Fall Begins Part 3

The United Nations Exposed



The UN is a big international banking invention for the use of globalism and social engineering. This is contrary to the Constitution. The Founding Fathers weren't perfect as we know. Yet, they were absolutely correct to outline the decree that ultimate government power was infeaseable. Therefore, a division of powers within government was a necessity in order to stablize society and prevent a country to become a tyranny (with checks and balances). Government exists to protect our rights which come from God. You can't understand the United Nations understand fully without learning about some of WWI and WWII. Each wars' conclusions made some from Woodrow Wilson to FDR to envision an utopian world. Woodrow Wilson failed in his League of Nations pre-UN superstate organization. The Senate refused to ratify the League of Nations treaty. The Council on Foreign Relations was formed in America as a mid level conduit to influence politics, the media, education, etc. to endorse pro-globalism policies. The internationalists wanted an international body to end all wars. After WWII was over, the time for the UN's creation was on (as supported by the CFR). Some have exposed the Rockefeller roots of the United Nations. The Rockefeller family was German and came into America during the 1700's. They were heads of the oil monopoly called Standard Oil. Mainstream historians have documented their nefarious past from funding the Nazi Party, buying up local car system (or electric street cars) to be replaced with diesel buses, and controlling our health industry to a degree. Some in the Rockefeller Family also were involved with eugenics, and promoting international abortion plus population control for decades. The Rockefellers were instrumental in forming the United Nations. This refutes the lie paraded by many liberals that the U.N. is a just, independent group that isn't created by the international bankers at all. The United Nations' land was originally Rockefeller owned land. David Rockefeller in his Memoirs admitted that he wanted to establish an one world and he isn't ashamed of that goal. Now, in April 1, 1945, CFR member Alger Hiss coauthored the UN charter. Carroll Quigley in the 1960's supported the CFR's agenda being controlled by the Round Table groups. Ex-CFR member Admiral Chester Ward said the the CFR's agenda was the "...submergence of U.S. soverignity and national independence into an all powerful, one-world government." The CFR isn't the most powerful group in the world, but they still powerful enough to influence administration for decades. Even the Bush administration in 2008 have plenty of CFR members like Dick Cheney, Elaine Chao, Condoleeza Rice, etc. Hiss was accused of being a Communist. The headquarters were later moved into New York City. Now, Hiss was the UN's first Secretary General. The UN General Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948. It claimed to promote religious freedom and the freedom of expression, but the catch is in its Article 29 states that "these rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations." In other words, you can't outline principles that go against the rule of the UN. These rights aren't granted to those nations that oppose the United Nations, but show compliance to the United Nations as a requirement to earn rights. Many of the UN leaders from Under Secretaries, etc. were Communists or had elitist connections.





The United Nations were involved in the Congo. European nations were pressured to need colonization. Ending colonalization was fine, but many Soviet Communists wanted control of the Congo. Peaceful independence lasted for a short time in the Congo and war existed. It's more complex than the Communists though. See, although Patrice Lumumba was a hashish smoking Communist person (he was called a great African leader by Nikita Khrushev), the Rockefellers wanted the Congo's resources. The Belgian elites didn't want Chase Manhattan to have that power over the Congo's coal, cobalt, copper, diamonds, germanium, gold, and manganese. For a time, the West aligned with the Soviets to get Belgians out of the region. The choas caused Europeans to flee the Congo because of the murdering and choas going on. The Belgian troops came into the region to control it and protect the property of the Belgians there. The US sided with a Russian resolution (from the UN) to condemn Belgian activities. This authorized the U.N. to send troops to aid Lumumba. Hence, Beglian troops left the Congo and Lumumba recieved United Nations protection. The move backfired when Lumumba wanted not allow the mineral resources of the Congo to exploited by anyone. He said this in 1959. The U.S. then worked with the Belgium government to support Moise Tshombe, who is the leader of the seceded province. According to a 1985 retrospective study prepared by International Basic Economy Corporation, top executives of Belgian corporations in the Congo and the Rockefeller conglomerate met to bargain. The beginning of these negotiations took place at the 1960 Bilderberg meeting in Burgenstock, Switzerland (Henry Kissinger was representing the Rockefeller dynasty and Pierre de Wigny was a Belgian foreign minister plus the former general counsel of the SG Trust). The West decied to assassinate Lumumba in order to gain Congo's resources more effectively. Leonard Mosley said that a US National Security Council meeting that the President wanted Lumumba out. Lumumba was murdered by Joseph Mubuto (whom Mosley called a CIA puppet). Some believe that the CIA killed him. CIA officer Paul Sakwa would recall Lawrence Devlin, CIA Station Chief in Leopoldville, taking credit for coordinating Lumumba's assassination (Pease, 1999, p. 5). In his book In Search of Enemies, former CIA operative John Stockwell tells of how he was approached by an Agency colleague who claimed to have Lumumba's corpse hidden away in the trunk of his car (1978, p. 105). It's definitely true though that the bluebloods and the elite seeked that Lumumba would be out of the way. Even in the place of Katanga, people was murdered by the United Nations. The UN was supported by the US to bomb in Katanga illegally against Katanga's sovereignity. It was a major attack in the December 1961 bombing in the capital of Katanga. The United Nations committed atrocities against civilians. Katanga was a break away area from the Congo (whose head was Moise Tshombe, who then began to oppose Wall Stret financiers and wanted true independence from the Congo). Tshombe wanted no choas and he was anti-Communist. Katanga for a time had peace. The Soviets called Tshombe a traitor. Some accuse the UN of promoting Soviet-style colonalism in the continent of Africa. Africa on many levels have been denied true independence. The deal is that the evil oligarches used violence to prevent the people of the Congo to establish true independence. The U.N. was apart of the problem of the economic exploitation of the Congo as well.







Mao Tse Tung forced the Nationalists into Taiwan. Mao murdered millions of people in China. In 1971, the United Nations voted to have China in the UN, while Taiwan was thrown out of the U.N. In 1989, Communist troops in China murdered peaceful protestors. Some were crushed with armored tanks. There were the killing feilds of Cambodians (This occured in 1975 The Khmer Rouge ruled Cambodia). They murdered as muh as 1/3 of Cambodia with the UN doing nothing about it. Leng Sary (who is a foreign minister of the Khmer Rouge) was flown to the UN. He boated that he cleansed the cities. Some applauded. Many terrorists and bureaucrats were aligned with the United Nations. Other forms of genocide were inspired by the U.N. and Western governments have been going on for many decades. One example of this was in Timor. This occured during the Carter administration. December 7, 1975 had bombs in Dili, East Timor. Troops invaded Dili (who almost outnumbered the residents of Dili) and for 2 weeks people were indiscriminately killed for no reason. The Timor tribes came into the jungles to escape the murders by the thousands. By 1977 to 1978, Indonesian set up retrieving centers for the Timorese escaping the jungle, to kill them. The Indonesian troops killed children and babies. They also starved them to death. The USA backed this genocide in the late 1970's and the Carter administration increased arms sales to Indonesia. Wicked leaders readily kill independent nations that seek to live their own lives refusing to be control by globalists.







The World Federalist Associate blatantly promotes World Government. Walter Cronkite recieved the WFA award to promote global government. Cronkite said that he wants world law and an enforceable world government. Now, the World Federal Organization changed their name. Hillary Clinton congratulated Cronkite. This isn't new. Strobe Tallbot said that "Nationhood as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recongize a single global authority." Tallbot was elected as Deputy Secretary of State during the Bill Clinton administration. In February of 2000, the New York Times allowed a full page ad in support of the World Federalist Association to spread its globalist propaganda. The ad mentions that: "...Cronkite and Clinton make a strong case for recasting the United Nations as a world federation.." Most who support world government try to keep their agenda secret. There was a declassified document entitled "A World Effectively Controlled by the United Nations" from a 1961 study that was commissioned by the US State Department. The study is quoted as mentioning that: "...it is world government we are discussing here-inescapable." Lincoln P. Bloomfield was apart of the study and said that the U.N. would mention that the U.N. would use disarmament to achieve world government. Globalists hide their real intentions by using slick phrases like "collective security", "interdependence","global community","economic integration" or "convergence." These phrases go down as nothing more than world government. Many Presidents then and now have endorsed the new world order like George H. W. Bush, who want to use the United Nations as a peacekeeping force (including power transfer from America to the U.N.). Deception is one way the United Nations use to manifest their views. One means is that the UN use NGOs (or non-governmental organizations) to appear to be independent of the power structure, yet they are in the power elite. The NGO movement uses tolerance and help for the world as an excuse to strengthen the UN while trying to increase public support of the UN organization. The UN is also using civilian disarmanet or weapons banning as well. The UN headquarters has a statue of a twisted gun. The UN falsely accuse small arms or guns as one of the primary cause of genocide in nations (instead of wicked leaders). They exploit the Rwanda genocide (when much of it was caused by machetes) as an excuse for gun banning. Of course Rwanda wasn't helped by the UN and people in Rwanda were disarmed of their guns to defend themselves (Obviously, NGOs promote the disarmament movement). The NGOs and UN developed Agenda 21 to try to manipulate how the world handle the environment. The International Criminal Court was formed with help from the CFR. The United Nations supports population control, abortion, enthanasia, and other anti-life measures. Many low level sincere people allied with the United Nations like celebrities, activits, etc. want to do some good in poor areas of Haiti, etc. Yet, this is overshadowed by the UN's ultimate agenda of control.









The UN isn't the most powerful group in the world neither are they going to be the total world government system. What they are manifests a blueprint for world government and an anti-national soveriegnity organization. As the evidence show, the United Nations was created by the elite for the elite. Some have called for the United States to withdraw from the U.N. The good news is that the United Nations isn't fully powered up. Books, the internet, radio shows, and other sources of information have fully exposed the UN for what it is. The United Nations has many crooks. They have no right to use Resolutions to criticize any nation when their own history is filled with the violation of national sovereignities of numerous countries.

The Prison Industrial Complex







The Prison Industrial Complex is for real. It's apparent that the United States imprisons more people than anyone in the world. There has been a big explosure of this complex, especially in the 21th century. In times past, few realized of the corruption in prisons. Some just have the monolithic view that you just need to lock people up and everyone will be fine. Unfortunately, that isn't the case. Crime rates are high in certain areas of the country and issues have to be addressed. There are many prisons that pay prisoners little money (for tons of works on jobs), some first time offenders treated like felonies, unfair mandatory minimum sentences (that has proven to not radically reduce crime) exist, the epidemic of the spreading of diseases, the epidemic of rapes occuring in male plus female prisons, and the stripping of education in some prisons. Jail isn't the spot to be. It's been glamorized in the movies and other forms of the media. Yet, it's a destructive place of despair and loneliness. The solution to these problems are easily apparent. There needs to be the treatment of prisoners as human beings. This doesn't mean we coddle criminals nor treat them as saints. Mandatory minimum sentences ought to be banned (since they are readily exploited to sent many minorities to prison under unfair sentencing), those with drug addiction ought to have treatment, and prisons should encourage education plus other constructive services to help prisoners cope with the real world. The Rockefeller's RICO Act and other laws unfairly gives some minorities higher jail terms for crack cocaine possession while some with cocaine are given less jail sentences. This does mean we afford them the legitimate basic treatment as we afford any human being.



Prisons are utilized as nearly as worse as plantations. Maya Schenwar from Global Research on August 30, 2008 outlined this truth. There is a prison location on 18,000 acres of farmland, it's located 59 miles northwest of Baton Rouge, and it's made up of mostly African Americans in the fields of Louisiana. The men pick cotton, wheat, soybeans, and corn. They literally work for pennies. The guards, who are mostly white, guard the location on horseback. The farm is called Angola. Angola is the nation and homeland of many of the slaves who first worked its soil. The prisoners exist from the maximum security Louisiana State Penitentiary, otherwise known as Angola. Thousands of prisoners are there. The land on where the prison stands was home to several slave plantations. This was bought up in the decades following the Civil War. It's the largest prison in the US acre wise. There are tons of critics of the cosmology of Angola. Tory Pegram, who coordinates the International Coalition to Free the Angola 3, told Truthout that slavery is going on still in Angola. Mwalimu Johnson, who spent 15 years as a prisoner at the penitentiary and now works as executive secretary of the Capital Post-Conviction Project of Louisiana, agrees with Tory. Johnson said that Angola is nothing more than a sophisticated plantation. Angola isn't the only place where forced labor is done. 17 percent of Louisiana prisoners are compelled to do farm labor, 17 percent of Texas prisoners and a full 40 percent of Arkansas prisoners do the same thing. The 2002 Corrections Yearbook, which was compiled by the Criminal Justice Institute, documented these facts. The prisoners are paid little to nothing for planting and picking the same crops harvested by slaves 150 years ago. Louisiana prisoners pick cotton and they earn 4 cents an hour. Some guards has killed inmates for decades and were exploited in extremely bad conditions in Angola. There were whippings and torture there as late as the 1970's. There are some reforms, but there is still a long way to go to end the involuntary servitude (plus economic exploitation) of the prisoners in that location. There is still next to no payment, they even keep half the money they make, and most Angola prisoners are never released. Ninety-seven percent will die in prison, according to Fontenot. It's worse in other places of Texas, Arkansas, and Georgia. Some of these locations have prisoners being paid nothing at all for their work in prison farms. Racism have occured there. These evil treatments for prisoners are in the 13 Amendment, which doesn't forbid slavery and involuntary servitude for prisoners. Therefore, amending the 13th Amendment for the abolishment of involuntary servitude for all citizens is needed. Labor camps with little pay are not only immoral, but dehumanizes our fellow man. Again, that means we should eliminate mandatory minimiums and the three strike laws that hamper liberty (because crime should be handled on a case by case basis. Not all criminals are monolithic). There should be education in prisons and means to encourage restitution (plus rehabilitation) not just punishment. If you just punish a person, then that will increase the rate of recidivism (or criminals coming back into prison after they left jail) and could cause more crime. Being tough on crime alone doesn't work. Also, any criminal who left prison and paid their debt to society should vote (even if they are felons, but are on parole. Some states prevent that from happening). Being fair towards crime (along with reforming the prison system, banning warrantless checkpoints, and ending the Federal Drug War) is a just, compassionate solution in ending this prison industrial complex.

Never Give Up



You can't quit. Quitting isn't an option in life. Regardless of the intrepit harsh circumstances of life that we all encounter, the strength within us is sufficient to transvere beyond evil. You have real and fake people. It's kind of apparent from folks in across the political spectrum have criticized Michelle Malkin. Malkin wrote a book "In Defense of Internment" promoting internment of Muslims, racial profiling, and justified the sick placement of Japanese Americans into concentration camps (during WWII). Now, that's extremism obviously, because Michelle Malkin is a faithful neo-con. Michelle Malkin agrees with our torture policy, the war on terror, and other establishment principles. She even lied and say that a Marine didn't kill a dog in Iraq. Yet, Michelle Malkin is 100% right to oppose abortion and expose the evil group of Planned Parenthood though. Unlike some people, I will not yell at her face to get my point across. Bill O'Reilly is similar. Recently, Bill O'Reilly yelled and criticized anyone (who opposed an over 700 billion bailout to the same crooks that caused the economic problems in the first place) as stupid. This plan supported by Paulson gives the FED too much power, restricts economic freedom, and places too much of a burden on taxpayers to pay for the incompetence of Wall Street plus the FED. O'Reilly lied and ignored this was unjustified socialism for the rich. O'Reilly mocked even intelligence 9/11 Truthers, agrees with the Iraq War, and supports restriction of gun rights against law abiding citizens. Even Keith Olbermann sees a battle of Republicans vs. Democrats when it's bigger than that. It's about allow those who want citizens to have freedom and liberty vs. a clique wanting a decentralization of power unto the hands of a couple of globalist oligarchs (who are headquartered in Europe in the Pilgrims, Vatican/Jesuits, and the elite bloodlines). That's part of the issue that we must address. Sean Hannity, Ann Coulter, and Rush Limbaugh (who attempted to justify the crimes in Abu Ghraib as people just blowing off steam) are Bushbots. They have an alliegance to the Republican Party. They even support John McCain when McCain isn't a true conservative. Even Michael Savage (which I don't agree with on many issues like promoting internment camps against ACLU members, or fighting a war on terrorism) have exposed Limbaugh and Hannity as apart of the country club Republican crowd. It isn't just them. The leaders of the Daily Kos, the Huffington Post, and others are Left Gatekeepers with foundation money funding much of their whole operations. Even Noam Chomsky (who is right to expose Western imperalism) refuses to expose sodium flouride, population control, eugenics, the gun grabbing agenda (when law enforcement stole guns away from innocent citizens in New Orleans during the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina), and abortion (an agenda funded by the establishment for the establishment).



The bailout is reaching into more controversy. Congress held hearings about Bush's 700+ billion dollar bailout law of certain big banks. It was passed by the House and the Senate. It's ironic that the government wants the Federal Reserve to have this immense power, but polls show that most Americans oppose such a measure. According to a recent Rasmussen Reports survey, 28% of Americans support the banker bailout plan and another 35% are not sure what to think. Much of the story behind the economic crisis isn't displayed by the mainstream media. Some elites have been writing about such a crisis for a long time. Their goal (as found in the words from theTrilateral Commission, the FED, the Bilderbergers, and other groups) is to form an integrated world economic order where the majority of our economy is controlled by the banking elite (which most of their leaders are controlled by Europeans). Even Freemason Barry Goldwater wrote about this. He said that: "The Trilateral Commission is international and is intended to be the vehicle for multinational consolidation of the commercial and banking interests by seizing control of the political government of the United States." Some economic experts believe that dumping billions of payouts to banks with fiat currency (even trying to bailout foreign banks) will increase the risk of causing an economic meltdown in America. This multinational corporations' consolidation of power (under groups like the IMF and World Bank owning real assets) can cause a collapse of the dollar, because the burden to pay this debt off is unto the taxpayers. Paulson admits in his 200 page document "Blueprint for a Modernized Regulatory Structure" about describing the need for U.S. markets to meet global standards. The deal is that the FED and some elitists are looting money out of economy, while real competition (and the people's usage of gold, silver, platinum, etc). are limited among citizens. "The bill would bar courts from reviewing actions taken under its authority," reports Bloomberg. The bailout law possesses authoritarian powers acquired by the executive branch of government once again (some have called it fascism, because the Bush proposal will have an big absolutist state ruled by corporations and international bankers). The money crisis occured for decades among Democrats and Republicans. The Reserve Reserve was created in 1913 and it caused fiat currency to reign. With the Bretton Woods Agreement being passed in the 1970's, the value of the U.S. dollar decreased even more. The war on terror and overspending are other contributing factors to an economic downtown under the Bush administration. It isn't just one administration that's responsible for this crisis though. The Trilateral Commission and the CFR were involved in a plan called Project 80's. This plan called for the controlled disintegration of the economy. Paul Volcker, who was appointed Federal Reserve Chairman by the 'Trilateral presidency' under Carter in August 1978, said only three months later:

"A controlled disintegration in the world economy is a legitimate object for the 1980s." Freeman adds, "it was not by chance that starting the week of Oct. 6-12, 1979, Volcker began raising interest rates, by raising the federal funds rate and increasing certain categories of reserve requirements for commercial banks. He kept pushing rates upward, until, by December 1980, the prime lending rate of U.S. commercial banks reached 21.5%."

Back in the late 1990's, Congress proposed a new economic system in dealing with housing. There was the Community Reinvestment Act (it was passed by President Jimmy Carter. He legitimately wanted incentives to help low income borrowers to own a home). That's a great idea if it's done correctly. In 1995, Clinton changed parts of the Community Reinvestment Act. These changes added subprime mortgages into them (or the securitization of CRA loans containing subprime mortgages). This forced banks to issue about 1 trillion dollars in new subprime loans. The subprime mortgage securities were created. Bear Stearns utilized it first. Then, Fannie Mae (who is a government sponsored enterprise or a GSE) sells the loans to banks plus investors. The more mortgages existing will result in more money Fannie making. Fannie allows flexibility in their loaning to appear to low income people) purchased about $2 billion of mortgage loans. Subsequently, the suprime mortgage purchases grew (home prices started to rise). Many banks offered loans on no money down with only interests on the mortgage (including a low variable rate and no income verification in some cases). With the prices of homes rising, gas prices rising and interest rates rising (especially during the Bush administration), low income citizens have a high economic burden to pay off those loans. Then some of the borrowers stopped paying and banks stopped lending. Therefore the subprime market collapsed. Foreclosures increase, because people couldn't pay of the value of their own homes (since the value of the homes shot up). The prices of homes started to fall (with borrowers not paying). Therefore, Fannie Mae's guarantees are worthless since they overstate their asset. Banks collapsed because of the failure of the subprime mortgage system (plus the worthlessness of the loans). The government sponsored securities issued by Fannie Mae were apart of why jobs disappeared, and the largest threat to our economic security since the Great Depression. The changing of the CRA (as supported by Rudin) or the Community Reinvestment Act is to be blamed for much of it as well The reason is that before CRA expansion, home prices increased with inflation. After the expansion, home prices become unhinged from inflation. In other words, home prices grew irrespective how inflation existed after 1995. These new CRA rates caused home prices to rise extremely fast. In other words, you don't mandate an extreme regulatory credit system as an economic solution. That causes a bubble to burst. Some people tried to stop it before now with a new ageny to oversee Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. This was in 2003. Ironically the Bush adminstration tried to do this (even though I don't agree with Bush on every issue). Barney Frank, Melvin Watt, and others opposed such a measure (they claimed it would prevent poorer Americans to have access to affordable housing when the prices of housing increased drastically since 1995). Even John McCain warned of a mortgage collapse in 2005 as reported by Ken Taylor on September 17, 2008. I don't support McCain on every issue also. The repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act (that seperated commercial banking from stock trading) was brought on by the Republicans and sponsored by Phil Graham. He was McCain's senior economic advisor. Liberals believe that the repeal of this act contributed to this crisis as well because the repeal of the law didn't encorporate legitimate oversight in the economy. "The Housing Enterpise Regulatory Act of 2005" was the bill called S-190 dealing with the issue (it was proposed to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac). It was blocked and in 2007 it wasn't passed. Fannie Mae had economic links to Chris Dodd, Jim Johnson (a Bilderberger, a big banker and on the Board of Goldman Sachs. He had to quit Obama's Presidential campaign because of a sweatheart loan he recieved), Franklin Raines (he was a Vice Chairman of Fannie Mae when the CRA was expanded. He was the CEO of Fannie Mae from 1999-2004), etc. There should be no discrimination and everyone deserve a home if they want to. Yet, it is incorrect revise a law to make no down payments or create subprime mortgages in order to do it. Poor people and true free markets never caused this economic crisis. A bad government regulation policy (along with theft of assets, corruption, weak legitimate regulations, and the manipulation of the markets) caused this (who allowed Main street bankers to embrace predatory lending practices in order to force "affordable mortgages" unto citizens, which some citizens couldn't afford) crisis. Wall Street and the White House helped caused this problem as well (while, some want them to get billions of dollars for their crimes). This plan sponsored by Bush is socialism for the rich plain and simple (with no judicial oversight in the earlier bill). This is plain theft by certain banking entities (not all banks). It's Robin Hood in reverse.

Frankily, the bailout is socialism for the rich or allowing banks to steal wealth from the people. This can increase the risk of an economic depression on the scale of the Great Depression (during the late 1920's to the 1930's). This is what we should not be doing again (the usage of central banks to control our political system in a feudal fashion who readily create secret agreements without the input of citizens at all). It appears that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac may have a connection to the McCain campaign. The New York Times reported something. They reported that Senator John McCain's campaign manager was paid more than $30,000 a month for five years as president of an advocacy group set up by the mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to defend them against stricter regulations, current and former officials say. Barack Obama has been accused of having links to Fannie Mae, while Obama denies this. Ironically, both Obama and McCain are criticizing Wall Street in a harsh fashion. Notice how no one is asking for immediate investigations or indictments for anyone committing crimes for wrong mortgage practices, etc. The Treasury Secretary acts like it can do what it wants whenever it wants. George W. Bush is really a economic socialist. Over 200 economists have criticized the present bailout situation. Here's problems with the new bailout law as passed by President George W. Bush. Conflicts of interests exist in the economic crisis on many levels. The head of the FED Hank Paulson was once the Chairman of Goldman Sachs. Now, Paulson is appointing Neel Kashkari to handle the bailout to people (many of whom don't deserve it). Neel is an ex-Goldman Sachs executive. Not to mention it has millions of pork barrel projects are in the bill (they include $6 million in tax breaks for wooden arrow manufacturers in Oregon, $128 million in tax breaks for the manufacturers of car racing tracks, $223 million in tax breaks for Alaskan fisherman, and others). H.R. 1424 – Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 is the name of the new law. It's a disgrace of a law and it will do little to solve our economic problems. You don't do these things when you have over 10 trillion dollars in national debt, spending over 1 trillion dollars in the war on terrorism, and a trade deficit inbalance. The law allows the Secretary of the Treasury to steal all assets deemed "troubled" (which can be ambigious defined as almost all assets from stocks to bonds). It specifically authorizes the purchase of securities held by foreign banks and central banks. Section 109 allows the Secretary to rewrite mortgage contracts unilaterally. The powers of the Secretary are not bounded by judicial review at all from Section 119 of the Act. This is dictator-like power by the government. It's about centralizing the power of a few elitists benefiting a select few of private bankers. We need real reforms from having a balanced budget, cutting unnecessary spending, cutting our military budget to save revenues, have more transparency about businesses, and use means to build up our national infrastructure (since these jobs can't be sent overseas. There need to be a rebuilding our urban areas as well). The deal is that private, central banks shouldn't control our economy at all. The W film (which doesn't expose the new world order, NORAD, Secret Societies, and other real issues) blames Bush being a rabid Christian for his policies, but Bush far from a conservative Christians. He is apart of the occult Skulls and Bones group, believes in abortion for rape and incest, agrees with preemptive war, and is apart of the Bohemian Grove (where its followers praise an idol of Minerva and cite Druid occult sayings). Therefore, we have a right to speak our minds publicly and taking real action in our land. I don't trust Oliver Stone's "W" disinformation information. The Fall Season is going on and the Election of 2008 is soon to be over.





By Timothy



October 25, 2008