Mad As Hell – Dylan Ratigan



Direct Link to Video

Dylan Ratigan joined by  Susan del Percio, Jimmy WIlliams and Karen Finney.

From 1:50
DR: Susan, is there any way that any president or any congressmen can intervene with the problem that we have right now . . . in this political system can a leader address these issue considering how dependent they are for funding for political campaigns from the banks, from the international trade organizations and from those who benefit from those tax loopholes that he or she would have to close.

SP: . . . it isn’t going to come from congress, it’s not going to come from an individual congress member of house of representative or US senator.  . . . Who does it fall on?  If falls on the executive. It falls on the president.  . . . since refusing to even say where he stood on the public option when he came into elected office has not lead this country. . . but he has been a complete and utter failure and disappointment to this country.

KF: Wait a second, it is congress who holds the power of the purse and I am going to get back to Dylan’s question, this president was willing to put on the table a big deal and who didn’t get the votes, John Boehner, Congress.

DR: What are you talking about?  Four trillion dollars.  We owe 70 trillion dollars . . . walking out a four trillion dollar solution which is basically just a way to get the democrats to avoid dealing with this until 2017.  I am not here to talk about plans to talk about this till 2017, I am saying we have got a real problem and I am tired of republicans and democrats who either want – republicans who want to burn the place to the ground and democrats . . . who want to offer a plan that gets it through the end of their second term of their presidency and then screws me and my kids when it’s over.  And until we do that we have to deal with the extraction that is at foot.  It is the reason the financial markets are behaving the way they are behaving.  That is a mathematical fact.  This is not some opinion.  This is a mathematical fact.  Tens of trillions of dollars are being extracted from the United States of America.  Democrats aren’t doing it, Republicans aren’t doing it.  An entire integrated system; financial system, trading system, taxing system that was created by both parties over a period of two decades is at work on our entire country right now.  And we’re sitting here arguing about whether or not we should do the four trillion dollar plan that kicks the can down the road for the president for 2017 or the burn the place to the ground.  Both of which are reckless, irresponsible and stupid.  And the fact of the matter is until we actually . . . and i am sorry to lose my temper . . . I have been coming on TV for three years doing this and the fact of the matter is there is a refusal on both the democratic and republican side of isle to acknowledge the mathematical problem which is the USA is being extracted.  It’s being extracted through banking.  It’s being extracted through trade.  And it’s being extracted trough taxation.  And there’s not a single politician that has stepped forward, Susan, to deal with it.

SP: . . . the president of the United States is arguably one of the most powerful individuals we have out there . . .

KF: Susan, what you are saying is exactly the point that Dylan is making.  It’s not about one guy, it’s about all of them . . .

SP: No, I actually disagree.  I think Dylan is saying it is about one guy . . .

KF: What is one guy going to do?

DR: I agree with her (Susan).  It is about one guy.

KF: What would you like him to do?  Tell me what you want him to do?

DR: I would like him to go to the people of the USA and say, people of the USA, your congress is bought.  Your congress is incapable of making legislation on healthcare, banking, trade or taxes.  Because if they do it they will lose their political funding and they won’t do it.  But I am the president of the USA and I won’t have a country that is run by a bought congress so I am not going to work with a bought congress and try to be mister big guy “I’m working with a bought congress”, I am going to abandon the bought congress like Teddy Roosevelt did and I am gonna to go to the people of the United States and say “you’ve got a bought congress” and until we get rid of the bought congress which is Jimmy Williams constant point which is get the money out of politics.  And until the president says that’s the problem and says he is going to fix it there is no policy that I can possibly see no matter how brilliant your idea might be or your idea or my idea or her idea or your idea at home . . . that idea will not happen as long as there is the capacity to basically fire a politician who disagrees with me by taking funding away from him.  Is that a fair assessment?

JW: Money in politics is the root of all political evil.  It is corruption at its worst.  And until we step up and kick that out of the park it’s going to be the same system all the way.

DR: And only the president can do that.

JW: No, no, no, congress has to do it too.

DR: But I will tell you what – How bad does it have to get?  How much money has to be extracted?  How many things have to be hurt?

KF: . . . ok, physically what do you do?

DR: You go and give a speech, right now.  Tomorrow you begin the process of actually investing and solving the problem.  . . . I create an infrastructure bank with 2 percent lending, immediately.  Once I explain to people the problem – Once I explain to you that you have cancer – Once you understand how screwed up your trade, tax and banking policies are believe me you will have no issue when I incorporate an infrastructure bank that I fund with repatriated offshore money that I bring in and then use to create 2 percent direct lending to every business in America – Because when you realize that the banking system is fully corrupt and defrauding us and I come out and say that which is what I want my president to do.  At that exact moment I say “you know what, we got a screwed up situation here people, you all know it and now I am going to admit it.  As a result not only have I admitted it but we’re going to begin the process of solving it like grown-ups.  They did it world war two, they did it after the civil war, they did in Latin America with the Brady Bonds, we are not seeing it happen now.

What War on Terror?


Who Voted for the Patriot Act??

http://1.usa.gov/muyrSP – reauthorize the patriot act 2011
http://bit.ly/luocqF – voted for the patriot act 2001 and 2006

Enabling Act of 1933 vs. US Patriot Act 2001

http://bit.ly/lEqxVo – US Pat Act vs Hitler Enabling Act
http://bit.ly/mOW9RV – The Judge: Natural Rights and Pat Act

Government Could Have Prevented 9/11 without Patriot Act

http://bit.ly/iS3Ono – Fox News: Secrets of 9/11
http://bit.ly/lndCEP – Complete 9/11 Timeline
http://bit.ly/izTe1n – Reason Mag and Harry Samit
http://bbc.in/kmz3xV – BBC and Harry Samit

Congressional Hearing on the TSA Oversight and Whole Body Imaging

http://1.usa.gov/mcd2mo – TSA Oversight Part 1: Whole Body Imaging

US Was Warned about the Underwear Bomber

http://thetim.es/ivSSSa – Warned about Underwear bomber
http://abcn.ws/jVPdJb – Missed Underwear bomber
http://exm.nr/kzvy2N – Napolitano admits US knew Underwear bomber

 

The patriot act of 2001 resembles the enabling act of 1933.  Most people will be surprised that the enabling act of 1933 was enacted by the third reich in nazi germany and not in america.  for the people who would still support the patriot act after all we know about the integrity of today’s politicians i will go over many reasons why the patriot act has nothing to do with terrorism.  If interested in hearing more [ on the similarities of the Patriot Act and Enabling Act you should follow the links here that are also below the video.

http://bit.ly/lEqxVo – US Pat Act vs Hitler Enabling Act
http://bit.ly/mOW9RV – The Judge: Natural Rights and Pat Act

The concept of war on terror is fallacious.  Anyone can be a terrorist.  the biggest fear tactic in recent history is the ‘war on terror’.  this can be re-worded as the war on being scared and can be related to similar tactics.  Any Russian with a computer seems to use spam for marketing.  This well known parent, Jenny McCarthy uses time-outs when previously she was a playboy playmate and talk show host.  Before steroids Mark and Jose might have bunted between hitting home runs.  On his way to millionaire status this man probably had to make some cold calls to raise money and sell his ideas.  Here is a former Berkeley professor who turned terrorist and became known as the unibomber.  A former patriot who was in desert storm was out for revenge against the US government in 1993 for the government’s massacre in Waco TX.  What about this well educated doctor who practiced medicine throughout the 80s became al qaeda’s number 2 in command in the 90s.  And finally, over medicated nerdy white kids turn to terrorism in 1999.  Yes, even though they didn’t use a bomb or praise Allah, they are terrorists.  The bottom line is a tactic can be adopted and implemented by anyone with little or no training.

Another aspect in recent history to realize ‘war on terror’ is false is the open border policy the US shares with Mexico.  There are supposedly two wars going on around the US/Mexico boarder; the war on terror and the war on drugs.  The war on drugs is another topic regarding lies and perpetual war.  Why is it that the border can’t be secured?  Israel has a secure border, North Korea secures it’s border, Soviet Russia was able to keep people within the walls of Berlin for about 30 years.  Even the Minutemen Project who are a national citizens neighborhood watch had success in decreasing drug trafficking on the parts of the border where they were located.  I am not making an argument for secure borders, I am making an argument that during any war on terror or even the perpetual war on drugs the border where the most illegal trafficking happens is the border that should be most secure.  The border from Sept 11, 2001 to now has never been secured as though there was any security threat.  After sept 11 2001 the airports were closed, all fights canceled, border check points were closed but nothing was done to increase security on the border.  The people and the precious drugs still flowed as free as they did before.  You would think that to make it look good right after 9/11 president bush would have militarized the borders and would have probably shot on sight anyone attempting to cross just like fight 93 or any other hijacked plane would have been shot down before it would be allowed to hit it’s target.  Then I would imagine the borders would go back to normal when the military was sent to invade iraq 2003.  We didn’t have secure borders because we never had a war on terrorism.  How can DHS have numbers of apprehended foreign nationals in these numbers if we are constantly under the threat of terrorism?  Keep in mind the operative word is apprehended.  How many more are never caught?

The past 10 years is another place to find evidence that the war on terror is simply a tactic used by the government to justify trampling the constitution, civil liberties and the american way of life.

Most recently there is the body scanners and TSA pat downs.  The most recent government accountability office reports that the scanners fail more than not and congressman mica on 3/16/2011 had a hearing on this fact. (audio).  If the GAO has tested these body scanners to show they fail more than are accurate why are the american people subjected to this form of treatment?

http://1.usa.gov/mcd2mo – TSA Oversight Part 1: Whole Body Imaging

The underwear bomber was allowed to get on the plane.  There was many warnings about this guy from his own father and he was already on the terrorist watch list.  So how could someone on the terror watch list get on any international flight?

More recently than that fox news ran a program called ‘The Secrets of 9/11’ on 5/20/2011 revealing many points where the US government knew about most of the hijackers and failed to push and follow up on the leads they had.  The US just didn’t pursue the intel they had.  There wasn’t any patriot act at the time and they had all they needed to investigate and very likely stop the 9/11 attacks.  There was also knowledge of the threat of a terrorist attack in the fbi.  just do a search for Harry Samit.    See all links below to find references to see how the US government had all they needed without the patriot act to investigate all known terrorist in the US.  There is even a complete timeline showing how the US had followed or initiated the organization of terrorist groups in the world.

http://bit.ly/lndCEP – complete 9/11 timeline

http://thetim.es/ivSSSa – Warned about Underwear bomber

http://abcn.ws/jVPdJb – Missed Underwear bomber

http://exm.nr/kzvy2N – Napolitano admits US knew Underwear bomber

http://bit.ly/iS3Ono – Fox News: Secrets of 9/11

http://bbc.in/kmz3xV – BBC and Harry Samit

http://bit.ly/izTe1n – Reason Mag and Harry Samit

The point has been to get the american people used to government intrusion.  Where the full intentions of the US government might end up is secure the internet, full body scanners for airport, bus and train stations, Europe style CCTV, in other words, cameras everywhere.  The only sect of the population against such intrusion are some moderate liberals and libertarians.  Republicans seem to be more interested in protecting george bush’s legacy rather than admitting his presidency was an absolute failure.  Unfortunately the liberals who had regular protests against George Bush have gone silent now that Barrack Obama is president.

In order to keep the US a free society is to put your vote behind anyone who is committed to the US constitution.  You will hear the people worth voting for use the constitution in their arguments and reasoning when voting against most democrats social agenda or the republicans need for securing a police state.

While you wait to hear from these people please read up by starting with the links below.

http://1.usa.gov/muyrSP – reauthorize the patriot act 2011

http://bit.ly/luocqF – voted for the patriot act 2001 and 2006

Obama heads-up UN Security Council




This is just a quick post about Obama taking on the head role in the UN security council this month.  Being a former instructor of constitutional law he must know that since he is president of the US he is not eligible to fill this position.

The concept ‘the ends justify the means’ is very popular among politicians these days.  In this case the ends are the global agreement about what to do with left-over nuclear weapons and the sale of ‘yet to be manufactured’ nuclear weapons.  The means is bending the limits of the constitution to settle the nuclear problem himself.

====Article 1, Section 9====
No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince or foreign State.
=====================

If all goes well globally i am sure this will make him look like a hero and at home some people will ridicule him for not upholding his oath to preserve and protect the constitution after they are done with other politicians who passed national healthcare and the patriot act which go a lot further in breaking constitutional law.

CNN Post

New York Daily