The Project for the New American Century, Rebuilding America’s Defenses Through False Flag Terrorist Operations
Sacred Owls mentions this document from The Project for the New American Century think tank led by William “Bill” Kristol, an American neo-conservative political analyst and commentator in our song “Inside Job“. He is the founder and editor-at-large of the political magazine The Weekly Standard and a political commentator on several networks.
I met his pal (co-conspirator) Yoshihiro Francis Fukuyama while he visited Florida International University during a geo-political conference along with Fareed Rafiq Zakaria (author of The Post American World), Marco Rubio, and other neo-conservatives. He is a key Reagan Administration contributor to the formulation of the Reagan Doctrine, Fukuyama is an important figure in the rise of neoconservatism, although his works came out years after Irving Kristol‘s 1972 book crystallized neoconservatism.
Fukuyama was active in the Project for the New American Century think tank starting in 1997, and as a member co-signed the organization’s 1998 letter recommending that President Bill Clinton support Iraqi insurgencies in the overthrow of then-President of Iraq Saddam Hussein.
He was also among forty co-signers of William Kristol’s September 20, 2001 letter to President George W. Bush after the September 11, 2001 attacks that suggested the U.S. not only “capture or kill Osama bin Laden” (US State Dept. asset code name “Tim Osman” AKA “USOSAMA”), but also embark upon “a determined effort to remove Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq”.
He referred to this think tank and series of documents signed by and with contributions from Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Condoleezza Rice, & many others as “Bill with a fax machine” dismissing it as something harmless. Read it for yourself. Keep in mind that it was published September 2000, one year before 9/11/01, which was the catalyst for the Iraq war, the founding of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), The Transportation Security Administration (TSA), Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), which all laid the ground work for the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), and the list continues to grow.
This is a prime example of the thought process of the pawns of the ruling class. The use of problem, reaction, solution strategies to work on the emotions of their subjects to limit resistance and manufacture consent.
(POPEYE) With the recent passing of author and friend Jim Marrs (August 2nd 2017) I decided to honor him by remastering the very first interview I did with Jim on air back in 2012 about his book RISE OF THE FOURTH REICH. This edition of DTRH originally aired back on 06-10-2012. I made an entire new video for YouTube with new images and cleaner audio in HD. I also made a new audio only version for the download archives and the audio player here on the site. Jim deserved at least this much. He was a good man, a great researcher, and my friend. Fair Winds And Following Seas Jim.
On this edition of DTRH Popeye talks to author and investigative journalist Jim Marrs. They cover Jim’s book RISE OF THE FOURTH REICH; 9/11; The New World Order Agenda; JFK’s Assassination; Hidden History of WW2; and much more.
LINKS TO FURTHER RESEARCH, THE ARCHIVE PAGES, FACEBOOK & TWITTER
DTRH W/ POPEYE FULL DOWNLOADABLE ARCHIVES
THE OCCULT ASPECTS OF 9/11
DTRH w/ POPEYE FULL ARCHIVE PAGE
DTRH FREE DOWNLOADABLE 9/11 INFO ARCHIVE
FACEBOOK ACCOUNT & PAGE:
POPEYE ON FACEBOOK
FJ FACEBOOK PAGE
DTRH W/ POPEYE
(William Norman Grigg) Jerad and Amanda Miller, who were banished from Bunkerville by supporters of Cliven Bundy, had worked as informants for Nevada law enforcement agencies. After the Millers murdered three people — Las Vegas Metro Officers Alyn Beck and Igor Soldo, and Joseph Wilcox, an armed citizen who heroically tried to stop their rampage — their former handlers claimed that they were unaware of the couple’s “anti-police sentiments.” That claim is difficult to credit, given that Jerad Miller had a lengthy criminal record, and the fact that the couple had made itself very prominent in protests associated with the Occupy Wall Street movement.
Jerad Miller, who was mired in the probation system because of narcotics convictions, was precisely the kind of person whose vulnerabilities make him valuable as an informant and provocateur.
The Millers were among many hundreds of people who traveled to Bunkerville, Nevada to support rancher Cliven Bundy in his confrontation with the BLM. They may well have been the only volunteers who were asked to leave because of concerns regarding what was described as their “aggressive nature and volatility.” During their brief visit, however, Jerad was interviewed by the local NBC affiliate, which meant that he was depicted as representative of the people who had rallied to the Bundy family’s cause.
Predictably, following the couple’s subsequent killing spree critics of Cliven Bundy claimed that the rancher, his supporters, and the entire “insurrectionist right” shared collective responsibility for that crime. Honest people who aren’t imprisoned in collectivist ideology would recognize that rather than being radicalized by so-called anti-government extremists, Jerad Miller is more properly seen as a living example of “blowback” in the government’s war on drugs.
(BIZ PAC REVIEW) Retired U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice John Paul Stevens would like to see five words added to Constitution’s Second Amendment, the result of which would be to destroy its intent, and turn the “right to bear arms” into a mere catchphrase lacking meaning. The Second Amendment, which is part of the Bill of Rights, reads:
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
In his yet-to-be released book, “Six Amendments: How and Why We Should Change the Constitution,” Stevens suggests that the Second Amendment’s sole purpose was protection against an oppressive standing army — not self-protection in the ordinary sense. Stevens said, according to The Blaze.
Emotional claims that the right to possess deadly weapons is so important that it is protected by the federal Constitution distort intelligent debate about the wisdom of particular aspects of proposed legislation designed to minimize the slaughter caused by the prevalence of guns in private hands.
He suggested the inclusion of five words for clarification, with the “new and improved” Second Amendment reading, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms when serving in the militia shall not be infringed.”
By adding those five words — when serving in the militia — Stevens would remove the teeth from the Second Amendment, rendering it impotent.
If it’s clarification Stevens is after, I suggest instead of adding five words, we delete 13 to have it read simply, “The right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.”
Stevens was appointed to the bench in 1975 by then-President Gerald Ford, and retired in 2010 to be succeeded by Elena Kagan.
(FEDERALJACK) Wolfgang W. Halbig doesn’t believe anyone was killed at Sandy Hook Elementary School on December 14, 2012, and he’s looking for some answers. So many answers, in fact, that he was paid a visit by some police investigators telling him to back off.
Mr. Halbig isn’t your average “conspiracy theorist.” He’s worked in public education as a teacher, dean, assistant principal, principal of an alternative school and as the Director for School Safety and Security for the Seminole County Public Schools, a school district of approximately 65,000 students.
A former Florida State Trooper and United States Customs Inspector, Mr. Halbig was invited by the U.S. Department of Justice to train over 3,500 school police officers, school superintendents and school principals. He travels the country providing presentations and keynotes to a variety of school board associations and conferences and is a nationally-recognized school safety and security expert and consultant, who has provided safety training and school assessments for more than 4,000 school districts nationwide.
Dave Gahary spoke with Wolfgang about why he doesn’t believe the official story of the Sandy Hook Elementary School event, in this interesting interview.
(Tony Oliva) If I say Columbine, Virginia Tech, Sandy Hook and Aurora you will most likely think of the mass shootings that took place there. I also think about all those places being gun free zones and how well that worked out. But what would come to mind if I said: Pearl High, Parker Middle School Dance, Golden Market and Clackamas Town Center?
If you are like most Americans you probably don’t know anything about these places and that is a shame because they are all places where a law abiding gun owner STOPPED a mass murderer before they could ratchet up the body count. Does the media trumpet these citizen heroes and repeat their names ad nauseam so they become household words? No. Their names are often unreported save for the local press of their town because apparently stopping a mass murderer with the ability to kill hundreds isn’t as sexy as letting him murder his way into the headlines.
I think that is a load of steaming bull crap. As such, let me tell you a little about the aforementioned situations.
Pearl High School; Pearl, Mississippi October 1st 1997: Luke Woodham started the day by beating and stabbing his mother to death before taking his 30-30 hunting rifle to school. Do I need to even point out the eerie similarity to Sandy Hook? Upon arriving at the school Woodham opened fire with his rifle injuring 7 and killing 2 including his former girlfriend. Principal Roy Balentine ran out of his office thinking something school related malfunctioned and ran across Woodham with his rifle. The principal, fearing that Woodham would come for him next ran back to his office and barricaded himself in to call the police allowing Woodham to continue on his rampage, shooting more kids along the way.
Fortunately the Assistant Principal Joel Myrick (HERO) ran to his truck to get his Colt .45 semi automatic handgun and confronted Woodham as he was heading to the Middle School for younger targets. Myrick held his pistol in Woodham’s face and forced him to the ground where he kept his foot securely on Woodham’s neck until police arrived.
Once again proving mass murderers are cowards and will either give up or kill themselves whenever they are challenged by someone else with a gun.
Hero Asst Principal Joel Myrick saved countless lives that day. Principal Balentine ran to his office and called the police. Which Principal would you rather have if you were a student that day?
Parker Middle School Dance; Edinboro, PA April 24th, 1998: Parker Middle School was holding its 8th Grade graduation dance at Nick’s Place, a banquet hall off campus. About 20 minutes before the end of the dance, 14 year old student Andrew Wurst pulled out a .25 caliber pistol and shot teacher John Gillette to death. He then went on to shoot three more people within the dance, moving along slowly and deliberately, mocking the people as they cowered there.
This situation was ended when the owner of Nick’s Place, James Strand (HERO) heard the shots from next door, grabbed his 12 gauge shotgun and came running over. He too, like Joel Myrick shoved the boomstick in Wurst’s face and ended the situation. The police arrived 11 minutes later. Wurst could have done a lot more damage in 11 minutes if not for the heroism of Stand who ran TO danger armed with the means to do something about it.
Wurst would later say he was intending to kill himself but like all cowards when faced with the actual threat of having his head blown clear from his body his talk proved cheap.
Golden Market; Richmond, VA July 13th, 2009: In this case the hero chose to remain anonymous yet his actions were not. A man entered the store with his revolver out, told everyone to get on the floor and then walked over to the store’s owner and shot him twice without provocation. The mass shooter then moved over to a teenage boy and raised his gun to shoot him when another customer (HERO) pulled out his concealed weapon and fired. The bad guy ran to the back of the store and found another innocent man lying prone and attempted to shoot him, until the hero distracted him and shot at him again.
The bad guy walked around the store attempting to execute people and each time the hero shot at him and forced him from his murderous intentions. Finally the bad guy walked in between aisles and the hero took his shot unfortunately learning that his single action revolver’s trigger spring had snapped and therefore the trigger would not return forward. Not missing a beat the hero simply fanned the hammer like in old school westerns striking the bad guy twice and ending the attack. The store owner survived and the bad guy was killed. No other injuries occurred thanks to a law abiding citizen being armed and present.
Clackamas Town Center; Clackamas, OR Dec. 11th 2012: Mass murder wannabe Jacob Roberts (22) entered the Clackamas Town Center shopping mall with a rifle and opened fire. He got off 16 rounds that killed 2 people and injured a third. Before he could continue, armed shopper Nick Meli (HERO) drew his Glock 22 and confronted Roberts. Meli would say that if there were not innocent bystanders standing behind Roberts he would have fired but the point was fortunately moot as the simple act of someone standing up to Roberts with a firearm ran him off where he committed suicide shortly after.
The ironic thing about this case is that the hero, Nick Meli, ignored the mall’s prohibition against firearms. Had Meli submitted to the idiotic notion of a gun free zone, the death count would no doubt have been higher.
If you want to look over the Center’s Code of Conduct you can do it here: Clackamas Town Center Code of Conduct. It’s pretty short and near the end it says “No firearms or illegal weapon.”
The funniest part is what comes after:
Guests who do not act responsibly may be asked to leave. If they refuse to leave the property, they may be arrested and prosecuted for criminal trespass.
No, if some mass murdering nutjob refuses to leave based on the prohibition they ignored in the first place they will shoot up the place and kill as many unarmed people as they can while you call 911 and wait for the police. Criminal trespass…ha…the Center should be on their knees praising Nick Meli, not promoting the silly notion that a gun free zone sign would stop Jacob Roberts.
Here’s another little bit of food for thought. Look at these locations, even if some are in gun free zones they are in states that embrace gun rights. Mississippi, Pennsylvania, Virginia; even Oregon has that libertarian gun rights streak. These are states where people have a gun close at hand and thus have the ability to stop tragedies before they happen.
Yet the national media will focus on the failures in states where gun control is oppressive and gun ownership is limited.
Light must be shined on the heroes in the cases where tragedy was averted or at least limited thanks to the law abiding gun owner.
Speaking of states with a culture of gun rights and ownership, I can only wonder if the Aurora movie theatre in Colorado weren’t a gun free zone if the incident would have been in the second group of tragedies averted instead of the first group of successful mass murders.
(Kurt Hofmann) As National Gun Rights Examiner David Codrea reported Friday, United States District Judge Alfred V. Covello upheld Connecticut’s draconian “assault weapon” ban, in what gun rights advocates involved describe as “only the first battle in a multi-year legal war.” Interestingly, Covello acknowledges that the law is an assault on the rights of gun owners–and he doesn’t care.
The Hartford Courant reports that much of the debate revolved around whether or not the law bans firearms and magazines that are “in common use.” This is significant because in the Supreme Court’s District of Columbia v. Heller decision, the Washington D.C.’s outright ban on handguns was unconstitutional because such guns are “in common use” for lawful purposes.
As the Courant noted, the state denied that these guns were “in common use,” and are thus without any Constitutional protection:
The Connecticut plaintiffs argued that assault weapons are commonly used, in the state and across the country, for hunting, sporting competitions and home protection. Common usage makes the weapons and large-capacity magazines subject to Second Amendment protection, the plaintiffs argued.
The state, in its defense of the law, disputed the claim of widespread usage.
Judge Covello, interestingly, admits that the state’s claim that the firearms and magazines in question arenot commonly used for lawful purposes was false, but he doesn’t care:
Covello, agreeing with the plaintiffs, concluded that the weapons and magazines are commonly owned and legally used in Connecticut and elsewhere. But he parted company with the plaintiffs when he wrote that the state’s ownership and sales ban is justified when the government’s goal of reducing violence is measured against the ban’s impingement on Second Amendment rights.
It does not appear that Covello is using the argument advanced by former Obama administration “regulatory czar,” and eternal “killer tomato,” Cass Sunstein, who tried to claim that “in common use at the time”referred to the time the Second Amendment was ratified, rather than at the time the Constitutionality of a ban is being considered–an argument that the Heller decision had already described as “bordering on the frivolous.”
Instead, Covello apparently claims to have measured the acknowledged “impingement [some might say “infringement“] on [the] Second Amendment rights” of the plaintiffs, against “the government’s goal of reducing violence.” Covello is evidently asking us to believe that a ban on firearms used in less than two percent of “gun crimes,” according to the Congressional Research Service will do what ten years of federal “assault weapons ” banning singularly failed to do.
Covello also claims that since a variety of other firearms remain legal–including handguns, which, as Covello reminds us, are described in the Heller decision as “quintessential self-defense weapon” in the longstanding view of Americans–an “assault weapons” ban is a permissible infringement on that which shall not be infringed.
It is unfortunate that in writing the Heller opinion, Justice Scalia neglected to mention that semi-automatic, detachable magazine-fed rifles with pistol grips, barrel shrouds and flash suppressors have long been considered by the American people to be the quintessential anti-tyranny weapon.
As said before, the unfortunate court ruling is just the beginning of the “long legal war” over this legislative abomination. In the meantime, Connecticut gun owners should continue to defy it. The “legal war” might, after all, escalate to the kind of war in which the quintessential “regime change rifle” is a vital piece of equipment.
(N3) Could Florida end nearly all federal gun laws in the Sunshine State? If a new bill introduced into the statehouse passes, that may come to pass. State Representative Dane Eagle has introduced House Bill 733 into the Florida statehouse. This bill is commonly known as the Second Amendment Preservation Act. The legislation being considered in Tallahassee would forbid any state agencies from participating in the enforcement of any federal laws related to firearms. This prohibition would cover both present and future laws passed in Washington, and may provide a path for other states to follow suit.
Preventing the enforcement of federal laws on a state level is not a new idea. Founding Father James Madison, known the Father of the Constitution, supported such actions. He created the first blueprint of how such actions could take effect.
Francisco Rodriguez is the outreach director of the Tenth Amendment Center. That group strives to keep the federal government from enacting legislation beyond powers enumerated in the Constitution. Rodriguez is also active in the James Madison Institute and was elected to the board of directors for the Florida Food Policy Council.
Rodriguez is our guest on the show today. He is here to talk to us about Second Amendment Preservation Act. We will discuss the history of the bill, as well as its potential to pass into law. We will look at the possible effect of the act, and similar efforts in other states.