DaniMartExtras, Too


REAL NEWS Sept 15 2012

Posted by Xaniel777 on September 14, 2012

TODAY’S NEWS : September 15, 2012



The Bankers Want America To Lose World War III



LOGO OF THE ELITE – Zionist Bankers/Corporate Gangsters 

From the Trenches World Report

Posted on September 14, 2012 by NC

Video Rebel’s Blog  To drive the final nail into the coffin of the bankers we must tell everyone this:

The Bankers Want America To Lose World War III

Drive this point home to everyone in the 911 Truth Movement, to every anti-war activist and to anyone who will listen.

Why? The number of billionaire bankers in the world is miniscule.

They only get what they want from our governments because millions of people in government, in the police, in the intelligence services, in the military and in the media go along to maintain their position.

But, what if they saw the world on the brink of economic chaos and World war III?

What if they knew Israel did 911 with the help of Zionist traitors inside the American government?

That is precisely what Dr Alan Sabrosky, a former Director of Studies at the Army War College, has been telling his former colleagues.

Today the anti-war activist’s very best friend just might be a general or an admiral inside the Pentagon.

Look at the Mideast and World War III from the perspective of a professional military officer.

Israel has been threatening to attack Iran in September prior to the UN General Assembly vote on Palestinian statehood.

Iran has said they will respond to an Israeli attack by attacking American troops and that they will fire 11,000 missiles and artillery shells in the first minute.

They can sink the entire US Persian Gulf fleet in minutes.

The Iranians have Russian made anti-ship missiles designed to sink American aircraft carriers.

They also have Chinese and NATO made anti-ship missiles.

The Iranians also have rocket artillery with ranges of 100 and 150 kilometers ( 62.1 and 93.2 miles.)

Simultaneously with sinking our Persian Gulf fleet, the Iranians will cut off oil coming out of the Gulf.

This will send oil soaring past $300 a barrel. The American economy will collapse.

Ten dollar a gallon gasoline will impoverish tens of millions of Americans.

Muslims will respond to the Israeli and American genocide of their brothers and sisters by cutting off supplies to our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The Iranians will send up to 100,000 suicide volunteers into Iraq and Afghanistan armed with shoulder fired anti-aircraft missiles, IEDs, automatic weapons and 50 caliber sniper rifles.

When our troops have no supplies and the Iranians have shot down our helicopters, our soldiers will be lucky to get out alive.

But the men inside the Pentagon also need to know that the bankers want them to lose WWW III.

Tell them that the passage of NAFTA in 1994 resulted in sending 50,000 American factories overseas.

In 2011 America’s supply lines extend 8,000 miles to China and even then only on a dodgy credit card.

It is by design that America must lose a protracted conflict fought without China’s permission.

The bankers want America to lose World War III so the soon to be impoverished citizens cannot demand both the arrest of the bankers and the return of the tens of trillions they stole.

They also want to fold a weakened America as a destroyed and failed state intothe New World Order with all power securely in the hands of multi-billionaires.

The professionals in the Mossad know that Netanyahu’s plan to attack Iran and start WW III in September is insane.

To make sure that Israel is told by the US military that they will not be allowed to attack Iran we need to hammer this home to everyone in the world and particularly to the US military:

The Bankers Want America To Lose World War III

I do not believe Israel will be allowed by the Pentagon to attack Iran because we are winning the information war.

And I also do not believe there will be another 911 mass casualty event on American soil for that same reason.

 Too many people have listened to us. Too many people know the truth. We have just passed the tipping point.

Now is not the time to give up. The economy is crashing and everyone will listen to anyone with answers.

Drive this point home:

The Bankers Want America To Lose World War III

We won. Their Games are over. We are very close to permanently canceling World War III and all future 911 type events.

When their system crashes with the dollar, we will inherit the government.

We will demand arrests, trials, forfeitures of assets and serious reforms.

Our day is coming sooner than you think.








White House continues fight to indefinitely detain Americans without charge under NDAA


 { XANIEL’S NOTE : Can The White House get any more Unconstitutional, Treasonous and Un American ?

This whole thing stinks of Marxist Dictatorship !

When will the  sleeping Americans among us wake up to this, ‘ in your face blatant treason ‘,

and take their own legal Constitutional stand and actions ??

Let’s not wait until it’s too late, because by then, it’s all over but the crying !}~~~Xaniel777


From the Trenches World Report

Posted on September 14, 2012 by Admin

RT News  Only hours after a US district judge made permanent an injunction that bans the indefinite military detention of Americans without charge, the White House said they’d appeal to continue their efforts to keep a controversial new law on the books.

On Thursday, the Obama administration acknowledged that they plan to challenge a ruling made only a day earlier by US District Court Judge Katherine Forrest that concreted an injunction she issued four months prior on a provision included in the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act , or NDAA.

In May, Judge Forrest said the indefinite detention statute in the NDAA failed to “pass constitutional muster” and ordered a temporary block.

On Wednesday, she made that injunction permanent, but not without raising objection once again from the Executive Branch.

“First Amendment rights are guaranteed by the Constitution and cannot be legislated away,” Forrest wrote on Wednesday. “This Court rejects the Government’s suggestion that American citizens can be placed in military detention indefinitely, for acts they could not predict might subject them to detention.”

Judge Forrest’s decision this week reaffirms her earlier ruling that prohibits the US government from abiding by the indefinite detention provision in the NDAA, a clause that allows for American citizens to be detained and held on the suspicion of supportingterrorists “or associated forces until a very vague time frame described as only “until the end of hostilities.” 

After US President Barack Obama signed the legislation into law on New Year’s Eve, a team of journalists and activists challenged it in court.

NDAA ruled unconstitutional; White House appeals

The White House had originally threatened to veto the act if it came onto President Obama’s desk, but the commander-in-chief signed it none the less on December 31, 2011.

When he inked his name to the bill, the president acknowledged that he was authorizing it, “despite having serious reservations with certain provisions that regulate the detention, interrogation and prosecution of suspected terrorists.” 

On Thursday, the White House affirmed that they will continue their legal battle to ensure that those certain provisions remain intact.

Carl Mayer, an attorney with The Mayer Law Group and legal counsel for the plaintiffs in the case, spoke with RT shortly after he found out that the White House plans to appeal the ruling.

Despite the Obama administration’s warning, Mr. Mayer calls Judge Forrest’s latest decision “a huge and historic victory for democracy” and remains optimistic that further administrative efforts to challenge the injunction will be thwarted by the Justice Department.

The Obama administration, Mr. Mayer says, “plan to appeal this to the Second Circuit and probably ultimately to the Supreme Court.

We think this is ill advised because it contradicts President Obama’s campaign statements, it contradicts his criticism of his own legislation in his signing statement and he knows, as a former constitutional law professor, that this is wholly unconstitutional.”

“Because the language is so vague in this law,” Mr. Mayer explains, “if any journalist or activist is seen as reporting or offering opinions about groups that could somehow be linked not just to al-Qaeda but to any opponent of the United States or even opponents of our allies” they could be imprisoned indefinitely.

Mr. Mayer adds that “When Congress passes a law that is so vague, [it] always has a chilling effect on everyone’s speech and that is not permitted under our Constitution.”

“You can’t chill a journalist’s speech; you can’t chill your speech or your colleague’s speech or your producer’s speech or other journalists who you work with by holding a Sword of Damocles over your head by threatening you of being detained by the military. That is something that you have a fundamental right to be protected by,” the lawyersays.

Also up for debate, says Mayer, is the NDAA’s violation of the Constitution’s right to due process.

“Let’s assume they thought a report,” says Mayer, is engaged in expressive activity that supports terrorists.” 

Without Judge Forrest’s injunction, that activity could warrant not a federal investigation, but a federal intervention — one that ends up with a suspect behind prison indefinitely.

 “And that is not how the Constitution works,” he says. “The Constitution gives you those fundamental bedrock protections.”

“You have a right to prove that that’s not true in front of a jury of your peers,” Mayer says.

Separate from the District Court case against the NDAA, several states have introduced legislation on their own that blocks usage of the indefinite detention provision on a local level.

In April, the Virginia legislature voted to approve an act that authorizes law enforcement agents within the state to reject the controversial detention provisions included in the NDAA.

Similar efforts were introduced in Washington, Utah and elsewhere.

Mr. Mayer says that while he expects to go back to court to fight the White House’s efforts to install the indefinite detention clause on a permanent basis, so far it seems as if their case is for a lost cause.

“I think they are ill advised to appeal this at all,” he tells RT.

“The Obama administration has now lost three times. They lost the temporary injunction, they lost the motion for reconsideration and they lost the hearing for permanent injunction. I say three strikes and you’re out.”











From 1BEARWIFE’s Sparkpage

By Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret.) -August 23, 2012

As the Supreme Court heard arguments for and against the Chicago, IL Gun Ban, this man offered you another stellar example of a letter (written by a Marine), that places the proper perspective on what a gun means to a civilized society. 

Interesting take and one you don’t hear much. Read this eloquent and profound letter and pay close attention to the last paragraph of the letter. ~~1BEARWIFE


“The Gun Is Civilization” By Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret) 

Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force.

If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument,

or force me to do your bidding under threat of force.

Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. 

Reason or force, that’s it. 

In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through persuasion.

Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction

and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as paradoxical as it may sound to some. 

When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason and try to persuade me,

because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force. 

The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger,

a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gang banger,

and a single guy on equal footing with a carload of drunken guys with baseball bats. 

The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender. 

There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force equations.

These are the people who think that we’d be more civilized if all guns were removed from society,

because a firearm makes it easier for an armed mugger to do his job.

That, of course, is only true if the mugger’s potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat–

it has no validity when most of a mugger’s potential marks are armed. 

People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young, the strong,

and the many, and that’s the exact opposite of a civilized society.

A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly. 

Then there’s the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in injury.

This argument is fallacious in several ways.

Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser. 

People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don’t constitute lethal force, watch too much TV,

where people take beatings and come out of it with a bloody lip at worst.

The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker.

If both are armed, the field is level. 

The gun is the only weapon that’s as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weight lifter.

It simply wouldn’t work as well as a force equalizer if it wasn’t both lethal and easily employable. 

When I carry a gun, I don’t do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I’m looking to be left alone.

The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded.

I don’t carry it because I’m afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid.

It doesn’t limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason,

only the actions of those who would do so by force.

It removes force from the equation – and that’s why carrying a gun is a civilized act. 

By Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret.) 

So, the greatest civilization is one where all citizens are equally armed and can only be persuaded, never forced. 








Who really killed Ambassador Stevens? It’s the Zionists, stupid!



From 12160.info

Posted by Sweettina2 on September 14, 2012

by Kevin Barrett      

Veteran’s Today

(9/12/2012, New York, NY) – Here in New York City, the 3rd-rate newspapers – all owned by 3rd-rate people who happen to be radical Zionist Jews – are pumping the “al-Qaeda” killing of the US Ambassador to Libya for all it’s worth.

The headline I saw in the Bed-Stuy Yemini-owned corner store screamed out:


The story doesn’t mention the fact that the vast majority of Muslims don’t like “al-Qaeda” and think 9/11 was an inside job .

Other American news agencies, however, are coming right out and saying who’s behind all the trouble:

Bacile, a California real estate developer who identifies himself as an Israeli Jew, said he believes the movie will help his native land by exposing Islam’s flaws to the world.

“Islam is a cancer, period,” he said repeatedly, his solemn voice thickly accented.

The two-hour movie, “Innocence of Muslims,” cost $5 million to make and was financed with the help of more than 100 Jewish donors, said Bacile, who wrote and directed it.  – Yahoo News

For once, a major American news agency is finally coming right out and saying who’s really behind the war on Islam launched by the 9/11 false-flag op.

It’s the Zionists, stupid.

Michael Scheuer, former head of the CIA’s Bin Laden unit, is a fake whistleblower, not a real one.

But that doesn’t mean he’s wrong when he says that the conflict in the Middle East is at root a religious war between Zionist Jews and the Muslims whose territory they have so brutally invaded…

and that since this conflict is none of the USA’s goddamned business, why in the world are we letting ourselves be dragged into this bloody, supremely dangerous Jewish-Zionist holy war of aggression against Islam and the world’s almost 2 billion Muslims? 

Ambassador Stevens, who like me got to know the Arab world by living in Morocco, was (as far as I know) neither Jewish nor a committed Zionist.

So why should Stevens, an American citizen and a representative of the American government, be murdered because a handful of fanatical Zionist lunatics have seized control of the US government and media, and dragged America into Israel’s hopeless war against the world’s almost 2 billion Muslims?

It isn’t ordinary Americans who spend millions of dollars to slander the Prophet Muhammad.

It’s the Zionists, stupid.


More at Veteran’s Today:  http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/09/12/who-really-killed-ambassado…

“Sam Bacile, 56, the movie’s writer and director, has gone into hiding following the violent reaction to his film.

An Israeli, Bacile lives in California and works in real estate development.

While filmmaking isn’t his main source of income, he put together the inflammatory movie in an effort to expose negative attributes that he believes come from and are associated with the Islamic faith.

The self-described Israeli Jew told the Associated Press, from an undisclosed location, that Islam is a cancer and that the film was intended to make a political statement, while condemning Islam on the whole.

The English-language movie spans two hours and is entitled, “Innocence of Muslims.”

Bacile claims that more than 100 Jewish donors helped put up the $5 million to make the film, which has reached no measurable level of success, possible.”


Is Muhammad Movie a Contrived Fraud?

“The bizarre circumstances behind The Innocence of Muslims, its shadowy creators and the deliberate attempt to manipulate the film to offend Muslims clearly suggests that the whole farce was a contrived set-up to inflame tensions in order to justify an acceleration of U.S., Israeli and NATO aggression across the Middle East and North Africa.”

Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Prison Planet.com.








According to British Intelligence sources



Murder Victim Saad Al-hilli

From Benjamin Fulford’s Blog


According to British Intelligence sources, the recent killing in France of Saad Al-hilli and his family was carried out because his company manufactured equipment capable of detecting nuclear weapons from the air.

It was his equipment that allowed for the detection and prevention of the recently planned nuclear terror attack on the London Olympics.

He was killed in order to pave the way for future nuclear terror attacks by the fascist P2 Freemason lodge that is seeking to create mayhem before offering a fascist solution to the problem they created.

Ignore the disinformation about Xi Jinping having gone missing, says a senior Chinese source.

The 9 members of the new politburo have been selected as previously announced and the transition is proceeding smoothly, he says.

The real reason for the widely published disinformation is that he snubbed Hillary Clinton when she went on a recent begging mission to China.

The United States Corporation is scrambling to avoid bankruptcy when its September 30 fiscal year ends.

Perhaps they should talk to the White Dragon Society and we can get them some gold on the condition they stop all their mayhem. 


FYI :  The following people have been recorded as saying they nearly got me killed when I was stabbed with a needle in June: Leo Zagami, Daniel Dal Bosco, Vincenzo Mazzara, according to the CIA and Swiss authorities.

In addition, they say they have sent 6 individuals to Japan to kill me. 









A Call from the The Powers That Be ?



~~ ‘ The Powers That Be ‘~~ 

From Urban Survival.com

By George Ure – September 14, 2012

Not sure whether he is or isn’t but a third-party reality check of my latest long conversation with the fellow says he’s right on. 

So that’s up on the Peoplenomics site Saturday Sept. 15, 2012 ( See Link below).

But the reason I wanted to mention this today is we’ve been pondering the arising war on cash and there are some interesting developments.

So we have, after a bit of research, a number of data points which are all going in the same direction:  There is a huge (globalist/one-worlders) full court press on to make sure that you don’t have any money, unless the money is in some kind of government-tracked system.

I’m not just talking about the USA, although that’s one reason why the BATF is still death on home-made moonshining gear. 

Booze is a currency. 

That’s why if you buy a still from an online outfit, the law says BATF can simple request (no court order needed) a whole customer list, if they so chose.

The reason for such government policies is not that they care about your liver.

They don’t, since if you die quicker, that’s less Social Security payments from them. 

You’re just an actuarial gnat. 

No, the reason (besides religions, which were unwitting stooges which worked hard steal this set of rights) is that alcohol can be used as a very desirable barter good

Since governments hate competition, they want to tax everything possible.

Which is why still ownership is not illegal, for making untaxed booze…and the Big Guys set this up in the own special ways so as to make it virtually impossible for the little guys (you and me) to get proper anointing so we can make some homemade rum.

OK….key point #1 this morning:  Anything that can be traded ISfiat currency

Yes, that’s right…if you can trade if for something else, it’s a currency and turning sugar into booze makes booze a fiat. 

Since moonshine comes in Mason jars, there’s no way to serialize and tax it….and you got the game, right? 

I might have even personally sipped some ‘shine from Tupperware…but I can’t remember, too clearly. 

I must have just forgotten to look for the tax stamp.  My bad.

OK, raise your eyes beyond America’s borders.  Do you see what’s going on in Italy? 

They’re on the financial ropes, of course, and infiltrated by the mob, of course, but come next year there’s a move afoot to outlaw the payment for anything more than $50 Euros in cash.

Banning anything but a small supply of hunting ammo figures into this, too, since my (presumed) PRB source pointed out how governments really work.  first, you need a navy….

So, with that in mind, click over to this recent Al Jazeera video report on how the seriously socialists are getting rid of cash in Sweden.

Yep, that’s the game:  Its why IRS wants its cut from even the little farmer roadside stand, and it’s why BATF won’t let you whip up a few bottles of hooch for personal use. 

The name of the game is keeping all possible fiat competition squashed.

Like my (nominally) PTB caller asked me You ever see the movie Wall Street?  The quote that mattered there was “,,,we can fix this malfunctioning corporation called the USA….” 

Kinda shakes your faith in that possibility we you have the Bigger Game smeared in your face. 

Remember, this is the source who said “...the movie IS the message… a few years back.

Just one of the nuggets from our little chit-chat, but more tomorrow.  There’s even juicer stuff than that. 

But just keep in mind if people have their own guns, grub, and gold, government can still be by and for the people. 

Otherwise, tables flip and government becomes all powerful.

Like it already is?


Peoplenomics.com premium content site:

More for Subscribers                To Subscribe, CLICK HERE                     Need Logon Assistance?  Click here 








(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: