The Leftist’s Ideal

The American Left would like America to be more like China. Senator Joe Leiberman (I-Conn.) said as much when touting the need for his Internet Kill Switch bill, which would give the President the authority to shut down the Internet in a time of national emergency.

Well, here is what goes on in China, as reported last week in London’s Daily Telegraph:

Parents who believed their children died in the 2008 Sichuan earthquake because school buildings were shoddily-built petitioned the Chinese government to release its findings in a post-earthquake investigation. About 60 parents that were attempting to deliver the petition were instantly arrested by police.

“The police came right away and took us away,” said one parent, who managed to flee.

In a related story, a Chinese activist who conducted his own investigation into the earthquake—and who had previously written about the violent 1989 crackdown in Tiananmen Square—was sentenced to five years in prison in February for subversion.

The New York Times’ Thomas Friedman once wrote: “One-party autocracy certainly has its drawbacks. But when it is led by a reasonably enlightened group of people, as China is today, it can also have great advantages… Our one-party democracy is worse.”

That’s where the Leftists would have us go.

Does The HIRE Act Only Pertain To Money Repatriated To The US?

Dear Bob,
I have a question about HIRE (Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment). My understanding is that for now you can transfer money to a foreign bank account, insurance company, etc. I am not sure that I understand where the controls come in. Is it when we take the money out and repatriate it to the US that the 30% is deducted and the bank reports all the data to the USG? And what if the transfer is not to the US, but another foreign bank where one has a residency? Is that reported to the USG also or does the HIRE act only pertain to money repatriated to the US?

Or is it when we make the deposit to the foreign entity that the reporting takes place. I have on your advice recently purchased an annuity through BLS. Has the insurance company already reported this to the USG? Or will they have to do so in 2013?

I would appreciate any clarification you might be able to give me.

Thank you.
Max Lund

Dear Max,
The full ramifications of HIRE are still being sorted out but here is what I understand:
The purpose is to identify what Federal government considers recalcitrant account holders (that is those who may try to avoid U.S. tax laws). In fact, the words recalcitrant account holders are found numerous times in the bill. It applies to accounts exceeding $50,000. The controls come when you try to bring your money back into the country. At that time the foreign institution is supposed to deduct the 30 percent and remit it to the U.S. Treasury. It appears as if it applies even if you transfer the money from one foreign bank to another. The reporting of information includes your tax identification number, name, address and account balance or value. The reporting is done on existing and new accounts.

According to Zero Hedge (zerohedge.com): "One thing we are confused about is whether this law is a preamble, or already incorporates, the flow of non-cash assets, such as commodities, and, thus, gold. If an account transfers, via physical or paper delivery, gold from a domestic account to a foreign one, we are not sure if the language deems this a 30 percent taxable transaction, although preliminary discussions with lawyers indicates this is likely the case."

Best wishes,
Bob

The Bilderberg Planning Session Ends: What’s In Store?

Forget global warming. It’s off the table. The new push from global climate “science” is going to be global COOLING.

How do I know? It was one of the main topics at the Bilderberg 2010 conference June 4-6 in Spain. That’s where the movers and shakers in government, politics, finance, industry, labor, education and communications—as the group’s own website says—meet in secret for “informal and off-the-record discussion about topics of current concern especially in the fields of foreign affairs and the international economy.”

These are the New World Order folks. This was their 58th annual meeting

In the coming months expect to hear a lot of talk in the main stream media and out of the fascists in government on the issues of social networking and cyber technology (this has already started—see Kill Switch Would Kill The Internet). A world food crisis of some kind will manifest itself. Medical science will be a hot topic—perhaps another “medical emergency” created by Big Pharma and hyped by the World Health Organization (WHO), much as the false pig flu epidemic of 2009 was. And the solution will enrich select drug companies and WHO researchers.

Financial reform was a hot topic (already there’s been talk in Congress of propping up the International Monetary Fund, and a move toward a new global currency is in the works); perhaps efforts to prolong the economic crisis to open the way for a global economic governance. Energy (the BP spill dominated discussions), Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran (were plans for the coming strike hammered out?) and relations between Europe and the United States were other topics.

Of course you didn’t see any news about the Bilderberg meeting if you watched the Big Three news networks or cable. And even though Donald Graham, the chairman and CEO of The Washington Post Co., was an attendee, none of the major U.S. newspapers covered it, either. (Though The Post has already published an editorial pushing a Bilderberg policy by calling for making the International Monetary Fund a global overseer.)

Two rapporteurs, as they call them across the pond, from The Economist were on the guest list. I wonder when their report on the meeting will appear in print.

About the only reporting from the conference came from the British newspaper The Guardian and a couple of people representing alternative media, like long-time Bilderberg chaser Jim Tucker of the American Free Press—the type of coverage that the Internet kill switch bill would eliminate.

Who are these movers and shakers that—as even they are now admitting—meet to shape world policy and push for one world government?

From the U.S. representing government you have former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, former World Bank head James Wolfensohn, former Deputy Treasury Secretary Roger Altman, Assistant Secretary of State Phillip Gordon, Barack Obama’s special representative to Afghanistan and Pakistan Richard Holbrooke, Undersecretary for Economic, Energy and Agricultural Affairs Robert Hormats, Director of the Office of Management and Budget Peter Orszag, former Treasury Secretary and current Co-Chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) Robert Rubin and former Fed Chairman Paul Volker, now the chairman of Obama’s economic recovery board.

From the university side are Harvard professors Martin Feldstein and Niall Ferguson and the President and Director of Broad Institute of Harvard and MIT, Eric Lander.

From the U.S. corporate side are Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates (whose foundation recently spent $10 billion to give deadly vaccines to children around the world), Google CEO Eric Schmidt, financier and Trilateral Commission member Timothy Collins, Goldman Sachs board member and Trilateral Commission member James A. Johnson, Alcoa head and former Bayer AG and Citigroup board member Klaus Kleinfield, Kohlberg, Kravis Roberts and Co. (KKR) head Henry Kravis and Paypal founder Peter Thiel.

Do you recognize the names of any of those corporations? They’ve been in the news a lot lately regarding the collapse of U.S. financial system. There are still others representing corporations and think tanks that shape policy and influence the elected elitists who aren’t important enough to be invited to the meetings.

From Europe there are corporatists and bankers and heads of state—some with names you’d recognize like Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands (a major shareholder in Royal Dutch Shell), former European Commission Vice President Viscount Etienne Davignon, former NATO Secretary General Javier Solana, Queen Sofia of Spain, Spanish Prime Minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, Grecian Minister of Finance George Papaconstantinou and members of parliament from several European nations.

Important people, all. Is it likely they have four or five days—with travel and all—to sit around and shoot the breeze and jawbone about the world’s problems like a bunch old geezers at the local coffee shop?

Not hardly. Which is why the claims from official Bilderberg documents that they pass no resolutions, take no votes and issue no policy statements stretch credulity. Especially after 58 years.

They may not do any of those things for public consumption. But you can bet that behind closed doors—which are locked to all but the chosen few and guarded by a security team that would make the Secret Service look like a bunch of amateurs—a lot of decisions were made on upcoming world events.

The New World Order folks were dealt a setback when the emails exposing the hoax of global warming were leaked. They thought that was their ticket to one world governance. And a few of them have publicly lamented that so many are awakening to their existence.

But they’re not done. Cap and Trade is one of their brainchildren, and the BP spill has been like a defibrillator for that atrocity’s heart. Obama is promoting open borders—while holding Arizona hostage—and the Russians and Chinese are pushing a global currency. And they know Obama is on board with the Small Arms Treaty (Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has said so) that would effectively eliminate personal ownership of firearms—one of their and the United Nation’s main goals. Obama’s just got to find a way around that pesky Constitution (can you say Elena Kagan?)

Hold on to your hats. After all the rah-rahs, glad handing and back slapping in Spain, the globalists are once again amped up and the push for global governance is on.

Another Assault On Free Speech

Free speech opponents in Congress found a way to squeeze a bill through the House of Representatives that will stifle 1st Amendment rights for the four months prior to an election.

The deceptively-named DISCLOSE Act of 2010 should more accurately be called the Incumbency Protection Act, because protecting their jobs is precisely what the liberals in the House are trying to do.

The bill reverses the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Citizen’s United vs. FEC that upheld the right of corporations to spend on political advertising in candidate elections. The 5-4 decision prompted President Barack Obama to classlessly chide the Supreme Court during his State of the Union address; an event unprecedented in its hubris.

What the DISCLOSE Act, passed late yesterday, will do is force any corporation that runs political advertising to name its top five contributors in the ad and make a complete list available upon request. It will also drown the corporation in red tape in order to comply with the vagaries of the bill.

At first glance one might think banning corporations from political advertising would be a good thing. But think again.

Corporations in this sense mean not large companies—say General Electric or Goldman Sachs—but special interest groups that advocate for their members like the National Rifle Association (NRA), AARP and Chamber of Commerce. And what’s worse, if you and a group of your friends wanted to ban together, pool your money and run adds opposing your local Congressman or State Senator, you would not be able to do that.

Not surprisingly, the bill does not affect the way unions spend. In fact The Hill recently reported that two unions will spend close to $100 million to re-elect the present majority in Congress.

So what Congress wants to do is let unions spend willy-nilly the money from dues that its members are FORCED to pay, and spend it on causes or candidates that members themselves may or may not agree with. But organizations in which people voluntarily make contributions because they support its cause or agenda are unable to advertise on their members’ behalf.

And liberals in Congress think that’s fair.

The 1st Amendment was written not to protect the speech that everyone wants to hear. It’s there to protect the speech that people don’t want to hear. For the fascists in Congress, at election time that’s just intolerable.

The Line Between General And State Government

The recent dustups between Gulf States and the Federal government over BP Deepwater Horizon oil gusher cleanup efforts demonstrate the folly of a gargantuan, obtrusive and obtuse Federal government trying to micromanage an operation that should be coordinated locally.

First there was Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal and his idea to build what would essentially have been barrier islands to intercept the oil before it reached the state’s delicate marshlands. Then there were efforts by Alabama Governor Bob Riley to string a massive system of booms to keep oil off the Alabama coastline and out of Mobile Bay.

These efforts were delayed by days and weeks while the Federal bureaucracy stumbled and bumbled over whether the ideas were good ones, or whether others might be better. Meanwhile, oil began washing up on shore.

Then there was halting of the cleanup efforts of some of the local governments by the Federal environmental police due to a perceived risk to some wildlife.

Finally, the coup de grâce, the Coast Guard’s forced docking of oil sucking barges off the Louisiana coast to check whether there were enough life preservers on board.

The Federal government proved during the hurricane Katrina aftermath, the Deepwater Horizon aftermath and in countless other ways that when it tries to get involved on a local level it only succeeds in getting in its own way—and in the way of those actually doing something.

As Riley complained of the so-called unified command in charge of the oil spill cleanup effort, each member of the command had veto power over any idea. One would raise a good fix and another would veto it because it might harm a turtle or cause a worker some discomfort (as in the Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s ruling that beach cleanup workers could only labor 20 minutes of each hour because of the heat).

In response to the Federal government’s inaction, Jindal decided to build the islands himself. Riley ordered municipalities along Alabama’s beaches to do what they needed to do to clean the beaches and promised them compensation. Municipalities in Florida are doing the same thing. And all are avoiding involving the Feds whenever possible.

During the Pennsylvania Ratifying Convention James Wilson, speaking on the line dividing powers between general (Federal) government and particular state governments, said:

“Are disputes between the general government and the state governments to be necessarily the consequence of inaccuracy? I hope, sir, they will not be the enemies of each other, or resemble comets in conflicting orbits, mutually operating destruction; but that their motion will be better represented by that of the planetary system, where each part moves harmoniously within its proper sphere, and no injury arises by interference or opposition.”

So far those disputes resemble comets in conflicting orbits rather than harmonious planets. Let’s hope the Feds will get out of the governors’ way and just make sure the funds needed for the local efforts are there.

The Coast Guard is rightfully overseeing cleanup efforts in the Gulf. But its time could be better spent monitoring oil skimming operations than worrying over whether a barge operator who has spent a lifetime at sea is wearing his lifejacket.

And as for the oil spewing forth from 5,000 feet below the ocean’s surface 40 miles out, that’s where the Feds should be concentrating their efforts. They should be providing BP with all the assistance it needs to contain the gusher. And that means bringing in top oil drilling experts from around the world and any other materiel or resources other countries may provide.

It also should mean for the Federal government to get its boot off BP’s neck. It’ll be a lot easier to work that way. There will be plenty of opportunity for the government to get its pound (or ton) of flesh once the gusher is capped and oil is no longer lapping along the beautiful Gulf Coast.

Kill Switch Would Kill The Internet

Relax!

It’s always a comforting feeling when the fascists tell you to relax. And that’s what Senator Joe Leiberman (I-Conn.) told everyone to do Sunday on CNN’s State of the Union with Candy Crowley.

Crowley asked about the Kill Switch bill Lieberman co-sponsors with Senator Susan Collins (R-Maine) that would allow the President to shut down the Internet in a time of emergency.

The President will never take over the Internet, Lieberman—with a warm smile—assured the audience. The government shouldn’t take over the internet. The president would only do that in catastrophic times. Not going to do it every day. It’s only for national security. Relax.

“Right now China—the government—can disconnect parts of its Internet in a case of war. We need to have the ability to do that, too,” Lieberman said.

Of course, in China the government runs over its people with tanks. It drags them off to prisons without trial for practicing Christianity or saying something government doesn’t like, where they disappear forever—probably with a bullet in the brain. I wonder if Lieberman thinks our government should have those abilities as well.

China also censors the Internet—every day—to stifle the free flow of information… because it can.

The worry for Lieberman and his fascist buddies—the elected elitists who march to the orders of the New World Order—is not what would happen to America if some outside entity launched a cyber attack on the United States.

The worry is that the Internet has opened up a treasure trove of information and an ability to share ideas with freedom-loving people all over the world. No longer is the main stream media the sole purveyor of information.

So that information can no longer be controlled. More and more people are learning the truth about government and the secret machinations that go one behind the scenes. They are learning about the corporatists that pull the strings. They are learning about the Bilderbergers and the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and the Trilateral Commission. They are waking up.

CFR member and Bilderberger Zbigniew Brzezinski recently lamented that people are becoming more aware of what’s going on in the world than ever before, and this awareness is harming their agenda.

So the U.S. government is gearing up for a crackdown on the information flow—or at least to have that ability when needed. Ignorant people, after all, are easier to control.

You may remember the protests in Iran a few months ago. The government there shut down the press. There was a complete information blackout throughout traditional media.

But we saw the atrocities that were taking place there—the shootings, the beatings, the imprisonments of the opposition—because of Facebook and Twitter. Despite the government’s best efforts to control the information coming out of Iran, the world knew the truth because of the Internet.

And protesters were able to organize large crowds in central locations and avoid the state police forces because they were able to communicate via the internet after other communications were shut down.

Not ready to think your government might be no better that Iran’s? Then surely you’ll consider that such a bill allowing control of the Internet would be used to monitor your Internet usage so it can be taxed… so web sites opposing the Big Government’s message can be better monitored and shut down.

The Federal Trade Commission recently proposed a plan—called a Drudge Tax—to tax websites and electronic devices in order to bail out failing newspapers—the propaganda rags of the ruling class. And since that didn’t fly with the masses the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) now says it wants to control prices and set rules for what traffic Internet Service Providers (ISPs) must carry.

Censor the Internet? That would never happen here, would it Senator Lieberman?

No, he smiles and chuckles at the foolishness of the little people. Relax. National security and all.

Thick Blood Solutions

Seniors are prone to thick blood more than any other age group. Some literature calls it sludging, and aging causes it. Thick blood can lead to heart attack and stroke.

You certainly don’t need a physician to prescribe a drug for this and you don’t need anybody to tell you if your blood is thick. Just assume that it is if you are over 50.

The answer simple and inexpensive: I use Circulation Solution™ from Health Resources™ www.healthresources.net (1-800-471-4007). I also take garlic and gingko to help keep my blood flowing freely.

Ceding Arizona To Mexico

America is losing the battle along the border with Mexico—apparently without a fight. As proof, a swatch of Arizona 80 miles wide that runs from the Mexican border about three counties deep into the state (encompassing about 3,500 acres) has been ceded to Mexicans.

Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu told Fox News that armed paramilitary elements control a portion of the Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge and other parts of Arizona. But rather than try and reclaim it, signs have been posted marking the area as off limits to Americans.

It was closed in October 2006, due to human safety concerns, according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

The signs read: “Danger—Public Warning. Travel Not Recommended.” To see a clip of Babeu’s interview click here.

The squad-sized (in American military parlance a squad refers to two teams of four or five soldiers each) armed paramilitary elements Babeu referred to are drug smugglers and human traffickers out of Mexico. And violence there has increased the last fourth months.

He conceded that neither he nor other local sheriff’s departments and city police forces had the manpower to take the area back. It’s going to take the U.S. military, he said, and that’s why Babeu, his fellow law enforcement heads and Senator John McCain (R-Ariz.) recently asked Obama for 3,000 National Guard troops.

Obama responded by promising Arizona Governor Jan Brewer he’d get back to her. He hasn’t.

As I wrote last week in Breaking Their Oath, this is not the only place armed elements have crossed the Mexican border in the U.S. There have been many sightings reported—and several videos made to back them up—of either elements of the Mexican military or police forces crossing the border in force. There have also been shootouts with U.S. Border agents.

Just recently a young smuggler was killed by U.S. Border agents and armed agents from Mexico fired on them as they investigated the scene of the shooting.

Breaking Their Oath demonstrated how Obama and the current Congress, as well as Presidents and Congresses past, have failed to live up to their oath of office and protect America from invasion.

The situation in the Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge demonstrates that the fascist elected elites are either feckless and weak or they have an agenda that is contrary to the best interests of our nation. It also demonstrates why Arizona’s recently passed immigration law was necessary.

(Article continued below…)

 

There were a lot of interesting comments to last week’s article. The vast majority agreed with Arizona’s soon-to-be-enacted immigration law which will make it a crime to be an illegal alien in the state.

Many were like this one from a person calling himself American Citizen who said,

“The only pertinent word about all of this is ‘illegal.’ They are criminals as soon as they step foot on our territory. Nationality means nothing here.”

Al Seiber is very familiar with what’s going on in Arizona. He has friends near the border. He posted,

“My friends live 1200′ from the border, out of Sierra Vista, Ariz. they told me they find more prayer mats then anything. I find lot’s of back packs, with tortillas and water bottles in them.”

Some commenters think the answer is a fence along the border: a fence that Washington obviously has no interest in completing. Typical of that line of thinking comes from someone calling himself bp who wrote,

“People are WALKING over the border with their backpacks long before they stand on the street corner for a day job! Fences, we need SERIOUS fences (like the ones we build around our prisons) and the kind of armored vehicles that the Mexican Polizia showed us last week (when one of their smugglers was killed on U.S. soil)! Who knew they had these?!”

Not all agree. A regular liberal commenter who calls himself Denniso had this to say:

“Bob Livingston says ‘we are being invaded and the gov’t is doing nothing to stop it’. Is that supposed to be a joke? I just drove along a part of the border and the highway was full of border patrol vehicles, driving back and forth. We have thousands more border patrol agents than we’ve ever had all along the border, at a cost of billions of dollars per year…what is that? doing nothing?

Come on Bob, don’t twist the facts just to stir up the hotheads in the country more than they already are. If thousands of agents swarming the border is doing nothing and building a ridiculous and multi billion $$ wall is nothing, then I wonder what it is you would consider doing something?”

No Denniso. Unfortunately it is no joke. Usually you provide coherent dissenting commentary. Not this time.

There are places—like the Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge and surrounding territory—where agents don’t go, but armed insurgents from across the border do. And ask the residents of some of the border towns about the armed Mexican helicopters—sometimes seen hovering over houses and shining spotlights at night as if searching for someone or something—and how they feel about what is being done to protect them.

Certainly more could be done by the Federal government if the fascist elites in power wanted something done. Big John in Virginia had a good suggestion. He wrote,

“Why do we have 37,000 troops on the border between North and South Korea, but we can’t put enough on our borders to protect us? Let’s all go to Arizona for vacations this year. I am. I’ve always wanted to see the Grand Canyon!! Help make up for the boycotts. See ya there!!!”

Or, we could reduce the size of Empire America and just bring those troops home and put them along our border. But visiting Arizona is always a good idea.

And refuse2lose commented, sarcastically I suppose,

“I would like to challenge any person that is against the Arizona immigration bill to call your representatives in congress, also write a letter to Obama and tell them that the federal immigration law needs to be shredded and a new one needs to be written up. Because, in case you are like Obama, Holder and Napolitano who didn’t take time to read the bill but got on tv and condemned it, I have actually read the bill and it is EXACTLY like the federal bill. So if you are accusing Arizonians of being profilers then you are in fact accusing your liberal icons of profiling.”

The grammar’s not great, but you get the drift. Actually, letting your fascist elected representative know how you feel about the illegal immigration situation is not a bad idea. So we’ve come up with a way you can do that. First, you can go here and vote in our Immigration Reform Poll.

So far 97 percent of those who’ve voted believe America should follow Arizona’s lead when it comes to immigration reform. And a whopping 92 percent of respondents would like to see their state pass a similar immigration law.

After you’ve voted, send the link to your friends and family and ask them to vote as well. The results will be shared with major media outlets across the country, so the more votes cast the better.

You can also contact your Congressweasel (or Congressman if his or her name happens to be Ron Paul or Michelle Bachman or one or two others) and let him or her know how you feel. If you don’t know how to contact your Senator or Representative you can find him or her by going here.

As rob posted:

“’We the People’ need to start being seen in ‘GREATER’ numbers and heard from in masses. We need to see and hear from candidates where they stand on major issues and hold them accountable. Why is it we are not asking our candidates or elected officials outright on their stance with major issues as immigration. Quit hiding….. NOW is our opportunity to be heard….NOW is our opportunity to be seen…. November is coming soon…. don’t pass it up.”

Why indeed? What better way to know where they stand than by asking them yourself? We’ve done the hard part for you. You no longer have an excuse.