The Iron Web (review)

For nearly three-quarters of a century, the spirit in my decrepit body has inhabited this planet. After having learned speed-reading in the 1960s, I have devoured countless books and written works, and have been perpetually driven by an insatiable desire to achieve and maintain episteme. Near the top of any list I might compile of the most enlightening works I've ever read, one would find G. Edward Griffin's The Creature From Jekyll Island. That's where I first learned of the true nature of money, currency, and banking. Prior to that, I had believed what I was taught and what the media told me.

Right up there with Griffin's magnificent works I now must place a brilliant hot-off-the-press 363-page can't-put-down book I read yesterday. It's Larken Rose's third book (and first novel) entitled The Iron Web. Every freedom-loving creature on the planet absolutely must read this remarkable book. It's difficult for me to imagine a person of Larken's relative youth -- I believe he's in his thirties -- possessing the knowledge, insight, and vision it took to produce this fictional account of the stark realities of life in this land widely mislabeled as the "land of the free and home of the brave."

If 300 million Americans would read this book -- oops, there aren't that many Americans who can read -- the society our founding fathers envisioned (and hoped for) could become a reality in very short order. Despite its fictional setting, the profundity of its philosophical content eclipses any minor deficiency one could possibly imagine in its realism. It's exceedingly difficult for any writer to accurately describe events and circumstances he has neither experienced nor witnessed firsthand, but Larken has done a superb job in that department as well. Realizing what this country could really be, and how easily the transformation could come about, will set the reader's mind a-reeling.

For a modest $15, we should all give a copy to everyone we love. I cannot think of anything I have ever recommended to anyone as enthusiastically as I endorse this masterpiece.

Order copies by sending $15 in cash, check, or money order to:

Larken Rose
The Iron Web
PO Box 653
Huntingdon Valley PA 19006

Hurry. Time's a'wastin' folks. There's work to do. There are people to educate.

Preparing Federal Police Forces for Martial Law

Most people don't know what FEMA is. Most of those who do know that it stands for Federal Emergency Management Agency mistakenly believe it is a federal agency whose mission is to assist local communities hit by natural disasters (floods, tornadoes, forest fires, etc.). That is the purpose for which it was originally established. But it was reorganized in 1991 for other purposes entirely. Since reorganization, 7 percent of its budget has been dedicated for those original functions. The remaining 93 percent is used for activities related to law enforcement and population control. And its funding from Congress has mushroomed it into one more out-of-control agency. Its performance in New Orleans during Katrina ought to let people know where its resources are not concentrated.

What it boils down to is that FEMA is intended to become a federal police force that can take over all the police functions of municipalities, counties, and states, and control all law enforcement activities for the entire nation when a president declares a national emergency. Over the 18 years since the reorganization, FEMA has been providing grants and subsidies to municipalities, counties, and states to train and equip all forces up to military standards. Tiny jurisdictions now have armored vehicles, flamethrowers, and all sorts of equipment that wouldn't be expected -- by any prudent mind -- to be needed in a thousand years. But, as has happened over time with the public schools, the federal government has used the insatiable human appetite for money to seduce nearly every jurisdiction in the country to accept their funding and, along with it, the strings of control that grants and subsidies carry with them.

To the schools they say, "You can have the money, but you'll have to teach this, and you cannot teach that." With law enforcement, it's, "You can have the money, but you will have to let us come in and train your officers, and you'll have to become proficient in this and this and this."

What they have done over these past two decades, in effect, is to militarize all law enforcement so that transitioning into a federal force can be pulled off with very little difficulty. Jurisdictions have gradually morphed from organizations that used to "protect and serve" to jackbooted thug units that employ "shock and awe" to subordinate the public and condition them for martial law.

Many readers have seen the videos and still photos of the storage facilities where hundreds of thousands of huge, durable-plastic "casket liners" (each capable of holding three to five human bodies, depending upon body size) are maintained at the ready. Many know, or at least have heard of, the dozens of concentration camp facilities either in existence or under construction across the fruited plain. It appears that planners are preparing to incarcerate about 10 percent of the population and bury at least another 25 percent. These plans, Dear Hearts, are a bit more than the mere "contingency plans" they are being represented as to local authorities. Cloth "Federal Police" shoulder patches have already been manufactured, sufficient to outfit all law enforcement personnel (both enforcement and administrative) in the nation. There have been reports of uniforms of all sizes already manufactured and stored.

Mexico, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and most countries in Europe already have federal police forces. In the United States, there are more than 70 federal agencies with law enforcement authorities granted by Congress. The average educated American might be able to name five or six, such as FBI, DEA, BATFE, EPA, CIA, NSA, etc., but few can name a dozen. There exist numerous agencies most Americans have never even heard mentioned.

The ballooning federal criminal code, draconian mandatory sentences, and rigorous law enforcement tactics -- deploying overwhelming force to "subdue" people who pose little or no threat -- and ever-growing instances of asserting federal "power" into jurisdictions that are constitutionally exclusive to the states (Waco, Ruby Ridge, OKC) are but a few of the indications of what lies ahead.

As I and many others have been warning for years, the vast majority of Americans won't believe there are black helicopters until one lands in their front yard. Then it will be too late. I have seen them. Many people have videotaped them conducting mock exercises in and around cities and townships all across the country. Alex Jones (infowars.com) and others have documented their widespread use in military and paramilitary exercises. The long-running television series COPS has gradually conditioned the viewing public to accept as normal all the earmarks of a police state. Yet the American people persist in yawning and changing the channel.

If all this sounds like a wild conspiracy theory, listen to this sheriff in a county near Chicago. Does he sound like a conspiracy nut to you? Or does he sound like a real live citizen sheriff who is concerned about what he sees going on right under our noses? Notice the context in which he says "but the law says you have to be involved in this." What most sheriffs don't know is that they have more constitutional authority than the federal government has. Sadly, most sheriffs are political puppets.

Planning for Martial Law? (audio)

Living Is Dangerous, Folks

It wasn't too many years ago that Americans could enter and leave courthouses unimpeded. Spectators with concealed carry permits freely sat through trials with loaded handguns in their shoulder holsters. Then one day a crazed gunman, bent on revenge, shot at a judge. Later that year another convicted felon shot and killed a judge. How could this have happened? How do we prevent it from happening again?

Metal detectors began to spring up in courthouses across the country. Law abiding citizens were subjected to searches whenever entering the section of a court house where trials are held. In time, detectors could be found at every entrance to the buildings. It wasn't enough that judges had long ago declared themselves, by fiat, immune from prosecution for almost everything. Not only were they above the law, their personal safety was insured by tens of thousands of government-paid security guards.

During that same period when one judge was killed and another shot at, I'd bet there were dozens of women who were killed by jealous husbands, and at least that many husbands killed by women in revengeful rages of retribution. Why didn't government assign security guards to protect husbands and wives? Being married is dangerous, don't you know? Remember Lorraine Bobbitt?

Guards could be placed at the entrance to every home to search all comers and goers. Male guards could pop the ladies' bra straps, massage the cups, and run their fingers along the thongs of wives' underwear. Female guards could examine the contents of jock straps for contraband. Everyone could have a great time while keeping citizens safe, and no one would be permitted to enter a private residence carrying firearms, knives, dangerous nail clippers, or those undeniably lethal metal toothpicks and steel paperclips.

Now we have terrorists. God help us. We could become victims at any moment. What can we do? Give us more guards. They needn't be citizens, needn't speak English, needn't have any judgment whatsoever. They need only to learn how to harass 80-year-old ladies and their 10-year-old grandchildren, and avoid any conduct that could be remotely called "profiling" to keep the rest of us safe.

What to do? Raise our taxes -- God knows we don't pay enough -- to fund expanded and intensified security measures to protect us from those horrible terrorists. They can be anywhere at any time. We are all at risk. Some of us cannot sleep at night, we're so scared. Never mind the odds are millions to one against any given person being harmed by a terrorist. More people have been killed by the person they used to sleep with than have been killed by terrorists, and odds are that will be true in the future.

If every American resident would pay me $100 a year, I would guarantee $1 million death benefit, per person, to anyone who dies as a result of a terrorist attack. I could even provide up to $200,000 per person for medical care for the wounded. Hell, make it $200 per year and I might even pay off half the national debt, patriotic American that I am. And my slogan would be "Lookout, Bill Gates, here I come."

At one time, there was a group of brave men who called themselves the "Foundational Daddies" -- or something like that -- and they talked incessantly about something called "liberty." Think they would be ashamed if they could see today's brave Americans -- who occupy the land for which they laid the foundation -- cowering at every loud noise and spending more money on security than health care?

Living is dangerous, folks -- it always has been. Accept it, and get on with your lives.

The side schools don't teach

Lincoln's Phony Legacy

by Ellen Gilmore
La Grange News LTE

I have a more accurate view of Lincoln from some well known, documented facts. This is not an exhaustive list by any means. It just barely scratches the surface to debunk the phony "legacy" put forward by the academics who have their professional reputations (and income) wrapped up in published books and articles that deify Lincoln: all champions of big government.

First of all, Lincoln started a war without the constitutional consent of Congress. He illegally declared martial law. He illegally blockaded Southern ports, illegally orchestrated the secession of West Virginia, shut down hundreds of opposition newspapers and imprisoned their editors and owners. He deported the most outspoken member of the Democrat Party opposition, Vallandigham of Ohio. He confiscated private property, including firearms, and violated the ninth and tenth amendments and tolerated the arrest of Christian ministers who refused to pray for him. He destroyed the system of federalism and "states rights" (our bulwark against tyranny) created by the founding fathers, thereby destroying the "voluntary" union of the sovereign states.

Lincoln's "spectacular lie" -- that state sovereignty never existed -- was used to "justify" his invasion and conquest of the Southern states. Lincoln's war was started over tax collections that ended up killing 620,000 Americans and wounding and maiming even more. He was a consummate politician who spoke out of both sides of his mouth. He said one thing to one audience and the opposite to another. His actions belied any of his lofty rhetoric. He refused to meet with Confederate peace commissioners before the war to work out a peaceful compromise. He provoked upper-south Virginia, North Carolina, Arkansas, and Tennessee to secede by launching a military invasion into northern Virginia. His war was waged on women and children, old people, black and white, bombarding cities, destroying crops, stealing and pillaging private property throughout the South. He promoted his generals for their willingness to use troops as cannon fodder.

Lincoln was adamantly opposed to racial equality. He opposed giving blacks the right to vote, to serve on juries, or to intermarry with whites. He supported the original 13th amendment that would have prohibited the federal government from ever interfering with slavery. He advocated sending all blacks back to Africa, Central America, and Haiti. He opposed black citizenship in Illinois and supported the State's constitution which prohibited the emigration of black people into the state. He was head of the Illinois Colonization Society, which advocated the use of state tax dollars to deport the small number of free blacks who resided within the state. He nullified the early emancipation of slaves in Missouri and Georgia early in the war. He sent troops into the streets of New York City to put down a draft riot by shooting hundreds of them in the streets.

He was a political tool of the corrupt northern business interests and bankers. He was a railroad industry lobbyist supporting corporate welfare. He was an enemy of free market capitalism. He was for high protectionist tariffs and central banking that would plunder one section of the country (the South) for the benefit of his northern political supporters. He orchestrated the rigging of the northern elections. He introduced the slavery of conscription and income taxation. He created an internal revenue bureaucracy that has ever increased in size and power. He censored telegraph communications.

These are just a few examples of Lincoln's tyrannical behavior that have been well documented. The incredible myths propagated by the "Lincoln Cult" are getting somewhat old and quite frankly, inexcusable. It is impossible to understand the present state of our country without truth about Lincoln and the truth about his needless war against the Southern States of the Confederacy. A man guilty of the above is anything but noble or virtuous. Generations of American have been taught lies and fantasies and sadly the inexcusable continues to this very day. The facts are available and there is no excuse for Americans to remain ignorant. It's time the truth is told, so I'm doing my small part to reeducate, for those who love truth. Yes, facts matter.

If You Mistakenly Believed ...

Caveat: I don't expect or want anyone to confidently accept or blindly believe anything I write as being factual. What I want to achieve is to motivate folks to look into matters for themselves and find the truths as they are, not as they are "told" they are or as they would wish them to be.

If you mistakenly believed the United States of America is governed by a Constitution for the United States of America, as the supreme law of the land then, although you'd be wrong, you would believe that:

1. If you had a grievance against government, you would have a First Amendment right to petition the government for a redress of that grievance and would be entitled to receive a legitimate written response explaining why your stated grievance was mistaken, or, the government would reasonably correct the circumstances which led to the grievance (and maybe even apologize). You'd be wrong; you'd receive no such responses. You'll be more likely to receive threats.

2. If the government acknowledged and respected that the 2nd Amendment means what it says, you would be able to own and bear any firearm manufactured on planet Earth, and you would be able to carry it with you anywhere. But you cannot.

3. The vast majority of lawyers, judges, law enforcement officers, members of the armed forces, elected officials (and other politicians), and bureaucrats -- all those who take the oath to uphold the Constitution -- are actually intimately familiar with the Constitution. But you'd be wrong. Aside from lawyers, judges, and seasoned elected officials, the rest of them know very little about the Constitution -- and understand even less. The overwhelming majority of them view the people as subjects of the government.

4. If a law enforcement agency had a warrant to search your home, an officer would knock on your door, show you the warrant, and you'd have an opportunity to examine the warrant and a copy of the sworn affidavit of probable cause upon which its issuance was based, BEFORE thirty or forty agents kick in your door and trash everything you own. That right is "guaranteed" by the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution. But you'd be wrong, as anyone who has ever watched a couple of episodes of COPS would know.

5. If the government acknowledged and respected that the 5th Amendment means what it says, you could not be forced -- under threat of violence -- to sign an income tax return under penalties of perjury, giving the IRS information upon which it could base an action or prosecution against you. That constitutes compelled self-incrimination against which the 5th Amendment allegedly protects you -- but it doesn't. The IRS doesn't abide by any laws it doesn't want to.

6. If the government acknowledged and respected that the 6th Amendment means what it says, you would be able to defend yourself against any criminal charge before an impartial jury of the state and district in which your crime was allegedly committed. You would be able to present evidence you believe would help in showing your innocence. But that doesn't happen in the criminal courts of this country. Jury pools (the general public) are first misinformed and indoctrinated by the criminal justice system and the media (including movies, etc.). Then the local jury pools, assembled for specific jurisdictions and time frames, are carefully screened to disqualify any potential jury member who has the slightest knowledge of a particular case or the slightest expertise in the realm(s) involved in the case. You are severely limited in the evidence you are permitted to present in your own defense, you are limited in what questions you can ask of the prosecution's witnesses, and your jury will be prohibited from doing its job with respect to judging the law. The jury will be mis-instructed that it may not concern itself with the law but must merely evaluate the evidence the court permits it to see and hear. The only thing that will be guaranteed to you is that you will not get a fair trial in any criminal court.

7. If the government acknowledged and respected that the 7th Amendment means what it says, then O.J. Simpson would not have been tried in civil court after he was acquitted in criminal court. This happens routinely and frequently when 15 percent of defendants are acquitted of charges regarding the income tax system.

8. If the government acknowledged and respected that Title 26, United States Code (USC) and Title 26, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) mean what they say, then citizens of the United States, living and working within the external boundaries of the 50 States, are not liable for the U.S. Individual Income Tax and are under no duty to file U.S. Individual Income Tax Returns. You'd also believe that the IRS Form 1040 is merely a supplemental form to the Form 2555 (Foreign Earned Income) and is not a form that stands on its own.

9. The only legitimate role of government is to protect the inalienable rights of the people and defend them against aggression from without or within. You'd be right, of course, as far as the "legitimate" role of government is concerned, but the actual government has, over time, gradually and systematically expanded its role to the extent that existing laws identify the people as "enemies of the State," a concept totally repugnant to the Constitution.

10. If the government acknowledged and respected that the 10th Amendment means what it says, you could not be charged in federal court for the alleged commission of a crime that is Constitutionally under the exclusive jurisdiction of the State. Yet history documents how well the 10th Amendment protected Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols. Under the Constitution, they should have been tried in Oklahoma State Court in Oklahoma City, not in federal court in Denver, Colorado.

11. Constitutional restrictions would have prevented Barry Soetero, aka Barack Obama and other aliases, from becoming a candidate for the Illinois state legislature, the United States Congress, or the Presidency of the United States. Moreover, as a result of all the lawsuits filed to uphold the Constitution in the latter regard, you'd expect the Supreme Court to invoke the provisions of Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution and remove this illegal alien from all ballots and all elections. That would clearly be the case if the historical memento were operational, but it isn't. With a functioning Constitution, we could not possibly have an illegal alien impersonating a president of the United States. Yet we have.

I could go on and on. Yes, we get a little lip-service here and there, mainly to keep the masses patriotically waving their flags and mistakenly believing they have rights but, by and large, we are subjects with government-granted privileges ... and that's all BY DESIGN. It has long been planned that way. Chains aren't necessary to restrain slaves who mistakenly believe they are free.

The stupidest remark I've ever heard is "It can't happen here." That's what the Germans thought in the early 1930s, before Hitler enslaved them. That's what 26 countries in Europe thought before the European Union destroyed their national sovereignty and their right to coin their own money. That's what Great Britain, Australia, New Zealand, and Canada thought before their governments confiscated their privately-owned firearms. The things Americans mistakenly believe "can't happen here" have crossed our threshold because we haven't been vigilant.

Read the wise words of Dr. Ron Paul, who an intelligent and informed electorate would have elected President by a landslide in 2008. He was right then, and he is right now. He could have saved the country because he knows its ills and he knows their cures. But the stupid people let the government and the media marginalize him as "out of the mainstream."

Obama's gonna fix it, Obama's gonna change the world

Ron Paul: End the Fed (speech at Mises Circle 1/24/09) - 24:14