What Is The Law, and Why Are Most Activities Now Considered Illegal By The State?

Just about every action in our daily lives is now considered illegal. But what is the Law exactly? The game is so rigged against we, the registered property of the state, that it has become difficult to ignore. Some are worried that if we shrank government, we would have anarchy, or if we distributed wealth there would be socialism. The fact is that we already have anarchy, because governments break the Law, Judges break the Law, Police break the Law, and corporations break the Law. We already have Socialism, but only for the rich -hence those “Bailouts” for the wealthy bankers. The poor have access only to the modern feudalism that was once upon a time based on Free Market Capitalism, built upon the skeleton of something called a “Democratic Republic.” These old English terms may be difficult to comprehend in today’s doublethink that is Corporate Fascism advertised as Democracy. Our journey essentially began with a Birth Certificate. Why do the words, “Midwest Bank Note Company” appear at the bottom of a notarized document edged with webbing very similar to the one-dollar-bill’s edged webbing? Your birth certificate is worth a hell of a lot more than a dollar, but only to the FED and only in estimated tax revenue over the course of a lifetime -valued at approximately $700,000. Our bodies have become Corporations, and Corporations have in turn become “Persons.” Citizens United was just the beginning. Instead of abiding to the Common Law of the Land, these Corporate Persons make Policy, which Police enforce. Is there anything the politicians could enact into Law that the the police wouldn’t perform? Isn’t there something inherently unethical about obeying laws that put people in jail for petty, technical offenses while keeping other people out of jail for enormous crimes? Is there anything we can do to reclaim the Old Republic?

Law is more than the Policeman on the corner, the enforcement of the courthouse, or the punishment of the jail. Law is one of three forms of Social Control which regulate our daily lives. The first is the Custom, which accounts for what we typically do. The second is the Moral Code, which dictates what we should do. Then there is the Law, know as “that we must do.” Law is supposed to be a body of rules created by representatives of the people and enforced by established means. There are many don’ts in these Laws, which are ever more prohibitionary. Ideally Law prohibits what the majority decide is wrong but the majority have nearly nothing to do with this process, as should be clearly by the number of drug offenders languishing in chains for petty marijuana possession charges. Law should direct what is agreed to be right, but today it only directs what the Corporations agree to be profitable. Now they’re working toward Superstate legal systems and eventually a world legal system. Technically speaking this has already happened with the Rothschild owned Bank For International Settlements, although for now it remains strictly in the world of finance.

Instead of merely complaining about how unbelievably out of control our militarized domestic police forces have become, let us instead arm ourselves with the knowledge of the Law – knowledge you won’t be taught in Law School. You don’t need to be a Lawyer to understand the Law, and you certainly don’t need to be a member of the BAR association to write up your own legal documents. Those who have endeavored to understand our modern legal system have left us plenty of breadcrumbs along the dark forest path to discover the diamonds of our freedom. The keys to the temple are yours, but you’ll have to turn the lock yourself. This is the story of your enslavement. How it happened and how you can finally regain your freedom.

“NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW”

What is the Law? You’ve heard people say, “No man is above the Law.” So what Law are they talking about? What Laws apply to every single Human Being on this Earth?

The dust has barely settled on the ruthless killing of 38 year-old James Boyd at the hands of Albuquerque police officers. Boyd was shot multiple times and executed for being homeless, a crime they have deemed, illegal camping. A video of the shooting that went viral illustrates one of the body armor covered officers yelling “booyah” after shooting Boyd in the back.

The astonishing brutality prompted more than a thousand protesters to take to streets, expressing outrage over the police murder not just of Boyd, but dozens of fatal police shootings since 2010. These protesters were themselves brutally beaten down by riot police claiming the crowd to be an illegal assembly, and hours after the protests the APD murdered another person whose name has not yet been released. If only police enforced Banking Regulations with the same violent ferocity they do with Camping Restrictions and so-called Illegal Assemblies.

Two days after the protests, US Marshalls in Albuquerque added another state-sponsored corpse to the list of killings by authorities, executing Gilberto Angelo Serrano with a single gunshot would to the head before seizing cameras from surrounding witnesses. Their efforts proved to be in vein, because one video still made it online. Also just this week Sgt. Joey Smith drew his firearm on 11 year-old Omari Grant in Henry-County Georgia because he was building a tree fort. The fifth-grader is now so traumatized he’s hesitant to go outside in his own neighborhood.

Now you may be thinking these are isolated incidents that don’t effect you, but you might do well to take another look around this so-called Republik we’re living in today. The frightening reality of these all-too-common stories is that many police are more interested in citizen subservience than upholding their oath to the constitution. Here in Montana we needn’t look any farther than the recent viral Youtube sensation that is Bozeman mountain man Ernie Wayne Tertelgte, and the frivolous persecution against him in the name of these so-called Laws, to see how the game is rigged against we, the registered property of the state. Today’s systems of Law are a long way from the Magna Carta or Hammurabi’s Code, and has transformed into the Corporate fiction that is darling of the dictators and the plague of the people.

In a world where police can murder the homeless and be called heroes, one might wonder where our country went so radically off course. Just about every action in our daily lives is now considered illegal with statutory limitations dictating everything from permission to build structures on property we apparently own, to the ingestion of ancient plants older than civilization itself. Despite having next to no legal training whatsoever and no requirement to have earned a college degree, police officers are all too willing to follow their superiors’ orders for a pat-on-the-back and an atta-boy, even though said orders might be completely out of line with the constitution, the Bill of Rights and most importantly the Law.

Instead of merely complaining about how unbelievably out of control our militarized domestic police forces have become, let us instead arm ourselves with the knowledge of the Law – knowledge you won’t be taught in Law School. You don’t need to be a lawyer to understand the Law, and you certainly don’t need to be a member of the BAR association to write up your own legal documents. Those who have endeavored to understand our modern legal system have left us plenty of breadcrumbs along the dark forest path to discover the diamonds of our freedom. The keys to the temple are yours, but you’ll have to turn the lock yourself.

NATURAL AND COMMON LAW

In this game they have us playing, there is a hierarchy to Law. Natural Law is supreme, entailing your rights and duties to those who you love. Imagine for a moment you’re in a forest. You live there alone with your family and no one else is around. Your rights and duties to your family essentially boil down to the Natural Law.

Below Natural Law exists Commercial Law. Now suppose in this forest that not just you in this forest, there is another family 100 miles away. Once a month you want to trade your berries for his fish. The commercial Law will now direct your transactions. Commercial Law is primarily concerned with trust because you need to be able to trust the people you’re engaging in Commercial interactions with.

Below Commercial Law exists Common Law. Now imagine that in this forest, whereas before there were only two families, now you have hundreds of families living there. At this point a certain system or structure is needed that will allow all of these people the protection that Commercial Law will afford them. It boils down to the Magna Carta which essentially said that Governments within this structure are bound by their own rules.

So what is the Magna Carta? Back in the days of Robin Hood, King John the tyrant was an actual historical figure who despite wanting to fight expensive and bloody wars, didn’t know anything about how to fight a war. He also lacked the funding to simply overwhelm opposing forces with resources, and having no land to his name, asked Pope innocent III for financial aid. In doing so he turned the entire Kingdom of England over to the Pope and thus promised loyalty. Within just a few years many of his angry Barons (the notorious “Four and Twenty Overlords) cornered him and forced him to sign the Magna Carta. This became the basis of English Law, and in turn American Law, as well as Australia, New Zealand, South Africa et. Al; any Crown Colony’s legal system is based on this document. It is the model for the American Bill of Rights, and the founding document for modern human rights declarations.

So we’ve explored the three systems of Law which deal with you as a Natural Human Being: Common Law, Commercial Law and Natural Law. But there are also forms of Law to deal with your Legal Corporate Person, and they’re known as Statutes, Regulations Bylaws and Orders. These don’t act on your body at all, but instead only act upon your Legal Person. They act only in your “Equity.”  You can only enter into Equity voluntarily. No one can ever force you into it. That’s why they’re utilizing Applications, Registrations and Submissions with your signature on them.”

In his seminal documentary Kymatica, Ben Stewart helps shed more light on this slippery concept:

“A common misconception among people is that any rule or regulation that governs them falls under one category: Law.  But there are many other forms of Law that people abide by without realizing that they simply do not apply to them. One of the predominant beliefs in modern culture is that licenses, permits, registrations and other forms of documentation are required to operate motor vehicles, us public roads, build structures and establishments, engage in free enterprise and much more. Sadly, these beliefs are based on little to no investigation whatsoever, and are false. Drivers Licenses, vehicle registrations, auto insurance forms, building permits, gun permits, work permits, tax filing documents, birth and death certificates, traffic citations and many other forms of documentation that were once believed to be absolutely necessary, only apply to Persons.”

---

WHAT IS THE LEGAL DEFINITION OF A PERSON?

“Do you know that the word ‘person’ means ‘mask’? The ‘persona’ which is the mask worn by actors in Greco-Roman drama, because it has a megaphone-type mouth which throws the sound out in an open-air theater. So the ‘per’–through–‘sona’–what the sound comes through–that’s the mask. How to be a real person. How to be a genuine fake. So the ‘dramatis persona’ at the beginning of a play is the list of masks that the actors will wear. And so in the course of forgetting that this world is a drama, the word for the role, the word for the mask has come to mean who you are genuinely. The person. The proper person. Incidentally, the word ‘parson’ is derived from the word ‘person.’ The ‘person’ of the village. The ‘person’ around town, the parson.”   ~Alan Watts

Slavery has always existed in some form or another. One method is to apply henchmen to force another tribe into obedience, which requires defeating them with force. Another method employees a much more clever deception, allowing the people to keep so much of their earnings for themselves to maintain themselves, and take off all the rest to supply the elite and the overall central banking structure.What is the definition of a slave? There are essentially two:

1) A person who is the legal property of another and forced to obey them

2) A person who is excessively dependent upon or controlled by something

So if we want to be free, perhaps we need to get rid of the dependencies and controls in our lives Judge Napolitano asks, “What is the consent of the Governed?”

“Natural rights are inherent to your humanity and the source of your humanity as a free individual. Just as slaves had the moral and legal right to leave those enslaving them; just as the States have the moral and legal right to leave a union that violates the Constitution that binds them; so too you have the moral right to live without a government when it breaks its own Laws. The federal government claims your consent through the Constitution. The Constitution is a social contract that binds the American people to their government. Did you freely consent to this? I don’t know anybody who did. So since none of us consented to the Constitution, either the government stays within the confines of the Constitution, or we can ignore or change the government.

AN OPEN MESSAGE AND REMINDER TO THE LAW ENFORCEMENT COMMUNITY

As Performed by Josie the OutLaw

“If you work in Law enforcement, I have a very important question for you, one which soon may become a matter of life or death. I’m sure some people become police officers just so they can boss other people around. But I’m going to assume here that you mean well, and that you want to be one of the good guys. In which case, my questions is this: Is there anything the politicians could enact into Law that you wouldn’t enforce? Is there any order that you would refuse to carry out, or will you do absolutely anything your bosses tell you to? In the US police have already obeyed orders to fine or arrest people for a wide variety of harmless activities, such as dancing at the Jefferson memorial, or having a vegetable garden in their front yard. Police have even gone so far as to execute violent paramilitary raids on food co-ops and organic farms. For decades, police have been carrying out armed home invasions, forced property confiscations, and other acts of violence against people who aren’t hurting anyone, but who engaged in behaviors or habits which Lawmakers have arbitrarily declared to be illegal. You may be comfortable in assuming that you’ll never receive an order to do something truly immoral, but the fact is that every order you receive you have a choice between obeying without question, or relying on your conscience. No doubt there were cops a few years ago who never expected to be ordered to disarm innocent people, to do door-to-door home searches without warrant or probable cause, or to detain and interrogate people for merely driving down a road. Yet police have since been ordered to do all of these things, and almost without exception they obeyed. So it’s not unreasonable to ask: Is there any point at which you will draw a line and say, “No. That I will not do.” And if you won’t draw such a line anywhere – if you will do absolutely anything you political masters tell you to – how are you any different from the enforcers of Soviet Russia, Red China, or Nazi Germany? You may be tempted to say, “I don’t make the Law, I just enforce it,” or to argue that if some legislature, court or some authority above you says its okay, then it must be. But keep in mind that this is exactly what the thugs of every tyrannical regime in history said to justify their actions, and how do we remember those people now? As courageous noble Law enforcers? No. Unless you want posterity remembering you as a heartless, mindless pawn of oppression, then you better decide and decide now, where you will draw that line.

“Unfortunately there is little indication that most cops have any line at all. The incidents of police officers refusing to inflict injustice upon the people, are extremely rare. Even when cops say they personally oppose certain Laws, such as marijuana prohibition, nearly all of them continue to violently enforce these Laws against nonviolent people. In other words, they recognize these Laws and counterproductive and unjust, but they choose to enforce them anyway. For the most part, American cops seem completely incapable of disobeying immoral orders, and instead do what the enforcers of every other authoritarian empire have done, inflicting harm on innocent people whenever and however those in power tell them to, while accepting no personal responsibility for their actions. I hope you are better than that.

“Keep in mind, there are a lot of decent Americans who do have the integrity and courage to draw a line in the sand; a point at which they will disobey and resist violations of their rights by those in power. It may be that they refuse to be disarmed. It may be they refuse to cooperate with warrantless searches, or refuse to keep funding a government they view as destructive and unjust. Whether you agree with them doesn’t particularly matter. What does matter is whether in the end you are willing, if and when you are ordered to do so, to violently assault the dissenters for their disobedience. When they draw their line in the sand and stand their ground, and your supervisors tell you to use whatever level of violence is necessary to get submission and compliance from the resisters, would you obey? If it came right down to it, would you kill American citizens for disobeying politicians?

“Now, if someone is actually harming someone else, of course you have the right to use whatever force necessary to stop the attacker and protect the innocent. But that would be the case even if you had no badge and no uniform. But when you try to arrest someone who hasn’t threatened or harmed anyone else, but has only disobeyed some arbitrary regulation, then you are the one initiating force – you are the one starting a fight – you are the bad guy.

“Now remember, the American Revolution was people forcibly resisting gun confiscation, warrantless searches, what they viewed as unfair taxation, and a number of other oppressions all in the name of Law all carried out by Law enforcers. If you had lived back then, would you be among the rebel colonists – the ones who refused to be disarmed, refused to pay taxes, and resisted warrantless detainment and searches? Would you have sided with the signers of the Declaration of Independence, or would you have been among the Red Coats – the Law enforcers – assaulting, caging or killing any colonist with the gall to disobey the king? And which side are you on today?

“Of course the message you’ll get from your superiors, the politicians and your fellow officers is that its not your place to decide which Laws to enforce, and as long as you faithfully follow orders, that you can’t be held personally responsible for doing what you’re told. But that is a lie – a horribly dangerous lie. At the Nuremberg trails it was established that the excuse used by the Nazi Law enforcers that they weren’t to blame and shouldn’t be punished because they were just doing as they were told, did not relieve them of personal responsibility for their actions. And make no mistake, if you choose to blindly obey unjust commands and one day your intended victims decide to fight back, saying that you’re just doing your job will not make you bullet proof. It may be your own life you save by deciding now at what point you will choose to be a moral, responsible Human Being instead of just an obedient pawn of those in power.

“Ultimately only you can answer the question of where you will draw that line. But really, the only moral, rational answer is this: if something would be wrong for you to do without a badge, then you shouldn’t do it with one either. The idea that uniforms and legislation can give you special rights is both false and horribly dangerous. Nearly every large-scale injustice in history was committed by people who wrongly imagined that their position of authority made it okay for them to do things that other people have no right to do. Like everyone else, you have the right to stop attackers, and protect the innocent, and when you do that you are the hero. But you have no right to be the attacker, even if its your job, and even if the aggression is called, “Law.” Always in every situation, you and you alone are responsible for what you do. Wearing a badge and a uniform and doing whatever you’re told does not make you brave and noble or deserving of any respect. “Just following orders,” is a coward’s excuse. If your job requires you to assault or cage people who haven’t threatened or harmed anyone, then quit. Being an actual protector – doing the right thing no matter what anyone else says even if it means disobeying orders and breaking the Law – that takes courage and integrity. That makes you a hero. So do you have enough of a spine to draw that line? Decide now before your failure to think for yourself results in damage that cannot be undone.”

Howard Zinn contends in his 1970 Speech, Civil Disobedience:

“I start from the supposition that the world is topsy-turvy, that things are all wrong, that the wrong people are in jail and the wrong people are out of jail, that the wrong people are in power and the wrong people are out of power, that the wealth is distributed in this country and the world in such a way as not simply to require small reform but to require a drastic reallocation of wealth. I start from the supposition that we don’t have to say too much about this because ail we have to do is think about the state of the world today and realize that things are all upside down.
“If you don’t think, if you just listen to TV and read scholarly things, you actually begin to think that things are not so bad, or that just little things are wrong. But you have to get a little detached, and then come back and look at the world, and you are horrified. So we have to start from that supposition—that things are really topsy-turvy.
“And our topic is topsy-turvy: civil disobedience. As soon as you say the topic is civil disobedience, you are saying our problem is civil disobedience. That is not our problem…. Our problem is civil obedience. Our problem is the numbers of people all over the world who have obeyed the dictates of the leaders of their government and have gone to war, and millions have been killed because of this obedience. We recognize this for Nazi Germany. We know that the problem there was obedience, that the people obeyed Hitler. People obeyed; that was wrong. They should have challenged, and they should have resisted; and if we were only there, we would have showed them. Even in Stalin’s Russia we can understand that; people are obedient, all these herd-like people.
“Remember those bad old days when people were exploited by feudalism? Everything was terrible in the Middle Ages—but now we have Western civilization, the rule of Law. The rule of Law has regularized and maximized the injustice that existed before the rule of Law, that is what the rule of Law has done.
“When in all the nations of the world the rule of Law is the darling of the leaders and the plague of the people, we ought to begin to recognize this. We have to transcend these national boundaries in our thinking. Nixon and [Leonid] Brezhnev have much more in common with one another than we have with Nixon, J. Edgar Hoover has far more in common with the head of the Soviet secret police than he has with us. It’s the international dedication to Law and order that binds the leaders of all countries in a comradely bond. That’s why we are always surprised when they get together—they smile, they shake hands, they smoke cigars, they really like one another no matter what they say.
“What we are trying to do, I assume, is really to get back to the principles and aims and spirit of the Declaration of Independence. This spirit is resistance to illegitimate authority and to forces that deprive people of their life and liberty and right to pursue happiness, and therefore under these conditions, it urges the right to alter or abolish their current form of government—and the stress had been on abolish. But to establish the principles of the Declaration of Independence, we are going to need to go outside the Law, to stop obeying the Laws that demand killing or that allocate wealth the way it has been done, or that put people in jail for petty technical offenses and keep other people out of jail for enormous crimes. My hope is that this kind of spirit will take place not just in this country but in other countries because they all need it. People in all countries need the spirit of disobedience to the state, which is not a metaphysical thing but a thing of force and wealth. And we need a kind of declaration of interdependence among people in all countries of the world who are striving for the same thing.”

AMERICA IS NOT A FREE COUNTRY

 When asked what the title of his 1988 book Manufacturing Consent signified, author and professor Noam Chomsky explained the nature of this borrowed term, its roots embedded the birth of the Public Relations industry:

“The title, Manufacturing Consent is actually borrowed from a book by Walter Lipman written back around 1921, in which he described what he called the Manufacture of Consent as a revolution in the practice of democracy. What it amounts to is a technique of control. He said this was useful and necessary because the common interests – the general concern of all people – elude the public. The public just isn’t up to dealing with them. And they have to  the domain of what he called a Specialized Class. Notice that’s the opposite of the standard view about democracy. There’s a version of this expression by the highly respected moralist and theologian Reinhold Neebor who was very influential on contemporary policy makers, his view was that rationality belongs to the cool observer, but because of the stupidity of the average man, he follows not reason but faith. And this naive faith requires necessary illusion.”

27 years after the publication of Brave New World, Aldous Huxley confirmed this notion of governing by consent:

“To start with I think this kind of dictatorship of the future will be very unlike the dictatorships which we’ve been familiar with in the immediate past. Take another book prophesying the future which was a very remarkable book – George Orwell’s 1984 – where this book was written at the height of the Stalinist regime and just after the Hitler regime, and there he foresaw a dictatorship using entirely the methods of terror – the methods of physical violence. I think what is going to happen in the future is the dictators will find as the old saying goes, that you can do everything with bayonets except sit on them. That if you want to preserve your power indefinitely you have to get the consent of the ruled and this they will do partly by drugs (as I foresaw in Brave New World), partly by these new techniques of propaganda. They will do it by bypassing the rational side of man and appealing to his subconscious and his deeper emotions and his physiology even, and so making him actually love his slavery. I think this is the danger that actually people may be in some ways happy under the new regime.”

For harsh, truthful, specific insight on what these necessary illusions entail, comedian Doug Stanhope repeatedly hits the nail squarely on the head:

“The Pledge of Allegiance is in the Supreme Court. That’s another trick argument. “Under God should be in the Pledge of Allegiance.” – “No it shouldn’t.”  We don’t need a Pledge of Allegiance, say that. Why do you need that brainwashing cult shit? If you have a good product, kids will find out on their own – you don’t need to advertise. 12 years of forced advertising. You’ve done drugs at some point, right? Did you have a good time? Did you ever see them advertised? They didn’t need to. If you’ve got a good product, people come around. You don’t need that shit. “Well you do have to have ‘under God’ in there because the founding fathers based this country on the principals of Christianity.” If you want to worry about the Pledge of Allegiance, don’t worry about the ‘under God,’ part, worry about, the ‘Liberty and Justice for All.’ The dictionary definition of Liberty is, ‘Freedom from Government Restriction and Control.” Not only do we not have liberty, but who has less liberty than the children you make say this? That’s the irony. They get the least liberty of anyone. They can’t do shit: they can’t drink, they can’t smoke, they can’t drive, they can’t vote, they can’t work, they can’t fuck for God sakes and you wonder why your teenager is such an asshole. You wonder why he is sitting in the Taco Bell parking lot after the Friday night high school football game and he’s keying cars and he’s smearing dog shit on your door handles for no particular reason, it’s because he’s bored out of his tit. You won’t let him do anything else. On the news you see a ten year old kid in a third world country; he’s got an AK-47 and a death stare looking right into the camera; that kid’s not spray painting overpasses on Saturday night. He’s got shit to do. He’s got a whole agenda. So if you want to fix the Pledge of Allegiance, put a disclaimer at the end: ‘…with liberty and justice for all – must be 18, void where prohibited, some restrictions may apply, not available in all states.’

“How do you pledge allegiance to a Government? How do you do that? All America is, is a government. There is no such thing as, ‘we’re Americans.’ That’s just trivial bullshit to get you rooting for the home team. You’re not an American, you’re a guy, or a chick – you’re a person. You’re an individual. That’s it. Until the Mongols come over the hills swinging machetes trying to take our fire-hazard, underground comedy club away from us, then we all buddy up as one. But those days are over. There’s no one trying to take America over. We weren’t on the verge of speaking Iraqi.

“If you’re going to pledge blind allegiance and call yourself an American for a government that fucks you on a regular basis, democracy is the worst kind. I’m sorry but it is. ‘We get to pick our leaders.’ Well, what if I don’t want a leader? Where does that vote go? I do good on my own. I don’t want to be led. Is that freedom? American Idol was the number one show for the last two years; those are the people picking your leaders, with less insight than they put into whether Rubin’s daughter should win an award. Would you call yourself a Christian if they had a new Jesus every four years?”

Regarding the concept of “freedom,” Stahnope’s 2004 analysis is the most articulate and lucid of anyone who has spoken of it in recent history. While performing his Deadbeat Hero tour, Stanhope said of America:

“Its not a Free Country. You’re born free except for Laws of nature. If you drink you get drunk that’s a Law. If you get old you die, that’s a Law too. If you sit on a tack you will bleed from the ass. These are the only Laws that you’re born with and any government just fucks you out of that type of Freedom. If you really think you’re free tonight – you – officer bob, you’re a free man, you live in a Free Country. You go upstairs, and take your beer you risked your life for and sit on the hood of your Mazda truck in the parking lot and drink your beer, and see how long it is before actual veteran cops come by and pound on you with trungeons on the kidneys. “Why can’t I do it? I’m just having a beer.” “I don’t know, it’s the Law though. You don’t fuck around.”

“You can’t drive down the street without a seat belt on. Why not? I don’t know. You’ve gotta put on a helmet. You can’t sit in your own back yard naked. Your own filthy dirty flesh that you’re born with. You know that body you carry around. Filthy. You can’t sit out there naked. Why not? That’s just the way it is.

“You’re not free. You’re not free in the least. You need a diploma in this country to cut hair. Free? you need to keep your tray in the upright and locked position during takeoff. That’s not just a hack premise, it’s a fucking felony.

“They say if you give a man a fish, he’ll eat for a day, but if you teach a man to fish then he’s got to get a fishing license but he doesn’t have any money so he has to get a job and he has to get into the Social Security System and pay taxes and now you’re going to audit the poor sucker because he’s not really good with math. They pull the IRS up to your house, they’ll take all your shit and that all goes up for auction with the burden of proof on you because you were just worried about eating a fish. And you couldn’t even cook the fish because you needed a permit for an open flame. And then the health department is going to start asking you a lot of questions about where you’re going to dump the scales and the guts, and “this is not a sanitary environment.” And ladies and gentlemen, if you get sick of it all, at the end of the day it’s not even legal to kill yourself in this country.

“You were born free, you got fucked out of half of it and you wave a flag celebrating. The only true freedom that you find is when you realize and come to terms with the fact that you are completely and unapologetically fucked. And then you are free to float around the system. ”

---

 TEACHING A MAN TO FISH

In a world of legal crimes perpetuated by agents of a system that will never police itself, those who have put themselves on the line to defend the Constitution and return to the rule of Law are consistently persecuted for failing to cooperate with a Corporate government. Common Law rights advocate Dean Clifford, arrested at his own seminar in front of crowds of suspicious citizens. Meanwhile, a simple mountain man named Ernie Wayne Tertelgte fights for his own common Law rights in Bozeman, Montana. 52 year old Ernie Wayne Tertelgte was arrested in September of 2013 and accused of fishing without a license and resisting arrest – their so-called “charges” don’t tell a very complete story of what actually happened, however. And while news and media outlets undermine Ernie’s exemplary courage, intelligence and tact, the online community reacted immediately to the Youtube videos of Ernie taking on Judge Wanda Drusch in the Three Forks Justice Court. Recently in January of 2014, Ernie recorded and submitted a verbal Affidavit of the events surrounding the petty technical offenses charged against him. Here is the abridged transcript of said Affidavit, as was aired on 5 May 2014 by the Outer Limits:

“Good afternoon. My name is Ernie Wayne Tertelgte, and I am the natural living man. Many of you know that I’ve had a large battle going with the Montana Court system in Gallatin County of Boseman Montana over the all-capitalized Corporate fiction that would appear to be my name, spelled in all caps which would then cause me to be property. You’ve heard me speak to the fact that I am not said property, that I am the living dirt, the living water, and the living air which all three have a voice. At the minute that voice is me. It’s also you.

“Do you believe in the Golden Rule of Law, which states that no one is above the Law? In Montana our State Law here which I have right here for a direct reference, mandates that every official, regardless of capacity, that holds any office, first must recite an oath to uphold and defend  the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the state of Montana, and that upon demand any official must produce that evidence of that oath, immediately. It should be memorized. That official as far as Montana is concerned it totally required to produce it just the instant you ask for it. If they can do it by memory, that would be the better for them. The facts of the matter are that none of them have done this. In Montana State Law, it is found in CF 37-61-207 Montana Code Annotated 2011.

“As to regards to my case I filed this request on the 6th of September of 2013 looking to build the discovery packet that would give me all the information necessary to navigate this banking mess, that they want you to think is a court action. It is a simple banking mess. Not one single actor – not a banker that wants you to think they’re a judge, not a deputy, not the sheriff – all of them, have utterly failed to observe and uphold the very oath that they took to claim the office that they’re claiming. There has not been brought to my hand one shred of evidence that any of them are actual. That causes them to become imposters.

“I began the requirement on this on the sixth of September, Two-Thousand-Thirteen and I gave them thirty days in this required response. In other words I didn’t say, “If you’d like,” or, “At your leisure.” I said you’ve got thirty days and you will produce it.

“Now one thing I’d like to say here. There are some of the deputies that I have come to know throughout this mess here that I have great respect for and I have seen in their faces that they have developed a respect for me. When this first kicked off in early September and I was first arrested and brought in, my manner of speech caused some of them to think that I was a mental case. However as they watched this grow and they watched the impact that all of you have brought to this – Eight-Million, Six-Hundred-Thousand, Four-Hundred hits – has opened their eyes. I have not treated the deputies badly. I have offered to shake their hands. I have looked them in the eyes. I have never called them names. I treated them with respect first. And so it is the to deputies, the working-class men and women that I extend this hand of fellowship to and I say if you’re not aware of this, then because of the Latin phrase “Ignorancia Juris Non Excusat” which means “Ignorance of the Law is No Excuse,” that being a double edged sword, verbally that runs both ways, you’d better dig them oaths out.

“Likewise it was required of them that they produce the evidence of a bond. Now I happen to know from research that it’s an insurance blanket bond. Nevertheless the word says, “Bond.” Where’s the daggum evidence? All of them likewise to the all-caps person, has utterly failed to produce any evidence of anything. That makes them professional frauds; total impostors. So in that 30 days I got utter silence. You heard me tell Wanda Drusch and show her in my large book of information the precise location the number of pages that I had done due diligence on face to face, filed it through all three levels of the Law and justice center which is a pirate ship – it’s a criminal ship having three decks to it – it is totally signed sealed and delivered received all the way in, and you saw that Ms. Drusch had no comprehension of anything that I was speaking of which ought to tell you something about your own cases. They don’t bother to look into it. They don’t have a clue about what you may have filed. This keeps them deeper in their own fraudulent criminal standing. They having had 30 days to comply with state requirement, that window then closed on the sixth of October of 2013.

“[Now], 8 days shy of going to trial on January 27th 2014, total silence is what I’ve had. I have no communiqué form you guys. I have nothing to work with. I’m totally on my own, as are all of you. While you all hear my voice and see my face and my old trihorn hat and all, this is actually you. You’re living this nightmarish hell with corrupt bankers just the same as I. You get to live it every time you receive a bribe from the IRS that  you think is a tax refund. You get to live it every time a private pirate called a Highway Patrolman pulls you over on a British water way for vessel inspection. You think you’re driving down a free way or a state highway or a city street or you’re even parked in your own driveway. Well, my good friends and fellow Americans you’re on British soil and in British water and that’s why you’re under Admiralty Maritime Law. Because while its only me today, it ain’t gonna be much longer, maybe tomorrow, it’s gonna be you.

“Gallatin County, which has 75 deputies on its force, has felt the need to drag in deputies from Mar County, Park County and Sweet Grass County. The last trial you all watched me be arrested at where I stood for the memory of those who fought and died for the 1789 Constitution, well they had deputies form other counties in there. None of those deputies have produced any evidence of their offices either.

“I want to reiterate what I said in the get go. There are good people on the inside. There are honorable men and women, who when presented with the truth, will cease their pirating. I have to give them the chance.

“Look around you at the condition of the county, expand it to the condition of the state. Expand your horizons to the condition of America, the nation at large, look at the world then.

“Think about what it is you’re upholding. What you claim that you’re willing to lay your lives down in defense of? It’s a vampirical system and it’s drained the people of everything.

“How long do think this can go on before there’s a backlash? Truth will not be repressed or suppressed forever. Darkness will not forever hold back the light of day. And neither will the claims of Admiralty Maritime Law hold back the word in Genesis 1, Verse 6, The dry land, the dirt, the soil, the good people of the Earth. Well, the water claims, the Laws of the sea, and the claims of the British Accredited Registry known as the BAR (Mr. Patrick C. Riley you traitor) won’t be able to hold the people back. Their time is a comin’.

“My goal in all of this has been to cause the people to talk, everyone who had an ear and a voice to listen, and to being communication. And as I said before, eight and a half million people is pretty good evidence. So as I have spoken these words to your heart today, remember that while today its me, tomorrow its you. Are you going to be the one in the chains headed for the British Gallows? Think about these things.

“All of you that have listened to this that are good people, I love you. I stand for the people of the United States and the people of the world at large who are under severe persecution by the criminal banking cabal. Thank you to those who have helped me to put this little blip out today. God willing as time permits, perhaps you’ll hear more from me. And with that, I’m going to let you go.”

---

YOU ARE A CORPORATION

They say that suicide is illegal because it is against the Law to destroy government property. Sadly, this statement is not far from the truth. Recently stepping out of obscurity, lifelong reporter Jordan Maxwell spells out just a few of the most obvious smoking guns associated with the modern American Corporate system of Trust Law and how we have all become chattel property under said system.

“Your body is a Corporation. That’s why when you die, you are a corpse, because you are a Corporation. You are a Company. And as such, you may be good Company, you may be bad Company, but you’re a Company nonetheless. By Law, it’s called international Maritime Admiralty Law which is the Law of money, Corporations and the sea. Therefore anything you do is Business. It may not be my Business, it may be your Business, but it’s a business by Law. Therefore anything you do (which is your Business) must have a License. So if you’re going to get married that means one Corporation is going to do Business with another Corporation, so you must have a marriage License. Anything you do, you need to get a Permit or a License.

“And in America you have something called the Statue of Liberty. Notice that it’s not called the Statue of Freedom.  Liberty is what a sailor gets when he gets off a ship in the Navy. When a naval vessel pulls into port, sailors ask permission from the Captain to go onto land. When (and if) the sailors get permission to do this, they call it Liberty – not Freedom. In America you have no Freedom. You have Liberty. Liberty means you ask permission, you get a Permit and you have a license. A License is simply an agreement, and a permit to do something which without that License is unLawful. So therefore you can’t get married without License, because you’re a Business and your spouse is a Business. And what the two of you do is none of my business.

“But the point you need to understand is that you are a Corporation. Your body is being bought and sold on the New York Stock Exchange every day and you have no idea in the world how the world really works. So people talk about having to go to Court and they talk about how the government does this and the government did that, and they get scared to death because they’ve got to go to Court, but why do people go to Court? -Because you play basketball on a Court. You play tennis on a Court. And the reason why you go to Court? It’s a game. It’s like tennis. And how do you play tennis? You play with a racket. So when you go into a basketball game to play on the court the whole idea is you have two teams. One side is a team of Lawyers, and the other is a team of Lawyers. The whole idea is to put the ball in the other guy’s court. And you have a judge who is the referee. You always have a referee, even in a baseball game. You’ve got the referee who makes the decision as to what really happened. I don’t care what really happened. And he decides what happened.  So whatever he says happened, that’s what happened.

“Then the next thing you need to understand is that there is a fence and a gate in the courtroom, and people sit out there and the judge sits inside. Why is there a fence and a gate? Because the gate represents a Water Gate like the Panama Canal. So therefore when you’re called up and you put your hand on the gate, you are opening up the floodgate under Maritime Admiralty Law.

“Happily, Americans don’t know about any of this. If you walk into the court and call your name and you open up the Water Gate, you are now in Hot Water, and somebody is going to have to Bail you out. Banks and Money run the world. So the judge rules from a bench. Look up the word Bench. Bench is a Bank in Latin. And the judge sits higher up looking down on you, but you’re looking up to the Bank.

“When a ship pulls into a harbor, and let’s say it has 800 million dollars of Toyotas on it, it has 800 million dollars of business on board when it comes in on water. So when the ship comes in, we say “it parts at the dock.” This ship of Toyotas amounts to 800 million dollars worth of Banking on a single vessel. Remember that Banking is synonymous with Maritime Admiralty, which is the Law of the Sea. So therefore if you’re going to be doing any business, you need to be part of this Corporation. In the World-Corporation, you are a Citizen on board a Ship. So you have Citizenship, Sportsmanship, Scholarship, Dealership, and Courtship. And any time you order something from a big company they’re going to “Ship” it to you.

“Where a ship sits in the harbor is called Berth. So we say, “The ship is sitting in her berth.” We say, “her” because all ships are she under International Law; they’re all female, just like in Jurassic Park. Because she Delivers the Product. The man on the other hand, Manufactures. So when you have been Manufactured, and she (your mother) Delivers the Product, you are a Product of two Corporations. Your mother was a Corporation and your father was a Corporation. Therefore you are the joint new product of two Corporations. In a similar way, if Ford Motor company gets together with Suzuki, that’s fine as long as they get a License because it’s Business. And regardless of what those two Companies produce, the one who gave them the License is the boss, because before they were Licensed, they couldn’t do it at all. So if the Corporation gives you permission to create a new product, that’s all fine and dandy, but the Product belongs to them, not you.

“So understand that not only is the ship female and sitting in her Berth, but any item taken off of that ship must have its own Certificate of Manifest. And each individual Toyota has to be represented: Four doors? Two doors? Air conditioning? What color is it? How heavy is it? And all of the paper work has to be correct for each item.

“So when you’re born the same events unfold, only it’s called a Birth Certificate: How much does it weigh? What race is it? Does it have two eyes? What color is it? -Because these are all vital signs for a Product. You are a Human Resource. You’re going to be bought and sold by the international banks of New York and London. Your body is a Security of the New York Stock Exchange.

“Next, the words you use on the street don’t work in a Court. You’d better know what you’re talking about when going before a judge. You’d better use the correct term. Because if you use the wrong term thinking they’ll understand, now you’re going to jail because you used the wrong word. The Styles Manual from the British and American Printing Office translates the words for use in International Court.

“A group of people got together back in 1871 and they formed a Corporation after the Civil War they called The United States Corporation, and it was a Municipal Corporation. And it was stipulated that anyone who worked for The Corporation was a member of the Corporation. Today if you are a US Citizen, when you walk into a bank or any place before some authority and they ask you, “Are you a US Citizen,” and you say, “Yes,” What you think they are asking you, is, “Are you Lawfully in American to do business, or are you an A-Lien?” Any good attorney will tell you that if you say you are a US citizen that means you are an employee of a foreign Corporation under Maritime Law and therefore your boss is in Washington D.C. and you work for him.

“Instead of the Law of the Land, the President has Policy, which is why we have Police. Police back up the Policy that the Politicians and Corporate CEOs dictate. So the masters of The Corporation make the Policy, and Police enforce it.”

---

YOU ARE LEGALLY REGISTERED PROPERTY OF THE STATE

So Too Will Your Children Be…If You Consent To It

Edward Mandell House had this to say in a private meeting with President Woodrow Wilson:

“[Very] soon, every American will be required to register their biological property in a National system designed to keep track of the people and that will operate under the ancient system of pledging.  By such methodology, we can compel people to submit to our agenda, which will affect our security as a chargeback for our fiat paper currency.  Every American will be forced to register or suffer not being able to work and earn a living.  They will be our chattel, and we will hold the security interest over them forever, by operation of the Law merchant under the scheme of secured transactions.  Americans, by unknowingly or unwittingly delivering the bills of lading to us will be rendered bankrupt and insolvent, forever to remain economic slaves through taxation, secured by their pledges.  They will be stripped of their rights and given a commercial value designed to make us a profit and they will be non the wiser, for not one man in a million could ever figure our plans and, if by accident one or two would figure it out, we have in our arsenal plausible deniability.  After all, this is the only logical way to fund government, by floating liens and debt to the registrants in the form of benefits and privileges.  This will inevitably reap to us huge profits beyond our wildest expectations and leave every American a contributor or to this fraud which we will call “Social Insurance.”  Without realizing it, every American will insure us for any loss we may incur and in this manner; every American will unknowingly be our servant, however begrudgingly.  The people will become helpless and without any hope for their redemption and, we will employ the high office of the President of our dummy Corporation to foment this plot against America.”

Whenever your dealing with Corporations or Governments, you must keep in mind that they’re not using the same language as you are. They’re not speaking English. They’re using Legalese.

How do you define “Person?” As a Human Being regarded as an individual? The Law definitions that Banks, Governments and Corporations use define it much differently. If we look at Black’s Law Dictionary, Person means individual or inCorporated group having certain legal rights and responsibilities Not a Human Being as an individual, but as an individual Corporation.

Comparing artificial person against Natural Person, we find that an Artificial Person is defined as A legal entity. Not a Human Being.

Natural Person: A Human Being that has the capacity for rights and duties.

The heart of the grand deception is keeping us mired in the world of money, while keeping from us all the fact that nearly every country operates with the Artificial and Natural Persons merged together as one. That means Human Beings are given the rights of Corporations (i.e. no human rights) while Artificial Corporate Persons are given the rights and privileges of Natural Persons more and more so. And the ones aware of this are profiting from it in a multitude of ways. We as sovereign Human Beings are a higher life form that a Corporation. In order for them to control us they’ve had to make great use of parody.

Robert Menard has firsthand knowledge of exactly how we have become chattel property without our even knowing it:

“What I uncovered was that when a person is registered from birth, it is from that point in time that a Legal Person is being created and associated with them. It’s at that point when you join a club, and when you join this club you’re given a membership card. The card itself would be your person as opposed to the Human Being who is the member of the club.

“Elizabeth Amy Lane came into my life about four and a half years ago. Two days after the birth of Elizabeth, ministry workers came and removed her without investigation or assessment. They claimed she only had one care giver. We said you’re wrong and we’re going to meet you in court. They told us that if we did that, she would spend the first five years of her life going from foster home to foster home to foster home. They shut me up in and court cost me my baby. For those of you who don’t know me, shutting me up even for a moment is a bit of a trick.

“So I sat down with Black’s Law Dictionary on one side Bouvier’s on the other, I had an old English dictionary, I looked up every single word in there. This took me three entire days. Nothing but toast and tea and a couple of tokes. And then, near the end of the third day, I finally saw it!

“Have you ever seen those laser pictures, you see nothing until you focus past the page and then a 3D picture pops into your head? Have you seen those? This is exactly what I saw when I did my Statute deconstruction. I suddenly saw what they’re doing. I saw finally their clever little trick.

“Here it is: You are not obliged to register your children. If you do it is at that point that you are creating a Legal entity or a “Person.” By doing so you are associating this Person with your offspring. By doing so you are abandoning ownership or title to that Person, and the government is seizing claim to said Person under the Laws of Maritime Salvage. Therefore the Person becomes their chattel property that they use as collateral to float bonds for loans.”

John Harris picks up where Menard left off:

“You are a man or a woman; you have a Person. My name is John Harris, or Jon. I exist naturally Okay? I’m here. I’m real. I was created by divine whatever you want to call it. I’m subject to Common Law Jurisdiction. I must never harm another, or cause another any form of loss. I’m free and unlimited in ability to contract and settle debt in a private capacity and under Commercial Law. I can basically do what I please as long as I abide by these principals. My Person that is attached to me is Mr. J Harris who is a fictional entity created by the government. He is subject to civil policy jurisdiction must fulfill all duties given to him and governed by Corporate policy (tax etc.) and Statutes.

“How was the Artificial Person created? When you were born your mother and father submitted a Birth Certificate Registration Application form in the formulation of any limited company or Corporation there is always a certificate of registration to create its legal personality. Your fictional person, known by Mr. or Mrs. is created by the same means. When you submit you are bending to another’s will. When you register you are handing over title ownership of what ever you are registering, to whom ever you are registering it to. You actually physically hand this over, and in doing this you acknowledge the transferring of that authority. When you apply it actually means you are begging, and when you beg its assumed you know what you’re begging for, and that you know what you’ll give up. That’s what this means. Most of the time you actually volunteer an application. You’re not made to do it. Do they make you get a Credit Card? No, but you submit an application for it.

“The whole world runs on submitting applications for this or submitting applications for that. You get a certified copy. You do not get the original, which goes somewhere else. The name of the Person that is being created appears in CAPITALIZED SURNAME. The surnames are capitals. This is a fiction. They need another fiction to do this though, who is known as the Informant. You actually inform on your own children. Did you know that? And your qualification is: You’re one of their parents. And it’s all capitalized. Look at your Birth Certificate. At the bottom [of the document] there is a declaration. Declaration is in Common Law, [signifying] a sworn oath of a man or a woman. And there is a reason that is on the bottom. -Because without that man or woman being present, the fictitious mother or father isn’t present. The Person is attached to the Human Being, but to do this, they need the Human Being to be there. That’s why there is a Declaration at the bottom. It says it quite simply you have to be present to represent the person needed to create the new Person’s legal personality. Then you register it to a Corporation.”

The state declares that your children must be registered to them, and threaten that you’ll be liable for prosecution if you fail to comply. So what can you do? Is there any way to avoid registering your biological property? Here is an example of a document one could write up in the event that they do not want to register their children to the state, and seek to claim their rights through administrative declaration:

Declaration of Denial of Consent to register Children
strictly private and confidential

We the authorized representatives for the legal persons [MOM] and [DAD] do hereby declare that the following is a verified plain statement of the facts as we perceive them.

Let it be known by all concerned and interested and affected parties that:

1. We have been granted irrevocable superior guardianship rights over our children by the creator of the Universe

2. We have accepted irrevocable power of attorney over our children’s’ well being and property until the 18th anniversary of their birth.

3. For and on behalf of our children we have settled their entire legal estate into a private trust which is administer for their maximum benefit

4. The property settled into said private trust includes without limitation, any and all information pertaining to the existence of our children, strictly precluding the disclosure of the details of their birth to any party whatsoever.

5. Any and all disclosures of information pertaining to the existence of our children, would represent a breech of the aforementioned private trust and all those parties responsible for said breeches will be liable for charges of $30,000 or function currency.

6. We do not recognize or consent to any perceived obligation whether Statutory or otherwise to register the birth of our children under any circumstances whatsoever.

7. As trustees of the aforementioned private trust, we affirm jointly and without division that we refuse to grant our consent and/or authorization to the registrar, or any other individual organization or entity
to register information pertaining to the birth of our children under any circumstances whatsoever.

What would you imagine would happen after sending that letter in? You’ll likely get threats, pleas, and all manner of excuses, depending on how long you keep the letter writing campaign up, urging you to make an urgent appointment in the near future under “Penalty of Law.” Debt collectors utilize this same lexicon.

If and when they do send you threatening follow-up documents, simply write them another letter outlining your conditions of acceptance. Ask them to prove that there is a benefit to registering, and ask them to prove that you have consented to this registration. Declare that you will accept their terms only if they can provide evidence to support these claims (which of course they cannot).

YOU’RE NOT THE BOSS OF ME

Robert Pagé is a Canadian Freeman and the feature personality of the Ben Stewart documentary Ungrip. Robert outlines his thoughts on the Consent of the Governed:

“I was raised to respect authority, do as they say, and I think most people are brought up that way. But I later learned that authority is based 100% on our consent to being governed. There is a Supreme Court ruling that says that the Consent of the Governed is a foundational principal of Democracy. But what is Consent? Does that imply you have a choice as to whether you are going to agree to that or not? I would suggest that the answer is yes. So we all have free will choice to Consent to being governed. When we do that, we’ve given them permission to use their authority over us. So when we used our free will to apply for or register something, we gave them permission to create a Corporation to interact between the Man and the System. And it’s that Corporation that the system acts upon but because we don’t know who we are. We think or we assume that that is us.

“So when you take a look at your Credit Card or Drivers License tour Birth Certificate, a lot of people including myself thought that that is actually me. But that’s not true. So when the courts are acting upon it, all they can really act upon is a CORPORATION, and the only reason they can act upon the Man is because we agree to be the representative of that CORPORATION, and bind yourself to the terms and conditions of that agreement. But we can say ‘no’ at any time.”

---

JUST SAY NO TO CORPORATE FASCISM

“This is what they don’t want you to know,” contends Robert Menard. “You can actually just say ‘no’ to them.”

“They got everyone to become a government employee. This way, where normally they would be our servants and we would be in charge of them they tricked us all into getting Social Insurance Numbers. These numbers identify us as a government employee, and we’re thus receiving “benefits,” as they call them. Therefore we are bound by the rules that bind all government employees.

“So they’ve tricked ups. We are a nation of people employed by the Government bound by the rules that the Government pens, but only because we are employed by them.

“Your Governments call the Social-Insurance-Number, an Employee-Identification-Number. The courts have ruled that payment into a pension plan is Prima Facie evidence of employee status. Only employees pay into a pension plan. They’ll tell you need this Social Insurance Number to work legally in your own country.”

“To put it into perspective, if someone tells you they are legally working in Wal-Mart, are they not then automatically working legally for Wal-Mart? Wal-Mart employees have rules and regulations they must follow. They can’t come into work and have alcohol on their breath. But who says that you can’t go into Wal-Mart after having a couple of beers? You don’t work there. This is why you have to pay income tax. The fact is your Social Insurance Number means we are all government agents, at least we have the capacity to be under this system.”

“If you go into a temporary job placement agency, they will set you up with a job, but you will have to pay them a portion of what you earn. Why? Because you were working as an agent for them. You  have to pay income tax to the federal government for a similar reason.”

“You are working as a Federal Agent under a contract for service, instead of a Freeman working under contract for hire.”

“When I hear you complaining about the government I don’t hear citizens complaining about their Lawful government, I hear employees bitching about their employer.”

---

DISAGREE WITH FUNDING ILLEGAL WARS? BECOME TAX EXEMPT.

To say no to the system, it is important to engage in a process where you prove beyond a doubt administratively, and without court (even though they’re threatening you with court) to repay alleged debts.

Simply write up a document explaining that liability for debt does not seem to exist. Ask them to prove that your previous taxes haven’t been spent on the illegal wars.  Such a document might be titled, “Declaration of Cancellation of Tax Registration,” declaring that there is no evidence proving beyond a reasonable doubt that a Natural Human Being is a “Tax Payer.” As it turns out, the Orwellian doublespeak hits a big-time feedback loop here: Tax Payers turn out to be Citizens, and Citizens are thus Tax Payers. The only way to opt out of one is to refuse identification with either. This doesn’t mean you aren’t paying “your fair share” for services you expect from Government, because that’s not where your tax money goes (click here for a refresher on the American Income Tax system as espoused by IRS whistleblowers Joe Banister, Sherry Peel Jackson, et Al.).

They will presume you are a Tax Payer until you rebut their presumption, because they operate primarily under presumptions.  In Law, anything that goes without rebuttal stands. So simply rebut their presumptions and watch what begins to unfold.

The Birth Certificate creates a contract which creates joinder between the Human Being and the Corporate fiction, granting  jurisdiction over the Human Being in the form of all the Statutes currently enforced. You are a Human Being. Your JOHN DOE is simply the legal fiction created by the piece of paper known as your Birth Certificate. The ALL CAPS title is known by many names, including De Facto, Strawman, and Capitis-Diminutio-Maxima (Maximum Loss of Rights), but because we will be explaining Corporate Trust Law a bit later on, let us keep simply referring to the corporate fiction as the Legal Person. Therefore your signature on any Legal document confirms that you are representing that piece of paper as a human trustee, or Employee of the State. Signing Legal documents creates joinder between the natural being and the paper fiction.

But authorities are both clever and intimidating, and will coerce your signature onto a great number of documents, all of which revoke your Common Law rights under the status of a slave. Such signatures are known to be written under protest and duress. That is to say that you didn’t wish to sign the document, but were made to anyway. If you’re doing anything against your consent, you’re doing so under Protest and Duress. You can express this in your signature by writing the abbreviation “V.C.” prior to your signature; the Latin phrase Vi Coactus signifies this Duress, and essentially makes the document worthless. It is, however, very important you place the V.C. prior to your signature, not after, and write the two capital letters as large as you can.

Deborah Williams asks, “What does a signature mean?”

“I will tell you right now that when you sign something (no matter what “they” say), it means that you accept liability. And if you don’t read and agree to EVERYTHING you sign, you are making a big mistake. I am constantly being asked… “How do I sign my name? … AND maintain my rights?”

“We all know that before they let us go, they ALWAYS want us to sign something to keep us coming back. There are other points in the “legal” system where a “signature” is expected or required before the court can proceed as well.

“I have heard that adding “Under Duress”, or “All Rights Reserved” to a signature when signing a document will maintain our inherent human rights; and while this could work as well, the proper and Latin way to sign under duress is to add a “V.C.” before your name.

“Vi Coactus, abbreviated to V.C., is a Latin term. Wikipedia cites the definition of vi coactus as:
“constrained by force”. Used when forced to sign (“or else …”)

“Perhaps the most famous use of vi coactus when signing a document was that of Cornelius de Witt. Alexandre Dumas captured the event as follows:

“The Grand Pensionary bowed before the will of his fellow citizens; Cornelius de Witt, however, was more obstinate, and notwithstanding all the threats of death from the Orangist rabble, who besieged him in his house at Dort, he stoutly refused to sign the act by which the office of Stadtholder was restored. Moved by the tears and entreaties of his wife, he at last complied, only adding to his signature the two letters V. C. (Vi Coactus), notifying thereby that he only yielded to force.

“There is scant authoritative information regarding this term on the web. However, on the One Heaven Society of United Free States of Spirits website the following information is provided:

“The Bar want you to sign as surety. At key points in a Court case, the Bar members want you to sign certain documents. Why? Because your signature is like your vocalized consent – it can be legally interpreted as your agreement to be surety for an obligation and to perform as well as to waive other rights.

“Do you have to sign? No you don’t. But in many cases, the Bar has designed a system so that if you don’t it is interpreted as dishonor so that they can invoke their power of attorney powers to declare you delinquent, incompetent and send you to prison anyway.

“This is why you may have heard of people who refused to sign the papers when entering prison and yet were treated worse than most serious criminals, with complete apparent ignorance of their rights- why? because the system is designed at certain points where you MUST sign. So how do you overcome an unjust and unfair system that forces a man or woman to sign under duress, against their will and yet interprets such signatures as valid under Canon Law? The answer is making sure you signature follows a clear mark of duress.

“Before you sign anything under duress, in order not to be unfairly determined as in dishonor and incompetent, you may Lawfully initial in large letters the letters V.C. where you will sign, then sign your name after- always after.

“What V.C. stands for is Latin for Vi Coactus which means literally “under constraint”. This should normally be sufficient on any document which you are forced to sign to bear witness to the fact that it was done under duress.

“Now, at the earliest opportunity before the court or official, you can make it known that upon review of your signature it can be proven to have been forced under threat and coercion and so cannot be used as legally binding agreement.

“In some locations and in some prisons as this knowledge grows, it is possible that Law enforcement officials may start to reject such signatures, adding more threat and force on a person to sign without using V.C. It is your choice remembering that if you allow such criminal intimidation and torture to prevail and do sign without protest then the system can simply lie and state you made such a sign of your “own free will”.
“So if they tear up the paperwork and demand you do it again, stating that such a signature is unLawful then such claims are against the Laws of the Roman Cult Canon Law- the actual Law that underpins their own statutes and regulations. However, if after several attempts they still refuse, there is a second method equally valid- the use of ellipse.

“When the threat of intimidation or outright rejection of Lawful protest is too great, then a second and equally valid method of signing under protest is permitted, namely the use of three full stops placed first, followed by the signature so that the three dots are not obscured by the signature.

“This is called an ellipsis eg “…” and indicates that legally there was a form of words you wanted to state but were unable due to some event, in this case because of threat and coercion. Thus, at the earliest opportunity the ellipsis can be revealed and it can be stated that you intended to write V.C. but were prevented therefore nullifying any agreement. [1]

The Corporate Employees must get a man or woman to represent the Person before a contract can be formed.

When you get to court they will immediately ask you your name, and then they’ll ask you for your address. These are not innocent, small-talk questions to get the conversation started. When you give them your address and you agree to represent the name they call out, they now have joinder between you and the CORPORATION. Because there could be 100,000 JON DOEs in the world, they need the admission of name and the articulation of address to obtain joinder to prove who you are in their system. The moment you do that, the Human Being has said, “Yes, I’m the Person,” and thus agrees to represent the CORPORATION.

A Contact is an agreement between two or more Persons that creates or modifies an existing relationship. Statute is defined in Black’s Law Dictionary as:

“A legislative rule of society given the rule of Law by the consent of the governed.”

Where in this definition does it say that Statute is Law? It is only given the force of Law, which means it will indeed apply to you if you decide to consent.  So what happens when you don’t agree? If you don’t Consent, it isn’t Law, because it can’t be given the force of Law.

Statutes are not Laws. Statutes are rules that has the force of Law within a structured society because somebody gave them that force. If we’re all equal. who can give these words the force of Law? -Only you can. You have decided to give those statutes the force of Law within your Societal structure. So what is a Society? Society is likewise defined as:

“A number of people joined by mutual consent to deliberate, determine and act for a common goal.”

Your consent is required for any Statute to have the force of Law. Point out the word Act to any agent claiming authority over you and ask what it means. You don’t have to make a positive affirmation in order for them to achieve consent; your silence and inaction will raise the appearance of consent. Consent can be achieved when you do nothing, so don’t do nothing!

Just as Thomas Jefferson once remarked, “All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent.”

STATUTES ARE NOT LAW

A police officer’s duty under common Law of this land is to serve and protect every individual on this land. That is their duty, and they mustn’t delay rights or justice to any individual in this land. But though they’re bound to uphold the Common Law, they have a fiction attached to them just like you have a CORPORATION attached to you, only their fiction is called a Police Officer. The word “Officer” comes from the Corporate world, wherein the highest authority is the Chief Executive Officer

The Officer is meant to enforce Statutes, while the Human Being is meant to “Serve and Protect.” The trouble is that today the boys in blue don’t even know that there is a difference, let alone how distinguish, and some of them didn’t know the difference in the first place, because they’ve been trained wrongly. In the past decade, Police training manuals have been usurped, and are now supplied by FEMA and DHS, who teach that the first Terrorists were Thomas Jefferson, George Washington and Benjamin Franklin. -I’m not making this up.

So Officers will want to identify you to establish jurisdiction over you. Ask them if they want your Legal or Lawful name, and iterate that you don’t have a Legal one. Ask under what authority they’re acting. If they accuse you of “breaking the Law,” ask them what Law they’re talking about. If they point to an Act or Statute clarify that they’re not Law. Ask them if they are aware that gross negligence is equal to fraud? They don’t like that question one bit, because have a duty to understand and distinguish between Statute and Law but they haven’t been given the adequate training to do so. But they haven’t had to educated because none of the citizens know their most basic and fundamental rights. So the Police have been dealing with people who are essentially ignorant who don’t even distinguish between statute and Law for so long now, that now Police simply assume Statutes are Law. They’ll tell you you’ve broken the Law and that they’re going to give you a ticket, or that they need to see your ID and if you don’t show them your ID I’ll arrest you for obstruction of justice.  The fact is that until they see ID they have absolutely no evidence of the existence of a Person who is liable under this statute, and this they are well aware of.

This runaround of asking ID to write a ticket puts the cart before the horse. They’re saying, “I need to see your ID so I can give you a ticket, because if you don’t let me see it I can’t give you a ticket.” They have been told that if they don’t see ID, they can’t give ticket. They know this.

If they hand you a citation, ask them if it’s a Transaction of a Security Interest. If they don’t know, it clearly can’t be, as you cannot engage in a Transaction of a Security Interest in ignorance. Since it’s not, they won’t be generating any obligation over you to pay or perform and you don’t need to be talking to them.

If, on the other hand, they affirm that it is, they need your consent for that, and if you tell them you don’t consent to it they can’t impose it.” Just say no!

If they try enforcing Statutory restraints or obligations against you, ask them what evidence they have that they are dealing with a person that is subject to said act. Until you produce an ID, they have no such evidence.

So if you can learn to distinguish between a Law Enforcement Officer and a Peace Officer and hold them to their Peace Officer status, and refuse to act as a Law Enforcement Officer against you because they have nothing to enforce, they’re typically relieved that you’re not an ignorant citizen. More citizens should know their rights.

It is also important to remember that these Officers, are just Human Beings. If you remember this, they have to remember this too. They can respond to Love, Compassion and Truth just the same as Threats, Lies and Emotion. If you treat them with the dignity which all Human Beings are worthy of, they will respond accordingly.

Court, likewise, is a Corporate place of business where they will immediately ask you for your name, for the same reason that the Police Officer immediately asks you for state issued identification; to ascertain jurisdiction over you. The Courts will even presume to know who you are, identifying you as MR. JON DOE/MRS. JANE DOE. Mr./Mrs. are title identifiers for something with legal personality status. After all, you weren’t called Mr. or Mrs. by your parents. So if you reply yes, you’ve agreed to represent the Legal Person.

Not man nor woman can be acted upon by Statutes. A Human Being living soul cannot conform to paper contracts unless they agree to represent them. Statutes only apply to the fictional entity which is the legal personality i.e. MR. JON DOE in all caps or every title in this land is a fiction. The only basic principals that any people of any nation need to adhere to are those of natural Law which are mirrored in common Law; never harm or cause loss. The Golden Rule of nonviolation covers every eventuality without exception.

Common Law applies to a man or a woman – a living soul. Statute rules apply tot eh Person only or when the man or woman consent to represent the person. Consent can be given in inaction or action.  But out of fear, the majority have chosen silent, obedient consent. We are slaves in a system designed to milk us like cows. Money is a tool that we, the masses, are made to believe in and use, ultimately to serve the elite. It is essential for the elite that people stop bartering or working for themselves and using money as a means of exchange which then can be taxed back from them to transform them into slaves. Therefore it is essential that the workers believe in money to maintain the illusion that they have control over your life, fortune and freedom. Because it is your fear and their ability to take away from you something that you deem to be valuable: Money. Do we all believe money is valuable? We use it every day and believe these pieces of paper and coin have some worth, when in fact they do not. If you need a refresher from The Bankfather series, you’ll remember that we learned banks create money out of nothing and then lend it to us and collect interest on money that doesn’t’ exist.  The elite don’t need money because they have the ability to print it, but they do need us to believe that there is nothing else to use as a means of exchange in order to maintain their wealth.

The truth is that though we’ve chosen to act as such, we are not debtor slaves. We are the lifeblood of the entire system. We are the currency. Not money. Because without us this country grinds to a halt. Because the principal workforce of any machine or Corporation or company are slaves, and they must give us something to believe in so we will do that work and not question, and to make it valuable they’re going to stiff you to make believe to make you give over that worthless piece of paper to another Corporation, just so you believe its real.

LEGALESE AND THE MAGNIFICENT DECEPTION

Ask yourself this: What is the name of your society? Do you have a society? Believe it or not, all of the Statutes are the legislated rule of a particular society which had been given the force of Law, but that’s the Law Society. These are the rules for the Law Society. You’re not allowed to pen he statutes regulations or orders, only they can. If you go to court they claim that only they may use these documents complete understanding unless you’re a member of that society you cannot understand these words because societies have number of powers. They claim that only members of their society can understand this language. The Law Society has created a language deceptively similar to English, with the meanings of critical words altered away from the common usage. They’ve changed just a few words and thus created a completely new language. Some of these words have very different meanings:

MUST is synonymous with the word MAY.
When a Corporation says to you, “You must,” they’ve actually given you a choice because can’t force you, because they’re not allowed to because it’s not Law it’s only Policy.

SUMMONS is synonymous with INVITATION
When you get a Summons from a court of supposedly Law, you are actually being invited to a Corporate place of business to discuss how much money you’re going to give that Corporate place of business!

UNDERSTAND is synonymous with STAND UNDER
If I say to you do you understand and you say yes, that means you stand under me, which means you’ve given me authority over you. Their language is simple, but it is nevertheless a language the common people do not know how to speak.

HOW DID WE GET INTO THIS MESS?

The founding founders of the United States desired people to have life, liberty and property, along with the free will to enjoy them, and the responsibility to respect the rights of others. After fighting their revolution for freedom from colonialism, the founders were intelligent enough to retain a healthy fear of the similar threats posed by Corporate power, and wisely limited Corporations exclusively to a business role. In the United States of America, up until the mid to late 1800’s, in order to create a company or Corporation, you would have to go through the arduous process of earning a charter from a particular state, which was both limited in duration and function needing to be renewed, but also subject to rules, regulations and heavy taxes.  They were also mandated to serve the public interest, with profit being the result to shareholders who were part of the public. If they exceeded their authority, went against their charter or went against the public interest a Corporation’s charter could be revoked rendering it invalid and essentially destroying it in the legal sense. The concept of “Corporate Personhood” came about around this time, which quickly gained popularity among business leaders.

When we were being formed as the Colonies, it took a lot of money to get the supplies and ships over here to form those original 13 colonies. The British Bankers and British Crown fronted a lot of cash, which they were happy to do because they knew that as long as they owned the Colonies, they knew that the resources of the Colonies would pay back a very good return on their investment in the long haul. But when we broke away from them with the Declaration of Independence, they had no return on their investment and thus had a legitimate claim of debt against us. If we weren’t going to be theirs anymore, we needed to repay them what they had invested to get the Colonies started. It was a legitimate debt that we owed when we were formed. There are sentences in the Constitution  that read that the debts under the Confederacy are continued under this Constitution so the Constitution is also an agreement of debt to the British as well as the French because we asked the French to help us defeat the British and they wanted to be paid back for their military expenditures. So we were basically broke when we became a country.

When other countries loan to another country, the bank note is a 70-year contract. So Seventy years after the revolution, this contract for the 70-year note came due under the Lincoln administration. The United States did not have the money under Lincoln to pay off the note, and Abe didn’t want to give the public lands of the 13 colonies and the public lands of the Louisiana Purchase back to the Europeans in a Foreclosure on his watch. So Lincoln asked the Bankers if the US could renegotiate the loan. And what do Bankers always say to you when you ask to renegotiate a loan? They say, “Well we might do that, but we’re going to want some up front money, we’re going to want better terms and we’re going to want more collateral.”

Under Lincoln there were now 34 republics, many of which were not part of the original 13 nor of the Louisiana Purchase. They wanted the public lands of all 34 Republics to be held as collateral against the new national debt for the next 70 years. So when the Southern states learned that they were being asked to do this in a war they hadn’t fought in, for collateral to bankers under terms they didn’t agree with, not only did they not sign any documents, they seceded from the Union completely! Just as with the American Revolution, it turns out that despite the fact that the history books in our schools reflect State’s Rights and the Abolition of Slavery as the prime causes of the Civil War, the chief underlying catalyst was the collateralizing of the public lands of formerly sovereign. republics.

The southern states decided to leave the Union and had every right to do that as sovereign individual nation-states. They had the right to break the Constitutional contract at that point. We called the Constitution a Compact at its inception, but ultimately it was just a contract between the states. When the Southern states walked out of Congress on March 27th 1861 the quorum to conduct business under the Constitution was lost. The only votes that Congress could Lawfully take under Parliamentary Law were those to set the time to reconvene to take the vote to get a quorum and to vote to adjourn and set a date time and place to reconvene. But instead the Congress abandoned the House and the Senate without setting a date and that’s called Sine Die.

Now Lincoln had a problem. He no longer had a quorum to convene Congress, so he couldn’t renegotiate the loan the power to pass Laws had fleeted away with the secession of the southern states. Congress ceased to exist. They no longer even had the ability to declare war.

On March the 27th of 1861, our Lawful Congress disappeared forever. Several weeks later, a man who was claiming to be President of the United States, Abraham Lincoln issued executive order #1. Why do I say claiming to be President? When the contract called the Constitution cease to exist, so did the United States, therefore Lincoln was no longer president. The United States only existed because of the contract of the Constitution – the Consent of the Governed.  So when Lincoln issued Executive Order #1 he established Martial Rule of all Federal Territories, and they found a way to take back control of all the territories on April 15th. This date has remained with us like a scar ever since. Everyone knows what April 15th is today. It’s the day you pay those unconstitutional Income taxes in exchange for a bribe from the Internal Revenue Service to not make a fuss about the interest you should have accrued when you didn’t have access to these monies.

In 1863 Abraham Lincoln issued the General Order 100. This was the synthesis for the Lieber Code that has come to replace the old Government with what we’re all living under today. Remember, the Constitution disappeared in 1861, but in 1863 they needed some way to govern the Federal Territories and they did that through General Orders 100. It instituted a Military Government, and the dictatorship was established in 1861 because there was no Congress and there was no President.

Also in 1863, the Supreme Court was abolished. After all, why would they need a Supreme Court if there was no longer a contractual obligation with the Constitution? The Article 3 Judiciary didn’t exist anymore, so why even pretend that there was Supreme Court? They reestablished a New Supreme Court in the District of Columbia that they controlled completely, but it isn’t the same Supreme Court the founders put into place, and this illegitimate De Facto Supreme Court is with us still today.

In 1865 the second 13th Amendment was created. Why? -Because the first version of the13th Amendment didn’t allow attorneys to hold office. You couldn’t have a title of nobility under the original 13th Amendment which was still part of the original, organic Constitution. What they replaced it with in 1865 under the pretense of “Freeing the Slaves” was more about creating a system of voluntary servitude for all Americans as a possibility.

Howard Zinn contends: “The 14th Amendment was passed at the end of the Civil War to give equal rights to black people. And therefore it said, “No state can deprive any person of life, liberty or property without due process of Law.” That was intended to prevent the states from taking away life, liberty or property from black people as they have done through so much of our history. And what happens is Corporations come into court, and Corporation Lawyers are very clever. “Oh, you can’t describe a person of life, liberty or property. We are a person. A Corporation is a person. And the Supreme Court goes along with that.”

In 1870 the 15th Amendment was passed, granting Americans the Legal right to vote – not Lawful right to Vote. Why does this distinction matter? They made it so you had to register to vote to participate in their legal system. Did you need to register to vote before 1870? Absolutely not, but do today. You actually had a right to participate prior to 1865. Adding insult to injury, the elite have made it a privilege to vote, as opposed to a right. What can you do with a privilege that you can’t do with a right? Take it away.

Also in 1870, something really important happened. The department of Justice was created. There was no Article 3 Judiciary and they needed some semblance of Law. But under what does DOJ fall? Department of Justice falls under the direct authority of the Executive branch as a department thereof. So who is in control of the Legal System? The President. This bastardization of the American government makes our president a dictator-like entity. Ultimately the top Law Enforcement officer under this new system is the Attorney General, who has nothing to do with the Supreme Court.

In 1871 a new private municipal Corporation was created under the Organic Act, and it had a charter called the Constitution of the United States of America; a private Corporate charter. This is not the Article 6 Constitution that was written in 1789, because it was assembled in 1871 that only resembles the original, which was never intended to be a living document and very specifically said so. The one America uses today is living because they can change it up and do whatever they want. Congress started giving the banks the right to rule. They stripped away our freedoms by developing the Corporation on a piece of paper.

With no Constitutional authority to do so whatsoever Congress created a separate form of government for the District of Columbia with the Act of 1871, which replaced our organic Constitution and with a Corporate Constitution. America is not even a country anymore. It is a Corporation. Now that every aspect of our life is under control, we can see that Benito Mussolini was right when he said that, “Facsim should more appropriately be called Corporatism, because it is a merger of state and Corporate power.”

Going on to 1913 we officially gave away the power of our economy to the banks when Woodrow Wilson agreed to sign the Federal Reserve Act into law in exchange for campaign financing.

Back then there was no FDIC and no guaranteed deposits, so when a bank failed the money supply shrank by the amount of deposits in that bank. And there were many bank failures so the money supply was shrinking. The Federal Reserve took expansionary actions, but they never took them far enough to offset the shrinkage. If the supply of money shrinks you can’t maintain the same levels of purchases. The shock wave of the stock exchange collapse had not subsided before the effects of the irreversible spiral of recession began to be felt. American industrial production dropped by half.  Thousands of families had to rely on the soup kitchen for food. America’s sturdiest strongholds collapsed after the Wall Street crash, which was in stark contrast to their recent period of rapid growth. One worker in Five was unemployed. The population seemed anesthetized. In New York, where every month 17,000 families were put on the streets, hundreds of thousands of unemployed, including many white-collar workers, struggled to survive, trudging through the cold for hours just to get a bowl of soup and a piece of bread.

In this dramatic context, the elections of November 1932 had symbolic significance. Roosevelt promised to curb the devastating effects of the 1929 crash, with measures such as the reform of the banking system, the assurance of a healthy currency, and economic and social aid. But what convinced the voters was to his despair, his rather hasty promise to repeal the amendment which prohibited the consumption of alcohol. In other words, the end of Prohibition. Franklin D. Roosevelt won with 23 million votes, compared to Hoover’s 16 million. This landslide victory put the democrats in power for the next twenty years.

Preceded by a big show, Roosevelt launched his program to fight the effects of the Great Depression, and to give a new boost to the American economy which had been ravaged since the 1929 Stock Market crash. Five Billion dollars were allocated to fight unemployment. Over 3 million Americans were hired, rising to 8 million two years later. Roosevelt had 15 keys Laws passed. He established a system of social welfare, pensions, and unemployment benefit. He outlawed child labor, discrimination against tiring blacks and women, and introduced a minimum wage.

Author of the 1994 publication, The Creature From Jekyll Island, G Edward Griffin dispels any myths we have about the benevolence of American Corporations:

“It always comes as a shock when people realize that some of the greatest tyrants and mass murders of history, were actually supported and funded by very wealthy financiers and forces in the United States and in Great Britain. Everybody knows about the rise of Hitler, but they don’t realize that the Nazi Party was funded by Banking Dynasties that still exist in the United States. They funded him. The large Corporations went into partnership with some of the German Corporations and called it I.G. Farben. It was a cartel that put up tremendous amounts of money as investment into the Nazi War machine.”

Today, the president is the Chief Executive Officer of this Corporation called the United States of America, not a democratically elected leader of the free world.

CEO’s are for companies. A Corporation Sole is a Corporation except there is only one (sole) individual who holds that title or owns that Corporation. The office of the Pope is a Corporation Sole. The office of the King is a Corporation Sole. The Governor Generals, Lieutenant Governors, all of the Catholic Church’s bishops and Arch Bishops and Cardinals and beyond – they all hold Corporation Soles. Take a look at the US Security and Exchange Commission. Countries are listed there, registered as Corporations and actually have to file with the Security and Exchange Commission in New York annually. These Corporations list income tax payments  as a stream of revenue for them, and they publish this information.

WHAT HAPPENS IN COURT?

When a person shows up to court, they typically concede that the system has something incriminating on them, that the judge and the prosecutor hate them, but most of all they concede guilt.  Alan Watts has contended that we in the west are all afflicted with Ontological guilt, that is if a Policeman shows at the door we all immediately wonder what we’ve done wrong. There’s something wrong with that paradigm. This is why there is a widespread misconception that smoking marijuana induces paranoia.  The fact is that the user is not paranoid because of something that marijuana is doing to them chemically.  Marijuana intensifies one’s sensitivity to their surroundings by many fold.  The fact remains that because partaking of such a beautiful experience that makes one more sensitive is simultaneously visited by the fact that they could be persecuted by government agents for it, the person understandably can become paranoid, absolutely.  Didn’t the poles feel paranoid when the Gestapo were inspecting everyone’s house and terrorizing the people?  Imagine the kind of paranoia you might feel smoking pot in Nazi Germany, because our present situation isn’t much better. Should people who don’t agree just “move away” from homes and ecosystems that have sustained them for generations?  Is the pot smoker injuring another party by smoking pot?  One could argue (and they certainly have before) that the pot smoker is supporting terrorism by giving a financial reward to the trafficking and cultivation of a Schedule-1 controlled substance.  Well we can rule that out right away because so many people who live in the state of Montana are growing it, none of whom fit the mold for a Terrorist.  It isn’t a novel idea that there are many bad Laws or good people who break them.  In fact good people breaking bad Laws is more or less what this country was founded on, wasn’t it?  Everybody knows that being treated like a criminal for failing to come to a complete stop at an empty four-way intersection in the middle of the night in their own neighborhood is absolutely ridiculous.  Everybody knows that it’s complete BS that through technical loopholes we all are somehow in big trouble if our car lacks a front license plate, or registration tags, or speeding by a mere five miles over the speed limit, or any of the other petty, technical offenses that supplant those citation quotas that Police Departments supposedly don’t have.  And yet courtrooms are packed with frightened citizens who just want to get in, get out and get the whole thing over with as quickly and painlessly as possible, even if it means parting with a few hundred of our hard earned dollars.

Court is like detention – the principal’s office for adults – and we’re all embarrassed just to be there.  After all, court is somewhere that criminals go, right?  Especially since so many television programs and movies are police or courtroom dramas where heinous murders and terrible crimes are the central focus.  No cop drama ever depicts defendants in court guilty of a traffic violation, but every cop drama depicts the enforcers drawing their guns and firing their weapons during desperate moments of heroism.  Yet I’ve known police officers who have said to me, “In ten years with the force I’ve never once drawn my weapon.”  So when we’re obligated to appear for court, we think to ourselves, “Everybody’s looking at me.  These people are all wondering what I did.  This is a place where criminals go.”  And the television dramas are usually the only exposure to courtrooms until we’re in one our ourselves.  And the judgmental part of your mind may wonder why everyone else is there. But no one is staring  because everyone else feels the same anxiety that you do, and as the judge begins calling them up to the tribunal one by one before reading off their charges, we begin to realize how completely frivolous so many of the complaints against them are.  The judge uses big words, towering above on high from a wooden throne, and the setting intimidates people with the imminent threat police force and arrest if someone fails to comply.  Does this sound like a free country to you?  This country fought a revolutionary war so that the people could get away from this kind of dictatorial rule.  But it isn’t necessarily dictatorial, because the good news is that this system was very much set up to benefit the individual  The problem is no one has ever taught us what to do in a courtroom, or what the words mean, or what is going on when our name is called.  We assume we need to hire a Lawyer to handle the affair, and in violent criminal cases that certainly can be true, hence the courtroom dramas on television.  We’ve been told we should know our rights a million times, but we are never taught how to actually implement them.  Knowing our rights isn’t enough in a system where others can take advantage of you through a court room proceeding, and people’s education on these matters would cost local and regional governments billions in revenue.  Let’s face it, they’re running a business.  We all know this for the same reason that we know police officers are required to meet quotas.  The way things are right now, it would be inconceivable to assume otherwise. Sure, media outlets and public figures will always deny this and paint a prettier picture, but in today’s world most people don’t trust the mainstream media for accurate reporting, and most of us are all too aware of the lies spit by politicians lips.  Government is a business that thrives by taking from X and giving to Y with the intention that it, the government, will be the beneficiary of the transaction.  The more transactions involved, the higher the profit margin.  Hence the more Laws there are, and thus the more loopholes with which to collect money from as many taxpayers as possible, the higher the profit.  And the fact that public schools perpetuate public ignorance regarding court proceedings only solidifies the bottom line that the establishment doesn’t want you knowing about what is actually happening when you enter a courtroom to represent yourself.  The good news is that you are about to walk through the door into a very special classroom.  I could call this class many things – Courtrooms for Dummies, or Trust Law 101, or Your Rights as a Human Being.  But let’s just say for now that the ledger on the door reads, “Outer Limits with Professor Dog Majik.” You’ll enter through this door into a larger world, and emerge from this classroom with a new view on reality.  As with all things, it is important to do your own research, and not to take anything I say as dogma, for that is not my intent.  I only wish to shed light on this issue, because we can’t open locked doors without the proper keys, and few of us have ever possessed the right keys to our freedom.

So with regards to most court cases, unless you have harmed another person, used fraud in a contract somewhere or affected their property, you have done nothing wrong.  In fact, for there to be what is commonly referred to as a “case,” there must be a damaged party from whom property has been stolen or damaged, or a victim who was assaulted or killed.  If none of those factors apply, why does an intimidating arrangement convene in a court room which you are obligated under threat of arrest to be present for, simply over something like a traffic ticket, or possession, or any other victimless crime?  I do not agree with the presumption that our freedoms or equity should be taken away when we have not harmed anyone.  In fact the term victimless crime is an oxymoron, for if there is no victim, there is no crime, unless you’re living under a fascist dictatorship.  And I don’t use the term fascism lightly.  I’m not the first one to describe our current state of affairs as such, because by definition, a system wherein large Corporations and banks merge with and have control over governments is textbook fascism.  That’s simply what it’s called.

No, court has not convened to preside over a crime, but to enforce statuettes.  And we all assume that the statutes apply to us, because we assume that statutes and Law are the same.  But just on the surface we know that there exist more Laws in the Lawbooks today than any one person – even a Lawyer –can even be aware or keep track of, and new Laws are being written constantly.  How is one supposed to keep up with all the new statutes coming into existence, especially since most of us spend most of our time just trying to scrape by?  They say that negligence of the Law is not an excuse, and they’re right, but we’re not talking about Law here.  We’re talking about statutes, which are not Law.  The question we ought to ask ourselves is not how to keep track of all the statutes, but what obligates the average person to them.  What makes me liable to a statute?  Is it citizenship?  Does living on a piece of land obligate me to be bound by statutes?  And what are statutes anyway?  And where is the contract that I signed that obligates me to all the existing statutes?  How is it that statutes are so often contrary to the Constitution of the United States?  Because of the founding documents we know what our rights should be, but on a daily basis they’re undermined or denied in total.  How can this be?  It can only be so with our consent.  If we consent to the statutes, we are bound by them.  This isn’t a call to revolution.  I’m not saying that we should break the Laws for the sake of breaking them.  But unjust Laws can only stand with our willful consent, and believe it or not, you don’t need to say anything for the system to assume you are giving them consent to enforce statutes over you.  The court system operates under presumptions.  They presume you don’t know anything about courtrooms; they assume you don’t know how to manage your legal account in court; and they assume that since you lack the ability to act as executor of your legal person in the courtroom, that they have the authority to manage it for you.  I know what you’re thinking – what is an executor of a legal person?  To understand this, we’ll revert to a question I asked a moment ago – where is the contract that I signed that obligates me to all existing statutes?  Believe it or not there are such a documents.  The first is your birth certificate.

When you were born your mother and father applied to enter into an agreement with the government and you, known as a Trust, and your Birth Certificate is the founding document.  No one owns title to the name on this document because so many parties have functional roles and vested interests in it.  As with car titles and housing deeds, regardless of who has the title, what matters is who has equity in the product.  When you become 18 years old, the equity to the legal person that appears on this Certificate is given entirely to you – it’s yours.  Your mother and father are the grantors of the trust that was created, and they put your share of the commonwealth into an organization with the expectation that you are going to benefit from this.  So when you come of age you become the grantor and beneficiary of your Corporation.  I know this may seem confusing, but bear with me here for just a moment.

Any trust agreement forms a Corporation, and there are three parties that merge to form it: the president, the shareholders and the employees. In trust Law, the president functions as the executor, the shareholders function as the beneficiaries, and the employees function as trustees.  The executor who acts as the President of the Corporation, sets policy, and those policies are handed to the employees, who, directed by the president, work to make money for the shareholders.  Thus the shareholders are the beneficiaries of this arrangement – because they are investors expecting something back in the form of dividends.  If what the employees are doing fails to make money for the shareholders, the shareholders can remove the president and reinstate a new president who will set better policies.  Put into legal terms, if the policy that the trustees follow, fails to bring dividends for the beneficiaries, the shareholders can remove the director from the board.

This model is also used to create Legal Persons, as individual Corporations.  You see, your parents initially function as the beneficiaries until you come of age at which point you become the beneficiary of your Corporation.  But you are always the executor of your Corporation, since you own all the equity in your legal person.  The executor and the beneficiary can be the same person, but neither can be an employee.  The reverse is also true, as employees cannot be beneficiaries or executors.  But in courtroom proceedings, most of us get suckered into acting in the capacity of an employee of the government, therefore granting the government executive power over you.  But if you are the director of your legal person, it is in fact the judge who is the employee – but this has to be stated at the top of the hearing, and written at the top of every document – otherwise their presumption that you are in fact liable, stands.

It is important to understand that you are not a legal person.  The legal person is not a living, biological organism.  The legal person is formed through the agreement made through the Trust.  Being aware of this, you can begin to take back control of your legal estate, and when you challenge the presumption that you are a trustee, you become known as a propria persona – the executor – the administrator – the chief executive officer.  No one represents you because you are the president of your legal person, and thus you set policy.  You are the president of your Corporation, unless you play the role of employee.  Since it is impossible for the Propria Persona to act in the capacity of a Legal Person, you cannot be the Legal Person though you are a very important component of the legal person.

We all unknowingly become liable by obtaining driver’s licenses and other government documents that are signed by the government.  Since a driver’s license is a government document signed off by the government, by obtaining one we unwittingly agree to acting in the capacity of a trustee of government, and are thus liable to the statutory regulations that govern public servants.

So when you go to court you are not showing up as a legal person – you’re showing up because a hearing is being conducted for a legal person that you have an interest in.  The problem is we get suckered into taking all the liability for everything that happens in there by playing the improper role – that is, the role of employee or trustee.
Now let’s say that you are a government employee and receive a government paycheck, then yes, statutory Law applies to you, since those are the rules that apply to agents of the government.  But say you are a government employee, and you get pulled over on your day off and written a traffic ticket.  See, you have to have been performing an action of government at the time the ticket was issued for the complaint to hold any water in court.  Unless you were acting in the capacity of a public servant at the time the complaint was made, it is irrelevant.  But this presumption is made in court with everyone, most of whom are not government employees, and unless you rebut this presumption, it stands, and we willingly enter into contract as trustees and are thus liable to statutes.   The court room is your court of record to convene, unless you do not know your rights, in which case the court and the judge will presume that since you do not know how to handle the account of your legal person, they have the authority to do so for you and thus act as the chief administrator of your account.  This presumption must be refuted before any person can proceed in court with their rights fully intact. All presumptions of Law stand until rebutted, so all one needs to do is simply rebut them.  Since the government derives its power from the people, the people set the policy.  YOU are the sole shareholder of all equity of your Legal Person defined by your Birth Certificate receipt identifying your estate.   The court room appearance is an administrative procedure to oversee the TRUST of your legal person.

The Live Birth Record is a very different document than your Birth Certificate.  For starters, Birth Certificates are warehouse certificates that establish ownership over a product.  Birth Certificates did not exist until 1933, when Social Security was implemented.  The Social Security System was not put into place to give retirement benefits to elderly folks, though that is one of the symptoms of it.  The Social Security System was established because the United States of America was bankrupt to the Federal Reserve Bank who had gained control over our money supply just two decades earlier in 1913.  After loaning the country’s money to America at interest, America inevitably fell into bankruptcy and was forced to put up collateral.  Their answer was the Social Security System, which established a Social Security number for every American as a monetary guarantee to the Federal Reserve.  In other words we were all put up as collateral on the debt owed to the private Central Bank.  It was also in 1933 that the unconstitutional IRS and Income Tax system was established, to manage the bankruptcy.  The income tax is the annual levy to the Federal Reserve put into place as the collateral on the bankruptcy.  The deeper the US goes into debt, the more the taxpayers are obligated to honor this collateral agreement that few of us have ever understood.  And the Birth Certificate is the establishing document that obligates you not only to make payments to the Federal Reserve on behalf of the United States, but makes you party to all of the statutes and benefits of the United States.   You’ll notice that at the boarders of your birth certificate resemble the same webbing that appears on the one-dollar bill – and you’ll notice that it too is a bank note.  In fact if you take a close look at the very bottom of your Birth Certificate will appear the words, “Banknote,” or “Midwest Banknote company,” or something similar.  This is because your Birth Certificate is worth hundreds of thousands of dollars.  You can’t cash this in because that money is only worth something to the Federal Reserve.  It’s a collateral note, typically worth somewhere in the neighborhood of $650,000 – $750,000 dollars – that’s the estimated tax revenue over the course of your life.  You’ll also notice upon close inspection of this Certificate that your name appears in all capital letters.  This has been called many things, from the Strawman to Capitis Diminutio Maxima to the Legal Person.  Let us for now understand that regardless of what we names we give the all caps name, the fact that it appears in all capital letters is a presumption of Law.

The Birth Certificate is a receipt, and in fact the only document we receive that is signed by the government, thus proving the government has an obligation to us.  When we come of legal age we become Executor and Beneficiary of all equity invested in our Legal Persons.  As such we are thus the Director, Administrator and Chief Executive Officer of the Corporation.  Our obligation to this model, however, ends with the initial investment made by our parents and ourselves.

Since no one can own the legal title to something living, the Legal Person is its own entity, in and to itself, thus necessitating the actions of people to act in its interest, not unlike a Corporation.  But if you happen to be the General Executor of this account, it’s important to ask, by whose authority does anyone use this name as personal identification for you?

Whenever court calls a formal hearing for the Legal Person it is recognized that all relevant parties in attendance of the hearing are acting as agents of the Legal Person.  If a court aims to make claims or legal determinations against you, demand some proof for the public record first.

Facts can only be defined as agreements between parties; if separate entities identify similar words to have different meanings, the parties disagree on what the facts are.  Since the legal definitions of words used in the legal world are drastically different from the common usage, there can be no determinations of the facts until a reconciliation of the definitions of the words that are being used are bridged between yourself and all other interested parties involved. The use of Legalese in the semantically driven dictation of Admiralty Law has created a vernacular that, while similar to the English language is drastically different in meaning and interpretation.  The definitions of the words “person,” “address,” “mail,” “resident,” “motor vehicle,” “driving,” “passenger,” “employee,” “income” and many others, have been altered away from the common usage, so as to be associated with a subject of slave status without citizen acceptance, compliance or knowledge.

Since the driver’s license is in fact not your property, but property of the government, presenting it to an officer upon his request presumes that YOU are acting as a public servant at the time ID is requested.  By handing over a drivers license, you have unwittingly perjured yourself as an employee, and thus liable as a driver.  But chances are that you were not acting in the capacity of a driver, since a driver is defined as the licensed operator of a motor vehicle, and a motor vehicle is defined as a commercial vessel carrying either goods for sale or employees for hire.  You have a right to freely travel about in your automobile, and do so without a license, registration or insurance, unless you’re a commercial vehicle, but even then you have to be working in a government capacity. So if you get a ticket, the court has the burden of producing payroll records that might indicate that YOU were in fact acting in the capacity of a public trustee at the time the complaint was issued, and therefore bound by statutory regulation.  State issued identification is only in place so that officers can identify Legal Persons in order to ascertain jurisdiction over them, and cite them under statutory regulation.
.
Supplying a peace officer with state issued identification consequently identifies you as someone who has applied for government benefits, and thus bound by statutory regulation.  Since government underwrites damage caused by its public servants, it assumes limited liability to all of its public employees.  if government assumes liability for your actions, it is only logical that they would want to ensure that YOU do not act in an undesirable manner for which the government would be responsible, and if YOU did, to correct those actions at the department of “corrections.”  It is however, impossible for a person other than you to assume liability for your actions.

I’m not saying that Human Beings are exempt from learning how to properly maneuver an automobile, nor that any Human Being who acts irresponsibly while traveling in an automobile is exempt from the liability of their actions.  Insurance companies, however, and the unconstitutional requirement to pay unnecessary monies to these private Corporations, do implicate that driver’s of motor vehicles are not accountable for their own actions, which is why the government and indeed the insurance companies can assume liability in the first place.  Public servants liable to the government need Drivers Licenses and Social Security Numbers, and Jurisdiction is therefore presumed over them. Since a Social Security Number allows you to play the role of a government agent should YOU so choose, it is necessary to reiterate the fact that YOU were not acting in the capacity of an agent of government at the time the complaint was made.  In presuming that YOU are bound by one of the existing statutes which would regulate you, also presumes that a contract exists between you and the government.  The court therefore must provide evidence that YOU have been compelled to perform in this name according to a contract somewhere.

Limiting the birthright of freedom of travel to licensed operators of motor vehicles is an unconstitutional determination.  The Public pays for the public roads, which constitutes travel as a right, not a privilege.  I’m going to say that again – travel is not a privilege, it is a right, since we pay for the public roadways, but police officers often claim the contrary.  Nevertheless, it is impossible to assert that only individuals with money to pay for these unnecessary limitations may access public roadways.  If there is any claim that we do not have access to public roadways, the courts are required to provide us with evidence of this claim.

The Supreme Court made the following determination in the case of Kale v. Henkel:

“The individual may stand upon his Constitutional rights as a citizen.  He is entitled to carry on his private business in his own way.  His power to contract is unlimited.  He owes no such duty [to submit his books and papers for an examination] to the State, since he receives nothing therefrom, beyond the protection of his life and property.  His rights are such as existed by the Law of the land [Common Law] long antecedent to the organization of the State, and can only be taken from him by due process of Law, and in accordance with the Constitution.  Among his rights are a refusal to incriminate himself, and the immunity of himself and his property from arrest or seizure except under a warrant of the Law.  He owes nothing to the public so long as he does not trespass upon their rights.” Hale v. Henkel,  201 U.S. 43 at 47 (1905).

Thus we reserve our natural common Law right not to be compelled to perform under any contract that we did not enter into knowingly, voluntarily, and intentionally.  And furthermore, should not accept the liability associated with the compelled and pretended “benefit” of any hidden or unrevealed contract or commercial agreement.

As such, the hidden or unrevealed contracts that supposedly created obligations to perform, for persons of subject status, are inapplicable to us, and are null and void.  If we have participated in any of the supposed “benefits” associated with these hidden contracts, we have all done so under duress, for lack of any other practical alternative.  We may have received such “benefits” but have not accepted them in a manner that binds us to anything.

Any such participation does not constitute “acceptance” in contract Law, because of the absence of full disclosure of any valid “offer,” and voluntary consent without misrepresentation or coercion, under contract Law.  Without a valid voluntary offer and acceptance, knowingly entered into by both parties, there is no “meeting of the minds,” and therefore no valid contract.  Any supposed “contract” is therefore void.

This position adheres to accordance with the U.S. Supreme Court decision of Brady v. U.S., 379 U.S. 742 at 748 (1970):

“Waivers of Constitutional Rights not only must be voluntary, they must be knowingly intelligent acts, done with sufficient awareness of the relevant circumstances and consequences.”

MAKE A DIFFERENCE

Speak up. Withdraw consent. Ask questions. Do your own research. And most importantly, know thyself.

Do you want to make the world a better place for your children? If the answer is yes, then you must realize that you have to do it yourself. No one is going to do it for you, and it starts with letting go of your fear. We should ask ourselves, is it really the best we can do to become debt slaves like our parents and then slip into retirement learning that we’ve got no pension, that all those years of paying into it wasn’t worth it because they were just going to rip us off in the end anyway, and wheel us into hospital wards and try to kill us with pharmaceuticals as quickly as possible – is that really as good as it gets?
Of course not! Freedom, peace and abundance for every man woman and child, living in harmony with nature, in mutual cooperation with each other, everywhere on the planet. That’s the best it can get.

So to conclude, here are a few seldom understood concepts you can put to good use right away in direct action applications.
If you sue for false arrest (or false imprisonment), the arrest is presumed to be false and all you need to prove is that the arrest occurred, and then the burden is on the officer to prove that it wasn’t false. For an imprisonment, all you need is to show that you were “restrained of your liberty by words and acts which you feared to disregard. And a car stop constitutes an arrest or imprisonment. If an officer says he has a warrant for your arrest, you can demand to see the warrant as well as the supporting affidavit, and if he arrests you without producing them, it’s a false arrest. The police routinely ignore and violate this Law, but officers are personally liable for any misdeeds during a warrant arrest. You can even ask an officer for his business card and ID, and if he doesn’t comply, he’s out of uniform. It might shock you to know that you have the absolute right to resist a false arrest with as much force as necessary, and if an officer misbehaves, you can complain to Risk Management. If they attempt to administer a breathalyzer, let it be known that the Federal Pure Food, Drug and Cosmetics Act that set up the FDA makes it illegal for anyone but a licensed physician to operate a breathalyzer? If an officer asks you a question, you have the right to ignore him and keep walking.

Citations that Police write end up in the courts, but many court documents are “signed” with a rubber stamp. Many clerks and attorneys have such stamps with a judge’s signature pressed into them. So how can you know the warrant wasn’t stamped by a clerk or attorney? How can a rubber-stamp signature on a warrant possibly be legal?

[1]  How To Sign Your Name Without Assuming Liability
http://kentfreedommovement.com/m/blogpost?id=5237500%3ABlogPost%3A51957

 

“All these people thirst for knowledge. And they could get it from a device which ruthlessly demands the attention of millions. A machine capable of slinging images and sounds into every home in the land. TV could teach you a new language, parade the entire history in front of your face, or it could simply distract you with brightly colored bibble. We all want to fill our brains with information, yet only few of us know as much as we think we know…maybe we never learned anything from TV but were simply transfixed by it like apes dazzled by technology.

“We’re all living through the most technologically advanced era since yesterday. Today everyone is obsessed with gadgetry  and machines that light up. We spend more time gazing into luminous screens than into the eyes of our loved ones. Gadgetry has become so common place we consider it part of nature itself. But recently machinery has become so advanced its downright terrifying. How did we get this messed up? Maybe things first started going wrong when we surrendered our attention to the flickering meddler of the television.

“The world of TV knowledge started with the news. Early news broadcasts were stern announcements from the authorities consisting of little more than still photographs and explanatory diagrams backed with a vocal summary. The BBC believed moving pictures would distract viewer and prevent them from absorbing the informational content. Gradually TV news loosened up and bean to realize the advantages it had over news print. Unlike their desperate, medieval income paper counterparts TV reporters could use moving image to make the otherwise mundane stories more interesting and immersive.

“The translation of news into TV grew more sophisticated. The newsroom arrived, there were more interesting graphics, and, and when major events occurred the printing press was left standing by the television, which could interrupt you in your own home to depress the ass off you. And what’s more, rather than reading wordy dispatches from overseas war reporters TV viewers could follow the journalists into the thick of the action. They didn’t even wait for the gunfire to stop before filing their reports. TV news grew even more dynamic as color television arrived making events seem increasingly vivid and dispiriting and brutal and all horrible-like.

“And just as documentaries were under pressure to become more populist, so was the news. Ever since satellite news first appeared the landscape had become more competitive, and the fight for impact intensified. As a consequence across the board the graphics steadily became more fearsome and bombastic, the sets more cavernous and self important, and the delivery more theatrical. And part of this more crowd pleasing approach was the opinion of the viewer grew steadily more important. This situation reached a peak in 1997 after the death of princess Diana when the opinion of the man in the street actually became the emotive focus of much of the news coverage.

“Current affairs was no longer a stern proclamation from the establishment, and was becoming more like a public sounding board. news in general had started to move away from explaining the world to us, and moved towards us explaining our view of the world to them. All the while the internet was starting to overtake TV as a source of instant news. And just as newspapers reacted to TV by becoming spicier, so TV news morphed into rolling news in which everything became sensational nonstop crisis full of incremental, horrible developments. Its become a hope-sapping broadcast from the depression dimension; someone simply reads aloud a list of the worst events in the world today’s news seems to be nothing but the thrill of the chase. An endless parade of fresh horror piled upon fresh horror. No time for reflection, just pictures. Look at this! – then – Look at this! Come on! Tune in rubber-neckers! Have a bloody good gawp!

“Soon it all becomes meaningless which has the side effect of making reality itself feel somehow unreal like a work of fiction writing itself; a destiny beyond our control. And all we can do is stare at it in stunned desperation. And if 24 hour news was stranding viewers in a nihilistic wilderness, the other source of knowledge the TV documentary had changed too. Where once doc experts were expected to speak and walk around like documentary academics there is a growing assumption that today’s viewer won’t pay attention to facts unless there is a star attached preferably one with a shaky link to the subject. For instance, because the actor Ross Kemp played a hard ex-soldier in Eastenders, he was considered an ideal choice to send to Afghanistan to show us how a real war works (and weirdly it turned out he’s pretty good at this). All of which opened the floodgates for other celebrity experts. Once consistent thumbprint of “Expertainment” is confuse fictional characters with the actors that portray them. So because he played a vet in African-based Wild At Heart, ITV thought it would be a good idea to send Stephen Tompkinson animal mending around Africa. In fact even Tompkinson seems to have forgotten he’s an actor. No one seems to have proper expertise any more. Jeffrey Jones’s Chief qualification for splashing around Britain’s rivers is that he’s sixty-percent water like the rest of us. These days you don’t even have to be vaguely suitable to front a documentary series, provided you’re a celebrity.

“Once documentaries were happy to show you stuff and take time to let you absorb it. Gradually they morphed into grandiose visual spectaculars like Walking With Dinosaurs. Sensation was starting to overwhelm fact and before long if we wanted to learn about say The Blitz, it was no longer good enough to listen to people who actually lived through it. No. Boring! Instead you had to hold your own Blitz.  In shows like the TV experiment Blitz Street which would answer the burning question, of what would happen in 1940’s German explosives were dropped on British houses, a question most of us would have thought was pretty comprehensively answered by the six-year experiment known as World War Two.

“To see where its all heading look no further than Deadliest Warrior – a flabbergasting show which explores history’s more fearsome brawlers by pitting them against each other in a manner which defies both sense and taste. Each week two sides are chosen and then the Deadliest Warrior team gleefully explore the injurious possibilities by road-testing their respective arsenals on bio-mechanically accurate dummies and the occasional dead animal. For instance, *here we see what happens when we detonate a Viet-Kong land mine, besides a deceased pig. Basically what they’ve done here is they’ve taken the tragic futility of war and used it to blow up a pig. Once they work out whose got the edge, in which top-trump style category, their resident computer expert runs a simulation pitching the two sides against one another in an imaginary mind space in which only one can emerge victorious. The thing is, its so far removed from reality its more like its a sport, which means its possible to watch this and find yourself cheering on the Nazis, like they’re Tim Henman or something.

“When you’re dealing with a world in which facts are treated as though they’ve been dreamed up, you may as well make factual programs not just about stuff we know, but about stuff we don’t know, i.e. the unknown, you know? Back in 1992 a fictional spook show caused a stink because viewers thought it was real, yet ten years later viewers were so desensitized to fact-bending ostensibly real  paranormal investigations had become a TV staple. Thanks in part to TVs obsession with the supernatural these days almost every son-of-a-bitch in the country claims to have encountered a ghost at some point. And its not just supernatural bibble people are prepared to believe. They’ll choke down anything that looks like a documentary. All TV really taught us was to believe what screens said, even when they were lying. TV’s relationship with information has taken has taken fact on a lengthy and unusual journey.

“Documentaries morphed from high-brow historical lecturing into low-brow historical pantomime remixing. And our taste for experts  shifted from knowledgeable respectable academics to tit-witted celebrity puppets. And what about those fact-based dramas? Well this traditional sense of reverence soon got pissed through a tinsel-coated hose pipe. Where once the tutors looked like old paintings TV now portrayed them like the cast of a sex-crazed 16th Century take on Hollyoaks.

“And the news went from a basic unemotional explanation of the facts to a nonstop entertainment format sold on the basis basis of its emotive impact. an entertainment format which sometimes talk to you like you’re back in the classroom watching a School’s program. So what did I learn from Television apart from catch-phrases and theme tunes? Almost nothing. I just looked at stuff and ended back where I started.”

“The goal for the corporations is to maximize profit and market share. And they also have a goal for their target, namely the population. They have to be turned into completely mindless consumers of goods that they do not want. You have to develop what are called “created wants”. So you have to create wants. You have to impose on people what’s called a philosophy of futility. You have to focus them on the insignificant things of life, like fashionable consumption. I’m just basically quoting business literature. And it makes perfect sense. The ideal is to have individuals who are totally disassociated from one another. Who’s conception of themselves, the sense of value, is just how many created wants can I satisfy? We have huge industries, public relations industry is a monstrous industry, advertising and so on, which are designed from infancy to try to mold people into this desired pattern.”

“When I was researching the take over of public space when I started off I thought okay this is just advertising. We’ve always had advertising. It’s just more advertising. But what I started to understand and what I understand now is that branding is not advertising it’s production. And very successful corporations, the corporations of the future do not produce products. They produced brand meaning. The dissemination of the idea of themselves is their act of production. And the dissemination of the idea of themselves is an enormously invasive project. So how do you make a brand idea real? Well, a good place to start is by building a three dimensional manifestation of your brand. For a company like Disney it goes even further where it’s actually building a town, Celebration Florida. Their inspiration, their brand image, is the all American family. And the sort of bygone American town.” And that’s where you see the truly imperialist aspirations of branding which is about building these privatized branded cocoons. Which maybe you start by shopping in and then you continue by holidaying in but eventually why not just move in.”

“Many early adverts were functional things little more than animated flickering billboards extolling the practical virtues of the products they were pushing. But as consumers began to realize that most products were basically the same (because its all just stuff, isn’t it?), advertisers began attaching fantasies to the products they were hacking. And often this fantasy was an opulent vision that could be all yours for the price of something that tasted like a refrigerated human organ inside chocolate.

“As the 60’s swung into view Cool was the primary dream. The lucky cool advert sods lived in the world of glamor, travel  foxy babes and nice hair. Of course instead of nice hair goo they were actually flogging you membership card: “Buy this McGuffin and you too could be one of the fortunate happy ones, complete with an enviably cool lifestyle.” The the 70’s arrived and everything outdoors was awful. But luckily the two or three members of the population who weren’t outside rioting or being bombed were indoors being distracted by eerie images of up-market aspirational living. As the 80’s approached the advertisers desirable vision of the high life stuck.  Conspicuous consumption was being celebrated for its own sake. Perhaps you could get your hand on luxury everyday.

“But somewhere the glitz and aspirational values of commercials leaked out and started infecting popular dramas. Shows like Dallas brought the billionaire lifestyle to the thespian masses. Dallas was a sumptuous conspicuously decadent soap detailing the existence of a family of impossibly wealthy Americans living empty lives. But even though it was clear money wasn’t bringing the Ewing’s happiness, it was impossible not to envy them. Dallas was a massive hit which chimed with the money-worshiping 80’s,which is why the BBC tried making its own version: Howard’s Way in which the sun-kissed oil barons were replaced by the rain battered yacht set. It stared a regatta of barnacled curmudgeons racing to acquire swank wagons and drink problems, the winner being the one who hoarded the biggest treasure trove of red things. Getting ahead involved endlessly barking business flavored claptrap at one another. Shows like this helped shift our perception of tycoons and the importance of money itself.

“Games shows are a sure fire clear indicator of how or relationship with money has changed. Not so long ago everyone on game shows was chummy and nice. And the shows themselves largely revolved around the simple pleasure of participating in a glorified parlor game on a ropey set. Once the game was done the contestants were delighted to accept mere products as prizes. And the whole shebang ended on an upbeat note as the fun gang of beaming neighbors waved goodbye to the cadavers back home. But now cold-steel menace and raw money is the order of the day and the game is a dog eat dog accumulation festival culminating in a bitter dispute.

“Another harbinger of change is the shifting portrayal of wealthy people on screen. Back in 1985 while their lifestyles looked glamorous fictional Billionaires like JR were clearly the bad guys. Twenty years later actual living, breathing tycoons tycoons were being celebrated and the more explicitly ruthless they were the brighter their stars shone.

“Money is terrible. Its just a depressing way of boiling our wonderful world down to a set of grey little numbers and then using them to screw each other over. “Oh, one for me and one for you. Oh, you’ve got one more than me I’m going to stab you in the ribs.” That’s what money is.

“Once you’ve accumulated plenty of money TV encourages you to invest it all in a box made of bricks. Rich people used to stop us noticing how privileged they were by tinting their car windows or hiding behind high walls where you couldn’t kill them. But now TV allows you a peak behind the gates and frankly its harrowing. Cribs is a highly successful variant of Through the Keyhole in which a very rich person shows you the rewards which society has granted them for being important and successful and loved, and you have to guess who in God’s tit they are. Its effectively a shopping channel of stuff that could have been yours if you’d been born in America and learned to rap rather than sitting on your ass watching Cribs. Cribs dangles the aspirational carrot so impractically out of reach they might as well put it on a million-mile-long stick tied to a rocket that’s been fired into a black hole.

“People have always wanted nice houses, obviously, they’re not mad. But back in the day, your options were limited. If you were poor you had to live in a cramped tin full of relatives and Cholera, if you were middle class you had a bigger home, and if you were a member of the aristocracy, you lived in Downtown Flipping Abbey. People largely accepted whichever kind of hovel they had been allotted. And then in the 80’s everyone suddenly wanted one. And glamorous TV ads made the dream look attainably easy.

“But having purchased the roofs over their head, people didn’t really know what to do with themselves. I mean, what are you actually meant to do in a house? Raise a family? Start a bottle top collection? Sit there and die? No wonder people went mad and started desperately trying to spruce their death boxes up in a bid to kill time. TV soon noticed this and began knocking up cheap-o home improvement guff castles like Changing Rooms which took the concept of interior design and married it to the concept of people slinging any old crap together, and generated several hundred hours of television in the process. The ultimate in home-made pornography has to be pornography made from homes; televised aspirational showrooms such as Channel Four’s Grand Designs which offers a tantalizing glimpse of the kind of dream house you too could be dwelling in if only you had several hundred thousands dollars, and/or six months of leisure times to spare. The presenter, Kevin McCloud (whose name even makes him sound like a man who stepped out of a dream) fronts the show in the manner of an enthusiastic curator leading you on a personal tour around a museum of cozy, middle-class satisfaction.

“Largely though its an envy generator, as we look on moving from mild interest to outright fury: “Oh that’s a nice fireplace…What a wonderfully huge kitchen…Oh I love the way the windows let the light into their lovely house…Oh they’ve got a pool – Oh you’ve got a fucking pool!” Thanks to shows like this it somehow feels like its not enough to just own A reasonably okay house anymore. Instead you feel a lingering sense of failure for dwelling inside anything other than an architecturally-fascinating 4,000 foot translucent diagram for you and your revolting kids to shit into.”

CELEBRITIES

While it is natural for someone to become popular for being the best at what they do, today in the west you are a celebrity if you simply appear on screen – any screen – even by mistake. You gain credibility and praise for nothing, and the more you appear, the bigger a celebrity you become if you become a big enough celebrity, then you become a brand to be sold and traded like any other product. Case and point: Miss Kim Kardashian famous for owning some clothes shops and going shopping. She wears diamonds and fur because they are symbols of wealth, and because she believes she is superior to other humans, she ignores the true cost of these luxuries. Despite the fact that tobacco in the west is laced with more than 2,000 deadly chemicals designed to addict and kill humans, celebrities frequently appear in magazines, movies and fashion shoots smoking cigarettes knowing that the youth want to be celebrities too. Many of the biggest celebrities have no talents at all. Like Katie Price or Paris Hilton. Hilton, from a wealthy hotel family, is said  to charge 150,000 dollars to appear at parties. She even has a TV program called My New Best Friend Forever where people compete to be her new best friend, proof that anything in the west can be reproduced and commodified for profit.

Charlie Brooker observes the evolution of celebrity over the course of television history:

“Way back in the past, folk only achieved a level of what might be termed, ‘celebrity’ by displaying a remarkable level of talent whereas during current confused period of human history it is apparently possible to become famous merely for inhaling and exhaling on camera. The galaxy of fame has a complex, every shifting hierarchy. Burning brightest are the proper stars – actors and musicians and the like. Some become super giants like Beyonce or Brad Pitt and they’re also insanely powerful; If George Clooney called a live globally televised press conference during which he plucked out two of his chest hairs, and said he’d post them to the first viewer to turn around and murder a member of their own family, thousands would perish.”

This is part of a trend in the west for what is called reality TV – a type of freak-show programming about talentless narcissists who like to talk about themselves and go shopping. In the field of American reality TV competition is fierce for the most grotesque examples of such exploitation. For example, The Swan is a show where women who are deemed “too-ugly-for-television” enter a plastic surgery competition to become sculpted into the most beautiful. Surveys reveal that an overwhelming majority of woman in the west (nine out of ten) are unhappy with their appearance. This perceived inadequacy drives western girls to spend exorbitant sums of money purchasing cosmetics, clothes and plastic surgery.

But this is nothing compared The Bachelor reality series, where a  handsome, wealthy young man declares a commitment to choose a wife from a lineup of sixteen potential brides. After sampling all of the potential brides, he decides which mare is most suitable for him to marry, transforming the most personal of decisions into another pre-packaged commodity.

WHERE DOES THIS LEAVE US?

Charlie Brooker again offers his profound perspective:

“Television: We managed to drag that from I Claudius to the Jeremy Kyle Show in the blink of a generation. The internet: the most incredible method of  communication ever devised and we use it for swapping funny photos of cats. Smartphones: with a smartphone, you could browse through the contents of the most incredible art galleries in the world, all in the palm of your hand. Yeah, you could do that or you could download a novelty app that makes it emit the sound of a farting duck.

“In summary TV famed progress was a great thing predicting a world in which we would relax in front of screens while computerized slaves did our bidding but now the future has arrived and those screens relax in front of us while we converse through them, loose our bleeding rags at them, and jig about like desperate gestures for the computerized approval. and the screens have left us marooned here in the future surrounded by magic and unable to focus on anything that doesn’t light up and go beep.”

In a world economy where information is filtered by global media corporations keenly attuned to their powerful advertisers, who will defend the public’s right to know and what price must be paid to preserve our ability to make informed choices? In order to take back our minds, lives and communities, we must first unplug the signal. Turn off your television. Cancel your cable and satellite subscriptions. Seek alternative news sources. Spend time with your family, and connect with your neighbors and local community. Discuss, learn, and allow new information to challenge your thoughts and opinions. When we unplug the signal, we being to realize that the matrix surrounding us is false, and many things we once held to be true were lies. Remember: the truth will not be televised.

The tale of how the internet discovered America’s hand in the Ukrainian cookie jar…

[CLICK HERE TO LISTEN TO THIS COLUMN’S COMPANION RADIO SHOW, ORIGINALLY BROADCAST ON 15 MARCH 2014]

On the other side of the globe, Jackals in Kiev sniped police and protesters alike, killing 94. In the following weeks a trickle of leaks ushered in a typhoon of recorded phone calls and classified materials, compelling those responsible for the massacre out of the shadows. 2014’s revelations transformed the Ukrainian Maidan uprising event from merely another isolated populist movement in the global jigsaw puzzle, into a Rosetta Stone that reveals the depth to which America’s power players are willing to plunge in order to maintain and expand America’s imperial dominance.

When Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland placed a phone call to US ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt, Neither of them suspected every word of their conversation would later go viral online. Now that we’ve heard them conspiring to overthrow the democratically elected leader of Ukraine, our government’s method for Empire building lingers in plain sight, even for those who haven’t been paying attention. As John Perkins makes painfully clear in his Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, this kind of spy-craft manipulation as happened many times before. But what sets the Ukrainian overthrow apart from the South American coups outlined by Perkins is the number and quality of smoking guns that this catastrophe has left behind.

A tidal wave of damning evidence has sprung out of the Ukraine and onto the internet, allowing a moment to admire these choreographed events as the signature blueprint, detailing how the largest multinational Empire in recorded history spreads its tentacles around the world. Of what consequence are events unfolding on the other side of the planet to us, and why should we care? Preventing World War Three might seem a good start. But how the situation in Ukraine has unfolded online has forever exposed the puppet masters who exploit nations indiscriminately if they have resources coveted by the empire.

HISTORY DOESN’T REPEAT, BUT IT DOES RHYME

Ukraine has functioned as the borderlands between East and West for a long time now and the Crimean peninsula remains strategically significant due to its location on the Black Sea’s northern shore, extending out from the south-eastern tip of Ukraine. During Ukraine’s involvement with the USSR, Joseph Stalin deported hundreds of thousands of native Crimean Tatars out of the country and replaced them with ethnic Russians in an effort to gain dominance over Ukraine’s industrial center and establish access to the prime Naval real estate. When Stalin died in 1953 he was succeeded by Nikita Khrushchev who transferred the Crimean peninsula from Russia’s SFSR to Ukrainian SSR the following year in 1954. Khrushchev emphasized the friendship between the Ukrainian and Russian nations as he was intimately familiar with the Ukrainian republic, having served as First Secretary of the Communist Party of Ukrainian SSR for more than a decade. As a peninsula that was transferred from the Russian Soviet Republic to the Ukrainian Soviet Republic in 1954, Crimea has long maintained strong cultural and political ties to Moscow. Most of Crimea’s population is Russian speaking and Russia’s Black Sea fleet still maintains a naval base at the Crimean port city of Sevastopol.

Within the Russian government, Khrushchev was succeeded by Leonid Brezhnev in 1964. Brezhnev  lead until his death in 1982, when Yuri Andropov took over. Fifteen months after taking office, Andropov died and Konstantin Chernenko took command. Thirteen months later and Chernenko too dropped dead, ushering in the seventh and final undisputed leader of the Soviet Union, Mikhail Gorbachev.

By the late 1980’s the Soviet Union was collapsing, and by 1991 a conservative faction within Soviet Communist lines staged a failed coup d’état to remove Mikhail Gorbachev. On 24 August 1991 the Ukrainian parliament declared Ukraine an independent democratic state, and by December of 1991 Ukraine held a nationwide referendum wherein an overwhelming majority of all Ukrainians voted for independence from Russia, voting in Leonid Kravchuk as the first president of Ukraine.

In 1994 Leonid Kuchuma succeeded Kravchuk as the second president, serving two terms until the 21 November 2004 elections, when Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych (formerly the head of the National Bank of Ukraine) won the presidential election and took over the Soviet reigns. Rumors ran wild that Yanukovych’s victory was the result of electoral fraud, voter intimidation and massive corruption, prompting public protests that led to the now infamous Orange Revolution of 2004. Nationwide protests ensued, spurring mass civil disobedience, sit-ins, and general strikes with demonstrations centered in the Ukrainian capital of Kiev. The Ukrainian Supreme Court annulled the original election results and ordered a re-vote on the 26th of December 2004. The second “run-off” vote in the end was determined to be a fair election, transferring victory to Viktor Yushchenko and ending the Orange Revolution.

Yushchenko was mysteriously poisoned that same year with dioxin TCDD – a contaminant in Agent Orange. Though he survived the poisoning, he became permanently disfigured physically. Yushchenko’s failures as a leader could be described as large and numerous, and his administration was shrouded in corruption. But Yanukovych was not permanently defeated, and became Yushchenko’s successor in 2010 in a vote that was once again declared by apparently objective international observers as “free and fair.” Yanukovych subsequently lead the country all the way up to the crisis unfolding in 2014.

In November of 2013, Yanukovych announced that Ukraine would abandon its agreement to strengthen ties with the European Union, instead choosing to strengthen ties with Russia. This decision is what incited protests in Kiev’s Independence Square. The demonstrations officially began on 24 November 2013, according to mainstream media pundits, as an expression of outrage against President Yanukovych’s “pause on the road to Europe.” Those protests turned into riots, growing larger and louder until 20 February 2014 when the world watched in horror as dozens of people were shot and killed by sniper fire in Kiev.

The murders disbursed the protesters and threw the situation into a deeper state of confusion. When Yanakovich disappeared from the Ukraine, it was widely assumed that he and his supporters were responsible for the appalling murders of 94 people. But a phone conversation between the European Union’s Foreign Affairs Minister Catherine Ashton and Estonia’s Foreign Affairs Minister Urmas Paet leaked to public on 05 March 2014, reveals that said snipers were actually working for the new coalition government. The conversation also reveals that Western diplomats were not only aware of this fact, but actively participated in helping to cover it up:

“The people who were killed by snipers from both sides among policemen and then people from the streets, that they were the same snipers killing people from both sides. Then she also showed me some photos she said that as a medical doctor can say it is the same handwriting; the same type of bullets. And its really disturbing that now the new coalition, that they don’t want to investigate what exactly happened so that now there is stronger and stronger understanding that behind the snipers it was not Yanakovich, but it was somebody from the new coalition.”

~Urmas Paet to Catherine Ashton

When Yanukovich’s government announced that it would not sign a key trade agreement with the EU in favor of one with Russia nearly four months ago, nobody expected Kiev to tear itself apart as a result. And even though everyone assumed Yanukovich was behind these sniper killings, its becoming more obvious by the day that he had nothing to do with them. Perhaps his life, like those in Kiev’s Independence Square, was also under threat. The trade deal prompted many Ukrainians to begin protesting, but the situation remained peaceful until February.  If corruption is the complaint, how could an alliance with the EU possibly help? Ukrainian corruption will not be alleviated by joining one of the most corrupt institutions on the planet, indicating that whatever genuine, grassroots, peaceful protests may have existed in the beginning, have since been co-opted and redirected. And as astute students of history will observe, we’ve all heard this story many times before.

 ‘I AM A UKRAINIAN’ VIRAL STATE DEPARTMENT HOAX

As this crisis unfolds and casualties accumulate on both sides, gaining speed is the struggle to control public perception of why this is happening. The official narrative sponsored by the pressitutes within the mainstream media claims these protests are peaceful, grassroots demonstrations. However, these so-called protesters have seized weapons, commandeered government buildings, assaulted media outlets and bloodied Ukraine in escalating violence. But affording legitimacy to the violent Ukrainian uprising is a 2-minute viral YouTube video called, ‘I Am A Ukrainian. It is eerily reminiscent of the KONY-2012 scam which sought to convince millions of people with simplified emotional propaganda of the immediate necessity of US military intervention in Uganda. In the case of, ‘I AM A Ukrainian,’ a backdrop of inspirational music serves as the electronic canvas for a young woman named Julia declaring that the Ukrainian uprising is about democracy and freedom. Julia insists that there is only one reason people in her country are on the streets, a contention which not only insults the intelligence of anyone familiar with the rich history, complex demographics, and multifaceted geopolitical factors centering on a a global tug-of-war between the United States, the European Union, and Russia:

“I want you to know why thousands of people all over my country are on the streets. There is only one reason: We want to be free from a dictatorship.”

Following the links in the description of the video quickly make it obvious that the origins of the video are not as grassroots as many have been led to believe. It was filmed by Ben Moses and produced by the same team behind A Whisper to a Roar (a documentary chronicling the worldwide fight for democracy); it was funded by Prince Moulay Hicham of Morocco; it was inspired by Larry Diamond of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) – America’s most influential political think tank who’s members have dominated every presidential administration since FDR and maintains very close ties with the US State Department headed up by Hillary Clinton. Larry Diamond worked closely with the US Agency for International Development (USAID) as well as the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), which is considered to be the CIA’s civilian arm. NED is deeply embroiled with innumerable instigated uprisings, attempted coups and other inhuman acts of neo-Colonial regime change since its inception in 1983, including the contrived Orange Revolution that brought US Puppet Victor Yushchenko to power in Ukraine in 2004. Under the auspices of the NED, Larry diamond also played instrumental role in the Arab Spring, supposedly a series of grassroots revolts which were in fact organized and managed by NED and other NGO’s tied in the CFR. [1] The viral, ‘I Am A Ukrainian,’ video appears to be another crude attempt to shift perception away from the western powers who have instigated the uprising, and persuade the public the Ukrainian uprising is a genuinely peaceful, grassroots movement. Larry Diamond also happens to be an adviser for the US State Department.

Confirming this suspicion was the fact that following the video’s release, Julia was immediately invited to appear on CNN with Anderson Cooper, who for some reason is often the point-man for contrived hoaxes perpetrated by the US State Department, including the KONY-2012 scam and the Syria Danny scam (in which a supposed Syrian activist was caught staging YouTube videos to blame atrocities on the Assad Regime as a means of demonizing the Syrian government, thereby justifying US military intervention in Syria). Cooper and other presstitutes within the mainstream media credited Julia with the creation of the video (music and all) when it was, in fact, created by a production company linked directly to the US State Department, funded by a Moroccan prince, filmed by a former ABC television affiliate, and inspired by Larry “CFR-NED” Diamond of California’s Stanford University.

NED claims to be a Non Government Organization (NGO) even though they receive all of their funding from the federal government pouring money into Ukraine for the stated purpose of “Strengthening Democracy and Civil Society.” These flowery words amount to the financial support of dozens of violent Ukrainian groups, some of whom call for the assassination of political opponents. NED directs funding by paying those who participate in the uprising with cash, and providing arms. NED in association with Freedom House and George Soros’ Open Society Institute, aided Viktor Yushchenko’s 2004 Orange revolution, instigating faux protests as an act of covert regime change at the behest of Washington’s shadow government.  In fact the violent Spilna Sprava organization who vandalized and overtook the Justice Ministry in Kiev demanding Yanukovych’s resignation in late January 2014 were funded by George Soros and tied to the European Union and the International Monetary Fund. These organizations have instigated fake revolutions, ensuring violent outcomes by financing madmen, ensuring the conflicts invite bloodshed as a means to ensuring regime change.

So with mainstream media whores leaping onto this KONY-2012-style, ‘I Am A Ukrainian’ video, the truth surrounding the Ukrainian uprising has evaded millions. Julia goes on to tell us that, “You can help us only by telling this story to your friends – only by sharing this video,” thereby framing the argument within an obscenely oversimplified 2-minute YouTube video. Alas, propaganda wouldn’t work it it wasn’t simple. Julia did, however, get one thing right: “We are civilized people, but our government are barbarians.”

Activist Post notes:

“Video designed to calm the public to back more foreign intervention by associating Ukraine’s shockingly violent coup with with some peaceful fragrant girl called Julia, instead of Nazi insurgents who murdered their way to power, or Assist Secretary of State Victoria Nuland caught revealing she’d plotted this coup against the elected government long before the protests began.”

THE CURSE HEARD ‘ROUND THE WORLD

The Leak of Victoria Nuland’s phone conversation Geoffrey Pyatt is timely considering Chrimea’s March 16th referendum, but what exactly was said?
Here’s the transcript, courtesy of the BBC:

*    *    *    *    *    *    *

Nuland: What do you think?

Pyatt: I think we’re in play. The Klitschko [Vitaly Klitschko, one of three main opposition leaders] piece is obviously the complicated electron here. Especially the announcement of him as deputy prime minister and you’ve seen some of my notes on the troubles in the marriage right now so we’re trying to get a read really fast on where he is on this stuff. But I think your argument to him, which you’ll need to make, I think that’s the next phone call you want to set up, is exactly the one you made to Yats [Arseniy Yatsenyuk, another opposition leader]. And I’m glad you sort of put him on the spot on where he fits in this scenario. And I’m very glad that he said what he said in response.

Nuland: Good. I don’t think Klitsch should go into the government. I don’t think it’s necessary, I don’t think it’s a good idea.

Pyatt: Yeah. I guess… in terms of him not going into the government, just let him stay out and do his political homework and stuff. I’m just thinking in terms of sort of the process moving ahead we want to keep the moderate democrats together. The problem is going to be Tyahnybok [Oleh Tyahnybok, the other opposition leader] and his guys and I’m sure that’s part of what [President Viktor] Yanukovych is calculating on all this.

Nuland: [Breaks in] I think Yats is the guy who’s got the economic experience, the governing experience. He’s the… what he needs is Klitsch and Tyahnybok on the outside. He needs to be talking to them four times a week, you know. I just think Klitsch going in… he’s going to be at that level working for Yatsenyuk, it’s just not going to work.

Pyatt: Yeah, no, I think that’s right. OK. Good. Do you want us to set up a call with him as the next step?

Nuland: My understanding from that call – but you tell me – was that the big three were going into their own meeting and that Yats was going to offer in that context a… three-plus-one conversation or three-plus-two with you. Is that not how you understood it?

Pyatt: No. I think… I mean that’s what he proposed but I think, just knowing the dynamic that’s been with them where Klitschko has been the top dog, he’s going to take a while to show up for whatever meeting they’ve got and he’s probably talking to his guys at this point, so I think you reaching out directly to him helps with the personality management among the three and it gives you also a chance to move fast on all this stuff and put us behind it before they all sit down and he explains why he doesn’t like it.

Nuland: OK, good. I’m happy. Why don’t you reach out to him and see if he wants to talk before or after.

Pyatt: OK, will do. Thanks.

Nuland: OK… one more wrinkle for you Geoff. [A click can be heard] I can’t remember if I told you this, or if I only told Washington this, that when I talked to Jeff Feltman [United Nations Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs] this morning, he had a new name for the UN guy Robert Serry did I write you that this morning?

Pyatt: Yeah I saw that.

Nuland: OK. He’s now gotten both Serry and [UN Secretary General] Ban Ki-moon to agree that Serry could come in Monday or Tuesday. So that would be great, I think, to help glue this thing and to have the UN help glue it and, you know, Fuck the EU.

Pyatt: No, exactly. And I think we’ve got to do something to make it stick together because you can be pretty sure that if it does start to gain altitude, that the Russians will be working behind the scenes to try to torpedo it. And again the fact that this is out there right now, I’m still trying to figure out in my mind why Yanukovych (garbled) that. In the meantime there’s a Party of Regions faction meeting going on right now and I’m sure there’s a lively argument going on in that group at this point. But anyway we could land jelly side up on this one if we move fast. So let me work on Klitschko and if you can just keep… we want to try to get somebody with an international personality to come out here and help to midwife this thing. The other issue is some kind of outreach to Yanukovych but we probably regroup on that tomorrow as we see how things start to fall into place.

Nuland: So on that piece Geoff, when I wrote the note [US vice-president’s national security adviser Jake] Sullivan’s come back to me VFR [direct to me], saying you need [US Vice-President Joe] Biden and I said probably tomorrow for an atta-boy and to get the deets [details] to stick. So Biden’s willing.

Pyatt: OK. Great. Thanks.  [2]

*    *    *    *    *    *    *

After being caught with their pants down actively conspiring to incite uprisings in Ukraine, Victoria Nuland apologized –NOT for conspiring to overthrow a democratically elected government, but for being rude to the European Union. This despite the fact that we can clearly hear them plotting to “midwife” the insurrection taking place in Kiev. Everything they discussed in the phone conversation has come to pass, including propping up Yatsenyuk into power.  In a matter of weeks Victoria Nuland has come to represent the vulgar arrogance and imperial hubris so typical of the neo-Conservative government running the show today, but her involvement in manipulating Ukrainian affairs runs deeper still…

COUNTLESS RIOTERS PAID TO DEMONSTRATE AT KIEV’S INDEPENDENCE SQUARE

As in all countries affected by the economic austerity that has crashed the entire global economic system, revolt in Ukraine was inevitable. But the stage was not set for violence until Victoria Nuland spoke at the “Ukraine in Washington 2013” conference, organized by the US-Ukraine Foundation on behalf of Chevron on the 10th of December 2013 wherein she announced:

On 10 December 2013, Victoria Nuland spoke at the Ukraine in Washington 2013 conference, organized by the US-Ukraine Foundation on behalf of Chevron:

“The United States believes there is a way out for UK that it is still possible to save the Ukraine’s European future and that is where we wanted to see the president lead his country. and that was going to require immediate steps to deescalate the security situation and immediate political steps to end the crisis and get Ukraine back into a conversation with Europe and the International Monetary Fund. Ukraine’s economy is in a dire state. having been in recession for more than a year and w. less than 3 months worth of currency reserves in place. the reforms that the IMF insists on are necessary for the long term economic health of the country. A New Deal with the IMF would also send a positive signal to private markets and would increase foreign direct investment that is so urgently needed in Ukraine. Signing the Association Agreement with the EU would also put the UK on a path to strengthening the sort of stable and predictable business environment that investors require.”

She went on to say that Ukrainian are European, which probably comes as news to Ukrainians who consider themselves Russians:

“When Ukrainians say they are European, this is what they mean. … As one very prominent UK businessman said to me, the Maidan movement’s greatest achievement is that it has proven that the people of UK will no longer support a president – this one or a future one – who does not take us to Europe … We’ve invested over five-Billion dollars to assist UK in these and other goals that will ensure a secure and prosperous and democratic Ukraine”

Why exactly is the American Assistant Secretary of State encouraging the people of Ukraine to join the European Union?

Nuland’s announcement to invest $5 Billion in the Ukraine ultimately equates to US, EU and NATO sponsored operatives giving cash and checks to Ukrainians to become state-sponsored Rioters. In order to maintain demonstrations for as long as is needed to dethrone the democratically elected government, the allocation of $5 Billion equates to enabling thousands of rioters for months upon months with the financial means to weaken the existing political infrastructure. And the goal of achieving a “good form of government” equates to Washington picking and choosing which crony puppets will staff the next Ukrainian puppet regime? If you’re American or European, that footage of Kiev’s Independence Square and all the carnage that has transpired there – that’s your tax dollars hard at work.

Johannes Loew of the Internet site elynitthria.net/ writes:

“I am just back from Ukraine (I live in Munich/Germany) and I was a lot at the Maidan. Most of those people get only 100 grivna. 300 is for Students.”

Simferopol locals repeat claims that Maidan protesters receive daily cheques from western governments.

According to Paul Craig Roberts:

“One reader wrote: ‘My wife, who is of Ukrainian nationality, has weekly contact to her parents and friends in Zhytomyr [NW Ukraine]. According to them, most protesters get an average payment of 200-300 grivna, corresponding to about 15-25 euro. As I additionally heard, one of the most active agencies and ‘payment outlets’ on EU side is the German ‘Konrad Adenauer Stiftung’, being closely connected to the CDU, i.e. Mrs. Merkel’s party.

“Washington has no money for food stamps or to prevent home foreclosures, but it has plenty of money with which to subvert Ukraine…Of course, not all of the protesters are paid. There are plenty of gullible dupes in the streets who think they are protesting Ukraine government corruption. I have heard from several. There is little doubt that the Ukraine government is corrupt. What government isn’t? Government corruption is universal, but it is easy to go from the frying pan into the fire. Ukrainian protesters seem to think that they can escape corruption by joining the EU. Obviously, these gullible dupes are unfamiliar with the report on EU corruption issued February 3 by the EU Commissioner for Home Affairs. The report says that a business-political nexus of corruption affects all 28 EU member countries and costs the EU economies $162.2 billion per annum.[3] According to the World Bank, the economic cost of EU corruption is almost as large as the size of Ukrainian GDP. [4]  Clearly, Ukrainians will not escape corruption by joining the EU. Indeed, Ukrainians will suffer worse corruption.

“It was fools like Nuland playing the great game that gave us World War I. Washington’s drive to exploit every opportunity to establish its hegemony over the world is driving us all to nuclear war. Like Nuland, a significant percentage of the population of western Ukraine are Russophobes. Ukrainian emotions fueled with Washington’s money should not direct the course of history.”

In the grand scheme of things, Victoria Nuland did happen to get one thing right when she said, “Fuck the EU.” The former Soviet nations would indeed do well to avoid the EU like the plague, as it teeters on the precipice of yet another choreographed economic collapse, whose leaders are the same people that brought us the neo-Conservative Anglo-American establishment that has poisoned much of the rest of the world, who are guaranteed to see Ukraine only in terms of resource exploitation and empire building.

Nuland’s conversation with Pyatt illustrates the intent to deliberately impose a puppet regime after their army of paid rioters have successfully removed the democratically elected government. But Victoria  Nuland is a small piece in a wide mosaic of Western-funded operatives, NGOs, political activists, politicians, clergymen, think-tanks and intelligence firms working all over the glove on behalf of the Anglo-Ameican World Empire. The mission: to incite uprisings that justify intervention. Stable societies cannot be invaded by military forces because they will be opposed. But the forces driving this world empire are clever, and have thus empowered arms dealers, war lords, terrorist organizations, and violent dictators the world over to continuously wage chaos, death and destruction and keep the system itself in perpetual need of foreign aid. Next, corporate media shoot selective footage of said chaos, and spin it to manipulate public emotional response on the home front. [5]

WHAT COULD THE WEST POSSIBLY WANT WITH UKRAINE?

Ukraine is almost as strategically important as Iraq. From Iraq, one’s military has proximal access to four continents and a number of water ways to deploy Naval forces around the world. Ukraine is strategically located between the European Union and the Russian Federation, sharing borders with each:

“Without Ukraine, Russia ceases to be an empire, but with Ukraine suborned and then subordinated, Russia automatically becomes an empire. But is Russia becomes an empire, it cannot be a democracy at the same time. We might add that an imperial Russia will be forced to abandon economic reform in favor of central planning.”
~Zbigniew Brzezinski in a 1993 Foreign Affairs article

Brzezinski’s assessment reveals how coveted the borderlands of the Ukraine are to the Anglo-American establishment and Rothschild-Zionists alike, not for the expanse of their empire, but the destruction of the Russian Federation. The entire process is less about Ukraine’s “democratic future,” and more about weakening Russia with a puerile retaliation against President Putin. Brzezinski isn’t just a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, and isn’t just a Bilderberg member, but he also goes as far up in the NSA as an individual can. Ukraine is a major geostrategic prize in the eyes of of the guys at the top.

The US is strongly pushing the Ukraine’s assimilation into the EU just as it was behind the 2004 failed “Orange Revolution” which attempted to split Ukraine from Russia in a  bid to encircle Russia with military bases, thereby isolating and weakening the Russian empire. The goals haven’t changed, and neither has the playbook. The internet is the one wildcard in all of this, preventing this agenda’s smooth transition into the New World Order so sought and desired by the Rotschild-Zionist faction pulling the strings; they’re beginning to lose their grip because even though the game has changed, they’re operating with the 20th century playbook. For example the collapse of the Soviet Union by 1991 provided the Western powers with an historic opportunity to penetrate into Russian dominated territories with mandatory reforms, but Russia’s security forces succeeded in assisting Vladimir Putin’s rise to power in 2000.

While the neo-Conservatives exploit Kiev in their geostrategic ambition to expand NATO and the multinational amusement park that is the European Union, even Henry Kissinger advises discretion:

Kissinger: “… Since the beginning of the end of the 17th, the beginning of the 18th century, Ukraine has been part of Russia. And I don’t know any Russian, whether they’re dissidents or pro-government, who does not consider Ukraine at least an essential part of Russian history. So the Russians cannot be indifferent to the future of Ukraine. Now, I’m strongly in favor of an independent Ukraine and strongly in favor of Ukraine having an organic relationship to Europe. My impression [is] it’s in essence a divided country. The eastern part is Orthodox, and the further west one gets, the more prevalent Catholicism grows … As to the parties fighting each other in Ukraine, my impression is, that each of them have democratic elements, each of them have oligarchic elements, and I don’t consider the current president inevitably pro-Russian.”

Zakaria: “You know Putin well. You’ve met him more than any American. Do you think he is watching what is happening in Ukraine and thinking, the West and the United States is doing this essentially as a way of surrounding Russia?”

Kissinger: “I think he thinks that this is a dress rehearsal for what we would like to do in Moscow … And the fact that it’s happening so close to the Sochi games, will make him even more suspicious. But Putin thinks that the disillusion of the Soviet Union was a great historical disaster. So obviously, the largest part of this independence is Ukraine with 50 million people, and he can’t be indifferent.”

Zakaria: “Do you think the Obama administration is handling this appropriately?”

Kissinger: “Well, the Obama administration has a tendency to keep making public statements on evolving, dramatic events, as if it’s going to be settled on a Sunday talk show. I don’t disagree with where the administration is heading, but I think it’s not necessary to do it so publicly and one should have a better view of the long term historic evolution … Relating Russia to the rest of the world and to us is a huge challenge because here is a country that has been an imperial country for all of its history that has identified itself, to itself as by its imperial achievements. Now they have a frontier with China, which is a strategic nightmare. They have a frontier with Islam, which is an ideological nightmare. And they have a frontier with Europe that’s historically very shaky. On the other hand, Russian rulers throughout history have governed by giving the impression that they’re very important abroad, so how to rally his country while looking fields abroad and yet realizing that huge adjustments are possible, are necessarily. I think that is the great challenge that Putin faces an it’s not in our interest to drive them into a beleaguered attitude where they feel they have to prove what they can do.”

It is important to clearly spell out here that Kissinger and Brzezinski represent the old-school approach to Empire building: cautious, systematic, covert and indirect.

The new-school approach of neo-Conservatives like Rohm Emanuel, by contrast, represent an ideology diametrically opposed in its mentality: overt, vulgar, arrogant, blatant, aggressive and loud.

Henry Kissinger, as old as he is, participated in this interview because he understands how precariously timed events in and around the Crimean peninsula can spell certain doom for Washington. They’re addicted to engineering faux revolutions in country after country around the world, and have become so predictable in their brazen behavior and arrogant attitudes that we’re all beginning to see exactly how their playbook is scripted, and that it hasn’t changed much.

In 1984 newspeak, “Open Society,” “Economic Reform,” “Democracy,” and “Freedom,” are buzzwords that translate to “Regime Change,” “Coup d’état,”and “Armed Mutiny.” The Western superpowers have invested trillions of dollars in attempts to promote “civil societies” around the globe. Since the turn of the century we’ve watched former Soviet nations falls to the architects of social engineering. Public emotions are scientifically manipulated by they lofty banners and happy slogans while Western agents feed the fires of anti-Russian dissent to sow the seeds of destruction. Because great societies can always defend themselves from external threats, and therefore can only fall from within.

America has a long-established history of meddling with the internal affairs of other countries. The CIA’s track record of color revolutions includes, but is not limited to, the 2004 Orange revolution, the 2003 Georgian Rose Revolution, the 2005 Kyrgyz Tulip Revolution, the 2005 Lebanese Cedar Revolution, the 2009 Iranian Green Revolution, the 2010 Tunisian Jasmine Revolution, and the 2011 Egyptian Lotus Revolution.

This method of “color revolution” was created by Gene Sharp, an American social scientist dubbed the modern Machiavelli of nonviolence. In 1998 Gene Sharp perfected the method of “color revolutions” with the overthrow of Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic. The principle is simple: exacerbate all underlying frustrations, blame the existing political apparatus for all the problems, manipulate the youth according to the Freudian “patricidal” scenario, organize a coup, and then use your propaganda mill to peddle  the myth that the establishment was overthrown by genuine grassroots movements.

French Political expert Thierry Meyssan remarks:

“The slogan of the “color revolutions” harks back to an infantile perspective; What matters is to overthrow the head of state without consideration of the consequences–“Don’t worry about your future, Washington will take care of everything for you.”

Economic Hit Man  John Perkins explains how fanatic the global elite are:

“Highly paid professionals cheat countries around the globe out of trillions of dollars … They funnel money from the World Bank, (IMF, and other international lending agencies, as well as) other foreign aid organizations into the coffers of huge corporations and the pockets of a few wealthy families who control the planet’s natural resources … Their tools include fraudulent financial reports, rigged elections, payoffs, extortion, sex, and murder … [and] They play a game as old as empire, but one that has taken on new and terrifying dimensions during this time of globalization.”

SOCIAL UNREST IS LUCRATIVE IF YOU’RE AT THE TOP

In the spirit of Rohm Emanuel’s well-known mentality, “never let a crisis to go to waste,” the reptilian hawks in Washington are all over Ukraine like flies on shit. They certainly haven’t wasted any opportunities to exploit the situation, and continue driving a bloody wedge into Kiev – the heart of Ukraine – dividing the people among themselves along the lines of Russian/Ukrainian, Orthodox/Catholic and unfortunately Nazi/Jew. Some Ukrainians want to secede, while others do not. Some Ukrainians think there should be a national language, others do not. And all the while, Washington’s hawks rub their eager palms together and lick their chops, admiring the golden opportunity to finally divide the region against itself. Once the United States can justify intervention in Ukraine, Shell Oil can move into the region and conduct Hydraulic-Fracturing operations – you know? Fracking? That method of Natural gas extraction that requires a toxic mix of 596 chemicals to be blasted 8,000 feet below the surface, thus permanently contaminating all watersheds within a square mile? That awesome phenomena currently underway in 34 of the 50 United States that we discussed last week? And Shell aren’t the only ones advancing – Halliburton purportedly now has Fracking contracts with Poland as well.

According to the Guardian’s Peter Grazul, Ukraine’s revolution has been fueled by international energy politics:

“Russia is currently the world’s second largest exporter of natural gas. A large portion of its hydrocarbons are imported by Western Europe, which is heavily dependent on the pipelines that traverse Ukraine. Governments of Western Europe for years have tried unsuccessfully to lessen their dependence on Russia’s state owned Gazprom. The pipeline infrastructure established in the region is largely a result of Soviet era industrial planning, meaning that the oil and natural gas of countries such as Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan gets shipped directly through Russia when being sent to European customers. Gazprom for its part charges fluctuating transport fees.

“When Yanukovich was deciding whether or not to sign a free trade agreement with the European Union, Russia threatened to raise the prices of its energy exports to Ukraine. Ukraine, already reliant on Russian energy, was even more so inclined to accept a Russian deal because of the approaching winter. What resulted in December was Gazprom agreeing to sell natural gas to Ukraine’s Naftogaz for $268.50 per 1,000 cubic meters instead of at the original price of roughly $400 per 1,000 cubic meters. Russia also handed Ukraine a $15 billion bail out package, with Yanukovich agreeing to use some of the funds to buy Russian hydrocarbons.” [6]

A New York Times article published 05 March 2014 By Coral Davenport and Steven Erlanger titled U.S. HOPES BOOM IN NATURAL GAS CAN CURB PUTIN, reads:

“The crisis in Crimea is heralding the rise of a new era of American energy diplomacy, as the Obama administration tries to deploy the vast new supply of natural gas in the United States as a weapon to undercut the influence of the Russian president, Vladimir V. Putin, over Ukraine and Europe..”

This should outrage rate payers, not only because their rates are going to skyrocket due to likely war rationings of Natural Gas, but because energy corporations were only able to sell the idea of Fracking to people who are too shortsided to see the environmental costs of it, by promising rate payers that Hyrdo-Fracking was guaranteed to make the United States “energy independent.”

But yesterday’s independence has perplexingly transformed into today’s export.

Mark Lippman of DailyKOS writes:

“Ukraine’s Parliament voted Thursday to approve Arseniy Yatsenyuk as the interim Prime Minister who will head the government until elections are held on May 25. The Parliament also approved a cabinet of ministers from the broad coalition that drove Viktor Yanukovych from office.. Yatsenyuk spoke before the Parliament on Thursday and if his description of the current situation is accurate, conditions in Ukraine are worse than anyone knew. Yatsenyuk said the country “is in the deepest economic, political and social crisis in the history of its independence.” He told the Parliament that the state treasury had been plundered and the country was one step away from financial and economic collapse.

“Ukrainians have heard promises before. The country’s political leadership has an unusual number of unseemly characters, opportunists, and unconventional oligarchs. In 2004, President Viktor Yushchenko, a former head of the national Bank of Ukraine, was poisoned with TCDD dioxin which left him disfigured.  Yulia Tymoshenko, known in Ukraine as the ‘Gas Princess’ for the fortune she made in the natural gas industry campaigned for Yushchenko during his illness. She later served two separate terms as Prime Minister. Her business partner, former Prime Minister Pavlo Lazarenko, was tried in US District Court, found guilty of money laundering and extortion, and he spent a number of years in federal prison. Tymoshenko was later convicted and jailed in Ukraine.  Yatsenyuk is a Tymoshenko supporter. It is expected that she’ll run for President in the May election … Every Prime Minister and President since 2008 promised fiscal reforms connected to the subsidized natural gas industry but nothing was done to implement them.

“The ruling elite in Ukraine has also benefited from the trade in natural gas but Russia has leverage as the supplier of an essential energy commodity.  Russia also supplies countries in eastern Europe through the pipelines that traverse Ukraine.  In 2006, a dispute between Russia and Ukraine erupted over payments for supply, use of the pipeline, and accusations of siphoning. The supply was disrupted. Disputes continued intermittently and natural gas supply was disrupted again in 2009. In a deal negotiated in 2010,Ukraine agreed to extend the stay of the Russian Black Sea Fleet in Crimea until 2042, from the original withdrawal date of 2017 in return for natural gas price concessions.

“Since Natural Gas subsidies are regressive, wealthy folks use more gas and collect a disproportionate share of the subsidy payments. The program could be targeted to provide assistance to those who need it most and the IMF recommended limiting it to the bottom 40% of the population. Today, Ukraine’s ruling elite swear they want to be European. The urgent priority is $35 billion that Ukraine needs to replenish its treasury. What strings would be attached to that amount and how would they be guaranteed once Ukraine has the funding it needs with Russia hovering nearby. It turns out that part was worked out far in advance. Shell, Exxon Mobil, and maybe some others will begin hydraulic fracturing for shale gas deposits that were discovered in Ukraine.” [7]

By weathering the crisis, corporations can swoop in when the battle is over and the defenses are down, to exploit the spoils of the aftermath. From a distance they’re able to Destabilize, Destroy and Dominate – the 3 D’s. But its not just the resources they’re after. War brings with it the fringe benefit of boosted sales, peddling to multiple (sometimes even opposing) factions, organizations and military forces. War brings with it the fringe benefit of market speculation, and the ability to purchase assets and commodities in trouble regions at rock bottom prices.  War brings with it the fringe benefit of issuing massive loans at high interest rates to the governments of these poor countries to create massive infrastructure projects (like Fracking) that benefit only the corporations, and paid for by taxpayers. War is a racket, and the most profitable one of all time according to Two-Time Medal of Honor winner Major General Smedley T. Butler, who retiring in 1931, saw his career for what it was and wrote his famous publication, War is a Racket:

“I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class thug for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 11914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested. Looking back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents.”

RISE OF THE NEO-NAZI SVOBODA FACTION IN MODERN UKRAINE

In February, footage of Ukrainian radical nationalist leader Oleksandr Ivanovych Muzychko nearly strangling the Prosecutor of the Rivne Oblast in his office with his own necktie while shouting obscenities emerged on YouTube:

For anyone who has ever been persecuted by the Legal sector, it may be difficult to find context here, since many western prosecutors adhering to Admiralty law, spend a great deal of their time litigating frivolous and unconstitutional charges against people too poor to pay the fines or afford council. But there exists a massive difference between expressing a healthy frustration toward frivolous exploitation, and dogged violence over a murder investigation – especially if you’re a card-carrying Nazi in the 21st Century. As you can see in the video, the prosecutor asked to be given a chance to explain the situation, but Muzychko did not want to hear explanations. For those who don’t speak Ukrainian, Muzychko’s shouts translate like this:

“Shut the fuck up, you bitch! Your fucking time is over!” he growled, threatening to rope the clerk like a dog and lead him to the people on Maidan. Muzychko called the prosecutors useless “chairwarmers,” and accused them of deliberately neglecting their job. “Does it mean I have to elect my own prosecutor, if these animals do not want to work? What is this, a sabotage? Should we have mayhem, anarchy in the country, they will keep sitting here and covering [the criminals]?” The clerk tried to intervene in the radical’s speech, but received a slap on the face.“If you think I am goodie because I’ve come without my rifle, you are gravely mistaken. I’ve come with a pistol. Work!”

Muzychko, who is a member of the Right Sector radical movement, arrived at the Rivne Oblast prosecutor’s office after he heard claims that a criminal investigation into a local murder was being delayed. The controversial figure known for taking part in the Chechen conflict against Russian troops, for his recent Kalashnikov brandishing in front of regional authorities and for making openly anti-Semitic statements, decided to take the matter of the investigation into his own hands.

Local Ukrainian publication rivnepost.rv.ua quoted additional statements made by Muzychko that were not caught on film.  According to the outlet, the Muzychko threatened to have the clerk lynched by an angry mob. The confused prosecutor later explained the situation to journalists, saying that Muzychko has probably been misinformed. Meanwhile, the new Ukrainian authorities cast a blind eye on extremist actions of the armed Right Sector apparently in return for the group’s active help in overthrowing the government of ousted president Yanukovich. Atrocities committed by the Ukrainian radicals in 2014 are routinely dismissed and ignored by the Western media and the ignorant alike, but new YouTube personalities like Muzychko will make it increasingly difficult for the propaganda mill to continue veiling the Ukrainian riot fascism as peaceful, grassroots protests…

John McCain with leader of the neo-Nazi Svoboda Party (right)

“We are putting our hopes in a new generation of politicians”

John McCain  with leader of the neo-Nazi Svoboda Party Oleh Tyahnybok.
McCain on a “Business Trip” to Kiev (Source Business Insider)

John McCain visited Ukraine in December (right around the time Victoria Nuland was giving her speech to the people at Chevron). McCain spoke to more than two-thousand protesters, telling them the United States supported their revolution. After boarding a plane, McCain was whisked in front of the camera so he could announce to the media that the US will intervene if Russia becomes involved in the Ukraine riots. McCain now calls for Sanctions, saying:

“We are here to support your just cause, the sovereign right of Ukraine to determine its own destiny freely and independently. And the destiny you seek lies in Europe … We want to make it clear to Russia and Vladimir Putin that interference in the affairs of Ukraine is not acceptable to the United States.”

Let’s keep that last statement in mind when considering that Mr. McCain supported the overthrow of Libya and actively backed Jihadi terrorist in an attempt to do the same thing in Syria that is being done now in Ukraine. So while Mr. McCain says that the Ukrainian government’s decision to make economic trade deal with Putin over the EU was an interference in their internal affairs, one has to wonder how that could even outwardly be true.  In exactly the same way, there exists no logical reason for the U.S. Assistant Secretary of State to engage in “conducting parallel coordinated high level diplomacy with EU High representative Cathy Ashton with all of the Key Ukrainian stakeholders,” to encourage a Foreign country like Ukraine to join the European Union.

Daniel McAdams calls John McCain the Energizer Bunny of Interventionism:

“As McCain joined an anti-government demonstration, stating that “we are here to support your just cause,” he threatened the government of Ukraine with US sanctions if it did not come to heel. Then, with his typical absence of irony, McCain demanded that Russia stop interfering in Ukraine’s internal affairs.”

Speaking to CNN, McCain recently said:

“What we’re trying to do is try to bring about a peaceful transition here, that would stop the violence and give the Ukrainian people what they unfortunately have not had, with different revolutions that have taken place – a real society.”

US Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland together with neo Nazi Svoboda leader Oleh Tyahnybok (left), IMF Banker Arseniy Yatsenyuk (right) and former boxer Vitali Klitschko (center).

neo-Nazis at the forefront of Ukrainian protests

The situation on the ground is not as simple as pro-EU and trade versus pro-Putin and Russian hegemony in the region. Svoboda is not just a Ukrainian neo-Nazi political party. Svoboda is the fourth-largest Ukrainian political party. Svoboda is part of the Alliance of European National Movements. Svoboda is supported by Washington.

According to Michel Chossudovsky of Global Research:
“The forbidden truth is that the West has engineered, through a carefully staged covert operation, the formation of a proxy regime integrated by neo-Nazis. Confirmed by Asst Sec State Victoria Nuland, key organizations in the Ukraine including the neo-Nazi party Svoboda were generously supported by Washington … While Yatsenyuk’s Fatherland Party controls the majority of portfolios and Svoboda neo-Nazi leader Oleh Tyahnybok was not granted a major cabinet post (apparently at the request of Victoria Nuland), members of Svoboda and the Right Sector occupy key positions in the areas of defense, law enforcement, education and economic affairs. Andriy Parubiy, co-founder of the neo-Nazi Social-National Party of Ukraine (subsequently renamed Svoboda) was appointed Secretary of the National Security and National Defense Committee, a central decision-making body with the Ukrainian acronym RNBOU. This is a key position which ocersees the Ministry of Defense, the armed forces, law enforcement, national security and intelligence. Parubiy was one of the main leaders behind the Orange Revolution in 2004. His organization was funded by the West. He is referred to by the Western media as the “kommandant” of the EuroMaidan movement. Andriy Parubiy together with party leader Oleh Tyahnybok is a follower of Ukrainian Nazi Stepan Bandera, who collaborated in the mass murderer of Jews and Poles during WW2. In turn, Dmytro Yarosh, leader of the Right Sector delegation in the parliament, has been appointed Parubiy’s Deputy Secretary of the RNBOU. Yarosh was the leader of the Brown Shirt neo-Nazi paramilitary during the EuroMaidan “protest” movement. He has called for disbanding the Party of the regions and the Communist Party. The neo-Nazi party also controls the judicial process with the appointment of Oleh Makhnitsky of the Svoboda party to the position of prosecutor-general of Ukraine. What kind of justice will prevail with a renowned neo-Nazi in charge of the Prosecutor’s Office of Ukraine? Cabinet positions were also allocated to former members of the neo-Nazi fringe organization Ukrainian National Assembly – Ukrainian National Self Defense (UNA-UNSO):

“Tetyana Chernovol, portrayed in the Western press as a crusading investigative journalist without reference to her past involvement in the anti-Semitic UNA-UNSO, was named chair of the government’s anti-corruption committee. Dmytro Bulatov, known for his alleged kidnapping by police, but also with UNA-UNSO connections, was appointed minister of youth and sports. Yegor Sobolev, leader of a civic group in Independence Maidan and politically close to Yatsenyuk, was appointed chair of the Lustration Committee, charged with purging followers of Pres Yanukovych from government and public life.

“The world is at a dangerous crossroads. The structures and composition of this proxy government installed by the West do not favor dialogue with the Russian government and military. A scenario of military escalation leading to confrontation of Russia and NATO is a distinct possibility. The RNBOU, which is controlled by neo-Nazis, plays a central role in military affairs. “The flowering of democracy” in Ukraine, to use the words of the NYT, is endorsed by Republicans and Democrats. It’s a bipartisan project. Lest we forget, Senator John McCain is a firm supporter and friend of neo-Nazi Svoboda leader Oleh Tyahnybok. We are not dealing with a transitional government in which neo-Nazi elements integrate the fringe of the coalition, formally led by the Fatherland party. The Cabinet is not only integrated by the Svoboda and Right Sector (not to mention former members of defunct fascist UNA-UNSO), the two main neo-Nazi entities have been entrusted with key positions which grant them de-facto control over the armed forces, police and national security. “

Even though a lot of corporate journalists are ordered to abstain from the term “neo-Nazi,” using designations such as “Svoboda” and the “Right Sector” instead, the act of whitewashing the story doesn’t change the fact that a neo-Nazi organization is systematically seizing control of Ukraine, and the US State Department is funding the installation. But this isn’t the first time that the US Government has funded known terrorists. A-la Charlie Wilson’s War, US funded extremists were documented in Syria massacring entire communities. And even after said extremists were caught by the UN using Sarin gas on thousands of civilians, Washington still covered for them, sending weapons, providing training, and allocating funding to boot.

THE BATTLE FOR CRIMEA

Today the Crimean peninsula might still be a part of Ukraine, but in many ways it is separate from the rest of the country: It has its own legislature and constitution, for example, and is still very Russian: Some  60 percent of the population is ethnically Russian, with the rest being Ukrainian or Crimean Tatars. This crisis hasn’t gone down quite the way the neo-Conservatives would have liked. The Parliament of Crimea in the south of Ukraine voted to secede and put the decision up for public referendum on 16 March 2014. The U.S. government claimed that referendum unconstitutional, and their reluctance to acknowledge the legitimacy of the decision is a huge red flag. If a declaration of independence put to a general vote is unconstitutional, yet violent, foreign-backed, neo-Nazi mutinies are constitutional, who’s constitution are we talking about anyway?

As Ukraine’s opposition leaders consolidate power over Kiev’s parliament, some of them privately admit they are worried over the fate of Crimea. They fear it could be most susceptible to secession or at least a useful tool for Russia, which has used separatist regions in Georgia, Armenia and Moldova to exert influence. A law passed by Ukraine’s parliament removing Russian as an official language risks further stoking tensions between the Russian-speaking eastern Ukraine and Crimea, and the largely Ukrainian-speaking east.

But the mainstream media once again makes God cry with their repeated fear mongering contention that Russia sent a wave of troops into Crimea. As we will recall from earlier herein, Mark Lippman cleared this up, stating that Russian troops have been garrisoned  in the Crimean peninsula for decades, in a deal re-negotiated for 25 additional years in exchange for low rates on Russian Natural Gas.   Russian military reinforcements have not yet intervened on the peninsula.  It is the desire of those pulling the strings to divide-and-conquer any way possible. The problem for them to manage now, is that the whole world knows what they’ve been up to, and the jig with the mainstream media is up.

On Monday 17 March 2014, President Vladimir Putin signed a decree on recognizing Crimea as a sovereign state following the former Ukrainian region’s declaration of independence from Ukraine,  applying to join the Russian Federation following the weekend referendum that saw a landslide 97% of Crimeans supporting the measure. Following yesterday’s referendum in which people in the Black Sea peninsula voted 97% in favor of becoming part of the Russian federation, the EU responded by slapping sanctions on 21 Russian and Ukrainian officials, declaring the referendum to be “illegal” alongside Kiev. Russia expects Ukraine to honor the treaty’s deadline and withdraw all troops from the peninsula by 21 March 2014. Ukrainian President Oleksandr Turchynov said the junta will do everything possible to prevent war, but said “the threat of war is real,” and, “Ukraine is ready to defend its territory.”

Ukraine’s Justice Minister Pavlo Petrenko shared similar sentiments, saying, “Our army should be ready for combat!”

The Coup Yatsenyuk government has called up Ukraine’s newly created National Guard, summoning 40,000 troops.

“This is our land,” acting coup Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk told a crowd in Kiev. “Our fathers and grandfathers have spilled their blood for this land. And we won’t budge a single centimeter from Ukrainian land. Let Russia and its president know this.” Following Crimea’s referendum Sunday, Yatsenyuk promised to hunt down and bring Crimean separatists to justice. “We will find all of them, if it takes one year, two years, and bring them to justice and try them in Ukrainian and international courts. The ground will burn under their feet,” he said.

On Saturday, during a trip to Ukraine, Senator John McCain called on the Obama administration to arm the junta. “They only have a few thousand combat troops and would be overwhelmed by the Russians if it came to that. One of their urgent requests is to have us supply them with weapons,” McCain said. “I will be urging our administration to arrange that transfer as quickly as possible.” [8]

TAKE A STEP BACK AND EXAMINE THE PATTERN

The real stakes of this drama are much larger than Ukraine or any of the other countries that have recently undergone regime change spared by a Color Revolution. These are not random or isolated events. We are witnessing the final moves in a geopolitical chess game deigned to end in war. But they need the public to accept the idea of yet another war. They’ll try to convince us as they have with every other false flag event in history, that they were not the aggressor when in fact  the opposite is the case. Proxy wars don’t seem diabolical until the people realize they’re proxy wars.

Because Obama signed an order targeting Russia with sanctions and revoking the visas of many Russian diplomats, the possibility for Russia to call America’s bluff and drop the dollar as their reserve currency should worry many economists. Russia has also vowed to encourage others to drop the dollar as well in such an event. And with China in Russia’s corner on this issue, economic war invites hot war. The negative press. The Liz Wahl affair. The preoccupation with the Sochi Olympics to make a calculated move on Kiev. The unfolding crisis in Ukraine is far from a black-and-white issue, but above all it is not merely a protest, just as it is not merely a faux Color Revolution, although undercurrents of both appear in the vast array of protest groups. Is Washington ready to risk a major advance toward new cold war by turning these protests into a full-fledged Civil War?

People around the world are hungry, homeless and furious. While the call for revolution is louder than ever, few are willing to pack a lunch. neo-Conservatives who don’t want to see a crisis go to waste see an opportunity here. They possess the understanding and the resources to spin our perception of this outrage to herd us toward their goals. Genuine rebellions and legitimate protests are used as springboards to advance geostrategic agendas by financially steering genuine movements toward outcomes favorable to the established oligarchs. The more volatile a situation becomes, the greater the profit potential; the greater the risk, the greater the reward. It is a simple gambling addiction of taking greater and greater risks that has exposed their hand, and placed the elite in hot water, on thin ice, and in the spotlight. Now that the jig is up, they still refuse to acknowledge that their hand in all of this was exposed. David Icke might observe this behavior as “cleverness without wisdom.”

At this point, a Ukrainian split seems inevitable because the region is already so divided. The crisis is merely a the result of Washington’s ability to encourage preexisting prejudices within a society to flower into all-out warfare. Will Russia annex Crimea? Will a Civil War ensure within the Ukraine? Will there be clashes between Crimean Tatars and Russian-speaking Ukrainians? -between Orthodox and Catholic? This all leaves one to wonder, what is America’s desire in all of this? What end-game scenario are the shadow government seeking out? Is it the total destruction of all society through another world war? Is it the creation of a new Cold War?

Recent developments prove beyond any shadow of a doubt that Western officials and Western funded organizations working in the Ukraine were funded and complicit in the events surrounding Kiev. Washington’s hawks have blood on their hands. Ukraine is experiencing a repeat of Syria, minus Al-Quaeda. The “Color Revolution” blueprint currently at work in Ukraine is a facsimile of every other Color Revolution, and in its very essence, culminates as a repetition of the circumstances that led up to the First World War. Nevertheless, it should be clear to us all now -even the ignorant- that the US and EuroMaidan rebels were never really concerned about anything called “democracy” for the Ukraine, nor did they ever really care about the European Union. What is happening in the Ukraine can only be described as a violent insurrection carried out by Western-backed separatists. And most repetitious of all is the chilling fact that ethnic hatred is the primary driving force fueling much of the separatist movement. And not just any ethnic hatred, but specifically Anti-Semitic hatred. Many Ukrainians are likewise understandably Anti-Russian, due to the Ukraine’s assimilation into the USSR following the New Deal following World War Two, the crimes of Stalin, the crimes of the Bolsheviks, etc. Unfortunately this hatred of Russia enables the conditions for despotic neo-Nazism to flourish. Haven’t we been down this road before?

Washington’s geostrategic goal to encircle Russia with military installations and allied buffer states cannot be completely fulfilled until Belarus, Georgia, Azerbaijan and Armenia are also secured. But the final outcome in the Ukraine remains up in the air. The country hangs on the verge of a Civil War which if sparked, runs the risk of dividing the country into the factions of pro-Europe western Ukrainians and pro-Russia eastern Ukrainians. The prospect of Civil War also heralds the risk of drawing in additional garrisons of Russian troops. With each passing day a Ukrainian split seems more inevitable.

Perhaps a split could be favorable since the imperialists seem to view the concept as detrimental to their goals. Genuine national independence is completely contrary to the assembly of superstates into a World Governing body.

When George Orwell wrote about the three Superstates (or Empires) competing for domination of the Earth in his seminal dystopia 1984, he called the three factions Oceania (Anglo-American Empire), Eurasia (Russian Federation), and Eastasia (China). We step closer toward that horrific reality with every new country this empire subsumes control over.

On the eve of the first World War’s one hundredth anniversary, the geopolitical climate of the world today is eerily similar to the one that existed a century ago. In their relentless Imperial pursuits, Western Oligarchs have yet again brought our world to the brink of yet another potential planetary conflict. They have come to control global trade routs and the commodities exchange. They set the world’s political, financial and cultural trends. The exhaustion of natural resources and the great internet awakening currently afoot are just two examples of countless direct threats to their monopolistic control. Everything they have acquired has only driven them to thirst for more, and they are so driven to maintain their obscene wealth and ridiculous standard of living, they may do just about anything to maintain dominance, up to and including thermonuclear war. Let us hope that the information warriors succeed in spreading the truth before the war hawks can succeed in ushering in the next deadly quagmire.

History doesn’t repeat, but it does rhyme. And unlike prior iterations of repetitious events, we have the internet, and there’s still time to influence the outcome toward a more prosperous tomorrow.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

SOURCES:

[1] US NGO Uncoverd in Ukraine Protests
Source: http://www.boilingfrogspost.com/2014/01/07/us-ngo-uncovered-in-ukraine-protests/#sthash.mJPpqq63.dpuf

[2] Transcript of leaked Nuland-Pyatt Call
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26079957

[3]  http://www.aljazeera.com/news/europe/2014/02/eu-report-corruption-widespread-bloc-20142313322401478.html

World Bank
[4]  http://data.worldbank.org/country/ukraine

[5] US/EU Paying Ukrainian Rioters

US and EU Are Paying Ukrainian Rioters and Protesters — Paul Craig Roberts

[6] Ukraine’s Revolution Fueled by International Energy Politics
[guardian]  http://guardianlv.com/2014/01/ukraines-revolution-fueled-by-international-energy-politics/

Ukraine Forms National Unity Interim Government Led by Arseniy Yatsenuk and Coalition of Ministers
[7] http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/02/28/1281080/-Ukraine-Forms-National-Unity-Interim-Government-Led-by-Arseniy-Yatsenuk-and-Coalition-of-Ministers

[8] Obama imposes sanctions on Putin’s aides and others over Crimean separation:
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/03/17/obama-imposes-sanctions-on-putins-aides-and-others-over-crimean-separation/

[9] http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2014/02/12/washington-orchestrated-protests-destabilizing-ukraine/

FOLLOW UP LINKS

[10] Married to the Ukrainian Mob: Meet Dmytro Firtash, the shady billionaire at the heart of Russia’s energy stranglehold over Kiev:
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2014/03/19/dmytro_firtash_ukraine_billionaire_corruption_arrest

[11] Right-Sector leader Aleksandr Muzychko shot dead in police raid; Nationalists threaten Ukrainian top cop with ‘revenge’ over murder:
http://rt.com/news/muzychko-avakov-revenge-ukraine-109/

[12] Muzychko killing: Ultra-nationalist mastermind demands cops’ arrest, Interior Minister’s dismissal
http://rt.com/news/yarosh-nationalist-resign-killing-157/

[13] “Time to grab guns and kill damn Russians” – Tymoshenko in leaked tape
http://rt.com/news/tymoshenko-calls-destroy-russia-917/

RESIDENTS ACROSS THE U.S. CAN NOW LIGHT THEIR TAP WATER ON FIRE
DUE TO CONTAMINANTS FROM HYDRO-FRACKING

As many fossil fuels draw closer to depletion following the peak oil event, many leading energy companies have told us that Natural Gas would move us toward a greener tomorrow as our clean energy solution for the future. Since most of our electric power comes form burning coal, it is true that Natural gas is cleaner. It is widely known that coal produces a great deal of carbon monoxide and other adverse things when it is burned (sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides and particulates). Natural Gas is offered as a clean alternative because it does not release those things. But given the very nature of fossil fuels, to say that Natural Gas is a cleaner alternative is like saying a 9mm bullet causes less damage than a 50 caliber; both are lethal. Because even if Natural Gas burns cleaner, the methods used to extract it negate whatever positive effects it has over other fuels.

Filmmaker Josh Fox reveals in his seminal documentary Gasland :

“…a method of gas drilling called Hydraulic Fracturing or Fracking blasts a mix of water and chemicals 8,000 feet into the ground. In order to Frack one needs Fracking fluid; a mix of over 596 chemicals, the brew is full of corrosion inhibitors, gellants, drilling additives, biocides, shale control inhibitors, liquid breaker aids, viscosifiers, liquid gell concentrates and more.”

After reports of residencies that could light their tap water on fire, the heavily Fracked Garfield County conducted a health study, which was prematurely abandoned by county commissioners and later continued to its conclusion by Dr. Lisa McKenzie. Her work reveals that people living within half a mile of a Fracking well have 60% higher cancer rates. If your water is contaminated by Fracking, you can’t drink it, you can’t bathe in it, you can’t wash your laundry in it, you can’t do your dishes with it, you can’t water your garden with it – it is absolutely, irreversibly toxic. Animals who drink water contaminated by Fracking fluids will lose weight, begin projectile vomiting, and lose large clumps of their hair.

Ron and Gene Carter, who had a gas well in their front yard, were interviewed as part of Josh Fox’s Gasland. Shortly after the well was drilled, their water started bubbling and fizzing. It turned out to be natural gas. Ron Carter had this to say:

“I told them that I wasn’t happy – that our water was good before they started drilling and when they got done it was bad. They asked if we could prove that it was because of them. My wife asked the guy if he could prove that it wasn’t He wouldn’t talk to her anymore. We’ve lived here forty years, and never had a problem with the water. Then they drilled. After they drilled the water was bad.”

SOME SIGNS THAT YOUR WATER HAS BECOME CONTAMINATED DUE TO HYDRO-FRACKING OPERATIONS IN YOUR AREA:

• Water turns color – from gold to amber and sometimes even black
• Water that tastes funny, described sometimes as metallic
• Water that smells like gas or turpentine and makes you dizzy
• Water tests that turn up various hydrocarbons and Glycol Ethers
• Water wells that explode. Physical symptoms include the loss of smell and taste, chronic headaches, ringing in the ears and extreme neuropathy. The loss of smell and taste is caused by exposure to Hydrogen sulfide, but long term exposure to this chemical cocktail can cause irreversible brain damage and even cancer.

AREN’T THERE REGULATORY AGENCIES IN PLACE TO PREVENT THIS KIND OF THING?

Josh Fox continues:

“From 1995 to 2000, Dick Cheyney was the CEO of Halliburton. In 2000 he stepped down as Halliburton’s CEO to become Vice President of the United States of America. One of the firs things he did when he became Vice President was to form what  is known as the Energy Task Force; an organization that met over forty time with industry leaders, but met only once with members from environmental groups. This Energy Task Force, combined with a Hundred-Million-Dollar lobbying effort on behalf of the industry, were influential in the passage of what is called the Halliburton-Loophole to the Safe Drinking Water Act, which authorizes oil and gas drillers exclusively to inject  hazardous materials known to be toxic, completely unchecked without any oversight whatsoever, directly into water systems or adjacent to underground drinking water supplies. It passed as a part of the Bush Administration’s energy policy act of 2005. The 2005 energy bill cleared away all the restrictions for companies like Encana, Williams energy, Cabot Oil and Gas, and Chesapeake who began using the Halliburton technology in the largest and most extensive domestic gas drilling campaign in history, now occupying 34 states.

“The water sample from Dimock, PA contained Barium, Strontium, Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen, and Methaline Blue Active Substance (MBAS) which are reactive agents that turn blue when they come into contact with detergents or surfactants. Detergents don’t sound so bad considering we wash our laundry with them, but you probably don’t want to drink a detergent, and you certainly don’t want to drink a surfactant. Everything that enters one of your cells, enters through a surface. A surfactant will allow oil or other substances to pass through surfaces, by dissolving them – so if a surfactant gets into a stream near fish, it will dissolve the fish’s gills.”

WHAT OTHER CHEMICALS ARE INVOLVED IN FRACKING?

For the same reason, the exemptions given to these industries equates to regulatory bodies of our government failing to do their job and collect valuable environmental contamination data, let alone disclosing anything to the public, since Fracking chemicals are considered proprietary, like the special sauce for a big mack, or the secret formula for Coca-Cola. Theo tells us that:

“Every environmental law we wrote to protect public health is ignored. But the neurological effects are really insidious. At first you might just have headaches. Then the next thing you might have ringing in your ears. Or you maybe you’re a little disoriented. Or you may feel a little dizzy. But eventually you may feel what is called peripheral neuropathy, and when you get to this stage, you have irreversible brain damage.”

FRACKING GUZZLES UP CLEAN WATER SUPPLIES

In addition to outwardly polluting existing water supplies, the water demands for the industry of Hydraulic Fracturing itself are nothing short of tremendous. Each well requires 1 to 7 million gallons of water, and there are now more than 450,000 wells nationwide. Each time they go back and Frack an existing well, they need an additional 1 to 7 million gallons of water.  They can Frack a well up to 18 times in its life.

450,000 wells, multiplied by 18 Fracks, multiplied by the 1-7 Million Gallons of water required for each Frack, comes out to something like 40 Trillion gallons of water, all of it infused with the 596 chemicals in the Fracking fluid. And the water this industry uses never returns to the spring, ever. They take clean, fresh water and mix it with these chemicals, only to dispose of it down another deep ejection well, and it never comes back to the surface, although it will very likely effect the top ground water in the surrounding area eventually. The water is permanently unusable after this process takes place, and everything surrounding the well is compromised as well.

Once wells and aquifers are destroyed, the damage is permanent. Fresh water is the most valuable liquid on the planet, and Fracking contaminates it permanently. According to a Green Peace Africa Infographic, Hydraulic Fracturing generated 280 billion gallons of toxic waste water in the year 2012, which to put things into perspective, would be enough toxic sludge to submerge Washington D.C. IN a 22-Foot Deep toxic lagoon.

And we can’t simply buy more sophisticated filtration systems, because many of the chemicals contaminants involved in Hydraulic Fracturing cannot be filtered out. For example, reverse osmosis won’t filter out Glycol Ethers, because Glycol Ethers (which are solvents commonly used in paints) eat the membranes inside of the filters, rendering them useless. Glycol Ethers are odorless, colorless, and are also the liquid chemical component of many plastics.

Water is the source of all life. Of all the water on earth, less than half a percent is clean, potable, drinkable fresh water. It is perhaps the most precious resources on the face of the Earth at present. And now thanks to Hydro-Fracking, it is quickly becoming an endangered resource.

The industry would have us believe that fluid migration is rare, and that the dangerous chemicals used in these operations are quarantined to the wells themselves. They tell us that after installing multiple layers of cement and steel, these Fracking fluids shouldn’t move into surrounding water systems. We know that this contention simply is not true. In fact 12% of all brand new wells have some kind of leak, and Fracking fluids have been found in the ground water of countless municipal water supplies.

The industry has posed no real solutions, monitoring, or oversight whatsoever.  And it is impossible to restore aquifers contaminated as a result of Fracking. Once they’re ruined, there is no bringing them back from the dead. Communities subsisting on contaminated aquifers will be forced into dependence on potable water hauled in from other places, hence dependence upon corporations capable of providing said clean water.

Water is among the scarcest of resources – much more so than oil or gas. Despite the fact that geologists see this sinkhole for what it is, the bigwigs at the energy companies charge forward toward the cliff’s edge, and we’re all along for the ride.  This kind of mismanagement of the Earth is happening everywhere. If you are near Hydro-Fracking wells, you’re not alone. Again – this is currently happening in 34 states.

We would do well to enact Fracking bans in our local governments, because we have a right to a clean and healthy environment.  When it comes to a clean and safe environment the Dollar will never be able to resurrect that which has been taken away. Corporations like Halliburton say there is no proof, and in order to do something they need some evidence. Meanwhile an army of corporate lobbyists who are funded the deepest pockets of all stand ready to defend against environmental hippies in the name of profits. When you ask them who represents the people, they’ll tell you to call a lawyer – as if we all can afford such luxuries. They would prefer we fight them in the kangaroo courts that are the mockery of our modern justice system, because they have rigged the system in the name of profit. You cannot defeat them in the courts because those who control the dollar are those who rig the courts in favor of the dollar. Perhaps we should stop wasting our time in courts that were made explicitly for wealthy domination over others.

RUNNING FASTER JUST TO STAY IN THE SAME PLACE: FRACKING’S NEGATIVE FEEDBACK LOOP

Pedro Da Costa of Reuters recently tweeted:

“Holy Frack! The U.S. will soon overtake Russia as the world’s top oil producer…because America is now producing 7.8 million barrels of oil – the most in a long time. 30% of that, however, is from Fracking, and the U.S. Shale oil boom may not last as Fracking wells lack staying power.”

The dark secret of this whole industry is that it is a short term solution that cannot last. After drilling a well, accelerated pumping and the establishing of new wells is required just to keep production steady. In other words, you have to keep running faster just to stay in the same place.

The average life of a Fracking well is 36 months at the absolute maximum, more commonly depleted at 18 to 24 months. Within the first year, the average shale oil wells have all declined by 70% in measurable output. The industry of Fracking requires constant new wells emerge to stay alive in the negative feedback loop. The higher production goes, the more wells are needed to offset the inevitable decline. So in the U.S. alone this year, corporations need to drill 6,000 new wells just to keep pace with the old wells declining. The cost of the energy it takes to drill for oil, is a process that itself requires energy; as oil prices escalate, the cost of pulling oil out of the ground is greater than the excess that will be sold down the line. Max Keiser refers to such economic practices as Suicide Economics. It is easy to see why – the amount of capital required just to keep even to produce new wells is $35 billion annually.

Stacy Herbert points out that what is more, the newest wells that have been drilled most recently, aren’t as productive as those drilled in the first years of the boom! This is a sign that oil companies have already tapped the best spots. This also means that next year, instead of drilling 6,000 additional wells, they will have to drill 12,0000 new wells, and after that 24,000 wells, and after that 48,000 &c.

At last it may be important to remember whenever we talk about the use of fossil fuels that it doesn’t have as much to do with consumerism, which is a problem, but much more to do with the military industrial complex’s dependence upon fossil fuels. At last I heard they haven’t figured out a way to run AH-64 Apache helicopters or F-16 Fighter Jets without the use of fossil fuels. In fact three-quarters (or 75%) of all oil that is consumed by the west is used by the military, which means no matter how dedicated consumers are to alternative energy, America will continue to consume more and more fossil fuels. For instance, how much fuel does it take to get a single fighter off of the ground? How much fuel does it take to run a single M-1 Abrams tank for 30 minutes? Perhaps the question that intrigues me the most as oil spills become more prevalent and the scorched earth that is the Tar Sands blackens our horizons is this: how can we calmly accept what many are calling, the next extinction event as it creeps ever closer to our perceivable reality?

[1] Ohio Earthquakes Linked To Fracking, A First For Region
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/11/ohio-earthquakes-fracking_n_5136110.html

[2] Gas patch scientists explain how hydraulic fracturing can permanently contaminate public water supplies
http://checksandbalancesproject.org/2011/05/06/gas-patch-scientists-explain-how-hydraulic-fracturing-can-permanently-contaminate-public-water-supplies/