Archive for July, 2013

Sodium Benzoate


I have a challenge for all of you today! That challenge is to rid your pantry and refrigerator of Sodium Benzoate. This chemical preservative is used to help inhibit the growth of bacteria and fungus in acidic products. It’s the cheapest mold inhibiter on the market, which is why it is so often used. Acidic foods tend to grow bacteria, mold and yeast more easily than non-acidic foods, so the Sodium Benzoate extends the shelf life. It is widely used in foods, beverages, cosmetics, dental care products, and pharmaceuticals. I even found it in Hyland’s Homeopathic Cough syrup. It is also found in a lot of food in restaurants. For example, Subway’s jalapeños, pickles, banana peppers and teriyaki glaze use Sodium Benzoate as a preservative.

Sodium Benzoate

Sodium benzoate is considerably more toxic than either processed sugar or high fructose corn syrup. It may exacerbate asthma, hyperactive behavior (when consumed in products with certain food colorings), and cause skin rash upon contact. A study in 2007 indicated that it may cause serious cell damage associated with cirrhosis of the liver, aging, and Parkinson’s disease. In animal studies, there are reports of possible weight gain, liver and kidney issues, and birth defects. (Source)

This ingredient has been linked with creating free radicals in the body, destorying mitochondrial DNA, and thus adding to the body’s aging process. Readily absorbed by the skin, Sodium Benzoate’s presence in anti-aging products may, ironically, actually age you faster, by damaging your DNA.

Sodium benzoate has been linked to cancer, but is not known to be carcinogenic on its own.  There have been concerns by the FDA that when both vitamin C (ascorbic acid) and sodium benzoate are mixed, they form benzene, a known human carcinogen and DNA damager. This creates a serious concern, because sodium benzoate is commonly used in acidic foods with vitamin C, such as juices, sodas and salad dressings. The FDA says it’s safe because the amount used to preserve foods is very low, but don’t ever combine it with vitamin C, as this causes benzene to be formed.

Outside of our foods, benzene is the main ingredient in various paint stripper products, rubber cements, and spot removers, due it its highly destructive and solvent qualities. It was discontinued in rubber manufacture in the U.S. because it caused large percentages of workers to get leukemia. (Source)

When reading your labels to confirm if Vitamin C is in the product, look for any of these names: Ascorbic Acid, Acide Ascorbique, Acide Cévitamique, Acide Iso-Ascorbique, Acide L-Ascorbique, Acido Ascorbico, Antiscorbutic Vitamin, Ascorbate, Ascorbate de Calcium, Ascorbate de Sodium, Ascorbyl Palmitate, Calcium Ascorbate, Cevitamic Acid, Iso-Ascorbic Acid, L-Ascorbic Acid, Magnesium Ascorbate, Palmitate d’Ascorbyl, Selenium Ascorbate, Sodium Ascorbate, Vitamina C, Vitamine Antiscorbutique, Vitamine C.

Cancer is all about the cumulative effect. When the human body is exposed repeatedly to any level of this carcinogen, which is found in thousands of products, the immune system, over time, is depleted to the point that one acquires an immune deficiency. Then the body does not have enough essential nutrients to detoxify, and this occurs at the cellular level. Parkinson’s, neuro-degenerative diseases, and premature aging have all been attributed to this infamous preservative. – Natural News

When going through your pantry look closely at the labels for:

  • Vinegar (salad dressings, pickled foods)
  • Carbonic acid (carbonated drinks)
  • Citric acid (jams, fruit juices, cough syrups, baby wipes, liquid hand soaps)
  • Alcohol (alcohol-based mouthwash)
  • Other high acids (soy sauce, Chinese food sauces)

We found replacements for many of the products in our pantry/refrigerator that contained Sodium Benzoate. Read about them here.- below

This was somewhat of a drastic week. I spent a good part of the day going through our pantry and refrigerator reading every label and discarding products containing preservatives, refined oils and sugars. This may sound wasteful, but a lot of the condiments in the refrigerator were actually expired anyways Innocent. A lot of the canned food and boxed food that was not expired was donated to food banks over the holidays. Once you go through this activity you will be shocked at how many products contain Sodium Benzoate and how many creams and alternative milks contain Carrageenan.

We went FROM –> TO:

1. Soy Sauce –> Coconut Aminos

Coconut Aminos is a healthy alternative to Soy and Tamari sauce. No table salt or preservatives are added — soy sauce contains sodium benzoate. (Soy sauces contains soybeans and 91 percent of soy crops are genetically modified.) The most notable nutritional benefit is the amino acid content compared to soy-sased sauces — commonly described as the building blocks of protein.

Although it’s often lauded as a healthy, cholesterol-free, cheap, low-fat protein alternative to meat, soy is NOT a health food. Any foods that list soy in any form as an ingredient should be avoided. Soy protein, soy isolate, and soy oil are present in about 60 percent of the foods on the market and have been shown to impair fertility and affect estrogen in women, lower sex drive, and trigger puberty early in children. Soy can also add to the imbalance between omega-6 and omega-3 fatty acids. The only soy products fit for human consumption are fermented and organic and you will never find this type of soy in any processed foods.

2. Pancake Syrup –> Pure Maple Syrup, Organic Grade A or 100% Pure Organic Maple Syrup, Grade B

I was shocked when I realized my pancake syrup contained Sodium Benzoate, and most of them do.

There are two varieties of maple syrup to choose from, USDA Grade A and Grade B. Grade A is the most popular, with a light maple flavor and a relatively thin consistency. It’s a good choice for pancakes, and can make a great topping for desserts and other foods.

Grade B maple syrup is much darker and has a stronger flavor. It also is a bit thicker, tending towards the consistency of pancake syrup rather than the runnier Grade A. Grade B is often recommended for baking because its stronger flavor comes through more readily, but it can be a better choice for pancakes or waffles than Grade A if you are a fan of the flavor of maple in general. The two are interchangeable as far as what will work in a recipe that calls for maple syrup. Grade C maple syrup, it is now called Grade B. Thus, Grade B & C are the same.

3. Ketchup –> Organic Ketchup

4. Pickles –> Organic Pickels

Most pickles contain Sodium Benzoate. We find the organic ones in the organic section of our grocery store. If you shop at Wegman’s they can be found in the organic section near the salad dressings.

5. Salad Dressings –> Homemade or Bragg’s Ginger & Sesame Salad Dressing are good choices.

Most salad dressings, even the organic ones, contain canola oil. Over-consumption of oils like canola cause an abundance of Omega 6 fatty acids — this imbalance increases the risk of inflammation, heart disease, obesity, and prostate and bone cancer. Further, 75 percent of canola crops are genetically modified. If you do purchase salad dressing, you want to make sure it contains ONLY olive oil and not a combination of olive oil and other oils (i.e. canola, vegetable, soybean, etc.).

Our pantry now consists of the following:

  • Coconut Milk
  • Organic Diced Tomatoes
  • Organic Tomato Paste
  • Organic Chicken Broth
  • Coconut Flakes
  • Coconut Flour
  • Almond Flour
  • Arrowroot Flour
  • Raw Almond
  • Raw Pecans
  • Raw Walnuts
  • Hazelnuts
  • Macadamia Nuts
  • Brazil Nuts
  • Pine Nuts
  • Pistachios
  • Pumpkin Seeds
  • Sesame Seeds
  • Almond Butter
  • Grass-fed Beef Jerky
  • Canned Wild-Caught Salm0n
  • Canned Wild-Caught Tuna
  • Olives
  • Artichoke Hearts
  • Dried Unsweetened Fruit
  • Extra-Virgin Olive Oil
  • Coconut Oil
  • Sun-Dried Tomatoes
  • Tons of Spices

Our refrigerator consists of the following with fruit varying through the seasons:

  • Free Range Eggs
  • Grass-Fed Ground Beef
  • Organic Chicken
  • Organic Deli Meat
  • Organic Bacon
  • Organic Mustard
  • Salsa
  • Veganaise
  • Sriracha Hot Sauce
  • Broccoli
  • Spinach
  • Kale
  • Carrots
  • Cucumbers
  • Organic Lettuce Mix
  • Romaine
  • Onions
  • Garlic
  • Organic Apples
  • Organic Blueberries
  • Organic Limes
  • Organic Lemons
  • Organic Pears
  • Organic Grapes
  • Kiwi


Militarized police gone wild across America

Terrorizing citizens, shooting pet dogs, behaving like occupying military force

Mike Adams
Natural News
July 6, 2013
America is rapidly devolving into the oppressive police state we’ve been warning readers about. Right now, cops are exhibiting thuggish, out-of-control “mafia” behavior as they run loose across America, terrorizing innocent citizens, shooting up the vehicles of people who are merely driving cars on public roadways, taking warrantless blood draws from drivers, shooting pet dogs of people who are merely filming police, raiding farmers at gunpoint over raw milk and terrorizing young women for buying bottled water and cookie dough.

All of these are real and happening right now in America. The cause behind them? Police are being “militarized” through federal training while being given weapons of war through federal grants. Police departments across the country are now being handed armored assault vehicles, surveillance drones and full-auto assault rifles. Along with this equipment comes a training and engagement posture that is increasingly aggressive and militaristic, subjecting more and more Americans to the kind of “theater of war” engagement tactics that the U.S. military would typically use at a roadblock in Afghanistan, for example. (See latest example, below.)

Military tactics and equipment now used by your local police

“In recent years, police departments have widely adopted military tactics, military equipment (armored personnel carriers, flash-bang grenades) — and, sometimes, the mindset of military conquerors rather than domestic peacekeepers,” writes

President Obama famously said, during the gun control debate of 2012, that, “AK-47s belong in the hands of soldiers, not on the streets of America.” Yet it is his administration that’s putting weapons of war on the streets of America via local police departments. By arming police and training police in the hardware and tactics of military warfare, the Obama administrations is doing an end-run around Posse Comitatus and effectively putting wartime troops on the streets of America.

As part of all this, federal law enforcement have been training with so-called “no hesitation targets” that train them to instinctively shoot pregnant women, children, young moms and old men. These targets — whose existence was first denied, and then downplayed when the denials didn’t work — offer irrefutable proof that the corrupt, criminal government currently running the USA is actively planning to engage women, children and senior citizens with weapons of war.

This is, of course, on top of the long-confirmed two billion rounds of ammunition the Department of Homeland Security has ordered (and partially acquired) in an attempt to stockpile enough ammunition for a twenty-year war with the American people. Once again, this stockpiling of hollow-point ammo by DHS was first denied, then downplayed, and now has been called a “conspiracy theory” even thought it is confirmed by the federal government iself which says it needs the ammo for “training purposes.”

The IRS is now being trained with AR-15 rifles, and DHS has also purchased thousands of armored assault vehicles that are mine resistant and bulletproof.

Meanwhile, the Boston marathon bombing proved that local police will now act completely outside of law and initiate Martial Law in a manhunt for a teenager. It wasn’t declared Martial Law, of course… it was called “shelter in place,” meaning you could not leave your homes. Once the lockdown was in place, Boston police went door to door, yanking citizens out of their homes at gunpoint, screaming at them to put their hands up or be shot on sight. This was all done completely without any warrant or any suspicion of wrongdoing on the part of homeowners.

It later turned out that the entire Boston marathon bombing was meticulously planned in advanced by the Boston police and was run as a “terror drill” to terrorize Boston and give the police some much-needed practice in running a police state oppression scenario. This is all 100% confirmed and openly admitted. Even the Boston Globe reported, on June 8th:

The scenario had been carefully planned: A terrorist group prepared to hurt vast numbers of people around Boston would leave backpacks filled with explosives at Faneuil Hall, the Seaport District, and in other towns, spreading waves of panic and fear. Detectives would have to catch the culprits. … But two months before the training exercise was to take place, the city was hit with a real terrorist attack executed in a frighteningly similar fashion.

Now, apparently, local law enforcement can simply utter the word “manhunt!” and completely ignore all citizens’ rights, the Bill of Rights, due process and state and federal law. Police have become rogue gangs with complete immunity from all crimes even while they are the ones committing crimes on a massive scale. They can pull you over for no crime whatsoever, stick their fingers inside your anus and call it a “roadside search” while using the same glove on you that they just used on somebody else’s anus. (True story. Click here for source.)

Police terrorize 20-year-old girl for buying bottled water and cookie dough

The latest example of the terror being dished out by local police operations is found in the story of Ann Downey, a young girl whose vehicle was assaulted by plain clothed “undercover” policewho she thought were trying to carjack her.

It is very important to listen to the audio of Ann’s 911 call begging for help as she and her friend were rushed by six men with guns:

It turns out Ann Downey was being terrorized by members of Virginia’s Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC), which apparently consists of trigger-happy police who are so bored out of their minds that they can think of nothing more useful to do than terrorize young women for buying cookie dough.

Imagine the scene: You’re getting into your car after buying some cookie dough, then suddenly six non-uniformed men rush your car and start screaming at you while wielding guns. At least one of the undercover officers drew his weapon, according to media reports.

Am I the only one here who might have pulled out my own gun and started shooting in self defense, believing my life to be in extreme danger by a rogue gang of armed criminals who were aggressively rushing my vehicle?

As far as I’m concerned, these ABC goons are lucky they didn’t get shot, and if they had been shot, it would be hard to argue that the woman wasn’t exercising her right to self defense in shooting them.

It’s important to note here that the driver of the vehicle, named Elizabeth Daly, was charged with three felonies. In a statement posted online, Daly said:

“This has been an extremely trying experience and one that has called into question what I value most: my integrity, honor and character. …Cookie dough and ice cream for a fundraiser should not put you through an extremely degrading night and afternoon in jail, appearing in court, posting bond, having to pay an attorney …not allowed to leave the state, causing you endless nights of no sleep, [a]ffecting your school work and final exams, wondering if you would be dismissed from school, wondering how this would damage your reputation and ability to get a job, all while waiting on pins and needles to see what the Commonwealth is going to offer you.”

See the interactive map of paramilitary police raids taking place across America

Here’s a map showing just some of the paramilitary police raids and attacks on American citizens:

To see the full map with interactive pop-ups, visit:

As you view the map above, keep in mind how widespread these events really are. Just last week in Nevada, a couple filed suit against local police there, claiming they were raided and shot with “pepperball rounds” by police that wanted to use their home as a stakeout location. For refusing this demand, the couple were shot at and then arrested for “obstructing justice.”

As the lawsuit reads:

[Police officers] conspired among themselves to force Anthony Mitchell out of his residence and to occupy his home for their own use. It was determined to move to [the home address] and attempt to contact Mitchell. If Mitchell answered the door he would be asked to leave. If he refused to leave he would be arrested for Obstructing a Police Officer. If Mitchell refused to answer the door, force entry would be made and Mitchell would be arrested.

Seconds later, officers, including Officer Rockwell, smashed open plaintiff Anthony Mitchell’s front door with a metal ram as plaintiff stood in his living room. As plaintiff Anthony Mitchell stood in shock, the officers aimed their weapons at Anthony Mitchell and shouted obscenities at him and ordered him to lie down on the floor. Officers, including Officer David Cawthorn, then fired multiple pepperball rounds at plaintiff as he lay defenseless on the floor of his living room. Anthony Mitchell was struck at least three times by shots fired from close range, injuring him and causing him severe pain. Officers then arrested him for obstructing a police officer, searched the house and moved furniture without his permission and set up a place in his home for a lookout.

This is America? Think again…

When do Americans stand up and say, “Enough!”

So here’s the question: At what point will Americans realize their country has become a Stasi-inspired police state tyranny? When will they march on their state capitols and demand to be treated with dignity and respect rather than being beaten, shot, arrested, intimidated and censored by police?

And I ask this question as a supporter of local law enforcement. I’ve worked with police, trained with police and volunteered with police. I know that most police officers across the country are honorable men and women who are trying their best to keep the peace. But the number of “good” police seems to be shrinking while the number of “rogue” cops is on the rise.

This highly disturbing trend is an intentional one put in place by the Obama administration that’s trying to militarize police all across the nation in a run-up to something very, very big: an event that is expected to cause nationwide rioting and social unrest.

Why else would DHS buy 2+ billion rounds of ammunition, bulletproof roadside checkpoint booths, armored assault vehicles and full-auto assault rifles? Why else would police be trained to shoot pregnant women, children and senior citizens on sight? Why else would the government be spying on every phone call, email and text of every U.S. citizen right now?

We are living under a nightmare Big Brother police state right now, and it’s not an accident. This has all been brought in for a specific purpose: to first acclimate the public to a police state presence (hence the TSA security pat-downs), and then to activate that police infrastructure to engage in the mass-arrest or mass-murder of Americans.

The American people are asleep at the wheel while tyranny encircles them

This will happen as long as Americans allow it to happen. Every day that the American people spend distracted by gay marriage, sports celebrities, TV programs and the Kardashians is another day that the criminal elite running this country build up their infrastructure of terror and oppression against the People.

While Americans are hypnotized into a state of delusional denial by CNN and the New York Times, the Obama administration is strangling freedom to death with a determined rollout of total surveillance, actual death squads that target journalists, the criminalization of whistleblowing, the targeting of reporters in the mainstream media, the intimidation of patriot groups by the IRS and a hundred other forms of oppression, intimidation and blackmail.

What we are witnessing here is a government gone completely criminal. This is a government that now openly kidnapped the President of Bolivia on the off chance that his airplane might have been carrying Ed Snowden. This is the government that openly admits to the existence of secret kill lists that target American citizens for assassination. This is the government that runs the world’s largest surveillance spy program which even spies on ally nations like Germany and France.

Trickle-down tyranny

The U.S. government abides by no law and respects no limits whatsoever to its power. It is a rogue, out-of-control criminal mafia that has taken over positions of government in order to grant itself the appearance of authority.

It is this mafia mentality that’s trickling down to local police departments in the form of aggressive tactical training, armored assault vehicles and even police uniforms which now look like something torn right out of a dystopian, Orwellian sci-fi flick depicting a dark future.

I coined the term “Trickle-Down Tyranny” in 2011. The phrase was later picked up by Michael Savage and became the title of his book by the same name.

Since 2011, Savage himself has become increasingly outspoken about the rise of tyrannical government, the oppression of freedom in America, and the dangerous tactics of intimidation and oppression being practiced by police nationwide.

Everyone can see what’s happening: America is turning into an occupied police state. Individual freedoms are bring crushed. All the rights guaranteed under the Bill of Rights are being systematically destroyed by design. The Obama administration is rapidly becoming the Orwellian dictator we all feared might one day rise up in America, yet half of America remains too far gone to open their eyes and realize what’s happening.

And so the injustices are allowed to accelerate to the point where innocent Americans are being routinely terrorized by law enforcement. While the guilty run free, the innocent are targeted for shakedowns, arrest or beatings.

This is the death of freedom in America. You are watching the destruction of the Land of the Free and the rise of Obama’s tyrannical regime.

If you and millions of others do not rise up against this, you may one day find yourself collapsed on your knees, looking over a large ditch of fresh bodies while a “police officer” holds a pistol to the back of your head and pulls the trigger.

You, like hundreds of millions before you, are about to become another statistical victim of government gone bad. Throughout history, rogue governments have murdered at least 260 million people. And it all began with precisely the same process we are seeing unfold in America today.

Rise up or be exterminated.

10 Quotes From Financial Experts About The Effect That QE3 Will Have On Gold And Silver

Do you want to know what QE3 is going to do to the price of gold and the price of silver?  Well, you can read what the financial experts are saying below, but it doesn’t take a genius to figure out what is likely to happen.  During QE3, the Federal Reserve will be introducing 40 billion new dollars that have been created out of nothing into the financial system each month.  So there will be more dollars chasing roughly the same number of goods and services, and that means that more inflation is on the way.  In an inflationary environment, investors tend to flock to hard assets such as gold and silver.  And it is important to remember that a lot of the money from QE1 and QE2 ended up pumping up the prices of various financial assets.  This included commoditiessuch as gold and silver.  The same thing is likely to happen again with QE3.  In addition, investors now have an expectation that the Fed will continue printing money for the foreseeable future and that the U.S. dollar is going to steadily decline, and that expectation will also likely give further momentum to the upward movement of gold and silver.  Of course when it comes to investing, there is never a “sure thing” and as the global financial system falls apart in the coming years we are likely to see wild swings in the financial markets.  So there is definitely an opportunity when it comes to gold and silver, but anyone that wants to invest in gold and silver needs to be ready for a wild ride. (Read More…..)

10 Shocking Quotes About What QE3 Is Going To Do To America

Ready or not, QE3 is here, and the long-term effects of this reckless money printing by the Federal Reserve are going to be absolutely nightmarish.  The Federal Reserve is hoping that buying $40 billion worth of mortgage-backed securities per month will spur more lending and more economic activity.  But that didn’t happen with either QE1 or QE2.  Both times the banks just sat on most of the extra money.  As I pointed out the other day, U.S. banks are already sitting on $1.6 trillion in excess reserves.  So will pumping them up with more cash suddenly make them decide to start lending?  Of course not.  In addition, QE3 is not likely to produce many additional jobs.  As I showed in a previous article, the employment level did not jump up as a result of either QE1 or QE2.  So why will this time be different?  But what did happen under both QE1 and QE2 is that a lot of the money ended up pumping up the financial markets.  So once again we should see stock prices go up (at least in the short-term) and commodities such as gold, silver, food and oil should also rise.  But that also means that average American families will be paying more for the basic necessities that they buy on a regular basis.  The most dangerous aspect of QE3, however, is what it is going to do to the U.S. dollar.  Most of the rest of the world uses the U.S. dollar to conduct international trade, and by choosing to recklessly print money Ben Bernanke is severely damaging international confidence in our currency.  If at some point the rest of the world rejects the dollar and no longer wants to use it as a reserve currency we are going to be facing a crisis unlike anything we have ever seen before.  The real debate about QE3 should not be about whether or not it will help the economy a little bit in the short-term.  Rather, everyone should be talking about the long-term implications and about how QE3 is going to accelerate the destruction of the dollar. (Read More…..)

The Federal Reserve Is Not Going To Save Us From The Great Depression That Is Coming

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke delivered his annual address to Congress on Tuesday, and he did very little to give lawmakers much confidence about where the U.S. economy is heading.  Bernanke told members of Congress that recent economic data points “suggest further weakness ahead” and that the Federal Reserve is projecting that the U.S. unemployment rate will remain at 7 percent or above all the way through the end of 2014.  Now, it is important to keep in mind that Federal Reserve forecasts are almost always way too optimistic.  The actual numbers almost always end up being much worse than what the Fed says they will be.  So if Bernanke is saying that the U.S. unemployment rate will be 7 percent or higher until the end of 2014, then what will the real numbers end up looking like?  During his testimony, Bernanke seemed unusually gloomy about the direction of the U.S. economy.  He seemed resigned to the fact that there really isn’t that much more that the Federal Reserve can do to stimulate the U.S. economy.  Yes, the Federal Reserve could try another round of quantitative easing, but the first two rounds did not really do that much to help.  The truth is that the United States is absolutely drowning in debt, and when that debt bubble finally bursts the Federal Reserve is simply not going to be able to save us from the Great Depression that will happen as a result. (Read More…..)

The FBI, The CIA, Homeland Security, The Federal Reserve And Potential Employers Are All Monitoring You On Facebook And Twitter

Why is there such a sudden obsession with monitoring what average Americans are saying on Facebook and Twitter?  To be honest, the vast majority of what is being said on Facebook and Twitter is simply not worth reading even if you could understand it.  But for the FBI, the CIA, the Department of Homeland Security and the Federal Reserve, Facebook and Twitter represent a treasure trove of intelligence information.  Tens of millions of us have compiled incredibly detailed dossiers on ourselves and have put them out there for the entire world to see.  Since the information is public, the various alphabet agencies of the federal government see no problem with scooping up all of that information and using it for their own purposes.  Many potential employers have also discovered that Facebook and Twitter can tell them an awful lot about potential employees.  Social media creates a permanent record that reflects who you are and what you believe, and many Americans are finding out that all of this information can come back and haunt them in a big way.  In the world in which we now live, privacy is becoming a thing of the past, and we all need to be mindful of the things that we are exposing to the public. (Read More…..)

Perpetual Debt Machine: U.S. National Debt Is 5000 Times Larger Than When The Federal Reserve Was Created

Have you noticed that very few people in the mainstream media ever directly criticize the Federal Reserve?  But why should that be the case?  Criticizing top politicians from both major political parties has become a national pastime.  Most Americans love to throw mud at either the Republicans or the Democrats.  But we are told that the Federal Reserve is “above politics” and that it is absolutely vital that the Fed remain “independent”.  The reality is that the Federal Reserve has more control over the performance of the U.S. economy than the president even does, and yet most Americans never spend much time thinking about the Fed at all.  It is almost as if someone has instructed us to “ignore the man behind the curtain” and most of us just blindly obey.  With the economy in such a mess and with the national debt exploding so dramatically, isn’t it about time that we had a national conversation about the performance of the Federal Reserve?  Isn’t it about time that we evaluated whether the Federal Reserve is doing a good job or not? (Read More…..)

Don’t Worry, The Federal Reserve Just Wants To Be Your “Online Friend”

According to CNBC, the Federal Reserve “is planning on monitoring what you say about it on social media platforms like Twitter and Facebook”.  Apparently we are not supposed to be alarmed though, because as the CNBC headline states, the Federal Reserve just “wants to be your Facebook friend“.  In fact, the CNBC article says that anyone that feels threatened by the fact that the Federal Reserve will be monitoring what we say on Facebook and Twitter is just “paranoid“.  Well, if it came out that Barack Obama was setting up a system that would identify “key bloggers” and monitor “billions of conversations” on the Internet to see what was being said about him, wouldn’t there be thousands of articles expressing outrage?  Sure there would be.  The Federal Reserve is supposed to be an independent central bank that is above politics.  So why in the world would they need to perform “sentiment analysis” on what is being said about them on “Facebook, Twitter, Blogs, Forums and YouTube“?  The Federal Reserve obviously intends to identify the negative things that are being said about it and the specific people that are saying those things.  So is it really being “paranoid” to point out that all of this is more than a little bit creepy? (Read More…..)

The Looting Of America: The Federal Reserve Made $16 Trillion In Secret Loans To Their Bankster Friends And The Media Is Ignoring The Eye-Popping Corruption That Has Been Uncovered

A one-time limited GAO audit of the Federal Reserve that was mandated by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act has uncovered some eye-popping corruption at the Fed and the mainstream media is barely even covering it.  It turns out that the Federal Reserve made $16.1 trillion in secret loans to their bankster friends during the financial crisis.  You can read a copy of the GAO investigation for yourself right here.  These loans only went to the “too big to fail” banks and to foreign financial institutions.  Not a penny of these loans went to small banks or to ordinary Americans.  Not only did the banksters get trillions in nearly interest-free loans, but the Fed actually paid them over 600 million dollars to help run the emergency lending program.  The GAO investigation revealed some absolutely stunning conflicts of interest, and yet the mainstream media does not even seem interested.  Solid evidence of the looting of America has been put right in front of us, and yet hardly anyone wants to talk about it. (Read More…..)

10 Reasons Why Lindsay Lohan Is Right About The Federal Reserve And The Price Of Food

Does Lindsay Lohan understand monetary policy better than Ben Bernanke does?  The other day, her Twitter account sent out the following message: “Have you guys seen food and gas prices lately? U.S. $ will soon be worthless if the Fed keeps printing money!”  Well, it turns out that it was a “sponsored tweet” that Lohan was paid to send out, but in a subsequent tweet Lohan explained that “i actually do care about gas and food prices, so whether it’s an #ad or no, it’s important for people to be aware of it.”  Okay, so we probably will not see Lohan at any “End the Fed” rallies, but it turns out that in her own bizarre way she has brought a little bit of attention to some very important issues.  Food and gas prices are skyrocketing, and a lot of the blame for that can be placed on the shoulders of the Federal Reserve. (Read More…..)

American police now “Israeli-DHS trained,” precursor to dictatorship
July 4, 2013

As part of this training, there is an increased move to use of military uniforms, armored vehicles, heavy weapons, illegal surveillance, lying to the people, press and courts and systematic interference in the electoral system.

They are becoming “Israeli.”

The door to this “ZIONIST” foreign influence in America was thrown open by the Department of Homeland Security and, in particular, “ZIONIST” Michael “TRAITOR” Chertoff, an Israeli “SPY” citizen who was, in particular, most instrumental as former “TREASONOUS” Director of DHS in implementing policies challenged as “TOTALLY”unconstitutional, policies the new “ZIONIST” “Israeli trained” “TERRORIST” American police are tasked with stopping opposition to.

“Israelization”-“ZIONISM” of American police is a simple “TOTALLY ILLEGAL”process:

– Total militarization of police, military tactics, utter disrespect for civil law, the constitution, civil liberties, freedom of speech and the unbridled growth of centralized power under unlimited corruption; government by money and organized crime.

– Systematic suppression of dissent

– Systematic use of intimidation to control the electoral process at every level of government

– Seamless coordination with military and “internationalist” groups to prepare for mass internment of sectors of the population, numbering in the millions

– Coordinated use of full military power including but not limited to bombing, strafing, heavy artillery and summary executions, the same methods Israel uses on a daily basis

– Even more control of the press, based on the Israeli model, with two “controlled” views, on pro-government and the second, “controlled opposition.”


It is absolutely necessary to differentiate between Israeli companies and those working tied to quasi-governmental organized crime in America. It is also necessary that citizenry, in particular Americans of Jewish background, recognize that a systematic campaign of controlled and revised history and, more seriously, orchestrated “incidents” are coordinated with groups misrepresenting themselves as defending the Jewish people.

These groups, several come to mind, are, in actuality, Israeli “psyops” groups that actually work on an active basis with terrorists. What are we saying?

90% of terrorism, worldwide, including many of the mass killing incidents, all show a pattern of involvement by intelligence organizations. Almost all “terror threats” and “staged announcements” are traced to groups tied directly to the same people who show up at our door with the “cure” to a disease they themselves create.


“While in Abuja, Nigeria, 3 weeks before the attack on the national police station, I met with Chief of Security Gordon Obua, a close friend and told him this:

“We have identified the Headquarters of the National Police as a potential target. It has an unguarded gate and parking facility and is close to the presidential palace. We predict that a car bomb will be exploded there, followed by one other bombing attack.

At these attacks, you will be approached by a security company that will offer you, not only protection by a massive bribe.”

The meeting was in the presidential suite of the Transcon Hilton in Abuja, witnessed by my legal team. The attack as described happened exactly 3 weeks later and the company that came with a suitcase of cash and a promise to turn Abuja, a beautiful city into “Fortress Abuja” is among those now training American police.

The same group is also suspected in the bombing of a Christian Church in Alexandria, Egypt, on January 1, 2011, another car bomb. Similarly, recent bombings in Cameroon, Kenya and Tanzania have the same “fingerprints.”

The same group “ran” the Detroit “Crotch Bomber.”

The Israeli handlers who worked with Abdullah Mohamed in Yemen and walking him onto a plane to the US with a bomb, no ticket, no passport and no visa, as witnessed by two Detroit area lawyers, Kurt and Lori Haskell, also train American police.

We see this over and over, police, government and terrorists, all the same thing.

Of course, few Americans are aware that the “spokesman” for the group called “al Qaeda” is actually an American named Adam Perlman whose grandfather helped found the ADL (Anti-Defamation League)

Adam Pearman Al-CIAda #1 asset

To some, terrorism is a business, and like a tire store that leaves nails in the road nearby, some “counter-terrorism” companies have more experience in building car bombs than finding them.

Why America?

Israeli security companies, primarily made up of active Mossad and former Israeli military members, began working across Africa. Israeli expertise in wiretapping on behalf of ruling parties was what opened the door. Their expertise, as shown in Britain by the Murdoch/News of the World scandals, is excellent.

They were even able to wiretap the 3 prime ministers, members of the royal family, heads of police and national security agencies, key members of legislative bodies and a hand full of celebrities. The equipment for this costs millions, can only be brought into the country by diplomatic pouch and its use is considered espionage as it foments broad unregulated and unauthorized wiretapping, totally unaccountable.

Hundreds of such units are with America police departments, as advised by the Department of Homeland Security, to keep track of group they feel require observation, despite recent court rulings that have overturned FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) as unconstitutional.

Among the groups watched are veteran’s organizations, the Tea Party, Christian, Muslim and Jewish religious groups, labor unions, professional organizations and members of government, police officers and members of Federal law enforcement and anti-drug organizations.

Former American military, even the crippled and maimed, now head every “terror watch list.”


The truth is, America has a long reputation for corrupt police organizations. Every few years there is, in every major city, an investigation with the police commissioner and many senior officers imprisoned.

At one point, Bernie Kerik, nominee for head of the Department of Homeland Security and Police Commissioner of the City of New York had actually served as Minister of the Interior of Iraq under the interim US government that ran that country after the 2003 invasion.

Kerik is in prison, originally charged with 16 felonies, some committed while running Iraq and facing a 142 year sentence and millions in fines. In a plea deal, Kerik is only serving 4 years. Kerik, prior to becoming police commissioner, Minister of the Interior of Iraq and nearly taking over the operation of the largest agency in the United States was New York mayor Rudy Giuliani’s driver.

Every major American city and most smaller departments, and there are thousands, are being “retrained,” not to fight corruption but being armed for civil war, trained to work directly with military personnel to police America in accordance with unpublished policies mistakenly announced by Army head, General Odierno, as published in his article for the Council on Foreign Relations in the May/June edition of Foreign Affairs:

“Where appropriate we will also dedicate active-duty forces, especially those with niche skills and equipment, to provide civilian officials with a robust set of reliable and rapid response options.”

As for the Department of Homeland Security, spearheading the Israeli takeover of America’s police, David Rittgers of the Cato Institute has noted:

“A long line of fusion center and DHS reports labeling broad swaths of the public as a threat to national security. The North Texas Fusion System labeled Muslim lobbyists as a potential threat; a DHS analyst in Wisconsin thought both pro- and anti-abortion activists were worrisome; a Pennsylvania homeland security contractor watched environmental activists, Tea Party groups, and a Second Amendment rally; the Maryland State Police put anti-death penalty and anti-war activists in a federal terrorism database; a fusion center in Missouri thought that all third-party voters and Ron Paul supporters were a threat….”

Wikipedia quotes the following on the quality of management and personnel at DHS, a national scandal in itself:

“In July 2006, the Office of Personnel Management conducted a survey of federal employees in all 36 federal agencies on job satisfaction and how they felt their respective agency was headed. DHS was last or near to last in every category including;

– 33rd on the talent management index

– 35th on the leadership and knowledge management index

– 36th on the job satisfaction index

– 36th on the results-oriented performance culture index

The low scores were attributed to major concerns about basic supervision, management and leadership within the agency. Examples from the survey reveal most concerns are about promotion and pay increase based on merit, dealing with poor performance, rewarding creativity and innovation, leadership generating high levels of motivation in the workforce, recognition for doing a good job, lack of satisfaction with various component policies and procedures and lack of information about what is going on with the organization.”

Creating the perfect police state

The visible face of the totalitarian takeover of America is candidate Mitt Romney, sworn to start a world war for Israel, his backers, Sheldon Adelson, gambling boss of Las Vegas and China, the Koch Brothers and the Israel lobby, said to control America’s congress, certainly 100% of the Republican Party.

Gasoline pricing manipulation through terrorism

Gasoline pricing in the world is run by the Koch Brothers who manage the futures market. Fuel prices are unrelated to oil costs but rather manipulated to serve political interests of two Israeli-American billionaires with extremist views.

During the past two weeks, there have been multiple “accidents” in refineries and with pipelines. These have, in fact been terror attacks, cutting refinery output in the US significantly, blocking oil pipelines from the Middle East and inside the US.

None of this, and it is terrorism, has been reported. There is only one cause and that is tied to who benefits from economic problems in an election year, this being Mitt Romney and the Likudist faction in Israel that is advocating war with Iran, not fought by Israel but by the United States, of course.


As with the mass shootings, be they Columbine years ago, Gabby Giffords at Tucson or so many others, the anthrax attacks now tied to our own government to the DC sniper, police and federal authorities have given out false press notices, sometimes showed up at crime scenes long after normal response times or may well have been complicit.

Nearly every terrorist act that supposedly occurs in the US involves law enforcement recruiting terrorists or carefully removing key suspects who were actually police officers involved.

The Oklahoma City bombing had several suspects disappear. The Detroit airport bombing attempt had witnesses report multiple arrests but no trials.

9/11 had nearly arrested, 2 on the George Washington Bridge who set off a truck bomb but disappeared the next day, people we suspect of being tied to law enforcement or “training groups” that are, in reality terrorists.

Terrorism is law enforcement

What careful analysis indicates is that the groups that are training our police are, if not exactly the same, are closely related to groups suspected of being terrorists themselves, providing support for terrorists in Africa and the Middle East.

Should our new police cars say?

“Protect and Serve
Trained by Terrorists
Big Brother is Watching”


Rise of the Warrior Cop

Is it time to reconsider the militarization of American policing?



On Jan. 4 of last year, a local narcotics strike force conducted a raid on the Ogden, Utah, home of Matthew David Stewart at 8:40 p.m. The 12 officers were acting on a tip from Mr. Stewart’s former girlfriend, who said that he was growing marijuana in his basement. Mr. Stewart awoke, naked, to the sound of a battering ram taking down his door. Thinking that he was being invaded by criminals, as he later claimed, he grabbed his 9-millimeter Beretta pistol.


Photo illustration by Sean McCabe

The police say that they knocked and identified themselves, though Mr. Stewart and his neighbors said they heard no such announcement. Mr. Stewart fired 31 rounds, the police more than 250. Six of the officers were wounded, and Officer Jared Francom was killed. Mr. Stewart himself was shot twice before he was arrested. He was charged with several crimes, including the murder of Officer Francom.

The police found 16 small marijuana plants in Mr. Stewart’s basement. There was no evidence that Mr. Stewart, a U.S. military veteran with no prior criminal record, was selling marijuana. Mr. Stewart’s father said that his son suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder and may have smoked the marijuana to self-medicate.

Early this year, the Ogden city council heard complaints from dozens of citizens about the way drug warrants are served in the city. As for Mr. Stewart, his trial was scheduled for next April, and prosecutors were seeking the death penalty. But after losing a hearing last May on the legality of the search warrant, Mr. Stewart hanged himself in his jail cell.

The police tactics at issue in the Stewart case are no anomaly. Since the 1960s, in response to a range of perceived threats, law-enforcement agencies across the U.S., at every level of government, have been blurring the line between police officer and soldier. Driven by martial rhetoric and the availability of military-style equipment—from bayonets and M-16 rifles to armored personnel carriers—American police forces have often adopted a mind-set previously reserved for the battlefield. The war on drugs and, more recently, post-9/11 antiterrorism efforts have created a new figure on the U.S. scene: the warrior cop—armed to the teeth, ready to deal harshly with targeted wrongdoers, and a growing threat to familiar American liberties.

The acronym SWAT stands for Special Weapons and Tactics. Such police units are trained in methods similar to those used by the special forces in the military. They learn to break into homes with battering rams and to use incendiary devices called flashbang grenades, which are designed to blind and deafen anyone nearby. Their usual aim is to "clear" a building—that is, to remove any threats and distractions (including pets) and to subdue the occupants as quickly as possible.


Daily Republic/Associated Press

Today the U.S. has thousands of SWAT teams. A team prepares to enterahouse in Vallejo, Calif., on March 20, above.

The country’s first official SWAT team started in the late 1960s in Los Angeles. By 1975, there were approximately 500 such units. Today, there are thousands. According to surveys conducted by the criminologist Peter Kraska of Eastern Kentucky University, just 13% of towns between 25,000 and 50,000 people had a SWAT team in 1983. By 2005, the figure was up to 80%.

The number of raids conducted by SWAT-like police units has grown accordingly. In the 1970s, there were just a few hundred a year; by the early 1980s, there were some 3,000 a year. In 2005 (the last year for which Dr. Kraska collected data), there were approximately 50,000 raids.

A number of federal agencies also now have their own SWAT teams, including the Fish & Wildlife Service, NASA and the Department of the Interior. In 2011, the Department of Education’s SWAT team bungled a raid on a woman who was initially reported to be under investigation for not paying her student loans, though the agency later said she was suspected of defrauding the federal student loan program.

The details of the case aside, the story generated headlines because of the revelation that the Department of Education had such a unit. None of these federal departments has responded to my requests for information about why they consider such high-powered military-style teams necessary.

Americans have long been wary of using the military for domestic policing. Concerns about potential abuse date back to the creation of the Constitution, when the founders worried about standing armies and the intimidation of the people at large by an overzealous executive, who might choose to follow the unhappy precedents set by Europe’s emperors and monarchs.

The idea for the first SWAT team in Los Angeles arose during the domestic strife and civil unrest of the mid-1960s. Daryl Gates, then an inspector with the Los Angeles Police Department, had grown frustrated with his department’s inability to respond effectively to incidents like the 1965 Watts riots. So his thoughts turned to the military. He was drawn in particular to Marine Special Forces and began to envision an elite group of police officers who could respond in a similar manner to dangerous domestic disturbances.


Standard-Examiner/Associated Press

When A strike force raided the home of Matthew David Stewart, one officer was killed.

Mr. Gates initially had difficulty getting his idea accepted. Los Angeles Police Chief William Parker thought the concept risked a breach in the divide between the military and law enforcement. But with the arrival of a new chief, Thomas Reddin, in 1966, Mr. Gates got the green light to start training a unit. By 1969, his SWAT team was ready for its maiden raid against a holdout cell of the Black Panthers.

At about the same time, President Richard Nixon was declaring war on drugs. Among the new, tough-minded law-enforcement measures included in this campaign was the no-knock raid—a policy that allowed drug cops to break into homes without the traditional knock and announcement. After fierce debate, Congress passed a bill authorizing no-knock raids for federal narcotics agents in 1970.

Over the next several years, stories emerged of federal agents breaking down the doors of private homes (often without a warrant) and terrorizing innocent citizens and families. Congress repealed the no-knock law in 1974, but the policy would soon make a comeback (without congressional authorization).

During the Reagan administration, SWAT-team methods converged with the drug war. By the end of the 1980s, joint task forces brought together police officers and soldiers for drug interdiction. National Guard helicopters and U-2 spy planes flew the California skies in search of marijuana plants. When suspects were identified, battle-clad troops from the National Guard, the DEA and other federal and local law enforcement agencies would swoop in to eradicate the plants and capture the people growing them.

Advocates of these tactics said that drug dealers were acquiring ever bigger weapons and the police needed to stay a step ahead in the arms race. There were indeed a few high-profile incidents in which police were outgunned, but no data exist suggesting that it was a widespread problem. A study done in 1991 by the libertarian-leaning Independence Institute found that less than one-eighth of 1% of homicides in the U.S. were committed with a military-grade weapon. Subsequent studies by the Justice Department in 1995 and the National Institute for Justice in 2004 came to similar conclusions: The overwhelming majority of serious crimes are committed with handguns, and not particularly powerful ones.


The new century brought the war on terror and, with it, new rationales and new resources for militarizing police forces. According to the Center for Investigative Reporting, the Department of Homeland Security has handed out $35 billion in grants since its creation in 2002, with much of the money going to purchase military gear such as armored personnel carriers. In 2011 alone, a Pentagon program for bolstering the capabilities of local law enforcement gave away $500 million of equipment, an all-time high.

The past decade also has seen an alarming degree of mission creep for U.S. SWAT teams. When the craze for poker kicked into high gear, a number of police departments responded by deploying SWAT teams to raid games in garages, basements and VFW halls where illegal gambling was suspected. According to news reports and conversations with poker organizations, there have been dozens of these raids, in cities such as Baltimore, Charleston, S.C., and Dallas.

In 2006, 38-year-old optometrist Sal Culosi was shot and killed by a Fairfax County, Va., SWAT officer. The investigation began when an undercover detective overheard Mr. Culosi wagering on college football games with some buddies at a bar. The department sent a SWAT team after Mr. Culosi, who had no prior criminal record or any history of violence. As the SWAT team descended, one officer fired a single bullet that pierced Mr. Culosi’s heart. The police say that the shot was an accident. Mr. Culosi’s family suspects the officer saw Mr. Culosi reaching for his cellphone and thought he had a gun.

Assault-style raids have even been used in recent years to enforce regulatory law. Armed federal agents from the Fish & Wildlife Service raided the floor of the Gibson Guitar factory in Nashville in 2009, on suspicion of using hardwoods that had been illegally harvested in Madagascar. Gibson settled in 2012, paying a $300,000 fine and admitting to violating the Lacey Act. In 2010, the police department in New Haven, Conn., sent its SWAT team to raid a bar where police believed there was underage drinking. For sheer absurdity, it is hard to beat the 2006 story about the Tibetan monks who had overstayed their visas while visiting America on a peace mission. In Iowa, the hapless holy men were apprehended by a SWAT team in full gear.

Unfortunately, the activities of aggressive, heavily armed SWAT units often result in needless bloodshed: Innocent bystanders have lost their lives and so, too, have police officers who were thought to be assailants and were fired on, as (allegedly) in the case of Matthew David Stewart.

citizen-protectionlaws (1)

In my own research, I have collected over 50 examples in which innocent people were killed in raids to enforce warrants for crimes that are either nonviolent or consensual (that is, crimes such as drug use or gambling, in which all parties participate voluntarily). These victims were bystanders, or the police later found no evidence of the crime for which the victim was being investigated. They include Katherine Johnston, a 92-year-old woman killed by an Atlanta narcotics team acting on a bad tip from an informant in 2006; Alberto Sepulveda, an 11-year-old accidentally shot by a California SWAT officer during a 2000 drug raid; and Eurie Stamps, killed in a 2011 raid on his home in Framingham, Mass., when an officer says his gun mistakenly discharged. Mr. Stamps wasn’t a suspect in the investigation.

What would it take to dial back such excessive police measures? The obvious place to start would be ending the federal grants that encourage police forces to acquire gear that is more appropriate for the battlefield. Beyond that, it is crucial to change the culture of militarization in American law enforcement.

Consider today’s police recruitment videos (widely available on YouTube), which often feature cops rappelling from helicopters, shooting big guns, kicking down doors and tackling suspects. Such campaigns embody an American policing culture that has become too isolated, confrontational and militaristic, and they tend to attract recruits for the wrong reasons.

If you browse online police discussion boards, or chat with younger cops today, you will often encounter some version of the phrase, "Whatever I need to do to get home safe." It is a sentiment that suggests that every interaction with a citizen may be the officer’s last. Nor does it help when political leaders lend support to this militaristic self-image, as New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg did in 2011 by declaring, "I have my own army in the NYPD—the seventh largest army in the world."

The motivation of the average American cop should not focus on just making it to the end of his shift. The LAPD may have given us the first SWAT team, but its motto is still exactly the right ideal for American police officers: To protect and serve.


SWAT teams have their place, of course, but they should be saved for those relatively rare situations when police-initiated violence is the only hope to prevent the loss of life. They certainly have no place as modern-day vice squads.

Many longtime and retired law-enforcement officers have told me of their worry that the trend toward militarization is too far gone. Those who think there is still a chance at reform tend to embrace the idea of community policing, an approach that depends more on civil society than on brute force.

In this very different view of policing, cops walk beats, interact with citizens and consider themselves part of the neighborhoods they patrol—and therefore have a stake in those communities. It’s all about a baton-twirling "Officer Friendly" rather than a Taser-toting RoboCop.

Corrections & Amplifications
The Consumer Products Safety Commission does not have a SWAT team. An earlier version of this article incorrectly said that it did.

Mr. Balko is the author of "Rise of the Warrior Cop," published this month by PublicAffairs.


Andrew Galambos — the Unknown Libertarian

By Harry Browne

(Published in Liberty, November 1997)

Andrew J. Galambos died on April 10, 1997.

He was an influential libertarian, but I refer to him as "the unknown libertarian" because he never wrote a book or appeared on national radio or TV. His renown will be limited mostly to those who came in personal contact with him.

But he had a profound effect on thousands of individuals who took his courses — who in turn affected others. Undoubtedly the ripples from the stones he dropped eventually touched some of today’s leading libertarians.

He was a fascinating mixture of contrasts. He combined a brilliant mind with an ungracious personality. He was an astrophysicist who taught social science. He preached the importance of respect for intellectual property, but freely lifted the ideas of others without giving them credit. He was dishonest, but he inspired others to be more honest. He disdained the word "libertarian" while turning thousands of people into libertarians. He was an insensitive teacher, and yet he apparently changed the lives of most of the people he taught. And he pushed out of his own life practically everyone who was important to him.

One of those people was Alvin Lowi — a long-time friend and business associate of Galambos, who had taught some of his courses. This memoir is based both on my brief relationship with Galambos and on Alvin Lowi’s more extensive recollections.

A Life

Andrew Galambos was born in Hungary in 1924. His parents moved to New York City soon afterward, and Andrew grew up there. After serving in the military in World War II, he attended Carlton College in Minnesota and earned a master’s degree — probably in astronomy or astrophysics.

In 1952, he moved to Los Angeles to work for North American Aviation in the new field of Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBMs). His purpose wasn’t to make the world safe for democracy, but to make money for himself. In 1958 he was an astrophysicist at Ramo-Wooldridge Corporation, which later became TRW Space Technology Laboratories.

In 1957 the Soviets had launched Sputnik. Most of the engineers at Ramo-Wooldridge were unfamiliar with the concept of artificial earth satellites. Galambos became a respected mentor by explaining ballistics and astronautics to them in a series of noon-time lectures.

Andrew was well-versed also in astronomy, philosophy, the history of science, the scientific method, economics, investments, and insurance. And he was a master at coining precise definitions for words whose meanings we sometimes take for granted.

Although his life’s work turned out to be the promotion of a free society, his primary interest was astronautics — not the social sciences. He wanted to create a commercial transportation service to the moon, and he believed this would be possible only after the government got out of the way. So the first job on his agenda was to create a free society.

Around 1960, Galambos left the aerospace industry and taught briefly at Whittier College.

In 1961 he went to New York to meet Ayn Rand, Ludwig von Mises, Leonard Read, Murray Rothbard, and Henry Hazlitt. Galambos had a very strong personality, and he and Rand rubbed each other the wrong way — perhaps because they were so much alike. He spoke disparagingly of her thereafter. Mises wasn’t willing to discuss Andrew’s economic ideas — possibly because Galambos’ background was in the physical, not the social, sciences. Rothbard treated him cordially — as he did almost everyone — and thereafter Galambos was more respectful of Rothbard’s work than that of the others.

That same year, he established the Free Enterprise Institute (FEI) in Los Angeles — where he offered courses to the paying public on the construction of a free society. Thousands of students passed through his courses over the next two decades. He was one of the most successful "freedom entrepreneurs" ever — making very good money preaching the gospel of liberty and capitalism. Some of his later courses cost $500 or more (the equivalent of $2,000 today) and each were attended by several hundred people. He had very little overhead, advertising was mostly word-of-mouth, and he didn’t spend money to make his students comfortable in the classes.

In addition, he made money selling mutual funds — advocating his own investment strategy of cost-averaging and holding for the long term. He had no reservations about selling mutual funds to his students; he thought that earning investment profits would make them stronger advocates of capitalism.

Sometime during the 1980s Galambos became afflicted with Alzheimer’s Disease, and in 1990 he was institutionalized. Because he had been financially successful and had taken good care of his money, he didn’t have to rely on welfare or charity. In 1996 Suzanne Galambos, his wife of over four decades, died. And, finally, on April 10, 1997, he died.

The news undoubtedly saddened thousands of people whose lives had been improved by his teaching.

Social Lion & Teacher

According to Alvin Lowi, in Galambos’ early days in Los Angeles he was gracious, thoughtful, and hospitable. But after his courses made him important to people, he apparently no longer felt the need to be gracious. By the time I met him in late 1963, his personality had changed.

Someone had handed me a small pamphlet Andrew had written — one of the very few publications that came out of his work. It contained some novel thoughts that I considered worth quoting in a syndicated newspaper column I was writing at the time. As was my custom, I sent him a copy of the column. He was very pleased to be quoted and he wrote back, rather than calling, even though we were both in Los Angeles. Further communications led me to take his course, which I’d heard about from others.

In a phone conversation the day before the first lecture, he said he was looking forward to meeting me — as he was impressed by some of my articles that I’d sent him. But when I finally met him in person and said, "How do you do? I’m Harry Browne," he looked at me as though to say, "So?" I extended my hand, which he responded to only after a long pause, and he eventually replied, "How do you do?" No smile, no sign that we’d had any communication before. But then, during his lecture, he solicited my opinion a couple of times — referring to me as a fellow toiler in the fields of liberty. This was my first exposure to his many contradictions and his strange conception of the social graces.

By any normal standards, he was a very poor lecturer. Although the course, "Capitalism — the Key to Survival," was billed as a series of sixteen 2-hour lectures, each one ran well over two hours. And as the course went on, the lectures were longer and longer — with the last few running over four hours apiece. He used no script and very few notes — and sometimes rambled so far from his main thread that you didn’t know whether he’d ever find his way back (he always did). There was a single break in the middle of each lecture — during which Andrew would get a soft drink. After the break, he’d continue sipping his drink — and he’d suck on the ice while talking.

The chairs were uncomfortable and the lecturer was insensitive, but the course was fascinating. As Andrew covered the gamut from science to society, you learned about the special contributions to technology of various scientists, about the scientific method, about Andrew’s desire to apply the discipline of the physical sciences to the social sciences, and much more.

(A few years later, I realized that the inability to conduct controlled, repeatable experiments made it impossible to transfer the methods of the physical sciences to the social sciences — including economics and investments. Still later, I came across Ludwig von Mises’ The Ultimate Foundation of Economic Science, in which he explains this point better than I could.)

There were so many ideas discussed in a Galambos lecture that it was hard to sleep afterward. People who took the courses began looking at the world in new ways; in many cases they changed their businesses, their marriages, and their lives.

The Galambos Philosophy

In his early days as a teacher, Andrew wasn’t an anarchist. In 1960 he had gone to the Republican convention in Chicago to encourage Barry Goldwater to compete for the GOP nomination against Richard Nixon. And his first courses promoted limited, constitutional government. However, his own consistency, together with input from his students, caused him eventually to advocate a society without any political government.

He had reached that point before I took my first course from him in the winter of 1963-64. His free society relied on private, competing protection and judicial agencies. National defense was to be provided by insurance companies that reimbursed you if they failed to protect your property. His method of getting from here to there involved building private alternatives to government until those alternatives dominated society — at which point most people would see no reason to continue to rely on government for anything.

He strongly opposed voting or any other form of political action. He believed voting was an agreement to abide by whatever the politicians decided. He transformed the familiar slogan into, "If you vote, don’t complain."

Morality was a key element in his philosophy. Unlike Ayn Rand, who attempted to prove that there was a single morality that must be obeyed (what I call an absolute morality), Galambos felt that acting morally was optional, but that there was a single morality that would increase the happiness of anyone who lived by it (what I call a universal morality). In practice, the moralities were similar — revolving around non-coercion toward others.

Although he felt his greatest contribution was in the integration of many ideas and details into a single grand theory of freedom, I was less impressed by the overall design than I was by the precise way he defined and organized many of the details.


Everything in the Galambos philosophy revolved around property.

He described societal freedom as that condition in which everyone has 100% control of his own property and 0% control over anyone else’s property. This was a particularly succinct way of describing freedom. And with everything privately owned, many traditional questions about freedom would be automatically resolved.

Can I shout fire in a crowded theatre? That depends on who owns the theatre and what his policy is.

Should Nazis be allowed to demonstrate in Skokie? That depends on the street owner’s policy.

However, a weakness in Andrew’s thinking, in my view, was that he assumed that questions of property borders and definitions of property itself could be easily resolved. In Andrew’s mind, they already were resolved — and eventually they probably will be to the satisfaction of others. But the technology for doing so was very primitive in the Galambos courses.

A cornerstone of Andrew’s philosophy was the concept of intellectual property. In the words of the late Charles Estes, Galambos:

defined "primordial property" as a person’s own life and "primary property" as his ideas. All other property he derived from these two fundamental kinds.

Thus Galambos referred to physical property as "secondary property." Because primary property was antecedent to secondary property, he felt that respecting the ideas of other people was more important even than respecting their physical property.

Although academics have long honored the concept of proper intellectual credit for ideas, the Galambos view of primary property went far beyond anything previously promulgated on either the political left or right. He considered it immoral to use someone’s ideas without gaining permission and providing compensation. This meant, in effect, that the inventor of the wheel was due a royalty on every automobile sold.

While this would seem to lead to chaos and the stifling of technological progress, Andrew believed it wouldn’t be difficult to work out the mechanics of handling such payments — and he already had developed a number of techniques.

Unlike with patent laws, Andrew’s system recognized independent development of ideas — so that it would be unlikely that an eccentric inventor of, say, the computer could arbitrarily halt development of all computers.

His Vulnerability

Andrew was very possessive of his own primary property. He continually promised to write a book setting forth his philosophy, so that ownership of his ideas would be well-documented. But he never did so. It may be that he felt intuitively that his grand plan was impressive when delivered orally, but might not hold up when examined in print; or that he wasn’t by nature a writer and the task intimidated him; or that he was simply a procrastinator.

Whatever the reason, the lack of a written document to confirm his authorship apparently made him feel vulnerable — afraid that anyone could soak up his ideas, walk off with them, repackage them, and claim them as one’s own inventions.

He required every student entering one of his courses to sign a contract agreeing not to divulge any of the course ideas without permission from Galambos — and not even to use the ideas, in business or elsewhere, without permission. In effect, the course tuition bought you the right to become aware of the ideas, but not to use them or even to talk about them to outsiders.

This led to the humorous situation in which a graduate would rave about the course and insist that you take it — but when you asked him for examples of what was good, he would say, "Sorry, I can’t tell you."

Needless to say, some people did talk about the ideas. And many more graduates used the ideas profitably. This bothered Andrew, but he claimed to be bothered most by individuals who seemed to be using his ideas in other courses, lectures, or writings.

He spoke frequently of one individual or another who had stolen his ideas. And if it were pointed out that the person was preaching ideas that were the opposite of Andrew’s, Galambos would say the person had stolen Andrew’s ideas but had gotten them all wrong. One of his favorite epithets toward an enemy was that the person had "flunked the course."

Alvin Lowi pointed out to me that Andrew, despite his protestations, may not have been concerned about intellectual thievery. Instead, he may have been jealous of the success others were achieving — success in presenting and marketing the ideas of freedom, and success in applying the ideas to their business and personal lives.

Whatever his secret concerns may have been, his possessiveness, criticism, arrogance, and thoughtlessness served to alienate and eventually chase away every important person in his life. The one exception was his wife, Suzanne, who suffered frequent verbal abuse from him in public but never deserted him.

My Experience

My own experience with him was typical in several ways.

Taking his first course inspired me to bring back to life an earlier idea I had for a course on free-market economics. I discussed the idea with Alvin Lowi, who encouraged me to go ahead with it. Andrew also supported the venture and allowed me to mail to his customer list. The first presentation of the 8-session, 2-hour-per-lecture course was well received by my customers, and Andrew suggested that his Institute sponsor the course thereafter. I agreed to the arrangement.

Another presentation of the course began, and the trouble started. Andrew said he had heard from some of my students that I was presenting his ideas but not giving him credit. I explained that there was very little in the course that hadn’t been a part of my repertoire for some time — and that I did, in fact, give credit to him for any ideas I had gleaned from him.

He maintained that he was unconvinced. He frequently phoned me — saying he had heard further tales of my using his ideas without credit. He would berate me in conversations that lasted an hour or two or three. Looking back, it’s hard to imagine what could have been said that made those conversations so lengthy — or why I put up with the situation as long as I did. But, then, I was only 31 at the time.

I sent him transcripts of my lectures, along with a box full of articles I’d published prior to meeting him, so he could see that my world didn’t begin with him. I marked the appropriate passages in my articles so he could skim through them quickly. But he claimed he didn’t have the time to look at them. So instead of taking an hour to go through the material, he spent many hours on the phone literally yelling at me.

Andrew was willing to acknowledge that I (or anyone else) could have been exposed to similar ideas prior to meeting him. But he maintained that his packaging of the ideas was so revolutionary that one’s understanding of freedom was severely limited before taking his course. Thus, no matter what you knew before your exposure to him, you were indebted almost totally to him for your understanding of freedom. Therefore you should credit him even for ideas about freedom you developed yourself or heard earlier from someone else.

Because I believed he was an important person and we were doing important things, I tolerated all this for about six months. And then I informed him — in the spring of 1965 — that I would no longer give my course under his auspices. He told me I couldn’t unilaterally terminate the relationship — although we had no agreement that prevented me from doing so. In effect, he claimed I had to continue working with him until he no longer wanted me to. But I simply refused to put up with him anymore.

After this close, very intense relationship lasting about a year, I never saw him again. We spoke only one more time — briefly on the phone in 1973.

When I became somewhat well-known through my books, people would sometimes ask Andrew what he thought of my ideas. Andrew would shout that I had stolen all my ideas from him — even though I can’t imagine that he ever took the time to read any of my books or even knew what they covered.

But, as Lowi pointed out, the issue of how people were using his ideas may have been a red herring. He may have been more upset by the fact that I had published my ideas, and that I was making a great deal of money with them, while he was bogged down in weekly lectures and the trivia of running his course business. Again, the only reason he was even involved in the social sciences was to create a society in which he would be free to be an astronautical entrepreneur.

But that dream was fading because — although he was financially successful — he wasn’t getting very far in creating the free society in which he could start his lunar airline.

Although I had been closer to him than most people, my experience wasn’t unique. He thought of numerous former students as his enemies — and the more successful they were, the more he condemned them publicly.


As possessive as he was of his own intellectual property, he was very careless with the ideas of others. He often argued against someone’s suggestion, only to incorporate it as part of his own "original" thinking a few months or years later.

Although he lavished praise on some thinkers who were long since dead — Thomas Paine, Isaac Newton, and so on — he rarely gave credit to any living person. When he did, it usually was only in general terms, rather than for any identifiable contribution to his philosophy. And on some of the rare occasions when he gave specific credit to a living person, it was backhanded.

For example, Alvin Lowi was Andrew’s closest associate and a great intellectual stimulus to him. But in all of Andrew’s lectures I attended, I heard him give credit to Alvin only once. On that occasion he discussed the way a thorny social problem would be handled in a free society; he identified a key factor and said, "Once you get past that point it is, as Alvin Lowi has said, as easy as falling off a log."

After the lecture I tore into Andrew. "Why in the world would you embarrass Alvin by implying the he was taking credit for such an expression? You know he would never claim to have coined it."

Andrew answered, "But Alvin’s contribution was in applying it to this situation."

"That isn’t the way the audience understood it."

"That’s the way they should understand it," he said.

While appearing to be generous in dispensing credit, in truth Andrew — as far as I know — never acknowledged the many original ideas Alvin did provide.

Also, although he stood foursquare against force and fraud, he engaged in fraudulent practices himself. One example was the aforementioned contract students were required to sign before entering a course — acknowledging that Galambos was the owner of the ideas, that they were buying exposure to them only, and that the ideas were not to be repeated or used without Galambos’ permission. The contract was so full of gobbledygook that no one really understood what he was signing, and some people refused to sign such a vague agreement.

Thinking I was doing him a favor, I wrote a far clearer version of the contract and presented it to him. The event was much like your cat bringing a dead bird into your house and proudly laying it at your feet. Galambos was not pleased. He said, "Don’t you understand? If people know what the contract says, they won’t sign it."

"But how can you ask people to sign something they don’t understand?"

"Because after they take the course, they’ll understand it and agree with it."

Of course, not everyone who took the course came to believe that he should get Andrew’s permission before using any of the ideas.

He also had his own definitions for words, which he didn’t explain until you took his course. This allowed him to state his beliefs in public without shocking anyone. For example, he defined
"government" as a private company with whom you contract for protection (contrasted with "the State," which he defined as a coercive agency), and he would go before liberal groups to say he was in favor of world government. He also called himself a "liberal" — knowing that modern liberals would mistakenly consider him to be a political ally.

Influence on Me

Andrew Galambos was the stereotypical genius — impossible to deal with, but the source of great innovation. Much like the composer Richard Wagner, he aggravated, inconvenienced, and exploited many people while enriching their lives.

That certainly was true in my case. Although I paid a high price then, my life is far better for having met Andrew Galambos. Although much of what I consider valuable wouldn’t be what he’d want credit for, I did learn much from him. For one thing, my writing became more precise, better organized, and — learning negatively from him — more considerate of the reader.

And probably no one influenced the course of my personal life and career as much as he did. His ideas prodded me to make several major changes.

Most of all, he inspired and encouraged me to give courses — which led to my writing eleven books — which led to everything else worthwhile that has happened to me over the past 35 years.

Benefits to Others

Despite his personality and his business practices, he had a way of changing almost all his students’ lives. And I never heard of a Galambos graduate regressing to his former ways.

Ironically, one thing many people seemed to glean from his courses was the value of honesty —even though I don’t recall him preaching it and he certainly didn’t practice it himself. Doing business with a Galambos graduate was usually straightforward, profitable, and pleasurable.

The chicken-&-egg question is whether Andrew somehow attracted smart people to his courses or listening to him made them smarter. Either way, his clientele consisted of first-rate people who knew how to use what they learned. He appealed to people who wanted to solve problems. They wanted to know how to make a better world, but they also sought the means of improving their own lives in a realistic way — not with a magic cure-all.

Andrew provided the conceptual tools by which individuals could organize and refine their own ideas — their own observations about how the world works. In effect, they didn’t adopt Andrew’s philosophy so much as they made better use of their own.

They didn’t accept Andrew’s ideas because they were Andrew’s; they accepted what made sense to them. Because many of them were emotionally stronger than Andrew, they were able to survive the criticism and pettiness Andrew inflicted; if Galambos was abusive, they knew enough to ignore what wasn’t true and drink in from Galambos all that would help them. And they were secure enough in their own lives to be able to acknowledge their intellectual debts to him, even if he accused them of intellectual piracy.

Andrew Galambos made the world more intelligible to them, and they made the most of their newfound understanding. In the process, his graduates proved that a proper understanding of the free market can be used to effect a happier, more productive, much more prosperous life.

The Galambos Legacy

One of Andrew’s greatest failings appeared to be his inability to recognize that there are no final answers for a free society. If a totally free society will exist in, say, the year 2020, we have no way of knowing today how property will be protected, how the nation will be defended, how drivers will be charged for using roads, or how any of the thousands of other technical issues will be handled.

If someday there is a profit to be made from providing neighborhood protection or national defense, hundreds of ideas will come gushing forth — as some of the best minds in the world see an opportunity to get rich and to be intellectually challenged by devising the best possible systems.

It is presumptuous of us to think we can somehow foresee all these ideas and know now how these matters will be handled. All we can do is to cite potential ways to take care of them — to reassure people that matters can be handled without resorting to the coercion, inefficiency, and monopoly of political methods.

Andrew Galambos devised or promoted potential ways to deal with some of the thorniest issues of a free society. In this, he provided a great service. But he was wrong to think that his ways were the ways — and that this is how it will be. He set himself up as the final authority on these questions. In effect, he was playing God, and he was no better at it than anyone else who tries to fill that role.

But those who have criticized his ideas can be just as mistaken. If there was some part of his grand design that was defective, if he presumed too much — so what? No matter how Andrew perceived his role, he wasn’t setting the rules for a free society; he was helping us see how responsive and effective the free market can be when confronted with any sort of human need.

That was a large part of his great genius, and it opened the minds of a multitude of individuals who were exposed to his courses.

In the same way, there are thousands of other unknown libertarians around America — and around the world — who are helping people move a step further in their understanding of the limitless benefits of liberty. Whatever we think of the details of their ideas, we are indebted to them for opening the minds of so many people.

Andrew Galambos was one of the most important of these teachers. He transformed conservatives, liberals, and moderates into libertarians at a time when liberty was the most radical idea imaginable — when the welfare state was at the very peak of its popularity in the mid-1960s. With massive confidence, he encouraged thousands of people to live better lives and to become better salesmen of liberty.

As Alvin Lowi put it:

Galambos’ legacy is a work in process embodied in a few individuals enriched with new vistas of a rational world including a humanity worthy of survival. Those individuals have proceeded to celebrate that legacy with a strengthened courage of conviction to live their lives more fully and unashamedly for themselves, at no expense to anyone else, in the unshakable belief that in doing so, the world would be the better for it. In this outcome, Galambos could have taken ample satisfaction.


This is an open source download of a 3 session course by Andrew Galambos, delivered live in 1966, entitled ‘The Declaration of Independence, Thomas Paine and Your Freedom.’

Track 1
Track 5

Track 2
Track 6

Track 3
Track 7

Track 4

%d bloggers like this: