson writes in the Dec­la­ra­tion, it is then the right of “the People to alter or abolish it” and form a new government.

Con­sti­tu­tional attorney and author John W. White­head is founder
and pres­i­dent of The Ruther­ford Insti­tute. He can be con­tacted at Infor­ma­tion about the Insti­tute is avail­able


List Reveals Who Benefited In The AIG Bailout

A key question at the heart of the controversial bailout of AIG is just how much money the government lost. The Federal Reserve and Treasury Department have worked to keep that number secret and to conceal who was on the winning end.

An unredacted document obtained by the Huffington Post list the damage in detail. Goldman Sachs alone, for instance, got $14 billion in government money for assets worth $6 billion at the time — a de facto $8 billion subsidy, courtesy of taxpayers.

The list was produced as part of a congressional investigation led by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee into the federal bailout of AIG.

The Federal Reserve Bank of New York, then led by now-Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, purchased a slew of souring assets from the world’s biggest banks for 100 cents on the dollar in November and December 2008. A scathing report by a government watchdog held Geithner responsible for the overpayments.

The New York Fed initially pressured AIG to keep the list hidden from investors, regulators and the public. When it was eventually filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, the SEC allowed the Fed and AIG to keep the details secret. A heavily-redacted version was made public last March.

The document is part of 250,000 pages of internal documents on the AIG deliberations subpoenaed by the oversight committee. It lists the toxic mortgage bonds that banks insured through AIG.

Those insurance contracts, called credit default swaps, are what the New York Fed ultimately took off AIG’s books, paying the banks 100 cents on the dollar for toxic mortgage bonds — home mortgages that were bundled together and securitized. The banks could never have gotten anywhere near such a generous deal on the open market, so the move served essentially as a direct subsidy to those banks from taxpayers.

Up until now, taxpayers had no way to know exactly what they owned. They knew they owned a certain amount of assets, but none of the details: which bundles of mortgages it purchased from AIG; how the banks were valuing those mortgages; how much collateral they had demanded from AIG on those securities; or which bank bundled those mortgages into securities.

Rep. Darrell Issa of California, the top ranking Republican on the oversight committee, told HuffPost that he was not persuaded by government and Fed arguments that the transactions should be kept secret.

“Just because the government happens to own the bonds, which means–by the way, they don’t have to be sold at all until they are worth what we want them to be worth — that somehow they have to be kept a secret,” Issa said during a break in today’s AIG oversight hearing, where Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner testified about his role in the bailout as then-head of the New York Fed.

The troubled insurer tried to publicly disclose these details in December 2008 before being thwarted by the Geithner-led New York Fed. A month later Geithner left to head the Treasury Department.

Issa said that the public had a right to see the document. “I mean, think about it: What the government owns it can keep as long as it wants. It would be like saying you can’t appraise federal land. Why? It is one of those things that’s outrageous. We know we paid a hundred percent for them. We know who got the money. This document shows who ultimately were the beneficiaries. And we believe since that they’ve asked to have it locked up until 2018 — and nobody today defended that — that it’s time to release that,” Issa said.

A government audit this month found that as of Sept. 30, 2009, the Treasury Department was expecting a $30 billion loss on its TARP-related AIG investment. The value of the securities could ultimately rise, though.

“The way the AIG bailout was engineered was to specifically benefit Goldman Sachs and its trading partners,” said Janet Tavakoli, a Chicago-based derivatives expert and founder of Tavakoli Structured Finance. “Goldman’s past and present officers used crony capitalism to put their own interests ahead of the public.”

The nation’s fifth-largest bank by assets ultimately got $14 billion through what members of Congress are calling a “backdoor bailout” of the world’s biggest banks.

“The suppression of the details of the [credit default swap] trades protected Goldman Sachs and its trading partners,” said Tavakoli, who’s examined Goldman’s credit default swap arrangements with AIG. “The $182 billion bailout overall kept AIG alive, and its trading partners, including Goldman Sachs, benefited from the funds made available to the securities lending transactions and other subsequent trading transactions.”

At the time the document was prepared, Goldman’s $14 billion in souring derivatives had a market value of just $6 billion. Goldman had more than $8 billion in collateral from AIG to protect it from losses, meaning it was still about $6 billion short.

But more than $2 billion of those collateral payments came from AIG after it was bailed out on Sept. 16 of that year, according to a Nov. 2008 presentation prepared for the New York Fed that was released this week. So that $2 billion was made possible partly due to taxpayer assistance.

Combined with the $6 billion deficit it faced in the face value of those securities, Goldman Sachs ultimately received about $8 billion from taxpayers via AIG. Goldman posted a $1.3 billion profit for 2008.

Despite the Fed’s protestations that full disclosure would harm AIG — and thus the taxpayer — the financial blog Naked Capitalism has largely pieced together many of the key details using public sources — and traders who were interested in buying the bonds from the government would easily have access to the rest.

HuffPost published the unredacted document at 2:47 p.m. ET. One minute earlier AIG shares were trading at about $24.59. It closed the day at $24.91.

The document also includes detailed information about the transactions involved. The document, a Schedule A Shortfall Agreement, can be viewed here.

AIG Sched a


U.S. Army Invades Haiti – Turns away Relief/Aid Flights from other nations

Haiti Earthquake Aid, or Army Occupation – Al Jazeera TV Reports

Every country richer than Haiti is trying to help, but only the American government is sending armed occupation forces. Karachi-based charity worker, Abdul Sattar Edhi, pledged cash as former US president George Bush suggested. Food rots and cash disappears without any traceable accountability. Pakistan has also pledged to send other relief items. Other Muslim and Arab countries are also sending cash. Most countries are helping in any way they can, a lot more than what six billion people see, hear or read in the anti-Muslim media. Many Muslim-Arab states and charities gave America billions of dollars after the recent Katrina hurricane. Many other Muslim countries provided aid relief, including: Indonesia, Turkey, Iran, Morocco, Jordan, Islam Relief USA/UK, Muslim Aid, etc. But, by a remarkable coincidence, Muslims countries, where the US imposed and sustained despots with an occupation army, have donated almost nothing!!!

Photo of the Day: STRANGLED TO DEATH


Graham Hancock: Turning Orthodox Archeology On Its Head

Graham Hancock

Graham Hancock has long been a favorite researcher/explorer simply because he pursues the unresolved questions still open for debate on the origins of civilization, that most other archeologists claim are unimportant.  I dare say that this fact is due to numerous elderly academic egos, not to mention, decades of established facts in textbooks the world over.

Graham is not an archeologist, but instead a journalist and a sincerely objective one, which some, like myself, appreciate mainly because of his determination to prove that there is an extraordinary amount of pre-history missing, or, possibly being withheld regarding civilization’s true origins.

The enemy remains heavily entrenched at the gate even in matters on history and science.  Remember, the goal is to guard the truth not just on their political agenda but in all matters relating to human history, etc.  That is why an objective, truth oriented researcher like Graham Hancock remains partially in the background.  He has commented on a few programs for the History Channel, National Geographic and Discovery networks in the past, however, I do not recall this particular program being aired in the states.  I urge everyone to become familiar with Graham, his books and his message.  Whether or not he is aware of his importance remains to be seen. WW~

Graham’s introduction to UNDERWORLD – Flooded Kingdoms of the Ice Age and accompanying videos.

17,000 years ago and 7000 years ago, at the end of the last Ice Age, terrible things happened to the world our ancestors lived in. Great ice caps over northern Europe and north America melted down, huge floods ripped across the earth, sea-level rose by more than 100 meters, and about 25 million square kilometers of formerly habitable lands were swallowed up by the waves.  Marine archaeology has been possible as a scholarly discipline for about 50 years – since the introduction of scuba. In that time, according to Nick Flemming, the doyen of British marine archaeology, only 500 submerged sites have been found worldwide containing the remains of any form of man-made structure or of neolithic artifacts. Of these sites only 100 – that’s 100 in the whole world! – are more than 3000 years old.

This is not because of a shortage of potential sites. It is at least partly because a large share of the limited funds available for marine archaeology goes into the discovery and excavation of shipwrecks. This leaves a shortage of diving archaeologists interested in underwater structures and a shortage of money to pay for the extremely expensive business of searching – possibly fruitlessly – for very ancient, eroded, silt-covered ruins at great depths under water.  Moreover, with the recent exception of Bob Ballard’s survey of the Black Sea for the National Geographic Society, marine archaeology has simply not concerned itself with the possibility that the post-glacial floods might in any way be connected to the problem of the rise of civilisations. (

In 1997 a chain of mountains almost 2000 kilometers long and more than 3000 meters high was discovered in the South Pacific. Nobody ever knew the mountains were there before because they are under water – as, in fact, is 70 per cent of the earth’s surface. Marine archaeologists — who are looking for targets much smaller than mountain-ranges under the sea — can therefore be forgiven for finding just 100 submerged sites more than 3000 years old in the past half century. Even at the crude mapping level, it is one of the absurdities of scientific priorities that we now have a better map of the surface of Venus than we do of the 225 million square kilometers of our own planet’s sea-floor.

On land it is obvious that archaeology still has much more work to do before it can honestly claim to have fully understood (rather than merely theorized about) the process by which the great civilisations of ancient history arose. Vast areas of the earth’s surface – the Sahara Desert, for example (which was green for 4000 years at the end of the Ice Age) – have hardly benefited from the attentions of archaeologists at all. And even in countries like Egypt which have been intensively excavated for more than a century new discoveries can still be made that call established views and chronologies into question.

In December 2000 excavations at Abydos in Upper Egypt by a University of Pennsylvania/University of New York team demonstrated that the intriguing religious practise of boat burial – for example the so-called solar boat of Khufu buried on the south side of the Great Pyramid of Giza – is very likely to have predynastic origins. A fleet of 14 boats found buried at Abydos a decade ago were originally assigned to the mortuary complex of Pharaoh Khasekhemwy of the Second Dynasty (circa 2675 BC). However, after thoroughly examining one of the boats (a sophisticated narrow-prowed “sewn” boat about 23 metres long made of wooden planks lashed together with rope), the excavators now believe that “the ships were buried some centuries before Khasekhemwy’s enclosure was built. The fleet may have been intended for use in the afterlife of a much earlier pharaoh, perhaps even Aha [circa 2920 BC], the First Dynasty ruler of Egypt…” (

If this is the case, since the boat-burials at Abydos are far from being the work of beginners, then it seems obvious that the practise — and the entire wonderful religious apparatus that goes with it — must predate the First Dynasty. But by how much? Nobody knows. Another interesting development also announced in December 2000 was the discovery of a group of very unusual ancient tombs at Elkab in Upper Egypt. The Elkab tombs are thought to date to the Second Dynasty, although the site itself has yielded evidence of continuous occupation from 8000 years ago until about 2000 years ago. The tombs are circular stone structures (with diameters of 18 to 20 meters) which in two cases were carefully arranged around large natural boulders. They have been compared with the Neolithic funeral mounds of Europe and, as the Belgian excavators admit, are of a type “thus far unknown in Egypt”. (

So much then for the archaeologists having the whole picture about the evolution and development of any civilisation – even ancient Egypt which has been the subject of more archaeological investigation than any other. But now let’s remember as well that along continental margins and around islands across the world an area bigger than the Unites States of America was inundated at the end of the Ice Age: 3 million square kilometers (an area the size of India) was submerged around Greater Australia alone; another 3 million square kilometers went under around South-East Asia; the Florida, Yucatan and Grand Bahama Banks were fully-exposed off the Gulf of Mexico; huge areas of land were swallowed up in the Mediterranean, the Black Sea, the North Sea and the Atlantic, etc, etc, etc – the list really does goes on and on.

In my view the possibility of a serious “black hole” in scientific knowledge about recent prehistory is plausible, reasonable and worthy of consideration. I therefore propose that the conclusions of modern archaeology regarding the origins and early evolution of human civilisation should be treated as provisional until a comprehensive, global, marine-archaeological survey of continental shelves down to depths of at least 120 meters has been undertaken.

– Graham Hancock

UNDERWORLD – Flooded Kingdoms of the Ice Age: Part 1

UNDERWORLD – Flooded Kingdoms of the Ice Age: Part 2

Blog Update: New page added on Al-Qaeda

Don’t miss the newest page in Static Knowledge-

AL-QAEDA: Created by the Jewish Agency – Operation under Israeli Mossad

A lesson in history for the ages.


Geriatric Humor: Don’t Bungee Jump Naked!

Jeanne Robertson, award-winning humorist, professional speaker. Check Jeanne Robertson out on iTunes: This video clip is from Jeanne’s DVD Flat Out Funny! Jeanne is on Sirius & XM Radio. Jeanne’s official website

We all need to laugh especially during these stressful times, so please enjoy.


Blog Update 1/26/10

Check out the newest links added to the Blogroll –

Age of Treason


Guy White

Snippets & Snappits

The Truth Is Incendiary

Twelfth Bough

New pages added –

The Great Israeli Body Parts Scandal, and The Zionist Project Training Manual 2009

4.1 Million Jobs Lost in 2009 – Networks Fail to Criticize Obama Despite Most Jobs Lost Annually Since 1940

Reporters omit failure of stimulus, problems counting jobs created or saved from many jobs stories.

The national unemployment rate rests at 10 percent after 85,000 more jobs were lost in December, while the number of people too discouraged to look for work increased by 642,000. CNBC’s Steve Liesman called those figures “absolutely devastating.”

Yet the network news media refused to hold President Barack Obama responsible for the losses since the jobs release Jan. 8. Obama has been in office for a full year and made a number of “extravagant” promises regarding job growth, yet network news reports remained uncritical with the exception of Sunday talk shows.

That’s a sharp contrast to the treatment of Republican administrations’ jobs data. In those cases, the networks were determined to present a negative picture – even when times were good.

Anchor Brian Williams began the Dec. 2, 2005 “Nightly News” with a strong note of caution: “Rebound: A slew of good news about jobs and the economy, but are there warning signs ahead?” That’s how he prefaced a report about 215,000 new jobs.

Throughout 2005, the networks emphasized layoffs instead of the 2 million new jobs created that year under President George W. Bush. Now in 2009, Obama has presided over the most job losses in a single year since 1940 and some in the media tried to remain cheerful.

CNN’s Susan Lisovicz actually cited the 4,000 jobs created in Nov. 2009 as “glimmers of hope” Jan. 8, the same day Christine Romans called 10 percent unemployment “uncomfortable for many people.”

“Ten percent unemployment is just something that is not sustainable in a healthy economy. That’s just the bottom line there. But the pace of job loss over the past year has slowed pretty dramatically, and frankly, Heidi, even by the month of November last year we saw some job creation,” Romans said during the 10 a.m. hour.

With the exception of a single CBS mention, the networks’ job reports also failed to inform their viewers that 2009 had the highest yearly job losses on record (more than 4.1 million). And when Katie Couric did address the historic nature of the job losses, she underreported the number of jobs lost in 2009 by 700,000.

Many of those network stories also failed to admit that the stimulus package hadn’t created jobs. A recent Associated Press analysis of the “shovel-ready” construction part of the stimulus found almost no impact on job creation at the local level.

“The effect was so small, one economist compared it to trying to move the Empire State Building by pushing against it,” AP wrote.

Obama Says Stimulus Created Jobs, Networks Fail to Contradict

Obama made grandiose claims that his $787 stimulus package would halt rising unemployment, preventing it from climbing above 8 percent. During the campaign he also promised to “save or create” 3-4 million jobs.

But even with the 10 percent unemployment rate as evidence of the stimulus’ failure, many in the news media have given Obama a pass, refusing to criticize billions wasted on stimulus and some have even continued to support his plan to create jobs by spending even more taxpayer money.

Only one story on the networks reported the AP’s findings about the “failure” of the $20 billion stimulus money spent on roads and bridges to create jobs.

NBC’s “Today” even repeated the White House call for targeted spending on jobs. On Jan. 11, Jim Cramer supported the notion saying, “If we don’t get more stimulus, we will not have more jobs.”

Ironically, Cramer admitted that so far the stimulus package hadn’t created jobs. The White House claimed on Jan. 12 that the stimulus had “created to saved” between 1.7 million and 2 million jobs.

But the Washington Post’s Jan. 13 article about those saved or created jobs buried a very significant detail in the middle of that story: “Separately, the White House has announced a change in the way those reports tally jobs, a response to critics that could make the reports more reliable but make it more difficult to gauge the stimulus’s impact over time.”

Where’s the outrage over this change in accounting methods? Certainly the networks wouldn’t have put up with this under the Bush or Reagan administrations.

AP reported that it is “impossible to quantify exactly what effect the stimulus has had on job creation.” So the administration can claim it created or saved any number of jobs because there will be no way to prove or disprove it.

Just counting the jobs is becoming a challenge according to AP, which said: “Those who receive stimulus money can now credit jobs to the program even if they were never in jeopardy of being lost, according to new rules outlined by the White House’s Office of Management and Budget.”

Downplaying the ‘Bad News’

Although the networks were somewhat downbeat using terms like “disappointed” and “less than stellar” after the jobs report came out Jan. 8, most reporters did not portray 10 percent unemployment as a terrible tragedy.

Only one report mentioned that over a half million people were so discouraged in December they dropped out of the workforce, while several mentioned the 17.3 percent “real unemployment” rate.

NBC’s Savannah Guthrie reported Jan. 8 “they [White House] tried to put the best face on it here, but there’s no question this unemployment report is a disappointment.”

“Disappointment” understated the pain felt by many as 4.1 million jobs disappeared during Obama’s first year in office.

In 1982, when unemployment was slightly lower the networks quoted vicious political attacks on Ronald Reagan and showed footage of people living out of trucks under a bridge.

Network reports showed desperation, sadness and tragedy as a result of rising joblessness in 1982. NBC pictured lines of people waiting outside a food bank and interviewed crisis counselors in Seattle on May 7.

More callers talk of despair and even suicide,” Don Oliver reported that night, before interviewing Jim and Pam Smalls. Oliver called them “victims of unemployment depression and anger,” because Pam had to seek help from a battered woman’s shelter.

Nothing like that appeared in the network jobs reports following the Jan. 8 release. In fact, during 2009 the networks found a man “doing backflips” after he was rehired by his company.

Journalists on ABC, CBS and NBC constantly praised Obama for trying to stop rising unemployment in 2009, even as he failed. Month after month they tried to find the “good news” or signs of a turnaround.

The networks have been talking about the economic recovery, but even the economy is recovering as the White House and some journalists claim, it may not feel like one to many people.

According to BusinessWeek, the “misery index” (the sum of unemployment and inflation rates) is at 11.8 percent. That is the highest since May 1991.

“The last time the U.S. misery index was this high, in the early 1990s, gains in consumer prices accounted for almost half its reading. Today inflation makes up less than a fifth of the measure,” BusinessWeek wrote.

By Julia A. Seymour
Business & Media Institute


In numbers – 4,100,000 jobs lost!!!  So, why isn’t anyone counting?

Laws Governing People Exist In An Imaginary Reality

It’ a Fiction!

The world's rulers only have the power that we gave them!

(Editor’s Note: I don’t pretend to understand this information but many people I respect have been saying similar things. I welcome additional explanations from informed readers.)

by Rob Hay
Tax Resistor


What if I told you, you did not live in a country, nor do you have a true name, a true birth date and you did not have to file taxes or follow any laws?  As many of you scoff, stop for a moment and examine these facts.

If you look at the definitions of your Country/State/Province/City etc. you will find in the Constitution or the Interpretations Act that they are not  legally defined as being on the earth.  Canada, for example,is defined as the land under the water according to the Interpretations Act section 35(1), “Canada”, for greater certainty, includes the internal waters of Canada and the territorial sea of Canada;

Nowhere in any act will you find any mention of the earth.  To further this, Canada is a Corporation registered on the Security Exchange Commission in Washington D.C.  Here is the link:


Simply put, we live on a planet we call earth and not in Countries.  In fact Countries are not land under the real system of law, they are imaginary Seas, upon which Admiralty Law  applies and the NAMES you use are imaginary ships floating on the Sea, where Piracy reigns as the system of Commerce, between your and all the other imaginary ships.

But because you are not imaginary, they have to give you a play piece in the game. This is called a PERSON and its attributes are a NAME and BIRTH DATE.  The Game is rigged from the start. The pirates simply set up laws and wait for you to break one so that they can plunder your wealth and freedom.

A name is an imaginary thing you are given, typically when you were born.  However, a name is simply hearsay; you do not know what your true name is, no one does.  The other attribute of a person, a Birth Date, is hearsay because no one can say when exactly the Universe was created and making use of an event such as Jesus’ Death, hence A.D., is only hearsay.  Further Jesus was Crucified and died in the spring during Passover so the Calendar should actually start its new year in the spring.

What they have done is to overlay an imaginary world over the earth and make you believe that it is real, when in fact it is simply fiction.  So if you do not exist in their imaginary world, how is it that you must follow their laws and pay taxes?  You are not responsible for paying taxes and following their laws, and their laws even say so!  Again using Canada for example:

The BNA Act Section 2 dealt with the Succession of the Queen heirs ruling over Canada.  It was removed from the Act in 1897.  When Queen Victoria died in 1901, all executive power seized in Canada as per Section 9 states all executive power is vested in the Queen.  It is reported that two days after the Queen died the Bankers in The City of London, claimed salvage rights on the ship adrift at sea called Canada.

The UK Parliament did nothing to stop them.  The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms section 32 states that the application of the Charter only applies to Government and Section 52 of the Constitutional Act 1982, states that all laws in Canada must be compared against the Charter or they have no force or effect.  Thus all laws in Canada only apply to the Government, I am paraphrasing this for brevity, look it up!  This is because the Bankers own Canada and the Queen has nothing to do with Canada as there was no succession of power put into the Constitution.

This is only the tip of the iceberg in terms of Canada.  For the USA, the Constitution there starts off with, “We the People…”  Pick up any law dictionary and see if it defines people as human beings, persons or men and women created by God. It doesn’t. It is so ambiguous it is ridiculous.

All laws only apply to PERSONS.  If you open the King James Bible and look in Genesis Chapter 1, you will see very clearly that God did not create us as persons.  None of the US State Constitutions define any State as being on the earth and neither does the USA Constitution describe the USA being on the earth.  It is all imaginary.

Now for those of you who still think that law applies to you , take a look at the address of the court house and the documents that come from the court house.

You will notice that especially in Canada that they change the province name to a two letter abbreviation and in all cases they leave Canada off the address.

Look up the Address for the Supreme Court of Canada; they left Canada out of the address.

This is because the Courts are the Bankers Courts and not the People’s courts.  The laws have no executive power behind them from the people.  Executive power means the ability to enforce and make law.  So yes, since Queen Victoria died, all laws made since in Canada have no executive power or state authority behind them.

So you want out?  Well read my book, The Extortion System of the Ruling Elite

There is a solution.

Robert Hay (<>) graduated in Telecommunication Engineering Technology from the Northern Alberta Institute of Technology in Edmonton. From there, he dedicated 5 years of his life to learning the spiritual healing arts and discovered a completely different take on life.
He became quite concerned over massive injustices and began to fight back over paying taxes. He discovered that all laws reside within a fiction. After spending a few years gathering information and successfully preventing the Tax Man from taking him to court over unpaid taxes, he wrote a book called, The Extortion System of the Ruling Elite. It is a free download off his website.

Note from Whitewraithe: You can also access the online book by referring to the side panel image above the 9/11 flash .gif  on this blog.

STATES Can Tell Feds To “Shove It”!

United STATES of America

By now we have all heard the cliches and seen the posters from the “Tea Parties” espousing freedom, less government, and perhaps most of all, how the federal government had better back off trying to shove their national health care down our otherwise healthy throats. The truth of the matter is all the slogans of “Don’t Tread On Me” or “Give Me Liberty Or Give Me Death” or “We’re Mad As Hell And We’re Not Taking It Anymore,” don’t mean a thing when compared to the real and actual answer to all the protests, marches, and outrage.

The answer is in our own backyards! The States can stop every bit of it! That’s right, the individual States can stop “Obamacare” and all other forms of out-of-control federal government mandates and “big brother” tactics. If Arizona, Hawaii, New Hampshire, Texas, etc. want nothing to do with National Health care as proposed by Barack Obama or Congress, then all they have to do is say “No!”

For you skeptics…let’s look at the law. First, the U.S. Constitution is the ultimate and supreme law of the land. More specifically, the Bill of Rights was established, because some of our Founding Fathers, feared that the Constitution did not go far enough in restricting or limiting the central government.

Hamilton was one of a select few who wanted a bigger and powerful federal government. However, several key states and powerful delegates such as Patrick Henry, said they would not support the formation of a new government if the Constitution did not contain a Bill of Rights, a supreme law to establish basic and fundamental human rights that could never, for all future American generations, be violated, altered or encroached upon by government. So the Framers of our Constitution came up with ten; ten God-given freedoms that would forever be held inviolable by our own governments.

The last of these basic foundational principles was the one to protect the power, sovereignty, and the autonomy of the States; the Tenth Amendment. This amendment and law underscores the entire purpose of the Constitution to limit government and forbids the federal government from becoming more powerful than the “creator.”

Let’s be very clear here; the States in this case were the creator. They formed the federal government, not the other way around. Does anyone believe rationally that the States intended to form a new central government to control and command the States at will? Nothing could be further from the truth. Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution details what duties the federal government will be responsible for under our new system of “balanced power.” Anything not mentioned in Article 1, Sec. 8, is “reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” (Tenth Amendment) Hence, the federal government was not allowed creativity or carte blanche to expand or  assume power wherever and whenever they felt like it. The feds had only discrete and enumerated and very limited powers. Omnipotency was the last thing the Founding Fathers intended to award the newly formed federal government. They had just fought the Revolutionary War to stop such from Britain and their main concern was to prevent a recurrence here in America.

In perhaps the most recent and powerful Tenth Amendment decision in modern history, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Mack/Printz v U.S. that “States are not subject to federal direction.” But today’s federal Tories argue that the “supremacy clause” of the U.S. Constitution says that the federal government is supreme and thus, trumps the States in all matters. Wrong! The supremacy clause is dealt with in Mack/Printz, in which the Supreme Court stated once and for all that the only thing “supreme” is the constitution itself. Our constitutional system of checks and balances certainly did not make the federal government king over the states, counties, and cities. Justice Scalia opined for the majority in Mack/Printz, that “Our citizens would have two political capacities, one state and one federal, each protected from incursion by the other.”

So yes, it is the duty of the State to stop the Obamacare “incursion.” To emphasize this principle Scalia quotes James Madison, “The local or municipal authorities form distinct and independent portions of the Supremacy, no more subject within their respective spheres, to the general authority than the general authority is subject to them, within its own sphere.” The point to remember here is; where do we define the “sphere” of the federal government? That’s right; in Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution and anything not found within this section belongs to the States or to the People.

So where does health care belong? The last place it belongs is with the President or Congress. It is NOT their responsibility and the States need to make sure that Obama does not overstep his authority.

Just in case there is any doubt as to what the Supreme Court meant, let’s take one more look at Mack/Printz. “This separation of the two spheres is one of the Constitution’s structural protections of liberty. Hence, a double security arises to the rights of the people. The different governments will control each other…”  What? The Constitution, the supreme law of the land, has as a “structural protection of liberty” that States will keep the federal government in check? No wonder it was called a system of “checks and balances.”

The States (and Counties) are to maintain the balance of power by keeping the feds within their proper sphere. So do the States have to take the bullying of the federal government? Not hardly! The States do not have to take or support or pay for Obamacare or anything else from Washington DC.

The States are not subject to federal direction. They are sovereign and “The Constitution protects us from our own best intentions.” (Mack/Printz)  Which means the States can tell national health care proposals or laws to take a flying leap off the Washington monument. We are not subject to federal direction!

In the final order pursuant to the Mack/Printz ruling Scalia warned, “The federal government may neither, issue directives requiring the States to address particular problems, nor command the States’ officers, or those of their political subdivisions, to administer or enforce a federal regulatory program. Such commands are fundamentally incompatible with our constitutional system of dual sovereignty.”  It is rather obvious that nationalized health care definitely qualifies as a “federal regulatory program.”

Thus, the marching on Washington and pleas and protests to our DC politicians are misdirected. Such actions are “pie in the sky” dreaming that somehow expects the tyrants who created the tyranny, will miraculously put a stop to it. Throughout the history of the world such has never been the case. Tyrants have never stopped their own corrupt ways. However, in our system of “dual sovereignty,” the States can do it. If we are to take back America and keep this process peaceful, then state and local officials will have to step up to the plate.

Sheriff Richard Mack

Doing so is what States’ Rights and State Sovereignty are all about.

Original Title –The States Can Stop Obama

Contact Sherrif Mack

Speech by Sheriff Mack (Video)

Thanks to Phil for guidance.


Israel’s Desperate Attempt to Repair Tarnished Image via the Haitian Earthquake Disaster

Hotter Than A Pile of Curry blog writes:

I’m a downright sceptic when it comes to the Israelis being involved in any international efforts, after all they have a proven track record of connivance and deceit.

Surely being involved in the humanitarian relief effort in Haiti couldn’t involve any sort of moral subterfuge, could it?

Well the Jewish Daily Forward reports on the latest Hasbara campaign the Zionist state is involved in.

The Israelis are dedicating themselves to making sure people hear about their humanitarian mission and are spreading the word, even by means of attacking themselves via a classic piece of in-house propaganda.

Press officers from the Israeli death squads (military) are being flown in, as were photographers and a video team to document the work of medical and rescue personnel. They are distributing daily footage to the press, with representatives of Israeli and foreign media being embedded with the group to see their efforts at first hand.

A day after the Israeli field hospital opened, two Israeli officers in uniforms canvassed the row of TV producers sitting in their broadcast positions along the city airport’s runway.

“We’re telling them about our hospital”

A CNN report, widely circulated on the web by the hasbara squadron, showed an injured Haitian in a rudimentary makeshift hospital, his doctor telling the camera that if he doesn’t make it to a hospital where he could undergo surgery shortly, he would die. A quick cut followed to the site of the Israeli hospital.

“I’m just amazed, this is like another world compared to the other hospital.”

CNN reporter, Elizabeth Cohen, gushed. Later in the report she asked how it could be that the United States did not set up a hospital in Haiti while the Israelis came from the other side of the world.

“It’s like winning the lottery”

Said Jennifer Laszlo-Mizrahi, founder and president of The Israel Project, a Washington-based pro-Israel media group, describing the positive impact of Israeli PR efforts. Their website provides a very interesting breakdown of how to promote the efforts of Israel’s humanitarian efforts.

Her media-tracking data show that since the Israeli team began work in Haiti, thousands of positive news stories about Israel have appeared in the European press, and even more in America.

“As long as people don’t think that the motivation for this was PR and understand that it is a humanitarian cause, then you can’t go wrong”

Said Steve Rabinowitz, (whose client list of zionist groups’ speaks for itself) a Washington-based communications consultant who described the boost Israel’s mission gave to the country’s image as a “home run.”

The Israeli’s know exactly what they are doing;

“In Europe, Israel’s image is defined by the Goldstone report, so news items like those coming from Haiti can definitely help change that image”

Said an Israeli official referring to the United Nations report that accused Israel of committing war crimes.

Akiva Eldar pointed out in Haaretz;

The disaster in Haiti is a natural one; the one in Gaza is the unproud handiwork of man. Our handiwork. The IDF does not send cargo planes stuffed with medicines and medical equipment to Gaza.

The missiles that Israel Air Force combat aircraft fired there a year ago hit nearly 60,000 homes and factories, turning 3,500 of them into rubble. Since then, 10,000 people have been living without running water, 40,000 without electricity. Ninety-seven percent of Gaza’s factories are idle due to Israeli government restrictions on the import of raw materials for industry.

Soon it will be one year since the international community pledged, at the emergency conference in Sharm el-Sheikh, to donate $4.5 billion for Gaza’s reconstruction. Israel’s ban on bringing in building materials is causing that money to lose its value.

A few days before Israeli physicians rushed to save the lives of injured Haitians, the authorities at the Erez checkpoint prevented 17 people from passing through in order to get to a Ramallah hospital for urgent corneal transplant surgery.

Although I’d like to extend the benefit of the doubt, and rejoice in the Israelis rediscovering the long forgotten spirit of universal brotherhood, it’s quite apparent what their intentions are.

I have deliberately used as many quotations as possible, from pro-Israeli sources, lest I be accused of underhand tactics and being “hit for a home run” with the anti-semitic baseball bat.

The cynical exploitation of the death and suffering in Haiti by the Zionist state and their hasbara proponents is one that has to be exposed and condemned for all that it is, a piece of positive publicity for a country that has meted out death and suffering since it’s creation.

In earlier posts, Haitian Earthquake – The Muslim Response & The People Of Gaza Raise Funds For Haiti I touched upon what the Muslim response was to the Haitian disaster.

Islam teaches us that we have to come to the aid of your fellow man, regardless of his colour, creed or religion, and we do it without ruthlessly exploiting the situation for positive spin.

Unfortunately the same cannot be said for the zionist state.

US Southern Command’s “hidden agenda” in Haiti


USS Carl Vinson

The unspoken mission of US Southern Command (SOUTHCOM) with headquarters in Miami and US military installations throughout Latin America is to ensure the maintenance of subservient national regimes, namely US proxy governments, committed to the Washington Consensus and the neo-liberal policy agenda. While US military personnel will at the outset be actively involved in emergency and disaster relief, this renewed US military presence in Haiti will be used  to establish a foothold in the country as well pursue America’s strategic and geopolitical objectives in the Caribbean basin, which are largely directed against Cuba and Venezuela.

The objective is not to work towards the rehabilitation of the national government, the presidency, the parliament, all of which has been decimated by the earthquake. Since the fall of the Duvalier dictatorship, America’s design has been to gradually dismantle the Haitian State, restore colonial patterns and obstruct the functioning of a democratic government. In the present context, the objective is not only to do away with the government but also to revamp the mandate of the United Nations Stabilization Mission in Haiti (MINUSTAH), of which the headquarters have been destroyed.

“The role of heading the relief effort and managing the crisis quickly fell to the United States, for lack — in the short term, at least — of any other capable entity.” ( US Takes Charge in Haiti _ With Troops, Rescue Aid –, January 14, 2009)

Prior to the earthquake, there were, according to US military sources, some 60 US military personnel in Haiti. From one day to the next, an outright military surge has occurred: 10,000 troops, marines, special forces, intelligence operatives, etc., not to mention private mercenary forces on contract to the Pentagon.

In all likelihood the humanitarian operation will be used as a pretext and justification to establish a more permanent US military presence in Haiti.

We are dealing with a massive deployment, a “surge” of military personnel assigned to emergency relief.

The first mission of SOUTHCOM will be to take control of what remains of the country’s communications, transport and energy infrastructure. Already, the airport is under de facto US control. In all likelihood, the activities of MINUSTAH which from the outset in 2004 have served US foreign policy interests, will be coordinated with those of SOUTHCOM, namely the UN mission will be put under de facto control of the US military.

Read entire article

Cockpit Door of AA77 Never Opened: Pilots for 9-11 Truth

Cockpit Flight Recorder

Pilots for 9/11 Truth Forum has posted an examination of the Flight Data Recorder (FDR) supposedly from the Pentagon wreckage of American Airlines Flight 77 that suggests that the cockpit door was never opened during the flight. This discovery appears to be yet another piece of evidence disproving the official story about what happened at the Pentagon on 9-11.  The data from the FDR comes from Warren Stutt’s website at:

Here is the key paragraph of the posting from the Pilots for 9/11 Truth Forum by Rob Balsamo:
On the morning of September 11, 2001, American Airlines Flight 77 departed Dulles International Airport bound for Los Angeles at 8:20 am Eastern Time. According to reports and data, a hijacking took place between 08:50:54 and 08:54:11 in which the hijackers allegedly crashed the aircraft into the Pentagon at 09:37:45. Reported by CNN, according to Ted Olson, wife Barbara Olson had called him from the reported flight stating, “…all passengers and flight personnel, including the pilots, were herded to the back of the plane by armed hijackers…”. However, according to Flight Data provided by the NTSB, the Flight Deck Door was never opened in flight. How were the hijackers able to gain access to the cockpit, remove the pilots, and navigate the aircraft to the Pentagon if the Flight Deck Door remained closed?
Source: Balsamo, Rob, “9/11: Pentagon Aircraft Hijack Impossible, Flight Deck Door Closed for Entire Flight“, Pilots for 9/11 Truth Forum, November 27, 2009
Sheila Casey of the Rock Creek Free Press (Washington, D.C.) wrote an article entitled “Flight 77 Cockpit Door Never Opened During 9/11 ‘Hijack’” dated December 15, 2009, that lays out the FDR data problem very clearly:
Pilots for 9/11 Truth has reported that the data stream from the flight data recorder (FDR) for American Airlines flight 77, which allegedly struck the Pentagon on 9/11, shows that the cockpit door never opened during the entire 90 minute flight. The data was provided by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), which has refused to comment…
The official story about flight 77 is that five Muslim terrorists brandishing box cutters forced their way into the cockpit and herded two pilots, four flight attendants and all the passengers to the back of the plane. This story came into being via Ted Olson, US Solicitor General, who told CNN — that he received two phone calls from his wife Barbara Olson, a passenger on the doomed flight. Ted Olson’s story changed several times. Sometimes he claimed that the calls from his wife were made from seat back phones, other times that she used her cell phone….

It was the FBI that revealed the evidence that decisively disproves Ted Olson’s story. In the Zacarias Moussaoui trial in 2006, the FBI presented a report on the cell phone calls from all four 9/11 flights. Their report on AA77 shows that there was only one phone call from Barbara Olson, but that it was an unconnected call lasting zero seconds. So Ted Olson either lied about receiving calls from his wife or was deceived into believing he received calls from her….

This new evidence, showing that the cockpit door never opened during flight, is another nail in the coffin of the official story about flight 77. Clearly, if the cockpit door never opened, then hijackers did not storm the cockpit and herd the pilots to the back of the plane. The data, which originated from the government, does not support the government’s story.
Source: Casey, Sheila, “Flight 77 Cockpit Door Never Opened During 9/11 ‘Hijack’”, Rock Creek Free Press, Washington, D.C., December 15, 2009

Chris Bollyn’s “sabotaged” radio appearance on the AZL Roundtable

Christopher Bollyn

Bollyn exposes Michael Goff: PTech’s 911 Terrorist on AZL’s home turf?

Most of the beeps on this ”sabotaged show” have now been edited out.  911 researcher Christopher Bollyn ( joins the AZL Roundtable to discuss a likely ”home town” 9/11 terrorist in our midst – Michael S. Goff from Worcester, MA. Strong evidence points to Goff’s having provided an invaluable “sayan service” at PTech, in order to make Israel’s 9/11, Computer-Based Crime possible. The AZL calls for immediate investigation of this likely terrorist. If found guilty, may our nation “live on” to see Michael S. Goff brought to justice, along with every last Zionist accomplice. Law enforcement: If you Investigate GUARDIUM, another company (Israeli) with which Goff has been affiliated, and sequester THOSE ’suspects’ to Guantanamo, you’ll track down a whole rat’s nest of 9/11 Zio-terrorists. …..Jesus Christ is our Guide; and may God almighty show His justice, and finally, mercy (compassion and deliverance) for the innocent victims of Zionist terrorism and injustice the world over. In the meantime, awakening citizens, rise up and FIGHT for an investigation of Michael S. Goff, from Worcester Mass. – which is, fittingly enough, also the home of the Anti-Zionist League….

Download broadcast –


Activists Expose Michael Goff’s Role in 9-11


H.A.A.R.P. Likely Culprit for Haitian Earthquake According to Russian Northern Fleet

Report: US weapon test aimed at Iran caused Haiti quake

High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program

An unconfirmed report by the Russian Northern Fleet says the Haiti earthquake was caused by a flawed US Navy ‘earthquake weapons’ test before the weapons could be utilized against Iran.

United States Navy test of one of its ‘earthquake weapons’ which was to be used against Iran, went ‘horribly wrong’ and caused the catastrophic quake in the Caribbean, the website of Venezuela’s ViVe TV recently reported, citing the Russian report.

After the report was released, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez also made a similar claim, saying that a US drill, carried out in preparation for a deliberate attempt to cause an earthquake in Iran, had led to the deadly incident in Haiti, claiming more than 110,000 lives.

Though Russian Northern Fleets’ report was not confirmed by official sources, the comments attracted special attention in some US and Russian media outlets including Fox news and Russia Today.

Russia Today’s report said that Moscow has also been accused of possessing and utilizing such weapons.

In 2002, a Georgian Green Party leader claimed that Moscow had instigated an earthquake on Georgian territory, the TV channel said.

According to ViVe, the unconfirmed Russian report says earlier this month the US carried out a similar test in the Pacific Ocean, which also caused another 6.5 magnitude earthquake in an area near the town of Eureka, California.

The California quake resulted in no deaths or serious injury, but left many buildings damaged.

The Venezuelan news website said that the report also introduced the possibility that the US Navy may have had “full knowledge” of the damage that the test could cause.

The report also speculated that knowledge of the possible outcome was why the US military had pre-positioned the deputy commander of US Southern Command, General P. K. Keen, on the island so that he could oversee relief efforts if the need arose.

Based on the alleged report, the ultimate goal of the US weapons tests was to initiate a series of deadly earthquakes in Iran to topple the current Islamic system in the country.

The tests are believed to be part of the United States’ High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP), which has been associated with many conspiracy theories.

Other than being blamed for earthquakes, HAARP has also been associated with weather anomalies that cause floods, droughts and hurricanes.

Some sources have even linked the 7.8 magnitude quake that shook the Chinese city of Sichuan in May 12, 2008 with the program.

Allegations have been made that since the late 1970’s, the US has ‘greatly advanced’ the state of its earthquake weapons to the point where it is now utilizing devices that employ a Tesla Electromagnetic Pulse, Plasma and Sonic technology, along with ‘shockwave bombs.’

Russia has accused the US military of employing such devices in Afghanistan to trigger the devastating 7.2 magnitude earthquake that hit the country back in March, 2002.

In the mid-1990s the Russian State Duma issued a press release on HAARP, which was signed by 90 deputies. The statement said the US was “creating new integral geophysical weapons that may influence the near-Earth medium with high-frequency radio waves.”

“The significance of this qualitative leap could be compared to the transition from cold steel to firearms, or from conventional weapons to nuclear weapons.”

“This new type of weapons differ from previous types in that the near-Earth medium becomes at once an object of direct influence and its component,” the statement explained.

In 1997, US Secretary of Defense William Cohen also expressed concern about activities that “can alter the climate, set off earthquakes, volcanoes remotely through the use of electromagnetic waves.”

The US government, however, has chosen to stick to its position that HAARP is merely a program aimed at analyzing the Earth’s ionosphere for the purpose of developing communications and surveillance technology. PressTV

A Haiti Disaster Relief Scenario Was Envisaged by the US Military One Day Before the Earthquake


Zionism’s destabilizing force: “Israeli Exceptionalism” reviewed

Ahmed Moor, The Electronic Intifada, 20 January 2010

In his new book Israeli Exceptionalism: The Destabilizing Logic of Zionism, M. Shahid Alam successfully argues that the moral force behind the Zionist movement is a sense of Jewish, and consequently Israeli, exceptionalism. This claim of exceptionalism underpins what he calls the “destabilizing logic of Zionism.” According to Alam, Zionism “could advance only by creating and promoting conflicts between the West and the Islamicate” (p. 3). He defines the “Islamicate” as consisting of the broader Muslim world, with the Middle East at its heart.

Alam, a professor of economics at Boston’s Northeastern University, begins his book by detailing the core problem that confronted the nascent Zionist movement: the creation of a Jewish nation from disparate and scattered Jewish communities. Zionists set out to solve this problem by creating a myth of exceptionalism that could be embraced by Jews around the globe. These myths were steeped in a combination of religious mythology and ethnic nationalist exclusivism that presented the Jews as the “chosen people” (p. 9) and Palestine as their sole and God-given birthright.

These claims were expanded upon during the British mandate of Palestine and after the founding of the State of Israel. Zionists asserted that the Jewish “liberation” movement was different from other liberation movements because “the long history of Jewish suffering, the Jewish ability to outlive their enemies, their signal contributions to human civilization, and their spectacular victories against Arab armies” demonstrated the purity of their cause and their exceptionalism (p. 5). Finally, they argued that Israel was a singular case because it was surrounded and threatened by hostile and murderous Arab states and masses. Through these arguments, Alam asserts, Zionists cultivated an environment that overlooks and in some cases endorses their movement’s human rights abuses and racist policies.

In the second segment of the book, Alam examines the history of the region, reviewing the violent history of the early Zionist colonists and describing it as a core, rather than incidental, program of Zionism. Violent, racist attitudes towards the Arabs generally and the Palestinians specifically had to be nurtured by those who would make Palestine the Jewish homeland. They acted as intermediaries between the “West” and the “Islamicate” insofar as they were of the former and claimed to understand the latter. To galvanize Western support for Israel, it was vital for Zionists to create a myth of Muslim-Christian antipathy. Alam paraphrases the perceptions caused by the myth: “[I]f the Islamists vent their anger at the United States, it is not because of its policies, but because it is Christian” (p. 42). Naturally then, a Jewish state in Palestine could act both as a buffer against Muslim masses, and a projection of Western power and interests. This is the argument presented by some Zionists.

It wasn’t enough to argue that the Arabs were uncivil to gain their land. Zionists also had to align themselves with anti-Semitic elements in Europe to advance their goals. Alam writes, “In the 1930s, the Nazis banned all Jewish organizations except those with Zionist aims; they even allowed the Zionists to fly their blue-and-white flag with the Star of David at its center. In violation of the Jewish boycott of the Nazi economy, the Zionists promised cash and trade concessions to Nazi Germany if they directed Jewish emigrants to Palestine” (p. 123). This was necessary to promote Jewish emigration to Palestine. The reality was, and continues to be today, that when Jewish people from Eastern Europe are given the choice, many will choose to emigrate to Western Europe and the US before Israel.

Through these means, Zionists gained the support of a variety of surrogate mother countries across the decades. Anti-Semitism, anti-Arabism and anti-Islamism, and Jewish influence all came together to persuade the Soviet Union, France, Great Britain and of course, the United States to support Zionism.

Israeli Exceptionalism also sheds light on British, and later, American evangelical support for Zionism. Evangelical Zionists, broadly termed Christian Zionists, came into being as a result of the Great Reformation. Catholics believe that God nullified his covenant with the Jews when they rejected Jesus Christ. But when Protestants overthrew the authority of the Catholic Church, they sought to differentiate themselves by reinstating God’s covenant with the Jews and recognizing “the Jews as God’s chosen people with eternal rights to Palestine” (p. 130). Although created by Jewish Americans, the American Palestine Committee (APC) was intended to marshal Christian support for the Jewish occupation of Palestine. By 1941, the APC’s membership included “70 US senators, 120 congressmen, the Attorney General, the Secretary of Interior, 21 state governors” and other prominent individuals (p. 134). Reinhold Niebuhr and other leading Christian Zionists later created the Christian Council on Palestine to influence fellow clergymen.

Alam argues convincingly that Zionism itself is destabilizing, and the force that sustains it — tension between the West and Islamic societies — is a deliberate, not incidental, feature of Zionism. Israeli Exceptionalism manages to provide a fresh view to a vast library of literature on Zionism by dispelling the myth of Jewish disempowerment and highlighting the role of anti-Semitism and anti-Islamic sentiment inherent in Israel’s establishment. His discussion of Reformation theology is also crucial to understanding the long-standing support for a “Jewish Palestine” in American civil life, even before the founding of Israel. Alam’s straightforward and accessible discussion of the world’s last “exclusive settler colony” makes Israeli Exceptionalism an important addition to the scholarship on Israel-Palestine.

Born in the Rafah refugee camp in the Gaza Strip, Ahmed Moor graduated from university in Philadelphia, after which he spent three years working in finance in New York. He is currently based in Beirut, Lebanon.

Related Links

Yellowstone’s Plumbing Reveals Plume of Hot and Molten Rock 410 Miles Deep

Seismic imaging was used by University of Utah scientists to construct this 3-D picture of the Yellowstone hotspot plume of hot and molten rock that feeds the shallower magma chamber (not shown) beneath Yellowstone National Park, outlined in green at the surface, or top of the illustration. The Yellowstone caldera, or giant volcanic crater, is outlined in red. State boundaries are shown in black. The park, caldera and state boundaries also are projected to the bottom of the picture to better illustrate the plume's tilt. Researchers believe "blobs" of hot rock float off the top of the plume, then rise to recharge the magma chamber located 3.7 miles to 10 miles beneath the surface at Yellowstone. The illustration also shows a region of warm rock extending southwest from near the top of the plume. It represents the eastern Snake River Plain, where the Yellowstone hotspot triggered numerous cataclysmic caldera eruptions before the plume started feeding Yellowstone 2.05 million years ago. (Credit: University of Utah)

ScienceDaily (Dec. 14, 2009) — The most detailed seismic images yet published of the plumbing that feeds the Yellowstone supervolcano shows a plume of hot and molten rock rising at an angle from the northwest at a depth of at least 410 miles, contradicting claims that there is no deep plume, only shallow hot rock moving like slowly boiling soup.

A related University of Utah study used gravity measurements to indicate the banana-shaped magma chamber of hot and molten rock a few miles beneath Yellowstone is 20 percent larger than previously believed, so a future cataclysmic eruption could be even larger than thought.

The study’s of Yellowstone’s plume also suggests the same “hotspot” that feeds Yellowstone volcanism also triggered the Columbia River “flood basalts” that buried parts of Oregon, Washington state and Idaho with lava starting 17 million years ago.

Those are key findings in four National Science Foundation-funded studies in the latest issue of the Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research. The studies were led by Robert B. Smith, research professor and professor emeritus of geophysics at the University of Utah and coordinating scientist for the Yellowstone Volcano Observatory.

“We have a clear image, using seismic waves from earthquakes, showing a mantle plume that extends from beneath Yellowstone,” Smith says.

The plume angles downward 150 miles to the west-northwest of Yellowstone and reaches a depth of at least 410 miles, Smith says. The study estimates the plume is mostly hot rock, with 1 percent to 2 percent molten rock in sponge-like voids within the hot rock.

Some researchers have doubted the existence of a mantle plume feeding Yellowstone, arguing instead that the area’s volcanic and hydrothermal features are fed by convection — the boiling-like rising of hot rock and sinking of cooler rock — from relatively shallow depths of only 185 miles to 250 miles.

The Hotspot: A Deep Plume, Blobs and Shallow Magma

Some 17 million years ago, the Yellowstone hotspot was located beneath the Oregon-Idaho-Nevada border region, feeding a plume of hot and molten rock that produced “caldera” eruptions — the biggest kind of volcanic eruption on Earth.

As North America slid southwest over the hotspot, the plume generated more than 140 huge eruptions that produced a chain of giant craters — calderas — extending from the Oregon-Idaho-Nevada border northeast to the current site of Yellowstone National Park, where huge caldera eruptions happened 2.05 million, 1.3 million and 642,000 years ago.

These eruptions were 2,500, 280 and 1,000 times bigger, respectively, than the 1980 eruption of Mount St. Helens. The eruptions covered as much as half the continental United States with inches to feet of volcanic ash. The Yellowstone caldera, 40 miles by 25 miles, is the remnant of that last giant eruption.

The new study reinforces the view that the hot and partly molten rock feeding volcanic and geothermal activity at Yellowstone isn’t vertical, but has three components:

  • The 45-mile-wide plume that rises through Earth’s upper mantle from at least 410 miles beneath the surface. The plume angles upward to the east-southeast until it reaches the colder rock of the North American crustal plate, and flattens out like a 300-mile-wide pancake about 50 miles beneath Yellowstone. The plume includes several wider “blobs” at depths of 355 miles, 310 miles and 265 miles.”This conduit is not one tube of constant thickness,” says Smith. “It varies in width at various depths, and we call those things blobs.”
  • A little-understood zone, between 50 miles and 10 miles deep, in which blobs of hot and partly molten rock break off of the flattened top of the plume and slowly rise to feed the magma reservoir directly beneath Yellowstone National Park.
  • A magma reservoir 3.7 miles to 10 miles beneath the Yellowstone caldera. The reservoir is mostly sponge-like hot rock with spaces filled with molten rock.”It looks like it’s up to 8 percent or 15 percent melt,” says Smith. “That’s a lot.”

Researchers previously believed the magma chamber measured roughly 6 to 15 miles from southeast to northwest, and 20 or 25 miles from southwest to northeast, but new measurements indicate the reservoir extends at least another 13 miles outside the caldera’s northeast boundary, Smith says.

He says the gravity and other data show the magma body “is an elongated structure that looks like a banana with the ends up. It is a lot larger than we thought — I would say about 20 percent [by volume]. This would argue there might be a larger magma source available for a future eruption.”

Images of the magma reservoir were made based on the strength of Earth’s gravity at various points in Yellowstone. Hot and molten rock is less dense than cold rock, so the tug of gravity is measurably lower above magma reservoirs.

The Yellowstone caldera, like other calderas on Earth, huffs upward and puffs downward repeatedly over the ages, usually without erupting. Since 2004, the caldera floor has risen 3 inches per year, suggesting recharge of the magma body beneath it.

How to View a Plume

Seismic imaging uses earthquake waves that travel through the Earth and are recorded by seismometers. Waves travel more slowly through hotter rock and more quickly in cooler rock. Just as X-rays are combined to make CT-scan images of features in the human body, seismic wave data are melded to produce images of Earth’s interior.

The study, the Yellowstone Geodynamics Project, was conducted during 1999-2005. It used an average of 160 temporary and permanent seismic stations — and as many as 200 — to detect waves from some 800 earthquakes, with the stations spaced 10 miles to 22 miles apart — closer than other networks and better able to “see” underground. Some 160 Global Positioning System stations measured crustal movements.

By integrating seismic and GPS data, “it’s like a lens that made the upper 125 miles much clearer and allowed us to see deeper, down to 410 miles,” Smith says.

The study also shows warm rock — not as hot as the plume — stretching from Yellowstone southwest under the Snake River Plain, at depths of 20 miles to 60 miles. The rock is still warm from eruptions before the hotspot reached Yellowstone.

A Plume Blowing in the 2-inch-per-year Mantle Wind

Seismic imaging shows a “slow” zone from the top of the plume, which is 50 miles deep, straight down to about 155 miles, but then as you travel down the plume, it tilts to the northwest as it dives to a depth of 410 miles, says Smith.

That is the base of the global transition zone — from 250 miles to 410 miles deep — that is the boundary between the upper and lower mantle — the layers below Earth’s crust.

At that depth, the plume is about 410 miles beneath the town of Wisdom, Mont., which is 150 miles west-northwest of Yellowstone, says Smith.

He says “it wouldn’t surprise me” if the plume extends even deeper, perhaps originating from the core-mantle boundary some 1,800 miles deep.

Why doesn’t the plume rise straight upward? “This plume material wants to come up vertically, it wants to buoyantly rise,” says Smith. “But it gets caught in the ‘wind’ of the upper mantle flow, like smoke rising in a breeze.” Except in this case, the “breeze” of slowly flowing upper mantle rock is moving horizontally 2 inches per year.

While the crustal plate moves southwest, the warm, underlying mantle slowly boils due to convection, with warm areas moving upward and cooler areas downward. Northwest of Yellowstone, this convection is such that the plume is “blown” east-southeast by mantle convection, so it angles upward toward Yellowstone.

Scientists have debated for years whether Yellowstone’s volcanism is fed by a plume rising from deep in the Earth or by shallow churning in the upper mantle caused by movements of the overlying crust. Smith says the new study has produced the most detailed image of the Yellowstone plume yet published.

But a preliminary study by other researchers suggests Yellowstone’s plume goes deeper than 410 miles, ballooning below that depth into a wider zone of hot rock that extends at least 620 miles deep.

The notion that a deep plume feeds Yellowstone got more support from a study published this month indicating that the Hawaiian hotspot — which created the Hawaiian Islands — is fed by a plume that extends downward at least 930 miles, tilting southeast.

A Common Source for Yellowstone and the Columbia River Basalts?

Based on how the Yellowstone plume slants now, Smith and colleagues projected on a map where the plume might have originated at depth when the hotspot was erupting at the Oregon-Idaho-Nevada border area from 17 million to almost 12 million years ago.

They saw overlap, between the zones within the Earth where eruptions originated near the Oregon-Idaho-Nevada border and where the famed Columbia River Basalt eruptions originated when they were most vigorous 17 million to 14 million years ago.

Their conclusion: the Yellowstone hotspot plume might have fed those gigantic lava eruptions, which covered much of eastern Oregon and eastern Washington state.

I argue it is the common source,” Smith says. “It’s neat stuff and it fits together.”

Smith conducted the seismic study with six University of Utah present or former geophysicists — former postdoctoral researchers Michael Jordan, of SINTEF Petroleum Research in Norway, and Stephan Husen, of the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology; postdoc Christine Puskas; Ph.D. student Jamie Farrell; and former Ph.D. students Gregory Waite, now at Michigan Technological University, and Wu-Lung Chang, of National Central University in Taiwan. Other co-authors were Bernhard Steinberger of the Geological Survey of Norway and Richard O’Connell of Harvard University.

Smith conducted the gravity study with former University of Utah graduate student Katrina DeNosaquo and Tony Lowry of Utah State University in Logan.


Ultra Zionist, House Minority Leader John Boehner’s Correspondence with a Constituent

Sometimes it is not sufficient to know that our elected leaders simply “support” Israel. We must read their own words in order to understand how deeply ingrained are the lies, the false history and the blatant disregard for Palestinian suffering, subsequently manifested in American foreign policy. I received the following letter from Congressman John Boehner (Ohio-8th District):

Dear Tammy,

Thank you for contacting me regarding our Israel. (Yes, he did use the word “our.”) It is good to hear from you.

H.Res 867 was introduced by Representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen on October 23, 2009 and referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. H. Res.867 would urge the President and the Secretary of State to oppose unequivocally any endorsement or further consideration of the “Report on the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict” in multilateral fora. The resolution would further consider the “Report on the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict” or the Goldstone Report, to be biased and unworthy of further consideration or legitimacy. The resolution further supports the Administration’s efforts to combat anti-Israel bias at the United Nations and reaffirms support for Israel and for Israel’s right to defend its citizens from violent militant groups and their state sponsors. This resolution passed through the House on November 3, 2009 by a vote of 344 to 36, with 22 Representatives voting present. I voted for this resolution.

I am a strong supporter of Israel and always have been. This besieged nation is the oldest democracy in the Middle East and its stability and ability to defend itself are essential to a lasting peace in the region. Israel is surrounded by many countries which have never recognized its right to exist (with the exception of Egypt and Jordan). These neighbors have gone to war with Israel five times with the sole purpose of annihilating the Jewish state and have pledged time and time again to maintain this adversarial position.

My support for Israel does not mean that I ignore the tragic loss of life on both sides. I can assure you I am closely monitoring this situation. This is a matter Congress is paying a great deal of attention to, and we will continue to support President Obama’s efforts to encourage and facilitate peace.

Please rest assured I will keep your thoughts in mind should I have the opportunity to vote on legislation addressing this issue. Thank you again for contacting me with your thoughts. Please don’t hesitate to inform me of your concerns in the future. To sign up for email updates, I invite you to visit my website at


John A. Boehner

Image courtesy of

I replied with the following:

Congressman Boehner:

Thank you for contacting me regarding Palestine.

Your support of HR 867, effectively dismissing the Goldstone Report as “biased and unworthy of further consideration or legitimacy” is appalling. Judge Richard Goldstone serves as a trustee of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem and is a self-proclaimed Zionist. His report concluded both Israel and Hamas committed grave breaches of international law. Therefore, claims of bias are baseless, showing how far the House of Representatives will go to whitewash Israeli war crimes.

If you define democracy as a state with an elected government, then Israel may qualify. In the broader sense–the one where democratic ideals include life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for all people, regardless of race or religion–then Israel falls painfully short.

Israel is currently holding over 10,000 Palestinian prisoners in its jails, including women and minors. Ha’aretz, a leading Israeli newspaper, published the report of a European fact-finding mission to the prisons. It was discovered that 88 percent of the inmates were being held without formal charges, trial or hearing. Is this your idea of a democracy?

In a true democracy, freedom of religion is extended to all citizens. Israel has often denied Christian and Muslim pilgrims alike from worshipping in their respective holy sites. Muslim boys and men aged 15-40 have at times been barred from Friday prayers by Israeli authorities arbitrarily.

Moreover, it is historical fallacy to cite Arab countries as the aggressors in Israel’s wars. Prior to 1948, the Irgun and Stern gangs waged a terror campaign against British forces in Palestine, as well as targeting Palestinian civilians. The King David Hotel bombing killed 91 British personnel, injuring 45. These same gangs, led by Menachem Begin (who would later serve as Israel’s Prime Minister) massacred over 100 Palestinian men, women and children in the village of Deir Yassin on April 9, 1948. Small wonder that when Israel was established the following month, Arab neighbors attempted to thwart the total depopulation and subsequent obliteration of some 500 Palestinian villages, courtesy of the new Israeli army.

In October 1956, Moshe Dayan launched combined air and land assaults into Egypt’s Sinai peninsula.

In 1967, Israel launched a pre-emptive strike into Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula. It was during the six-day course of this war that Israel also attacked the USS Liberty, an American ship. Thirty-four American sailors died and an additional 172 were wounded. Israel claimed the Liberty was mistaken for the Egyptian El Quseir, a ludicrous excuse as El Quseir was 180 feet shorter and very differently configured. The Liberty had her name clearly written in English, while the Egyptian ship would have displayed Arabic script. Surviving sailors testified that it was a deliberate attack, unless you wish to doubt the words of the American servicemen you claim to so vehemently support. As an intelligence gathering vessel, Liberty was likely to intercept real time evidence of the massacres committed by Israel in the Golan Heights, enough motive to destroy the American ship.

The Yom Kippur War in 1973 stemmed from Egypt’s desire to regain the Sinai Peninsula lost in the 1967 conflict, as Syria tried to recapture the Golan Heights.

Israel launched a full-scale invasion of Lebanon in 1982.

It is apparent the only thing you are monitoring is the flow of money from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) into your coffer. Your position itself is not surprising; however, I was shocked by your audacity to spend 42 taxpayer cents on mailing me pro-Israel propaganda. Let me make it clear that I am not buying.



© 2010 Tammy Obeidallah


U.S. Supreme Court Decision Completes Corporate Takeover of American Politics

United Corporate States of America Flag

Washington – Sweeping aside a century-old understanding and overruling two important precedents, a bitterly divided Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that the government may not ban political spending by corporations in candidate elections.

The ruling was a vindication, the majority said, of the First Amendment’s most basic free speech principle – that the government has no business regulating political speech. The dissenters said allowing corporate money to flood the political marketplace will corrupt democracy.

The 5-to-4 decision represented a sharp doctrinal shift, and it will have major political and practical consequences. Specialists in campaign finance law said they expected the decision, which also applies to labor unions and other organizations, to reshape the way elections are conducted.

“If the First Amendment has any force,” Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote for the majority, which included the four members of its conservative wing, “it prohibits Congress from fining or jailing citizens, or associations of citizens, for simply engaging in political speech.”

Justice John Paul Stevens read a long dissent from the bench. He said the majority had committed a grave error in treating corporate speech the same as that of human beings. His decision was joined by the other three members of the court’s liberal wing.

Senator Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, an author of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law, called the ruling “a terrible mistake.”

“Ignoring important principles of judicial restraint and respect for precedent, the Court has given corporate money a breathtaking new role in federal campaigns,” said Mr. Feingold, a Democrat.

Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader and a longtime opponent of that law, praised the Court’s decision as “an important step in the direction of restoring the First Amendment rights of these groups by ruling that the Constitution protects their right to express themselves about political candidates and issues up until Election Day.”President Obama issued a statement calling on Congress to “develop a forceful response to this decision.”

“With its ruling today,” he said, “the Supreme Court has given a green light to a new stampede of special interest money in our politics. It is a major victory for big oil, Wall Street banks, health insurance companies and the other powerful interests that marshal their power every day in Washington to drown out the voices of everyday Americans.”

The case had unlikely origins. It involved a documentary called “Hillary: The Movie,” a 90-minute stew of caustic political commentary and advocacy journalism. It was produced by Citizens United, a conservative nonprofit corporation, and was released during the Democratic presidential primaries in 2008.

Citizens United lost a suit that year against the Federal Election Commission, and scuttled plans to show the film on a cable video-on-demand service and to broadcast television advertisements for it. But the film was shown in theaters in six cities, and it remains available on DVD and the Internet.

The lower court said the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, usually called the McCain-Feingold law, prohibited the planned broadcasts. The law bans the broadcast, cable or satellite transmission of “electioneering communications” paid for by corporations in the 30 days before a presidential primary and in the 60 days before the general election. That leaves out old technologies, like newspapers, and new ones, like YouTube.

The law, as narrowed by a 2007 Supreme Court decision, applies to communications “susceptible to no reasonable interpretation other than as an appeal to vote for or against a specific candidate.” It also requires spoken and written disclaimers in the film and advertisements for it, along with the disclosure of contributors’ names.

The lower court said the film was a prohibited electioneering communication with one purpose: “to inform the electorate that Senator Clinton is unfit for office, that the United States would be a dangerous place in a President Hillary Clinton world and that viewers should vote against her.”

The McCain-Feingold law does contain an exception for broadcast news reports, commentaries and editorials.

On its central point, Justice Kennedy’s majority opinion was joined by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Antonin Scalia, Samuel A. Alito Jr., and Clarence Thomas. Justice Stevens’s dissent was joined by Justices Stephen G. Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor.

When the case was first argued last March, it seemed a curiosity likely to be decided on narrow grounds. The court could have ruled that Citizens United was not the sort of group to which the McCain-Feingold law was meant to apply, or that the law did not mean to address 90-minute documentaries, or that video-on-demand technologies were not regulated by the law. Thursday’s decision rejected those alternatives.

Instead of deciding the case in June, the court set down the case for a rare re-argument in September. It now asked the parties to address the much more consequential question of whether the court should overrule a 1990 decision, Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce, which upheld restrictions on corporate spending to support or oppose political candidates, along with part of McConnell v. Federal Election Commission, the 2003 decision that upheld the central provisions of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law.

On Thursday, the court answered its own questions with a resounding yes.


Keith Olbermann’s Special Comment on Supreme Court Ruling

So, what about all those AIPAC prostitutes, Keith?