from Land Destroyer

In an April 2012 New York Times article titled, “Terrorist Plots, Hatched by the F.B.I.,” it is revealed that many of the high-profile terror attacks foiled by the FBI, were in fact fabricated from start to finish by the FBI itself. The article states:

The United States has been narrowly saved from lethal terrorist plots in
recent years — or so it has seemed. A would-be suicide bomber was
intercepted on his way to the Capitol; a scheme to bomb synagogues and
shoot Stinger missiles at military aircraft was developed by men in
Newburgh, N.Y.; and a fanciful idea to fly explosive-laden model planes
into the Pentagon and the Capitol was hatched in Massachusetts.

But all these dramas were facilitated by the F.B.I., whose undercover
agents and informers posed as terrorists offering a dummy missile, fake
C-4 explosives, a disarmed suicide vest and rudimentary training.
Suspects naïvely played their parts until they were arrested.

The report would also reveal that a fabricated, then foiled attack in Portland in 2010, even included a van and an inert bomb parked next to a real crowd of thousands during the city’s annual Christmas tree lighting ceremony:

When an Oregon college student, Mohamed Osman Mohamud,
thought of using a car bomb to attack a festive Christmas-tree lighting
ceremony in Portland, the F.B.I. provided a van loaded with six
55-gallon drums of “inert material,” harmless blasting caps, a detonator
cord and a gallon of diesel fuel to make the van smell flammable. An
undercover F.B.I. agent even did the driving, with Mr. Mohamud in the
passenger seat. To trigger the bomb the student punched a number into a
cellphone and got no boom, only a bust.

Indeed, the only missing ingredient separating Portland from Boston, was the FBI’s decision of what to fill the 55-gallon drums with. (For more details on other FBI cases, see: FBI’s History of Handing “Terror Suspects” Live Explosives)

The NYT piece continues, describing how the FBI picks its targets:

Typically, the stings initially target suspects for pure speech —
comments to an informer outside a mosque, angry postings on Web sites,
e-mails with radicals overseas — then woo them into relationships with
informers, who are often convicted felons working in exchange for
leniency, or with F.B.I. agents posing as members of Al Qaeda or other
groups.

The article also explains how some targets “seem ambivalent, incompetent and adrift, like hapless wannabes looking
for a cause that the informer or undercover agent skillfully helps them
find.” Disturbingly, the NYT reports what appears to be the coaxing of one target toward violence they would otherwise never have considered:

“He was searching for answers within his Islamic faith,” said his
lawyer, Clinton W. Calhoun III, who has appealed his conviction. “And
this informant, I think, twisted that search in a really pretty awful
way, sort of misdirected Cromitie in his search and turned him towards
violence.”

A year after the NYT article was written, the Boston Marathon would be attacked by two explosive devices, killing three and injuring many more. The suspects, Tamerlan Tsarnaev and brother Dzhokar Tsarnaev, would be announced by the FBI a day after a bizarre press conference cancellation and a security scare at the federal courthouse where a suspect was allegedly being brought.

An explanation for the FBI’s bizarre behavior may be owed to the fact that it now turns out that at least one of the suspects in the Boston bombing had caught the attention of Russian investigators in 2011 who then contacted the FBI to investigate the matter. The FBI would indeed interview Tamerlan Tsarnaev, several family members, and conduct investigations into Tsarnaev’s background, phone conversations, and Internet activity. This was all finally disclosed on April 19, 2013 in an official statement that can be found on FBI.gov:

The two individuals believed to be responsible for the
Boston Marathon bombings on Monday have been positively identified as
Tamerlan Tsarnaev, now deceased, and Dzhokar Tsarnaev, now in custody.
These individuals are brothers and residents of Massachusetts. Tamerlan
Tsarnaev was a legal permanent resident and Dzhokar Tsarnaev is a
naturalized U.S. citizen. Charges have not yet been filed against
Dzhokar Tsarnaev and he is presumed innocent.

Tamerlan Tsarnaev, age 26, was previously designated as Suspect 1,
wearing a black hat. Dzhokar A. Tsarnaev, age 19, was designated as
Suspect 2, wearing a white hat. Both were born in Kyrgyzstan.

Once the FBI learned the identities of the two brothers today, the
FBI reviewed its records and determined that in early 2011, a foreign
government asked the FBI for information about Tamerlan Tsarnaev. The
request stated that it was based on information that he was a follower
of radical Islam and a strong believer, and that he had changed
drastically since 2010 as he prepared to leave the United States for
travel to the country’s region to join unspecified underground groups.

In response to this 2011 request, the FBI checked U.S. government
databases and other information to look for such things as derogatory
telephone communications, possible use of online sites associated with
the promotion of radical activity, associations with other persons of
interest, travel history and plans, and education history. The FBI also
interviewed Tamerlan Tsarnaev and family members. The FBI did not find
any terrorism activity, domestic or foreign, and those results were
provided to the foreign government in the summer of 2011. The FBI
requested but did not receive more specific or additional information
from the foreign government.

The FBI’s bizarre behavior grew more suspicious when CBS reported that initially the FBI denied it had any prior contact with the Tsarnaev’s. In their report, “CBS News: FBI Interviewed Tamerlan Tsarnaev 2 Years Ago,” CBS claimed:

CBS News reports although the FBI initially denied contacting Tsarnaev, the brothers’ mother said they had in an interview with Russia Today.

That interview with Russia Today, in an article titled, “‘They were set up, FBI followed them for years’- Tsarnaevs’ mother to RT,” stated of the suspects’ mother:
She would say of the FBI to Russia Today:

“They used to come [to our] home, they used to talk to me…they were telling me that he [the older, 26-y/o Tamerlan] was really an extremist leader and that they were afraid of him. They told me whatever information he is getting, he gets from these extremist sites… they were controlling him, they were controlling his every step…and now they say that this is a terrorist act! Never ever is this true, my sons are innocent!”

Additionally, the suspects’ uncle, Ruslan Tsarni, told NBC news in an article titled, “Uncle: Mentors ‘radicalized’ older Boston bombing suspect,” that:

“I strongly believe they were just puppets and executors of something of bigger scale.”“There certainly were mentors. I was shocked when I
heard his words, his phrases, when every other word he starts sticking
in words of God. I question what he’s doing for work, (and) he
claimed he would just put everything in the will of God. It was a big
concern to me. He called me ‘confused’ when I started explaining to him,
make yourself useful to yourself and to your family and maybe you’ll
have extra to share with everybody else.

“It wasn’t
devotion, it was something, as it’s called, being radicalized. Not
understanding what he is talking (about). He is just using words for the
sake of the words and not understanding the meaning of it.’’

Perhaps, these two young suspects were “looking
for a cause,” that an “informer or undercover agent skillfully helped them
find.”

Clearly now, it is confirmed by the FBI itself, in an official statement found on their website, that they did indeed contacted the suspect and his family. The FBI also claims it, “did not find any terrorism activity, domestic or foreign,”  but clearly there must have been some evidence of at least some “pure speech —
comments to an informer outside a mosque, angry postings on Web sites,
e-mails with radicals overseas.”

The FBI refuses to elaborate on the case, prompting even journalists across the mainstream media to ask important questions. Business Insider’s article, “The FBI Needs To Explain Why It Failed To Monitor Boston Bombing Suspect Despite A Clear Warning,” asks the following questions:

• Given the explicit warning, why didn’t the FBI continue to monitor Tsarnaev?
• Why didn’t the FBI follow up with the foreign government when it didn’t get the additional information it requested?
• How common is a warning from a foreign government about a specific person like this? Does the FBI get thousands of them?
• What made the FBI effectively clear Tsarnaev — and what might the FBI change  to avoid making this mistake again?
• Will the FBI conduct a full investigation into what happened?

The answer to these questions may help answer what transpired between 2011 when the FBI allegedly closed the case, and the 2013 bombings – including answering whether or not the Tsarnaev brothers were part of yet another FBI entrapment. Perhaps such suspicion may seem unwarranted, after all, despite the FBI fabricating terror attacks, they averted them before being carried out…

But at least one undercover operation, in 1993, was carried out to deadly effect. FBI agents, according to the New York Times, were indeed overseeing the bombers that detonated a device killing six and wounding many more at the World Trade Center. In their article, “Tapes Depict Proposal to Thwart Bomb Used in Trade Center Blast,” NYT reported:

Law-enforcement officials were told that terrorists were building a
bomb that was eventually used to blow up the World Trade Center, and
they planned to thwart the plotters by secretly substituting harmless
powder for the explosives, an informer said after the blast.

The
informer was to have helped the plotters build the bomb and supply the
fake powder, but the plan was called off by an F.B.I. supervisor who had
other ideas about how the informer, Emad A. Salem, should be used, the
informer said.

The account, which is given in the transcript of
hundreds of hours of tape recordings Mr. Salem secretly made of his
talks with law-enforcement agents, portrays the authorities as in a far
better position than previously known to foil the Feb. 26 bombing of New
York City’s tallest towers. The explosion left six people dead, more
than 1,000 injured and damages in excess of half a billion dollars.

Can the FBI then, be ruled out as a prime suspect or accomplice in the Boston blasts? And isn’t it monumental folly to allow the FBI to investigate a crime they may have played a central role in? Raising suspicions further was the decision made not to read the lone surviving suspect his Miranda rights. While US President Barack Obama, the Justice Department and Republican Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham claim such a disgraceful violation of American law is required for “security,” it seems more likely that it is instead needed to enhance a desperate coverup.

And if 10 years of war, torture, indefinite detention without trial, and the creation and expansion of the Department of Homeland Security, the FBI’s Joint Terror Task Force, the TSA, and other federal agencies couldn’t prevent the Boston bombings, why does the President, DOJ, and two Republican Senators believe suspending the rights of a suspect will in any way make America safer? A better question is, why do we the people continue to let them make these decisions?

Article source: http://landdestroyer.blogspot.com/2013/04/nyt-fbi-hatches-terror-plots.html

A Bakersfield father of four died this week after struggling with nearly nine police officers outside of a medical facility. Witnesses say that the thirty-three year old pled for his life.

Reports say he died early Wednesday morning after being struck by nine officers an unreported number of times. He was believed to be intoxicated.

Some witnesses evidently filmed the incident on their cellphones. However, deputies were quick to confiscate the phones.Individuals who claim they saw the event in addition to Silva’s relatives recounted a scene where officers were beating a powerless man to death.  Witnesses were outraged at video evidence being confiscated by deputies.

According to Reason Magazine:

John Tello, a criminal law attorney, is representing two witnesses who took video footage and five other witnesses to the incident. He said his clients are still shaken by what they saw.

“When I arrived to the home of one of the witnesses that had video footage, she was with her family sitting down on the couch, surrounded by three deputies,” Tello said.

Tello said the witness was not allowed to go anywhere with her phone and was being quarantined inside her home.

When Tello tried to talk to the witness in private and with the phone, one of the deputies stopped him and told him he couldn’t take the phone anywhere because it was evidence to the investigation, the attorney said…..

A search warrant wasn’t presented to either of the witnesses until after Tello arrived, he said, adding that one phone was seized before the warrant was produced.

Tello said the phone of the first witness was taken after the deputies told him he was either going to give up the phone the easy way or the hard way.

For years the word “terrorist” has been systematically insinuated into the lexicon of the American police community. Credit for this goes to an internationalist entity that controls the training curriculum for Federal police. Tens of thousands of big-city police in America have also been indoctrinated from the same sheet of music. The quickest way to an understanding of what this internationalist entity wants — and more importantly what it doesn’t want — is to get familiar with the policy papers and training doctrine recommendations regarding probable cultural sources of insipient “domestic terrorism” in the United States… offered courtesy of the Southern Poverty Law Center (S.P.L.C.).

The concern of the S.P.L.C., as well as of the state (Israel) which sends so many of its military personnel and political cadre to participate in the indoctrination/instruction of American police using S.P.L.C.-inspired ideas, is to nip any nascent, grass-roots American nationalist movement in the bud.

These elite soldiers and cadre are part of an alien political “full court press” operating within our shores. This includes vast mainstream press resources, dozens of think-tanks and “institutes,” co-opted, main-line protestant clergy as well as the best-known and most powerful political lobby in Washington.

The collective goal of this web of influence? To steer American culture toward unquestioning loyalty to the U.S. Government. To persuade the masses to deem opposition to government un-American. To becloud the issue of America’s head-long plunge toward New World Order compliance, its brutal, proxy wars on behalf of Israel and its rapid slide into third worldism, in the worst case, as processes organic to a flawed democracy but not as the result of orchestration.

The idea is to supplant any adhesion to traditional American patriotism –which enjoins us to be loyal to the nation, NOT THE STATE — with a war-state, pride-of-empire mindset well seasoned with intolerance for dissent.

The public’s political sensibilities must be anchored in the idea that those who advocate a return to authentic American nationalism are extremists.

Edward L. Bernays, the father of mass marketing, could take pride in the S.P.L.C. and the behemoth mind control network it epitomizes. All parties concerned understand well the maxim “as goes the language, so goes the culture.” And their bet is likely already well-won. For the police in America, post-911, have already attained the status of super-citizens. They have been positioned as a kind of guiding class. And, they’re already throwing around the term “terrorist” in reference to the politically non-compliant, the dissenters, the soon-to-be refusniks and, most ominously, common criminals.

So, read the scripts which the trainers of your police have been hammering-home for years. That the police are now fully politicized, that they have become the guardians of the state should surprise no one who has read the work of the S.P.L.C.’s Mark Potok.

I once had a golden opportunity (meaning that I didn’t have to get arrested in the process) to personally experience the new, Samurai mentality which I am trying to describe. It was back in 2008. At that time I made the acquaintance of an ex-federal police officer who had the habit of proudly displaying a recently-acquired D.H.S. credential which he claimed, though he had just retired as an active police officer, afforded him a reserve status with Homeland Security. In reference to this document, his oft-repeated refrain was, “It will give me authority to shoot terrorists in all fifty states.”

Need I draw a picture of the intended implication? Genuine terrorist activity, in the entire Western Hemisphere, was then and is now, somewhere between extremely rare and non-existent. Where, and under what circumstances did he imagine such a terrorist-rich environment might someday exist in the “fifty states?”

Took me about 10 seconds to get his drift: People who are already here! But people who have, as yet, held-off revealing their true feelings toward his beloved National Command Authority. Folks who, in the interest of restoring the rule of law in an emergency (or whatever excuse is handy at the time) may have to be dealt with summarily… when “rat-killin’ time” finally arrives.

Note the words of the police chief (in the article below) whose officers were fired on thirty-seven times from an AK47-wielding nut a few days ago: “He was a scumbag and a terrorist and I’m glad he’s dead.” Already the transition to putting criminals into the lexiconic bucket “terrorist” is well established. The police will be describing their killings, more and more now, as part of a quick-reaction necessitated by the demands of public safety in a high-threat environment. Domestic terrorism… born from an epidemic of wrong-headed, socially irresponsible extremism.

And most of the public, predictively programmed to swoon to the men in blue (or DHS grey), will thank them for what really boils-down to making the world safe for our politician’s management of America’s slide into third worldism, the N.W.O. and an irreversible open vein flowing $30 Billion+ to Israel every year.

If you agree with much of what I’ve said here, consider yourself vermin. And everybody on the payroll, from dog catcher to Eric Holder, will be rooting for the cops to “take out the trash.”

Read:  Creating the Stasi American

The Palm Beach, Florida police program is the first of its kind in America. The Community Partners Against Terrorism (CPAT) initiative sprang out of the half-billion dollars dropped into Urban Area Security grants by the Department of Homeland Security. CPAT’s founder Sheriff Ric Bradshaw explains the purpose of the new police hot line that solicits anonymous tips:

“We want people to call us if the guy down the street says he hates the government, hates the mayor, and he’s gonna shoot him. What does it hurt to have somebody knock on a door and ask, ‘Hey, is everything OK?’”

A group of influential pastors and ministers recently met with Vice President Joe Biden at the White House where the Vice President called on them to use their influence to help pass President Barack Obama’s new gun control measures. Of course, these measures include the outlawing of all semi-automatic rifles, outlawing high-capacity magazines, and establishing a government-mandated national gun registration policy, which is subtly identified as “Universal Background Checks.” These measures were recently defeated in the US Senate, so now the White House is calling on the clergy to help sell this gun grab to America’s churches.

Here is how Breitbart.com covers the story: “Vice President Joe Biden wants pastors, rabbis and nuns to tell their flocks that enacting gun control is the moral thing to do. But another vote may have to wait until Congress wraps up work on an immigration overhaul.

“Biden met for two-and-a-half hours Monday with more than a dozen leaders from various faith communities –Christian, Jewish, Muslim and Sikh, to name a few. Both Biden and the faith leaders encouraged each other not to give up on what has been an arduous and thus far fruitless effort by Biden and President Barack Obama to pass new gun laws in the wake of December’s schoolhouse shooting in Connecticut.

“Around a large, circular table in a conference room on the White House grounds, Biden waxed optimistic about prospects for passing a bill, according to four participants who spoke to The Associated Press after the meeting. Biden’s chief of staff, Bruce Reed, joined the group, as did a handful of Obama aides who work on faith-based outreach. The meeting closed with a meditation and a prayer for action.”

The report continued saying, “Monday’s session reflects an attempt to broaden the coalition calling for new gun laws to include a wide array of religious groups–including evangelicals and conservative faith communities.”

The report concluded by saying, “A spokeswoman for Biden declined to comment on the meeting. But Rabbi Julie Schonfeld, executive vice president of the Rabbinical Assembly, said a diverse spectrum of denominations and religious orders were represented. She said they included evangelical leaders Richard Cizik and Franklin Graham, the son of evangelist Billy Graham, as well as Sister Marge Clark of Network, a Catholic group.”

See the report here:

Biden Asks Clergy To Make Moral Argument On Guns

There is nothing new about the White House attempting to use America’s pastors to promote gun control. Both the G.W. Bush and Barack Obama administrations have had the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) conduct pastor training programs whereby pastors are instructed to use their influence to convince citizens to completely surrender any and all rights and liberties to the federal government in the event of a national emergency or crisis. Submission to tyrannical actions such as forced relocation and gun confiscation is taught in these training programs.

See this report:

Secret FEMA Plan To Use Pastors As Pacifiers In Preparation For Martial Law

And here is a local Louisiana television news report on the FEMA “Clergy Response Teams”:

FEMA Training Pastors For Emergency Response

Obviously, the Obama administration’s effort to enact more gun control has already enjoyed the support of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Richard Land (who is a member of the CFR) and evangelist Franklin Graham. It is noteworthy that Mr. Graham was in attendance at Vice President Biden’s private meeting. President Obama must consider Franklin Graham a key ally in his quest to enact these new gun control measures.

Unfortunately, a sizable percentage of America’s pulpits are occupied by men and women who are either extreme liberal and socialist activists or by conservatives who are sheepishly passive and compliant, and who would, therefore, say or do nothing to interfere with or resist any tyrannical efforts by the federal government. There are many other pastors who truly love freedom and would naturally resist any effort of government to usurp God-given liberties, but they have been indoctrinated in the fallacious “obey-the-government-no-matter-what” interpretation of Romans 13. It is more than interesting that FEMA is instructing pastors to teach this perversion of Romans 13 to their congregations. Plus, I seem to recall that this is exactly what Hitler’s Nazi government instructed the pastors of Germany to also do. But this is just a coincidence, right?

This is the biggest difference between Obama’s gun control measures and the efforts of old King George III when he attempted to seize the weapons of the colonists that were stored in Concord, Massachusetts. When that attempt occurred in 1775, the pulpits of Colonial America were mostly unified in renouncing this act of tyranny and in boldly proclaiming the Biblical principles of lawful self-defense to their congregations. But when Barack Obama and Senator Dianne Feinstein tried to enact laws in 2013 that were equally egregious to those of old King George, the silence of America’s pulpits was deafening. Yes, millions of liberty-loving Americans rose to the challenge and helped beat back Obama’s gun grab, but this was done with little or no help from America’s pastors. This fact was not lost to the White House, and now the effort is underway to convince America’s pastors and ministers to openly support Obama’s gun grab.

For the sake of freedom and liberty in this country, it is critical that America’s pastors start sounding forth the clarion call. It is critical that they become “watchmen on the wall.” It is critical that they join the fight to preserve, protect, and defend those Natural rights that are safeguarded in the US Constitution–including the right of the people to keep and bear arms. PASTORS MUST BE ENGAGED.

As I said earlier, there are many pastors and Christians who only know what they have been taught. And what they have been taught is that the Bible does not support the right to resist government, that the right to keep and bear arms is not sacred, and that Christians are supposed to be pacifistic in their approach to issues that relate to the Second Amendment. They are taught this erroneous doctrine in Bible colleges and universities and seminaries all over America–regardless of denomination.

It is for this reason that my constitutional attorney son, Tim, and I wrote a brand new book entitled, “To Keep or Not To Keep: Why Christians Should Not Give Up Their Guns.” This book looks at the right to keep and bear arms strictly from a Biblical perspective. Books outlining the constitutional and historical principles relating to the Second Amendment are plentiful. But I know of NO BOOK written within the last one-hundred years that deals with this subject solely from a Scriptural perspective. That is exactly what our new book does.

Here are some of the questions we answer in our new book:

*Is the right to keep and bear arms a divine right?

*Should Christians surrender their firearms if the law requires them to do so?

*Does the New Testament require Christians to always be non-violent?

*Did the fact that Jesus and the apostles not rise up with arms against tyrannical government mean that Christians today should never do so?

*Were America’s Founding Fathers right or wrong when they rebelled with arms against the British Crown?

These are the questions that Christians everywhere are rightly asking. These are the questions that America’s pastors must be addressing from their pulpits. And these are the questions that Tim and I show the Biblical answers to in our new book.

To order this brand new book, “To Keep or Not To Keep: Why Christians Should Not Give Up Their Guns,” go to:

Keep Your Arms

I firmly believe that if enough pastors and Christians would read and digest this book, it would revolutionize the way churches respond to efforts such as Obama’s gun grab. It might even be an instrument that could help preserve liberty in our nation for the next fifty years or more.

We MUST get this book into the hands of as many people as possible. I’m asking readers to help me get the word out about this new book. If everyone reading this column would purchase two of these books, one for themselves and one for a friend, the results could be mind-boggling. I truly believe this book has the potential to change the course of America. Why? Because the pulpits and churches have the potential to change the course of America. And this book has the potential to provide the instruction and inspiration necessary to awaken and energize America’s pastors and churches. Perhaps your pastor or Christian school administrator would even be willing to sell multiple copies of this book in their church or school. There are discount prices for bulk orders. Why not ask him or her?

Again, to purchase this brand new book, “To Keep or Not To Keep: Why Christians Should Not Give Up Their Guns,” go to:

Keep Your Arms

President Obama and Vice President Biden are trying to enlist pastors and ministers in their efforts to disarm the American people. I’m asking pastors and ministers and Christians all over America to join “the holy cause of liberty.” (Patrick Henry) And make no mistake about it: without the freedom to keep and bear arms, there is no freedom. And, yes, as our new book shows, that is a Biblical principle.

P.S. Where does your pastor stand? We have asked pastors all over America to be courageous enough to publicly support the right to keep and bear arms from their pulpits. We have asked these men and women to also be willing to add their names to our list of Second Amendment Pastors so freedom-minded people in their cities can see that there are pro-freedom pastors nearby. To see if there is a Second Amendment pastor near you or, as a pastor, to sign up as a Second Amendment pastor, go here:

Second Amendment Pastors

An increasing number of people have complained about governments and central banks in recent years, even using the word “tyranny” to describe them. They are, of course, called names in the establishment press: conspiracy theorists, mainly.

Calling someone a name, however, does not erase their argument (at least not among rational people) and both the governments and the big banks stand accused.

Up till now, however, these accusations were never accepted by the general public. The average guy really didn’t want to hear about the evils of government money. After all, that was the only thing he had ever used to buy food, clothes, gasoline, cars, and so on. He didn’t want to acknowledge the accusations because he feared what might happen to him without his usual money.

Now, however, we have a brand new currency (called Bitcoin) available to us: something radically different. This gives us a new way to directly address the subject of monetary tyranny, providing a clear test for the governments and money masters of the world:

If they are truly NOT tyrannical, they will leave this new currency alone.

If they ARE tyrannical, they will attack the new currency because it eats into their scam.

In other words, Bitcoin is a test for “the powers that be.” The way they deal with this new method of exchange will reveal their true nature.

If they ignore Bitcoin, they refute the charges of tyranny. If they attack it, they verify those charges.

After all, what honest reason could there be to attack an inherently peaceful tool for transferring value?

Prospective Reasons

Reasons to attack Bitcoin have recently appeared in the “public square.” Here are the three most popular ones, each followed with some analysis:

1. It can be used for money laundering.

Of course it can be used for money laundering — ANY currency can be used for money laundering. Currencies are neutral — that is their purpose! Currencies are valuable precisely because they can be exchanged for anything else — that’s why we use them!

Moreover, dollars and Euros and Pounds are used for money laundering every day. Consider the recent money laundering crimes of HSBC and Wachovia/Wells Fargo. These banks laundered hundreds of billions of dollars for violent drug cartels. And consider that this amount of laundered money is several hundred times the value of every Bitcoin in existence.

No one from either bank went to jail. Neither bank was shut down. Neither bank suffered more than a minor fine. So, how much of a concern can money laundering really be to governments and banks? Clearly not much.

But, since they accuse Bitcoin of being used for bad things, let’s be clear about the situation:

– Every mafioso uses government money.

– Every drug smuggler uses government money.

– Every terrorist uses government money.

– Every pornographer uses government money.

– Every criminal of every type uses government money.

They also use the telephone system and the mail and banks and a wide variety of government services. But government money is good and Bitcoin is bad?

The argument fails.

2. It could destabilize the current system.

A tiny, new currency is a threat to the long-established king of the hill? Comparing Bitcoin to dollars, Euros and Yen is like comparing an ant to a dinosaur. This is a threat?

Please understand also that no one is forcing anyone to use Bitcoin. If you don’t think it’s a great idea, you don’t have to use it. If its price movements (relative to dollars) bother you, you don’t have to use it. How is that destabilizing to the current system? It is entirely separate.

And what of the current system? It was falling apart on its own before the Bitcoin program was ever written. And I could go on at length on the insane levels of government debt, hundreds of trillions in derivatives, rehypothecation, and innocent people being forced to bail-out failed banks.

The current system has massive problems, but none of them can be blamed on Bitcoin.

This argument fails also.

3. Bitcoin provides no customer protection.

Well, no, it doesn’t. Bitcoin is a currency, not a legal system.

What is implied by this argument is that the government banking system does protect customers. That is an outright lie. People are ripped-off via the banking system every day. And more than that, consider what happened just a month ago in Cyprus: Thousands of innocent people were ripped-off BY the banking system — purposely — all at once and without recourse. This argument is, really, an insult to one’s intelligence.

And I should add something else: If Bitcoin is used properly, the crime of identity theft (a big problem with government money) vanishes — there is no identity available to be stolen.

So, again, the argument fails. Only those people who believe anything a government says will buy it.

In the End

In the end, it is said, we judge ourselves. Bitcoin has now put governments and banks in the position of judging themselves. They will write their own verdicts.

It should be interesting to watch.

[Editor's Note: Paul Rosenberg is the "outside the Matrix" author of FreemansPerspective.com, a collection of insights on topics ranging from Internet privacy and economic freedom, to alternative currencies. Join our free e-letter list to receive other articles like this one... and immediately get a report that explains in a unique way how the US Government got into the mess it's in, the dangers that creates for us, and how to protect ourselves from it.]

One definition given for insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results; it might also be a definition of stupidity. Let’s look at some cities where large percentages of black Americans live under poor conditions.

Experiencing a violent crime rate of 2,137 per 100,000 of the population, Detroit is the nation’s most dangerous city. Rounding out Forbes magazine’s 2012 list of the 10 most dangerous cities are St Louis; Oakland, Calif.; Memphis, Tenn.; Birmingham, Ala.; Atlanta; Baltimore; Stockton, Calif.; Cleveland; and Buffalo, N.Y. The most common characteristic of these predominantly black cities is that for decades, all of them have been run by Democratic and presumably liberal administrations. Some cities – such as Detroit, Buffalo, Newark, N.J., and Philadelphia – haven’t elected a Republican mayor for more than a half-century. What’s more is that in most of these cities, blacks have been mayors, chiefs of police, school superintendents and principals and have dominated city councils.

You might ask, “What’s the point, Williams?” Let’s be clear about it. I’m not stating that there’s a causal relationship between crime, poverty and squalor on the one hand and, on the other, Democratic and black political control over a city. Nor am I saying that blacks ought to vote Republican. What I am saying is that if one is strategizing on how to improve the lives of the poorest black people, he wants to leave off his to-do list election of Democrats and black politicians. Also to be left off the to-do list is a civil rights agenda. Racial discrimination has little to do with major problems confronting black people.

Today 72 percent of black babies are born out of wedlock. Being born and finding out that your mother is 17 years old, that your grandmother is 35 and that you don’t know who or where your father is is not a good start on life. In fact, it’s a near guarantee for school dropout, poverty and crime, but such a start in life has nothing to do with racial discrimination.

Law-abiding poor black people suffer the nation’s highest rates of criminal victimization from assaults and homicide. More than 50 percent of homicide victims are black. Would anyone claim that this victimization is caused by racist groups preying on the black community? In addition to victimization, the level of lawlessness in many black communities has the full effect of a law banning economic growth. That’s because the thugs are equal-opportunity thugs who will rip off a black-owned business just as they’d rip off a white-owned business.

Black education is a disaster, but who runs the violent, disruptive big-city schools, where education is all but impossible? For the most part, it’s not white people. Go to a city such as Detroit and you’ll find that blacks have been superintendents, principals and most of the teachers for years. Most black high-school students, in Detroit and other cities, can’t read, write and compute as well as sixth-, seventh- and eighth-grade white students, but is it because of racism? What the elite teach is not only futile but counterproductive. For example, speaking standard English in an English-speaking country is critical for self-improvement. But that’s not the lesson from the nation’s multiculturalists, who call for the celebration of native languages and dialects. Sloppy-minded academics and assorted hustlers have taught that poor English, gangsta rap, men wearing pigtails and thug behavior should not be criticized but become a part of the celebration of diversity.

Black people could benefit from an honest examination of the bill of goods they’ve been sold. Such an examination would not come from black politicians, civil rights leaders or the black and white liberal elite. Those people have benefited politically and financially from keeping black Americans in a constant state of grievance based on alleged racial discrimination. The long-term solution for the problems that many black Americans face begins with an absolute rejection of the self-serving agenda of hustlers and poverty pimps.

The US has announced that it will provide militants in Syria, now openly admitted to being Al Qaeda terrorists, with $123 million in military aid – while thousands of cancer patients at home are being turned away from clinics because of budget cuts. Compounding the the criminal negligence of telling sick people to seek help elsewhere, is the fact that the military aid the US is providing terrorists in Syria will be used to perpetuate an already 2 year long, sectarian-driven humanitarian disaster.

RT recently reported in their article, “US to give $123 million military aid package to Syrian rebels,” that:

The US$123 million defense aid package, announced by Kerry at
the meeting in the Turkish capital on Sunday, includes body armor,
armored vehicles, advanced communication equipment and night vision
goggles.

In an April 3, 2013 Washington Post article titled, “Cancer clinics are turning away thousands of Medicare patients. Blame the sequester,” it was reported:

Cancer clinics across the country have begun turning away thousands of Medicare patients, blaming the sequester budget cuts.Oncologists say the reduced funding, which took effect for Medicare
on April 1, makes it impossible to administer expensive chemotherapy
drugs while staying afloat financially.

When one considers that the conflict in Syria was premeditated by the US, Saudi Arabia, and Israel, as early as 2007, simply to overthrow the Syrian government and weaken neighboring Iran, the mind-numbing criminality of America’s current foreign and domestic policy becomes even more obscene.

It was reported by Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh in his 2007 New Yorker article, “The Redirection: Is the Administration’s new policy benefiting our enemies in the war on terrorism?” that:

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

Now clearly, while the West attempts to feign ignorance over the inception and rapid expansion of Al Qaeda in Syria, these 2007 plans are coming into fruition. It was revealed by the London Telegraph and the Washington Post that even “non-lethal” aid provided by the United States, including flour, was being used as a political weapon by Al Qaeda’s al-Nusra front in Syria to win over support in territory it invades and occupies.

When pursing a destructive war of geopolitical hegemony abroad takes precedence over the health and well being of a nation’s citizens at home, the government taking such a posture has lost all legitimacy. The people of America will continue to watch their nation rot out from beneath them as long as they continue investing their money, time, energy, and attention into an establishment clearly divorced from the interests of the vast majority. Instead, the special interests exploiting America should be identified, condemned, boycotted permanently, and replaced by local alternatives – thus stealing from beneath them both their source of power, and their capacity to continue forward.

Article source: http://landdestroyer.blogspot.com/2013/04/us-turns-away-1000s-of-cancer-patients.html