Saturday, February 8, 2014

The Truth About The 2 Governments 2 Flags 2 Jurisdictions

The Truth About The 2 Governments 2 Flags 2 Jurisdictions


Whereas defined pursuant to Supreme Court Annotated Statute; [Penhallow v. Doane's Administrators (3 U.S. 54; 1 L.Ed 57; Dall. 54), defines governments succinctly]: 
 
"governments are corporations." Inasmuch as every government is an artificial person, an abstraction, and a creature of the mind only, a government can interface only with other artificial persons. The imaginary-having neither actuality nor substance - is foreclosed from creating and attaining parity with the tangible. The legal manifestation of this is that no government, as well as any law, agency, aspect, court, etc. therefore, can concern itself with anything other than corporate, artificial persons and contracts between them." 
 
From a layperson's or intuitive perspective, it must seem improbable that corporations can speak, assert privacy rights, or invoke the double jeopardy clause. Even in a legal world filled with fictions, the corporate claim to personal Bill of Rights guarantees must appear fantastic to the non-lawyer. 41 Hastings Law Journal (March, 1990) 577, 655, "Personalizing the Impersonal: Corporations and the Bill of Rights" (Carl J. Mayer).

 
When a Citizen challenges the acts of a federal or state official as being illegal, that official cannot just simply avoid liability based upon the fact that he is a public official. In United States v. Lee, 106 U.S. 196, 220, 221, 1 S.Ct. 240, 261, the United States claimed title to Arlington, Lee's estate, via a tax sale some years earlier, held to be void by the Court. In so voiding the title of the United States, the Court declared:

"No man in this country is so high that he is above the law. No officer of the law may set that law at defiance with impunity. All the officers of the government, from the highest to the lowest, are creatures of the law and are bound to obey it. It is the only supreme power in our system of government, and every man who by accepting office participates in its functions is only the more strongly bound to submit to that supremacy, and to observe the limitations which it imposes upon the exercise of the authority which it gives.

"Shall it be said... that the courts cannot give remedy when the citizen has been deprived of his property by force, his estate seized and converted to the use of the government without any lawful authority, without any process of law, and without any compensation, because the president has ordered it and his officers are in possession? If such be the law of this country, it sanctions a tyranny which has no existence in the monarchies of Europe, nor in any other government which has a just claim to well-regulated liberty and the protection of personal rights."

FIFTH AMENDMENT defined: Amendment to U.S. Constitution providing that no person shall be required to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous offense unless on indictment or presentment of a grand jury except in military cases; that no person will suffer double jeopardy; that no person will be compelled to be a witness against himself; that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law and that private property will not be taken for public use without just compensation. Black's Law Dictionary Sixth Edition (page 627)

UK MP: Queen may derail March 2014 Brussels trial with Pope by arresting Kevin Annett for sedition

UK MP: Queen may derail March 2014 Brussels trial with Pope by arresting Kevin Annett for sedition

WATCH ON YOU TUBE:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-G8PbuvVaY&feature=youtu.be
VANCOUVER, BC – Kevin Annett, field secretary of the International Tribunal for Crimes of Church and State (ITCCS.ORG) declared today that he was informed by a British Member of Parliament that the Crown of England’s Privy Council in London is considering issuing an order to the Canadian Governor General and Prime Minister’s office to have him arrested and prosecuted for sedition. Kevin Annett’s lawyers have prepared an application for political asylum in the United States in the event that Mr. Annett should be arrested on orders of the Queen. Kevin Annett’s declarations came in an ExopoliticsTV interview with Alfred Lambremont Webre.
Kevin Annett announced the commencement of a trial at the International Common Law Court of Justice in Brussels on March 31, 2014 against Queen Elizabeth, Pope Francis I, and the Jesuit Order and others for continuing child genocide and child trafficking.
Secret Holyrood Agreement to merge Catholic and Anglican Churches
Mr. Annett stated, “Last Monday, our organization revealed that on September 16, 2010, the Vatican and the Crown of England, through their chief officers, entered into a formal criminal conspiracy to traffick children and aid and abet child rapists throughout the world.
“That conspiracy occurred between Queen Elizabeth Windsor and former Pope Benedict, Joseph Ratzinger, at Holyrood Castle in Edinburgh, where as a condition of the merger of the Church of England and the Church of Rome, the Queen agreed to place all Anglicans under the notorious catholic law known as Crimen Sollicitationas. This law requires that all child rape be covered up within the church, thereby obstructing justice and the sovereign laws of every country in the world in which catholicism or anglicanism operates, including the United States and Canada.
“The present Pope Francis, Jorge Bergoglio, has not only concealed this conspiracy but has recently been accused by a key eyewitness of organizing the trafficking of children of political prisoners in Argentina under the military dictatorship there.”
References:
International Common Law Courts of Justice
http://iclcj.com/
ITCCS.ORG
http://itccs.org/
“Toothless” United Nations’ statement on catholic child rape condemned by ITCCS at New York rally – Pope Francis, the Jesuits and others to face prosecution by international court commencing March 31 – “Holyrood Agreement” between Queen Elizabeth and former Pope Benedict cited as proof of criminal conspiracy – Possible arrest order issued against Kevin Annett by the British Crown

http://itccs.org/2014/02/08/toothless-united-nations-statement-on-catholic-child-rape-condemned-by-itccs-at-new-york-rally-pope-francis-the-jesuits-and-others-to-face-prosecution-by-international-court-com/

Contact:
Email: Hiddenfromhistory1@gmail.com
Facebook: ITCCS.ORG & Kevin Annett
https://www.facebook.com/groups/550797205008325/
Tel (USA): 1-386-323-5774

 UK MP: Queen may derail March 2014 Brussels trial with Pope by arresting Kevin Annett for sedition
 http://exopolitics.blogs.com/exopolitics/2014/02/uk-mp-queen-may-derail-march-2014-brussels-trial-with-pope-by-arresting-kevin-annett-for-sedition.html

Obama - Who knew back then?

Who knew back then?
You’ve probably never heard of this president’s beliefs in the teachings of Saul Alinsky.  In case you haven’t read his books, this will give you a glimpse of what he believes in.
 
Who was Saul Alinsky?
 
Saul David Alinsky, a writer, was an American community organizer
and writer.  He is generally considered to be the founder of the modern community organizing movement.
 
Born:   January 30, 1909, Chicago, IL
Died:  June 12, 1972, Carmel-by-the-Sea, CA
Education: 
 University of Chicago
Books: 
 Rules for Radicals, Reveille for Radicals
 
 
He taught that there are eight levels of control that must be obtained
before you can create a social state:
 
1) Healthcare – Control healthcare and you control the people.
 
2) Poverty – Increase the poverty level as high as possible.  Poor people are easier to control and will not fight back if you are providing everything for them to live.
 
 
3) Debt – Increase debt to an unsustainable level.  That way you will be able to increase taxes – and this will produce more poverty.
 
 
4) Gun Control – Remove the ability for citizens to defend themselves from the government.  That way you will be able to create a police state.
 
5) Welfare – Take control of every aspect of their lives (food, housing, and income).
 
6) Education – Take control of what people read and listen to – take control of what children learn in school.
 
7) Religion – Remove belief in the God from the government and schools.
 
8) Class Warfare – Divide the people into the wealthy and the poor.  This will cause more discontent and it will be easier to take (tax) the wealthy with the support of the poor.
 
 
Does any of this sound like what is happening in the U.S.?

McDonald's Worker Arrested After Telling Company President She Can't Afford Shoes For Her Children

McDonald's Worker Arrested After Telling Company President She Can't Afford Shoes For Her Children

http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message2479930/pg1

‘Doc shock’ spreads, as ObamaCare commissars try to legislate it away

THE REALITY OF THE UNAFFORDABLE CARE ACT HITS HOME



Coming to an employee provided healthcare near you soon.  All part of the plan folks… Dissatisfaction, civil demonstration, economy collapse, riots, violence, marshal law, dictatorship…

 

‘Doc shock’ spreads, as ObamaCare commissars try to legislate it away



By: John Hayward
2/6/2014 09:39 AM

The L.A. Times has a big story about “doc shock” spreading like wildfire across California.  Unlike the Democrats’ hilariously stupid “job lock” talking point – in which they’ll try to convince their less discriminating followers that employment is a form of slavery which ObamaCare liberates you from by getting you fired – “doc shock” is very real, and it’s getting worse:
A month into the most sweeping changes to healthcare in half a century, people are having trouble finding doctors at all, getting faulty information on which ones are covered and receiving little help from insurers swamped by new business.
Experts have warned for months that the logjam was inevitable. But the extent of the problems is taking by surprise many patients — and even doctors — as frustrations mount.
This vignette about a cancer patient arriving at her oncologists’ to find a brightly-colored sign telling her to get lost will be one of the defining images of the ObamaCare disaster:
Aliso Viejo resident Danielle Nelson said Anthem Blue Cross promised half a dozen times that her oncologists would be covered under her new policy. She was diagnosed last year with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and discovered a suspicious lump near her jaw in early January.
But when she went to her oncologist’s office, she promptly encountered a bright orange sign saying that Covered California plans are not accepted.
“I’m a complete fan of the Affordable Care Act, but now I can’t sleep at night,” Nelson said. “I can’t imagine this is how President Obama wanted it to happen.”
Really?  You must have missed the appearance where Obama described doctors as tonsil-stealing vampires who love to perform unnecessary surgery to line their pockets., Ms. Viejo.  Or failed to hear the warnings from the absolutely correct ObamaCare critics who told you this was going to happen.  Restricted access to doctors is the only way insurance companies can control costs while complying with mandates imposed by politicians who couldn’t treat a paper cut without the aid of paramedics.  Barack Obama thinks politics is the only real profession; everyone else is an interchangeable drone.  One doctor should be as good as another for you peasants.
Obama supporters are still grappling with the painful realization that their man lied outrageously and shamelessly when he promised they would be able to keep their insurance plans, so it’s tough for them to process he was lying about keeping your doctor, too.
Even the people getting big taxpayer subsidies are finding out their “affordable” plans (everything looks more affordable when someone else pays for it!) aren’t worth much when you can’t find a doctor who will accept them:
Maria Berumen, a tax preparer in Downey, was uninsured for years because of preexisting conditions. The 53-year-old was thrilled to find coverage for herself and her husband for $148 a month after qualifying for a big government subsidy.
She jumped at the chance in early January to visit a primary-care doctor for long-running numbness in her arm and shoulder as a result of bone spurs on her spine. The doctor referred her to a specialist, and problems ensued. At least four doctors wouldn’t accept her health plan — even though the state exchange website and her insurer, Health Net Inc., list them as part of her HMO network.
“It’s a phantom network,” Berumen said.
It was no surprise to her family doctor, Ragaa Iskarous. She has run into this problem repeatedly with other patients in the last month, the doctor said. “This is really driving us crazy.”
“The Phantom Network” was my least favorite Star Wars movie, what with the endless scenes of the evil Senator Palpatine using Sith mind-tricks to make the Galactic Senate forget about the latest Cosmic Budget Office report.  I mean, get to the midichlorian-subsidized lightsaber battles already.
You’ll be relieved to know that Ms. Berumen finally got to see a neurosurgeon, “after state regulators intervened on her behalf.”  You have state regulators ready to personally intervene on your behalf, don’t you?  If so, then rest assured ObamaCare will kinda-sorta work, if you don’t mind waiting for the paperwork to shuffle and the back-channel phone calls to be placed.
Naturally, the Ruling Class – which was either blind or dishonest about doc shock for the past four years – thinks the latest problem created by government can be fixed with more government:
To hold down premiums under the healthcare law, major insurers have sharply cut the number of doctors and hospitals available to patients in the state’s new health insurance market.
Now those limited options are becoming clearer, and California officials say they are receiving more consumer complaints about access to medical providers. State lawmakers are also moving swiftly to ease some of the problems that have arisen.
“It’s a little early for anyone to know how widespread and deep this problem is,” said California Insurance Commissioner Dave Jones. “There are a lot of economic incentives for health insurers to narrow their networks, but if they go too far, people won’t have access to care. Network adequacy will be a big issue in 2014.”
Network adequacy.  Lovely euphemism.  ”What did your mom die from?” “Oh, it was a network-adequacy complex, developed after complications from ObamaCare.”
The Washington Examiner reports that federal regulators also think another thousand pages of regulations should fix a few of the problems in the previous fifteen thousand pages :
The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services on Tuesday proposed a new guidance for 2015 aimed at expanding choices of doctors and hospitals on plans offered through the exchanges in President Obama’s health care law…
Awesome!  See, you can legislate the laws of supply and demand out of existence!  In your face, free markets!
… but in an effort to answer one complaint of Obamacare, the proposed regulations could exacerbate another, by further driving up premiums.
Oh.  Never mind.
In a Tuesday letter to health insurers, CMS proposed a new set of rules to govern the plans to be offered through federal health exchanges for the 2015 benefit year.
The proposed rules would require insurers to submit a list of providers offered on each of their plans, and CMS would review the list to make sure that the plans provide “reasonable access” to hospitals, mental health providers, oncologists and primary care services.
“If CMS determines that an issuer’s network is inadequate under the reasonable access review standard, CMS will notify the issuer of the identified problem area(s) and will consider the issuer’s response in assessing whether the issuer has met the regulatory requirement and prior to making the certification or recertification determination,” the letter stated.
Great, so the bureaucrats who dumped the disastrous ObamaCare exchange network in our laps will now make imperial decisions about which doctors must work for what plans, driving the already hideous ObamaCare premiums up even higher, which will doubtless be followed by calls for even bigger deficit-blasting taxpayer subsidies, while the un-subsidized chumps who make the system sustainable by paying far too much for lousy insurance will become even less enthusiastic about enrolling in ObamaCare.  Sounds like the coming insurance industry bailout will be even more exciting than we thought!
Another problem with Big Government’s latest scheme to create a problem, and then use it as an excuse to seize even more power, is that doctors might have some inconvenient legal objections to the new requirements.  David Limbaugh wrote about one such doctor earlier this week, Dr. Kristin Held of San Antonio, who became an Internet sensation by delivering a declaration of independence to the Aetna insurance company.  Among other reasons Dr. Held gave for walking away from ObamaCare, she pointed out that it was forcibly altering her contract to provide services with Aetna, without her consent – or even prior notification! – which made the contract null and void, not to mention victimizing ObamaCare purchasers with what amounts to consumer fraud.  She called the system “tyranny through medicine” and declared “I will not comply.”
I will not comply.  What beautiful, perfectly American words those are!  If the commissars keep pumping out more regulations to patch the holes in the previous round of regulations, I suspect we’ll hear that patriotic declaration even more.
To return to the desperate Democrats and their dopey “job lock” talking point, if we really wanted to dissolve the frankly irrational link between employment and health insurance – another problem Big Government created, then presented itself as the solution to, half a century later – we could have done it without the rest of the garbage in Barack Obama’s train-wreck scheme.  Changing the system so that every individual owns their insurance is a feature of all the Republican proposals this deeply dishonest President keeps pretending he’s never heard of.  Allowing people to shop in truly competitive national markets for insurance would be the opposite of ObamaCare’s grim top-down socialist debacle, which is going to siphon an unholy fortune in overhead and compliance costs from the private sector.  It wouldn’t be necessary to hold anyone at gunpoint to solve the “doc shock” problem under such reforms.  Let’s junk ObamaCare and give it a try.



Economic data on hitmen

Economic data on hitmen

by  on January 26, 2014 at 8:03 am
The sample is pretty limited, but here is what they find:
The killers typically murder their targets on a street close to the victim’s home, although a significant proportion get cold feet or bungle the job, according to criminologists who examined 27 cases of contract killing between 1974 and 2013 committed by 36 men (including accomplices) and one woman.
…The reality of contract killing in Britain tended to be striking only in its mundanity, according to David Wilson, the university’s professor of criminology. He said: “Far from the media portrayal of hits being conducted inside smoky rooms, frequented by members of an organisedcrime gang, British hits were more usually carried out in the open, on pavements, sometimes as the target was out walking their dog, or going shopping, with passersby watching on in horror.”
Researchers found that the average cost of a hit was £15,180, with £100,000 being the highest and £200 the lowest amount paid. The average age of a hitman was 38 with the youngest aged 15 and the oldest 63.
The youngest, Santre Sanchez Gayle from north London, shot dead a young woman at point-blank range with a sawn-off shotgun in 2010 after she answered her front door. The oldest was David Harrison who, also in 2010, shot the owner of a skip-hire business in his Staffordshire home.
Most hits involved a gun, with three victims stabbed, five beaten to death and two strangled. The most conspicuous weapon was used in the killing of David King, a widely feared underworld figure known as “Rolex Dave”, who in 2003 was shot five times as he emerged from a Hertfordshire gym by hitman Roger Vincent and his accomplice David Smith, both 33. The killing was the first time an AK-47 assault rifle – apparently belonging to the Hungarian prison service – had been used on a British street.
For the pointer I thank Mike Brown.  By the way, those records are focused on Birmingham, England, which perhaps is not like Lodi, New Jersey in this regard.
The original work is cited as appearing in theHoward Journal of Criminal Justice, but I do not seem to find the article at that link.
http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2014/01/economic-data-on-hitmen.html

Lynda

2:16 PM (11 minutes ago)
to me

videos on Economic Hitmen:

Economic Hitmen: The Truth About Globalization

John Perkins on How the World Really Works

 
 
Economic Hitmen from Hans Fleischer on Vimeo. "We can't have Homeland Security until we realize that the whole planet is our homeland." -- John Perkins
 
 

Confessions of an Economic Hit Man: How the U.S. Uses Globalization to Cheat Poor Countries Out of Trillions

video on this page
 

Confessions of an Economic Hit Man: How the U.S. Uses Globalization to Cheat Poor Countries Out of Trillions

November 9, 2004
 
 

We speak with John Perkins, a former respected member of the international banking community. In his book Confessions of an Economic Hit Man he describes how as a highly paid professional, he helped the U.S. cheat poor countries around the globe out of trillions of dollars by lending them more money than they could possibly repay and then take over their economies. [includes rush transcript]
John Perkins describes himself as a former economic hit man–a highly paid professional who cheated countries around the globe out of trillions of dollars.
20 years ago Perkins began writing a book with the working title, "Conscience of an Economic Hit Men."
Perkins writes, "The book was to be dedicated to the presidents of two countries, men who had been his clients whom I respected and thought of as kindred spirits–Jaime Roldós, president of Ecuador, and Omar Torrijos, president of Panama. Both had just died in fiery crashes. Their deaths were not accidental. They were assassinated because they opposed that fraternity of corporate, government, and banking heads whose goal is global empire. We Economic Hit Men failed to bring Roldós and Torrijos around, and the other type of hit men, the CIA-sanctioned jackals who were always right behind us, stepped in.
John Perkins goes on to write: "I was persuaded to stop writing that book. I started it four more times during the next twenty years. On each occasion, my decision to begin again was influenced by current world events: the U.S. invasion of Panama in 1980, the first Gulf War, Somalia, and the rise of Osama bin Laden. However, threats or bribes always convinced me to stop."
But now Perkins has finally published his story. The book is titled Confessions of an Economic Hit Man. John Perkins joins us now in our Firehouse studios.
  • John Perkins, from 1971 to 1981 he worked for the international consulting firm of Chas T. Main where he was a self-described "economic hit man." He is the author of the new book Confessions of an Economic Hit Man.

Transcript

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.
AMY GOODMAN: John Perkins joins us now in our firehouse studio. Welcome to Democracy Now!
JOHN PERKINS: Thank you, Amy. It’s great to be here.
AMY GOODMAN: It’s good to have you with us. Okay, explain this term, "economic hit man," e.h.m., as you call it.
JOHN PERKINS: Basically what we were trained to do and what our job is to do is to build up the American empire. To bring — to create situations where as many resources as possible flow into this country, to our corporations, and our government, and in fact we’ve been very successful. We’ve built the largest empire in the history of the world. It’s been done over the last 50 years since World War II with very little military might, actually. It’s only in rare instances like Iraq where the military comes in as a last resort. This empire, unlike any other in the history of the world, has been built primarily through economic manipulation, through cheating, through fraud, through seducing people into our way of life, through the economic hit men. I was very much a part of that.
AMY GOODMAN: How did you become one? Who did you work for?
JOHN PERKINS: Well, I was initially recruited while I was in business school back in the late sixties by the National Security Agency, the nation’s largest and least understood spy organization; but ultimately I worked for private corporations. The first real economic hit man was back in the early 1950’s, Kermit Roosevelt, the grandson of Teddy, who overthrew of government of Iran, a democratically elected government, Mossadegh’s government who was _Time_’s magazine person of the year; and he was so successful at doing this without any bloodshed — well, there was a little bloodshed, but no military intervention, just spending millions of dollars and replaced Mossadegh with the Shah of Iran. At that point, we understood that this idea of economic hit man was an extremely good one. We didn’t have to worry about the threat of war with Russia when we did it this way. The problem with that was that Roosevelt was a C.I.A. agent. He was a government employee. Had he been caught, we would have been in a lot of trouble. It would have been very embarrassing. So, at that point, the decision was made to use organizations like the C.I.A. and the N.S.A. to recruit potential economic hit men like me and then send us to work for private consulting companies, engineering firms, construction companies, so that if we were caught, there would be no connection with the government.
AMY GOODMAN: Okay. Explain the company you worked for.
JOHN PERKINS: Well, the company I worked for was a company named Chas. T. Main in Boston, Massachusetts. We were about 2,000 employees, and I became its chief economist. I ended up having fifty people working for me. But my real job was deal-making. It was giving loans to other countries, huge loans, much bigger than they could possibly repay. One of the conditions of the loan — let’s say a $1 billion to a country like Indonesia or Ecuador — and this country would then have to give ninety percent of that loan back to a U.S. company, or U.S. companies, to build the infrastructure — a Halliburton or a Bechtel. These were big ones. Those companies would then go in and build an electrical system or ports or highways, and these would basically serve just a few of the very wealthiest families in those countries. The poor people in those countries would be stuck ultimately with this amazing debt that they couldn’t possibly repay. A country today like Ecuador owes over fifty percent of its national budget just to pay down its debt. And it really can’t do it. So, we literally have them over a barrel. So, when we want more oil, we go to Ecuador and say, "Look, you’re not able to repay your debts, therefore give our oil companies your Amazon rain forest, which are filled with oil." And today we’re going in and destroying Amazonian rain forests, forcing Ecuador to give them to us because they’ve accumulated all this debt. So we make this big loan, most of it comes back to the United States, the country is left with the debt plus lots of interest, and they basically become our servants, our slaves. It’s an empire. There’s no two ways about it. It’s a huge empire. It’s been extremely successful.
AMY GOODMAN: We’re talking to John Perkins, author of Confessions of an Economic Hit Man. You say because of bribes and other reason you didn’t write this book for a long time. What do you mean? Who tried to bribe you, or who — what are the bribes you accepted?
JOHN PERKINS: Well, I accepted a half a million dollar bribe in the nineties not to write the book.
AMY GOODMAN: From?
JOHN PERKINS: From a major construction engineering company.
AMY GOODMAN: Which one?
JOHN PERKINS: Legally speaking, it wasn’t — Stoner-Webster. Legally speaking it wasn’t a bribe, it was — I was being paid as a consultant. This is all very legal. But I essentially did nothing. It was a very understood, as I explained in Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, that it was — I was — it was understood when I accepted this money as a consultant to them I wouldn’t have to do much work, but I mustn’t write any books about the subject, which they were aware that I was in the process of writing this book, which at the time I called "Conscience of an Economic Hit Man." And I have to tell you, Amy, that, you know, it’s an extraordinary story from the standpoint of —- It’s almost James Bondish, truly, and I mean—-
AMY GOODMAN: Well that’s certainly how the book reads.
JOHN PERKINS: Yeah, and it was, you know? And when the National Security Agency recruited me, they put me through a day of lie detector tests. They found out all my weaknesses and immediately seduced me. They used the strongest drugs in our culture, sex, power and money, to win me over. I come from a very old New England family, Calvinist, steeped in amazingly strong moral values. I think I, you know, I’m a good person overall, and I think my story really shows how this system and these powerful drugs of sex, money and power can seduce people, because I certainly was seduced. And if I hadn’t lived this life as an economic hit man, I think I’d have a hard time believing that anybody does these things. And that’s why I wrote the book, because our country really needs to understand, if people in this nation understood what our foreign policy is really about, what foreign aid is about, how our corporations work, where our tax money goes, I know we will demand change.
AMY GOODMAN: We’re talking to John Perkins. In your book, you talk about how you helped to implement a secret scheme that funneled billions of dollars of Saudi Arabian petrol dollars back into the U.S. economy, and that further cemented the intimate relationship between the House of Saud and successive U.S. administrations. Explain.
JOHN PERKINS: Yes, it was a fascinating time. I remember well, you’re probably too young to remember, but I remember well in the early seventies how OPEC exercised this power it had, and cut back on oil supplies. We had cars lined up at gas stations. The country was afraid that it was facing another 1929-type of crash — depression; and this was unacceptable. So, they —- the Treasury Department hired me and a few other economic hit men. We went to Saudi Arabia. We -—
AMY GOODMAN: You’re actually called economic hit men —e.h.m.’s?
JOHN PERKINS: Yeah, it was a tongue-in-cheek term that we called ourselves. Officially, I was a chief economist. We called ourselves e.h.m.'s. It was tongue-in-cheek. It was like, nobody will believe us if we say this, you know? And, so, we went to Saudi Arabia in the early seventies. We knew Saudi Arabia was the key to dropping our dependency, or to controlling the situation. And we worked out this deal whereby the Royal House of Saud agreed to send most of their petro-dollars back to the United States and invest them in U.S. government securities. The Treasury Department would use the interest from these securities to hire U.S. companies to build Saudi Arabia — new cities, new infrastructure — which we've done. And the House of Saud would agree to maintain the price of oil within acceptable limits to us, which they’ve done all of these years, and we would agree to keep the House of Saud in power as long as they did this, which we’ve done, which is one of the reasons we went to war with Iraq in the first place. And in Iraq we tried to implement the same policy that was so successful in Saudi Arabia, but Saddam Hussein didn’t buy. When the economic hit men fail in this scenario, the next step is what we call the jackals. Jackals are C.I.A.-sanctioned people that come in and try to foment a coup or revolution. If that doesn’t work, they perform assassinations. or try to. In the case of Iraq, they weren’t able to get through to Saddam Hussein. He had — His bodyguards were too good. He had doubles. They couldn’t get through to him. So the third line of defense, if the economic hit men and the jackals fail, the next line of defense is our young men and women, who are sent in to die and kill, which is what we’ve obviously done in Iraq.
AMY GOODMAN: Can you explain how Torrijos died?
JOHN PERKINS: Omar Torrijos, the President of Panama. Omar Torrijos had signed the Canal Treaty with Carter much — and, you know, it passed our congress by only one vote. It was a highly contended issue. And Torrijos then also went ahead and negotiated with the Japanese to build a sea-level canal. The Japanese wanted to finance and construct a sea-level canal in Panama. Torrijos talked to them about this which very much upset Bechtel Corporation, whose president was George Schultz and senior council was Casper Weinberger. When Carter was thrown out (and that’s an interesting story — how that actually happened), when he lost the election, and Reagan came in and Schultz came in as Secretary of State from Bechtel, and Weinberger came from Bechtel to be Secretary of Defense, they were extremely angry at Torrijos — tried to get him to renegotiate the Canal Treaty and not to talk to the Japanese. He adamantly refused. He was a very principled man. He had his problem, but he was a very principled man. He was an amazing man, Torrijos. And so, he died in a fiery airplane crash, which was connected to a tape recorder with explosives in it, which — I was there. I had been working with him. I knew that we economic hit men had failed. I knew the jackals were closing in on him, and the next thing, his plane exploded with a tape recorder with a bomb in it. There’s no question in my mind that it was C.I.A. sanctioned, and most — many Latin American investigators have come to the same conclusion. Of course, we never heard about that in our country.
AMY GOODMAN: So, where — when did your change your heart happen?
JOHN PERKINS: I felt guilty throughout the whole time, but I was seduced. The power of these drugs, sex, power, and money, was extremely strong for me. And, of course, I was doing things I was being patted on the back for. I was chief economist. I was doing things that Robert McNamara liked and so on.
AMY GOODMAN: How closely did you work with the World Bank?
JOHN PERKINS: Very, very closely with the World Bank. The World Bank provides most of the money that’s used by economic hit men, it and the I.M.F. But when 9/11 struck, I had a change of heart. I knew the story had to be told because what happened at 9/11 is a direct result of what the economic hit men are doing. And the only way that we’re going to feel secure in this country again and that we’re going to feel good about ourselves is if we use these systems we’ve put into place to create positive change around the world. I really believe we can do that. I believe the World Bank and other institutions can be turned around and do what they were originally intended to do, which is help reconstruct devastated parts of the world. Help — genuinely help poor people. There are twenty-four thousand people starving to death every day. We can change that.
AMY GOODMAN: John Perkins, I want to thank you very much for being with us. John Perkins’ book is called, Confessions of an Economic Hit Man.
http://www.democracynow.org/2004/11/9/confessions_of_an_economic_hit_man

The world is a stage

The world is a stage

Economic Hitmen
   So what is an "economic hitman"?Of course , it has nothing to do with assasinating any person but they are responsibile for "assasinating" moral values and destroying one country's economy, profit and independence.How?
   Economic hitmen work more as agents in many different ways.The most common thing would be the identification of a country that has resources that their corporations covet, like oil, and then arrange a huge loan to that country from the World Bank or one of its sister organizations. But the money never actually goes to the country…instead it goes to their big corporations to build infrastructure projects in that country-power plants, industrial parks, ports  <->  things that benefit a few rich people in that country, in addition to our corporations but really don`t help the majority of the people at all.However those people, the whole country, is left holding a huge debt.
   It's such a big debt that they can`t repay it, and that`s part of the plan, that they can`t repay it. So at that point the country owe a large amount of money and can't pay their debt.This is when the economic hitman appears.He is more like a diplomat , a middleman which announces conditions and/or solutions for the country being.
Countries may be asked to :
♦sell the oil real cheap to US oil companies
♦allow US to build a military base
♦send troops as support to someplace in the world, like Iraq
♦ vote with US the next U.N.
♦vote to have their electric utility company privatized, and their water and sewage system privatized, and sold to US corporations or other multinational corporations
   Confused?Can't really believe this exists?Have a look at some facts showing how economic hitmen first started their actions.
  •  Iran, 1953
  The precedent for economic hit men really began in the early fifties, when Mossadegh, was democratically elected in Iran.He was considered to be the hope for democracy in the Middle East and around the world.He was Time Magazine`s "Man of the Year"but, one of the things that he`d run on and began to implement was the idea that foreign oil companies needed to pay the Iranian people a lot more for the oil that they were taking out of Iran, that the Iranian people should benefit from their own oil. The US didn't like it and was afraid to send the army.Instead they sent in one CIA agent, Kermit Roosevelt, Teddy Roosevelt's relative. Kermit went in with a few million dollars and was very, very effective and efficient, and in a short amount of time he managed to get Mossadegh overthrown…and brought in the Shah of Iran to replace him, who always was favorable to oil and it was extremely effective.
   So back in the United States in Washington people looked around and said "wow, that was easy , and cheap". So this established a whole new way of manipulating countries, of creating empire. The only problem with Roosevelt was that he was a card carrying CIA agent, and had he been caught, the ramifications could have been pretty serious. So very quickly at that point the decision was made to use private consultants, to channel the money through the World Bank or the IMF or one of the other such agencies, to bring in people who work for private companies so that if they got caught there would be no governmental ramifications.
  • Guatemala, 1954
   When Arbenz became president of Guatemala, the country was very much under the thumbs of United Fruit Company, the big international corporation, and Arbenz ran on this ticket that says "we want to get the land back to the people". Once he took power he started implementing policies that would do exactly that, give land rights back to the people.
  United Fruit didn`t like that very much, and so they hired a public relations firm, launched a huge campaign in the United States to convince the United States people, the citizens of the United States, and the press of the United States, and the congress of the United States that Arbenz was a Soviet puppet, and that if we allowed him to stay in power the Soviets would have a foothold in this hemisphere, and that at that point in time was a huge fear on everybody's mind, the red terror, the communist terror and so to make a long story short, out of this public relations campaign came a commitment on the part of the CIA and the military to take this man out.In facet , they did , they sent in planes,  sent in soldiers,  sent in jackals,  sent everything in to take him out, and did take him out. And as soon as he was removed from office, the new man that took over after him basically reinstated everything to the big international corporations, including United Fruit.

  • Ecuador, 1981
   Ecuador for many, many years had been ruled by pro-US dictators, often relatively brutal. Then it was decided that they were going to have a truly democratic election. Jaime Roldos ran for office, and his main goal he said as president would be to make sure that Ecuador's resources were used to help the people. And he won, overwhelmingly, by more votes than anyone had ever won anything in Ecuador, and he began to implement these policies , to make sure that the profits from oil went to help the people.
   Well, they didn`t like that in the United States. As John Prekins(former hitman) confesses "I was sat down as one of several economic hit men, to change Roldos, to corrupt him, to bring him around. To let him know, you know, ok, you know, you can get very rich you and your family if you play our game, but if you continue to try to keep these policies you`ve promised, you`re gonna go… he wouldn`t listen".Later , he died in a plane crash.It is no doubt he had been assasinated.
   As soon as the plane crashed, the whole area was cordoned off. The only people that were allowed in were US military from a nearby base, and some of the Ecuadorian military. When investigation was launched, two of the key witnesses died in car accidents before they had a chance to testify. A lot of very, very strange things that went on around the assassination of Jaime Roldos."
"In my position as an economic hit man I was always expecting something to happen to Jaime, weather it be a coup or an assassination I wasn`t sure, but that he would be taken down because he was not being corrupted, he would not allow himself to be corrupted the way we wanted to corrupt him." - John Perkins
 

  •  Panama, 1981
   Omar Torrijos, president of Panama,was very charismatic, he was a man who really wanted to help his country. When the economic hitman tried to bribe him or corrupt him he said "I don`t need the money. What I really need is for my country to be treated fairly. I need for the United States to repay the debts that you owe my people for all the destruction you`ve done here. I need to be in a position where I can help other Latin American countries win their independence, and be free of this terrible presence from the north that you people are exploiting us so badly. I need to have the Panama canal back in the hands of the Panamanian people. That`s what I want. And so leave me alone, don`t try to bribe me".
   It was 1981, and in may Jaime Roldos was assassinated, and Omar was very aware of this. Torrijos got his family together and he said "I`m probably next. But it`s ok, because I`ve done what I came here to do. I`ve renegotiated the canal, the canal will now be in our hands"He had just finished negotiating the treaty with Jimmy Carter. In June of that same year, just a couple of months later, he also went down in an airplane crash , which there`s no question that was executed by CIA sponsored Jackals. Tremendous amount of evidence show that one of Torrijos' security guards handed him at the last moment as he was getting on the plane a tape recorder, a small tape recorder, that contained a bomb.
  • Venezuela, 2002
It is interesting  how this system has continued pretty much the same way for years and years and years, except the economic hit men are getting better and better. In 1998 Hugo Chavez gets elected president, following a long line of presidents who had been very corrupt, and basically destroyed the economy of the country.Chavez was elected amidst all that. Chavez stood up to the United States, and he has done it primarily demanding that Venezuelan oil be used to help the Venezuelan people. The US didn't like that  so, in 2002 a riot was staged, which, there`s no question in most of people's minds that the CIA was behind that coup. The way that that coup was fomented was very reflective of what Kermit Roosevelt had done in Iran, of paying people to go out into the streets to riot, to protest, to say this Chavez is very unpopular. If one can get a few thousand people to do that, television can make it look like its the whole country, and things start to mushroom. Except in the case of Chavez, he was smart enough and the people were so strongly behind him that they overcame it  which was a phenomenal moment in the history of Latin America.
  • Iraq, 2003
   Iraq actually is a perfect example of the way the whole system works.So, the economic hit men are the first line of defense, they go in, they try to corrupt governments and get them to accept these huge loans which they then use as leverage to basically own them. If they fail, as  failed in Panama with Omar Torrijos, or in Ecuador with Jaime Roldos, men who refused to be corrupted, then the second line of defense is sending in the jackals. And the jackals either overthrow governments or they assassinate, and once that happens then a new government comes in and  it`s going to tow the line, because the new president knows what will happen if he doesn't. In the case of Iraq, both of those things failed-economic hit men were not able to get through to Saddam Hussein, and so the jackals went in to take him out…they couldn`t do it, his security was very good…after all, he at one time worked for the CIA. He had  been hired to assassinate a former president of Iraq, and failed but he knew the system. So in '91 they send in the troops to  take out the Iraqi military. So they assumed at that point that Saddam Hussein was going to come around. They could have taken him out, of course, at that point in time, but they didn`t want to because  he was the kind of strong man they like. He controlled his people and US thought he could control the Kurds and keep the Iranians within their border, and keep pumping oil for them and that once they took out his military,  he was going to come around. So the economic hit men went back in in the '90s, without success. If they had had success, he had still be running the country.  The Jackals couldn`t take him out . So they sent the military in once again, and this time they did the complete job and took him out, and in the process created for themselves some very, very lucrative construction deals.They had to reconstruct a country that they had essentially destroyed, which is a pretty good deal if you own construction companies, big ones.
   So, Iraq shows the three stages; the economic hit men, failed ; the jackals, failed ; and as a final measure the military goes in and solves it all.That is how empires are being built.
   Still, need more evidence to support this article?Read the book "Confessions of an Economic Hitman" by John Perkins and you will get more than enough.
   "I was sworn to secrecy , I've been bribed not to write it ,I've been threatened not to write it and I postphoned it..until 9/11." - J.Perkins
http://truthortale.webs.com/economichitmen.htm