A World Without Gray – Episode 3 – For Land And Country


Episode 3, for your listening enjoyment. This is my interview with Vicky Davis, writer and researcher of ChannelingReality.com

I highly recommend that you read the following information (below) before or after listening to this interview, for I believe it is one of my most important research projects yet in uncovering the true nature of the United States. Also, please watch the two videos at the end, for a glimpse of the future of mankind and America…

Download here: https://realitybloger.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/awwg_e3_02072013.mp3

–=–

For Land And Country

–=–

What does it mean to you when someone says “fight for your country”?

For some, the concept of just what a “country” is becomes blurred between two completely different things. While the conversational term for country usually defines the living people, the physical land, and the fictional government together in one neat package, the fact is that these things are quite different from one another, and are only connected through ink and consent of those living people as a “body politic”.

The “land” – the real and tangible thing we call home – is indeed not legally the “country”. Living men are also not legally the country.

The country is in fact a reamed folder of legal papers, notarized and signed by the appropriate members of a corporate “federation” called the United States. It’s borders are demarcated within this paperwork, but these too are not part of the actual physical land. It sets its own rules, changes those rules with the signing of a pen, and does so without the will of the people.

The land and the living people who inhabit it are called a country – a body politic – but only in a legal sense. The people, in order to inhabit this artificial country legally as “residents”, must also become artificial. They must become persons through contract so as to be part of (citizens) of this legal “country”.

“A “federation” is by definition an unincorporated entity, but a “federated” entity is corporated. A “union” of states is not a corporate entity, but that the “United” States is a corporation.”

Confused? You are supposed to be.

Instead of taking my word for it, I wonder what the government, the courts, and the Supreme Court thinks?

“Persons dealing with the government are charged with knowing government statutes and regulations, and they assume the risk that government agents may exceed their authority and provide misinformation,” –Lavin v. Marsh, 644 F.2d 1378 (9th Cir. 1981), 644 F.2d, at 1383.

“Whatever the form in which the government functions, anyone entering into an arrangement with the government takes a risk of having accurately ascertained that he who purports to act for the government stays within the bounds of his authority, even though the agent himself may be unaware of the limitations upon his authority.” –Federal Crop Insurance v. Merrill, Supreme Court, 332 U.S. 380

From the West LegalEdcenter’s Securities Litigation Report:

Link: http://corporate.findlaw.com/finance/cftc-sees-dodd-frank-reforms-essential-to-reduce-future-risk.html

“International Coordination”

Twenty-first century finance knows no true geographic borders. Money and risk can move around the globe with a touch of a button. Sober evidence of this was AIG’s swaps affiliate, AIG Financial Products, which had its major operations in London. When it failed, the U.S. economy and taxpayers shouldered a tremendous burden.

The current debt crisis in Europe is but a stark reminder of our interconnectedness. Moreover, it is precisely during times of heightened market uncertainty that transparent pricing of risk is essential. While European leaders are working to avert a deepening crisis, it is critical that we implement the Dodd-Frank Act to protect the American public.

We are actively consulting and coordinating with international regulators to promote robust and consistent standards in swaps oversight. We are sharing many of our memos, term sheets and draft work product with international regulators. Building on these efforts, I will be traveling to London to discuss derivatives reform as well as issues relating to high-frequency trading.

We also will work with international colleagues on memoranda of understanding for access to information and cooperative oversight. We also have a long history of recognizing foreign regulatory regimes. The Dodd-Frank Act authorizes the CFTC to recognize foreign regulatory frameworks that are comprehensive and comparable to U.S. oversight of the swaps markets in certain areas. We also anticipate seeking public input on the application of Section 722(d) of the Dodd-Frank Act, which says that the law doesn’t apply to activities outside the United States unless those activities have a direct and significant connection with activities in, or effect on, U.S. commerce.

So, let’s get this straight… The Dodd-Frank Act was a tool by Congress to prohibit one of government’s regulatory corporations (the Commodities Futures Trading Commission – CFTC) to act outside of United States jurisdiction as long as the activities to be regulated are outside of the United States? Yes sir. But the reality of what this means is even more shocking. For when the term “outside of the United States” is utilized here, it is referring to United States borders (remember, they are paper borders created by treaty and international agreements). This is where “Inland Ports” and “Foreign Trade Zones” come into play. This is how your “country” (both the land and the government) is incrementally being pulled out from under your feet – while American Idol agonizingly plays in the other room – through contracts, treaties, and international agreements.

If we were to look at a true representative interactive map of the borders of the United States, it would actually look like a U.S. shaped slice of Swiss cheese. Incrementally, as each Inland Port and Foreign Trade Zone is implemented, a new hole in the middle of the United States appears, where U.S. laws are non-existent.

Let’s take a land-locked state like Colorado for example. As there are no oceans (international waters) touching any of Colorado’s borders (the land), there is only one way to create an Inland Port in this state. The state must become a virtual body of water.

When an Inland Port is created, it becomes an international jurisdiction under international Maritime Law. And since Maritime/Admiralty law is the “law of the sea”, the land must become a port among a body of water in legal terms. Thus, as a port receiving trade through trade-routes, the land now becomes international jurisdiction. it’s brilliant really, when you stop and think about it. Suddenly a port pops up in the middle of of the land, with no water around it whatsoever. And yet it falls under the law of the sea!

So how is this accomplished?

Perhaps you’ve heard of the controversial NAFTA Super Highways…

You see, the rest of the United States (the land) becomes a “land-bridge” over virtual (paper) water between these ports and zones, and the roads and highways now outside of the United States called NAFTA represent international virtual waterways under international Admiralty Law going from Inland Port to Inland Port. Thus, the whole structure of ports and highways are under the law of the sea – outside of the United States. Why start a limited corporation in the great state of Colorado when you can move 10 miles away into an unlimited Foreign Trade Zone? Why hire American workers with all of their demands and minimum wages laws when you can hire foreigners living in these Foreign Zones? After all, anyone can live and work in the Zones without being a United States citizen. And with no U.S. labor laws, health insurance, or pension funding requirements for retirement, why hire American when you can hire Chinese, Indonesian, or Indian at a fraction of the cost? It’s just on the other side of the Highway you know…

In the middle of America…

So now let’s get back to government’s opinion:

“The House and Senate Reports accompanying the legislation virtually compel this conclusion, explaining as they do that “a foreign government’s . . . employment or engagement of laborers, clerical staff or marketing agents . . . would be among those included within” the definition of commercial activity. H.R.Rep. No. 94-1487, p. 16 (1976) (House Report); S. Rep. No. 94-1310, p. 16 (1976) (Senate Report)…”

“I had thought the [507 U.S. 349, 369] issue put to rest some time ago when, in a slightly different context, CHIEF JUSTICE Marshall observed:

“It is, we think, a sound principle, that when a government becomes a partner in any trading company, it divests itself, so far as concerns the transactions of that company, of its sovereign character, and takes that of a private citizen. Instead of communicating to the company its privileges and its prerogatives, it descends to a level with those with whom it associates itself, and takes the character which belongs to its associates, and to the business which is to be transacted. Thus, many States of this Union who have an interest in Banks, are not suable even in their own Courts; yet they never exempt the corporation from being sued. The State of Georgia, by giving to the Bank the capacity to sue and be sued, voluntarily strips itself of its sovereign character, so far as respects the transactions of the Bank, and waives all the privileges of that character. As a member of a corporation, a government never exercises its sovereignty. It acts merely as a corporator, and exercises no other power in the management of the affairs of the corporation, than are expressly given by the incorporating act.” –U.S. Supreme Court, Bank of the United States v. Planters’ Bank of Georgia (1824) 22 US (9 Wheat) 904, 6 L.Ed 244

See also Alfred Dunhill of London, Inc. v. Republic of Cuba, 425 U.S. 682, 695 -696 (1976) (plurality opinion).”

(Source: http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=507&invol=349)

According to Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, under the definition for the word “corporation”, it states:

“Chief Justice Marshall describes a corporation to be “an artificial being, invisible, intangible, and existing only in contemplation of law. Being the mere creature of law,” continues the judge, “it possesses only those properties which the charter of its creation confers upon it, either expressly or as incidental to its very existence. These are such as are supposed best calculated to effect the object for which it was created. Among the most important are immortality, and if the expression may be allowed, individuality properties by which a perpetual succession of many persons are considered, as the same, and may act as the single individual, They enable a corporation to manage its own affairs, and to hold property without the perplexing intricacies, the hazardous and endless necessity of perpetual conveyance for the purpose of transmitting it from hand to hand. It is chiefly for the purpose of clothing bodies of men, in succession, with these qualities and capacities, that corporations were invented, and are in use.”

(Author’s Note: It is important to note here that technically the corporation of the United States or portions thereof can be “conveyed” to foreign hands, including the United Nations. Remember, this is all on paper, through treaties and agreements. And it wont likely make the nightly news as it happens piece by piece, port by port, zone by zone… This can all be done while never changing the corporate charter name of “United States” or of states, counties, cities (municipal corporations), and districts.)

And this legal definition goes on to state:

Corporation: “Nations or states, are denominated by publicists, bodies politic, and are said to have their affairs and interests, and to deliberate and resolve, in common. They thus become as moral persons, having an understanding and will peculiar to themselves, and are susceptible of obligations and laws. Vattel, 49. In this extensive sense the United States may be termed a corporation; and so may each state singly.”

And Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1856, defines the word corporator as:

CORPORATOR. One who is a member of a corporation. 2. In general, a corporator is entitled to enjoy all the benefits and rights which belong to any other member of the corporation as such. But in some corporations, where the rights are of a pecuniary nature, each corporator is entitles to those rights in proportion to his interest; he will therefore be entitled to vote only in proportion to the amount of his stock, and be entitled to dividends in the same proportion. 3. A corporator is not in general liable personally for any act of the corporation, unless he has been made so by the charter creating the corporation.

(Author’s Note: This means the American people can be made liable for United Nations debt or funding, and that the United States is a member- i. e. not a “sovereign” entity – with only a “vote” in world affairs, including its own.)

Note here that the United States is a “member” of the United Nations, and of the International Monetary Fund (World Bank).

Can you put the pieces together?

And of course when Bouvier’s defines the United States, it says:

UNION. By this word is understood the United States of America; as, all good citizens will support the Union.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. The name of this country. The United States… 5. The United States of America are a corporation endowed with the capacity to sue and be sued, to convey and receive property.

Again from the Supreme Court – near the year of the founding of this “country”…

“If Congress, previous to the Articles of Confederation, possessed any authority, it was an authority, as I have shown, derived from the people of each province in the first instance. When the obnoxious acts of Parliament passed, if the people in each province had chosen to resist separately, they undoubtedly had equal right to do so as to join in general measures of resistance with the people of the other provinces, however unwise and destructive such a policy might and undoubtedly would have been. If they had pursued this separate system, and afterwards the people of each province had resolved that such province should be a free and independent state, the state from that moment would have become possessed of all the powers of sovereignty internal and external — viz., the exclusive right of providing for their own government, and regulating their intercourse with foreign nations — as completely as any one of the ancient kingdoms or republics of the world, which never yet had formed or thought of forming any sort of federal union whatever. A distinction was taken at the bar between a state and the people of the state. It is a distinction I am not capable of comprehending. By a state forming a republic (speaking of it as a moral person) I do not mean the legislature of the state, the executive of the state, or the judiciary, but all the citizens which compose that state and are, if I may so express myself, integral parts of it, all together forming a body politic. The great distinction between monarchies and republics (at least our republics) in general is that in the former, the monarch is considered as the sovereign, and each individual of his nation as subject to him, though in some countries with many important special limitations. This, I say, is generally the case, for it has not been so universally.

But in a republic, all the citizens, as such, are equal, and no citizen can rightfully exercise any authority over another but in virtue of a power constitutionally given by the whole community, and such authority, when exercised, is in effect an act of the whole community which forms such body politic. In such governments, therefore, the sovereignty resides in the great body of the people, but it resides in them not as so many distinct individuals, but in their politic capacity only. Thus A. B. C. and D., citizens of Pennsylvania and as such together with all the citizens of Pennsylvania, share in the sovereignty of the state. Suppose a state to consist exactly of the number of 100,000 citizens, and it were practicable for all of them to assemble at one time and in one place, and that 99,999 did actually assemble. The state would not be in fact assembled. Why? Because the state in fact is composed of all the citizens, not of a part only, however large that part may be, and one is wanting, in the same manner as 99 is not a hundred, because one pound is wanting to complete the full sum.

But as such exactness in human affairs cannot take place, as the world would be at an end or involved in universal massacre and confusion if entire unanimity from every society was required; as the assembling in large numbers, if practicable as to the actual meeting of all the citizens, or even a considerable part of them, could be productive of no rational result because there could be no general debate, no consultation of the whole, nor of consequence a determination grounded on reason and reflection, and a deliberate view of all the circumstances necessary to be taken into consideration, mankind has long practiced (except where special exceptions have been solemnly adopted) upon the principle that the majority shall bind the whole, and in large countries, at least, that representatives shall be chosen to act on the part of the whole. But when they do so, they decide for the whole, and not for themselves only.

Thus when the legislature of any state passes a bill by a majority, competent to bind the whole, it is an act of the whole assembly, not of the majority merely. So when this Court gives a judgment by the opinion of a majority, it is the judgment, in a legal sense, of the whole Court. So I conceive when any law is passed in any state in pursuance of constitutional authority, it is a law of the whole state acting in its legislative capacity, as are also executive and judiciary acts constitutionally authorized, acts of the whole state in its executive or judiciary capacity, and not the personal acts alone of the individuals, composing those branches of government. The same principles apply as to legislative, executive, or judicial acts of the United States, which are acts of the people of the United States in those respective capacities, as the former are of the people of a single state. These principles have long been familiar in regard to the exercise of a constitutional power as to treaties. These are deemed the treaties of the two nations, not of the persons only whose authority was actually employed in their formation. There is not one principle that I can imagine which gives such an effect as to treaties that has not such an operation on any other legitimate act of government, all powers being equally derived from the same fountain, all held equally in trust, and all, when rightfully exercised, equally binding upon those from whom the authority was derived.

I conclude, therefore, that every particle of authority which originally resided either in Congress or in any branch of the state governments was derived from the people who were permanent inhabitants of each province in the first instance and afterwards became citizens of each state; that this authority was conveyed by each body politic separately, and not by all the people in the several provinces or states jointly, and of course that no authority could be conveyed to the whole but that which previously was possessed by the several parts; that the distinction between a state and the people of a state has in this respect no foundation, each expression in substance meaning the same thing; consequently, that one ground of argument at the bar, tending to show the superior sovereignty of Congress in the instance in question, was not tenable, and therefore that upon that ground the exercise of the authority in question can not be supported.”

(Source: http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/3/54/case.html)

This important opinion tells you one very important thing… You do not now or did they then live in a true idealistic republic! If you are a citizen, you are nothing more than a part of the whole citizenry (in this case equality is a bad thing, for it takes away your rights). You are the State – a tiny piece of the jigsaw puzzle made up of equal size citizens. The people and the State are the same thing. “Distinct individuals have no power or sovereignty – only the state does as a body politic of all the people combined. This literally squashes the theory that in the United States all men are kings of themselves. This is just a falacy to be shelved with all the other “free country” myths out there. And the State creates these treaties and agreements with Foreign entities with the legal presumption that you don’t give a damn!

You aren’t fighting it, if you even know about it, and so the plans for world governance and the conveyance of the United States lands into United Nations (NWO) hands goes on unhindered.

For some clarification, here are the Bovier’s Law Dictionary definitions of a “Republic”:

REPUBLIC. A commonwealth; that form of government in which the administration of affairs is open to all the citizens. In another sense, it signifies the state, independently of its form of government. 1 Toull. n. 28, and n. 202, note. In this sense, it is used by Ben Johnson. Those that, by their deeds make it known, whose dignity they do sustain; And life, state, glory, all they gain, Count the Republic’s, not their own, Vide Body Politic; Nation; State.

REPUBLICAN GOVERNMENT. A government in the republican form; a government of the people; it is usually put in opposition to a monarchical or aristocratic government. 2. The fourth section of the fourth article of the constitution, directs that “the United States shall guaranty to every state in the Union a republican form of government.” The form of government is to be guarantied, which supposes a form already established, and this is the republican form of government the United States have undertaken to protect. See Story, Const. §1807.

Yet another common fallacy squashed by the constitution itself!

Some how the people of the United States have mixed up the notion that the “United States” government – the central government of Washington D.C. as a federation – is supposed to be a republic. But this is not what the constitution states at all. The only requirement of the United States Federal Government laid out in its constitution is that the United States corporation in Washington D.C. must protect the already establish form of government of each individual state. Remember, the citizen is subject to two forms of government, one the state and one Federal.

On this, the Supreme Court state its opinion:

“The people of the United States resident within any State are subject to two Governments: one State, and the other National; but there need be no conflict between the two. The powers which one possesses, the other does not. They are established for different purposes, and have separate jurisdictions. Together they make one whole, and furnish the people of the United States with a complete government, ample for the protection of all their rights at home and abroad. True, it may sometimes happen that a person is amenable to both jurisdictions for one and the same act… It is the natural consequence of a citizenship which owes allegiance to two sovereignties, and claims protection from both. The citizen cannot complain, because he has voluntarily submitted himself to such a form of government.–The Supreme Court, 92 US 551: “U.S. v Cruikshank”

While you may live in a republic within your individual state, you do not live in a republic called the United States. The distinction here is absolutely key, and the tempering of fallacious considerations of the intent of the national government

And if “Common Law” is your bag, you should know that in the same case the Supreme Court stated its opinion about the Common Law:

“It is a rule at common law (the reason applies in equity and other civil law cases) that if a party can plead a fact material to his defense, and omits to do it at the proper time, he can never avail himself of it afterwards.”

Now why would anyone in their right mind agree to such a sinister and offending rule as this? And why would anyone submit to this?

Can you imagine…

You: Oh yeah judge, I forgot to mention that I have a video tape and 20 witnesses that saw me 1,000 miles away from the scene of the crime at the exact time of the crime.

Judge (as his gavel smashes down): Inadmissible! Guilty as charged!!!

It goes on to say:

“The law rather chooses that a party should incur a risk of this nature than leave a door open to endless litigation upon pretenses the truth of which it is very difficult to discover.”

God forbid we should have long litigation in order to discover the truth!

This is called the “justice system”, by the way. And the only thing common about common law is that it is commonly tyrannical just like any other legal system. Even if you had a good experience in court by a judge who seemed lawful or constitutional, this does not dismiss the fact that at any time this type of “opinion” can arise. It’s a rule that a judge may choose to follow at his whim. And while a man acting as judge may certainly consider late evidence, he certainly is not required to. Law means nothing to a corrupt politician or judge. And it is certainly a fallacy to overlook the rules just because once you had a good experience. The fallacy: This judge acted fairly and constitutionally, therefore all judges act fairly and constitutionally.

In this particular case, believe it or not, the “person” harmed was actually physically dead, but since the defendants did not claim this fact within the discovery process, this fact actually had no bearing on the case. The fact that the person was dead was not considered when doing wrong to that person. Image how that felt to the defendants when those words were uttered by the judge, who were no doubt thinking… Why in the hell would this fact even need to be mentioned???

It states:

“II. The death of Doane has been alleged for another purpose.

It is said that the decree is to restore to Elisha Doane, which was impossible because Elisha Doane was not then in being. Admitting that upon this record we are to take judicial notice that Doane was dead at the time of pronouncing the decree (in which I am by no means clear), yet if this was the real reason why the plaintiffs in error had withheld the property or its proceeds, they might themselves have said so. They have not, and as each party generally makes the best of his own case, we are to presume that did not in fact constitute their reason. In this case it could be of no avail but at the utmost to prevent the allowance of interest until a demand actually made. It never could destroy the whole beneficial effect of a decree given in rem, and when the parties who make the objection were in court and parties to the very decree complained of. I think nothing can be more evident than that if the decree be not totally void, the administrators are entitled to the benefit of it, at least until it is set aside for error, if there be any error in it, and such a remedy is now practicable. If a scire facias was necessary before execution could have been obtained out of the court which passed the decree, it could be for no other reason than that the other party might have an opportunity to contest the validity of the letters and the existence of the administration, if any such objection could be supported. Such an objection might have been made here. It has not been made. There is therefore, I conceive, no principle of law or justice which forbids giving effect to the decree upon this ground.”

You: But judge, the victim was already dead before I had anything to do with her!

Judge: Inadmissible! Guilty as charged!!!

Ok, extreme I admit. The point is that the possibility – as a rule – is that at any time a judge can dismiss crucial evidence that would prove your innocence without considering it.

But listen to what was stated even later in this case:

“A court of justice, indeed, ought at its peril to take notice of its own jurisdiction, and it is not often that cases of such doubt arise that a judge can be at a loss on the subject. But it may happen and does sometimes happen that innocent and serious doubts are really entertained. Is a court therefore, because its judgments may be finally dissented from by a superior tribunal, to be considered as flying in the face of the law, so that parties before it shall not only be protected in disobeying it but punished for their obedience? If this be the case, the old maxim cedunt arma togae (let arms yield to the toga – modern: let military power give way to civil power) will very ill apply to courts of justice. Instead of being the peaceful arbiters of right and the sacred asylum of unprotected innocence, their very forums will be the seat of war and confusion.”

Why is this all so important to the establishment of a New World Order Government?

Well let’s see… so far the Supreme court has allowed corporations to be people with rights, allowed these corporations to merge and acquire each other to establish monopolies and trusts,  allowed these corporations not only to clone life but to create new genetically altered life and then patent that life-form as a novel (unique) property of the corporation and government, it has ruled that children can be vaccinated without parental consent, it has allowed the United Nations to claim a part of the City of New York as international land immune from U.S. law, and seems to not be at all concerned with the thousands of Presidential Directives and Executive Orders that have allowed everything from martial law in America to unmanned drones for the use of killing Americans abroad and spying on them nationally.

Now why in God’s name would I put my trust in this body of “Justices” to do the right thing in protecting me or my country or to  combat the implementation of world governance? They are, after all, appointed by the same president and congress that is allowing it to happen in the first place! They aren’t even voted in by the people who suffer their opinions!!!

So what does it mean to you to” fight for your country”?

Well, you better start comprehending that your country and your state is in the control of a rogue government, and that to save the land the government must not be allowed to expand globally by expanding its ream of paper to include all of the United Nations as it’s master.

The “United States” is in the process of becoming  nothing more than an admiralty law-based “land-bridge” between oceans and countries, a port of call for the world government and its corporations built with your taxpayer money.

And all of this proving the pen is mightier than the sword, simply because the people will not wield the sword as their fore-fathers supposedly did.

In our interview, we discussed that in order to create a new World Government, the current borders of the United States must be destroyed. It is, however, important to state that the individual state governments and borders need not be demolished simply because the Federal government and borders are abolished. It is in fact the contractual nature of the individual states to this central government which is the cause of the loss of individual state sovereignty. As individual republics, under a new United States “union” the country would be no less grand.

Is it only me that feels this way?

…whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness… all experience hath shown, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”

–Constitution of the united states of America

“Whenever the ends of government are perverted, and public liberty manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the people may, and of right ought to reform the old, or establish a new government. The doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power, and oppression, is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind.”

–New Hampshire Constitution, Article 10 of the Bill of Rights

“All power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority and instituted for their peace, safety, happiness and the protection of property. For the advancement of these ends, they have at all times an inalienable and indefeasible right to alter, reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may deem proper.”

–Kentucky Constitution, Kentucky Bill of Rights

“All power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority and instituted for their peace, safety and happiness. For the advancement of these ends they have at all times an inalienable and indefeasible right to alter, reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may think proper.”

–Pennsylvania Constitution, Article 1, Section 2 of the Declaration of Rights

“3d. That Government ought to be instituted for the common benefit, protection and security of the people; and that the doctrine of non-resistance against arbitrary power and oppression is absurd, slavish, and destructive to the good and happiness of mankind.”

–North Carolina Constitution, November 21, 1789

All political power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their benefit. The faith of the people of Texas stands pledged to the preservation of a republican form of government, and, subject to this limitation only, they have at all times the inalienable right to alter, reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may think expedient.”

–Texas Constitution, Article 1, Section 2

“Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by rule of law.”

–Universal Declaration Of Human Rights, United Nations (paying lip service to this decree with despicable arrogance and confidence as it subsumes all other constitutions!)

So what part of this aren’t you comprehending?

And just what do you think the 2nd amendment is for?

Better listen to the show now folks, and start to grasp exactly what’s happening in a local, county, district, state, and national government near you. For right this very second, government is doing all of the above for you, on paper, handing over the “country” to a global corporate federation, making the above options of abolition obsolete and unlawful with each treaty and contract your representatives sign, conveying the land to foreign interests…

And remember, just because you don’t see it doesn’t change the fact that it”s happening…

This is what you are truly fighting:

And the future of food (just replace metal powder with protein powder):

Truth is so much stranger than fiction, and so much closer to science fiction than imaginable.

In closing, I can only say that no matter what your “country” means to you; no matter how you define it – I think now would be a good time to start fighting for it while it’s still recognizable as such, and while we still have a resemblance to natural humans.

.

–Clint Richardson (realitybloger.wordpress.com)
–Monday, February 11th, 2013

An Insidious Plan to Take Over The World


If I were part of a very small group of elite individuals and families from around the world whom together held 90% of the entire world’s wealth along with the power to print its money and manipulate the value of that money, and I wanted to keep it that way for myself and pass this fortune and privilege on to my sons and daughters… what would I do to make sure I (we) remained in control of both the money, and more importantly my power over the world, specifically the United States?

The following is what I would do:

*** Disclosure: Any similarities to actual events or happenings from the last 50-100 years, with regards to people, beliefs, lies, manipulations, theft, treason, genocide, politics, religion, culture, money, industry, media or entertainment are strictly coincidental, and are, I assure you, accidental in very much a purposeful way:

1.    I would implement incremental change slowly over many, many years.

This simply means that I would manipulate the laws, cultures, beliefs, medias, entertainments, religions, and truths of the entire nation in such a prolonged yet purposeful manner that the vast majority of its citizens would not notice my efforts. Generationally speaking, the change would be both alien and destructive to the cohesion of any older generation’s morals and values, which they would attempt in vein to transfer or pass down to their new age children. The “New Age” would be every generation’s own crusade against the last. In fact I would change these things so slowly, say over a 60 year period, that these people would not only accept these incremental changes (changes which separately add up to a total change over time), but would actually think that the ideals behind them were in fact their own, pulling the spotlight away from my small group of elites who hide behind the celebrities, public officials, and politicians who sell and implement these changes. Adolph Hitler – whose efforts are used here as an example of the non-incremental fascist take-over of a society – in my eyes could not succeed due to the rapid degradation of the impression or illusion of freedom amongst the people of Germany and around the world. I, as part of this elitist group, would even fight against this type of take-over (and they did) in order to put into place my more sound incremental technique of domination over a society, until the country was no longer a sovereign nation, but one of corporate ownership under our foreign banks and partners, which would be controlled by a central construct (like the United Nations) that would slowly (incrementally) strip the nation of its property, land, and infrastructure, as well as its deeply rooted independence and sovereignty.

2.    I would put into place a puppet government whose strings I could pull, which would take the blame both currently and historically for my secretive groups’ undertakings.

In order to plausibly deny any and all connections to me with regards to public policy, our totalitarian laws, unjust or illegal taxes and legislation that is overtly anti-Constitutional, socialist, and fascist, or any type of less incremental (sudden) changes which would only benefit us and our corporate monopolies, I would rig or fix elections in order to give the people the illusion of their participation in the voting process for their favorite candidate – in most cases their favorite Cult of Personality spokesman – who in reality would be culled, prepped, empowered, funded, and completely controlled by us. Thus, the responsibility for all of the problems within the economy of the country (though they be caused by us), the attacking of other countries (though this too is our doing), and the constant ups and downs in monetary instability, recession, and depression  (again us), would be blamed solely on the President of the United States and his cabinet, of whose invisible strings I would pull. If a president or any other elected or appointed candidate of whom we put into power were to have a change of heart or attempt a coo against us, I would simply set up or assassinate them, and quickly replace him or her with our standby safety measure (like the vice-president) until the next election. I would slowly (incrementally) replace paper ballots, which leave a transparent and re-countable paper trail, with voting machines made by one of our conglomerate corporations in which the programming and systems information are kept top secret by federal law from any regulatory bodies, including the senate and congress (whom incidentally, also do our bidding). In this way, tallies can be instantly modified to ensure the correct candidate be placed into office, and we can ensure that no paper trail be left behind to double-check the actual individual voter tallies. Since both candidates in the two-party system we created and control would be placed there by us, we could rest assured that the losing candidate would never chase or require a full recount in the election, and would accede the vote to our other candidate. In this and other ways, checks and balances would be dissolved while keeping up the appearance of a fair election process. This left/right paradigm of political competition would pit those voters who are conservative against those who are liberal, keeping both sides busy fighting amongst themselves and blaming each other’s administrations for the political and economic problems that we engineer, while we at the top of the power pyramid continue to clandestinely take control of the country.

3.    I would never let a third political party gain any considerable control in the state or federal governments, unless I either controlled them as well, or had access to information which would discredit their candidacy once elected.

A number of third party candidates would always be allowed to appear on the ballot in order to keep the illusion of voter freedom, free will, and free-choice alive in the conscious of the uneducated voting pubic who, through carefully crafted and projected propaganda, would actually still believe that they live in a free country and that their votes are legally counted. But these alternative candidates would never be allowed to actually win any seat of power that would take away from my accessibility to the electorate, which I control. Of course the occasional dark horse, grass-roots, or “no other choice” candidate would be allowed to be “elected” in the short term to an insignificant political position, but the sheer majority of the two-party, democrat/republican, left/right paradigm will always trump any truly altruistic attempts at politically changing the system for the good of the people. I would also spread a doubt and disinformation campaign amongst the voting masses, convincing them against all logic and reason that a third-party candidate could never actually win an important post, nor would he or she ever possibly be able to effect change within the dominant two-party system, portraying them as a “lone wolf” with no supporters from the two dominant parties in the legislature. This would ensure even against the most tenuous of election campaigns that a third party candidate, from an intellectually brainwashed voters standpoint, could never be elected. I would also fund the campaigns of certain unpopular, off-the-wall, politically incorrect, or downright crazy third party candidates in order to further discredit the very ideal of voting for anything other than the established two-party system. This brainwashing would manifest in political conversations as anger, irrational confrontation, absolute denial, or sheer ignorance of the fact that any third party candidates are even on the ballot until voting day arrives. It would also show in the unreasonable shame one would feel when voting for an alternative candidate in the voting booth; a subconscious irrational feeling of guilt, dismay, or hopelessness for even the most ardent supporters of said third party candidate.

Essentially, when one party would begin to fall, the other one would be there to win the election. This teeter tottering of popularity between left and right would continuously serve to prop up the opposite party for election. When one becomes obviously corrupt, our controlled media would shine favorably on the other. By establishing an eight year term limit, which would be enough time for the people to forget or forgive the previous president – or more importantly his or her affiliated party – and by perpetrating nonsensical ideals such as ‘presidents always win re-election campaigns during war-time’, we would appease each supporting group of the populace every four or eight years, as they celebrate the triumph over the competing party. By using idealistic and emotional concepts like good and evil, liberal and conservative, left and right… each party would consider themselves to be on the correct side of modern politics. This combined psychological operation would ensure our two-party system’s un-fatigable, perpetual motion.

4.    I would use each generation gap against the next, ensuring differing views, ethics, and ideals that would make one generation blame the others before and after them for the corruption and problems in society as a whole.

Responsibility breeds reaction. Blame insures inaction. Perpetual blame and inaction assures the continuity of government. Fads, fashions, movie stars and themes, music, sitcoms, technology, beliefs, traditions, institutions, and educational differences and limitations would all contribute to the differing views and ideals of each new generation. While the elderly would remember the way things used to be and wonder at the degradation of society, the middle-aged will be wondering what happened to their youth, while changing the rules and laws to benefit themselves and their future retirement at the expense of even their own children, as these youth are busy with the impression of changing the world (to the extent that we allow and promote) and realizing the middle-agers are becoming corrupt and are responsible for their lower work standards, wages, and seemingly poor economic outlook. This never-ending cycle will be repeated until the end of time, as we will always be there to corrupt the middle-aged and guide the youth into middle age. I would promote disparaging nicknames for each new generation through the media (such as Generation X), providing continuous negative commentary on the supposed fact that each new generation is “lost” or “misguided”.

5.    I would decimate or make illegitimate the idea of the “role model” or “hero”.

By slowly changing the perceptions of the younger sections of our society who would ordinarily admire and strive to seek vocational, heroic, professional, or even family oriented individuals as their mentors… I would flood the media and entertainment outlets, including large percentages of the news, with sports and sports figures: individuals who in the eyes of our youth would become like idols. (Also: rock stars, actors, entertainers, models, porn stars, etc…). Thus, regardless of the fact that the chances of success in professional sports are literally a one in a million long shot, the perception that this or other non-realistic goals are attainable will illogically take precedence over scholastic goals and realistic career choices. So much so, that most youth will put such a low emphasis on education that they will be easily assimilated into the skill-less workforce which will tower up around them, and which will be the only alternative to their dreams. Farming, ranching, industry, health-care, fire-fighting, and so many other essential vocations would be reduced to second-chance jobs; consolations whose standards and practices we would simultaneously yet incrementally lower over time in order to accommodate the 99.9% of failures to these idealistic, popular, unrealistic dream jobs and sports star aspirations.

6.    I would shift the countries independent export economy into a dependant import economy.

Simply put, I would ruin the food and agricultural economy at home by imposing inane mandates and laws through a central governing body (like the FDA) which again is funded by us, replacing wholesome and nutritious crops with unnecessary and unhealthful commodities that could be traded predictably and profitably as futures, for the purposes of producing non-food items such as fuel (like ethanol), feed crops (like hay and aleph-alpha), and filler foods (such as soy beans). I would impose government subsidies or incentives for farmers to switch from growing healthy food to growing what we wanted them to grow. In this way, a farm eventually could not operate without money from the government, which as you remember, is controlled and funded by me, through your taxes. I would slowly invest in all of the seeds and seed companies which farmers must buy to plant their fields each year, and once we owned a majority of these seeds – including ones we genetically modify and then patent as intellectual property so that no one may use them without our permission, I would pass legislation that farmers be required to buy my seeds and use my pesticides or pay heavy fines. I would design these seeds so that they’re fruit would bear no seeds of their own, thus forcing farmers to buy new seeds every year, instead of traditionally re-using the seeds which were produced in the previous years crop yield. Thus, by incrementally slowing or stopping the production of common whole and nutritious fruits, vegetables, and nuts in this county, America would then be forced to purchase from other countries (import) most of it’s eatable produce. Of course I would also have control of these countries of export, meaning that we would be making the profits from this international trade and would also be able to set the health, pesticide use, and growing standards for these foreign and domestic farms of import. I would then sabotage the laws regarding the labeling of nutrition information on these foodstuffs, so that the facts about where they were grown, whether or not they’re organic or GMO (genetically modified organisms), and they’re nutrition information would no longer be required to be listed by U.S, international, or United Nations law. Of course we would have the corporations that produce these pesticides and GMO seeds and foods in our back pockets, and award lucrative, no-bid contracts to them for “research and development” purposes, in exchange for huge kickbacks to us, systematically destroying any smaller independent companies who seek market shares in the food industry. And finally, once the industry was in ruins and the food market and farmers were in serious trouble, I would establish a new governmental body controlled by me to replace the FDA, which would be “legally” voted in by the congress and senate, whom of course we would control with equally transparent strings, and signed by the president. A few contrived or “false flag” food emergencies and contaminations leading to total recalls of meat, dairy, or produce, would serve to help pass this new administration – under the guise of protecting the food supply, or for food safety. What better way to control people than to control the people’s food supply? Also, by allowing monopolistic corporations like Wall Mart and Target to overtake the marketplace (which would import most of their cheaply made products from Asian, African, and South American markets for pennies on the dollar, while putting quality American farms, manufacturers, and small businesses out of business), I would ensure a declining industrial and manufacturing base in America until the economy was almost completely consumer oriented and import dependant. Pride in one’s country would be incrementally destroyed, and younger generations would never know the difference as they seek work in the only industry remaining: the service industry. And finally, I would develop technology which would allow larger companies to outsource work to other countries for cheaper wages, even while American workers go unemployed, and not punish these companies for atrocities and crimes committed in these foreign places related to pollution, sweatshops, unfair wages and working conditions, and other human rights violations.

7.    I would systematically dumb down the population through the destruction of its system of education, and through it’s entertainment outlets.

Educated men are as much superior to uneducated men as the living are to the dead.”   – Aristotle: 384-322 B.C.

By slowly (incrementally) and legally altering the very definition of education over many years, I would transform the school system in this country from one of learning to one of socialization, liberalism (wealth sharing and welfare conscious), law enforcement, military, and non-skilled job training. I would organize a methodically efficient board of “education specialists” whose main objective is to covertly manipulate the parents and taxpayers into supporting controversial “education” programs (Sex Education, Health Education, Drug and Alcohol Education, Death Education, Critical Thinking Education, etc…) against their better judgment. I would liberalize the majority of kids and young adults in order to pressure the still critical thinking older conservative minority into submission and acceptance of this re-education process. I would slowly alter and rewrite the history books to reflect a more pro-military, pro-Federal Government, pro-world-government, anti-republic, pro-democracy, anti-Constitution, pro-socialism, pro-depopulation, and pro-illegal-immigration agenda, so that future citizens would conform easily to the incremental take-over of America by the United Nations and other international organizations, and bankers like us. I would replace critical thinking problems and exercises with multiple choice answer sheets. I would introduce machines for testing and grading, so that writing became obsolete. Fill in the blank would become fill in the bubble, with alternative test answers so obviously wrong that failure would be nearly impossible. I would first manipulate, and then require the use of teaching materials such as text-books, educational films, and other modified tools of education, basically re-writing history and text books so that our cause is cast in a positive light. I would then universally ban the use of certain non-fiction writings and all too relevant or realistic fiction books and movies in the classroom, to ensure the conformity of our new re-education process. Through media outlets I would change perceptions about home-schooling in the general populace, and then outlaw this form of education through use of the courts, mandatory inoculations, claiming parental incompetence, and threatening custody battles for non-compliance of education and vaccine laws.

8.    I would attack the family structure in America.

A constant attack campaign on the traditional ideal of the family unit through media and news outlets would be employed. Its goal would be to destabilize the structure and bond of the family and to liberalize and empower women and children in order to turn them against their parents or spouses on most issues, and disrupt any natural harmony in the family unit. This combined with other assaults to the moral fabric of society, such as the establishment and acceptance of the abortion and porn industries, would surely reduce the reality of family for young people from an ideal to a consequence of unsafe sex. Homosexuality would be projected as fun and acceptable and laws would be passed to protect its sanctity, with dissent thereof to be punishable by federal and state laws. I would produce, introduce, and maintain harmful and even deadly sexually transmitted diseases in order to promote condoms, reinforce birth control, and contribute to our depopulation agenda through the communicable spread of these transmittable diseases and fear of sex. Christmas and Thanksgiving would be morphed into repulsive, twice a year get-togethers, which families would actually see as a dreadful experience and begin to feel disdain and even stress towards these once cherished holidays, while the actual spiritual meaning would loose out to consumer advertising, Santa Claus, and gift giving. Sons and daughters would lose any appreciation of the sacrifices their parents made for them while growing up, and would be too busy or not care enough to take care of their mother and father when old age, senility or health issues strike in later life. The very idea of the duty and responsibility of parental care would be transformed into a repulsive subject through media outlets. Convalescence would become a state responsibility through insurance and hospice centers with little or no quality of care. And these businesses along with pharmaceutical manufacturers would take over the industry of death, profitably prolonging misery and sickness while allowing their consumer-minded children to continue in their full-time work as contributing members of society, ignoring the natural duty of parental care. By changing the economy from an industrial and food producing country into a service, consumer, and skill-less work based society, longer work hours and the necessity of both parents to work, specifically mothers, would consequentially make home-schooling and family values begin to degrade. Nanny’s, teachers, and baby-sitters would log more hours with children than their actual parents possibly could, making the juxtaposition towards outside influences opposed to family values and parental influence unavoidable. This constant struggle would hopefully serve to drive a wedge between father and son, mother and daughter. Beloved animated movies and children’s programming, which might subtlety steer children away from the foundations of family and morals, would take the place of parental guidance and quality family time. Unhealthy, mentally debilitating, and disease causing snack foods would be pushed onto the palates of children through advertising on kids programming and cartoons, magazines, and in schools causing serious health, developmental, social, learning and behavioral problems. Simultaneously, pharmaceutical drugs that would counter these developmental problems would be introduced and prescribed as a cure for the contrived side effects of these poisonous food ingredients we have inundated the food supply with. Of course, these built in side effects of prescription drugs would make children docile, socially inept, and ultimately controllable for life. For as they get older, adult versions of these drugs would be made available as well, since almost all of the manufactured consumer food supply would eventually be tainted in this way. How? We would simply purchase or take over all food-manufacturing companies and destroy the farming, meat and dairy industries by forcing them to use our GMO seeds, growth hormones, and GMO feed for their livestock. Our FDA or equivalent governing body would ensure that this was done legally, imposing largely un-payable and probably bankrupt-able fines and taxation for non-compliance of the rules and regulations we set. Since most farmers would already be subsidized by us the government (us), they would be forced to comply or loose these subsidies and go out of business.

9.    I would make all valuable and medically necessary drugs illegal, and covertly import illicit and addictive substances, ensuring they are dispensed throughout the nation by illegal means.

By owning or micro managing pharmaceutical companies and the drugs they manufacture, I would require that they be available by prescription only (illegal substances unless prescribed) and require a doctor to prescribe them. In this way, the medical industry (also controlled by me) will have a constant influx of citizens seeking permission to acquire illegal drugs through medical prescription. The slow sabotage and removal of healthy food choices, the inclusion of harmful substances into most manufactured food products, the fluoridation of the water supply, and the introduction of high fructose corn syrup and “sugar free” additives such as Aspartame and Sucralose would insure this influx of sick citizens with chemically induced illnesses. I would ensure the need of even more pharmaceutical drugs and prescriptions by systematically building side effects into these medicines, so that drugs to ease the side effects of the original drugs would be required. Knowing the cornucopia of health, medical, clothing and other benefits derived from hemp, I would equate this weed to the marijuana family of the cannabis plant in order to control its use and production, though it has no psychedelic or THC properties. Inversely, I would slowly (incrementally) make marijuana a medically permissible and easy to acquire prescription drug (still illegal) one state at a time, fooling the public into thinking that it is now a legal substance, as opposed to the still highly government grown, controlled illegal plant that it is. I would invade Afghanistan and take over the poppy seed fields, using low-level, uneducated enlisted army soldiers to guard the fields: pawns and cannon fodder who don’t ask questions. This would ensure the oversight and continued controlled production of mood-altering and addictive opium-based prescription drugs like Valium, Xanax, Provigial, and other anti-depressants and anti-anxieties, as well as illicit and more deadly addictive compounds like heroin. The Opium of the masses, as they say…

10.    I would promote abortion as birth control.

I (we) would incrementally push the logic and righteousness of abortion as a legitimate form of birth control, specifically in the less wanted ethnicity groups (African-American, Hispanic, etc…). In this way, population control of what we as eugenicist’s consider the lesser forms of the human species with respect to race, geographic location, and poverty levels could be accomplished through the enabling powers of cooperative group-think acceptance. Simultaneously, we would set up “Family Guidance” centers (like Planned Parenthood), mostly in these poorer neighborhoods, sponsored by apparently altruistic means (like The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, The Ford Foundation, etc…). By offering free and at cost “services” like counseling and abortion procedures, eugenics would become an unfathomed reality. Also, we would establish such clinics in third world populations and require through international law these services by local and world government (United Nations) decree. Denial of “mentally unstable”, single, or financially inadequate mothers to the privilege of bearing a child would be necessary, and so forced abortions and one child policies would become commonplace and even eventually acceptable. Constant propaganda through mass media and respected public figures would reinforce the fallacious and deceptive worldly perspective that over-population is on the verge of destroying the planet. Thus, we would ensure a non-empathetic response from the masses as we depopulated the planet. Abortion would play a key role in this effort, ensuring that only evolutionally superior races would substantially propagate.

11.    I would incrementally set up a surveillance grid, systematically requiring a national ID card, RFID, and biometric identification measures, ultimately leading to a computerized, plugged-in, cashless society in a complete and total control grid.

Slowly building confidence in the public through the media and entertainment venues, shows like Cops, America’s Funniest Home Videos, Candid Camera, Cheaters, and “undercover investigative” news programs would be used to push public acceptance of the positive and entertaining effects that constant surveillance and closed circuit television (CCTV) have on a society through crime-prevention and security. “Reality shows” like Big Brother, The Real World, and many others would be created to downplay the intrusiveness of cameras in the home and to get the masses used to being under 24 hour surveillance. A total surveillance grid could then be slowly (incrementally) put into place – virtually under (or over) the noses of the public – in the form of traffic light cameras, built-in computer web-cameras, security cameras on every corner, cable box and video game console cameras, satellite high definition surveillance feeds, and eventually mandatory government monitored in-home cameras (first in child custody and criminal cases, and later for every home), as well as digital wireless wire taps, cell-phone conversation recordings, collection and filing of text messages and emails (in federal fusion centers), and tracking through GPS positioning on cell-phones, products, and ID cards containing RFID tags, RFID embedded car license plates and on-board services like On-star and other GPS based devices. Playing on the ease and convenience of ATM, credit card, radio frequency ID (RFID), microchip, and other paper-free solutions, I would then push to make cash an obsolete form of payment, incrementally phasing out paper money in lieu of bank cards, credit and biometric scanning (thumb, body, and eye scans). By creating a cashless society, all forms of payment could then be tracked without discrepancy, taxed without fail, clandestinely monitored for suspicious activities (against us), sold to product placement organizations, and would ensure that the privacy of cash transactions be abolished. In this way, a total control and tracking system of all money and wealth would be accomplished. If a citizen steps out of line or is found to be contemptuous of the puppet government or our new social order, this dissenter and anyone involved with him would be shut off, his credit and digital bank account drained, his life ruined or his rendition approved… squashing any rebellion before it can receive adequate funding or become an menace to us. Also, by requiring permits for any type of protest or group meetings or gatherings, no unapproved, underground, political, or dissenting clubs or groups would be able to be formed, and secrecy would be increasingly difficult for these groups to maintain. They could easily be infiltrated, assigned provocateurs and watchers, and be remotely listened to or spied upon through cell phones and other clandestine listening and recording devices.

12.    I would ask citizens to monitor the actions of other citizens and offer rewards for tips and information, so that the people began to police themselves.

With the fear of being turned in or reported by their neighbors and friends, policies of conservation, curfew, housing conformity, rationing, wealth-sharing, auto maintenance, yard maintenance, diet guidelines, child welfare, association codes, criminal activity, public displays of emotion or affection, visitor logs, and general societal conformity would be strictly adhered to for fear of fines, confiscation, child custody loss, and imprisonment for violation of the law. Punishment would be a constant fear no matter where a citizen traveled. A small percent of the population would thrive on this type of “tattletale” behavior and feel empowered by it… and even volunteer to be trained as unpaid “thought police”. The use of RFID readers could be implemented here so that no cases of mistaken identity could take place, ensuring the total accuracy of citizen reporting (once the cataloging and mandatory RFID chipping of the population had taken place).

13.    I would give law enforcement powers to private security firms and use them to police the masses.

Blackwater, Bid Patrol, and other private security mega firms and corporations would be given no-bid contracts to assist police in their patrol and monitoring of the citizenry, once presidential directives and legislature mixed with secretive martial law mandates were put into effect. I would give these private security patrols “stand down” power, meaning they would have authority over state and local police officers. Felons, disgruntled immigrants, ex-military, dishonorably discharged ex-military and police, and other undesirables in law enforcement would be sought after to fill the ranks of these security firms. This would accomplish the same loyalty to the security firm as it would to such organizations as the mafia, and ensure the willingness to fire upon, arrest, and force civilians into internment camps: innocent men, woman and children. Foreign soldiers would also be utilized (through the United Nations or similar global governing body), since firing upon and imprisoning a foreign populace is not as difficult as firing on your own countrymen.

14.    I would start a media empire (like Hollywood) in order to subliminally project our views, policies, and propaganda through the entertainment industry.

We would write and produce books, movies, and television series that actually tell the people of our plans, but that are portrayed in a way that makes them seem fictional or even impossible. Thus, the masses would train themselves that terms like world government, conspiracy theory, New World Order, Illuminati, Free Masonry, secret societies, and Big Brother to name a few, are ridiculously unreal concepts and that the people who talk about them are crazy or insane conspiracy theorists. At the same time, these media outlets would covertly project our controversial themes and ideals such as global depopulation, eugenics, sterilization, quarantine and forced vaccination, the correctness of war, illogical patriotism towards these wars and the country, belief in the holocaust, placement of troops in the streets against the very Constitutional laws forbidding it, color (green) revolutions, political correctness, non-rebellion, anti-Constitutional views, pro-police state views, surveillance and tracking, positive or humorous drug and alcohol use, desensitization from blood, torture, police brutality, and violence, and many other global themes. I (we) would feminize the idea of the masculinity of men, promoting the positive aspects of homosexuality, and give the impression through television and movies that women are stronger and more intelligent than men, and that men are the unintelligent dreg of society.

15.    I would degrade the quality of music and its lyrics to the point that, only through intense repetition and hype could a song be liked or accepted as popular music.

After incrementally purchasing or corporately taking over almost all of the radio stations in the country, as well as the corporations which produce, chart, and sell such music, I would only allow to be aired on radio those songs and bands whose lyrics were non-dissenting, non-anti-government, non-anti-war, and generally degrading towards women, police, family values and morals. By establishing a federal censoring hub (such as the CDC) I could ensure that only group approved themes and conforming lyrical messages get airplay. I would force popular music to be kid and high school oriented: so immature in fact, that older generations would not be able to relate to the childlike, unimpressive, and immature messages in the music. I would actively discredit culturally significant forms of music and label them as alternative, unpopular, or old. In retrospect, I would disassemble music programs in public schools through budget cuts to reinforce the cultural hole I’ve created by these actions, filling that hole with sports and other non-vocational activities and re-educational types of subjects. I would create nationally syndicated talent shows in order to let the “voting” public decide their favorite entertainer, and then contractually exploit their “choice” as the next big thing. I would ensure that drugs and alcohol be introduced and/or sustained within bands to ensure the short lived legendary status of truly great musicians and artists.

16.    I would build a corporate empire out of the prison industry.

I would imprison at least 1% (1 out of 100 people = 3 million people) of the entire United States population and hold that minimum internment percentage on a permanent basis. I would in turn grant government and corporate business contracts to these private, state, and federally run prisons, essentially turning them into forced labor camps, paying much less than minimum wage and saving our corporate partners huge amounts of capital. Funding for the overhead of these prisons could easily be taken from each state tax fund, and this would continually help to keep states on an over-budget mode, forcing state debt to our central banks through their borrowing to pay for their falsely inflated budgets. I would project a sense of the righteousness of these prisons through media and entertainment, blacking out of the news the true nature of these facilities as indentured servitude, for-profit institutions.

17.    I would form an international representative group of all countries (very much like the United Nations) in the name of international law, conservation, and humanitarian efforts to halt poverty and hunger… and slowly (incrementally) turn over the country, its military, and its laws to this group.

While the state and local propositions and laws would have the illusion of being decided by ballot initiatives as well as local and state legislature, I would ensure that through presidential directives, federal mandates, congressional billing, and senatorial decree, that the law and power structure in the United States and world-wide would be transferred steadily yet incrementally over time to this international, or new world government (order). I would keep this information secret from the public for as long as possible, and even project it (the U.N.) as weak and un-influential in world and U.S. policy through the controlled media.

18.    I would implement social networking websites.

Sites like MySpace, Facebook, and YouTube would be portrayed as the ultimate form of expression, where your virtual self can be free of physical constraints, and where you can say whatever you want without fear of persecution, castigation, or criminal charges. In reality, they would become voluntarily storable catalogs of each citizens’ personal information, tastes, likes, dislikes, product placement preferences, sexual preferences, criminal thought processes, buying habits, musical tastes, legal and illegal download and upload histories, future plans and travel destinations, conformity scale (susceptibility to brainwashing and hypnotic suggestion), opinions about their puppet government, and weather or not they have an actual comprehension of their ruling elite class (us).

19.    I would slowly (incrementally) and covertly gain influence over religious institutions as a means to further control the easily suggestible church-going masses.

What better way to conquer a nation, than to take away it’s spiritual release?”   – The Fixx: 1986

I would place on the payroll and give airtime to the most charismatic of evangelical speakers to preach the word of God, as I would require it to be projected. In turn, these evangelists would subvert the churches and use their members by way of voting in elections for our interests on measures, initiatives, and for certain two-party candidates. Through a Federal regulatory body (like F.E.M.A.), I would institute a set of mandates to religious leaders, ideals like gun control, gun bans and confiscation, obeying the laws of the land no matter how tyrannical, and submitting to checkpoints and internment or “relocation” camps without crime or guilt in the case of quarantine or martial law. In turn, these mandates would be passed down to individual church ministers across the land, dubbed – Clergy Response Teams – which would include these mandates as part of their lessons and sermons. A general message to obey and submit to the government by decree of God would be disseminated through these institutions of faith, as well as the use of only non-violent, peaceful response or protest.

20.    I would project a constant state of irrational fear onto the hearts and minds of all citizens through our corporate controlled media.

In a state of perpetual fear, hypnotized citizens would become compliant, develop controllable patriotism in support of warfare, and concede to the willingness to relinquish rights and freedoms in exchange for government protection and intervention… and to the loss of their individual liberties. Therefore, I would ensure that through lies, false flag (government staged) terrorist attacks, media propaganda, seemingly humanitarian efforts, and the alleged spread of freedom and democracy throughout the world, the perception of imminent threat be thrust onto the citizenry in return for their support of our corporate take-over of the world through military intervention and occupation. Our ownership of the media would ensure that the United States was always portrayed in a positive light, while the millions of innocent men, women, and children who are in the way of our progress are continuously bombed, killed, displaced, and forcibly removed from their homeland… blaming the terrorists (us) and insurgents (native people fighting to preserve their homeland we invade – or us playing this part) for the many war crimes and atrocities we deliver. After destroying the infrastructure of the country we occupy (the electric grid, water supply, gas lines, living conditions, food stocks, and supplies) I would award taxpayer funded no-bid contracts to our own corporations who would, in a deliberately slow and sub-standard fashion, rebuild the economy and restore the weakened (by us) infrastructure. I would place a U.S. government friendly leader or dictator in power who would have no recourse but to sign over the newly built up economy (food, mineral deposits, oil, water, etc…) as debt paid to the United States (or the United Nations) for our “help” in the restoration of the their country and its infrastructure (which again, we destroyed in the first place). If the new leader has a change of heart and refuses to continue to pay the debt at the expense of his peoples welfare, instead using the profits to actually help rebuild and assist in the livelihood of his or her people and country… we would simply invent a new reason to attack and occupy that country, assassinate or forcibly remove that U.S. funded and appointed leader or dictator, stage a political coo to remove the leader through subversion of the countries media or through our (CIA, MI6, or Mossad) assets, and start the whole process over again. I would continually stage nearly successful terrorist plots, which were narrowly avoided using “known terrorists” (our agents and assets) as suspects, and continuously televise these events. The continuance of these never-ending warlike operations, campaigns, and occupations would be necessary to keep the terror scheme in motion (but never actual declarations of war, since that would involve Geneva Convention war crimes and other human rights law protections and restrictions). Torture, indefinite imprisonment, rendition, assassination, and other usual “war crimes” would be incrementally publicized to the masses as acceptable forms of interrogation and prisoner management, since these are only crimes during “declared” wartime. However, the “War On Terror” would not fall under the category of declared war, but instead as an offensive and preventative measure for the protection of the homeland. The use of private security contractors (like Blackwater) for these actions would be most imperative for the success of this type psychological operation, since they are not subject to U.S. military law while serving privately in other foreign regions.

21.    I would kill the 2nd Amendment, ban all guns and ammunition, and disarm the public.

Through news media, movies, uninformed “liberal” revolutions, and staged (false flag) shootings at schools and in public places, the right to own firearms would be challenged on a daily basis from all sides though the constant projection of these incidents. Gang shootings, domestic violence, crime, and suicide with gun-related angles would be the headlines and main stories on news programs, newspapers, and editorials by highly respected public figures and news-castors, which are actually change-agents on our (CIA) payroll. This increase in gun-related incidents would seem true due to our constant publicity of it, and despite the actual lessening of gun-violence statistics in America due to the fluoridated water supply, prescription anti-depressants and other calming medications, and through our psych campaigns. “Clergy response teams” (local priests and key religious figures) would be instructed to preach about the evil of gun-ownership, why they should be banned, and for good churchgoers to obey the laws of confiscation – and all “laws of the land”. Gun rights groups would be portrayed in a dark light through extremely emotionally disheartening anti-gun documentaries funded by us and pushed by the controlled media (though they appear to be grass-roots, very much like Michael Moore’s “Bowling For Columbine”). The more these groups appeared to be outlawed and crazy, the more guns would be universally disliked. Of course, as board members and owners of the largest weapons manufacturing companies in the world, we would still distribute guns and other weapons to foreign countries we later intend to attack, occupy, use the armies of to invade other countries – including our own, or use them as large-scale media examples of why guns are evil. As with other Constitutional infringements, clandestine legislation would be passed in our corrupt, bought and paid for legislature long before the actual confiscations would take place, which would allow us to outlaw guns under “extraordinary circumstances”. Of course, we would then manufacture an extraordinary circumstance, event, plague, riot, revolution, or other reason to ban guns which would comply with that previous legislation, that would allow us to declare martial law if necessary, and to unconstitutionally place the military on public streets per that legislation. The logical incremental order of this process would be: (1) guns released into society by us to gangs and criminal elements, (2) hunting portrayed as cruelty to animals, (3) gun vilification, (4) gun registration, (5) mandatory licenses to carry a gun, (6) bullet registration, (7) automatic (machine) gun ban and confiscation, (8) semi-automatic gun ban and confiscation, (9) handgun confiscation, (10) collectable weapon confiscation, (11) hunting to be outlawed, (12) total rifle confiscation, (13) bow and arrow confiscation, (14) and finally knife and sword vilification and later (15) confiscation.

22.    I would implement a psychological warfare campaign through all of my resources that would convince the masses that non-violent protest is the only politically correct form of dissent.

This is perhaps our most important objective, for keeping these naïve unsuspecting slaves under absolute dominative power and control by only a handful of men is absolutely required… for if even 2% of the people ever united as one and fought back against us with the 2nd Amendment behind them, they would without question defeat us and our goals. Despite the fact that the United States is celebrated as historically winning its independence only through violent revolution against England and its monarchy, and that it was written by one of it’s founders, Benjamin Franklin that, “Occasionally, the tree of liberty must be stained with the blood of tyrants and patriots.” I would convince the people that although we – as an elite minority – work completely outside of and free from the constraints of the laws that supposedly govern us all, they (the people) must work only from within them. This hidden paradox is the key to our success. Through red tape and corruption in the highest levels of the government and in the court system, we would ensure that no punishment or consequences would befall any in our faction. Though we would allow for protests and dissenting views, they would receive no media attention and would eventually only be allowed in what we might call “free-speech zones”, by permission of a permit, and under police surveillance in a blocked off area away from the actual thing being protested. We would portray these dissenters as racist, unpatriotic, violent extremists, and anti-American. We would actively portray militia groups in the same light. We would make movies like ‘Gandhi’, which would reinforce the fact that non-violent protest is actually a viable form of implementing change, though in truth much violence ensued during that particular part of history, and no peaceful resistance has ever changed or replaced a government. We would use deterrents like police brutality and the arresting of protesters as scare tactics to prevent others from protesting at later dates. Once again, conformity would be garnered and the feeling of helplessness would be etched into the patriot movement since they would gain no access to our controlled medias, except the dark light that I would allow to be shown on them. Only the craziest fringe elements of these groups would be given the media spotlight, as well as our imposters and provocateurs posing as parts of these groups, discrediting the rest of the movement in the eyes of our media viewers. Lastly, under the guise of some unfathomable and improvable medical benefit, I would poison the country’s water supply with a toxin that would subdue its victims, ensuring complacency and eliminating the urge to fight back against our tyranny. Fluoride would be the ideal substance for this, since it was tested and worked beautifully in the Nazi concentration camps and in other tests on populations and prisoners in the early 1900’s. It also has the added benefit of causing osteoporosis and other toxic bone and tissue disease, which would increase profits in our medical and pharmaceutical endeavors. And, since fluoride is the waste product of the aluminum industry, our conglomerates will save millions of dollars from not having to dispose of this highly toxic substance, and instead would make a profit from selling this byproduct to the government. Everyone wins!

23.    I would destroy man’s symbiotic connection and dependence on nature, replacing it with a dependence on my corporations, products, and institutions which would actually purge over time the ancient and intimate knowledge of farming, ranching, and natural medicines and healing, and eliminate the peoples capability of real self-sustainability, ethics, respect for nature, and even their love for one another.

They took all the trees, and put them in a tree museum, and charge us all a dollar and a half to see them… They paved paradise, and put up a parking lot.” – Joni Mitchell

By transforming the rugged natural terrain and beauty of rural areas, cities, and communities into landscaped, manicured, manufactured, and easily recognizable or familiar settings (i.e. strip malls, grocery stores, fast food, department stores, recognizable chain stores, etc…) the feeling of comfort and unending sustenance would be established. So much so in fact, that roads would merely become paths to the next set of the same brand name stores, and travelers would be disappointed at having to try something new. Vacationers would begin to prefer a hotel with a chlorinated pool as opposed to natural beauty of a lakeside cabin. They would begin to leave unpopulated areas alone, except to populate them with more of the same. They would begin to care less about these wild places, not even noticing as species extinction, depopulation, mass pollution, and deforestation was taking place. And since I or my colleagues and co-conspirators would own the majority of environmental foundations and clubs, this type of news would never even reach the ears of the average consumer, and they would instead be sold on protecting species who need no protection at all. For instance, I would force farmers off their land by denying them water, making the land worthless to grow food. I would simply make these now liberalized consumers believe that a fish or bird, which was dependent on that water for its very survival, was going extinct due to the divergence of that water. No proof would be needed as long as it was presented in an emotional media campaign backed by our environmental groups. The water would be diverted by legislative act, the land would dry up, the farmers and their families would be forced to move off the newly infertile and dry farmland, and the vacant land would be ripe for the picking so to speak, under the guise of a drought or water crisis. Food shortages would be a welcome side effect of this land grab, making food prices soar and only benefiting our corporate partners, not to mention some starvation leading to more depopulation. A general lack of appreciation for nature would thus ensue, and would even manifest in the most inundated of city dwellers as abhorrence for anything natural, dirty, or living (animals, bugs, weeds, dirt, etc…). Un-manicured or uninhabited wild areas within or on the edge of these cities would be considered dirty and uncivilized. These still natural unpopulated areas would then lose value, both organically and monetarily, leaving vast expanses of undesirable land to be bought up by our companies for pennies on the dollar. Concern for those who we would force off of these sparse locations, families who might have settled that land hundreds of years previous, would be non-existent due to our control of the media. I would use eminent domain to forcibly buy their property either in the name of conservation or for government need. I would then, after a necessary period of time, use that land for mining, drilling, logging, factories, highways, or other reasons and resource management which were opposite of the supposed altruistic reasons that we originally acquired it. In this way, I would eventually force all people to live in the unnatural, unappealing, unhealthy, competitive, socialistic, non-self-sustaining, and smart grid biometrically wired mega-cities I would incrementally set up.

In a setting of constant competition, the system of ethics in the workplace could be suppressed or even eliminated. In a “dog-eat-dog-world” which I would create… manipulation, cutting corners, and even lying, cheating and stealing would be rewarded with promotion, praise and bonuses. Persons who either through proper upbringing or are morally and ethically idealistic by nature, would be forced to conform, quit, or become stagnant in their workplace. I would project this noble value system as unproductive, making it appear weak in the eyes of business management – though the opposite is true – so that non-conformity to the competitive system would leave the most strong-willed of people in a constant state of melancholy and dejection, never being able to get ahead. This would ensure only the most ruthless competitors would remain in charge, and serve to ensure that this competitive, non-ethical work environment would ultimately stay in place… eventually without even our supervision. As before, re-education in schools, media, and entertainment venues would be used to reinforce this conundrum. ‘From the top’ memos and propaganda from our CEO’s and board member meetings would also be used to strengthen this resolve and underpin these desired non-ethics, which would be repeated over and over again by news anchors and portrayed in television and film for reinforcement.

ΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩΩ

This not-so-fictional work is very much what I see happening in this country today. Through the organizations and funds of the United Nations, our country has incrementally lost its independence from foreign domination. Be it England and its queen or the United Nations and its ambassadors, the effectual tyrannical rule is the same. The cost is astounding. And the loss of liberty is unacceptable. Our military is now under the control of this world governing body, and is unconstitutionally being used to patrol our streets and occupy the world. Our leaders are under its influence, and its policies are now our own.
The only way to stop this tyranny and to regain our sovereignty as a free nation is for the people to stand up as one united group and demand from our leaders that the United States, its government, and its legislature must immediately and unequivocally withdraw from the United Nations with no-strings-attached. The longer we wait, the more ingrained we will be in U.N. sanctions and red tape, and the harder it will be to get out. This is our last chance as an independent country; for the policies of this wicked organization has all but engulfed our constitution, our rights, and our freedoms with its anti-sovereign, pro eugenic agendas. If we don’t make a stand against our own corrupt government and this horrific United Nations stranglehold over our country, then the concept of America as a free and sovereign nation is all but over.

Freedom is not free. We must fight for it… together.

I hope that it is not too late.

God speed.

Clint Richardson (realitybloger.wordpress.com)
September 16, 2009

*** My wholehearted thanks to the true heroes, researchers, and patriots like Alex Jones, Steve Quayle, Mike Rivero, Alan Watt, Ron Paul, and so many others before them who have risked or lost their lives in the uncovering, publication, and exposing of these elites and their horrific agendas of which I speak, and which I assure you without hesitation are as real as you or me. They have opened my eyes to reality, and because of them I can attest that the truth will indeed set you free. Please turn off your televisions (controlled media outlets) and visit and support these brave people by clicking on their names, which will link to their websites. Read, listen, learn, and be free…