How the Fed plunders you illegally

Martha Stewart went to jail for it, but the Fed practices insider trading with impunity


by Don Hank

The article below on the global economic crisis explains why our financial system no longer operates on free market principles, and in short, this explains why we are failing. What’s worse, our system is illegal because it tolerates and encourages insider trading, which is defined as follows:

Insider trading occurs when a trade has been influenced by the privileged possession of corporate information that has not yet been made public.

To put this in its proper perspective, Martha Stewart was investigated for insider trading for selling stock when she learned from a friend that stock in his company would lose value because the FDA was going to reject the drug his company was trying to sell. Although the ultimate charge that put her in jail was lying to the FBI, insider trading was the original thrust and was considered illegal. Yet, the government is directly involved with just such insider trading on a vastly wider scale, involving inside info possessed by the Fed in its unsavory relationship with the US government, and is enriched daily by this info in an obvious and illegal conflict of interests.

If Martha Stewart deserved jail, then what does the Fed deserve?

Here is the article:—Excerpt_from_Introduction_to_The_Global_Economic_Crisis._The_Great_Depression_of_the_XXI_Century.html


The Federal Reserve Bank of New York and its powerful Wall Street stakeholders – which are Wall Street’s largest private banks – have inside information on the conduct of U.S. monetary policy. They are therefore in a position to predict outcomes and hedge their bets in highly leveraged operations on the futures and derivatives markets. They are in an obvious conflict of interest because their prior knowledge of particular decisions by the Federal Reserve Board enables them, as private banking institutions, to make multibillion dollar profits.

People have learned to ask politicians crucial questions about their politics. Yet politicians are almost never asked the key questions that decide our and our children’s economic future.

As our nation sinks further and further into the financial abyss, we must make some urgent changes to the demands we make on our public officials.

Will your candidate vote for congressional hearings of the Fed and of the major bankers who committed mortgage fraud, bundling and selling mortgages knowing they were worthless?

Will he or she demand a reduction in our sovereign debt?

It is time to demand accountability. No backbone, no vote.


Homo-nazis and the seduction of the West

Nazi Homosexuals and the Slow Steady Seduction of America

 By Jim O’Neill, Canada Free Press

“The American homosexual movement really only began in the 1940s after the Allied defeat of the Nazis. …the center of international “gay” power in the world did in fact shift from Germany to the United States after the demise of the Third Reich. This represented a huge setback for the “gay” movement, requiring it to begin “from scratch” as it were, since America in the 1940s was at least as family-centered as Germany had been in the 1860s.”—From “The Pink Swastika” 

“The 112th Congress requires sufficient time to conduct independent hearings on the consequences of the LGBT Law and policies that the lame-duck Congress did not consider before rushing to repeal the law last December. …The administration’s lack of answers to reasonable questions, combined with revealing missteps like the Navy’s move to prepare for same-sex marriages, are indications that the Pentagon does not know what it is doing.”Center for Military Readiness (CMR) 

”[Pollster Gary Gate’s] best estimate, derived from five studies that have asked subjects about their sexual orientation, is that the nation has about 4 million adults who identify as being gay or lesbian, representing 1.7 percent of the 18-and-over population. …Gates observed that the 10% figure [often used by homosexual activists] was pulled from a non-scientific work by sexologist Alfred Kinsey, and that it was latched on to by gay activists as a useful ‘political strategy.’ …‘It was a brilliant political strategy as a figure that was large enough to ‘matter’ but hopefully not so large as to threaten the general population,’ said Gates.”
Huffington Post, CBS News, LifeSiteNews               

“They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and revered and worshiped the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.” Romans 1:25 (NAB)                         

Only in his dreams could Hitler have imagined the blatant homosexualizing of the German Wehrmacht. What Hitler could only dream of, the United States is poised to make fact, a scant sixty-six years after fighting a costly and bloody war to defeat Hitler and the Nazis. Link                     

Before I get ahead of myself, let me point out that the title of this article, and the article itself, are meant to be attention getting, but do not constitute a spurious ad hominem attack on homosexuality; they are designed to bring attention to historical facts that are of profound importance to the future of America (and the world).                               

To give credit where it is due, I first became aware of much of the material presented here after reading “The Pink Swastika” (4th edition 2002), by Scott Lively and Kevin Abram. The entire book can be accessed for free online (link given after the opening quote above). My reaction to the book was similar to Scott Lively’s reaction, “When I initially learned the truths set forth in [“The Pink Swastika”] I was first astonished and then angered.”

At the outset of this article let me reiterate that Communism and Fascism (of which Nazism is a subset) are both Far Left ideologies. That is not to say that they are “like peas in a pod;” they are not—nonetheless they are both left-wing, top-down, big-government social engineering movements.

Read more here:

Why the media are out of touch with reality

No science used by the elites, just consensus of academics.

by Don Hank

The report at the NPR web site tending to exonerate Palin for her gaffe about Paul Revere is typical of how arguments are presented in the media these days. You will note that there is not a shred of new data here, just a prof’s opinion. (It should be clear that NPR is only throwing a sop to conservatives here as a way of staving off the effort to defund them).

Americans have stopped asking for facts and are accepting opinions of the “educated.”

We are no more educated now than we were in 1256, when Roger Bacon enumerated, in Opus Majus, the 4 causes of error:

authority, custom, the opinion of the unskilled many, and the concealment of ignorance by a pretense of knowledge.

In the case of the mainstream media (and also in most of the careers we insist on calling “professions”), it is obvious that all of these factors are involved in our grievous mis-education and the web of unsubstantiated myths we call the truth.

Roger Bacon then outlined, in later parts of this series, an almost perfect representation of what we today call the scientific method.

However, nota bene: this method, while still generally used in the hard sciences, is all but totally ignored by academicians in other disciplines, such as psychology, journalism, economics, etc, whose practitioners nonetheless pretend to rely on science. If in fact they did so, they would use some form of the scientific method as outlined by Bacon and as refined by later philosophers in arriving at conclusions and decisions.

In fact they only rely on a consensus of academics, whom they trust implicitly for some reason that they would be hard put to articulate.

Indeed, if you ask one of these practitioners by what cognitive mechanism they arrive at their conclusions and make their decisions, they will be at a loss for words, other than to quote some “authority.”

It’s like:

[such and such an academician] said it, I believe it and that settles it.

Yet, they fail to recognize that they are in fact adherents of a religious cult. They really don’t understand the tiny world that has been presented to them by their fellows as the universe, they can’t articulate what they believe, and they are therefore increasingly isolated from everyone as they grow older.

This is why old professionals often die lonely and miserable, not knowing to what it is they have dedicated a life of service, or whether it was in fact service at all or just effort expended on behalf of an unseen soulless ruling class.

Investigate the link between homosexuality and disease/death

by Don Hank

Psalm 86:15, NIV. “But you, O Lord, are a compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness.”

I have often gotten weary of waiting for good things to happen, wondering what was taking God so long to act.

Like back in 2006, when in my article titled “Gay agenda, you’re going down,” I introduced the idea that homosexuals who had been induced to pursue the “gay” lifestyle and became sick as a result, should sue the groups that promoted the lifestyle.

Comparing smoking with homosexual practice, I had written on March 5, 2006

Now “alternative” sexual lifestyles are all the rage. They too are killing people. And again, it’s the “intellectual” cool, liberal, worldly, suave thing to do. The usual suspects are involved. All the big name colleges have special programs for promoting “alternative” sex. Businesses promote the Gay Olympics. Politicians like Barney Frank think they can foist alternative sex on people through their power positions. Hollywood uses its influence to turn the Marlboro Man into a spokesman for today’s popular deadly activity. It’s just like the bad old days of Big Tobacco, and the Grim Reaper is having a gay old time (pun intended).

World Net Daily linked to this article and I got several thousand hits the first day it ran. Emails poured in from all over the world, some from “gays.” Many were enthusiastic about my idea. Some, of course, were skeptical, and some were irate, but I remember one from a young homosexual who said “you have given this 20 year old something to think about.” I was deeply touched.

Yet it seemed as if my idea was going nowhere. No activist group seemed to have picked it up and run with it.

May 16 of this year, I wrote on diseases incurred by homosexual behavior. Again, hoping to stir some discussion and spur someone, anyone, into action, I pointed out the disparity between the way smoking and homosexual sex are treated in our politically correct environment, and how “progressives” generally accuse people who want to keep homosexuals safe of being “homophobes” while praising those who celebrate a patently dangerous, irresponsible lifestyle. I wrote:

Why do professionals march in lock step to oppose people with one kind of unhealthy lifestyle (smokers) while endorsing another group with another unhealthy lifestyle (practicing homosexuals).

Since then, an article published in World Net Daily gave me hope that this idea will some day be brought to fruition.

On Saturday, June 11, World Net Daily published an article titled “What if some other behavior cost 25 million lives?”

It was about Peter LaBarbera’s latest campaign urging the government to investigate homosexual behavior in the same way as smoking was once investigated prior to the banning of smoking in public establishments. This campaign was new to me.

On his website, LaBarbera, President of Americans for Truth about Homosexuality, takes off on my idea, explaining that homosexual behavior is like the behavior of smoking, which the U.S. government investigated and addressed directly by requiring warnings and other limits and by suing tobacco companies.
LaBarbera is an effective activist and if his campaign to force government to investigate the link between homosex and disease is effective, ironically, it will benefit particularly the community that has fought it the most vigorously.

Once that link is established officially, I would urge LaBarbera’s group to push hard for lawsuits against groups that promoted homosexual behavior – on behalf of homosexuals who suffered the most from this irresponsible promotion of a lethal and morbid habit.

As I wrote in 2006:

Once enough of the victims have seen how they have been duped by the universities, politicians, the media, business (deep pockets), Hollywood, politicians, and, yes, the gay agenda itself, to throw away their health and life expectancy, they will come out swinging, marching boldly behind their lawyers.

My idea in March 2006: class action lawsuits against “gay” activists

My recent article on diseases linked to homosexual behavior:

WND article on the AFTAH campaign:

Web site of Americans for Truth about Homosexuality:

Bring back the draft — for politicians

Elect quality Americans – willing or not!

Posted: June 04, 2011
1:00 am Eastern

By Anthony Horvath
© 2011 

Conservatives rightly rejoiced at the results of the 2010 midterm elections, but a more sober analysis could lead them into abject depression. One could almost believe that last November’s results indicated real progress until one remembers that just two years earlier the landslide belonged to the liberals. We deceive ourselves if we think that there has been a tectonic shift in the way that Americans think. In reality, there was probably no principled, informed change in American sentiment. In all probability, it was a mere change in American winds.

We may see evidence of that in the reaction to Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker’s reform attempts. This July, six Wisconsin GOP senators are facing a recall election. In contrast, most of the Democratic senators that walked off the job are likely going to get a pass by the electorate. Oh, how quickly the winds change!

What we really need is an America that knows what its values are and remembers them from one election to the next. Before we address how to bring this about, we should consider why it is otherwise.

For example, recall G.K. Chesterton’s famous statement, “Christianity has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and not tried.” A similar charge can be made about conservatism, except it isn’t difficult – just not tried.

Read more: Elect quality Americans – willing or not!

Consequences of Global Ruling Class policies: more unintended than intended

Were they really unintended? Or do they just enjoy messing with us?

by Don Hank

On June 3, the BBC broadcast a report on how fishermen were forced to throw back perfectly good caught fish dead into the sea. The report failed to mention that EU regulations were the root cause of this wastefulness.

Precisely because of such media blackous, we need to be reminded that the Western elites are wasteful and harmful to the poor and disadavantaged, whether intentionally or out of sheer stupidity, despite their avowed “environmentally friendly” and “Third World friendly” policies, which almost never seem to achieve the purported goals.

I mentioned it before, but it bears repeating, that the treaty between the EU and Panama, for example, had 2 adverse effects, one on the environment and the other for the poor in the Third World:

1–The day after the treaty was signed, the price of fish, the number one protein staple in Panama, doubled, converting this staple into a luxury item that many Panamanians can now eat only on special occasions.

2–The transport of the fish to Europe is by air, which translates into several times as much CO2 emissions as shipments by sea.

As we read in the report linked above, before this treaty went into effect, the EU had implemented a fishing policy for Europe that also had disastrous effects on the environment there and on European fish prices, which indirectly led to treaties between the EU and the Third World related to fish and seafood trade.

In drafting, issuing and enforcing such regulation, the EU has followed the guidelines of UN Agenda 21, which purportedly is aimed at reducing pollution and especially CO2 emissions, and at helping the poor and middle class in Third World countries. Agenda 21 was attributed largely to the efforts of Maurice Strong, who was then Under-Secretary General of the UN.

The above-outlined unintended consequences of the Panama treaty are being repeated all over the Third World and reflect the total inability of out-of-touch spoiled billionaire white men like Maurice Strong, and his American counterpart George Soros, to intervene meaningfully and positively in the affairs of ordinary people with ordinary problems of survival and supporting families.

These results also reflect the inability of government (whether supranational or other) to control systems like the world economy, which, though not perfect, worked fairly well before all of this meddling by global governance aficionados with too much time on their hands.

 The more they meddled, the worse the economy became, until today we stand on the brink of a collapsing dollar, a collapsing euro, historical high unemployment and staggering debt that threatens whole generations to come.

Unintended consequences?

Or mission accomplished?

BBC report:

Agenda 21:

EU destroying European farming:

Environmentalism run amok:

The new royalty — EU spending sprees (they think it’s divine right)

Ann Barnhardt skewers Mitt

Ann Barnhardt skewers Mitt


The below-linked video did my soul good. I hope it will benefit you likewise.

When it comes to that old “lesser of 2 evils” thing, I always keep 2 things in mind: RINOs are out to destroy America by stealth. Democrats are out to destroy America straightforwardly.

The RINOs and false conservatives will take her down with the approval of weak-minded conservatives.

The Democrats will encounter more resistance from all conservatives — just as Obama is encountering resistance today for doing the same things Bush did with “conservative” approval in his day.

Therefore, the RINO is the more dangerous of the 2 enemies, because he is wearing camouflage and won’t be spotted as the enemy until it is too late.

Hence my motto is as follows:

If America is to be destroyed, better it be destroyed by someone I didn’t vote for.

Don Hank

Why you have no change, no hope and no job

Time to ring out the old economic paradigm and ring in the new one

by Don Hank

Linked below is a bombshell article about the US (and by extension, world) economy, or rather what is left of it. Kindly read it and my commentary below the link.

In the old US (and much of Europe, for the most part) and its old economy, your economic success was tied to your energy, intelligence, ingenuity and risk-taking willingness, and also to your integrity and willingness to sacrifice yourself at times for your clients. In the new economy, that paradigm has dwindled and is being lost, especially the last part, integrity.

The people who run our world are truly destroying this whole system and taking us back to the feudalism of the Middle Ages, where precious few owned it all and the rest broke their backs working for them. What we now have all around us running the economy are not entrepreneurs but a bunch of con artists, who are taking America apart piece by piece, à la Goldmann-Sachs, with the government’s blessing and with taxpayer assistance. They aren’t doing this through the free market, as the Left assumes, and they aren’t necessarily doing it entirely through oversized government, as the Right proclaims. Rather, they are accomplishing their wanton destruction through a partnership between government and business that cuts out newcomers and creates a static society. This is the same system Mussolini developed. It was called fascism then. You are welcome to call it that today as well, although many are calling it “corporatism.” Whatever you call it, it is destroying your savings, your income, your buying power, and you and your family. If America is still standing today it is by the sheer grace of God. But don’t expect Him to keep helping those who will not help themselves!

Under the old paradigm, if you pointed out that the richest 1% control two thirds of the wealth (according to #48 below, that is true!), conservatives would blast you for saying that, claiming you were envious. Some die hards are still saying that.

But envy is no longer the operative term. The term today is survival, as you will see from this eye-opening article (link courtesy of Steph Jasky of FedUpUSA).

The old (freedom) paradigm:

Business and government were separate and we were free to be prosperous.

The new (slavery) paradigm:

Business is stifling the economy by teaming up with government.

Government is stifling the economy by teaming up with business.


Never vote for a Democrat, even for dog catcher, and never vote for a RINO, even for dog catcher. Educate yourself as to who the RINOs are. As you dig deeper, you will be surprised how many “conservatives” aren’t. Get involved, fight for economic freedom and an end to the banker-controlled autocracy supported by corrupt government. Spread the word. Time is running out.

Global “leaders” want felons decriminalized

Fling open the gates of the Bastille! Free them all!

by Don Hank

The title of the report linked below, and appearing on the Yahoo home page under the innocuous sounding title “Global leaders call for major shift to decriminalize drugs,” is part of a sinister propaganda campaign, relying on unbacked statements by out-of-work politicians who want to legalize criminals.

The first prong of this campaign is to promote global governance by suggesting that there are such things as “global leaders,” i.e., unelected self-anointed technocrats, who play an important role in the lives of ordinary people. Actually, there is no such thing as a “global leader” because, so far, the world does not have a sovereign global government. Nations are, so far, still free and sovereign, but are threatened by such propaganda as this, which is a subtle suggestion that a global central government (a technocracy) is acceptable. Actually, the experiments with global government have all failed or, as in the case of the latest attempt, the EU, are in the process of disintegrating (triggered by the Greek collapse) and lead inevitably to dictatorships because the people pushing global governance are not democratically minded. To understand why I say that, just read this article by UK politician Sonya Porter. They also lack technical and real-world knowledge needed to solve problems, all the while displaying exceptional persuasive skills — obviously a dismal set of circumstances for everyone whose lives they touch with their ineptitude.

The second prong of the campaign is aimed at decriminalizing criminals. Drug dealers have waged war on their own people in Mexico and Colombia and kill indiscriminately (but note: only stable, anti-terror leaders in the Middle East are condemned by Western “leaders” for doing this). The cartels have grown so much in power that the government fears them. In Mexico, they have infiltrated major sectors of the national police and armed forces. These are inhumanly cruel, savage thugs who must be caught and dealt with harshly. Yet “world leaders” want to set them free. Regarding decriminalization and its results, Holland is a prime example of the failure of this plan. Holland’s experiment, initiated under the banner of legalization as a way to reduce drug use, has actually led to increased crime and drug use. Permissive drug policies in the US, beginning under Carter, also led to increased drug use, including among young people who should be studying. The result was a crackdown in the 80s.

The third prong is support for open borders. The subtle suggestion is that the real culprit in the cartel crime and gang violence that has swept the US Southwest and threatens major US cities everywhere, is not the notoriously porous border with Mexico but rather the fact that foolish Americans continue to criminalize drugs, which in fact are perfectly harmless for us and our children.

The linked Yahoo article tells only one side of the story and includes none of the results of the drug legalization experiments alluded to above. Gullible people reading the Yahoo article will reason that Obama’s open border policies are not a factor in America’s burgeoning crime rate, blaming instead our insistence on criminalizing drug sales. Yes, if only these benighted Americans could accept these drug shipments and the consequences of drug use on their children, then everything would be fine.

What the mainstream media, as well as the elitists in “education,” the universities, professionals and, yes, the churches (not only are they not an exception, they are ringleaders in stealth propaganda) have done is not only criminal, it is an assault on independent human cognition (thought) itself.

The article linked above, omits any detail on the consequences of drug legalization, presenting instead the opinions of supposed leaders who are nowhere quoted as providing evidence of their views.

And this article is typical of today’s editorials. Westerners everywhere are being trained not to think but rather to imitate a consensus of pseudo-scientific “thought” or rather propaganda. Thus, what many “educated” professionals in the schools, colleges, pulpits, media and so on have taught you to do over the last 50 years or so is not to think but to accept without question the opinions of so-called “scientists” and “experts” who themselves only regurgitate the opinions of their bosses and the rest of their community using thinly veiled pseudo-scientific language and psycho-babble.

But note that accepting the opinions of people wearing an aura of “science” (many of whom are not scientists at all but in fact, journalists, psychologists and the like “professionals” who are trained chiefly in the art of propaganda) isn’t the only problem. The problem is the public, which still accepts this propaganda as the genuine article, without question. And they are very good at persuading the public. Or rather, I should say, they have trained the public to follow them to such an extent that the public no longer knows how to think independently of them.

And yet, like an old college pal I ran into recently, people quote these propagandists and claim that in so doing, they are using “science” to reach conclusions and make decisions. Ordinary people are duped into believing that they are intellectuals, superior beings at the top of the evolutionary chain, when in fact, they haven’t used a scintilla of independent thinking. Thus, they substitute a consensus of the “educated” for science. My pal told me he uses science to refute Christianity and suggested I was unscientific. Yet when I asked him by what cognitive mechanism he had arrived at his conclusions, and why he thought my thinking was inferior, he was stymied.

If he could have articulated his cognitive method, it would no doubt have been something like this:

Academics said it, I believe it and that settles it.

And yet, for him I was the fanatic because I believe in God.

The “experts” tell us that if we disagree with Obama’s policies, we are racists. If we don’t accept the “climate change” theory, we are polluters and enemies of the earth.

And many believe this tripe because they don’t know what independent scientific thinking (human cognition) is. They haven’t a clue.

Well, for those who don’t know, true scientific thinking, in a nutshell, is always based on the scientific method, which has been developed in some form or other since Aristotle and was perfected in the Middle Ages. Simply put, this method of thinking, consists of


2—deriving a hypothesis (guess) based on that observation (using inductive reasoning),

3—testing the hypothesis by further observation (in the lab, this means experimentation) under controlled conditions.

4—drawing conclusions from this testing (using deductive reasoning) to derive a working theory that can be verified independently by others.

Before this method was developed, the sophists would sit around and argue issues without ever consulting the evidence. They believed pure reason (with no supporting facts) was superior to facts. This supremely unscientific method is illustrated by the parable of wise men arguing about the number of teeth in a horse’s mouth. The debate went on for years and the participants whose reasoning power was the most brilliant vaunted their skill and patted themselves on the back for their oratory excellence.

Until one day, an humble laborer brought them the news: he had actually counted the number of teeth in a horse’s mouth.

That was the end of the erudite discussion.

In real life, you can apply this in a modified form, for example, by on-line research, personal observations, or reading results of testing or observations of unbiased reporters.

For example, to test the hypothesis that opposing Obama’s policies makes people racist, you can find writings by blacks who oppose Obama’s ideas and see what they say.

You can also choose from among your friends or famous people individuals you know not to be racist and look at what they say about Obama’s ideas and policies.

Finally, you can easily find reading matter about how socialism has failed in the past everywhere it has been tried, including in black African countries like Zimbabwe, or how welfare and affirmative action, for example, have hurt blacks in inner cities.

You can look at unemployment statistics, crime rates, school dropout rates, etc, for black people before and after the institution of welfare.

All of these methods are scientific because they depend on your skills in analyzing raw data and not on a consensus of the “educated.”

It is almost surrealistic that mankind is returning to those primitive sophist methods where brilliance of oratory is replacing actual scientific research in the most vital areas of our lives and where the most polished politicians with the greatest skills in mendacity rule over intelligent people.

As evidence of this sinister development, modern philosophers and propagandists tell us that we are in a post-modern world where traditional methods of scientific inquiry are obsolete. They further tell us that there is no such thing as objective truth.

But they fall into a trap of their own making, for if one can say with certainty that there is no such thing as objectivity, then the universities lose their raison d’être and may as well shut their doors. No statement made by anyone amounts to a hill of beans. Indeed, as universities are completely taken over by “progressives” who deny the existence of objective knowledge, it is getting harder and harder for them to find enough gullible students to pay the bills.

Without government largesse, many would no longer be standing.

I say let them close their doors until they restore the missing ingredient: independent human cognition.

Yahoo Propaganda:

Holland experiment