Breaking News!!!

Source: http://www.thelibertybeacon.com/2015/10/26/breaking-news/
FINANCIAL » Breaking News!!!

Posted by:

Published October 26, 2015, filed under FINANCIAL, WORLD

City-460

by TLB Contributor: Paul James

As I have said repeatedly… the US (note US is foreign to u.s. of A) Legal System foisted on Americans is a CRIMINAL enterprise ran by the BAR which is a Franchise of the Corporation of London ( an enclave of the Vatican) – the system forgot to tell you ….. so that it could enslave you under a corrupt legal and monetary system!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Breaking News!!!

by David Robinson

An INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL OBLIGATION LIEN (INDICTMENT) has been filed against the AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION (A.B.A.), the INTERNATIONAL BAR ASSOCIATION (I.B.A.), and the UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE (D.O.J.), by a multitude of Lien Claimants, for violations of 15 USC 1 & 2, for a total monetary penalty of SIX-HUNDRED MILLION ($600,000,000.) US GOLD DOLLARS EACH, alleging that, since “fraud vitiates all contracts”, ALL commercial contracts, including, but NOT limited to, ALL unlawful sentences & incarcerations of political prisoners (i.e.; imprisoned I.R.S. Lien Debtors, non-criminal offenders), wherein, such commercial contracts were all conceived in fraud, and lacking any moral & ethical character are in direct conflict with Natural Law & Commercial Law, and thus, every A.B.A “contract” since 1882, whether verbal, or written, including, but not limited to all Judicial Oath’s of Office, falsely sworn to, and fraudulently securitized, monetized, and commercialized, are Null & Void, ab initio.

They have been given NINETY (90) DAYS in which to answer the ALLEGATIONS against them. Failure to do so will result in an immediate “Asset Forfeiture & Seizure” of “Accounts Payable” of TWO-HUNDRED-SEVENTY-NINE TRILLION ($279,000,000,000,000.) US GOLD DOLLARS currently held by the A.B.A. and the I.B.A. — and the Secured Parties’ Right to take possession after default.

PROOF OF ALLEGATIONS:

1. The “PROOF OF ALLEGATIONS” lies directly at the feet of the individual Officers & Crew of the A.B.A., the I.B.A., and the D.O.J., i.e.; their Administrators, Executives, Officers, Directors, Employees, Agents, and Contractors, and with their honor, willingness, and their ability, to respond, protest, argue, or rebut the allegations made, herein, point-by-point, and article-by-article, under an Affidavit of Truth, under sworn Oath, and under the Penalty of Perjury.
2. It is anticipated & expected, that these individual members & contractors of the A.B.A., the I.B.A., and the D.O.J., rather than admit to their crimes against humanity, in-writing, will choose to go silent, or simply invoke the Fifth Amendment of the US Constitution, which, again, is NOT open to ANY A.B.A., I.B.A., or D.O.J. member, agent, contractor, or employee.
3. Their acquiescence, or silence, will then, under the weight of Commercial Law & Natural Law, result in their waiving all of their corporate, public, private, and individual rights & immunities, as per 28 USC #455, and they will, also, be attesting 1) to their acceptance & agreement to all allegations made, 2) to accept all fines, fees, penalties & punishments they are deserving of, and entitled to, under Common Law, the Law of Merchants, International Law, Commercial Law, Natural Law, and 3) to have violated their very own corporate laws & selfengineered codifications, which are grounds for the immediate dissolution of their corporate charters.

LEDGERING AND TRUE BILL:

1. The ledger for this “TRUE BILL” is based on the Truth, the whole Truth, nothing but the Truth, and upon the MONETARY FACE VALUE of TWO HUNDRED SEVENTY-NINE TRILLION ($279,000,000,000,000.) US GOLD DOLLARS retrievable from stolen & pirated properties & assets, pursuant 12 USC #411, believed to be of record, and all properties & assets suspected of being hidden in privatized off shore properties & accounts by various individuals & members the AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION, and the INTERNATIONAL BAR ASSOCIATION.
2. These stolen & pirated “assets” and “properties” will be confirmed & verified by a People’s open, complete & independent audit of the Federal Reserve Bank, and an audit of the International Monetary Fund (IMF).
3. This “TRUE BILL” is, also, set against the MAXIMUM PUBLIC HAZARD BONDS/INSURANCES held by the A.B.A.‘s, and the I.B.A.’s Bonding Companies, whether “in-house,” or “independent,” for all of these Entities, Agents, and Individuals, including, but NOT limited to, the individual Lien Debtors listed above.
4. As a Commercial Instrument, this “TRUE BILL” has an S.E.C. Tracer Number of #2640220, which is the Reception No.# assigned by the Mesa County Colorado Deputy Clerk & Recorder, Brandy Emow, for the filing of the fraudulent, fictitious, and fabricated Oath of Office signed by Colorado’s 21st Judicial District Crown Administrative Clerks, Craig P. Henderson, and David A. Bottger, and witnessed by Sandra Casselberry, the Judicial Administrator for Mesa County, Colorado.
5. This S.E.C. Tracer Number of #2640220 is a “commercial securities tag,” and is but a single Exhibit, out of thousands, of the prima facie evidence of the A.B.A.‘s conspiracy to commit sedition, piracy, and commercial fraud, against the Lien Claimants, and against the American people, wherein, any such Oath “prescribed, given, taken,” commercially securitized & monetized, was, and is, a “solemn mockery,” and “equally a crime,” according to the Crown’s very own Supreme Court ruling by US Supreme Court Chief Justice, John Marshal, in 1803.
6. This S.E.C. Tracer Number of #2640220, as related to this Commercial Obligation Lien, may be used as form of identification for any & all “Witnesses,” “Crime Victims,” and/or “injured parties,” when asked for identification by any A.B.A., I.B.A., or D.O.J. contractor, or revenue/tax collector (“Pulbicanus”), (ie; I.R.S. Agent, H.L.S. Agent, F.B.I. Agent, C.I.A. Agent, Sheriff, Sheriff Deputy, Police Officer, etc.).
7. All such “Crown Contractors” are, under the terms & conditions of this International Commercial Obligation Lien/Agricultural Lien/Writ of Injunction & Restraint/Cease & Desist Order, prohibited from engaging with, detaining, arresting, incarcerating, harrassing, coercing, or intimidating, any “Witness,” “Crime Victim,” a.k.a. “any Living Being,” or citing same under any revenue-bearing statute, code, rule, ordinance, or any other “color of law” infraction, providing the Living Being has NOT harmed or injured another Living Being. [Corporations CANNOT be injured! Only Living Beings can be injured!] Without an “injury,” there can be NO crime, and NOWHERE can these revenue-bearing statutes adhere, and no “false presumptions of a crime” shall be made, authorized, or enforced!
8. Any encroachments, or violations, upon the terms & conditions stated above by any “Crown Officer,” “Crown Agent,” or “Crown Contractor,” will result in additional 15 USC penalties being levied upon the corporate, personal, and private properties & assets of these individual “Officers,” “Agents,” or “Contractors,” while operating privately, or in their “corporate capacities.”
9. This S.E.C. Tracer Number of #2640220, however, and wherever, presented, will serve as the People’s Rescission of Consent, and as fair, proper, and lawful notice to CEASE & DESIST with any & all criminal aggressions, trespasses, and transgressions, while operating on the Land, and/or under the ‘presumed & alleged’ jurisdiction, power, or authority of the Military/Admiralty Flag of the Crown Templar.

SURETY & CERTIFICATION:

The Sureties & Certifications of, and for, any & all Corporate, Public, Personal, or Private Accounts, Bonds, Securities, Profits, Procedes, Fixtures, Chattels, and Assets owned/managed by ANY individual operating within the jurisdiction, or control, of the A.B.A., the I.B.A., the D.O.J., or their, “in-house,” Bonding Companies, under the indirect, or direct control of the A.B.A., or the I.B.A., their Nation/State franchises, Inns of the Court, The Federal Reserve Banking System, or The International Monetary Fund (IMF) for these Entities, Agents and Individuals, are all considered forfeitable assets, and as “debt obligations” to the Lien Claimants, their assigns, and/or their heirs. As such, the Lien Debtors are lawfully responsible for producing, upon this commercial demand, these Sureties, Accounts, Financial Statements, and all Certificates of Liability & Indenture.

ENFORCEMENT:

1. The Affiants & Lien Claimants, without prejudice, and Reserving All Rights, declares this Commercial Obligation Lien to be self-effecting, self-evident, and self-enforcing, noting that the US Marshal Service, is now lawfully restored to the People’s Executive Branch of the Continental united States of America, and they are no longer contractually obligated to the A.B.A.’s subsidiary corporation of the Department of Justice,
both of which, are, hereby, dissolved for by the People for cause, and by necessity.
2. The US Marshal Service, a Constitutional Law Enforcement Agency, and NO LONGER a “Legal Enforcement Agency,” in the State of Illinois, and elsewhere throughout the 50 States, Washington, D.C., and their 94 government offices, will be tasked & charged with executing the seizing, freezing, and recovery of all the A.B.A.’s, and the I.B.A.’s corporate, public, personal, and private properties, found upon the Land, at sea, or found to be held by any & all individuals operating under the A.B.A., or the I.B.A., until such time, as it is determined that the full face amount of this Commercial Obligation Lien can be satisfied, and that all other Claims for Remedy made, herein, are unconditionally satisfied in full.
3. The US Marshals, having been given the preponderance of evidence, and probable causes stated, herein, that crimes have been committed, and that, crimes are being committed, shall under their own authority, jurisdiction, and powers, as dejure Marshals & Sheriffs, commence, IMMEDIATELY, with serving Notice of this Writ of Injunction & Restraint/Cease & Desist, without the need of a court order, or warrant, as is their privilege, duty, and obligation, under Law.
4. On the NINETY-FIRST (91st) DAY after receipt of this Lien, the US Marshals & Interpol, are to commence, at once, with the freezing, forfeiture, and seizing, of all corporate, personal, public, private, and individual properties, accounts, and assets, known to be in the possession of, or under control of, the A.B.A., I.B.A., D.O.J., and/or any & all of their corporate contractors, however related.
5. Fair compensation shall be made for the anticipated expenses & services rendered by these agents, and for their abiding by their own Oaths of Office (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/563). The US Marshal Service & Interpol will receive TWENTY(20%) of the recovered assets, and these funds will be divided equally. A Promissory Note shall be tendered to the dejure United States Treasury, and earmarked to the US Marsha Service & Interpol in this amount. The full face amount of the Promissory Note will be made payable to the US Marshal Service & Interpol immediately upon the successful recovery, reclamation, and return, of the Lien Claimant’s “Accounts Receivables.”
6. Should it ever be miscontrued, or misrepresented, that this Promissory Note, and/or payments made to the US Marshal Service & Interpol, is some form of bribery, the Lien Claimants shall argue & deny same, and declare these funds lawful & appropriate compensation for the tasks & expenses the US Marshals & Interpol are tasked & charged with. These funds constitute stolen & pirated properties & assets of the American people, and these compensations are to be considered “bounties,” “prizes,” and “rewards” for honest service by the people’s law enforcement agencies & agents.

AFFIDAVIT OF COMMERCIAL LIEN-ABA EXECUTIVES

About David Robinson

David Robinson is a journalist and author living in the mid-coast area of Maine. He served as a Grand Juror, seated under Summons, on the Cumberland County Maine Grand Jury for the first four months of 2014. For his other publications see – http://tinyurl.com/ctj3zsx – He can be e-mailed at drobin88@comcast.net  View all posts by David Robinson        

Read featured article here

TLB recommends you visit Maine Republic Email Alert for more great/pertinent articles.

Advertenties

Joe Martino The Secrets of Human Aura & Intentions

Published on 16 May 2014

Can people can change the world simply by using their own energy? Do we really have the power to change the world?

These are the intriguing questions we will be exploring with Joe Martino. In 2009 Joe began a personal journey of both exploring and understanding his own consciousness. On this path of self-discovery, Collective Evolution (CE) was born — an online community for people who want to change the world; for people who are looking for something beyond everyday life.

Joe has always felt inspired to help bring change to the world in positive ways and has done so through Collective Evolution. He has created 3 feature documentaries and one film documentary through Collective Evolution and is currently working on creating an off-grid sustainable community.

The “Aggressive” Dogs of Sarajevo

IN MEMORY OF VUČKO

GEDSC DIGITAL CAMERAJournalist and animal activist Jelena Paunovic walked the streets of Sarajevo to film the so-called ‘aggressive’ stray dogs of the city. She has taken photographs and a video of her findings… One of the photographs is above. Here is the video she took:

Please read Jelena’s post on her blog, Journalists for Animals:  Sarajevo: Are abandoned dogs truly dangerous?

I too wandered through Sarajevo recently, and not a single stray I came across was aggressive in any way. Here is just one of many:

P1020748P1020750

Petitions:
BOSNIA! IMPLEMENT HUMANE STRAY-DOG AND CAT POPULATION CONTROL AND TREATMENT
Stop massive killing of dogs in Sarajevo
Petition to save Bosnia’s stray dogs! Please sign!
Also see the petitions on the Petitions page.

Related articles in this blog:
The Campaign Begins With a Slaughter: You will kill the dogs, but what will you do with the beasts?
Stray Dogs of Sarajevo to be Killed in Election Ploy
Stop…

View original post 404 woorden meer

Putin is Defeating More than ISIS in Syria

NWO's "genie out of the bottle"

Source: http://journal-neo.org/2015/10/15/putin-is-defeating-more-than-isis-in-syria/

15.10.2015 Author: F. William Engdahl

53167566Russia and its President, Vladimir Putin, a little more than a year ago, in July 2014 were the focus of attention in Europe and North America, accused, without a shred of forensic evidence, of shooting down an unarmed civilian Malaysian airliner over eastern Ukraine. The Russians were deemed out to restore the Soviet Union with their agreement to the popular referendum of Crimean citizens to annex into the Russian Federation and not Ukraine. Western sanctions were being thrown at Russia by both Washington and the EU. People spoke of a new Cold War. Today the picture is changing, and profoundly. It is Washington that is on the defensive, exposed for the criminal actions it has been doing in Syria and across the Middle East, including creating the recent asylum crisis in Germany and large parts of the EU.

As a student of international…

View original post 2.212 woorden meer

Rumpelstiltskin (1987)

Published on 21 May 2014

The Cannon Movie Company made a collection of fairy tale musicals in the mid to late 80’s. These were mid-budget productions with C or D-list actors and this one is no exception.

Oh and these movies were bad. I mean really bad. But these are one of those ‘so bad they’re good’ type films.

I’m not uploading this because this is good, no. It’s one of these movies you have to see to believe and I thought I’d upload it in full so you don’t have to go to various parts. So you’re welcome for the convenience

PLOT: It’s your basic ‘Rumpelstiltskin’ story to a tee. For those who don’t know the fairy tale: the miller brags about his daughter being able to spin straw into gold (spoiler- she can’t) and word gets around to the greedy king. The king brings her to his castle, locks her in large rooms with mountains of straw and tells her to spin it into gold. If she succeeds after 3 nights, she’ll marry the prince [in some versions she marries the king, but I prefer prince myself] or she’ll die (kinda harsh, but okay). This magical midget man- played by Billy Barty in the movie- offers to spin the straw for her in exchange for her most prized possessions. When she doesn’t have anything the third time he appears, he makes her promise to surrender her first born child- which she agrees. The miller’s daughter and the prince marry, she has a kid, the little man comes to claim his reward, but the now princess begs for a chance to keep her baby. So, being a decent guy, the dwarf gives her 3 days to guess his name, or else the baby is his. That’s your basic plot with the obvious happy ending.

And no, Disney has not adapted this into a movie. Neither has Don Bluth, DreamWorks, Warner Brothers animation, etc. If you wanna see other versions of this story you can check out the Faerie Tale Theatre version with Shelley Duvall and Hervé Villechaize/ Tattoo from Fantasy Island, the HBO ‘Happily Ever After: Fairy Tales for Every Child’ one with Denzel Washington and Robert Townsend, or the animated Timeless Tales from Hallmark Version that’s probably uploaded on this site.

Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use

Vladimir Putin: The New World Order Worships Satan

Source: http://tapnewswire.com/2015/10/vladimir-putin-the-new-world-order-worships-satan/

By Jonas E. Alexis

Kevin Barrett: “It is worth noting that Russia and Iran – the two nations most successfully resisting NWO regime change – are doing so in the name of God…. Putin’s reference to Satanism was a pointed rebuke to the New World Order elites, who – though they push militant secularism on the societies they are trying to undermine – are closet Satanists.”

"So, you want to worship Satan? By all means, but leave Russia out of it."

“So, you want to worship Satan? By all means, but leave Russia out of it. Rest assured that I will be your worst nightmare. You can quote me on that.”

During the Cold War, the United States and much of the West argued that the Soviet Union was a “godless nation.”[1] Last year, Vladimir Putin took that pendulum, swung it on the other direction, and landed it on the Zionist regime. As Patrick Buchanan put it then, “In the new war of beliefs, Putin is saying, it is Russia that is on God’s side. The West is Gomorrah.”[2] Putin said:

“Many Euro-Atlantic countries have moved away from their roots, including Christian values. Policies are being pursued that place on the same level a multi-child family and a same-sex partnership, a faith in God and a belief in Satan. This is the path to degradation.”[3]

If you think that Putin is just pulling your leg here, then get this:

The Washington Times reported then:

“In his state of the nation address, Mr. Putin also portrayed Russia as a staunch defender of ‘traditional values’ against what he depicted as the morally bankrupt West. Social and religious conservatism, the former KGB officer insisted, is the only way to prevent the world from slipping into ‘chaotic darkness.’

“As part of this defense of ‘Christian values,’ Russia has adopted a law banning “homosexual propaganda” and another that makes it a criminal offense to ‘insult’ the religious sensibilities of believers…

“Although Mr. Putin has never made a secret of what he says is his deep Christian faith, his first decade in power was largely free of overtly religious rhetoric. Little or no attempt was made to impose a set of values on Russians or lecture to the West on morals.”[4]

Certainly Putin put the moral equation back on the table. Kevin Barrett declared that Putin here was trying to “put the fear of God in the New World Order.” Barrett moved on to make the forceful argument that much of the Zionist establishment in the West is afraid of Putin because the establishment leaves in fear. “Russian President Putin is resisting,” said Barrett. “That is why the Western propaganda machine is calling him names.” Barrett continued to argue cogently:

“It is worth noting that Russia and Iran – the two nations most successfully resisting NWO regime change – are doing so in the name of God…. Putin’s reference to Satanism was a pointed rebuke to the New World Order elites, who – though they push militant secularism on the societies they are trying to undermine – are closet Satanists.

“Anyone who doubts this should run the name ‘Lt. Col. Michael Aquino’ through a search engine. Aquino, an avowed Satanist and credibly-accused mass child abuser, was rewarded for his crimes against children with an appointment as Chief of Psychological Warfare for the US military…

“The shock troops of the NWO’s war against religion and tradition (and Russia and Iran) are the neoconservatives. Operation Gladio terrorist Michael Ledeen explains:

“‘Creative destruction is our middle name, both within our society and abroad. We tear down the old order every day, from business to science, literature, art, architecture, and cinema to politics and the law. Our enemies have always hated this whirlwind of energy and creativity which menaces their traditions (whatever they may be) and shames them for their inability to keep pace … We must destroy them to advance our historic mission.’

“Putin is stopping New World Order ‘creative destruction’ in Syria and Ukraine. He is part of a growing coalition opposing the NWO – not just religious traditionalists, but also progressive anti-globalization forces, including Hugo Chavez inspired anti-imperialists in Latin America.”

Kudos for Barrett here. The regime proved Putin right by applauding the Pussy Riot,[5] a Trotskyite group that ended up having sex (literal pornography) at the Moscow National Museum. (We have discussed this issue in the past.) As always, Neocons like Seth Mandel of Commentary were on the front line defending their brethren.[6]

But the crucial point here is that Putin, like Emmanuel Kant and even John Adams and others, understands that a nation cannot exist without objective morality, and objective morality cannot exist without Logos,[7] the essence and sustainer of the moral universe.

In that sense, and whether he notices it or not, Putin was implicitly or indirectly attacking the Neo-Darwinian ideology, which states that objective morality is an illusion and has no metaphysical basis. It is here that we find again that Neo-Darwinian metaphysics is intellectually useless and worthless because it denies the very essence of a moral universe.

As we have noted in the past, serious Darwinists agree that objective morality is an illusion. The noted biology philosopher Michael Ruse once again said that “there are no grounds whatsoever for being good…. Morality is flimflam.”[8] Yet like his intellectual antecedent Charles Darwin, Ruse ends up contradicting himself in the very next sentence by saying,

“Does this mean that you can just go out and rape and pillage, behave like an ancient Roman grabbing Sabine women? Not at all. I said that there are no grounds for being good. It doesn’t follow that you should be bad.”[9]

Well, duh! If there are no grounds for objective morality, then good and bad are also illusion. There is not such a thing as rape or bad behavior. What is good for you may not be good for me, and there is no way of adjudicating competing explanations. In that kind of world, might makes right. Ruse does not really have a problem with this argument here. In fact, he moves on to say that morality

“is something forged in the struggle for existence and reproduction, something fashioned by natural selection. It is as much a natural human adaptation as our ears or noses or teeth or penises or vaginas. It works and it has no meaning over and above this. If all future food were Pablum, we would probably be better off without teeth.

“Morality is just a matter of emotions, like liking ice cream and sex and hating toothache and marking student papers. But it is, and has to be, a funny kind of emotion. It has to pretend that it is not that at all! If we thought that morality was no more than liking or not liking spinach, then pretty quickly it would break down.

“Before long, we would find ourselves saying something like: ‘Well, morality is a jolly good thing from a personal point of view. When I am hungry or sick, I can rely on my fellow humans to help me. But really it is all bullshit, so when they need help I can and should avoid putting myself out. There is nothing there for me.’ The trouble is that everyone would start saying this, and so very quickly there would be no morality and society would collapse and each and every one of us would suffer

“So morality has to come across as something that is more than emotion. It has to appear to be objective, even though really it is subjective.”[10]

Ruse, like some genetic theorists, really believes that “morality is an illusion put in place by your genes to make you a social cooperator…”[11]

This, by the way, is logically congruent with Darwin’s survival of the fittest. And survival of the fittest is logically congruent with Zionism. If evolutionary theory “explains how warfare contributed to fitness in the course of the evolution of Homo sapiens,” as scholar Bradley A. Thayer maintains,[12] then how can a serious Darwinist say that social Darwinism or even Zionism is really bad on a consistent and logical basis?

Thayer, of course, struggles mightily to rationally defend the thesis that “Warfare contributes to fitness”[13]and that “people wage war to gain and defend resources”[14] while maintaining that social Darwinists were wrong in taking social Darwinism to its logical conclusion. He says that “social Darwinists perverted Charles Darwin’s argument” and

“distorted evolutionary explanations because they misunderstood Darwin’s ideas and were ignorant of or consciously chose to ignore the naturalistic fallacy. Those who use evolutionary theory to explain aspects of human behavior must recall the social Darwinists’ errors. Doing so makes it possible not only to avoid repeating errors but also to advance scientific understanding.”[15]

But Thayer moves on to make this argument:

“The ultimate causation for warfare is anchored in Darwinian natural selection and inclusive fitness….warfare can increase both the absolute and relative fitness of humans…From the classical Darwinian perspective, warfare contributes to fitness because individuals who wage war successfully are better able to survive and reproduce.”[16]

Thayer repeats this thesis over and over in the course of the book:

“An ultimate causal explanation for warfare based in evolutionary theory begins with the recognition that warfare contributes to fitness in certain circumstances because successful warfare lets the winner acquire resources.

“For evolutionary biology, a resource is any material substance that has the potential to increase the individual’s ability to survive or reproduce. As such it may be food, shelter, or territory, especially high-quality soil or wild foods; abundant firewood; or territory free of dangerous animals, such as lions, or  insect infestations, or disease; and also status coalition allies, and members of the opposite sex.”[17]

And then this: “Warfare might be necessary then for offensive purposes, to plunder resources from others. In these circumstances, an individual becomes fitter if he can successfully attack to take the resources of others.”[18]

Thayer cites evolutionary theorist William Durham saying that

“War is one means by which individuals ‘may improve the material conditions of their lives and thereby increae their ability to survive and reproduce…Thus successful warfare would help the tribe gain resources, and for a swidden agricultural economy land is critically important.”[19]

So, is Thayer really against social Darwinism? Ideologically, yes. Consistently and logically? No. I honestly don’t blame him, for his intellectual grandfather could not solve that problem either and had to live in contradiction until his dying day. Darwin declared at the end of his Origin of Species:

“Thus, from the war of nature, from famine and death, the most exalted object which we are capable of conceiving, namely, the production of the higher animals, directly follows.”[20]

Correct me if I am wrong here: isn’t he saying that war and famine and death are things that will get the higher animals ahead?

Scholars of all stripes agree that this is Darwin at his best. Yet when social Darwinists took his thesis and spread it across the political spectrum, Darwin disagreed![21]

If the Dreadful Few are in the struggle for survival, then the Goyim must swiftly be eliminated. That is certainly consistent with Darwin’s grand scheme. If people cannot see this and try to avoid this vital contradiction, then you can be sure that they are not to be taken seriously or they do not understand logic.

So, when people are trying to maintain an objective morality by either appealing to the so-called “evolutionary theory” or even DNA, then you can be sure that those people either are out of touch with the scholarly literature, are not well equipped to understand or articulate their own position, or are just deliberately lying.

Furthermore, to appeal to reciprocal altruism to prove objective morality, a central protocol in Darwin’s grand scheme,[22] is also a dead end because the life of Mother Theresa and countless other examples prove that this idea will not work. I was hoping that modern Darwinists would make some good improvement on this warfare theory, but so far virtually everyone has failed.

I am certainly not asking people to drop their cherished belief. In fact, there are many people who believe in the tooth fairy. But so long that this neo-Darwinian ideology remains intellectually stupid and morally indefensible, they can leave me out of it.

Alexander Solzhenitsyn

Alexander Solzhenitsyn

Going back to Putin, he said in 2013:

“People in many European countries are ashamed, and are afraid of talking about their religious convictions. [Religious] holidays are being taken away or called something else, shamefully hiding the essence of the holiday.”[23]

The Zionist regime, of course, made the false accusation that Putin was persecuting homosexuals. But Putin moved on to diffuse the regime’s silly argument this way: “We need to respect the rights of minorities to be different, but the rights of the majority should not be in question.”[24]

So, yes, Patrick Buchanan. Putin is one of us. Any serious politician who stands against the Mephistophelian establishment is one of us. As Friedrich Hansen of Asia Times put it,

“Make no mistake, Putin is not targeting homosexuals, as he made clear with his welcoming them to the Sotchi Olympics. It also seems only fair to remind Western readers that ever since the 1980s, Sotchi has been the center of Russia with a vibrant homosexual subculture. Rather, Putin is addressing the whole gamut of post-modern incarnations of the ‘sex and drugs’ revolution: binge drinking of both genders until the doctors move in, elite illicit drug use, unmanageable crime rates, surging divorce numbers, Hook-Up sex on campus, out of wedlock births, fathers and mothers in puberty, abortion on demand, public nudism and human copulation in parks, gay promiscuity with a good conscience, swinger clubs and darkrooms, ruthless Internet dating and pornography and what have you.”[25]

How does the regime respond? Well, you know the drill. Owen Matthews, a useful idiot, declared in theSpectator that Putin has a “new plan for world domination”![26] In order to slander Putin, Matthews indirectly linked him with Willi Munzenberg, a revolutionary Jew who wanted to take the Western world to perdition at any cost. Munzenberg was so passionate about his revolutionary goal that he wrote:

We must organize the intellectuals and use them to make Western Civilization stink! Only then, after they have corrupted all its values and made life impossible, can we impose the dictatorship of the proletariat.”

When Putin said that Russia will “defend traditional values that have made up the spiritual and moral foundation of civilisation in every nation for thousands of years,” Matthews declared that Putin “is on to something.” What is it? Matthews told us:

“Putin’s new mission goes deeper than political opportunism. Like the old Communist International, or Comintern, in its day, Moscow is again building an international ideological alliance.”[27]

He again emphasized this point so that readers could get it: “And again, like the Comintern, Putin appears convinced that he is embarking on a world-historical mission.”[28] He moved on to talking about “Putin’s conservative Comintern.”

At the other end of the political spectrum, David Cameron likened Putin to Hitler.[29] John McCain, Lindsey Graham, among other usual suspects, have all placed Putin and Hitler on equal footing.[30]

Historian Paul Johnson (sad to say) even went so far as to say that Putin and Hitler are basically two sides of the same coin. Johnson said that Putin

“believes in a strong Stalinist state. His goal is to reverse the events of 1989–the end of the Soviet state and dissolution of its enormous empire. He seeks to do this by using what remains of Russia’s Stalinist heritage: the military, a huge stockpile of nuclear weapons and immense resources of natural gas and other forms of energy.”[31]

Johnson is sad because “there is no Churchillian voice to sound the alarm and call the democratic world to action.”[32]

Johnson has got to be kidding. What he ends up saying is that someone like Churchill needs to step up and start lying to the West about Putin. It is so sad to read silly comments such as this by a good historian like Johnson.

But the real question is this: why do the regime and their puppets hate Putin so much? Well, Putin suggested back in 2013 the Soviet government was guided by a dark force whose “ideological goggles and faulty ideological perceptions collapsed.”[33]

“The first Soviet government,” Putin added, “was 80-85 percent Jewish.”[34] Sounds like Putin has read Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s Two Hundred Years Together. If so, then it seems clear that he will continue to challenge the Zionist regime. Perhaps Putin has been encouraged by Solzhenitsyn’s bravery. It was Solzhenitsyn who said:

“And thus, overcoming our temerity, let each man choose: will he remain a witting servant of the lies, or has the time come for him to stand straight as an honest man, worthy of the respect of his children and contemporaries?”[35]

Perhaps Putin is saying enough is enough. And this maybe one reason why nearly all the major news outlets have been relentlessly slandered him. Kevin Barrett ended up his excellent article saying, “God bless President Putin, who is putting the fear of God into the New World Order.” Let us hope that he will never be weary in well doing, for in due season he shall reap, if he faints not.

[1] Actually it was a Marxist/Leninist state.

[2] Patrick J. Buchanan, “Vladimir Putin, Christian Crusader?,” American Conservative, April 4, 2014.

[3] Marc Bennetts, “Who’s ‘godless’ now? Russia says it’s U.S.,” Washington Times, January 28, 2014.

[4] Ibid.

[5] Peter Pomerantsev, “For God and Putin,” Newsweek, September 10, 2012.

[6] Seth Mandel, Contentions: Putin Vs. the Punk Rockers,” Commentary, August 17, 2012.

[7] E. Michael Jones has made this very point in his article “Ethnos Needs Logos: or Why I spent Three Days in Guadalajara Trying to Convince David Duke to Become a Catholic,” Culture Wars, June 2015.

[8] Michael Ruse, “God is dead. Long live morality,” Guardian, March 15, 2010.

[9] Ibid.

[10] Ibid.

[11] Ibid.

[12] Bradley A. Thayer, Darwin and International Relations: On the Evolutionary Origins of War and Ethnic Conflict (Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 2004), 96.

[13] Ibid., 99, 100, 107, 114.

[14] Ibid., 99.

[15] Ibid., 102.

[16] Ibid., 103, 104.

[17] Ibid., 108.

[18] Ibid., 109.

[19] Ibid. 110, 111.

[20] Darwin, Origin of Species, 459.

[21] For a decent historical study on this, see for example Gertrude Himmelfarb, Darwin and the Darwinian Revolution (Chicago: Ivan R. Dee, 1962). Darwin was not as open-minded as people thought he was. “Former Darwin enthusiast St. George Mivart published anonymous articles critiquing Darwin’s theory. A gifted zoologist, Mivart would eventually publish a volume titled The Genesis of Species, an influential book that raised serious questions about the limits of natural selection, especially in its application to man. Far from rejecting Darwin wholesale, Mivart continued to embrace evolution and believe that the physical capacities of human beings had developed from the lower animals. But he continued to insist—like [Alfred] Wallace—that man was radically unique from the rest of creation and had a soul. Egged on by Thomas Huxley, Darwin became increasingly bitter over his former disciple’s criticisms, despite Mivart’s attempts to be personable in private correspondence and his public praise of the ‘invaluable labours and active brains of Charles Darwin and Alfred Wallace.”

John G. West, Darwin Day in America: How Our Politics and Culture Have Been Dehumanized in the Name of Science (Wilmington: ISI Books, 2007).

[22] See Denis L. Krebs, The Origins of Morality (New York: Oxford University, 2011), 41-42.

[23] Neil Buckley, “Putin urges Russians to return to values of religion,” Financial Times, September 19, 2013.

[24] Ibid.

[25] Friedrich Hansen, “Putin Stands Up to Western Decadence,” Asia Times, February 28, 2014.

[26] Owen Matthews, “Vladimir Putin’s new plan for world domination,” Spectator, February 22, 2014.

[27] Ibid.

[28] Ibid.

[29] Owen Jones, “David Cameron and the cynicism of comparing Putin to Hitler,” Guardian, September 3, 2014.

[30] Michael Kelley, “11 Prominent People Who Compared Putin To Hitler,” Business Insider, May 23, 2014.

[31] Paul Johnson, “Is Vladimir Putin Another Adolf Hitler?,” Forbes, April 16, 2014.

[32] Ibid.

[33] “Putin: First Soviet government was mostly Jewish,” Jerusalem Post, June 20, 2013.

[34] Ibid.

[35] Alexander Solzhenitsyn, The Solzhenitsyn Reader (Wilmington: ISI Books, 2007), 558.

Source: http://www.veteranstoday.com/2015/08/05/vladimir-putin-the-new-world-order-worships-satan/

SOVEREIGNTY EXPLAINED

Bron: SOVEREIGNTY EXPLAINED

 

Professor Breaks Down Sovereignty and Explains its Significance

3/1/14

Sovereignty is one of those terms we toss around without much thought. It is an important word within contemporary American Indian discussions. The term itself draws from legal, cultural, political, and historical traditions, and these traditions are connected to both European as well as Indigenous philosophies in complicated ways. A shared understanding of the term would be helpful to both local people working on their own issues, and working with surrounding communities.  Rather than defining sovereignty as a term, what I hope to do here is acknowledge aspects of sovereignty that have become sticking points as Indigenous people assert their own self-determination. I won’t go into Indigenous philosophies about sovereignty because it’s probably none of your business.

Sovereignty is a type of political power, and it is exercised through some form of government. For the sake of simplicity, I will focus on the United States and its treaty federalism.  In the US, there are basically three types of sovereigns:

–The US Federal Government

–Each of the 50 State governments

–Tribal governments

The US Federal government is sometimes called the supreme sovereign of the United States. Its powers are defined and limited by the US Constitution. It represents the largest focus of political, economic, and legal power, and has some (but not absolute) power over other sovereigns within the US.  As a constitutional democracy, its power is supposed to come from the People—its citizens.

The State governments derive much of their sovereign power from the US Federal government. The US Constitution explicitly grants States residual powers—those powers that are not explicitly given to the Federal government. The Tenth Amendment to the US Constitution reads,

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

Tribes have sovereignty that is obviously older than the US Constitution. Tribes had their own form of government, and many had legal codes written into their own documents, their own stories, their own practices, and their own memories.  Tribal sovereignty is derived from the people, the land, and their relationships; tribal sovereigntywas not a gift from any external government. Tribal sovereignty is not defined in the US Constitution. But anyone at all familiar with the history of US Indian Policy knows that many limitations—as well as possibilities—for tribal sovereignty have been defined over time.

Tribal sovereignty is recognized in the US Constitution.  Article VI, Clause 2 (sometimes called “the supremacy clause”) of the US Constitution says:

“This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.”

This clause is why American Indian treaties are so important to understanding sovereignty. Treaties are agreements made between sovereign entities—usually called nations. The US has signed several hundred treaties with Indigenous nations and other nations around the world. International relations occur through, and are often defined by, international treaties. Therefore, by signing a treaty, both sides are showing that they recognize the sovereignty of the other, and the treaty spells out how each nation will relate to the other as nations.

The relationship between many tribes and the US Federal government is based on treaties. The US Federal government did not have treaties with the individual States. The supremacy clause recognizes that tribal nations and other international laws are just as powerful as the US Constitution itself. This also means that the sovereignty of tribal nations is different—and in many ways higher—than the sovereignty enjoyed by individual States

Tribal sovereignty was immediately (if inconsistently) recognized by Europeans as they explored the hemisphere. Christopher Columbus himself wrapped his descriptions and interactions with “Indians” in the language of nationhood.  This wasn’t progressive or respectful, though.  It was a holdover from the Inquisition and other efforts to destroy and/or exploit nonchristian nations.

We all should know by now that Columbus was genocidal.Despite being a violently domineering slave trader, usurper, and land thief, the fact that he used the language of nationhood gives us a clue that sovereignty does not need to be absolute for it to be real, or legal, or recognized by other nations.

In fact, we can look to the Roman philosopher Cicero to explain how national sovereignty may be recognized despite a very unequal power relationship.  He said:

“Every nation that governs itself, under whatever form, without dependence on any foreign power, is a sovereign state. Nations or states are body politic, societies of men united together for the purpose of promoting their mutual safety and advantage by joint efforts of their combined strength.”

At first, this seems like the usual understanding of sovereignty as meaning absolute power, or at least absolute independence. This is the type of sovereignty celebrated by US patriots, anti-treaty rights activists, the TEA Party, and others who think that “might makes right” is a good idea. However, Cicero continues:

“We ought to include as sovereign states those who have united themselves with another more powerful by an unequal alliance, in which, as Aristotle says, to the more powerful is given more honor, and to the weaker more assistance. Provided the inferior ally reserved to itself the sovereignty, or the right of governing its own body, it ought to be considered as an independent state that keeps up an intercourse with others under the authority of the law of nations.”

The fact that other nations lack power, or may be dependent upon other nations, does not detract from their status as sovereigns. The US Supreme Court once defined tribes as “domestic dependent nations,” but this does not prevent the use of the term, “sovereignty,” to describe tribes. The treaties between tribes and the US Federal government are recognized as being equal to the US Constitution as the supreme law of the land.  Even the ancient philosophies of Europe demand legal, ongoing treaty relations between nations that may be unequal in power.

Thus, absolute power is not necessary for sovereignty to exist. In fact, the US Constitution limits the sovereignty of the US, not only by recognizing the co-supremacy of international treaties, but by delegating some powers to the States.  Most importantly, the US Constitution has recognized thatthe citizens themselves hold residual powers, or all those powers not granted to the State and Federal governments.

This is similar to a feature of American Indian treaty law, where those powers—those rights—not explicitly given up to the US Federal government are still held by tribes. Here is where we find the inherent sovereignty of tribes, and this is where many tribes have exercised their self-determination in ways like language revitalization, treaty rights, and Indigenous governance.

Absolute independence is also not necessary for sovereignty to exist. After all, how “independent” is the US? Does the US have energy independence? Trade independence? Manufacturing independence? Technological independence? Military independence? Resource independence? Agricultural independence? Economic independence? In many respects the US is dependent upon other nations for these things, but I rarely hear anyone doubt the sovereignty of the US.  While the economic situation for most tribal nations is dire, we have to remember that tribal economies were based on access to land. Lands were ceded to the US by treaty in exchange for tribal economic security and other provisions.  It is ridiculous to blame tribes for economic dependence, when that dependence arose from loss of the very lands that allow Americans to enjoy economic success, especially since holding 97 percent of the land base is still somehow not enough to support the desires of the US: they’re still after our lands and resources.

So what is the defining aspect of sovereignty? It’s not independence. It’s not absolute power.The defining aspects of sovereignty are the international relationships carried out as sovereign nations.Treaties are the most obvious evidence that one nation recognizes or acknowledges the sovereignty of another nation. This is why it is possible to say that the United States, as a nation, was not born in 1776 with the Declaration of Independence, or in 1789 with the establishment of the Constitution. No, the US became a nation with the Treaty of Paris in 1783. Put another way, the US only became a legitimate, recognized nation by entering into a treaty relationship with other recognized sovereign nations.

So next time someone says that Indigenous nations are “only quasi-sovereign” or “only domestic dependent nations,” kindly teach them about law, history, and philosophy. And ifthat someone is a Governor, tell them they’re just jealous of the inherent superiority of tribes over states.

Read more athttp://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2014/01/03/professor-breaks-down-sovereignty-and-explains-its-significance-152958