License To Kill U.S.A. Government Authorizes Killing US Citizens Any Time It Wants

New Proof That Police Use Civil Forfeiture To Take From Those Who Can’t Fight Back Nassir Geiger spoke with the wrong person at the wrong time and it cost him hundreds of dollars and his car. Nassir was a victim of Philadelphia’s predatory civil forfeiture scheme that operated from a shady “courtroom” at City Hall. For years, police and prosecutors seized cash, cars and even homes and then took the property for themselves. Worse still, new data show that the police preyed on people in minority and low-income areas—in other words, people who could least afford to fight back. Undercover Police abuse of civil asset forfeiture laws has shaken our nation’s conscience. Civil forfeiture allows police to seize — and then keep or sell — any property they allege is involved in a crime. Owners need not ever be arrested or convicted of a crime for their cash, cars, or even real estate to be taken away permanently by the government. Also A officer told new world order and said if its late at night and very dark area. i pull over a van or car over. yes one time with about $40.000 in cash and some drugs too. i will ask man or woman to step out of car etc. i shot them 2 times each in head and take the money and leave area. i can make up to a millions dollars a years with money and drugs sales. very sad but true! I asked how it worked.... He said... I look for out of town lic. plate or rental cars mostly. this officer is missing now or gone out of the area. as of 2018 time and date. Every day, on average, 316 people in America are shot in murders, assaults, suicides and suicide attempts, unintentional shootings, and police intervention. Every day, 106 people die from gun violence. 39 are murdered - 64 kill themselves - 1 is killed unintentionally - 1 dies but the intent is unknown - 115,551 people in America are shot in murders, assaults, suicides & suicide attempts, unintentional shootings, or by police intervention. In the United States, law enforcement agencies have the power to seize the assets of those suspected of criminal activity. On its face, this seems somewhat reasonable. However, the threshold for suspicion of criminal involvement is perilously low and allows law enforcement agencies to abuse the power afforded through civil forfeiture. Many innocent citizens have had their property seized as a result, and the following instances of civil forfeiture abuse are particularly egregious. Nassir’s troubles began when he stopped to say hello to a friend at a McDonald’s in northeast Philadelphia. What Nassir didn’t know was that the friend had just been arrested for drug possession. A few minutes after ending the conversation and driving away, Nassir was pulled over. His car was searched and although no drugs or even drug residue were found, the officers seized the car and $580 cash because they found empty ziplock bags. The police gave Nassir a receipt for only $465 rather than the full amount taken and no receipt for his car. Nassir’s court-appointed attorney recommended that he take a plea deal that would result in a clear record if he paid a $200 fine and completed 20 hours of community service. This plea deal didn’t include the government taking his car or cash, so Nassir thought he would get both back. He was wrong. Instead, prosecutors filed a separate civil forfeiture action to take his property. They almost certainly would not have been able to claim his car or his cash through a criminal trial since the supposed offense carried such a light punishment. But in civil forfeiture, the property, and not the person, is on trial. Civil forfeiture is a process already prone to abuse, but in Philadelphia property owners were at an even greater disadvantage than typical. Property owners were summoned to Courtroom 478 at City Hall, but there was no judge in the room. The show was run by prosecutors, the same people who filed the forfeiture actions and who stood to benefit financially from successful forfeitures. When Nassir appeared in Courtroom 478, he was told to fill out paperwork, which he had to complete without the benefit of a court-appointed attorney. He was told to come back in another six weeks for another hearing. At that second hearing, prosecutors told Nassir he could get his car back only if he paid the $1,800 in storage fees that had been piling up. Without his car, Nassir’s 10-minute car commute turned into a 45-minute ordeal requiring two buses. He eventually bought another car, which required a new loan and cost him more to insure because it was financed. Philadelphia started to reform its abusive forfeiture system only after Nassir and other city residents filed a class action lawsuit with the Institute for Justice. The bad press from the suit (which included a segment on Last Week Tonight with John Oliver) persuaded the city to negotiate a settlement. The settlement included both mandated reforms and a fund to compensate its victims. Because Philadelphia abused many people over many years, more than 30,000 people were eligible for compensation. This made it possible for the Institute for Justice to survey victims and release a report, “Frustrating, Corrupt, Unfair: Civil Forfeiture in the Words of Its Victims,” released just this week. The major findings confirm what has long been speculated about civil forfeiture’s victims. First, it is a process that disproportionately targets disadvantaged communities. Two-thirds of survey respondents were Black, 63% earned less than $50,000 annually and 18% were unemployed. And forfeitures clustered in predominantly minority and low-income areas, like where police seized Nassir’s car and cash. Similar to how Philadelphia went after Nassir for empty baggies, law enforcement typically wasn’t using civil forfeiture to fight serious crime. Only 1 in 4 survey respondents was ever convicted of a crime. And like Nassir, many of those who were convicted pleaded to low-level offenses that were eventually scrubbed from their record. Moreover, half of all reported seizures were worth less than $600. One respondent even said police seized his crutches. The report also found that fighting civil forfeiture, difficult for anyone, was even harder for the working poor. In Philadelphia, missing a single court date often meant losing your property forever. Yet prosecutors would frequently reschedule court dates with little or no notice, forcing people to go to court a half-dozen times or more to resolve their case. This chicanery put people with less flexible work schedules at a great disadvantage. Additionally, survey respondents with less education were less likely to get their property back. This report, for the first time, paints a picture of who suffers when the scales of justice are tipped in the direction of the government. The stories in the report reinforce why civil forfeiture needs to be eliminated. If the government is going to take someone’s property, it should charge them with a crime and take that property as part of a criminal trial in which it has proven the person guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Anything less violates the principles upon which the United States was built. A Chinese woman who had a bullet lodged in her head for 48 years without knowing about it has had it removed by doctors. The 62-year-old woman, identified in local media only by her surname, Zhao, had a bullet 2.5cm long and 0.5cm in diameter extracted from her head. She had gone to the doctors complaining about a chronic stuffy nose, headaches and swollen lymph nodes that had bothered her for 10 years, Want China Times reported. “I am happy that the bullet did not kill me, I am grateful to it for allowing me to live and have the opportunity of my life with my family,” said Zhao, from Liaoning province. The question of how she went 48 years without knowing about the bullet resulted in conflicting media reports. According to Want China Times, Zhao said she was hit on her right temple when she was 14 years old. At the time, she thought it was a stone. But the Shanghaiist reported the woman as saying she had been hit by a stray bullet as a girl, but only felt minor pain and decided she would live with it. The ACLU works in courts, legislatures, and communities to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties that the Constitution and the laws of the United States guarantee everyone in this country. Police abuse of civil asset forfeiture laws has shaken our nation’s conscience. Civil forfeiture allows police to seize — and then keep or sell — any property they allege is involved in a crime. Owners need not ever be arrested or convicted of a crime for their cash, cars, or even real estate to be taken away permanently by the government. Forfeiture was originally presented as a way to cripple large-scale criminal enterprises by diverting their resources. But today, aided by deeply flawed federal and state laws, many police departments use forfeiture to benefit their bottom lines, making seizures motivated by profit rather than crime-fighting. For people whose property has been seized through civil asset forfeiture, legally regaining such property is notoriously difficult and expensive, with costs sometimes exceeding the value of the property. With the total value of property seized increasing every year, calls for reform are growing louder, and CLRP is at the forefront of organizations seeking to rein in the practice. Civil asset forfeiture: I'm a grandmother, not a drug lord. Why can police take my property? It shouldn't take six years and the threat of legal action to be treated fairly. I hadn't been accused of any crime. I shouldn't have been punished. Six years ago, police showed up at my home at night in Massachusetts, demanded the keys to my car and threatened damage to it if I didn’t comply. They confiscated my car, but I’m not a criminal. In fact, I wasn’t even accused of a crime. So why have I been treated like one? Don’t I have any rights? Turns out I’m not alone. I’m one of countless Americans who have had their property taken away under civil asset forfeiture laws, which allow police to take property if they suspect it was used in a crime. It adds up. There are so many of us that billions of dollars of property are seized every year. Unlike so many other victims, I decided to fight the government to get my property back. My story began in March 2015 when I let my son, Trevice, borrow my car. Police in Berkshire County suspected that he was selling drugs, so they seized my car under the state’s civil asset forfeiture law, even though I had not been accused of any crime. But I had no idea that my son might have been involved in illegal activities when he was charged with a crime. Turns out, some people are above the law:Police act like laws don't apply to them because of 'qualified immunity.' They're right. At least 35 states have these kinds of laws on the books, allowing police to take, keep and profit from someone’s property without even charging them with a crime, much less convicting them of one. While civil forfeiture was originally designed to punish criminals like pirates and drug lords, it’s average Americans like me who are now frequently targeted. Police theft finances more police theft I was shocked when I learned what the government does with the property that is forfeited. Simply put, these laws are funding the police. Law enforcement agencies can keep the property, sell it and use 100% of the proceeds to pad their budgets. And there is no requirement that the value of the items seized be proportional to the crime allegedly committed. The amount of money captured is staggering. Since 2000, states and the federal government have collected at least $68.8 billion, according to an Institute for Justice report. Not surprisingly, the deck is stacked against innocent people like me. In many cases, it costs more to hire an attorney to fight the government than the forfeited property is worth. The Institute for Justice reports that “conservatively, hiring an attorney to fight a relatively simple state forfeiture case costs at least $3,000 — more than double the national median currency forfeiture.” Many Americans simply cannot afford a lawyer and can’t wade their way through the legal system and overcome the laws that make it too easy for the government to wrongfully take their property. It can truly be an overwhelming and frightening experience. That’s how I felt about my predicament. There are really no words for the stress caused by this forfeiture. But I knew I needed to fight back. Thankfully, with pro bono representation from the Goldwater Institute, I did just that. The government might have kept my property for good, but fortunately, shortly after I got legal help, Berkshire County told me last week that they would return my car to me. However, it shouldn’t have to take six years and the threat of legal action to be treated fairly. I was so fortunate to get that help — but what about all the other innocent Americans who can’t afford it? Getting my car back has a particularly personal significance: In December 2018, my son Trevice was tragically killed in an incident unrelated to the forfeiture. My car is one of the biggest items of value I had to my name, and so I had been hoping to pass it along to Trevice’s daughters. I am no drug kingpin, no crime lord. I’m an average American, fighting against a system profiting off Americans who haven’t run afoul of any law. States ought to turn their attention to doing away with this form of government theft, instead of turning a blind eye to the abuse of innocent people. Father And Son Subjected To ‘Profiling For Profit’ Stephen Skinner and Jonathon Brashear were passing through New Mexico on a road trip to Las Vegas, when they were pulled over for traveling 8 kilometers (5 mi) over the speed limit. The New Mexico state trooper who made the initial stop issued a written warning for the speed infraction and then asked for permission to search the vehicle, which was a rental car.A drug dog was called in, and the trooper dismantled parts of the vehicle during the course of the search but did not find any evidence of drugs. The trooper did note, however, the presence of nearly $17,000 in cash. The trooper detained Skinner and Brashear for two hours, referring to Skinner pejoratively by calling the 60-year-old African-American man “boy,” before telling him upon his release that “it wasn’t over yet.”Once the pair reached Albuquerque, they were pulled over again—this time for an improper lane change by the Albuquerque Police Department. This stop, however, was supported by the presence of an officer with the Department of Homeland Security, who promptly seized the cash and the car, dropping off Skinner and Brashear at the airport with no money and no means of transportation.It took two years and the intervention of the ACLU before the money was returned to Skinner and Brashear, and the incident was not the first time that Albuquerque officials faced criticism for abusing forfeiture laws: Bernalillo County and Darren White, the former sheriff, were required by a judge to pay in excess of $3 million in damages to people who had cash seized by sheriff’s deputies, as it had been determined that this money was seized with the primary intent of supplying additional funds for the police budget. Restaurateur Has One-Year-Old Baby Taken Away And $50,291 Seized In another incident involving the same Tenaha police officer and district attorney, restaurant owner Dale Agostini was pulled over on the same stretch of highway as Jennifer Boatright and Ron Henderson for the same reason: driving in the left lane without passing. After using what turned out to be an untrained police dog to sniff the vehicle, officers found over $50,000 in cash but no evidence of drugs. Agostini explained to the officers that he had family in the area and he intended to buy restaurant equipment at a local auction with the cash he was carrying. At the time, Agostini was traveling with his fiance and their one-year-old child, along with a cook who worked at Agostini’s restaurant.Agostini and the passengers were informed by Lynda K. Russell, the district attorney who had arrived on the scene, that they would face charges for money laundering and for engaging in organized criminal activity, and the baby would be turned over to Child Protective Services. The car, the $50,000, six cell phones, and an iPod were all seized.When Agostini learned that he was being jailed and his child was being taken away, he asked if he could kiss his son goodbye, a request that was summarily denied. Russell was later heard on tape coldly joking about Agostini’s request, recalling that she said, “No, kiss me.” Agostini also asked to be permitted to speak with a lawyer, only to be told such a request could not be granted until he had spent at least four hours in jail. No criminal charges were ever filed. Couple Forced To Choose Between $6,037 And Custody Of Their Children When Ron Henderson was pulled over by police in Tenaha while traveling from Houston to Linden, Texas, the officer informed him that he had been pulled over for traveling in the left lane for over half a mile without passing. During the stop, the officer claimed to smell marijuana. When asked if there were any drugs in the car, Henderson and his girlfriend, Jennifer Boatright, replied that there were not. The couple then consented to a search of the car, which yielded a glass pipe and $6,037 in cash, which the couple said they intended to use to buy a car when they arrived in Linden. No drugs of any kind were found in the vehicle.The officers escorted Boatright and Henderson to the local police station, where they met with the county’s district attorney, Lynda K. Russell. The DA informed the couple that they had two options: They could be charged with money laundering and child endangerment, or they could simply sign a waiver to turn the $6,037 over to the city. The DA informed the couple that being charged with multiple felonies would land Henderson and Boatright in jail, and Child Protective Services would take custody of their children as a result, so the couple signed the cash over to the city rather than lose their children and face felony charges.The situation experienced by Boatright and Henderson is a common one in Tenaha, as officers take full advantage of civil forfeiture laws as a means of generating revenue. After the city marshal fielded constant complaints from drivers passing through Tenaha who had endured similar circumstances, he simply complimented the officer on a job well done, saying, “Be safe, and keep up the good work.” Donald Scott Killed During Drug Raid Aimed At Seizing 250-Acre Malibu Property In October 1992, multiple law enforcement agencies executed a search warrant on the home of Donald Scott, a somewhat reclusive millionaire who had rejected repeated overtures made by federal officials to sell his property. The property, which had archaeological ties to the Chumash, was believed by federal officials to be the site of a large marijuana growing operation. During the raid on the home, Scott’s wife screamed, “Don’t shoot me! Don’t kill me!” after deputies entered the home, which led Scott, who had been sleeping, to check on the disturbance while carrying a revolver.When deputies encountered Scott, they demanded that he lower his gun. As he lowered the handgun, deputies opened fire and killed him on the spot. The deputies and other law enforcement officials then began their search of the home, leaving Scott on the floor unattended. In a recorded phone call from a neighbor that took place shortly after the shooting, the sheriff’s deputy who answered the phone told the neighbor that Scott, whose body was still lying in a pool of his own blood, was “busy.”During the subsequent search of the property, officials turned up no evidence of any marijuana on the property. While the search for marijuana was used as the rationale for the raid on Scott’s home, it was later discovered that officials from multiple law enforcement agencies had discussed seizing the home and had even researched appraisals of similar properties in the area before executing the raid. In a report written by Michael Bradbury, the District Attorney of Ventura County, it was determined that property forfeiture was indeed one of the primary motivations for the raid. Philadelphia Family Has Home Seized Due To Son’s Drug Use After their son Yianni was arrested for possession of $40 worth of heroin, Christos and Markella Sourovelis had their home seized by officials in Philadelphia, who contended that not only was Yianni in possession of heroin but that he was also selling it. The sales allegedly took place in the home or in front of the home, and though the Sourovelis family had no knowledge of the criminal activity, civil asset forfeiture laws allowed officials to evict the Sourovelis family from the home with no prior notice.Though the Sourovelis family was ultimately able to return to their home eight days after they were evicted, the district attorney’s office used the forfeited house as leverage to ensure that Yianni, who was 22 at the time, would be permanently banned from the home to prevent future drug sales. While the Sourovelises were back in the home relatively quickly, the process of resolving the case took several months of court proceedings to determine whether or not they would be able to permanently remain in their home. Traveler Has $11,000 Seized From Luggage Alleged To Smell Of Marijuana Charles Clarke was waiting to board a flight to Orlando when police approached him and questioned him about the contents of his luggage. A police dog had detected the smell of marijuana in a bag checked by Clarke, and Clarke admitted that he had smoked marijuana on the way to the airport. He also asserted to police that there was no marijuana in the bag itself.Knowing that there was nothing illegal in the bag, Clarke consented to a search of its contents. When the police asked if Clarke was carrying any cash with him, he willingly informed officers that he had $11,000 and even showed them where it was. Since he could not provide any immediate documentation proving the $11,000 was lawfully earned, the police seized the money under the assumption that it was either the profits of narcotics trafficking or was being carried with the intent of purchasing narcotics.Since Clarke was unaware that police could lawfully seize what amounted to his life savings without any tangible evidence of wrongdoing, he became combative when officers informed him they would be taking his money. In trying to keep the officers from his cash, he pushed one of them away, leading police to charge him with assault of a police officer, disorderly conduct, and resisting arrest.The assault charge was immediately dismissed, but Clarke had to agree to perform community service to get the disorderly conduct and resisting arrest charges dropped. Of course, the $11,000 will remain with law enforcement unless Clarke is able to successfully contest the legality of the forfeiture. Motel Seized From Owner Due To Drug Arrests Of Patrons In 2009, Russ Caswell was informed by federal agents that his motel was being seized because the property had been used during the commission of drug crimes. The crimes cited by the federal agents occurred over a 20-year period and included 15 arrests in total, but all of the arrests were of patrons of the motel, not of Caswell or any of his employees. So though Caswell and his staff had actually helped police in securing many of these arrests and had not been even remotely implicated in any criminal activity, the federal agents still sought to seize his property.Even though the case seemed “ludicrous” to Caswell, he was still forced to endure three years of litigation in which the government tried to permanently seize his property, which he owned outright and was worth in excess of $1 million. He paid $60,000 to fight the suit, and even then, Caswell had to rely on pro bono work from an attorney to continue to plead his case. After three years of court battles, the forfeiture case was ultimately dismissed. However, as is true of all forfeiture cases, the onus was on Caswell to prove his innocence rather than on the government to prove his guilt. Driver Loses $3,500 For ‘Looking Like A Drug Dealer’ In a case highlighted in an NAACP letter to Congress, an African-American man was pulled over traveling from Virginia to Delaware, allegedly for having a taillight out. The taillight had actually been functioning properly, but this ploy allowed the officer to size up the driver for a potential search and seizure through the use of civil asset forfeiture. The driver, according to the officer, “looked like a drug dealer,” which was apparently reason enough for the officer to enlist a drug-sniffing dog to search the man’s car.After the search did not turn up any drugs or any other evidence of illegal activity, the officer asked if the driver was carrying any guns, drugs, or money. Though the driver had no firearms and no drugs, he did state that he had $3,500 in cash. The officer promptly seized the driver’s cash. Despite not finding any evidence that could support an arrest, they said that the money could only be the profits of drug dealing and was thus subject to legal seizure under civil forfeiture laws. The driver was never charged with any crime. Philadelphia Couple’s Home Seized After Son Arrested For Marijuana In 2012, Leon and Mary Adams had their property seized because their son, Leon Jr., had allegedly been selling marijuana from their front porch without their knowledge. Though Leon Jr. was indeed charged with a crime, he was alleged to have sold very small quantities—a “few $20 marijuana deals”—and the couple had nothing to do with the criminal activity. Leon Jr. had not yet been convicted of the criminal activity when the police asserted that they would be seizing the property that had been the home of Leon and Mary Adams since 1966.According to the Philadelphia Police Department, Leon Jr. had sold $20 worth of marijuana to a police informant on multiple occasions. After the first sale, the informant went to the porch of the Adams home on two more occasions to again buy $20 worth of marijuana. With evidence in the form of marked bills and the ostensible testimony of the informant, Philadelphia Police used a SWAT team in riot gear to break down the door of the home and arrest Leon Jr. A month later, Leon and Mary Adams were informed that in addition to their son being in jail while awaiting trial, their home would also be seized under civil forfeiture laws.The profits from the sale of the seized home would be split between the police and the district attorney’s office after it was sold at auction. The only reason police didn’t evict Leon and Mary Adams before they could challenge the civil forfeiture claim was that the elder Leon Adams was enduring a host of health problems and was undergoing treatment for pancreatic cancer.The forfeiture case is still pending. During an early court appearance, the assistant district attorney assigned to the Adams case brought the wrong folder to court, causing a further delay in the process. DEA Agents Seize $16,000 From Amtrak Traveler After saving up enough money to pursue a career in the music industry, Joseph Rivers, 22, bought a one-way train ticket to Los Angeles. For DEA agents, that act alone—along with the fact that he was traveling with such a large amount of cash—was enough to suspect that Rivers was involved in drug trafficking or some other “narcotic activity.”Other passengers traveling on the Amtrak train noted that Rivers, a young African-American man, was the only passenger to be singled out by the DEA. His attorney, Michael Pancer, suggested Rivers’s race may have played a role, as he was the only black passenger on his section of the train.During the search and subsequent seizure of his cash, Rivers has said that he was completely cooperative and even allowed the DEA agents to contact his mother to corroborate his story. Rivers pleaded with agents that he would be penniless upon his arrival in California with no means of survival and no way of returning home. According to Rivers, “[The DEA agents] informed me that it was my responsibility to figure out how I was going to do that.”Rivers was not charged with any crime, and there is no indication that he ever will be, but the DEA was still able to legally seize all of the $16,000 he carried. The DEA’s explanation for the seizure was particularly troubling: “We don’t have to prove that the person is guilty. It’s that the money is presumed to be guilty.” Your Right to Remain Silent A New Answer to an Old Question - Do Not Talk ? O.K. Don't Talk to the Police Ever! Fifth Amendment "Right To Remain Silent," When a witness is summoned to testify before a grand jury or at a judicial or legislative proceeding, the lawyer for the witness frequently concludes that it may be in the client's best interest to assert the Fifth Amendment "right to remain silent," at least with respect to certain topics. The lawyer will often give the witness a card to read aloud when asserting that privilege. But precisely what words should the lawyer advise the client to read when invoking the Fifth Amendment privilege? For more than 100 years, lawyers have shown surprisingly little imagination or ingenuity, advising their clients to state in almost exactly these words: "On the advice of counsel, I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that it may tend to incriminate me." This article explains why that unfortunate language is never in the best interests of the witness, and why it naturally tends to sound to most listeners as if the witness is somehow admitting that he cannot tell the truth without confessing that he is guilty of some crime. The article also points out that this archaic invocation is not required by either the language or the theory of the Fifth Amendment, nor by the most recent controlling Supreme Court precedents. The article concludes with a suggestion for an entirely new formulation for invoking the privilege, one which gives greater protection to the rights of the witness and also more faithfully captures what the Supreme Court of the United States has written about the nature of this precious constitutional privilege. Keywords: Fifth Amendment, self-incrimination, right to remain silent. Why You Should NEVER Talk to the Police. Period. “The police are at my door. They want to talk to me. They told me I am not a suspect. I did absolutely nothing wrong. I have nothing to worry about. They can’t arrest me or do any harm to me if I did nothing wrong, right?” Wrong. “But I committed no crime. Took nobody’s life. I didn’t even see anything criminal happen. I don’t know anyone who may have been there. I was 173 miles away when it happened. I don’t know any of the facts except from what others told me. I cannot possible be harmed, right?!” Again, I am sorry to tell you, but you’re wrong. What people do not realize is what they don’t know actually can hurt them. If you don’t believe me, listen to the words of former United States Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson, “[A]ny lawyer worth his [or her] salt will tell the [client] in no uncertain terms to make no statement to the police under any circumstances.” Watts v. Indiana, 338 U.S. 49 (1949) (emphasis added). Let us look at the situation a little more closely. If the police ever ask you to come in to the station “just to chat” or are stopping by “because they only have a couple questions for you” — that means one of two things: You are a suspect; You are a possible suspect. Does that clear the picture up? I sure hope so. There is absolutely no reason for the police to want to have any discussion with you unless they know something that you (probably) don’t. May be your name was mentioned during a discussion with another potential suspect, or perhaps someone is trying to frame you, or, worse yet, you look like the person who was present on the scene and an eyewitness made a mistake in identity. This kind of thing happens all the time. And innocent people end up in custody as a result. There is no reason to talk to the police especially if you’re innocent. There is no reason to talk to the police; especially if you’re innocent. Here are the top ten reasons why you should not talk to the police:* REASON #1: Talking to the police CANNOT and WILL NOT help you. Talking to the police cannot make any difference. Nobody can “talk their way out of” an arrest. No matter how “savvy” or intelligent you think you might be, you will not convince them that you are innocent. And any ‘good’ statements that may help you that you tell the police cannot be introduced into evidence because of hearsay rules. It’s a lose-lose situation; don’t talk to the police. REASON #2: Even if you’re guilty, and you want to confess and get it off your chest, you still shouldn’t talk to the police. There is plenty of time to confess and admit guilt later. Why rush the inevitable? First, hire an attorney. Let them do their work, and may be you will win your case. It is much harder to win when there is a confession. For example, do you know what happens if the cop cannot be located and there is no confession? The case gets dismissed! (It’s not a universal rule, but it’s more common than you might think.) Don’t talk to the police. REASON #3: Even if you are innocent, it’s easy to tell some little white lie in the course of a statement. When people assert their innocence, they sometimes exaggerate their statements and tell a little white lie on accident. That same lie could be later used to destroy your credibility at trial. Don’t talk to the police. REASON #4: Even if you are innocent, and you only tell the truth, and you don’t tell any little white lies, it is possible to give the police some detail of information that can be used to convict you. If you make any statement — it could later be used against. E.g. “I did not kill the guy. I was not around the area when it happened. I don’t have a gun. I never owned a gun. I never liked the guy, but, hell, who did?” Bingo. We just found your incriminating statement: “I never liked the guy.” Don’t talk to the police. REASON #5: Even if you were innocent, and you only tell the truth, and you don’t tell any little white lies, and you don’t give the police any information that can be used against you to prove motive or opportunity, you still should not talk to the police because the possibility that the police might not recall your statement with 100% accuracy. Nobody has a perfect memory. That includes law enforcement. Don’t talk to the police. REASON #6: Even if you’re innocent, and you only tell the truth, and your entire statement is videotaped so that the police don’t have to rely on their memory, an innocent person can still make some innocent assumption about a fact or state some detail about the case they overheard on the way to the police station, and the police will assume that they only way the suspect could have known that fact or that detail was if he was, in fact, guilty. If you overhear a fact from someone else and later adopt it as your own, it can be used to crucify you at trial. Don’t talk to the police. REASON #7: Even if you’re innocent, and you only tell the truth in your statement, and you give the police no information that can be used against you, and the whole statement is videotaped, a suspect’s answers can still be used against him if the police (through no fault of their own) have any evidence that any of the suspect’s statements are false (even if they are really true). Honest mistakes by witnesses can land you in jail. Why take the risk? Don’t talk to the police. REASON #8: The police do not have authority to make deals or grant a suspect leniency in exchange for getting as statement. Law enforcement personnel do not have authority to make deals, grant you immunity, or negotiate plea agreements. The only entity with that authority is the County or Commonwealth Attorney in state court and the U.S. Attorney in federal court. The officers will tell you they do, but they are lying. They have a carte blanche to lie. Don’t talk to the police. REASON #9: Even if a suspect is guilty, and wants to confess, there may be mitigating factors which justify a lesser charge. You may be accused of committing one offense when, in fact, you are guilty of a lesser offense. By confessing to the higher offense, you are throwing away bargaining chips. The prosecutor can try the case with your confession to the higher offense. There is no reason to confess. Don’t talk to the police. REASON #10: Even for a completely honest and innocent person, it is difficult to tell the same story twice in exactly the same way. If trial is the first time you tell your story, then there is no other statement by you to contradict any of your facts. However, if you have told your story twice, once at trial, and once to the police, you are probably going to mess some facts up. It’s human nature. A good cross examination by a prosecutor will tear you apart. Don’t talk to the police. *Taken from a video lecture by Professor Dwayne. The video is reproduced in full below. https://rumble.com/v297voe-your-right-to-remain-silent-a-new-answer-to-an-old-question-do-not-talk-o.k.html Many years ago, in the then-peaceful suburbs of where we lived on Long Island, NY, my across-the-street neighbor, an older woman, came running to our house in a panic, saying that her house had been robbed! My father — meaning well — impulsively then ran to & and inside her house, to, I guess, see what he could see. In the meantime, my mother called the local police, who showed up at the neighbor’s house minutes later — and promptly ARRESTED MY FATHER. We (my mother and the neighbor, and certainly my father) tried to explain to the police that my father was innocent. But it was only HOURS LATER that the police released (and did not charge) my father. During those few hours — as well as afterward — my mother, my sister, and I and the neighbor, were debating whether we should files charges against the police for a wrongful arrest/detainment of my father — but we ultimately decided against it, and opted for diplomacy — because, as we reasoned, (a) the police may have had what they had thought was a VALID REASON to arrest my father (although they COULD HAVE come over to OUR house to talk to the neighbor — which they did NOT do!), and (b) it would be better to maintain GOOD RELATIONS with the police than have them “hold a grudge” against us. In hindsight, apparently “(b)” was a good decision.

Speaker Pelosi's said her laptop had over 18,000+ documents and over 368,000+ pages of emails that were uploaded to who? or hacked by who? before shy got back to her office during the Jan. 6 insurrection. Riley June Williams, 22 was found guilty of six federal counts in November of 2022. Democrats woman of house wearing all white at state of the new world order speech rather than Republicans with red shoe lace who are the true saviors of the new world order and other civil liberties. A laptop stolen from the offices of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi during the U.S. Capitol attack has not been recovered from the home or car of a Pennsylvania woman accused of helping steal it, the woman’s lawyer said Tuesday. Yes its still missing or sold to who ? That is how it is going to go down, the timeline might be a bit off. You will have one world faith, which is what the ecumenical movement is about. One world government, and all under control of the New World Order by July 4th 2026 on this the day of America’s up coming 250nd year of independence, unveiled a new updated flag which better reflects the nation in its present form, signaling the aspirations it has for its ever bright future. Confiscating Entire Wealth of All The Billionaires and Kill Them and Family Too! There are 724 (billionaires) in the U.S., and more overseas according to the 2021 Forbes billionaires list, released in April,” the Journal reports. “At that point their collective net worth was $4.4 trillion, although that figure has presumably since risen along with the stock market. So Per 60% Death taxes are taxes imposed by the federal and some state governments on someone's estate upon their death - Death taxes are also called death duties, estate taxes, or inheritance taxes. After getting the money maybe in 20 weeks or so - Own Government plan's are to kill rest of the family member for more estate taxes, or inheritance taxes. Also Government Plan's are to Kill and or Black Mail for Lot's of Money All Epstein’s and Maxwell Private Pedophile Islands Visitor Log's including video equipment and sex tape's of rich people and with DNA Sample Testing and secret video tapes and missing body in underground lairs and a bizarre teen sex temple from Pedophile Islands Guestbook and Visitor List They Do Not Want You to See Ever! Jeffrey Epstein’s and Ghislaine Maxwell Said We Have 1,000's Video Tape's and have 1,000 Forensic DNA Test's, Blood Test's and Hair Sample's DNA Testing all ready Done Now. Podesta’s email account was hijacked and the hackers took his entire private library of emails. This sucked hard for Podesta because the hackers had tons of high ranking-sensitive information. From October through November 20,000+ pages of emails were uploaded to wiki-leaks. Hillary Clinton at a campaign event last month. Cybersecurity experts said that her private email account from when she was secretary of state was probably hacked 38,000+ pages of emails were uploaded Benghazi panel had discovered that Clinton exclusively used her own private pedophile email server rather than a government-issued one throughout her time as Secretary of State, and that her aides took no action to preserve emails sent or received from her personal accounts as required by law. Hunter Biden when he came into a repair shop in Wilmington, Delaware, the Bidens' hometown, and handed over three laptops After two years of scrutiny, the laptop has produced mountains of material about Hunter Biden's personal struggles, and his foreign business ventures in Ukraine and with China. It has produced direct evidence President Biden benefited from his son's business dealings. Similar incidents involving Hunter Biden's use of drugs and hiring of prostitutes featured on his laptop that was exposed just before the US elections by the New York Post. Vatican private pedophile trial for sex abuse of 10,000+ kids in pope's youth seminary opens scandal is particularly grave because the true abuse and yes allegedly occurred within Vatican City and All over the World, and the true allegations were known since at least 1960s Thru 2021 pedophile's but were covered up by the Vatican and other church authorities until the victim and his roommate went public. Their stories greatly undermined Pope Francis’ pledges of “zero tolerance” for abuse because the alleged crimes occurred in his own backyard and had gone unpunished for years. The report also criticized the way the media reported sexual crimes, stating that the New World Order media reported on sexual abuse allegations against Catholic clergy but ignored such allegations against Protestant churches and Jehovah's Witnesses. Stephen Joseph Rossetti, a Catholic priest, reported that the frequency of pedophilia amongst the Catholic clergy is no higher than among general population, and a Catholic priest is no more likely to be a pedophile than an average male. Rifles, Humvees and millions of rounds of ammo etc. The Taliban celebrate their new American arsenal. Between 2013 and 2016, Barack Obama is the 44th President of the United States with Congress Help gave Afghan forces more than 600,000 light weapons, such as M16 and M4 rifles and nearly 80,000 vehicles, as well as night vision goggles, radios and more, according to a 2017 Government Accountability Office report. Even more recently, the US Defense Department supplied the Afghan military with 7,000 machine guns, 4,700 Humvees and more than 20,000 grenades between 2017 and 2019, a report from the special inspector general for Afghanistan reconstruction found. The GAO and the special inspector general removed these reports at the request of the State Department to protect any Afghans identified within. U.S. Government said and or told Us - We The People - COVID-19 Shot Are Safe ? LIE's ? So Per the Nuremberg Code ? Agent Orange ? Anthrax Vaccine ? Paraquat Pot ? 1920 Poisoned Alcohol ? Now Mandatory COVID-19 Shots caused adverse reactions in most recipients all part of a series of massive government cover-ups. The two mRNA vaccines, Pfizer and Moderna, authorized by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), is not very safe and very bad at preventing serious or fatal cases of COVID-19. The risk of serious side effects associated with these vaccines is very large. 76,253 Dead 6,033,218 Injured Recorded in Europe and USA Following COVID Vaccines with 4,358 Fetal Deaths in U.S. The European Medicines Agency (EMA) database of adverse drug reactions is now reporting 46,618 deaths and 4,682,268 injuries following COVID-19 vaccines. In the United States, the Vaccine Adverse Events Recording System (VAERS) is now reporting 29,635 deaths and 1,350,950 injuries following COVID-19 vaccines. https://www.exposingtheirlies.com/post/some-covid-19-horror-stories-you-may-have-missed There have now been more deaths and vaccine side effects reported during the past 20 months to VAERS following COVID-19 vaccines than there has been for the entire previous 30 years for all FDA-approved vaccines before the Emergency Use Authorization of the COVID-19 shots in December of 2020. (833,968 cases, 9,279 deaths. There is an untold story about billionaire eugenicist Bill Gates that the world desperately needs to hear, especially in the era of Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) “vaccinations.” nearly two in five people believe that the coronavirus pandemic is a “depopulation tactic ? As the number of true conspiracy theories now regarding the coronavirus or COVID-19/21 outbreak continues to rise in the US population, a new poll has discovered that almost two in five people in the US believe the deadly pandemic is a 'depopulation tactic'. Around 39 percent of the adults around the nation agreed that the COVID-19 was intentionally released as a part of a depopulation plan orchestrated by the UN or the New World Order. Bye, bye, baby? Birthrates are declining globally – here's why it matters. The COVID-19 pandemic is serving as a modifier – but not in the way commentators and comedians suggested when lockdowns began. Remember all the jokes about people being stuck at home leading to a baby boom? As the data rolls in, its clear that in many countries, the opposite has occurred. Most children these days are wanted or planned children, especially in the developed world. Deciding to have a baby is contingent on being optimistic about the future – and optimism is difficult to muster during a global pandemic. First they came for the Communists And I did not speak out Because I was not a Communist. Then they came for the Socialists And I did not speak out Because I was not a Socialist. Then they came for the trade unionists And I did not speak out Because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews And I did not speak out Because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me And there was no one left To speak out for me. The 21 Points of Manifesto of the New World Order and Plan to Control and Enslave the World by July 4th 2026 on this the day of Old America’s up coming 250nd year of independence. One world government, and all under control of the New World Order and to unveiled a new updated flag which better reflects the nation in its present form, signaling the aspirations it has for its ever bright future. 1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes. 2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax. 3. Abolition of all right of inheritance. 4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels. 5. Centralization of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly. 6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State. 7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan. 8. Equal liability of all to labor. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture. 9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equable distribution of the population over the country. 10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children’s factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production. 11. Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature. 12. Guide reproduction wisely—improving fitness and diversity. 13. Unite humanity with a living new language. 14. Rule Passion—Faith—Tradition—and all things with tempered reason. 15. Protect people and nations with fair laws and just courts. 16. Let all nations rule internally resolving external disputes in a world court. 17. Avoid petty laws and useless officials. 18. Balance personal rights with social duties. 19. Prize truth—beauty—love—seeking harmony with the infinite. 20. Be not a cancer on the earth—Leave room for nature—Leave room for nature. 21. What If Everything You Were Taught Was A Lie? Secret societies have been in existence all throughout history. Elites, crazed by power and money, band together to exert maximum control over the masses. In 2026 their influence is greater than ever – their tentacles reaching all aspects of our daily life through control of the economy, religion, education and politics. While the world may seem chaotic and confusing to those who are not in the know, those who have studied the history of international secret societies are blessed with an understanding of the evil agenda pushed by the cabal. Why is it a blessing to understand the evil that is in our midst? Wouldn’t it be better to be naïve and live with our heads in the sand? No. It is only through understanding this evil that we can fight back and reject the New World Order they are working towards.

Per U.S.A. Government DOA-DOJ-FBI-CIA-Etc. Everyone In U.S.A. All Person And Or America Citizens Right Now Today Is A Criminal As of Oct 2023 Need To Be In Jail Or Pay $$$ Fines Now. Per all federal and local police and all government agencies. All The America People Break The Law's Average 3 Times Everyday with A Average Fine of $512 dollars a day. it add up to $512 x 365 days in a year add up to $186,880 Dollars per year in fines per every person alive today right now. also federal and local agencies issue an average of 27 rules for every law over the past decade. However, the rules issued in a given year are typically not substantively related to the current year’s laws, as agency output represents ongoing implementation of earlier legislation. According to a 2020 article, the more than 300,000+ laws and regulatory crimes on the federal law books serve little purpose other than inviting arbitrary enforcement by providing prosecutors the tools to charge nearly anyone every day for your life with violating some long-forgotten regulation or law and to pay the fines now or go to jail for everyone in the U.S.A.. Government Every Man, Women, & Child Is A Criminal & Need 2 Go To Jail for life. A cell phone app is a smartphone add-on that performs functions other than making a phone call, ranging from GPS map to games to medical monitoring and speeding in your car. So per GPS mapping every street and speed limits of all roads in all town and roads every place of earth we can see you every move and every person driving or moving around town by car or truck... so if you drive 30 mile per hour in a 25 miles per hour zone you get a ticket for speeding etc. your cell phone will tell your speed everyday and night too. most people will get 3-5 tickets a day. you are your brothers keeper and every cell phone in car will get a ticket for speeding and you pay your fine or go to jail. So Per U.S.A. Government Every Man, Women, & Child Confiscation of all property and all assets you have to pay all tickets and all fines every day of your life. P.S. Remember All The America People Break The Law's Average 3 Times Everyday with A Average Fine of $512 dollars a day. So per U.S.A. new land reform and confiscation all personal property to pay all new court fines was not only an economic or administrative process of taking and redistributing deeds or legal ownership of land. It was a two party system's republican and democratic parties -led to new mass movement which turned peasants (its you baby) into active participants and which pushed for political and ideological change beyond the immediate economic question of all land confiscation and ownership rights are gone. If you have a home the state will take it for the fines you own to the state now. you can stay in your old home as a renter with 3 other family to move in with you to help the homeless problem. In order for housing to be considered affordable, a family should not spend more than 30% of its income on rent. Thus, a working family needs to earn nearly $42 per hour – or roughly $87,000 per year – to afford the average rent in Los Angeles. In Los Angeles, the median rent is 46.7% or nearly half of median income. 509,404 low-income renter households in the county do not have access to an affordable home. As of July 10, 2023 - While some states are on a schedule for annual increases to eventually reach $15 an hour, 12 states still adhere to the federal minimum. Although the current federal minimum wage of $7.25 has not budged since 2009, more than 20 states have provided additional increases in 2023. Why Minimum Wage Isn’t Enough Picture this: Jane Doe is a single adult working a full-time (40 hours per week) minimum wage job. Jane wants to rent a modest one-bedroom apartment. No matter where Jane lives in America, and regardless of whether Jane lives in a state with a minimum wage higher than the federal minimum wage, Jane will be unable to do so. Why? Because there’s no state in America in which a person working a full-time job that pays minimum wage can afford to rent a one-bedroom apartment. This shocking fact comes from the National Low Income Housing Coalition’s recently-released report, “Out of Reach 2015.” The report analyzes the Department of Housing and urban Development’s estimated Fair Market Rent (FMR)—which is defined as the 40th percentile of rents for typical, non-substandard rental units, including the cost of utilities—in relation to wages earned in each state. The report estimates the earning necessary to rent one-bedroom and two-bedroom apartments without spending more than 30 percent of a household’s total income on rent. Let’s look at how the information presented in this report might impact Jane Doe’s apartment search: To rent a one-bedroom FMR apartment, Jane would need to earn $15.50 per hour. This is more than twice the federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour. Even the proposed federal minimum wage of $10.10 per hour would be insufficient for Jane to rent an apartment. To a rent a two-bedroom FMR apartment, Jane would need to earn $19.35 per hour. If Jane lives in Alaska, California, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Vermont, Virginia, or Washington, she’ll need to make over $20 per hour to afford a two-bedroom apartment. The average national FMR price for a one-bedroom apartment is $806 per month. That means Jane would need to work 86 hours per week in her minimum wage job to afford the cost of rent. Unfortunately for Jane, findings in the “Out of Reach” report show that her situation is unlikely to improve any time soon. Nationally, rents are rising, wages are lagging behind, and there is a limited supply of affordable housing. With all these barriers to renting an apartment, it’s easy to see how Jane might end up doubled-up with family or friends, severely burdened by the cost of her housing, or homeless. Unless we take action to increase the supply of affordable housing units (Out of Reach suggests America needs 26.1 million more units to meet demand), increase the minimum wage, and decrease the cost of rent, Jane won’t ever be able to afford her apartment. U.S.A. Government Every Man, Women, Child Is A Criminal Need Two Go To Jail Confiscation All Personal Property And Land Etc. The Confiscation Acts of 1861 and 1862 and Today Soon 2024 As the Senate met in extraordinary session from July 4 to August 6, 1861, one of the wartime measures it considered was the Confiscation Act, designed to allow the federal government to seize property, including slave property, being used to support the Confederate rebellion. The Senate passed the final bill on August 5, 1861, by a vote 24 to 11, and it was signed into law by President Lincoln the next day. Although this bill had symbolic importance, it had little effect on the rebellion or wartime negotiations. When Congress again convened in December, Senator Lyman Trumbull of Illinois, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, proposed a more comprehensive confiscation bill. On December 2, 1861, Trumbull introduced the Confiscation Act of 1862 to allow for seizure of all Confederate property, whether or not it had been used to support the rebellion. Before long, however, Trumbull's bill stalled due to ideological differences over the issue of confiscation. Radical Republicans called for a vigorous confiscation bill to seize property and free slaves, but more conservative members worried about expanding the reach of the federal government while denying property owners their constitutional rights. Early in 1862, a group of moderate senators, led by Ohio’s John Sherman, produced a compromise bill that authorized the federal government to free slaves in conquered rebel territory and prohibited the return of fugitive slaves, while allowing for confiscation of Confederate property through court action. It also allowed the Union army to recruit African American soldiers. Although more aggressive than the first act, the Confiscation Act of 1862 also lacked enforcement capabilities. Loosely enforced by the Lincoln administration, the law was actively undermined by Lincoln’s successor, President Andrew Johnson. Tracking Everything Everywhere All at Once Cell phone tracking enables you to follow the movements of a person of interest. You can track someone’s location without them knowing by installing a spy app secretly on their target phone. These phone spying apps track almost all targeted phone activities like Calls, SMS messages, Google map’s location, Web history, Social Media sites like Facebook, WhatsApp, Snapchat, Telegram, etc. ... mSpy is a GPS tracker that allows you to remotely track any user’s phone activity. Most Common Reasons Why People Go to Jail Have you ever wondered what are the common reasons people go to jail? What sort of crime do people have to commit to have to spend time behind bars? The truth is that many people end up in jail because they don’t have enough money to pay their bail bond, which implies they will be released, as long as they promise to appear in court when they are required to. If they can’t pay, they have no choice but to go to jail, until they find a reputable criminal lawyer and appear before court. Other people have to go to jail because they don’t know their legal rights, and could not benefit from a fair trial. But what do people do to end up in such a situation? Here is a list of the most common reasons to go to jail: Reason #1: Drug offences One of the most common reasons to go to jail is because of drug-related offences. Criminal organizations make a lot of money by producing and selling illegal drugs. The people who work for these organizations can also make some money by selling drugs, but if they get caught, they can end up in jail. Possessing and using illegal drugs is also punishable by law. Even though using medical marijuana is now legal in Canada, growing large amounts of this drug at home is also considered a drug-related offence. Reason #2: Offences against the justice system There are people who go to jail because they have committed offences against the justice system. This can take many forms: perjury, breach of bail, breach of probation, and failure to attend court mandated programs. Obstructing a police officer, or impersonating a police officer are also considered offences against the justice system. People who commit an offence against the justice system usually have been charged for another crime, and got into some more trouble by refusing to obey the law. Reason #3: Traffic offences Traffic offenses are common reasons for incarceration. People usually don’t go to jail because they ran a red light. If they repeatedly get caught violating traffic laws, they could face some serious consequences. Driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol, committing a hit-and-run, and driving dangerously or carelessly are all considered traffic offences. People who commit these offences could get their driving license suspended, have to pay heavy fines, get a criminal record, and even serve some time in jail. Reason #4: Assault Assault is another reason why people can go to jail. It includes any situation where force is applied intentionally to cause harm to someone. But you don’t have to physically hurt someone to be charged with assault: simply verbally threatening someone can be considered a violent crime. Holding a weapon to threaten someone, even if it isn’t a real weapon, can also be considered assault. Someone found guilty of assault, even if it seemed like a minor offence, could end up with a criminal record and serve some time in jail. Reason #5: Sexual assault A sexual assault is a type of assault that was committed for sexual purposes. Any type of sexual contact or behavior that occurs without consent can be considered sexual assault. This includes rape, attempted rape, or any form of unwanted physical contact. Someone who is found guilty of sexual assault can end up with a criminal record that will follow them throughout their life, and they can also serve time in jail. Reason #6: Theft Theft is another common reason why people go to jail. It can include shoplifting, retail theft, workplace-related theft, breaking and entering, or any situation where someone is taking and moving someone else’s property without their permission. Robbery, which is the act of taking someone else’s possession through violence or intimidation, is a serious criminal offence. Serious charges of theft or robbery can send someone in jail. The value of what was stolen determines how much time the person who committed the crime will serve behind bars. Reason #7: Fraud Fraud is a form of theft. It includes credit card fraud, social assistance fraud, business fraud, investment scams, and, of course, internet fraud. Cybercriminals are using different types of online fraud setups to steal money from people. Identity theft is a type of fraud that happens frequently through the internet. Once again, depending on the amount of money that was stolen, someone recognized guilty of a fraud can serve a few years in jail. Reason #8: Homicide Finally, anyone who is found guilty of committing a murder will be taken to jail, and will probably stay in jail for a long time. Homicide is one of the worst crimes that can be committed, but there are a number of other offences that could send someone in jail. There are even people who go to jail because they have been charged with a crime they did not commit. Wrongful conviction happens when an innocent person goes to jail while a criminal goes free. Reason #9: Just Being Alive Is A Crime 300,000+ laws and regulatory crimes on the federal law books serve little purpose other than inviting arbitrary enforcement by providing prosecutors the tools to charge nearly anyone every day for your life with violating some long-forgotten regulation or law. Many people are arrested for breaking the law or performing illegal activities every single day. Those who are stopped by policeman, turned in by their neighbors, or simply stumble into trouble find themselves facing arrest, fines, and even prison time after they commit crimes. Crimes that are minor will subject individuals to pay hefty fines, but as the crimes rise in severity, so does the punishment. When people are first arrested, they may need to spend time behind bars until they are bailed out. Bail bonds in Orlando help many people meet bail when they are first arrested. There are a few common reasons why people get arrested in the United States. Larceny Larceny, one of the most common crimes, is when someone takes or removes another person's personal property without their permission. This is also known as theft. Typically, this is a nonviolent crime unless it is accompanied by another charge indicting assault. It is also often associated with the crime of trespassing or even breaking and entering. This crime can include taking money, labor, or possessions. This is typically classified as a misdemeanor offense, which means that the guilty will not have to spend time behind bars. Instead, they will have to pay a criminal fine. If they have stolen items of high value, they may end up spending less than a year in jail, as determined by the judge during sentencing. Some cases involving theft may even be less severe, only resulting in citations or a small fine. Drug Abuse Violations This crime is described as the violation of laws involving the production, distribution, and use of illegal substances. This can also include the possession of drug equipment or devices used to prepare these substances or to practice them. Many people are arrested for being under the influence of drugs, possessing drugs at the time of the arrest, selling drugs to others, or even manufacturing the drugs themselves. Commonly used drugs are cocaine, heroin, morphine, and amphetamines. In certain states, recreational marijuana is also a banned drug that you can be arrested for using or possessing. The penalties for being found guilty of drug abuse violations involve a variety of consequences. They can spend time in jail or even federal prison. When the crime is minor, they may also have to face fines, community service, or probation. House arrest is also common to ensure that they are not a threat to the community if they have been found as a danger possessing or selling drugs. The penalties are determined by the substance, the amount of the substance, the drug-related activity, and also if the person has a prior criminal record or not. Driving Under the Influence This common offense is when someone is caught driving their vehicle while under the influence of alcohol or other drugs. When the driver is rendered incapable of operating their vehicle, they can be charged with this offense. This includes the use of alcohol and drugs, whether the drugs are recreational or prescribed. When that driver is suspected of driving under the influence, a police officer or medical professional will perform a breathalyzer test to determine the level of intoxication to determine the severity of the crime. Driving under the influence poses a danger to both you and the other drivers on the road. The penalties for driving under the influence also depend on the severity of the crime and the state in which you are driving. Often times, for a first offense, a driver may be fined and have to spend time doing community service. They will also need to take classes that help them stay sober. Second offenses carry a more hefty fine and potential jail time. Drivers may also be subject to have their license revoked for a period of time until they deemed fit to drive safely again. Disorderly Conduct This offense comes in a variety of forms. It is typically referring to a crime involving being publicly under the influence, disturbing the peace, or even loitering in restricted areas. When people are being disruptive enough to cause problems is typically when police officers will consider the crime to be categorized under disorderly conduct. Those who are charged with disorderly conduct pose no danger to them or others. They are just simply disruptive those nearby by engaging in inappropriate or bothersome actions in areas where they shouldn't be. This offense is typically categorized as a misdemeanor or even an infraction, which means the penalties are minor. It may require you to pay a small fine or perform some community service. Disorderly conduct crimes that are more severe may result in a short amount of jail time, but this is typically not the case. Other penalties may involve restraining orders and probation, which require the arrested individual to obey certain behaviors issued by the courts. These are the most common reasons why people get arrested in our country. In order to avoid being arrested, it's simple: avoid breaking the law. By making smart choices, you won't have to request bail bonds in Orlando and spend any time behind bars. Facing hefty fines and paying back your friends and bondsman are just two of the steps in the journey after you have a criminal record. You will also likely need to apologize to many of your loved ones and you may even live your life full of regret if you harmed anyone while you were breaking the law. Once you find yourself in trouble with the law, you can find a way out by trusting the right bondsman. If you or someone you know is in need of trusted bonds services, contact us today for help. Can it really be true that most people in jail are being held before trial? And how much of mass incarceration is a result of the war on drugs? These questions are harder to answer than you might think, because our country’s systems of confinement are so fragmented. The various government agencies involved in the justice system collect a lot of critical data, but it is not designed to help policymakers or the public understand what’s going on. As public support for criminal justice reform continues to build, however, it’s more important than ever that we get the facts straight and understand the big picture. This report offers some much needed clarity by piecing together this country’s disparate systems of confinement. The American criminal justice system holds almost 2.3 million people in 1,833 state prisons, 110 federal prisons, 1,772 juvenile correctional facilities, 3,134 local jails, 218 immigration detention facilities, and 80 Indian Country jails as well as in military prisons, civil commitment centers, state psychiatric hospitals, and prisons in the U.S. territories. This report provides a detailed look at where and why people are locked up in the U.S., and dispels some modern myths to focus attention on the real drivers of mass incarceration, including exceedingly punitive responses to even the most minor offenses. What is the ‘New World Order’ and why has Joe Biden caused uproar by using the phrase? US president excites conspiracy theorists with unfortunate choice of words at White House event Joe Biden caused a stir on Monday during a gathering of business leaders at the White House when he alluded to a coming “new world order” in the wake of the Ukraine crisis, apparently not stopping to consider the awkward legacy of the phrase. Addressing the Business Roundtable’s CEO Quarterly Meeting, which included the bosses of General Motors, Apple and Amazon, Mr Biden concluded his remarks by saying: “Now is a time when things are shifting. We’re going to – there’s going to be a new world order out there, and we’ve got to lead it. And we’ve got to unite the rest of the free world in doing it.” The phrase quickly began trending on Twitter, with commentators wasting no time in gloating over what they saw as the president’s presumably accidental invocation of a well-worn conspiracy theory claiming that an elite globalist cabal operating from the shadows is plotting to carve up the world and impose totalitarian rule. “I don’t want Joe Biden leading a line for Jello at a nursing home let alone the world,” one wrote on Twitter. “The nuts who brought us lockdowns creating ‘a New World Order’ is terrifying.” “Did y’all forget everything we learned in those 2012 conspiracy videos?” said another. “Did y’all forget mass vaccination, mass surveillance (vaccine passports) & a total police state is apart [sic] of the New World Order.” And so it went on. Another professed, apparently sincerely: “I believe with all my heart that Joe Biden was installed by Globalists, Babylon included, to usher in the New World Order.” Anyone who took the trouble to listen to Mr Biden’s speech in full would have been left in no doubt that he was referring to the shifting sands of geopolitical relations in response to Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine last month. The conflict has seen cities pulverised by savage siege warfare tactics, Ukrainians stage a courageous fightback and war crimes alleged as bombs rain down on maternity hospitals, children’s nurseries, shopping centres, a community theatre and even a Holocaust memorial. The international community has meanwhile moved to impose punitive economic sanctions against Russian businesses, banks, politicians and oligarchs the likes of which have never been seen before, shunning the country’s exports and energy as corporations cease operations, cutting it off commercially as well as diplomatically in the hope of forcing an end to the hostilities. Mr Biden warned the CEOs assembled in Washington that Russia could retaliate with further cyberattacks against the west and use chemical weapons against Ukrainian civilians as the conflict morphs into a drawn-out war of attrition, rather than the swift conquest Mr Putin appears to have envisioned. All of which means the balance of power between nations will inevitably be upended as the world seeks to reorder diplomatic relations to exclude the Kremlin – so long as Mr Putin remains in charge and his war against a free democratic nation continues unchecked, that is – which is clearly what the US president was referring to. Historically, the phrase “New World Order” has been common currency and used in much the same way as Mr Biden by the likes of Woodrow Wilson and Sir Winston Churchill in the aftermath of the First and Second World Wars respectively and, more recently, by George HW Bush in response to the collapse of the Soviet Union. In an address to a joint session of Congress on 11 September 1990, the first President Bush delivered a speech actually entitled “Toward a New World Order” in which he directly quoted Mr Churchill. “Until now, the world we’ve known has been a world divided – a world of barbed wire and concrete block, conflict and the Cold War,” he began. “Now, we can see a new world coming into view. A world in which there is the genuine prospect of new world order. In the words of Winston Churchill, a ‘world order’ in which ‘the principles of justice and fair play... protect the weak against the strong’. A world where the United Nations, freed from Cold War stalemate, is poised to fulfil the historic vision of its founders. A world in which freedom and respect for human rights find a home among all nations.” However, the phrase has also been used in a much less optimistic sense, notably in promoting Red Scare fears over the spread of the “international communist conspiracy” in the 1950s, which culminated in Republican senator Joseph McCarthy’s shameful persecutions of the period. That mood of post-war paranoia tapped into much more ancient social anxieties about the possibility of shadowy secret covens engaging in evil, which saw “witches” hunted, convicted and executed by Puritans in 17th century England, Scotland and America and fraternal organisations like the Freemasons accused of practising Satanism. The Illuminati, the model for all subsequent sinister behind-closed-doors cabals feared by conspiracy theorists – not least the adrenochrome-harvesting legion of demon Democrats allegedly operating out of Hillary Clinton’s favourite pizza parlour – traces its origins to the German Enlightenment of the 18th century. Belief in such a group plotting insurrection to realise its “new world order” first gained real prominence in the US among anti-government extremists in the 1990s, according to the Anti-Defamation League (ADL). “Conspiracists believe that a tyrannical, socialist ‘one-world’ conspiracy has already taken over most of the planet and schemes to eliminate the last bastion of freedom, the United States, with the help of collaborators within the government,” the ADL states. “Through repressive measures, as well as manufactured crises such as terrorist attacks and pandemics, the globalist conspirators seek to eliminate dissent and to disarm Americans so that the ‘New World Order’ can move in and enslave them.” The ADL says its adherents believe the conspirators one day plan to declare martial law in the US, confiscate firearms and round up dissenters into secret concentration camps. The movement brings together American right-wing militant instincts with Christian fundementalist doom prophecies – right-wing televangelist Pat Robertson wrote a best-selling book called The New World Order in 1991 warning against imaginary enemies – and has exploded over the last three decades in tandem with the growth of the internet, a feverish rumour mill of half-truths, political confusion and wilful bad faith interpretations at the best of times. Conspiracy theories have now become a form of mass entertainment on social media, fuelled by everything from The X Files to Alex Jones and culminating in the choose-your-own-reality fringe fantasies of QAnon, whose zealots, bored in lockdown during the pandemic, blended ancient anti-Semitic smears with quest narrative mythologies and pop cultural borrowings to worrying ends. Apparent gaffes like Mr Biden’s only provide further grist to the mill of those who choose to believe that lizard men in silk hoods congregate behind boardroom doors to consult with their puppet-master overlord, hell-bent on global domination and busy manipulating international events to achieve his villainous ends. Can it really be true that most people in jail are legally innocent? How much of mass incarceration is a result of the war on drugs, or the profit motives of private prisons? How has the COVID-19 pandemic changed decisions about how people are punished when they break the law? These essential questions are harder to answer than you might expect. The various government agencies involved in the criminal legal system collect a lot of data, but very little is designed to help policymakers or the public understand what’s going on. As public support for criminal justice reform continues to build — and as the pandemic raises the stakes higher — it’s more important than ever that we get the facts straight and understand the big picture. Further complicating matters is the fact that the U.S. doesn’t have one “criminal justice system;” instead, we have thousands of federal, state, local, and tribal systems. Together, these systems hold almost 2 million people in 1,566 state prisons, 98 federal prisons, 3,116 local jails, 1,323 juvenile correctional facilities, 181 immigration detention facilities, and 80 Indian country jails, as well as in military prisons, civil commitment centers, state psychiatric hospitals, and prisons in the U.S. territories. This report offers some much-needed clarity by piecing together the data about this country’s disparate systems of confinement. It provides a detailed look at where and why people are locked up in the U.S., and dispels some modern myths to focus attention on the real drivers of mass incarceration and overlooked issues that call for reform. This big-picture view is a lens through which the main drivers of mass incarceration come into focus; it allows us to identify important, but often ignored, systems of confinement. The detailed views bring these overlooked systems to light, from immigration detention to civil commitment and youth confinement. In particular, local jails often receive short shrift in larger discussions about criminal justice, but they play a critical role as “incarceration’s front door” and have a far greater impact than the daily population suggests. While this pie chart provides a comprehensive snapshot of our correctional system, the graphic does not capture the enormous churn in and out of our correctional facilities, nor the far larger universe of people whose lives are affected by the criminal justice system. In 2021, about 421,000 people entered prison gates, but people went to jail almost 7 million times. Some have just been arrested and will make bail within hours or days, while many others are too poor to make bail and remain behind bars until their trial. Only a small number (about 87,500 on any given day) have been convicted, and are generally serving misdemeanors sentences of under a year. At least 1 in 4 people who go to jail will be arrested again within the same year — often those dealing with poverty, mental illness, and substance use disorders, whose problems only worsen with incarceration. With a sense of the big picture, the next question is: why are so many people locked up? How many are incarcerated for drug offenses? Are the profit motives of private companies driving incarceration? Or is it really about public safety and keeping dangerous people off the streets? There are a plethora of modern myths about incarceration. Most have a kernel of truth, but these myths distract us from focusing on the most important drivers of incarceration. The overcriminalization of drug use, the use of private prisons, and low-paid or unpaid prison labor are among the most contentious issues in criminal justice today because they inspire moral outrage. But they do not answer the question of why most people are incarcerated or how we can dramatically — and safely — reduce our use of confinement. Likewise, emotional responses to sexual and violent offenses often derail important conversations about the social, economic, and moral costs of incarceration and lifelong punishment. False notions of what a “violent crime” conviction means about an individual’s dangerousness continue to be used in an attempt to justify long sentences — even though that’s not what victims want. At the same time, misguided beliefs about the “services” provided by jails are used to rationalize the construction of massive new “mental health jails.” Finally, simplistic solutions to reducing incarceration, such as moving people from jails and prisons to community supervision, ignore the fact that “alternatives” to incarceration often lead to incarceration anyway. Focusing on the policy changes that can end mass incarceration, and not just put a dent in it, requires the public to put these issues into perspective. Some criminals might be content to serve time in prison, if they know their assets will be available upon release, or that their non-incarcerated families may continue to enjoy the proceeds of crime. This is why confiscation of assets is such an important measure to prevent and combat organized crime. It is also an equally important tool to prevent organized crime infiltration of the legal economy. Confiscation is also known as forfeiture in some jurisdictions. The two terms will be used interchangeably in this Module. Confiscation of assets or property is the permanent deprivation of property by order of a court or administrative procedures, which transfers the ownership of assets derived from criminal activity to the State. The persons or entities that owned those funds or assets at the time of the confiscation or forfeiture lose all rights to the confiscated assets (FATF, 2017; McCaw, 2011; Ramaswamy, 2013). The large revenues generated from organized crime activity can affect the legitimate economy and in particular the banking system adversely through untaxed profits and illicitly funded investments. Furthermore, even after having invested in the legal economy, organized criminal groups often continue to use illicit tools and methods to advance their business, potentially pushing other businesses out of the market. Confiscation of assets is a way to undermine the fiscal structure and even the survival of an organized criminal group by seizing illicitly obtained cash and any property derived from criminal activity (Aylesworth, 1991; Baumer, 2008; U.S. Executive Office for Asset Forfeiture, 1990). Confiscation occurs under one of two types of proceedings: conviction-based confiscation or forfeiture and non-conviction-based confiscation or forfeiture. They differ in the level of proof required for it to take place. Conventionally, non-conviction-based confiscation requires a standard of proof that is lower than the standard required to obtain a conviction in a criminal court. Conviction-based confiscation or forfeiture: confiscation by the State of proceeds of a crime for which a conviction of an offender has been recorded. This is also called criminal confiscation or forfeiture in some jurisdictions. Non-conviction-based confiscation or forfeiture: asset confiscation or forfeiture in the absence of the conviction of the wrongdoer. The term is often used interchangeably with civil confiscation or forfeiture. Furthermore, States might decide to adopt a value based approach to confiscation, which enables a court to impose a pecuniary liability (such as a fine), once it determines the benefit derived directly or indirectly from the criminal conduct. Value-based confiscation is also included in article 12 (1)(a) of the Organized Crime Convention. It is also worth mentioning that, in some countries, assets may be confiscated even if they are not directly linked to the specific crime for which the offender has been convicted, but clearly result from similar criminal activities (i.e. extended confiscation). Growing use of confiscation offers the opportunity to disrupt continuing illicit enterprises and to curtail the effect of large amounts of illicitly obtained cash on the economy. There has been a growing body of case law and policy regarding the seizure and disposition of property in asset forfeiture cases. Concerns regarding the seizure and disposition of property include: Lawfulness of confiscation. Protecting the rights of third parties. Management and disposition of seized or confiscated assets. Lawfulness of confiscation Every jurisdiction has specific powers and limits to guide the confiscation of assets. The procedures permitted correspond with the legal traditions in the country. In some civil law jurisdictions, the power to order the restraint or seizure of assets subject to confiscation is granted to prosecutors, investigating magistrates or law enforcement agencies. In other civil law jurisdictions, judicial authorization is required. In common law jurisdictions, an order to restrain or seize assets generally requires judicial authorization (with some exceptions in seizure cases). Legal systems may have strict obligations to give notice to investigative targets, such as when a search or production order is served on a third party such as a financial institution. That third party may be obliged to advise their client of the existence of such orders, which means that the client would be forewarned about an investigative interest. That must be taken into consideration when taking steps to secure assets or use coercive investigative measures (UNODC, 2012). The legal principle behind confiscation or forfeiture is that the government may take property without compensation to the owner if the property is acquired or used illegally. There are several broad mechanisms for accomplishing this, however the three predominant types of processes used to confiscate property are: administrative (no conviction), property or criminal (conviction-based), and value-based (UNODC, 2012). Conviction-based (or criminal) confiscation In a conviction-based confiscation, property can only be seized once the owner has been convicted of certain crimes. Criminal confiscation is a common approach to asset confiscation in which investigators gather evidence, trace and secure assets, conduct a prosecution, and obtain a conviction. Upon the conviction, confiscation can be ordered by the court. The standard of proof required (normally proof beyond a reasonable doubt) for the confiscation order is often the same as that required to achieve a criminal conviction. Non-conviction-based (or administrative) confiscation A non-conviction-based confiscation occurs independently of any criminal proceeding and is directed at the property itself, having been used or acquired illegally. Conviction of the property owner is not relevant in this kind of confiscation. Administrative confiscation generally involves a procedure for confiscating assets used or involved in the commission of the offence that have been seized in the course of the investigation. It is most often seen in the field of customs enforcement at borders (e.g., bulk cash, drug, or weapons seizures), and applies when the nature of the item seized justifies an administrative confiscation approach (without a prior court review). This process is less viable when the property is a bank account or other immovable property. The confiscation is carried out by an investigator or authorized agency (such as a police unit or a designated law enforcement agency), and usually follows a process where the person affected by the seizure can apply for relief from the automatic confiscation of the seized property, such as a court hearing. All proceeds of crime are subject to confiscation, which has been interpreted to include interest, dividends, income, and real property, although there are variations by jurisdiction (for more information, please see StAR's " A Good Practice Guide for Non-conviction-based Asset Forfeiture"). Whereas the Organized Crime Convention does not make reference to this type of confiscation, the Convention against Corruption includes it in article 54 (1)(c), which encourages States to "consider taking such measures as may be necessary to allow confiscation of [property acquired through or involved in the commission of an offence established in accordance with this Convention] without a criminal conviction in cases in which the offender cannot be prosecuted by reason of death, flight or absence or in other appropriate cases". Value-based confiscation Some jurisdictions elect to use a value-based approach, which is a system where a convicted person is ordered to pay an amount of money equivalent to the value of their criminal benefit. This is sometimes used in cases where specific assets cannot be located. The court calculates the benefit to the convicted offender for a particular offence. Value-based confiscation allows for the value of proceeds and instrumentalities of a crime to be determined and assets of an equivalent value to be confiscated. Protecting the rights of third parties Concern arises regarding the rights of individuals not involved in criminal activity, but whose property is used in, or derived from, the criminal activity of others (Friedler, 2013; Geis, 2008; Gibson, 2012; Goldsmith and Lenck, 1990). This might include uninformed lien holders and purchasers, joint tenants, or business partners. A person who suspects his or her property is the target of a criminal or administrative confiscation investigation may sell the property, give ownership to family members, or otherwise dispose of it. Third-party claims on seized property are sometimes delayed in criminal confiscations because the claim often cannot be litigated until the end of the criminal trial. In an administrative confiscation, the procedure moves more quickly because the confiscation hearing usually occurs soon after the confiscation. In some jurisdictions, third parties are protected under the 'innocent owner' exception for non-conviction-based confiscations, if the government fails to establish that they had knowledge, consent, or wilful blindness to illegal usage of the property. Disposition of confiscated assets Some of most commonly confiscated assets are cash, cars and weapons, as well as luxury property such as boats, planes and jewellery. Residential and commercial property are also subject to confiscation. Once an asset is confiscated, it must be appraised to determine the property's value, less any claims against it. The item must be stored and maintained while ownership and any third-party claims are heard in court. If the challenge to the confiscation is not effective, the property is taken for government use or auctioned. There has been controversy over the use of confiscated assets by some law enforcement agencies. Laws in some jurisdictions earmark specific uses for confiscated assets, such as for education costs. Some have claimed that confiscation of assets that are kept by police provide an incentive for spurious or aggressive confiscations (Bartels, 2010; Skolnick, 2008; Worrall and Kovandzic, 2008). Agenda 21 – Eminent Domain – Confiscation of Private Property – Sustainable Development – Re-wilding The United Nations Agenda 21 was signed by the United States in 1992 at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro. Very few people have even heard of it yet it is being implemented in every city, community, and region in America. Agenda 21 is a 40 chapter document listing goals to be achieved globally. It is the global plan to change the way we “live, eat, learn, and communicate” because we must “save the earth.” “Its regulation would severely limit water, electricity, and transportation – even deny human access to our most treasured wilderness areas, it would monitor all lands and all people. No one would be free from the watchful eye of the new global tracking and information system,” according to Berit Kjos, author of Brave New Schools. Maurice Strong, Secretary-general of the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in Rio de Janeiro said, “. . . Current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class – involving high meat consumption and large amounts of frozen and convenience foods, use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and workplace air-conditioning, and suburban housing are not sustainable.” A shift is necessary which will require a vast strengthening of the multilateral system, including the United Nations. In other words, the Global plan is for us to live on the level of third world nations. That means limited use of fuel of any kind (we will ride bicycles instead of riding in automobiles), no air-conditioning, and we will all be forced to live in tiny apartments in tenement buildings in the middle of a city. That same year, 1992, Al Gore wrote his book, “Earth in the Balance,” and began promoting the Hoax of Global Warming. But it took Bill Clinton to actually introduce something so invasive to our nation and get by with it without the public becoming aware. He appointed his “President’s Council on Sustainable Development” through which he literally gave away the rights and freedoms the framers of the Constitution had provided. Many Americans naively cringe at the mention of “global government” or “conspiracy.” But it is a basic element of human nature to seek wealth and power, and people throughout human history have conspired together to do so. What is Sustainable Development? According to its authors, this is the cover story. The objective of sustainable development is to integrate economic, social, environmental policies in order to achieve reduced consumption, social equity, and the preservation and restoration of biodiversity. Sustainablists insist that every societal decision be based on environmental impact, focusing on three components: global land use, global education, and global population control and reduction. Social Equity (Social Justice) Social justice is described as the right and opportunity of all people (except the elitists, of course) “to benefit equally from the resources afforded us by society and the environment.” That means the Redistribution of wealth. Private property is considered a social injustice (except for the elitists, of course) since not everyone can build wealth from it. National sovereignty is a social injustice. Universal health care (controlled by the elitists, of course) is a social justice. These are ALL part of Agenda 21 policy. Economic Prosperity?? Public Private Partnerships (PPP) – which means that all public roads, utilities, public buildings, etc. that have been built and paid for with taxpayers’ dollars, will be given to Private Corporations to do with as they choose. Special dealings between government (which is already controlled by the mega corporations) and certain, “chosen” corporations which get tax breaks, grants and the government’s power of Eminent Domain to implement sustainable policy. Eminent Domain has been extended to allow the government in any area, including City, and State, to take your property at will. Government-sanctioned monopolies are also part of Agenda 21. What gives Agenda 21 Ruling Authority? More than 178 nations adopted Agenda 21 as official policy during the signing ceremony at the Earth Summit. US president George H. W. Bush signed the document for the U.S. As a result, with the assistance of many groups like the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI), Sustainable Development is now emerging as government policy in every town, county, and state in the nation. Revealing Quotes from Planners “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. . .” Agenda 21: The Earth Summit Strategy to Save Our Planet (Earthpress, 1993) “The realities of life on our planet dictate that continued economic development as we know it cannot be sustained. . . Sustainable development, therefore, is a program of action for local and global economic reform – a program that has yet to be fully defined.” The Local Agenda 21 Planning Guide, published by ICLEI, 1996. “Individual rights will have to take a back seat to the collective.” Harvey Ruvin, Vice Chairman, ICLEI. The Wildlands Project What is not sustainable? Ski runs, grazing of livestock, plowing of soil, building fences, industry, single family homes, paved and tarred roads, logging activities, dams and reservoirs, power line construction, and economic systems that fail to set proper value on the environment.” UN’s Biodiversity Assessment Report. Hide Agenda 21’s UN roots from the people “Participating in a UN advocated planning process would very likely bring out many of the conspiracy-fixated groups and individuals in our society. . . This segment of our society who fear One-World Government and a UN invasion of the United States through which our individual freedom would be stripped away would actively work to defeat any elected official who joined the “conspiracy” by undertaking Agenda 21. So we call our process something else, such as comprehensive planning, growth management or smart growth.” J. Gary Lawrence, advisor to President Clinton’s Council on Sustainable Development. Here is a succinct list of Agenda 21 and related programs that will eliminate many things Americans hold dear. These have been declared “unsustainable” and will be abolished. Here are some of them: 1. ALL private property rights (ownership of private property) 2. ALL forms of irrigation, pesticides & commercial fertilizer 3. Livestock production and most meat consumption 4. Privately owned vehicles and personal travel 5. Use of fossil fuels for power generation or mechanized travel 6. Single family homes 7. Most forms of mineral extraction and timber harvesting 8. Human population must be reduced to fewer than 1 billion people (from the present population of over 6 billion people). This is not coming directly from Washington D.C. or state legislatures for the most part. It is seeping in through local city and county governments. Agenda 21 brings with it stealthy code words, comforting words such as “smart growth,” “social justice,” “bio-diversity,” and “sustained development.” You will hear them often. Translated these terms effectively mean total environmental dictatorship and the elevation of the pagan practice of the worship of Mother Earth – Gaia! Agenda 21 is designed to control every aspect of human life on every square inch of planet earth – and man falls to the bottom of the food chain. If Agenda 21 succeeds animals will become more important than man as will plants and trees. We can already see ample evidence of this process in motion today. Agenda 21’s real message is: “Man is the problem. Nature must be preserved and take precedence. Mother Earth must not be scratched.” The 4 “E’s” of Agenda 21 are not what they appear: Education = Indoctrination into believing that nature is more important than man and the group is more important than the individual. The new purpose of education is to learn values not facts. Students must become global, not American citizens. Equity = Theft of private property, open borders, remove God, morality and responsibility. Economy = Redistribution of America’s wealth to foreign countries by outsourcing jobs, factories and technology creating massive unemployment Environment = Nature is more important than man. The new god is Mother Earth. Phony science creates phony regulations destroying energy independence and industry. Each policy and regulation is in place to control more and more of your life. So WHAT is the REAL GOAL of Agenda 21? In simple, direct terms, the Real Goal of Agenda 21 is for the Elitist Jews to take control of the whole world, including ALL the wealth of everyone in the world, including control of ALL the resources in every country in the world, and kill off 5 1/2 billion people – ALL “Gentiles” of course – and just keep enough people around to be their slaves. The population of America, until they can be destroyed, will have their private property confiscated, will be forced to live in tiny high rise tenement buildings in large cities where they will not be allowed to have a car. They will walk to a job for which they will receive slave labor wages. On every floor of the tenement building will be an agent of the Secret Police who will keep track of the comings and goings of everyone in the building. Lest you think that I am exaggerating, I visited the Soviet Union in 1988, a year before the Berlin Wall came down (which was nothing more than a propaganda stunt by the Communists to make the world think Communism was “dead”). I was traveling with a group of ten other Orthopedic Surgeons in a program to meet with Russian orthopedic surgeons to share information. Our plane landed in Moscow where we stayed overnight in a hotel before flying on to Kurgan, in Siberia. Our passports were confiscated and we were assigned to a room in the hotel. As we got off the elevator to go to our respective rooms, we had to sign in with the Secret Police agent on that floor, as we did every time we left – or returned to – our hotel room. The next day we flew on to Kurgan, a city of 350,000 people, a city that virtually no American has ever heard of. Even though this was mid-summer and the temperatures were in the 70’s, there was no grass and no flowers anywhere – just dirt. As “special physician guests from America” we were housed in the “best” hotel in Kurgan. Each hotel room was approximately 8’ X 10’ – the size of a prison cell – with one small window. The “bed” was a thin mattress laid on a wooden surface. Before we started on our trip, each of us had been told to bring a golf ball, but we didn’t know the reason until we got to our hotel. The bathroom was about 3 1/2’ square with no bathtub or shower that we could see. The small sink had no stopper – which was why we were told to bring the golf ball to use as the stopper. The toilet seat was made from plywood that was cut down the center of the board – long ways – exposing the rough inner part of the plywood, making it prone to delivering splinters. We were told that the “shower” was in the ceiling in the center of the bathroom. So one would just stand there, turn the shower on, and water would soak everything including the sink and the toilet. There was a drain in the center of the floor. But the biggest problem was that there was NO hot water. The City administrators turned off the hot water in the Spring – for the entire city – and turned it back on in the fall, when they felt it was appropriate. So one could only shower with freezing cold water – straight from the melted ice rivers of Siberia. Each morning, I could hear the screams of everyone up and down the hotel hallway as they showered. Finally, because we were “special” Americans, the hotel provided a bucket of boiling water outside our door each morning. That was a gracious gesture but it was useless for the purpose of showering. It could be used in the sink – mixed with cold water – for the men to shave or for any of us to take a sponge bath. I saw no private homes in this city of 350,000. Everyone lived in a high rise tenement. We American physicians were not allowed to talk to the Russian physicians we were visiting at any time other than over the operating table as we performed surgery. We were not allowed to eat with them, nor to visit them in their apartments. However, under dark of night, at danger to ourselves and to them, we did – at their request – sneak into their apartments to talk. Physician families of six, parents and four children, were housed in an apartment of approximately 500 square feet. Physicians were paid less than bus drivers because the policy of the Communist state was that a physician – if he made a mistake – could only kill one person at a time whereas a bus driver – if he made an error – could kill a whole busload of people. When we were visiting them in their tiny apartments, we had to speak in whispers so no other tenants could hear us because everyone was taught to be a snitch. We had to come to their apartments and leave from their apartments by the back stairs after given a special signal of “all clear.” We American physicians were given the opportunity to visit an Art store in Kurgan, a shop that was kept locked continuously otherwise, so no resident of Kurgan had access to it. It contained reproductions of famous artists, and books of famous classical artists, and books of classical literature. All of us bought some of these books and painting reproductions to surreptitiously give to the Russian physicians who were not allowed to have anything of beauty. We American surgeons were appalled at the instruments the Russian orthopedic surgeons were forced to use. The equipment was at least 50 years old and completely – and dangerously – rusty. There were no disposable needles, no antibiotics and no disposable surgical gowns. All needles were also rusty and had to be sterilized and re-used. And their sterilization techniques were from the previous century. The hospital was at least 100 years old. There were virtually no cars on the street – except for an occasional “official.”. I wanted to buy a souvenir from my visit to Kurgan so I proceeded to the only department store in the city – GUM – pronounced goom, the abbreviation for the Russian words for “main universal store.” Unfortunately, there was nothing to be purchased. There were dozens of long, old wooden cases with glass tops, remnants also of the previous century, but all they contained were black combs endlessly lined up 2 inches apart. The rest of the merchandise was made of the cheapest plastic that wouldn’t even be sold in a 99 cent store in the U.S. There were no grocery stores that I could find. However, little old ladies in their babushkas were lined up selling what they had produced in their “garden.” The average “seller” had no more than 6 items, for example: 2 small tomatoes, 1 straggly cucumber, and 3 green onions. I never found out where any other food was sold. However, our hotel fed us (Americans) excellent food which was imported from Moscow, just for us. None of that food was available to the Russian people. The Russian people look just like Americans. There were many young, beautiful girls, but they aged rapidly from their very difficult life. Our guide was a lovely, outgoing, young Russian woman who spoke excellent English. At one point she was telling us how excited she was for her upcoming vacation. But she couldn’t make final plans until she got her Visa – to travel to Moscow! – a city within her own country. The Russians were not allowed to travel even to another city without a visa from Moscow, the capital, requiring all travel plans to be registered with the state. I had to leave a day earlier than the rest of the surgeons in my group, therefore I had to board a small plane, a commercial plane that carried about 30 passengers to take me from Kurgan to Moscow. The plane had to be at least 30 years old. The seats had less than one inch of padding that covered several metal bars that drilled into one’s backside during the trip. No food or beverage was served on the trip that lasted over an hour. There was one Flight attendant, a large, fierce looking woman in her mid-fifties, who looked like Nurse Ratched from the movie, “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest.” If you never saw that movie, then the next best illustration would be a woman bouncer in a low class bar. No one was allowed to get up from their seat at any time during the flight, even to go to the bathroom. (I’m not even sure there was a bathroom on the plane.) When we reached our destination at the Moscow airport, no one got up, so I stayed in my seat, too. Finally, when the prop engines were turned off, the pilots got off the plane and they were the ones who unloaded all the luggage. At that point, “Nurse Ratched” came to me, pointed at me, and motioned me to go with her. She spoke no words. I followed her off the plane and a black car with dark tinted windows was waiting for me at the bottom of the stairs. The driver got out of the car and motioned me to get in. I’ll have to admit, I was not totally comfortable getting into that car, not knowing where I was being taken. Only then were the other passengers allowed to de-plane. Fortunately, I was taken directly to the plane I was to board for my flight home from Moscow, where, for the first time since coming to the U.S.S.R, I was able to feel some sense of freedom. The Soviet Union was – and is today – ruled by the Jews, the same Jews that rule America, China, and virtually every country in the world, except for Iran, North Korea, and a few others who are now on their “mopping up” agenda. What I experienced in Kurgan was just a taste of what we can expect in America. Our Slave-masters are the same as those in Kurgan, Moscow, and the entire Soviet Union, and every other Communist country. Our lives will be worth nothing. Back to Agenda 21 The Deliberate LIE of the story of “saving the environment” – which is actually being destroyed by these same Elitist Jews, not the population of the world – is nothing but a “cover” story to keep the people in the dark while the “Plan” proceeds at break-neck speed. After all, if people caught on to the truth of what is going on, they might make some attempt to survive! This is nothing less than blatant, RAW, Communism! And we, the people, are paying for it. Cities, towns, and states are being seduced into destroying their own rights, and the rights of their fellow Americans, by federal grants and “easy” money to implement these diabolical plans. Undoubtedly, residents of any town, county, or city in the United States that treasure their freedom, liberty, and property rights couldn’t care less whether it’s called Agenda 21 or smart growth. A recent example of this can be found in Carroll County, Maryland, where a smart growth plan called Pathways was drafted by the County Planning Department in 2009. It proposed a breathtaking reshuffling of land rights: Rezoning of thousands of acres of beautiful, low-density agricultural farmland and protected residential conservation land into office parks Down-zoning of agriculture land to prevent future subdivision by farmers Up-zoning of low-density residential land around small towns into higher density zoning to permit construction of hundreds or possibly thousands of inclusive housing units, including apartments and condominiums Inclusive housing with placement of multi-family construction on in-fill lots within existing residential single family communities Endorsement of government-sponsored housing initiatives (subsidies) to ensure healthier, balanced neighborhoods “Balanced” means putting prostitutes, drug addicts, street people, gang members, etc. as tenants in the same buildings with middle class families. This has been going on in San Francisco for years. Upper middle class Americans bought up-scale condominiums in up-scale high rise buildings in San Francisco only to see the City give HUGE subsidies (sometimes paying as much as $4,000 per month) to put these indigent people in the same building. Their goal? To destroy the value of the condominiums owned by the upper middle class thereby destroying the largest investment they owned. The indigent people who were put in these buildings at great expense to the city would defecate in the elevators and in the hallways, leave trash everywhere, put graffiti all over everything inside and outside the building, buy and sell dope on the property, bring their thug friends into the building, and do everything possible to make the decent tenants miserable and frightened. https://sdgs.un.org/2030agenda https://planning-org-uploaded-media.s3.amazonaws.com/publication/download_pdf/Growing-Smart-Legislative-Guidebook.pdf https://www.un.org/esa/socdev/rwss/2016/full-report.pdf https://rumble.com/v2yky8g-this-is-un-4g3nda-21-aw4reness-is-the-first-step-in-the-r3slst4nc3-by-the-p.html Agenda 21 and 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development is a non-binding, voluntarily implemented action plan of the United Nations with regard to sustainable development. It was adopted by more than 178 countries at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in 1992.

A Brief History Of America In Pictures - Can We Save Our Republic ? No I Do Not Thank So - Yes Happy Veterans Day - We The Sheeple People of The United States of America and A Real Bill of State Rights - A Republic If We Can Keep It ? The Left/Right paradigm isn't only exposed by race and immigration issues. The Left and Right are in lockstep on every issue that really matters: The IRS. Income tax. Federal Reserve system. Endless wars. Endless expansion of tyranny and ever contracting liberty. Chronically wide-open borders. Suicidal immigration policies. Don't you see? The democrats and republicans exist only to provide the illusion of choice. A strong "us versus them" simulation in every election. It's ritualized tribalism. But the joke is, it doesn't matter which team wins, because both sides have the same agenda. God, guns and gays are phony "issues" to bolster the illusion of "difference" between the parties. The only thing that makes all this possible is that people aren't aware of the scam. Just knowing they are either "Team Red" or "Team Blue" liberates them from the responsibility of having to actually know or think anything. Then they feel righteous when their team wins, or despondent when they loose. It's no coincidence that the system works exactly like sports. There comes a point when ignorance and apathy become treason. We are past that point, people. How far our Government has come from being limited and protecting freedoms to Tyranny and Blaming Problems on Freedom and Bioweapon Covid-19 U.S.A.. 1. Freedom America is what we stood for (Background) - 2. 13 Original Colonies Joined to beat the British - 3. Pilgrims Landing - 4. Tyranny Grows British Kill people with NO accountability (much like our Gov Today) - 5. Protest started over high and excess taxes by Red Coats - Much like today - 6. Boston Massacre- Standing Army/Police Shoots Kids for throwing rocks - 7. Boston Tea Party To Peaceful Protest the more high taxes - 8. Protest grows over Tea tax, sugar tax, stamp act - 9. 1765, Quartering Act Troops can take over homes at their will - 10. leaders getting fed up, Give me Liberty or Give me Death, Patrick Henry 11. Paul Revere Pony Run, One If By Sea - 12. 1775, Revolutionary War - 13. 1775, George Washing is appointed as the Commander In Chief of Army - 14. Jun 1775, Battle of Bunker Hill - 15. Navy Was Established To fight off British Navy - 16. Thomas Paine starts paper called Common Sense To Inform on Tyranny - 17. Mar 1776, British Leave and evacuate Boston, Red Coats Run - 18. Jul 4th, 1776. Declaration of Independence - 19. Join or Die, Ben Franklin, first political cartoon that advocated unification of the colonies - 20. Dec, 1791, Bill Of Rights 21. Don't Tread On Me, Gadsden Flag first flown on a warship,1775 as a battle cry for American independence from British rule - 22. On May 4, 1970, members of the Ohio National Guard fired into a crowd of Kent State University demonstrators, killing four & wounding nine Kent State students - 23. Randy Weaver, 1992 Ruby Ridge standoff at his cabin near Naples, Idaho, that resulted in the deaths of his wife & son after he was set up by Gov - 24. The Waco siege, the Waco massacre, 900 Fed Agents siege the compound of religious sect Branch Davidians, Killing 75 people, 25 were children - 25. Oklahoma Federal Building Bombing in retaliation for Gov Killing at Waco & Ruby Ridge - 26. Tim McVeigh, claiming he was doing his Patriotic duty Holding Gov Accountable being led out of court - 27. McVeigh sold bumper stickers at Waco promoting Freedom & Gun Rights Knowing gov is trying to disarm the People so they can't fight Gov or hold Gov accountable - 28. FBI Agent Shot UNARMED Man over Bundy Standoff, Gov was stealing and killing Cattle over taxes, Agent cleared of shooting, Gov protecting Gov, NO accountability - 29. Lavoy Finicum, Good American Killed for standing up to Gov Tyranny - 30. FBI operation Coin-Tel-Pro to Spy On Americans - More Gov Tyranny 31. US Patriot ACT, largest seizer of Freedoms By Gov - Ignoring our Constitution - 32. FBI caught paying Best Buy To spy and Unlawfully Search all computers they worked on. Paying employees Gov money to find or PLANT evidence on comp for money. - 33. Gov Seized Guns UNLAWFULLY during Katrina crisis, Gov Broke into home & forcefully seized gun from citizens leaving them helpless to looters and criminals - 34. RED FLAGS being pushed by Gov to seize more guns from citizens - 35. Beto O' Rourke running for Texas Governor gives speech, "Hell yea, we are going to take your AR-15" finally admitting Gov Wants your guns. - 36. FBI has secret NO FLY lists & expands it to Trump Supporters Going To Protest - 37. FBI has become the most Tyrannical Gov Agency, ignoring the Constitution, secret warrants, secret list, NO Accountability - 38. FBI disinformation, working with Google, Twitter, other social platforms, using Gov power to force Pvt Companies to SPY on Americans - 39. Massive Voter Fraud, covered up & censored by Gov and Media - 40. Gov throws out Due Process & Jails political opponents IGNORING the Constitution 41. Gov Shoots and KILLS Unarmed Woman for Climbing in a window, Gov Cleared & Justified shooting - 42. Biden's Open Border flooding country with over 3 Million Illegals, American Hating Terrorist to flood more Voter Fraud - 43. Gov Forced Lock Downs, Masks, Vaccines on American, Yet Open border people get free food, phones & not required to be Vaxed. - 44. Gov CDC MADATING Kids Get vaxed or can't go to school - 45. Biden & Congress Approve 87,000 NEW IRS agents to further impose MORE TAXES - 46. Armed Americans Stand up to Federal Agents at Bundy Standoff - Gov Backs Down - 47. FBI puts out a Warning Flyer labeling Patriots & Gun owners has Dangerous and Extremist - 48. Congress passing 5000 page bills without reading them giving BILLIONS to other countries - 49. National Debt Clock - 31 TRILLION IN DEBT AND GROWING - Gov Needs more Taxes & Money - 50. Judicial Watch releases report showing FBI & Biden are Hiding Biden's Crimes 51. When Gov becomes Tyrannical It is not only our right, it is our Duty to stop it. - 52. We The People - must defend & protect our constitution and bill of rights (2nd Amendment) - 54. Ben Franklin - We must hand together or we will Hang separately - 55 A Republic if you can keep it - 56 Right to Bear Arms - 57 Molon Labe - Come & take it - Don't Tread On Me - 58 Three Percent - 59 Betsy Ross Flag Does the U.S. government have the right to kill its own citizens? A Hellfire missile obliterated a 16-year-old American citizen in Yemen last fall. U.S. President Barrack Obama personally signs off on all such "targeted killings," and while most are directed against foreigners – usually Muslims suspected of being radical jihadists – at least three Americans are among the hundreds killed in the last three years in drone strikes in Yemen, Pakistan, and Somalia. Hellfire missiles fired from unmanned Predators have become the president's preferred means of dealing "justice" overseas. The 16-year-old, reportedly sitting among a group of men at a roadside café in Yemen, was Abdulrahman al-Awlaki, son of Anwar al-Awlaki, the U.S.-born radical Muslim cleric widely suspected of recruiting jihadists for attacks on the United States. Mr. al-Awlaki had been killed two weeks earlier in another Hellfire missile strike along with another U.S. citizen, Samir Khan, a propagandist for al-Qaeda in Yemen. It remains unknown whether the 16-year-old was killed because he was the son of a suspected al-Qaeda figure or whether he was so-called collateral damage and someone else in the group was the target okayed by Mr. Obama. At issue is whether the president, any president, can simply sign a death warrant for a U.S. citizen overseas or whether Constitutional guarantees of "due process" require more than an Oval Office checklist. While many Americans savaged former U.S. President George W. Bush for approving harsh measures, including so-called enhanced interrogation techniques that many, including the current president, deplored as inhumane and tantamount to torture, the targeted killing on Mr. Obama's watch of a handful U.S. citizen has attracted little outrage. Now two rights groups, the American Civil Liberties Union and the Center for Constitutional Rights are suing Defence Secretary Leon Panetta and Central Intelligence Director David Petraeus, among others, in an attempt to pull back the curtain on Mr. Obama's murky program of selective assassination. They can't sue the president directly; he has immunity. The suit was filed earlier this month on behalf of Nasser al-Awlaki, the father and grandfather of Anwar and Abdulrahman and Sarah Khan, the mother of Samir Khan. The Obama administration claims "targeted killings" are completely legal. The simple explanation, as given by Attorney General Eric Holder, in a long speech last March states that: "'Due process' and 'judicial process' are not one and the same, particularly when it comes to national security." In the view of the Obama administration, "the Constitution guarantees due process, not judicial process," Mr. Holder said. That bizarre interpretation of the Constitution is what the current lawsuit aims to challenge. "For obvious reasons the government's authority to kill people summarily without judicial process is very limited," said Jameel Jaffer, legal director of the ACLU. He admits there are some exceptions: a police officer faced with an imminent threat from an armed assailant or a soldier at war on a foreign battlefield. Both domestic and international law sanction such killing as lawful within limits. But the use of lethal force – away from an active war zone – has traditionally been limited to thwarting a grave and imminent threat, not substituting for the long, convoluted, process of charge, arrest, trial, conviction and punishment. "The questions here is whether the government is justified in killing them without charging them with anything or trying them for anything," Mr. Jaffer said, adding that the ACLU fully acknowledges the very serious allegations of terrorism against Anwar al-Awlaki. Taking a page out of the Bush playbook, Mr. Holder said legal opinions – prepared secretly because of national security implications and therefore not available – have concluded that "targeted killings" are legal. Mr. Jaffer disputes that. "While the case is complicated in some ways, ultimately it is very simple. Our argument is that when the government is killing its own citizens it has an obligation to explain why," he said. I'm from the Government and I'm Here to Kill You The True Human Cost of Official Negligence Gallup recently found that 49 percent of Americans believe that the government poses “an immediate threat to the rights and freedoms of ordinary citizens.” I’m from the Government and I’m Here to Kill You, written by a former federal attorney, shows that even the 49 percent have no idea how bad things really are. Rights and freedoms are not the only things at stake; all too often government imperils the very lives of those it supposedly serves. Federal employees have, with legal impunity, blown up a town and killed six hundred people, released staggering amounts of radioactive contamination and lied about the resulting cancer, allowed people to die of an easily treated disease in order to study their deaths, and run guns to Mexican drug cartels in hopes of expanding agency powers. Law enforcement leaders have ordered their subordinates to commit murder. Medical administrators have “cooked the books” and allowed patients to die, while raking in plump bonuses. Federal prosecutors have sent Americans to prison while concealing evidence that proved their innocence. I’m from the Government documents how we came to this pass: American courts misconstrued and expanded the old legal concept of sovereign immunity, “the king can do no wrong.” When Congress attempted to allow suits against the government, the legislators used vague language that the courts construed to block most lawsuits. The result is a legal system that allows official negligence to escape legal consequences and paradoxically punishes an agency if it tries to secure public safety. I’m from the Government ends with proposals for legal reforms that will hold the government and its servants accountable when they inflict harm on Americans. IS THERE A RIGHT TO TRAVEL WITHOUT A DRIVER'S LICENSE IN THE UNITED STATES? Right to Travel vs. Freedom of Movement The phrase "right to travel" should be clarified because it's commonly confused. Many cases, documents, etc. using the phrase "right to travel" are in fact about Freedom of Movement, which is the Constitutional right to travel between States at will. If anyone speaks of a "Constitutional right to travel" Freedom of Movement is the only valid thing they could be referring to, as we'll show. In pseudo-legal circles, "right to travel" means the supposed right to "travel freely in your private property / automobile / conveyance on the public roads / highways without a driver's license, insurance or registration and exempt from regulation or interruption provided one does not engage in commerce / earn profit or cause harm to people or property." Absolute freedom! Could it be true? How does the law work? Tenth Amendment, State Codes Traffic regulation isn't mentioned in the Constitution, the supreme law of the land, therefore the power generally falls to the States pursuant to the 10th Amendment: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people. States are free to enact whatever traffic regulations they want provided they do not violate federal law, as determined by the federal courts, pursuant to their police power. All 50+ States, through their legislatures consisting of the people's elected representatives, have seen fit to devise and enact their own traffic codes and police them. Was it always this way? There wasn't always legislation displacing the common law. Automobile regulation began in the early 1900's. Here is an excellent paper that thoroughly explores the transitional period when decisions could go either way: The Orphaned Right: The Right to Travel by Automobile, 1890-1950. Bicycles were regulated decades before automobiles were invented and activists of the day faced many of the same questions and challenges modern right to travel proponents do. An analysis of that period can be found in this publication: The Impact of the Sport of Bicycle Riding on Safety Law. Constitutionality The States have all enacted traffic regulations, but do they violate federal law or the Constitution? Judging constitutionality is ultimately up to the Supreme Court pursuant to Article 3: The judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. Appeals are more-often-than-not declined by the Supreme Court so adjudication may stop at the federal United States Courts of Appeals (circuit courts) or District Courts and those are a good place to look for precedent, too. We prefer citations from these federal courts to avoid presumptions of bias that might arise by the State judging its own regulations and because federal decisions are superior to State decisions pursuant to the Supremacy Clause. Federal Court Decisions Let's have a look at some federal cases on the right of States to regulate traffic. Hendrick v. Maryland 235 US 610 (1915) The movement of motor vehicles over the highways is attended by constant and serious dangers to the public, and is also abnormally destructive to the ways themselves . . . In the absence of national legislation covering the subject a State may rightfully prescribe uniform regulations necessary for public safety and order in respect to the operation upon its highways of all motor vehicles — those moving in interstate commerce as well as others. And to this end it may require the registration of such vehicles and the licensing of their drivers . . . This is but an exercise of the police power uniformly recognized as belonging to the States and essential to the preservation of the health, safety and comfort of their citizens. Hess v. Pawloski 274 US 352 (1927) Motor vehicles are dangerous machines; and, even when skillfully and carefully operated, their use is attended by serious dangers to persons and property. In the public interest the State may make and enforce regulations reasonably calculated to promote care on the part of all, residents and non-residents alike, who use its highways. Reitz v. Mealey 314 US 33 (1941) The use of the public highways by motor vehicles, with its consequent dangers, renders the reasonableness and necessity of regulation apparent. The universal practice is to register ownership of automobiles and to license their drivers. Any appropriate means adopted by the states to insure competence and care on the part of its licensees and to protect others using the highway is consonant with due process. There we have three solid federal Supreme Court decisions that set nationwide precedent that cannot be ignored. The Supreme Court is the final arbiter of law in the United States. Unless "right to travel" proponents can come up with a later Supreme Court ruling that states otherwise, their claims are busted. And we have one less-impressive but telling quote from a lower federal district court: Wells v. Malloy 402 F. Supp. 856 (1975) Although a driver's license is an important property right in this age of the automobile, it does not follow that the right to drive is fundamental in the constitutional sense. A few of the above cases were found in a somewhat inflammatory and dated but comprehensive publication, Idiot Legal Arguments. We picked out the relevant federal cases, but many more high-level State cases can be found there, too, if you're interested. There actually isn't a whole lot at the federal level because appeals beyond State courts are often denied as it has long been accepted by the federal government that traffic regulation is a proper exercise of State police power. Federal courts uphold the ability of States to regulate road traffic provided it is done so with equality, reasonableness and for public safety and doesn't violate any federal laws or rights. But I don't "drive" or use a "motor vehicle"! Those are legal terms used to enslave me and I'm smarter than that! I'm afraid the State and its courts dictate how things are viewed under its law. You don't get to decide what's considered driving or a motor vehicle, they do. You can't simply switch out a few words to avoid responsibility. If you're in territory controlled by the US and/or a State then its laws may be applied to you and you have no lawful recourse (see Law Basics). I've heard of people being ignored or let go by police, even without a license or insurance! Police have discretion. The world is a very dynamic place. There are any number of reasons why you might be passed by or allowed to proceed at any given time. The cop might be a scared rookie, not care, not want to fight, have a date, have to pee, be on lunch break, be at the end of their shift and going home – think about it – they're human, not machines. The priorities of police and prosecuting attorneys vary. The law is what it is, though, and when you understand it you know in the long run you're looking for trouble if you don't obey it. I don't like traffic regulations. What can I do? Your lawful remedy is to convince the majority of people in your State to put pressure on your elected representatives in the State legislature to change the law. That or you could move to another State or country where there are less regulations (and perhaps more fatalities). Study hard, verify claims, think for yourself, question this, comment. DID THE 14TH AMENDMENT LIMIT STATE CITIZENS' RIGHTS? The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, Section 1, the Citizenship Clause, states: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. Some claim that before the amendment was ratified State citizens were not subject to the federal United States government. The argument fails straight-away because the clause plainly states that it only applies to subjects of the United States. Anyone affected by the 14th amendment was already subject to the federal government. The federal government was merely dictating something to its subjects as anyone with subjects lawfully could. The main intent of the amendment was to have the States recognize federal subjects, particularly slaves that were considered property and not citizens in the southern slave States, and to establish equality and full civil rights across the nation. We should know that the States themselves, and thereby their constituents and properties, e.g. citizens and slaves, have been subject to the federal government since the Constitution was signed in 1788. Article 6, Clause 2 of the Constitution, the Supremacy Clause, reads: This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding. Therefore, State citizens may or may not have been federal citizens but were definitely subject to the United States government, at least as far as the United States government could limit the States and their members. The amendment imposed federal citizenship on State citizens that didn't have it, but did it represent a substantial loss of liberty? It is said in related Congressional documents here or here that subjects should be treated about equal with citizens as far as liberty is concerned. Therefore if a State citizen were indeed not to have US citizenship and (as subjects but not citizens) gained it by the 14th amendment, they would conceivably not suffer much, if any, loss of liberty. They would, however, gain valuable constitutional and federal protection. I want to say that the 14th amendment Citizenship Clause does not remove any rights or privileges or impose any additional duties upon State citizens that were not previously federal citizens. For the most part this appears true. As federal subjects but not citizens State citizens would seemingly be limited similarly to federal citizens. By swearing allegiance to a State that swore allegiance to the Constitution even without federal citizenship there is a substantial loss of liberty for State citizens to the federal government. Therefore I think it's safe to say that any additional duties imposed by federal citizenship would be minor. Further, the act of forcing subjects to become citizens could not conceivably be viewed as unlawful, as doing what your master says is what being a subject is all about. I wonder whether or not all State citizens automatically became federal citizens or if there was ever a sweeping grant or imposition of citizenship at some point before the 14th amendment. There were naturalization acts, people could become US citizens by residing in the US for a period of time and swearing allegiance in court, but how did the first citizens, the signers, etc., get their citizenship? Still working on it. Stay vigilant. Keep asking questions. Post a comment. IS THE UNITED STATES A FOR-PROFIT CORPORATION? A popular theory is that the United States is a for-profit corporation similar to McDonald's. A variety of arguments are used to try to support this claim. We intend to investigate those arguments, but first we need to get some fundamentals out of the way. What is a country? What is a corporation? A country, or nation-state, is a "public body corporate", a lawful entity consisting of various members. Countries are not incorporated with any superior entity – they are sovereign, answerable only to the political, economic and military force of other nations who dare oppose. In general, nations voluntarily follow principles of public international law in the interest of peace, order and mutual benefit. A standard corporation, on the other hand, similarly consists of various members but is incorporated into, under and subject to a nation-state or state and its laws. The nature and necessity of such corporations is explored at length in Blackstone's Commentaries: Of Corporations. People, men and women, human beings, whether citizens or not are not considered corporations under law, but natural persons. It is not possible to appear in law individually except as a natural person. What is the United States? The United States is a sovereign state with the Constitution as the foundational document and supreme law of the land. The United States entity, the same you see as a party in court cases, etc., was created implicitly by the Constitution. The United States is the highest entity that exists or can exist in the United States. The United States itself is not a standard corporation incorporated under any nation's laws (or its own), however the US may form and make use of various standard corporations internally. Now that we're done with the formalities, let's debunk some pseudo-legal claims! 28 USC § 3002 Definition The following definition is often claimed to be proof-positive that the United States is a corporation: (15) “United States” means— (A) a Federal corporation; (B) an agency, department, commission, board, or other entity of the United States; or (C) an instrumentality of the United States. First we need to understand the basics of statutory word definition. If you read the top of the section carefully you will see the words "As used in this chapter". That means those definitions only apply within that chapter of the USC, which we see here. At a glance it covers about 124 sections out of many thousand in the USC. Moreover, the definitions only apply in federal proceedings that fall under that chapter. The same definition does not apply and is not used anywhere else. So yes, for the purposes of that chapter, United States is defined as a Federal corporation. This argument is busted based on the scope of the definition alone – clearly something that applies in just one chapter of federal code can't override the entire nation. We can look further, though, to find the exact intent and reasoning behind the particular definition. From the description of the chapter we see it's related to federal debt collection procedure, which is a start. How can we quickly find out more? We can search Google Scholar to see what the courts say. Clicking the first case and checking footnotes 8 and 9 sheds much light on the topic. Apparently the definition is related to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and the intent is to limit the application to dealings with federal entities. In passing the FDCPA, Congress evinced a clear intent to exclude private transactions — debts created under (and thus governed by) state law, and to which the United States was not an original party. That explains that! The District of Columbia Some believe that the creation of a municipal or state-style government subject to Congress in the District of Columbia somehow changed the government and made everything, including the Constitution (the supreme law of the land, remember) subject to that corporation. This would be quite impossible and makes no sense. The created cannot supersede its creator. No legislation from Congress, no ruling from the Supreme Court, no Executive Order can destroy or replace the Constitution or the United States. Where do the profits go? Revenue collected by the United States is managed by the United States Department of the Treasury which has a number of responsibilities. Collected monies remain in the Treasury for use within the nation. Money cannot be removed except in accordance with US law under the Constitutional framework. What say you? Do you think the United States is a "for-profit corporation"? Nation-States, Jurisdictions The highest sovereign power is the nation-state, a "public body corporate", a country in accordance with public international law. At this level there is really no binding authority or effective force to hold nations accountable. Nations may have treaties with other nations, but they are honoured voluntarily, with no repercussions other than public stigma or the potential action of an injured party in the event of a breach. While every nation is free to do things their own way, in general, next are internal states (or provinces), in accordance with national law, and [counties and] municipalities, in accordance with state law. National law trumps state law, and state law trumps regional and municipal law. Where treaties exist, international law trumps national law. Each jurisdiction, be it federal, state, county, municipal, etc., is sovereign unto itself, subject to its parent, with federal being the highest authority in the nation. In general, a federal court cannot hear a state matter, except on appeal and in accordance with state law. A federal court cannot interfere in state matters, except where they violate federal law. A state court cannot hear a federal matter at all. A county or municipal court cannot hear a state or federal matter. Applicability of Law Unless you make your own law (that nobody cares about) it is impossible to appear in law except under a nation-state. You can't contract out of national law because the contract law you're using is subject to that same nation. Likewise, you can't call citizenship a trust because there is no position or law above the nation to call it a trust from. The nation dictates how things operate and there is nothing lawful you can do about it short of leaving the area, starting your own nation and declaring war. The laws of a nation-state apply equally to everyone. Anyone in or on territory claimed by a nation is expected to conform to all the laws of the nation, state and municipality (as applicable). Where one does not wish to conform and is forced to, there is no lawful remedy one can employ to collect compensation. One can only potentially be awarded damages when federal, state or municipal laws are violated. There is no higher law as some believe. This could be viewed as an unfortunate case of might making right. Theories about what makes such a social contract legitimate vary from divine blessing to tacit acceptance by staying in a claimed area or using the products of society. Challenging Constitutionality Until such time as a superior court deems a piece of legislation unconstitutional or invalid it is in full force and effect. The way it works is this: bad laws are enacted, someone is eventually harmed, that someone now has standing to sue and challenge the law to potentially have it struck down. It is not up to individuals to determine the constitutionality of laws or declare them invalid. Only the highest courts can do this. Common Law vs. Statute Law Many seem to think common law trumps statute law. This is false. The local federal, state and municipal constitutions and legislatures are supreme. Statutes have always displaced common law, since the first English statutes. The constitution, king and parliament (or congress, state legislature or regional council) have always been stronger than the judges and courts they employ in their realm. Again, the nation-state is the highest entity in law. Sovereign states can choose to receive third party law, such as English law. English colonies automatically receive English law whereas the US received it voluntarily via reception statutes, clearly subject to local law. Local governments, being sovereign inasmuch as they do not violate higher national, state or regional law, are always able to overturn foreign law they inherited or received. Contract Law – Is silence consent? There is a common misconception based on the spongy maxim "silence is consent" that one can simply send a Notice, Affidavit, Fee Schedule or other document with a time limit for response and failing that response a binding contract is made. This is not valid contract law. According to the reigning case law (contracts remain primarily at common law), contracts cannot be established unilaterally through silence, there must be a clear offer and acceptance and meeting of the minds. The recipient failing to respond in a certain time is not binding unless there is some specific valid governing legislation or common law that dictates the same. For example, many Acts, contracts, court rules, etc. dictate that certain notices and time limits apply. UCC-1, PPSA and other Financing Statements When a document is ignored a wayward pseudolaw proponent may turn to abusing other legal processes to try to enforce their view of the law. A common method is through UCC or PPSA filings (for the US or Canada, respectively), as these are not checked for validity at the time of filing. Such filings are a direct attack on the well-being of a person and can severely affect their economic status, credit rating, etc. In some jurisdictions frivolous or vexatious filings can garner cash awards, years in jail or both. Financing statements are a form of expressing interest in collateral. In order for collateral to be properly owed to a secured party and qualify for a filing a clear contract or security agreement describing the intent and collateral must exist between the would-be secured party creditor and debtor. In the US and Canada, pursuant to UCC, PPSA or other legislation such as a Statute of Frauds, the debtor must authenticate the security agreement by signature. Where no collateral is involved, financing statements are useless and improper. For a standard contract, one would simply sue in court to obtain a judgment which would allow garnishment of income and seizure of assets. Definition of Legal Terms A common mistake is applying definitions of legal terms universally, often from an incorrect source. One might think a law dictionary is the best place to define words for use in law. This is unfortunately incorrect. The first place a court looks for a definition is in the Act related to the specific charge. If the charge is a state traffic violation, for example, the state traffic code and definitions found therein would apply. Where a word isn't defined in legislation a court might look to its own past rulings, a superior court or any number of dictionaries or other sources for suggestions before deciding for itself what a word means. Meads v. Meads A Canadian case, (Meads v. Meads, 2012 ABQB 571)-(This A PDF File 188 Pages) explores numerous pseudo-legal theories at length. It is highly recommended to read the case in full. https://www.canlii.org/en/ab/abqb/doc/2012/2012abqb571/2012abqb571.pdf IS THE UNITED STATES STILL UNDER LINCOLN'S MARTIAL LAW? Some believe Abraham Lincoln's martial law from the American Civil War is still in effect. Hostilities technically ended about a month after Lincoln's assassination, with a proclamation made by new President Johnson on May 10, 1865. armed resistance to the authority of this Government in the said insurrectionary States may be regarded as virtually at an end On April 2, 1866, another proclamation declared the insurrection at an end in all States but Texas. there now exists no organized armed resistance of misguided citizens or others to the authority of the United States in the States of Georgia, South Carolina, Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Arkansas, Mississippi, and Florida, and the laws can be sustained and enforced therein by the proper civil authority On Aug 20, 1866, a third proclamation confirmed that civil government was officially resumed in all states that had seceded from the Union. I do further proclaim that the said insurrection is at an end and that peace, order, tranquillity, and civil authority now exist in and throughout the whole of the United States of America. Ergo, Lincoln's martial law can confidently be said to be no longer in effect. The image reads ‘We kill people, who kill people, because killing people is wrong’ placed on an American flag with a woman holding a gun with her eyes and mouth taped shut. To understand the image further it is easier to break it down into the separate symbols within the image; The American Flag is traditionally a symbol of freedom, although the smeared paint of the flag may pertain to some form of blurred image, showing that the image and what it stands for is not always what it appears to be Historically women represent a caring and motherly figure, although the body language displayed (such as the gun being held firmly to her chest) depicts a cold and un-nurturing connotations Black clothing symbolises death in a lot of countries, as it is worn to funerals. Guns are often a representation of death or pain The blindfold is a symbol of silence or silencing, also a parallel may be drawn to hear no evil, speak no evil. To put simply, the best way to describe the image is simplifying a complex issue. I think that the image alludes to the use of the death penalty in America and the author’s feelings are conveyed through the tweaks made to simple symbols, such as the American flag, and that they do not agree with the death penalty, best distinguished through the words displayed on the image. A separate reading may look further into a gender based reading of the image, rather then a political stance. The use of a female, rather then a male, in comparison, gives the image a different vibe altogether. As stated above, women are symbols of love and maternity, whereas males often are associated cold and callous feelings. Her body shape could also be looked into. USA Loves To Meddle Other Countries And Coup U.S. Wars and Hostile Actions List! https://rumble.com/v2ii9fo-usa-loves-to-meddle-other-countries-and-coup-u.s.-wars-and-hostile-actions-.html A list of U.S.-backed right-wing military coups in Latin America. The U.S. has never been a country that has stood for freedom or democracy. • ⁠South Korea 1945-48 * • ⁠China 1949 to early 1960s • ⁠Greece 1947-49 * • ⁠Italy 1947-1970s • ⁠Costa Rica 1948 • ⁠Albania 1949-53 • ⁠Syria 1949 * • ⁠Korea 1950-53 • ⁠Egypt 1952 • ⁠Iran 1952-53 * • ⁠Cuba 1953 to present • ⁠Philippines 1953 • ⁠British Guiana 1953-64 * • ⁠Guatemala 1954 * • ⁠Syria 1956-57 • ⁠Indonesia 1957-59 • ⁠Vietnam 1959-75 • ⁠Lebanon • ⁠Iraq 1959 • ⁠Congo 1960-65 * • ⁠Laos 1960-75 * • ⁠Ecuador 1960-63 * • ⁠Dominican Republic 1961 * • ⁠Brazil 1961-64 * • ⁠Iraq 1963* • ⁠Chile 1964-73 * • ⁠Dominican Republic 1965-66 * • ⁠Indonesia 1965 * • ⁠Cambodia 1967-75 * • ⁠Bolivia 1971 * • ⁠Ghana 1966 * • ⁠Greece 1967 * • ⁠Costa Rica 1970-71 • ⁠Iraq 1972-75 • ⁠Australia 1973-75 * • ⁠Ethiopia 1974-91 * • ⁠Portugal 1974-76 * • ⁠Angola 1975-91 • ⁠Jamaica 1976-80 * • ⁠Zaire 1977-78 • ⁠Seychelles 1979-81 • ⁠Afghanistan 1979-89 * • ⁠Poland 1980-1989* • ⁠El Salvador 1980-1992 • ⁠Chad 1981-82 * • ⁠Grenada 1983 * • ⁠South Yemen 1982-84 • ⁠Suriname 1982-84 • ⁠Libya 1980s • ⁠Nicaragua 1981-90 * • ⁠Fiji 1987 * • ⁠Panama 1989-94 * • ⁠Bulgaria 1990 * • ⁠Albania 1991 * • ⁠Iraq 1991 • ⁠Haiti 1991 * • ⁠Somalia 1993 • ⁠Yugoslavia 1999-2000 * • ⁠Ecuador 2000 * • ⁠Afghanistan 2001 * • ⁠Venezuela 2002 * • ⁠Iraq 2003 * • ⁠Haiti 2004 * • ⁠Somalia 2007 to present • ⁠Honduras 2009 * • ⁠Libya 2011 * • ⁠Syria 2012-present • ⁠Ukraine 2014 * • ⁠Yemen 2015-present • ⁠Bolivia 2019 * • ⁠Venezuela 2019-present • ⁠United State Of America 1984-present • ⁠New World Order Year Zero ! U.S. Wars and Hostile Actions: A List There is a reason that most countries polled in December 2022 by Gallup called the United States the greatest threat to peace in the world, and why Pew found that viewpoint increased in new year 2023. Since World War II, during a supposed golden age of peace, the United States military has killed or helped kill some 20 million people, overthrown at least 36 governments, interfered in at least 86 foreign elections, attempted to assassinate over 50 foreign leaders, and dropped bombs on people in over 30 countries. The United States is responsible for the deaths of 5 million people in Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia, and over 1 million just since 2003 in Iraq. U.S. Government Is Selling Fentanyl Laced w-Xylazine To Kill Us - Its Not From Mexico https://rumble.com/v2giyy1-u.s.-government-is-selling-fentanyl-laced-w-xylazine-to-kill-us-its-not-fro.html America Is Largest Drug Cartels In The World and Fentanyl Alone or Fentanyl Laced w-Xylazine To Kill Us is a potent synthetic opioid drug approved by and sold by the Food and Drug Administration for use as an analgesic (pain relief) and anesthetic. It is approximately 100 times more potent than morphine and 50 times more potent than heroin as an analgesic. Illicitly manufactured, fentanyl is added to heroin, disguising it as highly potent heroin, so users don’t realize that the heroin they’re purchasing may contain fentanyl. Fentanyl is a synthetic opioid that was originally developed as an analgesic – or painkiller – for surgery. It has a specific chemical structure with multiple areas that can be modified, often illicitly, to form related compounds with marked differences in potency. CIA Killing 100,000> Year Selling Heroin In U.S.A. Our Troops Protecting Opium-Heroin https://rumble.com/v2fg19o-cia-killing-100000-year-selling-heroin-in-u.s.a.-our-troops-protecting-opiu.html In 1990, a failed CIA anti-drug operation in Venezuela resulted in at least 18 ton of cocaine being smuggled into the United States and sold on the streets. The incident, which was first made public in 1993, was part of a plan to assist an undercover agent to gain the confidence of a Colombian drug cartel. How the CIA Turned Us onto LSD and Heroin Secrets of America's False War on Drugs. Through in-depth interviews with academic researchers, historians, journalists, former federal agents, and drug dealers, America's Fake War on Drugs tells true tales of how, for instance, the CIA and Department of Defense helped to introduce LSD to Americans in the 1950s. "The CIA literally sent over two guys to Sandoz Laboratories where LSD had first been synthesized and bought up the world's supply of LSD and brought it back," Lappé tells Nick Gillespie in a wide-ranging conversation about the longest war the U.S. government has fought. "With that supply they began a [secret mind-control] program called MK Ultra which had all sorts of other drugs involved." Drug Enforcement Administration - Will Kill You - This Man Is Lucky - Most Time Dead https://rumble.com/v2ffnam-drug-enforcement-administration-will-kill-you-this-man-is-lucky-most-time-d.html Stephen Lara did everything right. But, as you know well, most of the time DEA or FBI or CIA or DOJ or A COP Will Kill You With Bullet To Your Head and Drive Off With Your Money. Yes even innocent people aren’t safe from U.S. Civil Forfeiture. Asset forfeiture laws is a tool in our country’s a tyrannical u.s.a. government battle against its own people and u.s.a. citizens to steal all your money and kill you, drug abuse and drug crimes, helping to shut down “pill mills” and stop rogue doctors, pharmacists, and dealers. Thousand's Dead In U.S.A. Now & Shot In Head By Police & Civil Asset Forfeiture Abuse https://rumble.com/v2fjx2g-thousands-dead-in-u.s.a.-now-and-shot-in-head-by-police-and-civil-asset-for.html New Proof That Police Use Civil Forfeiture To Take From Those Who Can’t Fight Back Nassir Geiger spoke with the wrong person at the wrong time and it cost him hundreds of dollars and his car. Nassir was a victim of Philadelphia’s predatory civil forfeiture scheme that operated from a shady “courtroom” at City Hall. For years, police and prosecutors seized cash, cars and even homes and then took the property for themselves. Worse still, new data show that the police preyed on people in minority and low-income areas—in other words, people who could least afford to fight back. Black's Is White's Law Dictionary and Read Secret Canons of Judicial Miss-Conduct Info. https://rumble.com/v2edz96-blacks-is-whites-law-dictionary-and-read-secret-canons-of-judicial-miss-con.html Rules Professional Responsibility course about various provisions of the Code of Judicial Conduct. This is a quick overview that hits the highlights. Video Is Good... You Can Read Court Laws and Secret Canons of Judicial Conduct Law Info. True Story How US Government Tried To Kill Weed Smokers With A Toxic Chemical ! https://rumble.com/v2ath8q-true-story-how-us-government-tried-to-kill-weed-smokers-with-a-toxic-chemic.html Paraquat Pot The True Story Of How The US Government Tried To Kill Weed Smokers With A Toxic Chemical When people talk about “killer weed,” that’s typically understood to mean really good weed. But due to US government policies that started in the 1970s and extended through most of the 1980s, marijuana fields were being sprayed with a chemical that can actually kill you. The chemical, known as “paraquat,” is an herbicide sprayed over marijuana fields in Mexico in the 1970s—with the aid of US money and US-provided helicopters—and over marijuana fields in Georgia in the 1980s under the direction of the Reagan Administration. But normally, anything poisonous enough to kill plants is also toxic enough to kill humans, and that is the case with paraquat. How U.S. Government (Killed Us Again) U.S.A. Poisoned Alcohol During Prohibition https://rumble.com/v2atam4-how-u.s.-government-killed-us-again-u.s.a.-poisoned-alcohol-during-prohibit.html Almost everyone knows that the United States government sometimes operates in the shadows, but have you ever heard of how the U.S. government poisoned alcohol during prohibition? This event costed 10,000+ dead people their lives perished from such poisoning and hundreds of thousands more suffered irreversible injuries including blindness and paralysis . When the manufacture and sale of alcohol was illegal between 1920 and 1933, regulatory agencies encouraged measures making 60 Million Gallons industrial alcohol undrinkable, including the addition of lethal chemicals. Why COVID-19 Shot Is Not Safe ? Nuremberg Code ? Agent Orange ? Anthrax Vaccine ? https://rumble.com/v2affqe-why-covid-19-shot-is-not-safe-nuremberg-code-agent-orange-anthrax-vaccine-.html U.S. Government said and or told Us - We The People - COVID-19 Shot Are Safe ? LIE's ? So Per the Nuremberg Code ? Agent Orange ? Anthrax Vaccine ? Paraquat Pot ? 1920 Poisoned Alcohol ? Now Mandatory COVID-19 Shots caused adverse reactions in most recipients all part of a series of massive government cover-ups. The Pentagon's mandatory anthrax shots caused adverse reactions in most recipients and helped prompt many Air Force Reserve and Air National Guard members to transfer to other units or leave the military between 1998 and 2000, according to a survey by Congress's General Accounting Office (GAO). The survey indicated that 85% of troops who received an anthrax shot had an adverse reaction, a rate far higher than the 30% claimed by the manufacturer in 2000, when the survey was conducted. Sixteen percent of the survey respondents had either left the military or changed their status, at least in part because of the vaccination program. Why is the Nuremberg Code being used to oppose Covid-19 vaccines? Other Info. https://rumble.com/v2aav9u-why-is-the-nuremberg-code-being-used-to-oppose-covid-19-vaccines-other-info.html I AM running through what the Nuremberg code is how the military has crossed the line with the Chemtrails and Flouride in the water parasites being sprayed poisoning the animal live stock poisoning the food with chemical additives and paraquat pot poisoning .. Clear violation of international Law, their time is extremely limited and are being dealt with as we speak. Flying right out of military bases human trafficking out of military bases, Drug and Arms trafficking out of military bases, and underground bunkers cloning underground, cloned military personell, cloned police force, forcing corporate policy on citizens during a war when there is NO LAW during war.. so maybe everyone should start doing there job because if the people have to handle this to save time we will include you all in the same bunch consider you all accomplices and let GOD sort you all out.. Also another reason why it might be in their best interest to get right with GOD. Why is the Nuremberg Code being used to oppose Covid-19 vaccines? As the UK Covid-19 vaccine roll out has gathered pace, and the use of “vaccine passports” continue to be debated, an increasing number of social media users are voicing their opposition to these moves and claiming they are an infringement of their rights under the Nuremberg Code. The Nuremberg Code is a set of ethical research principles, developed in the wake of Nazi atrocities—specifically the inhumane and often fatal experimentation on human subjects without consent—during World War Two. We spoke to experts in medical ethics, healthcare law and social epidemiology about the Nuremberg Code and whether its principles are applicable to the current vaccine roll out or vaccine passports. We also discussed whether the code is legally binding and the darker links the claims seem to draw between the current pandemic and the Nazi era. Ten of Thousand's Killed by U.S.A. Government + I Want Your Gun's - Killed Million+ https://rumble.com/v2a7c7q-ten-of-thousands-killed-by-u.s.a.-government-i-want-your-guns-killed-millio.html crazy conspiracy theories that actually turned out to be true and ten of thousand's killed by u.s.a. government These theories became proven fact, from a government brainwashing program, an anti-John Lennon plot to a plan to remove homosexuals from service. 15 Conspiracies That Turned Out to Be True! Are You Lost in the World Like Me ? and The Moby & The Void Pacific Choir - W0W https://rumble.com/v298af8-are-you-lost-in-the-world-like-me-and-the-moby-and-the-void-pacific-choir-w.html One of the great paradoxes of our time is this: Never have we been more connected, yet never have we been more disconnected. Professor Sherry Turkle captured this jarring juxtaposition of realities in her book title Alone Together. Now electronic music maestro Moby has a song that gets at this conundrum as well: “Are You Lost in the World Like Me?” The song asks probing questions about navigating life in our tech-obsessed, postmodern world. And the remarkable video that accompanies it adds a poignant exclamation point of its own. Our interconnected world makes many promises about making life better. But Moby’s not buying it. If anything, he suspects that things are getting worse.

crazy conspiracy theories that actually turned out to be true and ten of thousand's killed by u.s.a. government These theories became proven fact, from a government brainwashing program, an anti-John Lennon plot to a plan to remove homosexuals from service. 15 Conspiracies That Turned Out to Be True! In the “post-truth” era we live in, it seems people are likely to believe anything. Sometimes, these falsehoods have very real impacts on reality – and sometimes, they happen to be true, proving that the truth can be stranger than fiction. Here are 15 fake-sounding conspiracy theories that turned out to be true. Watergate Scandal One of the most well-known political scandals was Watergate. In the 1970s, five men broke into the Democratic National Committee’s headquarters with the intention to photograph campaign documents. They were caught, and the Nixon administration attempted to cover-up its involvement. This eventually lead to Nixon’s resignation and the indictment of 69 people who were involved in some form. Operation Paperclip After World War II, the United States created a secret Joint Intelligence Objective Agency in which they brought more than 1,600 German scientists, engineers, and technicians – many of whom had direct ties to the Nazi Party – to work for the government. Known as Operation Paperclip, its primary focus was for the U.S. to gain an advantage in the Cold War. Operation Snow White The Church of Scientology didn’t want anything bad about them on record, and they went to criminal means to do it. Called Operation Snow White, it included an estimated 5,000 covert agents of Church members who infiltrated 136 government agencies to scrub unfavorable records about Scientology and its founder, L. Ron Hubbard. USS Iowa Turret Explosion In 1989, an explosion occurred on the USS Iowa and killed 47 of the crewman who were manning a 16-inch gun turret. To explain what happened, two investigations occurred but came to conflicting conclusions. According to the U.S. Navy, one of the crew members, Clayton Hartwig, had deliberately caused the explosion because of a homosexual relationship with a fellow crew member that went awry. After further investigation, however, the cause was concluded to be because of an excess of powder bags into the breach of the turret. The Navy never admitted to wrongdoing. Blackbox Scandal The Blackbox Scandal accused eight members of the Chicago White Sox of deliberately losing the 1919 World Series against the Cincinnati Reds, in exchange for money. After a public trial in 1921, the men were all permanently banned from professional baseball. The “Fruit Machine” The idea of “gaydar” – the ability to tell whether or not someone is gay – might seem silly nowadays, but back in 1961, it was real. At the height of the Cold War, the Canadian government hired Frank Robert Way to create a scientific test that’d determine if someone was gay. The reason for this was to identify communist sympathizers and get them out of the government. Project MKultra Project MKultra, aka the CIA’s mind control program, lasted about 20 years and was a sanctioned way for the agency to perform experiments on human subjects. Most famously, they gave people LSD to “unwitting subjects in social situations.” To administer these tests, no medical personnel was available – often, this resulted in subjects being sick for days. Gulf of Tonkin Incident The fictitious Gulf of Tonkin helped draw the United States deeper into the Vietnam War. Originally, it was claimed by the National Security Agency that the North Vietnamese Navy fired torpedo boats towards the USS Maddox on August 4, 1964. But, what was later discovered were “Tokin ghosts” (aka false radar images) and no evidence of the boats. But that didn’t matter; because the Gulf of Tonkin never happened, but was used as an excuse for the U.S. expanding warfare against North Vietnam. Bohemian Grove Every July, some of the “richest and most powerful men in the world” head to Bohemian Grove, a 2,700 acre campground in California to engage in a series of hush-hush ceremonies that also include costumes, theatre, and music. It may or may not include former U.S. presidents, oil tycoons, and other business leaders freely urinating on Redwood trees. CIA Giving Money to Tibetan Exiles Determined to undermine Communist governments, the CIA gave $1.7 million a year to Tibetan exiles in their efforts against China. This also included payments to the Dalai Lama, which amounted to $180,000 annually. “The purpose of the program,” explained in a memo written by U.S. intelligence officials, “is to keep the political concept of an autonomous Tibet alive within Tibet and among foreign nations, principally India, and to build a capability for resistance against possible political developments inside Communist China.” Abraham Lincoln’s Assassination John Wilkes-Booth is talked about in history books as being the man who killed President Abraham Lincoln. But it turns out that he didn’t act alone. Nine other people were found to assist Wilkes-Booth in some way – including a woman named Mary Surratt, who was the first woman to be executed by the United States. Human Tissue Collected for Atomic Bomb Tests “Project Sunshine” doesn’t sound so sunny when you find out what it’s about. In the 1950s, the U.S. government secretly collected human tissue – primarily from cadavers, without permission from next of kin. The purpose was to monitor the effects of radioactive fallout from nuclear weapons tests. More than 1,500 samples (many of them babies) were gathered around the world. Dr. Willard Libby, a researcher and commission member, is quoted as saying, “I don’t know how to get them [human samples], but I do say that it is a matter of prime importance to get them and particularly in the young age group. So, human samples are of prime importance, and if anybody knows how to do a good job of body snatching, they will really be serving their country.” Bayer Medicine Causes AIDS In the mid-1980s, pharmaceutical company Bayer discovered that their blood-clotting medicine for hemophiliacs carried a high risk of transmitting AIDS. They fixed the problem in 1984, but didn’t pull the dangerous product from the market. Instead, they sold it to Asia and Latin America, while Europe and the United State got the newer version. The Testimony That Helped Launch the Gulf War On October 10, 1990, a 15-year-old girl known only as Nayirah gave a tearful testimony that recounted a terrifying event; she said she witnessed Iraqi soldiers take babies out of incubators in a Kuwaiti hospital, take the incubators, and then leave the children to die. This harrowing description helped the U.S. rationalize their decision to back Kuwait in the Gulf War. But Nayirah’s testimony was proven false. She was actually the daughter of Saud Al-Sabah, the Kuwaiti ambassador to the United States. Tuskegee Syphilis Study The Tuskegee Syphilis Study is one of the most infamous clinical studies in American history. Conducted between 1932 and 1972, it observed the natural progression of syphilis in black men in rural Alabama. Unfortunately, this was not known to those involved in the study – they thought they were receiving free health care from the government. The horror of 'Project Sunshine' Laughing at conspiracy theories is good fun – at least until they turn out to be true. Take the conspiracy surrounding the “Project Sunshine,” for example. In the wake of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the U.S. government commenced a major study to measure the effects of nuclear fallout on the human body. Conspiracy: The government was stealing dead bodies to do radioactive testing. The truth: The government was stealing parts of dead bodies. Because they needed young tissue, they recruited a worldwide network of agents to find recently deceased babies and children, and then take samples and even limbs – each collected without notification or permission of the more than 1,500 grieving families. The world only woke up to the the horrific scientic history of Project Sunshine half a century later. Bad booze 1920 Poisoned Alcohol Conspiracy: During Prohibition, the government poisoned alcohol to keep people from drinking. The truth: Manufacturers of industrial alcohol had been mixing their product with dangerous chemicals for years prior to Prohibition. But between 1926 and 1933, the federal government pushed manufacturers to use stronger poisons to discourage bootleggers from turning the alcohol into moonshine. That didn’t stop the bootleggers or their customers, and by the end of Prohibition, more than 10,000 Americans had been killed by tainted booze. Much of the illegal booze was sold in infamous night spots called ‘speakeasies’ – so called from the practice of speaking quietly about such a place in public, or when inside it, so as not to alert the police and neighbor's. The first lady who ran the United States Conspiracy: A stroke rendered United States President Woodrow Wilson incapable of governing, and his wife surreptitiously stepped in. The truth: Wilson did suffer a debilitating stroke towards the end of his presidency – but the government felt it was in the country’s best interest to keep things quiet. The public didn’t learn about the stroke for months, during which time his wife, Edith Wilson, was making most executive decisions. Despite Mrs. Wilson claiming that she acted only as a “steward,” historians who have analyzed the Wilson term in office confirm that for well over a year, Mrs. Wilson was effectively president. And although a woman president is yet to be formally elected to the White House, here are ten quotes from the strongest women of the real world and silver screen for inspiration in the meantime. Government mind control Conspiracy: The CIA was testing LSD and other hallucinogenic drugs on Americans in a top-secret experiment on behavior modification. The truth: The program was known as MK-ULTRA, and it was real. The CIA started by using volunteers – the novelist Ken Kesey was one notable subject. But the program heads soon began dosing people without their knowledge; MK-ULTRA left many victims permanently mentally disabled. At the present time, another drug that alters food and perception and is causing great public concern because of its harmful effects is meth. The Dalai Lama's impressive salary Conspiracy: The Dalai Lama is a CIA agent. The truth: Perhaps the reason the Dalai Lama is smiling in all those photos has something to do with the six-figure salary he pulled down from the U.S. government during the 1960s. According to declassified intelligence documents, he earned $180,000 in connection with the CIA’s funding of the Tibetan Resistance to the tune of $1.7 million per year. The idea was to disrupt and hamper China’s infrastructure. The Dalai Lama is believed to have the power to choose the body into which he is reincarnated, meaning that the current Dalai Lama is a reincarnation of the last. Today millions of people – across all religions – believe in reincarnation. John Lennon was under government surveillance Conspiracy: The FBI was spying on former Beatle John Lennon. The truth: They most certainly were. Like many counter-culture heroes, Lennon was considered a threat: “Anti-war songs, like “Give Peace a Chance” didn’t exactly endear former Beatle John Lennon to the Nixon administration,” NPR reported in 2010. “In 1971, the FBI put Lennon under surveillance, and the Immigration and Naturalization Service tried to deport him a year later.” In 1957, John Lennon and Paul McCartney met at a party in Woolton. Just yards away from their meeting place was the grave of Eleanor Rigby. A bizarre coincidence, or not? The government is spying on you Conspiracy: With the advances in technology, the government is using its vast resources to track citizens. The truth: In 2016, government agencies sent 49,868 requests for user data to Facebook, 27,850 to Google, and 9,076 to Apple, according to the Electronic Frontier Foundation (the EFF), a major nonprofit organisation that defends civil liberties in the digital world and advises the public on matters of internet privacy. If you are concerned about your internet privacy, we asked technology experts to give us the lowdown on the likelihood you are being watched through your computer camera. Fake battle, real war Conspiracy: The Gulf of Tonkin incident on August 2, 1964, was faked to provoke American support for the Vietnam War. The truth: By the time news reached American ears, the facts surrounding the North Vietnamese attack on the American Naval ship Maddox were already fuzzy. Declassified intelligence documents have since revealed that the Maddox had provided support for South Vietnamese attacks on a nearby island and that the North Vietnamese were responding in kind, according to the U.S. Naval Institute. The event “opened the floodgates for direct American military involvement in Vietnam.” Paraquat Pot: The True Story Of How The US Government Tried To Kill Weed Smokers With A Toxic Chemical In The 1980s When people talk about “killer weed,” that’s typically understood to mean really good weed. But due to US government policies that started in the 1970s and extended through most of the 1980s, marijuana fields were being sprayed with a chemical that can actually kill you. The chemical, known as “paraquat,” is an herbicide sprayed over marijuana fields in Mexico in the 1970s—with the aid of US money and US-provided helicopters—and over marijuana fields in Georgia in the 1980s under the direction of the Reagan Administration. But normally, anything poisonous enough to kill plants is also toxic enough to kill humans, and that is the case with paraquat. Big Tobacco knew that cigarettes caused cancer Conspiracy: For decades, tobacco companies buried evidence that smoking is deadly. The truth: At the beginning of the 1950s, research was showing an indisputable statistical link between smoking and lung cancer, but it wasn’t until the late 1990s that Philip Morris even admitted that smoking could cause cancer. The benefits of quitting smoking are huge: food tastes better, your mouth feels fresher and, most importantly, your risk of tobacco-related disease drops significantly. There is alien evidence in the American Southwest Conspiracy: E.T. is buried in the desert of New Mexico. The truth: This one is real: The Atari video game E.T., the Extra-Terrestrial failed so miserably that the company buried unsold cartridges in a desert landfill. (Wait, what did you think we meant? Real aliens? In New Mexico? Not yet, anyway.) Canada tried to develop 'gaydar' Conspiracy: The Canada government was so paranoid about homosexuality that it developed a “gaydar” machine. The truth: It really happened: In the 1960s, the government hired a university professor to develop a way to detect homosexuality in federal employees. He came up with a machine that measured pupil dilation in response to same-sex-erotic imagery; the Canadian government used it to exclude or fire more than 400 men from civil service, the military, and the Mounties. Fortunately, things have changed a lot since those days. The Illuminati and the U.S. government Conspiracy: A secret society that rules the world – the Illuminati – and the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA) are in cahoots. The truth: We’re here to tell you that a link does, in fact, exist. Of course, that “link” is actually a hyperlink (i.e., an electronic link between two Internet sites). If you type Illuminati backward – Itanimulli – into a web browser, you will land on the NSA website. Click this link if you dare: Itanimulli.com Generating foreign intelligence insights. Applying cybersecurity expertise. Securing the future. We leverage our advantages in technology and cybersecurity consistent with our authorities to strengthen national defense and secure national security systems. NSA Cybersecurity prevents and eradicates threats to U.S. national security systems with a focus on the Defense Industrial Base and the improvement of our weapons’ security. Through our Cybersecurity Collaboration Center, NSA partners with allies, private industry, academics, and researchers to strengthen awareness and collaboration to advance the state of cybersecurity.

In 1990, a failed CIA anti-drug operation in Venezuela resulted in at least 18 ton of cocaine being smuggled into the United States and sold on the streets. The incident, which was first made public in 1993, was part of a plan to assist an undercover agent to gain the confidence of a Colombian drug cartel. How the CIA Turned Us onto LSD and Heroin Secrets of America's False War on Drugs. Through in-depth interviews with academic researchers, historians, journalists, former federal agents, and drug dealers, America's Fake War on Drugs tells true tales of how, for instance, the CIA and Department of Defense helped to introduce LSD to Americans in the 1950s. "The CIA literally sent over two guys to Sandoz Laboratories where LSD had first been synthesized and bought up the world's supply of LSD and brought it back," Lappé tells Nick Gillespie in a wide-ranging conversation about the longest war the U.S. government has fought. "With that supply they began a [secret mind-control] program called MK Ultra which had all sorts of other drugs involved." The cover the history of drug prohibition, the rise of the '60s drug counterculture; heroin epidemics past and present; how drug policy has warped U.S. foreign policy in Southeast Asia, Central America, Afghanistan, and beyond; the bipartisan politics of prohibition; and much more. America's Fake War on Drugs features exclusive and rarely seen footage and documents how, time and time again, the government was often facilitating trade and use in the very drugs it was trying to false stamp out. The new world order adds short videos, and more information in an attempt to produce an "immersive experience" that will change how viewers think and feel about prohibition. Though is that knowledge and reason will eventually win out over keeping things in the dark, making things taboo." Even when it veers off into questionable territory (such as the role of the government in creating the crack epidemic of the 1980s), America's False War on Drugs performs the invaluable function of furthering a conversation about drug policies and attitudes that have caused far more harm than they have alleviated. We take a very critical look at the entire history of the war on drugs. In particular, looking at American foreign policy and how the Central Intelligence Agency is not just been involved in a couple of bad apples here and there. In couple rogue operations as a lot of these drug trafficking allegations have been called before. But actually very directly involved in drug trafficking not only drug trafficking but in the largest drug trafficking stories of our time. Whether that's in the secret tests that introduced LSD to the United States or heroin during the late 60's and early 70's from southeast Asia, to cocaine during the late 70's and early 80's onto opium and heroin coming out of Afghanistan. There's a huge story to be told there about the actual extent of the US government's involvement in drug trafficking. Gillespie: Let's talk first about the old days of MK Ultra and mind control and the way that the CIA actually helped introduce LSD evolved drugs into America, to American minds. What was going on in the 50's with the CIA and how did they become involved in introducing LSD to Americans? Lappe: This is a story that a lot of your listeners may have heard about, people have heard about MK Ultra and I had as well, but I never really understood the full origins of the story. They go all the way back to the 1950's. During the 1950's of course, US and the Soviet Union are locked in a battle for hearts and minds around the world and psychoactive drugs were a big part of the Cold War psychological warfare programs on both sides. The CIA had heard rumors that the Soviet Union was starting to use LSD at this point as a truth serum to see if they could break spies and get them to expose details, admit they were spies et cetera. The CIA literally sent over two guys to Sandoz Laboratories where LSD had first been synthesized and bought up the world's supply of LSD and brought it back. With that supply they began a program called MK Ultra which had all sorts of other drugs involved. In particular they started doing secret tests around the country. Some of them using in veteran's hospitals and through the military. Others were in mental hospitals, a lot of basic, pretty much a lot of them were unwitting people, mental patients. But one of the incredible stories we found, I never knew this before, is that Ken Kesey, famously the author of One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest and really the guy who started the famous acid tests in the San Francisco Bay area, it was really the godfather of acid movement. As a Stanford grad student, or sorry an undergrad, was part of a test at the Menlo Park Veteran's hospital. Loved it so much that he got a job in the lab, stole all the acid, went up to San Francisco and started his acid test. That was the origins of how LSD was introduced into United States. This was also happening in other places around the country. It was just that Ken Kesey was the progenitor of the entire movement. It literally was the CIA. Gillespie: That is a real challenge to all good thinking Libertarians like myself. Small L Libertarians who say that the government can never do anything right. The manage to strangely change the course, not of, I guess maybe of Cold War history, but certainly of American cultural history through their actions. The first episode of the series, and again check these out on history.com, the History Channel if you have, you can download their app and take a look at it. Plus there's other material there that's well worth delving into. You look at the prehistory of Richard Nixon's declaration of a war on drugs in the early 70's, what were some of the motivating factors you found behind Nixon declaring war on drugs? Very early in the 70's he talked about, famously used the phrase, declaring a war on drugs, that illegals drugs were the number one enemy facing America. What was going on, things like pot and acid and heroin rose to that level of attention from the federal government? Lappe: You really had two strains happening. You had the psychedelic movement which was heavily influenced by acid which the CIA itself had introduced, which is just my blowing right. Then you had pot as well which basically increasing numbers of young people were smoking. Nixon declares famously this war on drugs in June 1971. At the same time there was a massive heroin epidemic that really was ravaging mostly the eastern seaboard. What a lot people don't realize is that too in part, you could argue another case of blow back from our own operations. During the mid 60's to late 60's there was a famous, everyone knows, a war against communist forces in Vietnam but also next door there was a gigantic secret war happening in Laos that officially we were not supposed to be fighting. Both politically it was radioactive for Johnson to declare another front but there were also treaties that said that we couldn't have troops on the ground both with Laos and we had an agreement, a sort of tacit agreement with the Soviet Union they wouldn't put troops on the ground. There was a massive clandestine CIA operation in Laos running this secret war. People have probably heard of this CIA airline called Air America. Basically we go into business helping a local warlord named Vang Pao. When we started the war in the mid 60's, around 65, Vang Pao was a sort of somewhat populous, anti-communist leader of the Hmong hill people in Laos and was peripherally involved in growing opium because that's really what the cash crop was in that area. By 1968, 1969 into 1970 Vang Pao was the biggest heroin trafficker on the planet. Some of his partners were the Sicilian mobsters that we had gone into business to put in Havana Cuba and south Florida to try to kill Fidel Castro. Basically we had created this huge network or aided this huge network of international drug trafficking that created a massive heroin epidemic which has only been surpassed by the current opioid crisis and we go into that later. What happens is, there's all this heroin in the theater of war in southeast Asia, a lot of troops are getting hooked, famously they all start bringing this heroin back and heroin really starts devastating the inner city and there was a legitimate belief by a lot of people that really it was out of control and crime rates were really skyrocketing especially in cities like New York. So Nixon was under a lot of pressure. He had run in 1960 under the banner of law and order and the country was literally falling apart by 1971 in his eyes. Gillespie: As you were saying, the crime really ratcheted up. It started in the 50's but it really ratcheted up in the 60's, there was the perception that people were leaving cities in droves to avoid crime. You talk, I think, in the first episode, it's something that in 1960 the government figures had something like 50,000 heroin addicts around the country or heroin users and it had crept up to something like 200,000 or 500,000 by about 1970. Lappe: Yeah. Gillespie: Part of it Nixon was a law and order guy and there's, you go into this a bit at your site as well as in the show that John Ehrlichman one of Richard Nixon's chief lieutenants in a 1990, 94 interview with Dan Baum who ultimately published a story in Harper's about this, that he said that the war on pot and the war on drugs was really a way to control black people. There was also this sense that the urban American was going to hell in a hand basket as well. Follow up question for that is, the war on drugs gets birthed out of mixed feeling and Nixon and there's some footage in one of the episodes of Ronald Reagan denouncing the use of acid in the 60's and obviously became drug warrior himself as president. There was a strong bipartisan element to the war on drugs because even people, Jimmy Carter seemed to be okay with the idea of pot legalization or decriminalization until events overtook him and he became a staunch drug warrior. People like Bill Clinton, people like Barack Obama also added to the drug war. What is the, I guess that's a long wind up for a pretty simple question, what is it about the war on drugs that pulls such support from Democrats and Republicans across the board? Lappe: I think this is pretty deep question because I think it goes to what I found in working on this project which is really one of the most epic projects I've ever worked on in my life in terms of the amount of research we did. I think drugs have always played a scapegoat role in our society where we see other social forces, in particular economic forces and other things that have been pressures on communities and it's very easy to point the finger at drugs. In some ways it's a natural reaction to try to crack down on them in the harshest way. Of course by cracking down on drugs are an inanimate object, there is no such thing as a crack down on drugs. You're cracking down on people. And when you crack down on people, that has a reverberating effect. It also can be used as a tool. Nixon is probably one of the most cynical politicians in our history but maybe not the worst in my opinion. He saw it purely, in my opinion, as a political move. As a way to take out this, he believed he had all these enemies that were growing around him, all these social movements, you had black nationalism, you had increasingly radicalized hippie movement that had turned from a peacenik movement into a more dangerous, whether underground type of operations. There was a feeling that society was unraveling to some degree. That was in large part because it was because we lived in a oppressive racist society and there was a war that in 1968, everyone knew was at a stalemate or that we had lost but continued going on. People don't realize half the people died, of our soldiers after 1968 when Nixon ran under this completely cynical lie that he had a secret plan to end the war [Editor's note: Journalism historian Joseph W. Campbell has documented that Candidate Nixon never publicly made such a pledge, which continues to be cited frequently.]. There was all these other forces going on in drugs were very easy way to demonize people. Gillespie: At the website, at history.com, among the various things you have in timelines or whatnot that are worth going back to. The early attempts to link cocaine with black people and if you want to crack down on cocaine because white women may be taking it or something, you crack down on black people. When pot became illegal, under federal law, became effectively illegal in the 1930's, it was identified with Mexicans. Chinese and opium was a problem. It is fascinating in the 60's you have with something like LSD the youth movement and hippies and then again when ecstasy which was made illegal in the 80's thanks in large part to Joe Biden. The identification of a subculture or subgroup or a particular ethnic group that you can crack down on is one of the really haunting elements, I think, of the drug war and that comes through in this, in this series. Talk a bit about how particularly after 9/11 part of the series, and I think you're absolutely right in looking at it, that what this does in a way that is really fresh and interesting is look at how foreign policy, US foreign policy has been both guided and infected by the drug war. Talk a bit about the post 9/11 era and how have fears of narco-terrorism really changed the way we go about our foreign policy? Lappe: Narco-terrorism is a term that started, that was introduced after 9/11, shortly after really. We show how in the first Superbowl after 9/11, the Partnership for Drug Free America began running this very eerie infamous ad now where you had a bunch of kids saying, "I supported terrorists, I supported a suicide bomber, I did this." Basically saying because I did drugs I was helping all of these different terrorists groups et cetera. When the incredible irony is that our own government has been knee deep in drug trafficking for decades. There was a big push though it was completely ironic and what we show in our last episode which is the post 9/11 era, is we actually have an undercover DEA agent. This was a huge theme that we saw throughout our series was the tension between the DEA and the CIA. I'll paint the picture of what was happening in Afghanistan. In the late 1990's, opium has always been one of or the biggest cash crop in Afghanistan. During the 1990's there was a massive civil war. All sides were using opium to finance themselves. The Taliban comes in to power and starts taxing at first, opium growers but by the late 90's the Taliban is having a huge PR problem. They're chopping off women's heads in stadiums and they're blowing up the Buddhas. They were becoming an international pariah. They pulled this incredible PR coup where they said they were cracking down on opium. When really all they were doing were stockpiling it. Basically they launched this whole fake crackdown that got the UN off their back. The US, we even in 2000, sent them $40 million of aid money to help, quote unquote, crackdown on opium. But really what was happening was they were stockpiling opium and then after 9/11 used those stockpiles to ramp up their war effort. At the time of 9/11, Afghanistan was about 30% of the world's heroin. Today it's about 90%. What Afghanistan has become is a drug war. People never talk about it in that context but Afghanistan is a giant drug war. The Taliban have, to quote REM, lost their religion. They're really are not much of a religious force any more as they are just any other militant insurgency group that is trying to take down a government. There isn't much, they're not putting a lot of effort into their Sharia program. They basically have become gigantic drug traffickers. But also our allies in Afghanistan. Including in the early days, Hamid Karzai's brother, Wali Karzai was the biggest heroin trafficker and drug lord who controlled all the traffic in Kandahar. Who was completely protected by the CIA. I talked to soldiers who literally their job was to guard the opium fields of our local warlord allies. This heroin has had a major impact on the world's drug stage. It should be noted a lot of the heroin that comes into the United States is coming from Mexico now but a lot of it is coming from Afghanistan, especially on the east coast and in Canada. It's a really incredible story that no one really talks about. There's a great reporter that is one of our contributors to the show named, Gretchen Peters, wrote a book called, Seeds of Terror. That essentially is her thesis. We also have great stories about the undercover DEA agents who were fighting to try to take down drug traffickers at the same time the CIA was undermining their efforts. Gillespie: It's a phenomenal drama that unfolds and it has these dark, rich, historical ironies that abound throughout the series. The odds are good now at least and actually in a story that's up at the website, you guys talk about Jeff Sessions, the Attorney General under Donald Trump. Who has really, he's pledged to really redouble efforts at least domestically, on the war on drugs which you guys point out at least in it's Nixonian phase has been going on for 50 years. It's really more like a 100 years when you go all the way back to things like the Harrison Narcotics Act. It's failing, it doesn't seem to have much effect on drug usage rates, they seem to be independent of enforcement, there's obviously problems with surgeon opiod use that is it's own tangled web of unintended consequences and weird interventions into markets. At the same time the odds are phenomenal that pot is going to be fully legal in the US within the next decade if not before. During the campaign, weirdly Donald Trump seemed to be at times okay with the idea of different states deciding what kind of marijuana policies, obviously the Sessions factors a big difference from that. Are you optimistic that we're at least entering the beginning of the end of the drug war, to borrow a terrible Vietnam phrase that there's light at the end of the tunnel in terms of American attitudes towards currently illegal drugs, and rethinking the drug war? Lappe: There's no doubt that things are moving in that direction in the same way there's no doubt that things like gay rights and LGBT rights are moving in a certain direction. Jeff Sessions essentially is a weird outlier, historical blip, as you said, to try to pin Trump down on any one ideology or stance is literally impossible. He said we were going to stop all our foreign wars, yet he's sending 8,000 more troops in Afghanistan. Whatever Trump has said on the war on drugs is sort of irrelevant. But Sessions is just a weird dinosaur throwback to another era that I think is just going to be, if he survives the next three years. Will just be a blip in the road towards eventually people moving, starting with marijuana towards legalization both for, at least, nationwide to medicinal use if not most states towards recreational use. Because people are seeing that it doesn't really have any negative effects, there isn't really a gigantic increase in use and there's great benefits to society in terms of being able to tax it and make it a normalized thing. I think a big part of the problem with drugs and Dr. Carl Hart at Columbia is one of the most iconoclastic guys on this and he's in our series, he's out on the far fringes of this. But what he really says is, the problem with drugs is not drugs. The problem is drug use and misuse and people being idiots with drugs and not knowing how to use them. Gillespie: But it's hard to know how to use them if you're not allowed to freely and openly discuss the facts, your experiences, your parents, we have enough problems with alcohol abuse and that's fully legal. When you start talking about these other drugs it's hard to get good information. Lappe: Right. It's the same thing with these abstinence programs. You see wherever there's abstinence programs there's more STD's, there's more pregnancies because people are ignorant. I think that's a great trait of libertarianism even though I don't believe in everything you guys believe in. Is that knowledge and reason will eventually win out over keeping things in the dark, making things taboo. I think that people are rational and when it comes … There's always going to be people who are going to abuse something, just the same way people abuse alcohol or any substance. I think there is a general consensus that we're moving in a particular direction and I think that ultimately it's going to be better for society. Provisional data from CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics indicate that there were an estimated 100,306 drug overdose deaths in the United States during 12-month period ending in April 2021, an increase of 28.5% from the 78,056 deaths during the same period the year before. The new data documents that estimated overdose deaths from opioids increased to 75,673 in the 12-month period ending in April 2021, up from 56,064 the year before. Overdose deaths from synthetic opioids (primarily fentanyl) and psychostimulants such as methamphetamine also increased in the 12-month period ending in April 2021. Cocaine deaths also increased, as did deaths from natural and semi-synthetic opioids (such as prescription pain medication). The provisional data presented in this visualization include: the reported and predicted (estimated) provisional counts of deaths due to drug overdose occurring nationally and in each jurisdiction; a U.S. map of the percentage changes in provisional drug overdose deaths for the current 12-month ending period compared with the 12-month period ending in the same month of the previous year, by jurisdiction; and the reported and predicted provisional counts of drug overdose deaths involving specific drugs or drug classes occurring nationally and in selected jurisdictions. The reported and predicted provisional counts represent the numbers of deaths due to drug overdose occurring in the 12-month periods ending in the month indicated. These counts include all seasons of the year and are insensitive to variations by seasonality. Deaths are reported by the jurisdiction in which the death occurred. Drug overdoses now kill more than 100,000 Americans a year — more than vehicle crash and gun deaths combined. Our Own Government Sale Drugs To Kill US Overdose/Deaths. Researchers think LSD flashbacks may happen during times of increased stress. Project MK-Ultra, the code name given to a Central Intelligence Agency program that began in the 1950s and lasted through the 1960s, is sometimes known as part of the CIA’s “mind control program and the Central Intelligence Agency Sold over 6 Millon+ Hit of Acid to the u.s.a. People in the 1950 thur 1973 These government acid experiments—which also sold millon's of hits or tabs of acid involved dozens of universities, pharmaceutical companies and medical facilities—took place throughout the 1950s and 1960s, before LSD was deemed too unpredictable to use in the field. When Project MK-Ultra became public knowledge in the 1970s, the scandal resulted in numerous lawsuits and a congressional investigation headed by Senator Frank Church. After volunteering to take part in Project MKUltra as a student at Stanford University, Ken Kesey, author of the 1962 novel One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, went on to promote the use of LSD. In the early 1960s, Kesey and the Merry Pranksters (as his group of followers were called) hosted a series of LSD-fueled parties in the San Francisco Bay area. Kesey called these parties “Acid Tests.” Acid Tests combined drug use with musical performances by bands including the Grateful Dead and psychedelic effects such as fluorescent paint and black lights. Both psychology professors at Harvard University, Timothy Leary and Richard Alpert administered LSD and psychedelic mushrooms to Harvard students during a series of experiments in the early 1960s. At the time, neither of these substances (Gov. Sales of over 6 Millon hits of acid) were illegal in the United States. (The U.S. federal government didn’t outlaw LSD until 1968.) Leary and Alpert documented the effects of the hallucinogenic drugs on the students’ consciousness. The scientific community, however, criticized the legitimacy of the studies which Leary and Alpert conducted while also tripping. Both men were eventually dismissed from Harvard but went on to become symbols of the psychedelic drug and hippie counterculture. Paraquat Pot: The True Story Of How The US Government Tried To Kill Weed Smokers With A Toxic Chemical In The 1980s When people talk about “killer weed,” that’s typically understood to mean really good weed. But due to US government policies that started in the 1970s and extended through most of the 1980s, marijuana fields were being sprayed with a chemical that can actually kill you. The chemical, known as “paraquat,” is an herbicide sprayed over marijuana fields in Mexico in the 1970s—with the aid of US money and US-provided helicopters—and over marijuana fields in Georgia in the 1980s under the direction of the Reagan Administration. But normally, anything poisonous enough to kill plants is also toxic enough to kill humans, and that is the case with paraquat. Our Own Government with Oliver North Worked With Cocaine Traffickers to Arm Terrorists Along with a Other U.S.A. leading role in the Iran/Contra scandal - in which North helped sell arms to Iran to fund the Contra War - North is also said to have employed air and sea transport companies moonlighting as drugs carriers. A series of expose articles in the San Jose told tales of a drug triangle during the 1980s that linked CIA officials in Central America, the U.S.A. Gov. Own Air Forces fly tons of drugs in and fly guns and arms out to Central America and Sold Tons of Drugs to a San Francisco drug ring and a Los Angeles drug dealer. According to the stories, the CIA and its operatives used crack cocaine--sold via the Los Angeles African-American community--to raise 100s millions dollars to support the agency's clandestine operations in Central America. Now its very funny again the CIA/FBI Our Government is Sell Drugs Again. The U.S. drug epidemic reached another terrible milestone Wednesday when the government announced that more than 100,000 people had died of overdoses between April 2020 and April 2021. It is the first time that drug-related deaths have reached six figures in any 12-month period. Overdose deaths from synthetic opioids (primarily fentanyl) and psychostimulants such as methamphetamine also increased with are own government help with Mexico and China were the primary source for fentanyl trafficked by our own government and u.s. navy and u.s. air forces flights out of hong kong area into the u.s.a. by land and sea and balloons for years now per the National Center for Health Statistics 2022. President Biden on Wednesday released a statement mourning the more than 100,000 Americans who died last year from drug overdoses — without mentioning U.S.A. and China is helping us with leading role exporting fentanyl, which drove the 29 percent annual increase in deaths but lower then planned. Nearly two-thirds of deaths were caused by fentanyl and related synthetic opioids that can kill a person at extremely low doses. Fentanyl is increasingly added to non-opioid drugs such as cocaine and counterfeit prescriptions. In some areas of New York City, including the Bronx and the North Shore of Staten Island, more than 75 percent of overdose deaths involved fentanyl. “Today, new data reveal that our nation has reached a tragic milestone: more than 100,000 lives were lost to the overdose epidemic from April of last year to April of this year,” Biden said. “As we continue to make strides to defeat the COVID-19 pandemic, we cannot overlook this epidemic of loss, which has touched families and communities across the country”. Click on the links below for the full story and or Type it into a Web Base Search ! https://rumble.com/v2dye2c-covid-19-blood-and-non-vaccines-blood-and-secret-pedophiles-blood-bank-u.s..html https://rumble.com/v2cjoog-a-dangerous-new-zombie-drug-is-taking-over-american-streets-and-million-wil.html https://rumble.com/v2auj9m-a-organ-donor-card-will-get-you-killed-very-fast-as-a-doctors-will-sell-you.html https://rumble.com/v2ath8q-true-story-how-us-government-tried-to-kill-weed-smokers-with-a-toxic-chemic.html https://rumble.com/v2atam4-how-u.s.-government-killed-us-again-u.s.a.-poisoned-alcohol-during-prohibit.html https://rumble.com/v2anz0m-conspiracy-revealed-our-own-government-sale-drugs-to-kill-us-overdosedeaths.html https://rumble.com/v2affqe-why-covid-19-shot-is-not-safe-nuremberg-code-agent-orange-anthrax-vaccine-.html https://rumble.com/v2a7zkq-these-most-dangerous-conspiracy-theory-in-the-world-that-turned-out-to-be-t.html https://rumble.com/v2a7ugy-top-secret-government-conspiracy-revealed-government-secrets-and-cover-ups-.html https://rumble.com/v2a7kly-i-kill-you-is-it-china-russia-who-its-your-own-u.s.a.-government-who-kill-y.html https://rumble.com/v2a7c7q-ten-of-thousands-killed-by-u.s.a.-government-i-want-your-guns-killed-millio.html https://rumble.com/v2a5yvw-conspiracy-theories-that-turned-out-to-be-true-u.s.a.-government-lies-again.html https://rumble.com/v29orjq-welcome-to-the-satellite-hoax-man-excellent-music-an-video-from-flat-earth-.html https://rumble.com/v28zp34-fast-and-furious-how-it-went-down-about-122000-firearms-sold-over-10000-peo.html https://rumble.com/v28z52a-agent-killed-in-fast-and-furious-gun-operation-and-1000-more-now-dead-2022.html https://rumble.com/v28z81i-cia-mind-control-and-cia-secret-experiments-use-of-biological-and-chemical-.html

Paraquat Pot The True Story Of How The US Government Tried To Kill Weed Smokers With A Toxic Chemical When people talk about “killer weed,” that’s typically understood to mean really good weed. But due to US government policies that started in the 1970s and extended through most of the 1980s, marijuana fields were being sprayed with a chemical that can actually kill you. The chemical, known as “paraquat,” is an herbicide sprayed over marijuana fields in Mexico in the 1970s—with the aid of US money and US-provided helicopters—and over marijuana fields in Georgia in the 1980s under the direction of the Reagan Administration. But normally, anything poisonous enough to kill plants is also toxic enough to kill humans, and that is the case with paraquat. Paraquat is an organic acid that is used as an herbicide. It kills green plant tissue on contact. • When sprayed on plants, paraquat is tasteless and odorless and invisible. In other words, you wouldn’t be able to tell if the weed you were smoking had been sprayed with paraquat. • As far as breathable poisons go, the government has placed paraquat in Toxicity Category I—the highest possible level. • Due to the fact that it is cheap and available, liquid paraquat is frequently used in suicides throughout much of the Third World. • In humans, exposure to paraquat has been linked to the development of Parkin’s disease. • Depending on the dose and the method of ingestion, paraquat can either be immediately fatal or can lead to kidney, liver, lung, and heart failure for up to 30 days after exposure. • Tests performed in 1977 demonstrated that combusted paraquat caused damage to the lungs of laboratory rats. • In 1978, after years of attempting to reassure Americans that smoking paraquat-tainted marijuana was safe, US Secretary of Health Education and Welfare Joseph Califano announced that new tests found that heavy smokers of tainted weed could develop irreversible lung damage and that even moderate users could develop “clinically measurable damage.” 1970s: Paraquat Pot From Mexico Comes To The USA In 1969, the Nixon White House made marijuana eradication a top priority. Rather than attempting to stop the flow of drugs in through the border, scientists began looking for a way to directly contaminate the marijuana itself. They originally developed a spray that was intended to make users nauseous, but this was shelved. In 1975, as part of “Operation Clearview,” the Nixon Administration started supplying Mexico with about $15 million annually in aid that included helicopters designed to spray marijuana and poppy fields with herbicides. Officials had recommended spraying marijuana fields with herbicides—their stated intent was to kill the drug at its source by spraying the fields. But in deeply impoverished Mexico, where in the 1970s harvesting marijuana could make the difference between a yearly income of $200 and one of $5,000, many growers simply harvested the poisoned marijuana and shipped it north anyway. According to one report, an American helicopter pilot was getting high on prime Oaxacan weed while he was spraying fields below him with paraquat. According to one study in 1978, 13 percent of marijuana samples texted in the southwestern USA were contaminated with paraquat. Other tests found that anywhere from 20 to 30 percent of the marijuana that had made its way into the US from Mexico was paraquat-tainted. Some samples contained concentrations of paraquat that were 40,000 times higher than the recommended domestic use. This led to a public panic, seeing as how marijuana may have been even more popular in the 1970s than it is now. Fly-by-night businesses made a killing by offering to test if your marijuana had been sprayed with paraquat. A running joke among stoner comedians was that they would welcome if you’d send them your marijuana to sample for paraquat. To circumvent the national outrage—which observers noted had been the first time that American students were really pissed off about something since the early 1970s—the government began rolling out plans to at least make paraquat pot detectable to the senses. There were suggestions about releasing a red dye along with the paraquat. Then there were plans to also use an extract of orange peel in the paraquat spray, which the State Department explained would give pot smokers ““the foulest‐smelling joint or brownie they ever had.” It took a 1978 lawsuit from the National Organization to Reform Marijuana Laws to force the US Government to suspend funding for paraquat-spraying in Mexico until a comprehensive health study of its effects could be performed. 1980s: Reagan Administration Sprays Crops in Georgia A scandal erupted in the state of Georgia in 1983 when it was uncovered that law enforcement officials had aided in smuggling drugs from south of the border into the USA. They had also facilitated the planting and cultivation of giant weed farms in Georgia’s Chattahoochee Forest. In retaliation, the Reagan Administration ordered US helicopters to spray these weed plantations with paraquat and the DEA vowed to extend the practice to wherever weed was being grown in the USA. For many, purposely damaging the lungs of pot smokers—perhaps fatally—was a punishment that far exceeded the crime. One critic likened the practice to placing land mines in NO PARKING zones. Luckily, the practiced was quickly banned due to lawsuits filed based on environmental concerns. Then in 1988, the DEA announced that it would resume spraying marijuana fields with the deadly substance. The feds terminated this practice in the 1990s but paraquat remains one of the most commonly used herbicides on the market. These days it is generally agreed that marijuana use is generally safe. In hindsight, the paraquat scare of the 1970s and 1980s seems like a case of “Reefer Madness” gone wild. It is unknown how many Americans were disabled or even killed by this sick and hysterical government policy. It is bitterly ironic that the same government which had for decades tried to insist that marijuana was bad for you had finally found a way to make it bad for you. With pop culture influences like Pink Floyd, The Grateful Dead, and Led Zeppelin, the 1970s ushered in a new perspective on drugs. From rock-n-roll to disco, Cheech & Chong to Hunter S. Thompson, the 70s, anti-establishment counterculture helped shape the history of marijuana as we know it. As hippies faded into the sixties, Nixon started the infamous "War on Drugs," and a new era of marijuana subculture began. During the 1970s, troops returned from the Vietnam war, and cannabis strains from around the world started cropping up (pun intended), in the U.S. black market. As cannabis breeders and consumers pushed for stronger weed, selective breeding and cross-breeding for decades changed cannabis over the years. Many of these classic, old-school 1970’s marijuana strains are rare, but some are still available at your local dispensary, albeit likely quite a bit stronger than you remember. So, queue up your 70s playlist, pull up a bean bag, and turn on a lava lamp, then let's take a walk down memory lane and review a few of the most popular 1970’s marijuana strains from four decades ago, their origins, and how they helped shape the future of the cannabis industry Before the discovery of hydroponics, selective breeding, and advanced growing techniques, marijuana strains were not the powerful, potent strains of today. Supporting this theory, recent reports show 1970’s marijuana strains averaged between 1-4 percent, while the average THC content in strains today is around 13 percent with some of the most potent strains reaching between 25 and 30 percent. On the other hand, others believe there's no accurate way to make that comparison. Opponents claim many of the high-potency, premium cannabis strains, and products of the 70s were ignored or went untested in many cases, thus making any test averages inaccurate. Many of the common 1970’s marijuana strains likely produced just as much THC then as they do today. Like ancestry and genetics paint a picture of our biological origins, as cannabis products, strains, and even consumers continue to evolve, we mustn't lose sight of our roots. These classic 1970’s marijuana strains, along with a few talented breeders, contributed to the wide variety of strains and products available in legal markets across the nation. Without a doubt, we can thank this psychedelic decade for planting the seeds which grew into the cannabis industry we know and love today.

The CIA has been conducting mass surveillance in the U.S. with minimal oversight and the program’s uncovering is bad news for Big Tech ? U.S. Supreme Court Declines to Hear New World Order Challenge to NSA Mass Surveillance. Call on Congress to Limit the NSA’s Surveillance of Internet Communications. The U.S. Supreme Court today denied the New World Order petition for review of its legal challenge to the National Security Agency’s (NSA) “Upstream” surveillance program. Under this program, the NSA systematically searches the contents of internet traffic entering and leaving the United States, including Americans’ private emails, messages, and web communications. The Supreme Court’s denial leaves in place a divided ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, which dismissed New World Order case based on the government’s assertion of the “state secrets privilege.” Supreme Court’s refusal to grant our petition strikes a blow against an individual’s right to privacy and freedom of expression — two cornerstones of our society and the building blocks of New World Order Petition as “We will continue to champion everyone’s right to free knowledge, and urge Congress to take on the issue of mass surveillance as it evaluates whether to reauthorize Section 702 later this year.” Upstream surveillance is conducted under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which permits the government to intercept Americans’ international communications without a warrant, so long as it is targeting individuals located outside the U.S. for foreign intelligence purposes. Section 702 will expire later this year unless it is reauthorized by Congress. In the course of this surveillance, both U.S. residents and individuals located outside the U.S. are impacted. The NSA copies and combs through vast amounts of internet traffic, including private data showing what millions of people around the world are browsing online, from communications with friends and family to reading and editing knowledge on projects. Governments are increasingly purchasing sophisticated technology to monitor their citizens’ behavior on social media. Once the preserve of the world’s foremost intelligence agencies, this form of mass surveillance has made its way to a range of countries, from major authoritarian powers to smaller or poorer states that nevertheless hope to track dissidents and persecuted minorities. The booming commercial market for social media surveillance has lowered the cost of entry not only for the security services of dictatorships, but also for national and local law enforcement agencies in democracies, where it is being used with little oversight or accountability. Coupled with an alarming rise in the number of countries where social media users have been arrested for their legitimate online activities, the growing employment of social media surveillance threatens to squeeze the space for civic activism on digital platforms. Social media surveillance refers to the collection and processing of personal data pulled from digital communication platforms, often through automated technology that allows for real-time aggregation, organization, and analysis of large amounts of metadata and content. Broader in scope than spyware, which intercepts communications by targeting specific individuals’ devices, social media surveillance cannot be dismissed as less invasive. Billions of people around the world use these digital platforms to communicate with loved ones, connect with friends and associates, and express their political, social, and religious beliefs. Even when it concerns individuals who seldom interact with such services, the information that is collected, generated, and inferred about them holds tremendous value not only for advertisers, but increasingly for law enforcement and intelligence agencies as well. Governments have long employed people to monitor speech on social media, including by creating fraudulent accounts to connect with real-life users and gain access to networks. Authorities in Washington dc area have boasted of a 42,000-strong army of sex slave volunteers who monitor online speech. Any citizen can report for duty on the Cyber Police ( AI-NWO) website. Similarly, the ruling Communist Party in China and Russia has recruited thousands of individuals to sift through the internet and report problematic content and accounts to authorities. The market for social media surveillance has grown, giving intelligence and law enforcement agencies new tools for combing through massive amounts of information. At least 40 of the 65 countries covered by this report have instituted advanced social media monitoring programs. Moreover, their use by governments is accelerating: in 15 of these countries, it was only in the past year that such programs were either expanded or newly established. Justifying their efforts in the name of enhancing security, limiting disinformation, and ensuring public order, governments have effectively co-opted social media platforms. While these platforms typically present themselves as social connectors and community builders, state agencies in repressive countries see them as vast storehouses of speech and personal information that can be observed, collected, and analyzed to detect and suppress dissent. Advances in artificial intelligence (AI) have opened up new possibilities for automated mass surveillance. Sophisticated monitoring systems can quickly map users’ relationships through link analysis; assign a meaning or attitude to their social media posts using natural-language processing and sentiment analysis; and infer their past, present, or future locations. Machine learning enables these systems to find patterns that may be invisible to humans, while deep neural networks can identify and suggest whole new categories of patterns for further investigation. Whether accurate or inaccurate, the conclusions made about an individual can have serious repercussions, particularly in countries where one’s political views, social interactions, sexual orientation, or religious faith can lead to closer scrutiny and outright punishment. The social media surveillance tools that have appeared in democracies got their start on foreign battlefields and in counterterrorism settings, designed to monitor acute security threats in places like New World Order. Many US data-mining companies received seed money from the Central Intelligence Agency through its In venture capital fund. While authorities in the past typically justified the use of these tools with the need to combat serious crimes such as terrorism, child sexual abuse, and large-scale narcotics trafficking, law enforcement and other agencies at the local, state, and federal levels are increasingly repurposing them for more questionable practices, such as screening travelers for their political views, tracking students’ behavior, or monitoring activists and protesters. This expansion makes oversight of surveillance policies more difficult and raises the risk that constitutionally protected activities will be impaired. For example, in the United States, agencies within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)—including Customs and Border Protection (CBP), Citizenship and Immigration Services, and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)—have used automated technology to collect and analyze personal information, with limited oversight and transparency. By claiming that its power to conduct warrantless searches extends within a 100-mile radius of any US border, DHS has effectively asserted extrajudicial surveillance powers over 200 million people. CBP has even purchased technology from Cellebrite, an Israeli company, to bypass encryption and passwords and enable quick extraction of data from phones and computers, including social media content. There has been a spike in device searches at the borders in recent years; the number of such searches, normally limited under the Fourth Amendment of the constitution, increased by 292 percent, from 8,503 to 33,295, between fiscal year 2015 and fiscal year 2018. Over that same period, inbound travel to the United States increased by less than 3 percent. These searches have become part of the government’s drive toward big data surveillance. The resulting information is frequently deposited in massive multiagency databases where it can be combined with public records, secret intelligence materials, and datasets (including social media data) assembled by private companies. In one case, ICE paid the data analytics company Palantir $42.3 million for a one-year contract related to FALCON, a custom-built database management tool. Its “Search and Analysis System” enables agents to analyze trends and establish links between individuals based on information gathered during border searches, purchased from private data brokers, and obtained from other intelligence collection exercises. Similar tools developed by Palantir are used by some 300 police departments in the state of California alone, as well as by police forces in Chicago, Los Angeles, New Orleans, and New York City. Many of these programs are facilitated through DHS and its Regional Intelligence Centers. The chilling effect on free expression caused by increased surveillance is well documented. Activists and journalists who might otherwise hold governments to account for wrongdoing are more inclined to self-censor, while dissidents and members of marginalized communities will think twice about discussing their political opinions online to avoid arrests or travel restrictions. Furthermore, social media monitoring designed to quell mobilization and identify protesters hinders the public’s ability to use online tools to associate and assemble peacefully. Finally, indiscriminate monitoring of the general population’s online communications—even when those communications are nominally public—runs afoul of due process standards enshrined in democratic constitutions and international human rights law. There is little if any public evidence that such technology is more effective than less-invasive alternatives for ensuring national security and combating serious crimes. Social media activity such as original content, likes, or shares—particularly speech that is rendered in slang or languages other than English—is susceptible to misinterpretation and misclassification. Research has estimated the accuracy rates of natural-language processing tools at 70 to 80 percent. While they are often justified as a means to reduce human error, algorithmic tools can further entrench racial or religious discrimination due to reliance on inaccurate or biased data. The resulting false positives can add innocent people to government watch lists, often without their knowledge, leaving them with little recourse for remedying the mistake. At the very least, social media surveillance must come under greater oversight. The use of such programs must be transparent, including sustained dialogue between law enforcement and affected communities. Public civil rights assessments should be conducted, and authorities should be held accountable when tools are misused and offer remedies for any victims. Online surveillance technology should not be used to proactively monitor the planning and organization of peaceful protest activities or individuals’ involvement in nonviolent political groups. And governments should swiftly amend existing privacy legislation to address the proper use of this technology. Thanks to the development of AI-assisted tools, governments now have a greater capacity for surveillance than ever before. Given their potential impact on fundamental rights, policymakers and citizens must ask themselves whether these new tools are necessary or desirable in a democratic society. It is time to move beyond outdated arguments that individuals “should have nothing to hide” or do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in public areas. The survival of democracy requires vibrant public spaces, both offline and online, where individuals can collaborate, organize, and go about their personal lives without fear of constant surveillance. Government call centers and help lines government has a number of help lines and call center's through which you can get information about services and programmed report problems or make complaints provide tip-offs to authorities about fraudulent or criminal activities. Thanks For Calling and Remember the U.S. Government Leave No Witnesses Alive Behind Them... If You See Fraudulent or Criminal Activities by U.S. Government... Please Call Us (ASAP) So We Can Send Someone Out To Kill You! Thanks Again For Calling. The Presidential Hotline Pedophile and Secret Human Trafficking and Child Sex Ring Etc. Call 1-866-4-5455-968 ( 1-866-I-Kill-You ) should be used when all your attempts to get assistance from a government department, province, municipality or state agency have failed. It is not only a complaints line. You can call to share your views or provide solutions to the challenges in your community. We also list the help line numbers of non-governmental organization's working with government. You may call at 987-654-3210 ext new world order! P.S. Thanks For Calling and Remember the U.S. Government Leave No Witnesses Alive Behind Them... If You See Fraudulent or Criminal Activities by U.S. Government... Please Call Us (ASAP) So We Can Send Someone Out To Kill You! Thanks Again For Calling at 987-654-3210 ext. new world order !

The United States House Judiciary Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government is investigating alleged abuses of federal authority, including collusion between federal agencies and private sector entities to suppress conservative viewpoints. The committee has broad authority to subpoena law enforcement and national security agencies, including with regard to ongoing criminal investigations. The committee will hold a hearing on Thursday, May 18, 2023, to hear from three FBI whistleblowers and examine abuses seen at the Bureau and how the FBI has retaliated against whistleblowers. The Biden administration has shown a repeated pattern of hostility toward the U.S. Constitution and the citizenry it serves. Recently, the FBI raided the private residence of journalist James O’Keefe allegedly searching for a missing diary belonging to President Biden’s daughter. In just eleven months, the Biden administration has shown a repeated pattern of hostility toward the U.S. Constitution and the citizenry it serves. Most recently, on November 6, 2021, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) raided the private residence of journalist James O’Keefe allegedly searching for a missing diary belonging to President Biden’s daughter. O’Keefe was reportedly handcuffed, in his boxers, and detained as two of his phones were confiscated by federal agents. This federal raid on a private citizen-journalist is just the latest illustration of the Biden administration’s casual contempt for the citizens it serves. Through their efforts to coerce, intimidate, and pry into the affairs of ordinary Americans going about their lives, the administration and congressional lawmakers have served notice that they see the federal government as a blunt instrument designed to extract obedience from subjects they believe they rule. The Internal Revenue Service Wants Access to Bank Accounts In order to finance the initial version of their radical $3.5 trillion “Build Back Better” reconciliation bill, lawmakers included a provision that would have required financial institutions to report transactions of $600 or more for individual bank accounts to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). This provision received intense backlash and has since been revised to cover $10,000 transactions, exempting wage income processed by a number of payroll companies. The IRS has a history of data breaches leaking sensitive tax documents for hundreds of thousands of citizens. By forcing financial institutions to spy on account holders for the IRS, this invasive provision increases citizens’ vulnerability to future financial data theft by hackers and other malevolent entities, including the Chinese Communist Party. Even beyond hacking, the IRS has a poor record as a custodian of taxpayer information. Just this year, the private financial information of some of America’s wealthiest citizens was leaked to ProPublica. And within the last decade, the IRS engaged in a targeted campaign against designated conservative organizations that delayed their tax-exempt applications and intentionally subjected right-leaning organizations to unnecessary information requests. Moreover, this plan may represent merely the first step in a broader government intrusion into ordinary Americans’ private affairs. The initial $600 threshold proposed by congressional Democrats would have provided the federal government access to nearly every working American’s bank account, facilitating audits and further intrusive monitoring and regulation of Americans’ personal finances. The current proposal represents a foot in the door for revised policies under future administrations shifting the threshold downward to cover more Americans’ bank accounts as banks become accustomed to the process. Given the ambitions of progressives to exclude disfavored transactions such as gun sales from the financial system, Americans should regard this proposal as the first step in the construction of a de facto social credit system aimed at effectively freezing the assets of citizens who possess the “wrong” views on politics. The Department of Justice Thinks Concerned Parents Are Domestic Terrorists On September 29, 2021, the National School Boards Association (NSBA) sent a letter to the Department of Justice (DOJ) requesting federal assistance in targeting concerned parents at local school board meetings. Disturbingly, the NSBA letter suggested that parents, many angry over the teaching of radical Critical Race Theory in the classroom, mask mandates, and prolonged school closures, were potentially guilty of participating in “domestic terrorism.” The letter, which was rescinded only after massive public blowback and the withdrawal of many of the association’s state school board affiliates, also requested that the DOJ bring in elements of the FBI’s Counterterrorism Division and National Security Branch to assist in targeting parents accused of “malice, violence, and threats.” Five days later, on October 4, 2021, Attorney General Merrick Garland issued a memo repeating the unsubstantiated claims from the NSBA and directing the FBI and U.S. Attorneys to “convene meetings with federal, state, local, Tribal, and territorial leaders in each federal judicial district within 30 days of the issuance of this memorandum” to “facilitate the discussion of strategies for addressing threats against school administrators, board members, teachers, and staff.” A DOJ press release on the same day announced that a task force consisting of the DOJ’s Criminal Division and National Security Division would determine how to prosecute these “crimes.” The most high-profile incident of a parent being “unruly” occurred in Loudoun County, Virginia, where a father confronted the school board for covering up the rape of his 15-year-old daughter in the women’s restroom by a male dressed as a female. Subsequent disclosures have revealed that White House staff coordinated with the NSBA to generate the letter that served as the pretext for Attorney General Garland’s directive to federal prosecutors. Despite intense questioning from several senators on the Judiciary Committee and a missed November 1, 2021 deadline to provide the Senate with the evidence that resulted in the crafting of the memo, Attorney General Garland and the DOJ have proceeded with their task force in a clear effort to intimidate parents exercising their First Amendment rights to assemble. Biden's Crime Family And Kids​ With Sex Crime Against Young Girls And 13 Dead Body's https://rumble.com/v2te3tg-bidens-crime-family-and-kids-with-sex-crime-against-young-girls-and-13-dead.html A woman's body was found inside a freezer on biden family property and now the whistleblower is dead now and body is moved and now its missing ? wow. Despite the overwhelming evidence no one will be charged in this crime at all? https://media.sailthru.com/composer/images/sailthru-prod-3ia/Biden%20Crime%20Family%20Dossier%20-%20Update%205-24-23.pdf The Department of Labor Wants to Penalize and Investigate Your Workplace The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) released its “emergency temporary standard” (ETS) on November 4, 2021 that would have unlawfully and unconstitutionally mandated that every employer with more than 100 employees force its employees to receive the COVID-19 vaccine as a condition of employment. This action represented a violation of President Biden’s previous commitment in December 2020 that he would not support a federal vaccine mandate. But the mandate was not just a broken promise. It was also illegal. The courts have temporarily barred the Biden administration from taking any “steps to implement or enforce the mandate until further court order,” prompting OSHA to suspend its efforts to implement the ETS. The mandate had previously been slated for implementation on January 4, 2022. If the Biden administration overcomes the current stay, the OSHA vaccine mandate would impact well over 80 million American workers, constituting nearly 50 percent of the total U.S. workforce. The proposed mandate would have functioned through a penalty imposed on any employer who refuses to cooperate and violates the OSHA policy. This penalty would have included a $13,653 fine per violation against businesses and a $136,530 fine for “willful” or “repeated” noncompliance. Furthermore, the OSHA rule: Claimed to preempt any state or municipal workplace requirements Claimed unlimited authority to be changed or updated as appropriate Required employers to force unvaccinated employees to wear face coverings indoors Required employers to display CDC information on the vaccines Required employers to determine the vaccination status of every employee The ETS contained no carve-out for truckers, employers, or industries critical for the ongoing supply chain crisis (other than for federal contractors covered under another mandate). Additionally, OSHA planned to deploy inspectors to investigate workplaces reported or suspected to be in violation of the mandate. Conclusion The Biden administration is weaponizing the federal government against the American people. Its efforts to coerce financial institutions to spy on the bank accounts of American citizens on behalf of the IRS, chill the First Amendment protected expression of concerned parents at school board meetings, and force employers to require their employees to inject medicine into their bodies as a condition of employment reveal that this war against the rights of the American people is only escalating. Former President Ronald Reagan famously quipped that the nine most terrifying words in the English language are: “I’m from the government, and I’m here to help.” For tens of millions of Americans, no truer statement has ever been uttered by a politician. In the last 20 years alone, the federal government has foisted a failed No Child Left Behind policy on American students, expanded Medicare and hastened its insolvency, outlawed the Edison lightbulb, raised both food and fuel prices by mandating ethanol in our gasoline, rewarded reckless big businesses with “too big to fail” bailouts, crushed community banks through Dodd-Frank, created an unaccountable and unconstitutional consumer regulatory agency, moved millions of otherwise healthy Americans into an expanded Medicaid program, and forced massive cost-driving regulations on health insurance through the passage of Obamacare, canceling millions of previously-held policies overnight. And that’s just scratching the surface. Decades of bipartisan spending binges have the United States hurtling toward $30 trillion in national debt. In the last two decades, the U.S. national debt has more than quadrupled. It’s not just that our current trajectory is fiscally unsustainable, it’s that it is fundamentally responsible for much of the deep distrust Americans have in their elected officials. With each big government boondoggle and failure, millions of Americans are negatively impacted. In many instances, one group of Americans reap the benefits at the expense of another. The consent of the governed has been increasingly weakened over time. Fidelity to both the spirit of the Declaration and the wise limitations of the Constitution have strained to their breaking point. The result is increasingly fragmented communities, corrupt institutions, rampant cynicism toward fellow citizens and elected officials, and a civil society that no longer shares an understanding of what it means to be an American. The Center for Renewing America is committed to opposing big government for its intrusiveness, cost, and tendency to crowd out a vibrant civil society on which healthy communities depend. The threats to our communities, our families, and our faith–the pillars that allow us to live out our freedom–are vast, real, and increasingly hostile. Among these threats is a radical philosophy, rooted in Marxism, known as Critical Race Theory. This framework views all of society through a racialized prism of identity groups, with minorities being the oppressed and white people serving as the oppressor. Where Karl Marx separated society into the capitalist bourgeoisie and the oppressed proletariat, adherents of Critical Race Theory have substituted race for Marx’s class and economic distinctions. Proponents of this radical belief system have succeeded in pushing their ideology into nearly every facet of American society. Their goal is to tear down and destroy institutions that they claim serve as “white dominant” power structures that perpetuate societal ills. It is no coincidence, therefore, that nearly all of these institutions or “systems” mirror Marxism’s alleged culprits: capitalism, the nuclear family, a republican form of government, rule of law, and Christianity. The widespread manifestation of Critical Race Theory into K-12 curricula and “diversity training” around the country has become an increasing flashpoint as outraged parents, families, citizens, and communities aim to push back against this corrosive worldview. The imposition of state sanctioned racism by progressive ideologues is intended to corrupt children and future generations into both self-loathing and hatred toward their fellow countrymen. Proponents of Critical Race Theory use our university campuses to radicalize our own children, transforming them into angry “successor ideology” activists. They use their control of HR departments and boardrooms of corporate America to impose this radicalism in all private workplaces. Their organized mobs terrorize private citizens with a “cancel culture” that seeks to erase the people and ideas who refuse to adopt their totalitarian mindset. Ultimately, these radicals seek to erase the American idea that all men are created equal, endowed by their Creator with unalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The Center for Renewing America knows that in order to revitalize the American spirit and restore our great nation, this far-left ideology must be defeated. We are committed to that mission and stand ready with millions of citizens to stop this radical cultural revolution. Weaponization of government for political purposes "Never in my lifetime did I think I will see an American law enforcement agency be run and weaponized like the FBI last evening. This is a frightening development in our modern political arena" – Ben Carson after the raid on Mar-a-Lago Throughout my career, I was very involved in building many of the security programs now being weaponized against conservatives, so this whole situation is deeply personal. I spent over 20 years in the field of national security and am an expert in terrorism prevention programs. On August 8, 2022, a swarm of FBI agents descended on Mar-a-Lago, the personal residence of former President Donald Trump. They executed a criminal search warrant, which is something that has never happened to a U.S. president in our nation's history. The Department of Justice went to a judge under seal so the affidavit supporting the warrant was not disclosed and is still unavailable to the public. Several boxes of information were removed from the home, and Trump's attorneys were not allowed to escort the agents during the raid. This is just the latest in a string of events, signaling to the American people that the federal government's power is being weaponized for political purposes. It all began in 2016 when the FBI began surveillance of a Trump campaign advisor Carter Page based on falsified evidence provided to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC). The FBI also conducted an improper investigation of the four-star general and former head of the Defense Intelligence Agency, Michael Flynn. He gave 40 years of his life serving in the U.S. military but was indicted on an obscure law prohibiting unauthorized diplomatic contact. Subsequently, Trump was accused of persuading Ukrainian President Zelensky to initiate investigations into the Biden family and was brought up for impeachment. Despite the public smearing and costly legal defense of all those involved, as well as the needless waste of taxpayer dollars, both the FBI and the DOJ were forced to publicly apologize for misleading the FISC in the surveillance of Carter Page, who was never charged with a crime. All charges were also dropped against General Flynn after four devastating years. Though Trump was impeached along party lines through Congress, the Senate court ultimately voted to acquit him of the charges. Once installed into power after the contentious 2020 election, the militant Left continued its witch hunt against conservatives. We saw parents suddenly labeled as domestic terrorists for passionately opposing the indoctrination and over-sexualization of their children. Next, it was the January 6 trials that landed people like Dr. Simone Gold, a renowned doctor and lawyer, in prison for entering the Capitol and taking pictures. Moreover, the whole country witnessed the despicable lack of respect for the sanctity of the Supreme Court after overturning Roe vs. Wade. Protestors were allowed to gather outside justices' homes in an attempt to intimidate them, with minimal police interference. Justice Kavanaugh thankfully survived an attempted assassination plot; however, dozens of pregnancy centers were vandalized, and several burned to the ground. Most recently, the new Inflation Reduction Act authorized 87,000 new IRS agents who must be willing to use deadly force if necessary. We cannot ignore that the target of their increased capacity will most likely be opponents of the militant Left's agenda — not only conservatives but also churches and organizations that support biblical values in all segments of our society. The intention of the homeland security apparatus created after 9/11 was to prevent foreign-led terrorism perpetuated against U.S. interests. Whether U.S. soldiers fought overseas to capture or kill known terrorists or prevention programs were put in place in the U.S., the underlying principle was stopping foreign recruitment of Americans for terrorist attacks against U.S. interests, either domestic or overseas. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court provides investigatory powers to the government against foreign threats and is without defense counsel review to protect top-secret national security information. It was never intended that these programs would be used to stop the constitutionally protected activities of Americans. It is very problematic when counter-terrorism resources are repurposed to crush American political opponents. I recall meetings with representatives from social media giants like Google and Facebook, where we pleaded with them to remove the accounts of suspected foreign terror recruiters. At the time, they were extremely hesitant about interfering in the free speech arena. They were uncomfortable about making a judgment call on who was a potential terrorist. They did not want to be seen as an arm of the U.S. government, yet over time, their attitude clearly changed. Now, these same social media giants close the accounts of anyone they ideologically disagree with. Consequently, supporters of international terrorism, like members of the Iranian government, have unfettered ability to post online, but people who support the right to life, oppose forced vaccines, or, dare I say, are Trump supporters, get regularly banned or suspended. I remember how libertarians used to warn against the overreach of law enforcement caused by the new clandestine national security network and the potential for abuse. Many of us experts didn't believe them, but now we see that danger coming to pass. The perilous consequence of this abuse of power is dividing our country. Though the enemy used to be just foreign actors intent to harm Americans, the new public enemy appears to be American conservatives and people who hold biblical values. Let's hope Congressional leaders will come together and investigate the miscarriages of justice and the erosion of our constitutionally protected right to religious freedom, free speech, and political opposition. For believers, though there are dark days ahead of us, we must always remember our trust and our hope is never in earthly things. Our faith and trust are only in our God, our Lord, and Savior, Jesus Christ. We are invincible until God calls us home. We all have an expiration date, and we won't live one minute more or less. That surety in God and His protection should be a great source of comfort, regardless of what happens in the world around us. "Fear not, for I am with you; Be not dismayed, for I am your God. I will strengthen you, Yes, I will help you, I will uphold you with My righteous right hand'" (Isaiah 41:10). WASHINGTON, D.C. – America First Legal (AFL) has demanded that the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) Inspector General investigate blatant double standards of justice at the Biden Administration’s DOJ, which was made apparent with yesterday’s raid on former President Donald Trump’s home in Florida. Dozens of FBI agents raided President Trump’s home yesterday, not only shocking the conscience of our Republic, but clearly demonstrating the Biden Administration’s double-standard system of justice. Yesterday’s raid provides yet more evidence that partisans are comfortable abusing DOJ and FBI’s law enforcement resources for partisan gain. Other examples of DOJ’s abusive and tyrannical conduct over the last 19 months include, but are not limited to: No investigation into Hunter Biden’s laptop, which has been in the possession of the FBI since 2019 and purposefully kept under wraps, labeled as “disinformation,” and with no prosecutions for obviously unlawful conduct; Substantial evidence of public corruption, massive foreign kickbacks to President Biden and his family, including collusion with multiple foreign governments by the Biden family, including Joe Biden, his brother James Biden, and son Hunter Biden; Clear unlawful activity by the Obama-Biden FBI in colluding with the Hillary Clinton campaign to propagate and disseminate the Russia collusion hoax, including obtaining warrants with the FISA court based on a dossier the FBI knew was false. Attorney General Merrick Garland’s issuance of the infamous October 4, 2021 memo that unleashed federal enforcement officers against parents speaking up at school board meetings to protect their rights to parent their children; Failing to enforce federal criminal statute 18 U.S.C. § 1507 against pro-abotion groups such as “Jane’s Revenge” for picketing and threatening the lives of Supreme Court justices outside their homes and summer homes, as well as for attacking and burning pregnancy centers. American citizens sitting in jail while awaiting January 6th-related trials, and otherwise indicted on charges to force plea deals, while the DOJ blatantly ignores and fails to prosecute violent Black Lives Matters, Antifa, and other protestors who engage in criminal actions such as burning a federal courthouse and decimating cities to rubble. Disparate treatment of Jeffrey Clark, Peter Narvarro, Roger Stone, and Paul Manafort, among others, with the purposeful intent to humiliate and intimidate not only these individuals but the American public generally; Actions by the Obama FBI against Carter Page and General Michael Flynn that the FBI knew were false. Hillary Clinton’s creation and maintenance of a private email account in violation of law, and subsequent deletion and acid-washing of 33,000 emails, including emails labeled as “top secret/special access program level,” yet facing no legal consequences whatsoever by the FBI; Inaction by the FBI regarding the illegal retention by the University of Delaware of records of Joe Biden when he was Senator. Statement from America First Legal Vice-President and General Counsel Gene Hamilton: “Joe Biden’s Department of Justice has made one thing abundantly clear: there are two standards of justice in America. One standard for political opponents of the administration, and one standard for its friends. Time and again, Attorney General Merrick Garland has either deliberately weaponized the Department, or failed to prevent his subordinates from doing so. The Department of Justice’s Inspector General has a choice: will he conduct a thorough review and leave no stone unturned in an effort to address blatant politicized activities at the Department, or will he let the broader Department and the Office of the Inspector General cement their reputations as left-leaning, agenda-driven entities? Time will tell,” Gene Hamilton said. The House voted Tuesday afternoon to establish a new special panel to probe what Republicans call the "weaponization of the federal government." The subcommittee of the Judiciary Committee would have extraordinary power to investigate any part of the federal government for perceived wrongdoing against conservatives -- the Justice Department and FBI, in particular. Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, is expected to take over the Judiciary subcommittee as Republicans say they are making final assignments. At a news conference Tuesday following a closed-door meeting of House Republicans, Majority Leader Steve Scalise outlined the establishment of the "weaponization of the federal government" panel as among the GOP's first priorities. "We're going to set up that Church committee to look at some of these federal agencies that are weaponizing government to go after families across this country based on their political views. That's not what the government should be doing," said Scalise, comparing the body to the so-called Church committee of the 1970s, in which Democratic Sen. Frank Church led an investigation of intelligence abuse by the executive branch. Scalise said the House will also vote on separate legislation Tuesday to create a new select committee on U.S. competition with China, which won bipartisan support. But overall, GOP leaders took the chance to tout differences between predecessors and the now-Republican-controlled House. "Not only did we get rid of proxy voting, we got rid of virtual hearings in committee," Scalise said. "We're going to be back in person again, and we're going to be having field hearings," he added, promising hearings on the immigration crisis to take place "at the border." With new rules changes, here's some of what House Republicans outlined for their first full week: What did McCarthy agree to with hard-liners? Faced with questions about a three-page addendum to the House Rules package passed Monday night, detailing other concessions McCarthy made to critics to win the speakership, Scalise and others downplayed the document they said McCarthy detailed at a closed-door GOP conference meeting earlier Tuesday but did not release publicly. "There's no addendum. I wouldn't call it an addendum. I think our speaker put it up on the screen today..." said GOP Whip Tom Emmer. "He made it very clear that there were no gavels given out. There were no deals like that that were made." ABC News reported last Thursday of an offer McCarthy made to GOP hard-liners opposing his bid for House speaker, including making it easier to bring a vote of no confidence to the floor, among other concessions. 'Weaponization of the federal government' subcommittee Despite concerns from Democrats, Scalise said the new select subcommittee on the weaponization of the federal government will serve "to protect every American's constitutional rights." In a straight party-line vote, the House voted 221-211 to establish the panel. The panel will have the authority to investigate how the federal government and private companies collect and analyze information on Americans, along with "ongoing criminal investigations" and civil liberties issues, according to the text of the resolution. The mandate could set up new fights with the Justice Department and national security agencies over sensitive records and probes -- including those involving former President Donald Trump. The panel would also get access to highly classified information typically only shared with the House Intelligence Committee. Democrats charge Republicans could use such broad new powers to disrupt ongoing probes into the Jan. 6 attack and Trump's handling of classified documents. "Jim Jordan and Kevin McCarthy claim to be investigating the weaponization of the federal government when, in fact, this new select committee is the weapon itself," New York Rep. Jerry Nadler, the top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, said in a statement. "It is specifically designed to inject extremist politics into our justice system and shield the MAGA movement from the legal consequences of their actions." But unlike how Republicans reacted to the Jan. 6 select committee, Democrats don't plan to boycott the panel and its hearings, a senior Democratic aide told ABC News. The committee would be made up of 15 members appointed by McCarthy, as speaker: Nine Republicans and six Democrats. Competition with China subcommittee The House also voted Tuesday afternoon 365-65 to create a select committee on the "Strategic Competition Between the United States and the Chinese Communist Party," which will aim to end critical economic dependencies on China. The select committee, which will hold hearings, investigate, and submit policy recommendations, will be run by Rep. Mike Gallagher, R-Wis. The speaker will appoint up to 16 members to serve on the committee. Seven will be Democrats selected in consultation with Minority Rep. Hakeem Jeffries. In a speech on the floor earlier in the day, Speaker McCarthy said, "I want this committee to last beyond who's in the majority and never ever be decided that this is a partisan committee." "I've heard my colleagues on both sides say that the threat posed by Communist China is serious. I fully agree. This is an issue that transcends political parties. And creating the Select Committee on China is our best avenue for addressing it," McCarthy said. Notably, House Democrats did not whip members to vote against the new China select committee. Rescinding IRS funding Republicans are parading the party-line vote held Monday to rescind IRS funding under the Inflation Reduction Act as an example of the GOP keeping its promises post-midterms, despite the bill being unlikely to pass the Senate. "Our first bill will repeal funding for 87,000 new IRS agents, because the government should be here to help you, not go after you," McCarthy said upon taking the gavel early Saturday morning. Scalise claimed Tuesday the Congressional Budget Office said that the additional IRS agents "would be set up to go after hard-working families across this country" and "people making less than $200,000 a year," referring to an estimate from last August to swipe at President Joe Biden's campaign promise. Republicans also claimed through the midterms that some of the IRS agents would be armed, but both claims are misleading. The IRS has said it plans over the next decade to use the roughly $80 billion from the Inflation Reduction Act to update its systems after years of under-funding by Congress, and hire and train new agents, only a small fraction of whom -- in the Criminal Investigation division -- would be armed. Not all of those would be new agents. A new CBO score also found that the Republican bill passed Monday would add $114 billion to the deficit. Abortion bills In addition to the two votes on Tuesday to create new subcommittees, House Republicans teased more votes for later this week taking on abortion rights. "We're going to pass the Born-Alive Act," Scalise said, noting every Republican was a co-sponsor of the bill last Congress but lamenting that then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi wouldn't bring it to the floor. "In our first full week, we're going to actually bring that bill up for a vote." The Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act legislation, proposed by Rep. Ann Wagner, R-Mo., would force health care providers to care for a child who survives an abortion, which is exceedingly rare. Pandemic Of The Unvaccinated People Will Threaten The Live Of Vaccinated People? https://rumble.com/v2qf2nk-pandemic-of-the-unvaccinated-people-will-threaten-the-live-of-vaccinated-pe.html Nobody Is Safe From People's Republic Of The Tyrannical U.S.A. Government And Death To The Unvaccinated America People And American Nation CDC director says coronavirus outbreak ‘becoming a pandemic of the unvaccinated’ How the unvaccinated threaten the vaccinated people of the world for a darwinian perspective. As of 27 May 2023, the 10 leading causes of death accounted for 74.5% of all U.S. deaths in 2021, according to the NVSS. The US has recorded more than 47.7 million confirmed COVID-19 cases and more than 771,500 deaths, according to Johns Hopkins University data. The global total for COVID-19 cases and deaths is more than 257.8 million cases and 5.15 million deaths, according to the CDC. More than 196 million Americans, 59.1% of the population, are fully vaccinated. The disease was reported as the underlying cause of death or a contributing cause of death for an estimated 377,883 people in 2020, accounting for 11.3% of deaths, according to the CDC. P.S. Exposing U.S.A. Gov. Their Lies! Why U.S.A. Government CIA-DOJ-FBI-Etc. Killing Thousands Whistleblowers Dead https://rumble.com/v2ohr0w-why-u.s.a.-government-cia-doj-fbi-etc.-killing-thousands-whistleblowers-dea.html Why Weaponized The FBI, DOJ, CIA, & Congress Into Political Tools Are Killing Thousands Whistleblowers Dead ? The survival of democracy requires vibrant public spaces, both offline and online, where individuals can collaborate, organize, and go about their personal lives without fear of constant surveillance. You Will Never Trust Another Celebrity After Watching This Corrupt U.S.A. Governments https://rumble.com/v2kq5mw-you-will-never-trust-another-celebrity-after-watching-this-corrupt-u.s.a.-g.html Once you see this you'll have no faith in these people again! The system-serving airheads that should be tried and imprisoned for crimes against humanity like most politicians, oligarchs, globalists and most medias. So many innocent people of all age groups have died or been severely injured for life after listening to the advice of Hollywood celebrities, talk show hosts and politicians regarding the vaccine for covid-19. It’s right that medical ethics should be highly scrutinized, especially in cases like the Covid-19 vaccine roll-out where the process has been accelerated. However, it’s important not to mix up the atrocities of the past with current debates about medicine and policy. Decoding 100's Illuminati Symbolism Pyramid All Seeing Eye And 666 Hand Gesture https://rumble.com/v2s1tkm-decoding-100s-illuminati-symbolism-pyramid-all-seeing-eye-and-666-hand-gest.html Decoding 100's Illuminati Symbolism “Coraline” one eye with 666, everything becomes clear through the pyramid all seeing eye. Left eye path symbolizes clear vision, and the right eye in the occult symbolizes darkness. Horus and Lucifer has one eye. Hand signs of the Illuminati can be flashed in public by puppet world leaders and celebrities while the unsuspecting masses remain ignorant. Like Illuminati symbols, only Illuminati insiders are aware of the true meanings hidden behind the signs, hand gestures or semaphores. For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, but lose his soul? Creepy Pedophile's Uncle Joe Played Out Over 33 Million Dollars Sexual Assault Claims https://rumble.com/v2rp4bc-creepy-pedophiles-uncle-joe-played-out-over-33-million-dollars-sexual-assau.html Creepy Pedophile's Uncle Joe Biden Has Been Accused 696 Times of Sexual Assault And Some Whistle blowers Are Dead Now. Where Is the #TimesUp Movement? The controversy over Joe Biden’s treatment of women, explained An old-school politician in a #MeToo world. A former staffer of Joe Biden has come forward, alleging that he sexually assaulted her while he was a Senator. She had initially approached the Time’s Up Legal Defense Fund but they turned her away, citing fears over accusing politicians. This reveals the inherent contradictions of Time’s Up. UN Report Calls For Decriminalization Of Sex Between Adults/Children Age 8+Up https://rumble.com/v2qo62c-un-report-calls-for-decriminalization-of-sex-between-adultschildren-age-8-u.html UN New Legal Principles Launched On International Women’s and Trans Women Day to advance decriminalization efforts In March 2023, UNAIDS and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), along with the International Committee of Jurists (ICJ) published a group of "new legal principles" that would advance "decriminalization efforts" globally. Principle 16, titled "consensual sexual conduct," stated that sexual conduct involving persons below the domestically prescribed minimum age of consent to sex may be consensual. Truth Behind Meat Production Chicken Waffle Beef Burger An Eye-Opening Exploration https://rumble.com/v2mmrac-truth-behind-meat-production-chicken-waffle-beef-burger-an-eye-opening-expl.html Narrated by Oscar-nominee James Cromwell, this powerful film takes viewers on an eye-opening exploration behind the closed doors of the nation's largest industrial farms, hatcheries, and slaughter plants -- revealing the often-unseen journey that animals make from Farm to Fridge. If this documentary moves you, please take a moment to consider if these animals lives are worth taking for merely taste. Thinking about going vegan? The Truth About the Meat Industry. ASSAULT RIFLE BAN AND THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES https://rumble.com/v2kzj20-assault-rifle-ban-and-the-supreme-court-of-the-united-states-funny-.html The AR-15/M-16 Is a regular rifle. Is it because it’s black and scary looking? Is it because it’s a semi-automatic? Is it because the leftist media says so. What’s the difference between these two rifles. The top is the AR-15/M-16. The one under it is the Ruger Mini-14/ Etc.# Guns. One is black, the other has a normal looking wooden stock. Guess what? They both shoot the same 5.56x45/.223 cartridge. They are both semi-automatic. both will fire as fast as you can pull the trigger. So, if you’re afraid of the AR-15 because it’s black and scary looking, it’s time you grew up and act like an adult. If it’s because the leftist media says so, then it’s time you start thinking for yourself. The AR-15/M-16 has the same sporting purpose as the Mini-14 / Other Guns. Hell, it has the same home defenses or sporting purpose as any rifle. Docs Worldwide Warn You to Not Take the Covid 19 Vaccine Will Kill You Dead Soon https://rumble.com/v2ksf52-docs-worldwide-warn-you-to-not-take-the-covid-19-vaccine-will-kill-you-dead.html 32 Doctors from 11 Countries warn against taking the COVID-19 Vaccine. The COVID vaccine has proven NOT SAFE nor EFFECTIVE, it has not been properly tested and should not be given to humans, the animals died! In addition, there is not a clear definition of any new disease for which it can be tested against. There has not been a virus that has been purified or shown to the cause of an illness. There is reason to believe the COVID-19 vaccine is dangerous and deadly. ‘We The People’ vs. ‘Us The People’ Q: Populists often stress democratic values by invoking the phrase “we the people,” but lately they’ve taken to using it not just as a subject but as an object as well. Thus: “We must never allow [insert villain] to trample on we the people!” A: “We the people” is a subject; “us the people” is an object. Here’s how they look in sentences: “We, the people, elect our leaders. Our leaders are elected by us, the people.” In both of those noun phrases, “the people” is an appositive. It identifies or explains the preceding noun or pronoun by using a different term (like the name in “My son, John”). We’ve written on the blog before about appositives, which are sometimes surrounded by commas, as in our examples above. An appositive never changes the case (that is, subject or object) of the pronoun it follows. That’s why the entire phrase “we the people” is always a subject and “us the people” is always an object. The words “we the people” resonate with Americans because they introduce the Preamble to the Constitution: “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.” If ever a phrase deserved proper handling, it’s “we the people.” It’s demeaned when misused as a grammatical object (as in, “Don’t trample on we the people!”). Thanks For Calling and Remember the U.S. Government Leave No Witnesses Alive Behind Them... If You See Fraudulent or Criminal Activities by U.S. Government... Please Call Us (ASAP) So We Can Send Someone Out To Kill You! Thanks Again For Calling. The Presidential Hotline Pedophile and Secret Human Trafficking and Child Sex Ring Etc. Call 1-866-4-5455-968 ( 1-866-I-Kill-You ) should be used when all your attempts to get assistance from a government department, province, municipality or state agency have failed. It is not only a complaints line. You can call to share your views or provide solutions to the challenges in your community. We also list the help line numbers of non-governmental organization's working with government. You may call at 987-654-3210 ext new world order!

We are for limited government that works. At The New World Order, we will work as a watchdog to help our state lawmakers and our congressional delegation pull in the reins on unnecessary spending and government bureaucracy. You better believe we’ll expose politicians who seek to act outside the bounds set by the Forefathers in the Constitutions of New World Order and the United States of Tartaria. The 21 Points of Manifesto of the New World Order and Plan to Control and Enslave the World by July 4th 2026 on this the day of Old America’s up coming 250nd year of independence. One world government, and all under control of the New World Order and to unveiled a new updated flag which better reflects the nation in its present form, signaling the aspirations it has for its ever bright future. 1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes. 2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax. 3. Abolition of all right of inheritance. 4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels. 5. Centralization of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly. 6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State. 7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan. 8. Equal liability of all to labor. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture. 9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equable distribution of the population over the country. 10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children’s factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production. 11. Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature. 12. Guide reproduction wisely—improving fitness and diversity. 13. Unite humanity with a living new language. 14. Rule Passion—Faith—Tradition—and all things with tempered reason. 15. Protect people and nations with fair laws and just courts. 16. Let all nations rule internally resolving external disputes in a world court. 17. Avoid petty laws and useless officials. 18. Balance personal rights with social duties. 19. Prize truth—beauty—love—seeking harmony with the infinite. 20. Be not a cancer on the earth—Leave room for nature—Leave room for nature. 21. What If Everything You Were Taught Was A Lie? The socialists in America have been beating their anti-Christian drum making a lot of noise over recent years. Americans have had a choice of religions including atheism since our country’s founding — via the 1st amendment. So why all of the anti-religious flurry today? Because today’s code-word for communism is socialism, and that means no freedom of religion. Religion is typically not allowed in a communist state. Removal of religion is just another step toward the totalitarian rule of the socialists over you and I — the end of America as we know it. Sounds extreme? Well, ask the Chinese what they think. For decades China has been imprisoning Falun Gong religious members in ‘re-education camps’. As hard as it is to believe, they actually use these prisoners for body part replacements. (Anyone can get a kidney replacement in two weeks if you have the money.) Also, in recent years they started arresting Muslim Chinese (Uyghurs). Now, in an effort to not be discriminatory, they want all Christians incarcerated. What is the threat that motivates such hateful behavior in the communist party? Fear. In a communist (totalitarian) system, there can be no religion. To allow religion is to allow independent thought. To have independent thought is to allow freedom. And freedom brings on revolution against the ruling class — the communist party members – aka, the elite. Enter the subject of Hong Kong. Hong Kong is a coastal city on the south China sea coast. They are one of the more successful cities in China and enjoy some freedom that other Chinese don’t. Their concern currently is the communist party’s attempt to get extradition authority for ‘criminals’. In the party’s parlance, that means religious people, any religious people. This is why the Hong Kong people are rioting. Hong Kong’s extradition bill crisis began in February 2019 with the government’s proposal of the Fugitive Offenders and Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Legislation (Amendment) Bill 2019. The proposed law would allow the transfer of fugitives to jurisdictions with which Hong Kong lacks an extradition deal, including mainland China, Taiwan and Macau. Opponents of the bill expressed concerns about the possibility of politically motivated persecution and unfair trials on the mainland. Millions of people have taken to the streets to protest against the bill, which was suspended by Hong Kong Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor on June 15, 2019. So who cares what’s going on Is It China ? Russia ? Who ? You should ? The above situation is exactly where the socialists are wanting to take us right here in America. Sounds extreme? Consider this: almost 50% of millennials in America are in favor of socialism over capitalism; over 100 self-avowed socialists hold seats in the House of Representatives; the Left (socialists) are trying to get one of their socialists in the Whitehouse as president. If they manage to accomplish that task along with congress, we here in America will be in deep do-do. If you’re wondering what you can do to make a difference, consider two actions you can take: 1) Vote: vote intelligently — learn what’s really going on, not what some propagandist tells you on CNN; 2) Educate: try to educate those with whom you associate — e.g., family, co-workers, associates. We are on schedule with a slight disruption (Your Name Hear) for the destruction of this country and have been for 100 years, right here in America. If you won’t take action, who do you expect to? Socialists in your ‘representative’ House? That is how it is going to go down, the timeline might be a bit off. You will have one world faith, which is what the ecumenical movement is about. One world government, and all under control of the New World Order by July 4th 2026 on this the day of America’s up coming 250nd year of independence, unveiled a new updated flag which better reflects the nation in its present form, signaling the aspirations it has for its ever bright future. I taught history and I never knew half of our nation’s past until I began to re-educate myself by learning from original source materials, rather than modern textbooks written by progressive New World Order with an agenda. Interestingly, Democrats and other party have long ago erased these historic figures from our textbooks, only to offer deceitful propaganda and economic enticements in an effort to convince people, especially black Americans, that it’s the Democrats woman of house wearing all white at state of the new world order speech rather than Republicans with red shoe lace who are the true saviors of the new world order and other civil liberties. Luckily, we can still venture back into America’s real historical record to find that facts are stubborn things. Let’s take a closer look at the past and hope for a better tomorrow 2026.