The Economic Rape of America Chapter 1

The Economic Rape of America - Chapter One

WHAT IS MONEY?

Abraham was very rich in livestock, in silver, and in gold.
Genesis 13, verse 2

"The definitions, or descriptions, that have been applied to money are legion. They range from those which carry the implication that [the love of] it is the root of all evil to those who regard it as manna from heaven. Some have argued that it does not matter, others that it matters too much. Money has been described as a political, or sociological, phenomenon, as a mechanism, as a mirror, as a religion, as a myth, as a means of communication which reduces complexity and as a distortion which increases it, as the curse of the miser and the elixir of the spendthrift, as a means to all ends and as an end in itself, as barren and as all-powerful, as inert or neutral and as "the drink which stimulates the economic system to activity," as the tool of social progress and as an obstacle to it."
-- S. Herbert Frankel, 1977
To properly understand the extent of the economic rape of America, how it is being perpetrated, and who does it, we need to understand a few things about this curious thing or phenomenon we call "money."
ANDREW CARNEGIE'S EXPLANATION
"I suppose everyone who has spoken to or written for the public has wished at times that everybody would drop everything and just listen to him for a few minutes. I feel so this morning, for I believe that a grave injury threatens the people and progress of our country simply because the masses - the farmers and the wage-earners - do not understand the question of money. I wish therefore to explain "money" in so simple a way that all can understand it."
So wrote Andrew Carnegie, the steel magnate, around the turn of the century - I guess. I have an undated 28-page booklet by him called The A B C of Money. The booklet is not copyrighted, so I shall quote from it extensively. First, Carnegie explains why "money" comes about and what it really is.
In "primitive" societies barter develops because some people have things that others want, and some people do certain things better than others. Specialization and division of labor occur. One person becomes a shoemaker, another a farmer. The farmer exchanges ten bushels of wheat for a pair of shoes. Both parties gain from the transaction. It would take the farmer five times as long to make a pair of shoes, compared to the shoemaker, and it is not even practical for the shoemaker to attempt to grow his own wheat.
As society develops, someone gets the idea of becoming a "barter specialist" and opens a store. His store becomes a center for barter. Spontaneously, in every society, some article becomes the "basis-article" that turns out to be most convenient for exchange and for expressing the value of other articles. In Pennsylvania that article was wheat; in Virginia, Maryland, and North Carolina it was tobacco. There was a saying, "As good as wheat." Tobacco remained a basic money in Virginia and its neighboring colonies for nearly two centuries.
Our modern word "pecuniary" comes from "pecunia," the Latin word for "cow." Our word "fee" comes from the German word "Vieh," meaning cattle. In several societies cattle spontaneously came to serve the function of money. In other societies salt, silk, dried fish, feathers, stones, cowrie shells, beads, cigarettes, cognac, whiskey, sheep, goats, and horses have been used as money. The early American settlers used the "wampum," a form of shell, to trade with native Americans. Now back to Carnegie:
"... [I]n all cases human society chooses for that basis-article we call "money" that which fluctuates least in price, is the most generally used or desired, is in the greatest, most general, and most constant demand, and has value in itself... An article is not first made valuable by law and then elected to be "money." The article first proves itself valuable and best suited for the purpose, and so becomes of itself and in itself the basis-article - money. It elects itself.
We take one step further. The country becomes more and more populous, the wants of the people more and more numerous. The use of bulky products like wheat and tobacco, changeable in value, liable to decay, and of different grades, is soon found troublesome and unsuited for the growing business of exchange of articles, and they are therefore unfit to be longer used as "money." You see at once that we could not get along today with grain as "money." Then metals proved their superiority. These do not decay, do not change in value so rapidly, and they share with wheat and tobacco the one essential quality of also having value in themselves for other purposes than for the mere basis of exchange. People want them for personal adornment or in manufacture and the arts - for a thousand uses; and it is this very fact that makes them suitable for use as "money." Just try to count how many purposes gold is needed for, because it is best suited for those purposes. It meets us everywhere. We cannot even get married without the ring of gold.
... We have proceeded so far that we have now dropped all perishable articles and elected metals as our "money"; or, rather, metals have proved themselves better than anything else for the standard of value, "money." But another great step had to be taken. When I was in China, I received as change shavings and chips cut off a bar of silver and weighed before my eyes in the scales of the merchant, for the Chinese have no "coined" money. ... [Y]ou can well see how impossible it was for me to prevent the Chinese dealer from giving me less than the amount of silver to which I was entitled... Civilized nations soon felt the necessity of having their governments take certain quantities of the metals and stamp upon them evidence of their weight, purity, and real value. Thus came the "coinage" of metals into "money" - a great advance. People then knew at sight the exact value of each piece and could no longer be cheated, no weighing or testing being necessary. Note that the government stamp did not add any value to the coin. The government did not attempt to "make money" out of nothing; it only told the people the market value of the metal in each coin, just what the metal - the raw material - could be sold for as metal and not as "money."
But even after this much swindling occurred. Rogues cut the edges and then beat the coins out, so that many of these became very light. A clever Frenchman invented the "milling" of the edges of the coins, whereby this robbery was stopped, and civilized nations had at last the coinage which still remains with us, the most perfect ever known, because it is of high value in itself and changes least...
Although one would think that in coined metal pieces we had reached perfection, and that with these the masses of the people could not be cheated out of what is so essential to their well-being - "honest money" - yet one way was found to defraud the people even when such coin was used. The coins have sometimes been "debased" by needy governments after exhausting wars or pestilence, when countries were really too poor or too weak to recover from their misfortunes. A coin is called "debased" coin when it does not possess metal enough to bring in the open market the sum stamped upon the coin by the government. There is nothing new about this practice, which always cheats the masses. It is very, very old. Five hundred and seventy-four years before Christ the Greeks debased their coinage. The Roman Emperors debased theirs often when in desperate straits. England debased hers in the year 1300. The Scotch coin was once so debased that one dollar was worth only twelve cents. The Irish, the French, German, and Spanish governments have all tried debased coin when they could wring no more taxes directly out of their people, and had therefore to get more money from them indirectly. It was always the last resort to "debase" the coinage. These instances happened long ago. Nations of the first rank in our day do not fall so low. I must pause to make one exception to this statement. I bow my head in shame as I write it - the republic of the United States. Every one of its silver dollars is a "debased coin." When a government issues "debased coin," it takes leave of all that experience has proved to be sound in regard to money. Sound finance requires the government only to certify to the real value possessed by each coin issued from its mints, so that the people may not be cheated. Every time the government stamps the words "One Dollar" upon 371 1/4 grains of silver, it stamps a lie; disgraceful, but, alas! too true, for the silver in it is worth today not a dollar, but only seventy-eight cents.
Another delusion about money has often led nations into trouble - the idea that a government could "make money" simply by stamping certain words upon pieces of paper, just as any of you can "make money" by writing a note promising to pay one hundred dollars on demand. But you know that when you do that, you are not making "money," but making "a debt"; so is any government that issues its promise to pay. And there is this about both the individual and the government who take to issuing such notes on a large scale: they seldom pay them. The French did this during their revolution, and more recently the Confederate States "made money" at a great pace, and issued bonds which are now scarcely worth the paper they are printed upon. Every experiment of this kind has proved that there can be no money "made" where there is not value behind it...
But I am now to tell you another quality which this basis-article of metal has proved itself to possess... The whole world has such confidence in its fixity of value that there has been built upon it, as upon a sure foundation, a tower of "credit" so high, so vast, that all the silver and gold in the United States, and all the greenbacks and notes issued by the government, only perform eight percent of the exchanges of the country. Go into any bank, trust company, mill, factory, store, or place of business, and you will find that for every one hundred thousand dollars of business transacted, only about eight thousand dollars of "money" is used, and this only for petty purchases and payments. Ninety-two percent of the business is done with little bits of paper - checks, drafts. Upon this basis also rest all the government bonds, all state, county, and city bonds, and the thousands of millions of bonds the sale of which has enabled our great railway systems to be built, and also the thousands of millions of the earnings of the masses deposited in savings-banks, which has been lent by these banks to various parties, and which must be returned in "good money" or the poor depositor's savings will be partially or wholly lost.
The businesses and exchanges of the country, therefore, are not done now with "money" - with the article itself. Just as in former days the articles themselves ceased to be exchanged, and a metal called "money" was used to effect the exchanges, so today the metal itself - the "money" - is no longer used. The check or draft of the buyer of articles upon a store of gold deposited in a bank - a little piece of paper - is all that passes between the buyer and the seller. Why is this bit of paper taken by the seller or the one to whom there is a debt due? Because the taker is confident that if he really needed the article itself that it calls for - the gold - he could get it. He is confident also that he will not need the article itself, and why? Because for what he wishes to buy the seller or any man whom he owes will take his check, a similar bit of paper, instead of gold itself; and then, most vital of all, everyone is confident that the basis-article cannot change in value...
... The question is, How long could you get people to take these slips for dollars? How soon would some suspicious man suggest that you were issuing too many? And then these slips would lose reputation; people would begin to doubt whether you could really pay all the dollars you promised if called upon; and from that moment you could issue no more. Just so with governments: All can keep their small change afloat, although it may not contain metal equal to its face value; and it is a poor government which cannot go a little further and get the world to take something from it in the shape of "money" which is only partially so... Every nation has had eventually to recoin its "debased" coin or repudiate its obligations, and go through the perils and disgrace of loss of credit and position. In many instances the "debased" coin never was redeemed, the poor people who held it being compelled to take the loss.
... Upon the solid rock of gold as our basis-article we have built up the wealthiest country in the world, and the greatest agricultural, manufacturing, and mining and commercial country ever known. We have prospered beyond any nation the sun ever shone upon. In no country are wages of labor so high or the masses of the people so well off. Shall we discard the gold basis, or even endanger it? This is the question before the people of the United States today."
All the above quotations are from Andrew Carnegie's The A B C of Money. The following section is partially based on The Biggest Con: How the Government is Fleecing You by Irwin A. Schiff.
THE FUNCTIONS OF MONEY
According to Schiff, "Money, like the wheel, was one of mankind's most important inventions... Because of the development of money, which facilitated and accelerated the exchange of goods and services and made specialization and division of labor possible, productivity increased and thus living standards rose. The sounder a nation's money, the more efficient would be its economy and the faster would its standard of living grow."
Sound money performs four basic functions:
1. It serves as a standard of value or a unit of account. At present the U.S. Dollar still performs this function. When we see something priced at $10 we have an idea of its value and how that value compares to the value of something else. Companies keep their accounting records and issue their financial statements, using the dollar as unit of account.
2. Money serves as a medium of exchange. As Carnegie and Schiff explained, money facilitates exchange. The U.S. Dollar also still performs this function. There are several reasons why the dollar is still used as a medium of exchange:

• "Legal tender laws" that say we must accept the dollar;
• "Everybody" uses the dollar - banks, shops, everybody;
• Ignorance of the true nature of the dollar;
• Confidence in the dollar;
• Most other currencies lose their value even faster than the dollar - in comparison the dollar seems "strong";
• Most Americans spend their money as fast as they get it, so they don't notice its loss of value from day to day;
• Habit;
• Anyone who attempts to introduce an alternative currency is branded a counterfeiter and criminal.

3. Money provides mobility of value. Because of our superb communications, the dollar can be wired almost instantaneously to any part of the world - value being "transported" from one place to another. Money also makes it possible to obtain value in the present in the form of a loan or credit, and to repay the value in the future - another aspect of mobility of value.
4. Money serves as a store of value; it makes it possible to "transport" value into the future. Because of the rapid rate at which the dollar loses its value, it no longer serves as a store of value into the future. Every month the dollar loses some of its value. As we shall see in Chapter Four, the loss of value is considerably greater than "measured" by government statistics, like the consumer price index.
STATE, RELIGION, AND MONEY
Many of the original American settlers were religious rebels. In England and Europe they had been persecuted for practicing "illegal religions." For example, William Penn, the famous Quaker who gave his name to Pennsylvania, was prosecuted in England for preaching an "illegal religion."
The American settlers wanted to be free to practice the religion of their choice. They certainly did not want the state to dictate to them what their religion should be. Our Founding Fathers established the principle called "separation of church and state." The state has no business interfering with people's religion or dictating what their religious beliefs should be. This principle has been repeatedly upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court. This is why prayers are not allowed in state schools.
Now stretch your imagination. Imagine that the original American settlers were "money rebels" rather than religious rebels. They had been persecuted for using the money of their choice. They came to America to achieve monetary freedom. People had an inalienable right to use the money of their choice. Our Founding Fathers established the principle of the "separation of money and state." The state had no business interfering with people's money or dictating to them what their money should be.
Not so long ago, in Russia, atheism was the "state religion." Other religions were declared illegal. People practicing the religions of their choice were persecuted.
At the time of the Revolutionary War, the Continental Congress considered decreeing the death penalty for anyone who refused to accept the "lawful money" - Continental Dollars - they issued. That is where the expression "not worth a continental" comes from.
Today, in America, the paper dollar is the "state money." There are "legal tender laws" which essentially decree that people must use the paper dollar as money and other kinds of money are illegal. People who use the money of their choice are persecuted, prosecuted, and jailed. The members of the National Commodity and Barter Association use gold as money. During the past few years their branches across the country have been raided by armed government agents. Their gold, equipment, and records have been confiscated; their members persecuted, prosecuted, and jailed...
Hans F. Sennholz, author of Age of Inflation, was asked in the context of currency reform after World War II in Germany, what he would do if he had the power to reform the currency. His reply:
"When pressed for his proposal for a currency reform, this writer must confess that he would have conducted the simplest reform of all. He would pass no reform law, seek no conversion or parity, and offer no government cooperation. He would merely cease and desist from interfering with the inalienable rights of man. In particular, he would immediately restore all economic freedoms and repeal all legal tender laws. The freedom to trade and hold gold, the freedom to use gold in all exchanges, and the freedom to mint coins would bring forth the ideal currency to which all others would repair."

WHAT, THEN, IS MONEY?
In this report the term "money" will be used to refer to whatever people freely choose to serve as their medium of exchange. The term "fiat money" will be used to refer to what people are forced by government decree to use as medium of exchange. The Latin word "fiat" means "let it be done." The U.S. dollar is fiat money. (Similarly, in Russia atheism was the "fiat religion" people were forced to adopt by government decree.)
The term "currency" will be used to include all the items people use in practice as a medium of exchange. It includes money, fiat money, checks, drafts, bonds, etc. I will use the term "currency supply" (where most people say "money supply") to refer to the total currency in circulation.
In a free market people choose their money. There is competition between different kinds of money. Over time, people come to prefer and use as money that which best fulfills the functions of money outlined above. Historically, people have chosen gold and silver as money. The Bible is replete with examples.
It is quite possible that monetary theorists, such as C.H. Douglas (Social Credit), Sylvio Gesell (The Natural Economic Order), Henry Meulen (Free Banking), and E.C. Riegel (Private Enterprise Money), will devise forms of money that will prove superior to gold and silver. In a free market all such "advanced moneys" will have the opportunity to prove themselves. However, as workable money, only gold and silver have passed the test of history.
"I deny the power of the general government to making paper money, or anything else a legal tender."
-- Thomas Jefferson
"The terms 'lawful money' and 'lawful money of the United States' shall be construed to mean gold or silver coin of the United States." (12 USC 152)
"Legal tender is quite different from lawful money. In no U.S. law are Federal Reserve notes declared to be "lawful money." Lawful money is that money described in the Coinage Act of 1792 and in Article I, section 10 of the U.S. Constitution: gold and silver... the only money the Supreme Law of the Land allows states to make legal tender."
-- Tupper Saussy, 1980

Illegal Acts of Aggression by the U.S. Government and NATO against Libya...

It has been reported that Muammar Abu Minyar al-Gaddafi posed a profound question to President Obama; what if armed rebels attacked U.S. cities with the force of arms, what would you do? I would love to hear the response that the President would give, seeing that the U.S. is known for aggressive acts against sovereign countries in the name of democracy. Gaddafi poses a valid question, because Libya is a sovereign country which is clearly non-democratic and NATO has intervened under the guise of helping civilians. Mislead and misinformed people may believe that civilians are being killed in Libya, but when have armed rebels ever been considered harmless civilians. It is obvious that the U.S. and Britain are trying to protect their interests in the region, and the U.S. has even acknowledged that they are funding rebels. According to various reports, the bombing of Libya by U.S. and NATO forces have hit residential and office buildings. Libyan officials have continuously asked the UN to send international observers to objectively report on the crisis taking place in Libya to no avail. Gaddafi has held his position that NATO forces have no right to conduct military operations in Libya, as he says, "They are getting involved in internal affairs". The fact that the U.S. and NATO have the power to invade sovereign countries at their discretion is a big reason for concern, as Vladimir Putin said, "Russia is justified for building up their defences" when Russia and any other country can be invaded under bogus pretenses at anytime. Currently there are rebellions in Bahrain, Yemen, and other countries where dictators and kings are blatantly killing civilians. Why are there no military operations there? The fact is that the U.S. and Britain have no interests there; basically there is no oil. We are living in a time of hypocritical self-interests....



Radiation Does A Body Good... Say Word....

The propaganda that these conservative and liberal news agencies continue to spew into the public is shameless. Ann Coulter has once again displayed her outlandishness by remarking that being exposed to high levels of radiation is actually harmless and reduces the risk of obtaining cancer. On her website, Coulter wrote an article entitled A glowing report on radiation, in which she wrote: “With the terrible earthquake and resulting tsunami that have devastated Japan, the only good news is that anyone exposed to excess radiation from the nuclear power plants is now probably much less likely to get cancer.” She declared “excess radiation operates as a sort of cancer vaccine.” Evidently their agenda is to mislead the masses of people who are now in harms way of the radiation that has blown across the Pacific Ocean and has been detected as of recently in trace amounts on the west coast of the United States. But, the governments play on words is what the people need to pay attention to the most. They have said that while radiation has indeed reached the U.S. the risk of health problems is not immediate. So, basically they are saying your children won't show any signs of bad health anytime soon, but ten years from now when they reach about 16 or 17 years old, there is a possibility that they will catch cancer. To all of my west coast people; demand that the government stop lying to you about the level of radiation that has seeped into the atmosphere and demand that they make potassium iodide (KI) pills more readily available.



The Obama Basher That I Am.....

Recently I have been posting many news articles on Facebook that have outlined current President elect Barack Hussein Obama's political defects. As a consequence I have been labeled an Obama basher lol. I find it quite amusing, although not surprising in the least bit that I have been clothed in that jacket. My response has continued to be "I am not an Obama basher but a hypocrisy basher". What the President of the supposed "free world" campaigned upon and what has sufficed has been in total contradiction. Personally being a person who didn't buy into the rhetoric that the current President rehashed time and time again on his road to being elected the U.S. leader, I have only tried to hip people to the truth. It is my belief that all U.S. Presidents are puppets, but Obama is the most dangerous. With Bush, what you saw and heard was what you got, but Obama has been exceptionally deceptive. I have heard over and over again that it will take time to override the damage that Bush imposed. Granted, that is a true statement, if he was truly trying to enforce his campaign goals, but that's not the problem here. The problem is that Obama has chosen to impose policies that completely contradict what he promised the American people. His administration is quite similar to the Bush administration, he has proposed cuts to education, he has continuously bailed out the same culprits who crippled the economy, he has pushed forward with a baseless war, he has been slow to react to disasters, he has continued to enable Israel to push farther into Gaza, he has profoundly made the rich even richer, by using a fine tooth comb one can see that his healthcare reform hurts more than it helps, and it seems as though the U.S. is headed for the worst economic collapse yet..... So I ask where is the change he promised, I mean even a slight change? For some sort of perspective into my views, take some time out to watch the videos below....

            

Survival of the Fittest

The last two blogs that I posted were written by Tony Cartalucci and are from his blog Land Destroyer Report. http://landdestroyer.blogspot.com/2011/02/middle-east-then-world.html The two articles give an undeniably true perspective of what is taking place in the world now. The globalist elites are currently trying to restructure the world to their liking, thus, all of the civil unrest in many countries in North Africa and the Middle East. He points to one very important key to survival, self suffenciency. We must learn how to become effecient sharecroppers and huntergatherers. Because if we don't, what will happen is the food shortage will be upon us, and we will have to rely on them in order to feed or families. The days of wanton gluttony are soon over and there will be a strict ration process put in place. Worldwide economies are destined and designed to collapse and the majority of the world population are not prepared nor will they know how to react. Please take heed and prepare yourselves.....

The Middle East & then the World: Globalist blitzkrieg signals largest geopolitical reordering since WW2

The Middle East & then the World

Globalist blitzkrieg signals largest geopolitical reordering since WW2. analysis by Tony Cartalucci

Beginning in North Africa, now unfolding in the Middle East and Iran, and soon to spread to Eastern Europe and Asia, the globalist fueled color revolutions are attempting to profoundly transform entire regions of the planet in one sweeping move. It is an ambitious gambit, perhaps even one born of desperation, with the globalists' depravity and betrayal on full display to the world with no opportunity to turn back now.

To understand the globalists' reasoning behind such a bold move, it helps to understand their ultimate end game and the obstacles standing between them and their achieving it.

The End Game

The end game of course is a world spanning system of global governance. This is a system controlled by Anglo-American financiers and their network of global institutions ensuring the world's consolidated nations conform to a singular system they can then perpetually fleece. As megalomaniacal oligarchs, their singular obsession is the consolidation and preservation of their power. This will be achieved through a system of population control, industrial control, and monetary control, which together form the foundation of their Malthusian policies.

These policies are on full display in the UN's "Agenda 21," and by policy wonks like the current White House Science Adviser John Holdren in his book titled "Ecoscience."

Malthusian as their policies may be, they surely do not believe the world is in danger due to over-population or the environmental hazards posed by industrial progress. Instead, like all tyrants in history, they are establishing a convincing narrative to defend the immense concentration of undue power within their elitist hands and the implementation of measures to ensure such power stays in their hands indefinitely.

The immediate dangers posed to their plans are numerous, including an alternative media increasingly exposing the true nature of their agenda, and thus awakening a vast number of people who simply refuse to go along with it. There is also national sovereignty, where nations are openly challenging this Anglo-American centric world order and refusing to implement the conditions of their own enslavement.

These sweeping color revolutions, and coordinated military operations, both overt and covert, are dealing with the latter of these two challenges, while censorship, cognitive infiltration, and a tightening police state spanning the Western world under the very false premise of a "War on Terror" confronts the former.

Red = US-backed destabilization, Blue = US occupying/stationed.
China's oil and seaways are all covered.

The Middle East

With the globalist fueled destabilization in progress, concessions and regime changes are being made from Jordan to Egypt, all in the name of "democratization." The protesters' calls are verbatim repeats of the their local US funded NGOs' mission statements. Skeptical as many may be that all of this is being orchestrated by the West, one needs only read the RAND Corporation's 2007 report titled "Building Moderate Muslim Networks" where breathtaking confessions are made to not only reorder the Muslim world according to the West's interests, but how they would follow the same model of "civil society networks" they have already used for decades during the Cold War.

Egypt's recent "transition" played out as a direct translation of RAND's blueprint for meddling in the Muslim world. From the protest organizers and NGOs to the protest leaders, to the behind-the-scenes meddling by America's military leadership, the Egyptian uprising was entirely a US production. Even the drafting of the new Egyptian Constitution is being carried out by organizations funded by George Soros and the US National Endowment for Democracy.

The regional destabilization is resetting the geopolitical board in favor for a renewed effort to affect regime change in Iran. It has been extensively covered that the globalists have intricate and extensive plans, in the form of Brookings Institute's "Which Path to Persia?" report, to fund color revolutions, support terrorism inside of the Islamic Republic and even provoke war with a nation they concede would rather avoid conflict. No sooner did North African and Arab regimes begin to crumble did the "Green Revolution" in Iran start up again. As if reiterating the summation of Brookings' report, the globalist Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) has recently and overtly called on the US to back the "Green Revolution."

Iran's fall to the globalists, the extraction of its wealth, and the end of its support for Chinese and Russian economic and military ambitions would isolate the so-called Shanghai Cooperative Organization further.

NATO creeping forward, suffering failures in Ukraine, Belarus, and Georgia.

Russia's Encirclement

Russia, along with China appear to be the two biggest blocs of opposition to the Anglo-American establishment. Indeed there are plenty of people and organizations within each nation gladly working hand-in-hand with the globalists, who in turn, are overtly trying to tempt and coerce the two nations to integrate themselves into their global world order.

Men like Mikhail Khodorkovsky, who rose to power in Russia amongst an era of immense corruption, began building networks of NGOs modeled directly after those of the Anglo-Americans in the West, even naming this network the "Open Russian Foundation" after George Soros' Open Society Foundation. According to geopolitical researcher William Engdahl, this Open Russian Foundation included Henry Kissinger and Lord Jacob Rothschild on its board of directors and its goal was to transform Russia from a sovereign state and into something more palatable for globalist consumption.

Whatever Khdorkovsky's early successes may have been, they were cut short by Russian Prime Minister Vladamir Putin, who has safely confined Khodorkovsky behind the bars of a Siberian prison. Today, Khdorkovsky receives lobbying and legal services from notorious globalist lawyer Robert Amsterdam who leads international efforts to vilify Russia and justify the nation's encirclement by NATO.

After Tunisia fell and protests began brewing in Egypt, Foreign Policy magazine published the Freedom House's list of "Who's Next?" On the list was Belarus' Aleksandr Lukashenko, leader of a European nation directly bordering Russia's western border, staring Moscow in the face. NATO itself admits the reluctance of Belarus to join its now unjustified organization, while the mainstream media berates the Belarusian government for putting down protests launched after the results of recent elections that saw the Western-backed opposition defeated.

Looking at a map of Russia, not a nation touching its borders has been spared the globalist treatment, from the Ukraine and their US-backed Orange Revolution, to Georgia and its US-backed invasion of South Ossetia. For Russia, they seem more than prepared to fight back, humiliating the US-trained and equipped Georgian military on the battlefield and overseeing the results of the US-funded Orange Revolution overturned, with Ukrainian talks to join NATO halted.

By targeting the Middle East, and in particular Iran, which both China and Russia have been using to check the West's world domineering ambitions, the globalists' hope is to renew political unrest in Russia's satellite regions and complete its campaign of encircling Russia, thus forcing it to concede to its place amongst the new global order.

SSI's "String of Pearls:" China's oil lifeline.

China's String of Pearls

It is no secret China depends on oil imports to not only keep its economy growing, but to keep its vast population busy and prosperous, thus keeping the ruling government in power. This has been a long known realism by both China and the West. For China's part, they have begun building a presence on continental Africa, especially in Sudan where they have established a 1,000 mile oil pipeline from the vast nation's heartland to Port Sudan on the Red Sea. They have also provided relief to the country from UN sanctions and buys the majority of Sudan's oil exports.

China also imports an immense amount of oil from Iran. In fact, the Islamic Republic represents the world's second largest exporter of oil to China, behind Saudi Arabia.

From Sudan and Iran, across the Indian Ocean, and back to China's shores in the South China Sea, represents a "String of Pearls," or a series of geopolitical assets China is developing to protect this vital logistical route. This "String" includes a Chinese port in Pakistan's Baluchistan region, another facility in Myanmar (Burma), and expanded facilities in the South China Sea off the coast of Vietnam. China is also building up the size and capabilities of its fleet, including submarines which now shadow America's carrier groups, and the outfitting of their first aircraft carrier which is nearing completion.

The term "String of Pearls" was used as the title of the US Strategic Studies Institute's (SSI) 2006 report "String of Pearls: Meeting the challenge of China’s rising power across the Asian littoral." In this report, China's ambitions to project its power along this route is viewed as a direct challenge to American supremacy as well as a threat to the West's unipolar vision of a "new world order."

While China may not be a champion of human freedom, they do appear to favor a multipolar world where sovereign nations coexist instead of the Anglo-American unipolar world where, unsurprisingly, the British and American oligarchs dominate the planet.

To prevent such a multipolar world from coming into existence, the SSI report suggests several strategies regarding China, from engaging and enticing it to become what globalist pusher Robert Zoellick calls a "responsible stakeholder" in the "international system," to outright military confrontation and containment.

Of course this report was written in July 2006, and the ink hadn't even dried before Israel suffered a humiliating defeat in its war with Lebanon, the war with Iran stalled, and globalist minion Thaksin Shinawtra was ousted from power in Thailand in a display of jealously defended sovereignty in Southeast Asia.

It appears that the globalists, over the following years, would present China with a flattering role to play in their global order while simultaneously destabilizing nearly every nation along the "String of Pearls." The US has expanded its war in Afghanistan and is attempting to balkanize Pakistan in the process, specifically the Baluchistan region where China is establishing a naval presence. Pakistan's Baluchistan region is also the seaside starting point of an energy and logistical conduit running northward through the Himalayas and into Chinese territory. The US is also heavily involved in destabilizing Myanmar (Burma) to affect regime change and subsequently establishing a Washington dependent government.

Thailand neighbors Myanmar to the east and possesses the narrow Kra Isthmus China would like to develop into a Suez/Panama Canal-like project to shorten trips for its oil laden, China-bound tankers. Thailand also serves as an overland conduit, running north and south as in Pakistan, with a developed rail system connecting Singapore's shipping yards to Laos' capital of Vientiane. China has begun the development of a rail system through Laos and the upgrading of Thailand's rail system. Thailand also is one of the world's largest rice exporters, which makes the nation vital to China's future growth.

It is no surprise then, that Thailand, like Myanmar, has suffered multiple attempts by the US to affect regime change. Their man, Thaksin Shinawatra is an overt globalist, having formally served as an adviser to the Carlyle Group, and since his ousting from power in 2006, has been lobbied for by everyone from James Baker's Baker Botts, to ICG's Kenneth Adelman and the Edelman PR firm, to his current lobbyist and lawyer, Robert Amsterdam.

It is quite clear that Washington is using its control of the Middle East and its control of the seas, albeit challenged control, to check China's vastly superior financial and economic position. It is also clear that Washington is investing a great amount of military resources and intelligence assets to destabilize the entire "String of Pearls" to confound, contain, and leverage concessions from China, with the ultimate goal of folding the emerging Asian giant into the unipolar Anglo-American global order.

How well this strategy is working is debatable, however, the US military is politically hobbled, strategically stretched, and led by vastly incompetent leaders in Washington who have lost the faith and trust of their own population, not to mention the world. The bold and perhaps desperate gambit the US is playing out in the Middle East could be a bid to rectify years of failure against China and the Shanghai Cooperative since the SSI wrote their report in 2006. Regime change in Iran is still the linchpin in making this latest bid a success.

South America

Even South America is not spared. There has been a lull in overt American meddling, allowing South America to become a bastion of sorts against the agents of globalization, however, covert operations and staging has been ongoing.

Troubling reports coming from South America's Argentina, no stranger to the ire of Anglo-American ambitions, indicate that tension is building up between Buenos Aires and Washington. It has culminated in a diplomatic row over a recently seized US C-17 transport chalk full of suspicious equipment and an even more suspicious explanation. This is leading many, including the government of Argentina, to believe the US is staging another round of destabilization efforts in South America.

Venezuela and Bolivia have been overtly targeted by the West in recent years by efforts to undermine and even overthrow their respective governments. The muted-confused response over the coup in Honduras also raises suspicions that America has begun striking back against the wave of regional nationalism sweeping South America. A visit over to Movements.org reveals that the US State Department/corporate funded organization is backing dissidents in Venezuela and encouraging the spread of "civil society," gleefully noting the insidious effects it is having on bolstering the anti-Chavez opposition.

Conclusion

The recent US-backed wave of revolution sweeping the Middle East is just the beginning of a greater move to dislodge Iran and begin regaining ground against Russia and China after several years of disappointing results geopolitically. The ultimate goal in mind is to force Russia and China to accept their role as "responsible stakeholders" in the unipolar Anglo-American "new world order." The unipolar world of Anglo-American financier domination requires that all competition be eliminated, all nations become interdependent, and most importantly, all governments conform to the globalists' model of "civil society" which in turn answers to centralized global institutions.

Understanding the overarching plan reveals the danger of being apathetic or complacent about the current unrest in the Middle East. It will surely spread, and depending on the Shanghai Cooperative's response and their determination to remain the masters of their own destiny, greater confrontation may ensue. For the United States and its dwindling power, its meaningless offers to the world's nations to join their bankrupt, one-sided model of world governance, and their growing economic mire, there is no telling what their desperation may transform into. This unpredictability and desperation may be perhaps the only card they have left in their hand worth playing, and one that should trouble us all.

The Globalists' Worst Nightmare, Self-Sufficiency: a universal solution to the globalist problem.

The Globalists' Worst Nightmare

Self-Sufficiency: a universal solution to the globalist problem. commentary by Tony Cartalucci

Introduction

When thinking about "solutions" many are quick to cite organizing a protest and taking to the streets. Let's for a moment consider the mechanics of a protest, what it might accomplish, and what it may leave to be desired.

Take Glenn Beck's feckless and disingenuous 2010 "Restoring Honor" event in Washington D.C. It drew thousands of honest, well-intentioned people from all over the United States. Indeed, thousands of people filled up their Fortune 500 made cars with gas from Fortune 500 oil companies, drove countless miles, stopping along the way at Fortune 500 fast food restaurants, stayed at Fortune 500 run hotels, and stocked up on supplies purchased at Fortune 500 Walmart. They slaked their thirst under the hot August sun with cans of Fortune 500 Pepsi and Coke, and at the end of the day, they drove home, paid their Fortune 500 cable subscriptions to watch their Fortune 500 media reports, most likely on News Corporation's Fox News, a Council on Foreign Relations corporate member.

At best, all a protest will lead to, while we are so hopelessly dependent on this system, is a round of musical chairs inside the political arena, with perhaps superficial concessions made to the people. The vector sum however, will still be decidedly in favor of the global corporate-financier oligarchy.

If we understand that the fundamental problem facing not only America, but the entire world, is a global corporate-financier oligarchy that has criminally consolidated their wealth by "liberalizing" their own activities while strangling ours through regulations, taxes, and laws, we should then understand why events like Beck's "Restoring Honor" are not only fruitless, but in fact, counterproductive. We should also realize that any activity we commit ourselves to must be directed at this corporate-financier oligarchy rather than the governments they have co-opted and positioned as buffers between themselves and the masses.

While people understand something is wrong and recognize the necessity to do "something," figuring out what that "something" should be becomes incredibly difficult when so few understand how power really works and how to strip it away from the oligarchs that have criminally consolidated it.

Understanding Globalization

As of late, the expansion of this global oligarchical empire has taken a more extreme, perhaps desperate form involving staged revolutions as seen in Egypt and Tunisia, and in Libya's case, armed rebellion and the specter of foreign military intervention. However, worldwide globalist coup d'etats have occurred before - for example, in the late 1990's under the guise of a "financial collapse" and IMF "restructuring."

Many nations fell beholden to the IMF and its regiment of "reforms" which amounted to neo-colonialism packaged under the euphemism of "economic liberalization." To illustrate how this works, it may help to understand what real colonialism looked like.

Thailand's geopolitical surroundings 1800-1900. Thailand was
the only Southeast Asian country to avoid European colonization.

Thailand in the 1800's, then the Kingdom of Siam, was surrounded on all sides by colonized nations and in turn was made to concede to the British 1855 Bowring Treaty. See how many of these "gunboat policy" imposed concessions sound like today's "economic liberalization:"

1. Siam granted extraterritoriality to British subjects.
2. British could trade freely in all seaports and reside permanently in Bangkok.
3. British could buy and rent property in Bangkok.
4. British subjects could travel freely in the interior with passes provided by the consul.
5. Import and export duties were capped at 3%, except the duty-free opium and bullion.
6. British merchants were to be allowed to buy and sell directly with individual Siamese.

A more contemporary example for comparison would be the outright military conquest of Iraq and Paul Bremer's (CFR) economic reformation. The Economist gleefully enumerates the neo-colonial "economic liberalization" of Iraq in a piece titled "Let's all go to the yard sale: If it all works out, Iraq will be a capitalist's dream:"

1. 100% ownership of Iraqi assets.
2. Full repatriation of profits.
3. Equal legal standing with local firms.
4. Foreign banks allowed to operate or buy into local banks.
5. Income and corporate taxes capped at 15%.
6. Universal tariffs slashed to 5%.

Read more: Egypt Today, Thailand Tomorrow

And few could argue that the IMF's rehabilitation regiments being forced upon nations all over the world after the late 90's financial crash are any different than economic colonialism both past and present. In fact, the IMF itself publishes reports at great length concerning the "necessity" of economic liberalization.

To be sure, the governments that come to power in the wake of the current Middle East destabilizations will be more servile and will undoubtedly be committed to similar economic liberalization. Brookings Institute's Kenneth Pollack already made it quite clear that "The struggle in the new Middle East must be defined as one between nations that are moving in the right direction and nations that are not; between those that are embracing economic liberalization, educational reform, democracy, the rule of law and civil liberties, and those that are not."

Siam eventually rolled back the terms of the 1855 Bowring Treaty as the British Empire waned, but as of 1997, Thailand was once again faced with similar terms, dictated this time by the banksters of the IMF.

Thailand's Answer to the Globalization

Thailand's answer to the IMF, and globalization in general was profound in both implications as well as in its understanding of globalization's end game. Fiercely independent and nationalistic, and being the only nation in Southeast Asia to avoid colonization, Thailand's sovereignty has been protected for over 800 years by its revered monarchy. The current dynasty, the House of Chakri, has reigned nearly as long as America has existed as a nation and the current king is regarded as the equivalent of a living "Founding Father." And just as it has for 800 years, the Thai Monarchy today provides the most provocative and meaningful answer to the threats facing the Kingdom.

The answer of course is self-sufficiency. Self-sufficiency as a nation, as a province, as a community and as a household. This concept is enshrined in the Thai King's "New Theory" or "self-sufficiency economy" and mirrors similar efforts found throughout the world to break the back of the oppression and exploitation that results from dependence on the globalist system.

A vision of self-sufficiency in Thailand. Agrarian values and the
self-reliance they engender are the hallmarks of real freedom.

The foundation of the self-sufficiency economy is simply growing your own garden and providing yourself with your own food. This is portrayed on the back right-hand side of every 1,000 baht Thai banknote as a picture of a woman tending her garden. The next step is producing surplus that can be traded for income, which in turn can be used to purchase technology to further enhance your ability to sustain yourself and improve your life-style.

The Thai 1000 baht banknote. Left is one of the many dams controlling
floods and producing electricity throughout the Kingdom. Center is the current
King of Thailand. Right is a depiction of a local garden providing
food in a self-sufficient manner.

The New Theory aims at preserving traditional agrarian values in the hands of the people. It also aims at preventing a migration from the countryside into the cities. Preventing such migrations would prevent big agricultural cartels from moving in, swallowing up farming land, corrupting and even jeopardizing entire national food supplies (see Monsanto). Those familiar with the UN's Agenda 21, the more recent UN "Climate Change Program," and the globalist "end game" may understand the deeper implications and dangers of such a migration and why it needs to be stopped.

By moving to the city, people give up private property, cease pursuing productive occupations, and end up being folded into a consumerist paradigm. Within such a paradigm, problems like overpopulation, pollution, crime, and economic crises can only be handled by a centralized government and generally yield political solutions such as quotas, taxes, micromanagement, and regulations rather than meaningful technical solutions.

Also, such problems inevitably lead to a centralized government increasing its own power, always at the expense of the people and their freedom. The effects of economic catastrophe are also greater in a centralized, interdependent society, where everyone is subject to the overall health of the economy for even simple necessities like food, water, and electricity.

A slide presenting the "New Theory" depicting a manifestation
of greed leading the people from their rural private property and
into a "city of extravagance." If Agenda 21 had an illustrated
cover, this could be it.

The goal of the "New Theory" is to have people return
to the countryside from the cities and develop their communities in a
self-reliant manner. It is, in other words, Agenda 21 in reverse.

Under the "New Theory," demonstration stations all across Thailand have been created promoting education in matters of agriculture and self-sufficient living. The program is competing against the contemporary globalist system, which as of now, is mired in many parts of the world with economic meltdown. The relatively self-sufficient nature of Thais in general has weathered this economic chaos fairly well. In 10 years, a plate of food still costs the same amount of money, as do many everyday commodities. This only further vindicates the value of being self-sufficient and now more than ever, in both Thailand, and abroad, it is a good time to get involved and get self-sufficient.

Globalist Reactionary Hand-Wringing

Of course the head-of-state of a nation almost 70 million strong promoting a lifestyle that cuts the legs out from under the globalist agenda does not sit well with the oligarchical establishment. Their response to this, as it has been with all of Thailand's habitual displays of defiance is something to behold.

Perhaps the most vocal globalist critic of Thailand is the Economist. It openly criticizes the King's self-sufficiency economy in an article titled "Rebranding Thaksinomics." It states that the economic plan is "a partial retreat from Thailand's hitherto liberal economic stance." The Economist muddles the debate by side-stepping the self-sufficient aspects of the"self-sufficiency economy." It claims that socialist handouts under deposed Prime Minister and notorious globalist stooge Thaksin Shinawatra somehow accomplished the exact same goals. The Economist also claims the concept of self-sufficiency is merely a "rebranding" of such socialist handouts.

The Economist article then breaks down into a pro-Thaksin rant, decrying his ousting from power and continued claims that somehow encouraging people to grow their own food is a theft of Thaksin's socialist policies.

It should be noted that socialism is not self-sufficiency. It is complete dependency on the state and on people who pay their ever increasing taxes. Socialism is not about growing your own garden, using technology to enhance your independence or solving your problems with your own resources. It is about taking from the collective storehouses of the state, and when you are again hungry, taking again. Socialism could only be useful as a stop-gap measure between current problems and the active pursuit of technical solutions. However, the goal of globalization is to create interdependency between states, and total dependency on global institutions, therefore, perpetuating problems, not solving them becomes the equation.

Another globalist point-of-view comes from Australia's National University's "New Mandala" blog written by academic wonk Andrew Walker. The blog itself is a clearinghouse for globalist talking points regarding Southeast Asia. Some "contributing writers" even include Thaksin Shinawatra's hired lobbyist, Robert Amsterdam.

Walker's entire perception of Thailand seems to be derived from his time spent in a single village in Northern Thailand. From his myopic point-of-view in the minute village of "Baan Tian," he condemns entirely Thailand's self-sufficiency economy in his article "Royal misrepresentation of rural livelihoods." He suggests that "the sufficiency economy prescriptions for rural development are inappropriate and disempowering."

As with the Economist, the article breaks down into a pro-Thaksin rant claiming the entire plan is meant to keep the rural population of Thailand in their place, out of the cities, and thus out of the debate of national issues.

Of course, becoming self-sufficient is one step on the road to real empowerment. Academic wonks like Andrew Walker presume the height of empowerment is feeding a paper voting stub into a box, on your way home from a service sector job, and then relaxing behind the glow of a new plasma screen TV bought on credit. A more likely argument would be that sustaining your own existence, wrought from the land beneath your feet, and the ability to shape the world around you with an understanding of science and the mastery of multiple trades is the height of empowerment and the truest form of human freedom.

The hand wringing within the writings of the Economist and ANU's Andrew Walker is not the full extent of the globalists' reaction to Thailand and its wandering from globalist dominion. A full fledged "red" color revolution has been brewing within the Kingdom since at least 2009. Reading the "Red Siam Manifesto" penned by "red shirt" intelligentsia Giles Ungpakorn makes it quite clear how they view "self-sufficiency" and the need to "reform" Thailand as a socialist welfare state.

Ungpakorn's childish and ranting manifesto can be found on "Socialist Worker Online" here. A complete selection of the "red shirt" propaganda used within Thailand can be found here.

It should be noted that the leader of the "red shirt" protest is deposed ex-PM Thaksin Shinawatra, a former adviser to the Carlyle Group who was literally standing in front of the CFR in NYC on the eve of his ousting from power in 2006. Since 2006, he has been represented by fellow Carlyle man James Baker and his Baker Botts law firm, International Crisis Group's Kenneth Adelman and his Edelman Public Relations firm, Belfer Center adviser Robert Blackwill of Barbour Griffith & Rogers, and now Robert Amsterdam's Amsterdam & Peroff, a major corporate member of the globalist Chatham House.

To say that Thaksin Shinawatra and his "red shirts" have foreign backing is a profound understatement.

Thaksin's proxy political party maintains the "red shirt" mobs which in turn are supported by several NGOs including the National Endowment for Democracy funded "Prachatai," an "independent media organization" that coordinates the "red shirt" propaganda efforts. Prachatai was recently nominated for the Deutsche Welle Blog Awards by the "Neo-Con" infested Freedom House, upon which former Thaksin lobbyist Kenneth Adelman sits as a member on the board of directors.

Freedom House "tweets" their March 11, 2011 nomination of NED
funded "red shirt" propaganda clearinghouse, Prachatai.com.

The globalists know what's going on already and they are moving against it while the majority of humanity still sleeps in ignorance and apathy. Thailand is but one nation of many, in China's "String of Pearls" that is targeted for destabilization and US State Department sponsored "liberation." The key to stopping the globalists dead in their tracks is seizing back from them the mechanisms of civilization - and we have done that already in terms of the alternative media. Such success is necessary in all aspects of our life, and as the King in Thailand suggests, it can start with something as simple as growing your own garden.

Today and Into the Future

Of course in Thailand, agricultural self-sufficiency is coupled with technology to enhance efficiency and improve the quality of life. Even in the city, small independent businesses are adopting the latest technology to improve their production, increase their profits, and even out-compete larger corporations. Computer controlled machining equipment can be found in small workshops crammed into old shop-houses, automatic embroidering machines allow a single woman to fulfill orders for name tags on new school uniforms - rather than both businesses sending off orders to factories owned by a handful of wealthy investors. A multitude of examples can be seen walking around any city block in Thailand's capital of Bangkok.

MIT's Dr. Neil Gershenfeld inside his "Fab Lab," arguably
the birthplace of the personal fabrication revolution.

Bringing this sort of technology to rural people, even enabling people to create their own technology rather than just employ it, is not just science fiction but is a reality of today. MIT Professor Dr. Neil Gershenfeld has developed the "fabrication laboratory" or "Fab Lab." The Fab Lab is a microfactory that can "make almost anything." His Fab Lab has since been replicated all over the world in what he calls the personal fabrication revolution. It aims at turning a world of dependent consumers into independent designers and producers.

Dr. Neil Gershenfeld presents his Fab Lab at TED.

Dr. Gershenfeld in his own words articulates the problem of finding support amongst institutions and governments, stating that individuals are very enthusiastic about this revolution "but it breaks their organizational boundaries. In fact it is illegal for them, in many cases, to equip ordinary people to create rather than consume technology."

This indeed not only encapsulates Dr. Gershenfeld's dilemma, but describes to a "t" the mentality of oligarchs and the fears they harbor about empowering the people, a fear reflected in the "organizational boundaries" of their corporations and governmental institutions. This is a feature of oligarchy described as early as 300 B.C. in ancient Greece in "The Athenian Constitution." In it, a character referred to as "the Old Oligarch" describes his contempt for the social mobility the technology of the Athenian navy affords the lower echelons of Athenian society.

Dr. Gershenfeld goes on to encapsulate the true potential of his Fab Labs by stating, "the other 5 billion people on the planet aren't just technical "sinks," they are "sources." The real opportunity is to harness the inventive power of the world to locally design and produce solutions to local problems." Dr. Gershenfeld concludes by conceding he thought such a possibility was 20 years off, but "it's where we are today," noting the success his Fab Labs are already having around the world.

The interior of a "Fab Lab" in Amsterdam, featuring an
array of personal manufacturing technology.

Dr. Gershenfeld's message resonates with the current culture of Thailand and the ambitions of the "self-sufficiency economy." In many ways, Thailand's patchwork of micro-businesses, already successfully by-passing capital intensive centralized production, vindicates the work and optimism of Dr. Gershenfeld. It also, however, resonates strongly with the self-reliant traditions that had made America great. The technical possibility for this to change the world is already a reality, but Dr. Gershenfeld himself concedes that the biggest obstacle is overcoming social engineering - in other words - creating a paradigm shift in the minds of the population to meet the technical paradigm shift that has already taken place.

Self-sufficiency and the harassing of technology in the hands of the people are the greatest fears of the global oligarchy - fears that oligarchs throughout the centuries have harbored. Simply boycotting the globalists' corporations and replacing them with local solutions is something everyone can afford to do starting today. And by simply looking into Dr. Neil Gershenfeld's "Fab Lab," raising awareness of the personal fabrication revolution, and even in the smallest way participating can help overcome the obstacle of social-engineering and spur a profound paradigm shift. We have begun to seize back the media, now it is time to seize back the other levers of power. Now is the time to recognize true freedom as being self-sufficient as a nation, as a community, and as a household, and start living it everyday.

See also: Alternative Economics

No Conscience When the War Pops Off is Hell on Earth.... Part 2

With disasters looming, hell on earth seems to be fast approaching. Economically, the U.S. is worst off than it has been in nearly a century. Educationally, the U.S. is not producing the skill sets or intellectual capacities needed to keep up with other countries. Politically, the two party system has run its course. Industrially, the U.S. has outsourced its jobs to foreign countries. Racially, the U.S. is still segregated, just not as much as it used to be. Militarily, the U.S. is strong, yet, most servicemen are brainwashed. Environmentally, the earth is continuously being poisoned. In turn, this makes way for disasters of grandeur in the U.S. Food shortages, water shortages, and new illnesses have all been documented in various parts of the world. Ponder this, if there were to be such revolutions as the U.S. is funding across the Middle East and Africa; will the government have mercy and spare the people, or will they use deadly force against its citizens? When basic necessities are denied to the people, things get hectic. Case in point, in 2005 when hurricane Katrina slammed through New Orleans and Mississippi (I was in Jackson MS, and felt the effects) chaos ensued. What if an even more catastrophic event happens that affects the whole of America? Who is going to have a conscience when their family doesn't have the basics to survive? Will the conscious decision be to shoot first or be shot? This will be Hell On Earth, and I promise you consciousness will fly in the wind....

What Does It Mean To Be Black In America????

http://edition.cnn.com/Specials/2008/black.in.america/index.html

Back in 2008, CNN ran a special entitled Black in America, with subsections focusing on The Black Woman and Family, The Black Man, and the King Assassination. So, I pose this question if you are Black of course: What does it mean to be Black in America to you? Some of the topics dealt with AIDS affecting Black women, why so many Black women aren't married, ex-convicts trying to find a way after prison, the education of Black children, racism, the assassination of MLK, and others.
So, does being Black and living in America mean that you will be subjected to some form of racism or discrimination; more than likely. Does it mean that you have a high risk of going to jail; probably. As a Black woman does it mean that the probability of you finding a spouse is extremely low; statistics point to this. Does it mean that a Black child is at risk of not getting a good education and becoming a victim of the system; sure. Does it mean that AIDS is a Black disease in America now; studies show. So, with all of this dialogue, solutions are still very slow to come to fruition. The prison industrial complex is still at its highest which, adversely affects the statistics of Black women getting married. Racism and discrimination pushed its way back into the forefront with the 2008 election. Funding for inner-city and higher education is still diminishing. And what may be the worst of all, funding for the AIDS epidemic in Africa is continuously increasing, yet domestically it seems null and void. As the story pointed out, to be Black in America is still discouraging. So, how de we make being Black in America encouraging?

Dumb it Down: Stupid Rap Has Become Meteoric

Me and my homie Tony Jones were tripping on Facebook today. We often talk about the hottest new "Real Hip-Hop" albums that are released and he said the most hillarious shit. Dude said, "Mane I need a q-tip because of all this bullshit rappers are putting out is hurting my ears". Man did he hit the hammer on the nail with that statement. Too many of these rap cats are getting pushed by these labels while the real rap is being pushed to the side, or the real artists are being asked to "Dumb it Down". Such is the case with one of the greatest lyricits to grace the Hip-Hop scene in a minute, Lupe Fiasco. After going through a battle with his label Atlantic Records Lupe's current album Lasers finally got a release date. It upsets me and my heart goes out to Lupe because he went through an ordeal that should not have surfaced, causing his music to take a major hit. You can tell that his heart wasn't fully in this album. Lupe also addressed the situation proclaiming that the higher ups at the record company told him to stop rapping so complex. Basically as the hook on his song Dumb it Down off his much acclaimed The Cool explicitly lays out. Lyrically, Lupe is still one of the sickest and smartest, and I will continue to admire him musically. Another example is the near classic 99.1% Just Blaze produced The Greatest Story Never Told by Saigon, who was also signed to Atlantic Records. Due to label politics and them wanting Saigon to "Dumb it Down" the album was nearly shelved. The bullshit isn't just from the record labels either as Little Brother's video Lovin' It  from their album  The Minstrel Show was banned by BET for being too intelligent. If you have any type of peripheral vision you can see what's happening in the case of our music. Black music whether it be Hip-Hop, Rap, or R&B has become sex, crime, and drug laden, losing its teaching capacity. In hindsight, this was all part of the plan as it was blueprinted in the Harvard Report to control Black music.