House Representative Chris Stewart proposed the Regulatory Agency De-militarization Act (RAD) in order to eliminate federal regulators who are “armed to the teeth and breaking into homes and businesses when there was no reason to think there would be resistance.”
On Stewart’s website, a press release states: “In recent years, numerous federal regulatory agencies – including the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the Food and Drug Agency (FDA) and the Department of Education (DoE) – have created their own special law enforcement teams to conduct their own arrests and raids. This is in part a product of the 2002 Homeland Security Act , which gave most Offices of Inspector General (OIG) arrest and firearm authority.”
- The OIG’s authority to “arrest and firearm authority”
- Demands the OIG publish “a complete report detailing all federal agencies, including OIG, with specialized units that receive special tactical or military-style training and that respond to high-risk situations that fall outside the capabilities of regular law enforcement officers”
- Stops federal agencies “from purchasing machine guns, grenades, and other weaponry regulated under the National Firearms Act ”
Stewart said: “I understand that federal agents must be capable of protecting themselves. But what we have observed goes far beyond providing necessary protection. When there are genuinely dangerous situations involving federal law, that’s the job of the Department of Justice, not regulatory agencies like the FDA or the Department of Education. Not only is it overkill, but having these highly-armed units within dozens of agencies is duplicative, costly, heavy handed, dangerous and destroys any sense of trust between citizens and the federal government.”
Recently it has been reported that many federal agencies have been amassing hollow point bullets and other armory in unprecedented amounts. ….
The leadership class in the US is now dominated by a neo-conservative group of people with the shared goal of asserting US military power worldwide. This global dominance group, in cooperation with major military contractors, has become a powerful force in world military unilateralism and US political processes. This research study is an attempt to identify the general parameters of those who are the key actors supporting a global dominance agenda and how collectively this group has benefited from the events of September 11, 2001 and irregularities in the 2004 presidential election. This study examines how interlocking public private partnerships, including the corporate media, public relations firms, military contractors, policy elites, and government officials, jointly support a US military global domination agenda. We ask the traditional sociological questions regarding who wins, who decides, and who facilitates action inside the most powerful military-industrial complex in the world. …
KPFA‘s Guns and Butter – September 6, 2006
“The Global Dominance Group and 9/11:”
Presentation by Director of Project Censored, Dr. Peter Phillips, at the June 4th, 2006 “9/11 Education and Strategy Conference” in Chicago. This talk is based on recent research conducted at Sonoma State University which identified 240 global dominance advocates who have been the primary promoters and beneficiaries of the so-called war on terror before and after 9/11. Dr. Phillips covers the rise of the neocons and their agenda, who benefited from 9/11 and permanent war, the complicity of the corporate media, and the stolen presidential elections. It’s a “who dunnit” analysis and investigation of the greatest crime of the 21st century.
… Remember Swine Flu? The dreaded H1N1 virus? It was the “Ebola” of 2009. The whole world was going to be infected. The World Health Organization declared it a “level-6 pandemic,” their most dangerous category.
The US Centers for Disease Control was turning out press releases like hot cakes, churning up fear, promoting the Swine Flu vaccine.
The CDC had one very, very important job: letting the press know, up to the minute, how many cases of Swine Flu there were in the US.
That was their only real job.
If they couldn’t get that one right, they had no reason to exist.
How did the CDC decide how many cases of Swine Flu existed? They took reports from health agencies in the 50 states and they added them up.
Not exactly rocket science. You could say any idiot could perform that task.
Well, along came Sharyl Attkisson, and she exploded a bombshell:
“If you’ve been diagnosed ‘probable’ or ‘presumed’ 2009 H1N1 or ‘swine flu’ in recent months, you may be surprised to know this: odds are you didn’t have H1N1 [Swine] flu. In fact, you probably didn’t have flu at all.
“That’s according to state-by-state test results obtained in a three-month-long CBS News investigation.
“In late July, the CDC abruptly advised states to stop testing for H1N1 [Swine] flu, and stopped counting individual cases. The rationale given for the CDC guidance to forego testing and tracking individual cases was: why waste resources testing for H1N1 flu when the government has already confirmed there’s an epidemic?
“…we [CBS News] asked all 50 states for their statistics on state lab-confirmed H1N1 [Swine Flu cases] prior to the halt of individual testing and counting in July. The results reveal a pattern that surprised a number of health care professionals we consulted. The vast majority of cases were negative for H1N1 as well as seasonal flu, despite the fact that many states were specifically testing patients deemed to be most likely to have H1N1 flu, based on symptoms and risk factors, such as travel to Mexico.” (cbsnews.com, October 21, 2009, “Swine Flu Cases Overestimated?”)
The CDC exposure was titanic, even if many readers didn’t get the point:
The CDC had stopped counting the number of Swine Flu cases in America, by blithely assuming there was an epidemic; and therefore, its job was done.
But that was a naked lie. The CDC had actually stopped counting cases because the tests of patients who most likely had Swine Flu didn’t have Swine Flu at all, and most of them didn’t have any kind of flu. In other words, the whole Swine Flu “epidemic” was a bust. A dud.
This was apparent from Attkisson’s article.
The CDC was lying through its teeth.
And the staggering capper on this tale? Roughly three weeks after Attkisson’s Swine Flu revelations appeared in print, the CDC, obviously in great distress over the exposure, decided to double down. The best lie to tell would be a huge lie.
Here, from a November 12, 2009, WebMD article is the CDC’s response: “Shockingly, 14 million to 34 million U.S. residents — the CDC’s best guess is 22 million — came down with H1N1 swine flu by Oct. 17 .” (“22 million cases of Swine Flu in the US,” by Daniel J. DeNoon)
In other words, leaping from overblown and false reports of tens of thousands of Swine Flu cases in American, the CDC was now saying that roughly 1 out of every 14 Americans had Swine Flu—when their own tests showed the overwhelming number of people presumed to have Swine Flu didn’t have it at all.
I interviewed Sharyl Attkisson. She told me the following:
“…we discovered through our FOI efforts that before the CDC mysteriously stopped counting Swine Flu cases, they had learned that almost none of the cases they had counted as Swine Flu was, in fact, Swine Flu or any sort of flu at all! The interest in the story from one [CBS] executive was very enthusiastic. He said it was ‘the most original story’ he’d seen on the whole Swine Flu epidemic. But others [at CBS] pushed to stop it and, in the end, no [CBS television news] broadcast wanted to touch it. We aired numerous stories pumping up the idea of an epidemic, but not the one that would shed original, new light on all the hype. It [Attkisson’s investigation\] was fair, accurate, legally approved and a heck of a story. With the CDC keeping the true Swine Flu stats secret, it meant that many in the public took and gave their children an experimental vaccine that may not have been necessary.” …
Some people suspect that if a national health crisis were to occur, that a vaccine could be made mandatory. (I hope that President Obama doesn’t read my website, because I’d hate to give him any ideas – he gets so excited about circumventing Congress and making his own laws.) He’s already signed an executive order that says people suspected of being ill can be detained and isolated. Michael Snyder of The Economic Collapse Blog wrote:
“Isolation” would not be a voluntary thing. The federal government would start hunting down anyone that they “reasonably believed to be infected with a communicable disease” and taking them to the facilities where other patients were being held. It wouldn’t matter if you were entirely convinced that you were 100% healthy. If the government wanted to take you in, you would have no rights in that situation. In fact, federal law would allow the government to detain you “for such time and in such manner as may be reasonably necessary”.
And once you got locked up with all of the other Ebola patients, there would be a pretty good chance that you would end up getting the disease and dying anyway. The current Ebola outbreak has a 55 percent percent mortality rate, and experts tell us that the mortality rate for Ebola can be as high as 90 percent. (source)
Quarantine detention stations are ready and waiting.
Ebola quarantine stations are already in place to detain those who show signs of illness.
It turns out that not only is the government prepared to identify, isolate and detain potentially contagious individuals, but they already have the facilities in place.
According to the Centers for Disease Control there are twenty (20) quarantine centers actively prepared to accept patients as of this writing…
…Such “quarantinable” diseases may include Cholera, Smallpox, Plague, SARS, Hemorrhagic fevers (like Ebola), and now even “respiratory illnesses” that may have symptoms similar to those of deadly viruses. (source)
You can check out THIS MAP to find the quarantine station conveniently located nearest you.
There is no way to know the longterm effects of the vaccine.
The pharmaceutical companies are already mentally counting the money as they scurry to finish an experimental vaccine. Meanwhile, the public is being whipped into a panic, becoming more and more convinced they’ll die a horrible bloody death if that vaccine does not arrive at their local physician’s office soon.
That vaccine, however, will be completely untested. There is no way to know the long-term effects of something without…you know….a long term. Something rushed to market like this could cause all sorts of issues. (Remember all of those kids who now suffer from a severe form of narcolepsy due to the swine flu vaccine that was hurriedly created a few years ago?)
Terrified people will be in a frenzy to receive this untested vaccine, convinced by a media blitz that it’s the only way to survive. But, as Michael Snyder wrote, much like the flu vaccine pushers, they will insist that everyone else be injected, forcibly if necessary.
They say that if this vaccine is approved, it could potentially be available to the public at some point in 2015.
If a full-blown Ebola epidemic is raging by that time, the demand will be overwhelming. But many people will not be satisfied to just get the vaccine themselves. They will want everyone living around them in their communities to get vaccinated as well for the sake of “herd immunity”. They will argue that those that refuse to get the Ebola vaccine are endangering public health.
So could politicians make the Ebola vaccine mandatory for all Americans at some point? According to a paper by Jared P. Cole and Kathleen S. Swendiman, many states already have laws that allow for mandatory vaccinations “during a public health emergency”… (source)
And what if the vaccine has deliberate side effects?
Furthermore, if there was some kind of crazy mad scientist at the helm of this project, that person could have all sorts of fun inclusions in a mandatory vaccine that was forced upon every man, woman, and child in America. Maybe the population growth could be slowed if recipients became less fertile. Perhaps people could be more easily tracked if there was a teeny tiny little nanogadget in there.
I’m not saying any of this is actually happening, but it’s a fact that the science exists to do so. Anyone receiving a rushed mass vaccine like this is putting an enormous amount of trust in Big Pharma and the government, both of whom don’t have a history of trustworthy behavior.
Call me crazy. but…
Call me crazy, because I’m sure that some folks will. Allow me to pre-empt that by saying: This article should give loads of new fodder to the dogmatically pro-vax folks that enjoy taking a superior tone to poke fun at the paranoid, anti-government, granola mama. This seems to be a trend every time I write something that is against the Vaccine Gospel. Most likely, the previous sentences will be quoted, followed by a scathing comment. It’s okay, that won’t hurt my feelings.
Luckily, at this point anyway, we both have the freedom to express our views, and readers have the freedom to look more deeply into subjects and wade through the rhetoric on both sides.
The public is being deliberately terrified in order to assure compliance.
Anything mandatory should always be viewed with suspicion.
The vaccine is being rushed through the approval process.
There is no way to know the longterm effects.
We will not be getting an Ebola vaccination.
Whether or not you agree with her conclusion, it can hardly be doubted that such an analysis is legitimate. And it wouldn’t be some lone “crazy scientist” adding sterilants to the vaccine. He would be acting under the direction of a committee which is very much involved in social engineering, such as the WHO committee that directed the addition of hCG into the tetanus vaccine that they used in numerous 3rd world countries to sterilize women without their knowledge or consent. See: http://thoughtcrimeradio.net/2014/03/the-malthusian-eugenicists-at-the-who-are-still-covertly-sterilizing-african-women/ and http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/tetanus-vaccines-sterilizing-women-kenya-catholic-church-there-raises-suspicions and http://thoughtcrimeradio.net/2013/03/cdc-lying-about-safety-of-tetanus-vaccine-in-pregnancy/
The “government”, such as it is, has brought such suspicion on itself.
Liberian President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf has officially declared a 90-day state of emergency, and she told Associated Press that, “some civil liberties will be suspended”. The article went on to say, “In neighboring Sierra Leone, military forces also deployed as part of ‘Operation Octopus’ which officials said was aimed at preventing ‘the unauthorized movement of Ebola-infected persons.’”
This is martial law and in the case of Sierra Leone, martial law with a really creepy code name.
While the media seems hellbent on scaring the crap out of everyone by mentioning the word Ebola every other five seconds, there is actual useful information eeking out that we might want to glean here, in case anything like this should happen in our neighborhoods. You just have to wade through all the fear porn to get to it.
Let’s stick with this AP article for a second.
So, civil liberties will be suspended with military force. What else?
AP continues, “National Health Workers Association president Joseph Tamba said the state of emergency is necessary. But he says people should have been given advance notice to buy food ahead of the movement restrictions.”
So, civil liberties were suspended and they didn’t give the average person who isn’t prepper-minded adequate time to get prepared? …
People in West Africa are staying the hell away from the government “isolation” centers and hospitals. People there believe it’s a government conspiracy. How many Americans would (and do) feel the same way about what’s going on right now, knowing our very own Fort Detrick biowarfare scientists who just so happen to have been over in the Ebola hot zone in the main three Ebola-ravaged countries testing lab-grown monoclonal antibody cocktails on healthy human adults for several years now are staying pretty mum on the current situation?
In an outbreak scenario even as small as neighborhood-wide, would Daisy Luther be considered a “hold out” who refuses to go to a treatment center should vaccinations or isolation for this deadly disease become mandatory?
By executive order, our government currently has a laundry list of infectious diseases for which the CDC states it “has the legal authority to detain any person” who “may” be afflicted — including cholera, diphtheria, infectious tuberculosis, plague, smallpox, yellow fever, viral hemorrhagic fevers (like Ebola), SARS, and “new types of flu (influenza) that could cause a pandemic” — according to the CDC’s quarantine stations fact sheet dated August 2013.
Again, I want to stress the CDC says it can legally detain anyone if the person “may” have the disease, not if the person has officially, definitely been diagnosed with the disease in question. The fact sheet also says, “CDC also can have them admitted to a hospital or confined to a home for a certain amount of time to prevent the spread of disease.” It does not say this any of this will be voluntary or optional.
On top of that, the Pentagon is all over this experimental Ebola treatment being grown in tobacco cells that has just been approved for human testing.
As Jon Rappoport recently reported,
This “Blue Angel” project, as it’s called, suddenly puts the Pentagon in the forefront of the vaccine business. The big question is: why is the Army involved in vaccines at all? And the answer is no surprise. According to DARPA, it’s all about readiness in containing bio-threats. Translated, that means terrorist attacks that could use flu viruses.
This is a sinister development. It creates a potential scenario in which the military can invent the “bio-threat” and then step in and provide the solution. It doesn’t really matter whether the bio-threat is real or imaginary. …
For seventy years, one of the critical foundations of American power has been the dollar’s standing as the world’s most important currency. For the last forty years, a pillar of dollar primacy has been the greenback’s dominant role in international energy markets. Today, China is leveraging its rise as an economic power, and as the most important incremental market for hydrocarbon exporters in the Persian Gulf and the former Soviet Union, to circumscribe dollar dominance in global energy – with potentially profound ramifications for America’s strategic position.
Since World War II, America’s geopolitical supremacy has rested not only on military might, but also on the dollar’s standing as the world’s leading transactional and reserve currency. Economically, dollar primacy extracts “seignorage”—the difference between the cost of printing money and its value—from other countries, and minimises U.S. firms’ exchange rate risk. Its real importance, though, is strategic: dollar primacy lets America cover its chronic current account and fiscal deficits by issuing more of its own currency – precisely how Washington has funded its hard power projection for over half a century.
Since the 1970s, a pillar of dollar primacy has been the greenback’s role as the dominant currency in which oil and gas are priced, and in which international hydrocarbon sales are invoiced and settled. This helps keep worldwide dollar demand high. It also feeds energy producers’ accumulation of dollar surpluses that reinforce the dollar’s standing as the world’s premier reserve asset, and that can be “recycled” into the U.S. economy to cover American deficits.
Many assume that the dollar’s prominence in energy markets derives from its wider status as the world’s foremost transactional and reserve currency. But the dollar’s role in these markets is neither natural nor a function of its broader dominance. Rather, it was engineered by U.S. policymakers after the Bretton Woods monetary order collapsed in the early 1970s, ending the initial version of dollar primacy (“dollar hegemony 1.0”). Linking the dollar to international oil trading was key to creating a new version of dollar primacy (“dollar hegemony 2.0”)—and, by extension, in financing another forty years of American hegemony. …