1 Trillion Dollar Lawsuit Filed Against MSM For Staging ‘Sandy Hook’ | Neon Nettle

http://www.neonnettle.com/sphere/353-1-trillion-dollar-lawsuit-filed-against-msm-for-staging-sandy-hook-

1 Trillion Dollar Lawsuit Filed Against MSM For Staging ‘Sandy Hook’

William Brandon Shanley Launches Wave of Lawsuits

Posted by: Jack Murphy
on 5th June 2016

Filmmaker and Author William Brandon Shanley Launches Wave of Lawsuits for more than $1 Trillion Against Big Media

image

In another shocking twist in the Sandy Hook saga, Filmmaker and Author William Brandon Shanley Launches Wave of Lawsuits for more than $1 Trillion Against Big Media Over Sandy Hook Massacre Coverage.

Here is Mr. Shanley’s Statement:

“After exhaustive research, the good news is that overwhelming evidence reveals that no children or teachers died at Sandy Hook two years ago. For relief, I have filed lawsuits against the media in US District Court in New Haven for Fraud and Terrorism.

SCROLL DOWN FOR VIDEOS

Here is an example of our abundant evidence, Exhibit D: The Connecticut State Police dash cams record no evacuation of children from school at critical moments:

“Smoking Gun evidence no children died at Sandy Hook.”

Via RedFlagNews Mr. Shanley is the producer of “The Made-for-TV Election” starring Martin Sheen that analyzed media coverage in the tectonic Carter-Reagan election of 1980.

He is also the author of books on quantum physics, including “Alice and the Quantum Cat” (2011).

Dr. James Fetzer, whose 35 articles on Sandy Hook for Veteran’s Today qualify him for the highest investigative journalism awards, and School Safety Consultant, Wolfgang Halbig, whose investigative expertise as a former Florida State Police officer, and loving attention as a former principal, makes this case’s particulars comprehensible to all, will be called as expert witnesses.

Mr. Shanley’s Complaint states, in part:

Defendants entered in a multi-year conspiracy, meeting in groups separately and together, to commit fraud and terrorism, i.e., to brainwash the public into thinking a lone gunman drill known as the “Sandy Hook Massacre” was real, when in fact it was a staged FEMA National Level Exercise Event that redirected government resources to terrorize the public. These crimes were undertaken with the intent of subverting the US Constitution and to affect national, state and local laws.

This fraud involved lying to the public, faking news, publishing one-sided news reports, censoring reality, suppressing facts, and deliberately skewing the news to shift public perceptions.

The true costs of this breach of integrity and trust to society are unfathomable. Instead of fulfilling their Constitutional Role as the People’s Surrogates and being honest brokers of information, the Plaintiff will show how the men and women who dominate the TV news industry in the United States broke laws, besmirched the First Amendment, their Constitutional role as government watchdogs, and forfeited the right to report the news, and thereby profit from news production and distribution.

The sine qua non of journalism is the search for truth. Our Fourth Estate chose a different path. Punitive damages of one year’s annual revenue from each Defendant are being sought to establish a News Trust, that will free journalism and restore trust and integrity to our communications sources. A democracy cannot survive this tyranny over human consciousness.

The New York Times, the Associated Press, the Hartford Courant, and the Newtown Bee are being sued for 10 billion usd, punitive damages, in a separate Complaint.

Case Name: Shanley v. Smith et alCase Number:3:14-cv-01881-JAM

Filer: William Brandon Shanley

Mass TV and wire service news media are being sued for 1 trillion usd, punitive damages.

Shanley v. O’Prey et al
Case Number: 3:14-cv-01929-JAM

Filer: William Brandon Shanley
Photo Credit: press
tags: Sandy Hook | False Flag

Subscribe to our mailing list
Related Articles

    Ex-State Trooper: ‘No One Killed In Sandy Hook Massacre
   
    15th February 2014

**********
Watch or listen to these informative Videos:

SMOKING GUN! Sandy Hook was a HOAX!

By Barry Soetoro 

Published on Oct 20, 2014
SMOKING GUN proof that Sandy Hook was FAKE! Photos prove it. We explain WHO staged this hoax, and WHY.

We explore HOW the Newtown lead investigator (Podgorski) VANISHED and WHO staged the fake shooting.

The “Biggest School Shooting in US History” was a GUN GRAB HOAX.

[MUST SEE] Smoking Gun Footage DESTROYS Sandy Hook HOAX:
http://bit.ly/1V0Gy4K

AN EERIE VISIT TO SANDY HOOK (Photos Mentioned in Video):
http://bit.ly/1YrHsFl

WHY THEY GRAB GUNS (China & Newtown CT): 
http://bit.ly/1Vi5uUY

HOW are they using Sandy Hoax to trick Americans, and WHAT are their GOALS?

JOSEPH GOEBBELS: “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually believe it.”

THAT quote explains the GUN GRAB ROADSHOW. Sandy Hoax. Aurora. Gabby Giffords. Cassidy Stay. And MANY more.

If they KEEP REPEATING the LIE (staged shootings), they think folks will believe it and SURRENDER THEIR GUNS.

(MORE) Sandy Hook PHOTOS: 
http://bit.ly/1TfUbMw

**********

The Made-for-TV Election 1980 starring Martin Sheen (1986/2008)

By William Shanley 

Published on Jun 20, 2014

A William Brandon Shanley film available at Amazon.com.

“Pertinent, powerful, persuasive. Handsomely produced… Brilliant.” — Los Angeles Times. 

“Profoundly enlightening. A devastating look at television’s impact on the presidency.” — Helen Thomas, “Dean” of the White House Press Corps.

“This film should be seen by every American in every city and town.” — Norman Lear, TV Creator.

Hollywood star and activist Martin Sheen shows how broadcast TV networks create winners and losers in US presidential elections by typecasting the candidates in a drama of their own making in this long-suppressed and sabotaged documentary about the 1980 Presidential Election Campaign when former Governor Ronald Reagan defeated President Jimmy Carter. 

Watch how network news shows use polls, gaffes, flip-flops, stereotypes, and show business values to pump the ratings and misdirect you from what you need to know to be an informed citizen and understand what’s really happening in America. The program dissects network coverage and reveals TV’s “hidden hand” in changing the outcome of the most important election since 1968, exposing the myth of the Reagan Revolution and the made-for-TV “conservative tide” that so tragically changed America’s course. 
*
Host Martin Sheen. Jimmy Carter (president) Ronald Reagan (Republican challenger) Ted Kennedy (Democratic challenger) John Anderson (Independent challenger) Walter Cronkite (CBS News “The Most Trusted Man in America”). Other media stars and guests include Frank Reynolds, Sam Donaldson, Helen Thomas, Ed Bradley, John Chancellor, Dan Rather, Leslie Stahl, Gerald Rafshoon, Jody Powell, Ted Turner. 
*
A William Brandon Shanley film. Gerald J. Keane, co-producer and writer. Alvin H. Goldstein, executive producer. Joe Rothstein, studio director. Harry Miles Muheim, consultant. Running time: 102 minutes. A Production of News Analysis Associates in association with Capitol Video Communications. Copyright William B. Shanley & Gerald J. Keane – 1986-2014 – All Rights Reserved. Distributed by Evolution Solutions, Inc., a Connecticut not-for-profit corporation. Write to Will Shanley for more information: wbs2012@zoho.com.

**********

Wolfgang Halbig ~ Sandy Hook Staged Government Community Capstone Exercise False Flag

Mert Melfa 

Published on Oct 11, 2014

FULL LENGTH VIDEO — Wolfgang Halbig, former teacher, law enforcement, and national school safety assessment & emergency management consultant, maintains that the so-called Sandy Hook CT shootings were a staged cooperative government – community “Capstone” exercise planned years before December 2012, for the purpose of banning commonly-used firearms and limiting free speech. Halbig asserts the incident was a financial bonanza for the Newtown community and involved parents, all involved parents moving into the CT community only between 2009-2011, and all receiving over $200K each for their involvement in the exercise. Halbig’s questions to Newtown are returned with silence and contempt; threat of arrest. 

Many details don’t add up… record shows no report of actual shots fired; no social security numbers for the dead students; 16 state troopers pre-positioned 45-60 minutes before the alleged shootings; tax accessor’s website shows the families got free houses on Christmas day when all government offices are closed; half-a-dozen charities set up for alleged victims days before the shootings; no one sued the school or the estate of Nancy Lanza; no parent wanted to see their children in the school; closed casket funerals; no EMT’s allowed in the school; the shooter was a 112-pound weakling with a debilitating condition but shoots like Rambo….with 95% percent kill rate; crisis actors, and much more.

Halbig also presents the proper safety procedures that schools must follow in a code-red event and urges parents to study your local school emergency management plan.– October 6, 2014

#sandyhook
#sandyhookhoax

For more information visit: http://www.sandyhookjustice.com

*********

Note from Angel4Light:

It is hard to believe that people will sell their souls for Fiat Money or 3D possessions, for you cannot take it with you.

All people involved in these False Flags are Traitors and need to be held accountable, which we know in the end will be by our Source Creator.

I knew instinctively that it was a hoax but people (the fluorided sheep), would swear it was real because they saw it on TV, so it must be real. Why would our Government lie to us? I gave up trying to point out the obvious, and would just tell them to investigate for themselves. Many people are too lazy or programmed not to care or bother.

image

image

Everything we have been told, has been a lie.

image

Be blessed


image

image

image

image

image

The DEA On Trial : Injectable Torture Devices

Source

image

When was the last time you heard anything about this court case on ABC, NBC, CNN, CBS, Fox or Court TV ? Have you sen any stories about this case in the New York Times, Los Angeles Times, Washington Times, Washington Post, USA Today, or Wall Street Journal [or in your local paper] ? It is never mentioned by Time or Newsweek either. I wonder *why* …….

[For the record, while this case has worked its way through the courts over the last few years, the DEA has *never* denied that these injectable torture devices exist.] ========

U.S. SUPREME COURT DOCKET NO. IN THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT CHARLES AUGUST SCHLUND, III and RANDY D. LANG, Petitioners vs. THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al, Respondents. ON APPEAL FROM THE JUDGMENT OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT C.A. NO. 00-15-126 (D.CT. NO. CIV-98-1875-PHX-RCB) PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI
On Petition For A Writ of Certiorari To The United States Supreme Court On Appeal from the Judgment on the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI Charles August Schlund, III Randy D. Lang, Attorney Petitioners In Pro Per XXXX N. 54th Drive Glendale, AZ 853XX (602) XXX-XXXX (M) QUESTIONS PRESENTED #1.

Whether the joint failure and refusal of the Central District Court and 9th Circuit Appellate Court to issue, per Petitioner’s continuous written requests, findings of fact and conclusions of law is a gross departure from the normal and customary course of procedure and substantial violation of Petitioners’ due process rights, thwarting Supreme Court review and eliminating a record for review by violating mandatory procedure, justifying the Supreme Court’s supervisory review. (See, Appendix 3). PARTIES TO THE PROCEEDING The parties to this proceeding are Petitioners Charles August Schlund, III and Randy D. Lang, Attorney, and Respondent, the United States Government, Department of Justice, Drug Enforcement Agency. PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT Appellant Charles August Schlund, III and Randy D. Lang, Attorney (“Petitioners”) in Pro Per, respectfully petitions for a Writ of Certiorari to review the Judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in this case. OPINIONS BELOW The opinion of the Court of Appeals (Appendix No. 1) was ordered not for publication. The opinions of the District Court (Appendix No. 2) are unreported. JURISDICTION The Court of Appeals entered its decision on December 14, 2000 (Appendix No. 1). No Petition for Rehearing was filed. The jurisdiction of this court is invoked under 28 U.S.C. 1254(1). STATUTORY PROVISIONS INVOLVED Because the text of the citations are too voluminous, Petitioner hereby complies with Rules of the Supreme Court of the United States (“Rule”) Rule 14(f). References are to U.S. Constitutional Provisions, Federal Statutes, Executive Issuances and include: the First, Second, Fourth, Fifth, Seventh, Ninth, Fourteenth and Seventeenth Amendments to the United States Constitution; Federal Torts Claim Act, 28 U.S.C. �� 2671 through 2680; 28 U.S.C. �1346(b); 18 U.S.C. �1964; 42 U.S.C. �� 1983 and 1988; Protection of Human Rights Act; The Convention Against Torture and Cruel, Inhumane or Degrading Treatment or Punishment of June 26, 1987; Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rules 43, 52, 56, 65 and Federal Rules of Evidence 201(b); and the conflicting decisions of (1) Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (1986) [ Summary Judgment]; Doran v. McGinness, 158 F.R.D. 383 (1994) [“mental telepathy mind control”]; and Siderman De Blak v. Republic of Argentina, 946 F.2d 1450 (9th Cir. 1991) [Torture by Government officials]. Factual Background Appellant Schlund, an ex-United States Marine, was solicited by the United States Drug Enforcement Agency (“DEA”) to participate in various activities of an illegal nature under color of authority. After receiving information about the activities, he refused. He was then set up by the DEA with fabricated evidence and arrested and charged as being an alleged drug manufacturer in Cave Creek, Arizona. The conspiracy by the DEA to fabricate the evidence was a planned scheme designed to enable them to create a”pretext” for reasonable suspicion and probable cause for creating a joint investigation task force to place Appellant Schlund under surveillance, to violate his privacy and due process, remove Schlund as a witness to corruption in the DEA, and to violate other constitutional protection and those of whom he comes in contact with. Also, to discredit him as a political witness and utilize electronic surveillance for information gathering concerning all those with whom he comes in contact, violating other historical and constitutional rights of such person(s) including, but not limited to, the attorney- client privilege, physician-patient privilege, spousal privilege, clergyman-penitent privilege, privacy of voting privilege, privacy of association, privacy of speech, etc. The gross “electronic force” intrusions were also made of his body, personal residence, papers, affects and things. He asserts in his verified Complaint (“Complaint”) and in many affidavits and documents filed in the case that during one or more of the episodes of electronic force torture, subcutaneous body implants of a CIA design were used by the DEA (“Electronic Implants”) and separately various forms of electronic force vibration, sounds, magnetic fields, radio waves, and other known forms of torture have been imposed upon him through excessive “electronic force” commonly referred to as (excessive force) resulting in psychological and physical torture of Schlund as a form of retaliation and violation of his civil rights, causing him extensive losses and damages personally and in his commercial activities as pled in detail in his verified Complaint and corroborated in this case (See Appendix 3). Petitioner Lang, an attorney, asserted a single declaratory relief cause of action, asserting the Government does not have the right to use sophisticated surveillance telecommunications activities and other integrated devices and methodologies to violate his rights to privacy due to his association with Schlund or other members of the public or to harass, torture, or otherwise violate his or other third parties’ rights of privacy with whom he associates, or violate protective privileges also set forth above based on Schlund’s personal knowledge. Lang asserted the course of intervention for a declaratory judgment is necessary to prevent such violations under color of authority or retaliate against him for his association with Petitioner Schlund (See, Appendix 3), as well as the judicial necessity to clarify or modify existing law on this unique “electronic force” privacy intrusion issue of first impression due to it being recently exposed and rapidly burgeoning in exposure as to the government’s use of such integrated computer etc. electronic technologies whose existence and use have been intentionally covered up and repeatedly denied by the Government but was, as always, later exposed then admitted to by it. Although tedious and continuous efforts over a rather lengthy period of time, heavily cloaked in a convoluted myriad of distorted secrecy and public lies, the Government’s illegal continuous violations of human rights and rights to privacy are being forced to the surface of truth by the courts (i.e., Koyomejian, Siderman De Blak, etc.). This includes its “scorched earth” policy of committing perjury, witness tampering, judicial coercion, and fabrication of evidence all classified as contemptible “outrageous Government conduct” by the Hon. Judge Lacey (Id., infra). Petitioner Schlund’s Criminal Acquittal. Despite the fact the DEA violated their oath of office and federal and U.S. Constitutional laws while acting under the pretext of color of law for the purpose of fabricating evidence, perjured testimony, and other illegal acts outside the course and scope of their authority, and in violation of Petitioner Schlund’s constitutional rights (See Appendix 3), Petitioner set the matter for a jury trial. It was established at the trial that the Government used an alleged “informant” who lied to induce Schlund by means of illegal entrapment to come to the location of a laboratory under false pretenses. The laboratory was set up by the Government to suck Schlund into the entrapment posture to remove Schlund as a political witness against the DEA to conceal massive corruption in the DEA. Petitioner Schlund did go to the location, where he was recorded by electronic surveillance cameras and other integrated telecommunications related devices and methodology, showing Schlund performing various legal activities at the Government’s (DEA) directions at the property located in Arizona (See Appendix 3). Petitioner Schlund then left the residence where the so-called laboratory was located and was followed by the joint task force of Government surveillance agents who then arrested him without a warrant and alleged on probable cause they believed he was operating an illicit methamphetamine laboratory (See Appendix 3). Later, on January 3, 1979, Petitioner Schlund, after a jury trial, was “acquitted” in the United States Central District Court, Phoenix, Arizona of all charges of conspiracy, etc. related to the trumped up drug charges that were created to remove Petitioner Schlund as a political witness against the DEA. The Dept. of Justice (“DOJ”) appealed that decision, and the decision was sustained in favor of Schlund by the 9thCircuit Court of Appeals (See Appendix 3). NOTE BENE: Judge Lacey of the United States District Court aggressively and severely reprimanded the government officials that they were “in contempt” and demanded they be “arrested” for committing “perjury” and “obstructing justice in his court” and for fabricating evidence against Petitioner Schlund. The acquittal was upheld on appeal; and on March 3, 1980, the DOJ and the DEA were advised by the United States Attorney General, Daniel R. Dray, there would be no further prosecution on the grounds of lack of evidence, and presumably because Judge Lacey noted there was “outrageous prosecutorial misconduct” which included withholding crucial evidence critical to Petitioner Schlund’s defense (See Appendix 3). Despite the acquittal, the conspiracy, illegal sur- veillance, illegal invasion of privacy, and the electronic force torture of Petitioner Schlund was and is continuous and ongoing to present (See Appendix 13). Petitioner Schlund has asserted in his verified Complaint and other corroborating documents that the DEA tortures him and continues to invade his privacy, based on personal knowledge he possesses relating to documentation he personally analyzed and reviewed with others, contained in files they collectively agreed would be called the “Don Boles Papers.” Petitioner asserts he is a political witness and the electronic torture etc. is done to discredit him to protect the corrupt governmental officials who are involved in the corrupt activity of the Government’s covert operations, which include influencing certain federal and state judges in the honorary judicial system. Proceedings in the Central District and 9th Circuit Appellate Courts. Petitioner Schlund filed a Motion to Recuse United States District Judge, the Honorable Robert C. Broomfield, based on his personal knowledge as set forth in Petitioner Schlund’s Motion for Recusal and Affidavit in Support of the Motion. The judge was assigned to his case after the Honorable Rosalyn Silver recused herself on the grounds she was an ex-United States Assistant Attorney in the DEA’s office for over ten years (See Appendix 3), although this was not disclosed by her to Petitioners and later discovered by Petitioners. CONCLUSION The Petition for Writ of Certiorari should be granted. Petitioners request the Court to vacate the Central District and Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals’ decisions and order it to make findings of fact and conclusions of law for an adequate record for the Supreme Court’s review if it becomes necessary in the interests and appearance of justice and to protect the integrity of justice. Respectfully submitted, Charles A. Schlund, III Petitioner In Pro Per XXXX N. 54th Drive Glendale, AZ 853XX (602) XXX-XXXX (M) Randy D. Lang, Attorney Petitioners In Pro Per XXXXX N. 28th Drive, Suite XXX Phoenix, AZ 850XX (623) XXX-XXXX Appendix 1 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT CHARLES AUGUST SCHLUND, ) No. 00-15126 III; RANDY D. LANG, ) ) D.C. No. CV-98- Plaintiffs-Appellants, ) 1875-RCB v. ) ) MEMORANDUM THE UNITED STATES OF ) AMERICA, ) ) Defendant-Appellee. ) ) Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona Robert C. Broomfield, District Judge, Presiding Submitted December 4, 2000 Before: TROTT, GRABER, and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges Charles August Schlund, III and Randy D. Lang appeal pro se the district court’s summary judgment in favor of the defendant and the denial of their Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) motion to amend or alter the district court’s summary judgment. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. � 1291. We review de novo the grant of summary judgment, see Wallis v. J.R. Simplot Co., 26 F.3d 885, 88 (9th Cir. 1994), and for abuse of discretion the district court’s denial of a motion to amend the judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of civil Procedure 59(e), see School Dist. No. 1J, Multnomah County v. AC and S, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1262 (9th Cir. 1993). We affirm. Because there were no genuine issues of material fact, the district court properly granted summary judgment. See Warren v. City of Carlsbad, 58 F.3d 439, 441 (9th Cir. 1995). Because appellants’ motion failed to demonstrate that they were entitled to relief from the district court’s grant of summary judgment, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e), the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying appellants’ motion to amend or alter judgment, see School Dist. No. 1J, Multnomah County, 5 F.3d at 1262-63. Appellants’ pending motions are denied. AFFIRMED. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA CHARLES AUGUST SCHLUND, ) III, et al, ) Plaintiffs, ) No. CIV 98-1875 vs. ) PHX RCB ) THE UNITED STATES OF ) AMERICA; et al. ) ORDER ) (Dated 8/31/99) Defendants. ) ) Pending before the court are Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss and Defendants’ Alternative Motion for Summary Judgment. Having carefully considered the arguments raised, the court is now prepared to rule on the motions. I. BACKGROUND On October 16, 1998, Plaintiffs filed Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”) claims against the United States of America and the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration. Plaintiff Charles Schlund’s claims are based on the factual allegation that: Complex micro receiving and transmitting implants were placed into Schlund’s body for purposes of harassing and monitoring [his] speech, movements, and activities and for purposes of torturing and controlling [him] by torturing or otherwise punishing him through physical torture or/and mental torture of sleep deprivation and pain and suffering throughout his body, through use of highly sophisticated technologies, which included, but was not limited to, laser and electromagnetic technologies.
(Comp. # 28.) Mr. Schlund alleges that Defendants implanted these devices to discredit him as a witness to the following: (1) the government’s covert operations that have caused millions of Americans to suffer from Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, Epstein Barr Virus, Agent Orange Illness, and Persian Gulf Illness; and (2) the government’s assassinations of John F. Kennedy, Robert F. Kennedy, Mary Jo Kopeche, Martin Luther King, and thousands of others.

US Bipartisan Political Elite Implicated in For-Profit Education Fraud

Stephen: In a case of classroom to courtroom, for-profit education fraud looks like being the next game changer in the US.

Could her husband’s involvement in a potential for-profit education fraud case be the reason behind the recent retirement of Maine Senator Olympia Snowe? Most likely.

Meanwhile, current GOP candidate Mitt Romney is among a vast network of former and current government officials named in this story who actively participate in the for-profit college swindle. 

By Danny Weil, Truthout April 19, 2012

On Friday, April 13, 2012, Courthouse News reported a class-action lawsuit by students filed in federal court against the Art Institute of California and its owner, Educational Management Corporation (EDMC).

As reported in Truthout, Sen. Olympia Snowe’s (R-Maine) husband, former governor of Maine John McKernan, is chairman of the board of EDMC and a former CEO of the company. The company also faces an $11 billion false claims lawsuit by the federal government and 11 states.

The lead plaintiff in the class-action suit, Chinea Washington, claims The Art Institute of California, Hollywood, led her to believe that federal grants and loans would cover the entire $89,000 cost for a bachelor’s degree in interior design.

In November 2011, after three years of study, Washington was provided notice by the “college” that she had reached the federal loan/grant aggregate limit of $52,340 and that it would cost $37,000 to complete the degree. Washington dropped out with $52,160 in debt. Because The Art Institute’s credits are not transferable, Washington has been swindled out of $52,000 and three years of her life.

The only way to describe $89,000 for a four-year degree with non-transferable credits from a non-academic college is as a fraud and a swindle, and that characterization possibly fails to convey the frustration and downright victimization students like Washington must feel.

Like subprime mortgages, for-profit colleges are a scam driven by payment of commissions to sales staff known as recruiters. The payment of commissions to high-pressure salespeople is so central to the scam that the umbrella trade group for for-profits, the Association of Private Sector Colleges and Universities (APSCU), has sued the federal government to overturn its ban on incentive pay.

It cannot be stated strongly enough: for-profit colleges could not engage in the ongoing exploitation of students and theft of federal money without the direct cooperation and assistance of the federal government in what can only be termed an immoral economy.

The same forces that demonize everything government does or attempts to do are busy feeding from the government trough. The hypocrisy is untenable, the federal subsidies unfathomable and the lack of criminal prosecution unconscionable.

For-profit colleges are a kickback scheme where politicians enact favorable legislation and regulations that allow for-profit colleges to maintain access to student loans and grant money. The for-profit colleges then “give” a small cut of the federal money back to the politicians to enact favorable legislation.

In the cases of Senator Snowe and Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-California), their husbands have operated under the cover of their wives as they directly benefited, and continue to benefit from, their positions as shareholders in for-profit college companies. Snowe and Feinstein are accomplices in the ongoing evisceration and defrauding of citizen taxpayers and students, which explains the pair’s complete silence on this matter.

The so-called ruling class of government officials and elected politicians, to which Feinstein and Snowe clearly belong, is little more than a gaggle of white-collar criminals which facilitates and benefits from the diversion of taxpayer money into private coffers. It all takes on the appearance of legitimacy.

Unfortunately, this is not a victimless crime. Like Washington, thousands of students who attend these subprime institutions are left with tens of thousands of dollars of nondischargeable debt which ends up ruining their lives.

There is a vast network of former and current government officials who actively participate in the for-profit college swindle.

Some of the conspirators are well known, and include: Mitt Romney, Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-North Carolina), John Kline (R-Minnesota), Alcee Hastings(D-Florida), Trent Lott (R-Mississippi), Lamar Alexander (R-Tennessee), Steve Gunderson (R-Wisconsin), Virginia Democratic Party Chairman Brian Moran, Snowe, Feinstein, Nancy Pelosi (D-California), and John Boehner (R-Ohio). The group also includes Obama administration officials and supporters such as Lanny Davis, Anita Dunn, Hilary Rosen, Anthony Miller and Charles Rose.

As I have previously written, you won’t read about any of this in The Washington Post because the Post owns a predatory for-profit college outfit known as Kaplan University, nor will you hear much about it in the rest of the corporate press.

By not prosecuting a single person related to the mortgage debacle, the Obama administration has now given the green light to for-profit college executives, such as McKernan and Post CEO Donald Graham, to engage with impunity in conduct which should be considered illegal and subject to criminal prosecution.

For-profit colleges serve as a corporate poster child for the need for campaign-finance and lobbying reform to staunch the ongoing corruption of the government which has looted the country and is turning it into a dysfunctional, third world nation.

Dragon Family Trillion Dollar Lawsuit

China US trade imbalance: bad policy or payback for CIA use of stolen WWII gold?

 Michael E. Salla, MA., Ph.D., Exonews, © February 8, 2012

www.exopolitics.org

Introduction

One of the enigmas of U.S. trade policy is the willingness of policy makers to allow China open access to U.S. markets while China throws up many obstacles to American imports. This has predictably led to the US China trade imbalance becoming an issue in the U.S. Presidential Republican campaign. In an interview on Fox News on February 2, 2012, Republican Presidential front runner, Mitt Romney, declared:

On my first day in office, I will label China a currency manipulator and under US law once that label has been affixed the president is able to apply tariffs to any of their goods … I’ve made it very clear to the Chinese that’s where we’ll go if they continue the practices they’re pursuing right now.

Romney’s get tough on China rhetoric impressed Donald Trump who promptly endorsed Romney for the Republican Presidential Primary. According to Trump: “I love what Mitt was saying about China and the rest of the world, which is just absolutely ripping us off and trying to destroy this nation with a smile. And I think that Mitt Romney really sees China for what they are.”

It is a fact that China maintains a huge trade deficit with the U.S. The exchange rate of China’s currency, the Renminbi, is kept artificially low making it very difficult for U.S. products to compete with cheap Chinese imports. Imports of Chinese products have devastated the U.S. manufacturing industry. To make matters worse, China establishes tariffs on a range of key U.S. export products, such as automobiles, making it even more difficult for the U.S. to reverse the trade deficit which continues to grow. Compounding the issue is China’s flagrant violation of intellectual property laws where Chinese firms pirate many U.S. products with almost total impunity thereby removing another means of balancing the trade deficit.

The trade imbalance has led to China accumulating vast reserves of US dollars, becoming the biggest purchaser of U.S. treasury bonds, and becoming America’s chief creditor. According to the U.S. Treasury, as of November 2011, China held 1.1 trillion dollars in U.S. treasury securities. All this has U.S. Republican presidential candidates and many economists speaking out loudly against China and calling for retaliatory measures such as tariffs, getting tough on Chinese violation of intellectual property laws, and pressuring China to revalue its currency. So are Romney, Trump and a host of prominent economists correct about China? Do they make a compelling case for abandoning a bad China trade policy?

1. Dragon Family Trillion Dollar Lawsuit

A mysterious trillion dollar lawsuit filed on November 23, 2011 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, claims that 145.5 billion dollars worth of gold was secretly given to the U.S. government in the mid-1930s by the then Nationalist government of China for safekeeping. The lawsuit claims that 1934 U.S. Federal Reserve notes were issued to the Chinese government, and the gold transferred to the Federal Reserve Bank:

Upon information and belief, between 1927 and 1938, as a result of arrangements made between China and the United States, the United States … leased vast amounts of gold from the nationalist Chinese Government, known as Kuomintang. During this period, China was partly occupied by Japanese troops and there was a fear of China being overrun by the Japanese.

It is claimed that a total sum of almost one trillion dollars representing both the principal and accumulated interest of the 1934 Federal Reserve notes was fraudulently taken from the plaintiff, Neil Keenan, an agent for the owners, a mysterious Asian entity called “The Dragon Family.” According to Courthouse News:

Plaintiff Neil Keenan claims he was entrusted in 2009 with the financial instruments – which included U.S. Federal Reserve notes worth $124.5 billion, two Japanese government bonds with a combined face value of $19 billion, and one U.S. “Kennedy” bond with a face value of $1 billion – by an entity called the Dragon Family, which is a group of several wealthy and secretive Asian families.

The Japanese bonds and Kennedy bond were allegedly added to the initial bond issue as interest. To calculate the total amount of gold ‘leased’ by China’s nationalist government to the Federal Reserve we can use the 1938 historic figure for the price of gold which was $34.87 per troy oz. $124.5 billion converts into an approximate total of 3.6 billion troy oz or 110 thousand metric tons

Given that the world’s total gold reserves is officially only 165 thousand tons, this is a staggering amount of gold that was secretly leased from China’s nationalist government. Using the current spot price of gold, nearly $1700 per troy oz, the value of Chinese gold in possession of the Federal Reserve has a price of six trillion dollars! This is more than double the total income for the 2012 U.S. federal budget of 2.6 trillion dollars. Surprisingly, there appears to be another similar size cache of gold that was leased by China as an incident on the Swiss-Italian border in 2009 illustrates.

Massive Class Action Law Suit Against: Monsanto, the FDA, Dow, & other Biotech Genesidal Monsters

CGI’s Maryhrt: Millions Against Monsanto: The Food Fight of Our Lives

Posted By: Susoni
Date: Saturday, 14-Apr-2012 18:28:38

Isn’t this the point (His quote)?? To let people know how dangerous it is ??

“”*”If you put a label on genetically engineered food you  might as well put a skull and crossbones on it.” *– “”

And the FDA?? You have got to be kidding. Their ruling goes to the highest bidder only the People’s interest is not included. As usual, insanity prevails. I am excited that Monsanto and their cohorts are finally getting the press they deserve. They are bastards to the highest degree. They brought us agent orange which many of our veterans suffer from tremendously to this day. They brought us the poison, aspartame, that causes a disconnect in the brain, nervous system and more. The glyphosate, the product courtesy of Monsanto, is poisoning the soil making it dead and unusable in the future. It causes infertility in people. Plus, if you breathe it in, it could kill you and has killed people including children passing by on school buses where it was being sprayed. That stuff is like agent orange on steroids. Here is a little expose’ on it, http://naturalsociety.com/monsantos-infertility-linked-roundup-found-in-all-urine-samples-tested/

Might I add, if you own Monsanto stock, you are part of the problem and you are receiving blood money.

Maryhrt

Millions Against Monsanto: The Food Fight of Our Lives

By Ronnie Cummins, AlterNet

12 April 12

*If you put a label on genetically engineered food you might as well put a skull and crossbones on it.” *– Norman Braksick, president of Asgrow Seed Co., a subsidiary of Monsanto, quoted in the *Kansas City Star*, March 7,
1994

*”Monsanto should not have to vouchsafe the safety of biotech food. Our interest is in selling as much of it as possible. Assuring its safety is the FDA’s job*.” — Phil Angell, Monsanto’s director of corporate communications, quoted in the *New York Times*, October 25, 1998

For nearly two decades, Monsanto and corporate agribusiness have exercised near-dictatorial control over American agriculture, aided and abetted by indentured politicians and regulatory agencies, supermarket chains, giant food processors, and the so-called “natural” products industry.

Finally, public opinion around the biotech industry’s contamination of our food supply and destruction of our environment has reached the tipping point. We’re fighting back.

This November, in a food fight that will largely determine the future of what we eat and what we grow, Monsanto will face its greatest challenge to date: a statewide citizens’ ballot initiative that will give Californians the opportunity to vote for their right to know whether the food they buy is contaminated with GMOs.

A growing corps of food, health, and environmental activists – supported by the Millions against Monsanto and Occupy Monsanto Movements, and consumers and farmers across the nation – are boldly moving to implement mandatory labeling of genetically engineered foods in California through a grassroots-powered citizens ballot initiative process that will bypass the agribusiness-dominated state legislature. If passed, the California Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act will require mandatory labeling of genetically engineered foods and food ingredients, and outlaw the routine industry practice of labeling GMO-tainted foods as “natural.”

Passage of this initiative on November 6 will radically alter the balance of power in the marketplace, enabling millions of consumers to identify – and boycott – genetically engineered foods for the first time since 1994, when Monsanto’s first unlabeled, genetically-engineered dairy drug, recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone (rBGH), was forced on the market,

As Alexis Baden-Mayer, Political Director for the Organic Consumers Association, pointed out at an Occupy Wall Street teach-in in Washington DC in early April: “The California Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act ballot initiative is a perfect example of how the grassroots 99% can mobilize to take back American democracy from the corporate bullies, the 1%. By aggressively utilizing one of the last remaining tools of direct democracy, the initiative process (available to voters not only in California and 23 other states, but in thousands of cities and counties across the nation), we can bypass corrupt politicians, make our own laws, and force corporations like Monsanto to bend to the will of the people, in this case granting us our fundamental right to know what’s in our food.”

*Moving the Battleground*

This is not the first time Monsanto has been challenged by citizens’ initiatives or state and local legislative efforts. But this time, the momentum is in our favor.

In the past, GMO “right-to-know” activists have been outmaneuvered and outgunned by Monsanto and its minions in every state, except Vermont and Connecticut, where passing a labeling bill is still, at least theoretically, a long-shot. (Monsanto recently threatened to
sue the state of Vermont if legislators there pass a GMO labeling bill).

Efforts to pass GMO labeling laws at the federal level have gone nowhere, despite the fact that more than one million consumers have emailed “Just Label It” petitions to the FDA, demanding mandatory labeling. (The FDA counted only 394 of the signatures, claiming that the main petition was submitted as a single document, or docket, and therefore counted as only one signature.)

More

Thank You President Trump

Draining The SwampDecember 15, 2018
Pray for President Trump, the White Hats, our Military and all benevolent beings helping to Free Humanity . Be in JOY and in PEACE. Love others as you Love yourself. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Be an example of Love and Joy. Peace will be ours and so it is.

Angel4Light777@gmail.com

Join 2,137 other followers