Staatlosigleit und Massenversklavung

Bekanntmachung an die Hohe Hand im In- und Ausland

Veröffentlicht am 06. Januar 2014

Staatlosigleit und Massenversklavung:

Bekanntmachung an die Hohe Hand im In- und Ausland

Die – Bundesrepublik Deutschland – eine Kolonie. Der Personalbestand wurde am 01.01.2000 massenversklavt und zur Entsorgung freigegeben. Das Besatzungsstatut der Alliierten ist gültig.

Die Reichsangehörigkeit von 1871 wurde ab dem 01.01.1914 nicht mehr verliehen. Die unmittelbare Reichsangehörigkeit wurde von 1914-2000 verliehen. Ab 1934 wurde die deutsche Staatsangehörigkeit StAG=R mit der unmittelbaren Reichsangehörigkeit zur Kolonieangehörigkeit gleichgeschaltet.

Die deutsche Staatsangehörigkeit von 1933 wurde durch militärische Anordnung 1946 nicht ausgerottet, im Gegenteil durch die Militärregierung weiterbefohlen.

Die Kommission 146 distanziert sich ausdrücklich von der unmittelbaren Reichsangehörigkeit R=StAG, die mit der deutschen Staatsangehörigkeit verschmolzen gleich=geschaltet war. Die deutsche Staatsangehörigkeit = unmittelbare Reichsangehörigkeit und das Deutsche Reich sind verbrannte Wörter aus dem III. Reich!

In der Machteroberungsphase der Faschisten wurden 1933 die Völker Deutschlands zum deutschen Volk gleichgeschaltet.

Dieser NS-Zustand wurde von den Alliierten und der BRD bis heute nicht ausgerottet.

Am 01. Januar 2000 wurde der Gleichschaltungs-Status § 1 aus dem III. Reich R=StAG im Staatsangehörigkeitsgesetz beseitigt. Der NaZi- Status täuscht seit 2000 mit der deutschen Staatsangehörigkeit eine Glaubhaftmachung vor.

Deutschland besitzt bis heute keinen Friedensvertrag, durch den geheimen Staatsstreich am 01. Januar 2000 wurde die deutsche Staatsangehörigkeit beseitigt. Der Staatsstreich hat sämtliche Verträge mit der Hohen Hand gebrochen. Der Waffenstillstand II. Weltkrieg ist verletzt und wieder offen.

Die Nicht-Staatsangehörigkeit der BRD hat den Personalbestand mit über 80 Mio. Menschen ahnungslos in die Massenversklavung gesetzt. Mit dem BRD-Staatsstreich ist das gleichgeschaltete deutsche Volk komplett untergegangen.

• Die Deutschen kennen nicht ihren Status der Staatsangehörigkeit
• Die Glaubhaftmachung täuscht den Personalbestand der BRD
• Die Massenversklavung 2000 ist das größte Verbrechen der BRD / EU
• Die Bewohner der BRD wurden nach Plan vorsätzlich geplündert
• Das Medienmonopol Rothschild liefert unwahre Berichterstattung
• Der angekündigte Krieg 2014 entsorgt die Staatlosen und Rechtlosen

Der Euro vernichtet die EU-Völker. In Griechenland erschoss sich ein Mann auf dem Marktplatz mit einer Kurzwaffe in den Kopf. Der Tote hielt einen Zettel in der Hand auf dem stand: “Ich will in Würde sterben.”

Der €uro ruiniert nach Plan die Mittelmeerstaaten. Der Faschismus tarnt sich in der EU-Gleichschaltungswährung und zerstört finanziell die Völker Europas.

Aufklärungspflicht

Wer den Zustand der Staatlosigkeit erkannt hat, ist in der Pflicht, seine Angehörigen, Freunde, Nachbarn und Arbeitskollegen zu informieren.

Wer den Zustand der Staatlosigkeit wissentlich ignoriert, macht sich strafbar gegen die Völker Deutschlands und den Völkermord gegen sich selbst.

Freies Denken zerschlägt den Käfig der Denkfallen – Denkfehler – Denkblockaden.

Die Heimat Deutschland wartet seit 1933 auf ihre Heimatlosen, seit 2000 auf ihre Staatlosen.

Ziel: Beseitigung der BRD-Staatlosigkeit – Urkunde 146.

Verteiler

Auszug aus dem Strafantrag auf Grundlage des geheimen Staatsstreichs vom 01. Januar 2000 in der Verwaltungszone Bundesrepublik Deutschland:

Hohe Hand der ehemaligen Sowjetrepublik

• Präsident der Russischen Föderation
• Außenministerium
• Haupt Militärstaatsanwalt

Hohe Hand in Deutschland

• Headquarters USEUCOM, General Philip M. Breedlove, 70569 Stuttgart
• Headquarters British Forces Germany, Major General John Henderson, 33605 Bielefeld

Internationale Strafgerichtshöfe

• KLWCT, 50480 Kuala-Lumpur, Malaysia
• ICC, 2516 AB Den Haag, Niederlande

Die Kommission 146 überreichte am 20.12.2013 die Unterlagen bei den Behörden in Moskau und erhielt die Kopien gesiegelt zurück. Der Auftrag war nach 2,5 Stunden ausgeführt.

Am 23.12.2013 übergab die K 146 im HQ BFG Bielefeld die Unterlagen. Nach 20 Minuten war die Kopie gestempelt.

Am 27.12.2013 wurden die Unterlagen durch einen Kurier der K 146 bei den HQ USEUCOM Stuttgart abgegeben. Nach 1 Stunde war der Vorgang vom Deputy Chief of Protocol Gary Jacobson quittiert und angenommen.

Die Hohe Hand im In- und Ausland steht in der Pflicht, die BRD-Bewohner aus der Staatlosigkeit in ihre Heimat-Staatsangehörigkeit überzuleiten und die Verbrecher vor einem Internationalen Militärstrafgericht zu verurteilen.

Präsentation zum Vorgang mit mehr Informationen und Dokumenten:

http://info.operation146.de/HoheHand

Heimat und Weltfrieden

Die Urkunde 146 setzt das Signal an die Hohe Hand und zeigt den entgegengesetzten Willen:

Befreiung Deutschlands, Heimatangehörigkeit und den Weltfrieden wieder herzustellen.

Die staatlosen Deutschen müssen sich durch die Urkunde 146 selbst befreien, oder
werden in der Staatlosigkeit vernichtet…!

Ihr Signal an die Hohe Hand hier. Hand in Hand mit der Hohen Hand!

Verfallorganigramm der Staatsangehörigkeit hier.

Weitere Präsentationen hier.

 

 

 

---

 

Veröffentlicht am 26. Oktober 2013

 

Die Kommission 146 hat mit Beginn der Umsetzung Artikel 146 aus dem Grundgesetz am Weltfriedenstag, dem 30. August 2009, ihre Tätigkeit aufgenommen. Der Artikel 146 aus dem Militärgrundgesetz spricht nicht von einer neuen Verfassung, sondern dass das Grundgesetz ungültig wird.

Am 13. September 2013 hatte die Kommission 146 in Berlin gegenüber dem Reichstag, außerhalb der Bannmeile, öffentlich für die Manifestation des Weltfriedens ein Signal gesetzt. Der Auftritt wurde von Reichsideologen und anderen Splittergruppen gestört. In den folgenden Tagen konnte die Manifestation immer gezielter ohne Störungen durchgeführt werden.

Die Banner waren mit der Aufschrift Befreiung vom BRD / EU Faschismus, Staatenlos on Tour und Welche Staatsangehörigkeit verleiht die BRD deutsch /  deutsche Staatsangehörigkeit gezeigt worden. Die Kommissionsmitglieder und aufrechte Demokraten haben aus verschiedenen Teilen der Republik die Manifestation ohne Gewalt und ohne Gesichtsmasken durchgeführt.

Diese Aktion wurde nach knapp einer Woche abgebrochen. Der Grund war die Aufspaltung der Manifestation durch eine Person, die der Gruppe von staatenlos.info angehörte. Die Störung war menschlich so negativ, dass die Manifestation zum Schutz der Beteiligten beendet wurde. Die Kommission 146 bedankt sich an dieser Stelle noch einmal bei den Berliner Sicherheitskräften, die der Manifestation positiv gegenüberstanden.

Die Kommission 146 distanziert sich an dieser Stelle nochmals ausdrücklich von staatenlos.info, deren Webinhalt mit dem Ziel der Kommission 146 nicht übereinstimmt. Die Flugblätter von staatenlos.info sind unverständlich und tragen ohne Absprache die Domain von GG146.de. Die Kommission 146 distanziert sich auch von den schlecht dargestellten Inhalten der BRD-Staatlosigkeit.

An dieser Stelle wird darauf hingewiesen, dass „verbrannte“ Wörter wie unmittelbare Reichsangehörigkeit, Deutsches Reich und NS-Ideologien nicht zielführend sind und die Mitglieder der Kommission 146  sich ausdrücklich davon distanzieren.

Der blaue Punkt ist das Zeichen für den Weltfrieden. Dieser Punkt wurde in Berlin durch angebliche Reichsangehörige und die operierenden Kräfte der BRD-Dienste (Steuerung), versucht in die radikale Ecke zu stellen.

Je mehr das Thema Manifestation für den Weltfrieden und die doppelte Staatlosigkeit der BRD / EU in der Öffentlichkeit sachlich dargestellt wird, umso mehr nehmen die Angriffe gegen die Kommission 146 zu.

Am 22.Oktober 2013 wurde ein Mitglied der Kommission hausdurchsucht wegen Volksverhetzung. Aus diesem Grund hat die Rechtsabteilung der Kommission 146 den Entschluss gefasst, bei der Kriminalpolizei Abteilung 3, wegen Verdacht der Volksverhetzung sich anzuzeigen, damit der Tatvorgang Staatlosigkeit geprüft wird. Das Landeskriminalamt in Kiel wurde über diesen Vorgang am 23.10.2013 um 10.30 Uhr informiert.

Das Thema der BRD-Staatlosigkeit wurde am 5. September 2013  beim Strafgerichtshof ICC in Den Haag abgegeben und strafangezeigt. Die Kommission kann das gleichgeschaltete deutsche Volk nicht verhetzen, da am 01. Januar 2000 der Bundesgesetzgeber den Personalbestand der BRD in die Massenversklavung der Staatlosigkeit entlassen hat.

Der Status R=StAG (unmittelbare Reichsangehörigkeit wird als deutsche Staatsangehörigkeit erworben) von 1934 ist durch den Statuswechsel gelöscht worden. Die beseitigte unmittelbare Reichsangehörigkeit war die deutsche Staatsangehörigkeit. Seit dem 01. Januar 2000 ist die deutsche Staatsangehörigkeit in den Staatsangehörigkeits-Urkunden nur noch eine Nicht-Staatsangehörigkeit (Staatlosigkeit) oder Glaubhaftmachung.

Das gleichgeschaltete deutsche Volk aus der NS-Zeit ist komplett durch Staatlosigkeit untergegangen. Aus diesem Grund kann das Volk nicht mehr verhetzt werden. Diese Massenversklavung ist dem ICC in Den Haag strafangezeigt und die Hohe Hand in Moskau durch den Hauptmilitärstaatsanwalt in Kenntnis gesetzt worden.

staatenlos.info hat als Kurier für die Kommission 146 den Auftrag in Moskau nicht erfüllt. Die Aktionen von der Splittergruppe staatenlos.info sind nicht mit der Kommission 146 abgesprochen und daher nutzlos. Die Kommission 146 distanziert sich hiermit ausdrücklich von der Splittergruppe.

Der Zustand der Staatenlosigkeit wird indirekt immer offenkundiger von BRD-Juristen bestätigt. Die BRD besaß die (R=)StAG  „deutsche Staatsangehörigkeit“ aus dem III. Reich und hat am 01. Januar 2000 den Gleichschaltungs-Status von 1934 beseitigt. Damit ist die deutsche Staatsangehörigkeit nur noch eine Glaubhaftmachung für den Geschäftsbetrieb der BRD-GmbH.

Die Massenversklavung ist durch Gesetze und Zeitzeugen aus dem III. Reich wasserdicht nachweisbar. Ein Richter vom Amtsgericht Vechta hat am 06.09.2012 das Verfahren mit der Begründung eingestellt, dass die Staatsangehörigkeit nicht bekannt ist.

Die Prüfung der Staatsangehörigkeit wurde von der BRD-Verwaltung oder den BRD-Gerichten bisher verweigert. Nach dem Europäischen Abkommen über die Staatsangehörigkeit hat jeder Bewohner der Bundesrepublik das Recht auf Prüfung. Zurzeit wird vor dem Verwaltungsgericht in Frankfurt / Oder im Eilverfahren der Sachverhalt geklärt.

Die Kommission 146 besteht aus Demokraten, die für das Ziel „Heimatangehörigkeit“ und Beseitigung der BRD-Staatlosigkeit die Völker Deutschlands aufklären und Verantwortung tragen. Ehemalige Mitglieder haben aus verschiedenen Gründen die Kommission 146  verlassen. Neue Mitglieder beleben das Ziel der Heimat. Die Kommission 146 verkörpert das Grundlegendste für das Zusammenleben in der Gesellschaft: Einheit und Freiheit für die Heimat Deutschland und die Staatsangehörigkeit aus den Bundesstaaten.

 Kommission 146   –   Adresse  Postfach146   D-24205 Preetz.

Nach Besatzungsvorgaben ist die zukünftige Deutschlandangehörigkeit DuStAG der Status und der entgegengesetzte Wille aus dem Grundgesetz Art. 116 Absatz 2  –  Umsetzung  Artikel 146. Dieses Grundrecht wird durch Unterschriftsbeglaubigung auf der Urkunde 146 dokumentiert und bezeugt den entgegengesetzten Willen der Staatlosen.

Einige BRD-Behörden verweigern rechtswidrig die Beglaubigung der Unterschrift auf der Urkunde 146. Die BRD-Kolonie kann keine Zukunft schaffen und überlagert die Heimat mit Staatlosigkeit.

Die Aufklärungspflicht „Welche Staatsangehörigkeit verleiht die BRD?“ läuft auf vollen Touren. Ein Flugblatt der Kommission 146 und verschiedene Internetpräsentationen – wie

Heimatkunde für Staatslose   –    Krieg oder Frieden    –    Heimat Deutschland

geben einen Einblick in das Thema Staatsangehörigkeit. Die Aufklärungspflicht über den Status der Angehörigkeit wurde seit 1914 gegen die Völker Deutschlands verletzt.

Den Zustand der Staatlosigkeit kann man nur verstehen, wenn man die Grundlagen der Staatsangehörigkeit versteht. Diese Grundlagen sind für den Rechtsunkundigen nicht leicht zu erfassen, wenn die Aufklärungspflicht verletzt wird. Der tatsächliche Zustand und die Auswirkungen weichen von den in der Bevölkerung herrschenden Vorstellungen deshalb erheblich ab.

Seeräuber, Barbaren und Staatlose leben im rechtsfreien Raum des Völkerrechts. Jeden Tag werden staatlose Menschen auf der Welt ermordet. Der IStGH in Den Haag und das Völkerrecht bestrafen keine Staatlosen, Seeräuber und Barbaren. Die Kolonie BRD hat mit der EU am 01. Januar 2000 den Status der doppelten Staatlosigkeit planmäßig erreicht. Die Bewohner der BRD besitzen seit dem Staatsstreich die unmittelbare Unionsbürgerschaft. Dieser Status wurde den Roma in der EU verweigert.

Sie hatten das Ziel der Staatlosigkeit schon erreicht.

Staatlose sind vollkommen rechtlos, ohne Eigentum und die Aufenthaltskolonie kann sie sogar töten. Dieser Zustand ist Alltagsgeschäft wie z.B. im Gaza-Streifen.

Was soll die Urkunde 146 und die Verfassung von 1919 ändern?

Die Heimat-, Recht- und Staatlosen erhalten nur mit der Verfassung 1919 ihre Rechte zurück und machen Deutschland wieder souverän. Die Heimat Deutschland kann dann mit den Siegermächten und Feindstaaten Friedensverträge schließen und den Waffenstillstand II. WK für den Weltfrieden beenden.

Vertragsbrüche durch BRD-Staatlosigkeit.

Die BRD hat durch den Staatsstreich jeden Vertrag zerstört. Der gebrochene Über-lagerungsvertrag 2 + 4 hat den Waffenstillstand II. WK wieder scharfgeschaltet und der angekündigte Krieg von J-C. Junker in 2014 wird zur Realität.

Die Strafgerichtshöfe und die Hohe Hand sind in der Pflicht, den Zustand der Massenver-sklavung durch Staatlosigkeit in der BRD zu beseitigen. Das Problem kann nur durch Verfügungen von hoher Hand im In- und Ausland (Quelle: BRD-Finanzagentur GmbH und Banken AGBs) gelöst werden.

Die Urkunde 146 setzt zusätzlich ein Signal an die Hohe Hand und zeigt den entgegen-gesetzten Willen der Staatlosen in der BRD zur Befreiung der Heimat Deutschlands, den Kriegsplan in 2014 zu stoppen und den Weltfrieden herzustellen.

Die Österreicher wurden 1945 von der deutschen Staatsangehörigkeit befreit.

Die staatlosen Deutschen müssen sich selbst befreien … oder werden vernichtet!

Kommission 146

Text im PDF-Format – Link

Сенсация ‘Рак излечим’ Мировой заговор кукловодов

Sensation ‘Cancer is curable’ World conspiracy puppeteers

Kevin Annett’s April 17th Update on the Trial of the Pope

 …et al for Child Rape, Torture, Sacrifice

Public Information Update from The Prosecutor’s Office of The International Common Law Court of Justice

 

In the Matter of the People v. Bergoglio, Pachon, Welby and others charged with global child trafficking and ritual murder

Summary:

The Court adjourns for two weeks after the first round in the Prosecutor’s Case discloses the startling testimony of eight witnesses.

Two separate witnesses describe their alleged rape and ritual torture by chief defendant Jorge Bergoglio (alias “Pope Francis”) in 2009 and 2010.

The Chief Prosecutor establishes a link between the British, Dutch and Belgian royal families and the disappearances and killing of Mohawk children at the Church of England’s Brantford Indian residential school in Canada.

Jesuit records are introduced as evidence detailing the so-called “Magisterial Privilege” decreeing papal involvement in “Ninth Circle” ritual murder of newborn children. The same records identify Joseph Ratzinger as a member of the “Knights of Darkness” S.S. sacrificial cult during World War Two.

ITCCS Field Secretary Kevin Annett is scheduled to testify before the Court during its second round of sessions in early May to corroborate witnesses’ testimonies from his own work and experience.

A prominent Vatican official initiates back channel communication with the Court and offers key evidence, as Magistrates consider extending closed Court sessions during May.

The Court and its affiliates will issue an Easter Proclamation this Sunday, April 20 and endorse public actions at the Vatican and Catholic churches across the world. Rev. Kevin Annett will lead a public ceremony of “exorcism and replacement” at a prominent Catholic cathedral on that day.

The Details:

Following eight days of Court procedure and the commencement of the Citizen Prosecutor’s case against the three chief defendants, the first Common Law adjudication of evidence concerning global child trafficking has adjourned for two weeks, until 10 am GMT on Monday, May 5, 2014.

Commencing on Tuesday, April 8 after an opening Court session the day before, the case by the Citizen Prosecutor’s Office presented evidence directly linking all three chief defendants with the planning and execution of child trafficking networks within the Roman Catholic and Anglican churches, and with the practice and concealment of the ritual rape, torture and killing of children.

Along with considerable documentation, the Prosecutor introduced notarized affidavit statements from eight eyewitnesses to these crimes, including videotaped interviews with two adolescent women who claim to have been tortured and raped by chief defendant Jorge Bergoglio, alias “Pope Francis”, during the spring of 2009 and 2010, at horrific cult functions connected to the “Ninth Circle” child sacrifice network.

“Survivors of these rituals describe newborn babies being chopped to pieces on stone altars, and their remains were then consumed by the participants” described the Chief Prosecutor to the Court.

“The survivors during the 1960′s period were forced to rape and mutilate other children, and then cut their throats with ceremonial daggers. Former Pope Benedict, Joseph Ratzinger, Dutch Cardinal Alfrink, and Prince Bernhard were among the cult participants, according to these survivors. But significantly, the more recent incidents in 2009 and 2010 involved exactly the same kinds of ritualized murder of newborn infants in rural Holland and Belgium.”

Other witnesses described their personal knowledge of efforts by the defendants to conceal the involvement of not only the Catholic and Anglican church, but the British, Belgian and Dutch royal families, in the ritual killing of Mohawk Indian children at the Brantford residential school in Ontario, Canada.

These killings span over seventy years and include the period between 1942 and 1945 when exiled Dutch Queen Wilhemina and her family lived in Canada, and participated in Ninth Circle rituals at the Mohawk Indian school.

Introduced documentation* indicates that, to assist and conceal such involvement of Dutch “royals” in these cult killings, the Canadian government and Privy Council Office in London granted “extra-territorial exemption” to the Dutch royals from all criminal, civil and military jurisdiction while in Canada. (* The Canada Gazette , Issue No. 232, December 26, 1942, Ottawa)

Dutch and Belgian royal participants in the rape and killing of Mohawk children and newborns included Bilderberger founder Crown Prince Bernhard and King Hendrick, consort to Queen Wilhelmina of Holland.

As part of the Prosecutor’s corroborating evidence, secret archives from the Jesuit Order were introduced into the Court record that describe in detail the so-called “Magisterial Privilege” compelling the participation of every new Pope in the Ninth Circle sacrifice of new born children.

The records suggest that the Ninth Circle was established by the Jesuits just prior to their staged “disbandment” in 1773 and their establishment three years later of the so-called Illuminati cult, although references are also made to organized child sacrifice rituals at Catholic cathedrals in Rome as early as the year 1528.

The Chief Prosecutor told the Court,

“These archives clearly indicate a premeditated plan for centuries by the Jesuits to ritually murder kidnapped newborn babies and then consume their blood, born of a twisted notion of deriving spiritual power from the lifeblood of the innocent and thereby assuring the political stability of the Papacy in Rome. Every Pope was expected to and did in fact participate in these monstrous rituals … These acts are not only genocidal but systemic and institutionalized in nature, and indict the Roman Catholic Church and the Jesuits as a whole, and every Pope since at least in the year 1773.”

The same collection of Jesuit archival records make reference to a child sacrificial cult known as The Knights of Darkness, established by the Nazi Waffen S.S. Division in 1933 with Jesuit backing. The archives identify former Pope Benedict, Joseph Ratzinger, as a member of the Knights and as an S.S. Chaplain’s assistant at the Ravensbruck concentration camp in Germany, where he participated in sacrificial rites using children transported to the camp or kidnapped from political prisoners.

The latter practice was a common Jesuit undertaking in Spain, Argentina and other fascist regimes, and one implicating chief defendant Jorge Bergoglio while he was a priest, Bishop and front man for the military junta in Argentina during the 1970′s.

ITCCS Field Secretary Kevin Annett is scheduled to appear as a witness during the second session of the Court commencing Monday, May 5. Annett will provide thorough corroborating evidence and personal testimony to support the Prosecutor’s case and the evidence concerning the Brantford killings, gained over twenty years’ work with residential school survivors in Canada, including during his targeted persecution by church and state. (www,hiddennolonger.com)

Meanwhile, in startling related news, a senior Vatican official initiated a back channel communication with the Court last week in order to offer key evidence to the Prosecutor’s Office concerning its case against the chief defendants.

The Vatican official has requested strict anonymity and security, prompting the Court Magistrates to consider extending the closed sessions of the Court during its next round in May.

Finally, this Easter Sunday, April 20, the Court and its affiliates in twenty one countries will issue a Public Proclamation to be read at Catholic churches in Rome and dozens of other cities.

Rev. Kevin Annett will lead a public ceremony of “Exorcism and Replacement” at a central Catholic facility on that day, and similar ceremonies will be held at the Vatican and at many other catholic churches. Details of the event will be posted this Sunday evening GMT at www.itccs.org .

Stay updated regarding further Court and related news at www.itccs.org and www.iclcj.com .

Issued by The Public Information Agency of The Office of the Citizen Prosecutor.

The International Common Law Court of Justice, Brussels.

There is no German unification/reunification

http://wp.me/p4pQa9-7U

 …without applying the original text of Article 146 GG

It seems most people believe everything they are told, especially when given an extra “holiday,” and they are told by “snob-rule” governing Elites in Berlin and Karlsruhe that “Germany achieved national unity in 1990 by using Article 23 of the Basic Law (Grundgesetz–GG) for the Federal Republic of Germany” without applying Article 146 GG—claimimg “Article 23 GG was the fastest legal way.” But they lie: There was a very different reason why Article 23 GG disappeared, why these “elites” then claimed to “amend” Article 146 GG and the Preamble of this Basic Law, and why they claim “the Basic Law became the constitution.” Read the following and see clearly for yourself that the German people have in fact not “achieved national unity” and that there is instead a stealthy ongoing coup-plot—seeking to abolish the free democratic basic order (existence) of the Federal Republic of Germany and European Union—supplanting this Basic Law and international treaties with a supranational fascist totalitarian regime, (i.e., a fascist totalitarian European community), not unlike the Third Reich.

NOTE: A fascist totalitarian regime is always a group of friends that appoint one another to positions in government, use “government power and authority” to protect themselves from accountability and disrespect human dignity.

In a nutshell, these Elites have been traitorously violating, obfuscating and alienating the rule of law for over 45 years—fraudulently claiming to have “amended” this Basic Law over 65 times (with illegal “legislation/amendments/supplements”), tampering with international treaties and always refusing to relinquish their dictatorial (illegitimate) “authority”.

In 1990 the political and legal Elites of the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG) and the German Democratic Republic (DDR), two states coloquially known as ‘West Germany’ and ‘East Germany,’ discussed the drafting of a constitution to be followed by a plebiscite (a referendum) for “unification” as provided for in Article 146 and Article 20 paragraph 2 of the Basic Law for West Germany.

Article 146 Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany            This Basic Law shall cease to be in force on the day on which a constitution that is adopted by a free decision of the German people [a referendum] comes into force.

Article 20 Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany              (2) All state authority emanates from the people. It shall be exercised by the people by means of elections and other votes [referendums] and by specific legislative, executive and judicial organs.

NOTE: Article 146 GG makes a distinct difference between “this Basic Law” and “a constitution,” (i.e., “this Basic Law” is not “a constitution”), and also makes clear that “this Basic Law “may only be replaced by “a constitution” adopted under the provisions of Article 146 GG and Article 20 paragraph 2 GG. In addition, the requirement in Article 146 GG and Article 20 paragraph 2 GG to adopt a constitution by means of a referendum is one of “the basic principles” of Article 20 GG protected by Article 79 paragraph 3 GG, i.e., the eternity clause.

Traitorous violations of the eternity clause and all of “the basic principles” of Articles 1 and 20 GG

But then Wolfgang Schäubles and other elites in West Germany insisted that the DDR accede to West Germany under Article 23 GG instead of applying Article 146 GG and Article 20 paragraph 2 GG. These Elites coerced the DDR into becoming subject to the authority of the Basic Law for West Germany by claiming “a perceived threat from the Soviet Union,” (i.e., that there was no time to draft and adopt a constitution), and that “the Basic Law had proved to be effective for West Germany.” In speaking of “the Basic Law” these Elites were in fact speaking of their illegal “legislation/amendments/supplements” used to supplant “this Basic Law” as seen in Article 23 GG, Article 79 GG and Article 146 GG. Nevertheless, the result (over 20 years later) is that both the FRG and DDR are today governed by “this Basic Law,” not by a constitution.

NOTE: It could be easily argued that the people of the DDR were defrauded, (as the people of West Germany have been defrauded), i.e., told that they have a Basic Law that guarantees human rights, but they are in fact deprived of their rights.  Their rights are ignored – not enforced – not upheld.

The fact is that the FRG is operated in the same way China is — by a group of friends that dictate to the masses. The FRG “government” may at first glance look sanitary (inside and out), but in reality political and legal Elites in the FRG are as disrespectful of human rights as China’s proletariat and courts are. Obviously, the three organs of the FRG’s “government” (legislative, executive and judiciary) are no longer able to conceal their disrespect for the Republic and human rights, i.e., conceal their violations and alienation of the rule of law.

History of Article 146 GG

The hope and intention of the Parlamentarische Rat (Parliamentary Council) of 1949 was for an ultimate unification of all the post-war provincial German territories by applying Article 146 GG, i.e., “a constitution adopted by a free decision of the German people,” including a free decision by the  German people in the east controlled as part of the Soviet Bloc. It is in fact for this reason that the Parlamentarische Rat did not draft a constitution in 1949, but chose to draft “this provisional (temporary) Basic Law for West Germany,” having the force and effect of constitutional law, but without the formal enactment of a constitution. The temporary purpose (intent) of “this Basic Law” can easily be seen in Article 146 GG, i.e., obviously “this Basic Law” is not “a constitution.” With Article 146 GG the Parlamentarische Rat made very clear that the FRG was not to be a definite state for the German people.

The FRG (West Germany) was provisionally (temporarily) established under “this Basic Law” in 1949 from eleven Länder (federal states) which were at that time occupied by the Western Allies. The Parlamentarische Rat made very clear in Article 23 GG that “this Basic Law” would apply to the eleven Länder listed in Article 23 GG and would also apply “in other parts of Germany” upon  those parts’ “accession” to the FRG. There is no indication in Article 23 GG of any specific “parts of Germany” nor of any number of “parts” fewer than all of post-war Germany’s provincial territories. There is no mention of unification or reunification of Germany, only of “accession” to the FRG, i.e., without the German people in those “parts” participating in the negotiation of “this Basic Law” for the FRG. It is for these reasons that these “elites” quickly claimed to “repeal” Article 23 GG and “amend” Article 146 GG and the Preamble of “this Basic Law.” It is not legal to repeal and amend Articles of “this Basic Law” so as to cover up willful violations of “this Basic Law.” Therefore Article 23 GG is a legal and intrinsic part of “this Basic Law,” not “repealed” as these Elites claim.  Article 23 GG reads as follows:

Article 23 Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany
For the time being, this Basic Law shall apply in the territory of the Länder of Baden, Bavaria, Bremen, Greater Berlin, Hamburg, Hesse, Lower Saxony, North Rhine Westphalia, the Rhineland Palatinate, Schleswig-Holstein, Württemberg-Baden, and Württemberg-Hohenzollern. In other parts of Germany it shall be put into force on their accession.^[1]

What is notably missing from Article 23 GG is a requirement for a decision by the German people. And in fact there is no requirement in Article 23 GG for a decision, none whatsoever, not by means of a referendum nor by any federal legislature. The fact that there is no decision required in Article 23 GG makes it very clear that these “elites” did not have “state authority,” (i.e., the “state authority” of Article 20 paragraph 2 GG), to make a decision that “Germany had achieved national unity.” In fact these Elites have been willfully opposing the mandate of “this Basic Law”—refusing for over two decades to call for a constitutional convention to draft a new constitution (the last one was the Weimer Constitution) for consideration by the German people.

NOTE: The Bundestag (Federal Legislature) is not a constitutional convention and it is only by a constitutional convention that a new constitution can be drafted for consideration by the German people. It was the Bundestag that claimed to “repeal” Article 23 GG and to “amend” Article 146 GG and the Preamble of “this Basic Law,” and in doing claimed that “Germany achieved national unity” without applying Article 146 GG—traitorously violating the mandate of “this Basic Law.” The claim to have “repealed” Article 23 GG and “amended” Article 146 GG was not the drafting of a new constitution, but willful violations of the rule of law—willfully violating domestic and international law. The fact is that a decision for post-war Germany’s unification is for the German people to decide “by means of” a constitutional convention and a referendum, not by these political and legal Elites.

And in fact, these Elites knew in 1990 that Article 23 GG was intended by the Parlamentarische Rat (Parliamentary Council) in 1949 only for “accession” to the FRG under the temporary “Basic Law.” These Elites knew full and well in 1990 that the “accession” of the DDR to the FRG was only to temporarily subject the German people from the DDR to the authority of “this Basic Law,” i.e., until Article 146 GG was applied. For example, when the Saar Protectorate in 1957 declared its “accession” to the FRG, as provided for by Article 23 GG, no drafting of a constitution or achievement of Germany’s unification had been discussed. It had only been agreed that the Saar Protectorate would become the twelfth Länder of the FRG  (West Germany), and thus become subject to the authority of the temporary Basic Law for the FRG.

NOTE: The Saar area had been included within the First French Empire as the “département Sarre“ between 1798 and 1814, and (after much manipulation by Hitler) acceded to the Third Reich in 1937 without having taken part in the negotiation of the Weimer Constitution of 1919. In the same way, the people of the Saar Protectorate and the DDR did not take part in the negotiation of the Basic Law for the FRG in 1949. The people of the DDR were not even afforded a referendum for “accession” to the FRG as the people of the Saar Protectorate were in 1957. The “accession” of the DDR to the FRG with the claim of “a perceived threat from the Soviet Union” amounts to nothing more than a selfish grab, including by Elites from the DDR, not for “unification” or “reunification,” but for themselves, i.e., these Elites today prefer claiming their permanence of this provisional (temporary) Basic Law.The facts are that the people of East Germany did not take part in the negotiation of the Basic Law for West Germany (‘FRG), and that Germany will not achieve unity as a nation until “a constitution adopted by a free decision of the German people [referendum] comes into force.” It was very clear in 1990 when reading Article 146 GG and Article 20 paragraph 2 GG in that the only provision in “this Basic Law” for German unification was in applying Article 146 GG and it was for this reason that the “elites” (in both the FRG and DDR) were at first discussing the drafting of a constitution in accordance with Article 146 GG and Article 20 paragraph 2 GG. They knew this was the only legal way.

There is nothing in Article 23 GG that permitted state authority, after the “accession” of the DDR to the FRG, to declare in 1994 that “On 3 October 1990 Germany achieved national unity.” Besides, there are still provincial post-war territories that the Parlamentarische Rat intended for “accession” to the FRG and to then be included in unification under “a constitution” enacted by means of Article 146 GG and Article 20 paragraph 2 GG. There is no number of “parts of Germany” identified in Article 23 GG which permits these Elites to declare that “Germany achieved national unity.” In fact, West Germany is united as a nation, but not post-war Germany, nor a new form of Germany.

“Accession” of the Saar Protectorate to West Germany in 1957 did not achieve “national unity” nor is any “accession” of a part of former Germany a legal basis to declare that “the Basic Law became the constitution.” There is nothing in Article 23 GG or anywhere else in “this Basic Law” which speaks of or implies that with the “accession” of post-war provincial territories that “Germany achieved national unity” and that “the Basic Law became the constitution.” That is because the only provision for a constitution and Germany’s unification is in the original text of Article 146 GG. There was in 1990 and is today no other provision in “this Basic Law” to adopt a constitution, nevertheless these political and legal Elites, beginning with President Roman Herzog in 1994, have been fraudulently claiming that “the Basic Law became the constitution.”

NOTE: President Herzog was in the executive organ (branch of government) and was, therefore, not permitted by “this Basic Law” to make legislation, nor was he permitted to pass an executive or administrative order that opposes the mandate of “this Basic Law”. But President Herzog nevertheless  stated three times within the “foreward” published in 1994 that “this Basic Law the constitution,” and he did so after Elites claimed to “repeal” Article 23 GG and “amend” Article 146 GG and the Preamble of “this Basic Law.” President Herzog also did so without a complaint being made by other Elites. Their fraudulent “foreward” reads as follows:

“Foreward by the Federal President:

On 3 October 1990 Germany achieved national unity. By virtue of a sovereign, conscious decision of the people, the Basic Law became the constitution for the whole nation. The successful democratic revolution in the former German Democratic Republic had achieved its goals: human dignity, civil rights, fundamental freedoms and democracy for the entire German people in a society based on the rule of law tempered by social justice. 

We overcame the division of Germany within the wider framework of a radical transformation in Europe. The creation of the European Union entails new challenges and opportunities for us all. Both our country’s increasing integration and the completion of its national unity were bound to have repercussions on our constitutional law. The fact that only adjustments were necessary attests to the Basic Law’s excellent quality as the foundation of our polity from its inception. Its liberal, democratic, federal and welfare elements enabled our country to acquire economic prosperity and social security while maintaining internal stability.

The constitution can only set the standards and provide a framework of law and order. It cannot solve specific problems directly. If it is not to be rendered insignificant it must remain committed to fundamental principles.

The Basic Law has proved its worth. It is the most liberal constitution the Germans have ever had and has served as a model for many other democratic constitutions. We Germans have every reason to be proud of our Basic Law and to defend it to the best of our ability.

Bonn, November 1994
Roman Herzog”

“This Basic Law” is the formal rule of law for the Federal Republic of Germany, and the only other republic the German people have ever had was the pre-Nazi Republic established in the Weimer Constitution of 1919. The Weimer Constitution was the only and last constitutional republic of the German people. There has been no other republican constitution, and the vast majority of the German people today do not know that the snob-rule Elites in Berlin and Karlsruhe, (that claim their use of Article 23 GG and illegal “amendments” to “this Basic Law” have converted “this Basic Law” into “the constitution”), are fraudulently claiming “authority”—acting arbitrarily (illegitimately)—moving against the rule of law—surreptitiously blocking the drafting and adoption of a new constitution in favor of their corrupted law—corrupting the formal identity of the German people.

You will notice when reading the claimed “amendments” of Article 146 GG and the Preamble of “this Basic Law” below that neither of these two texts claim that “this Basic Law” is now “the constitution,” as President Roman Herzog claimed three times in his “forward” in 1994. President Herzog’s “foreward” is in fact utterly false. The claimed “amendment“ of Article 146 GG reads as follows. The added part is bolded:

Article 146                                                                                                                                    “This Basic Law, which since the achievement of the unity and freedom of Germany applies to the entire German people, shall cease to apply on the day on which a constitution freely adopted by the German people takes effect.”

This claimed “amendment” above does not claim or imply that “this Basic Law” is a constitution. In fact, nowhere in “this Basic Law,” including in the original Preamble and claimed “amendment” of the Preamble does it say or imply that “this Basic Law” is a constitution. The claimed “amendment” of the Preamble in 1990 is as follows, deleted parts stricken, added parts are bolded:

“Conscious of their responsibility before God and man,

animated by the will to preserve its national and governmental unity and to serve the peace of the world as an equal member of a united Europe, the German people

in the states of Baden-Württemberg, Bayern, Berlin, BrandenburgMecklenburg-Vorpommern, Niedersachsen, Nordrhein-Westfalen, Rheinland-Pfalz, Saarland, Sachsen, Sachsen-Anhalt, Schleswig-Holstein, Württemberg-Baden, and Württemberg-Hohenzollern, and Thüringen,

has by virtue of its constituent power resolved on given itself this Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany

so as to give governmental life a new order for a transitional period. It has also acted for those Germans to whom participation was denied. The whole German people remains challenged to complete the unity and freedom of Germany in free self-determination.

This Basic Law thereby applies to the whole German people.“

In what appears to be yet another version of the Preamble published by the Bundestag on the internet (see below) it says that “Germans have achieved the unity and freedom of Germany in free self-determination” and that “this Basic Law thus applies to the entire German people.” Notice that there is no claim in the “Preamble” below that “the Basic Law became the constitution,” as claimed in their “foreward” today.

“Conscious of their responsibility before God and man,
Inspired by the determination to promote world peace as an equal partner in a united Europe, the German people, in the exercise of their constituent power, have adopted this Basic Law. Germans in the Länder of Baden-Württemberg, Bavaria, Berlin, Brandenburg, Bremen, Hamburg, Hesse, Lower Saxony, Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, North Rhine-Westphalia, Rhineland-Palatinate, Saarland, Saxony, Saxony-Anhalt, Schleswig-Holstein and Thuringia have achieved the unity and freedom of Germany in free self-determination. This Basic Law thus applies to the entire German people.”

The text of the Preamble after the “accession” of the Saarland in 1957 reads as follows, and as you can see it does not claim that “Germany achieved national unity.” Also, the text of the Preamble below acknowledges that the German people in the DDR and other post-war provincial territories east  of the DDR had not participated in the negotiation of “this Basic Law.” It is precisely for this reason that the Parlamentarische Rat specifically required the application of Article 146 GG for an ultimate unification/reunification of Germany.

Preamble after “accession” of the Saarland Protectorate to the Federal Republic of Germany in 1957

NOTE: “Accession” under Article 23 GG was not a prerequisite for unification, but a provision for post-war territories to accede to the FRG while waiting for unification by means of formally adopting a constitution under Article 146 GG.

These Elites also claim that Article 23 GG was “repealed” and that Article 146 and the Preamble of “this Basic Law” were “amended” to placate the Soviet Union and Poland regarding their claims to lands east of the DDR that had been ceeded by the Western Allies to Russia and Poland in the Potsdam Agreement. In other words, these Elites claim that they sacrificed, (i.e., cut off), all of the Weimer Germany post-war provincial territories east of the DDR to assure that the Soviet Union and Poland would not interfere in the DDR’s “accession” to the FRG. By claiming to “amend” Article 146 GG and the Preamble of “this Basic Law” these Elites in fact illegally informed the Soviet Union and Poland that there would be no more claims to post-war lands east of the DDR—cuting off 23.8% of the former Weimer Republic’s lands—willfully violating the mandate of “this Basic Law”.

Cutting off these post-war provincial territories by claiming to “amend” Article 146 and the Preamble of “this Basic Law” so that West Germany could acquire East Germany, (i.e., claiming that they had “achieved the unity and freedom of Germany in free self-determination”), was unlawful. By doing so these Elites willfully violated the intent of the Parlamentarische Rat seen in the original text of Article 146 GG (above), which requires “a constitution adopted by a free decision of the German people,” a decision to be made with a plebiscite (referendum), including affording Germans who have a lawful claim to land occupied by Russia and Poland to participate (vote) in the decision. These political and legal Elites will tell you that it was a compromise that they had to make hastily and that they did so for the “entire German people” and with the authority of “the German people.” But that simply is not true. As written at the beginning of this post, there is a very different reason (a very sinister reason) why the German people have not been afforded opportunity to adopt a constitution in accordance with Article 20 paragraph 2 GG and Article 146 GG.

This post is in progress. Please check back for additional content.

Judges in the Bundesverfassungssgericht (Federal Constitutional Court) for the first time ….. 2004 …..  (Basic Law ……. constitution)

And these traitorous violations of Article 20 paragraph (3) GG and Article 146 GG are only the tip of the iceberg, so to speak. There are numerous willful violations of “this Basic Law” being committed (beginning long before 1990 and ever increasing), arbitrary actions which thoroughly expose the criminal nature of the political and legal Elites in Berlin and Karlsruhe.

Related articles

• Democracy, East Germany and the Berlin Wall (prolecenter.wordpress.com)
• Germany’s New Dictator, Angela Merkel? (lynleahz.com)
• ProSyn: Judgment Day for the Eurozone – (foreignpolicyreview.org)

CBR – is the separation of the U.S. Federal Reserve

ЦБ РФ – это отделение ФРС США

 

 

Шок! ФРС США на 88,8% принадлежит России в лице Николая II

The Unknown History : The creation of the FED is something very Russian instruments . The 88.8 % of the original gold deposited by Tsar Nicholas II Romanov All Russia .

This has to do with the attempted murder of each member of the imperial family of financiers and the Bolsheviks imposed communist dictatorship.

What is , however, failed to exterminate every member of the Romanov family , and had , has and will have implications on the international political and economic reality .

Unknown facts about Imperial Russia : THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM OF U.S. created with money from Russia – TSAROS Nikolaos II.

 

http://ru-an.info/news_sys.php

Gründung der Exilregierung des DEUTSCHEN REICHES

—–
Gründung der Exilregierung
des DEUTSCHEN REICHES
am 8. Mai 2004
im Parkhotel Kronsberg Gut Kronsberg 1
W-3000 (30539) Hannover
– Beginn 19.00 Uhr –
In der Überzeugung,
– Protokoll – Gründung der Exil-Regierung

daß vor Ablauf von 60 Jahren, gerechnet vom 8. Mai 1945, dem Tag der Kapitulation der Deutschen Wehrmacht, mit den einstigen Kriegsgegnern, den Allierten, ein Friedensvertrag geschlossen werden sollte, kamen heute – am 8. Mai 2004 – Staatsbürger des DEUTSCHEN REICHES zusammen, um als rechtsfähige Verhandlungspartner die Exil-Regierung DEUTSCHES REICH

 
—————————————————————————————————–
ΙΔΡΥΣΗ ΤΗΣ ΕΞΟΡΙΣΤΗΣ ΚΥΒΕΡΝΗΣΗΣ
ΤΗΣ ΓΕΡΜΑΝΙΚΗΣ ΑΥΤΟΚΡΑΤΟΡΙΑΣ
ΣΤΙΣ 8 ΜΑΪΟΥ 2004
ΣΤΟ PARK HOTEL HANNOVER GUT KRONBERG 1
W-3000(30539) ANOBER
– Εναρξη 19:00 Ωρα
-Πρωτόκολλο – ίδρυσης της Εξόριστης Κυβέρνησης
Πεπισμένοι
ότι πριν από το τέλος των 60 ετών, που υπολογίζεται στις 8 Μαΐου 1945 την ημέρα της παράδοσης της γερμανικής Βέρμαχτ, με τους πρώην εχθρούς του πολέμου,τους Συμμάχους, θα έπρεπε να έχει συναφτεί μία Συνθήκη Ειρήνης, σήμερα φτάσαμε – στις 8 Μαίου 2004- οι πολίτες του DEUTSHE REICH ορίζουν νομικό Διαπραγματευτή την Εξόριστη Κυβέρνηση του DEUTSHES REICH.

θυρεός και σημαία του DEUTSHE REICH

 

Prophet or Profit?

Nikola Tesla’s Vision vs J.P. Morgan’s Greed

New original art by Abel, published on Earth Day, 2014

Around 1900 the basic framework was being put in place for the industrial architecture that still shapes many aspects of our global civilization. Nikola Tesla, a Serbian immigrant who settled in New York City, was by far the most brilliant of the inventors to emerge at a time when it was possible to conceive and apply whole new complexes of technology on rapidly expanding frontiers of science.

Tesla worked with George Westinghouse on Alternating Currents, AC. Their endeavors along these lines far outpaced the development of Direct Current, DC, by Thomas Edison and his General Electric Company. After winning the contract to electrify the lighting system at the World’s Columbian Exposition in Chicago in 1893, Tesla’s AC system was quickly adopted as the standard for electric utilities first in the United States and then throughout the world.

Fossil fuel magnet, John D. Rockefeller, reacted to the growing popularity of electric illumination, which preempted the oil-based technology of kerosene lamps, by backing Henry Ford’s motor car company. Ford’s Detroit-based enterprise would help entrench the gas-guzzling internal combustion engine as the primary medium of ground transport. Rockefeller backed Ford because he feared Tesla was about to limit the scale of the fossil fuel industry by mapping out a way to manufacture and propel cheap electric cars.

Beginning with the construction in 1894 of power stations run by the descending waters at Niagara Falls, Tesla and Westinghouse entrenched their system for generating, transporting, and using huge amounts of AC electricity. At age 38 Tesla was just beginning the most fruitful part of his career in applying breakthroughs in science, including some of his own discoveries, to the development of paradigm-shifting technologies.

In his legendary public presentations Tesla introduced many new theories, including those that enabled him to display dramatically wireless systems of electric lighting.

For a time many of the leading financiers of the day vied with one another to invest in Tesla’s projects. Eventually the most important US banker of his generation, J.P. Morgan, became Tesla’s exclusive backer during the period when he experimented most actively using the earth itself rather than wires for conducting electrical current.

First at Colorado Springs and then with his Wardenclyffe installation on Long Island New York, Tesla worked on ways for drawing electricity from the ionosphere, the earth’s outer atmosphere. He combined his work on tapping naturally-occurring systems of electrical interaction with wireless means for communicating text, pictures, and sound.

Morgan is said to have turned against Tesla’s work when he realized the scale of its revolutionary implications. The financier, who was a conduit between the Rothschild banking family’s European and American interests, complained famously that Tesla’s technological innovations were problematic because it was not clear how meters could be imposed for the buying and selling of energy.

Morgan could easily see that Tesla’s main motivation was not to make money. Rather it was to emancipate humanity with new forms of technology that would liberate people from darkness, drudgery, and various forms of top-down oppression. Neither Morgan nor the class he represented shared Tesla’s goal of conducting research and development to make life easier and better in ways that operate within, rather than against, prevailing patterns of nature, including what is best in human nature.

Tesla suffered a nervous breakdown after 1904 when Morgan betrayed him. Tesla’s famous tower and laboratory at Wardenclyffe were subsequently destroyed even as Morgan placed many obstacles in the way of the inventor’s ability to gain backing from other financiers.

The next four decades of Tesla’s life remain shrouded in mystery. Some believe that Tesla fully recovered and returned to his work covertly with a new set of secret collaborators. Some believe his secret inventions include devices for teleportation and communication with other life forms in the universe. Whatever transpired, the FBI intervened to seize his papers and prototypes when Tesla died penniless in New York in 1943.

There is good reason to believe that to this day the US military continues to exploit Tesla’s inventions and theories in ways that directly violate the animating philosophy of the person who was, perhaps, the most gifted and enlightened inventor ever given to humankind.

One of the best examples of such a military abomination is HAARP, the High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program based in Alaska. Rather than following through with Tesla’s  goal of deriving electric power from the ionosphere to provide humanity with free energy, HAARP has become a vehicle to advance the goal of what the US Armed Forces has described as “full-spectrum dominance.”

Among those systems of electromagnetic warfare being developed by HAARP’s technologists are, quite likely, devices to assist in the geo-engineering of weather patterns and the targeted generation of earthquakes. Such hostile interventions in the harmonious workings of nature run against everything that Tesla stood for.

Looking back it seems clear that humanity was forced in the early 1900s into a very wrong turn when it came to establishing the basis for systems to generate, transform, and use energy. While his early innovations were adopted as the basis of AC systems of global electrification, Tesla’s most advanced theories and inventions were eschewed in order to keep the way open for further development of less sophisticated but more profitable means of running the engines of commerce.

The consequences of our wrong turn in the early 1900s are showing up in the grotesque obscenities entailed in the derivation of energy from ecologically-disastrous activities like fracking and mining the Alberta Tar Sands. Most illustrative of the the utter insanity of the energy business as presently constituted is the slow motion holocaust of radioactive contamination being spewed into earth, air and ocean at Fukushima. This global disaster is still in its infancy.

Much depends on revisiting the wrong turn forced on humanity during the early years of the twentieth century. We still have it in our power to return to Nikola Tesla’s vision of a global political economy of peace, harmony and equity. How many other inventors after Tesla have seen their offerings of emancipatory technology spurned and repressed because of obstructions thrown up by vested interest hostile any progressive changes that might negatively affect the bottom line?

We still have it in our collective power to turn away from the vision of for-profit energy historically promoted by the likes of Morgan, the Rothschilds, Rockefeller, Edison and Ford.

Transcript of 1944 Bretton Woods Conference Found at Treasury

Associated Press

Acting Secretary of State Dean Acheson, standing at center, and representatives of 28 Allied nations met in Washington in 1945 to sign the pact reached at the Bretton Woods conference.

By ANNIE LOWREY

WASHINGTON — A Treasury economist rummaging in the department’s library has stumbled on a historical treasure hiding in plain sight: a transcript of the Bretton Woods conference in 1944 that cast the foundations of the modern international monetary system.

Historians had never known that a transcript existed for the event held in the heat of World War II, when delegates from 44 allied nations fighting Hitler gathered in the mountains of New Hampshire to create the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. But there were three copies in archives and libraries around Washington that had never been made public, until now.

“It’s as if someone handed us Madison’s notes on the debate over the Constitution,” said Eric Rauchway, a historian the University of California, Davis.

Economic historians who have viewed the transcript say it adds color and detail to the historical record, an already thick one given the many contemporaneous and subsequent accounts of Bretton Woods. The transcript seems to contain no great surprises, but it sheds light on the intense debates as the war raged abroad.

It depicts John Maynard Keynes, the British economist, hurrying to marshal support for the broad agreements on international finance. It underscores the tremendous power then wielded by Britain and, especially, the United States. It also shows the seeds of contemporary disputes being sown.

For instance, seven decades ago, a number of poorer or smaller countries were protesting their International Monetary Fund quotas, which determine power in the fund. Many of those countries, including China and India, are still pushing for more influence today.

In one section of the transcript, an American representative lays out a proposal for apportioning power in the fund and underscores what was at stake, with the war coming to its bloody climax in Europe.

“We fight together on sodden battlefields. We sail together on the majestic blue. We fly together in the ethereal sky,” said Fred M. Vinson, who later became chief justice of the United States. “The test of this conference is whether we can walk together, solve our economic problems, down the road to peace as we today march to victory.”

But the response was not one of absolute unity.

“In spite of the very eloquent and moving speech of the United States delegate, on behalf of the Iranian delegation I wish to state that the quota proposed for my country is entirely unsatisfactory,” a delegate from Tehran responded.

Then, a delegate from China added: “I hesitate greatly to sound a note of discord at this conference. It has been the effort of the Chinese delegation to promote harmony and the success of this great common enterprise. But every delegation has its difficulties.”

The Netherlands, Greece, Australia, India, Yugoslavia, New Zealand, France, Ethiopia, Norway and Britain then added their comments and objections. “I think that a lot of people have thought of Bretton Woods as being a stitch-up job between United Kingdom and the United States,” Mr. Rauchway said. “But that’s overstated, and it’s definitely visible in this transcript. You can see the poorer countries fighting their own corner.”

Kurt Schuler a Treasury Department economist, was browsing in an “out of the way” section of uncataloged material in the library two years ago when he came across the Bretton Woods document. He flipped through and saw some remarks by Keynes that he was not familiar with, sort of the economists’ equivalent of a Bob Dylan fan finding unknown lyrics.

“I checked them against Keynes’s collected works,” Mr. Schuler said. “And I knew I had something.”

His research revealed that there were three copies of the transcript that scores of economic historians were not aware of: the version at the Treasury Department; one in the National Archives; and the third in the International Monetary Fund archives.

In his spare time, Mr. Schuler set about turning the yellowed transcript into a book, with a co-editor, Andrew Rosenberg. It took a tremendous amount of work, Mr. Schuler said. They read the transcript aloud into transcription software. They added hyperlinks to documents referenced at the conference, and wrote summaries, annotations and historical notes.

This week, the polished transcript was published as an 800-page e-book by the Center for Financial Stability, a nonprofit group based in New York that researches financial markets, where Mr. Schuler is a senior fellow and Mr. Rosenberg a research associate.

“Everyone thinks they know what happened at Bretton Woods, but what they know has been filtered by generations of historical accounts,” Barry Eichengreen, a professor or economics and political science at the University of California, Berkeley, said in a statement. “International monetary history will never be the same.”

The transcript provides “insight in how it was that they were able to maintain a pace of work which allowed them to reach two really big agreements, on the I.M.F. and the World Bank, within a space of three weeks,” Mr. Schuler said. “Keynes was something of a task master,” he added.

Benn Steil, a senior fellow and director of international economics at the Council on Foreign Relations, said readers can see the British Empire “disintegrating before your eyes,” in the transcript. “The Indians are so vociferous that the British are ripping them off. The British are both furious and mortified that their colony would do this to them,” he said, describing a dispute over debts with the colonies.

“Bretton Woods was itself 95 percent Kabuki theater,” he said. “But it’s interesting Kabuki theater.”

 

George Papandreou interviewed on BBC by Andrew Marr

SHOCK! U.S. Federal Reserve secretly gave $ 7.7 trillion. U.S. banks before the crisis of 2008

SHOCK! U.S. Federal Reserve secretly gave $ 7.7 trillion. U.S. banks before the crisis of 2008

Published on Jun 22, 2013
While in the U.S. Congress considered every dollar the Fed just printed $ 7.7 trillion. and gave the banks in the form of loan bezprotsentnogo.
Thereby the Fed once again showed who really controls the U.S..
taken on channel Novosti novostey http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w0MPnX …

Why silent Nemtsov?

Where angry voice A.Navalnogo?

Why not clams L.Ponomarev, A.Podrabinek and L.Alekseeva?

What “Seated Russian” lurking? Where, finally, of protest against the persecutors Snowden from the “Helsinki Group”, “Amnesty International”, “Transparency International-Russia” and other “Doctors Without Borders”?

Yes, and “World Wildlife Fund”, “Greenpeace” and forgive me, the LGBT community could also speak. Cho they are silent, then?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqPo4TSi_1w