DaniMartExtras, Too



Posted by Xaniel777 on February 7, 2012

TODAY’S NEWS : February 08, 2012

The takedown of the satanic cabal is proceeding smoothly

From Benjamin Fulford’s Blog


Despite widespread pessimism on the part of many truth seekers about the situation in the G5 terrorist states, behind the scenes the satanic cabalists in control of the Western central banks are in a state of extreme fear.

One reason is that US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta told a White Dragon Society representative last week that the Pentagon and the US agencies were in no mood to let off the cabalists with a truth and reconciliation committee. “We have been watching these guys for a long time” he said and the conclusion reached was that the Federal Reserve Board needs to be dismantled and the cabalists jailed.

The 65% drop in the Baltic Dry Index (the price of shipping) this year is one visible sign of the dismantling. This is related to a growing global boycott of the G5 terrorist states as seen in the growing number of countries refusing to use US dollars or Euros for trade.

Another sign was the stoppage on February 3rd of the Federal Reserve Board owned Clearing House Interbank Payments System.

Under the surface much more radical events are being planned.

Become a member and continue reading at :  Weekly Geopolitical News and Analys




Dear Benjamin Fulford,

 I’ve been following your blog and the various interviews you’ve been
 doing. I’m just wondering if you can say when you would expect that
 the mainstream media will be taken from the satanists and when the
 truth will start coming out on a larger scale.

For many people it is hard to believe that there are major changes

taking place until there is some obvious evidence (video footage etc).

If there has been a decision to unite North Korea, South Korean and

Japan will that at least be announced via the media soon?

 Thank you for your time.

Benjamin’s reply :

 First of all, let me say that I do not use the term mainstream media. I call it corporate propaganda media because it is centrally controlled by fascists. As far as Korean unification is concerned, what I am reporting is from the very front lines of decision making. There will be secret meetings and discussion for weeks or possibly months before any public announcement is made through government controlled newspapers and TV. 

The latest proposal being made is to unite the Korean Peninsula with Japan to create a nation of 200 million that will become a major new center for world development and finance. Japan needs Korean help to get out of its rut. However, this is still just a proposal being discussed at high levels and no final decision has been made. 


March to War: 25 to Go?


By George Ure

February 07, 2012 

“That’s be two eggs, over easy, hash browns, bacon, and oh, yeah, a side of global thermonuclear war…”  That seems to be the menu this morning as global forces are being put into place for a huge showdown in early March.  But, let’s begin at the beginning.

 Since 2001, my friend Clif,  ( Clif High at HalfPastHuman.com ),  has been wondering about the “data gap” which has been visible in predictive linguistics since 2001.  It’s a period which we were hoping would be just a widespread internet outage, or something like that.  Imagine a situation later on this year where solar flares, or EMP attack, or attack on America’s telephone switching networks takes down the internet. 

Another though was that if he could just “tunnel through” the massive pile-on of immediacy events from March into summer, there would be enough data on the far side to give a picture from the future (looking back) that could hold some hints about what lays in our immediate future.

 After publishing his “Future Recent History 2020 report, Clif has continued to run the data while he can, and the results of his further refining can be read in his report posted yesterday:  “The Last 26 Days of life…  Not exactly the kind of outlook that makes us want to jump out of bed, and go work toward our glorious future, to be sure.

As you read his report, two things to keep in mind.  First is that Clif is always quite precise in his use of language and Zionist to him is not a religion (Judaism), the distinction being one is a policy of territorial expansion while the other is a religion/belief set.

 The second is that his modelspace is comprised of words and so when he looks up all the word primary meanings, aspects, and attributes, his learning of history leads him to couple those words with past historical evidence of “false flag” attacks which have been used historically to justify large wars.

 Although he makes reference to the case of the USS Liberty, a subject exhaustively covered in the BBC Documentary “Dead in the Water”, the events surrounding a 1967 Israeli attack on a US electronics laden spy ship was described by one survivor this way: “If it was an accident, it was the best planned accident I’ve ever heard of.”

 But the USS Liberty is not the only case of maritime provocation being occurring.  Let’s recall that it was not until 2010 that the murky historical record, which includes the tacit admission that the supposed August 4, 1964 on a US ship never really took place.  But then-president Lyndon Johnson used the false pretext as a reason to sends hundreds of thousands of America’s best and brightest into combat in South Vietnam.

 Worse, this false flagging (or its first cousins forgery and deceit) haven’t occurred in isolation.  A more recent example can be found in the Niger uranium document forgeries, another cornerstone of American involvement in Iraq.

 These are only three readily-remembered examples, but there are many more, but rather than mention missing “weapons of mass destruction” and other allegations, or wondering why, when all Americans were barred from flying, closely-connected Saudis were able to fly over America…and some folks are still wondering “If all those hijackers came from Saudi Arabia, how come we didn’t go there to kick some butt?”

 Fine questions, indeed, but only if you fail to comprehend that what was one represented to bestatecraft is really economic imperialism in disguise; often not very well-disguised, at that.

 In each of these examples, and we fear in the coming debacle – which hopefully will be no more than an artifact of some code module gone wonky instead of those bright flashes of light that vaporize things – will similarly be caused for a multiplicity of economic reasons.

  • To solve unemployment:  Sending young people into battle means they must be supported by the folks back home who, because of kin in the trenches, will gladly pay higher tribute (taxes) and that, in turn, will fatten the purse of those who profit from the killing of humans with the War Industries.

  • To downgrade the northern hemisphere standard of living:  While it is true that America enjoys a fine standard of living, we’ve been reduced to buying small (mainly electronic) trinkets from Asia and home industry has collapsed, including the home-building industry.  War on American soil causes huge demand for replacement infrastructure.  Think of the profits!

  • To thoroughly end global warming potential:  A limited international exchange of nuclear weapons would send cubic miles of smoke and particulates into the upper atmosphere, thus, nuclear winter (lite) could easily drop the planet just the right number of degrees to ensure an end for several dozen years, to dangerous industrial emissions.  Those are very what? Profitable!

  • To cover-up evidence of economic crimes:  A war would go many miles toward preventing thorough investigation of in-your-face-theft of money invested by Americans in such outfits as MF Global.  Indeed, an outbreak of nuclear war could cause whole pension funds to disappear, since records would be lost and how could such claims ever be reconciled?  The profit from that alone would be humongous.

  • To prevent public recognition of a failing economic system:  I have for years pointed out the uncanny coincidence of timing of 9/11 which came mere weeks before I believe the American public would have recognized that the collapse of the Internet Bubble really was about as “good as it ever gets.”  If you take the Dow’s high in Y2K and correct for inflation, you’ll see (not counting commission, dividends, or splits) that the Dow would need to be at least into the mid 15,000’s range to have equal value.  It hasn’t.  And even more troubling questions arise when you read the report over at ZeroHedge about the rise of the High Frequency Trading machines, which have become market feedback implements of their own.  Should they be legal, at all?  Best not ask those kinds of questions, I suppose.

  • And best of all: Make tons of money.  War causes the destruction of people and things.  This leads to massive opportunity at all levels for reconstruction to occur.  The winners (such as they are in war models) definitely come out on top and hold onto their positions of power and influence.  So if you do happen to catch a nuke going off in the future, don’t think “Oh my God!!!”  Try thinking “Ka-ching!” on the global cash register.  Or cash register beeps, if you’re under 40.

There.  An answer to the flood of emails I’ve received claiming we’re crazy (no argument) and that all we report is gloom and doom.  Not really.  In fact, I go out of my way to point out that these predicted future events could just be blips in language-use.  They don’t have to be exactly as described, although the “ship of state” with the sinking of the Concordia was eerie, to say the least. 

 Often, though, timing in wrong, since predictive linguistics is anything but perfected.  Still, here’s an email just in this morning about an unfilled data set reported a year or two back:


talk about your crazy web bot hit (“ski the 7 hills of Rome”) 

(link “Europe deep freeze reaches North Africa…”)

Well, yes, sometimes the stuff really works out.  Other times, it doesn’t.  I figure the project’s hit rate is about 15% overall, but that’s so far ahead of “chance” as to not even be funny.  And higher on big stuff; 9/11, anthrax attack, Banda Aceh quake, NE Power Outage, economic downfall in 2008, return of kids to living at home with parents, and that damn “ship of state” business, which just got filled.

 For now, Clif is going into semi “off line” mode.  Igor is moving, the servers are going down, and the earliest we could take up the linguistics again would be in late March and by then it may not matter, since there’s a chance (15%??) that what’s coming will be obvious by then, even if Clif’s timing is off.

 My role has been rather like that of Dr. John Watson, trying to chronicle the adventures of Sherlock Holmes.  Still, there’s a pattern here now, and more could become evident in future weeks.  But while we wait, I’ll try to keep on mixing up  equal doses of sardonic and humor to come up with a very different take on things than you’ll likely find elsewhere.

 My inbox has been flooded with emails like this one:Has Cliff gone off the deep end? … So, what is it George? We really facing some sort of extinction event for a few billion people just three weeks away? I urge you, and Cliff, to be responsible, first so those that need to be prepared can do so and secondly so you do not look like a gigantic fool if nothing happens.”

 By now you’ll need a warm-up on that coffee before we go back to the classroom where the present is being rolled out before us… 

 The simple answer is this:  Clif looks at data.  I look at headlines but I consider his data seriously as it oftentimes (but not always) is right.  I tend NOT to issue conclusions or make dire forecasts.  What I do instead is try to look at the headlines and publicly available trends.


US Vote Fraud 2012 you can take that to the bank.

From Anti-Neocons

Posted By Eazy

February 07, 2012

User avatar

       ‘ EAZY ‘

Forget the look of this dude he has some good points in relation to possable vote fraud. Make sure you still vote anyway.


This was a live feed on CCN Must read the info below this video as it shows the Jewish Caucus goers, The one time we get to here the live results Ron Paul Smashed it with 183 votes over the runner up Romney with only 61 votes.

This Ron Paul supporter has a good idea and some good info.

More proof of vote fraud

Sorry about all the uploads but we need to get this straight.

What Dead people voting?

Some evil Tactics used but definetly not limited to this.

More Dirty Deeds Done Dirt Cheap.

Dose this sound like Ron Paul is not popular, The crowed yells out fot him.

It is undebatable that Ron Paul is the most popular Candidate running on YouTube Yet he is the most disscriminated and blacked out candidate on maintream so what is going on? Its that obvious (Election manipulation and Vote fraud)

OH Dear! Obvious Media Biase = Professional miconduct and this has happend more than once believe me.

When Injustice becomes Law,  Resistance becomes Duty.


DHS Implementing No Work List: Citizens Must Get Government Approval to Work in Private Sector Jobs

{ XANIEL’S NOTE : This is an older story ( little over a year old ), however, it very much applies today ! } ~~ Xaniel777

From InfoWars.com

Kurt Nimmo
December 16, 2010

You’ve heard of no fly and no buy lists – get ready for no work lists. Millions of workers now must apply to the DHS and prove they are not terrorists in order to be granted permission by the government to work.

On the Alex Jones Show today, a caller pointed to information posted on a union website for ironworkers spelling out details on the Department of Homeland Security’s TWIC and SWAC programs.


TWIC is short for Transportation Worker Identification Credential and SWAC stands for Secure Worker Access Consortium.

TWIC “is a biometric credential that ensures only vetted workers are eligible to enter a secure construction site, unescorted,” Ironworkers Local 361 in Ozone Park, New York, explains. “Before issuing a TWIC, TSA must conduct a security threat assessment on the TWIC applicant. An applicant who, as a result of the assessment, is determined to not pose a security threat, will be issued a TWIC card.”

In other words, construction workers in New York will need permission from the TSA and DHS in order to practice their profession and earn a living. It was much the same in the former Soviet Union and authoritarian states such as China where the government determines all aspects of an individual’s life and where even the mildly rebellious are severely punished.

SWAC is even more draconian. It is “a large-scale collaborative effort among public and private authorities, facility owners, contractors, and labor organizations who are partnering to prevent terrorist activity by creating a trusted contractor community. Over 500 organizations, including the Port Authority of NY and NJ, which manages and maintains the bridges, tunnels, bus terminals, airports, PATH, and seaports that are essential to the bi-state region’s trade and transportation capabilities, have joined this effort,” according to the union website.

SWAC also requires a background investigation by the government, so if construction, port workers, longshoremen, and truck drivers are involved in political activity frowned upon by the feds – for instance, 9/11 truth, considered dangerous and subversive by the State Department – it is likely they will have to find another line of work.

A SWAC PDF specifically mentions “treason” in an exhaustive list of crimes and misdeeds that will result in the federal government denying a person the right to earn a living.

The TWIC Disclosure and Certification form states the following: “I acknowledge that if TSA or other law enforcement agencies determine that I pose an imminent threat to national security or transportation security, my employer may be notified.”

The TSA no-fly list contains thousands of names, including journalists and political activists. If the government determines you hold the wrong political beliefs, according to the TWIC document, your employer will be told and you may lose your job and the ability to provide for your family.

The TWIC application also mentions “treason” and “sedition” as a criteria to put an end to an individual’s employment.

Sedition is defined as overt conduct, such as speech and organization, that is deemed by officialdom to tend toward insurrection against the establishment. The Sedition Act of 1918 forbids the use of “disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language” about the United States government, its flag, or its armed forces. The Sedition Act was updated on October 26, 2001, when Congress signed the USA Patriot Act into law. In the mid 70s, the Church Committee discovered that the government had carried out an aggressive campaign for decades to neutralize – as FBI director Hoover characterized it – political activity the establishment considered a threat to its monopoly on power.

As noted above, TWIC plans to force an expensive biometric ID on workers. This idea is hardly new. In 2002, the Electronic Privacy Information Center sued the Department of Homeland Security in order to get details on then director Tom Ridge’s plan to introduce a biometric national ID card. Ridge and the government have stated repeatdly that “national security requirements would ultimately make such cards a reality.”

Earlier this year, Democrats pushed the idea making a biometric national ID card mandatory for all Americans. “Everyone would have to produce the card to get a job, or keep a job,” the UPI reported on May 9. “On a five-year timetable the biometric cards would replace Social Security cards and would be used to prove eligibility for employment. Card scanners would be issued to all U.S. employers. The cards would at least have the capability of being linked to a central data system.”

TWIC and SWAC represent an incremental effort by the national security state to introduce biometric ID as a prerequisite for employment. In the months ahead, we can expect more intrusions by the government on our rights as spelled out by the Declaration of Independence.

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness,” that document states.

Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness, however, according to the government, will soon be predicated on a national biometric ID card and inclusion of our most private information in sprawling databases.

In the coming Brave New World Order, only citizens vetted by a totalitarian government will be allowed to work and feed their families. All others will be locked out of the system like the mutants in Total Recall, the dystopian movie based on a story by Phillip K. Dick.


Obama Invokes NDAA Declaring Threat From Iran A National Emergency

From Alexander Higgins Blog

Posted by  – February 7, 2012

President Obama invokes the NDAA, which authorizes the use of military force, and issues an executive order declaring the “threat” of Iran a National Emergency.

The video below shows this issuance of President Obama executive order which declares Iran’s threat to cut off oil supplies a national emergency.

The executive order directs all government agencies to respond immediately to the threat. It further invokes the authority of the 2012 NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act) which gives the President the power to launch military action against any nation without the approval of Congress.

Ironically, the State of Emergency order also accuses the Iranian central bank of deceptive banking practices.

Watch: Obama Signs Executive Order On Iran

For those who think some random serious of events led up to this situation, the following article is a real eye opener. The Brookings Institute laid out the playbook in 2009 on how to provoke a war with Iran and garner international support for and invasion.

Comparing the chain of events since then, it is pretty clear that the war hawks have followed the playbook to the tee so far. It is quite scary thinking about the the next steps in the playbook – an Iran sponsored 9/11 attack.

Brookings: ‘Horrific Provocation’ and ‘Tehran-Sponsored 9/11′ Needed to Trigger Iran Invasion

Brookings Institute issued playbook in 2009 to provoke war with Iran to implement regime change

Brookings Institute issued playbook in 2009 to provoke war with Iran to implement regime change

In a 2009 policy paper,published by the influential Brookings Institute, the authors propose almost anything to guarantee dominance of Persia, including such measures as bribery, lying, cheating and mass murdering in the shape of an all-out military assault on Iran. The paper ‘Which path to Persia: Options for a New American Strategy toward Iran’ is just one of many recent and not so recent examples of an unwavering resolve by the Anglo-American establishment to engage Iran militarily and acquire its natural resources at the same time.

The group of authors — a cozy little convergence of globalists — contemplate four separate options on ‘how to deal with Iran’ in the cold bureaucratic language that poses as scientific but really amounts to little more than the intelligent musings of a calculating psychopath.

The first option, ‘Dissuading Tehran’ through diplomatic means is being discussed as something tried, tested and discarded into the trashcan of history.

The second option, ‘Disarming Tehran’ covers several ways of rallying the ‘international community’ around the globalists’ intentions. In the third part, ‘Toppling Tehran’ the warmongering increases as the writers contemplate both covert and overt military action against the Islamic republic of Iran. In the fourth and last section, ‘Deterring Tehran’ the option of ‘containment’ is elaborated upon. The proposed final strategy predictably involves all of the above mentioned options, in roughly the same order of appearance.

To ensure the cooperation of surrounding countries, the authors propose bribery as an effective tool. After the authors assert thatit may be necessary to cut some deals in order to secure Moscow’s support for a tougher Iran policy’, the authors continue with their ‘brainstorming’, advising a widespread bribery campaign in order to ensure international cooperation in regards to Iran:

Other countries also will want payoffs from the United States in return for their assistance on Iran. Such deals may be distasteful, but many will be unavoidable if the Persuasion approach is to have a reasonable chance of succeeding.’ And further on: ‘To be successful, a Persuasion approach would invariably require unpleasant compromises with third-party countries to secure their cooperation against Iran.’

This means the US will have to cut all kinds of deals with dictators, bloodthirsty local tyrants and other corrupt kings of Arabia- even facilitating them with weapons. Besides rallying the ‘international community’ around the Anglo-American establishment with the help of these ‘unpleasant compromises’, the paper stresses it will also be necessary to persuade the Iranians themselves to topple their government (page 39):

Inciting regime change in Iran would be greatly assisted by convincing the Iranian people that their government is so ideologically blinkered that it refuses to do what is best for the people and instead clings to a policy that could only bring ruin on the country.’

But the authors underline the necessity of creating a favorable climate for the transnationalists in which to operate.

‘(…) any military operation against Iran will likely be very unpopular around the world and require the proper international context (…) The best way to minimize international opprobrium and maximize support (however, grudging or covert) is to strike only when there is a widespread conviction that the Iranians were given but then rejected a superb offer- one so good that only a regime determined to acquire nuclear weapons and acquire them for the wrong reasons would turn it down. Under those circumstances, the United States (or Israel) could portray its operations as taken in sorrow, not anger, and at least some in the international community would conclude that the Iranians “brought it on themselves” by refusing a very good deal.’

Here the authors seem to abandon even the facade of civility as they proceed. Even though the authors put these vile warmongering words in quotes, they cannot mask the mindset behind those words. They mean to rally the ‘international community’ through bribery and deceit- as a steppingstone towards military strikes. The path toward such military strikes will be made smooth by economically strong-holding surrounding countries, forcing them to accept western military action as well as the justifications for it without question.

Military action. This is as acutely on the mind of the current chickenhawks, as the invasion of Iraq was on that of the neocons in the last couple of decades. Apparently, the authors feel compelled to give a justification for the obvious bravura of their manuscript.

We chose to consider this extreme and highly unpopular option partly for the sake of analytical rigor and partly because if Iran responded to a confrontational American policy- such as an airstrike, harsh new sanctions, or efforts to foment regime change- with a major escalation of terrorist attacks (or more dire moves against Israel and other American allies)invasion could become a very “live” option.’

As this geopolitical feeding frenzy increases, the authors clearly begin to lose their cool as they begin to talk about the real plan behind all this elaborate brainstorming, reflecting on the long-term agenda of the globalists for whom they work:

Like Iraq’, the authors state, ‘Iran is too intrinsically and strategically important a country for the United States to be able to march in, overthrow its government, and then march out, leaving chaos in its wake. (…) Iran exports about 2.5 million barrels per day of oil and, with the right technology, it could produce even more. It also has one of the largest reserves of natural gas in the world. These resources make Iran an important supplier of the energy needs of the global economy. Iran does not border Saudi Arabia- the lynchpin of the oil market- or Kuwait, but it does border Iraq, another major oil producer and a country where the United States now has a great deal at stake.’

And exactly in line with their master’s tendency of using false flags, they allow themselves the luxury of speculating openly about a possible ‘provocation’ to escalate things to the point of armed conflict.

‘(…) it is not impossible that Tehran might take some action that would justify an American invasion. And it is certainly the case that if Washington sought such a provocation, it could take actions that might make it more likely that Tehran would do so (although being too obvious about this could nullify the provocation). However, since it would be up to Iran to make the provocation move (…)the United States would never know for sure when it would get the requisite Iranian provocation. In fact, it might never come at all.’

Now that would be a great disappointment, wouldn’t it? Under the headline ‘The Question of a Provocation’ on page 66, the authors press the point even further:

With provocation, the international diplomatic and domestic political requirements of an invasion would be mitigated, and the more outrageous the Iranian provocation (and the less that the United States is seen to be goading Iran), the more these challenges would be diminished. In the absence of a sufficiently horrific provocation, meeting these requirements would be daunting.’

Reminiscent of the Pearl Harbor-quote by raving neocons pre-9/11, the authors continue imagining how excellent it would be to have an Iranian-sponsored terror attack within the US to trigger war and march off toward Iran. During all this, the authors are aware how unlikely it is that Iran would actually commit such an attack on American soil (probably because they know who is usually responsible for such mass terror attacks):

Something on the order of an Iranian-backed 9/11, in which the plane wore Iranian markings and Tehran boasted about its sponsorship.(…)The entire question of “options” becomes irrelevant at that point: what American president could refrain from an invasion after the Iranians had just killed several thousand American civilians in an attack in the United States itself?

Regarding the question of international support for an US invasion of the Islamic Republic, the Brookings people lament:

Other than a Tehran-sponsored 9/11, it is hard to imagine what would change their minds.’

The same goes for their plans in regards to that old favorite of the elite, covert psychological warfare, in order to subdue a sovereign nation. In chapter 7 of the manuscript, called ‘Inspiring an Insurgency’, it examines the possibility of propagandizing the Iranian people into helping out the globalists loot their nation:

The core concept lying at the heart of this option would be for the United States to identify one or more Iranian opposition groups and support them as it did other insurgencies in Afghanistan, Nicaragua, Kurdistan, Angola, and dozens of other locales since the Second World War. The United States would provide arms, money, training, and organizational assistance to help the groups develop and extend their reach. U.S. media and propaganda outlets could highlight group grievances and showcase rival leaders.’

Isn’t that a familiar sight? Could one way to ‘highlight’ group grievances be to mass distribute the death of a poor woman and then claim it’s all thanks to Twitter?

All this hinting at another false-flag attack underway and prepping the international community for a future invasion of Iran is becoming increasingly serious as the warmongering is being stepped up. This is the time to fix our eyes upon these globalists and their think tanks. If their blatant arrogance permits them to openly publish their bloodthirsty musings, we should be vigilant enough to pass this knowledge around lest we have another 9/11 on our hands.

Similar/Related Articles :

  1. Brookings Publication mentions possibility of ‘Horrific Provocation’ to Trigger Iran Invasion

  2. Flashback: Brookings Publication Mentions Possibility of ‘Horrific Provocation’ to Trigger Iran Invasion

  3. Tehran: West Responsible for Terror Attack in Iran

  4. Israel calls for attack on Iran

  5. Iran: ‘Nuclear’ scientist shot dead in Tehran

  6. Obama’s Secret Letter to Tehran: Is the War against Iran On Hold?

  7. Iran’s Intelligence Ministry Details Plot to Overthrow Tehran Government

  8. Iranian authorities arrest eight British embassy employees in Tehran

  9. Tehran Has Little Reason to Fear Sanctions

  10. Could Iran Trigger A New Cuban Missile Crisis?

  11. A Pre-election Attack on Iran Remains a Possibility

  12. USS Carrier Harry Truman Now Officially Just Off Iran, As Israel Allegedly Plotting An Imminent Tehran Raid


    NDAA Trojan Unleashed – Massive Military Drone Deployment In U.S. Airspace

    Despite promises the 2012 NDAA did not apply to military operations on U.S. soil or against American Citizens, a massive military drone deployment into U.S airspace has been approved by …



The DHS Defends Globalism, Not America

Posted by 

 Brandon Smith via alt-market.com 

February 07. 2012

{ Xaniel’s Note : Here’s A face we will remember when Justice comes into play ! She and all her kind will answer for ‘ Treason ‘ and ‘ Crimes against Humanity ‘ !!! } ~~ Xaniel777


The Department Of Homeland Security is the very epitome of unnecessary bureaucracy.  Its formation was predicated on the existence of terrorist threats, many of which the U.S. government and orbiting alphabet agencies either created through acts of war, or fabricated out of thin air. 

Its policies of centralization were sold to the public as necessary to prevent systemic “miscommunications” that never actually took place. 

Throughout our history, it has been a rare occasion indeed when an attack falls upon American infrastructure or interests that was not influenced, directly or indirectly, by the actions of agencies which were supposedly employed to prevent such events from ever occurring. 

Whether through ‘blowback’, or through ‘false flag’, frankly, most of the harm that comes to our nation is perpetrated by the guiding hand of our inexorably corrupt government.    

Knowing that the DHS was established on false pretenses forces us to question the agency’s true intentions, especially when a professional fear-monger like Secretary Janet Napolitano announces that the globalization of the world economy falls within her jurisdiction:


Average citizens would assume that the DHS is a U.S.-centric institution, and regardless of its Orwellian behavior, is at the very least a distinctly American brand of tyranny. 

However, under encroaching strategies enforced since 2006 through the National Infrastructure Protection Plan (NIPP), it is becoming very apparent that the Department Of Homeland Security is quickly taking on an “all-of-nation” role, most prominently in the defense of globalization:


In her most recent op-ed / propaganda piece published by Reuters, Napolitano makes it clear that the business of the DHS is lately focused on what she calls “global supply chain security”

This by itself could be seen as a perfectly logical extension of the DHS mandate to protect America.  Unfortunately, the situation is not that simple.  A few talking points and guidelines within the NIPP platform are rather disturbing, and create an open door for the internationalization of the DHS.

Ironically, Napolitano sets the stage first by pointing out the brittle nature of globalization, along with its numerous vulnerabilities:

“A vulnerability or gap in any part of the world has the ability to affect the flow of goods and people thousands of miles away. For instance, just three days after the earthquake, tsunami and nuclear tragedies struck Japan last March, U.S. automakers began cutting shifts and idling some plants at home. In the days that followed, they did the same at their factories in more than 10 countries around the world…”

As I have pointed out many times in the past, the utter lack of redundancy within our globalized system makes it the most impractical and downright destructive economic model in history.  Janet Napolitano seems to agree at least in part on this point.  The problem is that the weaknesses of globalization are not a mistake; they are a deliberate and useful tool for further centralization of once sovereign economies. 

Instead of addressing the obvious concern that globalization does not work, Napolitano, like every other globalist in our government, claims that it must be propped up at all costs for the “greater good”:

“Because protecting the global supply chain is inherently an international challenge, it will take an international effort to meet it. The tremendous benefits we all reap from an interdependent global economy means that we are all stakeholders in the security of that system…”

“…we will continue to think globally, enhancing our coordination with the international community and international stakeholders who have key supply chain roles and responsibilities. We will seek to develop and implement global standards, strengthen detection, interdiction, and information-sharing capabilities, and promote end-to-end supply chain security efforts with the international community.”

What “benefits” are we “reaping” from globalization?  I haven’t the foggiest idea.  The internationalization of banking and finance has led to the creation and subsequent implosion of the world’s largest debt bubble and further devaluation of many of the world’s currencies. 

Centralized and corporatized food production has led to a complete lack of self reliance within our society, contributed to food scarcity, not abundance, and opened our means of sustenance to the mad-science and genetic criminality of monstrous entities like Monsanto. 

The globalization of law through treaty has supplanted the U.S. Constitution, fed the growth of unaccountable and unelected councils and committees, and stricken our country with policy initiatives that weren’t even written by officials that live here. 

There are absolutely no substantial benefits to globalization that outweigh its considerable detriments, unless, of course, you are one of the elite few who stand at the helm of the machine.

At the Davos Economic Summit which took place in the final week of January, Napolitano announced a program called the “National Strategy For Global Supply Chain Security”


Within this plan, the DHS seeks to unite with international corporate interests in an effort to ensure the dominance of the globalist ideal of centralized economy.  The collectivist rhetoric inherent within the document above is apparent. 

Napolitano summarizes it well when she states:

“As globalization brings nations closer together, we need to jointly disprove and leave behind the notion that security and efficiency cannot coexist, and together build a security architecture that better uses information to assess risk. By taking a coordinated, strategic and thoughtful approach, we can expedite legitimate commerce while focusing our attention on that much smaller portion that poses harm. Security and confidence in the global supply chain enhance our collective economic strength, rather than impeding progress.”

Napolitano treats globalism as an inevitability; a future without recourse and without option.  A smart person might ask; “What business is it of Janet Napolitano to comment on the global economic model, let alone utilize DHS resources in its defense!” 

But look at it this way; by using the failings of globalization and the spectral boogie-man of terrorism as a rationale, the DHS has created a grey area in which the U.S. government can be more fully integrated into the global corporate dynamic, which furthers the disintegration of American sovereignty.  

The global supply chain encompasses everything!  It is a vast artificial international construct.  For the DHS to truly “defend” its integrity, it will be REQUIRED to sacrifice the specific and sovereign interests of the U.S.  In a globalized trade system, every economy is important, as long as it does not compete with any other economy. 

The U.S. economy is no exception.  Harmonization diminishes the wealth of more successful nations and transfers it to less successful nations.  This transfer of wealth does, in a sense, create equality; it makes everyone equally poor. 

By becoming the militant hand of globalization, the DHS is put in the position of hurting America in order to “save” America.  

The National Strategy For Global Supply Chain Security document is extraordinarily vague when it comes to the manner in which the DHS will implement defense directives.  More DHS agents at shipping ports?  Of course.  More DHS involvement in airline cargo centers?  Certainly. 

But what about DHS agents overseeing trucking and freight, or even stationed at highway checkpoints (remember, the TSA is an agency under the direct authority of the DHS)?  What about DHS agents acting as permanent corporate liaisons? 

Will corporations decide who is a threat to the global supply chain and who isn’t?  What about the usage of copyrighted materials on the internet?  Is this a disruption of global trade?  How does the DHS actually plan to return a disrupted supply line to normal efficiency? 

The DHS has no production capacity, and would have to TAKE (possibly by force) a supply from somewhere in order to reinstitute it elsewhere.  What about communities, states, or countries which refuse to participate in globalization? 

What about those who choose to decentralize?  Could this not be labeled as an attempt to derail the global system, and thus be interpreted as an act of terrorism?

Under any collectivist society, the act of non-participation is always painted as an attack on the group.  In a fully interdependent system, refusing to contribute automatically hurts others, and therefore, makes you a criminal by default. 

These systems are built this way deliberately, in order to control a population by exploiting their sense of innate guilt. 

The DHS may claim a limited involvement in globalization, restricted to security issues, but the very process of integration with the international corporate framework as well as foreign institutions makes the agency a catalyst for forced collectivism. 

Bombs in shipping containers (the bombs we’re supposed to believe are everywhere), do not warrant the massive shift of our security apparatus into a policy of global centralization. 

In the end, this move on the part of the DHS has nothing to do with security, and everything to do with manipulating the attitude of the general public towards globalization. 

It is much more difficult to challenge a methodology when that methodology is suddenly treated as a national security issue, and is defended by an army of bureaucrats and blue-shirted thugs. 

When a world view is made violently essential to the very survival of a people, defiance is held tantamount to treason, and change, no matter how wise, becomes impossible.

You can contact Brandon Smith at brandon@alt-market.com

Alt-Market is an organization designed to help you find like-minded activists and preppers in your local area so that you can network and construct communities for mutual aid and defense.  Join Alt-Market.com today and learn what it means to step away from the system and build something better.

To contribute to the growth of the Safe Haven Project, and to help us help others in relocating, or to support the creation of barter networks across the country, visit our donate page here:

Do you have enough Non-GMO seeds in case of economic collapse?  Seeds are the OTHER alternative currency, and if you aren’t stocked, then you aren’t prepared.  To buy top quality non-GMO seeds at a special 10% discount, visit Humble Seed, and use the codeAlt10


Fair Use Notice ):

This web site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance the understanding of humanity’s problems and hopefully to help find solutions for those problems. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. A click on a hyperlink is a request for information. Consistent with this notice you are welcome to make ‘fair use’ of anything you find on this web site. However, if you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. You can read more about ‘fair use’ and US Copyright Law at the Legal Information Institute of Cornell Law School. This notice was modified from a similar notice at Information Clearing House.} ~~ Xaniel777



Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

%d bloggers like this: