Please be sure to downloaded the AGENDA 21 PDF. File here:



  • Money (US Currency)  controls the OIL Industry, and the world
  • OPEC: Exclusivity is US DOLLARS ONLY
  • Who controls the OCCUPY Movement?
  • Distractions to the original INTENT of Occupy Movement
  • Who is George Soros?
    • Who is Maurice Strong? Billionaire Canadian Maurice Strong is a man of profound influence. He’s been called the “Michelangelo of networking,” “an international traveling salesman with buts [sic] of paper in his pocket” and described as “a cross between Rasputin and Machiavelli.”

Maurice Strong And The Collapse Of Industrialized Civilizations

In 1990, a small, round faced Canadian described a scenario to a reporter. He envisioned a small group of world leaders concluding that the rich countries were the “principle risk to the Earth.” This group then created a plan to get the rich countries to “sign an agreement reducing their impact on the environment.” When the rich countries refused, the group decided “the only hope for the planet” was for the industrialized civilizations to collapse. He pondered, “Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?”

Two years later, he helped lay the foundation for the Kyoto Protocol at the Earth Summit in Rio De Janeiro. His name is Maurice Strong, and he would love to see America collapse.


Please watch the TRIBE TV SHOW NOW (last show for 2012!)


The CFR/TRILATERAL CONNECTION: Rockefeller/Kissinger/Brazinski

By Gene Berkman

  • William Cooper has a graph of the control laid out in the back of his book BEHOLD A PALE HORSE


Money Isn’t Speech and Corporations Aren’t People ” ~ David Kairy

Move to amend


Overturn the Amendment CITIZENS UNITED

Amended the US Constitution January 21st, 2012 ruling that Corporations are people.

It affects WE THE PEOPLE in regards to the elections, the corporations can now donate money to campaigns …..


“The Supreme Court held in Citizens United that it was unconstitutional to ban free speech through the limitation of independent communications by corporations, associations, and unions,[21] i.e. that corporations and labor unions may spend their own money to support or oppose political candidates through independent communications like television advertisements.[22] This ruling was frequently interpreted as permitting corporations and unions to donate to political campaigns,[23] or else removing limits on how much a donor can contribute to a campaign.[24] However, these claims are incorrect, as the ruling did not affect the 1907 Tillman Act’s ban on corporate campaign donations (as the Court noted explicitly in its decision[25]), nor the prohibition on foreign corporate donations to American campaigns,[26] nor did it concern campaign contribution limits.[27] The Citizens United decision did not disturb prohibitions on corporate contributions to candidates, and it did not address whether the government could regulate contributions to groups that make independent expenditures.[22] The Citizens United ruling did however remove the previous ban on corporations and organizations using their treasury funds for direct advocacy. These groups were freed to expressly endorse or call to vote for or against specific candidates, actions that were previously prohibited.[28]

The majority opinion, written by Justice Kennedy, was relatively short, less than 30 pages; the dissenting opinions of Justices Kennedy and Scalia in Austin v. Michigan State Chamber of Commerce and McConnell v. Federal Election Commission actually provide a more complete picture of the majority’s thinking, in many respects. Chief Justice Roberts wrote a concurring opinion to address concerns about stare decisis, and Justice Scalia wrote a concurring opinion about the history and meaning of the First Amendment. Justice Thomas wrote separately to announce his disagreement with the majority’s decision not to strike down the mandatory disclosure requirements in BCRA. Justice Stevens wrote a lengthy dissent to analyze the development of First Amendment doctrine and campaign finance restrictions and to rebut the arguments of the majority and concurring opinions.”

President Barack Obama stated that the decision “gives the special interests and their lobbyists even more power in Washington — while undermining the influence of average Americans who make small contributions to support their preferred candidates”

Obama later elaborated in his weekly radio address saying, “this ruling strikes at our democracy itself” and “I can’t think of anything more devastating to the public interest”

On January 27, 2010, Obama further condemned the decision during the 2010 State of the Union Address, stating that, “Last week, the Supreme Court reversed a century of law[58] to open the floodgates for special interests — including foreign corporations — to spend without limit in our elections. Well I don’t think American elections should be bankrolled by America’s most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities.”


American’s I ask you:

What is the difference between lobbying and Citizens United????


Reading Material:

The Image of the Corporate Symbol:

Please follow and like us:
Tweet 988k
2 thoughts on “REALITY CHECK : USA Corporate Elections MACHINE Part II”
  1. can you help, ive tried the ffchs and they just ignored me,, yes i’m tthe biggest t.i. targetet indivdual in the uk 07967525857

Leave a Reply