Firearms Crimes Plummet Even As Firearms Sales Rise


72 Killed Resisting Gun Confiscation in Boston!

Seventy-two killed resisting gun confiscation in Boston!

Boston – National Guard units seeking to confiscate a cache of recently banned assault weapons were ambushed by elements of a Para-military extremist faction. Military and law enforcement sources estimate that 72 were killed and more than 200 injured before government forces were compelled to withdraw.

Speaking after the clash, Massachusetts Governor Thomas Gage declared that the extremist faction, which was made up of local citizens, has links to the radical right-wing tax protest movement.

Gage blamed the extremists for recent incidents of vandalism directed against internal revenue offices. The governor, who described the group’s organizers as “criminals,” issued an executive order authorizing the summary arrest of any individual who has interfered with the government’s efforts to secure law and order.

The military raid on the extremist arsenal followed wide-spread refusal by the local citizenry to turn over recently outlawed assault weapons.

Gage issued a ban on military-style assault weapons and ammunition earlier in the week. This decision followed a meeting in early this month between government and military leaders at which the governor authorized the forcible confiscation of illegal arms.

One government official, speaking on condition of anonymity, pointed out that “none of these people would have been killed had the extremists obeyed the law and turned over their weapons voluntarily.”

Government troops initially succeeded in confiscating a large supply of outlawed weapons and ammunition. However, troops attempting to seize arms and ammunition in Lexington met with resistance from heavily-armed extremists who had been tipped off regarding the government’s plans.

During a tense standoff in the Lexington town park, National Guard Colonel Francis Smith, commander of the government operation, ordered the armed group to surrender and return to their homes. The impasse was broken by a single shot, which was reportedly fired by one of the right-wing extremists.

Eight civilians were killed in the ensuing exchange.

Ironically, the local citizenry blamed government forces rather than the extremists for the civilian deaths. Before order could be restored, armed citizens from surrounding areas had descended upon the guard units. Colonel Smith, finding his forces over matched by the armed mob, ordered a retreat.

Governor Gage has called upon citizens to support the state/national joint task force in its effort to restore law and order. The governor also demanded the surrender of those responsible for planning and leading the attack against the government troops.

Samuel Adams, Paul Revere, and John Hancock, who have been identified as “ringleaders” of the extremist faction, remain at large.

And this fellow Americans, is how the American Revolution began, April 20, 1775.


On July 4th, 1776 these same extremists signed the Declaration of Independence, pledging to each other and their countrymen their lives, fortunes, and sacred honor. Many of them lost everything, including their families and their lives over the course of the next few years.

Lest we forget…


Secret FISA Court Deems the Constitution Irrelevant – Welcome to Surveillance Hell

Secret FISA Court Deems the Constitution

Irrelevant –

Welcome to Surveillance Hell

Daneen G. Peterson, Ph.D.

So . . . was George Bush Junior right when he stated that “the Constitution was just a goddamn piece of paper”? Why do you think that ALL the major Federal Agencies possess enough guns and ammo to murder all 300+ million Americans three times over? What’s the REAL purpose for the thousands of drones that all the police departments across our nation are clamoring for and our colleges and universities are vying for government contracts to build?

Secret FISA Court Deems the Constitution Irrelevant – Welcome to Surveillance Hell

You Can Trust Government


The Hidden Hand That Shaped History



Hidden Hand


Shaped History



Secret Symbols of the Rosicrucians

Secret Symbols








Veritas News Service


CAJI/IS Exlusive


Author Chuck Frank


The U.S. Constitution, which is all but four handwritten pages long, is dwarfed by an out-of-control U.S. bureaucratic process which speaks for itself with reams of legalism and regulations while the fat cats of the agencies plan for additional policies and their own retirements. Yet all that is needed is one paragraph to take care of and eliminate the extortion of an over-regulated dinosaur which has produced numerous lost rights, the invasion of privacy, world record incarceration, and big government. Here is my proposal to stop this bullet train before it is too late. Except for a few instances where there is a clear and present danger to human life and runaway abuse, let it be known that WE THE PEOPLE now declare by decree a moratorium on all laws being made either by Congress, Presidential executive orders, state legislators, governors, county supervisors, or city councils.

We include in this declaration a proposal that all government agencies be cut at least by half or more. In addition, we now call upon the people, with the help of grand juries, pastors, farmers, private investigators, small businessmen and women, along with those of the newly elected impartial watchdog committees, to roll back any previous laws and over taxation that have recklessly infringed upon the inalienable God-given rights of the people. Thus the people’s protections of true representation and liberty, will once again flourish in the land of the free and the home of the brave. Big government’s treasonous trashing of the U.S. Constitution and the economy will be dealt with while two-thirds of the outsourcing of our jobs to numerous countries abroad will be stopped. Also included in this decree is the following: Lobbying by bloated special interest organizations which are worth millions is banned while any person that runs for any office in America or those persons who are appointed to government agencies or other offices will have extensive background checks. Also, persons who are part of government agencies in no way can be an ex CEO of a megacorporation. This includes any person who performed their duties in any executive capacity such as a vice-president while being part of a for-profit or a nonprofit corporation such as a Fortune 500 company. Furthermore, any presently-employed government czar who had previously served with corporations of this kind will be relieved of their duties and may not serve in any part of government.

Does this sound like communism? Absolutely not. This proposal is fully anti-communist as anyone can see. This is necessary in that the corporate lords of the nation and those of the worldly shadow elite are taking us down a road of tyranny and monopolistic destruction to where we as a people are very quickly losing our freedom and individual rights to a carefully-orchestrated international anti-sovereignty meltdown. It is brought to you by those rogue individuals of the republic, the U.N., and the New World Order. We as a people have been taken captive by an evil NWO plan of world domination that is meant to enslave the entire planet for the benefit of a few. It is now time to act for it is one minute to midnight. The sinister grand plan is spelled out here by David Rockefeller:

"We are grateful to The Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But the work is now much more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination (i.e., an ethical form democracy, “freedom to choose” based upon true christian guidelines; the author’s definition) practiced in past centuries."

David Rockefeller, founder of the Trilateral Commission, in an address to a meeting of The Trilateral Commission, in June, 1991.  "In the next century, nations as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single, global authority. National sovereignty wasn't such a great idea after all." Strobe Talbot, President Clinton's Deputy Secretary of State, as quoted in Time, July 20th, l992.

“Nor did these lawyers and bankers walk about suffused with guilt. They had the moral equivalent of teflon on their soul. Church on Sunday, foreclose on Monday.” —Norman Mailer, New York Review of Books, 27 March 2002

The Tower Of Babel Rises Again – It’s Called the Utah Data Center by Daneen G. Peterson, Ph.D.

The Tower of Babel Rises Again

It’s Called the Utah Data Center

Daneen G. Peterson, Ph.D.

I know I said I retired, however there are significant issues that need to be revealed about what’s happening under the guise of protecting us . . . NOT!

ALL semblance of privacy will be eliminated. Privacy has already been significantly eroded, however, you will not believe the total, complete control and invasiveness, that is planned for your future . . .

The Tower Of Babel Rises Again-It’s Called the Utah Data Center







Author: Chuck Frank


Globalists and environmentalists have a lot of common ground. They will use any crisis or even create one to further their objectives such as climate change. Then again, if 1000 endangered species isn’t enough ammunition to dismantle dams and the industrial complex of America, use the 2008 housing meltdown which was the result of the deregulation of the banks when Bill Clinton signed it into law before he left office. By doing so, he destroyed the country’s economic protections which had been in place since the Great Depression. Allen Greenspan and the rest of the banking club rode this wave of destruction. These “experts” placed the entire nation at risk as they were entwined with a “greed driven” deregulation policy which then brought on the great foreclosure disaster to millions. With such a failed track record, why is the Federal Reserve still in business and where is our own government’s credibility? It is zero!

Looking further into the wonderful world of finance, let’s not forget when the elite bankers came to town with their sinister scheme which would rake in billions selling an overblown environmental crisis while making loans to the many unsuspecting nations who were already broke. With interest, the IMF and the World Bank was there to “help” but when these nations could no longer pay their loans, then came the land grab. Countries like Germany are already waking up to the cold reality of a green energy sink hole that has an appetite for endless sustainability while costing the people extra Euros that are in the billions.  Here is Daniel Wentzel’s take on it: “Almost all predictions about the expansion and cost of German wind turbines and solar panels have turned out to be wrong – at least by a factor of two, sometimes by a factor of five.” –Daniel Wentzel, Die Welt, 20 October 2012.

The shock waves and cost burdens for consumers and industry have reached a “barely tolerable level that threatens the deindustrialization of Germany,” outraged business organizations said. All of Germany has been arguing about who is to blame for the “electricity price hammer” while Chancellor Angela Merkel had “promised” that green energy subsidies would not be more than 3.6 cents per kilowatt hour. Now, however, German citizens have to support renewable energy by more than EUR 20 billion – instead of 14 billion Euros. Daniel Wentzel asks the question, “How could Merkel be so wrong?” This isn’t “saving” the planet or anybody for that matter, but what it does is create havoc and poverty. What if you were a third world country implementing green energy? Soup lines anybody? How many missions is America going to need?


Since 2001, the U.S. has lost 42,400 factories:


America, like Germany, is crashing into a true de-industrialization mode. So what does the green agenda really have to offer? The best example is to look at the wages of the Western Rivers Conservancy out of Portland, Oregon, where employees currently earn about $72,186.00 per year (their stats) while our minimum wage may only bring in $16,000.00. This is the environmentalist grand plan for saving the planet or themselves? Everybody please say “thank you” to Western Rivers while the rest of America does with much less. Don’t forget too that the Klamath Dam at the headwaters of the Klamath River is on their chopping block list. One must understand how Western Rivers works it. In their own words, here are a few of their outrageous “grand plan” goals that are mentioned in their annual report:

“Increase the funds to 10 million dollars to “SEIZE” LAND PURCHASES.

“Focus on high quality rivers, and CONTROL WHOLE RIVERS FROM THE SOURCE TO THE MOUTH.”


Take note above. It is “Rivers” ending with a big “S.” Is the Feather River next? How about the Sacramento River or the American River? With these organizations there is no end to their appetite. The rivers could be full to the brim with fish pre-American Revolution times yet they would still not be happy. It’s called more donations to their fabricated cause. The endgame: sabotage American family farmers through burdensome federal policies and limit their amount of water.

Remember the Delta queens and the smelt fish debacle? Deprivatize family farms while Big Agri takes over. Is there any end to the loss and the destruction of family farms in America? Historically, there is also something to be learned here from Stalin’s 1933 takeover of Ukraine’s family farms. Fact check: 7 million men, women, and children died from starvation. Are we still America or are we some other country that is being ruled by the green czars of a lost republic? Question: When are the American people going to act and stand up for their inalienable rights, or perhaps they will just be content with their food stamps and cellphones? Something tells me they won’t be. “One does not live on bread alone.”

The Human-Hating Roots of the Green Movement

Behind the environmentalist facade lies a totalitarian agenda that is already being enacted.

By Arnold Ahlert April 24, 2013

Monday was the 43rd celebration of Earth Day, an event hailed as an effort to promote responsible stewardship of the environment. Fittingly, it is also the birthdate of Communist Party creator Vladimir Lenin, a reality that the radical environmentalists responsible for the creation of Earth Day dismiss as a mere coincidence. Yet there is little question that under the guise of "saving the planet," the earth-firster crowd would be more than willing to impose the same kind of totalitarian control over the masses envisioned by Lenin.

Like communism, the radical environmentalism that forms the heart of Earth Day celebrations is all about collectivism. In a 2007 column for the Cato Institute, former Czech Republic president Vaclav Klaus called environmentalism one of the main dangers to freedom in the 21st century. "Environmentalism only pretends to deal with environmental protection," writes Klaus. "Behind their people- and nature-friendly terminology, the adherents of environmentalism make ambitious attempts to radically reorganize and change the world, human society, our behavior, and our values."

The Earth Day concept was developed by then-Sen. Gaylord Nelson (D-WI), Congress's foremost environmentalist. Nelson also helped to develop college "sit-ins," where professors surreptitiously abandoned their curriculums to lecture students on the evils of imperialist America and the virtues of communism, a misunderstood system of governance that merely need better implementation to succeed.

Nelson's efforts were facilitated by Denis Hayes. Hayes was a student at Stanford University, where he was elected student body president and became a high-profile anti-Vietnam War activist who once helped lead a student siege of a campus weapons-research laboratory.

Stanford professor Paul Ehrlich was the third man behind the Earth Day cult. Ehrlich's claim to fame was The Population Bomb, a book that predicted societal disintegration, and hundreds of millions of deaths from famine — by the 1980s — due to the "cancer" of human population growth. In 1969 Nelson and Ehrlich decided that a nation enthralled by the ethos of Woodstock was ready for a nationwide teach-in on environmentalism. Hayes was brought in to coordinate and implement the operation. The trio decided that the first Earth Day would be held on April 22, 1970 — the centennial celebration of Lenin's birthday.

The philosophical alignment between Lenin, who issued a decree known as "On Land," declaring all natural resources the exclusive property of the state, and environmentalists, who believe that private enterprise and private property are impediments to saving the planet, are unmistakeable. To a large extent, those radical impulses have been realized in the United States. The federal government owns nearly 30 percent of all the land in the country, including five states where it owns more than half. Much of it remains federalized via the Endangered Species Act, which allows government to cordon off property from development if an endangered species is living on it. Furthermore, until the Supreme Court stopped the EPA last year, that agency was using the Clean Water Act to mandate what private property owners could or could not do with their own property, while preventing those owners from seeking recourse in the courts. "In a nation that values due process, not to mention private property, such treatment is unthinkable," said Justice Antonin Scalia, who wrote the court's decision.

The EPA was created by Congress eight months after the first Earth Day celebration.

Another major player promoting Earth Day is the Earth Day Network (EDN), founded in 1994 by the organizers of the first Earth Day celebration. The most insidious plank of EDN's "core programs" is its "Greening Schools and Promoting Environmental Education" agenda. EDN provides educators with a variety of games, interactive quizzes and other aids, that enable them to teach kids from kindergarten through twelfth grade how to be the best "green" citizens they can be. Much of EDN's emphasis is centered on making kids feel guilty about the size of their "ecological footprint" in comparison to children from other nations. "If everyone lived like you," EDN tells children, "we would need [X-number of] planets" to sustain the lives of all the earth's people." EDN's message is subtle but clear: capitalism is unjust and, as a result, America is using more than its "fair share" of the world's resources.

Hayes, who sits on EDN's Board of Directors, makes this plain. "Under communism prices were not allowed to reflect economic reality," Hayes contends. "Under capitalism, prices don't reflect ecological reality. In the long run, the capitalist flaw — if uncorrected — may prove to be the more catastrophic. …" Moreover, Hayes makes no bones about the fact that he considers human population growth to be the "most worrisome" environmental problem. "If everyone currently in the world aspires to consume at the same level as, say, the average Swede does, the human population already exceeds the planet's carrying capacity," writes Hayes.

Ira Einhorn who hosted the first Earth Day event at the Fairmount Park in Philadelphia on April 22, 1970, made his own personal contribution to population reduction. Seven years after the event, police raided his apartment and found the remains of his girlfriend, after one of his neighbors complained about a reddish- brown, foul-smelling liquid leaking into the ceiling directly below Einhorn's closet. After 23 years on the run, he was extradited from France, convicted of murder and is serving a life sentence.

Another major player in the radical environmentalist movement is a Canadian named Maurice Strong. After starting his career in the oil business in the 1950s, Strong cultivated contacts in the Canadian government. By 1966, he became head of the Canadian International Development Agency. His success there impressed UN Secretary General U Thant, who asked him to organize the Stockholm Conference on the Human Environment in 1972, better known as the first "Earth Summit." The "Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment" created there offered a number of socialist/Marxist ideas, including the transfer of wealth from developed countries to under-developed ones, the need for population control, and "extensive cooperation among nations and action by international organizations in the common interest," aka world governance. It offered 26 principles to advance this agenda.

In 1992, another Earth Summit was held in Rio, out of which the "Rio Declaration on Environment and Development" emerged. Another 27 principles, similar to the pie-in-the-sky, wealth transferring eco- socialist/Marxist agenda that emerged 20 years earlier, was added to the mix. That summit was also led by Strong.

One world government is the primary impetus behind a UN project known as Agenda 21 — originated by Maurice Strong. In 1993, the UN explained its mission. "Agenda 21 proposes an array of actions which are intended to be implemented by every person on earth…it calls for specific changes in the activities of all people…Effective execution of Agenda 21 will require a profound reorientation of all humans, unlike anything the world has ever experienced." 178 countries have currently adopted Agenda 21. Strong himself, who currently resides in the People's Republic of China, expressed his personal view on what must happen for Agenda 21 to succeed. "Isn't the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn't it our responsibility to bring that about?" he asked.

There is little question that such people will try. That is why the term "climate change," which replaced "global warming" when a decade of steady temperatures threatened the credibility of the environmentalists' "irrefutable data" — along with the movement itself — has itself been replaced by the newest catchword, "sustainability." The United Nations Rio+20 Conference on Sustainable Development held in June 2012 issued a report that reiterated the totalitarian ambitions of both Earth Summits and the Agenda 21

project. "Working Towards a Balanced and Inclusive Green Economy: A United Nations System-wide Perspective," detailed the trillions of dollars that must be spent moving the entire world towards a "green" economy, where every aspect of human behavior would be regulated by a top-down, command-and-control bureaucracy.

Havel foresaw exactly such a development. "There is no doubt that it is our duty to rationally protect nature for future generations," he writes. "The followers of the environmentalist ideology, however, keep presenting us with various catastrophic scenarios with the intention of persuading us to implement their ideas. That is not only unfair but also extremely dangerous."

That is a far more elegant way of describing how those who celebrate Earth Day envision implementing their agenda. Less elegant, but far more familiar, is the phrase that both communists and radical environmentalists thoroughly embrace, as in, "by any means necessary."

Earth Day was the impetus behind this mushrooming desire for global power, hidden by an environmental facade. Villainous mankind, whose expressions of waywardness have changed over the decades — from the polluter, to the deforester, to the animal species eliminator, and finally to climate fouler of the entire planet — must be brought to heel. Toward that end there has been a remarkable consistency. Earth Day remains a celebration of anti-capitalism, anti-humanism, population control and ill-disguised totalitarianism.

Two of Earth Day's founders make these assertions clear. Denis Hayes: "America has a mechanism to deal with things that are not well-served by the market. It's called government. Government is the way that we assert the fundamental values of the majority, constrained by the rights of the minority. Government is the realm in which we decide what is dispensable and what is — literally — priceless." Paul Ehrlich: "A cancer is an uncontrolled multiplication of cells; the population explosion is an uncontrolled multiplication of people…We must shift our efforts from treatment of the symptoms to the cutting out of the cancer. The operation will demand many apparently brutal and heartless decisions."

Arnold Ahlert is a columnist for FrontPage Magazine1

Infantilized Americans made to ‘shelter in place’


Remember the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave? All that was over as of the early morning of April 19, 2013. 

Of course, as everybody knows, the free and brave America of yore has been dead or dying for a long time. But on Friday her much-abused corpse was officially directed to remain indoors while a 19-year-old boy-bombing suspect, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, was given the run of Greater Boston, formerly headquarters of the American Revolution. He was eventually run down hiding under a tarp over a boat in the working-class suburb of Watertown.

Something like a million people were sternly warned to stay inside all day. By and large, it would appear, they did.

The specific language of the official entreaty was to "shelter in place". Do not go to work, do not go to school! Keep your doors locked! In fact, don't even answer your door, keep it shut to anyone and everyone unless they are a "credentialed, uniformed police officer."

Armored personnel carriers rolled through parts of Greater Boston, the home of Sam and John Adams, on the 238th anniversary of the battles at Lexington and Concord. It was just four days after Patriots Day, the celebration of the start of hostilities against the British Crown, the battles that eventually led to the founding of the country we are still pleased to call the United States of America.

Oddly enough, the fighting actually occurred on April 19, 1775, so whatever evil orchestrated all this managed to ruin both dates. Patriots Day is a holiday unique to a city still celebrated for its rebellious, freedom-loving spirit.

On Friday, April 19, 2013, an earth-shaking revolution, defined by its defiance of the arbitrary and irresponsible use of state force, was officially and finally suppressed. And the agent of that suppression was not a foreign power or a far-away monarch, but the once-revolutionary government itself. 

Oh, of course, it was all done for the benefit of the American Citizen, that increasingly pathetic, helpless creature who relies on the state to make him safe and a handful of giant corporations to make him happy.

Just after six in the afternoon, after about 12 hours of trembling in their homes, the command that Greater Bostonians remain indoors was rescinded. A few hours later, the last of two advertised Boston Marathon-bombing suspects was apprehended.

But it was already too late for those old American ideals — the ones concerning justice, freedom from fear, checks and balances on power, the presumption of innocence, Miranda warnings, government of, by and for the people… you know, all that jazz.

Oh, how the people of Greater Boston cheered the heavily armored men and women of our ever-more-militarized police forces! A few people, thank heaven, did think it odd that an entire metro area could be so easily brought to its knees by a single teenager, or rather his fanatically zealous accomplices in law enforcement. But the vast crowd welcomed their oppressors as liberators, and proclaimed them heroes.

Lost along with the struggle for freedom and independence, as it always is, was a sense of history. Not just about the real spirit of the old Revolution, but the countless previous efforts to undermine it. You know, the wars and crises that powerful and rich people have always used to accumulate more wealth and power. An endless parade of manufactured emergencies, most often begun by false pretext and mendacious invention.

It's a long and contentious list, so let me give you just one exceptionally well-documented example that seems apropos, though it took place overseas.

According to the BBC, among many other sources, "Operation Gladio" was a decades-long effort led by the United States to influence events in Europe. The technique? Hire fascists to blow people up at outdoor festivals, in train stations, supermarkets, etc., and then blame it on left-wing groups.

In the end, the fascists complained that the people who hired and directed them weren't even interested in the true philosophy of fascism, just in getting a sometimes restive citizenry to cling more tightly to the infantilizing skirts of government. Check it out for yourself here. and here.

Of course, without a sense of history, skepticism and critical thinking go out the window. If we were the people we once were, the ones who overthrew a tyranny, we might have taken more notice of what the two suspects' mother told Russia Today, as reported by Business Insider:

"He [the older brother] was controlled by the FBI, like for three, five years,” she said. “They knew what my son was doing, they knew what actions and what sites on the Internet he was going [to], they used to come…and talk to me…they were telling me that he was really a serious leader and they were afraid of him."

"How could this happen?…They were controlling every step of him, and they are telling today that this is a terrorist attack," she added.

A spokesperson for the FBI told Business Insider Friday that the agency would be putting out a statement "shortly" regarding its previous contact with either Dzhokhar or his now apparently dead older brother, Tamerian Tsarnaev . The spokesperson would not confirm or deny that the agency had had any previous contact.

You can read and watch for yourself here. Does anyone else find it strange that, as Mother Jones reported in 2011, "With three exceptions, all of the high-profile domestic terror plots of the last decade were actually FBI stings"?

In a 2012 New York Times opinion piece entitled "Terror Plots, Hatched by the FBI", Judge Colleen McMahon is quoted as characterizing a would-be synagogue bomber thusly: "Only the government could have made a 'terrorist' out of Mr. {James} Cromitie, whose buffoonery is positively Shakespearean in its scope."

The usual MO of the FBI, according to court transcripts ,is to place one of its thousands of informants– a retired Egyptian military officer, say, or a criminal looking to cut a deal– close to a hapless young man who may or may not have expressed anger in some public forum concerning U.S. behavior toward Muslims.

Sometimes the informant will show his mark pictures of torture at Abu Ghraib, to get their dander up. In a process that can take years, the informant will maneuver, cajole and brainwash the pawn into participation in some sort of plot.

Usually the FBI will provide everything that a first-time terrorist could want: maps, a driver, dummy explosives, you name it. Now totally entrapped, all the patsy has to do is set the phony charge or push the button, and out come the cuffs.

Did the FBI take one of its fake-bomb entrapments too far in Boston? If the older of the two brother-suspects was under complete "control" by the FBI, or at least under surveillance, how did he manage to do what he allegedly did?

Or is there a far worse scenario to consider, one where the obvious outcome of the past week's events– a more fearful, pliant citizenry; ever more "security" in ever more areas of our lives, and an even larger portion of our state and federal tax dollars diverted toward the everlasting war on terror–was welcomed and indeed encouraged by the very security forces we pay to protect us?

I'll let you do your own research into the verified reports of "exercises" or "drills" occurring before and during the marathon. Related to that is the unusually heavy security, including the possible presence of a truly bizarre mercenary/training group called Craft International at the finish line.

In photos released on 4chan.org, the logo of "The Craft" — a demonic-looking skull — can be seen on the hat of a man carrying a large bag. The Craft's Web site describes the design as including a cross hair over the right eye socket in the shape of the Templar cross to "symbolize the faith" of their founder, former Seal Team 3 member Chris Kyle, known as "the most lethal sniper in U.S. military history". Craft's motto is "Violence does solve problems". (Kyle was killed in February, purportedly by a fellow vet at a shooting range in Texas.)

The events of April 19 saw an entire city cowed into submission, the latest in an infamous string of highly suspicious attacks and outright abuses of government power that have occurred on that very date in years past.

Does the lockdown of Greater Boston indicate the onset of a new and terrifying stage of American quiescence, the solidifying of a herd-like mentality better suited to farm animals than citizens of an allegedly free country? How will we ever reclaim that revolutionary spirit, now that we need it more than ever, and gather the courage to open our doors and look out on the world around us with bold, unblinkered eyes?



The Mainstream Church: Yesterday and Today


Chuck Frank


What was it about the America’s early church that was so different from today's mainstream church? During the mid 1700’s the church was fully “involved” in supporting a country and a people who were being oppressed by a tyrannical king and a British government that knew no bounds and was making the life of the colonists unbearable. Besides taxation without representation, the grievances were many while pastors and their members were also being persecuted as England’s “state” religion was then being ushered into the fray. Therefore, the ministers were not only praying fervently to God on behalf of the oppression of the thirteen colonies, they were also being very zealous and active in bringing their own congregations into the forefront of a political struggle and standoffwithGreatBritain. AndwhenthreatscamedownfromtheCrown, pastors were not fearful of losing their “tax exempt status” for they had decided, in faith, to take on a firm political stance that would become the key in a major push towards the birth of A FREE NATION. Yet sadly, this will not be found in a high school or college text book, for America’s real history has been censored.

As far back as 1770, ministers who had already begun speaking out, once again stepped to the forefront, boldly denouncing the British abuse of power in the famous Boston Massacre. In fact, the Massachusetts House of Representatives even ordered that the Rev. Samuel Cooke’s sermon on the subject be printed and distributed.

Now then, let’s fast forward. It is very clear that though we have many enemies in the world who may even threaten us, however the real issue in America today is very different. We have a secular enemy( i.e., Homeland Security) from within, but on this note where is the church and a sermon on that subject.? I have only heard one such sermon in my lifetime a few years back by the pastor of Glad Tidings in Yuba City. It was without a doubt one of the finest sermons I have ever heard which touched upon the true Christian foundation of our country.

Focusing further, a law enforcement culture and Marxist thought in government presently challenges a majority of consensus among the people. It also dramatically sidesteps the Constitution, while arrogantly taking exception to God’s Word, the Holy Bible, the church, and our inalienable rights, all of which were key foundational elements of the country since its very beginning.

For years, government has been influenced by favored special interests while also authoring draconian and misrepresented legislation. In addition, hostile bureaucracies were created, while abominable court decisions were recklessly allowed to fly into the face of the American people and worse still, those decisions were responsible for the 55,772,015 atrocities of unborn children since 1973. (LifeNews.com.)

Now it is up to the mainstream church to take their stand, less the entire country be lost to a rebellious and desensitized generation bent on undermining Godly direction and Biblical principles. Consequently, we have major cities degenerating into gang-infested war zones, “over taxation” without representation, home bible studies being closed down, 30,000 spy drones estimated to be in the air by 2020, GPS everywhere, satellite black boxes in all of the new cars, SWAT teams and family farms being raided, hundreds of FEMA camps built all over the nation and I might ask for whom? Then there is the national ID Card which is still on the drawing board, along with government spyware to hack and track your cellphone and watch your every move. If that isn’t enough, any American citizen can now be detained indefinitely without a court hearing. Just say goodbye to the U.S. Constitution and if this isn’t treason, then what is? This is Homeland Insecurity. Sadly it is the tip of the iceberg, and all the while there is a free people inside the Titanic sipping wine but the ship is already sinking. Does anybody know what time it is? Just ask the lady with the diamond watch…life boat anybody?

I must ask a very serious question. If the church during pre-American Revolution times was experiencing the same type of radical police state intrusiveness along with a government and a large segment of the population that lacked either moral standards, accountability, or credibility, what would the early church have done, just remain silent? Certainly not! Now is the time for the mainstream church to either act within the framework of God’s will and save the country or the nation shall surely fall to a ruthless, “politically incorrect” generation.

Let’s reverse gears. When God saw the oppression of the Hebrew slaves in Egypt he sent Moses to deliver them. When God saw the great city of Nineveh that had crossed over into moral decay he sent Jonah the prophet and the city repented and was spared. Yet, what will it take for America to wake up to the realty that it needs to turn to God; another Detroit riot, a Watts, a Waco, or a Kent State, or will the final implementation of martial law finally bring America to its senses? By then, it will be far too late! The people as well as the church can no longer afford to be passive for the very foundation of America is vanishing at light speed. And what is the endgame? It has been incorrectly called, “the major transformation of America”, because the nation is about to implode into a million pieces while government adds fuel to the major meltdown.

In summary, modern accounts of our history often ignore the extensive leadership role pastors had in the building of America. Early historians, however, proudly heralded the direct influence of our clergy in not only addressing salvation but also forging America into the great and free nation it became. America’s pastors were closely involved in every aspect of securing what became our country’s civil and religious liberties.” We can all most assuredly learn something from the character of these courageous pastors from the years gone by. Shouldn’t all of us try to go forward with the same faith and works that was evident in these beautiful souls that were determined to raise up a standard to the world and for the glory of God? 

Department of Defense Support of Civilian Law Enforcement Agencies

Just a little reminder…


Department of Defense Instruction 

Number 3025.21

Department of Defense Support of Civilian Law Enforcement Agencies




Federal Register

12Apr13 – Vol.78, No.71

Department of Defense Support of Civilian Law Enforcement Agencies


Gun Control Survey: 11 Key Lessons from Officers’ Perspectives




Doug Wyllie, PoliceOne Editor in Chief 10-43: All Units…
with Doug Wyllie, PoliceOne Editor in Chief


PoliceOne's Gun Control Survey: 11 key lessons from officers' perspectives

Never before has such a comprehensive survey of law enforcement officers’ opinions on gun control, gun violence, and gun rights been conducted


Gun Survey 2013

In March, PoliceOne conducted the most comprehensive survey ever of American law enforcement officers’ opinions on the topic gripping the nation's attention in recent weeks: gun control.

More than 15,000 verified law enforcement professionals took part in the survey, which aimed to bring together the thoughts and opinions of the only professional group devoted to limiting and defeating gun violence as part of their sworn responsibility.

Totaling just shy of 30 questions, the survey allowed officers across the United States to share their perspectives on issues spanning from gun control and gun violence to gun rights.

Top Line Takeaways
Breaking down the results, it's important to note that 70 percent of respondents are field-level law enforcers — those who are face-to-face in the fight against violent crime on a daily basis — not office-bound, non-sworn administrators or perpetually-campaigning elected officials.

1.) Virtually all respondents (95 percent) say that a federal ban on manufacture and sale of ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 rounds would not reduce violent crime.

2.) The majority of respondents — 71 percent — say a federal ban on the manufacture and sale of some semi-automatics would have no effect on reducing violent crime. However, more than 20 percent say any ban would actually have a negative effect on reducing violent crime. Just over 7 percent took the opposite stance, saying they believe a ban would have a moderate to significant effect.  

3.) About 85 percent of officers say the passage of the White House’s currently proposed legislation would have a zero or negative effect on their safety, with just over 10 percent saying it would have a moderate or significantly positive effect.

4.) Seventy percent of respondents say they have a favorable or very favorable opinion of some law enforcement leaders’ public statements that they would not enforce more restrictive gun laws in their jurisdictions. Similarly, more than 61 percent said they would refuse to enforce such laws if they themselves were Chief or Sheriff.

5.) More than 28 percent of officers say having more permissive concealed carry policies for civilians would help most in preventing large scale shootings in public, followed by more aggressive institutionalization for mentally ill persons (about 19 percent) and more armed guards/paid security personnel (about 15 percent). See enlarged image

6.) The overwhelming majority (almost 90 percent) of officers believe that casualties would be decreased if armed citizens were present at the onset of an active-shooter incident.

7.) More than 80 percent of respondents support arming school teachers and administrators who willingly volunteer to train with firearms and carry one in the course of the job.

8.) More than four in five respondents (81 percent) say that gun-buyback programs are ineffective in reducing gun violence.

9.) More than half of respondents feel that increased punishment for obviously illegal gun sales could have a positive impact on reducing gun violence.

10.) When asked whether citizens should be required to complete a safety training class before being allowed to buy a gun, about 43 percent of officers say it should not be required. About 42 percent say it should be required for all weapons, with the remainder favoring training classes for certain weapons. 

11.) While some officers say gun violence in the United States stems from violent movies and video games (14 percent), early release and short sentencing for violent offenders (14 percent) and poor identification/treatments of mentally-ill individuals (10 percent), the majority (38 percent) blame a decline in parenting and family values.

Bottom Line Conclusions
Quite clearly, the majority of officers polled oppose the theories brought forth by gun-control advocates who claim that proposed restrictions on weapon capabilities and production would reduce crime.

In fact, many officers responding to this survey seem to feel that those controls will negatively affect their ability to fight violent criminals.

Contrary to what the mainstream media and certain politicians would have us believe, police overwhelmingly favor an armed citizenry, would like to see more guns in the hands of responsible people, and are skeptical of any greater restrictions placed on gun purchase, ownership, or accessibility.

The officers patrolling America’s streets have a deeply-vested interest — and perhaps the most relevant interest — in making sure that decisions related to controlling, monitoring, restricting, as well as supporting and/or prohibiting an armed populace are wise and effective. With this survey, their voice has been heard.

HOTT Podcast for 3 April 2013 – Robert Tuccio Interview

Hello everyone,

Please take a listen to today’s newly recorded podcast where Robert Houghton interviews Robert Tuccio, author of The PreTribulation Rapture Exposed!

Mr. Tuccio shares his inspiration to write the book and explains his motivation for clearing up details on where some churches go wrong.

Support Mr. Tuccio by purchasing his book here!


VNS and CAJI/IS Exclusive – 23Mar13 – The Modern Man: The CFR and the Control of America – Pt. 1

Veritas News Service


CAJI/IS Exclusive

The Modern Man:

The CFR and the Control of America

Part 1


By Mike Visockis

     What is wrong with our society today? How did we as a people ever let ourselves be so controlled by a gradually increasing threat to our freedoms, families, and our constitutionally protected rights? These are the questions we have on our minds, whether we realize it or not. This network of control is so complete that trying to explain the fact that it exists today is next to impossible. This is made possible by using the tools of political propaganda, political correctness, behavioral modification, COINTELPRO infiltration, and the attempted control of every facet of our lives. The best example of this control is the one exerted by the Council on Foreign Relations that Dan Smoot detailed in his book The Invisible Government.

     In his Farewell Address George Washington on September 17, 1796, warned us about allowing foreign influence and alliances in American affairs and about America's neutrality stance.  He promoted free exchange of “travel and commerce, ideas and culture.”  Fast forward to April 1917 when Woodrow Wilson's war message speech went back on his campaign promise of neutrality of 1916 and entered the country into World War I. 

     “Save the world … create a world federation of nations” was the catch phrase Wilson used in a May 27, 1916 speech to the League to Enforce Peace where he endorsed the House version of world government.  Colonel Edward Mandel House was the political adviser for Wilson, shaped his foreign policy, ran the State Department, and was influential to the international banking families in the United States and Europe.  In September 1916, the President’s Brain Trust made a “charter for world government.”  The Trust was made up of “150 college professors, students, lawyers, economists, writers, and others,” including Allan Dulles and John Foster Dulles.  This is where the idea for the League of Nations came from.  However, the conference in Paris went bad and the Constitutionalists in the U.S. Senate found out about the plans and vowed not to pass the treaty.  A stark contrast from the U.S. Senators we have today.

     The U.S.A. group returned from Paris to form the Council on Foreign Relations in 1921.  Described as a “… force in policy for America – to replace the traditional ‘negative’ foreign policy … old-world politics.”  The negative force they are talking about here is any foreign policy that is isolationist, anti-war, and against their aims.  But it was not until 1927 that the CFR really took off because they received funding from the Rockefellers.  After the Rockefellers sent their money, the Carnegie and Ford Foundations followed suit with more funds.  http://www.cfr.org/about/

     In 1929 they got their first headquarters in New York City at the Harold Pratt House, 58 East 68th Street.  In 1939 the CFR gained in its popularity and membership in the U.S. State Department.  Then in 1939, as World War II started, the CFR offered its services in security, armaments, economic and financial, political problems, territorial problems, and the Rockefellers funded the plans through foundation grants.  In San Francisco in 1945 forty members of the U.S. Delegation to the U.N. wrote the U.N. Charter.  Those in attendance were John Foster Dulles, Adali Stevenson, A. Rockefeller, Nelson A. Rockefeller, and others.  By 1945 the CFR had all but taken over the State Dept.  (Smoot, p. 10)

     “The ultimate aim of the Council on Foreign Relations … Is the same as the ultimate aim of international communism: to create a one world socialist system and make the United States an official part of it.”

     As an example of the political games CFR members’ play, Presidential Advisor Julius Holmes wanted to buy and sell marine ships and surplus, but Congressional law prohibited the selling to foreign countries.  In August 1947 he formed a corporation, bought eight tankers; everything was sold to foreign countries.  This equipment was then used to ship goods and equipment from Russia to Romania, and then to China for the North Korean war to be used against American troops. By September 1948 Holmes returned to the U.S. State Dept. with about $1 million in profit. 

     A Senate subcommittee in 1952 said that the operation was “morally wrong” and was criminally indicted in 1954, but was later dismissed.  By 1961 John F. Kennedy was President and he nominated Holmes to the same position.  Senator Prescott Bush [Grandfather to George W. Bush] speaking on the nomination said Holmes was “an innocent victim of sharp operators.”  Holmes never made restitution to the U.S. government for the laws he broke.  He was questioned in 1961 when he said that there was nothing wrong with what he did. 

     Holmes and many others believe in situational ethics.  This means the ends justify the means.  This is a good example to show that what he was doing was illegal, unethical, and not what the American people wanted as illustrated by the fact of the original outrage of him being nominated to an ambassadorship.  Holmes was not the only person to come up with this idea of skirting the law–organizations like the CFR take their ideas, collaborate, and guide their members to their own agendas.  We are told that is just how politics works.  The question is what are their agendas? This is actually easy to figure out if you know what you’re looking for.  All you have to do is look at their deeds, what they produce, or simply what they really do.  This is sometimes hard to figure out, but you have to dig deeper than the outward appearance and facades of people and their organizations. 

     Holmes continued to say that he would do it again, and no congressional committee ever investigated further.  The Senators he was working with all said that he did nothing wrong as well.  That was a bold face lie because it was illegal.  Here it is also obvious that these Senators believed in situation ethics as well.  Holmes Ambassador U.S. Senate debates, (Congressional Record, pp. 6385-6, 4/27/1961, pp. 6668-9, 5/3/1961, pp. 6982-95, 5/8/1961) and the vote was 75-21 in favor of his nomination.  Senator Prescott Bush [grandfather to George W. Bush] proceeded to praise Holmes by saying, “Julius Holmes is the noblest man.”  (p. 12)

1961 CFR members: John F. Kennedy [technically not an official member], Dean Rusk, Adali Stevenson, Harriman, Mcloy, Allen Dulles (DCI), Galbraith (Fed.), Edward R. Murrow, Holmes, Schlesinger, George W. Ball, McGeorge Bundy. 

     CFR publications like Foreign Affairs had circulation of 43,000 and it was very influential in 1961.  The CFR corporate income in that same year came from foundation grants of Ford and Carnegie, the subscriptions from Foreign Affairs, and membership dues.  Businesses that contributed to the CFR in the 1960-1 year: AT&T, Armco, Brown Brothers Harriman [currently the oldest private bank in the U.S.], Chase Manhattan [Rockefeller owned], Chicago Bridge and Iron, Continental Oil, I.I. DuPont, First National City Bank, Ford Motor Company, General Dynamics, General Motors, Gillette, Gulf Oil [one of the Seven Sisters which was owned by Rockefeller and is now Chevron.], Halliburton [once chaired and partially owned by Dick Chaney], Heinz, IBM, I.T.T., Kellogg, Loeb, Merck, Mobil, New York Times, Ohio Oil, Otis elevators, Owens-Corning, Pan-Am, Pfizer, RCA, Rand Corp., San Jacinto Oil, Sinclair Oil, Singer, Standard Oil [Rockefeller owned], Texaco, Texas Gulf Sulfur, Texas Instruments, Tidewater Oil, Time, Inc., and U.S. Steel.  What did they get in return?  Profits advantages, less competition, and Congressional breaks and funding helped these companies prosper very well for many years, and some are operating even today.  (p. 37) For a more modern and comprehensive list see the CFR Annual Reports that go back to 1999 here: http://www.cfr.org/about/annual_report/

     In turn for corporate funding, the CFR provides consultation, access to their library, copies of all their publications, off-the-record dinners, and two annual copies of the records. 

(p. 43-44). In 1958-1959, the U.S. held roundtable meetings with Premier Castro, Mikoyan, and Secretary General Dag Hammarskjold.  Castro spoke on “Cuba and the United States.”  The League of Nations, and even the United Nations today, gave legitimacy to barbaric Communist countries and their governments, and gave away more seats to them percentage wise compared to the United States.  One of the speakers at the meeting was the mayor of Communist East Berlin.  (p. 20)

     There have been 30 official CFR organizations in use across the country, including:  Albuquerque, Atlanta, Boston, Denver, Detroit, Houston, Indianapolis, Los Angeles, Nashville, Philadelphia, Portland, Tucson, Salt Lake City, San Francisco, Seattle, and St. Louis.  We will discuss these “Committees on Foreign Relations” in a later section.  To see more about these groups see: http://www.acfr.org/about.htm 

     In the aftermath of World War II the CFR expanded their influence over the U.S. Government, for example, by taking credit for the protection of Greenland under the Monroe Doctrine as FDR ran for his third term.  However, the Monroe Doctrine was never meant for this kind of an application.  The ideas like these come from the CFR and trickle down from the members and their respective positions and organizations and these are the people who are in leadership and advisory positions who guide the other people in their respective organizations.

     The CFR helped the U.S. during and after World War II to shape the policies of the U.S. Government and its foreign relations.  These CFR policies, from 1921 to the present day, have redistributed the wealth of the U.S. in gold to foreign countries and governments, and have funded the industrial buildup of them as well.  We have seen this more recently by the transfer of jobs overseas to countries like China that have devastated the U.S. manufacturing industry, by eliminating millions of jobs in the process. 

     One may ask why this information doesn’t make the local news or mainstream book publishing houses.  The answer to that is simple.  Many books are actually out there, they are just not as popular and are harder to find.  The other reason is the fact that there is a large web of control of media editors and anchors like Dan Rather, Barbara Walters, and Diane Sawyer, of U.S. Congressmen, Presidents, Military leaders, financial institutions, Federal Reserve System, International Monetary Fund, World Bank, U.N. Ambassadors, 9/11 Commission members, U.S. Cabinet officials, judiciary, union leaders, religious leaders like Rick Warren and Richard D. Land.  It is this web of control that guides the direction of everything in its reach to their aims.  The question is what are their aims and goals?  This may seem hard to find out, but actually it really comes down to basic logic. 

     Just like there are rules of gravity, there are certain things that can happen and some that are impossible.  Forensic scientists use these rules all the time to match up evidence like fingerprints.  The evidence that we can discover like a suspenseful murder mystery can be found by simply looking at what the CFR members do, especially their leaders.  By looking at their publications, writings, books, opinions, and decisions we see what they really believe.  As we have seen from the paragraph above, the CFR has no problem with planning and implementing the elimination of millions of jobs in the U.S.

     It has been their plan to lessen the world markets of production until the U.S. no longer dominates.  “The entwining of American affairs — economic, political, cultural, social, educational, and even religious – with those of other nations until the United States will no longer have an independent policy … until we cannot return to our traditional foreign policy of maintaining national independence, nor to free private capitalism as an economic system.” This is what the CFR believed then, and does today, and has plans of action for.

Works Cited:

Smoot, Dan. The Invisible Government, 1962.