Silenced No More

The REAL ID Act was enacted by Congress on May 11, 2005, without significant debate. It modifies U.S. federal law pertaining to security, authentication, and issuance procedures standards for state driver’s licenses and ID cards.

In response to numerous states resisting compliance, the federal government has extended the deadline several times. In 2007, Maine and Utah led the way in passing resolutions refusing implementation.

Arkansas, Arizona, Colorado, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, and Washington have joined Maine and Utah in passing legislation opposing Real ID.

Similar resolutions are pending in Alaska, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Mexico, New York, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Washington, D.C., West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.

According to Tela Mange, Chief of Media Relations at Texas Department of Public Safety, the timeframe for implementation in Texas has changed to January 15, 2013. “DPS is planning to follow the standards established to ensure that we issue secure credentials,” she wrote in an email.

“There are no new biometric requirements,” she added in a follow-up email.

On March 1, 2007, the Department of Homeland Security issued a NPRM (Notice of Proposed Rule Making) for the Real ID Act that detailed the minimum data elements required. It did not require a state to include biometric technology in its driver’s licenses.

Mange was contacted after she was quoted by CNET News. “We’re still reading the fine print,” she said in response to a question about the status of the law and its implementation in Texas.

REAL ID was in the news this week after House Republican sent a letter to DHS boss Janet Napolitano. The republicans said that “any further extension of Real ID threatens the security of the United States.”

Unless Homeland Security grants an extension, the law’s requirements take effect on May 11, CNET notes. According to reports, DHS is considering pushing back the deadline a further 21 months to January 15, 2013.

It’s Not Just Oil, It’s The Dollar, Stupid!

I learned something new today. I seem to continue to do that the more I look.

Why does the US wage war at the slightest ripple, anywhere in the world, and we just sit up here and take it?

Do you hear the sabers rattling on Iran?

A very similar rattling sound to Iraq. And you may say, “well, Iraq was responsible for the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center… weapons of mass destruction right?

You should know better and I won’t even go there, because there is enough very valid data on-line and in your favorite bookstore to debunk such quite easily.

But why did we really invade Iraq and what does that have to do with Iran?

We all say, “OIL,”  right? Right, but there’s more to it. (It’s the dollar stupid.)

After the war in 1944 at a big meeting in Breton Woods N.H. USA, the big bankers put the world on the dollar as its reserve currency, replacing the British pound.

That means, that everybody trades in dollars, to keep it simple.

We had enough military muscle and ample gold in our reserves, so the world readily accepted our dollar—as good as gold. So, of course, with that “confidence” in place the door was opened to printing more money with no gold to back it. Yet, the idea remained—a dollar is as good as gold.

Then the French and a few others threw a slight monkey wrench in the vault in the late 1960s. They demanded the US pay up in gold—the real stuff. Damn near drained Fort Knox – and put an end to the fake “gold standard.”

So, deep the night in 1971, tricky Dick, the then president, at the behest of the bankers that be, took the US off what partial gold standard that existed, to save the vault from being drained… Whether you realize it or not, that was in essence the admission of our insolvency as a country. We can’t pay our obligations and won’t.

This didn’t cause much alarm to most if not all nations who still believed the dollar was as good as gold.

But, the printing presses (and the Federal Reserve computers) revved up and started really printing the greenbacks … and part of the manipulation up of the dollar was an agreement made with the OPEC crew, whereby they made everyone pay for oil in dollars worldwide.

The dollar sort of became an oil-based currency. That’s a new one… didn’t know that before.

In return, the U.S. promised to protect the various oil-rich kingdoms (the OPEC crew) in the Persian Gulf against threat of invasion or domestic coup. This helped inginite the radical Islamic movement among those who resented our influence in the region.
Are the dots connecting yet?

But realize, that the printing presses and computers are still cranking out dollar bills by the jillions now. The more money that goes into the system, the less the dollar is worth. To make a long story short, the point is that the weakening dollar led some to start challenging it’s worth, like Saddam Hussein.

Senator Ron Paul said in a speech to the US House of Representatives in 2006:

“In November 2000 Saddam Hussein demanded Euros for his oil. His arrogance was a threat to the dollar; his lack of any military might was never a threat.

“At the first cabinet meeting with the new administration in 2001, as reported by Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill, the major topic was how we would get rid of Saddam Hussein — though there was no evidence whatsoever he posed a threat to us. This deep concern for Saddam Hussein surprised and shocked O’Neill.”

Later in this speech he states:

‘In 2001, Venezuela’s ambassador to Russia spoke of Venezuela switching to the Euro for all their oil sales. Within a year there was a coup attempt against Chavez, reportedly with assistance from our CIA.

“After these attempts to nudge the Euro toward replacing the dollar as the world’s reserve currency were met with resistance, the sharp fall of the dollar against the Euro was reversed. These events may well have played a significant role in maintaining dollar dominance.

“It’s become clear the U.S. administration was sympathetic to those who plotted the overthrow of Chavez, and was embarrassed by its failure. The fact that Chavez was democratically elected had little influence on which side we supported.”

Can you guess the next move? I can. Who else is proposing to sell oil for Euros and not dollars?

You guessed it. Iran.

Iran has no power to attack us. None. We’ve surely done a lot to piss them off – CIA overthrow of their democratically elected president in 1953; Installing the Shah and aiding Saddam Hussein in invading Iran in the 80s.

Think Iran would be a bit ticked off?

Ok, Ron Paul said another few things…

“Concern for pricing oil only in dollars helps explain our willingness to drop everything and teach Saddam Hussein a lesson for his defiance in demanding Euros for oil.

“And once again there’s this urgent call for sanctions and threats of force against Iran at the precise time Iran is opening a new oil exchange with all transactions in Euros.

“Using force to compel people to accept money without real value can only work in the short run. It ultimately leads to economic dislocation, both domestic and international, and always ends with a price to be paid.

“The economic law that honest exchange demands only things of real value as currency cannot be repealed. The chaos that one day will ensue from our 35-year experiment with worldwide fiat money will require a return to money of real value. We will know that day is approaching when oil-producing countries demand gold, or its equivalent, for their oil rather than dollars or Euros. The sooner the better.”

I say, open your eyes and look for the things that don’t make sense and dig deeper till you get the truth.

Then the real game on planet earth will become visible. You can read the whole speech here…

Al@ Components of Success.com

“If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.”

— Thomas Jefferson

Just recently, I attended a major event and heard a very dynamic speaker, Minister Louis Farrakhan.

The one point of a very powerful speech I could not reconcile was the support given to the Libyan leader, Muhammar al-Qaddafi. My impression of Qaddafi was – as publicized – the “mad dog of the Middle East.” Yet, the other indicators I had of Farrakhan were, though outspoken and quite criticized in the media, he spoke what I saw was true.

Cold, hard, no punches pulled, but true.

I decided, as I went about my normal routine, to look into what I could find to reconcile the contrary facts. Farrakhan said in a subsequent press conference that Libyans had a very high standard of living, free schools and things about very good medical care that had been provided by that very mad dog…

Something didn’t match. al-Qaddafi had wrestled the control of Libya’s oil resources and put the income back into his country for the betterment of his people.

Farrakhan felt it part of his integrity to stick by a person who’d given him support over the years and not back down on friendship due to media badmouthing.

Then, I found, while searching for something disrelated, that there are 5 countries that do not have Rothschild controlled central banks… they are: Cuba, Sudan, North Korea, Iran and Libya.

Okay, starts to make sense.

I know the media is the mouthpiece of the vested interests. 5 mega corporations control almost everything we see and hear on the mainstream media. Newspapers were literally bought out – their editorial policy was bought by the big boys years ago. They actually paid out of pocket, the salaries of editors of the 25 most influential newspapers on the US. Just so they could tell you what they wanted you to hear.

So, today, in search again of something disrelated, I find this:

LIBYA: ALL ABOUT OIL, OR ALL ABOUT BANKING?

Posted on April 16, 2011 by Ellen Brown
“If the Gaddafi government goes down, it will be interesting to watch whether the new central bank joins the BIS, (Bank of International Settlements) whether the nationalized oil industry gets sold off to investors, and whether education and health care continue to be free.

“Several writers have noted the odd fact that the Libyan rebels took time out from their rebellion in March to create their own central bank – this before they even had a government. Robert Wenzel wrote in the Economic Policy Journal:

“I have never before heard of a central bank being created in just a matter of weeks out of a popular uprising. This suggests we have a bit more than a rag tag bunch of rebels running around and that there are some pretty sophisticated influences.”

“Alex Newman wrote in the New American:

‘In a statement released last week, the rebels reported on the results of a meeting held on March 19. Among other things, the supposed rag-tag revolutionaries announced the “[d]esignation of the Central Bank of Benghazi as a monetary authority competent in monetary policies in Libya and appointment of a Governor to the Central Bank of Libya, with a temporary headquarters in Benghazi.”

Newman quoted CNBC senior editor John Carney, who asked, “Is this the first time a revolutionary group has created a central bank while it is still in the midst of fighting the entrenched political power? It certainly seems to indicate how extraordinarily powerful central bankers have become in our era.”

Another anomaly involves the official justification for taking up arms against Libya. Supposedly it’s about human rights violations, but the evidence is contradictory. According to an article on the Fox News website on February 28:

‘As the United Nations works feverishly to condemn Libyan leader Muammar al-Qaddafi for cracking down on protesters, the body’s Human Rights Council is poised to adopt a report chock-full of praise for Libya’s human rights record.

“The review commends Libya for improving educational opportunities, for making human rights a “priority” and for bettering its “constitutional” framework. Several countries, including Iran, Venezuela, North Korea, and Saudi Arabia but also Canada, give Libya positive marks for the legal protections afforded to its citizens — who are now revolting against the regime and facing bloody reprisal.”

“Whatever might be said of Gaddafi’s personal crimes, the Libyan people seem to be thriving. A delegation of medical professionals from Russia, Ukraine and Belarus wrote in an appeal to Russian President Medvedev and Prime Minister Putin that after becoming acquainted with Libyan life, it was their view that in few nations did people live in such comfort:

‘[Libyans] are entitled to free treatment, and their hospitals provide the best in the world of medical equipment. Education in Libya is free, capable young people have the opportunity to study abroad at government expense. When marrying, young couples receive 60,000 Libyan dinars (about 50,000 U.S. dollars) of financial assistance. Non-interest state loans, and as practice shows, undated. Due to government subsidies the price of cars is much lower than in Europe, and they are affordable for every family. Gasoline and bread cost a penny, no taxes for those who are engaged in agriculture. The Libyan people are quiet and peaceful, are not inclined to drink, and are very religious.’

“They maintained that the international community had been misinformed about the struggle against the regime. “Tell us,” they said, “who would not like such a regime?”

What do you think the answer to that one is?

Again, we see that contrary facts lead to some interesting falsehoods being manufactured. All one has to do is look and the blood stained hands are there, still wet and dripping.

Soon, there will be one less country with control over their finances and under the control of others who don’t have their best interests in mind.

And for the record, I never think it okay to leave one with such information and no real solution for it.

Well, right now, I suggest that you personally flourish and prosper as a first step. Understand what is going on around you and dig into things that don’t make sense. Some have said that awareness campaigns are worthless. I don’t agree. I know that before activity and production come prediction and before that comes recognition, communication and perception. Without this gradient of awareness, one never gets to activity, production and down the road results.

So, yes, awareness is needed. Before one can see and understand, one has to be aware of the real state of affairs in his environment. Then one is motivated to act and can remedy the situation.

Al
www.components-of-success.com