Thursday, July 19, 2012

Bankers Declare U.S. & Europe Conquered

Bankers Declare U.S. & Europe Conquered

World government now an open secret
Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones
Infowars.com
Thursday, July 19, 2012

A recent CNBC clip in which financial analysts admit to viewers that America is under the control of a group of central bankers who are building a world government is a damning insight into how the establishment has dispensed with any pretense of trying to hide their agenda as it is finalized.
During the video, the host asks guests, “Do we all work for central bankers – is this global governance at last – is it one world – the central bankers in charge….aren’t we all just living and dying for what the central banks do?”

“To answer your question, we are absolutely slaves to central banks,” responds the guest.  “We beholden to what central bankers and policy makers do rather than the fundamentals in the economy,” adds another.

This is just one of a deluge of examples where it is now being thrown in our faces that a banking elite is building a world government at the expense of the American people.

From treating the issue as a “conspiracy theory” for decades, the establishment is now tearing away the veil in an effort to force Americans to blithely accept what has been planned all along.

A global government is now being forcefully pushed as the “solution” to all manner of problems, but specifically in relation to financial crises. We are being brainwashed to accept the premise that centralized power in the hands of a tiny elite is the only recourse, and that a one world currency is inevitable.

At the height of the last economic crisis, Bilderberg member and Financial Times columnist Gideon Rachman argued that “everything is in place” for a dictatorial world government to be imposed by a technocratic elite.

Rachman’s 2008 call for authoritarian technocrats to be put in charge of the global economy in preparation for the official birth of global government is now well on its way to completion, with the economies of France, Ireland, Germany, Belgium, Italy, Greece, along with the IMF and the European Central Bank, all under Goldman Sachs banker occupation.

These technocrats have not been bashful in openly announcing what they are doing.

Upon his selection to become EU President in 2009, Herman Van Rompuy announced that the financial crisis and efforts to combat global warming were designed to precede “the global management of our planet.” He also declared 2009 to be “the first year of global governance.”

In the same year, Van Rompuy was joined by the Pope who also called for a “world political authority” to manage the global economy.

World Bank President and Bilderberg elitist Robert Zoellick also openly admitted the plan to eliminate national sovereignty and impose a global government during a speech on the eve of the G20 summit.
Calls for a one world currency to be a key component of global governance have been consistent.

In 2000 speech, member of the executive board of the ECB, Sirkka Hämäläinen stated, “In conclusion, I should like to come back to Paul Volcker’s prophecy. He might be right, and we might one day have a single world currency. Maybe European integration, in the same way as any other regional integration, could be seen as a step towards the ideal situation of a fully integrated world.”

In a 2010 speech to the CFR, former president of the ECB Jean-Claude Trichet made it clear that the Global Economy Meeting (GEM), which meets at the BIS (Bank of International Settlements) headquarters in Basel would “become the prime group for global governance among central banks.”

Trichet added that the BIS meetings were ensuring that “the system is moving decisively towards genuine global governance.”

Trichet went on to define how global governance would operate.

“There are numerous definitions of global governance. In the economic and financial sphere I will propose that global governance comprehends not only the constellation of supranational institutions – including the international financial institutions – but also the informal groupings that have progressively emerged at the global level. Those informal forums (G7, G10, G20, etc.) are key in improving global coordination in all the areas where decision making processes remain national – whether in helping to work out agreed prudential standards and codes or to facilitate where appropriate, the coordination of economic macro-policies.”

Numerous other members of the political establishment have openly expressed the agenda to create global government. not only in response to the financial crisis but also as an answer to man-made climate change.

In 2009, United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon admitted that carbon taxes levied in the name of abating global warming would be collected by a world body.

“We will establish a global governance structure to monitor and manage the implementation of this,” he stated.

In a New York Times editorial entitled “We Can Do It,” Ki-moon also wrote that efforts to impose restrictions on CO2 emissions, “Must include an equitable global governance structure.”

Fellow globalist and environmentalist David De Mayer Rothschild also disclosed the agenda for global governancein an interview with Bloomberg news.

“It’s past the point of talking. We know historically that the global governance sort of agenda to these issues is very hard to… with all the best intentions it’s very hard to actually activate.” Rothschild noted.
Similarly, Al Gore said in a 2009 speech that attempts to regulate CO2 emissions would be driven through “global governance and global agreements.”

A 2010 UN blueprint for putting the organization back at the forefront of global governance alarmingly revealed the agenda to re-brand global warming as “overpopulation” as a means of dismantling the middle classes while using “global redistribution of wealth” and increased immigration to reinvigorate the pursuit of a one world government.

Bureaucrats at the 2011 UN Climate Summit in Durban outlined plans for the most draconian, harebrained and madcap climate change treaty ever produced, under which the west would be mandated to respect “the rights of Mother Earth” by paying a “climate debt” which would act as a slush fund for bankrolling an all-powerful world government.

Earlier this year a Scientific American article entitled Effective World Government Will Be Needed to Stave Off Climate Catastrophe argued that global management of the planet was the only means of combating global warming.

Although the agenda for global government is now bearing its teeth with little regard for subtleness or stealth, the following quotes stretching back over the last several decades prove that the plan has been long in the works.

“Today America would be outraged if UN troops entered Los Angeles to restore order. Tomorrow they will be grateful. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well-being granted to them by the World Government.”  -- Henry Kissinger

“We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and their great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries.”  -- David Rockefeller

“In the next century, nations as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single global authority and realize national sovereignty wasn’t such a great deal after all.”  -- Strobe Talbot

“We need a global New Deal — a grand bargain between the countries and continents of this world.”
-- Gordon Brown

“It seems to many of us that if we are to avoid the eventual catastrophic world conflict we must strengthen the United Nations as a first step toward a world government patterned after our own government with a legislature, executive and judiciary, and police to enforce its international laws and keep the peace. To do that, of course, we Americans will have to yield up some of our sovereignty. That would be a bitter pill. It would take a lot of courage, a lot of faith in the new order. Pat Robertson has written in a book a few years ago that we should have a world government, but only when the Messiah arrives. He wrote, literally, any attempt to achieve world order before that time must be the work of the devil. Well, join me. I’m glad to sit here at the right hand of Satan.”  -- Walter Cronkite

“This is global governance in the making. But we must agree, and agree to a binding commitment.”
George Papandreou, former Prime Minister of Greece

“For the first time, humanity is instituting a genuine instrument of global governance. From the very earliest age, we should make environmental awareness a major theme of education and a major theme of political debate, until respect for the environment comes to be as fundamental as safeguarding our rights and freedoms. By acting together, by building this unprecedented instrument, the first component of an authentic global governance, we are working for dialogue and peace.” -- Jacques Chirac

“For more than a century ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents such as my encounter with Castro to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure – one world, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.” -- David Rockefeller, from his own book, Memoirs.
*********************
Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a regular fill-in host for The Alex Jones Show and Infowars Nightly News.
Similar/Related Articles

  1. CNBC Admits We’re All Slaves to a Global Government Run by Bankers
  2. Bankers Have Seized Europe: Goldman Sachs Has Taken Over
  3. Bankers Want World Economic Government To Solve Financial Crisis They Created
  4. Bankers Destroy Global Economy by Design to Consolidate Power
  5. Audit the Fed: Bernanke and the Bankers Are Running Scared
  6. Tentative First Steps in Europe’s Self-Defense Against Zombie Bankers and Hedge Fund Hyenas
  7. Financial Terrorists Want Global Currency, Global Central Bank
  8. ECB’s Paramo: “Prepare To Give Up Significant Sovereignty”
  9. UN Chief: We Will Impose Global Governance
  10. CIA Recruiting Laid-Off Bankers in NYC
  11. “Economic Government” Would Integrate Europe To A Degree Not Seen Since The Roman Empire
  12. Libya Conquered in the Dark


Article printed from Infowars: http://www.infowars.com

END QUOTE

9/11 Suspects - Explosive Connections (Updated Fixed and Revised)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ffs7PkOREEY&feature=player_embedded#!


Uploaded by  on Oct 15, 2011
Most of the material for this video was adapted from Kevin Ryan's landmark article on who had "Demolition access to the WTC Towers":
Tenants:
http://www.911review.com/articles/ryan/demolition_access_p1.html
Security:
http://www.911review.com/articles/ryan/demolition_access_p2.html
Convergence:
http://www.911review.com/articles/ryan/carlyle_kissinger_saic_halliburton.html
Clean Up:
http://www.911review.com/articles/ryan/demolition_access_p4.html

For blueprints of the WTCs with a list of all the suspicious tenants and connections check out:
http://911blogger.com/news/2010-09-10/explosive-connections-initial-draft-rel...

Links and sources for things mentioned in the video:

Kevin R. Ryan, et al, Environmental anomalies at the World Trade Center: evidence for energetic materials, The Environmentalist, Volume 29, Number 1 / March, 2009, http://www.springerlink.com/content/f67q6272583h86n4/

Niels H. Harrit, et al, Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe, The Open Chemical Physics Journal, Vol 2, 2009, doi: 10.2174/1874412500902010007, http://www.bentham-open.org/pages/content.php?TOCPJ/2009/00000002/00000001/7T...

Kevin R. Ryan, The Top Ten Connections Between NIST and Nanothermites, Journal of 9/11 Studies, July 2008,http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2008/Ryan_NIST_and_Nano-1.pdf

Website for In-Q-Tel, http://www.iqt.org/technology-portfolio/index-by-practice-area.html

Wikipedia page for Jerome Hauer, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerome_Hauer

Peter Jennings interview with Jerome Hauer, ABC, on 9/11, 14:53, available on You Tube, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dj0Rz9ZsDAg

Akzo's International Paint is the maker of Interchar http://www.international-pc.com/pc/pds/963to_uk.pdfhttp://www.sti.nasa.gov/tto/Spinoff2006/ps_3.html

Taku Murakami, US Patent 5532449 - Using plasma ARC and thermite to demolish concrete,http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/5532449/description.html

Steven E. Jones et al, Extremely High Temperatures During the World Trade Center Destruction, Journal of 9/11 Studies, January 2008http://www.journalof911studies.com/articles/WTCHighTemp2.pdf

Albert Gibson et al, Integral low-energy thermite igniter, US Patent number: 4464989, http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=rKl1AAAAEBAJ&dq=US+4464989

Skull and Bones is a secret society at Yale University, founded in 1832. Members have included George H.W. Bush, his father Prescott Bush, his son George W. Bush, his brother Jonathan J. Bush, and many other powerful people. For LMI's mission, see its website -http://www.lmi.org/aboutus/aboutus.aspx

Michael C. Ruppert, Suppressed Details of Criminal Insider Trading Lead Directly into the CIA's Highest Ranks, October 9, 2001,http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/10_09_01_krongard.html

Kevin R. Ryan, Mahmud Ahmed's itinerary from his Washington DC visit the week of 9/11, 911blogger.com, 11/27/2009,http://www.911blogger.com/node/21978

The agreement between LLNL and Savannah River can be found here -https://www.llnl.gov/str/News597.html

Savannah's reference to developing sol-gels can be found here -http://srnl.doe.gov/mat_sci.htm

SEC document for Washington pre-payments -http://www.secinfo.com/dRqWm.4G1Vx.c.htm

The Ties That Bind, Descended from family business empires, six huge business groups dominate the Japanese economy, Multinational Monitor, October 1983 - http://multinationalmonitor.org/hyper/issues/1983/10/ties.html

Securacomm Consulting Inc. v. Securacom Incorporated, United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, January 20, 1999, 49 U.S.P.Q.2d 1444; 166 F.3d 182, http://altlaw.org/v1/cases/1099498

Wikipedia page for Stratesec, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratesec

SEC filing for Stratesec, May 2, 1997, http://www.secinfo.com/dS7kv.82.htm

Kroll Inc website, http://www.kroll.com/about/

Wikipedia page for the Quill and Dagger Society,http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quill_and_Dagger

The History Commons, "Wolfowitz Doctrine",http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=us_international_relations_41 Aaron Dykes, Wolfowitz Warns of 'Surprise like Pearl Harbor' Months Before 9/11 Attacks, Jones Report, February 9, 2007 http://www.jonesreport.com/articles/070207_wolfowitz.htmlWolfowitz's meeting with Mahmud Ahmed was documented in a FOIA response obtained by the 9/11 Working Group of Bloomington -http://911workinggroup.org/

Plaintiffs'' Opposition to Defendant Terrence R. McAuliffe's Motion to Dismiss, Case No: 1:98CV02859 (RCL), W.L. Meng et al vs. Bernard L. Schwartz and Loral Space et al, US District Court for the District of Columbia,http://www.judicialwatch.org/archive/ois/cases/chinagate-loral/loral12500d.htm

Category:

Omar Rubbed Out In Cleveland - 7-19-12

THURSDAY, JULY 19, 2012

http://alcuinbramerton.blogspot.com/2012/01/altnews8-1ab-alcuin-httpalcuinbramerton.html
Alcuin Bramerton Twitter .. WikiLeaks Master Mirror Sites .. #1ab archive
Alcuin Bramerton profile ..... Index of blog contents ..... Home .....#1ab

Picture: Egypt's Omar Suleiman rubbed out in Cleveland (USA)

In the early hours of Thursday 19th July 2012, Omar Suleiman (76), the West's favourite torture master in the Middle East, "died unexpectedly" in hospital in the US. For a man of his age, he was said by those close to him to be in good health.

Suleiman and his family had been on the run from Egypt since his failed Presidential bid earlier in 2012.

Understood to be an intelligence asset of both Mossad and the CIA, Omar Suleiman knew too much about US covert operations in Egypt to be allowed to live once he was out of power.

Mainstream reportage here (19.07.12), here (19.07.12), here(19.07.12) and here (19.07.12).

Obama drone strikes as illegal as Bush torture practices: Analyst Alfred Webre

Obama drone strikes as illegal as Bush torture practices: Analyst Alfred Webre

WATCH VIDEO:


Relatives of three US citizens killed in non-UN sanctioned US assassination drone strikes in Yemen have sued senior officials at the US Defense Department and the CIA.

According to the lawsuit filed on Wednesday, the killings of US-born Muslim cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, his 16-year-old son Abdulrahman al-Awlaki and naturalized US citizen Samir Khan were unconstitutional, Reuters reported. 

The victims’ relatives said that the three assassinations committed by the CIA violated US legal guarantees, including the right to due process. 

On January 31, President Obama confirmed that the US uses the unmanned drones in Pakistan and other countries. 

Press TV has conducted an interview with Alfred Lambremont Webre, human rights & war crimes lawyer, to further discuss the issue. The following is a rough transcription of the interview. 

Press TV: First question is a natural one. How strong a case do these families have at this point against the US government and its officials? 

Webre: I think that the plaintiffs here have a very strong case and I base that on two different grounds. Number one, I’m a judge on the Kuala Lumpur war crimes tribunal, and in May of this year we found George W. Bush, Richard B. Cheney and Donald H. Rumsfeld and their foreign lawyers guilty of war crimes and their conspiracy to violate the Geneva Conventions for torturing civilians in Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, in Bagram airfarce base in Afghanistan, and in Guantanamo in Cuba. 

The reason was that they drafted memoranda and legal opinions which were part of a conspiracy to circumvent and to create fraudulent legal opinions by which their practices was constituted torture that was absolutely banned by the Geneva conventions they could get around.

And it’s the same strategy here. The CIA will not release the legal memoranda which allegedly gives the legal authority to President Barack Obama to approve these strikes, and they won’t do so because it’s the same patently fraudulent legal memorandum that was used by Alberto Gonzalez and Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld in the case of torture in Iraq, Afghanistan and in Guantanamo. 

Secondly, the drone program, the drone assassination program especially against US citizens, especially in nations like Yemen where there’s no declared war is absolutely unconstitutional because it violates the separation of powers as between the Congress and the executive.

Only the Congress can declare war, and then the president does not have the authority to be a judge over whether an individual -- who’s a US citizen -- is or is not a civilian, and to be judge, jury and executioner here. 

Here, the two civilians that were killed, they now admit were not the targets. According to the plaintiff, the ACLU and the Center for Constitutional Rights, there have been thousands of civilians killed. 

Press TV: Is it then your professional opinion that the future looks optimistic and bright for those who want justice from the likes of Panetta and Petraeus? 

Webre: Yes. People should just keep on challenging these rulings in court because there’s nothing but these fraudulent legal memoranda. Here we have the secret CIA legal memo which they will not show. 

We were able to prove that the Kuala Lumpur war crimes tribunal, I mean we judged it, we had opposing council, we had defense council and prosecution council, and we the court determined that in fact Cheney, Rumsfeld and Bush, and their four lawyers including Attorney General Alberto Gonzales having engaged in a conspiracy to circumvent the Geneva Conventions, and most probably that is occurring here in my judgment as a war crimes judge and as a war crimes attorney

Macy's Using Spychips:


Subject: [Listeners-l] Macy's Using Spychips: Live Radio Q&A w/Katherine Albrecht today 4:00-6:00 PM Eastern
Hello Radio Listeners:

Katherine Albrecht here, with a live radio update today and urgent news about Macy's department stores. The $25 billion retailer has announced it will attach RFID (radio-frequency) tracking technology to 300,000 pairs of shoes, starting next month. Their exact words are:

    "We believe now is the right time to roll out RFID aggressively." - Macy's (source)

What?!? There is never a good time to roll out privacy-invading Spychips. Macy's has promised to respond to consumer concern about its RFID plans in a statement by 5:00 PM today. I will share their response with you on my live radio program today.

Please tune in to my radio show from 4:00-6:00 PM Eastern for this breaking story, and to help formulate a response. You can listen here:
   www.KatherineAlbrecht.com (From the "Radio Show" menu, click "Listen Live")
   www.GCNLive.com (click the Katherine Albrecht show from the rotating lineup)
Please participate in the conversation:
* You can hit reply on this email to submit a question
* Call into the show:  855-660-4261 // 612-465-7369
Millions of radio listeners learned of Macy's plans to sell chipped shoes during my interview last night on Coast to Coast AM. Now let's give Macy's every chance to do the right thing and set a positive example for the rest of the retail industry.

Macy's, we're counting on you!

In freedom,

Katherine Albrecht, Ed.D.
Founder and Director, CASPIAN Consumer Privacy
Nationally Syndicated Radio Host, Consumer Privacy Expert, and Bestselling Author
www.KatherineAlbrecht.com  // www.Spychips.com


OTHER WAYS TO HEAR THE RADIO SHOW

* On-demand web link:
   http://www.gcnlive.com/mediaPlayers/odPlayer.php?program=drKatherine
   (show is available until replaced by the next show)

* "On demand" 24-hour telephone listen line: 605-562-7703
    Show can be heard live, then looping until it is replaced by the next show

* Live and delayed broadcast to national radio affiliates
   Broadcast on dozens of radio stations across the USA

* Available as an MP3 audio file
    Archive descriptions and MP3 audio are posted on my website each evening
    www.KatherineAlbrecht.com
    (Click the "Archives and Guests" menu, then go to the show date)

The Great Banking Deception


The Great Banking Deception

[Author Unknown]

Have you been cheated?

In order for any contract to be valid, there must be 'full disclosure', 'good faith', 'valuable consideration', and 'clean hands'.  Here is what the banks advertise: "Come to our bank.  We have money to loan you."  Is this really what happens?
Did you really get a loan when you contracted to borrow money from the bank to pay for your home?  Or was it just an exchange (your note for cash), but the bank called it a loan?  Or did two loans occur?
When you entered into a loan contract with a bank, you signed a note or contract promising to pay the bank back, and you agreed to provide collateral that the bank could seize if you did not repay the loan.  This contract supposedly qualified you to receive the bank's money.  But did the bank provide 'full disclosure' of all of the terms of this agreement?  Read the following and decide for yourself if the bank was acting in 'good faith', that you received 'valuable consideration', and that your 'signature' on that agreement is valid.
Bankers want you to believe that depositors deposit money at banks, banks lend the money to borrowers and the borrowers repay the money and the money is returned to the depositors who funded the loan.  If you think this is how American or Canadian banking works, you have been lied to and deceived.
The fact is the economics of today's banking system is similar to stealing, counterfeiting and swindling and that is why the bankers cannot explain the loan details or answer specific questions.  Bankers are terrified that the details might be exposed in public court.
The banker's own publications admit and the bank's bookkeeping entries prove that when the banks lend money, the bankers create new money with the economics similar to counterfeiting.
If a counterfeiter counterfeits money and lends it to you, do you have any moral or legal obligation to repay the loan? NO, The law says counterfeiting is illegal and that you do not have to repay the counterfeiter.
James Madison:  "History records that the money changers have used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means possible to maintain their control over governments by controlling the money and its issuance."
Bankers are too smart to counterfeit cash and go to jail.  They are money masters and use another method to create new money with the economics similar to counterfeiting without going to jail.  The secret involves two kinds of money. Legal tender -cash- money and non legal tender - money like checks and credit cards.  The bank's own publication claims that money does not have to be issued by the government or be in any special form.  According to the bank's manual, money is anything that can be sold for cash and that the banks accept as money.
The loan agreement you sign is sold to investors wanting interest.  If you do not pay the interest, they foreclose and collect the money.  The loan agreement can be sold for cash and the bankers use the loan like non-legal tender money. If you exchange $100 of cash for a $100 check the bankers acted like a moneychanger and lent you none of the bank's money.  If the bank uses your $100,000 loan agreement like money to fund a check like cash funds a check, the banker acted like a moneychanger without the bank using or risking one cent of their money to purchase your loan agreement.
The banker got your loan agreement for free, which has the economics similar to stealing.  The banker created $100,000 of new money, which has the economics similar to counterfeiting.  Would you agree to have the banker steal your $100,000 loan agreement and use it to create $100,000 of new money and return the value of the stolen property to you as a loan?  Did you agree to be swindled?
The banker knows you would never knowingly be this stupid and that is why he cannot disclose the whole truth in court.  The bookkeeping entries prove that the borrower's loan agreement funded the loan to the borrower. The bookkeeping entries prove that the banker merely acted like a moneychanger exchanging one kind of currency for another kind of currency and charging you as if there were a loan.  If you funded the loan to yourself, why are you paying the banker back the principle and interest?
Bankers understand the difference between money and wealth.  Money buys things.  If you could counterfeit money, you could buy the whole world and control Congress.  Wealth is anything that you can sell.  You can sell real estate, cars, gold, silver and people sell their 40 hours a week for a payroll check.  Yes, labor produces wealth. Labor produces gas for your car, food to eat and homes, cars and roads.  The banker knows that if everyone stopped working, stayed home and counterfeited money, everyone would starve to death, and no one would have gas for their cars or food to eat.  When bankers create new money and lend it to you, you must work for the banker for free to repay the loan or he forecloses and gets your home for free.
The money creator gets more of your wealth for free using a suit and tie than a gunman does pointing a gun to your head.
The banker says, "repay the loan because the bank lent you money."  We simply ask one question: "Should the one who funded the loan be repaid the money?"  Whether they answer "YES" or "NO," the bank must forgive the loan and zero out the debt.  That is the one question that they do not want to answer because the borrower funded the loan as proven by the bank's own bookkeeping entries.
We are not calling the bankers criminals.  We are showing you how intelligent, creative and genius the bankers are in developing this secret.
One of the biggest bankers in America told us that the banker's money controls who is elected into Congress, the President and judges.  He even boasted how the Banker's loan money and advertising money controls all major media to keep it a secret.  He explained how lawyers, judges, CPAs, politicians profit from the bankers by keeping this system going and keeping it secret.  You lose and they benefit by understanding this secret.
Henry Ford: (Founder of Ford Motor Company) "It is well enough that the people of this nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning."
This secret banking allows bankers to create economic booms and busts, makes the stock market go up and down as they increase and decrease the money supply.  You lose in investments as those who understand the secret transfer your investment money into their pocket.  You lose, they win.

FORM vs. SUBSTANCE

Before an attorney can sue for foreclosure, he must show that the defending party (you) breached the agreement. The attorney needs a witness to give testimony that there is an agreement and that the agreement has been breached.
If Rich (as an example) testifies in court that there was a loan when he knew that there was only an exchange of equal value,  Rich would be giving false testimony and would be called a false witness.
In a normal court foreclosure, the lender does not come to court to give testimony.  The bank attorney uses the alleged promissory note with the alleged borrower's signature as the witness in court to claim that there is an agreement, that there was a loan, that the lender fulfilled his agreement, and that the alleged borrower did not fulfill the agreement to repay the money.  Instead of the attorney using Rich to give oral testimony, the attorney used the promissory note as the witness as the evidence to sue the alleged borrower.
There is a legal concept of form vs. substance.  The form is the promissory note, which says that the lender lent money to the alleged borrower.  The substance is the money trail - the bookkeeping entries.  The substance shows that there were two loans exchanged - equal value for equal value.  The borrower was required to repay his loan to the bank plus interest, but the bank never repaid the debt it owes to you.  IOU was exchanged for IOU.  The two newly created IOUs cancel each other.
The Substance - the true transaction - shows that the borrower was the lender to the bank.  Then the bank repaid the loan from the borrower to the bank.  The form - the alleged bank loan agreement - shows the opposite.
Example: You sign a paper that says you were lent $10,000, but no one lent you one cent to obtain the promissory note.  A thief stole $10,000 worth of diamonds and returned the cash to you as a loan.  The form says that there was a loan; your signature also says that there was a loan.  The true transaction, though, proves that there was no loan.  The substance-money trail and the bookkeeping entries-proves that someone took something of value worth $10,000 from you, exchanged it for a different asset of equal value and returned your $10,000 to you as a loan that you now have to pay off with interest.  The attorney sues you, claiming that your signature proves that you received the loan.  You hire an expert witness to prove that there was no loan, that the substance of the transaction was an exchange, and that you were charged as if it were a loan.
Economically speaking, what is the difference if a stranger received your $10,000 worth of diamonds for free, or if he got a $10,000 lien on your property for free, or if he received $10,000 of your future payroll checks for free? The substance of the transaction is the transferal of $10,000 of property from you to the stranger for free. The transfer of wealth is precisely how bankers obtain liens on the nation's homes, cars, farms, and businesses for free. If a robber were to use a gun to transfer your wealth, you would place him in prison.  If a banker does the same thing by using "form," an attorney, a judge, and a sheriff, you think it is legal.
Does the attorney use the promissory note just like a witness to give false testimony in court, claiming that the lender lent money, cash or cash equivalent to the alleged borrower?  The attorney could be disbarred for bringing fraud into the court.  The substance was an exchange of value for value.  If the form and the substance disagree, one must rely on the substance over the form because substance always wins over form.
Example: You give Rich $100 for five boxes of toys.  Rich says, "Here are the five boxes.  Sign this paper that says you received the boxes."  You sign.  Rich refuses to hand over the five boxes and claims that the form - the paper you just signed - says that you received the boxes.  You would tell the judge that you acted in good faith by signing because you were told that you would receive the five boxes standing in front of you.  After you had signed, Rich refused to let you have the boxes.  The form - the paper-says that you received the boxes, but the substance - the true transaction-clearly shows you never received what you had bargained for.  If the attorney uses the form (paper) in court to claim that you received the boxes when, in fact, he knew that you had never received then, the attorney brought fraud on the court to sue you.  The form - the paper - would be a false witness against you.
Is the promissory note used as a false witness?  The promissory note has the borrower's signature agreeing that the lender lent the borrower money.
The attorney wants only the form - the promissory note with your signature - as a witness in court.  You want the true substance - the true transaction - and the whole truth and nothing but the truth.  Some attorney’s object to allowing the bookkeeping entries entered into court as evidence.  The attorney must rely on the form and stop the substance.
Extortion occurs when the court does not allow information into court for one's defense.
Few people disagree that the one who provided the original funds to fund the bank loan check should be repaid the money.  Few argue that we should have equal protection and full disclosure.  The lender concealed the true substance in the agreement.
If a banker received $10,000 of capital from Joe and deposits the funds into a checking account, should the bank return the $10,000 to Joe?  If all bankers agree that the answer is "yes," then all bank loans in America should be canceled tomorrow.
If the bank received $10,000 from Joe and lent the same $10,000 to Joe, should the bank return the $10,000 to Joe? The foreclosure attorney must argue that the bank should not return the $10,000 to Joe. Joe believed that the alleged borrower should repay the lender, and the lender should repay the one who funded the bank loan check. The foreclosure attorney must argue that the parties agreed to the terms and the one who funded the loan should never be repaid the money.  How could the judge rule in favor of the bank, claiming that the one who funded the loan should never be repaid the money?
Want proof that this is real?  Ask yourself the following questions:
  1. Were you told that the Federal Reserve Policies and Procedures and the Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) requirements imposed upon all Federally-insured (FDIC) banks in Title 12 of the United States Code,  section 1831n (a), prohibit them from lending their own money from their own assets, or from other depositors?  Did the bank tell you where the money for the loan was coming from?
  2. Were you told that the contract you signed (your promissory note) was going to be converted into a 'negotiable instrument' by the bank and become an asset on the bank's accounting books?  Did the bank tell you that your signature on that note made it 'money,' according to the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), sections 1-201(24) and 3-104?
  3. Were you told that your promissory note (money) would be taken, recorded as an asset of the bank, and be sold by the bank for cash - without 'valuable consideration' given to obtain your note?  Did the bank give you a deposit slip as a receipt for the money you gave them, just as the bank would normally provide when you make a deposit to the bank?
  4. Were you told that the bank would create an account at the bank that would contain this money that you gave them?
  5. Were you told that a check from this account would be issued with your signature, and that this account would be the source of the funds behind the check that was given to you as a "loan?"

If you answered "No" to any of these questions, YOU HAVE BEEN CHEATED! How does that make you feel?  It is now up to you to demand your deposit back and to challenge the validity of your "signature" on any alleged bank "loan" agreement or check.  Since the banks and other lending institutions cannot allow "full disclosure" of your "loan" agreement and cannot answer your challenges about it, their silence is your key, along with important steps that we can show you step-by-step, to get your deposit back and "payoff" their alleged "loan"  to you.

GLOBAL PLAN TO REPLACE THE DOLLAR

The Rumor Mill News Reading Room 

GLOBAL PLAN TO REPLACE THE DOLLAR
Posted By: IZAKOVIC [Send E-Mail]
Date: Thursday, 19-Jul-2012 14:57:25

http://www.voltairenet.org/Global-Plans-to-Replace-the-Dollar
by Bridgette Grillo, Krystal Alexander, Nicole Fletcher
Nations have reached their limit in subsidizing the United States’ military adventures. During meetings in June 2009 in Yekaterinburg, Russia, world leaders such as China’s President Hu Jintao, his then Russian counterpart Dmitry Medvedev, and other top officials of the six-nation Shanghai Cooperation Organisation took the first formal step to replace the dollar as the world’s reserve currency.
Voltaire Network | 17 July 2012
Español
Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev shows off sample coin of new ‘world currency’ at 2009 G-8 Summit meeting.The United States was denied admission to the meetings. If the world leaders succeed, the dollar will dramatically plummet in value; the cost of imports, including oil, will skyrocket; and interest rates will climb.
Foreigners see the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank, and the World Trade Organization (WTO) as Washington surrogates in a financial system backed by US military bases and aircraft carriers encircling the globe. But this military domination is a vestige of an American empire no longer able to rule by economic strength. US military power is muscle-bound, based more on atomic weaponry and long-distance air strikes than on ground operations, which have become too politically unpopular to mount on any large scale.
As Chris Hedges wrote in June 2009, “The architects of this new global exchange realize that if they break the dollar they also break America’s military domination. US military spending cannot be sustained without this cycle of heavy borrowing. The official US defense budget for fiscal year 2008 was $623 billion. The next closest national military budget was China’s, at $65 billion, according to the Central Intelligence Agency.”
To fund the permanent war economy, the US has been flooding the world with dollars. The foreign recipients turn the dollars over to their central banks for local currency. The central banks then have a problem. If a central bank does not spend the money in the United States, then the exchange rate against the dollar increases, penalizing exporters. This has allowed the US to print money without restraint, to buy imports and foreign companies, to fund military expansion, and to ensure that foreign nations like China continue to buy American treasury bonds.
In July 2009, President Medvedev illustrated his call for a supranational currency to replace the dollar by pulling from his pocket a sample coin of a “united future world currency.” The coin, which bears the words “Unity in Diversity,” was minted in Belgium and presented to the heads of G8 delegations.
In September 2009, the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development proposed creating a new artificial currency that would replace the dollar as reserve currency. The UN wants to redesign the Bretton Woods system of international exchange. Formation of this currency would be the largest monetary overhaul since World War II. China is involved in deals with Brazil and Malaysia to denominate their trade in China’s yuan, while Russia promises to begin trading in the ruble and local currencies.
Additionally, nine Latin American countries have agreed on the creation of a regional currency, the sucre, aimed at scaling back the use of the US dollar. The countries, members of the Bolivarian Alliance for the Americas (ALBA), a leftist bloc conceived by Venezuela’s President Hugo Chávez, met in Bolivia where they vowed to press ahead with a new currency for intraregional trade. The sucre would be rolled out beginning in 2010 in a nonpaper form. ALBA’s member states are Venezuela, Bolivia, Cuba, Ecuador, Nicaragua, Dominica, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, and Antigua and Barbuda.
The cycle supporting a permanent US war economy appears to be almost over. Once the dollar cannot flood central banks and no one buys US treasury bonds, the American global military empire collapses. The impact on daily living for the US population could be severe.
Our authors predict that in addition to increased costs, states and cities will see their pension funds drained. The government will be forced to sell off infrastructure, including roads and transport, to private corporations. People will be increasingly charged for privatized utilities that were once regulated and subsidized. Commercial and private real estate will be worth less than half its current value. The negative equity that already plagues 25 percent of American homes will expand to include nearly all property owners. It will be difficult to borrow and impossible to sell real estate unless we accept massive losses. There will be block after block of empty stores and boarded-up houses. Foreclosures will be epidemic. There will be long lines at soup kitchens and many, many homeless.
Update by Michael Hudson (Global Research)
Foreign countries are presently seeking to create an international monetary system in which central bank savings do not fund the United States’ military deficit. At present, foreign “dollar holdings” take the form of US treasury bonds, used to finance the (largely military) US domestic budget deficit, a deficit that is largely due to military spending.
Russia, China, India, and Brazil have taken the lead in seeking an alternative system. But almost no information about such a system was available in the US or even the European press, except for a shorter version of my “De-Dollarization” article that I published as an op-ed in the Financial Times of London.
Discussions about creating an alternative monetary system have not been public. I was invited to China to discuss my views with officials there and to lecture at three universities, and was subsequently asked to write up my proposals for Premier Wen Jiabao, pending another visit just prior to this year’s meetings between China, Russia, India, and Brazil, with Iran attending with visitor status. All of this signals that other countries are seeking an alternative. Now that the euro has collapsed, there’s currently little alternative to the dollar as a reserve currency. This implies that there is no national currency that is a stable store of value for international savings.
Meanwhile, US money managers are leading the flight from the dollar to Brazil, China, and other “emerging market” countries. As matters stand, these countries are selling their resources and companies for free—as the dollars being spent to buy them end up in their central banks, to be recycled into US treasury bonds, or to be used to purchase euro debt that is plunging in international value.
The result of this conundrum is the pressure to end the postwar era of “free capital movements” and to introduce capital controls.
There has been almost no press discussion of my story or indeed of the issue itself. US and European media have successfully ignored the proposal of an alternative to the existing state of affairs.
Update by Fred Weir (The Christian Monitor)
This story illustrates one aspect of post–Soviet Russia’s search for a place in the US-led global order—a position that would reflect that country’s own distinct geopolitical interests and how it differs from the West in terms of history, culture, and level of economic development. Russia inherited from the former Soviet Union close relations with many countries that the US regards as “rogue states,” including Iran, Cuba, and Venezuela. There continues to be a lot of official, public sympathy for those countries and their opposition to the US global system, even though Moscow no longer has any grand sense of anti-Western ideology or even any practical goal of mobilizing toward an “alliance” that would serve Russia’s ends.
Under the George W. Bush administration, Moscow felt itself under pressure from what it viewed as Western encroachments into the post-Soviet space, what Russians term the “near abroad.” This took the form of “colored revolutions,” or what the Western media referred to as “pro-democracy uprisings” in Georgia, Ukraine, and Kyrgyzstan, which removed corrupt but Moscow-friendly regimes and brought to power much more outspoken and active pro-Western ones. The Kremlin, rightly or wrongly, interpreted these upheavals as US-sponsored and orchestrated attempts to reengineer the political loyalties of neighboring states with which Russia has deep historical ties. Two of those new leaders, Georgia’s Mikheil Saakashvili and Ukraine’s Viktor Yushchenko, sought to put their countries on a fast track to membership in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), a prospect that Russia viewed with alarm bordering on panic.
Another Bush-era initiative that engendered deep hostility in Moscow was a plan to station strategic antimissile interceptors in neighboring Poland, with associated radars in the Czech Republic. Russian military experts argued these deployments were the beginning of a strategic process that might eventually undermine Russia’s own aging, Soviet-era nuclear deterrent, which is the main priority of Russia’s national defense.
In response to these perceived threats, Russia seemed to sometimes go out of its way to cultivate relationships with other countries that were at odds with the US, which is the subject of this story. The Russians also held war games with the Venezuelan navy in the Caribbean, resumed cold war–era nuclear bomber patrols along the North American coast, and talked about revitalizing former Soviet air bases in Cuba.
In the past year, with substantially changed foreign policy priorities brought in by President Barack Obama, Moscow’s attitude has relaxed somewhat. Obama shelved the controversial plan to station antimissile weapons in Poland, and implicitly removed from the agenda any question of inducting Ukraine and Georgia into NATO. The so-called Obama “reset” of relations between Moscow and Washington seems to be improving prospects for cooperation, even on such thorny issues as Iran, though it may be too early to draw any firm conclusions.
Faculty Evaluators:
Ronald Lopez (Sonoma State University)
Elliot D. Cohen (Indian River State College)
Mickey Huff (Diablo Valley College)
Bridgette Grillo
Krystal Alexander
Nicole Fletcher
Your e-mail address
Recipient
Text of your message:
This article was #1 on Top 25 of 2011 Project Censored; it was first published inwww.projectcensored.org on October 2, 2010.
Sources:
Chris Hedges, “The American Empire Is Bankrupt,” Truthdig, June 15, 2009.
Michael Hudson, “De-Dollarization: Dismantling America’s Financial-Military Empire: The Yekaterinburg Turning Point,” Global Research, June 13, 2009.
Fred Weir, “Iran and Russia Nip at US Global Dominance” Christian Science Monitor, June 16, 2009.
Lyubov Pronina, “Medvedev Shows Off Sample Coin of New ‘World Currency’ at G-8,” Bloomberg, July 10, 2009.
Edmund Conway, “UN Wants New Global Currency to Replace Dollar,” Telegraph (UK), September 7, 2009.
Jose Arturo Cardenas, “Latin American Leftists Tackle Dollar with New Currency,” Agence France-Presse, October 16, 2009
---
IZAKOVIC
http://www.deepspace4.com

BREAKING…Obama’s Kenyan Birth Records Discovered In British National Archives: Where Lies Go To Die!

Highlighting in paragraph about Hillary's visit is mine...

 Senate Bill To Stop NWO’s Drone Insanity In The United States: Operation Sledgehammer ~ Rand Paul

BREAKING…Obama’s Kenyan Birth Records Discovered In British National Archives: Where Lies Go To Die!

19 Jul
BREAKING…Obama’s Kenyan Birth Records Discovered In British National Archives: Where Lies Go To Die!
Evidence discovered shows British Protectorate of East Africa recorded Obama’s birth records before 1963 and sent returns of those events to Britain’s Public Records Office and the Kew branch of British National Archives.
By Dan Crosby of The Daily Pen
(Editors note: The records eluded to in this story were discovered through a May, 2012 search through BMD Registers, a BNA partner site, using the search term “Obama”. Corroborating evidence through public sources only implicates the identity of those involved but does not explicitly prove their identity in the absence of the availability of original documents.)
KEW, SURREY, Great Britain – The last place anyone would think to look for a birth record of someone claiming to be a “natural born” U.S. citizen is Great Britain. The very inclusion of the Article II eligibility mandate in the U.S. Constitution was explicitly intended by the founding fathers of America to prevent a then British-born enemy usurper from attaining the office of the U.S. presidency and thereby undermining the sovereignty of the newly formed nation.
In the absence of honor, courage and justice on the part of those serving in the U.S. Congress and Federal Judiciary, Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s Cold Case investigative group has concluded the only law enforcement analysis of the image of Obama’s alleged “Certificate of Live Birth” posted to a government website in April, 2011 and found it to be the product of criminal fraud and document forgery.
The seeming endless evidence against Obama has now taken investigators to the foreign archives of Great Britain wherein it has been discovered that vital events occurring under the jurisdiction of the British Colony in the Protectorate of East Africa prior to 1965 were recorded and held in the main office of the British Registrar in England until 1995 before being archived in the BNA.
It now appears the worst fears of the U.S. Constitution’s framers were well founded as investigators working on behalf of the ongoing investigation into the Constitutional eligibility of Barack Obama have found yet another lead in a growing mountain of evidence within the public records section of the British National Archives indicating the occurrence of at least four vital events registered to the name of Barack Obama, taking place in the British Protectorate of East Africa (Kenya) between 1953 and 1963, including the birth of two sons before 1963.
Recall, investigative journalists working for Breitbart.com have already discovered biographical information published by Barack Obama’s literary agent in which he claimed he was born in Kenya. Prior to Obama’s ensconcement to the White House, many international stories also stated that Obama was Kenyan-born as did members of Kenya’s legislative assembly. Since then information on Obama’s ties has been curtailed by government officials as the Obama administration has coincidently paid nearly $4 billion dollars for capital projects in Kenya.
Also, the presence of Obama’s mother, Ann Dunham, cannot be accounted for from February, 1961, the alleged month of her marriage to Obama, until three weeks after the birth of Obama II in August, 1961 when she allegedly applied for college courses at the University of Washington. Theories about her whereabouts have included that she participated in the Air Lift America project as an exchange student and traveled to Nairobi as one of many recent highschool graduates (see AASF Report 1959-1961).The record of birth of a second son prior to Kenyan independence is significant because biographical information about Obama’s family indicates Obama Sr. fathered only one other son prior to Obama II’s birth.
The books containing hand written line records of vital events attributed to Obama are contained in Series RG36 of the Family Records section in the Kew branch of the BNA. The hand written line records first discovered in 2009, indicate several events were registered to the name Barack Obama (appears to be handwritten and spelled “Burack” and “Biraq”) beginning in 1953 and include two births recorded in 1958 and 1960, a marriage license registration in 1954 and a birth in 1961. Barack Obama is said to have died in 1982 and had married at least once more in Kenya and had at least one more child in 1968, but no record of these were found in the BNA because, according to the Archives’ desk reference, the events occurred after Kenya achieved independence from British colonial rule in 1963.

To date, Barack Obama II is the only known alleged son of Obama Sr. born after 1960 and before the independence of Kenya became official in 1963.

A request for information from the BNA on the specification of birth information contained in the series of thousands of logs indicates that only vital events registered in Kenya’s Ministry of Health offices were recorded in the registration returns and were placed in the National Archives care before they reached 30 years old (the law was amended to 20 years after creation in 2010).
The line records do not specify the identity or names of the children, only gender. However, the line records are associated with index numbers of actual microfilm copies of certificates, licenses and registration applications filed in the archives.
According to researchers, Obama’s line records were discovered in Series RG36, reference books. Not surprisingly, when researchers specifically requested access to the relevant microfilm for the Obama birth registrations, they were told that the records were currently held under an outdated “privileged access” status, meaning researchers were denied access under Chapter 52, Sections 3 and 5 of the British Public Records Act of 1958. However, evidence shows these records were available for public access before August of 2009, the approximate date of arrival of Hillary Clinton in Great Britain during her trip to Africa that year.
http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/documents/information-management/access-to-public-records.pdf
Several sources show that Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton made a sudden visit to the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office, the British agency which oversees Public Records Archives from colonial protectorates, to speak with the Chief Executive of the Archives in early August of 2009. African news agency expressed surprise at Clintons arrival since she did not announce her intentions of stopping in Great Britain before embarking on her two week trip to Africa.
 
OBAMA’S FATHER FAILED TO INCLUDE BIRTH OF “SON” ON INS APPLICATION
CONTINUED HERE (Hat tip Capt-Dax): http://thedailypen.blogspot.com/2012/07/obamas-kenyan-birth-records-discovered.html
WATCH SHERIFF JOE’S 2ND OBAMA INVESTIGATION PRESS CONFERENCE HERE:http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2012/07/arpaio-obama-birth-record-definitely.html
WATCH SHERIFF JOE’S 1ST PRESS CONFERENCE ABOUT OBAMA’S FORGED IDENTITY DOCUMENTS HERE:http://www.art2superpac.com/joe.html
SHERIFF JOE TEA-PARTY PRESENTATION VIDEO HERE: http://www.art2superpac.com/arizonavideo.html
-ARTICLE II ELIGIBILITY FACTS HERE: http://www.art2superpac.com/issues.html
Related articles