The Propaganda Report w/ Perez & Binkley – this week’s podcast!

 

barry_goldwater_on_trilateral_commissionThank you very much Brad Binkley for putting together a great podcast in lieu of this week’s show on WSB which is preempted for UGA football (Go Dawgs!!) The sound quality is not perfect (sorry, my bad)–it will be next time 🙂

We discuss TPP, Hillary’s Neo-Con Coming Out Speech, Trump & the Mob, Soros/BLM/Dallas, Colin Kaepernick & More!!! (I have a half a video that goes with this but I’m not sure we can get it to work…check back next week if you’re interested.)

 

For just the audio click here

[archiveorg id=PropagandaReportWithMonicaPerezBinkley9316FromYouTube width=500 height=140]

Show notes (links to references made on the show)…

Read moreThe Propaganda Report w/ Perez & Binkley – this week’s podcast!

The Year of the LINO? Podcast of June 4, 2016 show

1980
Libertarian Vice Presidential nominee former Massachusetts Governor William Weld with then-President Bill Clinton who nominated Weld for the post of Ambassador to Mexico.

Hour 1

Hour 2

Hour 3

 

To think, we could have had Georgia’s own DERRICK GRAYSON as LP VP ’16!!!!

What Everyone Missed About the NC Bathroom Law (Including Me!)

Update (12/9/16):

principle-of-subsidiaritsfsfsefy.pdnoigfjsoijSince the first minute I heard of Georgia’s religious-freedom bill, I figured it was a trap. Get everyone riled up about another southern state showing its prejudice and get the national populace, or maybe even the federal government, to make sure that no one anywhere is permitted to enact anything so offensive. As DOMA clearly demonstrated, if you want to cram down your social legislation on subsidiary governments, as the federal Defense of Marriage Act did to states, get ready for an equal and opposite federal reaction like the Supreme Court ruling that states could not deny gay marriage. The prevailing paradigm at the top is secular humanism and if there’s going to be lasting social legislation, that will be its endpoint no matter how it gets started. As a libertarian, however, I don’t want social legislation of either variety, and I wouldn’t need it.

Pure libertarian principles would solve these problems before they arose…don’t have federal spousal benefits (which were the justification for both DOMA and its demise); don’t have government-bestowed marital privileges; don’t have government licensing of marriages; don’t let government tell you what you can or can’t do on your own property or in your own church or in your own club or any other private institution; don’t let government spread across institutions so that vital centers like airports and universities are public domains; don’t let government legislate with whom you can transact or not transact nor what you may buy and sell; and always employ the principle of subsidiarity, which demands that the smallest social unit capable of handling a problem handle the problem, so at least if the government oversteps these bounds you can step in–or step out.

The principle of subsidiarity is the essence of federalism and the American Experiment: first empower the self, then the family, then the town, city, county, state and as a last resort, the federal government–a last resort clearly defined by the 18 enumerated powers in the Constitution. That’s where North Carolina’s law really loses me…

A Georgia legislator wrote a defense of the religious freedom act in today’s Wall Street Journal. He laments the backlash the law received, which is a little baffling given how predictable it was. (I might even go so far as to say he played right into their hands.) The law was vetoed by Governor Deal, as promised from the start, but the national attention and backlash it started gained momentum and moved on to North Carolina’s recently enacted law defining who may use which bathrooms. On my show Saturday, I pointed out that private property owners should make the call on who uses their bathrooms–and it should all be private property! But what I didn’t point out, because I hadn’t realized it until I read the article in the Journal today, was that the North Carolina law banned subsidiary governments from making their own laws on the matter. Here’s the article and the quote:

Why Are Companies Taking Sides Against Religious Liberty?
Policies intended to encourage inclusion have curdled into antipathy for people of faith.

North Carolina finds itself targeted over a common-sense new law blocking cities and counties from forcing businesses to give transgender people access to the bathroom of their choice.

I’ve seen disturbing signs of what I’m afraid will turn into a trend of state governments restricting lower governments from making their own laws. All I’ve seen so far is laws banning bans on plastic bags or banning bans on GMO foods (actually, Congress is working on that for the whole country.) These are laws that, for seemingly practical reasons, might appeal to the right–but that’s the trick. To the extent those on the right are for small government and individuality, they would be the natural defenders of the principle of subsidiarity. Clever central planners, therefore, might start with right-friendly legislation, such as banning cross-gender bathroom laws, to chip away at the power of local government and local control without anyone even noticing that that is the real underlying principle at stake. That’s what concerns me most about the North Carolina law–that, and the fact that no one noticed.

Update (12/9/16):

Ohio Lawmakers Pass Bill Forbidding Cities From Raising Minimum Wage
Move comes amid growing pressure in other states to raise wages for workers

Ohio lawmakers passed a measure Wednesday to block cities from raising the local minimum wage above the state level, amid growing pressure in other states to raise such wages for workers.

The Ohio measure was included in a broader bill passed by the Republican-controlled legislature amid a flurry of legislative activity as the session winds down.

The Death of Justice Scalia: A Turning Point for America

Antonin_Scalia_Official_SCOTUS_PortraitWhen my 88 year old uncle died alone in his room clearly from having gotten confused and taken more of his medicine than he was supposed to (his little am/pm pill boxes were open and empty beyond the day and time they should have been), his doctor very somberly questioned those in the family who had seen him last. The doctor felt that Uncle Al was too healthy to die suddenly, and although exhibiting early signs of dementia, should have been capable of keeping up with such a simple system to take his meds. Clearly, the doctor wanted to rule out the possibility that someone had a hand in getting Uncle Al to take too much medication. My uncle had a paranoid cast of mind and always thought people were after his money–little of it though there was–and the doctor wanted to be sure there wasn’t more to Uncle Al’s suspicions than he had credited. The reality is, there were 13,000 murders in the United States that year motivated by all sorts of things–jealousy, rage, personal gain–when someone dies, it makes sense to ask “Cui bono?” Who benefits?

When Justice Scalia died, my first thought was, “Heavy-set guy, 79, probably died of a heart attack…sounds reasonable.” I did notice that he was not at home at the time, so his wife was not with him to verify the circumstances of his death, and that he was reported as animated and well when he was last seen–aren’t there oftentimes warning signs of a heart attack? At this point, I usually get on my headlamp and start down the rabbit hole, and in this case, I might even have seen the rabbit hole in advance.

Read moreThe Death of Justice Scalia: A Turning Point for America

Crisis + Solution = "Common Sense" Gun Laws? Podcast of December 5, 2015 Show

Tashfeen_Malik_syed_farook1-150x150
Above is a picture of the two suspects. I had seen another picture of the woman in which she looked westernized as in this one. Since then, however, all pictures show her looking scarier and scarier and more and more foreign. But the most disturbing picture I have seen so far–and be forewarned, it’s VERY disturbing–is a picture of the male suspect shot dead. The picture is disturbing not only because of the bloody gruesomeness of the scene, but also because the dead man’s hands and feet look to be bound. How could that be? If he was bound, why did they shoot him? If he was dead (and clearly he was killed with a headshot), why bind his hands and feet? Here is the picture if you want to see it. Again, be warned, it’s shocking. (It came from the UK Daily Mail, but I found it here.)
Hour 1*

* Note that at the end of the first hour, I fell for a canard…that people on the terrorist watchlist or no fly list should be denied the right to bear arms…thankfully I realized my mistake (and furthermore, was corrected by the next caller!) — those lists do not allow you the right to defend yourself and can therefore be used for political purposes. One always has to have one’s guard up, doesn’t one?! Here’s an article on the subject from a website I like…
Why People on the No-Fly List Should Be Able To Buy Guns, by Robert Farago
[UPDATE: I just saw a new article in the WSJ about denying gun rights to those on the no-fly list…this kind of coincidence–that an issue that is on the A-list agenda in the mainstream media is also the subject of a tricky call I get on the subject–makes my “troll-dar” ping!]
Hour 2

Hour 3

Two great resources:
Would Banning Firearms Reduce Murder & Suicide?, Harvard Law and Policy Review
More Guns, Less Crime, by John Lott (click image for details)

13-year-old shoots, kills would-be burglar
And don’t forget to dig more deeply into the origins of terrorism… https://monicaperezshow.com/2015/02/14/what-if-isis-isnt-what-it-appears-to-be/
(Here’s an article I referred to during the show that I also found interesting if not baffling: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2309446/How-The-Blind-Sheik-1993-World-Trade-Center-bombing-grown-social-media-empire-prison.html)
What could possibly explain Newt tweeting about the California terrorist attack weeks before it actually happened?

Here’s the clip I played on the show…

Here’s another witness with the same story…

Crisis + Solution = “Common Sense” Gun Laws? Podcast of December 5, 2015 Show

Tashfeen_Malik_syed_farook1-150x150

Above is a picture of the two suspects. I had seen another picture of the woman in which she looked westernized as in this one. Since then, however, all pictures show her looking scarier and scarier and more and more foreign. But the most disturbing picture I have seen so far–and be forewarned, it’s VERY disturbing–is a picture of the male suspect shot dead. The picture is disturbing not only because of the bloody gruesomeness of the scene, but also because the dead man’s hands and feet look to be bound. How could that be? If he was bound, why did they shoot him? If he was dead (and clearly he was killed with a headshot), why bind his hands and feet? Here is the picture if you want to see it. Again, be warned, it’s shocking. (It came from the UK Daily Mail, but I found it here.)

Hour 1*

* Note that at the end of the first hour, I fell for a canard…that people on the terrorist watchlist or no fly list should be denied the right to bear arms…thankfully I realized my mistake (and furthermore, was corrected by the next caller!) — those lists do not allow you the right to defend yourself and can therefore be used for political purposes. One always has to have one’s guard up, doesn’t one?! Here’s an article on the subject from a website I like…

Why People on the No-Fly List Should Be Able To Buy Guns, by Robert Farago

[UPDATE: I just saw a new article in the WSJ about denying gun rights to those on the no-fly list…this kind of coincidence–that an issue that is on the A-list agenda in the mainstream media is also the subject of a tricky call I get on the subject–makes my “troll-dar” ping!]

Hour 2

Hour 3

Two great resources:

Would Banning Firearms Reduce Murder & Suicide?, Harvard Law and Policy Review

More Guns, Less Crime, by John Lott (click image for details)

13-year-old shoots, kills would-be burglar

And don’t forget to dig more deeply into the origins of terrorism… https://monicaperezshow.com/2015/02/14/what-if-isis-isnt-what-it-appears-to-be/

(Here’s an article I referred to during the show that I also found interesting if not baffling: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2309446/How-The-Blind-Sheik-1993-World-Trade-Center-bombing-grown-social-media-empire-prison.html)

What could possibly explain Newt tweeting about the California terrorist attack weeks before it actually happened?

Here’s the clip I played on the show…

Here’s another witness with the same story…

Blue Helmets Coming To a City Near You! Please make them feel welcome :)

ScreenHunter_04-Oct.-07-11.02
Reminds me of “Boston Strong”…foreshadowing?

All signs point to a big leap forward in the push for world government, especially this UN initiative to help “fight extremism” in US cities. This dovetails nicely with the themes being pushed right now by the government and the media: civil unrest, terrorism, police overreach, racial conflict, religious conflict, militarization of police, the surveillance state, mass shootings…so many of these themes seem to be designed to serve a purpose. Internationalization of everything from police to the economy seem to be the end game.

Here’s a good podcast on the subject.

Strong Cities & Global Goals podcast

Atlanta is one of four US cities on the Strong Cities Network steering committee. (The other three are New York, Denver & Minneapolis.)

Here’s where I first heard of this

UN & Obama’s Strong Cities Network form Global Police Force to Combat “Extremism” in US Cities

Here’s the DOJ press release

Launch of Strong Cities Network to Strengthen Community Resilience Against Violent Extremism

While the DOJ doesn’t explicitly state that UN personnel could be on the ground in US cities, this initiative complements the CFR’s “Building a North American Community,” which calls for international inter-operability of police and the military. I suspect that the secret Trans-Pacific Trade Partnership, which includes the “trinational” area cited by the CFR (Canada, the US and Mexico), will foster these same goals.

Here’s the White House press release which, outrageously, does not mention that it’s an international effort which the UN launched on September 29, 2015.

This cites six US “launch” cities: Chester PA, Cleveland OH, Detroit MI, Fresno CA, Memphis TN, New Orleans LA.

Announcing Strong Cities, Strong Communities

Other articles…

UN Strong Cities Network Launched September 29, 2015

Obama Administration and UN Announce Global Police Force to Fight ‘Extremism’ In U.S.

I recently posted on the move toward international use of force…

What do Putin, the Popes, the Trans-Pacific Trade Partnership & the Afghan hospital bombing have in common?

What do Putin, the Popes, the Trans-Pacific Trade Partnership & the Afghan hospital bombing have in common?

They all cry out for world government. Here’s my take, with references underneath the video.

But there’s more than one way to skin a cat!

There’s plenty of speculation right now in the wake of simultaneous but uncoordinated military action in and around Syria between the US and Russia that we might be on the brink of World War III. After reading Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals, I stay aware that there’s always more than one way to skin a cat. Alinsky says that if things don’t go as planned, take the way they are going and use it for you. As for the move toward world government, yes, it could happen peacefully with the power elite working behind the scenes to get media, governments and institutions to sign-on in secret or under false pretenses or in response to false flags or other crises, or another path could be taken: war.
Norman Dodd, researcher for the Reece Committee, discovered that the Carnegie Endowment, in an effort to change American culture from individualist to collectivist, promoted war, specifically our involvement in World War I, as the best way to change a society. (I have often wondered if this is the way they will have to implement the “New World Order” or institute a new financial regime, as when the dollar replaced the pound as world reserve currency after World War II.) At the same time, the world wars were the primary instruments for promoting world government. World War I was used as the pretext for establishing the League of Nations and World War II for establishing the United Nations. Neither of these organizations fulfilled their creators’ dreams of having real authority (i.e., carte blanche autonomy for use of force anywhere in the world), so it might follow that as the United Nations was more successful than the League of Nations, so might a third world war bring a yet more successful world governmental organization–perhaps even one with a monopoly on the use of force.

References

Leaked tapes on Ukraine & the Deep State
Zbigniew Brzezinski’s Grand Chessboard quotes
China and the New World Order
FOX News Accidentally Shows Evidence of Syrian REBELS Using Chemical Weapons
Doctors Without Borders: Kunduz strike an ‘attack on the Geneva Conventions’
Moscow and Washington work together to restructure international relations
Pope Benedict Urges Forming New World Economic Order to Work for the ‘Common Good’
TOWARDS REFORMING THE INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL AND MONETARY SYSTEMS IN THE CONTEXT OF GLOBAL PUBLIC AUTHORITY. Vatican Council for Justice and Peace
Pope Francis calls for a new system of global government to tackle climate change (Note: The Report from Iron Mountain called for an environmental hoax to justify world government!)
UN & Obama’s Strong Cities Network form Global Police Force to Combat “Extremism” in US Cities (The Report from Iron Mountain applies here too – it suggested a global police force to unite citizens in fear and develop renewed loyalty to the nation-state! It’s like a rabbit hole within a rabbit hole!)
TPP / TTIP…The TIPPing Points: Podcast of June 13, 2015 Show
Even the much-publicized Russia-China financial pact could ultimately play right into world government. Perhaps competition from that coalition will finally “bring the US and the UK to the table” and get all the major powers to agree to a true world currency. Hegel’s old thesis-antithesis-synthesis trick! Replacing the Western Financial System BRIC by BRICS
For more on the UN, see PEACE: by the Wonderful People Who Brought You Korea & Viet Nam

Other stuff…

FT: And now for a world government…
Bill Gates: “We need a world government”
The United Nations: On the Brink of Becoming a World Government
Blue Helmets Coming To a City Near You! Please make them feel welcome 🙂

What do Putin, the Popes, the Trans-Pacific Trade Partnership & the Afghan hospital bombing have in common?

They all cry out for world government. Here’s my take, with references underneath the video.

But there’s more than one way to skin a cat!

There’s plenty of speculation right now in the wake of simultaneous but uncoordinated military action in and around Syria between the US and Russia that we might be on the brink of World War III. After reading Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals, I stay aware that there’s always more than one way to skin a cat. Alinsky says that if things don’t go as planned, take the way they are going and use it for you. As for the move toward world government, yes, it could happen peacefully with the power elite working behind the scenes to get media, governments and institutions to sign-on in secret or under false pretenses or in response to false flags or other crises, or another path could be taken: war.

Norman Dodd, researcher for the Reece Committee, discovered that the Carnegie Endowment, in an effort to change American culture from individualist to collectivist, promoted war, specifically our involvement in World War I, as the best way to change a society. (I have often wondered if this is the way they will have to implement the “New World Order” or institute a new financial regime, as when the dollar replaced the pound as world reserve currency after World War II.) At the same time, the world wars were the primary instruments for promoting world government. World War I was used as the pretext for establishing the League of Nations and World War II for establishing the United Nations. Neither of these organizations fulfilled their creators’ dreams of having real authority (i.e., carte blanche autonomy for use of force anywhere in the world), so it might follow that as the United Nations was more successful than the League of Nations, so might a third world war bring a yet more successful world governmental organization–perhaps even one with a monopoly on the use of force.

References

Leaked tapes on Ukraine & the Deep State

Zbigniew Brzezinski’s Grand Chessboard quotes

China and the New World Order

FOX News Accidentally Shows Evidence of Syrian REBELS Using Chemical Weapons

Doctors Without Borders: Kunduz strike an ‘attack on the Geneva Conventions’

Moscow and Washington work together to restructure international relations

Pope Benedict Urges Forming New World Economic Order to Work for the ‘Common Good’

TOWARDS REFORMING THE INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL AND MONETARY SYSTEMS IN THE CONTEXT OF GLOBAL PUBLIC AUTHORITY. Vatican Council for Justice and Peace

Pope Francis calls for a new system of global government to tackle climate change (Note: The Report from Iron Mountain called for an environmental hoax to justify world government!)

UN & Obama’s Strong Cities Network form Global Police Force to Combat “Extremism” in US Cities (The Report from Iron Mountain applies here too – it suggested a global police force to unite citizens in fear and develop renewed loyalty to the nation-state! It’s like a rabbit hole within a rabbit hole!)

TPP / TTIP…The TIPPing Points: Podcast of June 13, 2015 Show

Even the much-publicized Russia-China financial pact could ultimately play right into world government. Perhaps competition from that coalition will finally “bring the US and the UK to the table” and get all the major powers to agree to a true world currency. Hegel’s old thesis-antithesis-synthesis trick! Replacing the Western Financial System BRIC by BRICS

For more on the UN, see PEACE: by the Wonderful People Who Brought You Korea & Viet Nam

Other stuff…

FT: And now for a world government…

Bill Gates: “We need a world government”

The United Nations: On the Brink of Becoming a World Government

Blue Helmets Coming To a City Near You! Please make them feel welcome 🙂

Heidi Cruz wants to build a North American Community – what does that mean, exactly?

ted cruz
Rafael Edward “Ted” Cruz, with his Spanish name, Canadian birth and US citizenship, would actually be a natural candidate to be the First President of the North American Union! (n/t The Next News Network)

In today’s video preview of tomorrow’s show, I refer to a document, Building a North American Community, written by a Council on Foreign Relations task force which included Heidi Cruz (i.e., Mrs. Ted Cruz), who expressly agreed with the recommendations in the report. What are those recommendations? Here’s a sampling, but I highly recommend you read the whole text (it’s large print and only 32 pages of actual report, the rest you can skip):

  • To lay the groundwork for the freer flow of people within North America with the ultimate goal of full mobility of labor and goods across Canada, Mexico and the United States. To facilitate this, rules and regulations on labor and the environment among other things should conform across the “trinational” region. “[T]he three countries should make a concerted effort to encourage regulatory convergence…including harmonization at the highest prevailing standard…and unilateral adoption of another country’s rules.”
    • “Make a North American standard the default approach to new regulation….The new trinational mechanism also should be charged with identifying joint means of ensuring consistent enforcement of new rules as they are developed.”
  • Increase information and intelligence-sharing at the local and national levels in both law enforcement and military organizations.
    • Conduct annual training exercise to develop interoperability among and between law enforcement agencies and militaries of the US, Canada & Mexico.
  • Create a North American Border Pass with biometric identifiers.
  • Establish a North American energy and emissions regime that could offer tradable voucher systems for emissions trading.
  • Creation of a North American Advisory Council with a complementary private body “that would meet regularly or annually to buttress North American relationships, along the lines of the Bilderberg or Wehrkunde conferences, organized to support transaltantic relations.”
    • Creation of a North American Inter-Parliamentary Group that will include US Congress along with Canadian and Mexican Parliamentary representation, who play key roles in policy toward each other. The newly created North American Advisory Council (likened to the Bilderberg Group) “could provide an agenda and support for these meetings.”

Lest you think the CFR has no real influence on our government, recall this…

Update: (h/t JL) Here’s a history of and update on so-called North American “free trade” published by the Next News Network on February 18, 2016.

Update (3/31/2016): I guess we’re already doing it….

Mexico and United States Joining Forces in Maritime Security