Caveat: March 29, 2012

12:12 PM The Bundesbank will no longer accept bank bonds from Ireland, Greece, and Portugal as collateral, the first EU central bank to exercise this right recently granted by the ECB. The Buba currently has €500M of the paper pledged to it and will spend the next weeks notifying banks that new arrangements will be necessary. (Read the comments on this)
See more Market Currents on Global & FX, Financials

Caveat: March 29, 2012

Remember the bill that was supposed to make medical insurance, that is insurance, available? All those who mumble about your coverage is too expensive or someone or other is making money, here is your salvation: 


From AAPS, The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons:


You government will tell you:

• what type of insurance you must purchase OR pay a penalty,
• what the insurance must pay for,
• what insurance can cost,
• what medical specialists will be reimbursed and at what rates,
• what treatments are allowed, and for whom, at what age,
• what medical screening tests are approved or not approved,
• who may or may not own hospitals,
• what taxes are imposed on individuals, businesses, medical device makers, and pharmaceutical companies.

Some harms have already happened:

• Health insurance premiums up 9% in 2010, another 9% in 2011, and more increases ahead;
• Loss of patients’ privacy and control of their personal medical records, when the Secretary of Health and Human Services ruled in October 2011 that all private medical insurance companies must send all patient data to Washington’s central database—without the patient’s permission;
• Jobs lost and new ones not created because employers cannot afford higher premiums to pay for all of the “free” services the government now requires;
• Medicare facing cuts of $500 billion to pay for medical care for younger people in Medicaid;
• Loss of medical specialists in many fields due to fee cuts;
• Higher taxes on medical devices, which in turn are passed on to consumers;
• A massive increase in the projected deficit as the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) now has doubled the estimate of cost it gave before the bill was passed.

The “Affordable Care Act” is not affordable at all: it is now estimated to cost $1.76 trillion over the next decade, adding markedly to the U.S. debt.

Caveat: March 26, 2012

"In a nutshell, it’s the blueprint for Peacetime Martial Law and it gives the president the power to take just about anything deemed necessary for “National Defense”, whatever they decide that is." (The Intel Hub)

While millions of people have been preparing for the possibility of a catastrophic event by relocating to rural homesteads or farms, as well as stockpiling food, water, personal defense armaments, and other essential supplies with the intention of utilizing these preparations if the worst happens, the latest executive order signed by President Obama on March 16, 2012 makes clear that in the event of a nationally deemed emergency, all of these resources will fall under the authority of the United States government. 

The signing of the National Defense Resources Preparedness executive order grants the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Labor, the Department of Defense, and other agencies complete control of all U.S. resources, including the ability to seize, confiscate or re-delegate resources, materials, services, and facilities as deemed necessary or appropriate to promote the national defense as delegated by the following agencies...

Read full article...


Of course, this is unconstitutional. Does anyone get it yet?

I had to add this from the same page:

Ten reasons even Democrats are choosing Ron Paul over Obama

Caveat: 3-14-2012

NOVACANE OR CHEMOTHERAPY

Caveat: 3-13-12

The NDAA, called in propaganda terms, the National Defense Authorization Act, is where Congress "gave" the President power to treat the entire nation as a war zone and to direct the army to arrest citizens in the United States without a right to habeas corpus. 


You recall the internment of the Japanese in WWII, which prompted an apology by President Clinton.  Now, that action would be constitutional, it would also be acceptable to arrest anyone.  With the latest law, the Secret Service can declare anyplace sensitive and, thus, arrest anyone protesting there. The charge is a federal crime.


There was a protest in New York City on January 10, 2012, the bill sneaking through Congress and White House on New Years Eve, against this unconstitutional intrusion upon our rights. It was ended by a mass arrests not covered on TV. 


To add further insult, President Obama imperiously announced, after signing the bill giving him arbitrary powers of a monarch, that he disagreed with some of it and would deign to use them. A Constitutional president would veto the bill or follow it as the law, not decide which parts seem acceptable. 


Clearly it is not a law; it is a pretext. 


Vote against anyone who defends this bill. We are the Jews of 1937. This is not one of those stupid political things that we overlook; this is you right to a free country.




OBAMA's STATEMENT

Statement by the President on H.R. 1540

  Today I have signed into law H.R. 1540, the "National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012." I have signed the Act chiefly because it authorizes funding for the defense of the United States and its interests abroad, crucial services for service members and their families, and vital national security programs that must be renewed. In hundreds of separate sections totaling over 500 pages, the Act also contains critical Administration initiatives to control the spiraling health care costs of the Department of Defense (DoD), to develop counterterrorism initiatives abroad, to build the security capacity of key partners, to modernize the force, and to boost the efficiency and effectiveness of military operations worldwide.

  The fact that I support this bill as a whole does not mean I agree with everything in it. In particular, I have signed this bill despite having serious reservations with certain provisions that regulate the detention, interrogation, and prosecution of suspected terrorists. Over the last several years, my Administration has developed an effective, sustainable framework for the detention, interrogation and trial of suspected terrorists that allows us to maximize both our ability to collect intelligence and to incapacitate dangerous individuals in rapidly developing situations, and the results we have achieved are undeniable. Our success against al-Qa'ida and its affiliates and adherents has derived in significant measure from providing our counterterrorism professionals with the clarity and flexibility they need to adapt to changing circumstances and to utilize whichever authorities best protect the American people, and our accomplishments have respected the values that make our country an example for the world.

  Against that record of success, some in Congress continue to insist upon restricting the options available to our counterterrorism professionals and interfering with the very operations that have kept us safe. My Administration has consistently opposed such measures. Ultimately, I decided to sign this bill not only because of the critically important services it provides for our forces and their families and the national security programs it authorizes, but also because the Congress revised provisions that otherwise would have jeopardized the safety, security, and liberty of the American people. Moving forward, my Administration will interpret and implement the provisions described below in a manner that best preserves the flexibility on which our safety depends and upholds the values on which this country was founded.

  Section 1021 affirms the executive branch's authority to detain persons covered by the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) (Public Law 107-40; 50 U.S.C. 1541 note). This section breaks no new ground and is unnecessary. The authority it describes was included in the 2001 AUMF, as recognized by the Supreme Court and confirmed through lower court decisions since then. Two critical limitations in section 1021 confirm that it solely codifies established authorities. First, under section 1021(d), the bill does not "limit or expand the authority of the President or the scope of the Authorization for Use of Military Force." Second, under section 1021(e), the bill may not be construed to affect any "existing law or authorities relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States, or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States." My Administration strongly supported the inclusion of these limitations in order to make clear beyond doubt that the legislation does nothing more than confirm authorities that the Federal courts have recognized as lawful under the 2001 AUMF. Moreover, I want to clarify that my Administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens. Indeed, I believe that doing so would break with our most important traditions and values as a Nation. My Administration will interpret section 1021 in a manner that ensures that any detention it authorizes complies with the Constitution, the laws of war, and all other applicable law.  

Section 1022 seeks to require military custody for a narrow category of non-citizen detainees who are "captured in the course of hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force." This section is ill-conceived and will do nothing to improve the security of the United States. The executive branch already has the authority to detain in military custody those members of al-Qa'ida who are captured in the course of hostilities authorized by the AUMF, and as Commander in Chief I have directed the military to do so where appropriate. I reject any approach that would mandate military custody where law enforcement provides the best method of incapacitating a terrorist threat. While section 1022 is unnecessary and has the potential to create uncertainty, I have signed the bill because I believe that this section can be interpreted and applied in a manner that avoids undue harm to our current operations.

  I have concluded that section 1022 provides the minimally acceptable amount of flexibility to protect national security. Specifically, I have signed this bill on the understanding that section 1022 provides the executive branch with broad authority to determine how best to implement it, and with the full and unencumbered ability to waive any military custody requirement, including the option of waiving appropriate categories of cases when doing so is in the national security interests of the United States. As my Administration has made clear, the only responsible way to combat the threat al-Qa'ida poses is to remain relentlessly practical, guided by the factual and legal complexities of each case and the relative strengths and weaknesses of each system. Otherwise, investigations could be compromised, our authorities to hold dangerous individuals could be jeopardized, and intelligence could be lost. I will not tolerate that result, and under no circumstances will my Administration accept or adhere to a rigid across-the-board requirement for military detention. I will therefore interpret and implement section 1022 in the manner that best preserves the same flexible approach that has served us so well for the past 3 years and that protects the ability of law enforcement professionals to obtain the evidence and cooperation they need to protect the Nation.

  My Administration will design the implementation procedures authorized by section 1022(c) to provide the maximum measure of flexibility and clarity to our counterterrorism professionals permissible under law. And I will exercise all of my constitutional authorities as Chief Executive and Commander in Chief if those procedures fall short, including but not limited to seeking the revision or repeal of provisions should they prove to be unworkable.

  Sections 1023-1025 needlessly interfere with the executive branch's processes for reviewing the status of detainees. Going forward, consistent with congressional intent as detailed in the Conference Report, my Administration will interpret section 1024 as granting the Secretary of Defense broad discretion to determine what detainee status determinations in Afghanistan are subject to the requirements of this section.

  Sections 1026-1028 continue unwise funding restrictions that curtail options available to the executive branch. Section 1027 renews the bar against using appropriated funds for fiscal year 2012 to transfer Guantanamo detainees into the United States for any purpose. I continue to oppose this provision, which intrudes upon critical executive branch authority to determine when and where to prosecute Guantanamo detainees, based on the facts and the circumstances of each case and our national security interests. For decades, Republican and Democratic administrations have successfully prosecuted hundreds of terrorists in Federal court. Those prosecutions are a legitimate, effective, and powerful tool in our efforts to protect the Nation. Removing that tool from the executive branch does not serve our national security. Moreover, this intrusion would, under certain circumstances, violate constitutional separation of powers principles.

  Section 1028 modifies but fundamentally maintains unwarranted restrictions on the executive branch's authority to transfer detainees to a foreign country. This hinders the executive's ability to carry out its military, national security, and foreign relations activities and like section 1027, would, under certain circumstances, violate constitutional separation of powers principles. The executive branch must have the flexibility to act swiftly in conducting negotiations with foreign countries regarding the circumstances of detainee transfers. In the event that the statutory restrictions in sections 1027 and 1028 operate in a manner that violates constitutional separation of powers principles, my Administration will interpret them to avoid the constitutional conflict.

  Section 1029 requires that the Attorney General consult with the Director of National Intelligence and Secretary of Defense prior to filing criminal charges against or seeking an indictment of certain individuals. I sign this based on the understanding that apart from detainees held by the military outside of the United States under the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force, the provision applies only to those individuals who have been determined to be covered persons under section 1022 before the Justice Department files charges or seeks an indictment. Notwithstanding that limitation, this provision represents an intrusion into the functions and prerogatives of the Department of Justice and offends the longstanding legal tradition that decisions regarding criminal prosecutions should be vested with the Attorney General free from outside interference. Moreover, section 1029 could impede flexibility and hinder exigent operational judgments in a manner that damages our security. My Administration will interpret and implement section 1029 in a manner that preserves the operational flexibility of our counterterrorism and law enforcement professionals, limits delays in the investigative process, ensures that critical executive branch functions are not inhibited, and preserves the integrity and independence of the Department of Justice.

  Other provisions in this bill above could interfere with my constitutional foreign affairs powers. Section 1244 requires the President to submit a report to the Congress 60 days prior to sharing any U.S. classified ballistic missile defense information with Russia. Section 1244 further specifies that this report include a detailed description of the classified information to be provided. While my Administration intends to keep the Congress fully informed of the status of U.S. efforts to cooperate with the Russian Federation on ballistic missile defense, my Administration will also interpret and implement section 1244 in a manner that does not interfere with the President's constitutional authority to conduct foreign affairs and avoids the undue disclosure of sensitive diplomatic communications. Other sections pose similar problems. Sections 1231, 1240, 1241, and 1242 could be read to require the disclosure of sensitive diplomatic communications and national security secrets; and sections 1235, 1242, and 1245 would interfere with my constitutional authority to conduct foreign relations by directing the Executive to take certain positions in negotiations or discussions with foreign governments. Like section 1244, should any application of these provisions conflict with my constitutional authorities, I will treat the provisions as non-binding.

  My Administration has worked tirelessly to reform or remove the provisions described above in order to facilitate the enactment of this vital legislation, but certain provisions remain concerning. My Administration will aggressively seek to mitigate those concerns through the design of implementation procedures and other authorities available to me as Chief Executive and Commander in Chief, will oppose any attempt to extend or expand them in the future, and will seek the repeal of any provisions that undermine the policies and values that have guided my Administration throughout my time in office.

  BARACK OBAMA

Caveat: 3/12/12

In 2008 Icelanders witnessed the end of their currency and economy. They had been a popular investment (Ponzi) center. Being well educated and understanding the fiat money scam first hand, they told everyone to get the hell out, thank you, and don't expect a check in the mail.


Over the weekend, Iceland's Prime Minister said the currency situation in Iceland "can't remain unchanged." The U. S. Dollar has been rejected as a possible new currency. As I say, Icelanders are well educated and see what fiat currency scams can do. Icelanders are looking closely at the Canadian dollar.

Iceland's largest think: "The average person [in Iceland] looks at it this way: Canada is a younger version of the U.S., Canada has more natural resources than the U.S., it's less developed, has more land, lots of water… And Canada thinks about the Arctic."

Today's Assault: 3/8/12

WASHINGTON (AP) – The Obama administration is for the first time citing Vatican City as a potential hub for money laundering.

The State Department’s annual International Narcotics Control Strategy Report released Wednesday identifies the Holy See as one of 68 countries or jurisdictions “of concern” for money laundering or other financial crimes. Officials said the Vatican is on the list because it isn’t clear whether a year-old anti-money laundering regime is effective.

Plan your escape

We know about the NDAA that Congress passed when no one was looking on New Years Eve.  That law lets the executive department identify "terrorists" and abduct them and keep them incommunicado. Chris Gibson voted for it.

The FBI has already identified Constitutionalists as terrorists which makes sense as they would threaten "the government."  (Not to worry, the government says it was never intended to control the population, even though it provides for it.)

Last week President Obama imperially announced he would "waive" part of this act of Congress, the part where foreigners can be grabbed. He did this in response to criticism of the law. The press did not catch, or intentionally report, that the prior section dealing with Americans was not "waived."  Personally, I hope he waives the law regarding income tax for Chek-Irish-American males. Why not?  He is king and control Congress and the pretty much the courts.

About the same time as the NDAA, the government mounted an attack on the Internet and had to back down a bit as the Internet companies, who caught on to the game, are more powerful than Obama, for now.

As of a few days ago, we have a new law that was presented as a pointless duplication of trespass law to arrest people protesting. (Oh, don't worry about it, we are told, it is only for stopping trespassing. I can no longer believe our representatives are this stupid, so they must be subversive.)

Of course, it is designed to create a federal crime of being in a place the federal government says is protected from the citizens. What do you think this is saying.  (I have an article pasted below). For example, the Secret Service now protects Mr. Santorum, so if you protest his statism during an election stop, you can be abducted, charged with a federal "crime" and disappear. Is this your country?  You think this cannot be so?

Chris Gibson, our new Congressman in northern New York has voted for the end of habeas corpus and freedom of assembly. He probably doesn't even know it, being an earnest person, but he is a statist,  so vote accordingly. There is no slack to give in protecting your freedom.

Much is done in the name of security that subverts that which assures of security. Scott Murphy was only tweedle dee. If there is NY primary, go vote for someone else. I do not even know. I suggest following local elections and planning an escape route.

The Republican statists votes, nearly all of them but for Ron Paul, are not decisions we merely do not like, as Santorum suggests by saying he had to "take one for the team" on a vote, they are the abnegation of the Constitution;  bills passed when no one was looking. It used to be one amended the Constitution. People have been distracted as the media is going on about free contraception for sluts.

No one says a word when king Obama waives a law passed by Congress. Do you understand? As Motown put it: You better think....

Either you are with the Constitution or you are with the subversives.  You have no more time to sit on the fence as the fence is being topped with barbed wire. As I explained not long ago, the barbed wire is pointed to keep you in, not keep others out.

Keep on voting, but be aware you don't tug on Superman's cape. Keep a suitcase near the door. The best of times is gone; it is now the worst of times.

Oh yes, it is appropriate to add Mr. Bernanke recently said the nation is headed for an economic "catastrophe." (Did you hear that on the nightly TV news?)

Maybe, some people will listen to their hero, now. There is a catastrophe coming, the government, as it pretends to be mad at the rich in order to get the votes of the weak-minded, is preparing to arrest citizens and put them in a gulag, the last source of independent news is under assault, illegal aliens are being courted as well as the Muslim Brotherhood.

The enemy of our time is complacency. The devil's greatest success is that he convinces people he does not exist.

Pass this blog around.

-----

Latest From the Hill: Congress Criminalizes the Right to Free Assembly; Strips Basic Protections of First Amendment

Mac Slavo February 29th, 2012 SHTFplan.com Comments (245)

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Amendment I
The Constitution of the United States of America
September 17, 1787 

It seems like every day brings us one step closer to a totalitarian police state, and today is no exception.

The Daily Crux and Economic Policy Journal have reported on a little known bill that was overwhelmingly approved by the House of Representatives (H.R. 347 vote tally 388-3) and the Senate (S.1794 passed with unanimous consent, no voting records were kept of which Senators approved).

The Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011 essentially strips Americans of their right to protest and assemble in government buildings or on public or private grounds where events of “national significance” are taking place.

The summary of the bill clearly outlines the direct attack on our First Amendment protections which allow for peaceable assembly and public redress of grievances against our government or elected officials within it:

Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011 – Amends the federal criminal code to revise the prohibition against entering restricted federal buildings or grounds to impose criminal penalties on anyone who knowingly enters any restricted building or grounds without lawful authority. Defines “restricted buildings or grounds” as a posted, cordoned off, or otherwise restricted area of: (1) the White House or its grounds or the Vice President’s official residence or its grounds, (2) a building or grounds where the President or other person protected by the Secret Service is or will be temporarily visiting, or (3) a building or grounds so restricted due to a special event of national significance. 

Bill sponsor Tom Rooney (R-FL) claimed in a tweet responding to grievances on the internet, that “HR 347 does not effect your right to protest in any way whatsoever. It deals with fence jumpers, not protestors.”

As it turns out, the two page bill deals not just with ‘fence jumpers,’ but also lays the groundwork for all protests, gatherings and politic dissent in any facility or grounds in the United States of America that has been identified as a place of ‘national significance’ or where the Secret Service is charged with the protection of an individual – ANY individual, whether it’s the President, a congressional member or anyone else of national interest....