tony m

How about... Remember quantitative easing stopped two months earlier before the oil prices dropped? Here is a comment, from another board, fisharmor: Ron Paul has been saying forever that the price of oil mirrors fed monetary policy. When they pump tons of cash into the economy, everyone has more money, so everyone wants more money to part with things they value. Basic supply and demand... only nobody on the radio ever admits that money itself is subject to the law of supply and demand. When they take money out of the system, everyone has less, and so will settle for less of it to part with things they value. I don't know whether they're taking money out yet, but they've at least stopped pumping money in. Here we are two months later and everyone has kind of figured out that the dollar isn't going to be worth a whole lot less a month from now, so prices have stabilized. Silver is also down almost to $15 from a January price of $20. Other things to consider are 1) The overall tendency of the market is always to LOWER prices. 2) Sure, there might be downward pressure from suppliers - because when a good or service is wicked expensive the natural tendency for the providers thereof is to get as much of it out to market as they can. I'd bet that if you look at production figures you'd see that they tend to ramp up production when oil is expensive and throttle it back when it's not. How the dollar can be gaining so much value with oil dropping so hard? I thought the 'petrodollar' pegged the two together? The "petrodollar" is the currency (us dollars) which is used to buy and sell Saudi oil. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petrodollar The only difference between a petrodollar and a regular dollar is that the petrodollars don't really make it back inside the US and therefore aren't a normal part of circulating currency.

American-Russian Economic War Yet to Bend Either Side http://atlanticsentinel.com/2014/12/american-russian-economic-war-yet-to-bend-either-side/ Oil fell below $59 a barrel on Tuesday when the Russian ruble plunged more than 11 percent against the dollar in its steepest single-day decline since the 1998 financial crisis. The collapse of both owes much to the standoff between Russia and the West in Ukraine and suggests the two are willing to endure short-term economic pain for the sake of longer-term strategic goals. The ruble has lost over half its value against the American dollar since the start of the year. The collapse is partially due to falling oil prices and partially due to a lack of foreign capital flowing into Russia as a result of economic and financial sanctions Western powers imposed in the wake of its occupation and annexation of the Crimean Peninsula from Ukraine in March. The Russian central bank expects the economy will contract between 4.5 and 4.7 percent next year if oil stays below $60 per barrel. A weaker currency does have some positive impact on Russia’s public finances. It helps compensate for falling revenues from oil and natural gas which are sold abroad for euros and dollars. Import restrictions Russia imposed on European agricultural products in retaliation for the Western sanctions could also help stabilize its trade deficits. There is less money coming in because of the falling oil price but there is also less going out to buy food. Russia invariably sees America’s hand in its currency’s collapse and it might not be altogether mistaken. Saudi Arabia, the world’s largest oil exporter and an American ally, has not cut output, which would shore up the price of oil, and stopped other OPEC powers from doing so. The Saudis have several reasons not to act, argues Mohamad Bazzi at Reuters. The kingdom has two targets in its latest oil war: it is trying to squeeze US shale oil — which requires higher prices to remain competitive with conventional production — out of the market. More broadly, the Saudis are also punishing two rivals, Russia and Iran, for their support of Bashar al-Assad’s regime in the Syrian civil war. Whether Saudi Arabia and the United States conspired to drive down the price of oil or not, their interest have converged. Both oppose the Assad regime, which Iran and Russia defend, while America wants to dissuade Russia from further aggression in Ukraine without risking war in Europe. Since annexing the Crimea, Russia has supported a separatist uprising in Ukraine’s southeastern Donbas region. Russia needs oil to trade around $100 per barrel to balance its budget. Iran, suffering from more stringent Western sanctions because of its suspected nuclear weapons program, needs even higher prices. As Bazzi points out, Saudi Arabia is also anxious about unconventional oil extraction in North America that could reduce the world’s dependence on itself. If there is a strategy, it might not be working. Neither Iran nor Russia appears to have changed its behavior under economic pressure. The former has resumed nuclear talks with the West but they have yet to produce an accord. Russia is not retreating from Ukraine. It seems to prioritize the strategic imperative of keeping this crucial Russian borderland out of Europe and NATO over whatever economic pain the West is able to inflict upon it. America’s policy is a mirror version of Russia’s in this sense. It, too, appears willing to hurt its economy — a little — by allowing Saudi Arabia to undermine its shale revolution for the sake of preventing Russia from dominating Eastern Europe. Although unlike their Russian counterparts, American consumers aren’t feeling the pinch. Falling oil prices almost directly benefit them in the form of cheaper gasoline — even if it could come at the expense of American energy security in the long term.

whoops.

Two things to look at. Quantitative Easing purchases stopped two months prior to oil prices going down. US imposed sanctions against Russia for Ukraine, Russia immediately stop's taking dollars for their oil. Russia says screw selling oil with the dollar and signs deals with China and India. The sanctions and devastating loss in the value of the ruble, due to Russia's heavy dependence on oil/gas sales, is hurting Russia. Guess "taking out" Putin, like done with weak countries, isn't going to happen. Saudi Arabia is dropping the price of oil. Why? Low oil prices to force Russia into having to make a move. And they have been. The latest info won't be found on the MSM. ZeroHedge is a good site with cutting edge info and a good amount of intellectual posters over there. Lotsa insight.

Think this is going to get sent to the supreme court so they can interpret the Constitution for the safety of the children? If so, there would be a national backlash. Possibly, unlike any since the war of northern aggression, as the south would say. Or, does scotus not want that and will appease.

For anyone watching other countries slowly leave the united states to later decide how much more force they will end up using to 'spread democracy, have free markets', and try to save face. http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-1...turkey-instead http://redpilltimes.com/south-stream...n-gas-transit/ Turkey will capitalize on Europe’s stupidity and control Russian gas transit Winners: America: South Stream is gone. Europe will lose Russian gas over time, leaving the EU at America’s total energy mercy. European citizens will pay a much higher price for gas and oil…paid to American (and American supported) energy companies Russia: They can now move on and they already have. China is sealed up, now Turkey. Energy will always have buyers and two big deals have been sealed. Added bonus, Russia can stop dealing with the wanker losers that make up the EU. Turkey: Disrespected and teased by the EU for decades, Turkey will now be a major energy transit hub to Europe, and beyond. Should South Europe need gas, then it has to deal with Turkey now. Suck on that Brussels! Losers: Ukraine: You are about to see Ukraine turn into a rump state. Once gas stops crossing through Ukraine pipes, the country will become a wasteland of nothingness. They fell hook, line and sinker for the American / EU fairytale. With Turk Stream a reality, Ukraine has lost its strategic energy significance, and the fairytale is in fact a horror freak show. Bulgaria, Serbia, Austria, Italy: All these EU countries would have made big time revenue, and employed lots of people in need of jobs, by being links in the South Stream chain. Now they will have to pay the Turk Stream toll booth to secure their energy needs. Greece: Turkey and Greece are far from BFF status. Throw in the Cyprus problem and you can now see how being subservient to Turkey for your energy needs could be considered a bit of a security problem. After 8 years of austerity, Brussels really f**ked Greece big time by blowing apart South Stream. Brussels: They sold out the prosperity and security of Southern Europe so they could appease their US masters, line their pockets, and most likely avoid some NSA scandals. Europe forfeited energy security, revenue, jobs and so much more over a Ukraine over run with nazi elements. Brussels leadership should be held accountable for this betrayal.

When a person calls someone else the derogatory term - Conspiracy Theorist. Don't look at the person being bullied, but the person calling it. Real core exposure, that will barely touch MSM. But check the body fat numbers on that Defensive End! UBS to settle over precious metals misconduct allegations as part of forex market rigging probehttp://www.cityam.com/1415555430/ubs-settle-over-precious-metals-misconduct-allegations-part-forex-market-rigging-probe UBS are expected to strike a settlement with financial regulators over allegations of misconduct at its precious metals trading business. The settlement will form a part of a £1.5bn agreement the Swiss lender is due to make with five other banks to settle allegations of forex market rigging. According to a report in the Financial Times, the bank found a number of problematic incidents at its precious metals desk. UBS, Barclays, Citigroup, HSBC, JPMorgan and Royal Bank of Scotland have been the subject of probes into their foreign exchange trading from regulators in the UK, the US and Switzerland. The six banks will announce a £1.5bn agreement with the UK’s Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission in the US, and Finma in Switzerland on Wednesday this week. However, unlike the five other groups under investigation, UBS’s precious metals arm is closely integrated with its forex trading businesses. UBS and JPMorgan’s settlements this week will come less than a month after they were fined (along with Credit Suisse) £74m by the European Commission for colluding on benchmarks and prices, including libor rates and interest rate derivatives. All five banks had set aside large sums for such an eventuality in the investigation into their forex trading. UBS set aside up to £1.18bn, while JPMorgan had gone even further with £1.4bn reserved for potential litigation costs. ***** http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-11-09/another-conspiracy-theory-bites-dust-ubs-settles-over-gold-rigging-many-more-banks-f Remember when everyone decried wholesale Libor manipulation as a crazy conspiracy theory (Zero Hedge: January 2009: "This Makes No Sense: LIBOR By Bank") because after all, it was impossible for so many people to keep their mouth shut or whatever the generic justification is for disproving such "conspiracy theories"? Why, none other than ICAP chief Michael Spencer says they all though Libor was "unmanipulable." As it turns out, not only is Libor manipulable(sic), and a vast rate-rigging "conspiracy theory" is quite possible when everyone's interests are aligned, but it also was massively profitable. Then it was the turn of the even more massive, multi-trillion FX market, when first UBS squealed like a pig and soon ratted out every other bank in the criminal "Cartel" (or was it "Bandits"?) syndicate (see: "Meet The (First) Seven Banks Who Rigged The FX Market"). End result: banks such as JPM, Citi and BofA forced to review their criminal ways and adjusting their third quarter results a month into Q4. Many more legal fees, charges and settlement coming however for those who lost money on the other side of such long-running manipulation, please accept our condolences: you won't see a penny. And finally, there was the precious metals market: a market which all the Keynesian fanatic paper bugs said was immune from manipulation, be it of the central or commercial bank kind, even with every other market clearly exposed for perpetual rigging either by hedge funds, by prop desks, by HFTs, or central banks themselves. Sadly this too conspiracy theory just was crushed into the reality of conspiracy fact, when moments ago the FT reported that alongside admissions of rigging every other market, UBS - always the proverbial first rat in the coalmine, to mix and match metaphors- is about to "settle" allegations of gold and silver rigging. In other words: it admits it had rigged the gold and silver markets, without of course "admitting or denying" it did so.

Alright, activity action.

It "verbaged" that way, that day. lol. The numbers are, hopefully, really low.

I think it isn't out in the forefront to be used as a whiner thing. Good article.

New York State Police - Release the Safe Act AR Registered Numbers

That's normal. I came from a family who didn't want or look into what is the cause of issues. The majority of people thru the decades have been conditioned not to talk politics at work, so that evolved into everyday life. What got me investigating was back in 2007 when I heard the sentence, "The dollar today is worth 4 cents compared to the dollar of 1913 when the Federal Reserve took it over." I didn't understand any of it, so I started to research. From there I learned how wealth is transferred from the people to the government. My families wealth was being stolen so I have to stick up for myself and them. I had decades of learning to catch up with from what we are not taught. Hope you will lead your family and like a growing segment of people, start to figure out what the heck is going on with our nation and Freedom in general.

Nationally - With GOP in control: The bad. There will be no repeal of any progressive programs, no smaller government, MIC will have full power with McCain as Senate committee chairman - escalating in Ukraine, Syria, and Iraq. Blowback will be tougher U.S. police state. The good. Delaying of some Freedom relinquishment. Possible vote to Audit the Fed. (Due to Rand Paul [Ron Paul] influence on Mitch McConnell, probably the new Senate majority leader.) *** State The bad. Except for Grisanti out, the Senate has the same makeup (I believe so) who voted to weaken the commoners last resort to be free by voting for the Safe Act. Activism efforts would target that same makeup, since any new legislation passed concerning more attempt to have the populace relinquish Freedom defensive components, would come from the same group of Senators. The good. Really? *** Erie county The bad Popular Angela Woziak won Assembly, However, she is one of the Cheektowaga Soviets who voted to not allow other candidates, except incumbents, to be nominated for elections at the towns Republican party elections. Therefore, she will rise in the ranks. *** The good. ...

Thought there used to be. Auto embed sounds great. Just put the link or use the iframe?

How you doing Hider (WNYBuckHunter). Your keyboard still has sticky keys from playing with your mind. When you guys going to put the video icon back in the editor so I can embed videos like I was used to? Is this universal for everyone on the board or does the moderators choose which video is going to be embedded and which are not?

The debate was standard; soft journalism questions. Cuomo represents the power elite. Astorino has the "fakey, perfect" demeanor. Howie represented his party well and McDermott is trying to get Cuomo Independent votes and was the only candidate to mention the Consitution, twice I believe; and limited government. We sat first row behind Bob McCarthy from the Buffalo News, the first moderator. I was right behind Bob, so you only saw my silver hair when Bob was on camera. Don Hey from Western New York Talks, was on the right of Bob and Betty Jean Grant, Erie County Legislature was on my left. Mike Madigan, vice president of the Frederick Douglas foundation was on the right of Don. So what was the vibe? Standing in line to get in, gave us a voice. Don jested with NYS Senator Tim Kennedy where people in line heard the "spirited" to and fro. The major of Niagara Falls was behind us, so I called him out on why he walked by my booth, for three straight days at the Niagara Falls Blues Festival and did not stop over and introduce himself like with the other vendors. We helped him with some 2A education. He was/is ? one of the Mayors Against Guns Violence team. Paladino walked by and we voiced up a hello so attendees would notice that. I was asked to remove my New York State Resistance sweatshirt once I was in the debate. Buffalo Mayor Brown, Hochuel, Legislator Crystal Peoples (who attended our WNY Gun Debate Forum), Erie County Executive Polonczrk, were in the front row opposite us. We stared down Cuomo through the whole event. Watch the video of the debate, notice that through the whole debate his vision is located on our side and much of the time, at us. We stared and stared and stared at him. *** Paladino and Trump got to Astorino and therefore the GOP (system) distanced from Rob. Wish Rob's demeanor didn't have that careful polished politician crafted but it is what it is. Howie will take votes from Cuomo. McDermott will take votes from Republicans and some Democrats. That leaves the agenda vs. the lesser evil. How does this downward spiral continue?

http://www.bostonglobe.com/ideas/201...9sL/story.html Vote all you want. The secret government won’t change. The people we elect aren’t the ones calling the shots, says Tufts University’s Michael Glennon. By Jordan Michael Smith October 19, 2014 The voters who put Barack Obama in office expected some big changes. From the NSA’s warrantless wiretapping to Guantanamo Bay to the Patriot Act, candidate Obama was a defender of civil liberties and privacy, promising a dramatically different approach from his predecessor. But six years into his administration, the Obama version of national security looks almost indistinguishable from the one he inherited. Guantanamo Bay remains open. The NSA has, if anything, become more aggressive in monitoring Americans. Drone strikes have escalated. Most recently it was reported that the same president who won a Nobel Prize in part for promoting nuclear disarmament is spending up to $1 trillion modernizing and revitalizing America’s nuclear weapons. Why did the face in the Oval Office change but the policies remain the same? Critics tend to focus on Obama himself, a leader who perhaps has shifted with politics to take a harder line. But Tufts University political scientist Michael J. Glennon has a more pessimistic answer: Obama couldn’t have changed policies much even if he tried. Though it’s a bedrock American principle that citizens can steer their own government by electing new officials, Glennon suggests that in practice, much of our government no longer works that way. In a new book, “National Security and Double Government,” he catalogs the ways that the defense and national security apparatus is effectively self-governing, with virtually no accountability, transparency, or checks and balances of any kind. He uses the term “double government”: There’s the one we elect, and then there’s the one behind it, steering huge swaths of policy almost unchecked. Elected officials end up serving as mere cover for the real decisions made by the bureaucracy. RELATED: ‘National Security and Double Government’ by Michael J. Glennon Glennon cites the example of Obama and his team being shocked and angry to discover upon taking office that the military gave them only two options for the war in Afghanistan: The United States could add more troops, or the United States could add a lot more troops. Hemmed in, Obama added 30,000 more troops. Glennon’s critique sounds like an outsider’s take, even a radical one. In fact, he is the quintessential insider: He was legal counsel to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and a consultant to various congressional committees, as well as to the State Department. “National Security and Double Government” comes favorably blurbed by former members of the Defense Department, State Department, White House, and even the CIA. And he’s not a conspiracy theorist: Rather, he sees the problem as one of “smart, hard-working, public-spirited people acting in good faith who are responding to systemic incentives”—without any meaningful oversight to rein them in. How exactly has double government taken hold? And what can be done about it? Glennon spoke with Ideas from his office at Tufts’ Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy. This interview has been condensed and edited. IDEAS: Where does the term “double government” come from? GLENNON:It comes from Walter Bagehot’s famous theory, unveiled in the 1860s. Bagehot was the scholar who presided over the birth of the Economist magazine—they still have a column named after him. Bagehot tried to explain in his book “The English Constitution” how the British government worked. He suggested that there are two sets of institutions. There are the “dignified institutions,” the monarchy and the House of Lords, which people erroneously believed ran the government. But he suggested that there was in reality a second set of institutions, which he referred to as the “efficient institutions,” that actually set governmental policy. And those were the House of Commons, the prime minister, and the British cabinet. IDEAS: What evidence exists for saying America has a double government? GLENNON:I was curious why a president such as Barack Obama would embrace the very same national security and counterterrorism policies that he campaigned eloquently against. Why would that president continue those same policies in case after case after case? I initially wrote it based on my own experience and personal knowledge and conversations with dozens of individuals in the military, law enforcement, and intelligence agencies of our government, as well as, of course, officeholders on Capitol Hill and in the courts. And the documented evidence in the book is substantial—there are 800 footnotes in the book. IDEAS: Why would policy makers hand over the national-security keys to unelected officials? GLENNON: It hasn’t been a conscious decision....Members of Congress are generalists and need to defer to experts within the national security realm, as elsewhere. They are particularly concerned about being caught out on a limb having made a wrong judgment about national security and tend, therefore, to defer to experts, who tend to exaggerate threats. The courts similarly tend to defer to the expertise of the network that defines national security policy.

Since mid-August 2014 major news organizations have conveyed videos allegedly found online by the SITE Intelligence Group. Unsurprisingly the same media have failed to closely interrogate what the private company actually is and whether the material it promotes should be accepted as genuine. The Search for International Terrorist Entities Intelligence Group was co-founded by Rita Katz in 2001. Katz is an Iraqi-born Jew. Her father, an Israeli spy, was executed by Iraqis as a result of his intelligence activities. In 2003 Katz authored a book, Terrorist Hunter: The Extraordinary Story of a Woman Who Went Undercover to Infiltrate the Radical Islamic Groups Operating in America, which she published using the pseudonym, “Anonymous.” In the book Katz explains how she took on the trappings of a Muslim woman to infiltrate the meetings of radical Muslim terrorists. The plot is unlikely, especially when one considers that such secret fundamentalist gatherings are almost always segregated along gender lines and no woman, however elaborate her costume, would be granted entry without her identity being firmly established. SITE Intelligence Group consists of Katz and two “senior advisers,” one of whom is Bruce Hoffman, the Corporate Chair in Counterterrorism and Counterinsurgency at the RAND Corporation and former director of the RAND’s Washington DC office. The SITE Intelligence Group “constantly monitors the Internet and traditional media for material and propaganda released by jihadist groups and their supporters,” the company’s website announces. “Once obtained, SITE immediately translates the material and provides the intelligence along with a contextual analysis explaining the source of the material and its importance to our subscribers.”[1] In 2003 and 2004, though claiming to be a 501c3 non-profit, SITE received more than $500,000 from the US government. Also in the early 2000s Katz received $150,000 from the FBI for consulting services. http://memoryholeblog.com/2014/09/15/probing-site-intelligence-group/ The statement made by Katz on CNN is particularly telling: "The location from where the video was obtained from is the location where ISIS usually uploads their original videos to [sic]. The video shows a clear message from ISIS that follows the same message that it had before. And in fact within a short time after our release, ISIS’ account on social media indicated that within a short time they would be releasing the video, only we actually had that video beforehand and were able to beat them with the release."

1. NAFTA. International politician's driven. 2. "Until we get to the point..." That would mean Americans are gutless. And, most are. They don't study, use thinking skills, and have courage. Change isn't going to happen in the political arena.

On Thursday morning (8/14/14), the Common Law Grand Jury in Dixie County, Florida with 25 people plus 3 alternates, approached the County Court House requesting entry and space to perform their lawful duties, were admitted, seated and heard TWO cases. This means that one county in America is now operating in a LAWFUL manner as prescribed by the Supreme Court case of United States v. Williams, 112 S.Ct. 1735, 504 U.S. 36, 118 L.Ed. 2d 352 (1992), where Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for the majority, confirmed that the American grand jury is neither part of the judicial, executive nor legislative branches of government, but instead belongs to the people. It is in effect a fourth branch of government "governed" and administered to directly by and on behalf of the American people, and its authority emanates from the Bill of Rights. As this is our first big success news, I am hoping more see where this is going and jump on board. We have much more going on, but this just happened to shock us all, as by allowing us to fulfill our duties, they have acknowledged we lawfully exist, and we now have precedence to be used in other states and counties. We have the intent to return the common sense of Common Law back to the courts. Also remember: “There can be no limitation on the power of the people of the United States (of America). By their authority the State Constitutions were made and by their authority the Constitution for the United States (of America) was established...” Hauenstein vs. Lynham (100 US 483). “The United States Supreme Court declares that the “Sovereignty” remains with the “people” and resides with the “people”...Yick Wo vs. Hopkins and Woo Lee Hopkins (118 US 356). “...That statutes which would deprive a citizen of the rights of person or property without a regular trial, according to the course and usage of common law, would not be the law of the land.” (hoke vs. henderson,15, N.C.15,25 AM dec 677) Every man is independent of all laws, except those prescribed by nature. He is not bound by any institutions formed by his fellow-man without his consent.”(Cruden v. Neale) “The jury has the right to determine both the law and the facts.” —Samuel Chase, Justice US Supreme Court, 1796 Signer of the unanimous Declaration PS: Members of the BAR(British Accreditation Registry) will be asked to resign their BAR membership before you can lawfully become a member of a Citizen Grand Jury. *** Submitted by Anthony in AR on Sat, 08/16/2014 http://www.nationallibertyalliance.org

Thanks for the embed Mod.

Know Your Rights host Britt Hysen speaks with Nina Hodjat of Hodjat Law and DUI Partners about 4th Amendment protections against unreasonable searches and seizures. Includes short segments of people filming themselves being stopped and questioned. Excellent education. This segment is brought to you by Voices of Liberty. http://www.voicesofliberty.com Video - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wg_vF6NOWCo&feature=youtu.be Could a Mod please embed. Thank you.

A must watch. DHS detains and batters Cameramanhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3h-PZ0RIQk July 14, 2014 Tried uploading to here but it states that "You aren't permitted to upload this kind of file. Sorry, can't upload, no way to embed video for your convenience.

24 yo Gia Arnold from Upstate New York. TV Interview 7/16/14. Running against George Maziarz. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XYEe0lyyCI Isn't there supposed to be an icon to embed videos?