Wednesday, September 26, 2012

"Text-a-Tip" Snitch Program Invades Small-Town America

Brandon Turbeville
Activist Post
September 25, 2012

image source
In yet another example of the Big Brother-style snitch culture being fostered and implemented all across the country, the city of Marion, South Carolina, is now demonstrating how the oppressive surveillance state is no longer limited to large metropolitan areas and bigger cities already conditioned to living under the watchful eye of government. Now, even small towns such as Marion, with a population of 6,939 people, are getting in on the act.

According to WMBF News, the Marion Police Department is launching a new program that allows citizens to report “crimes” via text message.

The Department’s new “Text-a-Tip” program is scheduled to be operational by the end of September of this year. Much like the now infamous “See Something, Say Something” program being implemented by DHS in Wal-Marts, Hotels, and other available television screens, the MPD is encouraging everyone to text message (843) 430-0938 if they see a crime in progress or even so much as what they deem to be “suspicious activity.”

Unfortunately, one can assume that gangs of police preying upon the already economically destitute citizens of Marion day in and day out does not constitute reportable suspicious activity. After all, such has been the case in Marion for some time, as any unfortunate driver will easily attest to.

In regards to the launch of “Text-a-Tip,” Marion Mayor Rodney Berry stated, “This is just another option for citizens in our combined efforts to stop crime in the City of Marion. Together we can work to make Marion safer and to make a difference in our communities.”

Regrettably, Mayor Berry’s and the Marion Police Department’s plan will do virtually nothing to keep Marion safer. However, it will undoubtedly increase the number of snitching incidents resulting from vengeful individuals looking for quick returns on their or anger, or from otherwise nosy and frightful citizens whose paranoia is only increased by the incessant replays of police dramas and terror warnings paraded in front of them on television every single night.

“Text-a-Tip” is yet another technological program, much like the recently introduced CrimePush and PatriotApp smartphone programs aimed at providing the general public with all the tools necessary to
enslave themselves and their fellow citizens.

The Text-a-tip program is by no means unique to Marion, South Carolina, however. The fact is that low-tech programs of this type are becoming common place in cities large and small all across the country.

For instance, the cities of Springfield Massachussetts, Evanston, Illinois, and Boston have all implemented Text-a-Tip.

Even college campuses like the University of Southern California have introduced the program as well as High Schools such as Pottsgrove High in Pennsylvania.

In the end, “Text-a-Tip” is just one more snitch program to enable police to spy on the population they have sworn to protect, and justify even more confrontations with individuals they would otherwise have no authority to harass. Undoubtedly, this program will be used by a domesticated and terrorized citizenry to rat on their neighbors in yet one more embarrassing display of just how far the American people have fallen.

If you would like to contact the Marion Police Department and/or Marion Mayor Rodney Berry and express your dissatisfaction at the rollout of this new program, you can contact them using the following information:

Mayor Rodney Berry
(843) 423-5961
Fax: 843-423-8620
107 South Main Street
Marion, SC 29571

Marion Police Chief Jim Gray
(843) 423-8616
Fax: (843) 423-8604
1024 South Main St.
Marion, SC 29571
Read other articles by Brandon Turbeville here.

Brandon Turbeville is an author out of Mullins, South Carolina. He has a Bachelor's Degree from Francis Marion University and is the author of three books, Codex Alimentarius -- The End of Health Freedom, 7 Real Conspiracies, and Five Sense Solutions and Dispatches From a Dissident. Turbeville has published over one hundred articles dealing with a wide variety of subjects including health, economics, government corruption, and civil liberties. Brandon Turbeville is available for podcast, radio, and TV interviews. Please contact us at activistpost (at)

Thursday, September 20, 2012

Armed FBI Raid Targets Activist's Political Literature

Brandon Turbeville
Activist Post
September 18, 2012

Leah-Lynn Plante
photo: National Lawyers Guild
If anyone has any doubt as to whether or not the United States has earned the designation of “police state,” one need only look at the case of 24-year-old Leah-Lynn Plante, a Portland woman whose home was recently raided by paramilitary police in search of ordinary household items including “anarchist literature.”

Plante is currently enduring an affair with a special grand jury which risks seeing her imprisoned for civil contempt if she refuses to comply and possibly indicted for other, less-defined crimes.

In Plante’s case, the entire grand jury theatre is based on the stated attempt of the FBI and federal prosecutors to trace the root of several acts of vandalism in downtown Seattle on May Day of last year targeting several different banks and stores, particularly those of Niketown and Wells Fargo and a door of a federal court house. The vandalism is largely considered to be politically motivated and anarchists are the number one suspect. At least, that is the position of law enforcement.

But, while legitimate anarchists may very well have committed the criminal acts, the fact is also that police have been caught disguising themselves as activists, particularly of the anarchist variety, and committing violent acts for some time – all this for the purpose of placing the blame on activists and subsequently cracking down on protestors using the very acts committed by the police as justification for brute force and violation of rights. Interestingly enough, it was in Seattle where police were first widely exposed for such despicable behavior.

Not only that, but considering the history of the FBI in encouraging and facilitating outright acts of terror, one is clearly justified in second guessing the ability of the FBI or any other law enforcement agency to tell the truth in regards to an act of violence that precipitates the wholesale investigation of philosophically related activists.

The subsequent investigation of “anarchists” in the Seattle area following the vandalism thus makes us view the entire incident with skepticism, particularly in light of the fact that the FBI has conducted several militarized raids in both Seattle and Portland in recent months which are openly targeting political activity and Constitutionally protected paraphernalia.

As a result, Plante was served a federal summons to appear in front of a grand jury in Seattle. Yet, instead of a typical arrest warrant delivery style, Plante was awakened in the early hours of July 25 by an FBI raid. The agents, she claimed, smashed in her front door with a battering ram, rushed in, complete with drawn assault rifles and, according to Plante, “looking paramilitary.”

Plante’s claims are backed up by witnesses to other raids conducted by the FBI in Seattle and Portland which also state that both federal and local police burst into private homes while the occupants were sleeping, held them at gunpoint, and searched through their belongings, particularly their bookshelves, looking for evidence of political affiliation as opposed to evidence of a crime.

According to Brendan Kiley of The Stranger, a copy of the search warrant shows that the paramilitary intruders were in search of “black clothing, paint, flags, computers and cell phones, and ‘anti-government or anarchist literature.’”

Kiley points out the absurdity of issuing a warrant for such items by writing, “For the record, I executed a quick search of my home early this morning and found black clothing, cans of paint, sticks, cloth, electronics, and ‘anarchist literature.’”

This is an important point because none of these objects were alleged to be the same objects that were used in the commission of a crime nor are they illegal to possess on their own. However, the raids and the subsequent possible indictments that will be based upon them continue to set a dangerous precedent that the government can and will target anyone who not only actively or tacitly opposes its conduct, but also those who simply do not conform to the “new normals” provided to the general public by the culture creators in Hollywood and tax-free foundations.

Interestingly enough, Plante said that some of the agents involved in the raid, while initially very aggressive, eventually started to appear confused at not finding a cache of guns and violent anarchists hiding in their lair. She said, “It seemed like what they expected was some armed stronghold. But it’s just a normal house, with normal stuff in the pantry, lots of cute animals, and everyone here was docile and polite.”

As President of the Seattle chapter of the National Lawyers Guild, Neil Fox, stated, “When I see a search warrant that targets political literature, I get nervous.”

Fox also stated that raids like those made on Plante’s home may have a chilling effect on free speech and an even longer lasting “negative effect on the country – you want to have robust discussions about political issues without fear.”

He went on to say “’Anti-government literature’ is so broad. What does that include? Does that include the writings of Karl Marx? Will that subject me to having my door kicked in and being dragged in front of a grand jury?”

If Plante’s case is anything to go by, then the answer to Fox’s question might very well be “yes.”

While grand juries have the potential to be used for good, the fact is that, in 2012, all they have is potential. As Riley writes,
Nowadays, Fox said, grand juries are often used by prosecutors and investigators who have run out of leads. But grand juries are secret, so it’s difficult to know what the prosecutor is really doing. And the effects of raids and subpoenas like the ones in Seattle and Portland may be more about putting on the dramatic public spectacle of dragging people through the mud than investigating a crime.
Will Potter of GreenIsTheNewRed has documented numerous accounts of abuse of power and the violation of activists’ rights since the 1990s to the present. In cases like Plante’s, Potter suggests that law enforcement is actually trying to silence free speech.

In an interview with Brendan Kiley of The Stranger, Potter stated, “Sometimes, law enforcement believes this knocking-down-the-door, boot-on-the-throat intimidation is part of a crime-prevention strategy.” Meaning, simply frightening off potential “offenders.” However, Potter also suggests that one goal may be “social mapping,” or the gleaning of information, contacts, and connections between activists via obtaining “address books, cell phones, and hard drives.”

Yet Potter also points out the distinct differences between what law enforcement is told they are being trained to combat and what they are really being trained to combat. “There’s a huge disconnect between what the FBI and local police are being told and trained for, and what the reality is,” he says. “There are presentations about ominous, nihilistic, black-clad, bomb-throwing, turn-of-the-century caricatures – the reality is that many anarchists are just organizing gathering spaces, free libraries, free neighborhood kitchens.”

Indeed, Potter is largely correct. Much like how law enforcement was once trained to violate the Constitution based upon the fear of Muslim al-Qaeda terrorists, law enforcement is now trained to take on “white al-qaeda,” Christians, and Constitutionalists as well as animal rights advocates and environmentalists.

Yet, when law enforcement confronts these individuals, with few exception, the reality is much different from the perception held by the agents of the state who rush in with reckless abandon to deal death and destruction upon their unsuspecting victims.

Plante’s case, in this context, is not surprising. After all, police have been trained for some time that literature which questions the legitimacy of the state or even the mere manifestation of that legitimacy is grounds for search, seizure, or even arrest. For instance, one need only take a look at the now famous video of police conducting a post-arrest car search where, upon discovering “anarchist” literature in the back seat, they ponder as to whether or not the book is legal.

Nevertheless, in the face of potential loss of her liberty, Leah-Lynn Plante is taking a very courageous stand in regards to the federal grand jury proceedings. Beyond providing her name and birth date, Plante is refusing to testify to the grand jury for reasons of personal conviction. In short, Plante says she is refusing to cooperate with an FBI that has repeatedly violated the rights of innocent people.

Prior to her second appearance in front of the federal grand jury, Plante issued a statement explaining her position and her refusal to cooperate. She said:
This will be the second time I have appeared before the grand jury, and the second time I have refused to testify. The first time was on August 2nd. I appeared as ordered and identified myself. I was asked if I would be willing to answer any questions. I said, 'No' and was dismissed after being served a second subpoena. Over a month later, my answer is still the same. No, I will not answer their questions. I believe that these hearings are politically motivated. The government wants to use them to collect information that it can use in a campaign of repression. I refuse to have any part of it. I will never answer their questions, I will never speak.
She continued:
I know that if I am taken away, I will not be alone. We have friends and comrades all around the world standing behind us, and even though this has been one of the most traumatizing experiences of my life, I have never felt so supported or loved. I can only speak for myself, but I have every faith that the others subpoenaed to these hearings will likewise refuse. And I know that hundreds of people have called the US Attorney demanding that they end this tribunal. Hundreds of organizations, representing thousands of people, signed onto a statement expressing solidarity with those of us under attack and demanding an end to this sort of repression. I know that those people will continue to support me, the others subpoenaed, and the targets of the investigation. That spirit of solidarity is exactly what the state fears. It is the source of our strength, yours and mine. And that strength shows itself in every act of resistance.
Unfortunately, if Plante is found guilty of civil contempt for refusing to answer the jury’s questions, she faces a possible lengthy prison sentence -- theoretically life behind bars. Considering the paranoia and iron-fisted nature of the judicial system ever since 9/11, Plante undoubtedly faces more than a weekend in jail.

In the end, Plante’s case is emblematic of the now standard operating procedure of law enforcement agencies like the FBI. That is to say, heavy-handed, aggressive tactics which target political activity and thoughtcrime justified by an increasingly questionable sequence of events. Whatever one thinks of the political tenants of anarchy, the fact is that Plante appears to be just another victim of an increasingly free speech-resistant police state. We should certainly be watching her case closely.

Read other articles by Brandon Turbeville here.

Brandon Turbeville is an author out of Mullins, South Carolina. He has a Bachelor's Degree from Francis Marion University and is the author of three books, Codex Alimentarius -- The End of Health Freedom, 7 Real Conspiracies, and Five Sense Solutions and Dispatches From a Dissident. Turbeville has published over one hundred articles dealing with a wide variety of subjects including health, economics, government corruption, and civil liberties. Brandon Turbeville is available for podcast, radio, and TV interviews. Please contact us at activistpost (at)

Brandon Turbeville - Agenda 21 & the COG Strategy Pt. 3

Brandon Turbeville - Agenda 21 & The COG Strategy Pt. 2

Tuesday, September 18, 2012

Med Gas Fields Discovery Leading to Battle for Wealth in Volatile Middle East

Brandon Turbeville
Activist Post
September 18, 2012

As virtually the entire Muslim world erupts in violent protest over a very questionable anti-Islam propaganda video, the Syrian destabilization continues, the murder of the US ambassador to Libya is a world headline, and the impeding war with Iran looms heavier, one can easily see the build-up to a literal clash of civilizations of unprecedented proportions. Coupled with the worldwide economic depression and the constant edging closer of a confrontation between the West and Russia and China, one can only wonder when the world will plunge into an unfortunate and totally destructive third world war.

However, with so much focus placed upon the issues mentioned above, it seems that we may add yet another potential tinderbox for the total disintegration of world civilization. This new tinderbox is the underreported Med gas fields – a grouping of natural gas fields that are claimed, at least in part, by Israel, Lebanon, Palestine, and Cyprus, with vested interests held by Turkey and Russia. Iran, Syria, and Egypt are also paying very close attention to developments made in this particular region, as any military conflicts resulting from controversy would affect these nations in a very personal fashion.

The official announcement of the existence of the Med gas fields was announced as far back as 2000, when it was discovered that major gas fields were found off the Palestinian Gaza strip. Typically, Israel is blocking efforts to develop these fields out of fear that such natural resources will provide an injection of economic activity and funding to the embattled Palestinian people.

In 2009-2010, Israel announced that yet more natural gas fields were found in the Eastern Mediterannean sea, which has become one of the largest natural gas finds in the region. Two of the largest fields, known as Tamar and Leviathan (quite interesting and foreboding names when one considers the Jewish and Christian religious texts and traditions), are largely accepted as belonging to Israel.

However, in addition to the dispute surrounding the fields off the Palestinian Gaza Strip, the Lebanese also claim some rights to the natural gas under the Mediterannean sea. In fact, the Lebanese claim that some of the natural gas belonging to Israel encroaches upon Lebanese maritime waters.

260 miles west of Israel, Cyprus also sits atop a massive natural gas field. According to Cypriot figures, the fields hold enough natural gas to make the tiny nation energy independent for the next 200 hundred years even while Cyprus becomes a gas exporter.

Yet, in what could become yet another facet to the controversy between natural gas field claims centering around Israel, the Israeli maritime waters directly adjoin those of Cyprus. Even more so, Israel’s biggest natural gas field, Leviathan, appears to extend all the way into Cyprus’ waters, presenting the world with yet another potentially explosive maritime claim confrontation.

In anticipation of such a row, Israel announced early last year that the Israeli Navy was preparing plans to defend the fields. The plan is by no means miniscule as the mass of the gas fields is twice as big as the Israeli state itself – no short order for any military. With that in mind, the naval plan must carry with it the ability to defend offshore drilling vessels, undersea pipelines, production platforms, transportation ships, and other types of gas drilling equipment.

As UPI reported in 2011, “Israel's military command has been planning to expand the 7,000-person navy, the smallest of the country's armed services, for some time. Priority has gone primarily to acquiring three more Dolphin-class submarines from Germany to double the size of this strategic force capable of hitting Iran.”

This announcement came as Iranian warships moved into the area on what the Iranians deemed a “training and flag-showing operation.” While there were no altercations in this particular circumstance, the tension between Israel and Iran has only grown sharper in the year since.

As Israel moves to develop defensive plans for its natural gas find, Egypt has also stated that it will be watching the Mad Dog of the Middle East closely to ensure that it will not infringe upon sovereign Egyptian territory.

Yet interest in the Med gas fields is by no means confined to a small circle of Middle Eastern nations plus Cyprus. Russia, too, is seriously concerned over the potential challenge these gas finds may pose to their virtual monopoly over the natural gas supply to Western Europe. If Cyprus, Israel, Lebanon, or Palestine become gas exporters, Russia would then see its control over the Western European customer base threatened.

Thus, Moscow has been courting both Israel and Cyprus, in the form of massive energy company Gazprom who is now reportedly in talks with Israel regarding a possible deal involving a large injection of funds to encourage and facilitate further gas exploration in the region.

Furthermore, Turkey also may have a vested interest in the decisions being made over the Med fields. Although Turkey seized the Northern part of Cyprus after an invasion in 1974, the southern part of Cyprus remains under Greek-Cypriot control. Given the level of imperialist behavior being exhibited by Turkey in recent months over the NATO-backed Syrian destabilization, one can only wonder just how long the divided nation will be able to resist the temptation to lay its own claim to the gas fields in some way or another.

All in all, the Med gas fields discovery only add yet another dimension to an already volatile situation in the Middle Eastern region. With so many players having direct financial and energy-related interests in the fields, others with indirect interests, and others still who have the potential to be drawn in to any potential confrontations that might result, one thing is clear – the Med is a geopolitical time bomb just waiting to explode.

Read other articles by Brandon Turbeville here.

Brandon Turbeville is an author out of Mullins, South Carolina. He has a Bachelor's Degree from Francis Marion University and is the author of three books, Codex Alimentarius -- The End of Health Freedom, 7 Real Conspiracies, and Five Sense Solutions and Dispatches From a Dissident. Turbeville has published over one hundred articles dealing with a wide variety of subjects including health, economics, government corruption, and civil liberties. Brandon Turbeville is available for podcast, radio, and TV interviews. Please contact us at activistpost (at)

Friday, September 14, 2012

The American Corporate Party and the Derailing of Revolution

Brandon Turbeville
Activist Post
September 13, 2012

As the Presidential campaigns begin to heat up, it is thoroughly apparent that the vast majority of Americans will once again fall into the trap of political bickering, party affiliation, and personality cults.

One only needs to talk with their friends and family, watch social media sites, or listen to the callers of talk radio to understand that 2012 will be yet one more year where the populace is further divided and conquered by a force that spans both political parties.

Although the reason for the effectiveness of the steam valve known in the United States as elections goes much deeper than the mere greed and corruption of political parties and the complicity of the mainstream media, the fact is that, if we are to avoid a repeat of every other election year in American history and a continued dominance of the status quo, the American people must soon take drastic steps to ensure it.

This, however, is much easier said than done. Most Americans are not truly aware of the levels to which they are controlled as pawns on the political chessboard, much less the lengths to which they are controlled in their culture and personal lives. Yet, even those individuals who are largely awake to the forces directing society are both consistently and easily pulled back into the counterproductive game of political debate and supporting candidates whose best description by their supporters can only be that they are “the lesser of two evils.” Thus, individuals who are aware of larger conspiracies regarding 9/11, world government, Zionism, corporate finance oligarchy, and many others are caught in a web of pointlessly defending a candidate who is wholly owned by the very forces they seek to overthrow.

Generally, this reaction is produced by the inherent evil of the progression of events having taken place during the tenure of the current President or other elected politician briefly in the crosshairs of the exasperated voter. The tragedy of the Bush years was itself enough to produce a revolution of “swarming youth” weary of eight years worth of economic degradation, war, imperialism and a growing police state who now yearned for the “change” they were told would come if they would throw their faith and support behind the supposed opposite of George W. Bush. Yet, after four years of not only a continuance of these very same policies, but an acceleration of them, many are confronted with a similar non-choice in 2012.

While it is true that many on the left will simply not vote for Mitt Romney, it is also true that many on the right – mainstream republicans, conservatives, and even some libertarians – will inevitably go to the ballot box and support a man who embodies the same finance oligarchy, war machine, and austerity measures as the President they so despise. They will, as they put it, vote “NoBama” in 2012. Indeed, after the dismal past four years, it will seem to many of these individuals that almost anything will be better than the current administration.

On the left, however, after watching numerous speeches made by the Republican candidate crying for genocidal spending cuts, confrontation with Russia, and praise for the wealthy, a sizable portion of mainstream Democrats, Liberals, and Greens will be thoroughly frightened into voting for a man who represents what they perceive as an enormous threat. What may have, at first, prompted many of these individuals to simply stay home on Election Day will prompt them to run to the polls and support “their” President who, in turn, embodies these very same principles.

As a result, any shred of principles that the Libertarian/True Conservative and True Liberal/Green crowd may have laid claim to will evaporate as the propaganda intensifies. To support Obama, the left will also support perpetual war, shredding the social safety net, and banker bailouts. To support Romney, ironically, the right will use the very same arguments.

Yet the obsession with the two parties does not begin and end with the Presidential or U.S. Congressional elections. The intentionally divisive party politics continues all the way down to the local level in cities and towns across the country with unwitting voters supporting and opposing policies deemed acceptable by the system which are, in reality and unbeknownst to the useful idiots below, virtually identical to one another.

Regardless of one’s political pedigree, the fact is that there is a real temptation to return to the particular political party tailored to one’s bias during trying times, or when victory seems within the realm of possibility.

Indeed, the ultimate goal of recent political action seems to be centered around the victory of some electable messiah who will enter his office and enact timid and watered-down versions of the desires of those sweating blood for his campaign.

The oligarchy then watches in confidence as the two political parties wait in the wings to co-opt and redirect whatever movement arises, knowing that it will be only a matter of time before whatever legitimate opposition they face will soon fade into the recesses of history. Thus, it is safe to say that every political movement in the country is better off without the Republican or Democratic Parties.

For those on the political right, the most obvious examples of the deleterious nature of the Republican party might be the Ron Paul campaign that, ironically, took place inside of it; and the Tea Party protest movement which raised the eyebrows of the establishment long enough for it to take serious notice.

The amount of energy expended by devoted Ron Paul supporters was, in large part, the sole reason that Ron Paul’s presidential campaign was as successful as it was. Doing more with less, Paul’s campaign was able to take advantage of diehard supporters, activists, organizers, and the Internet to provide (at least at one point) serious contention for the Republican nomination.

Regardless of what one thinks of Paul’s economic theories, or the subsequent cozying up to the Romney campaign and Republican establishment, the fact is that, at every step of the way, the Ron Paul campaign was sabotaged at every turn. Despite Paul having been a legitimate member of the Republican party and a consistently-successful one in terms of elections, Paul’s campaign was represented as an interloper from the Libertarians and was treated accordingly. Again, despite bringing record numbers of young people into the Republican Party, an unfortunate result of his candidacy but one which the Republicans sorely needed, Paul was still ostracized and mocked in the meetings of Republican elites and Party operatives.

Numerous statements were openly made to the press by the Republican Party officials that Ron Paul would not receive the nomination even if he were to win the elections. Voter fraud abounded. When Paul did when the vote, it was not announced to the public until the wind had been sufficiently removed from his sails.

Even after the damage was done and the campaign’s death knell had tolled, the Republican leadership directing the RNC delegate count would not even allow the Paul camp to count the votes in a legitimate fashion as the delegates for Ron Paul were automatically counted as being for Mitt Romney.

Yet the truth is that the campaign was dead on arrival. The Ron Paul Revolution never had any hope. But it was not because the Ron Paul supporters were incompetent or not dedicated enough or even because the campaign was inserting itself into the Republican machine – it was because the campaign sought to become the Republican machine instead of seeking to defeat it. Likewise, it was because the Republican machine sought to consume the Ron Paul Revolution. Once the merger began to take place, with the Paul campaign’s cozying up to Romney, Neo-con Rand Paul becoming the face of the movement, and the obsession with convention speaking slots, recognition as the new face of the party, and other Republican-based trophies, the Ron Paul Revolution became the Republican Co-opt.

Such was also the fate of the Tea Party, ironically, another Ron Paul-related event. Beginning as far back as the tail-end of the Bush years, the Tea Party initially was a dedicated grouping of true Conservatives and Libertarians who were opposed to the Neo-Con ideology. The Tea Party only grew stronger after the election of Barack Obama who both continued and intensified all of the Neo-Con policies under left cover. The Tea Party, however, while of a more right-aligned stance, was neither Republican nor Democrat.

As the movement grew, however, particularly around the time of the debate centering around the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Obamacare), the mainstream media began portraying the Tea Party as racist, rightwing Republicans. This portrayal became the perception of an entire nation of television fanatics and, eventually, a self-fulfilling prophecy. As more and more rightwing Republicans saw the reports regarding the Tea Party and became convinced that it was, in fact, a grouping of rightwing Republicans, the Tea Party itself became infiltrated by the mainstream Republican contingent that supports the same policies as Barack Obama, yet opposes him only because of the “D” in front of his name.

When the Tea Party made an attempt to infiltrate the Republican Party, it was soon discovered that the Republican Party cannot be used for good in any real sense of mass movement. Coupled with the fact that the Tea Party was being flooded with mainstream Republicans, the demise of the true Tea Party, of which there is very few outposts left and virtually no politically relevant remnants, was only a matter of time. Indeed, it was in very short order that the Tea Party became an organizing platform for Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, and Paul Ryan – individuals who are the complete antithesis of everything the Tea Party stood for when it first began.

Thus, as in the case of the Ron Paul Revolution, the Tea Party’s attempt to infiltrate the Republican Party, coupled with the desire to be accepted by it, ultimately resulted in the complete co-opt and absorption of the movement.

As mentioned earlier, however, the act of co-opting a legitimate movement by specific wings of the American Corporate Party is by no means specific to the right. The left-wing branches of organic peoples’ movements have themselves been co-opted and derailed with lightning speed in recent years.

The first and most obvious example of this is the abject failure of the Occupy movement. Indeed, in the case of the Occupy Movement, it is apparent that the culture creators and intelligence community were well-prepared to counter any popular uprising, particularly one functioning as an offshoot of the union protests in the Midwest, movement which itself was derailed directly by the Democratic Party and the opportunists and agents working within it.

When the Occupy movement first began in the fall of 2011 as a semi-organic uprising with populist tendencies, the protesters understood one of the keys to drawing attention through physical demonstration, meaning that one should not leave the area of demonstration until one’s demands are met. For weeks, the protesters in New York and other cities fought inclement weather, typical brutish police, and other poor conditions which come with camping out in city streets. Yet the mainstream media completely ignored the movement. Even as the protests grew to cities all across the country, it was at least two weeks before any mention was made by major news networks.

Because Occupy was crippled by lack of cohesion from the start, there was an inherent inability to form concrete demands for such an effective method of protest. Thus, as it has been stated before, where no leader exists, one will be provided.

The leaders provided were, of course, were organizations like AdBusters, David Graeber, and George Soros’ Open Society Institute and Tides Foundation. The Occupy movement was theneffectively derailed by these organizations and turned into a caricature of social protest with ridiculous methods of decision making such as the General Assembly, hand signals, and an utterly laughable determination to refuse making actual demands. Occupy unfortunately became an exercise in fit- throwing whose biggest moral struggle was for the right to camp in the city park.

With typical opportunism, the Democratic Party soon began repeating the talking points given to Occupy via the Foundations and phony spokesman provided to the movement. As traditionally Democratic-based operative organizations began endorsing Occupy, the movement became more and more focused on Republican treachery and much more tolerant of that perpetrated by the Democrats. In the end, Occupy was reduced to staging protests in support of political correctness and wedge issues, and against vague social ills such as sexism.

Like the Tea Party and Ron Paul Revolution correlation, the derailing of Occupy Wall Street was devised much earlier on with the Democratic Party Co-opt of the Wisconsin pro-union/anti-austerity protests. The Occupy movement was, after all, a development that resulted largely from the fallout of the collective bargaining protests which had erupted in Wisconsin regarding the fascist Governor Scott Walker and his attempt to impose austerity and union-busting programs upon state workers.

What resulted from Walkers’ assault on worker’s hard won rights was a protest movement of unprecedented proportions. As other fascist Governors such as Kasich of Ohio, Snyder of Michigan, and Mitch Daniels of Indiana, began launching simultaneous attacks against workers in their respective states, resistance began popping up in these areas of the country as well. The swelling of opposition to fascism was such that the protests in Wisconsin are, at this point, the largest protests to ever have taken place in Wisconsin.

But it was only a matter of time before opportunists within the Wisconsin Democratic Party began to smell the blood boiling in the veins of the people in the street and began positioning themselves to appear as if they had been in solidarity with them all along.

Yet, unfortunately, one cannot attribute the failure of the Wisconsin resistance entirely to Democratic Party treachery. There was, after all, a desire among many of the protesters to achieve recognition by the Democratic Party to begin with. Others, of course, may have already been attached to the Democrats before the protests even began.

Regardless of the political pedigrees of many of the protesters, the fact is that the protesters were largely successful in putting pressure upon elected officials, particularly Governor Scott Walker, where enough signatures were gathered by protesters and activists so that he was actually recalled and a another vote was required.

However, with such a golden opportunity, everything the protesters had fought for was thrown away when the resistance joined forces with the Democratic Party. As soon as the champion of the Wisconsin protests became former Mayor Tom Barrett, a typical Wall Street Democrat in the mold of the Obama/Romney dichotomy, the revolution had certainly ended. A legitimate stirring of revolution had now become just another divisive political circus with an outcome that would be largely irrelevant in the long run. Barrett lost but, even if he had won, the big tent of the Wisconsin State House would have only substituted one clown for another.

Nevertheless, when the dust had settled, Scott Walker survived his recall challenge, and the right of state workers to collectively bargain was shredded. Even more so, Walker was now able to claim that he was given a mandate – twice – to continue his assault on the living standards of the American people.

In the end, he aforementioned co-opted and derailed movements are only four of many who never truly got off the ground as a result of the pandering to and insidious nature of the two major American political parties.

Thus, one must come to the conclusion from the unfolding of events discussed in this article that any social or political movement that seeks to use or allows itself to be used by the two major political parties is doomed from the start. Indeed, it should be absolutely clear that all social and political movements, whatever they may be, are better off without the Republican or Democratic parties.

While strategic infiltration at times may be necessary at this stage of the game, both the Republican and Democratic Parties are entirely too corrupt to be changed from within and any attempt to do so is simply fighting a losing battle. In addition, it must be understood that neither can any movement cooperate with the two Parties without itself being consumed and co-opted by that respective wing of the corporate oligarchy.

Ultimately, both the Republican and Democratic parties must be absolutely rejected and discarded from any legitimate social or political resistance. It is high time that protesters, activists, and dissenters alike realize that the two parties do not represent potential vehicles for change but a roadblock obstacle to it.

If a political party is a necessary piece of the puzzle to realizing political progress, then an entirely new party must be formed. It cannot be the Republican Party. It cannot be the Democratic Party. And it cannot be the Libertarian or Green Parties. These establishments are over and done with as an effective or even potential vehicle for political change and they are not coming back. That is, if they were ever here to begin with. It is high time for all activists to acknowledge this fact.

It is also time for Libertarians, Union activists, Ron Paul supporters, anti-austerity protesters, and all others to acknowledge that their movements have, heretofore, been completely derailed.

Ron Paul supporters must acknowledge that the Ron Paul Revolution, as an attempt to push Paul into office, is over. In this regard, the Revolution has failed. It absolutely must be realized that the Republican Party was a major factor in the Revolution’s destruction. Likewise for Tea Party activists, it is imperative to understand that your movement no longer exists and that it has been absorbed by the Republican Party. You do not have to desert the principles, but you do have to desert the Party.

Socialists, Greens, Unions, and anti-austerity champions must also acknowledge that the Wisconsin anti-austerity, pro-worker’s rights rallies achieved nothing in terms of political capital. The Democratic Party was the central reason for this failure. Likewise, the Occupy movement participants must realize that Occupy has now become irrelevant as a political force. With a combination of other factors, the Democratic Party has played a role in its demise as well.

Activists taking part in both movements must now sit down and acknowledge the fact that they have been betrayed by their respective political pedigree establishments. Subsequently, they must ask themselves, “How is this the case?” How have movements on the two different sides of the political spectrum been betrayed by their respective parties? The answer should be abundantly clear – because the parties are simply a tentacle of the same governing force that these movements are working so hard to oppose. The parties are only different in their manner of presentation – not in substance. They are both owned by Corporations, Wall Street, Secret Societies, and other branches of the Shadow Government.

There is no saving the Parties and there should no longer be any attempt to do so. These institutions thrive on the hard work of determined activists and, for this reason among many others, determined activists must remove themselves from their midst. You must allow the tired talking points and discredited directors do their own dirty work while pushing yet another repetition of the same system. You must focus on creating an entirely new structure for political change, a feat which can only be accomplished when all ties to the Republicans and Democrats have been severed.

With that in mind, it is wise to be aware of the fact that the most important aspect of a true political change driven by a political or social movement is not just leadership, it is a program. It is the demands of that movement.

Any movement that seeks to accomplish something more than mere television time absolutely must develop a program that provides the participants a goal to strive for and provides those on the fence with a possibility to judge. Any protest without demands is nothing more than a temper tantrum.

No activist can ever be content to simply complain about the state of the current system, he must provide solutions to it. He must be prepared to answer the question of “what will you do differently?” He must be prepared to address the concern which is, simply put, “Once you seize power, what will you do?”

With that being said, it is paramount to understand the goal of protest, activism, and revolution – the seizing of power. As Webster Tarpley has stated on many occasions, “Protest is for wimps. Revolutionaries seize power!”

Indeed, Tarpley is correct. We can no longer take to the streets for a day and hope that our voices have been heard. They haven’t.

We can no longer engage in coordinated action and demand that those in power simply figure out the solutions, whatever they are, and implement them. They won’t.

We must engage in coordinated political action which is sustained and based upon clear and concrete demands.

We must provide the solutions to the system that is currently broken and we must provide an alternative to the system we seek to abolish.

The control system exists because of our cooperation with it and it will end as soon as we refuse to comply.

Read other articles by Brandon Turbeville here.

Brandon Turbeville is an author out of Mullins, South Carolina. He has a Bachelor's Degree from Francis Marion University and is the author of three books, Codex Alimentarius -- The End of Health Freedom, 7 Real Conspiracies, and Five Sense Solutions and Dispatches From a Dissident. Turbeville has published over one hundred articles dealing with a wide variety of subjects including health, economics, government corruption, and civil liberties. Brandon Turbeville is available for podcast, radio, and TV interviews. Please contact us at activistpost (at)

Tuesday, September 11, 2012

FLASHBACK: 9/11 Truth: Now is the Time for Renewed Strength

Brandon Turbeville
September 8, 2011
Like most members of the 9/11 truth movement, I am filled with a mixture of emotions as the tenth anniversary of 9/11 rolls around. Undoubtedly, I feel a sense of anger at such a miscarriage of justice ten years after the criminal act. Clearly, 9/11 should have resulted in the imprisonment of various rogue government officials and intelligence agents, as well as those treasonous members of the military apparatus who betrayed the United States on that day. Instead, it resulted in a vastly increased police state and the bombing and destruction of now six countries. The burden of 9/11, from any and all angles, has been carried only by those who had nothing to do with the attacks and the unfortunate serfs now classified as citizens.

I also feel sadness at seeing my country, which has always had the potential for great things, being destroyed from within. It is horrific to watch as a nation that could lead the world as the model of freedom, productivity, true sustainability, and civilization turn into nothing more than the rotting corpse of fading ideals and the hammer by which the New World Order system is refashioning the world.

Of course, frustration comes to mind as well. The fact that the American people still refuse to admit that they have been completely hoodwinked; the fact that they so immediately dismiss the truth whenever it is presented to them (if it ever is), and subsequently fall into whatever trap is laid in their way is often infuriating. It is, perhaps, the most frustrating aspect of the entire situation. 

 It is extremely disappointing to see so many who at first called the manipulators on their lies, often at a time when it was much more dangerous to do so on many different levels, now retreat to the very weak “I have questions” position, or even that of outright denial and rejection of their original position. 
Yet, most of all, this 9/11 anniversary brings to mind disappointment. My disappointment, however, is more with the 9/11 truth movement itself than it is with the control system and the Big Lie. The fact is, I expect those who perpetrated 9/11 to continue to lie. I expect the criminals to continue to steal money and bomb Middle Eastern and African countries. I expect the liars to maintain the lie as long as they possibly can, and I also expect the average American to resist the basic facts about 9/11.

All of this is frustrating of course. Yet what is infinitely more frustrating is the fact that many of those who vowed to never give up on getting out the truth about 9/11 are now abandoning the cause of truth out of their own frustration and isolation, as well as the desire to assert more politically acceptable positions in the mainstream.

I will not be naming names in this article. I will not be branding people “sell-outs,” “shills,” or “weak” for the decisions that they make in regards to 9/11 truth. There is no need to do so, as most of them already know who they are, and the last thing the 9/11 truth movement needs is more infighting.

This article is not meant to demonize anyone, nor is it meant to minimize the contributions of the admirable people who stood up at a time when it was not popular, even physically dangerous, to do so. The fact that the 9/11 truth movement has even progressed this far is largely due to the courage of some of these individuals who now, unfortunately, choose to remain silent. Indeed, my goal here is not to needle anyone. It is not to minimize any efforts. It is simply to remind you of what you fought so hard and risked so much for years ago. My goal is to convince you not to give up.

I will be the first to admit that the 9/11 truth movement is not winning the argument. We have to be honest with ourselves. But we aren’t out of the fight either. In fact, we are just beginning to fight back. After a great deal of hard work, we are beginning to gain some headway with the hearts and minds of the American people.

The mainstream media reports is being forced to address the “9/11 Conspiracies” now where, previously, anything casting doubt upon the official version was completely ridiculed or ignored. Even the reporters themselves, like Geraldo Rivera, are even beginning to question the official story of 9/11 and, at least, admit that there are some very disturbing unanswered questions dealing with the official version of events. The fact is that more and more people are questioning 9/11 than ever before. Just talk to people on the street and you can easily see that this is the case.

Yes, we are still a minority. But did you really think it would be easy? Did you really think that those who perpetrated 9/11 would simply give up and roll over if only we kept handing out flyers for ten years?

Of course not.

The global control system works on a long-term planning scale. This is why they have been so successful. Yet the people, truthers included, work only on things that we believe we can realistically achieve or see to completion within the scale of our individual lifetimes. This is why we, as a people, have given up on so many good but laborious causes in the past, and it is also why we have failed so many times in our well-meaning endeavors. The control system uses time to its benefit. We do not.

Nevertheless, I cannot say this plainly enough - Now is not the time to give up!

We have just begun to make serious gains in our efforts to see the truth of 9/11 exposed to the general public. And now, when our destination is in sight, far off as it may be, there is talk of quitting? If we are to give up on the realities of 9/11 now, then it would have been better if we never fought to begin with. At least, had we remained silent, we may have been able to avoid the negative attention and found some way to work within the system. If we cease to push for truth now, we have only accomplished making our lives harder than they would have been otherwise. Giving up on 9/11 truth at this stage in the game is the equivalent of tearing down a house with the goal of refurbishing it, only to stop the work once the roof is off and the walls are gutted.

Don’t get me wrong. I understand that it’s hard. It’s particularly hard on those in professional and high-profile positions. It’s hard enough on those of us who are not in high-level positions. But, to use the age-old phrase of apathy, “what can you do?” Such is one’s lot.

I, myself, have spent countless hours and a great deal of money (at least a great deal to me) trying to wake up the masses. I have come home broke, frustrated, tired, and dejected. Ten years after 9/11, I certainly understand why one could be tempted to give up on the movement and move on to greener pastures. The thought has certainly crossed my mind before. But the thought of NOT continuing to fight is much more frightening. To let those who are guilty of the crimes of 9/11 simply win and move on to the next stage of their plan, to me, is unconscionable. Indeed, this thought eradicates any idea of quitting the movement that I may have entertained.

In all honesty, one of my biggest fears regarding the 9/11 truth movement has been that it would begin to fray or that some of its members would become disheartened and disillusioned. I have worried for some time that 9/11 will simply turn into another JFK. By that, I mean the fact that, close to fifty years later, virtually everyone knows that JFK was not killed by a lone nut but, in 2011, very few people seriously care.

We cannot allow this to happen with 9/11.

If it does, then the generation of people who witnessed the attacks, understood them for what they were, and gave up on the truth will have no one but ourselves to blame.

I said the goal of this article was to convince you not to give up. But I want to be clear: I’m not asking you to sacrifice your life. I’m not asking you to sacrifice all your money and time. I’m not asking you to picket or go to jail.

I’m not asking you to save the world.

But I am asking you to try. I’m asking you to do what you can.

What the 9/11 truth movement needs is not a politician. It is not a celebrity or a million man march. What the 9/11 truth movement needs is real people talking to other real people and telling them the truth:

9/11 Was An Inside Job.

Brandon Turbeville is an author out of Mullins, South Carolina. He has a Bachelor’s Degree from Francis Marion University where he earned the Pee Dee Electric Scholar’s Award as an undergraduate. He has had numerous articles published dealing with a wide variety of subjects including health, economics, and civil liberties. He also the author of Codex Alimentarius - The End of Health Freedom, 7 Real Conspiracies and Five Sense Solutions.

Monday, September 10, 2012

TSA Continues Its Unchecked Expansion Across the U.S.

Brandon Turbeville
Activist Post
September 6, 2012

In yet another example of the expansion of the role of the TSA beyond airport security, the now infamous agency is conducting “security” screenings at the 2012 Democratic National Convention.

Of course, with the exception of a few alternative news sites, the fact that the TSA mission creep has advanced several steps further in recent weeks has scarcely been mentioned by major news sources. Predictably, the mainstream media has been almost completely silent on the issue save for a few passing mentions in the middle of articles describing the “electric” atmosphere of the DNC.

One such mention was made by John Sweeney, a reporter who is attending the DNC. In his article entitled, “Hurricane Bloodhound hovers over DNC,” in the September 5, 2012 edition of the Florence Morning News, Sweeney confirmed that not only was the TSA in attendance, they were indeed screening DNC participants upon arrival at the convention hall.

Sweeney’s mention of the TSA was itself only cursory when he stated, “But the real ruckus in Charlotte didn’t come from handful of protesters I encountered on the way TWCA for the opening gavel or even the TSA who screened me before I entered the hall – yes, the airplane police were in charge of screening – it came from the delegates inside.”

Unfortunately, there was no further mention by Sweeney as to just how invasive the “screening” actually was. Nevertheless, it now appears that earlier reports claiming that the TSA would be both present and active during the DNC have now been confirmed.

Only days ago, Paul Joseph Watson wrote an article entitled “TSA To Conduct Grope Downs at DNC,” where he wrote,
The DNC will be held at three separate sites this week, all of which will have security checkpoints staffed by TSA officers. 
55 TSA screeners 'Will help the Secret Service with screening at Time Warner Cable Arena, the Convention Center and Bank of America stadium,' reports 
The first two days of the DNC will take place at the Time Warner Cable Arena, with the final day taking place at the Bank of America Stadium where Obama will deliver his acceptance speech. Events will concurrently be staged at the Charlotte Convention Center.
Watson continued, suggesting that the “Screenings” experienced by the DNC participants were more than basic metal detectors and bag searches. He stated,
Attendees will be forced to undergo invasive pat downs and have their personal items scanned if they wish to enter any of these venues. 
The agency is also increasing its footprint of TSA agents at the Charlotte Douglas Airport, adding a whopping 161 extra TSA screeners including 20 'behavior detection' officers who will watch for suspicious activity and conduct 'chat downs' with travelers. More than 700 TSA officers in the airport alone will be present for the duration of the convention.
The TSA presence at the DNC comes only one week after the RNC, where the TSA was also involved in screening convention-goers. Likewise, the TSA was present at a recent Paul Ryan event in The Villages, Florida where attendees were forced to undergo aggressive bag searches and body pat downs.

TSA presence at major political events, while concerning enough, represents only a fraction of the new frontier awaiting conquest by blue-gloved goons. The TSA has already appeared at bus terminals, highway checkpoints, and even high school proms in order to conduct so-called security screenings. And for those who might think this is all just an effort to keep us safe, hundreds of new FOIA letters reveal just how invasive these screenings have been in airports, and are guaranteed to become on the streets of America. So much so that experts say the screenings are tantamount to rape.
Rape counselors have warned that women who have been sexually assaulted face treatment metered out by TSA screeners that can be 'extremely re-traumatizing to someone who has already experienced an invasion of their privacy and their body.' An estimated one in six women in the United States have been the victim of an attempted or completed rape. (Source)
The TSA expansion into the lives of everyday Americans, coupled with peaceful activism being labeled as "low-level terrorism", heralds the full implementation of the National Defense Authorization Act, whereby anyone can wind up on a list, be arrested (kidnapped) and imprisoned, and be denied their right to due process. We are only left to wonder, what's coming next? 
Read other articles by Brandon Turbeville here.

Brandon Turbeville is an author out of Mullins, South Carolina. He has a Bachelor's Degree from Francis Marion University and is the author of three books, Codex Alimentarius -- The End of Health Freedom, 7 Real Conspiracies, and Five Sense Solutions and Dispatches From a Dissident. Turbeville has published over one hundred articles dealing with a wide variety of subjects including health, economics, government corruption, and civil liberties. Brandon Turbeville is available for podcast, radio, and TV interviews. Please contact us at activistpost (at)

Wednesday, September 5, 2012

Central Banks are the Real Target for West's Imperial Wars

Brandon Turbeville
Activist Post
September 4, 2012

With any move made by the globalist controllers and their surrogates of the Anglo-American NATO strong arm, it is safe to assume that there is rarely only one reason for the implementation of any given plan. Thus, the wars of conquest and aggression raging in the Middle East, “Eurasia,” and Africa are by no means working toward one purpose alone.

Ever since the invasion of Afghanistan eleven years ago, a small but increasing number of brave journalists, researchers, and activists have been decrying the real reasons for the destruction of entire nations and the tragic loss of life imposed by the hands of NATO and other Anglo-American forces such as the puppet regimes located in the same regions as the target countries. Among these vassal states are the remnants of feudal monarchies like Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, and others.

In the years since the first post-9/11 invasion, “real” reasons have abounded regarding the various countries provided with “democracy” by the United States.

These reasons include vast oil reserves, oil pipelines,[1] opium fields, strategic positioning, no-bid contracts for the defense industry and military-industrial complex, and mineral deposits.

All of these suggestions are both completely valid and accurate.

Yet, as mentioned above, there is rarely only one reason for such an undertaking of military force.

However, there is one reason for military intervention that is rarely discussed, even in the alternative media, in this context – the goal of total domination by the private central banking system.

It is true that both debt and the control of currency is one of the most effective means of enslaving an entire population without their knowledge. Continually chasing financial freedom with no ability to pay off debt and save for the future ensures that a sizeable majority of the population will not have the means, time, or energy to resist the totalitarian methods imposed upon them.

Likewise, it is true that by controlling a nation’s currency, one essentially controls the nation. Governments who are beholden to third parties and private banks for their money are not governments at all – they are receiverships existing solely at the pleasure of the controlling oligarchy. As Mayer Amschel Rothschild once stated, “Give me control of a nation’s money supply and I care not who makes its laws.”

Thus, when one takes a look at the worldwide banking system and, in particular, the amount of countries with government-owned, non-Rothschild affiliated central banks, one easily sees a monopolistic system coming into view. In addition, when one takes a closer look at those countries with government-owned central banks, independent of Rothschild and major financier control, it becomes even clearer that maintaining a government-mandated structure of currency and central banking places a nation on a very dangerous list.

After the beginning of the New Century, which truly began in 2001, nations maintaining some modicum of independence from the Rothschild private central banking cartel have been dealt with in short and brutal fashion.

Afghanistan was the first recent case.


Prior to the US invasion, the Afghanistan currency situation was already in disarray. In terms of central banking, the patchwork nation was a prime example of what not to do with a central bank, even a government-owned one.

Pre-2001, the banking system of Afghanistan was made up of six “state-owned commercial banks” that were largely unconnected with one another and engaged in very little coordination. Because the state-owned banks were used to fund the government entirely at the whim of a corrupt leadership of tribalists with little understanding of effective central banking, and because Afghanistan had spent the better part of the second half of the 20th century in a state of war, the Afghan currency had become virtually worthless.

The banks lacked connectivity, reliable information on assets and liabilities, and did not follow commonly agreed and accepted accounting standards. Minimum capital requirements were set out in the 1994 Law on Money and Banking, but '…risk management systems that would remotely resemble modern banking' were missing (IMF, 2003 p124). Nonperforming loans were not written off and no provisioning was made for them. Managers were political appointees with little or no banking experience; knowledge and capacity of bank staff were low. The operation of commercial banks had been hampered during the Taliban era as banks were not allowed to pay or to charge interest, in line with Islamic law. As a result, banks had ceased all lending activities, which had moved into the informal sector. Nevertheless, the banks had substantial assets (primarily real estate) on their books; they were solvent and some earned income from foreign currency deposits held abroad.[2]
The makeup of the Afghan banking system began to change shortly after the invasion, however.
In 2003 and 2004, after much of the country had been thoroughly secured for the establishment of institutions recognized by the invaders as vital, various banking laws and regulations were put into place. Perhaps the most important was the February 2004 law known as the DAB, or Law of Da Afghanistan Bank.
The DAB established the authority of the new Afghanistan Central Bank, Da Afghanistan Bank, to regulate and supervise all other banks within the country, as well as having control over monetary policy. In conjunction with the DAB, the September 2003 Banking Law also established the ability of Da Afghanistan Bank to regulate and monitor commercial banks operating inside Afghanistan, and was the original piece of legislation that authorized commercial banks to operate inside the country to begin with.

Shortly thereafter, in a nation where private and state banking was both ineffective and scarce, the IMF states that the banking industry “grew rapidly” after the Taliban was deposed. According to the IMF’s own statistics, by 2008, banking assets were clearly flowing up to a relatively few large private banks who were amassing most of the banking business amongst themselves.

The IMF report states, “As of March 2008, the two largest domestic private banks accounted for almost 50 percent of total banking system assets. The combined loans of these two banks were 70 percent of total commercial bank lending.” Obviously, Afghanistan has seen a trend of centralization and upward mobility of assets to the largest private institutions swooping down upon the war-torn nation.

What is more striking, however, is the fact that Da Afghanistan Bank, the central bank of Afghanistan, is responsible for setting the monetary policy of Afghanistan. This is key because it would seem that the Afghanistan government should be in control of monetary policy – not a bank independent of government control or oversight.

One need only take a look at the Da Afghanistan Bank official website in order to see how the same private central banking scheme has been implemented in Afghanistan. Under the section entitled, “Basic Tasks of DAB,” the bank states that its duties are to “formulate, adopt and execute the monetary policy of Afghanistan.” Nowhere is there mention of oversight by the Afghan government.

The Law of Da Afghanistan bank, which was mentioned earlier, explicitly states that the responsibilities of the Afghan central bank are “to formulate and adopt the monetary policy of Afghanistan, including the open market operations by Da Afghanistan Bank, the interest rates for discounts and loans by Da Afghanistan Bank, and the types and levels of reserves that banks are required to maintain with Da Afghanistan Bank.” (It should be noted that these responsibilities are presented as those of the Supreme Council, the Governing Board of Da Afghanistan Bank, along with the Comptroller General.)

Furthermore, it is the job of the bank to “Print and issue Afghani banknotes and coins,” another clear responsibility of any government that is to remain independent of the control of private bankers.

In addition, it is a stated goal of the central bank to “Act as banker and adviser to, and as fiscal agent of the State.” The implication here is that the central bank, while often accommodating the State, is not subservient to it, nor is it bound by any control of the Afghan government. By acting as the “banker” of the State, it is also safe to assume that loans made to it are not of the interest-free variety – it is much more likely that the central bank functions exactly as the US Federal Reserve, meaning that it is both independent of government control, responsible for the issuance of currency, and approves loans at interest to a government entirely capable of doing all of the above at virtually no cost.


Iraq is yet another case where private central banking could be argued as a major factor in the decision to invade. It is also another example of poorly executed central banking prior to that invasion.

In all fairness, however, it should be noted that Iraq has only enjoyed a sliver of opportunity with which to experience growth since its inception. After becoming independent of British colonial rule, the country was forced to mop up the mess left behind by the imperialists including falsely constructed borders, civil unrest, and corruption, among many other issues.

Still, by the 1970s, Iraq was improving its economic lot, as well as its education system. Improvements were such that when Saddam Hussein officially assumed power, Iraq had earned itself the designation of “developing nation.” Shortly thereafter, Hussein nationalized Iraqi oil companies and put the state-owned banks under his own direct control.

After the Iraq-Iran war of the 1980s, the Gulf War, and the decade of merciless UN sanctions, however, Iraq had lost virtually all of its economic gains. The Iraq-Iran war itself depleted many of Iraq’s reserves, while the Gulf War further damaged the state of the nation. Because UN sanctions forced Iraq to move to their own currency printing machines that were greatly inferior to those of the nations being previously used, the Iraqi currency became subject to increased levels of counterfeiting, thus, compounding the problem.

However, although Hussein had assumed direct control of the semi-central banking system, the fact remained that the banking system was not privatized. Indeed, there were very few private banks operating in Iraq up until the point of the US invasion in 2003.

From the very beginning of the invasion, it was clear that forming a privatized central bank for Iraq was a major goal of the United States and its “coalition of the willing.” As The Economist reports,

Rehousing the central bank is one thing. Rebuilding an entire banking system is quite another. Despite the focus on military and political matters, the task has been surprisingly high on the American-led coalition's to-do list: even before George Bush declared that 'major combat operations have ended' in May 2003, American advisers were preparing in neighbouring Kuwait. The job is all the more formidable because under Saddam Hussein Iraq had no independent banks to speak of. From the CBI to the lending policies of the six state-owned institutions that controlled most bank assets, the system was under Mr Hussein's thumb. [Emphasis added]
Yet rebuilding the banking system is exactly what the invaders did. Of course, the new system unveiled to the Iraqi people was slightly different from what they had lived under for so long. There was no more Saddam Hussein to dictate monetary policy at his whim, and no more state control over banks. Instead, the “free market” would take the place of the former central banking system.

The term “free,” however, is a misnomer when referring to the Iraqi Central Bank. This is because the new Central Bank of Iraq, now known as the Trade Bank of Iraq, was completely restructured and privatized as early as 2003. Slightly more obvious than the privatization of the Afghanistan banks, it was openly announced that none other than J.P. Morgan was chosen by the Coalition Provisional Authority to “set up” the new bank.

As Rob Kirby of Market Oracle wrote in 2008,
In the energy area [crude] – J.P. Morgan was 'granted' the rights to, effectively, set up the Central Bank of Iraq in Dec. 2003:

J.P. Morgan Chase was chosen by the Coalition Provisional Authority [CPA] to 'set up' the NEW Central Bank of Iraq [specifically, the Trade Bank of Iraq ]. Take note how this TRADE BANK only became operational in December of 2003:

• Trade Finance. The Trade Bank of Iraq (TBI) was established in July 2003 to facilitate trade of goods and services to and from Iraq by providing irrevocable letters of credit. The TBI officially became fully operational in December 2003 and has a services contract with a multi-international banking consortium led by JP Morgan Chase. Since opening in December , the Trade Bank of Iraq has issued or has pending 183 letters of credit, totaling $708.9 million in imports from thirty-one countries. Letters of credit have been issued on behalf of Iraqi Ministries as well as several state-owned enterprises.
In that capacity, Morgan was charged with developing the framework of collateralizing movable and immovable property for the nation of Iraq.
The fact is that one of the largest derivatives facilitators in the world is one the principal architects of the Trade Bank of Iraq, plus it is also well-known that J.P. Morgan has a direct connection[3] to the Rothschild banking dynasty;[4] a trend that is to be seen in virtually every central and major bank in existence across the planet.


Yet, if developing an Iraqi central bank before the bombs finished dropping seems a bit premature, consider the case of Libya and the NATO-backed Libyan terrorists who announced the creation of a new central bank of Libya before foreign forces ever became involved.

Libya, of course, is an example of a much more successful model of government-run central banking. Regardless of Ghaddaffi’s individual and personal crimes or his iron-fisted nature, it cannot be denied that the living standards of the Libyan people were far above that of any nation in Africa.

Even the regime’s penchant for cruelty seems to have shown signs of fading in recent years. After all, even as the assault on Libya began taking form, the UN Human Rights Council was set to praise Ghadaffi on the improvement made to the legal protections afforded its citizens such as “bettering its ‘constitutional’ framework” and “making human rights a ‘priority.’”

Left to its own devices the Libyan regime had managed to take a country mainly made up of desert and warring tribal factions and form a cohesive nation-state which afforded its people with comforts not seen inside the borders of “world leaders” like the United States and Britain. For instance, in a letter written by a delegation of Russian, Ukranian, and Belarusian doctors working in Libya to then-Russian President Dimitri Medvedev and Prime Minister Vladmir Putin, stated;
During this time, we became well acquainted with the life of the Libyan people and state with few citizens of other nations living in this social comfort, as the Libyans. They are entitled to free treatment, and their hospitals provide the best in the world of medical equipment. Education in Libya is free, capable young people have the opportunity to study abroad at government expense. When marrying, young couples receive 60,000 Libyan dinars (about 50,000 U.S. dollars) of financial assistance. Non-interest state loans, and as practice shows, undated. Due to government subsidies the price of cars is much lower than in Europe, and they are affordable for every family. Gasoline and bread cost a penny, no taxes for those who are engaged in agriculture.
Regardless of one’s feelings about the policies mentioned by the European doctors, Ghadaffi’s Libya also achieved some of the most impressive and unprecedented environmental and economic feats in the modern world. As Ellen Brown of the Asia Times writes,
Even if that [European doctors’ letter] is just propaganda, there is no denying at least one very popular achievement of the Libyan government: it brought water to the desert by building the largest and most expensive irrigation project in history, the US$33 billion GMMR (Great Man-Made River) project. Even more than oil, water is crucial to life in Libya.

The GMMR provides 70% of the population with water for drinking and irrigation, pumping it from Libya's vast underground Nubian Sandstone Aquifer System in the south to populated coastal areas 4,000 kilometers to the north. The Libyan government has done at least some things right.
This entire expedition was made possible by the fact that Libya maintained a central bank that was completely state-owned. Prior to the success of the “peaceful Libyan protesters” (some proved to be al-Qaeda extremists) with the help of the United States, France, and the rest of NATO, Libya created its own money, the Dinar, through its central bank. Unlike “free” nations such as the United States, which has farmed out its Constitutional responsibility to private banks, the Libyan issuance of currency was an entirely government-based affair.

In addition, according to Patrick Henningsen of Market Oracle on March 28, 2011, “Libya also holds more bullion as a proportion of gross domestic product than any country except Lebanon, according to the London-based World Gold Council using January data from the International Monetary Fund.”
In fact, Ghaddafi was working toward backing the Dinar with the country's vast gold reserves, thus posing a big threat to the world of fractional reserve fiat bankers.

All of these advancements were thrown away and destroyed with the NATO-backed assault on Libya and the subsequent murder of Ghaddaffi. What did emerge, however, was the new Libyan central bank.

Announced relatively early on in the destabilization campaign, the Transitional National Council declared the “Central Bank of Benghazi as a monetary authority competent in monetary policies in Libya and the appointment of a governor to the Central Bank of Libya, with a temporary headquarters in Benghazi." It is also noteworthy to mention that immediately after the official creation of the new bank, the newborn institution actually signed an oil deal with Qatar, an Anglo-American client state and brother-in-arms of brutality.

Geopolitics aside, the very description of the new Libyan Central bank, the Central Bank of Benghazi, leans toward the fact that the new bank is the opposite of the old one – meaning, the new bank is private. Furthermore, the new bank is not beholden to the Libyan government (where one exists or may exist in the future) but operates independently “as a monetary authority competent in monetary policies in Libya.”

With the appointment of a governor to the already-established Central Bank of Libya, the control of the independent private bank is thus exerted upon the assets which rightfully belong to the Libyan people.

Unfortunately, as of yet, the owners of the new Central Bank of Benghazi have not been made public with an official announcement. However, given the trend and given the recent developments in Libya, one can feel safe in making certain assumptions regarding the nature of the bank.


All in all, the destabilization of Libya was much more up front and open than the campaign against Sudan in the latter years of the Bush administration and continuing through the Obama administration. This might be partially due to the fact that Ghadaffi was better able to mount a defense against the forces of death squads, hordes of al-Qaeda terrorists, and NATO bombing campaigns than the teetering government of Sudan.

Nevertheless, the end result was essentially the same. With the inclusion of geopolitical concerns, the Sudanese breakup seems to be a perfect example of Zbigniew Brzezinski’s vision of “microstates and ministates”[5] who are unable to resist the demands of the world’s major powers. With South Sudan now a separate and officially recognized country, the ability to cut off the oil supply to Sudan as punishment for refusing American directives is now a realistic option. South Sudan is, in fact, the region of Sudan (as it was originally demarcated) that houses the majority of Sudanese oil.

The fact that the US is involved in destabilizing both South Sudan and Sudan is not a heavily debated claim. As Thomas C. Mountain wrote in his article, “The US Plan to Destabilize Sudan,” it is the United States which pays the bills for the Sudan People’s Liberation Army (the South Sudanese national army). Furthermore, the UN, under the cover of “peacekeeping” missions is flooding South Sudan with Ethiopian “peacekeepers” who are quite obviously serving the interests of the Anglo-Americans.

The interesting difference in this case, however, is the fact that Sudan appears to have maintained a private central bank of its own throughout the Sudanese civil war. Indeed, Warren Coats, the Senior Policy Advisor to the Bank of Southern Sudan in 2007, wrote in his report, “A Monetary Policy Framework For Sudan,” that the current policy of the Central Bank of Sudan was the control of the money supply. Coats states;
The next section of this paper presents a framework for control of the money supply by a central bank operating in, or wishing to promote, a market economy and adopting a market-determined exchange rate. This is more or less the policy regime adopted by the Central Bank of Sudan (CBOS). For such a central bank, monetary control needs to be based on its control of the total of the quantity of currency held by the public and by banks, plus bank deposits with the central bank (base money), and its influence over the creation of deposits in banks in relation to their reserves. [Emphasis added]
However, as one of the first orders of business after South Sudan seceded from Sudan and was officially recognized by the UN, a private central bank was established. In fact, the South Sudanese Constitution itself provides for the creation of such an institution.

After reading the South Sudanese Constitution as it existed in 2011, there is very little question as to whether or not the central bank is private. The document states that the central bank will be called the The Bank of South Sudan and that it will be “an independent corporate legal entity.” The Constitution goes on to state that the bank will be responsible for, among other things, “formulation, conduct, and implementation of monetary policy” and “the issuance of currency.” The bank has the “exclusive right to issue a currency” and has an organizational structure very similar to the US Federal Reserve with a Governor and Board of Directors appointed by the President.

Future and Current Targets

With all of the lives lost, military action taken, and money spent, - if central banking is, in fact, one of the main reasons for such operations– it would do well for us to take a brief look at those nations which currently exist without the curse of "international" private central banks. This should be done in an attempt to connect the dots and predict future military or intelligence acts of aggression.

While it would be impossible to provide a comprehensive study on the status of the banking system of every country in the world, the relevance of private central banks can, at the very least, can be investigated for those nations who are the current targets of American military might.


In this case, the most obvious and recent victim of the US/NATO juggernaut is the embattled nation of Syria. So far, the most religiously tolerant nation in the Middle East has been forced to endure NATO-backed death squads and savage terrorists (aka peaceful protestors as defined by the Western media), Western sanctions, direct aid to the destabilizing agents by NATO forces, covert operations by British and American intelligence agencies as well as French special forces inside Syria, and now the growing potential for direct NATO military action.

Coincidentally, Syria is one of the last nations left in the world that maintains a government-owned central bank. This fact has been the cause of some consternation from the International Monetary Fund (IMF). In fact, in 2006, the IMF actually published its annual Article IV Consultation Report regarding Syria’s economic developments. Among the recommendations made by the IMF in the report were suggestions of changes to the Syrian banking system. The report reads:
Progress toward this medium-term goal should start by having the central bank gain full control of existing direct instruments. The central bank should have the right to decide on credit ceilings and credit policies of banks with a view to ensuring a pace of credit and monetary expansion consistent with maintaining price stability while fostering economic activity and employment. Banks have to abide by all prudential regulations. Beyond this, the role and responsibilities of the central bank and the ministry of finance in exercising oversight on the banks should be clearly defined. While the government could play a lead role in choosing the board and the management of public banks, the CBS should have the authority to evaluate and approve banks' policies, and procedures related to the credit and investment.
Clearly, if these are the responsibilities the IMF believes the Syrian Central Bank should have, then it logically follows that they are responsibilities it does not have currently.

All in all, the Syrian banking system largely consists of four state-owned banks and fourteen private banks, mostly foreign banks providing services to the private sector inside Syria. For at least forty years, the state itself has maintained a total monopoly on the Syrian banking system. Even when that total monopoly was broken, it was not in the form of the privatization of the central bank, it was merely allowing private banks to operate commercially inside the country at all.


Nevertheless, while Syria is the most immediate target of the NATO war machine, it only wins that distinction by a thin margin. Iran, even in some mainstream outlets, remains a close second. Indeed, in most educated circles it is understood that Syria is merely a stepping stone to the larger goal of an invasion of Iran.

How interesting, then, that Iran also maintains a government-owned central bank.

One need only to read The Monetary and Banking Law of Iran to understand the fact that, like the authority granted solely to Congress over coining and issuing currency in the United States Constitution, the Iranian government is the only institution with the authority to issue Iranian currency. In direct language, it reads, “The Government is the sole authority having the right of issuing notes and coins and this right is hereby vested exclusively in Bank Markazi Iran Subject to the provisions of this Act.” [Emphasis Added]

Although neither Iran nor Syria are showman’s samples of successful central banking, it must be kept in mind that these nations have been forced to endure regional and domestic destabilization, warfare, and continuous economic sanctions for an extended period of time. Unlike the United States and Canada, neither Syria nor Iran are graced with the presence of diverse natural resources and industrial options.


Likewise, Cuba, which has managed to stay outside the scrutiny of the mainstream media propaganda efforts in recent years, also maintains a 100% state-owned central bank. Yet, even though the Cuba card has yet to be played in recent Anglo-American endeavors, the tiny nation remains designated as dangerous threat to the United States and “democracy” the world over. Indeed, it is safe to say that Cuba’s Castro regime has not faded from the radar screen of the Rothschild banking dynasty or the enforcement arm of that dynasty known as NATO and the United States.

North Korea

Lastly, it is interesting to note that the model totalitarian state for the world under the coming global system, North Korea, lacks in only one thing – a private central bank. Another example of central banking opportunities squandered by selfish psychopaths like Kim Jong Un and Kim Jong Il, the fact is that while the society as a whole matches the blueprint created for the rest of the world many years ago, North Korea still represents the lack of total domination by the private banking cartel which control the overwhelming majority of finance and industrial sources. Thus, North Korea retains its place firmly on the list of governments that will be overthrown, replaced, and erased from the history books, as the New World Order is gradually implemented throughout the entire planet.


As stated at the beginning of this article, when one discusses the reasons for military action, invasion, and occupation from the point of the view of the globalists who direct such operations, there is seldom only one reason for any given action. However, when one considers the information presented here, it would be foolish to rule out the motivation of the imposition of private central banking upon the last few holdouts.

Indeed, one need only look at recent history and the targets of US/NATO military operations to see a distinct pattern. Afghanistan, Iraq, Sudan, and Libya were all countries outside the clutches of the international banking cartel, and they are all countries which have been attacked, occupied, and fractured by US/NATO power -- usually based on fabricated excuses.

At the time of this writing, Syria, another country with a state-owned central bank, is likewise being subjected to the Anglo-American onslaught.

Although experiencing the political and financial ramifications of even the slightest resistance to global banking interests; Iran, Cuba, and North Korea are only waiting to be checked off the list in both a literal and figurative manner.


[1] Griffin, David Ray. The New Pearl Harbor. Interlink Publishing Group. 2004.
[2] Due to UN sanctions, commercial banks’ deposits abroad were frozen during the Taliban period. [Footnote provided in the IMF report.]
[5] Tarpley, Webster Griffin. Obama: The Postmodern Coup. 1st  Edition. Progressive Press. June 2008.
Read other articles by Brandon Turbeville here.

Brandon Turbeville is an author out of Mullins, South Carolina. He has a Bachelor's Degree from Francis Marion University and is the author of three books, Codex Alimentarius -- The End of Health Freedom, 7 Real Conspiracies, and Five Sense Solutions and Dispatches From a Dissident. Turbeville has published over one hundred articles dealing with a wide variety of subjects including health, economics, government corruption, and civil liberties. Brandon Turbeville is available for podcast, radio, and TV interviews. Please contact us at activistpost (at) 

You can support this information by voting on Reddit HERE