The Only Proof I Need Against Boston Bombing

I'm a huge klutz. I probably cut or otherwise injure myself at least once a week. I was also training as a medic for the Army once upon a time. The point to these statements is this. Blood, when exposed to oxygen, gets darker. It DOES NOT turn bright red. The blood in these pictures reminds me of Karo syrup with food coloring (classic Hollywood prop) or Kool-Aide, or red paint.

And while we're on the subject......that leg injury looks extremely fake. Annoyingly so.

Man Gets Stabbed 7 times While Stopping Killer, NYPD Does Nothing To Help Him and Takes Credit

From http://www.secretsofthefed.com/meet-the-man-who-stopped-a-serial-killer-getting-stabbed-7-times-while-cops-watched-did-nothing-except-take-credit-for-the-arrest-video/ Is The NYPD’s “Protect & Serve” Policy A Thing Of The Past? WeAreChange recently got the opportunity to meet and Interview Joe Lozito, the selfless hero who put his life on the line to stop a serial killer. The story is only magnified when Joe finds out, that while being stabbed by the serial killer, the NYPD was standing by watching everything unfold from the safety of the conductors door. Currently in a legal suit, the NYPD and City of NY is arguing that the NYPD has NO duty to protect its own citizens. If you want to learn more about Joe and be updated about his court case follow him on https://twitter.com/joe_lozito

The Illegal Quasi-Government in Washington D.C.

from http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/master_file/federalgovernment.htm

The "Federal" Government is a Separate Nation and should be called the United States, Incorporated.

This Awareness indicates there are two governments operating in this country:

the United States of America is the Republic government created by the states, for the states, created by the people, for the people and there is the US government, which is a corporate government, or corporation. This federal government, should be called the United States of America, Incorporated. Corporations are not allowed by law to become politically charged in terms of their controls over the masses of a region.

The Illegal Quasi-Government in Washington D.C.

A corporation is simply an entity which makes its own rules for its own employees and for its own structural operation. The US government, which is on a ten acre parcel of property in Washington D.C. (District of Columbia), outside the United States of America is a corporation that has taken on the role of a quasi-government, but which has no legal authority to do so.

This Awareness indicates that any action whereby this quasi-corporation known as the United States Federal Government attempts to make laws, to impose laws on the states or on the people that have not been authorized by the states of the people, operates illegally. This Awareness indicates that any of the states or the people who give their allegiance, and give their rights to such a quasi-government are doing so illegally. Anyone who volunteers to let such a foreign entity control their lives is volunteering their freedom away illegally, and this is where changes will soon begin to occur, and where entities will begin to recognize a breech in the relationship between the people, the states, and the quasi-government in Washington D.C.

The Federal government, which is foreign to the United States of America, which is located in the District of Columbia, which is not part of the United States and which is in fact controlled to a great extent by the international bankers and by the laws and rules of the United Nations, whereby this Federal Washington D.C. state or country, has set itself up as a control over the United States of America as a quasi-government

This Awareness indicates that elected officials residing outside of the United States of America in Washington D.C., are not actually employees or officials of the United States of America, or its rules. The states' rules do not apply. The states' Constitution does not apply to these entities in Washington D.C. because they are acting outside the country in this second nation known as the Federal government.

This Awareness indicates in other words, the United States Federal government and the United States of America are basically two different countries, and the Constitution of the United States of America is not the law of the United States Federal government. Therefore, these entities cannot, while in the District of Colombia, be accused of treason. They are operating on behalf of the foreign bankers and their special interests.

Most entities are unaware of vanishing freedoms

This Awareness indicates essentially, these so called "freedoms" that entities have enjoyed or believe they had, are taken away without the public even realizing they are being taken. It is as though an entity is ushered into prison by a very powerful hypnotist and one who is very persuasive, who talks the entity along as he walks him towards the prison, and who even walks the entity through the gate and into the cell before the entity awakes to find he is imprisoned.

This is the way it will be for many entities. They will be deeply imprisoned, unable to escape before they know what happened. This Awareness indicates that of course, because there are many patriots who are well aware of what is coming, they have the opportunity to inform others and others have the chance to wake up before it is too late.

It becomes important for entities to recognize the need to risk communicating with persons of their own interest. If they are interested in the patriot movement, then it is important that they risk communicating with such entities, for you can't escape the reality by ignoring it. There are many entities who live in denial, right up to the time when they face the inevitable imprisonment, but of they recognize what is coming, if they are open to hearing what is evidenced in regards to the future events so that they do not ignore the evidence that is available through Patriot groups, then these entities stand a chance of adding their weight to the weight of others who are still dedicated to freedoms in this country and in other countries around the world.

Some U.S. States Now Seeking Sovereignty

This Awareness indicates, there are close to a dozen states in the US that have seriously been moving toward secession from the United States and regaining their own sovereignty. This Awareness indicates that Colorado, Nevada, Texas, Utah, Idaho, Hawaii; these are but a few of those mentioned as turning toward the pursuit of their state sovereignty. Technically, the "United States" refers to the states themselves, not the Washington D.C. government, and the Federal government, or the United States, Incorporated, refers to the corporation that is governing ten square miles known as Washington D.C. It is not part of the United States. It is a separate nation, incorporated as the United States of America, and it has self-appointed its own purpose as being that of extending rule over the separate United States. The sovereign states of the union being individually sovereign with their own constitution or charters or separate laws based on the Constitution of the United States.

The United States of Americas, Incorporated

This Federal government sees itself as a democracy, whereas the original states of the Union were a Republic . This Republic is no longer recognized by the "democracy" known as the United States of America. It should be understood that "democracy" essentially is majority rule, or what some call "mob rule," and a Republic is a system of government that is focused on the right of each individual. The rules are such to protect the rights of the individuals, not so much the mob or the majority, but of the individuals that make up the whole. This Awareness indicates that these things that most entities are not taught in their school or not taught through the news, through television or through the ordinary information sources of the country. It should be realized that the United States of America, Incorporated is dominated and controlled by 13 powerful banking families; the Rothschilds being a dominant influence, so that the laws are passed to help curb the freedoms of the states.

Most of the laws of the Federal government are essentially just corporate rules and corporate laws on the states who have become associated with the Federal government, given there allegiance or otherwise bought into the Federal government in Washington, D.C., a corporation. The government in Washington, D.C. is not set up to represent the states, but to control the states, as though they were subordinate corporations to this greater corporation.

Originally, the laws passed were by consent of the states, but it has reached a point now where the Federal Reserve Bank has such power and loans to the states or programs for the states can be financed from Washington DC, the states sell out and go along with the Federal programs in order to get Federal money.

This Awareness indicates that it has been a very slow and gradual take over of the states and their sovereignty and independence, so that the independence is more of a sham. The so-called independence day is a celebration that occurs each July 4th, more out of memory than out of actual reality of the present time. There is really very little independence. In fact, there is much talk of "interdependence," meaning that the states are dependent on the Federal government, and the Federal government has some reliance on the state for its taxes collected from the people of the various states, and in this sense there is an interdependence. They each depend on each other.

The Oversight of the Founding Fathers

This Awareness indicates this all came about by an oversight of the Founding Fathers, wherein the Rothschild lawyers and representatives recognized that the oversight was that Washington, D.C. government for the states had never actually been a part of the United States and therefore, they took over and created a corporation of this Federal government, making it a separate nation from the United states, and from that action began to move toward a gradual take over of the various states of the union through statutes and laws which the states bought into.

Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement

What is the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP)?
The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is a secretive, multi-national trade agreement that threatens to extend restrictive intellectual property (IP) laws across the globe and rewrite international rules on its enforcement. The main problems are two-fold:
(1) IP chapter: Leaked draft texts of the agreement show that the IP chapter would have extensive negative ramifications for users’ freedom of speech, right to privacy and due process, and hinder peoples' abilities to innovate.
(2) Lack of transparency: The entire process has shut out multi-stakeholder participation and is shrouded in secrecy.
The eleven nations currently negotiating the TPP are the US, Australia, Peru, Malaysia, Vietnam, New Zealand, Chile, Singapore, Canada, Mexico, and Brunei Darussalam. The TPP contains a chapter on intellectual property covering copyright, trademarks, patents and perhaps, geographical indications. Since the draft text of the agreement has never been offically released to the public, we know from leaked documents, such as the February 2011 draft US TPP IP Rights Chapter [PDF], that US negotiators are pushing for the adoption of copyright measures far more restrictive than currently required by international treaties, including the controversial Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA).
The TPP Will Rewrite Global Rules on Intellectual Property Enforcement
All signatory countries will be required to conform their domestic laws and policies to the provisions of the Agreement. In the US, this is likely to further entrench controversial aspects of US copyright law (such as the Digital Millennium Copyright Act [DMCA]) and restrict the ability of Congress to engage in domestic law reform to meet the evolving IP needs of American citizens and the innovative technology sector. The recently leaked US-proposed IP chapter also includes provisions that appear to go beyond current US law.
The leaked US IP chapter includes many detailed requirements that are more restrictive than current international standards, and would require significant changes to other countries’ copyright laws. These include obligations for countries to:
Place Greater Liability on Internet Intermediaries: The TPP would force the adoption of the US DMCA Internet intermediaries copyright safe harbor regime in its entirety. For example, this would require Chile to rewrite its forward-looking 2010 copyright law that currently establishes a judicial notice-and-takedown regime, which provides greater protection to Internet users’ expression and privacy than the DMCA.
Regulate Temporary Copies: Treat temporary reproductions of copyrighted works without copyright holders' authorization as copyright infringement. This was discussed but rejected at the intergovernmental diplomatic conference that created two key 1996 international copyright treaties, the WIPO Copyright Treaty and WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty.
Expand Copyright Terms: Create copyright terms well beyond the internationally agreed period in the 1994 Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS). Life + 70 years for works created by individuals, and following the US-Oman Free Trade Agreement, either 95 years after publication or 120 years after creation for corporate owned works (such as Mickey Mouse).
Enact a "Three-Step Test" Language That Puts Restrictions on Fair Use: The United States Trade Representative (USTR) is putting fair use at risk with restrictive language in the TPP's IP chapter. The US and Australia are both proposing very restrictive text, and Peru is willing to accommodate the bad language.
Escalate Protections for Digital Locks: It will also compel signatory nations to enact laws banning circumvention of digital locks (technological protection measures or TPMs) [PDF] that mirror the DMCA and treat violation of the TPM provisions as a separate offense, even when no copyright infringement is involved. This would require countries like New Zealand to completely rewrite its innovative 2008 copyright law, as well as override Australia’s carefully-crafted 2007 TPM regime exclusions for region-coding on movies on DVDs, videogames, and players, and for embedded software in devices that restrict access to goods and services for the device—a thoughtful effort by Australian policy makers to avoid the pitfalls experienced with the US digital locks provisions. In the US, business competitors have used the DMCA to try to block printer cartridge refill services, competing garage door openers, and to lock mobile phones to particular network providers.
Ban Parallel Importation: Ban parallel importation of genuine goods acquired from other countries without the authorization of copyright owners.
Adopt Criminal Sanctions: Adopt criminal sanctions for copyright infringement that is done without a commercial motivation, based on the provisions of the 1997 US No Electronic Theft Act.
In short, countries would have to abandon any efforts to learn from the mistakes of the US and its experience with the DMCA over the last 12 years, and adopt many of the most controversial aspects of US copyright law in their entirety. At the same time, the US IP chapter does not export the limitations and exceptions in the US copyright regime like fair use, which have enabled freedom of expression and technological innovation to flourish in the US. It includes only a placeholder for exceptions and limitations. This raises serious concerns about other countries’ sovereignty and the ability of national governments to set laws and policies to meet their domestic priorities.
Non-Transparent and On The Fast Track
Despite the broad scope and far-reaching implications of the TPP, negotiations for the agreement have taken place behind closed doors and outside of the checks and balances that operate at traditional multilateral treaty-making organizations such as the World Intellectual Property Organization and the World Trade Organization.
Like ACTA, the TPP is being negotiated rapidly with little transparency. During the TPP negotiation round in Chile in February 2011, negotiators received strong messages from prominent civil society groups demanding an end to the secrecy that has shielded TPP negotiations from the scrutiny of national lawmakers and the public. Letters addressed to government representatives in Australia, Chile, Malaysia, New Zealand and the US emphasized that both the process and effect of the proposed TPP agreement is deeply undemocratic. TPP negotiators apparently discussed the requests for greater public disclosure during the February 2011 negotiations, but took no action.
Why You Should Care
TPP raises significant concerns about citizens’ freedom of expression, due process, innovation, the future of the Internet’s global infrastructure, and the right of sovereign nations to develop policies and laws that best meet their domestic priorities. In sum, the TPP puts at risk some of the most fundamental rights that enable access to knowledge for the world’s citizens.
The USTR is pursuing a TPP agreement that will require signatory counties to adopt heightened copyright protection that advances the agenda of the US entertainment and pharmaceutical industries agendas, but omits the flexibilities and exceptions that protect Internet users and technology innovators.
The TPP will affect countries beyond the 11 that are currently involved in negotiations. Like ACTA, the TPP Agreement is a plurilateral agreement that will be used to create new heightened global IP enforcement norms. Countries that are not parties to the negotiation will likely be asked to accede to the TPP as a condition of bilateral trade agreements with the US and other TPP members, or evaluated against the TPP's copyright enforcement standards in the annual Special 301 process administered by the USTR.
https://www.eff.org/issues/tpp