Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Topics - administrator

Pages: 1 ... 477 478 [479] 480 481 ... 707



By Nicholas West

We are accelerating to a full-on police state where “papers please” is set to be replaced by a less-intrusive biometric scan. It appears that, once again, what many people believed would be restricted to border control measures for specific groups of people is set to trickle down to any and all of the traveling public.

Just last week I reported on a new program initiated by Delta Airlines at Minneapolis-St. Paul airport to have automated baggage kiosks for “priority customers” that will first scan a traveler’s passport, then their face in order to match identity to checked luggage. It was promoted as a “pilot program” that Delta launched to seek customer feedback in the hope that it could be rolled out more widely in the future. However, pilot program or not, a new announcement by JetBlue makes it clear that this is quickly heading toward the mandatory in the very near future.

An article from Bloomberg states the familiar calls to convenience and security for the increased push toward requiring biometric ID for air travel:

JetBlue Airways Corp. and Delta Air Lines Inc. will test facial- and fingerprint-recognition technology at two U.S. airports to replace boarding passes, building on industry efforts to increase security and ease passage through airports.

The JetBlue program will start next month on flights from Boston to Aruba’s Queen Beatrix International Airport, the airline said in a statement Wednesday. It will match passenger photos to their passport or visa photos. Delta has been trying fingerprint identification in Washington that may eventually replace boarding passes.

“We hope to learn how we can further reduce friction points in the airport experience, with the boarding process being one of the hardest to solve,” Joanna Geraghty, JetBlue’s executive vice president for customer experience, said in the statement.

While at first this might seem limited in scope, additional statements in the article make it clear that not only is this likely not to be an opt-in situation, but there is an admission that the move toward biometric ID will go far beyond the airport. Emphasis added:

JetBlue passengers will be able to participate without enrolling or registering in advance.

A custom-designed camera will take a photo and transmit it to U.S. authorities to compare against databases of passport, visa and immigration images. A display above the camera will notify travelers when they can board. New York-based JetBlue is working with U.S. Customs and Border Protection and SITA, an information-technology provider for airlines.


“This is the first integration of biometric authorization by the CBP with an airline and may prove to be a solution that will be quick and easy to roll out across U.S. airports,” Jim Peters, SITA’s chief technology officer, said in the statement.

“We’re rapidly moving toward a day when your fingerprint, iris or face will become the only ID you’ll need for any number of transactions throughout a given day,” Gil West, Delta chief operating officer, said in the statement.

This should be viewed as an integral part of helping to lay the foundation of a much larger initiative to turn people into digital organisms with virtual papers. The political will is there, the databases exist, and the technology is clearly being rolled out across every meaningful area of human activity.

Nicholas West writes for He also writes for Counter Markets agorist newsletter.

This article may be freely republished in part or in full with author attribution and source link.





By Catherine J. Frompovich

Professor Olle Johansson, Associate Professor at the Karolinska Institute, Department of Neuroscience and head of The Experimental Dermatology Unit, in Stockholm, Sweden, recently advised about extremely-concerning research confirming “bacteria exposed to mobile phone and WiFi radiation turned resistant to antibiotics, science demonstrates [1].

Taheri, et al. published “Evaluation of the Effect of Radiofrequency Radiation Emitted From Wi-Fi Router and Mobile Phone Simulator on the Antibacterial Susceptibility of Pathogenic Bacteria Listeria monocytogenes and Escherichia coli” in the January 23, 2017 issue of the journal Dose-Response [2] wherein the Abstract, they state in part:

Our laboratory at the nonionizing department of the Ionizing and Non-ionizing Radiation Protection Research Center has performed experiments on the health effects of exposure to animal models and humans to different sources of electromagnetic fields such as cellular phones, mobile base stations, mobile phone jammers, laptop computers, radars, dentistry cavitrons, magnetic resonance imaging, and Helmholtz coils. [….]

In this study, we assessed if the exposure to 900 MHz GSM mobile phone radiation and 2.4 GHz radiofrequency radiation emitted from common Wi-Fi routers alters the susceptibility of microorganisms to different antibiotics. [….]

It is also shown that exposure to RF-EMFs within a narrow level of irradiation (an exposure window) makes microorganisms resistant to antibiotics. This adaptive phenomenon and its potential threats to human health should be further investigated in future experiments. [2]

[CJF emphasis]

Smart Meters and Smart Appliances RF Outputs

Perhaps I ought to point out the RF range exposure level of 2.4 GHz is the same radiofrequency radiation levels emitted by AMI Smart Meters ZigBee transmitters [3] built in to track and spy upon in-home utility and appliance usage! Check out what Onzo does in that department.

Wi-Fi, the ‘smart tech’ everyone is exposed ubiquitously, is addressed head-on and, yet, schools and work places deliberately expose students and employees without “batting an eyelash” to harmful non-ionizing RF radiation effects administrators don’t want to know about nor investigate, specifically: state public utility commissions, state legislative bodies and, especially, the Federal Communications Commission in the USA. No wonder hospitals have such high rates of super bugs; they’re ‘palaces of high technology’, especially Wi-Fi.

The above information is yet another targeted and scientifically-determined statistic lobbed against microwave industry consensus science regarding no such thing as “non-thermal radiation effects” to human health and the environment! Believe it or not, even bad bacteria are life forms! Many of my articles published at Activist Post and Natural Blaze address RF adverse effects on life; please check out my archives for more information.

Probably, the most incriminating example of industry collusion to protect vested interests is the established fact 32 percent of microwave industry research and published studies confirm there are non-thermal RF radiation adverse effects. However, the microwave industry’s leadership, ICNIRP, refuses to accept that scientific finding, but claims, categorically, there are no non-thermal RF radiation adverse effects, only thermal (heat) effects. How stupid can big money interests become? That reminds me of the cliché, “Do you know the difference between dumb and stupid?” You can’t fix stupid; it doesn’t want to be fixed!




What’s the Difference Between 2.4 and 5-Ghz (and Which Should I Use?)

Note: the above article does not discuss the adverse effects of each type of RF radiation, so be aware of that; it only defines them, but also recommends “wired” connections.

Catherine J Frompovich (website) is a retired natural nutritionist who earned advanced degrees in Nutrition and Holistic Health Sciences, Certification in Orthomolecular Theory and Practice plus Paralegal Studies. Her work has been published in national and airline magazines since the early 1980s. Catherine authored numerous books on health issues along with co-authoring papers and monographs with physicians, nurses, and holistic healthcare professionals. She has been a consumer healthcare researcher 35 years and counting.

Catherine’s latest book, published October 4, 2013, is Vaccination Voodoo, What YOU Don’t Know About Vaccines, available on

Her 2012 book A Cancer Answer, Holistic BREAST Cancer Management, A Guide to Effective & Non-Toxic Treatments, is available on and as a Kindle eBook.

Two of Catherine’s more recent books on are Our Chemical Lives And The Hijacking Of Our DNA, A Probe Into What’s Probably Making Us Sick (2009) and Lord, How Can I Make It Through Grieving My Loss, An Inspirational Guide Through the Grieving Process (2008)

Catherine’s NEW book: Eat To Beat Disease, Foods Medicinal Qualities ©2016 Catherine J Frompovich is now available.

Image Credit: Pixabay





By Steven MacMillan

Trump’s first trip to a foreign country as US President was anything but dull. During his time in Saudi Arabia, there was sword dancing, glowing orb madness and a whole other host of strange behaviour. In between all of this weirdness however, there was one thing that was entirely orthodox for a US President to do when in Arabia: agree to arm the Saudis to the teeth.

The US and Saudi Arabia sealed the largest arms deal in US history during Trump’s visit, a deal worth approximately $350 billion over the next decade, although Senator Rand Paul is expected to try and block a portion of the deal. Trump’s slimeball son-in-law, Jared Kushner, was heavily involved in the negotiations, reportedly helping to get the Saudis a better deal.

This agreement once again reveals that Trump will serve the military-industrial complex well during his reign in office, as the share price of the giant war contractors soared after news of the deal broke. In the words of the former US congressman and host of the Liberty Report, Ron Paul, the military-industrial complex was the special interest that gained the most from Trump’s Saudi visit:

This trip I would consider not a diplomatic trip. This was well-staged to serve a few special interests; and I would say the most powerful special interest that the President has kowtowed to would be the military-industrial complex. It’s up to 350 billion dollars over the next 10 years and who knows what, and Trump is just excited about this (from 3:55 into the show).

The US-Saudi arms deal comes a month and a half after Trump launched 59 Raytheon-made Tomahawk cruise missiles at a military base controlled by the Syrian government, one of the main powers fighting against ISIS and associated ‘moderate rebels.’ The illegal military action led to an immediate surge in the value of Raytheon shares, as well as in the stocks of other war contractors whose technology was also used in the missile launch.

Since Trump’s inauguration on the 20th of January, the former real estate mogul has clearly shown a prominent militaristic side, a side which elates the military-industrial complex. In fact, some of the giants of the military-industrial complex contributed to Trump’s record-breaking inaugural fund, with both Boeing and Lockheed Martin donating $1 million each, according to a US filing.

Trump’s first proposed budget – for the fiscal year that begins on the 1st of October – is yet more confirmation that we can expect a continuation of the perennial wars under the ‘anti-interventionist’ commander-in-chief. The budget includes a 10% increase for the Pentagon (yes, the same Pentagon that couldn’t account for $6.5 trillion during the 2015 fiscal year), which will put the national security budget at over $600 billion if it is approved.

To put that in perspective, Russia’s defence budget has been well under $100 billion for years, with the 2017 budget slashing defence spending to around $50 billion. Trump’s proposed budget also includes 100 Tomahawk cruise missiles from Raytheon, helping to replenish the ones used to strike a sovereign country that is at the forefront of the real war on terrorism.

As I warned in an article published all the way back in August 2016, the idea peddled by Trump’s zealot supporters during the election campaign that Trump was somehow an anti-war, anti-interventionist candidate, was, and still is, total nonsense. Trump will continue the long tradition of US Presidents who pursued policies that enriched the military-industrial complex at the expense of an infinite number of human lives.

Dwight D. Eisenhower’s warning over half a century ago could not have been more prescient, as the military-industrial complex is one of most powerful special interests that rules the US today. Unfortunately, Americans did not heed Eisenhower’s warning, which he expressed in his 1961 farewell address:

This conjunction, of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry, is new in the American experience. The total influence – economic, political, even spiritual – is felt in every city, every state house, every office of the federal government. We recognise the imperative need for this development, yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications… In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists, and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes.

Steven MacMillan is an independent writer, researcher, geopolitical analyst and editor of  The Analyst Report, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”, where this article first appeared.


Huffington Post General Discussion / McMaster Does Bilderberg
« on: June 01, 2017, 06:25:59 PM »



By Kurt Nimmo

Donald Trump’s top advisor, H.R. McMaster, will attend the Bilderberg meeting this week. His name is on the participant list.

See it here.

So much for draining the swamp.

During the election, it was obvious Trump had no intention of taking down the deep state. It was merely a phrase fed to him by Steve Bannon and the alt-righters. It was an election gimmick, a trick to get you to pull the lever.

Trump and McMaster are caretakers in the swamp. McMaster knows the score, I’m not sure Trump does. The system is owned by the elite, international banks and corporations. The interlocking fascist plutocracy is not going to allow a New York billionaire to have an alt-right revolution.

The last president to the learn this lesson the hard way was John F. Kennedy.

Trump loves himself too much to let that happen.

McMaster will have his say on Iran, Syria, and what the establishment calls ISIL.

How to live this betrayal down? It’s not a problem.

Most Trumpites are not schooled in the finer details of the swamp, so Bilderberg might as well be German bratwurst to them. Millions of Americans are vested in Trump. Even if they know what the Bilderberg meeting is they can’t back down now. They continue to explain away his broken campaign promises.

McMaster’s sojourn to the table of the global elite will be reported in the alternative media and in Europe, but don’t expect much from The New York Times or The Washington Post.

It’s time the alt-right look elsewhere for presidential material.

Kurt Nimmo is the editor of Another Day in the Empire, where this article first appeared. He is the former lead editor and writer of Donate to ADE Here.





By Anna Hunt

The French government is about to make some drastic changes to the enforcement of cannabis use laws. A government spokesperson revealed that by the end of 2017, France will end all prison terms for cannabis users.

Existing Policy

Current French law states that cannabis use is a criminal offense. It is punishable by up to one year in prison and up to a EUR 3,750 fine. Regardless, officials plan to end prison terms for cannabis users, even though cannabis use will remain a criminal offense until further legislative changes take place.

One can expect that these changes the government will modify existing law in some way or another. Many expect further cannabis law reform by French President Emmanuel Macron considering his election campaign platform.

Although decriminalization of cannabis use is unlikely in France, an initiative exists to reform the judicial procedure when prosecuting cannabis users. Government spokesperson Christophe Casaner stated:

Last year, 180,000 people were found to be in violation of drug laws. On average these cases take up six hours of police time and the same amount for the presiding magistrate.

Casaner added:

What is important today is to be effective, and above all to free up time for our police so they can focus more on essential matters.

Is Policing Cannabis Use Essential?

Consequently, what the French government is saying is that policing cannabis users is not essential. What is happening more frequently are scenarios where police officers are turning a blind eye when it comes to recreational cannabis use. Patrice Ribeiro of the French police officers’ union, stated:

Most policemen who arrest a user tell him to throw the joint away and then let them move on.

Although these changes in the enforcement of cannabis use laws in France may seem small, they are likely to free up some of the country’s judicial resources. The French Observatory for Drug Use and Addiction reported that in 2014, 17 million French citizens said they had taken cannabis at some point in their lives. There are estimated 700,000 daily cannabis users in France.

Read more articles by Anna Hunt.

Anna Hunt is the founder of Awareness Junkie, a community paving the way to better health, a balanced life, and personal transformation. In addition, she is the proprietor of, an online store offering GMO-free healthy storable food and emergency kits. Anna is a certified Hatha yoga instructor and founder of Atenas Yoga Center. She enjoys raising her children and being a voice for optimal human health and wellness. Visit her essential oils store here.

Like Waking Times on Facebook. Follow Waking Times on Twitter.

Awareness Junkie created and published this article (France to Effectively Decriminalize Cannabis by Ending Prison Terms) under a Creative Commons license with attribution to

Disclaimer: This article is not intended to provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of Waking Times or its staff.





By Brandon Turbeville

As ISIS moves across the world, conveniently popping up wherever America wants to touch down, the fact that the terrorist organization is an American creation is becoming more and more obvious to many people. Regardless, the news that ISIS recently managed not only to conduct terror attacks in the Philippines but was able to seize and occupy an entire city caught many people by surprise. Indeed, for those who are unaware of the nature and history of the terrorist organization and what role American imperialism plays in regards to its activity, the recent events in the Philippines no doubt have many Americans absolutely befuddled.

The Incident

As the Independent article “ISIS-Linked Militants Behead Police Chief And Take Priest And Churchgoers Hostage In Philippines City,” reported on May 24,

A Catholic priest and churchgoers have been taken hostage by Isis-linked militants attempting to seize control of a city in the Philippines, while the local police chief has been beheaded.

President Rodrigo Duterte has declared martial law on the island of Mindanao, where militants have taken over much of the largest city of Marawi, and cut short a state visit to Moscow in order to return to Manila.

While details of events from inside Marawi remained hazy after militants cut off electricity, gunmen are believed to have forced their way into a cathedral and seized the Rev Chito Suganob, alongside more than a dozen members of his congregation and staff, as fighting continued to rage with government troops.

. . . . .

Mr Duterte revealed upon his arrival back in Manila that the police chief was stopped at a checkpoint set up by the militants and murdered.
. . . . .

Thousands have fled the city amid intense fighting between the army and up to 100 militants from the Maute group, part of a loose alliance of militant groups which pledged allegiance to Isis in 2015. The fighters appear to have reacted to a botched security raid on a hideout belonging to Isnilon Hapilon, a commander of the Abu Sayyaf militant group and designated leader of the alliance.

Two soldiers and a police officer were among those killed and at least 12 people have been wounded in the violence, in which Maute fighters set fire to a school, a church and a prison.

Authorities insisted the situation was under control, but residents who fled Marawi said it was in the hands of the extremists, who had allowed civilians to leave.

“The city is still under the control of the armed group,” student Rabani Mautum told Reuters in nearby Pantar town, where some residents were leaving in overloaded trucks.

“They are all over the main roads and two bridges leading to Marawi.

“I was in school when we heard gunfire … when we came out there were bloodstains in the building, but we did not see dead or wounded.”

. . . . .

A photograph from one resident showed the black flag used as a symbol by Isis flying in Marawi, and other flags are believed to have been erected elsewhere in the city.

Alongside Abu Sayyaf, the Maute group is one of two major militias in the Philippines linked to Isis, which is attempting to intensify its presence in Asia.

There is little question that ISIS is attacking the Philippines but now the question is why?

Why Is ISIS Attacking The Philippines?

If one can rightly understand ISIS for what it is – the proxy army of the United States, NATO, Israel, and the GCC – the reasons for attacks, the location of attacks, and their timing tend to make much more sense. Such is the case with the recent “surprise” attacks in the Philippines.

Bouth Maute and Abu Sayaff are offshoots of ISIS and al-Qaeda which are themselves funded by and facilitated by Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the intelligence agencies of Western powers. The United States has successfully used this strategy since at least the late 1970s and it continues to do so today.

The global network of terrorism, allegedly inspired and dictated through cave-dwellers with good modems is evidenced by the fact that, even as Russia, Syria, and Iran destroy the focal point of radical Sunni terrorism in the Middle East in Syria and Iraq, the organization continues to launch attacks across the world in Europe, North America, Australia, Africa, and Asia. The Philippines is only the most recent location to witness a surprise jihadist offensive that overwhelms security forces and shakes the confidence of the population in their government.

ISIS and ISIS-style terrorism is Asia is not a new thing, however. As Tony Cartalucci writes in his article, “ISIS Touches Down In The Philippines,”

Likewise, violence in Malaysia and Thailand are directly linked to this wider US-Saudi alliance, with violence erupting at each and every crucial juncture as the US is incrementally pushed out of the region. Indonesia has likewise suffered violence at the hands of the Islamic State, and even Myanmar is being threatened by Saudi-funded terrorism seeking to leverage and expand the ongoing Rohingya humanitarian crisis.

This NATO-U.S.-Saudi-Israeli support network for terrorism easily explains how allegedly backwards terror organizations have such a massive global reach. Philippine officials have been aware of this fact for some time, at least since around 2005 when a WikiLeaks cable stated,

Philippine officials noted their continuing concern about Saudi-origin terrorist financing coming into the Philippines under the cover of donations to mosques, orphanages, and madrassahs. Although three Saudi nationals suspected of being couriers had been detained on separate occasions, Saudi Ambassador Wali had intervened in each case to secure their release.

ISIS Is Controlled By The U.S. And NATO

It is important to point out that the Islamic State is not some shadowy force that emerged from the caves of Afghanistan to form an effective military force that is funded by Twitter donations and murky secretive finance deals. IS is entirely the creation of NATO and the West and it remains in control of the organization.

As Tony Cartalucci writes in his article “Implausible Deniability: West’s ISIS Terror Hordes In Iraq,”

Beginning in 2011 – and actually even as early as 2007 – the United States has been arming, funding, and supporting the Muslim Brotherhood and a myriad of armed terrorist organizations to overthrow the government of Syria, fight Hezbollah in Lebanon, and undermine the power and influence of Iran, which of course includes any other government or group in the MENA region friendly toward Tehran.

Billions in cash have been funneled into the hands of terrorist groups including Al Nusra, Al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI), and what is now being called “Islamic State in Iraq and Syria” or ISIS. One can see clearly by any map of ISIS held territory that it butts up directly against Turkey’s borders with defined corridors ISIS uses to invade southward – this is because it is precisely from NATO territory this terrorist scourge originated.

ISIS was harbored on NATO territory, armed and funded by US CIA agents with cash and weapons brought in from the Saudis, Qataris, and NATO members themselves. The “non-lethal aid” the US and British sent including the vehicles we now see ISIS driving around in.

They didn’t “take” this gear from “moderates.” There were never any moderates to begin with. The deadly sectarian genocide we now see unfolding was long ago predicted by those in the Pentagon – current and former officials – interviewed in 2007 by Pulitzer Prize-winning veteran journalist Seymour Hersh. Hersh’s 9-page 2007 report, “The Redirection” states explicitly:

To undermine Iran, which is predominantly Shiite, the Bush Administration has decided, in effect, to reconfigure its priorities in the Middle East. In Lebanon, the Administration has cooperated with Saudi Arabia’s government, which is Sunni, in clandestine operations that are intended to weaken Hezbollah, the Shiite organization that is backed by Iran. The U.S. has also taken part in clandestine operations aimed at Iran and its ally Syria. A by-product of these activities has been the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam and are hostile to America and sympathetic to Al Qaeda.

“Extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam” and are “sympathetic to Al Qaeda” – is a verbatim definition of what ISIS is today. Clearly the words of Hersh were as prophetic as they were factually informed, grounded in the reality of a regional conflict already engineered and taking shape as early as 2007. Hersh’s report would also forewarn the sectarian nature of the coming conflict, and in particular mention the region’s Christians who were admittedly being protected by Hezbollah.

While Hersh’s report was written in 2007, knowledge of the plan to use death squads to target Middle Eastern countries, particularly Syria, had been reported on even as far back as 2005 by Michael Hirsh and John Barry for Newsweek in an article entitled “The Salvador Option.”

Regardless, Cartalucci states in a separate article, “NATO’s Terror Hordes In Iraq A Pretext For Syria Invasion,”

In actuality, ISIS is the product of a joint NATO-GCC [Gulf Cooperation Council] conspiracy stretching back as far as 2007 where US-Saudi policymakers sought to ignite a region-wide sectarian war to purge the Middle East of Iran’s arch of influence stretching from its borders, across Syria and Iraq, and as far west as Lebanon and the coast of the Mediterranean. ISIS has been harbored, trained, armed, and extensively funded by a coalition of NATO and Persian Gulf states within Turkey’s (NATO territory) borders and has launched invasions into northern Syria with, at times, both Turkish artillery and air cover. The most recent example of this was the cross-border invasion by Al Qaeda into Kasab village, Latikia province in northwest Syria.

Cartalucci is referring to a cross-border invasion that was coordinated with NATO, Turkey, Israel, and the death squads where Israel acted as air force cover while Turkey facilitated the death squad invasion from inside its own borders.

Keep in mind also that, prior to the rapid appearance and seizure of territory by ISIS in Syria and Iraq, European media outlets like Der Spiegel reported that hundreds of fighters were being trained in Jordan by Western intelligence and military personnel for the purpose of deployment in Syria to fight against Assad. The numbers were said to be expected to reach about 10,000 fighters when the reports were issued in March, 2013. Although Western and European media outlets would try to spin the operation as the training of “moderate rebels,” subsequent reports revealed that these fighters were actually ISIS fighters.

Western media outlets have also gone to great lengths to spin the fact that ISIS is operating in both Syria and Iraq with an alarming number of American weapons and equipment. As Business Insider stated,

The report [study by the London-based small arms research organization Conflict Armament Research] said the jihadists disposed of ‘significant quantities’ of US-made small arms including M16 assault rifles and included photos showing the markings ‘Property of US Govt.’

The article also acknowledged that a large number of the weapons used by ISIS were provided by Saudi Arabia, a close American ally.

The fact that ISIS is nothing more than a name change for al-Qaeda is significant as well since the terror organization was the open creation of the United States with the help of Saudi Arabia as far back as the late 1970s. In its article, “Sleeping With the Devil: How U.S. And Saudi Backing Of Al-Qaeda Led Directly To 9/11,” Washington’s Blog writes:

Jimmy Carter’s National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski admitted on CNN that the U.S. organized and supported Bin Laden and the other originators of “Al Qaeda” in the 1970s to fight the Soviets.

Brzezinski told Al Qaeda’s forefathers – the Mujahadin:

We know of their deep belief in god – that they’re confident that their struggle will succeed. That land over – there is yours – and you’ll go back to it some day, because your fight will prevail, and you’ll have your homes, your mosques, back again, because your cause is right, and god is on your side.

CIA director and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates confirmed in his memoir that the U.S. backed the Mujahadin in the 1970s.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton agrees:

MSNBC reported in 1998:

As his unclassified CIA biography states, bin Laden left Saudi Arabia to fight the Soviet army in Afghanistan after Moscow’s invasion in 1979. By 1984, he was running a front organization known as Maktab al-Khidamar – the MAK – which funneled money, arms and fighters from the outside world into the Afghan war.

What the CIA bio conveniently fails to specify (in its unclassified form, at least) is that the MAK was nurtured by Pakistan’s state security services, the Inter-Services Intelligence agency, or ISI, the CIA’s primary conduit for conducting the covert war against Moscow’s occupation.


The CIA, concerned about the factionalism of Afghanistan … found that Arab zealots who flocked to aid the Afghans were easier to “read” than the rivalry-ridden natives. While the Arab volunteers might well prove troublesome later, the agency reasoned, they at least were one-dimensionally anti-Soviet for now. So bin Laden, along with a small group of Islamic militants from Egypt, Pakistan, Lebanon, Syria and Palestinian refugee camps all over the Middle East, became the “reliable” partners of the CIA in its war against Moscow.


To this day, those involved in the decision to give the Afghan rebels access to a fortune in covert funding and top-level combat weaponry continue to defend that move in the context of the Cold War. Sen. Orrin Hatch, a senior Republican on the Senate Intelligence Committee making those decisions, told my colleague Robert Windrem that he would make the same call again today even knowing what bin Laden would do subsequently. “It was worth it,” he said.

“Those were very important, pivotal matters that played an important role in the downfall of the Soviet Union,” he said.

Indeed, the U.S. started backing Al Qaeda’s forefathers even before the Soviets invaded Afghanistan. As Brzezinski told Le Nouvel Observateur in a 1998 interview:

Question: The former director of the CIA, Robert Gates, stated in his memoirs [“From the Shadows”], that American intelligence services began to aid the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan 6 months before the Soviet intervention. In this period you were the national security adviser to President Carter. You therefore played a role in this affair. Is that correct? Brzezinski: Yes. According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahadeen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, 24 Dec 1979. But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise Indeed, it was July 3, 1979 that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the president in which I explained to him that in my opinion this aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention.


Q: And neither do you regret having supported the Islamic fundamentalism, having given arms and advice to future terrorists?

B: What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?

The Washington Post reported in 2002:

The United States spent millions of dollars to supply Afghan schoolchildren with textbooks filled with violent images and militant Islamic teachings ….

The primers, which were filled with talk of jihad and featured drawings of guns, bullets, soldiers and mines, have served since then as the Afghan school system’s core curriculum. Even the Taliban used the American-produced books ….

The Council on Foreign Relations notes:

The 9/11 Commission report (PDF) released in 2004 said some of Pakistan’s religious schools or madrassas served as “incubators for violent extremism.” Since then, there has been much debate over madrassas and their connection to militancy.


New madrassas sprouted, funded and supported by Saudi Arabia and U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, where students were encouraged to join the Afghan resistance.
And see this.

Veteran journalist Robert Dreyfuss writes:

For half a century the United States and many of its allies saw what I call the “Islamic right” as convenient partners in the Cold War.


In the decades before 9/11, hard-core activists and organizations among Muslim fundamentalists on the far right were often viewed as allies for two reasons, because they were seen a fierce anti-communists and because the opposed secular nationalists such as Egypt’s Gamal Abdel Nasser, Iran’s Mohammed Mossadegh.


By the end of the 1950s, rather than allying itself with the secular forces of progress in the Middle East and the Arab world, the United States found itself in league with Saudi Arabia’s Islamist legions. Choosing Saudi Arabia over Nasser’s Egypt was probably the single biggest mistake the United States has ever made in the Middle East.

A second big mistake … occurred in the 1970s, when, at the height of the Cold War and the struggle for control of the Middle East, the United States either supported or acquiesced in the rapid growth of Islamic right in countries from Egypt to Afghanistan.

In Egypt, Anwar Sadat brought the Muslim Brotherhood back to Egypt. In Syria, the United States, Israel, and Jordan supported the Muslim Brotherhood in a civil war against Syria. And … Israel quietly backed Ahmed Yassin and the Muslim Brotherhood in the West Bank and Gaza, leading to the establishment of Hamas.

Still another major mistake was the fantasy that Islam would penetrate the USSR and unravel the Soviet Union in Asia. It led to America’s support for the jihadists in Afghanistan. But … America’s alliance with the Afghan Islamists long predated the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 and had its roots in CIA activity in Afghanistan in the 1960s and in the early and mid-1970s. The Afghan jihad spawned civil war in Afghanistan in the late 1980s, gave rise to the Taliban, and got Osama bin Laden started on building Al Qaeda.

Pakistani nuclear scientist and peace activist, Perez Hoodbhoy, also wrote about the role of both the West and Pakistan in the creation of global jihad and the control those countries had over the movement. He wrote,

The bleeders [leaders who advocated the idea of “bleeding” the Soviet Union, by Hoodbhoy’s own definition] soon organized and armed the Great Global Jihad, funded by Saudi Arabia, and executed by Pakistan. A powerful magnet for militant Sunni activists was created by the US. The most hardened and ideologically dedicated men were sought on the logic that they would be the best fighters. Advertisements, paid for from CIA funds, were placed in newspapers and newsletters around the world offering inducements and motivations to join the Jihad.

American universities produced books for Afghan children that extolled the virtues of jihad and of killing communists. Readers browsing through book bazaars in Rawalpindi and Peshawar can, even today, sometimes find textbooks produced as part of the series underwritten by a USAID $50 million grant to the University of Nebraska in the 1980’s . These textbooks sought to counterbalance Marxism through creating enthusiasm in Islamic militancy. They exhorted Afghan children to “pluck out the eyes of the Soviet enemy and cut off his legs”. Years after the books were first printed they were approved by the Taliban for use in madrassas – a stamp of their ideological correctness and they are still widely available in both Afghanistan and Pakistan.

At the international level, Radical Islam went into overdrive as its superpower ally, the United States, funneled support to the mujahideen. Ronald Reagan feted jihadist leaders on the White House lawn, and the U.S. press lionized them.

Washington’s Blog also adds that, Michael J. Springmann, chief of the visa section at the U.S. Consulate in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, claims that the CIA insisted that the consulate approve visas for Afghanis so that they could travel to the United States and be trained in terrorism so that they could then be sent back to Afghanistan to fight the Soviets.

This, of course, only addresses the beginning of the terrorist group and not the fact that the United States has used and supported al-Qaeda ever since during the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, the attempted assassination of Ghaddaffi in Libya in the late ’90s, death squads in Iraq, the eventual overthrow and murder of Ghadaffi in 2011, and terrorists in Syria for the last six years. Indeed, the United States has also openly supported them in their operations against Iran.

The U.S. Pivot To Asia

In accordance with the Obama administration stated strategy that the United States would “pivot to Asia,” the United States is becoming increasingly active (read, aggressive) in the entire region, most notably southeast Asia. This is because the strategy is based mainly upon the perceived need to not only contain China as a geopolitical competitor but to break China from providing any resistance to the Western financier system which is being imposed by force on nations all across the world. Russia, partially in Asia itself, also falls into this target system. The Philippines is just one of many other nations in Asia facing the incremental destabilization and force of the Western countries, particularly the United States as a repercussion for not simply falling into line with the dictates of the Anglo-European financier system.

“The Philippine president, Rodrigo Duterte, cancelling his meeting with Russia is a microcosm of the very sort of results Maute and Abu Sayaff are tasked with achieving in the Philippines,” Cartalucci writes. “Attempts by the US to justify the presence of its troops in the Philippines as part of a wider strategy of encircling China with US military installations across Asia would also greatly benefit from the Islamic State “suddenly spreading” across the island nation.”

The “Asian Pivot” was announced by one of the leading bloodthirsty officials of the 21st Century, then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in 2011, and involves the “rebalancing” of 60% of U.S. forces to the Asia-Pacific theatre. Obviously, more forces equal the need for more bases in the region and the U.S. is moving fast to acquire those bases as well as other necessary staging grounds. In the Philippines, the U.S. is using the spectre of the Chinese threat, a real but stoked and overstated concept, in order to frighten the Filipino government into cooperating. One issue surrounds the desire to re-open U.S. bases in the Philippines which were closed in the late ’90s due to pressure from the population surrounding the behavior of American servicemen as well as the political domination of the U.S. over the Philippines as a whole.

Shortly after the Obama administration’s Asian pivot plan was publicly announced, in 2014, the EDCA (Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement) was signed, allowing the United States access to five separate bases in the Philippines on a rotational basis under the guise of “humanitarian and maritime security” operations.

Although not legally “permanent” or “officially” controlled by the US,” writes Andrew Korybko of The Duran, “this wink-and-a-nod arrangement would in reality allow the US to redeploy its forces to the Philippines, returning the Philippines archipelago to the role of the US’s second ‘unsinkable aircraft carrier’ (alongside Japan) which it had during the Cold War.”

Korybko further explains the usefulness of the Philippines in regards to the U.S. plans to “contain” China. He writes,

The Pentagon plans to use the Philippines as the maritime lynch of its “China Containment Coalition” (CCC), gathering all of its allies’ navies together and deploying them within provocative striking range of China’s claimed islands.

The other three members of the US-led Quadrilateral Security Dialogue – Japan, India, and Australia – would find their own way to “rotate” their military units throughout the Philippines islands as well, thereby forming the core of the CCC.

To add a regional element to this mix, the plan is for the Philippines and Vietnam, both of which contest some of China’s maritime claims, to intensify their strategic cooperation to the point of a mutual defence treaty.

This would draw Vietnam into the network of the anti-China coalition being built up by Washington by using the defence ties between Vietnam and the Philippines to making the members of the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue de facto allies of Vietnam.

Altogether, the Pentagon plan is to produce a critical mass of hostile states near China’s southern maritime border which backed by the US could quickly “counter” any moves by Beijing thereby “containing’ it to the East Asian mainland.

The Philippine Pivot To China

While the Philippines under Duterte have made positive motions toward China, it has also made moves toward greater independence from the influence and control of the United States. As Washington becomes more and more hostile to Beijing, the two acts are becoming more and more exclusive.

Back in 2014, Duterte stated that, while he intends to honor the EDCA, he will do “from a position of strength,” giving credence to the suspicions that he has the EDCA set in his sites and that the agreement will be scrapped as soon as he has the legal justification for doing so within the framework of the agreement. Duterte went on record that same year to state that the EDCA should be abandoned if Americans soldiers are going to use it in order to escape justice for criminal acts they commit in the Philippines.

Andrew Korybko writes,

This pinpoints an issue very sensitive for Filipinos who have vivid memories of how US troops were able to escape punishment for acts of gross misbehaviour whilst the US military occupied its bases in the Philippines. Public anger over this issue was one of the key factors in mobilising local opposition to the bases and explains why many Filipinos oppose their return.

Since it is impossible to imagine such an incident not arising at some point, it is all but inevitable that a situation will occur which will fulfil Duterte’s criterion for scrapping the “Enhanced Defence Cooperation Agreement.” Taken together with Duterte’s assertion that he intends to deal with the US “from a position of strength” it is easy to see how this might trigger the process of revoking the agreement.

No Filipino politician has previously spoken about the US in this way. Moreover other things he has said also suggest an intention to send a strongly independent line.

In article published by Stars and Stripes in 2016, it was noted that Duterte does indeed have the EDCA in his sights. The article reads,

Duterte publically [sic] opposed the Visiting Forces Agreement with the U.S. – of which the EDCA was an amendment – and claimed in 2013 that he had rejected a request by the U.S. to establish Davao as a base of operations for drones.

Earlier this year, he was quoted saying that although the country was now bound by the EDCA, he had “reservations about the presence of foreign troops.” He added, “We will not allow the building of structures.”

Duterte has also recently become more and more critical of the U.S. foreign policy in public such as the interview conducted by Maria Finoshina of RT. During the course of the interview, Duterte pointed out the hypocrisy of the West whenever it complains of human rights abuses and crimes against humanity in other countries. Duterte said,

RD: Yes. Even in war, even in your own country, if there is fighting between the police and security forces, and civilians are hit, accidentally, and they die. That is not a crime for the police or the security officer. Because they use automatic guns. And when you are confronted with automatic guns, several bullets go out of the barrel, and some of those would penetrate the walls of the houses, and some will go long way and hit another one. But it is really in connection with the fight between law and order and criminals. But you have to pay, the state has to pay. But – sorry. Just like Americans. When they drop the bomb there, it is so powerful that it also kills others there.

But we are talking about human liability. So, it doesn’t say that, because they are Americans, they are exempted. And just because I am a small time government official, I am not exempted. So, where’s the fairness there? No? When they drop bombs, they kill so many villages, and there’s not even a whimper. America invaded Iraq. What was the excuse? That there were weapons of mass destruction. And yet when they invaded Iraq, so many people were killed. So where is justice now?

MF: So you think it’s really hard to avoid civilian casualties?

RD: We need to say, justice has to be equal. It cannot be a justice for one, and another set of standards of justice for another. It has to be equal.

MF: Is that the reason why you’re turning away from America?

RD: Because they refused to understand my predicament when they knew that they were also in the same predicament, only on a larger scale. Remember Panama? Okay, they invaded Panama, a sovereign state in Central America. So what was the purpose there? They went inside, seized the country, arrested the president, brought him outside the country, placed him in a detention cell in New York. He faced a trial in the Federal Court and is convicted. What happened to the invasion? And what was the reason? Drugs.

You invade a country. Me, I’m just fighting the criminals in my country. I never invaded a country. You have to look at it this way: there is so much incongruity in the principles that are being followed by nations. The powerful ones, they can invent the weapons of mass destruction or they can invade your country. Me, I never touch anybody. I do not even go to the United States. And then they criticize me for the criminals that I have killed!

The Stars and Stripes article did more than point out Duterte’s hostility to the EDCA. It also highlighted the fact that Duterte appears interested in dealing with the Chinese one on one as an independent country. Stars and Stripes quotes Duterte himself in regards to the President’s China policy. It says,

In Romualdez’s interview with the front-runner, the candidate said “we really don’t need the Americans to deal with the Chinese because the Chinese want to talk to us alone.”

“If I become president I’m going to reach out to the Chinese and talk to them alone without American intervention,” he said.

Andrew Korybko adds even more to the question of the Filipino-Chinese relationship when he writes,

Worse still for the US Duterte is saying the Philippines and China could have peaceful and pragmatic relations with each other, engaging in bilateral dialogue over their disputes without the meddling interference of the US.

What that would mean for the US is that the Philippines might become a tacit Chinese ally, which would completely upend the regional strategic balance.

That is not what Duterte is actually calling for, but he did say is that he not only would be open to talking to Beijing, but would even further and engage in joint exploration in the South China Sea. Further, in seeking to develop the decades-neglected infrastructure of one of the most promising economies of Asia, Duterte has suggested that he would be open to inviting China to build a railroad and other types of connective projects that Beijing has become globally renowned for. This would of course mean replacing US contractors – traditionally heavily entrenched in the Philippines – with cheaper and possibly more efficient Chinese ones – potentially causing US companies to lose out from billions of dollars of construction deals.

Joint maritime exploration and infrastructure cooperation between the Philippines and China has the potential to turn the entire Philippines archipelago into the latest pit stop for China’s New Silk Road, presenting the US with its biggest geopolitical setback since the reunification of Crimea with Russia.

Opposing US Imperialism Does Not Equal Supporting Duterte

It seems clear enough that Duterte and his country has now found itself in the sites of the United States and a Western world aimed at forcing the hegemony of a corporate-financier oligarchy on the rest of the planet. What is left of Filipino independence is now at stake. The recent ISIS activity in the Philippines is clearly an attempt by the United States/NATO to force Duterte back into the Western sphere of influence and American domination. It is an attempt to prevent China from gaining a valuable ally and expanding its own sphere of influence and to use the Philippines as America’s “unsinkable aircraft carrier.”

Unfortunately, the Filipino people are facing the onslaught of a Western-backed terrorist organization as well as the leadership of a verified killer. Duterte’s “war on drugs” has already claimed a sizeable number of lives of both drug dealers and drug users. The Filipino people are thus being forced to choose between Western imperialism and internal fascism. Those of good will seemed to be faced with the same choices.

However, the reality of the situation is not that simple. One does not need to side with a tyrant in order to oppose American imperialism. Opposing American intervention in the Philippines, whether directly or by use of proxy terrorist organizations like ISIS, does not mean that one supports Duterte and his murderous war on drugs. It simply means the Filipino people should have the right deal with Duterte in the Philippines while Americans should deal with America within their own borders as well. Indeed, those who oppose America’s imperialism must also have the courage to admit that America’s targets are also flawed and, at times, tyrants themselves. America’s evil does not make its victims good. Likewise, evil of America’s victims does not justify America’s intervention, wars, or destabilization tactics.

Recognizing that Duterte and thus the Philippines is now a target of Western imperialism should not be seen as a glorification of Duterte or a glorification of his leadership. It is, however, simple realism. If people of good will cannot maintain a commitment to their principles without simply joining sides, then there will be few positive effects to come out of all the good will in the world.

Brandon Turbeville – article archive here – is the author of seven books, Codex Alimentarius — The End of Health Freedom, 7 Real Conspiracies, Five Sense Solutions and Dispatches From a Dissident, volume 1 and volume 2, The Road to Damascus: The Anglo-American Assault on Syria, The Difference it Makes: 36 Reasons Why Hillary Clinton Should Never Be President, and Resisting The Empire: The Plan To Destroy Syria And How The Future Of The World Depends On The Outcome. Turbeville has published over 1000 articles on a wide variety of subjects including health, economics, government corruption, and civil liberties. Brandon Turbeville’s radio show Truth on The Tracks can be found every Monday night 9 pm EST at UCYTV. His website is He is available for radio and TV interviews. Please contact activistpost (at)

This article may be freely shared in part or in full with author attribution and source link.





By Rory Hall

Central banksters, central planners and governments in general have grown up over the past 4-5 decades believing they own the citizens and have the absolute right to dictate every aspect of our lives. They don’t. Unfortunately, what has happened is the citizens, around the world, have bought the lie the government has been selling – we are here to care for you, your children and everything you need we will provide. What a scam.

Now, it appears, there is a growing number of citizens that see this lie for what it truly is – dictatorship and enslavement. As we have pointed out endlessly, in the United States, the enslavement began with the passing of the Federal Reserve Act in 1913. The lies, corruption and fascism have all had to grow up with the Federal Reserve Note – U.S. dollar – otherwise, the lie would have been revealed a long time ago and the jig would’ve ended.

We see the results of what is termed “populism” with the election of Donald Trump, the BREXIT vote in the U.K. and the uprisings across Europe. The people have had enough and their voices grow stronger every day.

How do we maintain this movement? How do we, as individuals, grow stronger, smarter and break away from this failed system? What are the lessons from our ancestors we can learn and combine them with today’s technology to create a system that works for us? How does that happen and how will it work?

Our grandparents and great-grandparents lived a much simpler life. Primarily they grew their own food, maintained their own water supply and when something “broke” or needed repairs they either did it themselves or recruited local help with the necessary skills. Usually these tasks and chores, depending on the size and scope, were handled devoid of any monetary transaction. Simple trade or other form of “payment” was made. These transactions were “off-book” and did not require any government intervention on any level. They didn’t have a codes department telling them what they can and cannot do with their property, there was no tax man waiting for his cut at the end of the transaction and the other neighbors kept to themselves and didn’t really feel the need to tell someone how to raise their child. My, my, my how things have changed.

Why can’t some, or all, of these situations be handled today as they were 100 years ago? Actually, they can. We need the guts to knock on our neighbor’s door or reach out to the church and have the courage to ask for help or seek guidance with an open mind. We can also remove our monetary transactions from view of the government. We now have options to make this happen. We now have technology, both ancient and new, that will allow us to break away from the system almost completely. Within a few years, or, perhaps, even in a few months, we may actually be able to break away 100%.

Enter GoldMoney and cryptocurrencies. Gold Money was introduced in 2015 by the Gold Money company. Gold Money is a form of digital gold that spends like your national currency, e.g. U.S. dollar. The physical gold is held in a vault and has a debit card assigned to it allowing the end user, owner of the physical gold, to use the debit card on most any of the credit/debit card systems currently in operation. This is genius.

Gold and silver have been money and stores of wealth since the beginning of trade. Now we have, not only, GoldMoney, but several new players getting into the market using the blockchain. ZenGold, OneGram and, coming soon, Royal Mint Gold are backed by physical gold and the “tokens” or “coins” can be acquired in as little as one gram of physical gold. This technology allows a person to spend gold instead of their worthless national currency.

Grow our own food, begin drinking actual water instead of lead-laced poison coming out of the tap and using alternative forms of currency. Combine these with other self-sufficient means and the next thing you know your life has transformed into something altogether different and a heck-of-a-lot more meaningful.

How can someone begin to make these changes? A great starting point is The Conscious Resistance, published by Derrick Broze and a handful of other like-minded seekers of truth. Starting June 1, 2017 in Houston, TX, Derrick and his merry pranksters will set out across the country delivering a message of new beginnings, self sufficiency and new/old ways of doing things. The next 30+ minutes will introduce ways, in detail, that will help you and your family move closer to home and further away from government interference and theft.

Easiest way to get your first bitcoin (Ad)

Rory Hall’s site is The Daily Coin, where this article first appeared. Beginning in 1987 Rory has written over 1,000 articles and produced more than 300 videos on topics ranging from the precious metals market, economic and monetary policies, preparedness as well as geopolitical events. His articles have been published by Zerohedge, SHTFPlan, Sprott Money, GoldSilver, Silver Doctors, SGTReport, and a great many more. Rory was a producer and daily contributor at SGTReport between 2012 and 2014. He has interviewed experts such as Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, Dr. Marc Faber, Eric Sprott, Gerald Celente and Peter Schiff, to name but a few. Don’t forget to visit The Daily Coin and Shadow of Truth YouTube channels to enjoy original videos and some of the best economic, precious metals, geopolitical and preparedness news from around the world.





By Jay Syrmopoulos

Gardendale, AL — A regular summer right of passage for motivated teenagers across the United States in search of some extra spending money has always been cutting the neighbors’ grass. However, teens in Gardendale, Alabama, and many other cities across the United States, are about to get a rude lesson in how government overregulation stifles personal and financial growth.

Local officials and area law services have reportedly warned area teens that without a business license issued by the city, which costs $110, they are in violation of a city ordinance, thus violating the law, if they attempt to cut grass without a license.

It’s patently absurd that local teenagers can’t make a private agreement with a neighbor to mow a lawn without the government sanctioning the transaction by inserting themselves as the arbiter of who is allowed to legitimately cut grass.

Mowing grass in the summer is often one of the first jobs a motivated teenager will engage in during their summer break from school. But, with a business license costing $110 for a job that will likely be ongoing for a few short months in the summer, the cost will likely drive many ambitious entrepreneurial teens away from what would likely be a rewarding experience.

“I have never heard of a child cutting grass having to have a business license,” Elton Campbell, whose granddaughter, Alainna Parris, mows a few lawns around the neighborhood, told ABC-33/40.

“She charges one lady $20, and another lady $30, and another girl $40 besides what we pay her,” said Campbell.

The teen is disappointed as she felt like this was the perfect way for her to make some extra money during the summer.

“Just helping out and raising money for admissions and trips,” said Alainna Parris.

According to Campbell, Parris is allegedly being targeted by someone upset by the competition from the teen. That person is using the power of the state to eliminate his competition.

“One of the men that cuts several yards made a remark to one of our neighbors, ‘that if he saw her cutting grass again that he was going to call Gardendale because she didn’t have a business license,’” said Campbell.

Campbell called out the irony of trying to prevent a child from taking on a summer job, when they show an internal drive and take the initiative, as so many teenagers are not engaging in enterprising behavior, or taking on additional responsibilities, during their summer break.

“He’s coming after a kid when a kid is at least trying to do work. There’s kids at home on iPads and electronics and not wanting to go outside,” said Parris.

Mayor Stan Hogeland weighed in on the controversy, noting that when operating a business for pay within the city limits, you must have a business license. But, he also said that sending law enforcement after a child trying to earn extra money in the summer is not a priority. Unfortunately, however, if children do resist this tax on their entrepreneurial spirit — police force will most assuredly come. These children would most assuredly face at the very least, a fine, and possibly even arrest.

Hogeland stated he’s committed to finding a way to resolve this issue. But, of course, the government still wants its cut, so he will explore the possibility of a temporary license for summer months that targets entrepreneurial youth.

“I would love to have something on our books that gave a more favorable response to that student out there cutting grass. And see if there’s maybe a temporary license during the summer months that targets teenagers,” said Mayor Hogeland.

While it is heartening to hear Mayor Hogeland recognize that it’s unfortunate there are young people are complaining about the permits for cutting their neighbors grass for a few bucks and saying that he doesn’t want this to discourage kids from trying to earn money, the fact that he still believes that these kids should be licensed, speaks to the true insanity of government over regulation.

There is clear cognitive dissonance seen in Hogeland’s ability to recognize the foolish and petty nature of calling city authorities on these teenagers for trying to do something adults should be congratulating and supporting while at the same time failing to acknowledge that there is no legitimate reason for these kids to be licensed.

The formality of requiring teens to be licensed to cut grass is a simple revenue generation scheme, plain and simple. This type of regulation does nothing to keep anyone safe – and only serves to enrich the government coffers.

Once again the free market is being squeezed by unnecessary regulation, for the sake of revenue generation, which only serves to stifle competition and keep consumer prices higher.

Jay Syrmopoulos is an geopolitical analyst, freethinker, and ardent opponent of authoritarianism. He is currently a graduate student at the University of Denver pursuing a masters in Global Affairs and holds a BA in International Relations. Jay’s writing has been featured on both mainstream and independent media – and has been viewed tens of millions of times. You can follow him on Twitter @SirMetropolis and on Facebook at SirMetropolis. You can support his work at Patreon. This article first appeared here at The Free Thought Project.





By Carey Wedler

In the United States, a crazed racist is currently facing murder charges for stabbing multiple men who attempted to stop him from harassing two teenage girls. In a court appearance, he justified his murder of two Americans, one a military veteran, by citing “free speech.”

On the other end of the spectrum, in Switzerland, a man was just convicted of liking Facebook comments that implied the plaintiff was racist, highlighting the potential dangers of regulating speech.

The Guardian reported:

According to a statement from the Zurich district court, the 45-year-old defendant accused an animal rights activist, Erwin Kessler, of racism and antisemitism and hit the ‘like’ button under several comments from third parties about Kessler that were deemed inflammatory.

The comments were made in 2015 during heated discussions on a range of Facebook groups about which animal welfare groups should be permitted to take part in a vegan street festival, the Swiss daily Tages Anzeiger reported.

Kessler was previously convicted under an anti-racism law almost twenty years ago and received a short prison sentence for “comparing Jewish ritual slaughter methods to Nazi practices,” a conviction already questionable in and of itself.

Kessler sued over a dozen Facebook commenters over their 2015 statements. The unnamed man convicted of liking comments was the only defendant found guilty without actually posting his own Facebook comments. The court ruled that “y clicking the like button, ‘the defendant clearly endorsed the unseemly content and made it his own,’” as noted by the Guardian.

The court also determined that the defendant had insulted Kessler’s “honor” and, by liking the “unproven” comments, exposed their content to large numbers of people. The court ruled the defendant failed to prove the allegations were true.

The comment-liking defendant was fined 4,000 Swiss francs ($4,129 USD). Amr Abdelaziz, a lawyer for one of the defendants, said those convicted can appeal but it’s unlikely they will put in the time and resources to do so.

Though the conviction was made by a lower court, Abdelaziz believes it could still have profound implications across the country. He said the court needs to clarify whether liking Facebook comments “should be given the same weight as other forms of speech more commonly cited in defamation cases,” the Guardian reported.

“If the courts want to prosecute people for likes on Facebook, we could easily need to triple the number of judges in this country,” Abdelaziz said. “This could also obviously easily become an assault on the freedom of expression.”

Creative Commons / Anti-Media / Report a typo





By Jason Ditz

The most recent figures related to President Trump’s proposed increases in Pentagon spending, along with cuts at the State Department, show the general national security budget of the United States rising once again, with the 2018 proposal in the ballpark of $1.1 trillion.

Needless to say, that’s the biggest military budget on the planet by a far measure. As the figures are broken down into their component parts, however, it becomes particularly shocking how money is disappearing not just into the general war-fighting budget, but into related costs of having such a massive military for so long.

For interest, Veterans Affairs is expected to eat up $183.5 billion, which by itself comes very close to being the second largest military budget on the planet, just behind China’s $200 billion overall cost for its vast military. Figuring in other retirement costs, the cost of retirees is even bigger.

This $1.1 trillion also includes over $112 billion that just represents the interest on the military’s share of America’s massive national debt. This interest alone would be more than the cost of NATO’s next two largest member nations’ militaries, Britain and France.

Even cuts in international affairs don’t really put a dent into how much the cost of everything else is rising, and with plans for a massive modernization scheme related to America’s massive nuclear weapons arsenal, the $21.8 billion nuclear weapons expenses for 2018 could easily explode manyfold, with the expectation that they’ll dump well over $1 trillion just in the modernization scheme over the years to come.

The costs of retirees and debt are likewise things that could rapidly grow out of control, as increases in the amount being spent on fighting in the present inevitably leads to even more retirees and an even vaster debt to service.

Jason Ditz writes for, where this article first appeared.

Image Credit: Global Research





By Vin Armani

In this video, Vin Armani interviews Jack Spirko of The Survival Podcast about how preparedness and self-sufficiency feeds his political philosophy as an anarcho-libertarian voluntaryist. Spirko’s 5-day-a-week podcast is about managing his homestead in Texas, practical prepping, permaculture and self-reliance. It receives a remarkable 150,000 downloads per day.

Visit Jack at

Watch the full broadcast here
Live free and succeed outside the rigged system! Join the Counter Markets newsletter and community

Vin Armani is the host of The Vin Armani Show on Activist Post, TV Star of Gigolos on Showtime, Agorist entrepreneur and co-founder of Counter Markets. Follow Vin on Twitter and subscribe on YouTube. Get the weekly podcast on iTunes or Stitcher. Vin is available for interviews at email Vin (at)





By Clint Siegner

The U.S. and other nations with “free market” economies got credit for defeating the communists in Russia. That is ironic, because it is now more clear than ever that Western leadership actually shares the Soviet inclination for central planning, and they have been increasingly intervening in our markets since the collapse of the USSR.

Our officials make economic policy as if healthy markets must be planned and coerced, much like the politburo. Some of this policy is created and run in the open; the government bailouts, Quantitative Easing, and zero interest rate policy, for example.

Other programs are more secretive. Investors know the “Plunge Protection Team” exists to be the buyer in markets when all genuine buyers have left. But we can only guess as to what that crew actually does day to day.

What these self-appointed market masters do in complete darkness is likely even more controversial and intrusive. They remain violently opposed to audits and other attempts to impose accountability.

But, recently, some leaked documents have given a sense of what Western officials do behind closed doors.

They have actually been micromanaging markets since the 1970s.

Ronan Manly with Bullionstar wrote a terrific piece outlining the coordination among western central bankers pertaining specifically to the gold market after Nixon shut the “gold window” and launched the era of purely fiat currencies.

WikiLeaks published a secret memo sent from London to the U.S. Treasury Department regarding the purpose behind the formation of the futures markets for gold.

Officials wanted to create a paper market which dwarfed the physical market and encouraged volatility; all with the aim of discouraging investors from holding bullion. To wit:


The futures markets have served their nefarious purpose very well. Americans today view gold as volatile and risky, and almost no one owns any of the physical metal.

So it is with good reason that many investors look at today’s markets and sense the disconnect from reality. We now know what artificial forces produce record high stock prices relative to earnings.

We understand why precious metals investors have been driven to distraction wondering why prices never seem to reflect fundamentals. We can see why government regulators might intentionally turn a blind eye to clear evidence of bank traders rigging prices and cheating customers.

What are the consequences of all this central planning? It would be impossible to list the full effects. But is easy to identify some of the winners and losers that have been hand-picked by the bankers and bureaucrats who run this show.

The banking and finance industry has more than doubled as a percent of GDP over the past 40 years. The government sector is also just about double the size it was in the 1950s in proportion to the economy. Meanwhile, the gold and silver markets spend years with prices held at, or below, the cost of production – a playground for crooked bullion bankers.

Western central planners aren’t going to be immune from the consequences of their actions.

People are waking up to just how fake today’s markets are. After all the public interventions never end, the leaked documents are generating new awareness, and many fundamental investors now sense the markets are little more than Potemkin villages – even if they don’t fully understand why.

These factors are eroding confidence, which means the ultimate consequence of all this central planning may not be so different from that which befell the USSR. The facade can be maintained no longer and therefore crumbles.

We may be one big shock in the financial markets away from a collapse of confidence. The jig will be up. And, we can hope, responsibility will be pinned where it belongs. The central planners here in the West should be remembered for being just as inept and destructive as those who once set Soviet quotas for the production of ball bearings.

Clint Siegner is a Director at Money Metals Exchange, the national precious metals company named 2015 “Dealer of the Year” in the United States by an independent global ratings group. A graduate of Linfield College in Oregon, Siegner puts his experience in business management along with his passion for personal liberty, limited government, and honest money into the development of Money Metals’ brand and reach. This includes writing extensively on the bullion markets and their intersection with policy and world affairs.





By Jon Rappoport

If Trump had Hillary’s Russian connection…

Trump would be curled up in a ball in a bunker a few hundred feet under the White House. And that’s on his best day.

The newspapers and television news would be citing nothing less than treason as the cause for his impeachment. They would claim he was, in fact, helping Putin win World War 3 against the US. A nuclear war.

Forget “Putin influenced the election on behalf of Trump.” Instead, mainstream attack dogs would be claiming Trump was a conscious agent who had been turned, years ago, against his home country. The dogs would be making up stories about how this happened.

“It was on a business trip that the world changed for a desperate real estate mogul named Donald Trump. Mr. Trump was on his way to Moscow, ostensibly to meet with several Russian oligarchs about a casino project he was hoping to launch. Instead, he huddled with a representative and close friend of Vladimir Putin at the Baltschug Kempinski Hotel, and that friend offered Mr. Trump a different kind of deal, one that would change his life forever and alter the future of America…”

This is what we would be seeing and hearing if Donald Trump had been involved in the 2013 Clinton business deal with Russia that everyone knows about—but no one is willing to prosecute or even cover (anymore) in the mainstream press.

I have written about the Clinton deal before, but it’s worth reviewing again, given the kind of heat Trump is dealing with for Phone Conversations. Conversations several of his people have had with Russians; even business deals that could have been consummated during those discussions.

So…here it is again. Imagine Hillary and Bill Clinton were not the wheelers and dealers. Imagine Trump was. Try to conceive what would be happening to him now vs. what is happening to Bill and Hillary: i.e., nothing.

I’ll go one step further. Wherever Bill or Hillary’s name, or the name of their Foundation, appears in the NY Times story I’m about to quote, I’ll substitute a Trump name (in CAPS), so you get the full effect:

Consider this plot line. Follow the bouncing ball.

Putin wants 20% of uranium on US soil. That 20% is owned by a Canadian mining company.

The Canadian executives want to sell it to Putin.

But because uranium is a US “national security” product, various US federal agencies have to OK the deal. One of those agencies is the US State Department.

The State Department is headed up by MELANIA TRUMP. Her Department says yes to the uranium deal.

The kicker? Those Canadian mining executives, who wanted the sale to Putin to go through, donated millions to the TRUMP FAMILY FOUNDATION.

Memory is short. On April 23, 2015, the NY Times ran a story under the headline: Cash Flowed to TRUMP Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal.

The bare bones of the story: a Canadian company called Uranium One controlled a great deal of uranium production in the US. It was sold to Russia (meaning Putin and his minions). So Putin now controls 20% of US uranium production.

From the Times: “…the sale gave the Russians control of one-fifth of all uranium production capacity in the United States.”

From the Times: “The [Pravda] article, in January 2013, detailed how the Russian atomic energy agency, Rosatom, had taken over a Canadian company [Uranium One] with uranium-mining stakes stretching from Central Asia to the American West. The deal made Rosatom one of the world’s largest uranium producers and brought Mr. Putin closer to his goal of controlling much of the global uranium supply chain.”

“At the heart of the tale are several men, leaders of the Canadian mining industry, who have been major donors to the charitable endeavors of DONALD TRUMP and his family. Members of that [mining] group built, financed and eventually sold off to the Russians a company that would become known as Uranium One.”

“Frank Giustra…a mining financier, has donated $31.3 million to the foundation run by DONALD TRUMP…”

“Since uranium is considered a strategic asset, with implications for national security, the deal [to sell Uranium One to Putin] had to be approved by a committee composed of representatives from a number of United States government agencies. Among the agencies that eventually signed off was the State Department, then headed by Mr. TRUMP’S wife, MELANIA TRUMP.”

“As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the TRUMP Foundation. Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the TRUMPS, despite an agreement Mrs. TRUMP had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors. Other people with ties to the company made donations as well.”

“And shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Mr. TRUMP received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock.”

Got the picture?

Circumstantial case, you say?

Well, imagine the case applied to Donald Trump and his wife.

Where would we be now?

What hell would be unleashed from the press corps?

What venom would be spewed from the Arctic Circle to Tierra del Fuego?


And that headline would run on a mild slow news day.

But Hillary and Bill Clinton, the actual players in the Russia/Putin/uranium deal…

Roam free.

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Image Credit: The Anti Media





By Aaron Dykes

In this video, Aaron Dykes covers a shocking news clip from 1971 about vaccines. Today the corporate media doesn’t dare report anything like this. Yet, even back then, it was laced with propaganda.

Aaron & Melissa Dykes are the founders of, Subscribe to them on YouTube, like on Facebook, follow on Twitter, and support on Patreon.

Watch their mini-documentary Obsolete here and their new series The Cold Noir here.





By Michael Maharrey

Activists in Connecticut are working to improve a bill to limit the use of “stingrays.” If amended and passed, the proposed law would not only protect privacy in Connecticut, but would also hinder one aspect of the federal surveillance state.

The House Judiciary Committee introduced House Bill 7291 (HB7291) in March. The legislation would require a judicial order for the use of a cell site simulator device to obtain geo-location tracking information in most situations.These devices essentially spoof cell phone towers, tricking any device within range into connecting to the stingray instead of the tower, allowing law enforcement to sweep up communications content, as well as locate and track the person in possession of a specific phone or other electronic device.

The proposed law would allow for the use of a stingray to obtain geo-location data without a judicial order for no longer than 48 hours if the information is relevant to an ongoing criminal investigation and if exigent circumstances exist.

The House passed HB7291 by 144-0 on May 17.

As at stands, the bill has two glaring weaknesses.

It only prohibits stingray use for geo-tracking. It does not address using a cell site simulator to gather communications data. Language in the bill currently could be taken to allow police to use a stingray to listen in on phone conversations or access text messages without judicial oversight.
HB7291 does not require an actual warrant. Police could use a cell site simulator with a judicial order based only on an officer’s sworn statement. The order would be “shall issue” meaning the judge would have no authority to scrutinize and reject the officer’s petition. He would have to issue the order simply based on the existence of the sworn statement.

Due to these issues, privacy activists including the Connecticut ACLU are pushing for the following amended language to remedy the bill’s weaknesses.

The judge may grant any order sought pursuant to subsection (b) (3) (authorize use of a surveillance device to obtain, the content of a subscriber’s or customer’s communications or geo-location data associated with a subscriber’s or customer’s call-identifying information) upon finding probable cause to believe that a crime has been or is being committed and that the content of such subscriber’s or customer’s communications or the geo-location data associated with such subscriber’s or customer’s call-identifying information is relevant and material to an ongoing criminal investigation. Any such order entered pursuant to this subsection shall state upon its face the case number assigned to such investigation, the date and time of issuance and the name of the judge authorizing the order.

With these changes, HB7291 would be a strong piece of legislation limiting the use of stingrays. Otherwise, it could open the door to even more intrusive warrantless stingray use.


The federal government funds the vast majority of state and local stingray programs, attaching one important condition. The feds require agencies acquiring the technology to sign non-disclosure agreements. This throws a giant shroud over the program, even preventing judges, prosecutors and defense attorneys from getting information about the use of stingrays in court. The feds actually instruct prosecutors to withdraw evidence if judges or legislators press for information. As the Baltimore Sun reported in April 2015, a Baltimore detective refused to answer questions on the stand during a trial, citing a federal non-disclosure agreement.

Defense attorney Joshua Insley asked Cabreja about the agreement.

“Does this document instruct you to withhold evidence from the state’s attorney and Circuit Court, even upon court order to produce?” he asked.

“Yes,” Cabreja said.

As put it, “The FBI would rather police officers and prosecutors let ‘criminals’ go than face a possible scenario where a defendant brings a Fourth Amendment challenge to warrantless stingray spying.”

The feds sell the technology in the name of “anti-terrorism” efforts. With non-disclosure agreements in place, most police departments refuse to release any information on the use of stingrays. But information obtained from the Tacoma Police Department revealed that it uses the technology primarily for routine criminal investigations.

Some privacy advocates argue that stingray use can never happen within the parameters of the Fourth Amendment because the technology necessarily connects to every electronic device within range, not just the one held by the target. And the information collected by these devices undoubtedly ends up in federal data bases.

The feds can share and tap into vast amounts of information gathered at the state and local level through a system known as the “information sharing environment” or ISE. In other words, stingrays create the potential for the federal government to track the movement of millions of Americans with no warrant, no probable cause, and without the people even knowing it.

According to its website, the ISE “provides analysts, operators, and investigators with information needed to enhance national security. These analysts, operators, and investigators…have mission needs to collaborate and share information with each other and with private sector partners and our foreign allies.” In other words, ISE serves as a conduit for the sharing of information gathered without a warrant.

The federal government encourages and funds stingrays at the state and local level across the U.S., thereby undoubtedly gaining access to a massive data pool on Americans without having to expend the resources to collect the information itself. By placing restrictions on stingray use, state and local governments limit the data available that the feds can access.

In a nutshell, without state and local cooperation, the feds have a much more difficult time gathering information. Amending and passing HB7291 would represent a major blow to the surveillance state and a win for privacy.


The bill has moved over to the Senate. It will need to be amended before a full Senate vote. If you live in Connecticut, contact your state senator and urge him or her to support an amendment version of HB7201. You can find contact information HERE.

Michael Maharrey [send him email] is the Communications Director for the Tenth Amendment Center, where this article first appeared. He proudly resides in the original home of the Principles of ’98 – Kentucky. See his blog archive here and his article archive here.He is the author of the book, Our Last Hope: Rediscovering the Lost Path to Liberty. You can visit his personal website at and like him on Facebook HERE

Image Credit: The Free Thought Project


Pages: 1 ... 477 478 [479] 480 481 ... 707