Friday, October 25, 2013

VIDEO: Matt Taibbi and Chrystia Freeland on the One Percent's Criminal Power and Privileges

VIDEO: Matt Taibbi on How Wall Street Hedge Funds Are Looting the Pension Funds of Public Workers

VIDEO: WARNING! ObamaCare Death Panels Want You Dead

VIDEO: Soldiers Warn of Coming Gun Confiscation and War Against Patriots

VIDEO: Satan Warns American Patriots That His New World Order Plan Almost Complete

Wednesday, October 23, 2013

VIDEO: John McAfee Says Obamacare Web-site Is Unfixable! Scrap It!

VIDEO: Banksters On Trial! JP Morgan Chase Fined $16 Billion For Fraud!

Nut-Job Obama Supporters Believe Healthcare.Gov Disaster Is Part Of Right Wing Conspiracy

Tin-foil hats at the ready as Obamanoids declare Koch brothers are behind healthcare glitches 

Steve Watson
Oct 22, 2013

Obama supporters are simply refusing to believe that Obamacare could be anything short of world beating, with many blaming the glitch ridden rollout of on a nefarious right wing conspiracy to sabotage the Affordable Care Act.
Many Obama supporters have taken to social media to float the notion that the Koch brothers, Charles G. and David H. Koch, the billionaire industrialists, are funding an army of techies and hackers to somehow infiltrate and take down the website.

Continue reading here:

VIDEO: Alex Jones Now Endorses Obamacare

VIDEO: Interpol Chief Says It's Time to Arm Citizens / Obama to Cut Food Stamps by $36 on Nov 1st

Fox Host: ‘All Hell Could Break Loose’ On November 1st

Cavuto links DHS armed guards with food stamp cut

Paul Joseph Watson
October 23, 2013

Fox News’ Neil Cavuto thinks the Department of Homeland Security’s $80 million outlay on armed guards to protect government buildings is directly connected to food stamp cuts set to take effect on November 1st, a day on which all hell could break loose.

As Infowars first reported on Monday, the DHS announced its intention to hire a raft of new armed guards to prepare for “public demonstrations” and “civil disturbances” in upstate New York, adding that some of the guards would be posted outside IRS facilities.
Covering the story on his Fox News show, Cavuto said, “November 1st could be a very very iffy kind of a day….this could be all hell breaks loose day,” noting that the armed guards were not to protect government buildings from terrorist threats but “From American citizens because on November 1st the food stamp program is set to start decreasing the amount that is allocated to food stamp recipients….and they’re worried that violence will ensue.”
Cavuto’s concern that the cut in food stamp benefits could spark violence is legitimate given what happened when the EBT card system crashed for just hours earlier this month, prompting mini-riots and looting at several Walmart stores.
A scheduled cut in food stamp benefits which most Americans are seemingly unaware of threatens to cause unrest next month when families will be hit with a $36 dollar per month reduction in credits.
Cavuto’s guest Niger Innis, National Spokesperson for the Congress of Racial Equality, labeled the prospect “frightening,” adding “We are on a slow march to becoming Greece,” while blaming the fact that some 50 million Americans’ are dependent on food stamps on big government’s failure to spark a proper economic recovery.
Innis said that food stamp riots may not occur this cycle, but that they were a real threat for the future and that America was heading towards a European-style socialism where the population embraced an entitlement mentality, and that Americans should be “liberated” from their dependency on welfare.
The notion that Homeland Security is preparing for riots is an admitted fact. In June, it emerged that the DHS was purchasing top of the range body armor and helmets for FPS (Federal Protective Service) guards as part of preparations for “riot control situations.”
The federal agency also ran a controversial drill last year dubbed “Operation Shield,” during which FPS agents armed with semiautomatic guns were posted outside a Social Security office in Florida.

FOLLOW Paul Joseph Watson @

Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for and Prison He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a host for Infowars Nightly News.

Monday, October 21, 2013

VIDEO: Victor Sperandeo Warns Of The Coming Hyperinflation

Top Democrat Opens Door for Social Security Cuts

Slick snake oil salesman Dick Durbin exploits language of supposed Democrat-Republican divide

Kurt Nimmo
October 21, 2013

Illinois Democrat Senator Dick Durbin used the language of partisan politics on Fox News Sunday to make it feasible for Democrats to agree to slash entitlements.

“If this is the bargain that the Republicans are now pushing for, that we have to cut Medicare to avoid cuts at the Department of Defense, they need to take a step back,” Durbin said.
In order to make it appear the government is helping seniors by cutting back on the money they were promised, Durbin said Democrats are working to remedy Social Security and Medicare, two programs that dominate the federal budget. The palliative is Obamacare, a stillbirth baby that can’t even enroll Americans, let alone deal with their health issues.
If we don’t focus on the health care and dealing with the entitlements, the baby boom generation is going to blow away our future,” Durbin said.We don’t want to see that happen. We want to make sure that Social Security and Medicare are solid.”
In short, under sequestration, expect more rhetoric about “tough choices” and “shared sacrifice.”

It appears Social Security is not running out of money, as Durbin claims. If we take stats issued by the Social Security Administration at face value, the fund is solvent through 2020 and projected income expropriated from the American people will continue to fund the social security at 75 percent of its current level until at least 2086. Book cooking, however, is a normal and accept accounting practice at all levels of government.
Democrats and Republicans never touch upon the fact that a) Americans were promised the government would take care of them in their old age (a Faustian bargain on a titanic scale) and this would require the expropriation, often a gunpoint, of an ever increasing percentage of their income, and b) the government, in cahoots with banksters and the Federal Reserve, has destroyed the United States economy through inflation and destructive monetary policy, thus making it nearly impossible for most people to save seriously devlaued dollars or invest for their old age.
“The real measure of inflation is the increase in the monetary supply, and the Federal Reserve has increased the Federal Reserve credit by 17.4 percent in the last year alone,” former congressman Ron Paul wrote earlier this year.
The war budget, euphemistically called defense spending by the establishment, is naturally off limits as Democrats line up with their Republican counterparts to impose austerity on the masses. They are working on schemes of the sort now unfolding in Greece and other parts of Europe.
Earlier this year, Obama, said to be a socialist by conservatives, requested a Pentagon budget totaling $640.5 billion (a budget ignoring a supposed budgetary cap set by law). This represented a substantial increase the previous budget of $493 billion after supposed reductions under sequestration.
Obama lied about the increase to the military budget. He portrayed it as a cut of nearly a half trillion dollars. He did this through the Congressional Budget Office, a frontline agency that serves as a propaganda operation churning budget increases into cuts through the smoke and mirrors of reduced military spending in the future, mostly due to the inevitability of reduced taxation and spending.
Slick snake oil salesman Dick Durbin, exploiting the language of the supposed Democrat-Republican divide, made it sound like Democrats, faced with Republican intransigence, are obliged to consider budget cuts to Social Security.
In fact, the global elite have planned for some time now to radically reduce the living standard of Americans and turn the one-time engine of prosperity into a third world wasteland.
It’s a process already well advanced, as the Associated Press noted in July. “Survey data exclusive to The Associated Press points to an increasingly globalized U.S. economy, the widening gap between rich and poor and loss of good-paying manufacturing jobs as reasons” that four out of five U.S. adults “struggle with joblessness, near poverty or reliance on welfare for at least parts of their lives.”

VIDEO: The Global Banksters Criminal Playbook = Total Control Through Unpayable Debt

VIDEO: Banks Preparing For Major Collapse And Feds Gearing Up For War Against American People

Friday, October 18, 2013

VIDEO: Rising Interest Rates Will Bring On Financial Collapse - Michael Pento

VIDEO: The Real Reason For The Government Shutdown

NJ father jailed, stripped of parental rights for transporting legal guns to new home

Joe Saunders
October 18, 2013

Three unloaded, legally owned guns locked in the car trunk of a man moving from Colorado to New Jersey is keeping a man from watching his son grow up.
In New Jersey, they call that the rule of law.
Now, Brian Aitken is traveling the country, using the crowdfunding website Indiegogo to raise money and hoping to write a book about a travesty of justice that’s keeping him from his son.
Aitken was arrested in 2009 while returning to live in New Jersey to be near his son who lived with his ex-wife, according to a Daily Mail article. He had stopped at his mother’s home with a vehicle full of his belongings and she called 911 because she was concerned he was so distraught he might harm himself.
She hung up before the call was complete, but police responded anyway. By the time they did, Aitken had left, so police called him on his cell phone and — with a combination of threats and persuasion — convinced him to return to the scene.
Officers searched his car and found the weapons in the trunk, where Aitken said he’d been instructed to keep them for transport by the New Jersey State Police.
“I did exactly what they told me to do,” Aitken told the Daily Mail.

Regardless, police arrested him for violating the Garden State’s strict gun control laws, which prevent even legal owners of guns to have them in their possession outside of the home except under certain conditions.
After a trial that in Reason magazine’s description comes across as Kafkaesque – his jury seems to have wanted to acquit him but was essentially prevented from doing so by the judge – Aitken was sentenced to seven years in prison, but released after four months when his sentence was commuted by Republican Gov. Chris Christie. Even with the commutation, Aitken still spent his 27th birthday behind bars.
So Aitken is out of prison, but because his conviction was on a second-degree felony a family court has ruled he cannot see his son.
“After I was indicted of a victimless and violentless charge, with no prior criminal record, a family judge interpreted the charge to mean that I was a violent criminal with access to firearms and that fathers who own guns pose a threat to their children,” he said in a written statement to Ammoland.
Granted, some fathers who own guns probably do pose a threat to their children. Just as some fathers who don’t own guns can pose a threat to their children.
The real question is, did Aitken, who had no criminal record before the day his mother called the police hoping to make sure he was safe,  ever pose a threat to anyone — much less to the son he moved half a continent to be with while he grew up?

VIDEO: Lyndon LaRouche On Obama's Policies Of Mass Murdering Of Americans

VIDEO: The Obamacare Debacle And The National Debt Crisis

10 Ways the Obamacare Train Wreck is Screwing the American People

Soaring costs, assaults on privacy, and a nanny state gone wild

Paul Joseph Watson
October 18, 2013

Obamacare is a big government boondoggle that will empower the nanny state to extort, intimidate, harass and surveil Americans like never before. Here are ten ways in which the Obamacare train wreck is screwing the American people.

1) Research by the Manhattan Institute documents how average insurance rate premiums will rise 99 per cent for men and 62 per cent for women under Obamacare. In states like North Carolina, men face a whopping 305 per cent average rate hike, whereas women in Nebraska will be paying on average 237 per cent more. Studies by the Congressional Budget Office found that some Americans will face premium increases of 203% under Obamacare. The new law will increase health care spending by over $7000 for a typical family of four. When we asked Americans on Facebook and Twitter if their costs would be higher or lower under Obamacare, virtually all said they would be paying significantly more.

2) The Obama administration claims that federal subsidies will counteract these rate hikes, but according to health care expert Avik Roy that’s simply not true. “You hear all these excuses from the [Obama] administration — that people are exaggerating the effect of the law,” Roy told CBS News. “But real people are getting notices from their insurers now. My blog is flooded with comments from people saying that they just got a huge premium hike,”

3) The Obama administration lied to the American people when it claimed that existing health insurance plans could be kept. Obama’s promise that, “If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor. Period. If you like your health care plan, you will be able to keep your health care plan. Period. No one will take it away. No matter what,” was complete baloney. Americans across the country are being informedthat their existing health care plans are being canceled because of “changes from health care reform (also called the Affordable Care Act or ACA).” “The promise that you could keep your old policy, if you liked it, has proved illusory, writes Kathy Kristof. “My insurer, Kaiser Permanente, informed me in a glossy booklet that “At midnight on December 31, we will discontinue your current plan because it will not meet the requirements of the Affordable Care Act.” My premium, the letter added, would go from $209 a month to $348, a 66.5 percent increase that will cost $1,668 annually.”

4) Numerous analysts have concluded that the complete train wreck that was the launch of was in fact designed to fail in order to avoid a sudden backlash from Americans irate at the massive premium increases. Online database experts say the system wasn’t even tested before it was launched. “So far, the Affordable Care Act’s launch has been a failure. Not “troubled.” Not “glitchy.” A failure,” wrote the Washington Post’s Ezra Klein. Even CNN’s Wolf Blitzer said it should be delayed for a year. Only about 1 out of every 100 people who have attempted to enroll for a health care plan (if they could even access the website in the first place) have been successful.

5) For those Americans who are able to enroll in Obamacare, they are putting their private information at the mercy of hackers and NSA spies. IP addresses, social security numbers, private bank account details, employer details, email addresses and passwords are all being uploaded to a shoddily designed database that is wide open to penetration, and the record can never be deleted. “Obamacare is the meta-level con of tricking Americans into thinking they’re signing up for free health insurance when, in reality, the website primarily exists to scrape personal financial details, passwords, emails and social security numbers from Americans who will later be targeted by the government itself,” writes Mike Adams.

6) As a result of Obamacare, the general precedent has now been set, thanks to last year’s Supreme Court ruling, that the federal government has the power to force Americans to purchase private goods and services. What’s next? Will the government force Americans to buy a certain brand of “eco-friendly” vehicle only? Will the feds force Americans to buy “licenses” to watch television, as happens in the UK? The door has now been opened with potentially disastrous consequences for financial freedom and the cancerous growth of big government.

7) Obamacare provides the IRS with a new justification to hunt down Americans deemed to be evading the new system. While claiming that the IRS will not target Americans who don’t sign up, the administration last year directed $500 million to the IRS “to help implement the president’s healthcare law.” With the IRS already claiming the power to prevent Americans who are merely under investigation from leaving the country, a House Ways and Means Committee study last year concluded that 16,500 new IRS agents would be hired to oversee the nearly two dozen tax levies imposed by Obamacare.

8) Many small businesses are firing workers and scaling back working hours in a desperate effort to avoid exorbitant Obamacare costs. Whereas giant companies like McDonalds have received waivers, almost half of small businesses said they froze hiring as a result of the Affordable Care Act and one fifth said they had been forced to fire workers. Numerous companies announced last year that they would be laying off hundreds of employees. Many businesses are also reducing the number of hours their employees work in order to avoid Obamacare mandates. According to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), Obamacare will be a disaster for the US economy, expanding the deficit by billions of dollars every year and “further spiraling America into an uncontrollable debt.”

9) Other small businesses have chosen to close down entirely. A chiropractic clinic in Pennsylvania was forced to close down as a result of receiving reduced payments from insurance companies thanks to Obamacare. CiCi’s Pizza franchise owner Bob Westford pointed out that the additional $221,000 in taxes as a result of Obamacare was $78,000 more than the combined profit of his three restaurants, making the decision to shut up shop a no brainer.

10) The only entities that seem to be benefiting from Obamacare are giant insurance companies, who have all seen their stock prices soarover the last three years. That’s unsurprising given that it was the insurance companies who wrote the foundational document for Obamacare in the first place.


Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for and Prison He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a host for Infowars Nightly News.

VIDEO: America's Road to Serfdom

Thursday, October 17, 2013

VIDEO: SHADE the Motion Picture. “Nothing In This World Works The Way You Think It Does”

IMF Proposal to Tax Bank Deposits
October 17, 2013

A report by Agence France-Presse, the International Monetary Fund strongly suggests countries tax the rich to fix deficit, is a caveat for a bigger risk. “The IMF has set off shockwaves this week in Washington by suggesting countries fight budget deficits by raising taxes. In its Fiscal Monitor report, subtitled “Taxing Times”, the Fund advanced the idea of taxing the highest-income people and their assets to reinforce the legitimacy of spending cuts and fight against growing income inequalities.”Before all those occupy supporters, rejoice and start their partying, the sober reality of the actual methods that the financial elites would use to implement revenue enhancement, needs a closer examination.
Contrast the interpretation from Europe with the broader assessment in, IMF Discusses A Super Tax Of 10% On All Savings In Eurozone.
“The sharp deterioration of the public finances in many countries has revived interest in a “capital levy”— a one-off tax on private wealth—as an exceptional measure to restore debt sustainability. The appeal is that such a tax, if it is implemented before avoidance is possible and there is a belief that it will never be repeated, does not distort behavior (and may be seen by some as fair). There have been illustrious supporters, including Pigou, Ricardo, Schumpeter, and—until he changed his mind—Keynes. The conditions for success are strong, but also need to be weighed against the risks of the alternatives, which include repudiating public debt or inflating it away (these, in turn, are a particular form of wealth tax—on bondholders—that also falls on nonresidents)
The tax rates needed to bring down public debt to pre-crisis levels, moreover, are sizable: reducing debt ratios to end-2007 levels would require (for a sample of 15 euro area countries) a tax rate of about 10 percent on households with positive net wealth(*).”
The rhetoric of taxing the supra rich floats the argument that the pain of confiscation is fine when the wealthy are bled. Such poppycock meant for the unsophisticated, clings to the notion that the world operates under some noble objective, of fair taxation levies. How ridiculous.
Analysis from The Market Oracle, Raul Ilargi Meijer adds the correct context, implication, and significance in this IMF “Taxing Times”.
“We can’t however, discard the possibility that this appears in an October 2013 IMF report precisely BECAUSE it, and its peers in national governments, have found a different way to achieve the same goals. The underlying ideas are clear: most governments have debt levels that can’t be rolled over into the future much longer. And inflating them away is not an option: that can’t be done without increased consumer spending, and consumers are maxed out. Radical solutions are called for. Not just in Europe either, US government debt will need to be dealt with too.”
The exact detail scheme of any wealth toll certainly has to be broad in scope for remotely approaching a reprieve on immediate default. The sums of funds necessary to rescue the global banksters gambling tab requires that claims on assets, once thought to be secure, must be tapped.
Dave Hodges writes in The International Plot to Steal All Retirement Accounts and hints at the actual target of the IMF’s effort to soften up the climate for drastic measures.
“The banks are acquiring hard assets while restricting their exposure by curtailing lending. We have long heard that bankers that have hijacked the government would commence stealing our private wealth through the pension funds, and this is exactly what the chief bankster, Jack Lew, is implementing. The next step will be to seize bank accounts like they did in Cyprus, and then step up the MERS mortgage fraud as the Federal Reserve continues to purchase $40 billion dollars in Mortgage Backed Securities every month.
The G Fund is invested in interest-bearing Treasury securities (i.e. bonds) that make up the public debt. The Civil Service Retirement Fund finances benefit payments under the Civil Service Retirement System and the basic retirement annuity of the Federal Employees’ Retirement System, and those investments are made up of securities also considered part of the public debt. In other words, for you people who have cushy federal government jobs, Lew is telling you that the government controls your retirement. They own it and they own you. Since the national deficit is $17 trillion dollars and the unfunded federal mandated liabilities (e.g. social security, Medicare, etc) will exceed $220 trillion dollars in one year, these victimized federal workers will never see their full retirement.”
The central banker club uses the IMF as an enforcer. Derivatives used as transferring the debt obligation to the unsuspected asset claimers’, are instruments for expropriation. The mere mention of a tax on bank deposits causes a red alert in financial investment circles. However, the public is so dependent on the whims and continued existence from government policy and programs that the threat of raiding bank accounts does not compute.
Economic subsistence, with no cash reserves or negligible nest eggs, for the majority of the masses is routine. Draining the coffers or annuities of retired public employees, really is an acceptable alternative, since the less privileged perceive their status would get a jump-start when the affluence differential narrows.
Only those who have something to lose will see the IMF trial balloon as a danger to their monetary well-being. The class warfare card works every time. As long as the underlying reasons why the unsustainable debt obligations, mathematical inability of being serviced, without direct appropriation of massive assets from the ordinary public, is ignored.
Here resides the connection that anyone who is part of the paper financial system, is so unwilling to confront. The anointed “PC” rich, like Sir Richard Branson avoids their tax duties by fleeing to tax havens of artificial exemptions. What is next, just orbit the planet from space to keep the IMF collector out of your pockets? Brokerage and security firm’s danger zones are creations of the financial elites, to fleece private depositors of their retirement savings. Schlock’s like Jack Lew weave government policy to feed his banksters appetites.

9 Reasons Why Many Liberals Absolutely Hate Obamacare

Michael Snyder
New American
October 17, 2013

Barack Obama’s number one job is not to defeat the Republicans.  Rather, his number one job is to run the government well.  And when it comes to Obamacare, he has failed miserably.  The launch of Obamacare has been such a colossal fiasco that words like “disaster” and “catastrophe” simply do not do it justice.  According to recent polls, Americans are against Obamacare by an average margin of about 10 percent, and even many liberals that fought so hard to get Obamacare passed are now abandoning ship. 

All over America, health insurance policies are being canceled, health insurance premiums are absolutely skyrocketing, and millions of people that actually wanted to get health insurance through Healthcare.govfind that they are unable to do so.  Yes, the U.S. health care system was alreadya complete and total mess before Obamacare, but now Obamacare has made things much, much worse and there is little hope that things will improve any time soon.  The following are 9 reasons why most Americans (including a growing number of liberals) absolutely hate Obamacare…
#1 The launch of Obamacare has been such a colossal technical failure that many liberals are now completely ashamed to be associated with it.  At this point, it is nearly impossible to sign up for a health insurance policy  According to USA Today, the first person to successfully enroll in Obamacare in the state of Delaware had to spend seven hours on the phone and in front of the computer to accomplish that feat…
She needed seven hours of waiting on the phone and sitting in front of her computer, but Janice Baker can claim something few people in the First State can at the moment: She has signed up for health coverage through Delaware’s insurance marketplace.
Officials from the Delaware Department of Health and Social Services declared Baker the first confirmed resident to have enrolled in the marketplace, which opened Oct. 1 as part of the roll-out of the Affordable Care Act also known as Obamacare.
A lot of liberal pundits are not pulling any punches when describing how nightmarish the launch of Obamacare has been.  The following is how Ezra Klein of the Washington Post described the launch of Obamacare…
So far, the Affordable Care Act’s launch has been a failure. Not “troubled.” Not “glitchy.” A failure.
#2 In some areas of the country, people are only able to purchase health insurance from a single company on the Obamacare health insurance exchanges.
#3 Obamacare is causing health insurance premiums to skyrocket, and many liberals are absolutely shocked when this happens to them.  In fact, one liberal blogger was horrified to learn that Obamacare is going to nearly double his monthly health insurance premiums
My wife and I just got our updates from Kaiser telling us what our 2014 rates will be. Her monthly has been $168 this year, mine $150. We have a high deductible. We are generally healthy people who don’t go to the doctor often. I barely ever go. The insurance is in case of a major catastrophe.
Well, now, because of Obamacare, my wife’s rate is gong to $302 per month and mine is jumping to $284.
#4 Obama promised us that if we liked our current health insurance plans that we could keep them.  Unfortunately, that was a lie.  All over the country, existing health insurance plans are being canceled thanks to Obamacare.
#5 Large numbers of employers are no longer offering health insurance to their employees thanks to Obamacare.
#6 Lots of liberals are actually losing their good paying jobs because of Obamacare.  For example, thousands of Connecticut doctors were just fired by UnitedHealthCare
In the midst of major changes in health care, UnitedHealthCare has sent thousands of pink slips to Connecticut doctors.
Termination letters went to physicians caring for Medicare patients. Those letters were sent out to doctors caring for ‘Medicare Advantage’ patients. It’s a plan, marketed to Seniors to provide additional services through UnitedHealthCare.
#7 Many liberals are absolutely mortified by the fact that it cost more than 93 million dollars to build
#8 Many people that believe that they have successfully enrolled in Obamacare are not actually enrolled at all.  There are major problems in transmitting enrollment data from to the health insurance companies.  This is how it was explained in the Washington Post
The backroom connection between the insurance companies and the federal government is a disaster. Things are worse behind the curtain than in front of it”
Here is one example from a carrier–and I have received numerous reports from many other carriers with exactly the same problem. One carrier exec told me that yesterday they got 7 transactions for 1 person – 4 enrollments and 3 cancellations.
For some reason the system is enrolling, unenrolling, enrolling again, and so forth the same person. This has been going on for a few days for many of the enrollments being sent to the health plans. It has got on to the point that the health plans worry some of these very few enrollments really don’t exist.
The reconciliation system, that reconciles enrollment between the feds and the health plans, is not working and hasn’t even been tested yet.
#9 Obamacare is extremely complicated.  In fact, according to, the regulations for Obamacare are now over 11 million words long
Bureaucracies in the Obama Administration have thus far published approximately 11,588,500 words of final Obamacare regulations, while there are only 381,517 words in the Obamacare law itself.
That means unelected federal officials have now written 30 words of regulations for each word in the law.
So is there any hope that Obamacare will go away?
Not at this point.  The Democrats control the White House and the Senate, and they have been absolutely united in their position that there will be absolutely no important changes to Obamacare.
The Republicans could have done a substantial amount of damage to Obamacare by sticking to their guns, but when push came to shove they folded like a 20 dollar suit like they always do.
The cold, hard truth is that Obamacare is the U.S. health care system now.  If you plan to live in the United States, you are going to have to deal with this monstrosity one way or another.  If you don’t like it, you are out of luck, because our politicians in Washington D.C. do not really seem to care about the rest of us.

VIDEO: Survivalist Explains How to Prepare Against Social Collapse

Four-Year-Old Preschooler SUSPENDED Over Toy Gun

Mother Angry At Punishment: “Anybody can look at this gun and say its a fake”

Steve Watson
Oct 17, 2013

It’s that time of week again, where we bring you our regular feature, which stupid school suspended a kid over a toy gun this week?
And the award goes to Swazye Elementary School in in Monroe, Louisiana, where “leaders” (since when did teachers get re-branded to leaders?) freaked out over a preschooler bringing an airsoft gun to school in his bag.

Continue reading here:

Internal TSA Documents: Body Scanners, Pat Downs Not For Terrorists

TSA’s ‘Administrative Record’ admits ineffective security theater

Adan Salazar
Oct. 17, 2013

The TSA has quietly admitted there is no actual “threat-addressing” basis for employing nude body scanners or invasive pat down procedures at airports, a notion many travelers who are weary of the federal agency’s borderline sexual molestation have long suspected but were hard-pressed to prove.

Continue reading here:

Obama says he’ll veto bill that mandates Obamacare for himself, Congress

Michael Dorstewitz
October 17, 2013

President Barack Obama is reportedly telling congressional officials he will veto any debt-ceiling bill from Congress that includes the so-called Vitter amendment, which would make the Affordable Care Act applicable to senior executive branch officials, including the president and vice president.
The amendment, offered by U.S. Sen. David Vitter, R-La., and supported by House Republican leaders, would also apply to Congress, according to Politico.
You might call the Vitter amendment the “eat the food you cooked, sleep in the bed you made” proposal.
“This is really about fairness, making sure that Washington is forced to live under the same train wreck of Obamacare that is forced on the rest of America,” Vitter said in a statement on his website. “It will take the policy makers in Washington walking in the same shoes as the millions of Americans to actually make real policy changes, and clean up the train wreck.”
Politico reported:
Obama brought up the issue of the so-called Vitter language unprompted, according to one of the sources. The president and congressional Democrats also discussed how to set caps for discretionary spending for next year given the possibility that a short-term spending bill could fund the government for only a few months, and their shared perception of a need to come up with a larger budgeting plan to avoid governing, as Obama often says, “from crisis to crisis,” the sources said.
While Obama said he would veto the Vitter language, he was “more irate” one of the sources said, over the Republican proposal to limit his ability to use tools referred to as extraordinary measures to avoid a default.
Perhaps Obama is happy with the insurance plan he already has and wants to continue seeing his doctors.

Yawn. Government Non-shutdown Ends

Pain for average Americans will continue on schedule.

Kurt Nimmo
October 17, 2013

The establishment media is making hay about the end of what they call our long national nightmare – the government shutdown that wasn’t a shutdown. Senate Democrat Harry Reid and Republican comrade Mitch McConnell make it sound like a miracle occurred when Congress finally reached an agreement to continue the interminable shakedown of the American people and their children’s children.

The establishment media refuses to discuss the initial reason for the shutdown – an effort to defund the Obamacare monstrosity, a principled effort that ultimately failed. Meanwhile, in the real world out here beyond the confines of the District of Columbia, the horror of Obamacare lives on as people open letters from their insurance companies.
“There’s going to be a number of people surprised” by their bills, Jonathan Wu, a co-founder of ValuePenguin, a consumer finance website, told the San Jose Mercury News. “The upper-middle class are the people who are essentially being asked to foot the bill, and that’s true across the country.”
In September, before the government non-shutdown carnival pitched its tent, Obama’s Department of Health and Human Services walloped us upside the head with a range of startling statistics. “Based on a Manhattan Institute analysis of the HHS numbers, Obamacare will increase underlying insurance rates for younger men by an average of 97 to 99 percent, and for younger women by an average of 55 to 62 percent,” Forbes warned.
Obamacare is no different than any other government scheme. It is designed to fleece the horde and redistribute crumbs to preferred official minorities. “Middle-class Americans face the double-whammy of higher insurance premiums, and higher taxes to pay for other people’s subsidies,” Forbes notes. “For months, we’ve heard about how Obama care’s trillions in health care subsidies were going to save America from rate shock. It’s not true. If you shop for coverage on your own, you’re likely to see your rates go up, even after accounting for the impact of pre-existing conditions, even after accounting for the impact of subsidies.”
The mandated scheme depends on standard government bizarro world physics in order to operate. In the normal world, young, healthy people would pay less and older, less healthy people would pay more, as the laws of economic reality dictate. “Most policy analysts concur that average premiums will go up for younger, healthier people – and that they will get better benefits than they do now – but that rates may fall for older or sicker Americans, as new rules go into effect Jan. 1. Increases may be offset for many of those buying coverage through tax credits available to people with low and moderate incomes,” reports NBC News.
But the reality of Obamacare – it will further erode the middle class – is almost completely lost on establishment Republicans. Arizona Senator John McCain, for instance, is more concerned about partisan bickering. On Wednesday, he told NBC News the supposed government shutdown has damaged the confidence of the American people in the government. He characterized the effort by a minority of House Republicans as “a fool’s errand” and said Congress had “inflicted pain on the American people that was totally unnecessary. We cannot do this again. We, Republicans, have a hole that we’ve got to come out of and obviously we’re going to have to do a lot of work.”
That “work,” widely loathed by an overwhelming number of Americans, will obviously not include saving the middle class or mitigate the apparently endless cycle of expropriation from the producers and redistribution to government selected minorities and victimhood groups.
Pain for average Americans will continue on schedule. The failed effort by Tea Party-tinged House Republicans to get a handle on the budget and spare us from the ravages of Obamacare will, if anything, serve as an object lesson. Short of more drastic and less symbolic measures, the looting and impoverishment of America will move forward.

Wednesday, October 16, 2013

VIDEO: World Bank whistleblower warns 'Dollar valueless, about to crash'

Girls Threatened With Hate Crime Charges For Complaining About Transgender Bathroom Harassment

School tells parents boy’s rights as transgender trump their daughter’s privacy rights

Paul Joseph Watson
October 14, 2013

Female students at Florence High School in Colorado were threatened with hate crimes charges when they complained about being harassed by a transgender boy in the girls’ bathroom.

Initial complaints about the transgender student’s behavior towards the girls were made by their parents, who were told by the school that the boy’s transgender rights trumped the privacy rights of their daughters.
When the female students continued to complain about the harassment, the school threatened to kick them off the athletic team or even hit them with hate crimes charges if they didn’t stay silent.
The Pacific Justice Institute sent a letter to the school warning them against prioritizing transgender rights over the privacy rights of female students.
“We’re not going to stand by and let 99.7 percent of our students lose their privacy and free speech rights just because .3 percent of the population are gender-confused,” the letter stated.
The school so adamantly sided with the transgender student that officials even suggested the girls give up access to most of their restrooms altogether, reported CBN News.
Although Colorado’s treatment of transgender school children is determined by policy, California became the first U.S. state to mandate by law the right of girls and boys to choose which bathroom they would use regardless of their gender back in August when Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown signed AB 1266, otherwise known as the ‘Transgender Bathroom Bill’. The law takes effect on January 1st.
The Pacific Justice Institute is circulating a petition that would force state officials to put the bill up for a referendum. If the group collects 500,000 signatures from Californians before November 10, the Bathroom Bill will be temporarily suspended until it is voted on at the next State general election in November of 2014.
Californians “jolted by the mental image of children sharing lavatories and locker rooms with opposite-sex classmates,” are making concerted efforts to repeal the bill before it becomes law, reports Bloomberg. If the bill is suspended, it could set the precedent for other areas of the country.
However, in states like Colorado, Massachusetts, Connecticut and Washington, students and parents are at the mercy of schools who have already instituted policies which exalt the rights of a tiny minority while violating the privacy rights of a huge majority of students who are being forced to share bathrooms with members of the opposite sex who identify as transgender.


Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for and Prison He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a host for Infowars Nightly News.

Confirmed: Chase bank drops the hammer on capital controls; no money allowed to transfer out of USA starting Nov. 17th

Mike Adams
Natural News
October 16, 2013

(NaturalNews) I admit that when I saw today’s breaking news on about Chase Bank limiting cash withdrawals and banning international wire transfers, I was skeptical. Many readers didn’t believe it, either. So just to check it out, I called my own accounting team to ask if we had received a similar letter from Chase, announcing that no international wire transfers would be allowed after Nov. 17th.
Sure enough, we were sent the same letter! I’ve posted a JPG image of the letter below so you can read it for yourself.

Or Click here to see the hi-res scan of this letter. This is the letter that we received directly from Chase. This is not secondhand information.
The letter clearly states that beginning November 17:
• All international wire transfers will be disallowed.
• All cash activity, including cash withdrawals and deposits, will be halted at “$50,000 per statement cycle.” How are businesses who deal with a lot of cash (such as restaurants) supposed to function under such restrictions?

Chase Bank representatives told Natural News “everything is fine”
We called and spoke with Chase Bank to ask why these capital controls were being implemented on November 17th.
Their response was that these changes were being implemented “to better serve our customers.” They did not explain how blocking all international wire transfers would “better serve” their customers, however.
Chase Bank specifically denied any knowledge of problems with cash on hand, or government debt or any such issue. They basically downplayed the entire issue and had no answers for why capital controls were suddenly being put into place.

Dropping the hammer on capital controls

This is the beginning of the capital controls we’ve been warning about for years. Throughout history, when governments are on the brink of financial default, they begin limiting capital controls in exactly the way we are seeing here.
Following that, governments typically seize government pension funds, meaning the outright theft of pensions for cops, government workers, etc., is probably just around the corner.
Finally, the last act of desperation by governments facing financial default is to seize private funds from banks, Cyprus-style. The precedent for this has already been set in Cyprus, and when that happened, I was among many who openly predicted it would spread to the United States.
This is happening, folks! The capital controls begin on November 17th. The bank runs may follow soon thereafter. Chase Bank is now admitting that you cannot use your own money that you’ve deposited there.
This is clearly stemming from a government policy that is requiring banks to prevent cash from leaving the United States. Such policies are only put into place when a huge financial default event is expected.
More updates to follow. Stay tuned to Natural News for intelligent analysis of why this is happening. We are already receiving word that this may have something to do with the “Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act” and we are looking into it further.

Chase Bank Limits Cash Withdrawals, Bans International Wire Transfers

Capital controls imposed on small business owners

Paul Joseph Watson
October 16, 2013

UPDATE: Chase Bank confirmed to Infowars that all business account holders were being subjected to these new regulations. They indicated that customers would have to pay a fee on every dollar withdrawn over the limit. Given that even a relatively small grocery store or restaurant is likely to turnover more than $50k a month in cash payments, this appears to be part of a wider move to shut down businesses who mainly deal in cash. Chase told us customers would have to upgrade to much more expensive accounts to avoid the capital controls, meaning larger corporations will not be affected. The bottom line is that banks think your money is their money and will do everything in their power to prevent you from withdrawing it in large quantities.

Chase Bank has moved to limit cash withdrawals while banning business customers from sending international wire transfers from November 17 onwards, prompting speculation that the bank is preparing for a looming financial crisis in the United States by imposing capital controls.

VIDEO: The Max Keiser Financial Terrorism Report 10/16/13. China And A De-Americanizing World

Monday, October 14, 2013

How Much Longer Will the Dollar be the Reserve Currency?

Patrick Barron
Mises Daily
October 14, 2013

We use the term “reserve currency” when referring to the common use of the dollar by other countries when settling their international trade accounts. For example, if Canada buys goods from China, it may pay China in US dollars rather than Canadian dollars, and vice versa. However, the foundation from which the term originated no longer exists, and today the dollar is called a “reserve currency” simply because foreign countries hold it in great quantity to facilitate trade.
The first reserve currency was the British pound sterling. Because the pound was “good as gold,” many countries found it more convenient to hold pounds rather than gold itself during the age of the gold standard. The world’s great trading nations settled their trade in gold, but they might hold pounds rather than gold, with the confidence that the Bank of England would hand over the gold at a fixed exchange rate upon presentment. Toward the end of World War II the US dollar was given this status by international treaty following the Bretton Woods Agreement. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) was formed with the express purpose of monitoring the Federal Reserve’s commitment to Bretton Woods by ensuring that the Fed did not inflate the dollar and stood ready to exchange dollars for gold at $35 per ounce. Thusly, countries had confidence that their dollars held for trading purposes were as “good as gold,” as had been the Pound Sterling at one time.
However, the Fed did not maintain its commitment to the Bretton Woods Agreement and the IMF did not attempt to force it to hold enough gold to honor all its outstanding currency in gold at $35 per ounce. The Fed was called to account in the late 1960s, first by France and then by others, until its gold reserves were so low that it had no choice but to revalue the dollar at some higher exchange rate or abrogate its responsibilities to honor dollars for gold entirely. To it everlasting shame, the US chose the latter and “went off the gold standard” in September 1971.
Nevertheless, the dollar was still held by the great trading nations, because it still performed the useful function of settling international trading accounts. There was no other currency that could match the dollar, despite the fact that it was “delinked” from gold.
There are two characteristics of a currency that make it useful in international trade: one, it is issued by a large trading nation itself, and, two, the currency holds its value vis-à-vis other commodities over time. These two factors create a demand for holding a currency in reserve. Although the dollar was being inflated by the Fed, thusly losing its value vis-à-vis other commodities over time, there was no real competition. The German Deutsche mark held its value better, but German trade was a fraction of US trade, meaning that holders of marks would find less to buy in Germany than holders of dollars would find in the US. So demand for the mark was lower than demand for the dollar. Of course, psychological factors entered the demand for dollars, too, since the US was seen as the military protector of all the Western nations against the communist countries for much of the post-war period.
Today we are seeing the beginnings of a change. The Fed has been inflating the dollar massively, reducing its purchasing power in relation to other commodities, causing many of the world’s great trading nations to use other monies upon occasion. I have it on good authority, for example, that DuPont settles many of its international accounts in Chinese yuan and European euros. There may be other currencies that are in demand for trade settlement by other international companies as well. In spite of all this, one factor that has helped the dollar retain its reserve currency demand is that the other currencies have been inflated, too. For example, Japan has inflated the yen to a greater extent than the dollar in its foolish attempt to revive its stagnant economy by cheapening its currency. So the monetary destruction disease is not limited to the US alone.
The dollar is very susceptible to losing its vaunted reserve currency position by the first major trading country that stops inflating its currency. There is evidence that China understands what is at stake; it has increased its gold holdings and has instituted controls to prevent gold from leaving China. Should the world’s second largest economy and one of the world’s greatest trading nations tie its currency to gold, demand for the yuan would increase and demand for the dollar would decrease. In practical terms this means that the world’s great trading nations would reduce their holdings of dollars, and dollars held overseas would flow back into the US economy, causing prices to increase. How much would they increase? It is hard to say, but keep in mind that there is an equal amount of dollars held outside the US as inside the US.
President Obama’s imminent appointment of career bureaucrat Janet Yellen as Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board is evidence that the US policy of continuing to cheapen the dollar via Quantitative Easing will continue. Her appointment increases the likelihood that demand for dollars will decline even further, raising the likelihood of much higher prices in America as demand by trading nations to hold other currencies as reserves for trade settlement increase. Perhaps only such non-coercive pressure from a sovereign country like China can wake up the Fed to the consequences of its actions and force it to end its Quantitative Easing policy.

Radio Host Michael Savage Calls For Answers Over Missing Nuke Report

Radio host Michael Savage joins in calling for answers over secret nuke transfer

Anthony Gucciardi
October 13, 2013

Top radio host Michael Savage has joined in calling for answers regarding the leaked secret transfer of nuclear weapons to South Carolina that was followed by both warnings of a nuclear strike by South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham and the termination of the top two US nuke commanders.
Originally reported by myself and Alex Jones back on September 3rd, a number of disturbing red flags have continued to give further evidence to the high level military intelligence source that initially exposed the transfer of the off-the-record nuclear warheads from Dyess Air Force base to South Carolina — and still, the irrelevant mega media has ultimately failed to even investigate. Once again, the real media continues to dominate along with investigative radio personalities in reporting on the news that matters.
As Savage points out, specifically speaking on my report last Friday concerning how the termination of a high level nuke commander coincided with the exact September 3rd date of the secret transfer, what we truly need is answers. And while we are already talking about an issue that is deeply concerning at a base level, what really give the secret transfer a disturbing amount of depth are the events that followed the leaked intel.
It was Senator Lindsey Graham who came out later on the same day in warning against a ‘nuclear attack’ in South Carolina if we did not take military action in Syria. Then we also consider the fact that two of the top nuke commanders in the United States were terminated for laughable reasons, and it becomes an even larger red flag scenario. What is most amazing to me, however, is the fact that the termination of the commanders was actually leaked to the Associated Press and others.
What this means is that United States government did not want us to know that the commanders were terminated — specifically that the second top commander was fired on the same day as the secret nuke transfer report.
When we look back at the ’2007 United States Air Force nuclear weapons incident’, where nukes were reported missing from the Minot Air Force Base with no official suspect, the media went into turmoil and investigations were launched immediately. Even CNN covered the event in depth and continued to investigate what was going on. The CNN reporter even stated that “this kind of thing is not supposed to happen” in response to the event:

But where is the mainstream media now? Once again, it is up to us to get the word out and demand answers. My respect goes out to Michael Savage for demanding answers on such a pertinent and real issue.
This article originally appeared on Anthony Gucciardi’s Storyleak

Top 5 ways lobbyists win and you lose with the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP)
By Noushin Khushrushahi
October 11, 2013

Something very important happened this week.

For the first time, Presidents and Prime Ministers of several countries met with industry lobbyists to discuss the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) on the sidelines of the annual Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit in Bali, Indonesia. Although U.S. President Obama suddenly announced he would not be joining these discussions, industry lobbyists are hoping to push through TPP talks to finalize the agreement.

What exactly is the TPP? It’s been called one of the most significant international trade agreements since the creation of the World Trade Organization -- but you’d be forgiven for not knowing about it. Discussions about this monumental agreement have been so secret that the little we know about the text is from leaked documents -- documents that show we have grave reason to be concerned.

One of its most troubling chapters includes an extreme Internet censorship plan that could break your digital future. Here are the top five ways the TPP censors the Internet and why it should concern you:

5. The TPP could criminalize small-scale copyright infringement

The next time you want to share a song or a recipe online, you’d have to ask yourself: Am I a criminal? Interested in writing some fan fiction based on your favourite detective series and sharing it online? Ask yourself that very same question. That’s how TPP provisions could characterize you based on what we know about its Intellectual Property chapter.

According to the leaked drafts, unauthorized small-scale downloading or sharing of copyrighted material could result in severe fines and criminal penalties. Law enforcement could even seize your computer and send you to jail for minor copyright infringement.

4. The TPP could prohibit blind and deaf users from breaking digital locks to access their content

Under the TPP, attempts to circumvent digital locks in order to use your paid-for and legally-acquired media may become illegal. If you are blind, this means you could be criminalized for circumventing digital locks on your purchased e-books and other digital materials in order to convert text to braille, audio, or other accessible formats. If you are a librarian, it may become very difficult to share excerpts of content with students for education purposes, lend out material to the public, or even gain full access to purchased content; and as a consumer of digital media, attempts to make backup copies of that DVD you purchased or transfer your legally-purchased e-book on a different device would become unlawful.

3. The TPP could lead to excessive copyright terms

Copyright, which was originally intended to promote the creation of new works by giving authors certain exclusive rights for a limited time, may be threatened by excessive terms and a rigid system that could stifle creativity and innovation under the TPP.

Under the TPP, excessive copyright terms could be created beyond internationally-agreed upon periods; it could also lengthen terms for corporate-owned works. Despite the strong and growing body of evidence demonstrating the importance of a rich commons in creating new works, such a rigid copyright regime would stifle creativity and innovation. It would also restrict the limitations and exceptions that member countries could enact, ensuring that countries enact compliant laws in order to avoid trade sanctions.

2. The TPP may regulate temporary copies at the cost of innovation and freedom

Temporary copies, or the small copies that your computer needs to make in order to move data around, are being targeted by TPP lobbyists who are attempting to redefine the very meaning of the word “copy”. The very notion of regulating temporary copies is ludicrous given how basic the creation of temporary copies of files and programs is to computer functioning and the Internet. As the Electronic Frontier Foundation notes:

This proposal may seem absurd to you. It should. Given how crucial the storage of “temporary copies” of digital files is to the functioning of our devices, the inclusion of unfettered provisions to regulate it is purely backward, especially given the supporters’ failure to justify a legitimate purpose for imposing a burden without a balance.

If lobbyists have their way, anyone viewing content on any device could potentially be committing copyright infringement. Companies like Wikipedia and Connexions would face serious difficulty in hosting and storing user-generated content. Ultimately, this provision could make it more expensive for you to access licensed content, make you more vulnerable to liability, require you to purchase licenses from copyright-holders for transactions, and hinder your ability to use and create online content.

1. The TPP could kick you off the Internet

The TPP will place the burden of monitoring copyright infringement on your Internet Service Provider (ISP), potentially resulting in the blocking of entire websites. Your ISP would have to institute what’s called a “three-strike rule” -- a rule that would kick you and your whole family off the internet after three infringement accusations by copyright holders.

It would also force websites to police user-contributed material.. Not only would this mean added financial burden, which could lead to the stifling of technology startups, it would also result in websites having to actively monitor for banned links -- forcing the creation of a stringent Internet censorship regime. If ISPs are incentivized to remove content because of the resource-heavy nature of investigating copyright infringement complaints, such immediate takedown could censor time-sensitive news, including information to facilitate social organization, protest, and community-building.

It would also break your right to privacy by forcing your ISP to share your private sensitive information with law enforcement in order to investigate your alleged copyright crimes.

Here’s the bottom line: The TPP is a secretive and extreme agreement that could break our digital future. It could change how we behave online, threaten our freedom of expression by promoting an extreme Internet censorship plan, and invade our privacy. The TPP will stifle creativity and innovation, hinder our ability to access information and organize, and criminalize our Internet use. The TPP is an affront to global Internet freedom.

Over 100,000 people have said no to the TPP’s extreme Internet censorship plan and several thousand have put forward their vision of a fair digital future. Join them and make your voice heard -- the time is now.

TPP Is a Race to The Bottom -- We Need a Race to the Top

The Huffington Post
by Larry Cohen
Oct. 8, 2013

For 130 million working Americans, the Trans-Pacific Partnership is, as Minnesota Rep. Keith Ellison (D) described so well, the "largest corporate power grab you never heard of."

After 19 rounds of negotiations between the United States, Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam, TPP remains a mystery to everyone except government trade negotiators and the corporate lobbyists who get to read all the proposals.

Even Members of Congress have real no idea of what's involved in the negotiations.

Rep. Alan Grayson (D-Fla.), has seen some of the proposals. TPP is "a punch in the face to the middle class of America ... but I'm not allowed to tell you why," he said.

In addition to the secrecy, trade negotiators are counting on "fast track" authority, which blocks any changes or amendments to the trade deal and only allows for an "up or down" vote by Congress. Stopping or changing fast track is the only real way to change TPP.

TPP is bad for working families, because, like nearly every other trade agreement that's been negotiated by the U.S. in the past 20 years, TPP isn't concerned with U.S. workers or jobs. Every other nation starts out with jobs and the economy as their priorities. The U.S. unfortunately has a different focus, and looks at trade in terms of national security and global corporate interests, not ensuring the economic well-being of working families.

Here's a good example. The minimum wage in Vietnam, one of the proposed member nations of TPP, is 25 cents an hour. U.S. workers should not compete with workers who earn 25 cents an hour. But multinational corporations, in this continuing race to the bottom, will be happy to send jobs to Vietnam and every other subsistence-wage nation.

It's not just manufacturing jobs. We're talking service sector work, including information technology and tech support jobs. "Buy America" policies, call center legislation to keep good jobs here and stop taxpayer handouts to companies that offshore jobs, environmental standards, and even public health efforts would be disallowed or dramatically weakened.

Foreign firms would be given equal access to bidding on U.S. federal government contracts, and private corporations from other countries would be able to challenge U.S. laws and regulations, including those dealing with telecom, health and the environment, if they think our laws limit their "expected future profits."

Without a floor for wages and workers' rights, U.S. workers will again lose out. Our 20 years of experience in trade deals, going back to NAFTA, has proven that U.S. jobs go offshore and the jobs that are created here are low wage, no benefit jobs. That's not the future Americans want for themselves or their children.

We have built a strong coalition that's working together to get full participation in these negotiations, and to stop fast track if that doesn't happen. No citizens groups have been involved to any extent so far in these negotiations but we have been making our voices heard.

Unions; greens, including Sierra Club and Greenpeace; consumer and citizen action groups like Citizens Trade Campaign and Public Citizen; public health groups; and people of faith all are working for changes in or rejection of this deal.

We must pursue economic policies and trade policies for American workers, just as the Vietnamese and other nations are pushing policies in their own interests. Clearly, we don't have much in common with countries that pay workers 25 cents an hour, nor should we. Again, it's time to stand up and fight back.