Globalist Candidate Gingrich Gets Influential Establishment Endorsement Kurt Nimmo Infowars.com November 27, 2011 The establishment has left the flubber Rick Perry in the dust and may do likewise to Mitt Romney as the 2012 election season gears up. It looks like they are putting their money behind the former Speaker of the House and seasoned globalist, Newt Gingrich. On Sunday, Gingrich received the endorsement of the influential editorial board of the New Hampshire Union Leader. “We are in critical need of the innovative, forward-looking strategy and positive leadership that Gingrich has shown he is capable of providing,” said an editorial penned by publisher Joseph W. McQuaid. “A lot of candidates say they’re going to improve Washington. Newt Gingrich has actually done that, and in this race he offers the best shot of doing it again,” he added. The Union Leader endorsement is considered influential because New Hampshire is an early primary state. “The failure to win the board’s endorsement may be a setback for former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney’s campaign which has struggled to win support from Tea party-affiliated voters and the right-wing of the GOP base,” reports The Hill. Despite the endorsement for Gingrich, however, Romney still leads in the first primary state. According to a Suffolk University/7News poll conducted last week, Romney has the support of 41 percent of likely GOP voters. Gingrich came in second with 14 percent and tied with Texas Rep. Ron Paul. A Bloomberg poll held on November 10 placed Ron Paul second at 17 percent, while former House Speaker Newt Gingrich came in at 11 percent. All the other candidates were below 10 percent. The Union Leader endorsement is designed to push Gingrich above Paul in the polls. The establishment is
vexed by Ron Paul’s stubborn popularity despite its best efforts to ignore him and minimize his participation during its highly stage-managed debates. CFR globalist Newt Gingrich is the ideal candidate for the ruling elite. He has served the elite faithfully and helped it trade away our national sovereignty. He worked with Bill Clinton to foist NAFTA on the American people and move millions of jobs into the China slave labor system of totalitarian globalism. During his stint in the House, Gingrich also supported GATT and the WTO, two big cornerstones of the one-world government agenda. “Gingrich’s Benedict Arnold act helped to hand over the power to regulate foreign commerce, a power reserved in the Constitution to Congress alone, to an internationally controlled body, making America’s economic interests entirely at the mercy of the WTO,” explains Rebecca Terrell, writing for Campaign for Liberty. Now that he is masquerading as a “conservative” in order to fool Americans next November, Gingrich has backed away from the climate change mantra he so unenthusiastically supported before he was groomed once again for GOP nominee. In the video below, Newt shills for climate legislation with Democrat Nancy Pelosi. Last week he told Fox News’ Sean Hannity that the ad “is probably the dumbest thing I’ve done in recent years. Nancy Pelosi and Newt Gingrich Commercial on Climate Change
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qi6n_-wB154 In 2007, however, Mr. Speaker was talking out the other side. At that time, Gingrich praised Democrat John Kerry’s book about environmentalism and said global warming is real. He offered what amounted to an unexpected apology for his party’s inaction on curtailing greenhouse gas emissions, according to the 1. Boston Globe. Gingrich, of course, is fully behind the plan to implement carbon taxes under the ruse of climate change, but will turn in an Oscar performance in
order to trick the voting public. If elected, he will turn on a dime, pull an Obama, and go back on his disavowal of the climate change agenda. Gingrich likes to parade as a constitutionalist. In fact, he is a sworn enemy of the Constitution. His Contract With America was one of the most unconstitutional pieces of legislation to ever come down the congressional pike. It proposed amending the Constitution with a “balanced budget amendment,” a completely unnecessary proposal if Congress would only act on constitutional programs. Gingrich’s Contract also allocated a ton of money to unconstitutional “federal crime-fighting measures, despite the Constitution’s prohibition on federal involvement in police matters outside of piracy and treason. Countries that do not have such strict constitutional safeguards on federal police end up with Gestapos, KGBs, and Departments of Homeland Security,” notes Terrell. Newt has also expressed his contempt for the concept of a Fourth Amendment when he told Fox’s Bill O’Reilly that Americans should be subjected to drug testing. He cited the advanced police state of Singapore as an example of the sort of drug policy the United States should have. Finally, in order to understand just how dedicated Gingrich is to destroying the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, consider that he described himself as a “conservative futurist” who enthusiastically recommended as Speaker of the House his colleagues read Alvin Toffler’s 1980 book The Third Wave. In the book, Toffler wrote a letter to America’s “founding parents,” in which he said: “The system of government you fashioned, including the very principles on which you based it, is increasingly obsolete, and hence increasingly, if inadvertently, oppressive and dangerous to our welfare. It must be radically changed and a new system of government invented – a democracy for the 21st century.” According to Toffler, our constitutional system is one that “served us so well for so long, and that now must, in its turn, die and be replaced.” The Real Newt Gingrich Part 1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=02HX5v5Thpk The Real Newt Gingrich Part 2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ksmCU9Nbksw The Real Newt Gingrich Part 3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exs41FdfqpY The Real Newt Gingrich Part 4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xk_0Ot9z3xg
Congress to Vote Next Week on EXPLICITLY Creating a Police State Washington’s Blog Sunday, November 27, 2011 If You Thought Police Brutality Was Bad … Wait Until You See What Congress Wants to Do Next Week The police brutality against peaceful protesters in 1. Berkeley, Davis, Oakland and elsewhere is bad enough. But next week, Congress will vote on explicitly creating a police state. The ACLU’s Washington legislative office explains: The Senate is gearing up for a vote on Monday or Tuesday that goes to the very heart of who we are as Americans. The Senate will be voting on a bill that will direct American military resources not at an enemy shooting at our military in a war zone, but at American citizens and other civilians far from any battlefield — even people in the United States itself.
The Senate is going to vote on whether Congress will give this president—and every future president — the power to order the military to pick up and imprison without charge or trial civilians anywhere in the world. *** The power is so broad that even U.S. citizens could be swept up by the military and the military could be used far from any battlefield, even within the United States itself. The worldwide
indefinite detention without charge or trial provision is in S. 1867, the National Defense Authorization Act bill, which will be on the Senate floor on Monday. I know it sounds incredible. New powers to use the military worldwide, even within the United States? Hasn’t anyone told the Senate that Osama bin Laden is dead, that the president is pulling all of the combat troops out of Iraq and trying to figure out how to get combat troops out of Afghanistan too? And American citizens and people picked up on American or Canadian or British streets being sent to military prisons indefinitely without even being charged with a crime. Really? Does anyone think this is a good idea? And why now? In support of this harmful bill, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) explained that the bill will “basically say in law for the first time that the homeland is part of the battlefield” and people can be imprisoned without charge or trial “American citizen or not.” Another supporter, Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) also declared that the bill is needed because “America is part of the battlefield.”
The senators pushing the indefinite detention proposal have made their goals very clear that they want an okay for a worldwide military battlefield, that even extends to your hometown.
Part of an Ongoing Trend While this is shocking, it is not occurring in a vacuum. Indeed, it is part of a 30 year-long process of militarization inside our borders and a destruction of the American concepts of limited government and separation of powers. As I pointed out in May: The ACLU noted yesterday [that] Congress is proposing handing permanent, world-wide
war-making powers to the president – including the ability to make war within the United States: As I noted in 2008: An article in the Army Times reveals that the 3rd Infantry Division’s 1st Brigade Combat Team will be redeployed from Iraq to domestic operations within the United States. The unit will soon be under the day-to-day control of US Army North, the Army service component of Northern Command. The Army Times reports this new mission marks the first time an active unit has been given a dedicated assignment to Northern Command. The paper says the Army unit may be called upon to help with “civil unrest” and “crowd control”. The soldiers are learning to use so-called “nonlethal weapons” designed to subdue unruly or dangerous individuals and crowds. This violates posse comitatus and the Constitution. But, hey, we’re in a “national emergency”, so who cares, right? (We’re still in a declared state of national emergency). I noted a couple of months later: Everyone knows that deploying 20,000 troops on U.S. soil violates Posse Comitatus and the Constitution. And everyone understands that staging troops within the U.S. to “help out with civil unrest and crowd control” increases the danger of overt martial law. But no one is asking an obvious question: Does the government’s own excuse for deploying the troops make any sense? Other Encroachments On Civil Rights Under Obama As bad as Bush was, the truth is that, in many ways, freedom and constitutional rights are
under attack even more than during the Bush years. For example: Obama has presided over the most draconian crackdown on leaks in our history — even more so than Nixon. As Marjorie Cohen – professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law and past president of the National Lawyers Guild – writes at the American Constitution Society for Law and Policy: Army Pfc. Bradley Manning, who is facing court-martial for leaking military reports and diplomatic cables to WikiLeaks, is being held in solitary confinement in Quantico brig in Virginia. Each night, he is forced to strip naked and sleep in a gown made of coarse material. He has been made to stand naked in the morning as other inmates walked by and looked. As journalist Lance Tapley documents in his chapter on torture in the supermax prisons in The United States and Torture, solitary confinement can lead to hallucinations and suicide; it is considered to be torture. Manning’s forced nudity amounts to humiliating and degrading treatment, in violation of U.S. and international law. Nevertheless, President Barack Obama defended Manning’s treatment, saying, “I’ve actually asked the Pentagon whether or not the procedures . . . are appropriate. They assured me they are.” Obama’s deference is reminiscent of President George W. Bush, who asked “the most senior legal officers in the U.S. government” to review the interrogation techniques. “They assured me they did not constitute torture,” Bush said. After State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley criticized Manning’s conditions of confinement, the White House forced him to resign. Crowley had said the restrictions were “ridiculous, counterproductive and stupid.” It appears that Washington is
more intent on sending a message to would-be whistleblowers than on upholding the laws that prohibit torture and abuse. Torture is commonplace in countries strongly allied with the United States. Vice President Omar Suleiman, Egypt’s intelligence chief, was the lynchpin for Egyptian torture when the CIA sent prisoners to Egypt in its extraordinary rendition program. A former CIA agent observed, “If you want a serious interrogation, you send a prisoner to Jordan. If you want them to be tortured, you send them to Syria. If you want someone to disappear – never to see them again – you send them to Egypt.” In her chapter in The United States and Torture, New Yorker journalist Jane Mayer cites Egypt as the most common destination for suspects rendered by the United States. As I pointed out in March: Former constitutional law teacher Glenn Greenwald says that – in his defense of state secrecy, illegal spying, preventative detention, harassment of whistleblowers and other issues of civil liberties – Obama is even worsethan Bush. Indeed, Obama has authorized “targeted assassinations” against U.S. citizens. Even Bush didn’t openly do something so abhorrent to the rule of law. Obama is trying to expand spying well beyond the Bush administration’s programs. Indeed, the Obama administration is arguing that citizens shouldnever be able to sue the government for illegal spying. Obama’s indefinite detention policy is an Orwellian nightmare, which willcreate more terrorists. Furthermore – as hard as it is for Democrats to believe – the disinformation and propaganda campaigns launched by Bush have only increased under Obama. See thisand this.
And as I pointed out last year: According to Department of Defense training manuals, protest is considered “low-level terrorism”. And see this, this and this. An FBI memo also labels peace protesters as “terrorists”. A 2003 FBI memo describes protesters’ use of videotaping as an “intimidation” technique, even though – as the ACLU points out – “Most mainstream demonstrators often use videotape during protests to document law enforcement activity and, more importantly, deter police from acting outside the law.” The FBI appears to be objecting to the use of cameras to document unlawful behavior by law enforcement itself. The Internet has been labeled as a breeding ground who questions for terrorists, the government’s with anyone versions of history being especially equated with terrorists. Government agencies such as FEMA are allegedly teaching that the Founding Fathers should be considered terrorists. The government is also using anti-terrorism laws to keep people from learning what pollutants are in their own community. See this, this, this andthis. Claims of “national security” are also used to keep basic financial information – such as who got bailout money – secret. That might not bode for particularly warm and friendly treatment for someone persistently demanding the release of such information. The state of Missouri tried to label as terrorists current Congressman Ron Paul and his supporters, former Congressman Bob Barr, libertarians in general, anyone who holds gold, and a host of other people.
And according to a law school professor and former president of the National Lawyers Guild, pursuant to the Military Commissions Act: Anyone who … speaks out against the government’s policies could be declared an “unlawful enemy combatant” and imprisoned indefinitely. That includes American citizens. Obama has refused to reverse these practices.
There Is Still a Chance to Stop It The ACLU notes that there is some hope: But there is a way to stop this dangerous legislation. Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.) is offering the Udall Amendment that will delete the harmful provisions and replace them with a requirement for an orderly Congressional review of detention power. The Udall Amendment will make sure that the bill matches up with American values. The solution is the Udall Amendment; a way for the Senate to say no to indefinite detention without charge or trial anywhere in the world where any president decides to use the military. Instead of simply going along with a bill that was drafted in secret and is being jammed through the Senate, the Udall Amendment deletes the provisions and sets up an orderly review of detention power. It tries to take the politics out and put American values back in. ZEITGEIST ADDENDUM http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gKX9TWRyfs
EndGame Blue Print to Global Enslavement http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-CrNlilZho&ob=av3e
Police State 2000 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKty_3IlXOc
Police State 4: The Rise of FEMA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Klqv9t1zVww
The American Dream http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPWH5TlbloU
Conspiracy Theory with Jesse Ventura FEMA CAMP http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Qx20LA4PM0
American Dictators http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Fr5QC6u2EQ
America: Freedom to Fascism http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUpZhhbKUBo