Free news

FREE blog







Gun poll








14th Amdt

19th Amdt













xmas3.gif (5351 bytes)



Statistical evidence that our public servants are under the control of an enemy foreign power, and not at all responsive to the constituents who elected them

"By all means, let Israel remain Jewish, but by the same token let the United States remain majority-white. Mr. Horowitz has a distinguished record of fighting double standards, so he should recognize one when he sees it. If he supports a Jewish Israel, he should support a white America" Jared Taylor

bulletThe two-faced Chutzpah of jews who condemn Trent Lott for "racism".
bulletThe double standard that created "Israel".


horizontal rule

Treason is punishable by the death penalty!!

Crimes Punishable by the Death Penalty

The Bureau of Justice Statistics, Capital Punishment 2001 , (December 2002, NCJ 190598) lists the following as captial crimes, by state:

Alabama. Intentional murder with 18 aggravating factors (13A-5-40(a)(1)-(18)).

Arizona. First-degree murder accompanied by at least 1 of 10 aggravating factors (A.R.S 13-703(F)).

Arkansas. Capital murder (Ark. Code Ann. 5-10-101) with a finding of at least 1 of 10 aggravating circumstances; treason.

California. First-degree murder with special circumstances; train wrecking; treason; perjury causing execution.

Colorado. First-degree murder with at least 1 of 15 aggravating factors; treason.

Connecticut. Capital felony with 8 forms of aggravated homicide (C.G.S. 53a-54b).

Delaware. First-degree murder with aggravating circumstances.

Florida. First-degree murder; felony murder; capital drug trafficking; capital sexual battery.

Georgia. Murder; kidnaping with bodily injury or ransom when the victim dies; aircraft hijacking; treason.

Idaho. First-degree murder with aggravating factors; aggravated kidnaping.

Illinois. First-degree murder with 1 of 15 aggravating circumstances.

Indiana. Murder with 16 aggravating circumstances (IC 35-50-2-9).

Kansas. Capital murder with 7 aggravating circumstances (KSA 21-3439).

Kentucky. Murder with aggravating factors; kidnaping with aggravating factors (KRS 532.025).

Louisiana. First-degree murder; aggravated rape of victim under age 12; treason (La. R.S. 14:30, 14:42, and 14:113).

Maryland. First-degree murder, either premeditated or during the commission of a felony, provided that certain death eligibility requirements are satisfied.

Mississippi. Capital murder (97-3-19(2) MCA); aircraft piracy (97-25-55(1) MCA).

Missouri. First-degree murder (565.020 RSMO 1994).

Montana. Capital murder with 1 of 9 aggravating circumstances (46-18-303 MCA); capital sexual assault (45-5-503 MCA).

Nebraska. First-degree murder with a finding of at least 1 statutorily-defined aggravating circumstance.

Nevada. First-degree murder with at least 1 of 14 aggravating circumstances (NRS 200.030, 200.033, 200.035).

New Hampshire. Six categories of capital murder (RSA 630:1, RSA 630:5).

New Jersey. Knowing/purposeful murder by one's own conduct; contract murder; solicitation by command or threat in furtherance of a narcotics conspiracy (NJSA 2C:11-3C).

New Mexico. First-degree murder with at least 1 of 7 statutorily-defined aggravating circumstances (Section 30-2-1 A, NMSA).

New York. First-degree murder with 1 of 12 aggravating factors.

North Carolina. First-degree murder (NCGS �14-17).

Ohio. Aggravated murder with at least 1 of 9 aggravating circumstances (O.R.C. secs. 2903.01, 2929.02, and 2929.04).

Oklahoma. First-degree murder in conjunction with a finding of at least 1 of 8 statutorily defined aggravating circumstances.

Oregon. Aggravated murder (ORS 163.095).

Pennsylvania. First-degree murder with 18 aggravating circumstances.

South Carolina. Murder with 1 of 10 aggravating circumstances (� 16-3-20(C)(a)).

South Dakota. First-degree murder with 1 of 10 aggravating circumstances; aggravated kidnaping.

Tennessee. First-degree murder with 1 of 14 aggravating circumstances.

Texas. Criminal homicide with 1 of 8 aggravating circumstances (TX Penal Code 19.03).

Utah. Aggravated murder (76-5-202, Utah Code annotated).

Virginia. First-degree murder with 1 of 12 aggravating circumstances (VA Code
� 18.2-31).

Washington. Aggravated first-degree murder.

Wyoming. First-degree murder.


The following survey confirms the complete and total breakdown of our "democratic process" and the need to put on our "white shirts".

horizontal rule

> *    The gap between the opinions of the American people and their leaders
> on immigration is enormous. The poll found that 60 percent of the public
> regards the present level of immigration to be a "critical threat to the
> vital interests of the United States," compared to only 14 percent of the
> nation's leadership a 46 percentage-point gap.

horizontal rule

> WHY DO THE PUBLIC AND ELITES DIFFER? It is not entirely clear why the
> public and nation's leaders have such different views on immigration. Other
> areas in which the public and elites disagree are those dealing with
> protecting the jobs of American workers and economic competition from other
> countries. This strongly suggests that one of the main reasons ordinary
> Americans are concerned about immigration is that they fear job
> competition. Opinion leaders on the other hand are overwhelmingly educated,
> and compared to the public much more affluent. Thus at least part of the
> reason for the difference of opinion stems of the class interests of the
> two groups. However, the huge difference between the public and opinion
> leaders on the issue is clearly an important social phenomenon in need of
> further exploration. What we can say from this data is that the gap is
> large, persistent over time, and seems to be growing.

horizontal rule

Camarota and Beck seriously understate the problem.  The problem is treason, plain and simple.

It's got nothing to do with "elites" being better educated than the American people.  Even IF they have more extensive formal educations, decades of affirmative action assured that too many of these "elites" are too dumbed down for formal education to have any serious effect.

It's not "job competition" that Americans "fear"--it's that they've observed over the last three to four decades that "their" government will use any and all means of amoral and unconstitutional laws to force corporate America to displace qualified American workers [read: White men] with morons who weren't even born or educated in this country [read: nigger women].   They've spent too much time observing "their" own government participate in the jew scam of decrying that White Americans are "racists", while completely ignoring that jews in Israel test the DNA of immigrants to make sure they're jewish enough to qualify for the "law of return".

Many of these "elite" (the moral minors who are one quarter as likely to want to uphold immigration laws as the far more upstanding average American citizen) were ELECTED by those American people.   According to putative democratic principles, they're supposed to REPRESENT the interests of those who elected them, and not the interests of zionists, jews, "Israel", Japan, nor any of our other "global economic competitors".

Who asked these "elites" to pass affirmative action laws which sent most of our manufacturing and high tech jobs to the remotest parts of the planet?  Who asked them to pass the 55 mph speed limit that they KNEW would never save lives or oil, but which WOULD (and did) open the flood gates for puny little Japanese cars that should never have been deemed safe on freeways built for 120 mph in the first place (and reduced the share of the world auto market served by US auto manufacturers from 60% to 20%)?  Who asked them to take over airport security after it was THEIR unconstitutional laws against guns that put us in the embarassing position of having the WTC taken down by sand niggers with boxcutters?

horizontal rule

Certainly illustrates why the most political reform should be / must
be in the area of having all votes on significant public policy immigration be  validated by votes of the people and thus
give less and less power to these utterly horrible elected officials

> Poll: People Deeply Anxious, While Nation's Leaders Remain Unconcerned
> WASHINGTON (December 17, 2002) -- An analysis from the Center for
> Immigration Studies finds compelling evidence that an enormous gap exists
> between the American people and opinion leaders on the issue of immigration
> a gap that seems to be increasing.
> The CIS Backgrounder, "Elite vs. Public Opinion: An Examination of
> Divergent Views on Immigration," is the first to examine in detail the
> differences between public and elite opinion on the issue of immigration.
> The report is based on data from a recent survey on foreign policy issues
> conducted by the Chicago Council on Foreign Relations. The survey, taken in
> May through July of this year, was based on 2,800 interviews of ordinary
> Americans and a cross-section of 400 "opinion leaders," including members
> of Congress, the administration, church leaders, business executives, union
> leaders, journalists, academics, and leaders of major interest groups.
> The CIS report, authored by Roy Beck, Executive Director of NumbersUSA
> Education and Research Foundation, and Steven Camarota, Director of
> Research at the Center for Immigration Studies, is on line at
> Among the findings in the report:
> *    The gap between the opinions of the American people and their leaders
> on immigration is enormous. The poll found that 60 percent of the public
> regards the present level of immigration to be a "critical threat to the
> vital interests of the United States," compared to only 14 percent of the
> nation's leadership a 46 percentage-point gap.
> *    The current gap is even wider than the 37 percentage-point difference
> found in 1998, when 55 percent of the public viewed immigration as a
> "critical threat," compared to 18 percent of opinion leaders then.
> *    The poll results indicate that there is no other foreign
> policy-related issue on which the American people and their leaders
> disagreed more profoundly than immigration. Even on such divisive issues as
> globalization or strengthening the United Nations, the public and the elite
> are much closer together than they are on immigration.
> *    The enormous difference between elite and public opinion can also be
> seen on the specific issue of illegal immigration. The survey found that 70
> percent of the public said that reducing illegal immigration should be a
> "very important" foreign-policy goal of the United States, compared to only
> 22 percent of those in the elite.
> Co-author Roy Beck noted that the poll's findings indicate that "continued
> deep public dissatisfaction with current immigration policy indicates that
> this is an issue just waiting for a candidate to champion it and thereby
> reap a significant political benefit." The is especially true, he said,
> because, "it could be marketed as 'anti-elite' and more in sync with the
> American people, a message that has traditionally been well received by
> voters."
> Steven Camarota, the other co-author, pointed out that, "The very large
> difference between the elite and public opinion makes what has transpired
> on immigration in recent years much more understandable. It explains why
> border enforcement increased in the 1990s, but at the same time,
> enforcement within the United States was phased out. More recently it
> explains why broad interest group support for an illegal alien amnesty,
> including the business community and labor unions, has not translated into
> the passage of an amnesty."
> Among other findings in the report:
> *    President Bush's efforts to grant amnesty to illegal immigrants
> appears to be hurting him politically. While 53 percent of the public said
> his handling of foreign policy overall was excellent or good, on
> immigration only 27 percent said his handling of immigration was good or
> excellent.
> *    When asked a specific question about whether legal immigration should
> be reduced, kept the same, or increased, 55 percent of the public said it
> should be reduced, and 27 percent said it should remain the same. In
> contrast, only 18 percent of opinion leaders said it should be reduced, and
> 60 percent said it should remain the same. It appears that there was no
> other issue specific question on which the public and elites differed more
> widely.
> *    A significant discrepancy also exists with respect to illegal
> immigration, as when respondents were asked an open ended question "What
> are the biggest foreign policy problems?" The public ranked illegal
> immigration sixth of 69 concerns, while elites ranked it twenty-sixth.
> WHY DO THE PUBLIC AND ELITES DIFFER? It is not entirely clear why the
> public and nation's leaders have such different views on immigration. Other
> areas in which the public and elites disagree are those dealing with
> protecting the jobs of American workers and economic competition from other
> countries. This strongly suggests that one of the main reasons ordinary
> Americans are concerned about immigration is that they fear job
> competition. Opinion leaders on the other hand are overwhelmingly educated,
> and compared to the public much more affluent. Thus at least part of the
> reason for the difference of opinion stems of the class interests of the
> two groups. However, the huge difference between the public and opinion
> leaders on the issue is clearly an important social phenomenon in need of
> further exploration. What we can say from this data is that the gap is
> large, persistent over time, and seems to be growing.
> The complete results of the Chicago Council on Foreign Relations survey can
> be found at
> Contacts: Steven Camarota, (202) 466-8185;
> Roy Beck, (703) 816-8820;
> # # #
> -----------------------------------------------
> Mark Krikorian, executive director
> Center for Immigration Studies
> 1522 K Street N.W., Suite 820
> Washington, DC  20005
> (202) 466-8185    fax: (202) 466-8076
> ------------------------------------------------

horizontal rule


Let us get right to the point.  Day after day, week after week, month after month and year after year the Congress of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA has passed legislation   that has been against the best interest of the People of the united States.   The Beltway pastime has been to pare away from the people as many of the Constitutionally secured rights as possible. Page upon page could be presented to mark a paper trail of this group from the Amendment fiascos to the latest bill that creates an absolute police state. There is blatant fraud incorporated into the ratifications of the Amendments and absolute disregard for the Constitutionally secured rights of the people.   When it is finally brought before a Grand Jury, indictments will be handed out like candy at a picnic, and sentences will be in the thousands of years.

This is not just the story of crooked politicians.  They are usually the result of extraneous forces, such as money and greed.  This is the story about the men with the money who corrupted  the men and women who gained the trust of the People who worked and built the Republic that made it a special target for the men with money.

The history of the United States will reflect skirmishes between these men and honorable men.  Yes, there have been a few.  However, the period following the Civil War made the Republic especially vulnerable because of the financial depletion caused by the war.  You can almost see the wolves gathering around a lone animal on the prairie, waiting for the first sign of weakness to begin their attack.  Attack the men of money did in the 1860's. Scholars of the civil war say that it was one of the bloodiest, but the attack of the men of money on this Republic after the civil war, has caused more bloodshed and death than most minds can fathom.  Thus, began the final decline.

In the annuals of Congress it was but a small entry with seeming insignificance.   A few innocent written words that no one would hold of any value, if they noticed them at all.  The Acts of the Forty-First Congress. Chances are this would not prick your interest. Quite possibly no one outside of Congress and a select few ever heard or thought about the Acts of the Forty-First Congress.  We were not vigilant. However, the record reveals that on February 21, 1871 A.D., Section 34 of the Acts of the Forty-First Congress, Session III, Chapters 61 and 62, the Congress passed an Act entitled, "An Act to Provide a Government for the District of Columbia. Most will say "So what?"  A public entity of the united States of America was provided a government.  Did this public entity not already have a government under the Constitution for the united States?  Why did the Congress feel the need to separate the District of Columbia with a special Act of Congress.  What kind of a government did they create?   The Congress created a corporation.     A corporation?  Where did the Congress find the authority in the Constitution to reconstitute any part of the united States as a corporation?  Quite simple, the 1791, Constitution was set aside to make room for the corporation.  How or would this Act benefit the Republic? In truth, it would be of no benefit. We are talking about apples and oranges!  The corporate bottom line is profit.  The municipal bottom line is service.   This was treason, pure and simple!  What Rationale, Treason? Transportation and communication systems were primitive in those day.  Who would ever know?

  We would be naive to believe the Congress, sitting on an empty treasury would conjure up the corporation scheme.  If they would have had the inclination they would not have had the money.   Enter the International Banker, he unlike the governments of old, would not loan the money without binding strings, hence the formation of a corporation. A foot in the door, so to speak.  The framers of the Constitution actually despised the central bankers.  And kept them in check.  The International Bankers spoken of here, were the central bankers of Europe, and of the same ilk that were so despised by the forefathers.  The terms central banker and liberty cannot be spoken of, seriously, in the same sentence.  The Constitution, not withstanding, a deal was struck.  As is the way with all governments, wise fiscal management never prevails for long and soon we were in bankruptcy.  Honest politicians could have rescued the Republic from bankruptcy on several occasion, but alas, the money from the International Banker was far better than the pittance received from the Republic.  Some things never change!

Now that the hook was well set the insidious activity began, subtle at first, but always relentless.  The goal, as we would later learn, was world domination "One World Order."

Throughout this time there had been some, not too subtle, indications that the Congress had been striking out on its own by striking down some very fundamental Constitutionally secured rights.  An example of this is a paragraph generated by the Senate in 1933, wherein they stated that all property is owned by the UNITED STATES and that basically we have its use by the good graces of the Government.  (Quite a statement by someone who had authority only in the District of Columbia.)  You will look a long time in the Constitution for the united States and never find their authority to remove individual property rights.  Incidently, this is one of the major planks of the Communist Manifesto.  Another plank of the Communist Manifesto that our Congress foisted on us and the Republic was the graduated Income Tax.  The controversy of the 16th Amendment still rages on. You would have to be struck stupid not to realize, after reading the research material on the 16th Amendment fraud, compiled by Benson and Beckman, that Amendment 14 is irreconcilably indicted by the letter used to justify the l6th Amendment. When the issue of the 16th Amendment was returned to the congress, they did not want to hear about it.  For whom do these people work?   That is what this document is all about!

Are we going to overlook the initial treason? That is impossible!  Is treason an excusable offense?  I do not think so!  But, for a little exercise or mental gymnastics let us go back to1871, and look a little deeper into this Congressional Act and take it apart for examination, first the Act and then their actions toward the Act.   (A treason, then an embellishment of the treason)  First, we see that a Government was provided for the District of Columbia, a ten-mile-square parcel of land.   Secondly, that by definition the UNITED STATES is a corporation of the District of Columbia. Tertiary, that the UNITED STATES has no authority or jurisdiction outside of the District of Columbia.  Fourth, the government of the District of Columbia is authorized to pass Private International Law applicable and enforceable only in the District of Columbia.  To secure the feature in your mind that the United States is indeed a corporation, See UNITED STATES CODE. TITLE 28 3002 (15)(A)(B)(C), where it states that the United States is a corporation.  It states further that all departments, Justice, Treasury, Judiciary , Etc. are corporate depart-ments of the United States corporation.

The UNITED STATES corporation is not separate from the government it is the government.   Therefore, the UNITED STATES CORPORATION is the government of the district of Columbia.  However, we have learned by their definition that the UNITED STATES has no jurisdiction outside of District of Columbia. Therefore, the UNITED STATE HAS NO JURISDICTION OR VENUE IN ANY STATE OF THE REPUBLIC.  Simply put this means that all District of Columbia based departments and agencies located in the several States are there in violation of Congressional mandate.  In other words, in violation of the law.  Does this sound bad?  Ask your Congress person!  Go to the telephone book, there you will see them listed. To name a few: UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF   JUSTICE; THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY; THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTS, THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS, THE UNITED STATES MARSHALS SERVICE, UNITED STATES BUREAU OF PRISONS.  The infiltration has been thorough.

The Congress of the UNITED STATES makes the rules and regulations for these department and agencies.  The Congress  has committees on everything, including the oversight of almost every corporate department.  Does it occur to you that the UNITED STATES CONGRESS does not know that these agencies are active outside of the District of Columbia?  It hardly seem possible, does it?  There must be some explanation.   Indeed, there is.

The Congress of the united States created a government for the District of Columbia, which is in fact a corporate instrument that is known as the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Corporation/ govern- ment.  The Congress perfected this Act in the absence of Constitutional authority and thereby committed treason against the People.  The Congress for purposes of fraud and deception, purposely defaced the description of the united States by capitalizing all of the letters, (see example, UNITED STATES,) thus, making a title of the description, (see example, united States, "united" is an adjective and is not capitalized))  In so doing the Congress prepared a deceptive way to use the title in place of the actual description of the Nation. Thus, saying one thing and meaning another to the deception of those who do not understand.  The Congress did knowingly and wilfully change the title and meaning of the Constitution to read , the CONSTITUTION [OF] THE UNITED STATES, thereby claiming same to be the bylaws of the UNITED STATES corporation.  The Congress perpetrated this deception on the people so they could speak openly about the Constitution to the people and the People would believe they were talking about the Constitution for the People, which when properly written, should read the Constitution [for] the united States.  All this may seem petty but it has had a profound and destructive effect on the people of this Nation.  Take note:   The Congress is not guided by the Constitution for the People.

The Congress is guided by the corporate constitution--the word-altered Constitution. (THE CONSTITUTION [OF] THE UNITED STATES.)  Although, bearing the same words within, as the Constitution [for] the people, the word-altered or corporate constitution, promises nothing and gives nothing to the people.  The document is used for their own benefit, whatever it may be.

Article VI of either constitution requires an Oath of Allegiance.  All elected and appointed government employees take an Oath of Allegiance to the corporate Constitution, this includes the President, Senators and Representative.  Think about this!   Make a note of it, because it is extremely important.  The elected and appointed officials and employees of our so-called government do not owe their allegiance to the People or Constitution for the united States, and therefore are not obligated to do our bidding.   Basically, they are traitors, however, most do not even know they have been duped.  Hence, the reason for this and other missives. This group of people has absolutely NO LEGAL authority over you or your property. Ask your Congressperson.!

Because of its diminutive physical size, the UNITED STATES blew itself up like a mating turkey. Indeed, they employed self aggrandizement,  hence the reason for the capitalization.  Little by little the corporation is working to fulfill its congressional statement that all property belongs to the state, even YOU.  Take a look at your birth and marriage certificates--all capitals.  All documents issued to YOU by the government use your assigned name, all in capitals.  According to the Uniform Commercial Code, even your unborn are imprinted for government use.  Here is a fun exercise.  Write and tell them you want to be known in writing under the name that you use not the one that has been assigned to you. (This name assignment is significant.)  Do you suppose that your Congress person is unaware of this. In all seriousness, there are a lot of attorneys who are unaware of what is going on. (No pun intended.)  Although, attorneys take an Oath of Allegiance to the Constitution their only allegiance is to the American Bar Association.  This organization has nothing to do with America, except inflict the will of the European Central Bankers on the attorneys of this nation. If you can imagine, the American Bar Association is governed by the Bar Council an England-Wales based organization.  (This is almost an oxymoron..)    They make the rules, the judges act as the enforcers.  How do you suppose this matter slipped by our esteemed, elected public officials, The Congress?

Let us talk about the Congress, our esteemed, elected public officials.  Our Senate recently passed a bill that permits government agents to go into your house at any time, without a warrant, confiscate whatever they deem appropriate and leave you looking.   All of this to curb the "Methamphedamine problem." (Remember this group has no legal authority)  Strange, the Constitution speaks of only three law jurisdictions, namely, Common Law, Equity and Admiralty.  I am certainly not in favor of the use of this material, either for me or mine but I do not believe it is a crime for someone to use or make this material in their own home.  If indeed,  someone is injured the common law comes into play.  This crime is not a crime because there is no victim.   The State says they are the victim. However, municipalities cannot be victims, but corporations can be.  Does that not speak volumes about who they are in the final analysis!  It is apparent, they do not consider themselves a municipality.  If they are injured, common law is their remedy.

Our prisons are filled with people who have been convicted of victimless crimes.   There is no Constitutional law jurisdiction to prosecute these people.   Therefore, the corporation uses the UNITED STATES CODE.  The UNITED STATES CODE has no basis in the Constitution for the Republic, and no jurisdiction in the States of the Union.  (Now, you see it does make a difference whose Constitution you follow-one you have rights the other you do not)  Prisons are a growth industry in this country and they are also a money-maker for the corporation.   Do you suppose this bit of truth has slipped by the Congress, our esteemed elected officials.

Speaking a little bit more about the subject of the above paragraph let me dovetail in a piece of information covered earlier in this missive.  We were speaking about Private International Law.  The UNITED STATES CODE, in totality is Private International Law.  It is also Private Copyrighted Law. Why?  The UNITED STATES CODE , in totality, was put together in the District of Columbia.  I say put together because very little of the UNITED STATES CODE was ever enacted into law.   Unbelievable?  How can this be, it is the law of the Republic?  No, it is not!!  They want you to believe it is, but it is not!  (Look it up, see for yourself) Better yet, ask your esteemed elected officials, the Congress.  Beyond that, the UNITED STATES CODE is applicable only in the District of Columbia.  By their own rules of jurisdiction the UNITED STATES ATTORNEYS have no business prosecuting anyone outside of the District of Columbia.  What about the federal courts?    The UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT has no venue outside the District of Columbia , therefore, no jurisdiction.   What about the Congress ?   Statutorily, the Congress cannot pass a law that is applicable in the States of the Republic. Do you suppose this matter slipped by the Congress without their notice? This is a felony!  Kidnaping and conspiracy are involved in every arrest and conviction by federal authorities outside of the District of Columbia. What an indictment! (A prosecutor's delight; how can it be defended?)  Are we just going to turn our heads?   Do you suppose the Congress knows this?  You bet they do.  The Congress arranged it.

It is clear that we do not have a municipal government.  It is a proven fact that what we now call our government is actually our enemy.  They are a force that is bent on the destruction of the Constitution and the Republic. They have anointed themselves with super power that put them above the law. They would have you believe that all things are the property of the State, including your body and that they have the absolute right to control your every movement. (See FEMA, plans for America)  They would have you believe they have the right to break into your home, take your possessions and if you object, arrest you for obstruction of justice and put you into prison. They have anointed themselves with this power, not from the people but from a foreign corporation known as THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.  Why yes, didn' t you know the UNITED STATES corporation and government is bankrupt and in the hands of foreign trustees.  They rule with impunity!.  Their twisted criminal minds believe they own you!   Therefore, they have the right to break into your home, take your property, and if you do not like it, then put you in prison.  They make money either way!  Ask your Congress person, he or she will be happy to explain it for you!  If you get an answer.  If you do not, Demand an answer!!

The united States of America is in the hands of  foreign agents!  The Congress is an integral working part of this foreign corporation.  Indeed, they, like all employees of the so-called government are  indentured servants of the corporation. They do as they are told to do.

The Congress does not have an admirable record of safeguarding our Constitutionally secured rights, but why should they?  THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES DOES NOT REPRESENT THE PEOPLE!  THEY REPRESENT THE CORPORATION UNDER THE CORPORATE CONSTITUTION. DON'T YOU FORGET IT!!!


A post note if you please.  I think about a grand jury when I hear of government corruption.  The English barons forced  King John to sign the "Great Charter" the "Magna Carta" to guarantee their input into matters of state, particularly taxation.  John signed it against his will, but he signed it none-the-less.  The idea grew into the grand jury.  (It was and still is a serious matter.)  King John could not live with the loss of some of his power and was later killed by a soldier of one of the barons that was enforcing the "Great Charter."  The Magna Carta and the Grand Jury have never been authority friendly.  It was meant as a tool for the People against oppressive leaders.   The grand jury must be construed to be the last civil means open to the People before open hostility. (War)   Why have the People of the united States permitted oppressive leaders to gain control over this peaceful means of problem resolution?    The grand jury may be the only peaceful means out of our present dilemma.  Demand that it be returned!!  Indeed, are we less than the barons!

       Everyone should send a copy of this letter to his or her Congress person!

horizontal rule

The size of the PDF file (unclassified memorandum for
the Secretary of Defense dated March 13, 1962) I
attached to the first E-Mail is 778K. The details
planned for the phony Cuban attack on U.S. military
personnel at Guantanamo is provided in Annex to
Appendix to Enclosure A (Pretexts to Justify U.S.
Military Intervention in Cuba, pages 7-11).

Could President Kennedy's rejection of the treasonous
plot, among other things apparently, be one of the
reasons why he was assassinated by criminal elements
(Mafia), the military, CIA, and rebuffed conspirators
in Washington, D.C. as Oliver Stone's movie "JFK"
concluded? It seems that Kennedy admirably had a
conscience, something rare in many politicians then
and now, and refused to go along with the sinister
schemes of the Hidden Hand/Shadow Government. Evidence
showing that President Roosevelt, a Mason and
occultist who was a member of both the Mystic Order of
Veiled Prophets of the Enchanted Realm and Ancient
Arabic Order of Nobles and Mystics that claimed an
origin with the Islamic Illuminati, knew in advance of
Japanese preparations to bomb Pearl Harbor. He did
nothing to stop it so that the U.S. could be incited
to enter WW II. This is documented in "Day of Deceit:
The Truth about FDR and Pearl Harbor" (2000) by Robert
Stinnett, "Pearl Harbor Conspiracy" (Srdja Trifkovic,
Rockford Institute, 2000), "COMINT and Pearl Harbor:
FDR's Mistake" (Edward S. Barkin and L. Michael Meyer,
"International Journal of Intelligence and
Counterintelligence", No. 4, Winter 1988), and "FDR's
Mistake? Not Likely" (Edwin C. Fishel and Louis W.
Tordello, "International Journal of Intelligence and
Counterintelligence", No. 3, Fall 1991). My obvious
point is that we can't readily trust our leadership.
We must question what we are told and be suspicious of
what gets reported in the news.

Background information on Operation Northwoods,
is available at
(ABC News!):

Friendly Fire

Book: U.S. Military Drafted Plans to Terrorize U.S.
Cities to Provoke War with Cuba

By David Ruppe

NEW YORK, May 1-In the early 1960s, America's top
military leaders reportedly drafted plans to kill
innocent people and commit acts of terrorism in U.S.
cities to create public support for a war against

Code named "Operation Northwoods", the plans
reportedly included the possible assassination of
Cuban �migr�s, sinking boats of Cuban refugees on the
high seas, hijacking planes, blowing up a U.S. ship,
and even orchestrating violent terrorism in U.S.

The plans were developed as ways to trick the American
public and the international community into supporting
a war to oust Cuba's then new leader, communist Fidel

America's top military brass even contemplated causing
U.S. military casualties, writing: "We could blow up a
U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba", and,
"casualty lists in U.S. newspapers would cause a
helpful wave of national indignation."

Details of the plans are described in "Body of
Secrets" (Doubleday), a new book by investigative
reporter James Bamford about the history of America's
largest spy agency, the National Security Agency.
However, the plans were not connected to the agency,
he notes.

The plans had the written approval of all of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff and were presented to President
Kennedy's defense secretary, Robert McNamara, in March
1962. But they apparently were rejected by the
civilian leadership and have gone undisclosed for
nearly 40 years.

"These were Joint Chiefs of Staff documents. The
reason these were held secret for so long is the Joint
Chiefs never wanted to give these up because they were
so embarrassing", Bamford told

"The whole point of a democracy is to have leaders
responding to the public will, and here this is the
complete reverse, the military trying to trick the
American people into a war that they want but that
nobody else wants."

Gunning for War

The documents show "the Joint Chiefs of Staff drew up
and approved plans for what may be the most corrupt
plan ever created by the U.S. government", writes

The Joint Chiefs even proposed using the potential
death of astronaut John Glenn during the first attempt
to put an American into orbit as a false pretext for
war with Cuba, the documents show.

Should the rocket explode and kill Glenn, they wrote,
"the objective is to provide irrevocable proof.that
the fault lies with the Communists, et al Cuba [sic]."

The plans were motivated by an intense desire among
senior military leaders to depose Castro, who seized
power in 1959 to become the first communist leader in
the Western Hemisphere-only 90 miles from U.S. shores.

The earlier CIA-backed Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba by
Cuban exiles had been a disastrous failure, in which
the military was not allowed to provide firepower. The
military leaders now wanted a shot at it.

"The whole thing was so bizarre", says Bamford, noting
public and international support would be needed for
an invasion, but apparently neither the American
public, nor the Cuban public, wanted to see U.S.
troops deployed to drive out Castro.

Reflecting this, the U.S. plan called for establishing
prolonged military-not democratic-control over the
island nation after the invasion.

"That's what we're supposed to be freeing them from,"
Bamford says. "The only way we would have succeeded is
by doing exactly what the Russians were doing all over
the world, by imposing a government by tyranny,
basically what we were accusing Castro himself of

'Over the Edge'

The Joint Chiefs at the time were headed by Eisenhower
appointee Army Gen. Lyman L. Lemnitzer, who, with the
signed plans in hand made a pitch to McNamara on March
13, 1962, recommending "Operation Northwoods" be run
by the military.

Whether the Joint Chiefs' plans were rejected by
McNamara in the meeting is not clear. But three days
later, President Kennedy told Lemnitzer directly there
was virtually no possibility of ever using overt force
to take Cuba, Bamford reports. Within months,
Lemnitzer would be denied another term as chairman and
transferred to another job.

The secret plans came at a time when there was
distrust in the military leadership about their
civilian leadership, with leaders in the Kennedy
administration viewed as too liberal, insufficiently
experienced and soft on communism. At the same time,
however, there were real concerns in American society
about their military overstepping its bounds.

There were reports U.S. military leaders had
encouraged their subordinates to vote conservative
during the election.

And at least two popular books were published focusing
on a right-wing military leadership pushing the limits
against government policy of the day. The Senate
Foreign Relations Committee published its own report
on right-wing extremism in the military, warning a
"considerable danger" in the "education and propaganda
activities of military personnel" had been uncovered.
The committee even called for an examination of any
ties between Lemnitzer and right-wing groups. But
Congress didn't get wind of "Northwoods", says

"Although no one in Congress could have known at the
time", he writes, "Lemnitzer and the Joint Chiefs had
quietly slipped over the edge."

Even after Lemnitzer was gone, he writes, the Joint
Chiefs continued to plan "pretext" operations at least
through 1963.

One idea was to create a war between Cuba and another
Latin American country so that the United States could
intervene. Another was to pay someone in the Castro
government to attack U.S. forces at the Guantanamo
naval base-an act, which Bamford notes, would have
amounted to treason. And another was to fly low level
U-2 flights over Cuba, with the intention of having
one shot down as a pretext for a war.

"There really was a worry at the time about the
military going off crazy and they did, but they never
succeeded, but it wasn't for lack of trying," he says.

After 40 Years

Ironically, the documents came to light, says Bamford,
in part because of the 1992 Oliver Stone film "JFK",
which examined the possibility of a conspiracy behind
the assassination of President Kennedy.

As public interest in the assassination swelled
after.[the] release [of "JFK"], Congress passed a law
designed to increase the public's access to government
records related to the assassination.

The author says a friend on the board tipped him off
to the documents.

Afraid of a congressional investigation, Lemnitzer had
ordered all Joint Chiefs documents related to the Bay
of Pigs destroyed, says Bamford. But somehow, these

"The scary thing is none of this stuff comes out until
40 years after", says Bamford.

horizontal rule

>  Thoughts from some famous folks......
> *Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of
> Congress. But I repeat myself. --Mark Twain
> *We contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is
> like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the
> handle. --Winston Churchill
> *A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the
> support of Paul. --George Bernard Shaw
> *A liberal is someone who feels a great debt to his fellow man, which
> debt he proposes to pay off with your money. --G. Gordon Liddy
> Democracy must be something more than two wolves and a sheep voting
> on what to have for dinner. --James Bovard, Civil Libertarian (1994)
> *Foreign aid might be defined as a transfer from poor people in rich
> countries to rich people in poor countries. --Douglas Casey, Classmate
> of
> W.J.Clinton at Georgetown U. (1992)
> *Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car
> keys to teenage boys. --P.J. O'Rourke, Civil Libertarian
> *Government is the great fiction, through which everybody endeavors
> to live at the expense of everybody else. --Frederic Bastiat, French
> Economist (1801-1850)
> *Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short
> phrases If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if
> it
> stops moving, subsidize it. -- Ronald Reagan (1986)
> *I don't make jokes. I just watch the government and report the
> facts. --Will Rogers
> *If you think health care is expensive now, wait until you see what it
> costs when it's free. --P.J. O'Rourke
> *If you want government to intervene domestically, you're a liberal.
> If you want government to intervene overseas, you're a conservative.
> If you
> want government to intervene everywhere, you're a moderate. If you
> don't
> want government to intervene anywhere, you're an extremist.
> --Joseph Sobran, Editor of the National Review at one time (1995)
> *In general, the art of government consists in taking as much money as
> possible from one party of the citizens to give to the other.
> --Voltaire (1764)
> *Just because you do not take an interest in politics doesn't mean
> politics won't take an interest in you. --Pericles (430 B.C.)
> *No man's life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature
> is in session. --Mark Twain (1866)
> *Talk is cheap-except when Congress does it. (Unknown)
> *The government is like a baby's alimentary canal, with a happy
> appetite at one end and no responsibility at the other.
> --Ronald Reagan
> "The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of the
> blessings. The inherent blessing of socialism is the equal sharing of
> misery. --Winston Churchill
> *The only difference between a tax man and a taxidermist is that the
> taxidermist leaves the skin. --Mark Twain
> *The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly is to
> fill the world with fools. --Herbert Spencer, English Philosopher
> 1820-1903)
> *There is no distinctly native American criminal class save Congress.
> --Mark Twain
> *There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn
> well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to
> take
> the consequences. --P.J. O'Rourke (1993)
> *What this country needs are more unemployed politicians.
> -- Edward Langley, Artist 1928-1995
> When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first
> things to be bought and sold are legislators. --P.J. O'Rourke



jewn McCain

ASSASSIN of JFK, Patton, many other Whites

killed 264 MILLION Christians in WWII

killed 64 million Christians in Russia

holocaust denier extraordinaire--denying the Armenian holocaust

millions dead in the Middle East

tens of millions of dead Christians

LOST $1.2 TRILLION in Pentagon
spearheaded torture & sodomy of all non-jews
millions dead in Iraq

42 dead, mass murderer Goldman LOVED by jews

serial killer of 13 Christians

the REAL terrorists--not a single one is an Arab

serial killers are all jews

framed Christians for anti-semitism, got caught
left 350 firemen behind to die in WTC

legally insane debarred lawyer CENSORED free speech

mother of all fnazis, certified mentally ill

10,000 Whites DEAD from one jew LIE

moser HATED by jews: he followed the law Jesus--from a "news" person!!

1000 fold the child of perdition


Hit Counter


Modified Saturday, March 11, 2017

Copyright @ 2007 by Fathers' Manifesto & Christian Party