1 International Bankers Emptying all Retirement & Bank Accounts?
Do banks have a right to empty any of your accounts, including your retirement? Check out [www.activistpost.com/2013/02/is-it-time-to-pack-your-bags-am] to a post where 5 million Americans have already decided to live "Free" and "American" outside the US.
I believe that the international bankers and foreign corporations are subverting America. I believe there are rogue, clandestine operatives who are pulling off "False Flags". The Gulf of Tonkin incident has been declassified as being completely bogus and was the excuse for the Vietnam War. It has been declassified that the CIA wanted to run airplanes into buildings, blow up buildings, shoot children in schools, blow up school buses to blame Cuba for an excuse for a ground war. John F. Kennedy denied the CIA those black ops and how did it work out for him? Abby Martin of RT America's Breaking the Set talks about False Flags at the end of [rt.com/programs/breaking-set-summary/us-meteorite-anti-war-m].
Max Keiser talks about the banker conspiracy and takeover [rt.com/programs/keiser-report/episode-407-max-keiser/. I believe 9/11, Sandyhook, and other events after the Oklahoma City Bombing were false flags. Why was the FBI allegedly able to get away with planning the bombing of the World Trade Centers in 1993, convincing men to become bombers, supplying the bombs, and then allowing the bombing to occur? James Corbett with others breaks down how the Oklahoma City Federal Building Bombing was most likely a government black op to get the ATF more money when they faced budget cuts. [www.corbettreport.com/corbett-report-radio-023-the-okc-bombi]
Why haven't US Attorney General Eric Holder and Barack Obama been arrested for their roles in the ATF "Fast and Furious" program to get guns into the hands of Mexican Drug Gangs to attack the Second Amendment? Just knowing about felonies being committed, and then not reporting it is a crime. So, the pair at minimum are guilty of that. Why no arrests and prosecution for blatant law breaking? Are officials, bankers, and select corporate operatives above the law?
I contacted Connecticut US Senator Christopher Dodd and then Governor of Connecticut John G. Rowland about teens going bad and that police and the courts were out to eradicate the self-employed and small businesses who are not Mafia connected bank in the 1990's. I talked about police "Crime Farming" in Stafford Springs, Connecticut, promoting prostitution, contributing to the delinquency of minors, racketeering, obstructing justice, lying, terrorizing the public, aiding heroin and cocaine trafficking, promoting crime, and revenue collecting and confiscating property while refusing to protect and serve taxpayers.
I did not know that Dodd and Rowland were taking bribes from organized crime, bankers, and/or crooked leaders in the business world. So, my name and address was then forwarded to the Commissioner of the Connecticut State Police, Arthur L. Spada, to carry out the Connecticut State Police threat that I would become permanently estranged from my daughter, my family, lose my contracting business built over 2 decades, my home, be arrested, imprisoned, and kicked out of Connecticut upon my release if I tried to redress grievances to elected officials and if I continued to write letters to the editor critical of pirate police and rigged courts.
[judicialmisconduct.blogspot.com/2006/11/attn-fbi-and-ct-stat], Rep. Mordasky, and their staffers let me know that Steve Spellman, Connecticut State Police liaison to legislators let elected officials know they were not allowed to propose Civilian Oversight of Police legislation, court reform, and my desire to have Judge Jonathan J. Kaplan removed for bad behavior and bias in civil cases.
Why was Stafford Springs, Connecticut, allegedly allowed to be a "test city" back in the 1990's, to listen to all citizens calls, monitor all their internet use, and string surveillance cameras and microphones all over? Why were self-employed and small business owners who are not organized crime set up to fail, for property confiscation, family breakup, and prison if they got in the way of the "revenue collection" system of lawyers, police, town hall, and court operators?
Before 9/11, a seemingly grossly overweight, retarded, police officer who lived with his mother, could bounce me off my house, threaten me with arrest, tell me I was kicked out of Connecticut, and that my wife should be with him, not me. She showed no interest, when he stalked me and hung out in front of our house, sometimes daily. "Fat Frank" Prochaska would make mocking statements about private conversations I had in my house, on the phone, content of my emails, and was asking for informant and criminal help in harassing, terrorizing me, and for setting me up for a false arrest and prison.
Complaining about Prochaska, got me followed by two cruisers at a time. I once had eight cruisers parked on my property, where officers refused to answer calls. I had broken no laws, just had written another letter to the editor printed in a Connecticut newspaper. The dispatcher, finally said over the radio, "You all can't hang out with Mr. Erickson, this side of the state is now not getting any coverage. Please answer your calls."
So taxpayer may have shelled out 6 figures in their tax dollars for police to harass me, set me up for prison, to lose my family, my house, my rental properties, and for me to lose my contracting business built up for 2 decades. Does it make sense to use tax dollars to take take taxpayers offline to then be a burden to the remaining taxpayers? Does that make economic sense?
Should Peter J. Coukos have allegedly been offered dibs by Officer Prochaska and the Connecticut State Police and help in getting a gun permit to carry concealed pistols for his sexually harassing my then 14 year old daughter, stalking, and [www.youtube.com/watch?v=AxmouGaSEO4]? Coukos is a alleged crack head, alcoholic, psychotropic drug abusing, sleeps with prostitutes, propositions underage boys and girls for sex, and is admittedly a bi-polar sociopath and/or psychopath.
Do citizens get representation for their taxation?
Have international banker and foreign corporate operatives hijacked the US Government, US Military, and created a UN World Government to pirate all resources, wealth, energy, assets, and cash, worldwide?
-stevengerickson AT yahoo.com
Would Steven G. Erickson take down all videos and all internet posts, change his name, and then live a life of obscurity if he had his bogus criminal record expunged and was offered pennies on the dollars for his state sponsored losses? The question was posed to Connecticut Governor Dannel P. Malloy:
Here are the boilerplate responses I have just gotten back from Vermont US Senators Bernie Sanders and Patrick Leahy:
Thank you for contacting me about the targeted extrajudicial killing of U.S. citizens abroad and Executive orders. I appreciate knowing of your concerns and I apologize for my delay in response.
On September 30, 2011, American-born cleric Anwar al-Awlaki was killed in Yemen, reportedly by an armed American drone. As the leader of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, al-Awlaki is believed to have had direct links to a number of terrorist plots against the United States, including the Christmas Day 2009 attempt to explode an airliner over Detroit, the deadly shooting at Fort Hood, Texas in 2009,
and an attempted car bombing in Times Square in 2010.
While I commend President Obama and his national security team for renewing our focus on destroying al Qaeda, I have serious concerns and questions about the legal authority to target and kill an American citizen abroad. According to press accounts after al-Awlaki's death, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) issued a classified memorandum concluding that the United States can lawfully target a U.S. citizen overseas if that person is plotting attacks against the United States and there is no way to arrest that person.
On February 4, 2013, I joined a bipartisan group of Senators in writing to President Obama asking for the release of all legal memos related to targeted killings, in light of John Brennan's nomination to head the Central Intelligence Agency. On February 6, 2013, President Obama responded to this letter by releasing the legal opinions to the Senate and House Intelligence committees. Regrettably, the administration failed to allow the Senate Judiciary Committee to have access to these opinions and legal reasoning.
As Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, I take seriously my responsibility to conduct oversight of the executive branch – particularly concerning constitutional and national security issues. That is why on February 7, 2013, I wrote a letter to President Obama with Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Charles Grassley of Iowa, demanding full access to the legal memos concerning targeted killings that have been provided to the Senate and House Intelligence committees.
I believe strongly, as all Americans do, that we must do everything we can to prevent terrorism, and we must ensure severe punishment is imposed upon those who do us harm. However, I also believe strongly that we must ensure our safety and security, and bring terrorists to justice, in ways that are consistent with our Constitution, our laws, and our values. You can be sure that I will continue to
closely monitor this issue and work to ensure that our national security policy respects the rights and constitutional protections of all Americans.
You also mentioned Executive orders. In his capacity as the chief executive, the President has discretion on the issuance of Executive orders. These orders are instructions or declarations issued by the President and his administration which can establish a uniform set of policies and procedures that stem from an act of Congress and are compatible with the will of Congress as expressed in their legislative actions. Some Executive orders in the past have created new commissions, councils, task forces and committees; issued and allocated bonds; authorized certain acts by federal agencies; and protected land. It is important to know that Executive orders are limited in their scope and cannot be used to legislate or override existing laws. Authority for these directives comes directly from the Constitution. The power of the President to issue executive decrees is one that dates back to the beginning of the presidency.
In 1996, Congress created the Congressional Review Act (CRA), an act granting Congress power to disapprove rules and regulations administered by the President and federal administrative agencies. The CRA provides Congress with an opportunity to respond to executive orders, within 60 days of issuance, thereby allowing the Congress to take necessary measures to prevent abuse. While I do not believe that President Obama has abused his power or position as President of the United States, you can be sure I will never hesitate to investigate executive actions if I believe they are overreaching, regardless of who occupies the White House.
Thank you for sharing your concerns with me and I will be sure to keep your thoughts in mind.
Sincerely, PATRICK LEAHY United States Senator
Dear Mr. Erickson:
Thank you for contacting me about the federal response to gun violence in this country. I appreciate the opportunity to respond to your concerns.
There is a proud tradition of gun ownership in Vermont, which I celebrate and strongly support. Thousands of Vermont families enjoy hunting, target shooting and other gun-related activities. Well over 99 percent of them are law-abiding citizens who are extremely careful with their weapons. Their rights must be protected as we proceed with this national debate.
On the other hand, very few deny that we must do everything we can to end the horror of mass killings that we have seen at Newtown, Connecticut, Aurora, Colorado, Blacksburg, Virginia, Tucson, Arizona and in other American communities.
It has long been my position from before I was elected to Congress in 1990 that gun regulation is largely a local issue best decided by the states, but that there are times when it does become a federal issue and Congress must act. One of the issues that concerns me is that, because of inadequate background checks, there are now too many people who own guns who should not have them – including felons, and people with severe mental illness. I also worry about the lack of effective investigative tools and sanctions for "straw purchases," where people legally able to buy guns act as a front purchaser for criminals.
In my view, the debate over mass killings should not be only about guns. In my view, Congress must consider a comprehensive approach which also includes a serious discussion about the need for greatly expanded mental health services and ending gratuitous violence in the media. It is imperative that Americans who need mental health services be able to access them in a timely manner. That is not the case today. Several hearings that I recently attended made it very clear that throughout our country there are thousands of Americans who harbor suicidal/homicidal thoughts – and are unable to find treatment at a cost they can afford. That must change.
Again, thank you for contacting me about this important issue. Feel free to contact me again in the future about this or any other subject of interest to you, or for up-to-date information on what my office is working on please visit www.sanders.senate.gov/. While there, I invite you to sign up for my e-newsletter, the Bernie Buzz, at sanders.senate.gov/buzz/.
Please be aware that due to security screening procedures, postal mail to my office experiences delays that will lengthen the time it takes me to get back to you. The fastest way to contact my office is by calling [phone number snipped].
Sincerely, BERNARD SANDERS United States Senator
By: SvenVonErick (1458.52)
Tags: yoursay, US, News, Independent, Internet, Censorship, NDAA, CISPA, Patriot Act, Martial Law, Impeach, Obama, protest, war, gun, confiscation, Connecticut, State, Police, Brutality, Newtown, Sandyhook, Schoolyard, shooting, hoax