Florida state capitol approves Satanic “holiday” display

Rule No. 4 of satanist (and Obama’s political mentor) Saul Alinsky’s rules for radicals is “Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules.”

Leftists and satanists alike are experts in deploying that rule against conservatives and Christians. A demonic group that calls itself the Satanic Temple is especially deft in wielding that weapon.

In January of last year, citing the Oklahoma legislature’s approval of the placement of a Ten Commandments monument outside the state capitol building in Oklahoma City, the Temple managed to wrestle permission to erect a 7 ft. statue of Satan next to the Ten Commandments. Since then, the Ten Commandments monument itself was smashed by a man driving his car into it.

Then the Satanic Temple demanded equal treatment by having prayer in public schools to the Devil.

Now the Satanic Temple has obtained approval from Florida’s state capitol for a “holiday” display (see below) — all in the name of equal treatment.

Satanic Temple’s 2014 “holiday” display in Tallahassee, Florida

CBS Miami reports, Dec. 4, 2014, that the Florida Department of Management Services (DMS) this week approved a proposed (Christmas) holiday display from the Satanic Temple, which a year ago was rejected because the agency had found its proposal “grossly offensive.”

The Satanic Temple threatened to sue after being rejected last year but never took action. Lucien Greaves, spokesman for the Satanic Temple, said in an email that “the difference seems to be in the fact that this time around we arrived with lawyers.”

Satanic Temple’s approved display will banner the phrase “Happy holidays from the Satanic Temple” atop a diorama of an angel falling into Hell. Inscribed on a card next to the display is this quote from Isaiah 14:12, leaving no doubt that the falling angel is Lucifer:

How you are fallen from heaven, O Day Star, son of Dawn!

With pseudo piety, Greaves said in the email, “We hope that, this holiday season, everybody can put their religious differences aside and respect that the celebratory spirit of responsible hedonism is available to all.”

The temple’s display, scheduled to be set up on Dec. 22, is one of five displays that got approval to be put up in the first-floor rotunda of the Capitol for the end-of-year “holiday” period, joining nativity scenes and various secular presentations. The state agency also approved a “Happy Winter Solstice” banner from the Madison, Wis.-based Freedom From Religion Foundation and an entry from the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster — a group that opposes the introduction of creationism and intelligent design as science in public schools.

Credit to Fellowship of thew Minds

Pope Francis: Church Should Support Families With gay children

The Catholic Church must help parents stand by their gay children, Pope Francis said in a new interview about his papal ministry. The pontiff’s comments come a day after Francis urged top church officials to pay attention to the “signs of the times” and listen to ordinary Catholics, according to The Independent.

“We come across this reality all the time in the confessional: a father and a mother whose son or daughter is in that situation. This happened to me several times in Buenos Aires.... We have to find a way to help that father or that mother to stand by their son or daughter,” he said in a wide-ranging interview with the Argentine daily La Nación. While it is important to find ways to welcome gay Catholics, gay marriage is still not on the church’s agenda, Francis said.

The pontiff’s remarks were made as part of a larger reflection on the church’s recent Synod of Bishops, which discussed some of the most controversial issues around family life for Catholics. The October gathering revealed fractures in church opinion about adapting traditional teaching to accommodate modern attitudes, according to the BBC. While Francis made a powerful appeal to traditionalists, conservative cardinals prevailed and rejected proposals for wider acceptance of gay people.

Francis also addressed the issue of divorced Catholics, saying they were often treated as though they had been excommunicated. “In the case of divorcées who have remarried, we posed the question: What do we do with them? What door can we allow them to open? This was a pastoral concern: Will we allow them to go to Communion? Communion alone is no solution. The solution is integration. They have not been excommunicated,” he said, according to the National Catholic Reporter.

Credit to International Business Times

The Western Banking Cabal's Stranglehold

Pax Americana to give way to a new world order

FUTURE historians may well come to see 2014 as a bellwether year in world affairs, marking an epochal shift to a new, more turbulent world order no longer dominated by the values or power of the US and its Western allies.

Such shifts occur periodically in the international system. More often than not, they are accom­panied by conflict and heightened geopolitical volatility. Sometimes they are preceded by dramatic events such as revolution or war, the dates of which become enshrined in human consciousness and shape national identities.

The years 1918 and 1945 spring to mind, as does 1989, when the mass flight of East Germans through the once formidable barrier of the Berlin Wall signalled the demise of the Soviet empire and the end of the Cold War.

But if 2014 lacks the end of era feel of earlier tipping-point years, in retrospect it will be seen as the year in which a fraying Pax Americana (literally, American peace) fin­ally unravelled and was replaced by a new order, the contours of which are becoming more discernible, even though the final form is still unclear.

The consequences of this shift are likely to be profound, affecting the prosperity and security of every global citizen. And they pose daunting challenges in foreign policy, trade and national security for Australians, the like of which we have not confronted before.

Understanding the drivers and implications of the new order requires an appreciation of the distinguishing characteristics of the old order, as well as its genesis. Pax Americana rose from the ashes of World War II, when the victorious Western democracies, led by the US, established a set of global institutions and norms that privileged the free market, liberal democracies and the rule of law.

Underpinning these norms and institutions was the unrivalled military power of the US and a set of alliances that spanned the globe and included Australia.

Of course, the era of Pax Americana was never as peaceful as its name implies. During the long years of the Cold War, US strategic pre-eminence was vitiated by the illusion and reality of Soviet military power. A series of regional proxy wars between the US and Soviet Union frequently disturbed the peace, while the Cuban missile crisis in 1962 brought the world perilously close to a full-blown nuclear conflagration that would have dwarfed any previous war.

Nevertheless, the US-led order provided sufficient stability and predictability to allow Europe and Asia to recover quickly from the destruction of World War II. The unprecedented era of global economic growth and prosperity that followed seemed to validate not just the superiority of Western capitalism but the foundational values of Western democracies.

However, Pax Americana is now under threat on many fronts. Chief among them are the emergence of China as a genuine peer competitor to the US; the new military assertiveness of a dissatisfied, authoritarian Russia; the accelerating disintegration of the regional order in the Middle East; and the accompanying spread of a virulent brand of anti-Western fundamentalism.

Undoubtedly the greatest long-term challenge is China’s latest incarnation as a major Asian and, potentially, global power. China is a mega-state the likes of which has not been seen before. For millennia, the Middle Kingdom was the dominant polity and civilisation in Asia and President Xi Jinping dreams of reclaiming that status.

Xi’s dream is no longer illusory, for modern China has the strategic clout to realise it. But his dream could well turn into America’s nightmare, for China’s re-emergence poses strategic challenges of a complexity and order of magnitude not previously experienced by the US-led international order.

China’s population and economy dwarf that of fascist Germany, imperial Japan and the Soviet Union, the previous and ultimately vanquished pretenders to the US throne. Twenty years of double-digit increases in defence spending have bequeathed the Chinese leadership a highly capable military, albeit one that is, as yet, unproven in combat.

Although China’s rise has brought immense economic benefits to its people, the rest of the world and Australia in particular, China’s recent international behaviour strongly suggests an unwillingness to conform to international norms when its core interests are at stake. The problem is that these self-designated core interests are neither fixed nor ­apparently amenable to peaceful ­resolution, as illustrated by China’s uncompromising approach to the many disputed ­islands and maritime features it claims in the western Pacific.

The extent to which China is prepared to challenge the Asian regional order, particularly at sea, has become abundantly clear during the past year. In a series of actions designed to broadcast its power and intent, Beijing has unilaterally declared an air defence identification zone over the East China Sea and dramatically increased air and sea patrols around the disputed Senkaku-Diaoyu islands, which are administratively controlled by Japan.

Beijing also has dispatched naval ships south of Java for the first time; sent two nuclear submarines to the waters off Sri Lanka; provoked a confrontation with Vietnam by drilling for oil in contested territorial waters; and stepped up the militarisation of ­occupied coral reefs and islands in the South China Sea. China also is at odds with four other Asian states (India, Japan, Vietnam and The Philippines) over territorial disputes, while anxiety levels about China’s strategic intentions have been raised throughout the region.

More fundamentally, China’s view of what the new Asian order should look like is clearly at variance with that of the US. Beijing makes no secret of its desire to use its newly acquired power to change the rules of the game and replace the US as the pre-eminent state in Asia. Whether China’s ambitions extend to being the dominant global power will depend on how successfully it can compete with the US in Asia and to what extent the balance of economic and military power shifts in its favour during the coming decades.

From Beijing’s perspective the auguries are promising. While its own position continues to strengthen, the US remains distracted and stretched by a host of international crises, which has created new opportunities for the kind of creative Chinese trade and foreign policy diplomacy seen in recent months.

Examples are the successful advocacy of a Chinese-dominated Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank; the signing of a free trade agreement with Australia; a preliminary gas accord with Russia to go with the $400 billion natural gas deal signed earlier in the year; and a tenuous but important first step towards a limited rapprochement with Japan.

Beneficial though they may be to regional development and economic integration, such initiatives are also part of a calculated Chinese strategy to reduce US economic influence in Asia, decouple longstanding allies such as Australia and South Korea from the US alliance system, and supplant the US as the region’s indispensable nation.

A second major challenge to Pax Americana is from a familiar adversary also on the geopolitical comeback. Russia’s annexation of Crimea this year, ironically during the centenary of celebrations to mark the war that was once ­expected to end all wars, came as an unwelcome shock to a complacent and ill-prepared Europe.

Unfortunately, the European political class committed the cardinal sin of believing its own ­wishful thinking that predatory nationalism and military aggression had been effectively elimin­ated from the continent.

Russia’s muscular revanchism in Ukraine and its renewed international assertiveness are clear indications that Vladimir Putin does not share the European aversion to military force or Europe’s dream of a democratic Russia at peace with an enlarged EU.

It took the hard-nosed realism of Mikhail Gorbachev, the last leader of the Soviet Union, to spell out the full implications of Putinism for Europe and Pax Americana. Earlier this month, Gorbachev declared that the world was on the brink of a new Cold War, a prognosis that would have been almost universally derided had it been made before the Crimean annexation in March this year. There is no derisory laughter now.

Crimea and the Ukraine imbroglio may be only the beginning of the bad news for the West.

Putin has sent an unequivocal message to the world that Russia is dissatisfied with an international order that Putin sees as inequitable and unsustainable, denying Russia’s rightful status as a resurgent great power. Henceforth, Putin intends to assert this status, by leveraging his country’s massive energy reserves and a modernised, rejuvenated military.

From the Baltic to the Atlantic and the Gulf of Mexico to the Pacific, Moscow is flexing its new military might, reconstituting old alliances, seeking bases and facilities from which to project military power and using energy as a strategic tool to advance its national interests.

Russian strategic bombers and intelligence-gathering aircraft flying over the Atlantic, the Baltic and the Black Sea are regularly testing European and North American air defences, with 100 incursions reported by NATO this year alone, approaching Cold War levels.

Moscow also is establishing military and intelligence facilities in like-minded Latin American countries, notably Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela. Russia’s Defence Minister, Sergei Shoigu, has announced his intention to send long-range bomber patrols along the US east coast and over the Gulf of Mexico.

Putin also has embarked on his own pivot to Asia, moving closer to China, maintaining a dialogue with Japan, seeking defence-maintenance facilities in Vietnam and reminding the world that Russia is an Asian, as well as a European, power by dispatching a naval flotilla through the South China Sea to the Coral Sea during the G20 leaders’ meeting in Brisbane, much to the surprise of most ­Australians.

Underlining his capacity to act as an international spoiler in regional hot spots such as the Middle East, Putin has continued to support the pariah Assad regime in Syria and complicated Western ­attempts to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons by agreeing to sell Iran nuclear reactors and hinting that Moscow may ­assist Tehran to build its own nuclear fuel fabrication plant.

The third main strategic challenge to Pax Americana is the fragmenting regional order in the Middle East, as the promise of the Arab Spring turns into a winter of discontent, revealing in all their primal complexity the deep tribal, ethnic, religious and political cleavages that endanger the security and viability of virtually all the region’s states.

Iraq and Syria, two of the Middle East’s heartland states, having suffered through several years of internecine warfare, are facing their moment of truth. Whether they survive as unitary states is an open question. The consequences of their dismemberment would be deeply destabilising and have global repercussions, recasting ­national boundaries, changing the regional distribution of power in unpredictable ways, aggravating terrorism and adding to doubts about the wisdom of US strategy and Washington’s staying power.

Egypt, having endured its own internal revolution and emerging with a government eerily reminiscent of the military autocracies that preceded it, seemed to have the redeeming strategic virtue, from Washington’s point of view, of being an oasis of stability compared with the chaos elsewhere.

But this may turn out to be deceptive, as the government of Abdel-Fattah al-Sisi has been preoccupied internally with the residual threat from the banned Muslim Brotherhood and now confronts a second danger from militant group Ansar Beit al-­Maqdis, which has killed hundreds of Egyptian soldiers and police during the past six months.

A further complication is the rapid deterioration in Israeli-­Palestinian relations, following on the heels of the latest destructive war between Hamas and Israel in Gaza. A third “intifada” would only add to Washington’s many headaches, dissipating already stretched American diplomatic resources and contributing to the impression of US impotency when the US capacity for global leadership is already much diminished.

Amid this turmoil is the game-changing and largely unforeseen rise of Islamic State this year as the media-savvy, anti-Western prototype of a new kind of terrorist group, distinguished by the scope of its strategic ambition and ability to capture large swaths of territory with a level of autonomous military power previously the preserve of nation-states.

Islamic State is a transnational movement with the trappings of statehood, which makes it highly resistant to conventional deterrence and counter-strategies. ­Defeating or containing it is only going to get harder with the Novem­ber announcement of a de facto alliance between Islamic State, al-Qa’ida and other hardline extremist groups such as Jund al-Aqsa, Khorasan and Ahrar al-Sham. This is the real “axis of evil”, and its aim is the destruction of Pax Americana and all that it ­represents.

Faced with three simultaneous challenges of such magnitude when the economic, institutional and military power of the West is in relative decline it is clear that, Pax Americana, as we have known it, cannot endure.

The US can no longer carry the burden of global leadership in partnership with its traditional ­allies while their share of world gross domestic product continues to shrink, indebtedness climbs and threats multiply. This is not to argue that the US won’t bounce back. But even if it does, Washington will not be able to exercise the same degree of authority and leadership to which we have become accustomed.

In the new, multipolar world of influential states and non-state ­actors, the ambitions, interests and values of the West will be resisted by increasingly powerful players with different and often diametrically opposed world views.

Rather than an aberration, the geopolitical tensions and volatility of the past year are likely to become the new normal and may worsen until the transition to a more stable order is complete, a process that is likely to be lengthy and characterised by simmering conflict punctuated by periodic spikes in violence.

This transition could be even more difficult, and consequential, if it were to be accompanied by other systemic shocks of a financial, economic or environmental nature such as global deflation, a return to recession or an acceleration of disruptive climate change impacts.

As a fully paid-up member of the US alliance system, and a strong supporter of Pax Americana, Australia has reaped the strategic and economic benefits of being part of the dominant Western club. We have much to lose if the familiar verities, power structures and values of the old order are replaced by those that are less liberal and constrain our independence of action.

But we cannot inoculate ourselves against adverse geopolitical change by retreating behind fortress Australia or by deluding ourselves that the unsettling events of 2014 are merely an inconvenient interlude before Pax Americana re-emerges stronger than before. We have to be proactive in shaping the emerging order and innovative in recalibrating our foreign, trade and defence policies.

The US alliance has served us well, but it is no longer a sufficient guarantee of our security in a rapidly changing world. Managing future strategic risk means div­ersifying our security and trade partners to include countries with dissimilar cultures, traditions and even values. These differences should not be a bar to doing business and co-operating on shared foreign policy and strategic goals.

As a coming energy superpower and a country that is increasingly seen as an influential player in world affairs, Australia is better placed than most to navigate the hazardous shoals ahead.

Ensuring the smoothest possible passage will require a thorough re-examination of Australia’s foreign policy, trade and defence settings and the articulation of an overarching national strategy for maintaining our prosperity and security in more difficult times.

In addition to the foreshadowed defence white paper, the government would be well advised to consider a complementary foreign and trade policy white paper and a major update of the 2013 National Security Strategy, which is already showing its age, having failed to anticipate the seminal shift in the international order that is now apparent and shows every sign of accelerating.

Alan Dupont is professor of international security at the University of NSW and a non-resident fellow at the Lowy Institute.

Credit to the Australian

The Calm Before the Storm: All Hell Will Break Loose In 2015

Something big is about to happen. So many say that they can feel it in their bones.

A migration to underground hideouts began two years ago in earnest for members of the alphabet soup agency retirees. I knew one of these “refugees” personally and he pointed to 2015 as the time when he anticipated that all hell was going to break loose. I wrote an article about the defection of my FEMA contact, his family and like-minded individuals from FEMA and DHS,  almost two years ago.

Pastor Lindsay Williams recently sent me an email regarding a survival tip for the difficult times ahead. Pastor Williams has been a guest on my show several times and I sent him back an email asking when he would like to come back on my show. He responded that he has stopped doing interviews. His message indicated it is almost time to stop talking and to start preparing for some very dark days.

How do I know?  Some of my very best contacts have told me that it is time to stop warning the people, because it is now time to start hiding from the wrong people. My initial reaction is to not believe them, but there are too many well-placed sources to not take seriously.

Jim Marrs Saw the Warning on the Wall Five Years Ago

In a December 9, 2012 interview on The Common Sense Show, Jim Marrs discussed how approximately 400-500 top level bankers have left their positions and have gone into seclusion. Marrs reminded my listening audience of how the elite have developed seed vaults which only they have access to. Marrs was clearly alluding to the fact that some very bad events are coming and the global elite are aware of it and are moving to meet the threat.  I have firsthand knowledge of four ex-fed officials and their families who have relocated to safety enclaves when doing so was very disruptive to their respective family’s lives. Increasingly, it is looking like some major event(s) is/are coming and persons with insider information are attempting to remove themselves from harm’s way. Jim Marrs will be a guest for three hours (9pm-Midnight Central) on December 7, 2014 to discuss this and other issues.

Another media friend of mine, Paul Martin, of Revolution Radio, has been repeatedly telling me that several key contacts of his from the various alphabet soup agencies as well as the military have, or are, leaving the country in anticipation of what is coming. In the past two weeks, I have had a number of phone calls from media people who are telling me that their sources are repeating the same mantra, or they are just dropping off of  the radar.

“Get ready for 2015″!

We Are In the Calm Before the Storm Period

The late summer and early fall were abuzz with the latest rumors about Ebola. Many of us in the independent media spent countless hours debunking this misinformation being put out by the CDC (e.g the existence of a previous vaccine, the fact that it is airborne, etc.). And just as soon as the Ebola stories peaked in October, somebody in the MSM flipped a switch and virtually all meaningful reporting disappeared from the news. Why?

The reason for Ebola’s disappearance from the media is simple, it was Christmas shopping time. America has become a service economy. Most of the retail shopping for the year happens between Halloween and the end of the year. The financial success tied to Christmas shopping is based upon the fact that people must trust that it is safe to go out in public. If the public perceived that Ebola could be contracted by going out in public, the Christmas shopping season could be stopped in its tracks and globalist corporations would not be able to maximize profits. However, this all about to change.

What Was the Ebola Scare All About?

Many mistakenly believe that the Ebola scare has been mitigated and nothing could be further from the truth. Isn’t it interesting that we never saw a toxicology report about the so-called victims of Ebola? When some of these victims somehow recovered against all odds, these people were kept away from the media. Why?

Many of us have privately concluded that we in the United States were not dealing with traditional Ebola. What we were dealing with in the United States was something designed to give the impression that we were on the verge of an Ebola pandemic in the United States. Why would the CDC go through such an elaborate charade? The answer is really quite simple, the appearance that the U.S. was on the verge of an Ebola pandemic gave rise to governmental preparations that would not raise an eyebrow from an unaware public. And what preparations am I talking about? I am talking about martial llaw preparations which could easily be morphed from a form medical martial law to politically motivated martial law related to not only a pandemic, but to an economic collapse. And believe me, if Ebola or some other dangerous pathogen makes its way into mainstream America, the economy will collapse because people will not be eating out, shopping, attending sporting events and concerts and the service economy as we know it will crumble in a matter of days.

Martial Law Preparations Arising Out of the Ebola Scare

 By this point in the article, some are saying that “OK Dave, name some sources, something concrete that we can wrap our minds around”. And these people are correct in demanding as much concrete information as possible. This is the point in the article where logic and common sense outweigh doubt and cognitive dissonance.  Judge a man by his actions, not by his words. Forget everything you think you know and learned about the Ebola scare of this past summer and fall. Simply consider the actions and implications of the following events:

The United States has detailed procedures to deal with a pandemic outbreak and it carries the force of law. Under section 361 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S. Code § 264), the U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services is authorized to take measures to prevent the entry and spread of communicable diseases from foreign countries into the United States and between states. The authority for carrying out these functions on a daily basis has been delegated to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The CDC utilizes two basic strategies when trying to contain a public outbreak of something as deadly as Ebola and they are Isolation and Quarantine.

Paul Watson opened a lot of eyes with the following statement: ” The source, an office clerk within the LADHS, said that during a policy meeting on the morning of June 18th last month, his supervisor announced that the Los Angeles County Dept. of Health Services had struck a deal with the government to open up “low cost housing” facilities for homeless people, otherwise known as “FEMA camps.” The source said that his supervisor ordered staff not to use the term “FEMA camps.” One look at who is behind this program should raise the eyebrows of every person. as it is being administered by the Department of Health Services.

“In an effort to respond to the high need for recuperative care services, Housing for Health will open a 38 bed recuperative care site in South LA this summer. The goal of recuperative care is to provide short-term housing with health oversight to homeless DHS patients who are recovering from anacute illness or injury or have conditions that would be exacerbated by living on the street or in shelters. The site was renovated to serve patients with mobility impairments and provides wheelchair accessible community space indoors and in an open-air courtyard. The site will be operated by LAMP Community, a non-profit agency with over 25 years of experience providing services to homeless individuals”.

Can’t talk about FEMA camps? Where there is smoke there is fire.

A memo from the Health and Human Services (HHS) as administered by the Center for Disease speaks about setting up isolation facilities.

Todd Starnes, FOX News contributor and talk show host, has interviewed unidentified sources including doctors, nurses and counselors who say that while working with the new illegal immigrants at the Lackland AFB in San Antonio, TX., and he found that these civilian employees are being threatened, by the East German Stasi contingent of the Department of Homeland Security, with prison if they report how bad the health conditions are and how much at risk the American public is being placed under.

Here is an excerpt from the Starnes report:

“We have so many kids coming in that there was no way to control all of the sickness – all this stuff coming into the country,” she (an unidentified nurse) said. “We were very concerned at one point about strep going around the base.”

Both the counselor and the nurse said their superiors tried to cover up the extent of the illnesses.

“When they found out the kids had scabies, the charge nurse was adamant – ‘Don’t mention that. Don’t say scabies,’” the nurse recounted. “But everybody knew they had scabies. Some of the workers were very concerned about touching things and picking things up. They asked if they should be concerned, but they were told don’t worry about it.”

The Starnes report issued an ominous warning:

“My sources say Americans should be very concerned about the secrecy of the government camps”.

At about the same time, Infowars reported the same kind of observations in Houston, Texas and later in Phoenix, AZ.

Since late May of 2014, the country has been besieged with reports, pictures and videos of UN vehicles in our country.  FOX 5, San Diego, ran

Sightings of these vehicles have been widely reported beginning last Spring. And this has led some to suspect that an occupation force is being mobilized.

a report on Sunday morning, July 6th, in the early morning hours, which detailed sightings of UN vehicles being transported north of San Diego on Interstate 15 headed towards Riverside. The story said that the vehicles were manufactured in the United States and were being transported for shipment overseas. Really? Does this explain why these vehicles are being transported in SEVERAL southern states? Does the manufacturer have a automotive plant in Georgia, California, Texas, etc? Why didn’t we see these reports in Detroit?

The FOX 5 website contains neither a video or a written report of the story. I suspect the story was a trial balloon used to gauge the believability and response to the story without leaving behind much in the way of evidence.

In every case, the vehicles are being transported and not being individually driven. This clearly suggests the prepositioning of military assets for future use. The UN is preparing to seize American guns and have hired personnel to do so.

The references for this first part of this invasion and the second part as well can be found hereand here.

In October of 2014, I discovered evidence of Human Health Services medical quarantine camps. However, none of these camps had any medical personnel, medical organizations or any evidence of treatment facilities.

During the “Ebola crisis” we learned that in the event of a pandemic, the Secretary of Human Health Services (HHS) would assume operational control of Federal emergency public health and medical response. In the event of a pandemic outbreak the HHS will order the quarantining of Ebola sufferers and the transport of the same to detainment camps. The mass transport of Ebola victims to quarantine camps is referred to as “ambulance services”, and it is a euphemism for transporting sick people to a death camp.

I have found evidence supporting these claims in a federal document entitled  Emergency Support Function #8 (ESF #8) – Public Health and Medical Services Annex.  

This document can be accessed by Googling “ESF #8″ and you will arrive at the following listing and a PDF will appear.

[PDF]Emergency Support Function #8 – Public Health and Medical

www.fema.gov/…/emergency_s…

Federal Emergency Management Agency

Medical Services include responding to medical needs associated with mental health, ….. assistance are executed by ESF #8 in coordination with DHS/FEMA. … primarily for communications, aircraft, and the establishment of base camps.

ESF #8 established the national ambulance contract, which is designed to provide support forevacuating seriously ill or injured patients.

HHS will enlist the VA and Department of Defense assets (e.g. the military) in support of providing “transportation assets, operating and staffing NDMS Federal Coordination Centers, and processing and tracking patient movements from collection points to their final destination reception facilities” (emphasis added).

According to the ESF #8 document, the DOD is the only recognized Federal partner responsible for regulating and tracking patients transported on DOD assets to appropriate treatment facilities (i.e., NDMS hospitals). However, other agencies “may assist with isolation and quarantine measures and with point of distribution operations (mass prophylaxis and vaccination)”.

The ESF #8 document leads to some disturbing revelations.

Look at the participating partners in the “hospital” detainment centers in the EFS #8 document.

Support Agencies:

Department of Agriculture

Department of Commerce

Department of Defense

Department of Energy

Department of Homeland Security

Department of the Interior

Department of Justice

Department of Labor

Department of State

Department of Transportation

Department of Veterans Affairs

Environmental Protection Agency

General Services Administration

U.S. Agency for International Development

U.S. Postal Service

American Red Cross

No Healthcare Personnel at the HHS/FEMA Detention Camps

In the above list of Ebola detainment centers, I don’t see the CDC or the National Institute of Health listed. Nor do I see any legitimate medical organizations. I don’t even see the presence of any “volunteer” medical organizations such as Doctors Without Borders. Does anyone else find it disturbing that the transport of very sick people will be conducted and the end point is devoid of any medical treatment organizations and/or facilities?

There is not one shred of evidence that these camps are intended to treat or even make comfortable people who will contract Ebola or be exposed to Ebola. The most disturbing thing is that these camps will be death camps for relatively healthy people. If you are a person who is unlucky enough to be discovered to have asthma or merely be temporarily suffering from congestion in one’s lungs from allergies or a simple cold, you could find yourself on one of the Federally approved ambulance services (bus, train, plane) and headed to your final destination. If you doubt this claim, Google Executive Order 13295.

ANY MEDICAL DETENTION CAMP THAT DOES NOT HAVE MEDICAL ORGANIZATIONS IS A CONCENTRATION CAMP BY ANY OTHER NAME! THE PREPOSITIONING OF THESE ASSETS FOR USE IN 2015 WAS THE INTENTION OF THE EBOLA SCARE. 

Conclusion

This article listed a small representation of the prepositioning of assets during the Ebola crisis. The prepositioning of martial law assets and concentration camps went largely unnoticed, because most of these developments seemed like reasonable precautions one would find in the midst of an outbreak. Ebola may have “temporarily” disappeared, but the martial law and mass detention plans have not.

In January, the Ebola vaccines will be ready with the first trial centers set up in Knoxville, TN.  Bill Gates did not invest over a half a billion dollars in Ebola vaccines for Ebola to not come back which it will after the Christmas shopping season. The insiders are saying that Ebola, or something as deadly as Ebola, will resurface between mid-January and April. And as you have seen, the flimsiest excuses for detainment and incarceration for Americans have been set into place. We will see mandatory vaccination and medical martial law in 2015.

There is yet another challenge coming our way after the first of the year and that has to do with the world’s arms race and World War III preparations as the new cold war is moving towards a hot war. As many of us noted last summer, we were witnessing the emergency infrastructure shift from peacetime to martial law. Remember the consistent scenario which has been revealed on this site: Medical Martial law followed by military martial law which will culminate in World War III.  We are in the quiet time.  When the clock strikes midnight on January 1, 2015, we will begin another countdown, the countdown to Armageddon.

Credit to Common Sense

The Coming Wealth Transfer and Where To Hide

History may not repeat but it sure does rhyme. Mike Maloney has studied monetary and financial breakdowns throughout history and concludes that there's nothing new or different happening this time, except its global and far more massive than any other time in history.

Worse, there are echoes of 1911 where a series of diplomatic blunders and national pride and intransigence combined to create the still largely inexplicable start to WW I.

Chris Martenson: Well it’s global this time, right? This is -- there’s nowhere to hide. (...) What has happened when we’ve tried to print our way to prosperity before? What has happen? Why has it happened and what have been the consequences always been?

Mike Maloney: Whenever you try to print your way to prosperity it transfers well from the masses to the few. The few being the people running the game and then also the hucksters that are very nimble, the con artists and so on. You see these people get rich during the Weimar Hyperinflation. There were quite a few of these fancy salespeople that got rich; they didn’t stay rich once things stabilized again.

But it creates such a topsy turvy world that the normal person that does not know how to operate under these weird economic conditions cannot possibly keep up with things and wealth is transferred away from those people to the people that are very good at observing what’s going on that second and adjusting to it. But the one thing that I see as a constant throughout history is that gold and silver eventually do an accounting of all this -- the financial -- you know financial finessing that the governments are doing.

And when it does that it -- there is a transfer of wealth to the people that own gold and silver. And so -- it’s very rare moments in history. This does not happen often. But it’s a great opportunity and I’ve just -- you know if you look at gold right now the public’s opinion of gold is quite low because it’s been going down for three years.

But if you look at it in a longer timeframe and I started investing in gold in 2002 and by early 2003 I started investing in silver and if you look at it from the year 2000 it’s still the best performing of the assets. It’s still out performed the Dow and S&P and real estate.

And I will continue, myself, to accumulate on the way down I see this as an opportunity. And if it goes lower than it is right now, you know nobody has a perfect crystal ball. So it may have already put in its lows. But I just accumulate every single month and I will continue doing that because I see that as the only sure thing in this crazy world of currency creation.

Click the play button below to listen to Chris' interview with Mike Maloney (43m:35s)

Credit to Zero hedge

The Most Essential Lesson Of History That No One Wants To Admit

Ron Paul wrote an eye opening article recently about some legislation that was just signed in Congress, namely H. Res. 758.  In the article Dr. Paul explains the purpose of the resolution.  It’s not a new law but provides a basis of facts that will be relied on for future action.  So essentially the resolution purports that Russia behaved badly in various ways and by way of signing H. Res. 758 each congressman was indicating their agreement that the propositions contained therein are factual.  Now just because a group of obnoxiously arrogant A-holes stand around in a tax-revenue financed chamber and say “yeah” to several assertions does not make those assertions factual, but here in the United Orwellian States of America it kinda does.  Because those assertions that were voted to be fact (similar to the First Council of Nicaea) will now be written as factual history and taught to our children as having happened that way.  The very same way we all attained our ideas of American superiority.

The dishonesty and ignorance it creates is reason enough not to do such things, however, the real stinker of it is, as Dr. Paul so clearly points out, the sole purpose of H. Res. 758 is simply a pouring of the legal  foundation for something much more substantive.  You see this is how wars begin.  And the wheels for this particular war have been in motion for many years now.  We’ve been told our actions heretofore are simply a necessary response to the Ukraine situation.  However, those who can objectively look at the Ukraine situation will realize the US sponsored coup in Ukraine was simply a spark to light the fuse of a much larger detonation.

Now I understand many at this point are thinking “yep another conspiracy theory, why can’t it ever just be the US government thinks what they are doing is best for Americans”?  And it can, it just never is anymore and perhaps ever was.  Lies are told and public opinion is manipulated.  For war must be every bit good theatre in the press, as good strategy on the ground.  It is the theatre that makes war so ugly.  Fighting a war for what one believes in is unfortunate and brutal but fighting for lies and deceit to an end that benefits only those telling the lies is a type of ugliness most of us cannot comprehend.  It is only in the world ruled by sociopaths where such things can happen.  Allow me to offer some facts many don’t know about how it came to be that we invaded Iraq and Syria as the truth is still very much hidden from common knowledge.

We had a tragic start within the first two years of the new millennium.  That event actually seemed to bring the world together.  However, very quickly it turned into a launching pad for war.  One might think well that’s reasonable to expect given the tragedy that took place in New York.  A mighty nation like America is going to get retribution to those responsible.  And I agree with that.  I was one of the many who wanted to see retribution to those responsible.  However, we abandoned the attack on those responsible to initiate a war that had been in the works for many years.

It is pretty common knowledge at this point we pulled out of Afghanistan to push our forces and objectives toward Iraq. Now to get the world onboard with this, as we now know, the US created incredible lies about Iraq not only having some connection to 9/11 but that they were also building enormous stockpiles of ‘Weapons of Mass Destruction’ and that they were hell bent on using those against western nations.  Again, we now know that none of these assertions were true.  And we know our legislators were aware that no credible evidence existed to support such views.  And we know that despite knowing those assertions were false they still made the decision to lie not only to the American people but to the world.  The lies were told in an effort to build support so that parents around the world would see a righteous cause that they were sending their sons and daughters to their potential deaths or to be maimed in unimaginably horrifying circumstances.

Now I want you to think about that for a moment and don’t just read over that and move on.  Because this is the essence of what our government has become in America today.  They knowingly lied to the world so that the world would be willing to sacrifice their children, believing it was a necessary and righteous cause to do so.  And in the end the truth came to light that there was no righteous cause.  That all these young men and women from around the world had been used as pawns to fulfill the ambitions of a few.  It is truly one of the ugliest atrocities to ever have been carried out by an elected government against its own citizens.  And yet today because of our state edited media, most will not acknowledge that such an atrocity took place.  So I want to make very clear that Iraq was not a consequence of poor intelligence or bad decisions in the wake of post 9/11 emotions.  The invasions of both Iraq and Syria were being planned and discussed for many years before 9/11.  It is imperative to understand such things.  Because while we cannot change history, we must use history to change the future.  And I will add a note here because of the complexities of discussing Israel in a public forum.  The immediately following should not be misconstrued as an indictment of Israel for it is America that is responsible for America’s actions.  Now please carry on.

In 1996 the Prime Minister of Israel, Netanyahu, sponsored an ad hoc think tank called The Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies’ “Study Group on a New Israeli Strategy Toward 2000.”  From this think tank came a report that was the beginning of a powerful lobby movement.  Let’s take a close look at a few main points that come from the 1996 report.

Israel’s quest for peace emerges from, and does not replace, the pursuit of its ideals. The Jewish people’s hunger for human rights — burned into their identity by a 2000-year old dream to live free in their own land — informs the concept of peace and reflects continuity of values with Western and Jewish tradition.

Israel can shape its strategic environment, in cooperation with Turkey and Jordan, by weakening, containing, and even rolling back Syria. This effort can focus on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq — an important Israeli strategic objective in its own right — as a means of foiling Syria’s regional ambitions.

Syria challenges Israel on Lebanese soil. An effective approach, and one with which American can sympathize, would be if Israel seized the strategic initiative along its northern borders by engaging Hizballah, Syria, and Iran, as the principal agents of aggression in Lebanon, including by:

• striking Syria’s drug-money and counterfeiting infrastructure in Lebanon, all of which focuses on Razi Qanan. 
• paralleling Syria’s behavior by establishing the precedent that Syrian territory is not immune to attacks emanating from Lebanon by Israeli proxy forces. 
• striking Syrian military targets in Lebanon, and should that prove insufficient, striking at select targets in Syria proper.

To anticipate U.S. reactions and plan ways to manage and constrain those reactions, Prime Minister Netanyahu can formulate the policies and stress themes he favors in language familiar to the Americans by tapping into themes of American administrations during the Cold War which apply well to Israel. If Israel wants to test certain propositions that require a benign American reaction, then the best time to do so is before November, 1996.

But who would have authored such a report?  A report that seems to promote the idea of constraining, manipulating and achieving a benign american reaction.  Well have a look at the authors of this document below.  They should be familiar to most of you as they are US not Israeli policymakers, which is odd because again this is an Israeli state sponsored project with objectives that are clearly focused on the well being of Israel, not the US or the  American people.

Richard Perle, American Enterprise Institute, Study Group Leader

James Colbert, Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs
Charles Fairbanks, Jr., Johns Hopkins University/SAIS
Douglas Feith, Feith and Zell Associates
Robert Loewenberg, President, Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies
Jonathan Torop, The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
David Wurmser, Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies
Meyrav Wurmser, Johns Hopkins University

Now subsequent to that 1996 report being released there was a letter drafted and sent to President Clinton in January 1998 that provides us some additional clarity on the war policies of the new millennium.  Let’s have a look at that.

Again we see a very explicit and aggressive lobby effort to persuade the US to invade Iraq.  Now I’m sure you’ll find these authors even more interesting.  Many of the same authors of the 1996 recommendation are also authors of this lobby effort.  Only this time they are acting as benefactors of America.  Odd though that they are pushing the very same agenda that just 18 months earlier these same folks were pushing as benefactors to a foreign nation.  It almost seems as though the authors are indeed attempting to manage and constrain the American people’s reaction, as discussed in the first report, to their desired recommendations that US use its military to engage various nations in war.  I’ve attached the list of authors here as well.

Let’s think about this rationally for a moment.  In 1996 we had a foreign government sponsor a think tank staffed by very prominent US policymakers with the objective benefiting that foreign sponsor nation.  And then two years later we see a follow on letter to the President from not only the same US policymakers that authored the 1996 report but now had additional prominent US policymakers.  The recommendation of both the ’96 report and ’98 letter to the President were lobbying for the US to invade and overthrow Iraq and Syria.  However the original recommendation was for the benefit of Israel and the latter recommendation was being sold as necessary for America.  And remember, 9/11 had not happened yet but we already see these very powerful, very prominent policymakers pushing very hard to invade Iraq and Syria.

The problem is Americans didn’t want another Iraqi war.  Times were good in the late 1990′s.  People were happy.  The cold war was over, jobs were a plenty and the world felt safer than it had for decades.  And as such, there was no way Americans were going to war for the benefit of a foreign nation. The US had decided Hussein was actually a stabilizing force there in the middle east and as such we wanted him there.  But then an election happened and little Bush was elected president.  Along with him came all those names we just saw authoring the two dossiers recommending the US invade Iraq and Syria.  The authors were given titles such as Chair of the Defense Policy Board (Richard Perle) and Secretary of Defense (Rumsfeld), etc.   And so all of a sudden the same group of people who were championing the invasion of Iraq and Syria back in the late 1990′s were now in a position to make it happen by way of their own authority.  What luck!  Shortly thereafter the worst attack on US soil took place in New York and the rest is, as they say, history.

To believe we went into Iraq because our fearless and integrity driven leaders truly and honestly believed it was the morally and justifiable thing to do based on the tragedy of 9/11 is just ignorance.  There was a small group of men, called Neocons, that had derived these military actions some 10 years prior to operations themselves and some 5 years prior to the events that were used to sell these war efforts to the American people and the world.  None of that can we change.  And so my ultimate point here is to learn from what happened with Syria and Iraq and to show you it is exactly what is happening with Russia today.

Let me introduce a letter written by Bill Kristol and Donald Kagan to the Heads of State and Government Of the European Union and NATO.  The letter was signed by many but of particular interest are many of the same names from the 1996 report and 1998 letter to President Clinton pushing for war against Iraq and Syria.  This 2004 letter does not mince its words.  It is very much pushing for European support of a what would obviously be a US military stand off with Russia.  The letter is sponsored by the American Enterprise Institute, which is a neoconservative think tank.  In fact, one of the prestigious awards handed out by the AEI is called the Irving Kristol award.  Irving Kristol (father to Bill Kristol) is known as the godfather of the neocon movement in the US.  So again this is essentially the same crowd from ’96 an ’98, pushing for support of a US military operation, this time with Russia.  This is back in 2004 mind you before the current events in Ukraine had even been imagined (signatories of the attached letter can be found here).

Again we see the aggressive recommendations to back a military operation many years before the catalyst event takes place.  That is the event that is being sold as the moral justification for a military operation.  But this letter tells us that this military objective against Russia has been promoted for many many years now, far before Ukraine was an issue.  This is again, a push from the same folks that lied to us about Iraq and then trained, equipped and funded ISIS in order to get into Syria and are now working hard to create a catalyst for an offensive with Russia.

For years before 9/11 it was determined by those warmongering policymakers that we would be invading Iraq and Syria.  All we needed was a catalyst.  9/11 provided that for Iraq.  ISIS provided that for Syria and now Ukraine has provided that for Russia.  I’m not saying these folks had anything to do with 9/11 because I have no idea.  What we do know is that 9/11 was used as a catalyst to lie to the American people about the need to invade Iraq.  It has also been fully admitted by our government that we did in fact, train, equip and fund ISIS, ‘mistakenly though’.  And finally we have recordings of senior US diplomats discussing our involvement in the coup in Ukraine.

And so one can only conclude here that again Americans are being manipulated to accept the recommendations from a powerful group of warmongering policymakers to go to war with a nation that has posed absolutely no threat to the American people in more than 25 years.  And we are being led down this path by lies and propaganda.  Quite specifically things like H. Res. 758.  And if we do not make a stand against these policymakers we are most certainly headed for what could very well be the war to end all wars.

For the West is clearly looking to fortify its power hold over the world by destroying Russia economically to disable them militarily in an effort to prevent a Sino-Soviet alliance.  I recently watched a presentation by former World Bank President, James Wolfensohn, to a political science class at Stanford University.  The moral to his story (and I use that ironically) was to challenge them to figure out a way, in the face of a rising East soon to control a higher share of the worlds assets than the West, to retain the West’s global control.  He stressed it was something his generation  did not have to deal with but that today’s Western up and coming political class must consider.  You see China is a powerful nation but without an alliance with Russia, China can be contained due its lack of energy.  Because China is both a more difficult opponent and one that has much more trade with the US, Russia is the obvious target to prevent a fully formed Sino-Soviet alliance.

 However, I cannot imagine a scenario where China does not clearly identify such a strategy being played out.  And so they will come to the defense of Russian energy, as we’ve already seen with the signings of the world’s largest energy deals between those two nations.   The Chinese defense will not be limited to economic if push comes to shove.  And we will be put in the midst of the most powerful nations in the history of the world fighting for ultimate power.  This small group of horrible people are willing to put the world on the line so their lineage can continue to rule the world while the rest of us struggle to simply stop the financial bleeding that has become a 15 year epidemic.  This all sounds like the stuff of fiction novels but unfortunately the facts tell us this is all too real.  What is hard for me to believe is that we so readily ignore and deny the most essential lessons of history.  Perhaps the foremost being that the political class will always be willing to sacrifice the working class in order to retain its power.  And so we find ourselves again on the precipice of being asked by our political class to offer our young men and women up to be sacrificed for the ‘greater cause’.  However, while they try to convince you the cause is one of morals and righteousness, in the end, it is the same cause it has been since post WWII and some will argue the same cause it has always been, which is for their interests and their victories, not ours.

Credit to Zero Hedge