BILL'S TWITTER PAGE

Thursday, February 28, 2013

Recently Converted Christian Families in Vietnam Beaten for Their New Faith

Recently Converted Christian Families in Vietnam Beaten for Their New Faith

Recently Converted Christian Families in Vietnam Beaten for Their New Faith

February 28, 2013|10:06 am
  • A church is seen as the sun sets in Vietnam in this December 17, 2012 file photo.
    (Photo: Reuters/Kham)
    A church is seen as the sun sets in Vietnam in this December 17, 2012 file photo.

Newly converted Christians of the Sedang ethnic minority in Vietnam's Central Highlands were terrorized last week – their homes and personal property badly damaged or destroyed in four consecutive night raids, and some of the faithful seriously injured from beatings in broad daylight, sources said.

Since becoming Christians in the past year, five families in mountainous Kontum Province have reported constant harassment from villagers upset that they are no longer contributing to communal sacrifices and other practices because of their new faith. The attacks from Monday (Feb. 18) to Friday (Feb. 22) constituted a third wave of sustained violence since their conversion, leaving their property severely damaged and their lives threatened.
Attacks on the new Christians – who belong to a Christian Mission Church (CMC) congregation in Ngoc La village, Mang Ri Commune, Tumorong District in northwestern Kontum Province – were primarily motivated by strong tensions within the ethnic group over the families leaving the "old ways." Ideologically opposed to Christianity, local Communist officials freely permit and even encourage such conflicts, sources said.
At the same time, local Vietnamese officials commonly incite and employ area thugs to attack Christians, whose united faith is perceived as a threat to government ideology and sovereignty. Often officials themselves put on civilian clothes or otherwise disguise themselves, joining in the attacks, sources said.
The assailants last week attacked the Christians' homes, pelting them with bricks and cement roof tiles and swinging wooden clubs. They then invaded their houses and destroyed their belongings.
The victims managed to take photos with their cell phones, and though taken mostly in darkness, the images are clear enough to show a destroyed fibro-cement roof; a motorcycle with parts bent, broken and missing; dishes and kitchen utensils smashed to pieces; food cast to the ground; badly damaged furniture; broken windows; wooden shutters, doors and frames ripped out of walls; and wooden clubs and bricks strewn about.
Follow us 
The gangs on Friday (Feb. 22) beat a number of the Christians in broad daylight, with some, including women, struck below the abdomen. Several were reported to be seriously injured. One family, threatened with death if they stayed in their home, fled into the forest, where they were forced to spend nights in the cold with inadequate clothing and no shelter.
Officials positioned above the local ones were notified of the attacks. They eventually did come to the area but left soon thereafter, having said and done nothing about the violence, sources said.
The families are related to the Danang-based CMC, legally recognized by the Vietnamese government for several years. The CMC is one of several Christian groups that have been evangelizing along the former Ho Chi Minh Trail now being developed with roads and other infrastructure. CMC evangelists and other groups have seen great openness to the Christian faith among ethnic minorities.
The 2010 government census reported that just under 80 percent of Vietnamese evangelicals are ethnic minorities. One acknowledged Vietnam expert on Protestantism in the country told Morning Star News the government figure was surprising.
"We know well that ethnic minorities Protestants far outnumber the dominant ethnic Vietnamese ones but consider the ratio to be about two-to-one," he said. "So we are bit surprised that the government census percentage is that high."
While the religious freedom environment for many Christians in Vietnam's larger cities has improved considerably in recent years, that of many ethnic minority Christians in remote and mountainous regions of the country definitely has not, sources said. Regularly occurring incidents demonstrate that Vietnamese authorities actively work to limit and contain Christianity, even as they appear to have given up on eradicating it.
There were several serious attacks on Christians in northern Vietnam over last Christmasseason. Local Vietnamese leaders and advocates decided to try local advocacy and quiet channels rather than publicity. Nothing came of these efforts, so some Vietnamese leaders say that international publicity should be resumed.
Vietnam's new Decree (on religion) No. 92, which came into effect on Jan. 1, promised further clarity and easing of controls on religion. But Protestants who have analyzed the decree say it portends more regulation and interference into internal church affairs, and much more difficulty for new churches and believers.
"Please intercede for these brothers and sisters and use this news in all places that it reaches to recruit prayer and to advocate for them," an advocate in Vietnam said.
Used with permission from Morning Star News. Read more by clicking here.

Read more at http://global.christianpost.com/news/recently-converted-christian-families-in-vietnam-beaten-for-their-new-faith-90967/#M283wD1KYzKge10r.99 

Obama Terrorizes Public with Illegal Alien Releases

Obama Terrorizes Public with Illegal Alien Releases

Obama Terrorizes Public with Illegal Alien Releases


In one of the most politically despicable moves ever perpetrated by a sitting administration, federal immigration officials have released hundreds of illegal aliens from prison in anticipation of budget cuts produced by the sequester. “As fiscal uncertainty remains over the continuing resolution and possible sequestration, ICE has reviewed its detained population to ensure detention levels stay within ICE’s current budget,” said agency spokeswoman Gillian M. Christensen in a statement. Immigration officials further warned that even more releases are possible, if the anticipated cuts are realized.
In Arizona, Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu, who revealed that more than 500 inmates were released in his county alone, put this ploy in the proper perspective. “President Obama would never release 500 criminal illegals to the streets of his hometown, yet he has no problem with releasing them in Arizona. The safety of the public is threatened and the rule of law discarded as a political tactic in this sequester battle,” he said.
House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) were equally incensed. ”This is very hard for me to believe that they can’t find cuts elsewhere in their agency,” said Boehner in an interview on Tuesday night. “I frankly think this is outrageous. And I’m looking for more facts, but I can’t believe that they can’t find the kind of savings they need out of that department short of letting criminals go free.” Goodlatte concurred. “It’s abhorrent that President Obama is releasing criminals into our communities to promote his political agenda on sequestration,” he said in a statement. “By releasing criminal immigrants onto the streets, the administration is needlessly endangering American lives.”
Yet it gets even more cynical. The “most transparent administration in history” is not only releasing inmates, it is refusing to say how many have been released, and where those releases are taking place. Federal officials claim that the detainees are still being monitored, even as they continue to face charges. They also insisted that only nonviolent offenders will be let go.
That first claim is utterly disingenuous, if not an outright lie. How is an agency ostensibly so “devastated” by budget cuts that it is forced to release criminals into the streets better equipped to monitor individuals in numerous locations, as opposed to keeping track of a group of incarcerated detainees in far fewer locations?
As for only nonviolent offenders being released, it seems the definition of that term is also somewhat elastic. The New York Times profiled one “nonviolent” detainee named Anthony Orlando Williams. Mr. Williams became an illegal alien after overstaying his visa in 1991. In 2010, he was detained by a deputy sheriff in Gwinnett County, GA, not for being in the country illegally, but for violating his probation stemming from a 2005 conviction–for simple assault, simple battery and child abuse.
Yet ICE insists it has no choice, claiming the “current fiscal climate” has forced it to do a spending review, part of which includes examining who they have detained. “As a result of this review, a number of detained aliens have been released around the country and placed on an appropriate, more cost-effective form of supervised release,” ICE said in a statement.
The notion that the “current fiscal climate” has forced ICE’s hand is ludicrous. The entire amount of the reductions engendered by the sequester this year is $85 billion, out of projected budget of $3.5 trillion. Yet even the $85 billion may be overstated. According to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), ”Discretionary outlays will drop by $35 billion and mandatory spending will be reduced by $9 billion this year as a direct result of those procedures [sequestration]; additional reductions in outlays attributable to the cuts in 2013 funding will occur in later years.” In other words, the true cost of the sequester for FY2013 is only $44 billion. Yet even that number is misleading: regardless of any so-called reduction in spending, the federal government will spend $15 billion more this year than it did last year–and a full 30 percent more than it did as little as six years ago.
Unsurprisingly, advocates for illegal aliens favor the releases, maintaining that there are better and more cost effective alternatives to incarceration. They are further urging the Obama administration to maintain their current enforcement priorities, which include the refusal to arrest illegal aliens accused of low-level crimes, or ICE administrative violations.
Yet this latest effort may backfire. Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL), who contended that “the administration is using the sequester as a convenient excuse to bow to political pressure from the amnesty groups,” warned that such a move “lessened the chances” of comprehensive immigration reform. “With this new action, the administration has further demonstrated that it has no commitment to enforcing the law and cannot be trusted to deliver on any future promises of enforcement,” he added.
In a coordinated scare tactic, DHS Secretary Janet A. Napolitano on Monday warned that, if the sequester occurs, as many as 5000 border agents will also be furloughed, increasing the chances that even more, and possibly more dangerous, illegal aliens will be roaming the countryside. “I don’t think we can maintain the same level of security,” Ms. Napolitano contended.
Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) cut right through the manufactured hysteria. In a letter sent to Ms. Napolitano, he outlined a host of alternative cuts Ms. Napolitano could make. Yet the most telling part of that letter was the revelation that DHS will have approximately $9 billion in unspent funds by the end of FY2013, “raising the question of why we would not start reclaiming these funds,” Coburn wrote.
Napolitano is not the only government official with options. Barack Obama has the authority to prioritize the sequester cuts in any manner he chooses. Yet this is what he said in 2011 when the Congressional Supercommittee was formed in a failing effort to avoid sequestration:
Already, some in Congress are trying to undo these automatic spending cuts. My message to them is simple: No. I will veto any effort to get rid of those automatic spending cuts to domestic and defense spending. There will be no easy off ramps on this one.
Yesterday the Wall Street Journal reported that Congressional Republicans are considering ways to give Obama an off ramp, as in the power to determine how the cuts are administered. The president has dismissed those efforts. The dismissal follows a Wednesday statement by White House press secretary Jay Carney claiming that ICE made the decision to release illegals “without any input from the White House.”
If that is true (which already strains credulity), then why doesn’t the same president who issued an executive order granting legal status to nearly a million illegal aliens last August, order ICE to stop releasing illegals from incarceration?
The answer is simple. Once again, the President of the United States has made it clear that he and his administration are prepared to implement their agenda by any means necessary. In this case, Obama, along with DHS and ICE officials, have now demonstrated that they are more than willing to potentially endanger American lives, rather than accept a “cut” that merely reduces the overall increase in government spending. The president undoubtedly sees such tactics as “negotiation.” Extortion is more like it.

Obama’s release of illegals ‘impeachable offense’

Obama’s release of illegals ‘impeachable offense’

  • Text smaller
  • Text bigger
The Obama administration’s release of hundreds and potentially thousands of illegal-alien criminals from U.S. detention centers in connection with possible budget cuts is being called “an impeachable offense” by the nation’s highest-rated radio talk-show host.
“In what used to be considered – if we can remember this far back – normal, sane times, this is an impeachable offense,” broadcaster Rush Limbaugh said Wednesday. “This is action being taken against the country. … It is sheer madness to be doing this. It is petulant, it is childish.”
“This is in direct violation of the oath of office,” he continued. “Defend and protect the Constitution of the United States, and the people. We’re just opening the doors of prisons before the sequester has even happened. Before there have even been any budget cuts. This is so childish, except the consequences are real for people that live nearby these detention centers. This is on-the-ground, hard, cold reality.
“This is exacting harm on the country and it’s entirely unnecessary. None of these so-called budget cuts are necessary. None of this panic is necessary. It is not even going to be felt, in reality, if the sequester actually does happen.”
Limbaugh likened the president’s action to what happened in Iraq just before the U.S. invaded in the 1990s.
“That’s the kind of thing that [former Iraqi dictator] Saddam Hussein did,” he explained. “He just opened the doors to his jails and he let every reprobate that he was holding loose. He created total panic and havoc in Baghdad and throughout the country. That’s the kind of thing Obama’s done here.”
Limbaugh said the release of illegals was “clearly not in the best interests of anybody.”
“For the record, these illegals being released really are criminals; otherwise, they would never have been detained,” Limbaugh said. “It was the [Obama] regime that detained them in the first place. These are not Bush’s prisoners. These are Obama’s prisoners. They were detained and imprisoned by the regime in the first place. And let’s not forget, thanks to Obama’s executive orders, ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement), the immigration people, no longer detain any illegal aliens unless they’ve been convicted of a serious crime. That’s who we’re talking about here. You have to commit a serious crime before we detain you if you’re illegal. This isn’t just a bunch of discriminated-against freedom fighters that have been wrongly jailed finally seeing freedom.”
In Arizona, Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu told Fox News the move was a “mass budget pardon” and suggested the administration was going to unnecessary lengths to demonstrate the impact of the so-called sequester.
“President Obama would never release 500 criminal illegals to the streets of his hometown, yet he has no problem with releasing them in Arizona. The safety of the public is threatened and the rule of law discarded as a political tactic in this sequester battle,” Babeu said.
“Clearly, serious criminals are being released to the streets of our local communities by this mass budget pardon. These are illegals that even President Obama wants to deport. This is insane that public safety is sacrificed when it should be the budget priority that’s safeguarded,” he added.
ICE spokeswoman Gillian Christiansen told the Los Angeles Times, “All of these individuals remain in removal proceedings. Priority for detention remains on serious criminal offenders and other individuals who pose a significant threat to public safety.”
  • Text smaller
  • Text bigger

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/02/obamas-release-of-illegals-impeachable-offense/#UwfwguPYlD0ShJLB.99 

The architects of our economic demise

The architects of our economic demise

Part I: Aldrich-Vreeland Act, Federal Reserve, Jekyll Island

The architects of our economic demise

Author
- Doug Hagmann (Bio and Archives)  Thursday, February 28, 2013 
(21) Comments | Print friendly | Subscribe | Email Us

The architects of our economic demise
Today, we are witnessing the final stages of the greatest financial fraud ever perpetrated on the American people. Behind the massive debt, threat of “sequestration,” and the threat of massive pending layoffs exists a story that must be told and understood by every American. It is a truth that too few understand and even fewer will talk about.
The system has been rigged. However, understanding exactly what is being done to us, our country, and our economy has been deliberately made difficult for a person of average or even above-average intelligence by the architects of our demise. This process continues today, and much of it is done in secret or behind closed doors.
Every person on the planet is being robbed of their wealth by a select group of people. Worse, they are robbing your children, grandchildren, and further generations of their wealth not yet earned and (by extension) their time not yet invested, while making you believe that their enrichment is your moral obligation. It’s mental conditioning on a grand scale.

How we got here

A significant aspect of understanding why we find ourselves in our current financial mess is to understand exactly how we got here in the first place. Like most events taking place in Washington, DC, we are witnessing the ongoing shredding of the United States Constitution by both sides of the political divide. Yet how many people actually understand that what is taking place is completely unconstitutional? Thanks to the incremental infusion of Communist goals into the legal and societal framework of the fabric of America, people have been intellectually hobbled by a complicit media and a compromised educational system.
Discarding revisionist history and knowing the truth behind the larger global scheme will tell us, by default, what we must do to get out of the mess we’re in, and identify those who are responsible, both past and present.
The founders of our country fought a difficult war of independence to break free of the constraint and oppression of England. The blood that was shed on the battlefield over two centuries ago resulted in the creation of our Constitution.
Article I, Section 8, Part 5 of the United States Constitution states that “[T]he Congress shall have the power to coin money, regulate the value thereof…” Yet, that has been violated to the detriment of all Americans. So, what is the truth?
There is a rich history of our country’s monetary system, and significant events that occurred before the twentieth century. For example, why have some of the real factors for the War of 1812 been expunged from our history books? There is no mention of our forefathers’ refusal to permit a central bank to run America, thereby creating antagonism with England. What were the causes of the previous financial panics that struck America in her early years? History has been revised. But for the sake of brevity, we’ll begin with the events of last century and end with the present.

In all conspiracies, there must be great secrecy

In response to a Wall Street orchestrated financial panic in 1907 that saw a 50% fall in the stock market, a National Monetary Commission was created by the U.S. Congress in 1908 and signed into law by President Theodore Roosevelt. It was a “study group,” ostensibly to prevent further financial panics and economic troubles. Known as theAldrich-Vreeland Act, it was a Republican-led initiative introduced by Senator Nelson Aldrich. It is important to note that Senator Aldrich was a business associate of J.P. Morgan, and the father-in-law of John D. Rockefeller. He was ultimately named head of the National Monetary Commission, a group that spent two years in Europe studying the structure of their banking and financial system.
Two years later, and under the cover of darkness, a meeting of about a half-dozen of the wealthiest people in America took place amid great secrecy on an island just off the coast of Georgia. The meeting was set up by Aldrich himself and held on Jekyll Island, which was purchased in 1888 by J.P. Morgan and William Rockefeller (the brother of John D. Rockefeller).
Late on the night of November 22, 1910, Senator Nelson Aldrich, his personal secretary, and six of the wealthiest men in the world[ia] stealthily boarded Aldrich’s personal rail car in Hoboken, New Jersey to make a trip of nearly a thousand miles to this remote location, where no media or others outside of this clique were allowed.
In addition to Aldrich and his personal secretary, the other men who secretly boarded that rail car included A. Piatt Andrew (the Assistant Secretary to the U.S. Treasury, and Special Assistant to the National Monetary Commission),Frank Vanderlip (President of the National City Bank of New York), Henry P. Davison (senior partner at J.P. Morgan Company, and considered Morgan’s personal emissary), Charles D. Norton (President of the First National Bank of New York, a Morgan dominated bank), Benjamin Strong(also of J.P. Morgan), and Paul Warburg (a German immigrant working for Kuhn, Loeb and Company).[ii]
The unprecedented secrecy surrounding this nine-day conference on Jekyll Island was such that the attendees were only permitted to use first names of others, causing some to refer to the group as “The First Name Club.” Unbeknownst to all Americans, the framework was being set for the greatest financial Ponzi scheme that still exists today.

The Federal Reserve Act of 1913

As a result of that secret meeting on Jekyll Island in 1910, the Federal Reserve (or “Fed”) was created after a three-year long magic act designed to fool the American people into believing that the Federal Reserve was something it was not. On December 23, 1913, President Woodrow Wilson signed the Federal Reserve Act into law after it passed in a nearly empty Capitol chamber,since many lawmakers had already departed for the Christmas holiday.
It is important to understand that, during the three years between the meeting at Jekyll Island and the passage of the Federal Reserve Act, there is a rich history of deception and subterfuge. This included influencing the presidential election that brought Woodrow Wilson (governor of New Jersey, and former president of Princeton University) into office, over popular incumbent William Howard Taft. Historians could rightfully assert that the primary (and perhaps only) purpose of getting Wilson elected as U.S. President at this time was in order to assure that a central banking system would be signed into law.
President William Howard Taft was the incumbent, and favored for re-election. The Republicans also held a majority in both houses of Congress. It was not until the former Republican President Theodore Roosevelt (the creator of the National MonetaryCommission) entered the race as a third party candidate that Taft was threatened. Roosevelt was highly funded by members of both parties who wanted a central banking system put in place in the United States. The entry of Theodore Roosevelt split the vote, and Woodrow Wilson was elected.
Two figures who played a very prominent role in the creation of a central bank, and the passage of the Federal Reserve Act behind the scenes, were Paul Warburg (a German immigrant) and Colonel Edward Mandel House from Texas. Both had European connections. House was a friend of he most powerful man in America at that time - President Woodrow Wilson. He also had connections to the Rothschild money dynasty in London. The influence of Colonel House over two presidential administrations is without question. Accordingly, he and his ideology warrant a closer look.
“Colonel” is only a nickname, as he had no military experience, just an odd and influential friendship with U.S. President Woodrow Wilson. House was active in Texas politics, and became an advisor to Wilson in foreign affairs. Much like today, access to the President appears to hinge on “excess,” or how much money one has. According to one account, House reportedly showed up at the Wilson White House with a $35,000 political contribution.[iii]
In 1911, House anonymously published a novel titled Philip Dru: Administrator, in which the main character causes a civil war in the United States and then becomes a dictator. As dictator, the character Dru turns the U.S. into a Socialist nation - a Socialist utopia, as dreamed by Karl Marx. The cumbersome novel seemed to serve as a blueprint for President Wilson. Then later,it influenced President Roosevelt, in terms of the implementation of socialist programs.
It is interesting that House, an avowed Socialist, viewed the enactment of the Federal Reserve as the crowning achievement of the Wilson administration.[iv] Among other decidedly Socialist “reforms,” House (personally and through his novel) actually called for the creation of the Federal Reserve, or a central banking system.[v] A centralized banking system, along with a progressive or graduated income tax, is one of the ten planks of the Communist goals.

What’s in a name?

Before the Federal Reserve Act was signed into law, it was initially known as the Aldrich Plan, named after Senator Nelson Aldrich. To positively impact public opinion, national banks organized a propaganda campaign through three American Universities: Princeton, Harvard, and the University of Chicago. The banks contributed $5 million to this propaganda campaign, much of it spent by the National Citizens’ League, an organization composed primarily of college professors.
As facets of the Republican Aldrich Plan became known, however, there was staunch opposition launched against it by Democrats, who presented their own plan in the form of the Federal Reserve Act. It is here - at this point in American history - that the Republican-Democrat political paradigm seems to have been essentially and forever dissolved. Much print space could be dedicated to this time period in history alone, that would enlighten readers to the collusion between parties at their highest and most powerful levels, in order to fool the American people.
Perhaps one of the most disingenuous feats during this period was this inter-party collusion for the centralization and control of our national monetary system. The illusion of dueling plans was thrust upon the American people by a simple name change. The Aldrich plan was associated with the Republicans. The Federal Reserve plan was associated with the Democratic party. The difference was in name only.
Despite the identical nature of the plans, those pushing for a central banking system made it appear that they were at odds with each other. Aldrich joined with Frank Vanderlip, president of the National City Bank, to publicly denounce the Federal Reserve Act.
The people of the United States had fought previously against the implementation of a central banking system under Presidents Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson, when the Rothschild family attempted to install such a system (and briefly succeeded via The First Bank of the United States and the Second National Bank, respectively). Therefore, the advocates of the Federal Reserve Act wanted to hide the fact that it was really a centralized banking system.
Accordingly, one of the architects at Jekyll Island, Paul Warburg, devised the plan to set up a series of regional banks throughout the U.S., in order to make it appear that the Federal Reserve was not a central bank. Additionally, Warburg also seemed to alleviate concerns over who would oversee the appointments to head the Federal Reserve by making it appear that the U.S. government had full authority over such appointments. Actually, appointments were (and are) made from a list of “acceptable candidates” provided by the Federal Reserve alone.
After the political theater that made it appear that the Republicans and Democrats were at odds with each other, the objective of the architects of a central banking system prevailed. As previously noted, the Federal Reserve Act was signed into law by President Woodrow Wilson on December 23, 1913.
Wilson apparently realized what he had done. In 1916, Wilson wrote, “Our system of credit is concentrated [in the Federal Reserve]. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities, are in the hands of a few men.”

London bridges

The creation of the Federal Reserve concentrated the power, wealth, and industry of the United States into the control of a handful of people, including J.P. Morgan who was (for all practical purposes) an emissary for the Rockefeller dynasty. But it was not only the Rockefellers who benefitted from this devious plan; the Rothschild family of London also controlled the wealth of the U.S. by proxy. The Rothschilds also took over the Vatican Bank in 1824.
It is becoming clear that all roads and bridges lead to the bankers of London. Not just to London, but a specific area within London—a city within a city. It is within this magical mile where the root of untold wealth and power exists. It is here where its denizens control men and might, plan wars and “a New World Order.”
Accordingly, honest investigation into the creation and continued existence of the Federal Reserve must include identifying the people behind its creation, as well as its current existence.

“Thou doth protest too much”

Additionally, honest investigation and research into the Federal Reserve, past and present, would not be complete without looking at its “protagonist threats” and their fates. Examples can be found in President Abraham Lincoln (who issued “Greenbacks”), President James A. Garfield (who suggested serious monetary reforms just before his assassination in 1881), and of course, President John F. Kennedy.
It is applicable to introduce Louis Thomas McFadden, a Republican member of the U.S. House of Representatives serving from 1923 to 1935. He was a member of the House Banking and Currency Committee, and had a working understanding of what the central bankers and the power elite were doing to the United States.
On June 10, 1932, Rep. McFadden addressed the House of Representatives with this important message [emphasis added]:
“Some people think the Federal Reserve banks are United States Government institutions. They are not government institutions. They are private credit monopolies which prey upon the people of the United States for the benefit of themselves and their foreign customers. The Federal Reserve banks are the agents of the foreign central banks. Henry Ford has said, ‘The one aim of these financiers is world control by the creation of inextinguishable debts.’ The truth is the Federal Reserve Board has usurped the Government of the United States by the arrogant credit monopoly which operates the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve Banks.”
Based on his analysis of the treachery taking place by the Federal Reserve and its enablers, McFadden introduced House Resolution No. 158, Articles of Impeachment on May 23, 1933 against the Secretary of the Treasury and two Assistant Secretaries of the Treasury; the Federal Reserve Board of Governors and the officers and directors of the Federal Reserve Banks for their guilt and collusion in causing the Great Depression.
McFadden stated: “I charge them with having unlawfully taken over 80 billion dollars from the United States Government in the year 1928, the said unlawful taking consisting of the unlawful recreation of claims against the United States Treasury to the extent of over 80 billion dollars in the year 1928, and in each year subsequent, and by having robbed the United States Government and the people of the United States by their theft and sale of the gold reserve of the United States.”
Rather than a bullet, McFadden was instead marginalized by rumors that he was legally insane. The Progressives of that era heavily funded his political opposition. Between the allegations of his insanity and the money furnished to his opposition, McFadden lost his congressional district and faded into relative obscurity. The impeachment resolution never saw the light of day.

Franklin Delano Roosevelt

Quietly backed by the Socialist and Communist parties, Roosevelt was elected President in 1932, ostensibly to end Wall Street domination and free the American people from the evil domestic banking cartel and its equally evil international influences that caused the Great Depression.
But who was Roosevelt? He was himself was an international banker who floated large issuances of foreign bonds in the U.S. during the 1920s. He was also the was President and Director of United European Investors, Ltd., which also floated millions of German marks in this country. Like the pattern we have witnessed more recently, the bonds defaulted and Americans collectively lost millions of dollars.
Perhaps most telling were his associations. Upon taking office, Roosevelt appointed James Paul Warburg, son of Paul Warburg, as Director of the Budget and Vice President of the International Acceptance Bank and other corporations.
Moving quickly through history, there were a number of significant events related to the Federal Reserve and our economy that brought us to this most dangerous point in history.

Glass-Steagall Banking Act of 1933

Partly due to the Great Depression, the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 essentially separated commercial and investment activities by banks.Enacted in part as a result of the findings of the Pecora Commission, an investigation of the events that led to the Wall Street Crash of 1929 and the Great Depression, the commission’s findings led to the Glass-Steagall Banking Act.
Most telling about the secrecy and conspiracy of the central banks, bankers and the Federal Reserve is an entry in the memoir of Ferdinand Pecora, published in 1939:
“Bitterly hostile was Wall Street to the enactment of the regulatory legislation. Had there been full disclosure of what was being done in furtherance of these schemes, they could not long have survived the fierce light of publicity and criticism. Legal chicanery and pitch darkness were the banker’s stoutest allies.”

The Banking Act of 1935

This legislation greatly increased President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s power over the country’s finances and accordingly, his power as president. It repealed the specific clause of the Glass-Steagall Act that provided that a banking house could not be on the Stock Exchange and also be involved in investment banking. The most essential provision of the Glass-Steagall Act was repealed in 1935, thus permitting the Federal Reserve Banks to loan directly to industry.

Summary of Part I

“The dollar represents a one dollar debt to the Federal Reserve System. The Federal Reserve Banks create money out of thin air to buy Government bonds from the United States Treasury, lending money into circulation at interest, by bookkeeping entries of checkbook credit to the United States Treasury. The Treasury writes up an interest bearing bond for one billion dollars. The Federal Reserve gives the Treasury a one billion dollar credit for the bond, and has created out of nothing a one billion dollar debt which the American people are obligated to pay with interest.”—Money Facts, House Banking and Currency Committee, 1964, p. 9
It is clear that the Federal Reserve and central banks across the globe represent a shadowy, elite group of the wealthiest and most powerful men on this planet. The central bankers finance wars, often all sides of the conflicts, loaning money for war materials for their own financial gain.
Because of the very manner in which it was established, our current economic system is untenable and is destined for collapse, leaving only those elite with the riches stolen from the American people.
Is there a conspiracy of global takeover, of a “New World Order,” of global governance that has been in the works since the United States gained independence from Great Britain? The honest answer is undeniable: yes.
I’ve attempted to cover as much history in Part I to establish the groundwork and backdrop of Part II: Who is responsible today for robbing the Americans of our wealth, our heritage, our freedom, and our country. Today, we have men and women in power who, by the very definition of the word, are involved in the greatest conspiracy to be thrust upon America and all of the world. By definition, they are traitors to our country, and will be responsible for the collapse of the United States. They must be identified and exposed. But to adequately and effectively do so, it is important to understand the history of the conspiracy of which we are the victims.
When the U.S. dollar collapses, who will appear to be our savior, rescuing the United States from economic destruction through restructuring? I contend that our salvation, which will be our imprisonment, will rise from the seat of economic power - a city within the city of London. The significance of this cannot be understated, as we will be facing the end of our country and our freedoms. It will be the final stage of the implementation of global governance.
Perhaps then people will understand the significance and true meaning of the opening ceremonies of the 2012 London Olympics.
[ia] Extensive research for this report noted conflicting reports pertaining to the identities of the attendees of this meeting, even 100 years later.
[ii] Eustace Mullins, The Secrets of the Federal Reserve (Bridger House Publishers, Inc., Carson City, Nevada, 1991), pages 1-2.
[iii] Ibid, page 26.
[iv] George Viereck, The Strangest Friendship in History: Woodrow Wilson and Col. House (Liverwright, New York, NY, 1932) page 45.
[v] Edward Mandell HousePhilip Dru, Administrator.
Copyright © Douglas Hagmann
Douglas J. Hagmann and his son, Joe Hagmann host The Hagmann & Hagmann Report, a live Internet radio program broadcast each weeknight from 8:00-10:00 p.m. ET.
Douglas Hagmann, founder & director of the Northeast Intelligence Network, and a multi-state licensed private investigative agency. Doug began using his investigative skills and training to fight terrorism and increase public awareness through his website.
Doug can be reached at: director@homelandsecurityus.comOlder articles by Doug Hagmann