DISGRACEFUL: Ghana’s Census Figures Cannot Be Accessed

Ghana's Finance Minister and Economic Planner Seth Tekper

By Ekow Mensah.

Do you doubt the claim in this headline?

If you do then please join us in this verification exercise. You may have to be warned however that there are no pink sheets involved in this.

First step:  Just goggle Ghana Statistical Services and it takes you straight to

statsghana.gov.gh.

Please go to the home page and click on census and surveys as a sub link.

This takes you to another page headed 2010 Population And Housing census. 

If you click on this what pops up is this message “This domain has expired. If you owned this domain contact your domain registration service provider for further assistance. If you need help identifying your provider visit http// tucows domain.com”.

All of this simply means that you cannot access information on Ghana’s population census on the net because the relevant website of the Statistical Service is no longer being maintained.

The statistical Service ought to be ashamed of itself.

By its neglect many Ghanaians who need the statistics for academic work and planning have been denied access.

What would it take the Ghana Statistical Service to maintain its website? This is truly disgraceful.

Who will rectify this situation and when?

Editorial                                                        

There are confusing signals from the centre of government.

Whiles some leading members of Government insist that the state has responsibilities which dictate that it should participate vigorously in the development of the national economy others are singing the discredited  mantra of the private sector being the engine of growth.

Some government officials have even taken worse positions. They have said that government has no business protecting local enterprises from unfair competition from foreign companies.

We dare ask, what is the Government’s policy?

The Insight believes that services like health and education ought to be seen as social services which should not be subjected to commercialisation. 

The state has a responsibility to find the necessary resources to fight poverty and facilitate the realisation of the aspirations of the people of Ghana.

Some of the resources needed for this purpose can be generated through the participation of the state in running of viable enterprises.

Those who say that the private sector is the engine of growth certainly emphasis profit over social welfare.

The state has a responsibility to solve the problems of the masses and this is completely different from the effort of private capital to maximise profits.

Money Laundering and the Drug Trade
 

By Dylan Murphy

Mexico is in the grip of a murderous drug war that has killed over 150,000 people since 2006. It is one of the most violent countries on earth. This drug war is a product of the transnational drug trade which is worth up to $400 billion a year and accounts for about 8% of all international trade.

The American government maintains that there is no alternative but to vigorously prosecute their zero tolerance policy of arresting drug users and their dealers. This has led to the incarceration of over 500,000 Americans. Meanwhile the flood of illegal drugs into America continues unabated.

One thing the American government has not done is to prosecute the largest banks in the world for supporting the drug cartels by washing billions of dollars of their blood stained money. As Narco sphere journalist Bill Conroy has observed banks are where the money is in the global drug war.

HSBC, Western Union, Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase&Co, Citigroup, Wachovia amongst many others have allegedly failed to comply with American anti-money laundering (AML) laws.

The Mexican drug cartels have caught the headlines again and again due to their murderous activities. The war between the different drug cartels and the war between the cartels and government security forces has spilled the blood of tens of thousands of innocent people. The drug cartels would find it much harder to profit from their murderous activity if they didn’t have too big to fail banks willing to wash their dirty money.

In March 2010 Wachovia cut a deal with the US government which involved the bank being given fines of $160 million under a deferred prosecution agreement. This was due to Wachovia’s heavy involvement in money laundering moving up to $378.4 billion over several years. Not one banker was prosecuted for illegal involvement in the drugs trade. Meanwhile small time drug dealers and users go to prison.

If any member of the public is caught in possession of a few grammes of coke or heroin you can bet your bottom dollar they will be going down to serve some hard time. However, if you are a bankster caught laundering billions of dollars for some of the most murderous people on the planet you get off with a slap on the wrist in the form of some puny fine and a deferred prosecution deal.

Charles A. Intriago, president of the Miami-based Association of Certified Financial Crime Specialists has observed, If you’re an individual, and get caught, you get hammered.

But if you’re a big bank, and you’re caught moving money for a terrorist or drug dealer, you don’t have to worry. You just fork over a monetary penalty, and then raise your fees to make up for it.

Until we see bankers walking off in handcuffs to face charges in these cases, nothing is going to change, Intriago adds. These monetary penalties are just a cost of doing business to them, like paying for a new corporate jet.

This failure on the behalf of the US government to really crack down on the finances of the drug cartels extends to British banks as well. In July 2012 the US Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs issued a 339 page report detailing an amazing catalogue of criminal behaviour by London based HSBC. This includes washing over $881 for the Mexican Sinaloa Cartel and for the Norte del Valle Cartel in Colombia. Besides this, HSBC affiliated banks such as HBUS repeatedly broke American AML laws by their long standing and severe AML deficiencies which allowed Saudi banks such as Al Rajhi to finance terrorist groups that included Al-Qaeda. HBUS the American affiliate of HSBC supplied Al Rajhi bank with nearly $1 billion in US dollars.

Jack Blum an attorney and former Senate investigator has commented, They violated every goddamn law in the book. They took every imaginable form of illegal and illicit business.

HSBC affiliate HBUS was repeatedly instructed to improve its anti-money laundering program. In 2003 the Federal Reserve Bank of New York took enforcement action that called upon HBUS to improve its anti-money laundering program. In September 2010 the Office of Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) sent a, blistering supervisory letter to HBUS listing numerous AML problems at the bank.

In October 2010 this was followed up with the OCC issuing a cease and desist order requiring HBUS to improve its AML program a second time. Senator Carl Levin chairman of the Senate investigation into HSBC has commented that , HSBC’s Chief Compliance Officer and other senior executives in London knew what was going on, but allowed the deceptive conduct to continue.

Let us look at just a couple of the devastating findings in the Senate report. The main focus of the report is the multiple failures of HSBC to comply with AML laws and regulations:

The identified problems included a once massive backlog of over 17,000 alerts identifying possible suspicious activity that had yet to be reviewed; ineffective methods for identifying suspicious activity; a failure to file timely Suspicious Activity Reports with U.S. law enforcement; a 3-year failure by HBUS [a HSBC affiliate] , from mid-2006 to mid-2009, to conduct any AML monitoring of $15 billion in bulk cash transactions a failure to monitor $60 trillion in annual wire transfer activity by customers inadequate and unqualified AML staffing; inadequate AML resources; and AML leadership problems. Since many of these criticisms targeted severe, widespread, and long standing AML deficiencies.

The report catalogues in great detail the failings of HSBC affiliates HBUS in America and HMEX in Mexico: from 2007 through 2008, HBMX was the single largest exporter of U.S. dollars to HBUS, shipping $7 billion in cash to HBUS over two years, outstripping larger Mexican banks and other HSBC affiliates. 

Mexican and U.S. authorities expressed repeated concern that HBMX’s bulk cash shipments could reach that volume only if they included illegal drug proceeds. The concern was that drug traffickers unable to deposit large amounts of cash in U.S. banks due to AML controls were transporting U.S. dollars to Mexico, arranging for bulk deposits there, and then using Mexican financial institutions to insert the cash back into the U.S. financial system.  High profile clients involved in drug trafficking; millions of dollars in suspicious bulk travelers cheque transactions; inadequate staffing and resources; and a huge backlog of accounts marked for closure due to suspicious activity, but whose closures were delayed.

In the Senate hearing on 17 July 2012 Carl Levin Chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs explained how HMEX helped the Mexican drug cartels:

Because our tough AML laws in the United States have made it hard for drug cartels to find a U.S. bank willing to accept huge unexplained deposits of cash, they now smuggle U.S. dollars across the border into Mexico and look for a Mexican bank or casa de cambio willing to take the cash. Some of those casas de cambios had accounts at HBMX. HBMX, in turn, took all the physical dollars it got and transported them by armored car or aircraft back across the border to HBUS for deposit into its U.S. banknotes account, completing the laundering cycle.

Senator Levin went on to note how:

Over two years, from 2007 to 2008, HBMX shipped $7 billion in physical U.S. dollars to HBUS. That was more than any other Mexican bank, even one twice HBMX’s size. When law enforcement and bank regulators in Mexico and the United States got wind of the banknotes transactions, they warned HBMX and HBUS that such large dollar volumes were red flags for drug proceeds moving through the HSBC network.

In December 2012 the Department of Justice cut a deal with HSBC which imposed a record $1.9 billion dollar fine. It may sound a lot to ordinary folks but it is a tiny fraction of its annual profits which in 2011 totalled $22 billion. Assistant Attorney General Lanny Bauer announced the settlement at a press conference on 11 December 2012. His comments reveal why the US government decided to go soft on such criminal behaviour and show quite clearly how there is one law for the richest 1% and one law for the rest of us. Lenny Bauer said:

Had the U.S. authorities decided to press criminal charges, HSBC would almost certainly have lost its banking license in the U.S., the future of the institution would have been under threat and the entire banking system would have been destabilized.

Think about that statement for a moment. A bank that has quite clearly been caught out helping murderous drug criminals, terrorist groups, third world dictatorships and all sorts of criminal characters is to be let off with a slap on the wrist. No criminal prosecutions or even a mention of criminal behaviour due to the fears that to do so would put the world economy in jeopardy. So there you have it. Banksters who engage in such behaviour that is regarded as criminal by the vast majority of people on the planet are not only too big to fail they are also too big to jail.

After the Department of Justice announcement of the deferred prosecution HSBC Chief Executive Stuart Gulliver said, we accept responsibility for our past mistakes. We have said we are profoundly sorry for them, and we do so again.

Such statements will provide little solace to the families of the 150,000 people estimated by US Secretary of Defence Leon Panetta to have been killed in Mexico’s drug war. Nor will it help the hundreds of thousands of Mexican citizens who have been forced to flee their homes and escape the violence by going to the United Sates or moving to other parts of Mexico.

Senator Elizabeth Warren appearing at a meeting of the Senate Banking Committee in February expressed frustration with officials from the US Treasury Department and US Federal Reserve over the issue of why criminal charges were not pressed on HSBC or any of its officials. The officials were evasive when she tried to draw them on the issue of what it takes for a bank to have its licence withdrawn:

HSBC paid a fine, but no one individual went to trial, no individual was banned from banking, and there was no hearing to consider shutting down HSBC’s activities here in the United States. So, what I’d like is, you’re the experts on money laundering. I’d like an opinion: What does it take how many billions do you have to launder for drug lords and how many economic sanctions do you have to violate before someone will consider shutting down a financial institution like this?

Senator Warren finished the session by commenting on the glaring double standards within the US justice system:

You know, if you’re caught with an ounce of cocaine, the chances are good you’re going to go to jail. If it happens repeatedly, you may go to jail for the rest of your life. But evidently, if you launder nearly a billion dollars for drug cartels and violate our international sanctions, your company pays a fine and you go home and sleep in your own bed at night, every single individual associated with this. I think that’s fundamentally wrong.

On 4 March 2013 HSBC announced profits of $20.6 billion in 2012 while it paid out a $3 million bonus to its CEO. This outrageous state of affairs beggars belief after HSBC has been clearly caught out engaging in activity on behalf of murderous drug lords, terrorist financing banks and brutal third world dictatorships. Where is the British Government’s condemnation of HSBC? You may be waiting a long time for that considering the fact that Chancellor George Osborne and his fellow ministers are intimately connected to the British banking elite.

Long time observer of the Mexican drug war Bill Conroy comments that the deal cut with HSBC by the Department of Justice, should illuminate for all the great pretense of the drug war no matter how hard US prosecutors, via the mainstream media, attempt to convince us otherwise. And it should lead us to conclude, if we are honest with ourselves, that the so-called drug war is little more than one immense drug deal.

Unmanned aircraft: No thanks

Planes like this will soon be automated?

By Timothy Bancroft-Hinchey

The latest gossip has it that pilotless aircraft are soon to take to the skies, ferrying passengers from one part of the globe to another in an entirely automated process. Until what point does robotics have a use and at which point does the human being become redundant?

"Bugsplat!" shout the controllers of NATO unmanned aircraft, or Unmanned Aerial Vehicle, UAV, when from thousands of miles away they target someone on the ground somewhere hot and far-off. BANG! goes the drone. "BUGSPLAAAATT!" shouts the demented murderer from his computer console as he pumps the air with his arm and gets pats on the back from his fellows in crime in the control room.

This is (not) a nice example of where the human being controls the robot. But what about when human beings sit inside the robot, hundreds of them, and instead of hearing the familiar message from the flight deck about 30,000 feet and the outside temperature being minus whatever and the local time and temperature, they know that nobody is sitting on the flight deck?

Under normal circumstances, there would be a captain sitting on the left and a first officer sitting on the right, either them being the Pilot In Command (PIC), usually one on the outward leg and the other on the second leg.

In an emergency, the captain (usually the one with more experience in that type of aircraft) might assume control while the First Officer assumes control of communications and indeed in some airports, only captains have permission to perform a landing. The cockpit resource management (CRM), namely the communication between the two pilots as they pool experience to stabilise the aircraft in abnormal situations, is the main asset on board which will guarantee that a tricky situation does not become a critical one as they go through their checklist of operations to perform.

While the major part of the flight is automated these days, the pilots are there to check that systems are functioning and to check if there are anomalies. Just occasionally, these appear. For example, what happened to the pitot tubes on the Air France Flight 447 from Rio de Janeiro to Paris in May 2009? Why didn't the automated Airbus system kick in to stabilise the aircraft, and why did it stall?

And what happens when there is a near collision near the ground and the TCAS (Traffic Collision Avoidance System) sends one aircraft down and the other one up, but the lower aircraft is too low and activates the alarm "Terrain, terrain. Pull up, pull up"?

What happens when there are conflicting head winds, tail winds and crosswinds with gusts greater than that which the aircraft is designed to withstand and windshear as the aircraft makes its final approach? Is the automated system going to simply activate the standard routine or do something "iffy" which in the event is the only way to put the equipment on the floor?

While Airbus is the plane for engineers and Boeing the aircraft for pilots, in both cases, give me a pilot, please.

Understanding Obama and other people who kill

US President Barack Hussein Obama

By Robert J. Burrowes

When Barack Obama orders the US military to attack people in another country, whether in a war or by using an illegal drone strike, he knows that people, including innocent men, women and children (called 'collateral damage'), will be killed. How can he do this? When Benjamin Netanyahu orders Israeli military attacks on unarmed Palestinians, he knows that innocent men, women and children will be killed. How can he do this? When corporate executives, such as Hugh Grant (chief of Monsanto) and Gregory R. Page (boss of Cargill), make decisions that deprive people - including those in Africa, Asia and Central/South America - of the means of economic survival, they know that people will be exploited and killed. How can they do this?

It takes someone with a particular psychological profile to kill people. Most of us cannot do it even when ordered to do so. Studies have shown that even in combat situations under enemy fire many soldiers either do not shoot or 'aim to miss'.

People who deliberately kill have suffered an extraordinary level of terror and violence during their own childhood and this leaves them particularly badly emotionally damaged. This might be concealed behind a good-looking face and/or a superficially pleasant personality. So what is the psychological profile of a killer, whether political leader, corporate executive, terrorist or someone who commits murder on our streets? Careful scrutiny and analysis reveals that these individuals share at least 23 feelings/attributes most of which are invisible to casual observation. See 'Why Violence?' http://tinyurl.com/whyviolence I will identify just twelve here.

Fundamentally, perpetrators of violence are terrified and they are particularly terrified of those individuals who perpetrated violence against them when they were a child although this terror remains unconscious to them. Second, this terror is so extreme that archetype perpetrators are too terrified to consciously identify to themselves their own perpetrator (one or both parents and/or other significant adults who are supposed to love them) and to say that it is this individual or individuals who are violent and wrong.

Third, because they are terrified, they are unable to defend themselves against the original perpetrator(s) but also, as a result, they are unable to defend themselves against other perpetrators who attack them later in life. This lack of capacity to defend themselves leads to the fourth and fifth attributes  - a deep sense of powerlessness and a deep sense of self-hatred and this latter attribute, in turn, negates any sense of personal self-worth, leaving them with an extremely negative conception of themselves as 'bad', the sixth attribute. However, and this is vitally important, it is too terrifying and painful for the perpetrator to be consciously aware of any of these feelings/attributes: they remain deeply embedded within their unconscious and they are not necessarily apparent to others.

Seventh, the extreme social terrorisation experience to which archetype perpetrators of violence have been subjected means that the feelings of love, compassion, empathy and sympathy, as well as the mental function of conscience, are prevented from developing. This is because the human potential to have a conscience and to have the feelings of love, compassion, empathy and sympathy depend on exposure to these and cultivation of them during childhood: they cannot be fully developed later. Devoid of conscience and these feelings, perpetrators can inflict violence on others without experiencing the feedback that conscience, love, compassion, empathy and sympathy would provide.

Eighth, archetype perpetrators of violence have a delusional belief in the effectiveness and morality of violence; they have no capacity to perceive its dysfunctionality and immorality. Ninth, because they are terrified of identifying that they are the victim of the violence of their own parents (and/or other significant adults from their childhood) and that this violence terrified them, archetype perpetrators unconsciously delude themselves about the identity of their own perpetrator. They will unconsciously identify their 'perpetrator' as one or more individuals of whom they are not actually afraid from an existing 'legitimised victim' group because this or these individuals are either clearly not threatening (to them) and/or are vulnerable in some way. This identification might be limited to their own children and/or be a larger social group such as people who are black, Islamic or Palestinian, for example. It might also include the impoverished masses of people in Africa, Asia and Central/South America.

Tenth, archetype perpetrators unconsciously project their self-hatred, one outcome of their own victimhood, as hatred for their victim. This enables them to both self-justify their behaviour and to obscure from themselves their true but unconscious motivation: to remain unaware of their own terror, defencelessness, powerlessness, self-hatred, self-worthlessness, and all of the other unpleasant feelings that make them become perpetrators of violence. 

Eleventh, archetype perpetrators have an intense fear of knowing the truth: it is safer to believe that their carefully but unconsciously chosen victim, who is always much less powerful than the perpetrator, is 'the problem' (and thus gain the desired, but delusionary, sense of 'having control'). The truth would require them to stand up to the actual perpetrator and, of course, this is utterly terrifying.

Twelfth, archetype perpetrators of violence lack the courage to heal; that is, they delude themselves that their own fear and terror are not responsible for their violence because they are too terrified to take responsibility for feeling this fear and terror as the central component of any strategy for dealing truthfully and powerfully with their violence.

Perpetrators of violence need our understanding and support: they are people who are badly emotionally damaged. But their violence needs to be nonviolently resisted as well. If not, perpetrators in powerful positions will drive us to extinction as they endlessly seek delusional relief from their own fear, self-hatred and powerlessness by inflicting violence on the rest of us.

In contrast to perpetrators, why do some people resist violence? Why, for example, do professors like Noam Chomsky and Chandra Muzaffar, and individuals such as Bradley Manning, resist violence? Why do nonviolent activists such as Mairead Maguire, Kathy Kelly and Dr Teck Young Wee (Hakim) resist violence?

They do so because they feel courageous and powerful; they have a deep sense of Self-worth and can ascribe worth to others; they have well-developed feelings of compassion, empathy and sympathy; they have a clear conscience; they abhor violence and injustice, as any emotionally undamaged individual must do, and they know that violence cannot achieve any desirable social outcome; because of their courage and power to act, they have no self-hatred to project; they love the truth and do what they can to expose it, even at risk to themselves; and, perhaps most importantly of all, they are self-loving which means that they can love others too. Self-love is true love: the individual that does not truly love itself cannot love another. 

If you like, you can ask yourself this: which of these two psychological profiles most accurately fits you? If you see yourself with something like the latter profile, you might wish to consider signing online 'The People's Charter to Create a Nonviolent World' http://thepeoplesnonviolencecharter.wordpress.com

Robert has a lifetime comitment to understanding and ending human violence. He has done extensive research since 1996 in an effort to understand why human beings are violent and has been a non-violent activist since 1981. 

He is the author of 'The Strategy of Nonviolent Defense: A Gandhian Approach', State University of New York Press, 1996. His email address is flametree@riseup.net and his website is at http://robertjburrowes.wordpress.com

Combating terrorism or wasting billions?

Hussein Obama in the company of security chiefs

 By Dr. Dylan Murphy

Following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 Congress passed legislation that created the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Its mission was simple: to protect the United States from any future terrorist attacks. 

It now employs over 240,000 people to carry out five core security missions. Number one is to prevent terrorism, enhance security and ''defend the nation''. This is closely followed by managing US borders and administering immigration law to safeguarding cyber space and ensuring resilience to natural disasters. The Department of Homeland Security has become the third largest Federal department bringing together 22 different Federal agencies and has a huge billion-dollar budget. 

Recent events have cast shadows over the Department of Homeland Security and suggest that the third largest Federal department is not fit for purpose. The recent Boston bombings together with a Senate report into the way DHS has wasted USD 35 billion over the last decade suggest that it has failed miserably in its prime mission of fighting terrorism and ''defending the nation''. Homeland Security documents recently released under freedom of information requests reveal how it works together with the FBI to undermine and spy upon peaceful Occupy protests. 

Any attempts by ordinary people to fight back against corporate elite who rapaciously exploit society while millions more fall into poverty are being resisted by the various agencies of the state whose alleged purpose is to protect and serve the public. The Department of Homeland Security is using huge sums of public money to militarize US society on behalf of corporate elite that fear protests by millions of angry, impoverished Americans. 

In December 2012, a damning report on DHS was issued by Senator Tom Coburn in “Safety at Any Price: Assessing the Impact of Homeland Security Spending in US Cities.” Dr. Coburn conducted a yearlong investigation into how the DHS spends its billion dollar budget. It is a devastating indictment of the organization's leadership. 

The 55-page report issued by Senator Coburn goes into forensic detail of how the DHS has misspent over USD 35 billion of taxpayers’ money over the last ten years. His report pulls no punches. In his introduction, Senator Coburn informs the taxpayer:

''This report, Safety at Any Price, exposes misguided and wasteful spending in one of the largest terror-prevention grant programs at the Department of Homeland Security - the Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI). Significant evidence suggests that the program is struggling to demonstrate how it is making US cities less vulnerable to attack and more prepared if one were to occur....'' 

Audits carried out by the DHS Inspector General reveal ''serious shortcomings'' about the way DHS grants have been spent. The report questions how many of the acquisitions made by towns and cities have contributed in any way to combating the threat of terrorism. The spending spree has led many cities to purchase military assets often used in warzones such as unmanned aerial drones and armored cars. When officials in Carlsbad, California proposed buying a BearCat armored car, one resident observed: 

“What we're really talking about here is a tank, and if we’re at the point where every small community needs a tank for protection, we’re in a lot more trouble as a state than I thought.'' 

Senator Coburn's report goes on to question whether the UASI program has made any difference to making America any safer from terrorist attacks. Of course, officials from the DHS maintain that their funding has been well spent and that it has improved America's security. Senator Coburn's report makes the critical observation that:

''Little concrete evidence exists to support such claims. ...Ten years and billions of dollars since the September 11th attacks, many are asking is the nation safer and better prepared and if not, how much more money is needed to be adequately prepared. Instinctively, FEMA and its advocates declare that the nation is safer because of all the spending. The primary premise of providing grant dollars is to invest in security measures that reduce risk and stem the resulting losses from a potential attack. Yet, FEMA cannot demonstrate how UASI dollars (or for that matter, any other homeland security grant dollars) have helped to buy down risk and enhance the nation’s ability to prevent, respond to, or recover from man-made attacks or natural disasters.'' 

Remember, this prescient comment was made way back in December long before the Boston bombings. Incredibly, Homeland Security is asking for increased funding to the tune of USD 1.5 billion! Senator Coburn's report is a searing indictment of way in which billions of dollars of tax payer's money has been misspent. At a time of economic crisis which has driven million of Americans into poverty and left millions homeless, the public should demand that DHS officials be held accountable for the wasteful use of tax payer's money. 

Meanwhile, this gigantic white elephant has totally failed to protect the public from terrorist attacks yet it continues to whip up public fear about future terror attacks. All of this is of course part of the ruling elite's plan to keep people scared and living in fear in an effort to try and stop workers from fighting back to defend their jobs, homes, the environment and public services.

US dictatorship and its free fall

(L-R) Hussein Obama, George W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George Bush& Jimmy Carter

By Gordon Duff

In 2000, a criminal conspiracy overthrew the government of the United States through violence, threats of violence and massive fraud.

In light of what many believe to be the upcoming collapse, world war, economic meltdown, climate sabotage, global pandemics and radiation threats, key evidence has been brought forward. 

The oft spoken of New World Order is now much more than conspiracy or myth. The United States is now and has been little more than a colony, to be bled dry.

It is now clearly recognized that this organization stands ready to destroy the last vestiges of human civilization in service of some indiscernible goal. Ascribing the term “reptilian” to these machinations is an insult to a viper. 

Some Have Had “Enough”

In recognition of the current state of emergency, leaders of America’s military and intelligence community loyal to constitutional authority have taken exception with the continuity of governmental and command authority.

This is not a specific challenge to the Obama presidency but rather a clear recognition of the seizure of political authority in the US (and most other western nations) has ended all representative government. 

By this standard, all governmental actions of the United States since that time will be “null and void.” However, the dead will still be dead, the maimed and despondent, countless in number, may look for what solace they can.

The old dialectic, “republic or democracy” is passé, much of the world exists under the slavery of a New World Order or is awaiting doom. Not all will pass into the darkness as sheep, as happened in America and her “allies.” 

“The People against the New World Order”

Legally, George W. Bush was never the President of the United States, according to legal opinions now under broad acceptance with America’s top commanders.

Authorities now cite the election of former Vice President Al Gore. The same authorities demand both the restoration of the Gore presidency and the impeachment of Gore for failure to assume office though legally elected.

Records of Supreme Court deliberations during their bizarre move against the constitution in 2000 show that they were aware, not just of broad electronic vote rigging but that five court members were fully involved in a plot against the United States, knowingly complicit in a coup that involved broad threats of violence, blackmail and bribery on a massive scale.

New information on the 2000 election, information now in the hands of top military officials in the US, conclusively proves that America’s government is in “free fall.”

The evidence, leaked by top Pentagon commanders, tells a story now very easy to believe, a story of hate, of greed and, especially of brutal totalitarian intent. 

Background

A group closely aligned with a “not so hidden” world government made up of financial criminals, oil and defense corporations, groups like the Council on Foreign Relations, Trilateral Commission and Bilderbergers and extremist groups that penetrated all western military and intelligence commands exercised a violent overthrow of the government of the United States. 

The operational planning group was the Project for a New American Century (PNAC), tasked with rigging the 2000 election, organizing the corporate media behind the coup.

As some may remember, the Supreme Court appointed George W. Bush as president, on a 5/4 vote on pure party lines. Retired Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, in recent public revelations has “strongly hinted” at the court’s legal misconduct in 2000. 

Less publicly, secret deliberations, now in the hands of key leaders, penetrate the secrecy behind this critical time. The Supreme Court, led by a five-member cabal at the heart of the coup, knowingly abrogated state’s rights, separation of powers and equal protection provisions of the constitution to empower a criminal conspiracy intent on unleashing an American dictatorship on the world as a “super-cop.” 

As early as 1999, PNAC had announced the need for “a new Pearl Harbor” to condition the American people to accept a consolidation of totalitarian authority and a permanent state of warfare. 

The subsequent planning and execution of 9/11 was only one aspect of the broader plan; seizing the government, 9/11, suspending civil rights, rigging congressional districts, instill “true believers” in military and government and setting up a multi-national world government to manage a quasi-global slave state. 

Experts in nearly every field all agree on one thing, collapse is imminent. 

Correcting Course

Restoration of constitutional authority, the basis of all “oaths of allegiance” for those serving with the authority of “the republic” requires the restoration of said republic and its last elected president. Thus, Albert Gore is the last legally elected president and must, by law, fulfill his term of office. 

Two branches of government are, technically, in rebellion against the United States.

The Supreme Court of the United States has strayed, an understatement of Olympic proportions. 

Evidence of a conspiracy against the court to overthrow the government exists. Dissenting members of the court were subject to threats of violence against their persons and families as was President Gore. 

This has been confirmed. 

Subsequent acts of the court, the utter and absolute failure to uphold constitutional guarantees time and time again has been a travesty. 

It has been treasonous, from Citizen’s United to the congressional redistricting which denied “equal protection and representation” to over 100 million Americans.

When the Supreme Court allowed suspension of habeas corpus, all semblance of representative government ended. 

When they allowed murder, kidnapping and torture, ending all “due process,” they became war criminals. 

The “Horrible House”

The US House of Representatives is now a tyranny controlled entirely by minority party under the control of criminal elements. Nearly half the members of the “majority party” would lose their seats but for bizarre gerrymandered districts, some geographies of phantasmagorical mien. 

The 2012 Mob Ploy

During the 2012 election, drug cartel kingpin Mitt Romney received over $1 billion in “contributions,” much from narcotics, human trafficking and gambling backers.

Gambling boss, Sheldon Adelson spent $100 million, a number personal cited by President Obama. 

Prior to the election, documents were released by sources within the FBI and Mexican intelligence agencies revealing that Mitt Romney, working closely with the Castro government and former members of Soviet intelligence services, managed hundreds of secret “slush fund” offshore accounts for key government and military leaders. 

These accounts were funded through the generous contributions of the Mexican drug cartels and the CIA’s burgeoning narcotics operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. 

This relationship, which some believed began with Carlos Salinas and Mitt Romney at Harvard, actually began generations before. The Bush/Romney financial partnership, built, initially on profits from Nazi war industries, now dwarfs even the Rothschild cartel for “funds under management.” 

DHS, Neither “Home” Nor “Secure”

The Department of Homeland Security is an Israeli controlled organization tasked by the New World Order to infect every aspect of American society in lieu of a declaration of full martial law. 

The Wanta, Reagan, Mitterand Protocols

As things are now, only the “Wanta trillions” can save the United States from the grip of the New World “Dis-Order.” 

Keeping America ignorant of the truth about the “protocols” is vital to those who continue to bleed America dry. 

At one time, speaking of a “trillion dollars” was considered absurd. In recent years, despite obfuscation, psychological operations, disinformation, propaganda and simply corrupt news “Imagineering,” the public has learned that banks created “funny money,” amounting to what is now estimated to be $5 quadrillion dollars. 

That would be 5 million billion dollars or 5,000 trillion dollars. 

Don’t worry, none of it is real. We call this money “derivatives.” $10 trillion of the US national debt is money “invented” to keep foreign banks alive that got confused, they were no longer able to tell their real from their phony cash. 

They were considered “too big to fail.” 

The largest “poke” of real cash in the world is money accumulated by Ameritrust Corporation, solely controlled by Lee Wanta, former Reagan White House Intelligence Chief.

A trading platform for world currencies, including and especially the Soviet ruble, eventually yielded a very real $27 trillion, of which nearly one third belonged to Wanta personally.

The rest was to be used to finance the future of the United States as a debt free nation in perpetuity. That wouldn’t be allowed! 

The Wanta cash is real. Most of the $27 trillion has long been distributed to Bush cronies, the international banking cartel that overthrew the US government and put “little Bush” in the oval office, much to the dismay of the human race. 

Wanta sat in a Swiss dungeon as the Bush cartel plundered the birthright of the American people. 

However, well over $7 trillion has been located and legally assigned for payment to Lee Wanta. Al Gore knows. The Pentagon knows.

The Bush family knows. 

Federal courts have ordered the Department of Treasury and the Federal Reserve to remit the funds, now deposited with the International Monetary Fund. 

Military leaders in the United States are hesitant to continue “sitting on their hands” with Wanta’s offer on the table, a massive pay-down of the national debt and broad private financing of massive public works projects in the United States. 

The Ticking Clock

There is a war within our own government and military. The forces that would ask President Obama to step down from office voluntarily on constitutional grounds are, oddly enough, closely aligned with Secretary of Defense Hagel and Chairman of the JCOS, General Martin Dempsey. 

They are, in fact, Obama supporters. 

Against them are the very real forces of darkness, that “vast conspiracy” spoken of so many years ago by First Lady Hillary Clinton. 

The “grand conspiracy,” the New World Order, is playing a new game, inventing wild conspiracies over Benghazi, a wild narrative of conjecture and fabrication intended to ensnare those who are stupid enough to accept “facts” from corporate controlled media.

While this dance continues, America is either being dragged into world war over Syria or, through failure to show leadership, will be supplanted throughout the Middle East and Central Asia by Russia and China. 

America is, it seems, addicted to its own lies.

While the clock is ticking, maybe ticking away America’s final hours, will oaths be kept, will courage take hold, will bold and daring action confront the monster that has been feeding off so many of us for so long?