ACTION

If a tree falls in the woods and no one hears it, does it make a sound? If the Obama Administration breaks the law at will, lies to the American people, uses every government agency at it's disposal to punish it's conservative/Republican enemies and no one does anything about it, does it make a sound? Yes it does resulting in devastating consequences for the American people.

Despite a trifecta of scandals, Obama and company continue to stonewall, lie or refuse to answer questions; in essence, giving Congress and the American people the finger. Pundits are shocked and taken-aback by the unprecedented arrogance of the Obama Administration.

Such pundits are a bit late coming to the dance as we in the Tea Party have been well aware of the lawlessness and arrogance of this bunch of thugs from Chicago for years. Have these surprised pundits forgotten Obama's unprecedented overreaches into the private sector – nationalizing General Motors; bullying banks; ignoring the ruling of federal judges, trashing the Constitution and more?

Still, pundits are missing the much greater horrifying picture. My fellow Americans we are in deep, deep trouble. The cold reality is that until someone steps forward in real opposition to Obama governing according to his will while ignoring all the laws, checks and balances, we are defenseless expendable supplicants of a tyrannical dictator.

Remarkably, the mainstream media is complaisant with Obama acting like our king rather than our president because he is liberal, black and his presidency is historic. Obama's agenda fits neatly with the mainstream media's socialist/progressive agenda. So they are elated to have a Teflon liberal black guy in the White House furthering their cause.

Speaking of expendable supplicants, let us not forget Ambassador Chris Stevens, Tyrone Woods, Glen Doherty and Sean Smith who lost their lives left to die in our consulate in Benghazi.

The Obama Administration is emboldened to do whatever it pleases; bully conservative groups and individuals – secretly invade our privacy, target reporters and thumb it's nose when they get caught – all without any “real” political push-back or consequences. We the American people are in deep excrement.

Ponder that folks. As long as the mainstream media provides cover for Obama and keeps his poll numbers high by making sure no bad news is linked to Obama (Limbaugh Theorem), our president is empowered to function as a supreme ruler, free to do whatever he pleases to us. Dear God help us!

Obama is the first black president. Okay, I get it. But Obama's black skin nor protecting his legacy should award him Imperial Dictator status, trumping the best interest of the American people.

The Republican party desperately needs leadership – someone not just willing to say “no” to Obama's tyranny. We need someone who will walk tall and passionately proclaim, “H - - No!”

America needs a politician with backbone and fortitude willing to endure being called racist by Obama's subservient mainstream media; someone unafraid of being targeted by the IRS; someone willing to be hated by clueless poll participants; someone willing to endure EPA persecution if they're a business owner; someone willing to endure their phone and email privacy illegally violated and someone willing to endure attempts to criminalize their opposition to Obama's agenda.

Under Obama's IRS controlled health care, any politician daring to oppose Obama's agenda will more than likely suffer delays and denial of medical care for their family and themselves. Suddenly, their conservative Republican mom finds herself at the bottom of the list for that kidney.

Yes, it is going to take a politician with incredible stones to challenge the great all-powerful beast, the Obama Administration.

I am confident that such a hero will step forward. Between you and me, I am keeping an eye on Rep. Trey Gowdy, House Oversight & Government Reform Committee. I

As the kids would say, Obama's arrogance is “off the chain” (my attempt to sound cool). Most people caught lying or with their pants down, back off. When caught red handed, Obama pokes his finger in our eye.

For example: It has been exposed that the Administration sent Susan Rice out to lie about Benghazi on five national TV shows. In response to getting caught, Obama promoted Rice. Lois Lerner was caught using the IRS to bully, intimidate and suppress the conservative vote in the 2012 presidential election. Obama promoted Lerner. The latest in his growing list of offenses and scandals, Eric Holder was caught lying about targeting reporter James Rosen.

Naïve pundits say, “Eric Holder is toast. He has to go.” My reply is, “Holder ain't goin' nowhere. You guys still do not get it. Holder is black and liberal and Obama is arrogant beyond belief with the media in his back pocket.” Obama recently stated that he is behind Holder 100 percent.

Folks, do you see the horror of what we are dealing with in America today? We have an Administration free to rule as it pleases with no one, I repeat no one, really holding it's feet to the fire. Will, someone please throw this out-of-control administration across their knee, spank it's butt and say, “No!”

Meanwhile, I heard someone say on TV in response to Holder's stonewalling and lying, “Holder risks another contempt of congress filed against him.” I am sure Holder is quaking in his boots.

Lloyd Marcus, Proud Unhyphenated American
Chairman, Conservative Campaign Committee
LloydMarcus.com

I was sick to find out about the patriot act making it legal to violate every citizen's privacy. Senator Feinstein approved it which I believe violates her oath to defend our constitution. This violation of privacy violates our Constitution. Also, She drafted the bill trying to violate our 2nd Amendment. These are very huge violations of the U.S. constitution which she is sworn to uphold and protect. So, I was wanting to see how many of our california chapter is willing to participate in getting her recalled. Helping with petitions, etc. We will send a very big message to our representatives to uphold our constitution. Please let me know if your able. thank you.

DIVORCE AGREEMENT - THIS IS SO INCREDIBLY WELL PUT AND I CAN HARDLY BELIEVE IT'S BY A YOUNG PERSON, A STUDENT!!! WHATEVER HE RUNS FOR, I'LL VOTE FOR HIM.

  Dear American liberals, leftists, social progressives, socialists, Marxists and Obama supporters, et al:

  We have stuck together since the late 1950's for the sake of the kids, but the whole of this latest election process has made me realize that I want a divorce. I know we tolerated each other for many years for the sake of future generations, but sadly, this relationship has clearly run its course.
  Our two ideological sides of America cannot and will not ever agree on what is right for us all, so let's just end it on friendly terms. We can smile and chalk it up to irreconcilable differences and go our own way.
  HERE IS OUR SEPARATION AGREEMENT:
  --Our two groups can equitably divide up the country by landmass each taking a similar portion. That will be the difficult part, but I am sure our two sides can come to a friendly agreement. After that, it should be relatively easy! Our respective representatives can effortlessly divide other assets since both sides have such distinct and disparate tastes.
  --We don't like redistributive taxes so you can keep them.
  --You are welcome to the liberal judges and the ACLU.
  --Since you hate guns and war, we'll take our firearms, the cops, the NRA and the military.
  --We'll take the nasty, smelly oil industry and the coal mines, and you can go with wind, solar and biodiesel.
  --You can keep Oprah, Michael Moore and Rosie O'Donnell. You are, however, responsible for finding a bio-diesel vehicle big enough to move all three of them.
  --We'll keep capitalism, greedy corporations, pharmaceutical companies, Wal-Mart and Wall Street.
  --You can have your beloved lifelong welfare dwellers, food stamps, homeless, homeboys, hippies, druggies and illegal aliens.
  --We'll keep the hot Alaskan hockey moms, greedy CEO's and rednecks.
  --We'll keep Bill O'Reilly, and Bibles and give you NBC and Hollywood .
  --You can make nice with Iran and Palestine and we'll retain the right to invade and hammer places that threaten us.
  --You can have the peaceniks and war protesters. When our allies or our way of life are under assault, we'll help provide them security.
  --We'll keep our Judeo-Christian values.
  --You are welcome to Islam, Scientology, Humanism, political correctness and Shirley McClain. You can also have the U.N. but we will no longer be paying the bill.
  --We'll keep the SUV's, pickup trucks and oversized luxury cars. You can take every Volt and Leaf you can find.
  --You can give everyone healthcare if you can find any practicing doctors.
  --We'll keep "The Battle Hymn of the Republic" and "The National anthem."
  --I'm sure you'll be happy to substitute "Imagine", "I'd Like to Teach the World to Sing", "Kum Ba Ya" or "We Are the World".
  --We'll practice trickle-down economics and you can continue to give trickle up poverty your best shot.
  --Since it often so offends you, we'll keep our history, our name and our flag.
  Would you agree to this? If so, please pass it along to other like-minded liberal and conservative patriots and if you do not agree, just hit delete. In the spirit of friendly parting, I'll bet you might think about which one of us will need whose help in 15 years.

  Sincerely, John J. Wall, Law Student and an American

  P.S. Also, please take Ted Turner, Sean Penn, Martin & Charlie Sheen, Barbara Streisand, & ( Hanoi ) Jane Fonda with you and you won't have to press 1 for English when you call our country.

The gang of 8 & cohorts are ready to give 11 million criminal invaders amnesty at a cost of $1.5 to $2.7 trillion per year to citizens!   That’s roughly what is already embedded in our economy right now!   The gang doesn’t know how many are here, where they are, lie about the cost, and refuse to mention around 25.8 million citizens who might want to be employed.   Calling criminal invaders “undocumented workers” doesn’t change the facts that they criminally entered the country, criminally remain every day, are criminally employed in criminal jobs (no tax etc.), criminally pay no taxes, criminally take citizens’ public resources… simply saying it’s serial crime!   The executive-legislative-DOJ areas of government invite, aid, and abet this corruption by violating oath of office, Constitution, and law!     The issue is CRIME, NOT RACE!    We borrow roughly $1.5 trillion/yr that we can’t repay, while countless millions of every race citizen live in progressive hell holes worse than Afghanistan, TODAY.

Bottom line "jobless American" loses $37,096 cash pay, government loses $100,294 (tax revenue plus 2 subsidies), & the US economy takes a $137,391 hit for every illegal… assuming there is only 11 million.     That's up to $1.5 trillion @ 11 million to $2.7 trillion if 20 million!   That’s $69 to $124 Trillion over a 46 year work life!

Remember!!!   Illegals take home $12,480 (40 hr @ $6 cash (same as $8 pre tax)) plus $36,545 from various government & other related government subsidies ($402 BILLION/11 MILLION) for a total $49,025.     An average BLS citizen takes home $37,096 after $12,365 employee taxes & regulations – That’s $11,929 less than the alien takes home!      The criminal alien’s criminal employer doesn't pay employer wage taxes.     Government pays the $36,545  illegal alien subsidy plus subsidies for jobless citizens at the same $36,545 (?).

Don't understand the jobless numbers???  December 2012 was 12.506 million "unemployed", 6.434 wanting a job, 6.896 disappearing workforce (1997 through 2008 workforce to population 66.54% vs 2012 @ 63.70%), sets maximum unemployed @ 25.839 million (16.7%)!

If 154.975 "working" 40 hours full time instead of 34.4 (BLS) adds 25.228 million (16.3%) more jobs lost, then joblessness potential is 51,067 (33%).    Obamacare scare is throwing millions into the part-time unemployment.

This country is being divided and conquered from within by deception and sedition.    The Constitution as written and its core law will heal and reunite if enforced!    That won’t happen until a good dose of truth and consequences is injected into the legislature.    Let them be known by  what they are!

April 2013 ....... Religion and Public Life in America by R.R. Reno (Editor, First Things)

R. R. RENO is the editor of First Things, a journal of religion in public life. He received his B.A. from Haverford College and his Ph.D. in religious studies from Yale University, and taught theology and ethics at Creighton University in Omaha, Nebraska, for 20 years. He is the author of Fighting the Noonday Devil, Sanctified Vision, and a commentary on the Book of Genesis, as well as a number of other books and essays.
The following is adapted from a speech delivered on February 20, 2013, at a Hillsdale College National Leadership Seminar in Bonita Springs, Florida.

RELIGIOUS LIBERTY is being redefined in America, or at least many would like it to be. Our secular establishment wants to reduce the autonomy of religious institutions and limit the influence of faith in the public square. The reason is not hard to grasp. In America, “religion” largely means Christianity, and today our secular culture views orthodox Christian churches as troublesome, retrograde, and reactionary forces. They’re seen as anti-science, anti-gay, and anti-women—which is to say anti-progress as the Left defines progress. Not surprisingly, then, the Left believes society will be best served if Christians are limited in their influence on public life. And in the short run this view is likely to succeed. There will be many arguments urging Christians to keep their religion strictly religious rather than “political.” And there won’t just be arguments; there will be laws as well. We’re in the midst of climate change—one that’s getting colder and colder toward religion.

Recent court cases and controversies suggest trends unfriendly to religion in public life. In 2005, a former teacher at Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School in Redford, Michigan, filed an employment lawsuit claiming discrimination based on disability. The school fired her for violating St. Paul’s teaching that Christians should not bring their disputes before secular judges. The subsequent lawsuit revolved around the question of whether a religious school could invoke a religious principle to justify firing an employee. The school said it could, drawing on a legal doctrine known as the ministerial exception, which allows religious institutions wide latitude in hiring and firing their religious leaders. It’s in the nature of legal arguments to be complex and multi-layered, but in this case the Obama administration’s lawyers made a shockingly blunt argument: Their brief claimed that there should be no ministerial exception.

The Supreme Court rejected this argument in a unanimous 9-0 vote. But it’s telling nonetheless that lawyers in the Justice Department wanted to eliminate this exception. Their argument was straightforward: Government needs to have broad powers to address the problem of discrimination—in this case disability—as well as other injustices. Conceding too much to religious institutions limits those powers. Why should the theological doctrines of the Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod, or of any other church, trump the legal doctrines of the United States when the important principle of non-discrimination is at stake? It is an arresting question, to say the least—especially when we remember that the Left is currently pushing to add gay marriage to the list of civil rights.

Concerns about the autonomy of religious institutions are also at work in the Obama administration’s tussle with the Catholic Church and her religious allies over the mandate to provide free contraceptives, sterilization, and abortion-inducing drugs. After the initial public outcry, the administration announced a supposed compromise, which has been recently revised and re-proposed. The Obama administration allows that churches and organizations directly under the control of those churches are religious employers and can opt out of the morally controversial coverage. But religious colleges and charities are not and cannot. To them, the administration offers a so-called accommodation.

The details are complex, but a recent statement issued by Cardinal Dolan of New York identifies the key issue: Who counts as a religious employer? It’s a question closely related to the issue in the Hosanna-Tabor case, which asks who counts as a religious employee. Once again the Obama administration seeks a narrow definition, “accommodating” others in an act of lèse majesté, as it were. The Catholic Church and her allies want a broad definition that includes Catholic health care, Catholic universities, and Catholic charities. The Church knows that it cannot count on accommodations—after all, when various states such as Illinois passed laws allowing gay adoptions, they did not “accommodate” Catholic charities, but instead demanded compliance with principles of non-discrimination, forcing the Church to shut down her adoption agencies in those jurisdictions.

Cardinal Dolan’s statement went still further. For-profit companies are not religious in the way that Notre Dame University is religious. Nonetheless, the religious beliefs of those who own and run businesses in America should be accorded some protection. This idea the Obama administration flatly rejects. By their progressive way of thinking, economic life should be under the full and unlimited control of the federal government.

Religious liberty is undermined in a third and different way as well. For a long time, political theorists like John Rawls have argued that our laws must be based on so-called public reason, which is in fact an ambiguous, ill-defined concept that gives privileged status to liberalism. In 2010, Federal District Court Judge Vaughn Walker overturned Proposition 8—the ballot measure that reversed the California Supreme Court’s 2006 decision that homosexuals have a right to marry—citing the lack of a rational basis for thinking that only men and women can marry. “The evidence shows conclusively,” he wrote, “that Proposition 8 enacts, without reason, a private moral view that same-sex couples are inferior to opposite-sex couples.” He continues by observing that many supporters of Proposition 8 were motivated by their religious convictions, which—following Rawls—he presumes should not be allowed to govern public law.

This line of thinking is not unique to Judge Walker. The influence of Rawls has been extensive, leading to restrictions on the use of religious reasons or even religiously-influenced reasons in public debate. In striking down Texas sodomy laws, Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy noted that moral censure of homosexuality has “been shaped by religious beliefs.” The idea seems to be that moral views historically supported by religion—which of course means all moral views other than modern secular ones—are constitutionally suspect.

Here we come to the unifying feature of contemporary challenges to religious freedom—the desire to limit the influence of religion over public life. In the world envisioned by Obama administration lawyers, churches will have freedom as “houses of worship,” but unless they accept the secular consensus they can’t inspire their adherents to form institutions to educate and serve society in accordance with the principles of their faith. Under a legal regime influenced by the concept of public reason, religious people are free to speak—but when their voices contradict the secular consensus, they’re not allowed into our legislative chambers or courtrooms.

Thus our present clashes over religious liberty. The Constitution protects religious liberty in two ways. First, it prohibits laws establishing a religion. This prevents the dominant religion from using the political power of majority rule to privilege its own doctrines to the disadvantage of others. Second, it prohibits laws that limit the free exercise of religion. What we’re seeing today is a secular liberalism that wants to expand the prohibition of establishment to silence articulate religious voices and disenfranchise religiously motivated voters, and at the same time to narrow the scope of free exercise so that the new secular morality can reign over American society unimpeded.

Rise of the Nones This shift in legal thinking on the Left reflects underlying religious trends. As the religious character of our society changes, so do our assumptions about religious freedom. The main change has been the rise of the Nones. In the 1950s, around three percent of Americans checked the “none” box when asked about their religious affiliation. That number has grown, especially in the last decade, to 20 percent of the population. And Nones are heavily represented in elite culture. A great deal of higher education is dominated by Nones, as are important cultural institutions, the media, and Hollywood. They are conscious of their power, and they feel the momentum of their growth.

At the same time, the number of Americans who say they go to church every week has remained strikingly constant over the last 50 years, at around 35 percent. Sociologists of religion think this self-reported number is higher than the actual one, which may be closer to 25 percent. In any event, the social reality is the same. As the Nones have emerged as a significant cohort, the committed core of religious people has not declined and in fact has become unified and increasingly battle tested. Protestants and Catholics alike know they’re up against an often hostile secular culture—and although a far smaller portion of the population, the same holds for Jews and Muslims as well.

These two trends—the rise of the Nones and the consolidation of the committed core of believers—have led to friction in public life. The Nones and religious Americans collide culturally and politically, not just theologically.

For a long time, the press has reported on the influence of religious voters, especially Evangelicals. Polling data shows that religiosity has become increasingly reliable as a predictor of political loyalties. But what’s far less commonly reported is that this goes both ways. In their recent book, American Grace: How Religion Divides and Unites Us, Robert Putnam and William Campbell focused on the practice of saying grace before meals as an indication of religious commitment and found a striking correlation. Seventy percent of those who never say grace before meals identify as Democrats, compared to slightly more than 20 percent who identify as Republicans. Nones are extremely ideological. Meanwhile, among those who say grace daily, 40 percent identify as Democrats and 50 percent as Republicans. Religious people are more diverse, but they trend to the political right, and the more religious they are the more likely they are to vote Republican.

Other data also suggests a growing divide between the irreligious and religious. A recent Pew study confirms that Nones are the single most ideologically committed cohort of white Americans, rivaled only by Evangelical Protestants. They overwhelmingly support abortion and gay marriage. Seventy-five percent of them voted for Barack Obama in 2008, and they played a decisive role in his victory in 2012. In Ohio, Obama lost the Protestant vote by three percent and the Catholic vote by eleven percent—and both numbers rise if we isolate Protestants and Catholics who say they go to church every week. But he won the Nones, who make up 12 percent of the electorate in Ohio, by an astounding 47 percent.

I think it’s fair to say that Obama ran a values campaign last fall that gambled that the Nones would cast the decisive votes. For the first time in American political history, the winning party deliberately attacked religion. Its national convention famously struck God from the platform, only to have it restored by anxious party leaders in a comical session characterized by the kind of frivolity that comes when people recognize that it doesn’t really matter. Democratic talking points included the “war on women” and other well-crafted slogans that rallied their base, the Nones, who at 24 percent of all Democrat and Democratic-leaning voters have become the single largest identifiable cohort in the liberal coalition.

This presents the deepest threat to religious liberty today. It’s not good when the most numerous and powerful constituency in the Democratic Party has no time for religion. This is all the more true when its ideology has the effect of encouraging the rest of the party to view religion—especially Christianity—as the enemy; and when law professors provide reasons why the Constitution doesn’t protect religious people.

Religious Liberty Under the Gun From the end of the Civil War until the 1960s, the wealthiest, best educated, and most powerful Americans remained largely loyal to Christianity. That’s changed. There were warning signs. William F. Buckley, Jr. chronicled how Yale in the early ’50s could no longer support even the bland religiosity of liberal Protestantism. Today, Yale and other elite institutions can be relied upon to provide anti-Christian propaganda. Stephen Pinker and Stephen Greenblatt at Harvard publish books that show how Christianity pretty much ruins everything, as Christopher Hitchens put it so bluntly. The major presses publish book after book by scholars like Elaine Pagels at Princeton, who argues that Christianity is for the most part an invention of power hungry bishops who suppressed the genuine diversity and spiritual richness of early followers of Jesus.

One can dispute the accuracy of the books, articles, and lectures of these and other authors. This is necessary, but unlikely to be effective. Experts savaged Greenblatt’s book on Lucretius, The Swerve, but it won the National Book Award for non-fiction. That’s not an accident. Greenblatt and others at elite universities are serving an important ideological purpose by using their academic authority to discredit Christianity, whose adherents are obstacles not only to abortion and gay rights, but to medical research unrestricted by moral concerns about the use of fetal tissue, to new reproductive technologies, to doctor-assisted suicide, and in general to liquefying traditional moral limits so that they can be reconstructed according to the desires of the Nones. Books by these elite academics reassure the Nones and their fellow travelers that they are not opposed to anything good or even respectable, but rather to historic forms of oppression, ignorance, and prejudice.

I cannot overstate the importance of these ideological attacks on Christianity. Our Constitution accords us rights, and the courts cannot void these rights willy-nilly. But history shows that the Constitution is a plastic document. When our elite culture thinks something is bad for society as a whole, judges find ways to suppress it. The First Amendment offered no protection to Bob Jones University, which lost its tax-exempt status because of a policy that prohibited inter-racial dating. As the Supreme Court majority in 1983 wrote in that case: “Government has a fundamental, overriding interest in eradicating racial discrimination in education . . . which substantially outweighs whatever burden denial of tax benefits places on [the University’s] exercise of their religious beliefs.”

In recent years the Supreme Court has been largely solicitous of religious freedom, sensing perhaps that our cultural conflicts over religion and morality need to be kept within bounds. But the law professors are preparing the way for changes. Martha Nussbaum, who teaches at the University of Chicago Law School, has opined that the colleges and universities run by Catholic religious orders that require their presidents or other leaders to be members of the order should lose their tax exempt status, because they discriminate against women. She allows that current interpretations of the First Amendment don’t support her view, but that’s not much comfort. All Nussbaum is doing is applying the logic of the Bob Jones case to the feminist project of eradicating discrimination based on sex.

Former Georgetown law professor Chai Feldblum—who is also a current Obama appointee to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission—has written about the coming conflicts between gay rights and religious liberty. With an admirable frankness she admits, “I’m having a hard time coming up with any case in which religious liberty should win.” Again, the Bob Jones case is in the background, as are other aspects of civil rights law designed to stamp out racial discrimination. For someone like Feldblum, when religious individuals and institutions don’t conform to the new consensus about sexual morality, their freedoms should be limited.

It is precisely the possibilities evoked by Nussbaum and Feldblum that now motivate the Obama administration’s intransigence about allowing places like Notre Dame to be classified as religious employers. In the Bob Jones case, the justices were very careful to stipulate that “churches or other purely religious institutions” remain protected by the First Amendment’s principle of free exercise. By “accommodating” rather than counting Notre Dame and other educational and charitable organizations as religious employers, secular liberalism can target them in the future, as they have done to Catholic adoption agencies that won’t place children with homosexual couples.

A recent book by University of Chicago professor of philosophy and law Brian Leiter outlines what I believe will become the theoretical consensus that does away with religious liberty in spirit if not in letter. “There is no principled reason,” he writes, “for legal or constitutional regimes to single out religion for protection.” Leiter describes religious belief as a uniquely bad combination of moral fervor and mental blindness, serving no public good that justifies special protection. More significantly—and this is Leiter’s main thesis—it is patently unfair to afford religion such protection. Why should a Catholic or a Baptist have a special right while Peter Singer, a committed utilitarian, does not? Evoking the principle of fairness, Leiter argues that everybody’s conscience should be accorded the same legal protections. Thus he proposes to replace religious liberty with a plenary “liberty of conscience.”

Leiter’s argument is libertarian. He wants to get the government out of the business of deciding whose conscience is worth protecting. This mentality seems to expand freedom, but that’s an illusion. In practice it will lead to diminished freedom, as is always the case with any thoroughgoing libertarianism.

Let me give an example. The urban high school my son attended strictly prohibits hats and headgear. It does so in order to keep gang-related symbols and regalia out of the school. However, the school recognizes a special right of religious freedom, and my son, whose mother is Jewish and who was raised as a Jew, was permitted to wear a yarmulke. Leiter’s argument prohibits this special right, but his alternative is unworkable. The gang members could claim that their deep commitments of loyalty to each other create a conscientious duty to wear gang regalia. If everybody’s conscience must be respected, then nobody’s will be, for order and safety must be preserved.

* * *

The Arabic word dhimmi means non-Muslim. Under Muslim rule, non-Muslims were allowed to survive only insofar as they accepted Muslim dominance. Our times are not those times, and the secularism of the Nones is not Islam. Nevertheless, I think many powerful forces in America would like to impose a soft but real dhimmitude. The liberal and libertarian Nones will quarrel, as do the Shi’a and Sunni, but they will, I think, largely unify against the public influence of religion.

What can be done to prevent them from succeeding?

First and most obvious—defend religious liberty in the courts. Although I have depicted deep cultural pressures that work against religious liberty, we live in a society governed by the rule of law. Precedent matters, and good lawyering can make a substantive difference.

Second—fight against the emerging legal theories that threaten to undermine religious liberty. This is a battle to be carried out in the law schools and among political theorists. For decades, legal activists on the Left have been subsidized by legal clinics and special programs run in law schools. Defenders of religious liberty need to push back.

Third—fight the cultural battle. Legal theory flexes and bends in accord with the dominant consensus. This Brian Leiter knows, which is why he does not much worry about the current state of constitutional law. He goes directly to the underlying issues, which concern the role of religion in public life.

We must meet the challenge by showing that religion is indeed special. Religious people are the most likely Americans to be involved in civic life, and the most generous in their charitable contributions. This needs to be highlighted again and again. Moreover, we need to draw a contrast with the Nones, who tend to outsource their civic responsibilities and charitable obligations to government in the form of expanded government programs and higher taxes.

There is another, deeper argument that must be made in defense of religion: It is the most secure guarantee of freedom. America’s Founders, some of them Christian and others not, agreed as a matter of principle that the law of God trumps the law of men. This has obvious political implications: The Declaration of Independence appeals to the unalienable rights given by our Creator that cannot be overridden or taken away. In this sense, religion is especially beneficial. As Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI both emphasized, it gives transcendent substance to the rights of man that limit government. Put somewhat differently, religion gives us a place to stand outside politics, and without it we’re vulnerable to a system in which the state defines everything, which is the essence of tyranny. This is why gay marriage, which is sold as an expansion of freedom, is in fact a profound threat to liberty.

Finally, we must not accept a mentality of dhimmitude. The church, synagogue, and mosque have a tremendous solidity born of a communion of wills fused together in obedience to God. This gives people of faith the ability to fight with white fury for what they perceive to be a divine cause, which is of course a great force for righteousness—but also a dangerous threat to social peace, as early modern Europe knew only too well.

In conclusion, I want to focus not on fury but on the remarkable capacity for communities of faith to endure. My wife’s ancestors lived for generations in the contested borderlands of Poland and Russia. As Jews they were tremendously vulnerable, and yet through their children and their children’s children they endured in spite of discrimination, violence, and attempted genocide. Where now, I ask, are the Russian and Polish aristocrats who dominated them for centuries? Where now is the Thousand Year Reich? Where now is the Soviet worker’s paradise? They have gone to dust. The Torah is still read in the synagogue.

The same holds for Christianity. The Church did not need constitutional protections in order to take root in a hostile pagan culture two thousand years ago.

Right now the Nones seem to have the upper hand in America. But what seems powerful is not always so. If I had to bet on Harvard or the Catholic Church, Yale or the Mennonites in Goshen, Indiana, the New York Times or yeshivas in Brooklyn, I wouldn’t hesitate. Over the long haul, religious faith has proven itself the most powerful and enduring force in human history.

A Tribute to Margaret Thatcher

Larry P. Arnn President, Hillsdale College

The following is adapted from remarks delivered at a ceremony in honor of Margaret Thatcher sponsored by the Hillsdale chapter of Young Americans for Freedom on April 22, 2013.

Margaret Thatcher was born in 1925, in October. Her father was a grocer. She was born in Lincolnshire, in the middle of England. She studied chemistry at Oxford. In 1959 she got elected to Parliament for Finchley, which she represented until she retired from the House of Commons in 1992. She’s one of the great prime ministers in British history, and one of the longest serving, at least in continuous times.

I happened to live in England when Mrs. Thatcher’s party won the 1979 election and she became prime minister— the first woman to do so. It was better than watching sports on television. There was nothing like it. Every day she would do something big, and every day she would not apologize for it, even when reporters would press her. You just never saw anyone so direct or clear of speech.

Mrs. Thatcher faced a situation in Britain that was devastating, much like the situation we have today in our own country. What she did was to make plain that situation and to place great faith in the people of her country, and then when they were asked to choose, they chose for her over and over again. Indeed, she never lost an election after she won the first one. She only lost her job as prime minister because her party got tired of her. They were not as strong as she was and they threw her out, and she left very nobly.

I’ll tell you two quick stories about her. The first concerns a coal strike led by a very left wing man named Arthur Scargill, who was the head of the coal miners union. That union was powerful because people got their heat from coal, and if the union didn’t mine coal in the winter, people got cold.

The major political party opposed to Mrs. Thatcher’s Conservative party, the Labor party, was basically controlled at that time in its governing structure by the labor unions, and the worst and most aggressive of them was the coal miners. So the Prime Minister stood largely alone, and great powers were arrayed against her. And what she did was store up a bunch of coal to get ready for a strike because she knew Mr. Scargill was going to call one, and he did call one. The coal mining regions of the country had thousands of people picketing, and parts of the country basically ceased to function.

This had happened many times in the past, and the government had capitulated. But this time there was Mrs. Thatcher at the head of the government, and there was something called the Battle of Orgreave, in which five thousand miners clashed with five thousand policemen. The policemen triumphed, and there were over 100 casualties. That was a battle for the soul of the country, and the Prime Minister was very clear about it. She explained that the stakes were enormous and that the government was going to stand up for the country. There was no wiggle in her. She didn’t budge. And what happened was that a large part of the membership of the miners union broke off, formed their own union, and made a deal that was in their interest but was not what Scargill had demanded. So Mrs. Thatcher basically broke that strike, and she broke that kind of unionism. The other kind—the kind where people act under laws that are fair, and where unions don’t take over parts of the country or the property of others—that kind of unionism thrives in Britain today. And so far there has not been an effort to bring back  the destructive kind.

My second story concerns terrorism. You probably know that Mrs. Thatcher was almost killed when IRA terrorists put a bomb in her hotel during the annual Conservative Party Conference in 1984. They checked into that hotel months in advance and planted an explosive device set to go off near where the Prime Minister slept. It did go off, and it killed five people, but Mrs. Thatcher was working late and her life was spared.

IRA terrorists had previously killed one of her best friends, a man named Airey Neave, a distinguished soldier in World War II and one of the few men to escape the German POW camp at Colditz. He was very close to Mrs. Thatcher, and he was the Shadow Secretary for Northern Ireland. Shortly before she became prime minister, the terrorists placed a bomb in Neave’s car set to explode when the car was at a certain angle coming out of the parking lot underneath the House of Commons, and Airey Neave was killed, having survived the Nazis.

So Margaret Thatcher had strong reasons to oppose terrorism. And when it happened that several IRA terrorists, the key one being a man named Bobby Sands, went on a hunger strike in the Maze prison in Northern Ireland—they were demanding to be classified as political prisoners rather than as criminals—she stood firm as they starved themselves to death. Over and over, she stated her position forthrightly: “Crime is crime is crime. It is not political. It is crime.” And what that meant was that those terrorists had chosen the wrong time to go on a hunger strike.

I’ll tell you what I think all that means. I’ve thought about this most of my adult life, and much of what I think about it is informed by having watched Mrs. Thatcher. We live in an age when a new kind of government has been invented, and it’s not so much that it has different aims, although it does have many different aims, but that it proceeds by a different method—through rules made by so-called experts, who gather the forces of government over themselves.

There’s an agency that has been created recently in the United States, and that agency does not get its budget from the Congress of the United States, but from a percentage of the revenues of the Federal Reserve, which gets its revenues as a government monopoly bank. This new agency has regulatory power that may affect us as a college and will certainly affect each of us as individuals. And Congress is forbidden to hold hearings on the budget of that agency, and that agency routinely refuses inquiries from Congress about its operations. That means it is sealed off from popular control. And the weight and scale of the government run by this new method means that there’s some chance that the government is going to overwhelm the society. That is the very abnegation of liberal politics—liberal in the sense of a free people managing those who govern them because human beings are born equal, with equal rights.

The greatest defender and servant of this principle of liberal government that I have seen in my lifetime is Margaret Thatcher, and I pray that we will see the likes of her again, because the battle over this kind of government is upon us again. For making clear that the right way of government is to operate under a constitution, and under the control of free people, and for fighting for constitutionalism more effectively than anyone in our time, we today remember Baroness Thatcher of Kesteven.

Copyright © 2013 Hillsdale College. The opinions expressed in Imprimis are not necessarily the views of Hillsdale College. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is hereby granted, provided the following credit line is used: “Reprinted by permission from Imprimis, a publication of Hillsdale College.” SUBSCRIPTION FREE UPON REQUEST. ISSN 0277-8432. Imprimis trademark registered in U.S. Patent and Trade Office #1563325.

The Miracle of Freedom by U.S. Senator Ted Cruz

In 2012, Ted Cruz was elected as the 34th U.S. Senator from Texas. Prior to that, he served for five years as Solicitor General of Texas and was for five years a partner at one of the nation’s largest law firms. He has authored more than 80 U.S. Supreme Court briefs and argued 43 oral arguments, including nine before the U.S. Supreme Court. He has also served as Director of the Office of Policy Planning at the Federal Trade Commission and as Associate Deputy Attorney General at the U.S. Department of Justice. Senator Cruz graduated with honors from Princeton University and with high honors from Harvard Law School, and served as a law clerk to Chief Justice of the Supreme Court William Rehnquist.

The following is adapted from a speech delivered at Hillsdale College’s 161st Commencement, held in the College’s Biermann Athletic Center on May 11, 2013.

Today is a day of celebration. For you graduates, it’s a day to celebrate your hard work, your commitment, time, energy, passion, and prayers that you have put in to graduate from Hillsdale College. It’s also a day to celebrate the sacrifice and dedication your family has put in to get you here. I am honored to join you today—but let me say I fully recognize that the most forgettable part of this important day is going to be the politician delivering your commencement speech.

This morning I had the opportunity to tour your wonderful campus, and one of the highlights for me was the statue of Margaret Thatcher. I understand that when the statue was unveiled, she sent a letter of praise that read: “Hillsdale College symbolizes everything that is good and true in America. You uphold the principles and cherish the values which have made your country a beacon of hope.” I couldn’t agree more.

There are commencements being held on campuses all over the country this spring, but this one is different. Hillsdale, it is known across the country, is in a class by itself. Those graduating from other colleges are being told to go out and make something of themselves. But for the men and women receiving their degrees here today, expectations are higher. Because of the education you received here, you are uniquely prepared to provide desperately needed, principled leadership to your families, your churches, your communities, your country, and your fellow man. While other graduates have been exposed to college courses such as “Lady Gaga and the Sociology of Fame,” you have been grounded in an understanding of our Constitution and of the freedom it was designed to preserve.

* * *

Last month the world lost Baroness Thatcher, and in her honor I’d like to spend a few minutes discussing with you the miracle of freedom.

In the history of mankind, freedom has been the exception. Governed by kings and queens, human beings were told that power starts at the top and flows down; that their rights emanate from a monarch and may be taken away at the monarch’s whim. The British began a revolution against this way of thinking in a meadow called Runnymede in 1215. It was embodied in the Magna Carta, which read: “To all free men of our kingdom we have also granted, for us and our heirs for ever, all the liberties written out below, to have and to keep for them and their heirs . . . .” That revolution reached full flower in Philadelphia in 1787, in a Constitution that began from two radical premises.

The first is that our rights come not from kings or queens—or even from presidents—but from God. As the Declaration of Independence put it, “We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, and that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”

Second, in the Constitution, America’s Founders inverted the understanding of sovereignty. Power comes not from the top down, but up, from “We the People,” and governing authority for those in political office is limited to set periods subject to elections. As James Madison explained in Federalist 51: “If men were angels, no government would be necessary . . . .  In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.”

Even from my short time in elected office, I can assure you there are no angels in Washington, D.C. And that is why Thomas Jefferson said the “chains of the Constitution” should bind the mischief of government. Only when government is limited are rights protected, the rule of law honored, and freedom allowed to flourish.

You who are graduating from Hillsdale are familiar with these ideas. As the late conservative writer and educator Russell Kirk observed, “Hillsdale does not subscribe to the notion that all books published before 1900 are obsolete. Against all odds, the College speaks up—as it did during the nineteenth century—for ‘permanent things.’ ” And with those as our foundation, what has freedom wrought?

* * *

Simply put, the American free market system is the greatest engine for prosperity and opportunity that the world has ever seen. Freedom works. No other nation on Earth has allowed so many millions to come with nothing and achieve so much. In the centuries before the American Revolution, the average human lived on between one and three dollars a day, no matter whether one lived in Europe, Asia, Africa, or North or South America. But from that point on—from the beginning of the American experiment—for the first time in human history, per capita income in a few countries began to grow rapidly, and nowhere more so than in the United States.

Over the last two centuries, U.S. growth rates have far outpaced growth rates throughout the world, producing per capita incomes about six times greater than the world average and 50 percent higher than those in Europe. Put another way, the United States holds 4.5 percent of the world’s population, and produces a staggering 22 percent of the world’s output—a fraction that has remained stable for two decades, despite growing competition from around the world.

This predominance isn’t new. The late British economist Angus Maddison observed that American per capita income was already the highest in the world in the 1830s. This is a result of America’s economic freedom, which enables entrepreneurs and small businesses to flourish.

Today the U.S. dollar is the international reserve currency. English is the world’s standard language for commerce. The strength of our economy allows us to maintain the mightiest military in the world. And U.S. culture—film, TV, the Internet—is preeminent in the world (although for many of our TV shows and movies, perhaps we owe the world an apology). A disproportionate number of the world’s great inventions in medicine, pharmaceuticals, electronics, the Internet, and other technology come from America, improving, expanding, and saving lives. America was where the telephone, the automobile, the airplane, and the iPhone were invented. Americans were the first to walk on the moon.

But most importantly, freedom produces opportunity. And I would encourage each of you to embrace what I call opportunity conservatism, which means that we should look at and judge every proposed domestic policy with a laser focus on how it impacts the least among us—how it helps the most vulnerable Americans climb the economic ladder.

The political left in our country seeks to reach down the hand of government and move people up the economic ladder. This attempt is almost always driven by noble intentions. And yet it never, ever works. Conservatives, in contrast, understand from experience that the only way to help people climb the economic ladder is to provide them the opportunity to pull themselves up one rung at a time.

As President Reagan said, “How can we love our country and not love our countrymen, and loving them, reach out a hand when they fall, heal them when they’re sick, and provide opportunity to make them self-sufficient so they will be equal in fact and not just in theory?”

Historically, our nation has enjoyed remarkable economic mobility. About 60 percent of the households that were in the lowest income quintile in 1999 were in a higher quintile ten years later. During the same decade, almost 40 percent of the richest households fell to a lower quintile. This is a nation where you can rise or fall. It is a nation where you can climb the economic ladder based not on who you are born to, or what class you are born into, but based on your talents, your passion, your perseverance, and the content of your character.

Economic freedom and the prosperity it generates reduce poverty like nothing else. Studies consistently confirm that countries with higher levels of economic freedom have poverty levels as much as 75 percent lower than countries that are less free.

Thanks to America’s free market system, the average poor American has more living space than the typical non‑poor person in Sweden, France, or the United Kingdom. In 1970, the year I was born, only 36 percent of the U.S. population enjoyed air conditioning. Today, 80 percent of poor households in America have air conditioning; and 96 percent of poor parents say that their children were never hungry at any time in the preceding year because they could not afford food.

Now, of course, there is still need in America and throughout the world, and all of us should act to help our fellow man. But more and more government is not the way to do this. To insist otherwise is to ignore the fact that all major European nations have higher levels of public spending than the United States, and that all of them are poorer.

Nor are human beings happiest when they’re taken care of by the state. Indeed, areas under the yoke of dependency on government are among the least joyous parts of our society. The story of Julia that we saw depicted in last year’s election—the story of cradle-to-grave dependency on government—is not an attractive utopia. Men and women flourish, instead, when afforded the equal opportunity to work and create and accomplish.

I remember some time ago when former Texas Senator Phil Gramm was participating in a Senate hearing on socialized medicine, and the witness there explained that government would best take care of people. Senator Gramm gently demurred and said, “I care more about my family than anyone else does.” And this wide-eyed witness said, “Oh no, Senator. I care as much about your children.” Senator Gramm smiled and said, “Really? What are their names?”

* * *

It is precisely because economic freedom and opportunity outperform centralized planning and regulation that so many millions have risked everything for a chance at the American dream.

Fifty-five years ago, my father fled Cuba, where he had been imprisoned and tortured—including having his teeth kicked out—as a teenager. Today my father is a pastor in Dallas. When he landed in Austin, Texas, in 1957, he was 18. He couldn’t speak a word of English. He had $100 sewn into his underwear. He went and got a job washing dishes and made 50 cents an hour. He worked seven days a week and paid his way through the University of Texas, and then he got a job, and then he went on to start a small business.

Now imagine if, at that time, the minimum wage had been two dollars an hour. He might never have had the opportunity to get that dishwashing job and work his way through school and work his way up from there. I cannot tell you how many times I’ve thanked God that some well-meaning liberal didn’t greet him when he landed in Austin and put his arm around him and say: “Let me take care of you. Let me make you dependent on government. Let me sap your self-respect—and by the way, don’t bother learning English.”

When I was a kid, my father used to say to me: “When we faced oppression in Cuba, I had a place to flee to. If we lose our freedom here, where do we go?” For my entire life, my dad has been my hero. But what I find most incredible about his story is how commonplace it is. Every one of us here today has a story like that. We could line up at this podium and each of us tell the story of our parents or grandparents or our great, great, great grandparents. We are all children of those who risked everything for liberty. That’s the DNA of what it means to be an American—to value freedom and opportunity above all.

In 1976, Margaret Thatcher delivered her “Britain Awake” speech. In it, she said: “There are moments in our history when we have to make a fundamental choice. This is one such moment, a moment when our choice will determine the life or death of our kind of society and the future of our children. Let’s ensure that our children will have cause to rejoice that we did not forsake their freedom.”

If we don’t fight to preserve our liberty, we will lose it. The men and women graduating here today, blessed with a world-class liberal arts education and a Hillsdale love of learning, are perfectly situated to lead the fight, to tell and retell the story of the miracle of freedom to so many Americans—so many young Americans in particular—who’ve never heard that story from the media, or in their schools, and certainly not from Hollywood.

Mrs. Thatcher continued: “Of course, this places a burden on us, but it is one that we must be willing to bear if we want our freedom to survive.”

Throughout history, we have carried the torch for freedom. At Hillsdale, you have been prepared to continue to do so, that together we may ensure that America remains a shining city on a hill, a beacon to the world of hope and freedom and opportunity.

Thank you and God bless you.

Foreign policy "golden rules

1.International treaties have to be negotiated by diplomats prior to endorsement by  presidents.

2. The information gathered by spies plays an increasingly role in diplomacy (arms-control treaties would be impossible without the power of reconnaissance satellites and agents to monitor compliance).

3. If you start war, it doesn’t mean you failed diplomacy , it means military decision is much more profitable.

4. Make it clear to foreign leaders right away whether you are or you are not going to follow the previous President’s foreign policy (after consultations with big business). If you are not going to follow it, design a doctrine of your own (it’s a strategy that is the recognized approach or policy of the US government.

5. National security is your top priority and is the “king’s job” because actually you have no domestic political obstacles to your foreign policy (if it’s a question of war), so you are a chief decision maker there. (The CIA Director has to be excluded from this process — you don’t need him. Besides, the CIA even today, no matter how hard I tried to educate the Agency, remains the worst of the worst and is not to be reformed — it has to be abolished. We have to transfer political intelligence functions to Pentagon. National security is designed to protect the United States and the vital interests (investments) of big business and to promote American values in a world of rivals, and the CIA, through all 60 years of its history, has proved to be absolutely unsuitable for the job).

6. Any country has to be involved in the sphere of our strategic interests if it has a strategic geographic position, significant sources of raw materials, a well-developed transportation system, or could be used as a military base. The strategic policy of any country rotates around the USA and if not — that means a certain President is waiting for greater incentives to come on board. Against target countries, don’t hesitate to use the strategies of pre-emptive war, post-war (post-crisis) reconstruction, and nation building (which means erasing national identity and supplanting it by liberal values).

 With China’s growth , the Cold War is back with a vengeance, so we are back to secret deals based on spheres of influence — but that’s a temporary strategy.

7. You can’t always do what you want without help -  you are dependent on other world leaders, Congressional positions and international public opinion. Ask the Senate to help you sometimes - believe me, they’ll be happy and proud to do so.

8. Create super-profitable conditions for big business by political penetration worldwide. Big money men start investing abroad when they find a safe environment — law and order. The more they invest the more political power they get (international corporations is the most important element of  international system ; the other two are governments and non-governmental organizations).

9. Use big investors to ruin other national economies and governments by withdrawing finances when the economic situation is worsening. As soon as the country opens its financial markets, it increases its dependence on global economic processes that it cannot control; and a financial crisis can easily be staged. Conversely, other countries’ access to the US markets is a powerful economic and political tool.

10. Make the US markets the most attractive for investors by provoking unstable situations in other countries and regions.

11. Send troops or work through military intelligence (not the CIA) to wherever you perceive a threat to the US investments.

12. Use pressure everywhere — strategic nuclear missiles are still the most powerful blackmail tool. Remember, if you are dealing with Russia or China, they will look not only for agreement, but for advantages.

13. Use “personal diplomacy” — phone calls to foreign leaders (every planned phone call has to go through the National Security Adviser and be well prepared, like a serious negotiation). Most important are phone calls to our allies — NATO members. Don’t forget to wish happy birthday to the leaders in person!

14. Use “informal diplomacy” – recruit politicians in other nations who might be able to give informal access to a country’s leadership. In some situations, such as between USA  and China diplomacy is done through semi-formal channels using  interlocutors such as  academic members or think tanks. This occurs in situations when presidents wish to express intentions or to suggest methods of resolving a diplomatic situation, but do not wish to express a formal position.

15. Don’t hesitate to use summits  as a tool, because:

-if you meet a foreign leader in person, you can reduce tensions and clarify national interests.

-personal relationship may lead to improved relations between nations.

-summits allow you to focus national attention on specific issues.

-presidents engaging in personal diplomacy are much more capable than career diplomatic bureaucrats of understanding the domestic policy consequences of diplomatic actions.

-summit negotiations can yield quick results, since discussions are between leaders with the power of decision rather than between representatives who must receive instructions, make reports and rely new proposals.

-diplomatic impasses may be overcome at summits by shifts in policy that only top leaders are empowered to make.

-if presidents desire an international forum for their diplomatic policies, a summit meeting can provide one.

-successful summits can enhance the image of the President and the United States

16. If you’re ready to fight for national interests, forget about human rights — you can always blame infractions on the other side.

17. Isolation is the greatest enemy to information.

18. There’s no sense in applying sanctions if big business isn’t interested.

19. Economic and hence, political progress for any country affects the USA through economic competition that threatens the market and jobs.

20. Any initiative is risky if it’s about unstable region, but you lose popularity fast if you are perceived as indecisive or weak in foreign policy.

21. Any trip abroad has to convey a strong message.

22. Direct military intrusion indicates weakness in your foreign policy. If it’s inescapable, involve as many allies as you can.

23. Don’t touch our military bases abroad!

24. Big debts open markets. No matter what, open national markets world-wide for American big business and remember - the markets, not Presidents, rule the world.

25. Tie your allies to international economic projects and make them pay most of the expenses.

26. Never talk about money in public — talk about democracy, human rights, liberal values and disarmament — people like it.

27. Move forward — transform Americans’ national and patriotic feelings into nationalistic ones (follow the French model) to get total support of your policy (see “Mind Control”).

28. Don’t pay too much attention to the CIA - all they have to do is to support you with appropriate information to justify your strategic political decisions - and nothing else.

29. Ignore the UN - Secretary General has no real power, but you can take advantage of such a thing as the UN peace-keeping if it corresponds with your interests - the US economic costs could be minimized. Besides, UN peacekeeping can promote a spirit of international accountability in solving a certain regional problem. Don’t forget to explain your strategy to the Congress - they don’t like the UN either. On the other hand, you have to manage an international crisis, if it threatens our national interests (start with strategic planning, check national security system for the adequate response, use propaganda to get domestic and international support, consult with big business and allies, start crisis negotiations if possible, use diplomacy (see below) and force or threat of force).

30. To reach global leadership you must have enough resources, national support and a well-calculated strategy (see also “Strategic planning”). As you already know, the US budget is financed by foreign lending. When the dollar goes down in foreign exchange markets, it’s supported by foreign central banks and you’re OK as long as Japan, Saudi Arabia and Germany have an interest in propping up the American economy and do not raise the price for financing America’s debt. The worst situation would be to lose support both at home and abroad

 Foreign policy decision making::

- assessment  of the international and domestic political environment

- goal setting. We have multiple foreign policy goals, and we must determine which goal is effected by the international and domestic political environment

- determination of policy options

- decision making action

- implementation of chosen policy option

 World Domination

Securing the top position requires :

- economic domination

- military power — pre-emptive war or blackmail by war (seeking domination requires an inevitable increase in the military budget)

- a cultural and media invasion

- special operations to influence or neutralize leaders with negative attitude

Modern mechanism of world domination

1. If the country does not accept American rules of the game, we  start a "velvet" or "colored revolution.

2. We replace the government by pro-American regime.

3. If the government resists, we start the US and NATO military operation and help  the anti-government organizations to overthrow the government.

Strategies used

1.      Destabilization strategy based on terrorism - you kill political leaders and civil population, blow up government buildings and blame the opposition.

2.      Stabilization strategy - first, "terrorists" destabilize the situation in the country and then the US and NATO troops come to "stabilize' it.

3.      "New order" or a "managed chaos”  strategy - American “new world order”  through the international chaos, permanent wars, civil wars and revolutions.

My definition :  "Managed chaos” strategy - geopolitical re-division of the world by provoking riots, revolutions, civil wars and overthrowing regimes in independent from USA sovereign states to keep the U.S. world hegemony. Political, national, religious and social conflicts in target countries have to be permanent. The strategy is being covered by a "struggle against international terrorism". The operation is preceded by information war against the target regime and backed by NATO  forces if necessary (Lybia).

 Most important targets of the 21^st century – Russia and China. That’s the reason we occupy Afghanistan

and have to circle China with our military bases  in Central Asia.

4.      Global energy control strategy - the US control of major oil regions and gas fields.

To keep America on top, we would have to prevent cooperation and coalitions between: China and Africa; Shi’ia and Sunni Muslims; Germany and France; Venezuela and Cuba. Their trade agreements and alliances will change the geopolitical situation.

In most important world regions keep the balance by supporting the country which follows the leader:

In Europe — support Britain to balance Germany. You rule Europe if you rule the Persian Gulf. You rule the world if you rule Europe, and that’s why you have to keep NATO by all means to block the military independence of Europe (Germany).

In East Asia - support Japan, Russia and Taiwan to balance China.

In South Asia support Pakistan to balance India.

In Latin America — support Argentina to balance Brazil.

Diplomacy

1. Use secret visits (send the National Security Adviser) if the international problem is complex and important — in this way you don’t depend on media and public opinion. Afterwards you can talk, if it was a success.

2. If presidents like to drink with each other, they are ready to deal with each other.

3. Avoid negotiating on major issues at the end of the day, when your energy is low.

4. Negotiate smart, watch your initiatives. The more you tell about your position, the less your partner will tell you about himself, and the higher price you’ll pay. Diplomacy is all about money and the essence of any negotiations is the price range.

5. Any information should be exchanged as a part of a compromise and not merely given away.

6. Always talk less than necessary. Concentrate on facts and never tell other person about feelings (or your family and medical problems). Don’t interrupt others, try  to understand what they really want and if they try to manipulate you. Also, resist giving in to interruptions until you have completed your thoughts – “Just a moment, I haven’t finished”. Use  Taleyran approximation – if it’s difficult for you to speak up, try to make just one diplomatic statement. If they press you, insist on moving this questions to experts. And use indirect language  such as “It looks like” or  “You see situation from a very special angle”.

7. No negative emotions - strong emotions indicate weak nerves. Realize that there might be other issues motivating the other person’s behavior and never take things personally.

8. Stop self-limiting behaviors, such as smiling too much, nodding too much, tilting your head or dropping your eyes in response to other person’s gaze. Speak I normal conversational volume, don’t scream and don’t  whisper, either, as you won’t be taken seriously.

9. Take a problem-solving approach to conflict, and try to see the other person as your collaborator rather than your opposition. You’d better postpone negotiations than allow them to break down.

10. Fix all questions and don’t be in a rush to answer any of them.

11. The slower you talk, the more confident you are.

12. Never ask straight questions.

13. It’s important to know what questions and when you have to ask. Start with an “invitation” question that does not need a definite answer but opens up the discussion, like: “No matter what reporters say, we’ll start negotiating for arms control.” Proceed with “intelligence gathering” questions, like: “Are you going to abide by our last agreement on the withdrawal of military forces or do we have other options?” Go to “expertise” questions, like: “It’s 5000 soldiers, right? ”

 There’s a difference between expertise and straight questions - straight question are like: “Will you sign the treaty?” and these have to be avoided because you’ll get no straight answer right away. Finish with a closing question, like: “I think that’s what we intend to sign? Next time we can start from here.” Or you can press your partner: “Let’s not lose this last opportunity, eh?”

14. Explain your negative attitude in a smart way: give half the information and continue, depending on your partner’s reaction. If you can’t accept his proposal, tell him that the experts may look into it again and come to agreement. If your partner is not a complete idiot he’ll understand his proposal is unacceptable (because the experts have already done all they could). But if he is an idiot, he’ll agree to “kill” his proposals by passing them to the experts.

You start to lose momentum if you start to defend yourself.

15. Stop (postpone) negotiations the moment you start to lose or you could end up in a total failure and that could be used by opposition back home.

16. If you bring ideology - try to win. If you bring national interests, try to find compromise. Be flexible — that’s a sign of strength, not weakness.

17. Don’t make aggressive statements for the media, no matter what.

18. Respect is half a victory, but you usually win when your partner is scared. Avoid open confrontation and respond to personal attacks with humor.

19. Watch the military experts -  they are always ready to “push” you. No arms agreement can win ratification without backing from Joint Chiefs, because Congress needs and trusts their expertise, and their disapproval is a strong tool against you in case you ignore their advice. So, think three times before you appoint Joint Chiefs.

20. Take negotiations on the trade deficit very seriously — they often take you nowhere and have zero results as your partner wants you to change your attitude to him completely as well as your international economic policy, while you expect the same favor from him. You can influence one partner but you can’t very easily influence the international system.

21. After you come back home do some positive advertising through the media — in such a way you influence other presidents and future negotiations. If the negotiations resulted in a treaty, “sell” it to the Senate for approval.

22. Negotiation no-nos:

- don’t be confused if your partner threatens you — that means he needs your cooperation. Don’t enter into negotiation right away with high demands.

- don’t touch the toughest issues first. Don’t assume — that’s a sign of weakness.

- don’t hesitate to pause or take a break.

- never say “no” to your partner’s ideas — rather, pack them up in one “package” with your proposals.

Diplomatic tricks.

Tricks in diplomacy are usually used to distract your hard working team, shift the emphasis of the negotiation in order to shape the deal on terms of your adversary or manipulate your team into closing negotiation and accept terms you don’t really like. And the tricks are:

“Leap” - your adversary is losing and starts “jumping” from one point to another

“Pile” - your adversary “piles up” problems, tries to provoke a chaotic discussion or stop negotiations

“Empty chair” - a day or two before negotiations start your adversary informs you that he’s not ready yet, trying to press you (or he wants to change location)

“Diplomatic illness” – the practice of feigning  illness to avoid participation in negotiations and at the same time to avoid giving formal offense.

“Deaf” - your adversary keeps asking questions instead of answering yours

“Provocation” — your adversary doubts your team’s professional level and your ability to negotiate

“Busy guy” — your adversary breaks negotiation for an hour or two pretending he has to do some very important business (or that he got a very important call).

“Mirror” - it’s a very interesting “programming” trick. The technology is simple: you try to “mirror” your adversary’s style and behavior, adopt a similar posture, use his gestures, and follow the speed of his speech. First, he will like it subconsciously and will be more open to you. Second, you’ll understand better his way of thinking.

“Sandwich” - pressure (often — military) — negotiations — pressure

“Show” - using certain arguments your adversary appeals to your emotions

“Circle” - a very sophisticated trick: your adversary tries to “push” his proposal in different variants and finally comes back to his initial variant, trying to convince you that’s the best choice

“Carrot and stick” - threat (blackmail) plus promises (money). The guy could  blackmail you also by demanding to set a deadline

“Student” - your adversary talks too much about the details, asking a lot of minor questions, trying to make you nervous and make mistakes

“Donkey” – your adversary  declines the offer to speak first

“Ball” - encourage your adversary if he’s looking for “global decisions” and he’ll do a lot of minor favors

“Rubber” - delay, if you can’t predict the result, and press your adversary by delaying the answer

“Last train” - you can press your adversary by an ultimatum right before negotiations are over, if he really is interested in some result. “Spice” the  ultimatum with some important reasons and give your adversary a choice of variants.

   You can also leak opposing demands to the media (be careful with this one. Do not betray diplomatic trust by talking about secret deals or demands that actually have been mentioned). You may also escalate your demands during negotiation and manipulate public opinion to line up behind your demands.

Diplomatic Double Talk

Statement                                                                          Meaning

 We are disappointed.                                                       We got nothing.

 Situation disturbs us.                                                       It’s unacceptable no matter what.

 There are still differences between                                 There are huge differences.

 our approaches to the problem . 

 We can’t accept this deal.                                               This means trouble.

 We reserve the right to use any means

to prevent further worsening of the situation.                 This means war.

 Discussion helped us to understand each     

other better.                                                                     We’ve wasted our time.

 We don’t understand your attitude.                                Stop it immediately.

 I’m trying to understand your position.                          Understand me too, idiot!

 If I’ve understood you correctly, you don’t agree.        Do you have any other option?

 We both will pay a very high price if we don’t

reach agreement.                                                             Yes, that’s a threat.

How to Manage the White House

Be strong. Be attractive. Be logical. All you have to do during your first term is to take care of the second one.

The 2nd term’s agenda is to set your place in the world’s history.

1st  year. You have enough public support to start big initiatives.

2nd year. Develop your initiatives.

3rd year. Go, go public preparing your re-election. Presidents often lose voters during this period.

4th year. All-politics year. Try to achieve important international agreement (a treaty) for the historic record. Win re-election.

Divide your day into hours and minutes : 30% of your weekly hours go to senior White House staff, 10% — to Cabinet, 5% — to Congress members, 5% — to foreign leaders.

No matter what, even if it’s a war time, sleep one hour during the day to give your brain a break, and finish your day at 6 P.M. After 6 P.M. do not read any documents, do not take any phone calls, do not talk to anybody but family members and close friends. .And - eat whatever you want, but you must know that the more calories you have to digest, the slower you think.

Remember :

1. You are a national image (a national ideal based on pseudo-facts), a symbol of national unity, national continuity and the symbol of federal government. Leadership is the first quality Americans look for in you - they want a President who is steadfast in his convictions.

2. The power to control the federal budget is your top prerogative.

3. Whom are you going to be:

- utopist (ideas manipulator)

- manager (Government and Congress manipulator)

- challenger (reformer)

4. Any problem turns into a political one if it threatens your power.

5. Use your legal right to press the nation and illegal ones to press the world to eliminate problems.

4. Once you’re in politics, you are a hostage of your status and you must sacrifice privacy in return for power.

6. Never play alone.

7. All your decisions are risk taking ones (any decision brings a problem). You may ask advice before you make a decision, but don’t listen to anybody afterwards. You are not paid for the quantity of your work but for leadership and ultimate decision making.

8. Correct political mistakes fast  before they become political scandals. 

10. Never blame previous Presidents for the problems they left for you - that’s a sign of weakness.

11. Get rid of a  White House tradition to deal with problems only if they “knock at the door.”

 White House Staff tricks

1. Fight for access (influence) to President or to people with direct access (aiming to get a better position if President is re-elected).

2. Isolate government from the President.

3. Influence = relationship with the President.

4. Get a table in the West Wing. You are nobody if you are stuck in the White House basement and see the President by appointment only.

5. Before you send a document to the President, have to look at it and ask yourself if it’s too immoral or too radical.

6. Never say “no” aloud to anybody.

7. Remain anonymous with conflicts.

8. Never bring bad news to the President - let it be some idiot, not you.

9. Never say “That’s impossible,” no matter what the President is asking you to do.

10. Disappear (and find an excuse later) if the President is in a bad mood.

11. Never ague with the President if there’s somebody else present.

12. Learn how the President likes to do business (talking, giving orders, writing the documents and taking notes, managing official and non-official meetings) and his habits (food, drinks, cigarettes, favorite sport, movies, show business stars, writers, politicians; attitude to women) and try to copy him — the President has to feel comfortable with you.

13. Fight anybody who’s trying to do your job to be closer to the President.

14. Avoid taking on risky tasks controlled by the President in person (if necessary, try to “delegate” it to somebody else).

15. Avoid being associated with any failures.

16. Don’t say anything President doesn’t want to hear.

17. Use “Smith’s Principle”: if it can be understood by Congress, it’s not finished yet.

18. Write memorandums not to inform the reader, but to protect the writer.

19. No matter what subject is under discussion, employ the language of sports and war: say “breakthrough” instead of “progress” , never speak of compromise, consider “adopting a fallback position.”

20. Every public appearance in with the President is an investment in your career after the White House.

21. Minimize the number of rivals.

22. Gain independence according to how much the President needs you.

23. Before asking the President for some personal favor, make him believe he’s going to get some (political) profit out of it.

24. Tell the President what he can do and help him try to do it, and never tell him what he shouldn’t do.

25. Avoid giving any personal gifts to the President if you are not Chief of Staff.

Every public appearance in with the President is an investment in your career after the White House.

   There is an open power struggle between national security staff members and domestic policy staff and between those who develop new policies and initiatives versus budget staff.

Presidential decision making

1.      Decision making is a multiple choice process.

2. Any decision involves political risk.

3. If you can’t make a decision, you need more information.

4. Be optimistic, but remain realistic.

5. Give yourself a deadline.

6. No brainstorming chaos.

7. There are two kinds of decisions: irreversible and reversible. Better know which kind you are facing.

Here’s the process:

a) Identify the problem

b) Analyze the problem — what are the facts?

c) Evaluate options - what are the pros and cons? what can go wrong?

d) Identify choices - which alternative is the best?

e) Implement plans - what action needs to be taken?

How to Manage the Staff

Adopt a dominant management style:

1. Pyramidal, structured as hierarchy with you at the top, followed by the Chief of Staff and other key assistants. I strongly recommend this one - it insures a clear chain of command and provides precise channels of information going up and directives going down. 

2. Circular, when you are surrounded by advisers, all of whom have  equal access to the Oval Office. That  means chaos (JFK style).

All your assistants are political assistants and everyone will try to play a policy-maker. But a good thing is that all of them were not elected and are responsible to you only.

 Thus you can:

- reform your staff freely as there’s not even a word about it in the US Constitution

- interchange key figures if domestic crisis is approaching

- if you don’t agree with the staff on important issues, go to polls for back-up. (The best employee is the one you can blackmail. Besides, a very good “pusher” for your people is their deep understanding that they have to work together to help the President stay in office next term — if the President leaves, everybody leaves)

- use “the carrot and the stick”

- use “pulling by pushing” — give an important job without publicity to those who become too popular

- do as little reading as you can — you have staff for that

- do as little writing as you can — same reason

- involve yourself personally in your staff and Cabinet jobs as little as you can — same reason

-  make no minor decisions — same reason

-  send back any intelligence or other report if it’s more than one sheet of paper

Technology of  Mind Manipulation (MM)

1) Create a steadfast American collective will-power: “We want to live forever in the America we live in now” - through the media.

2) Don’t ask people to change their views and beliefs - they have only to change the object of their aggression - “Now we understand who are America's enemies! (the previous President, Republicans).

3) Get people accustomed to accept facts but believe only in the “right” comments  - any common sense has to be “switched off.” This way you create “mass artificial schizophrenia” — people lose the ability to connect statements and facts (notions) and just believe.

Besides, by extreme exaggeration of the enemy’s negative qualities you can install the national schizophrenic fear (of "international terrorism") and people have to accept you, the US President, as a savior. Plus, no matter what, repeat your major statements until people start accepting them without thinking.

4) Divide the nation into “good Americans”(patriots) and “bad Americans”(the “minority).

Make it clear : it’s much better and more comfortable to be “good” than “bad.” “We aren’t watching good Americans who support the President. The surveillance is for bad Americans and we make their lives and careers uncomfortable. We have to do that because enemies of America may be using them.” This method is called artificial social selection and its ultimate goal is a total regulation and standardization of the nation.

5) For successful MM, use the combined efforts of popular Democratic American writers, TV and radio anchors, talented publicists and columnists, business and show business celebrities, politicians. Thus, step by step you create the “industry of correct political behavior and correct American thinking.”

6) Use a combination: statement + image. It reduces the effort needed to understand your message and makes people comfortable with you.

1997

Obama was elected the Illinois State Senator

2004

Obama was elected the US Senator.

                               Don’t ask Senator  Lugar

Senators Lugar and Obama in Russia

  "Obama" visited Russia (together with Senator R. Lugar) and met secretly his SVR (former KGB intelligence) handlers to discuss his prospectives  for the U.S. presidency. It appeared that  U.S. Senator Barack “Obama” was getting out of control and Russians  decided  to teach him a lesson. Here’s what happened. 

 Sen. Richard Lugar, an Indiana Republican and Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and Sen. Barack Obama, an Illinois Democrat, were detained for three hours on August 7  at an airport in Russia's city of Perm .  "We are not certain as to why or the particular activity that caused that delay," Lugar said.  He said U.S. Embassy officials informed the senators that "an official at the Foreign Ministry has issued an apology this morning."

  No one from the Russian Foreign Ministry could be reached immediately. The U.S Embassy could not immediately confirm the information. Russia's Federal Security Service , however, defended the plane's delay, saying it was because the Perm airport isn't part of an Open Skies Agreement, which allows certain planes to bypass inspections. The FSB, the agency that succeeded the Soviet-era KGB, said it could only comment on the report within a week's time. Maksim Zhalayev, deputy head of the border control service at Perm’s airport, accused the senators of refusing to follow border guards’ orders, telling Russia’s Ekho Moskvy radio that was the reason behind the delay. U.S. Embassy officials  said the flight was a U.S. military flight, and therefore should have had diplomatic status. Lugar's spokesman, Andy Fisher, said that Russian officials had initially refused to allow the plane to take off, and insisted on boarding it. "They did not. The border patrol finally got orders to let us go," Fisher said. The senators and their aides spent three days in Russia visiting sites where warheads are stored before destruction under the U.S.-funded Comprehensive Threat Reduction program.  This international scandal  could never happen without President Putin’s straight order.

                                Bilderberg first

June 6, 2008

Hillary and Obama were invited for the Bilderberg  Club meeting, Westfields Marriott Hotel, Chantilly, Northern Virginia. Next day, June 7 Hillary announced she's out of the race.Both Obama and Hillary tried to keep this meeting a secret. Bilderberg Club rules the world and they actually ordered Hillary Clinton to leave the presidential race. They appointed Obama the President. Henry Kissinger is the oldest permanent member of the club and a close friend of Putin, Russian president.

Putin and Kissinger in Moscow - deal ?

Good Russian boy

November 4, 2008 .Obama  won the race and became the first Russian illegal spy to be elected the U.S. President. The Congressional Research Service, a public policy arm of Congress, officially admits no one in the government ever vetted Obama's constitutional eligibility

November 18,  2008. After his victory , President "Barack Obama", the most powerful man in the world, lost sense of reality and ignored his Russian intelligence boss (Mikhail Fradkov) instructions - he had his own vision on how to rule and destroy America .Russians were not going to lose control over the White House and American President. They explained to Obama, that it's OK, but he had to work together with Bill Clinton, a "big friend of Russia" and his people. Bill Clinton was instructed what to do and in November 2008 Obama had to divide the power - he appointed Hillary Clinton the Secretary of State, Rahm Emanuel ( Clinton's Chief Political Adviser) - the White House Chief of Staff and Leon Panetta (Clinton's Chief of Staff) - CIA Director

October 2, 2010 . He  managed to fire Rahm Emanuel (I'll tell you why) and after that Russians humiliated him one more time - in April 28, 2011, he was forced to nominate Panetta to replace Robert Gates as Secretary of Defense. Panetta would end all operations and withdraw all U.S. troops from Iraq - that's another Russian intelligence order. Obama, actually, lost half of his power by giving two key Cabinet positions to Clintons team - that's how Russians punished their illegal spy for his independence.

  And that’s what good Russian “Obama” is doing for Russia:

1.He's destroying America - its called "socialist intervention into the US economy".

A person who wants to spend $1 trillion on health care reform  which is not a priority at all in the middle of horrible economic crisis, is either an idiot or an enemy of America with a very well calculated plan to terminate the country.  Obama did it -  in March 2010 he signed Health Care Reform legislation into law.

2.He's into immigration reform which is a socialist intervention into American society - he'll turn 12 million poor illegal Latinos into US citizens-revolutionaries. In 2012 they'll get green cards, by 2016 they'll get citizenship and bring here all their family members (grandparents, parents, brothers, sisters, brides and grooms) - around 50-60 million unemployed poorly educated  people. And that will be the death of America, the end of American Constitution and the birth of a totalitarian "Obama - forever " Communist regime.

3.Rising unemployment and inflation, budget deficit at every state and city is another Obama's trick, planned by Russian intelligence - he's pushing big states like Texas, New York and California to a "boiling point" after which they might take serious steps towards independence - the beginning of America's death. USSR collapsed the same way -  now Russians through Obama want revenge.

4.While Bill Clinton saved one Russian "mole" John Deutch, Obama saved 10 (ten) Russian illegal spies, arrested by FBI in June, 2010, sending them back to Russia in 2010 without any investigation - severe blow to American national security and priceless gift to SVR, Russian intelligence. The case is very interesting because Hillary Clinton was the target  of Russian spy ring. That’s what happened.

 June 28, 2010

FBI arrested in New York, Massachusetts, Virginia and New Jersey 10 Russian illegal spies.All were charged as agents of a foreign government ((Russia) and were not registered with the Dept. of Justice , 5 years in jail. Also, all of them except Anna Chapman, were charged with conspiracy to commit money laundering, up to 20 years in jail.

In 2007-2010 Alan Patrikof, a financier, a close friend of Clintons, a sponsor Hillary Clinton's election campaigns, had business contacts with vice president of accounting firm "Morea Financial Services, Inc" (120 Broadway, #1016, New York, NY 20271, 212-608-1080) an SVR illegal Cynthia Murphy ( Lydia Gurieva). So, the whole group was working for Cynthia Murphy who was trying to get access to Hillary Clinton .

Philip J. Crowley, assistant press secretary to the US State Department, made right away the  statement:"There is no evidence to suggest that this spy group had U.S. Secretary of State as its principal target".

“Daily News”, 09.30.2010 :”One of the accused Russian sleeper spies may have been trying to worm her way into Secretary of State Clinton's circle of high-powered friends. Suspect Cynthia Murphy worked at a downtown financial firm that appears to have put her in contact with Alan Patricof, a New York venture capitalist and top Democratic donor who was a finance chairman of Clinton's 2008 presidential campaign.The federal complaint states that in February 2009, Murphy reported to Moscow that through work, she had met a financier who was "a personal friend" of a current cabinet official and an active political fund-raiser”

  On July 9, 2010 they were exchanged for garbage, 4 defectors convicted in Russia. On July 12 Russian leader, PM Vladimir Putin met the group which was official recognition of their merits. On October 10, 2010 , Dmitriy Medvedev, President of Russia , awarded all 10 spies with Russian orders and that means they did a very good job in America destroying its national security.

6.Obama’s pro- Russian U.S. National Security Strategy :

  “Analysts, agents and officers who protect us must have access to all relevant intelligence throughout the government”.

A very dangerous trick – just imagine Russian recruit a “mole” with access to all relevant information .

I call this a “hologram method”. If I, Russian “mole”, work for CIA as nuclear proliferation analyst, I have access to

“all relevant information” throughout US intelligence community:

Air Force Intelligence, Army Intelligence, Central Intelligence Agency, Coast Guard Intelligence, Defense Intelligence Agency, Department of Energy, Department of Homeland Security, Department of State  Bureau of Intelligence and Research, Department of the Treasury, Drug Enforcement Administration, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Marine Corps Intelligence, National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency , National Reconnaissance Office, National Security Agency

Navy Intelligence, Office of Director of National Intelligence

  Do you understand what that means ? I’ll explain. The White House is sending requests for information or research on a certain political or economic problem, situation in Europe, Asia, etc.  A “mole’ is sending those request to Moscow and Russians calculate the US strategy, understand ? Besides, “mole” is stealing information from all above mentioned agencies. We have to stop it today – just for that deadly blow to American national security Obama has to go to jail as the enemy of state.

7.All his foreign policy actions work for Russia - withdrawal from Afghanistan, withdrawal from Iraq (that's a huge gift for Iran, Russia's best friend), anti-Israel policy (a gift for Palestinian terrorists - Russia's best friends, most of whom were trained in Soviet Union).

  Why Russia needs the pro-Russian president of America ?

Russia has the world's largest reserves of mineral and energy resources, the world's largest forest reserves and its lakes contain 25% of the world's fresh water.  Russia is energy superpower : #1 in the world in natural gas reserves, #8 in oil reserves and #2 in coal reserves.

 The sources of energy  (oil, gas, uranium, coal) are rapidly coming to an end. At the same time China, India, Brazil, Indonesia are rapidly growing.

 China ranks since 2010 as the world's 2nd largest economy after the US. It became the world's top manufacturer in 2011, surpassing the United States . China is increasing its economy (GDP, gross domestic product) by 10% a year - in 5 years there will be 1,5 China, 1,15 India, 1,5 Brazil ,1,15 Indonesia. 9 billion people on Earth with energy, food and fresh water supplies coming to an end in the next 25-40 years. That means that 500 million Europeans and 300 million Americans have to lower their standards of living - and they will not accept this ! On top of it we have the global financial and economic crisis which is actually killing America.

 The only way out - to capture resources that still remain to preserve their standards of living.

 The World War III is coming - the war between USA and China for Russia's resources. It might start in Middle East and (radical Islam against Israel) and then re-directed to Russia.

 Russian leader Putin will do everything and will pay anything to postpone the war as long as possible.

Watch the microphone !

    To tell you the truth, I’ve finished this book on March 20, 2012, but Barack Obama “pushed”  me to add one more chapter – about the unexpected end to his KGB/SVR spy career.

   One of my professors at  Moscow Intelligence Institute said: “Mike, remember, one mistake in pronunciation and you’ll get a nice tiny bullet  in your smart head !”  Let’s see what  happened and how KGB “Barack Obama” operation almost came to its end.

Barack  Obama and Russian President Dmitriy  Medvedev,

 March 26, 2012, Seoul, South Korea :  dangerous  mistake of a spy.

OBAMA-MEDVEDEV SECRET TALK DECODED by Mikhail Kryzhanovsky

           Seoul, March 26, 2012

Obama and Russian President Medvedev had a short  talk before press conference, unaware that the microphone was on.

I can decode this talk between SVR (Russian Intelligence) asset Obama and one of his handlers, Medvedev, - the other one is Vladimir Putin, Russian President-elect since 03.04.2012.

 The secret deals.

"On these issues, but particularly missile defense, this can be solved, but it's important for him [Putin] to give me space".  Barack Obama.

Explanation.

1) "...these issues can be solved".

Obama promised that America won't start war in Iran in 2012 and, for sure , it won't happen after Obama is re-elected. Obama and Medvedev reached a  secret deal on Iranian nuclear program, because Obama didn't even mention  it, it's a minor problem now.

2) "...particularly missile defense...this can be solved"

Obama and Medvedev already reached a secret deal on American missile defense in Europe - Obama will put it on hold until 2016, for the period of his future second term.

3) "It's important for him [Putin] to give me space"

Obama didn't mention Putin's name and that means that secret deals in Seoul were initiated by Putin, not

Medvedev. Obama is begging Putin to "give him space" and that means Putin is pressing Obama hard as his asset.

Dmitriy Medvedev: "Yes, I understand. I understand your message about space. Space for you..."

Explanation.

Medvedev didn't promise to stop pressure, he promised "understanding".

That means: "We understand you can't be weak on this issues now. But Putin, who's not as strong and popular in Russia as before, wants to start his presidency with international victory - missile defense in Europe is a threat to Russia and it has to be removed".

Barack Obama:"This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility".

Explanation.

Obama is 100% sure he's re-elected and that means Obama and Medvedev reached a secret deal on Obama's 2012 campaign financing.

"After my election I have more flexibility" means "If Russian intelligence could finance my campaign properly, I'll get the second term and you'll get whatever you want, but not before".

Dmitriy Medvedev:"I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir [Putin] and I stand with you".

Explanation.

1) Again, Medvedev promised "understanding" and that means that Putin will make ultimate decision on Obama's campaign financing.

2) "Transmit", "transmitter" is espionage technical jargon. Medvedev would never use it if it was a regular meeting of two presidents. He would rather say "I'll inform Putin on that"

 Why it happened.

1. Unlike Putin, who was a professional spy, Medvedev is just a former lawyer.

2. Obama and Medvedev lost a sense of reality, otherwise they wouldn't talk without complete privacy.

KGB Operation “Barack Obama”

 August 4, 1961

  Barack Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawaii.

If there's something very wrong with someone's birth certificate and if there's an indication that this someone used a birth certificate of a newborn child (Virginia Sunahara) who died at birth or soon after birth, we have to talk about the methods Russian intelligence (SVR, a former KGB) and its illegal espionage department. We have to talk about the  illegal spy "documentation process" - using birth certificates to get legal documents in USA - SS#, driver license, passport.

 Now, let's look Obama's biography as I see it with my 30 years of espionage experience.

Illegal spy cover story works best if it's a mix of actual and fake facts. "Obama" (let's call him John Smith) was a child of a student from Kenya who studied in Moscow and dated a Russian girl. Such kids in Russia were often unwanted by both partners and were raised and educated at a special school. Like Obama, John Smith was born in 1961 and, like him, graduated from high school in 1979. KGB paid attention to a very smart young man.  Smith was Intelligence Institute student in 1979-1981  in Moscow, not far from "Cosmos" Hotel. There are couple of buildings in the area and I got intelligence education myself in one of them back in 1987, 15 Yaroslavskaya Street, Moscow Russia).

  Then a decision was made to train him individually as illegal intelligence officer .The "dacha" (Russian for small villa) not far from Moscow, provides an ideally isolated territory for training.2-3 instructors  live there to immerse the candidate completely into his American identity and supervise him all the time. From the first day the candidate becomes accustomed to the circumstances in which he will be living and working in USA for many years. He wears American clothes, eats the food, he's thinking, acting and living like 100% American . He is supplied with newspapers and magazines, he's watching movies and TV shows. The instructors ask the candidate the most difficult questions imaginable . After a number of years of such training, the future illegal knows everything about America, espionage technology and speaks perfect English (by the way, "Obama" once made a very interesting mistake - he said "leave the Agency" instead of "lead the Agency" - watch "Barack Obama 2012 :KGB technology 2008" on YouTube. In espionage business, we say :" One mistake in pronunciation, and the enemy puts a lead dot at the end of the sentence")

    After special training candidate often goes through a  special process:

a) illegal probation period abroad. A trip abroad through intermediate countries with numerous changes of passports and cover stories, jobs, personal connections. Then he gets to the target country, stays there for another 1-2 years and goes back to his country for additional training and correction of cover story — actually, it's his first combat assignment. The most important part of this assignment is to check the reliability of the cover story and documents; the cover story has to be reinforced with new and old true facts, like short-term studies at universities or professional training courses).

b) intermediate legislation. On his way back the officer could stay in an intermediate country for another 1-2 years, make contacts with business, scientists, government employees, celebrities.

c) basic legislation. Officer comes to the target country, obtains genuine documents, gets a job which allows him to travel and talk to many people, recruit informants thus creating an illegal station).

   At the same time, in 1979-1981, Barack Obama studied at Occidental College in Los Angeles where he became a socialist ready to transform the nation by redistributing wealth. KGB station in Washington, DC which was constantly looking for future secret sources at American  top universities and colleges, like Columbia, Yale or Harvard, got information about young socialist. They sent his picture and info to Moscow where some resemblance was discovered between a college student from Los Angeles and a future illegal spy John Smith.

    We have to investigate and prove one of  two versions of what happened next.                     

1981

  Obama traveled to Indonesia to visit his mother and sister Maya, and visited the families of college friends in India and Pakistan for 3 weeks. Then something happened in India, a good friend to Soviet Union and a perfect place to recruit foreigners. He was recruited and he disappeared.

  In Pakistan poor student who  was wearing "thrift store clothing" (from Obama’s “Dreams From my Father”)   managed to stay for 2 weeks and stayed  at Lahore Hilton International, was introduced to Yousa Gillani, the Central Working Committee of the Pakistan Muslim League (PML) member and the future prime minister - and went bird-hunting with him.

 That's exactly what  illegal spy had to do - make business and political contacts on his way to the target country. John Smith aka Barack Obama came back to the United States - change of agents, one of regular illegal espionage methods.

Obama's father , Barack  Obama Sr., aged 46 died in a car accident in Nairobi. His mother, Ann Dunham,  lived in Indonesia and might be just avoided or ignored by her "son" (Don Johnson, Dunham co-worker, said "Obama was distancing himself from her"). Russians approached her under a "false flag" ( National Security Agency or CIA) and explained that her son had to stay abroad for a secret mission for some time. They told her that she had to be ready to accept another person as her own son. For operation like that, espionage agencies often recruit close relatives and allow them to meet their son (daughter) from time to time outside USA. Money talks, there's nothing unusual, though for Dunham the pressure and depression was too big - she died in 1995 of cancer at 52.

Time changes people, so "Obama" had to stay away from his friends and do not show up in public too much.

1981

.

He  transferred to Columbia University in New York City, where he majored in political science and where nobody could remember him at all, and graduated with a B.A. in 1983. 

 "Obama" declined  repeated requests to talk about his New York years, release his Columbia transcript or identify a single fellow student, co-worker, roommate or friend from those years. Wall Street Journal editorial in September 2008, titled "Obama's  Lost Years" noted that Fox News contacted  400 Obama's classmates at Columbia and found no one who even remembered him. "Mostly, my years at Columbia were an intense period of study," Obama told Columbia College Today in a 2005 alumnus interview. "I didn't socialize that much. I was like a monk".

 Perfect cover up ! Columbia has refused to release any records regarding Obama's attendance, including his application to attend, his grades, and his financial aid records, if any exist. Only one person could order Columbia to shut up - CIA Director Leon Panetta. Why ? See next part. 

1983-1985

He worked at the Business International Corporation and at the New York Public Interest Research Group. He worked in Chicago as community organizer in 1985-1988.

1987

I have a perfect memory and I state that I saw the man in the center of this picture in Moscow in 1987, where I’ve been trained at KGB Intelligence Institute.

“Zolotoi Kolos” Hotel,Yaroslavskaya Street 15, Moscow, a secret PGU KGB Intelligence Institute facility. If you open the Moscow hotels catalog, you’ll se that this hotel has 5 buildings – 1,3,4,5,7,8 – buildings 2 and 6 “do not exist”.

Nearby I saw the man who looked like the person in the centre of the  picture above in January 1987.

On October, 13, 2011 a  statement appeared on Internet:  Paul Pieniezny .”The Obama who was in Russia at that time [1987 – M.K.] was not Barack Obama, but a student from Western Africa. He is still alive and well and a diplomat. I have mentioned that little fact a few times on the Fogbow. I hope he sues Mr Kryzhanovsky for every cent he earned in the extreme-right talk circuit”.

1988

He travelled to Europe to meet his KGB handlers and get new instructions. He had a choice - a safe variant (to make a political career in one of African countries), and a risky one of staying in America - KGB wanted him to be Martin Luther King #2 . But it appeared he could get much more which was Oval Office. It was decided he could stay in USA longer and it was a success : Illinois Senator (1997-2004) and U.S. Senator (2005-2008).

1988-1991                         

In 1988, Obama entered Harvard Law School. He worked as a summer associate at the law firms of Sidley Austin in 1989 and Hopkins & Sutter in 1990. After graduating from Harvard in 1991, he returned to Chicago.

                                     Mafia

1992

Alexi Giannoulias

   Vyacheslav Ivankov ("Yaponchik"), a "Godfather" of Russian mafia came to USA. In 1982 he got 14 years of jail time, was  recruited by KGB and got out of jail 5 years earlier, in 1991. He came to USA to build Russian criminal empire, penetrate American economy and political system (Mafia groups in Russia control all big banks and corporations). Victor Sergeev, a former KGB officer, was his adviser.

 He was involved in extortion, intimidation, gambling, arms sales, gasoline tax fraud, money laundering. In 1995 FBI recorded his phone call to Moscow: "The  base in America is ready"-  it was an open threat to the US national security. He was arrested , charged with extortion, got 9 years and then  deported to Russia in 2004. In 2009 he  was killed by a sniper in Moscow. Ivankov ruled 25 Russian mafia groups in New York, Los Angeles, Miami, Chicago, Boston, Seattle, Detroit and Philadelphia. Russians always make ties to other ethnic crime groups and make deals to avoid gangster wars for territory and influence. Illinois state Russian community is big and rich (around 400,000),  that's why Chicago and good relations with the Chicago Outfit boss John DiFronzo were very important for Godfather and KGB asset Ivankov.

 I want to know Russian mafia political connections through Chicago mobsters. Why ?

 Because New York Post reported on September 5, 2007:

  "A man who has long been dogged by charges that the bank his family owns helped finance a Chicago crime figure will host a Windy City fund-raiser tonight for Sen. Barack Obama. Alexi Giannoulias, who became Illinois state treasurer last year after Obama vouched for him, has pledged to raise $100,000 for the senator's Oval Office bid. Giannoulias bankrolled Michael "Jaws" Giorango, a Chicagoan twice convicted of bookmaking and promoting prostitution. Giannoulias is so tainted by reputed mob links that several top Illinois Dems, including the state's speaker of the House and party chairman, refused to endorse him even after he won the Democratic nomination with Obama's help".

 KGB Operation "John Deutch"

Deutch was born in Belgium to a Russian father and he was the only Russian CIA Director. He got some jobs with top secrets access:positions :

1977-1980 The US Department of Energy: Director of Energy Research

Acting Assistant Secretary for Energy Technology

Under Secretary

1980-1981 President’s Nuclear Safety Oversight Commission

1983 President’s Commission on Strategic Forces

1985-1989 The White House Science Council

1990-1993 The President’s Intelligence Advisory Board

1993-1994 Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology

Deputy Defense Secretary

1995-1996 Director of Central Intelligence

1996 The President’s Commission on Aviation Safety and Security

1998-1999 Chairman of the Commission to Assess the Organization of the Federal Government to Combat the Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction

He was appointed by President Clinton and stayed in Langley in 1995-1996. He ordered my recruitment , he is a Russian "mole," and he’s safe because  Bill  Clinton  pardoned this enemy of state in 2001.

                 3  signs are enough to triangulate a "mole" and here they are for Mr. Deutch:

1. Two days after Deutch retired from the CIA, on December 16, 1996, technical personnel discovered at his house highly classified information stored on his unclassified computer, loaded from his agency computer. He refused to explain why he violated strict security rules.

First, Director of Central Intelligence doesn’t need highly classified data on his home computer, because he is a bureaucrat, not an analyst.

Second, here we have a trick - the Internet-connected computer is accessible by anyone with some technical knowledge and you don’t have to send anything —  Russians will read secret information right from your home computer.

2. In 1997 the CIA began a formal security investigation. It was determined that his computer was often connected to Internet with no security, and that Deutch was known to leave memory cards with classified data lying in his car. Deutch used his influence to stop further  investigation and the CIA took no action until 1999, when it suspended his security clearances. He admitted finally the security breach and merely apologized but refused to explain communication via Internet with some Russian chemist.

3. In 1999 the Defense Department started its own investigation, and it appeared that in 1993 Deutch, as Defense Undersecretary, used unsecured computers at home and his America Online (!) account to access classified defense information. As Deputy Defense Secretary, he declined departmental requests in 1994 to allow security systems to be installed in his residence.

4. In 2000 Senator Charles Grassley asked the Justice Department to look into the case. There was no investigation

In 2001 President Clinton pardoned Deutch. There were no comments.

Hillary Clinton , Living History: "Jackie [Kennedy - М.К.]... she never came out and said it, but she meant that he [Bill Clinton - М.К]] might also be a target. ‘He has to be very careful," she told me."Very careful." In 1991, dying from lung cancer, Jackie Kennedy was still scared to talk about CIA.

 Since 2000 Deutch is MIT Professor and Director for Citigroup. Very good.

CIA/FBI  "Millenium Hilton" Conspiracy

September 1, 1995 

I  was recruited at "Millennium Hilton", NYC as CIA "Filament" by CIA agents Bill and Joe .I also met Frank from FBI National Security Division and had to work for two agencies.

Next was a joint CIA-FBI conspiracy. They decided to "copy" "Kremlin" operation  I  had to spy on the U.S. Congress and work with Congress Librarian James Billington who knew me as a political scientist through his Moscow office, and could introduce to Senators and Representatives.

I  had to influence the White House and created "The Professional" system - special instructions for Bill Clinton on successful election and re-election campaigns, strategic planning and top decisions making, national security, foreign policy and diplomacy, propaganda, economy, war and special operations.

Since 2009 Obama is using “The Professional” too.

      KGB instructions for Bill Clinton and  Obama, “The Professional” by M.Kryzhanovsky

How to Manage the White House

Be strong. Be attractive. Be logical. All you have to do during your first term is to take care of the second one.

The 2nd term’s agenda is to set your place in the world’s history.

1st  year. You have enough public support to start big initiatives.

2nd year. Develop your initiatives.

3rd year. Go, go public preparing your re-election. Presidents often lose voters during this period.

4th year. All-politics year. Try to achieve important international agreement (a treaty) for the historic record. Win re-election.

Divide your day into hours and minutes : 30% of your weekly hours go to senior White House staff, 10% — to Cabinet, 5% — to Congress members, 5% — to foreign leaders.

No matter what, even if it’s a war time, sleep one hour during the day to give your brain a break, and finish your day at 6 P.M. After 6 P.M. do not read any documents, do not take any phone calls, do not talk to anybody but family members and close friends. .And - eat whatever you want, but you must know that the more calories you have to digest, the slower you think.

Remember :

1. You are a national image (a national ideal based on pseudo-facts), a symbol of national unity, national continuity and the symbol of federal government. Leadership is the first quality Americans look for in you - they want a President who is steadfast in his convictions.

2. The power to control the federal budget is your top prerogative.

3. Whom are you going to be:

- utopist (ideas manipulator)

- manager (Government and Congress manipulator)

- challenger (reformer)

4. Any problem turns into a political one if it threatens your power.

5. Use your legal right to press the nation and illegal ones to press the world to eliminate problems.

4. Once you’re in politics, you are a hostage of your status and you must sacrifice privacy in return for power.

6. Never play alone.

7. All your decisions are risk taking ones (any decision brings a problem). You may ask advice before you make a decision, but don’t listen to anybody afterwards. You are not paid for the quantity of your work but for leadership and ultimate decision making.

8. Correct political mistakes fast  before they become political scandals. 

10. Never blame previous Presidents for the problems they left for you - that’s a sign of weakness.

11. Get rid of a  White House tradition to deal with problems only if they “knock at the door.”

How to Manage the Staff

Adopt a dominant management style:

1. Pyramidal, structured as hierarchy with you at the top, followed by the Chief of Staff and other key assistants. I strongly recommend this one - it insures a clear chain of command and provides precise channels of information going up and directives going down. 

2. Circular, when you are surrounded by advisers, all of whom have  equal access to the Oval Office. That  means chaos (JFK style).

All your assistants are political assistants and everyone will try to play a policy-maker. But a good thing is that all of them were not elected and are responsible to you only.

 Thus you can:

- reform your staff freely as there’s not even a word about it in the US Constitution

- interchange key figures if domestic crisis is approaching

- if you don’t agree with the staff on important issues, go to polls for back-up. (The best employee is the one you can blackmail. Besides, a very good “pusher” for your people is their deep understanding that they have to work together to help the President stay in office next term — if the President leaves, everybody leaves)

- use “the carrot and the stick”

- use “pulling by pushing” — give an important job without publicity to those who become too popular

- do as little reading as you can — you have staff for that

- do as little writing as you can — same reason

- involve yourself personally in your staff and Cabinet jobs as little as you can — same reason

-  make no minor decisions — same reason

-  send back any intelligence or other report if it’s more than one sheet of paper

CIA  also had "a very important job up to my  "high professional skills as a sniper" but  I didn't want to kill politicians and become Lee Oswald #2. They've pressed me very hard in return. 

  Bill Clinton was the target  because CIA wanted me "to stay close to him" - that's why I wrote a handbook for him. It’s interesting that in 1995 he started dating Monica Lewinsky in the White House  and his wife, Hillary  Clinton, was there on two occasions, at least. She knew about the dates,  she overreacted and asked CIA Director John Deutch for a “favor”. I’ve refused to do “a big job” and Bill Clinton has to say “Thank you very much, Mike, for saving my life”. In 2001 Bill pardoned John Deutch whom he completely ignored before because Hillary Clinton asked him to do so. She was scared Deutch might talk about a “favor" in case there was some serious investigation about his “security problems”.
 In 2001 I've asked Senator Hillary Clinton to help me fight CIA which kept pressing me - I couldn't get my family here. I've pressed  Lus Mendes, Hillary Clinton's Immigration Dept Chief to tell  her boss that I've saved Bill Clinton's life by refusing to work for CIA and kill him. After that Hillary  promised help  - and she did help. She had no choice because it was a blackmail, KGB style.After that she hates Russian President Putin, a former KGB - she said while campaigning in 2008 that "KGB agent by definition has no soul". I don't care.

.

 June 21,  2001

Three months before 9/11 tragedy happened, I  warned  President George W. Bush, the House,   the US Senate, including Senator Hillary Clinton,  on CIA anti-American activity, national security collapse and my personal situation.

 Hillary Clinton refused to mess with CIA. Now  a former Secretary of State and a future presidential candidate  Hillary Clinton has to take some responsibility for the deaths  of  3,000 innocent victims - why not ? 

September  17, 2002

White House sent a request to the Dept. of Justice, where FBI Director R. Mueller blocked it because  I  was a "joint" CIA-FBI project. Senator Chuck Schumer's (D) Office (Suzan Orloff)  explained to me that "American national security is not Senator’s  business".

June 8, 2010

US Office of Special Counsel Patrick Fitzerald (his predecessor, Ken Starr, brought Bill Clinton to impeachment): 

"Mr. Kryzhanovsky, You allege that Mr. Leon Panetta violated the Hatch Act through his role in the "Millennium Hilton" operation. We reviewed this matter, and as explained below, we are closing our file without further action. The Hatch Act prohibits government employees from engaging in political activity while on duty. Your allegation that Mr. Panetta is involved in a CIA-FBI conspiracy, which you call the "Millennium Hilton" operation, even if true, is not activity that falls within the prohibitions of the Hatch Act. Therefore , we are closing the above referenced file. Erica S. Hamrick"

President Obama and Janet Napolitano, Homeland Security Secretary keep silence.

 KGB Operation "Bill Clinton"

December 31, 1969 

 Oxford student and anti-war activist Bill Clinton came to Moscow through Holland, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, and Finland for 5-days vacation at expensive "National" Hotel. The only person he knew in Moscow was Anik "Nikki" Alexis, a daughter of a French diplomat . Clinton recalls, "One night I took a bus out to Lumumba University to have dinner with Nikki" .On the bus back home, Clinton says, there was only one other passenger, Oleg Rakito, who "spoke better English than I did" and "asked me lots of questions and told me he worked for the government, virtually admitting he was assigned to keep an eye on me".

  The story is all fake. First, foreigners who can afford "National" don't use public transportation on January -30 C night. Second, KGB officer might reveal his identity to a foreigner  if he's recruiting him only. Third, Bill Clinton was recruited, otherwise he would have left Moscow immediately and in panic. Instead, he enjoyed the rest of his vacation and went to Czechoslovakia, another socialist country. In 1969 Bill Clinton was 23 , perfect age – KGB tried to recruit young foreigners (students of  Yale, Harvard, Columbia, Oxford) between ages 21-26 because:

a)      you brainwash them much easier and faster than adults

b)      you build their careers the way you want

Bill Clinton was and is scared to death that sooner or later some “mole” inside Russian intelligence might point finger at him.

July 20, 1993

  Bill Clinton tried to move America towards socialism through health care reform plan. His effort ultimately died, though Obama finished the job.

 Much more important –  in 1997 Russia, totalitarian, 100% corrupted country with dying economy and dictator Boris Yeltsin ("Czar Boris") on top, joined the G7, a group of seven major industrialized democracies (USA, Canada, Great Britain, France, Italy, Germany, Japan). It was all KGB source Bill Clinton's huge  effort which had no explanation at all - now you have it.

                                   How and how much Russians paid Bill Clinton ?

   In 1993 Vice President Gore and Russian Prime Minister Chernomyrdin signed a 20-year $12 billion deal under which Russia would ship its weapons-grade uranium to the United States.

Bill Clinton in his over 1,000-page memoir My Life (2004) wrote actually nothing  about this “deal of a century.”  Look,

“In the afternoon [April, 3, 1993] we [Clinton and Russian President Yeltsin] agreed on a way to institutionalize cooperation, with a commission headed by Vice President Gore and Russian Prime Minister Victor Chernomyrdin.

  The idea was developed by Strobe [Talbott] and Georgi Mamedov, the Russian Deputy Foreign Minister, and it worked better than any of us could have imagined, thanks largely to the consistent and concentrated efforts made over the years by Al Gore and his Russian counterparts in working through a host of difficult, contentious problems” [p. 507].

“On January 30 [1996], Prime Minister Victor Chernomyrdin of Russia came to the White House for his sixth meeting with Al Gore. After they finished their commission business, Chernomyrdin came to see me to brief me on events in Russia and Yeltsin’s prospects for reelection” [p. 697].

That's it.

Questions:

What idea was “developed” by Talbot?

What extremely secret commission was “headed by Gore and Chernomyrdin”?

Why Clinton was so happy that “it worked better than any of us could have imagined”?

What “commission business” did Al Gore and his partner finish on January 30, 1996?

Answers.

At their summit meeting in Vancouver, in April 1993, President Clinton and President Yeltsin created the U.S.–Russian Joint Commission on Economic and Technological Cooperation. Since then it has become known as the Gore–Chernomyrdin Commission (GCC), after its co-chairmen US Vice President Al Gore and Russian Prime Minister Victor Chernomyrdin. The Commission’s original mandate was to support cooperation between the United States and Russia in the areas of space, energy and high technology.

 In fact it was a ruse to mask work on a non-proliferation agreement to convert highly enriched uranium (HEU) taken from dismantled Russian nuclear warheads into low-enriched uranium (LEU) fuel to be sold to customers in the USA and worldwide through the USEC (United States Enrichment Company). USEC was created in 1993 as a government corporation with the mission to restructure the US government’s uranium enrichment operation and to prepare it for sale to the private sector.

 Attention. On April 26, 1996 Bill Clinton signed into law the USEC Privatization Act.

 The HEU Agreement required the United States to purchase through USEC 500 metric tons, $12 billion worth, of HEU.

 Dead Russians.

Three Russian statesmen tried to investigate the Clinton- Yeltsin deal - Ruvim Nureyev, Lev Rokhlin, Yuri Shchekotchikhin. All of them are dead.

1. Ruvim Nureyev. The Russia Chief Inspector for Nuclear and Radiation Safety, who strongly opposed the deal, was found dead on the railroad tracks in June 1996. The incident was described as a suicide.

2. Lev Rokhlin. The Russian State Duma Deputy Lieutenant General Lev Rokhlin was a politician of rare honesty and bravity. In 1998 Rokhlin started his own official Clinton-Yeltsin deal investigation. Lev Maximov, the Nuclear Technologies Institute Director, who helped Rokhlin to obtain the documents, received death threats

On July 3, 1998 Rokhlin was shot three times and killed in his house while he was sleeping. His wife, Tamara Rokhlina, was arrested and testified that she killed him “for reasons of personal enmity.” She later recanted her testimony, saying she incriminated herself under threat. Rokhlin’s bodyguard, who was there that night, testified that he heard no gunshots (the killers used a silencer). Within days three more dead bodies were found in the vicinity of the Rokhlin household and were cremated before they could be identified. In November 2000, Rokhlina was convicted of murder and sentenced to 8 years in prison, but the Supreme Court overturned the verdict and ordered a new trial.

  On October 2, 1998 the US Congress, taking into account that Lev Rokhlin was a former Russian State Duma Defense Committee Chairman, asked President Clinton to “urge the Russia Government to promptly and thoroughly investigate” the case. Of course, Bill Clinton was smart enough not to dig his own grave, and just ignored this

                                                RESOLUTION

Expressing sympathy to the family and collegues of Lev Yakovlevich Rokhlin, and expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that President of the United States should urge the Russia Government to promptly and thoroughly investigate the circumstances surrounding the death of Lev Yakovlevich Rokhlin and to provide a full accounting of the circumstances as soon as practible, but no later than November 1999.

Whereas Lev Rokhlin assumed the chairmanship of the Defense Committee of the Duma and was the highest-ranking elected official in the Duma working on Defense issues…

Whereas Lev Rokhlin became involved in investigation of illegal arms from Russia to Armenia and other nations.

Wheras in October 1997, Lev Rokhlin advocated the resignation of President Yeltsyn.

Whereas attempts were made for 6 months to remove Lev Rokhlin from his Committee chairmanship.

Whereas on July 3,1998, Lev Rokhlin was stripped of the chairmanship of the Defense Committee, but maintained his position as a member of Duma.

Whereas on July 3,1998, Lev Rokhlin was shot in the head three times and killed.

Whereas members of Lev Rokhlin’s family have stated that Rokhlin’s wife, Tamara Pavlovna Rokhlina, was physically abused and was threatened with death unless she accepted responsibility for Lev Rokhlin’s murder.

Whereas Lev Rokhlin’s bodyguard, who was in the home the night of the murder, claimed that he heard no gunshots.

Whereas three bodies were cremated by the Moscow government authorities before they could be identified.

Whereas any inability of Russia to provide a full accounting of the circumstances surrounding the death of Lev Rokhlin would raise serious questions about the existence of a stable democratic system in Russia:

Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That –

(1)The House of representatives expresses sympathy to the family and collegues of Lev Rokhlin and :

(2)it is the senmse of the House of Representatives that the President of the United States should urge the Russian Government –

(A)to promptly and thoroughly investigate the circumstances surrounding the death of Lev Rokhlin;

(B) to provide a full accounting of circumstances as soon as practible, but not later than November,1999

3. Yuri Shchekotchikhin, a famous Russian reporter and corruption fighter, was elected to the Russian State Duma where he served as National Security Committee Deputy.

  After Rokhlin was murdered in 1998, Shchekotchikhin continued his investigation and concentrated his efforts in two directions: first, he tried to obtain the #1 Gore–Chernomyrdin Agreement (September 2, 1993), but President Yeltsin and then  President Putin denied the requests. Second, he started a full-scale investigation into the Atomic Ministry corruption and — against Atomic Minister Adamov in person (again, see file 4). On June 16, 2003, he lost consciousness and was taken to the Central (Kremlin) Hospital. He was pronounced dead after lying still unconscious for 12 days. (The official diagnosis — a flu). All medical records are still classified, but experts insist he was poisoned by thallium or cadmium.

 Eugene Adamov 

Professor Adamov was in 1986-1998 a Director of the NIKIET (a secret Research and Development Institute of Power Engineering).

He was secretly involved in the Gore–Chernomyrdin deal as chief expert on the Russian side (even Russian Defense Minister Rodionov knew nothing about it). In 1994 he opened the consulting and management company “Omeka, Ltd.” registered in Pennsylvania (by the end of 1999 the company had assets valued of $5,080,000) by his wife. In 1996 he signed a forged contract between NIKIET and “Omeka,” and opened other companies and banking accounts in Monaco, Switzerland and France to start money laundering the stolen funds the US Department of Energy provided Russia to improve safety at Russian nuclear facilities.

  On May 2, 2005 Adamov was arrested in Bern, Switzerland, and was charged with conspiracy to defraud the United States and to transfer stolen money and securities ($9 million), money laundering and tax evasion. US prosecutors demanded his extradition to the United States, but Russia did the same, asking to send Adamov back home where he would be faced a trial. Swiss authorities asked Adamov if he was willing to accept simplified extradition to the United States. He rejected that and Washington had to file a formal extradition request. The battle  began.

 A money laundering blew up into an international scandal. The American government’s insistence looked strange until Bill Clinton appeared on the stage on October 5, 2005 to save Adamov from 60 years in jail. He didn’t show up himself. Somebody  hired a lawyer -  Lanny Breuer, a nice young fellow  from the Washington, DC based “Covington & Burling.” Breuer had worked as a special Counsel to President Clinton in 1997-1999 and represented him in the presidential impeachment hearings and trial.

   This was not a battle between Russia and USA - it was a battle between the Republicans and Democrats for the Oval Office in 2008. Russians and their asset Bill Clinton had to win this struggle no matter what — if Adamov was extradited to America, he would “sing” everything on that Clinton-Yeltsin deal and share his federal cell with Bill Clinton.

 Meanwhile President Bush, a Republican, needed victory to remove the Clintons from the political arena forever. Clinton won - on December 18, 2005 the Swiss Supreme Court overturned a previous ruling by the Justice Ministry, which had said that Adamov must first face the US courts. On December 30, 2005 Adamov was extradited from Switzerland to Russia, thus opening the door to the Big Presidential Game  for Hillary Clinton. She lost in 2008. What price will the Russians ask Hillary Clinton to pay for Adamov’s silence, if she’s elected the US President in 2016 ? 

“All forces in the world are not so powerful as an idea whose time has come”. Victor Hugo
                                                                   
About the author

Education
KGB Counter-Espionage School
KGB Intelligence Institute (espionage)

Employment
KGB counter-espionage officer
 KGB intelligence officer
 KGB "Nabat" anti-terror group sniper
SBU (Ukrainian Security Service) illegal intelligence officer
CIA/FBI/US Secret Service "Filament"
the author of the White House Special Handbook, Algora, New York, 2007

New York City

Jerry Corsi ” : “Mike, thank you for your courage”. 

What’s KGB

   The KGB (КГБ) ,Committee for State Security, was the  internal security, intelligence, and secret police agency of the Soviet Union in 1917-1991 .

The Federal Security Service of the Russian Federation (FSB)  is the main domestic security agency of Russia and the main successor agency of the KGB. Its main responsibilities are counter-intelligence, internal and border security, counter-terrorism, and surveillance.

  The Russian Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) is Russia's external intelligence agency. The SVR is the successor of the First Chief Directorate (PGU) of the KGB since 1991.

KGB spy code

1. No mercy, no ideology, no emotions.

2. Intuition is nothing but the ability to watch and analyze.

3. No evidence is evidence in itself.

4. Distrust is a mother of security.

5. Never look as if you are sizing up the person — that's a sign that gives away cops and spies.

6. Don't start first if you don't know the rules.

7. The way you act is the way you think — behavior is a system of codes (information) which could be calculated by the enemy. Watch your face — that's a shop window.

8. Think fast, talk slow.

9. Think slow, act fast.

10. Avoid self-programming and never think bad about yourself.

11. Don't smoke, drink or take drugs if it's not necessary; spare your stomach from very hot or cold food or drinks; avoid too much noise and light.

12. The more you lie the more people respect you.

13. Let people talk out and "empty their brains" — then load your information.

14. People never change — everybody wants to get pleasure and avoid pain.

15. "He knew too much" means "He talked too much."

16. Never ask extra questions — wait. Wait and the object will get used to you and open himself — nobody can stay tense for long.

17. Lonely people live longer in espionage business.

18. "No exit" situation is the one you don't like or don't understand.

19. Avoid:

- personal enemies (they fix negative information on you)

- silent types (they watch and think too much)

- other professionals (they'll blow your identity)

- extra stress (it damages your heart and blood vessels and that kills your brain and your ability to think )

- talking too  much

                                                      What’s CIA

The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) is a civilian intelligence agency of the U.С. government. It's predecessor, the Office of Strategic Services, was established  in 1942.

It is an executive agency and reports directly to the Director of National Intelligence, responsible for providing national security intelligence assessment to senior United States policymakers through means of covert psychological, cyber, and social warfare using non-military commissioned civilian Intelligence Agents to carry out these intelligence-gathering operations.

  The Reagan transition team for the CIA (November, 1980) reported the following:

"The fundamental problem confronting American security is the current dangerous condition of the Central Intelligence Agency and of national intelligence collection generally. The failure of American intelligence collection has been at the heart of faulty defense planning and misdirected foreign policy."

  The team pointed out to the following intelligence failures:

- the general and continuing failure to predict the actual size and scope of the Soviet military effort and military sector of the Russian GNP

- the consistent gross misstatement of Soviet global objectives

- the wholesale failure to understand or attempt to counteract Soviet disinformation and propaganda

- the general failure to explain the characteristics of Soviet conventional weapon systems and vessels — for example the new Russian guided missile cruises

- the wholesale failure to understand and predict the nature of the so-called wars of national liberation in Africa and Central and South America

- the consistent miscalculation regarding the effect of and general apology for massive technology transfer from West to the East

- the apparent internal failure of counterintelligence generally.

The unhealthy symbiosis between the CIA and the Department of State is the chief underlying cause of the security position of the United States. The next Director of the Central Intelligence Agency … will be told repeatedly by virtually everyone in policy positions at the Agency that the CIA is a highly professional, non-political agency that produces ‘objective' intelligence. Those assertions are arrant nonsense. In part out of mutual drive for individual and corporate self-preservation, the CIA has become an elitist organization which engenders unshakable loyalty among its staff. The National Intelligence Estimate process is itself a bureaucratic game. These failures are of such enormity, that they cannot help but suggest to any objective observer that the agency itself is compromised to an unprecedented extent and that its paralysis is attributable to causes more sinister than incompetence."

In 1991  the CIA failed completely to predict the Soviet empire collapse and the end of the Cold War as  such.

CIA Operation "John Kennedy"

September 18, 1947 

The National Security Act of 1947 established the CIA. The agency conducts covert operations and paramilitary actions, and exerts foreign political influence through its Special Activities Division.

August 5, 1962  

CIA agents killed Marilyn Monroe (staged suicide - "acute barbiturate poisoning") who got information on planned JFK assassination and desperately tried to contact him or his brother, Robert Kennedy. It’s much more simple to kill without any traces on or in the body – use a suppository.

November 22, 1963 

President John Kennedy was assassinated at 12:30 p.m.in Dealey Plaza, Dallas, Texas.

 What's conspiracy? It’s when you ask the government a simple question and nobody wants to answer it. And  if you ask the wrong questions you get the wrong answers, as with the Warren Commission. Let’s ask some good questions.

Question 1. What would have happened if the snipers missed the target or Kennedy survived, being merely wounded - sniper is a human being - he makes mistakes.

Answer. Kennedy would have won the 1964 Presidential election and then conceivably his brothers, Robert and Edward, would keep the Oval Office until 1984 (count the years for yourself). No war in Vietnam. The CIA would have been shut down. The FBI and Pentagon would have been "cleaned up" and "cleaned out."

Question 2. Why would the CIA, FBI and big business behind them, not to mention others who had their eye on the Oval Office, take such a huge risk?

Answer. There was no risk at all and there was no "huge conspiracy - there was a "passive sabotage" operation. CIA Director John McCone, FBI Director Edgar Hoover and Secret Service Director James Rowley made a deal not to touch Lee Harvey Oswald until operation is over.

Question 3. Why was Kennedy murdered in public? President Kennedy was a sick man, taking a lot of  pills daily. He had Addison’s disease which, in addition to susceptibility to infection can cause weakness, weight loss and low blood pressure; so he was taking cortisone. For his back pain Dr. Max Jacobson injected him (and Jackie) with a mixture of unspecified (!) multivitamins, hormones, steroids, enzymes, and animal organ cells. Kennedy also used cocaine, marijuana, hashish and even LSD, especially during dates with women, including prostitutes —- for many people this was not a secret. There were enough opportunities to stage a death in private.

Answer. This had to be a public execution with a very clear message for the next Presidents - "Don’t touch the CIA!" and it worked until now. I want to touch CIA.

Question 4. What was the rush?

Answer. Kennedy wanted to eliminate CIA.

JFK's assassination was planned by a very professional expert. It might be Gestapo  Mueller who, unlike other assassins, had a very good reason to keep his mouth shut. That's why Congress wants to keep 40,000 documents on JFK case classified for another 20 years.

June 5, 1968 

After  winning the California primary election for the Democratic nomination for the US President, Senator Robert  Kennedy was shot as he walked through the kitchen of the Ambassador Hotel. Sirhan Sirhan, a 24-year-old Palestinian immigrant, was convicted of Kennedy's murder and is serving a life sentence for the crime. Robert Kennedy promised a full investigation of his brother's assassination in case he was elected.

1995 

John Kennedy Jr. who said once  that his father's death investigation was the most important thing  of his life, approached Princess Diana Spencer for an interview  for  his "George" magazine . They met at New York Carlyle Hotel where JFK dated Marilyn Monroe -  a holy place for John Kennedy Jr. where he would never have  "hot sex" and  "try cocaine" with Diana . It was a business meeting, an "investigation" meeting.

August 31, 1997 

CIA used my instructions on staged car accidents to kill Princess Diana. Diana was fatally injured in a car crash in the Pont de l'Alma road tunnel in Paris, which also caused the death of her boyfriend, Dodi Fayed.

 Billionaire  Mohammed al-Fayed, Dodi's father, recruited a "mole" inside CIA, somebody who knew the Agency had a file on Diana. He didn't get it of course through Washington, DC District Court and the mistake was - he had to recruit somebody with straight access to archives. If Diana left a notice on her talks with John Kennedy Jr  for her sons, they might be next CIA victims. I can tell Mohammed al-Fayed what's in Diana's CIA file for free - surveillance documents, a video tape of the Carlyle Hotel meeting, a plan to stage the car accident, a file on me if I  had to do the job. 

July 16, 1999 

CIA killed John Kennedy Jr. in a staged plane crash. Kennedy along with his wife Carolyn and sister-in-law Lauren were reported missing when the Piper Saratoga II HP he was piloting failed to arrive at its planned destination, the Martha's Vineyard Airport in Vineyard Haven, Massachusetts.

The Honorable Congressman Smith                                                                              10 June 2013

The Honorable Senator Cornyn

The Honorable Senator Cruz

Good morning Gentlemen;

With the recent revelations the Executive Branch of our government is spying on Americans - instead of jihadists and terrorists - I would like to pose a few questions for your consideration.

1. Why has no one in Congress forced this administration to revoke Department of Homeland Security (DHS) document IA-0257-09 (2009)? This document gives them their extra-legislative "authority" (sic) to declare Americans are the terrorists - instead of the real terrorists. How do you think Veterans feel about being called "terrorists" when many of these Veterans gave up quite a bit (some of them body parts) to fight for this Nation? I appreciate the Letter Congressman Smith wrote Janet Napolitano back in 2009 - but Gentlemen, this is not enough. This administration clearly ignores your letters!

2. In light of the recent revelations and claims the National Security Agency (NSA) and DHS were monitoring U.S. citizens phones, Internet and financial transactions - and in light of the massive computing power available within only one of these "Data Centers".... how is it that Congress has apparently accepted the excuse that all they are doing is logging records to and from? It is patently obvious to anyone with any knowledge of computers, that only one of these "data centers" has the capability of doing that particular alleged "job" - for the entire world - yet we have multiple "data centers" scattered over the U.S. with these abilities - one of them right here in San Antonio!

Is it not a bit more likely that they are, indeed, unconstitutionally spying on Americans e-mails, Internet, texts, telephone conversations and bank transactions? With multiple "data centers" and this kind of computing horsepower, they certainly have the ability to do so. I found an article written back on 10 June 2010 in the Tea Party Economist that stated there were 854,000 paid individuals spying on Americans. How many are there today?

3. We are in "sequestration", it began this year. Congress determined the amount would be an $86 Billion dollar cut. A report this morning found within the news online "Financial Times" - that the U.S. is spending $80 Billion annually on this intelligence gathering... Granted, not all of that would be going to these "data centers", but my assumption is a majority of it indeed is... There are indeed many programs this administration is spending taxpayer money on that fly in the face of Congressional rulings and decisions - yet the House has not pulled his plug to stop his frivolous squandering of taxpayer monies  and subsequent deepening of our National Debt. This administration seems bent on depleting our resources to the point where our Nation WILL default on loans - and our economy will fall in the toilet - providing President Obama his opportunity to declare martial law in a time of peace.

Do you really want to go there?

4. We have the Veterans Administration (VA) declaring certain Veterans are incapable of handling their own finances - all without due process of law or a Court involvement - removing their 2nd Amendment rights under the Constitution of the United States and "appointing" someone other than themselves or a family member to handle all of their finances.... We have a Democratic Senator who openly stated on-camera that all Military Veterans have Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and should not be allowed to own a weapon. To date; approximately 160,000 Veterans Nation-wide have lost their 2nd Amendment rights by these VA actions and these Veterans are forced to fight this illegal and unconstitutional action in a Court of Law - because Congress has provided no assistance, has taken no action to put a stop to it. This should NOT be the way a Nation treats those who fought for it.

I cannot begin to express how disgraceful this is. Words evade me.

So, Gentlemen... we have Sequestration, we have the highest deficit in U.S. history, we have Executive Branch overreach that exceeds the limits of the Constitution of the United States, we have extra-legislative regulations that violate the Constitution (EPA, IRS, HHS), we have monstrous taxpayer expenditures not approved by Congress (State Department) and extra-legislative actions authored and executed on a daily basis by an administration gone wild with power (NSA, DOJ, CIA, DHS, VA).

I would like to know when you are going to convince your peers on the other side of the isle that they too - and their constituents, are at risk here.

And here is another thought for you to chew on and review; In all of these hearings and Investigations that continue in all of the existing known scandals, and the scandals that continue to be revealed... one thing stands apparent to every American.

No one is being held accountable.

What I mean by this:  every citizen knows that if they did any one of these crimes, "Perjury to Congress", "Contempt of Congress" as examples - they would find themselves behind bars for a long time. Yet we see on a daily basis, members of this administration lying to Congress, refusing to provide information Congress demands, delaying the production of information Congress demands... and no one is locked up. They are all walking around scot-free.

I submit Congress itself is destroying the system of checks and balances by not immediately holding them accountable - by locking them up when they refuse to answer or refuse to provide the information Congress demands.

I submit Congress is creating precedent that will be continually followed by every member of this administration who does not wish their agenda revealed to the public and Congress.

Gentlemen, I am not claiming yourselves are the ones doing this - please take no offense. However, I firmly believe you would discover if Congress started locking them up - they would start talking and you probably would not be able to shut them up. All of you certainly have friends on the other side of the isle... they are not necessarily bad just because they are Democrats. It might be a very good time to start trying to convince them this Executive Branch overreach directly pertains to them and their well-being, that following a political agenda simply because it originated in their party - might not be the smartest thing to do for long-term career goals.

It is already apparent to anyone who is listening to all of this that our Nation is in the midst of a coup. No, we do not wear tin-foil hats and yes, according to one member of Congress we are all "Whacko Birds".

So be it. If that is the description we carry, we will shoulder that (yet I reiterate we do not wear tin-foil hats). What we desire of our elected is action - not words, not letters. We want our Constitutional Republic government back, we want our freedom back. We want this administration removed in its entirety and our government restored. All of you have a place in that and yes, I voted for all three of you. I will do so again, but that might prove difficult if this agenda of President Obama's continues to play out to the obvious ending.

Respectfully,

Aubrey Mason

San Antonio, Texas

cc:

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott

The Honorable Congressman Stockman

The Honorable Senator Paul

Chairman, House Judicial Committee, The Honorable Congressman Bob Good latté

Note: Please read Part 12 regarding this disturbing and gut-wrenching issue:

Note: The following articles, videos and audios relate to this disturbing and gut-wrenching issue:

DHS insider: It’s about to get Very Ugly!-Posted on VT News-By Jim Fetzer-On June 9, 2013:

“Everyone needs to reflect on the United States having become obsessed with national security, even to the extent of gutting our Bill of Rights and turning the country into a “surveillance society”. It is long past time that serious consideration be given to dismantling DHS and returning the organization of our government to its far saner past.”–Jim Fetzer

Editor’s note: While I would like to believe that Douglas Hagmann is exaggerating, all the evidence is against it. From my point of view, it is astounding that the major media has said nary a peep about the report of the subcommittee of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Intelligence, which was released on 3 October 2012.

After a review of 680 “fusion center” reports from 2009-2010, they found NO INDICATIONS OF ANY DOMESTIC TERRORIST THREAT, as I have reported here at Veterans Today. NONE! ZILCH! NADA! NOT ONE!

That none of the major networks—ABC, CBS, NBC, PBS, CNN, or MSNBC—has said a word about this tells me that the government’s control of the media is complete and comprehensive and that these seemingly interminable attacks at Sandy Hook, Boston and now Santa Monica are intended to create the FALSE IMPRESSION that we have a serious problem with domestic terrorism. Well, we do have a serious problem, but it lies in another direction, as Douglas Hagmann explains.]

DHS insider: It’s about to get VERY UGLY!

by Douglas Hagmann


7 June 2013: Something quite unexpected happened just hours ago, in the dark of night, during a two-day layover in Washington, DC. My son and I are scheduled to take part in a seminar outside of Raleigh, North Carolina this weekend, so we combined our travels to include a side-trip to DC for a business meeting we had previously arranged. It was during this layover that something seemingly ripped from the pages of a spy novel took place.

While I was in the middle of a perfectly good and well needed sleep in the very early hours of this morning, I received a message. I cannot disclose how I received this message, at least not now. The discerning reader will understand why, which, by the way, would make a very interesting story alone. The message was extremely clear and precise. I was to meet my high level DHS insider at a very specific location in Washington, DC at a time when most “normal” people, except third-shift workers are still asleep. And, I was to come alone and make certain that I was not being followed, and I was to leave any cell phone or electronic device behind.

Seriously? I thought, as I was still trying to make sense of it all. Is all this really necessary? Is this really happening? I considered waking my son to accompany me, but opted to follow the instructions to the letter. Besides, I thought, he?s not the most affable middle-of-the-night person. I left a hastily written but detailed note in my hotel room before my departure in the event something happened. I looked at the digital clock on my rental car (my personal car would never survive our long distance trip). It was 3:20 a.m.

The meeting


I felt like I was part of a spy movie set in our nation’s capital. A chill rose up my spine as I waited in the dark of a chilly, misty and foggy pre-dawn morning. I was to meet with my DHS insider source at a time when most of the nation is asleep, at a place I could swear was featured in the movie All the President?s Men. No one and I mean no one knows I’m here, I thought, as I could see one of the most recognizable national landmarks in the distance.

My source appeared out of nowhere, or so it seemed, and handed me a cup of coffee with the astute observation that I looked like I needed it. So tell me, I asked impatiently, why do we have to meet at this time, at this location, and under such specific circumstances? “Because this might be our last meeting,” he stated.

Maybe it was the lack of sleep, the time, the place, or the chill of the misty rain that caused my sense of foreboding. “Explain,” I asked in an almost demanding tone. So he did, without mincing words.

The details


“If anyone thinks that what’s going on right now with all of this surveillance of American citizens is to fight some sort of foreign enemy, they’re delusional. If people think that this ‘scandal’ can’t get any worse, it will, hour by hour, day by day. This has the ability to bring down our national leadership, the administration and other senior elected officials working in collusion with this administration, both Republican and Democrats. People within the NSA, the Department of Justice, and others, they know who they are, need to come forth with the documentation of ‘policy and practice’ in their possession, disclose what they know, fight what’s going on, and just do their job. I have never seen anything like this, ever. The present administration is going after leakers, media sources, anyone and everyone who is even suspected of ?betrayal.? That?s what they call it, ‘betrayal.’ Can you believe the size of their cahones? This administration considers anyone telling the truth about Benghazi, the IRS, hell, you name the issue, ‘betrayal,’” he said.

“We know all this already,” I stated. He looked at me, giving me a look like I’ve never seen, and actually pushed his finger into my chest. “You don’t know jack,” he said, “this is bigger than you can imagine, bigger than anyone can imagine. This administration is collecting names of sources, whistle blowers and their families, names of media sources and everybody they talk to and have talked to, and they already have a huge list. If you’re not working for MSNBC or CNN, you’re probably on that list. If you are a website owner with a brisk readership and a conservative bent, you’re on that list. It’s a political dissident list, not an enemy threat list,” he stated.

What does it mean?


“What’s that exactly mean, being on that list, that is,” I asked, trying to make sense of it all.

“It means that there will be censorship under the color of authority of anyone in the U.S. who is attempting to expose what’s going on in our name. It’s about controlling any damning information from reaching epidemic proportions. It’s damage control to the extreme. It’s about the upcoming censorship of the internet in the name of national security. The plans are already in place. These latest reports about ‘spying eyes’ have turned this administration and others connected to it into something very, very dangerous. They feel cornered and threatened, and I’m hearing about some plans they have to shut down the flow of information that is implicating them of wrongdoing. Time is short,” he stated.

“How are they going to do this? How is it even possible?” I asked.

“First, they intend to use the Justice Department to silence journalists like in the Rosen case, but they won’t stop there. They will use a host of national security policies, laws, letters, whatever to take out the bigger threats,” he stated.

“Next, they will use some sort of excuse, an external threat, and I believe it will be a combination of the economic collapse and a Mid-East war that will begin in Syria to throttle the information that is accessible on the Internet. And you know what? People will believe it!”

“Based on what I’ve seen, most of which I should not have seen, the DHS is co-ordinating efforts with other federal agencies to begin to threaten American citizens with incarceration for non-compliance. You know the old talk of color coded lists? Well, this is what they will be using. People exposing the truth about Benghazi, killing the U.S. Dollar, even those questioning Obama’s legal status and eligibility to be President are the current targets. And they’ve had five long years to get to this point. The ugly truth is that these policies and practices did not start under Obama, but long before. This is about the killing of our Constitutional Republic. The murder of our country and the stripping of our rights. While many have been preoccupied with one issue, few have seen the bigger issue. This is the ‘end game,’ for all the marbles,” he stated.

More to come


“Please,” pleaded my source, “get this information out while you can. Tell people what I?m saying, that we don’t have much time, that after the latest exposure of spying, Obama, Jarrett, Axelrod, and others, including members of Congress, have put their plans into high gear. This is about the Marxist [Editor’s note: Fascistic] takeover of America. This is about our country being able to survive another July 4^th holiday. This is about a world war about to break out that will kill millions of people, all because of the agenda of this administration.”

“They are very dangerous and will do anything and everything to stop the onslaught of negative information that?s being reported by the main stream media. But only about one quarter of the real information is being reported. The other three quarters will be the game changer. But first, tell people what I’ve said. Let them know that more will follow but get this information out right now while the internet is still relatively free. Do it today.”

My source provided additional information, but I am abiding by his wish to get this much out. I am writing now to let people know that we are in for seriously dangerous times ahead. Deadly times. War, and censorship under the color of authority and under the pretext of of national security. It’s about to get a lot uglier. Stay tuned.

7 June 2013
 


• Douglas Hagmann is the founder and director of the Northeast Intelligence Network, a multi-state licensed private investigative agency. Doug began using his investigative skills and training to fight terrorism and increase public awareness through his website. This article first appeared there.

Source:

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/06/09/dhs-insider-its-about-to-ge...

Brennan’s CIA purging political dissidents, purged CIA agent speaks out!-Posted on Examiner-By CHRISTOPHER COLLINS-On June 2, 2013:

“In the wake of the scandals over the terrorist attacks in Benghazi, the Internal Revenue Service’s targeting of conservative groups, and the Justice Department’s spying on journalists, the Paulding County Republican Examiner (PCRE) was contacted late last night that the latest scandal to break is the systematic political purge at the CIA under the direction of CIA Director, John Brennan.

The news was received by the PCRE by Kent Clizbe, a former CIA counter-terrorism operations officer and author of Willing Accomplices and Obliterating Exceptionalism, of the purge of non-supporters of Obama and vicious reprisals and threats against anyone who dared to speak out against the CIA or the administration and that it began in 2009 and has escalated ever since.

While Brennan has been Obama’s CIA director since March 8, 2013, Brennan has been President Obama’s confidant since 2008.

Clizbe’s troubles with Brennan first began when he wrote about what he called the Obama/Holder Global War on the CIA, in August of 2009 in Newsmax, when Leon Panetta was the Director of the CIA. In the next two years, Clizbe wrote several more articles about the politicization of the CIA and the war on terror. The main target of his analysis was John Brennan, who at the time was Obama’s “Terrorism Czar.”

In 2010, Clizbe wrote “John Brennan – Connecting the Dots Spells Conflict of Interest” in which the CIA was not pleased, especially Brennan.

When Clizbe left the CIA a while back, he was hired back on in 2011 as a contracted consultant.

In April 2013, two weeks after Brennan arrived at the CIA, not only were some other agents purged or threatened with termination, Clizbe was purged from the CIA payroll.

The reason? The CIA purged Clizbe because he was at the forefront of criticizing Brennan through his writings, appearances, and his two books.

“Unfortunately, in 2011, I accepted a beltway bandit’s offer to return to the Agency as a contractor. Mortgage and all, you know. They assured me that plenty of their employees had written books. And federal law made it illegal to retaliate for political speech,” Clizbe told the PCRE.

“I heard from friends that some of my articles had been posted on the media board inside headquarters. A shrewish comment on the BigPeace website was clearly from a classmate, now a high level officer in management. While not quite notorious, I definitely had ruffled feathers, and was not appreciated,” Clizbe said.

“The pure power the gang commands are unprecedented in American history. An astute student of American politics, influence, scandals, and misdeeds would be hard pressed to find a more stunning abuse of power than what has been revealed of the Obama clique’s misdeeds to date. And I use “to date” purposefully,” said Clizbe. “It is very likely that there remain many more shoes to drop as we learn the specifics of this regime’s corrupt political hounding of its “enemies.”

“One of the administration’s cabal—who has been hip-deep in all of their provoked international turmoil—from the Maghreb Mutinies to Benghazi, to the intra-Islamic struggle for power in Syria—is the reptilian John Brennan. Brennan has been Obama’s toady since the 2008 campaign. He lost out on the goal of his sucking-up, the political appointment to be the DCIA in 2009 when PC-Progressives objected to his role in Bush-era CIA interrogations,” Clizbe told the PCRE.

“But he was rewarded with an even better role—CT Czar—pretty much outside the purview of Congressional oversight. From his White House office, Brennan ruled as the de facto head of American Intelligence from 2009 to 2013.”

Brennan and other higher levels of government in the Obama administration threatened CIA agents’ careers and livelihood who spoke up about Benghazi and demanded that no CIA officers discuss publicly the events on the ground.

Clizbe also criticize the IRS persecution of political rivals to the Obama regime, the DOJ selective targeting of dissident media outlets, the massive secret collection of media outlets’ communications, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder obfuscates about his actions, and Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton’s refusal to address her actions on Benghazi.

Clizbe said, “Brennan’s eunuch-like manipulation of the Intelligence Community leadership and explains the unholy alliance of Brennan’s control of the Intelligence Community and PC-Progressives’ love of covert action. So, it’s pretty safe to say that I wasn’t on Brennan’s love-list.”

“The clandestine personnel security system is virtually impervious to oversight. Decisions are made by bureaucrats, much like the IRS, the DOJ, and other regime offices, which we see now are all too willing to please their PC-Prog masters. The big difference from the IRS is that everything the CIA does is cloaked to outside view due to national security. Their decisions are not appealable. They don’t have to explain,” said Clizbe.

“This regime, once it understood the power of the covert action and investigatory apparatus it controlled, turned on normal Americans. It applied the lessons learned in the GWOT to monitoring its domestic enemies. Total collection, all the time, of all electronic records—cell phones, emails, smart-phones and now tax returns—allows the regime the capability of compiling a complete profile of its enemies—names of contacts, physical locations, message content, interests, photos, and now tax records. What other “confidential and private” government records are added to this “big data” for the uses of the regime?”

The sum of all the data available provides them with a holistic overview of an enemy—where he is, what he’s thinking, who he’s talking to, and what his plans are,” said Clizbe. “This overview can be used, as on the battlefield, for targeting. What about drones in America, Master Holder? Have you recused yourself on that one too?”

“All signs that this administration is following the path of all power-hungry statist’s—vicious reprisals and threats against any who dare to speak out against them. This is what happened in Moscow, the former Soviet Union in 1936 when political opponents or perceived enemies were purged or silenced.”

As a result of Brennan’s and Obama’s political purge, Clizbe is unemployed. He told the PCRE that if anyone could use his unique combination of skills and experience, that he is available immediately.

Clizbe posted his situation in detail here.”

Source:

http://www.examiner.com/article/brennan-s-cia-purging-political-dis...

AMERICA IS ON THE THRESHOLD OF ORWELL’S 1984!-Posted on To The Point-By Victor Davis Hanson-On June 5, 2013:

 http://www.tothepointnews.com/content/view/5464/87/

Obama’s Birth Certificate Created in Adobe Illustrator Obama Guilty of Committing the Biggest Crime in American Presidential History!- Posted on National Report-By Nigel J. Covington III, Editor-in-Chief-On June 7, 2013:

http://nationalreport.net/obamas-birth-certificate-created-in-adobe...

DOJ & FBI Raid News Media Offices After Releasing an Alarming Story on President Obama!-Posted on National Report-By National Report Staff-On June 7, 2013:

http://nationalreport.net/doj-fbi-raid-news-media-offices-after-rel...

Death Threats Crash National Report’s Computers After Running Scathing Obama Story!-Posted on National Report-By National Report Staff-On June 8, 2013:

http://nationalreport.net/death-threats-crash-national-reports-comp...

PARTS OF NSA’S PRISM PROGRAM DECLASSIFIED: ‘We cannot target even foreign persons overseas without a valid foreign intelligence purpose’!-Posted on USA Today-By Donna Leinwand Leger, USA TODAY-On June 8, 2013:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/06/08/dni-declassifi...

BOUNDLESS INFORMANT TOOL TRACKS INTERNATIONAL COMMUNICATION RECORDS!-Posted on Big Government-By WILLIAM BIGELOW-On June 9, 2013:

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/06/08/CODE-NAME-Boundl...

INTEL CHIEF BASHES MEDIA FOR ‘RUSH TO PUBLISH’ ABOUT GOV’T SPYING!-Posted on The Blaze-By Madeleine Morgenstern-On June 9, 2013:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/06/09/intel-chief-bashes-media...

Can Obama be Impeached?-Posted on The Posts  Email-By Sharon Rondeau-On June 9, 2013:

http://www.thepostemail.com/2013/06/09/can-obama-be-impeached/print/

  Note: Please read Part 14 regarding this disturbing and gut-wrenching issue:

Americans – Like Nazi Germans – Don’t Notice that All of Our Rights Are Slipping Away (Part 14)!-Posted on Tea Party Command Center-By Jake Martinez-On October 6, 2013:

http://teapartyorg.ning.com/profiles/blogs/americans-like-nazi-germans-don-t-notice-that-all-of-our-rights-1

Note:  My following blogs relate to and/or further support this disturbing and gut-wrenching issue-You Decide:

Former Counsel to World Bank Claims that US Government has been Co-opted by Corrupt Global Corporations!

http://wethepeopleusa.ning.com/profiles/blogs/former-counsel-to-wor...

Letter To NM U.S. Senator Udall (Re: Request Non-Partisan Congressional Investigations)!-Posted on We The People USA-By Jake Martinez-On May 14, 2013:

http://wethepeopleusa.ning.com/profiles/blogs/letter-to-nm-u-s-sena...

Blowing a whistle on Benghazi: There’s no hiding four murders (Part 4)!

http://wethepeopleusa.ning.com/profiles/blogs/blowing-a-whistle-on-...

Letter To NM U.S. Senator Udall (Re: Questionable and/or mysterious circumstances surrounding Boston Marathon bombing)!

http://wethepeopleusa.ning.com/profiles/blogs/letter-to-nm-u-s-sena...

NY Times: Terrorist Plots, Hatched by the F.B.I. (Part 5)!

http://wethepeopleusa.ning.com/profiles/blogs/ny-times-terrorist-pl...

http://wethepeopleusa.ning.com/profiles/blogs/it-has-begun-our-curr...

The Greatest Fraud Perpetrated in American History!

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2011/06/20/the-greatest-fraud-perpetr...

CIA Columbia Obama Cover Up!

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/04/28/cia-columbia-obama-cover-up/

Why did a black preacher from Harlem receive a “hit” on his life?

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/10/19/why-has-a-black-preacher-f...

Progressives and Communists Are Out of the Closet Together!

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/10/05/progressives-and-communist...

An Open Letter To Communist Valerie Jarrett!

http://wethepeopleusa.ning.com/profiles/blogs/an-open-letter-to-com...

Godfather of The Islamic Revolution!

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2011/02/11/godfather-of-the-islamic-r...

Request For Congressional Investigation Into Mysterious Downing of Chinook Helicopter in Afghanistan!
http://wethepeopleusa.ning.com/profiles/blogs/request-for-congressi...

http://wethepeopleusa.ning.com/profiles/blogs/geoengineering-dangers

Who owns our supposedly fair and balanced airwaves and news outlets?

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/10/21/who-owns-our-supposedly-fa...

Obamanites Get Violent in Support of the Agenda!

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/04/05/obamanites-get-violent-in-...

Nearly 80 percent don’t trust the government!

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/04/19/nearly-80-percent-don’t-tr...

Where Is America Today?

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/05/26/where-is-america-today-2/

Note: The following videos are extremely appropriate today: 

The Fightin Side of Me!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32-OyyLJzHw&feature=player_embedded

When Injustice Becomes Law, Resistance Becomes Duty!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrqO_Hljf08

Note:  If you have a problem viewing any of the listed blog posts, please copy website and paste it on your browser.  Sure seems like any subject matter that may be considered controversial by this administration is being censored-What happened to free speech?-You Decide: 

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/10/23/what-happened-to-free-speech/

“Food For Thought”

God Bless America!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q65KZIqay4E&feature=related

http://www.greatdanepro.com/Pray%20For%20America/index.htm

Semper Fi!

Jake

Clinton's Immigration Dept Chief to tell  her boss that I've saved Bill Clinton's life by refusing to work for CIA. After that Hillary Clinton helped me.
  Later  Senators Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand refused to look into CIA/FBI anti-American conspiracy and both informed me that "national security is not their business".
 On July 2, 2008, Barack Obama, who was running for the U.S. President,  made a statement: “We can’t rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set. We got to have a civilian national security force that just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded”. Since then he is the target of the "Millenium Hilton" program.   
  I had a possibility to neutralize Barack Obama. On March, 20, 2010, I’ve received an invitation for a dinner with President  Obama and Speaker of the House  Pelosi from DCCC (Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee) signed by Ian Sugar, Director of Development. Sugar sent to me couple of personal e-mails and  explained  that I pay $15,999 (credit card) and on May 13, 2010 at 6.00 PM I  come to St. Regis Hotel, New York and enjoy a dinner with Obama.
 On June 8, 2010, I got the letter from the US Office of Special Counsel Patrick Fitzerald: "Mr. Kryzhanovsky, You allege that CIA Director violated the Hatch Act through his role in the "Millennium Hilton" operation. We reviewed this matter, and as explained below, we are closing our file without further action. The Hatch Act prohibits government employees from engaging in political activity while on duty. Your allegation that Mr. Panetta is involved in a CIA-FBI conspiracy, which you call the "Millennium Hilton" operation, even if true, is not activity that falls within the prohibitions of the Hatch Act. Therefore , we are closing the above referenced file. Erica S. Hamrick".                       
  On October 12, 2010 I had a meeting with U.S. Secret Service agents who informed me that I'm still on CIA program as "Filament" and I could work for Secret Service too. We talked about the vulnerability of Obama's security - the agents got pretty nervous and blamed Rahm Emanuel for that.
  On January, 20, 2011 I talked to FBI agent Eric Perry. He said I talk too much and I made "high authorities, people on the very top extremely nervous". He didn't explain if it was FBI Director Robert Mueller, the White House Chief of Staff or  somebody else.
  On August 30, 2012 I had a meeting with another Secret Service agents , who asked me again if I can and if I want to kill President Obama.
 Looks like President Barack Obama is really CIA/FBI/U.S. Secret Service  next target.I ask you, Mr. Rogers, to investigate this case.
 
Mikhail Kryzhanovsky
a former KGB spy and CIA "Filament"

   The Secret Service professional killers team which was ordered to assassinate me.

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-05-30/googles-eric-schmidt-invests-in-obamas-big-data-brains

Wonder why no one is talking about the google ceo starting company with team Obama campain data staff to shape all future elections with data?

Gee now that we know they are collecting data in NSA do we think that it might be connected?