A little-noticed provision in the highway funding bill Congress passed this week threatens a right most Americans take for granted: the right to travel abroad. The provision in question gives the Internal Revenue Service the authority to revoke the passport of anyone the IRS claims owes more than $50,000 in back taxes.
Congress is giving the IRS this new power because a decline in gas tax receipts has bankrupted the federal highway trust fund. Of course, Congress would rather squeeze more money from the American people than reduce spending, repeal costly regulations, or return responsibility for highway construction to the states, local governments, and the private sector. On the other hand, most in Congress fear the political consequences of raising gas, or other, taxes. Giving the IRS new powers allows politicians to increase government revenue without having to increase tax rates. Some even brag about how they are “cracking down on tax cheats.”
Pro-IRS politicians ignore how this new power will punish Americans who have actually paid all the taxes they are legally obligated to pay. This is because the provision does not provide taxpayers an opportunity to challenge a finding that they owe back taxes in federal court before their passport is revoked. Because IRS employees are not infallible, it is inevitable that many Americans will lose their right to travel because of a bureaucrat’s mistake.
It is particularly odd that a Republican Congress would give this type of power to the IRS considering the continuing outrage over IRS targeting of “Tea Party” organizations. This is hardly the first time the IRS has been used to intimidate its opponents and/or powerful politicians. Presidents of both parties have used the IRS to target political enemies.
For example, one of the articles of impeachment brought against Richard Nixon dealt with his attempt to have the IRS audit those Nixon perceived as political enemies. During the 1990s, an IRS agent allegedly told the head of an organization supporting then-President Bill Clinton’s impeachment, “What do you expect when you target the President?” Can anyone doubt that some Americans will be targeted because an IRS bureaucrat does not approve of their political beliefs and activities?
Some support giving the IRS new powers because they think that those who underpay their taxes somehow raise everyone else’s taxes. This argument assumes that the federal government must collect the maximum amount of taxes because the people cannot do without big government. Of course the truth is that the people would be better off without the welfare-warfare state. Wouldn’t we be better off without a national health care program that increases health care costs, or without a war on terrorism that led to the rise of ISIS? Freeing the people from taxation, including the regressive and hidden inflation tax, is just one of the many ways the people will benefit from restoring constitutionally limited government.
As the federal debt increases and the American economy declines, an increasingly desperate Congress will look for new ways to squeeze more revue from taxpayers. Thus, the IRS will increasingly gain new and ever more tyrannical powers over Americans, including new restrictions on the right to travel or even move capital out of the country. The only way to end the IRS’s assault on our liberties is for the people to force Congress to stop looking for new ways to pick our pockets, and instead usher in a new era of liberty, peace, and prosperity by demolishing the welfare-warfare state.
“The purpose of the military is to start wars and change governments? It’s not to deter conflicts? We are going to invade countries?” – General Wesley Clark
General Wesley Clark at the Commonwealth Club in 2007:
“9/11 happened. And what happened in 9/11 is we didn’t have a strategy, we didn’t have bipartisan agreement, we didn’t have American understanding of it and we had instead a policy coup in this country, a coup, a policy coup. Some hard nosed people took over the direction of American policy and they never bothered to inform the rest of us.
I went through the Pentagon ten days after 9/11…and an officer from the Joint Staff called me into his office and said, I would want you to know, he said, sir, we are going to attack Iraq. And I said, why? He said, we don’t know. He said. I said, will they tie Saddam to 9/11? He said, no he said but I guess, it’s they don’t know what to do about terrorism and so, they think they can attack states and they want to look strong is all, I guess they think if they take down a state, it will intimidate the terrorists and you know what its like that old saying, he said, if the only tool you have is a hammer, then every problem has to be a nail.
Well I walked out of there pretty upset and then we attacked Afghanistan. I was pretty happy about that, we should have. And then I came back to the Pentagon about six weeks later, I saw the same officer, I said why why haven’t we attacked Iraq? We are still going to attack Iraq, he said, oh sir he says, it’s worse than that. He said he pulled up a piece of paper of his desk, he said, I just got this memo from the Secretary of Defense’s office, it says we are going to attack and destroy the governments in seven countries in five years. We are going to start with Iraq and then we are going to move to Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran, seven countries in five years. I said, is that a classified memo? He said, yes sir. I said; well don’t show it to me, he was about to show it to me, cause I wanna talk about it. And I sat on this information for a long time, for about six or eight months, I was so stunned by this, I couldn’t begin to talk about it. And I couldn’t believe it would really be true, but that’s actually what happened. These people took control of the policy in the United States…”
“And I put that aside. It was like a nugget that you hold on to. This country was taken over by a group of people with a policy coup, Wolfowitz and Cheney and Rumsfeld and you could name a half dozen other collaborators from the Project for a New American Century. They wanted us to destabilize the Middle East, turn it upside down, make it under our control. It went back to those comments in 1991. Now did anybody tell you that? Was there a national dialogue on this? Did senators and congressman stand up and denounce this plan? Was there a full fledged American debate on it? Absolutely not; and there are still isn’t, and that’s why we are failing in Iraq, because Iran and Syria know about the plan.”
“A series of attacks in and around Paris on Friday night left 129 dead and 352 wounded. The attacks included three explosions at the Stade de France, a siege of the Bataclan theatre, and shootings/bombings at restaurants throughout the city.”
“ISIS, the terrorist group in Iraq and Syria fostered, funded, armed, equipped and trained by the United States, its Gulf allies, Turkey and Israel has reportedly taken responsibility for the attacks.”
“Give us a protective tariff, and we will have the greatest nation on earth.” Abraham Lincoln
America became prosperous by protecting American entrepreneurs from attacks by enemy governments and their favored business companies.
A subsidy is a “gift” or “grant” of the peoples money by government to a ‘privileged’ few.
America’s trade deficit with China, Japan, Korea, the European Union and rest of the world means that we are transferring huge amounts of our national wealth to other countries. In effect, Americans are being forced to subsidize the economic agendas of foreigners.
“Overall, the United States has accumulated a total trade deficit with the rest of the world of more than 8 trillion dollars since 1975.” (source)
Thanks to Donald Trump calling the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement:’Insanity’, the globalists weapon deceptively called “free trade” is a topic of the presidential election.
Americans have been duped by NAFTA, GATT and are currently being sold into slavery by the Trans Pacific Partnership
“In 1955, free-trade advocate Dr. Lewis E. Lloyd wrote a book on how eight conditions must be met to have free and fair trade. What he discovered changed his view of free trade, especially in regard to free trade agreements and the welfare of America. Are you in favor of merging America with other countries?” (source)
“Life is nothing but a competition to be the criminal rather than the victim.” – Bertrand Russell
“I think the subject which will be of most importance politically is mass psychology … Its importance has been enormously increased by the growth of modern methods of propaganda. Of these the most influential is what is called ‘education.’ Religion plays a part, though a diminishing one; the press, the cinema, and the radio play an increasing part … It may be hoped that in time anybody will be able to persuade anybody of anything if he can catch the patient young and is provided by the State with money and equipment.
The subject will make great strides when it is taken up by scientists under a scientific dictatorship … The social psychologists of the future will have a number of classes of school children on whom they will try different methods of producing an unshakable conviction that snow is black.
… the opinion that snow is white must be held to show a morbid taste for eccentricity. But I anticipate. It is for future scientists to make these maxims precise and discover exactly how much it costs per head to make children believe that snow is black, and how much less it would cost to make them believe it is dark gray.” (pg 40)
“Scientific societies are as yet in their infancy … It is to be expected that advances in physiology and psychology will give governments much more control over individual mentality than they now have even in totalitarian countries. Fitche laid it down that education should aim at destroying free will, so that, after pupils have left school, they shall be incapable, throughout the rest of their lives, of thinking or acting otherwise than as their schoolmasters would have wished … Diet, injections, and injunctions will combine, from a very early age, to produce the sort of character and the sort of beliefs that the authorities consider desirable, and any serious criticism of the powers that be will become psychologically impossible …
“The Nazis were more scientific than the present rulers of Russia … If they had survived, they would probably have soon taken to scientific breeding. Any nation which adopts this practice will, within a generation, secure great military advantages. The system, one may surmise, will be something like this: except possibly in the governing aristocracy, all but 5 per cent of males and 30 per cent of females will be sterilised. The 30 per cent of females will be expected to spend the years from eighteen to forty in reproduction, in order to secure adequate cannon fodder. As a rule, artificial insemination will be preferred to the natural method …
Gradually, by selective breeding, the congenital differences between rulers and ruled will increase until they become almost different species. A revolt of the plebs would become as unthinkable as an organised insurrection of sheep against the practice of eating mutton.” (pgs 49,50)
“After all, most civilised and semi-civilised countries known to history and had a large class of slaves or serfs completely subordinate to their owners. There is nothing in human nature that makes the persistence of such a system impossible. And the whole development of scientific technique has made it easier than it used to be to maintain a despotic rule of a minority. When the government controls the distribution of food, its power is absolute so long as they can count on the police and the armed forces. And their loyalty can be secured by giving them some of the privileges of the governing class. I do not see how any internal movement of revolt can ever bring freedom to the oppressed in a modern scientific dictatorship.” (pg 54)
“I do not pretend that birth control is the only way in which population can be kept from increasing. There are others, which, one must suppose, opponents of birth control would prefer. War, as I remarked a moment ago, has hitherto been disappointing in this respect, but perhaps bacteriological war may prove more effective. If a Black Death could be spread throughout the world once in every generation survivors could procreate freely without making the world too full. There would be nothing in this to offend the consciences of the devout or to restrain the ambitions of nationalists. The state of affairs might be somewhat unpleasant, but what of that? Really high-minded people are indifferent to happiness, especially other people’s. However, I am wandering from the question of stability, to which I must return.
There are three ways of securing a society that shall be stable as regards population. The first is that of birth control, the second that of infanticide or really destructive wars, and the third that of general misery except for a powerful minority. All these methods have been practiced: the first, for example, by the Australian aborigines; the second by the Aztecs, the Spartans, and the rulers of Plato’s Republic; the third in the world as some Western internationalists hope to make it and in Soviet Russia … Of these three, only birth control avoids extreme cruelty and unhappiness for the majority of human beings. Meanwhile, so long as there is not a single world government there will be competition for power among the different nations. And as increase of population brings the threat of famine, national power will become more and more obviously the only way of avoiding starvation. There will therefore be blocs in which the hungry nations band together against those that are well fed. That is the explanation of the victory of communism in China.” (pgs 103,104)
“The need for a world government, if the population problem is to be solved in any humane manner, is completely evident on Darwinian principles.” (pg 105)
“A society is not stable unless it is on the whole satisfactory to the holders of power and the holders of power are not exposed to the risk of successful revolution.” (pg 110)
“First, as regards physical conditions. Soil and raw materials must not be used up so fast that scientific progress cannot continually make good the loss by means of new inventions and discoveries … If raw materials are not to be used up too fast, there must not be free competition for their acquisition and use but an international authority to ration them in – such quantities as may from time to time seem compatible with continued industrial prosperity. And similar considerations apply to soil conservation.
Second, as regards population … To deal with this problem it will be necessary to find ways of preventing an increase in world population. If this is to be done otherwise than by wars, pestilences, and famines, it will demand a powerful international authority. This authority should deal out the world’s food to the various nations in proportion to their population at the time of the establishment of the authority. If any nation subsequently increased its population it should not on that account receive any more food. The motive for not increasing population would therefore be very compelling.” (pgs 110, 111)
ebook preview: The impact of Science on Society
ebook preview: The Scientific Outlook – Bertrand Russell
EDUCATION IN A SCIENTIFIC SOCIETY
“EDUCATION has two purposes: on the one hand to form the mind, on the other hand to train the citizen. The Athenians concentrated on the former, the Spartans on the latter. The Spartans won, but the Athenians were remembered.
Education in a scientific society may, I think, be best conceived after the analogy of the education provided by the Jesuits. The Jesuits provided one sort of education for the boys who were to become ordinary men of the world, and another for those who were to become members of the Society of Jesus. In like manner, the scientific rulers will provide one kind of education for ordinary men and women, and another for those who are to become holders of scientific power. Ordinary men and women will be expected to be docile, industrious, punctual, thoughtless, and contented. Of these qualities probably contentment will be considered the most important. In order to produce it, all the researches of psycho-analysis, behaviourism, and biochemistry will be brought into play. Children will be educated from their earliest years in the manner which is found least likely to produce complexes.”
Via: CBS News
The Data Brokers: Selling Your Personal Information correspondent Steve Kroft
Over the past six months or so, a huge amount of attention has been paid to government snooping, and the bulk collection and storage of vast amounts of raw data in the name of national security. What most of you don’t know, or are just beginning to realize, is that a much greater and more immediate threat to your privacy is coming from thousands of companies you’ve probably never heard of, in the name of commerce.
They’re called data brokers, and they are collecting, analyzing and packaging some of our most sensitive personal information and selling it as a commodity…
A vast hidden surveillance network runs across America powered by the repo industry
Dragnet Nation: What Do Data Brokers Know About Me?
ebook preview: Dragnet Nation
ebook preview: The Road To Big Brother
“You are also reminded that any ‘inappropriate’ remarks or jokes concerning security may result in your arrest.” – TSA public announcement at the George Bush Intercontinental Airport. (source)
Richard Johnson is a boy who nobody believes in, but he’s not going to let that stop him from growing up to become the greatest TSA agent the world has ever seen.
We Americans are being attacked by a ‘Divide and Conquer Strategy‘.
We have a two party system that, at the top, pursues a shared globalist agenda. So, good people in each party will support this party. But, when an important agenda item must be passed. The party leadership will betray their constituents to achieve their goal. Often working with the leadership of the “opposition” party.
Did you know the Republican Party was founded by radicals to pursue a radical agenda?
Remember the trade legislation: NAFTA and GATT.
Championed by Bill Clinton working with the Republican Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich.
Remember President Eisenhower. A lot of Republicans wore the button “I Like Ike” without realizing that Ike was a democrat who praised FDR. The Republican leadership betrayed good members of the party who supported Taft because Taft opposed the Republican leaderships Globalist agenda. So, They engineered Ikes switch to the Republicans and thus deny Taft the nomination..
Remember Richard Nixon, The Anti- Communist?
Who Better to open China and pave the way for the creation of a powerful enemy and a hollowing out of the American economy. Who would suspect an anti-communist to so powerfully aid the Communist Chinese.
Remember Obama’s birth certificate, draft card, passport, citizenship, ect. Scandals.
It was “Team Obama” in the controlled opposition that made his election possible. The Republican leadership ignored good party members concerns. Fox news, Rush Limbaugh and a large cast of establishment approved media filtered, censored, and downright fabricated the impression that these concerns had been addressed.
“Team Obamas” most important members are the ones the public perceives as opposing him. Look close at people and organizations who proclaim their support for your values but advance an unamerican agenda.
Rush Limbaugh was for the bailout of the Mexican Peso. He was for NAFTA and GATT, Free Trade outsourcing of jobs and the betrayal of the American economy.
He supported the neo-con agenda with all its wars, war on terror, and giving a pass to bankers and criminals in corporations. No callers to his show can discuss JFKs murder, Waco, the Oklahoma City bombing , 911, Boston bombing evidence, witnesses or ideas that are outside of the establishment medias approved boundaries. Millions of good Americans end up supporting un-American ideas because of Rush.
Fox news is definitely an important member of ”Team Obama”.
Why were Judge Napolitano and Glenn Beck let go from Fox? Replaced by who? Geraldo? Juan Williams? Bill O’Reilly?
State Of The Union 2014: Bush Speechwriter: Obama Plagiarized Bush
The TPP has been negotiated with the assistance of more than 600 corporate advisers while Congress has been largely excluded from the process. The President is pushing Congress to give him Fast Track Trade Promotion Authority so he can sign the agreement before Congress has a chance to vote on it. Under Fast Track, Congress would have limited time to review and debate the TPP and would not have the power to amend it, only to vote up or down on it.
The John Birch Society: “The JBS views trade agreements as “entangling alliances” that should be avoided. America should trade with all friendly nations but not enter into any regulated trade agreements — including “free trade” agreements. If trade is to be free, it doesn’t need to be regulated by thousands of pages of binding arbitration.”
Why Americans Should Oppose Trade Agreements