Bank Runs – A Useful Tactic, And All You Should Know On The Subject


A bank run occurs when many clients withdraw their money from a bank, because they believe the bank may cease to function in the near future. 

It is an efficient way to make a statement to the countries government. 

The video above talks about the shift of the French yellow vest movement to protesting the banks. This video touches a bit on the new laws against protesting, and how this new tactic is intended to be both legal, and nonviolent. He discusses the global implications, and how this idea could have large ripple effects. He also notes how the idea of a deliberate bank run has much more potential to affect those they intend to.

The first attempt ever to effect change by attempting a bank run. Dubbed “The Tax Collector’s Referendum”. Ties together very well how targeting the banks through a bank run can disrupt the finances of the 1%. Explains the reasoning behind the tactic, and why it can be tremendously useful.

What is a bank run? – Investopedia


In these videos we are given a walk through of how our central bank works. The commercial banks all hold accounts at the federal reserves. Each bank is required to have a certain amount of cash on hand to satisfy loans from the reserve. All commercial banks hold accounts at the central banks.

We are also shown how banks operate, how our money is used by them, and how currency interacts with both commercial and central banks.

Investopedia explains central banks

How central banks influence currency supply

The 9 functions of central banks


In this video, the idea is proposed what would happen if each person today asked to withdraw all their money in $100 bills. This would not actually be possible, as illustrated in video banks typically only have $.06 on hand for every $100 deposited due to the requirement of using our money to repay their loans from the recession in 2008. The balance of what we deposit facilitates loans to generate profits to keep system running.

As the video explains, the only cash at the Federal Reserve is that which they “reserve the right to print”. In the event all citizens did this, it would force the banks to borrow large amounts of money from the central bank, and respectively force them to print more currency. Essentially everyone withdrawing all their money would cause the banks to become bankrupt themselves, and the federal reserve would make us currency.


In the video above, they talk more about the bail in policies. After the 2008 banking recession, laws were passed allowing banks to use deposits to prop up the institutions. The bank of Cyprus was a test run for these policies. Some depositers even had 60% of their savings seized! This was rolled out to the G20 countries, enacting plans in the EU, US, UK, Canada, New Zealand, and more. The global central bank has recorded over $700 trillion units of currency deposited, with global GDP around $70 trillion. Currently, when you deposit money you become an uninsured creditor. There is not enough money in circulation to cover the losses from total bank collapse.
The video above talks about how banks are no longer simply holding our money, we are now actually loaning it to them. The yellow vests are calling for all citizens to withdraw all money. They advocate this legal nonviolent tactic to create an absolute nightmare for the 1%.
In the video above we are explained about how banks essentially run a scheme to gamble with our money for profit with diagrams. They discuss bank “bail ins”, and the bank of Cyprus.

They talk about bail in’s, and global banking. They give an example of how in 2013, one bank actually stole money from their customers by converting uninsured deposits into equity for recapitalization. These “bail in’s” are beginning to happen globally, and under the new rules “globally systemic banks will have to hold total loss absorbing capacity. Equity or debt that can be converted into shares of at least 16-20 % of their assets, weighted for risk”.

Bailouts are bad for politicians, and that is why this scheme was initially enacted. “The new global rules will force creditors to bear banks’ losses, ensuring taxpayers’ money should never again be used to bail out banks.” At the Brisbane G20 summit the countries all agreed to implement the new bail in concept. They pitch the idea as they would prevent recessions with bail in’s using money only from creditors, though in truth they are utilizing everyone’s money. They show how many countries have implemented these policies.

What are bail in’s?

More on the bank of Cyprus

The bank still exists too!


In this video we are walked through the scenario of a bank run from the perspective of the banks balance sheet. Commercial banks essentially hold assets or bonds, loans to customers, shareholder equity or investments, and customer deposits.

They state that a recession or crash is inevitable, but predicting when is impossible due to the amount of manipulation. The largest world banks do not have close to enough cash on hand to give everyone their money. The only thing supporting the banks is peoples faith in the system itself.

The video touches on JP Morgan, Wells Fargo, Goldman Sachs, TD, Alpha Bank, and Credit Unions. All institutions on hand only have only pennies on the dollar respective to total deposits. If everyone withdraws all their money these institutions would crumble respectively. “If your money is in the bank, it’s not yours, it’s theirs.” They suggest private vaults, gold or silver, and crypto currency as alternatives.

Banks operate on incredible risk, as they are no longer simply savings institutions. Where they now operate as investment banks our money is marked as a liability in their books because they can do almost anything with it. A man in Manatoba Canada was once told at a credit union that to withdraw a million dollars he would have to take out $100,000 each year to do so.

Through this video we come to learn more how banks work. Banks want cashless society’s so they own the money and have control of it. Bank runs ultimately can take the banks down altogether.


“Runs can be very useful in threatening bankers to stop taking such excessive risks.”

A run ensures a bank will close before becoming insolvent and be forced to repay depositors in full without a bailout. We currently hold the power to threaten banks with total failure and no possibility of a life boat.



The video above appears to come from a tech podcast. This person discusses how quickly things can change in a modern age. A big focus of this video is the implications of crypto currency with the French yellow vests calling for a bank run. The idea of everyone simply hoarding cash seems foolish, and here we examine some of the benefits of global decentralized currency as well as what society may look like without banks.

– Adam Rice

NCID – An Opinion On How To Get Our Power Back

In this piece I’m going to examine a constitutional amendment that was proposed in 2012 and was suppressed to the point that it never gained any traction. The National Citizens Initiative For Democracy, or NCID, is very similar to the RIC which is currently a large focal point of the French Yellow Vest Movement. It’s based upon a concept that through referendums and initiatives citizens can create or remove laws to affect chance outside the existing branches of government. The NCID can be assessed in depth through the links at the end of the article and readers can see how they had proposed facilitating doing as such when the situation calls for it. I’ve met individuals throughout this movement who have proposed the idea of a fourth branch of government. In many ways I could see the NCID being just that, as it would essentially make the people most powerful through the referendums and would result in them being a check and balance on any branch of government.
Many times in the past when we have seen social uprisings (at least in my generation in U.S.A.) its been a frequent point of concern that there are too many demands. I’d like to suggest my opinion as to how something like the NCID could shorten a list of demands while still amount to a means to correct the overwhelming list of issues we face. Currently the people do not have the power that we were taught we did in school. I was educated to understand that the people are sovereign and our government is of, by, and for the people. The situation we see today though is a government run amuck and is routinely making choices against what a majority of people want. When focusing on one issue at a time it appears to me that a large majority of people do feel similarly enough and could agree on things, but the system isn’t set up so we can fix our own problems. We only vote on people from the party’s they present to us and as such we are regularly forced to choose the “lesser of two evils”.

When the people start organizing a movement and put together a list of things that need to be changed or fixed it appears to me the next step is to demand the government do the things we demand. Well, history would show that the government may do enough to quell the uprising but will never completely correct the system as a whole so exploitation never exists. Through the demand for NCID we demand one thing…our power back. If our government gave us this right (which we SHOULD already have) we could spend our time fixing many of these problems on our own without needing to demand action from the government. Through this proposal we would be the supreme power, similar to what most of us were taught in school. The beauty of this proposal is that it could truly be implemented to any form of government and net the same results.

There’s a saying that goes something like “people in power should not also write the rules of power”. This too ties into this proposal very much as it would allow us to remove any laws that are passed against the will of the people. In almost any situation the people could decide to do or not do whatever they vote on. I’d like to give a few examples to establish what I’m describing. Say the people wanted transparency in an investigation or an audit that is taking place but the process is kept classified, through binding referendum the people could not only declassify the proceedings but they could actually take a role of oversight in the process after a successful vote. In the case of something like 5g cell towers, the people could vote to opt out or have more studies done prior to it rolling out. In many cases there will be several options to choose from, and I will later touch on an improvement to HOW we vote as another movement has created something I think should be paired with this to be most effective. This referendum concept could truly be applied to anything from healthcare to education curriculum, budget, and more. Any time something is not being done the people can see it enacted and vice versa.

To touch on how we vote I’d like to direct some attention to the equal vote coalition. They use the term STAR voting, but I’ve heard this named score-choice voting most commonly. The general premise is instead of getting to give one vote to a single option in the list, voters will provide a score to each item on the list. In STAR voting each option can be rated from 1-5 based on desirability and the highest score wins. This is not the same thing as ranked choice voting, and living in a state that has used that method I would like to suggest why I feel this is a better option. First, in ranked choice you get 3 choices and in a situation where there are say 5 candidates you can only place a vote on the top 3. If your top choice does not get 50% or more of the vote then there is a second round where your vote now goes to your second choice. In our state there were long drawn out court battles over this process taking place and truthfully it appeared to drag out the process longer than it needed to. With a score based model like the equal vote coalition, there is no need for additional rounds and voters can give their opinion on all options. One primary goal is to not split the vote, but truthfully this could still happen with ranked choice where its nearly impossible in score choice. Imagine a scenario where there is an election for officials and now instead of there being “two evils” there are three. Many times people vote for the lesser of the two in fear of splitting a vote and getting the worse option. In the event that 3 candidates like that are presented, the ranked choice model would still result in many people picking the “lesser of three evils” and independent candidates would likely still not get a fair shake. The way I see it, only through a score choice model where people rate all options presented can we truly eliminate a “split vote” and take fear out of our voting process.

To conclude, I’d finally like to touch a bit on what these two things would look like when combined. Earlier I gave a few examples of how referendums could be used to vote on issues and exert our own power to fix them. With these referendums and this voting model we wouldn’t need to simply do yes/no votes on one solution. Take the issue of 5g cell phone towers again. Instead of voting to simply stop the 5g we could have several options: Stop it now, do more studies, proceed as planned, etc. People could be rating how much they like each option and the most desirable could win. The same could be true with almost any cause, when the people decide something must be done about an issue they can form committees for each stance on the issue and present an option to the referendum. When people vote they can give their opinion equally to each option and participate in a fair, inclusive, and transparent process that I feel would be far more successful than how things are done now. The way I see it, it may be of merit to revamp these two concepts into one singular idea as truthfully they fit together perfectly. In our yellow vest movement we can stay focused on the NCID as the solution to almost every issue we face because it gives us a great model to approach the solutions ourselves. We wouldn’t need demands as it pertains to each cause and if we get this one thing it may be the last time we need to demand anything from the government. Inefficient or corrupt officials could be voted out by the people if enough thought it were necessary and likewise the system itself would be modified just enough that it cannot only work for the 1% yet we wouldn’t need to tear the entire thing down and start fresh. These are just my opinions after months of thought on the concepts but I do think there’s enough merit to warrant others thinking a bit on the concept as we really are at a point in history where something needs to change as most problems in existence today should by no means be allowed to continue.

Equal Vote Coalition Website

National Citizens Initiative For Democracy Website

On Est La – An American In France

Arriving in Paris I had butterflies in my stomach, right off the bat I was going to meet several people for the first time that I’d been working with online for months. Walking into the terminal at Charles DeGaulle airport Kate, Fred, and Robert were all waiting for me and flagged me down. We all connected and briefly walked to the car. Along the way there I quickly learned how difficult communication was going to be as my good friend Kate really spoke no English at all. I learned that Fred was pretty good with English, and we were lucky as it made many things a lot easier over the course of my next week in France.
Our first stop that day was the alliance jaune headquarters in Paris. We met several people there working on the yellow party’s campaign for the election may 26. Robert had a nice conversation with the woman about the failed RIC attempts that had been made in Utah while i still took in the gravity of what we were doing. I quickly got hungry so we all went to get some lunch and ended up at a KFC elsewhere in Paris where Fred bought us all lunch. The walk there was a shocking site as even with no protests that day we saw motorcades of military police that stretched entire blocks patrolling the city. At the KFC I was introduced to the huge change to European fast food restaurants – you now only order food from an automated terminal at all chains.

Over the meal Fred explained a lot to us about the election. He explained how the EU was supposed to be a good thing. After world war 2 the EU was sold to the french as a means of preventing wars like that, and came with many perks. He continued to also explain one specific downside to give an example of the complex situation. On one hand travelling to other countries is easier, but it can make the taxation unfair. In France employers have to pay a special tax on the wages they give employees. If a worker is paid $1000 euro, then the employer must pay $750 euro to the government. If the employer hires someone from a country like Poland then they are exempt from the tax. Many employers have now chosen to stop hiring french employees because it is cheaper and they likened it to our corporations choosing to hire undocumented workers to get around labor laws. Fred explained how he could envision many ways to stay in the EU and correct the issues but with many things, it may not work, and everyone had different opinions.
With their model, they had a plan that was an embodiment of the compromise in political stance between the younger generation and the older. In France there were many divides I witnessed people trying to work through. The biggest was between the elders wanting to fix the system and the young people wanting something new. Through the platform of the “yellow card” they could ideally move towards the RIC, and start fixing problems. Fred explained how the election process worked and even the steepness of the challenge ahead. In France they had 33 parties competing for this election, but they vote quite a bit differently than we do in America. Here the parties run candidates and we vote on the individual but there they vote on the party itself. Each party will create a list containing one member from each area of Paris. As people vote on each list the percentage of people are pulled proportionally from each list to serve in a portion of the parliament. He explained further how even at that point the representatives cannot create laws. Laws are proposed to parliament by a body no citizens vote for and these officials that are elected can only vote on these proposals.

After lunch we made a quick stop at the headquarters again and then drove to my friend Timothee’s house in Montargis where we’d stay for the next week. Before getting to the home we stopped at a local discount food store LIDL for a few things, and saw a GJ camp across the street. I would later learn how almost every group had at least one of these “camps”. A simple thing, these two had a pop up tent that they sat under located to the side of a rotary by the highway off-ramp. They placed signs all around the road where drivers would honk in support as they passed. The two men here explained how they had been arrested in the city for taking the french flags off the government buildings and returning them to the people. When he was caught, he was banned from Paris and each weekend he now has to check in with the sheriff. He responded by occupying the round point in Montargis on weekdays instead.

That evening we shared a social drink and all sat down for an exquisite home cooked meal. Timothee’s dad had prepared several soups for us with Tim’s wife. We shared some very interesting discussion over the meal with Fred, and Kate before they left. That night I spent a while talking to Timothee about philosophy and it was this evening I had one of my first revelations. He had briefly touched on how they use the same phrases “sleeping” and “wake up” the way we do. I believe he posed it like a question: “what do you think people do while they are out there each Saturday?” He explained to me for the first time that evening how the manifests themselves had actually become a tool to increase awareness of the members. As people talk to each other every Saturday they share ideas and grow. As philosophy meets collaboration the collective as a whole rises and better ideas naturally flourish. Where everything is vibrations (on a deep level), that the togetherness and sharing of ideas could actually be the most important element because people need to grow. We went to bed fairly early that night as there was a big project coming up the next day and we’d need to be up early.

The first whole day in France was the only day I was in Paris that I woke up earlier than Robert if I remember correctly. I took a trip with Tim, his wife, and a friend of his to a farm in the country side where posters for the alliance jaune were being distributed. The campaign posters were to be delivered all over the country and were arriving on a big truck. We unloaded something like 50,000 posters on palates and placed them in vans that arrived from all the big cities in the country. After dinner that night, Robert and I went out and explored Montargis at night and talked to many of the locals and discussed the Gilet Jaune with a bunch of people. We met people who both supported them, and others who didn’t. The next morning was manifest but we still ended up being out pretty late.

While in Montargis we were lucky enough to get a tour of the town. There was a large castle that we toured the outside of that had been converted into a school. We could see for miles from the top of the castle walls. Montargis is called the Venice of France by some due to its canal system and we followed them around the town. We saw a park where it was said that communism was birthed, and that Mao had spent extensive time in this town. The only museum was that of Chinese history and many toured here to see it. All in all this was one of the most beautiful places I had ever seen in my life. Timothee’s father was a teacher and we were lucky to have such kind and warm hosts while we spent our first week in the country.

The next day I slept in and had initially planned to go to a different town than Paris with Timothee. When I found in the morning he had other things required of him that day I contacted Robert. I thought he had already been in Paris but he was still at the train station in town waiting for a ride from Fred. I walked over to the station and we all rode to go to the manifest in Paris. We picked Kate up on our way to the city and traveled about an hour to the location where the manifestants were. It had been raining off and on much of the day which resulted in there being less people at the first location. We had to walk through a small park to get to the area where the GJ’s danced in the street. Horde’s of police lined the street in all black but let us enter safely.

Once we got to the crowd I saw a solitary car in the center of the road blasting bob Marley music while the protesters danced happily. Both sides of the road were blocked with police vehicles and officers. Everywhere small clicks of average people in vests ate, drank, and socialized. I saw nobody directly hassling the officers at this location, in fact most paid them no mind. A few individuals paraded a banner, others flew flags, and some sang chants through a megaphone. The large majority of people seemed to just be socializing and sharing ideas and stories. Eventually the officers moved in slowly and began to force the crowd out of the area. Fred explained that we had to leave but the group planned to reconvene in another location. As we walked back to the car we met a group of people headed where we were and talked a bit. We explained how we were actual yellow vest’s from america and saw all their faces light up with joy.

We next traveled to La Place De Republique on the other side of Paris. Already the streets were lined with hundreds of police officers. The all wore body armor, helmets, and carried shields and large guns. We passed safely to the square and my jaw dropped immediately. First, there were two box trucks equipped with massive exterior speakers blasting EDM music from live DJ’s. Crowds of young people drank beer and danced intensely on both sides of the central monument. Almost unnoticed at first, a much larger crowd of GJ’s quickly amassed the monument. As people arrived Robert flew our flag next to a man who held one of the flags reclaimed from the government buildings. A man came up to Robert and was very angry we were flying our flag but Robert did a wonderful job explaining our intentions and he left. The man with the french flag had a much more reasonable response and the two of them chatted while I filmed the crowd a bit. They set off yellow smoke and hung vests from the monument and called for the crowd to march.

We marched along with our flag in the crowd of a thousand or more people. We were very close to the back of the crowd and quickly realized we needed to run as we begun to hear explosions behind us. Flag in hand we hustled forward as the explosions continued. There was a moment when I looked over my shoulder and actually caught a glimpse of an exploding flash ball just feet behind me. I told Robert to run and we darted around a corner as I saw police chase the crowd a different way. We escaped safely and with our adrenaline pumping, I decided we should find the crowd and ensure they were safe. We came to an intersection closed down by a line of officers. An old man was arguing with an officer who was clearly threatening him, and the other was kicking chairs over in a restaurant hassling the patrons. We decided after a bit of convincing on Roberts part to go stand silently with our flag and face the police directly. I was admittedly quite scared but we did so and the police actually turned around shortly after.

By this point Robert and I were not with our friends Fred and Kate who had stayed back at the plaza. We walked back to the plaza to meet Kate and found the entire area surrounded by police officers. We knew they were going to force us back and they did initially, and everyone congregated across the street as certain individuals began to lead chants and songs to motivate the crowd. It was at this point we again took our flag out and stood in the street and sang along. Shortly after this everyone began to march towards the officers and they were pushed back a bit. The front line moved back and forth a bit and the crowd finally disbanded. In all the running during this manifest I lost my cell phone which both complicated some things here, but also in many ways made the rest of my trip much more interesting. We had lunch in Paris after the manifest concluded and stayed in one of Kate’s friend’s apartments for the night before getting a ride back to Montargis in the morning.

Jeremy Clement is a big spokesperson for the alliance jaune and someone I’d followed online at home for quite a while now. He picked us up and drove us back to Timothee’s house the next morning. We stopped for lunch at a burger king before parting ways and met his family. We had a nice meal and Jeremy explained that he wanted to bring a number of people and independent reporters and come manifest in America. At the time we floated the idea of coming back in a large group right after the elections and manifesting in Utah and Philadelphia. I later realized there were a few flaws in this plan, the first being that leaving the country in a large group could be difficult. Recently a large group of German yellow vests had attempted to take the train to join the protests but were denied entry to the country despite their freedom of travel. Secondly, I figured fundraising may take a little while. Lastly it would also take time to coordinate the events, so we put that on the back burner.

The next day Jeremy, Kate and Fred took us to Kate’s home in eastern France where we had events planned for the next two days. It took an entire day to get out there and I saw my first glimpses of the French countryside. We spent the night talking to her young children who were incredibly aware of what was going on in their country. Her 12 year old wished he was old enough to go to manifests, and her young daughter was very happy the adults were doing the things they were. We all took some photos and had dinner before catching up on some much needed sleep.

The following day started with us going to have breakfast at a GJ camp in Eastern France. We had bread and coffee and socialized a bit before we all went to “court watch” at the nearby tribunal. In France there are cameras everywhere, especially on the highway. Most overpasses have 20 cameras attached to them that I’m told can tell if people have their seat belts off. Likewise there are speed cameras everywhere that tag your speed and mail you tickets for violations. Many people during manifest were given summons for setting the machines on fire. I was told that they weren’t arrested, but their identity was discovered from the camera footage. In France I was told often times people will not have access to a lawyer so they will show support at their hearings like some do here in America. There are many cases in France where people are arrested for simply wearing a vest. They are then held without bail for several days, and arraigned without a lawyer. We were explained that the French are supposed to have lots of rights, but just like in America it seemed is if they were all being blatantly ignored.

From here we went to do two social gatherings that would be covered by several press outlets. First in a nearby park and then at a round point close by I observed another thing that seemed to repeat itself throughout my trip. It seemed that at least once a week the small local groups would meet for food and hold organized discussions. At times they would debate ideas, or talk strategy, and all was done civilly. At the first location we had a picnic and then everyone listened to Francis Lelanne play some music for all the children. He then talked to the group a bit on some of his ideas and everyone talked for a while. The second location was much more like a debate. As Francis and a Woman took turns exchanging sentiments I asked someone what the discussion was about.

A person explained to me that many in France didn’t want to vote at all anymore. Many felt that no matter who they voted for it would be nothing but enabling the same system to continue. Some felt that no list could ever represent all of France and wanted it all to stop so something new could flourish. Others believed in the model established by the alliance jaune. They felt that if there were many avenues to get where they want to be, then try all of them. They believed that the fact that alliance jaune was made up of regular people who wished to do nothing other than be transparent and speak FOR the people by using RIC, that it could work. The two were essentially having a televised discussion about both points. I spoke a bit to the cameraman here and he said that was the talk of the town. Both sides were making very valid points and many were split on the issue, it didn’t mean they fought each other, but they certainly disagreed. Everyone’s primary concern was to not hurt the movement and continue manifests until things actually change. Afterwards the two still hugged and talked as friends and it was very clear to me that the way they are doing things here may have ample merit to attempt at home.

Fred drove us back the next morning and dropped Jeremy off in Montargis. Robert and I planned to part directions the next morning and we ended up staying in a hotel that night. Due to a tennis match in the city there was only one room we could find in a hotel that was having its opening night. After we checked in we had some food and wine in the courtyard and I met the owner. Previously she had been a very well known Broadway actress in France and shared some stories. I met another man who had been educated in France and told me a lot of interesting things about the history of France. Many of the people there were all part of a dog walking group in the area and as a fellow animal lover, spent much time sharing animal pictures with people.

The next day I took the train to Marseilles, and boy was it a stressful day. Because of the new automation it seemed that most people bought their train tickets at self service kiosk’s that did not accept cash. If you only had cash, there was one ticket office where 10 people assisted a line that stayed consistently about 100 people long. I waited about an hour to buy my ticket and got some lunch. When I went upstairs I went to see which gate my train came to because there was none on my ticket. By the time I actually found help with the matter my train had left. I was told that they don’t post the gate until 20 minutes prior to departure. I waited in the line for another hour and got a new ticket for a later train. I was afterwards grabbed by three police officers outside who said it was police control. I told them I was American and one who clearly wasn’t said he was too. They asked me many questions and finally let me go inside. After the four hour trip I arrived in Marseilles that night.

I met my friend Petit Jean in the train station who is a medic in Marche Blanche in southern France. He drove an old army Jeep that he told me was an original that had been restored. Before going to his house in Aubagne he drove me to a few sites in the city at night. We first stopped at the skate park by the beach where people usually socialized in the daytime. We next drove to a massive church that stood high on a hill overlooking the whole city. We took some pictures of the city at night and he shared some history with me. All through the city exist the same castle walls that did a long time ago. Historically Marseilles has never respected any authority and they always joke how typically castle walls were to keep invaders out, but here they were built to keep people in. Without those walls the residents here would have always been after the king.

That was a sentiment that was still echoed to this day and was best described by my friend Micah who I met later in the trip. He’d always say “we are not French, we are just Marseille”. Many in this area all had their own way of describing it, but they all rejected the rule of police, government, and more. Petit Jean and Micah had a specific project I will describe later that was aimed at eliminating the Red Cross because they take peoples money and don’t do what they say they do. During the week there were no police patrolling it seemed, nothing compared to Paris. The cities are the same size, and one seems like a war zone and the other seems to exist differently. I’m told that a million people live in Marseille and all things aside, live in peace.

We stopped for snacks on the way to Jean’s house where he lived with his cousin in the country. She made food for us and we talked for several hours about the yellow vests. Jean showed me all of the rounds he had retrieved as a medic that were being used by the police. They had rubber bullets, flash balls, and gas. Also he showed me a rubber bullet grenade that would detonate with TNT and launch 18 rubber bullets into a crowd of people. Him and his cousin explained how a lot of the police are not happy these rounds are being used on the protesters. Historically they had only been used in Marseilles to subdue violent armed criminals. In their city they have large cartels and the primary focus of the police there was in the past to deal with drugs coming into the country from Africa. Now, the police either disagree with the tactics or think its not harsh enough. The reasons the medics are able to operate as they do is because they are neutral, and many police officers are willing to let them work. The conversation that night really set the stage for the next two weeks where I had many of my most memorable experiences.

The next day was the manifest in Marseilles and I didn’t wear white, but helped the medics. I wore full camo and my yellow vest that said press in large letters on the back. Every Saturday the people would meet at the port in the city’s center and march through the city. There were so many people when we arrived, it was incredible. Jean on several accounts throughout the day was asked if he was a Nazi because of the flag on his medical kit. He explained that it was the flag of the French resistance in World War 2 and many people there often use that term at the wrong times. Incidents like that were a rarity though, everyone would sing in unison for hours as they marched through the city.

Unlike Paris the entire way manifests went was a bit different. Here, the police will block the side streets but generally let the people march while attempting to control where they go. There are many pacifists here and they make a sort of game out of their marches. They will go back and forth up all the hills in the city forcing the officers to run in the heat with their equipment so they become tired and less combative. On this occasion however it was a special day, for 6 months they had been trying to manifest inside the train station but would often be gassed before they could get inside. This week we all hid our vests and took so many routes there that the police could not stop our entry into the building. The goal was to march long enough to disrupt the trains departures long enough that it costs the train company money. Inside we marched and sang our songs while most of the people who were there cheered and filmed.

It was in here where I had my second encounter with the police. As the large force of officers ran inside I had put my helmet on and was wearing a respirator in case gas was used. The officers grabbed me and pushed me against a wall and demanded I remove the headgear. I complied and then was ordered to give my backpack which I also did. I told them I was an American journalist and they shut my camera off and returned only that and my bag. Immediately afterwards the officers charged a group of protesters and beat them with their night sticks. Petit Jean was over helping the victim so I snuck outside and smoked a cigarette with the crowd while he worked. I met a woman outside with an Anonymous mask on and we both got excited about meeting people from the collective in different countries. We took pictures and eventually Jean came outside. He told me the officers said they would return my items after the manifest, but after many many attempts they never did.

From here we all dispersed, and I walked with Jean to a large shopping area where there was supposed to be another manifest. My new anon friend and I went inside to buy drinks for everyone and were hassled by security going in, and police exiting. We stood across the streets with the medics as a large group of officers beat one man and took him to jail. From here we walked back to the place where we began with my new anonymous friends. We talked a lot on the way there, and ate food before parting ways. Jean and I went then to Provence where a local GJ center was having a 6 month birthday party for the Yellow Jackets. There was food, drinks, music, and films. I bought a Yellow Vest calendar someone was selling copies of here to raise money for legal aid for their jailed comrades. After a lot of socializing we headed home, ate, and got some rest.

The next morning we went to a barbecue at the round point in that area where GJ 13 had their camp set up. Everyone sang and danced after they all ate together. This was a family event where all the kids played together and the adults played yard games. It was truly a sight to see. Many times throughout my trip it was emphasized to me how important it was to have humor and music. The premise behind both is that it continually puts more good back into the movement. Jean explained to me the Marianne women who sang songs. He talked about how there are a lot of women in the movement and they are an element of strength to everyone. I spoke to many who also talked about how having the support of the younger generations was very important. Everyone was very concerned about their future and preserving the planet for generations to come. Having all of the music about the yellow vests made it easier for the younger people to know what was going on, and engaged them in a way that was safer than what adults did.

During the week I stayed with Jean and our friend Micha came over many times. The next weekend we were supposed to go to Brussels, Belgium but encountered issues. During the week we talked a lot about the idea of Yellow Medics. Outside of the protests the medics want to be able to provide free social services to the homeless, elderly, and others in place of the corrupt agencies they have there. I spoke to him about my ideas of ways to get rid of the U.N. and replace it with something thats better and uncorrupted. The long term goal was to actually open up clinics that could further these ends. This is something that spoke so true to my heart that I have chosen to stay in touch with these guys and work on many things with them moving forward.

We also had a lot of great discussions about independence. In many people’s eyes here Marseilles was just Marseilles, not France. They will never respect the authority of the government and many see the quickest way to be free from government in any regard was to build something of your own to replace it. Regarding Red Cross and Corporate healthcare the Yellow Medic clinics were the ideal alternative. Many here loved the RIC too as they were simply tired of the government and its corruption. They felt if they could just worry about their own city independently many things would be better. I also learned in depth how the medics operate. They wear white symbolizing neutrality so they can maintain their arrangement with police to treat the injured. If they want to express their opinion and protest they manifest in yellow or black. Typically the yellow vests are the pacifists and the black blocks take additional steps. The black blocks and yellow vests do not seem to fight each other from what I observed, and most yellow vests in the south showed appreciation for what the black block’s do. The medics stay neutral towards everyone and off to the side and only have the focus of treating injuries.

The next manifest in Marseilles was also amazing, in part because it seemed like I knew so many people in the city at this point. Our march was led by a large group of drummers and I spent a good portion of time dancing and filming on the front lines. This time I was wearing the medic vest which was white and was left alone by the police the whole time. I did not see any violence at this event, but at one point the police did corral a large group of protesters into an alley and check everyone’s ID. I was able to help treat a woman who had an epileptic seizure at one point during this manifest as the responder had to call an ambulance. I had such a good time standing with Marseilles this day and I’ll never forget.

Afterwards we drove to the Airport to go to Belgium, but due to a crazy rule we were unable to go. Jean was fine, but Micah and I who bought our tickets days earlier hadn’t checked in online 48 hours before so they demanded more money. Nowhere on any of their emails did it say this was the policy, but neither of us could afford the fees they were asking so we stayed behind. I spent a few days in the city with Mica while Jean went to the other manifest. We took a bus to his apartment first to drop off my bags, and then headed to go buy some pot as both of us were incredibly stressed out and worried for Jean’s safety alone in Belgium.

On the walk across the city he explained to me about how the area we were going to was very dangerous. In America we have lots of smaller gangs, but here there were basically just a few large mafia’s. One was as he put it, a pickpocket cartel, and the other was an Islamic religious mafia. They all lived in a big area that resembled a New York City housing project. They stayed in business by paying off the officers in drugs and cash, and instead of their operation being stopped the officers instead focus only on their customers and competition. All of the weed, hashish, and other drugs come in from Africa and if you want to grow your own pot it is incredibly risky to do in large French cities. The drug market is essentially controlled by this cartel, and inside it was obvious. They had look outs on every corner and I was not even allowed inside. I stayed in the street where I could be seen from a distance. I was later told that it was more dangerous for me there than at manifests as I could meet a grim fate going there alone. Needless to say, nothing bad actually did happen and we returned home safely. We smoked a couple joints and watched the old 1984 movie from the 1950’s and got some sleep.

The next day was a slow day as we did laundry and picked up the house a bit. We went to Petit Jeans house and had lunch and retrieved some of my items and talked a while. The next day we took a tour of the city and walked along the beach a bit. My friend told me how he thinks things may get a lot worse before they get better. I had heard similar thoughts to his from many throughout my trip. Sooner or later many had established they would ditch their pacifist nature if something did not change. Nobody in France had any intentions of quitting until things change, and more were starting to view things differently. He explained how less people wear the vest now but instead wear arm bands. More people are becoming black block’s because they are fed up with not being heard. In this one persons opinion it could easily become a war of people versus the establishment.

We talked too about how the same elites control all of our countries. The central banks control everyone’s currency and they buy all the politicians. Here it was explained that people of any political stance share a common understanding that all the politicians screw everyone. They spend as much time debating opinions as we do, but when it comes time to fight they stand strong because the same people screw everyone. We talked about how much the French government spies on citizens and how there is almost nothing online they don’t spy on. Their government bought the codes to Discord and can see literally everything, Facebook is infiltrated, and many Telegram groups are too. The only safe interaction from spying is direct messages on Telegram as he put it. He explained how he didn’t know what will cause it, or when, but if one looks at history then we are following a pattern. These are the types of protests that lead to things like the French and American revolutions, and on this course there’s a lot that might or might not happen. They are marching into the unknown as he put it, and with so many pacifists they commit to non-violence because preserving the movement is integral. As long as there are so many pacifists it would stay that way, they vote on all decisions democratically. If the tides turned the way he saw it, things could become a lot different there and many throughout France seemed to be thinking this way as they grew more frustrated.

After our talk by the water we attended a general assembly meeting in the city. These occurred among all the groups in the cities of France, and there was always the time taken to discuss things in real life. One man here said the general assemblies are key because everyone must take time to actually talk to each other and listen, but also in the real world as social media will never allow the growth that meetings like these do. They talked for quite a while and ate food before we walked to the bus. On the walk some members from the meeting talked about how frustrated many were with the election. She explained how every time the politicians send people to the cities with envelopes of cash to buy votes. Without fail, every election the people they wanted to win always lost. We passed dozens sleeping on the street and remarked how that was the true violence of it all. The system in each country serves one interest and that is preserving itself. No officials serve the interest of the people, the economy only allows a small few to gain immense wealth while most struggle, we pollute our planet when we possess the ability not to, and medicine these days is closer to poison. We shared so many of the same problems in both our countries but shared hope because we knew as long as we don’t quit something has to give eventually. That’s their number 1 rule, never lose hope.

Eventually Petit Jean returned from Belgium and we spent a few days at his house before I flew home. We had another round point meeting in the city on my last night and talked to more people on a lot of these same topics. Jean was gearing up for his medic march on Saturday where he planned to march from Marseilles to Paris. His plan to protest the police violence was to embark on this march and ideally pick up as many people along the way as he could. I’ve been following his journey since I’ve gotten back. I’ve also begun to try and translate this experience into something we can all make use of at home. This last section will conclude with many of my observations and some ideas I had upon leaving France.

The biggest thing I noticed was how few people actually spent any time watching TV in France compared to the amount that do here. I think that if we can encourage more people to turn off the TV it would absolutely prove valuable, but likewise impossible. The same goes for social media, most of their organizing seems to be done through their general assemblies in person. The regular face-to-face interaction also appeared to make a significant difference. I believe it will be necessary to form groups in each city as well as each state. In those groups they can post fliers and begin organizing off the internet. This is a project many can have fun with, and engage in some fun with their local groups at same time.

If we don’t do something soon we will become like France also. The cameras and heavily armed government looming over everyone is nothing short of the same tyranny experienced in 1776-1789. It will prove useful to focus directly on waking people up to the madness, and also perfect a system to counteract division and propaganda. I have since created a hypothetical model for people to work with me on and test. The French seem to debate ideas socially and it benefits them much. To get to this same point I believe we will need to take baby steps and a solid plan. We should be able to disagree and talk to it without fighting, but the issue exists everywhere. The sooner we figure out a solution to this that encourages more communication is the sooner we as a society grow stronger.

Above anything else, we all need the RIC. Referendums and initiatives initiated by the citizens to create or remove laws. In this capacity, the people are their own branch of government that holds more power than any other branch. Whether government is changed, fixed, abolished, etc. this one thing will be the key to it in my eyes. We can implement it so many different ways I can conceive. No matter how things are set up when this is over, the RIC will give the citizens all their power back.

Throughout my whole trip in France I noticed many things it seemed people were in complete agreement on. Often people would write on their vests all the causes they were standing for. On that list were a few items like save the environment, stop polluting, save our kids, and the RIC. The beauty of the RIC is it is something each country can do even if their governments are set up differently, as well as it is something the entire world can also utilize to make global decisions. At the same time whether used on a small scale or a large scale, there are many ways this could be implemented. The biggest split I ever saw related to the RIC wasn’t that the people needed this but how do we actually do it? We met many people in Paris talking on different methods of implementation and many are thinking on this. It appeared that the ultimate goal is to devise several methods of implementing the concept and allowing the people to decide democratically. Similar to us here in America it seemed all people accepted the weight of the corruption within our system, the phenomena of the same issues existing worldwide, and that citizens need their power returned. Because of this it seemed that despite seeing different ways to implement the RIC, everyone still could agree that it is a perfect check and balance on most all things. There is no doubt in my mind that to get RIC implemented here we will have to work through the same viewpoints they do: direct democracy vs. representative democracy, no government vs. fix what we have, or no rulers vs. administrators. It seemed because the people there have maintained a successful platform to debate ideas they don’t have to spend as much time convincing people to come to the table, but instead can actually work together and blend thoughts to come up with viable options. In the near future I will be writing up something on the RIC where I’ve established a few different ways we could implement this here so Americans could even vote on a direction we wish to take together.

Medics are very necessary to call for action because they make protesters feel safe. It will be important to establish a medic network prior to any big actions. Medics should be capable of committing to complete neutrality so they are able to operate safely at manifest. These individuals could enact networks in cities to provide free care to the elderly, veterans, or the homeless. The same medics in France talked to me about goals to send teams to South America and Palestine to provide free aid to the injured. Many times it was proposed to me how many organizations have money donated to them and barely do anything to help after a natural disaster, or catastrophe. Whether we pay them of our own accord or through taxes we are more fueling corruption than we are actually helping at this point. These guys showed me a vision worthy of noting heavily in this piece. If there was a global network of medics in every city around the world there would be a true force of light that could respond to nearly everything. The way it was put is they don’t want to be paid for their work, they just do it because someone must. With ideas like these someone always needs to “just try” because its the only way to know if it will work. Just like the alliance jaune in Paris, they too talked about unequivocal transparency.

Through talking to them I came up with my own ideas, the first would be to bite back towards the U.N. and how their agendas actually cause global issues and don’t solve them. When we get into talk about getting rid of the U.N. I naturally start thinking about how do we create something that would replace it? With a few networks of citizens around the globe this could easily be done. The Yellow Medic network would first and foremost have medical and rescue teams that would work for no wages and run off donations. These guys can operate nearly everywhere and help preserve life during extreme conflicts. Secondly there could be a Yellow Peace Core that could also operate globally to maintain peace between nations. In another article I have begun working on a hypothetical method to reduce division and fight propaganda. Tentatively calling this the unity doctrine, I hope this can be improved and tested so it can become a model used in this global peace network. This too could be transparent and operate with volunteers and donations. Thirdly, with global RIC, the replacement network would never hold power over anyone’s sovereignty. This would deliver a method of decision making which put citizens of the globe in charge of what goes on without any globalism or NWO.

The only other thought I had after this was that I think a lot of the things we divide over are because we are still forced to choose between options given TO us. A viable solution could be to come together and reject all their options and create our own. By using the RIC we have a means to democratically decide on literally anything. We can create our own environmental plan, immigration, healthcare, business law, housing, and so much more. If we as a collective can create something new we all are satisfied with, we can demand it as one unified group. No more fighting each other over what big brother feeds us, I dream of teamwork…somehow. I know not how we will all get there, but after going to France I know we can do it. I’ll never lose hope or give up, not now…we’ve come too far. I hope we can all begin to start thinking of how to take all our energy and passion and turn it into big boots on ground activism that everyone can take part in!

The best lesson I really got while here is that independence is much more than just saying I don’t respect your authority. Independence requires work both in the short and long term’s. Much of that work is required so that the people can create a mechanism to solve issues and keep society going WITHOUT the government or corporations being involved. The Yellow Medics seek independence from The Red Cross by building an alternative that is not only better, but free of corruption. This practice can be replicated for nearly anything, and as it was put to me if is far easier to claim true independence when the people are equipped to do everything themselves if need be. There’s no cure all in this idea, I say it will take work because even though a good compromise will bring everyone to the table they still must fight. We fight against an enemy with more money than most of us could dream of. Whether its the pharmaceutical companies, big oil, government, or big tech, they will always have more resources than the people and stop them from doing just this. When we start creating new things that work for everyone I believe we can put a damper on division. We must absolutely all accept when we disagree, but in a process of creating something new disagreement can be critical thinking. We can give ourselves the ability to weigh all sides and options fairly and do what is actually best for everyone. We may all not get 100% of what we wanted, but things will surely be much better. In the face of any issue we can start to move towards creating something new by the people, with the people, for the people. In this manner we can spend time working together more, and fighting less. All in all, I am sure I still have plenty more from this trip I could write on and surely I will. For now, I’m going to consider this all for now and hope many enjoyed this. I’m leaving myself available to do live interviews as needed moving forward. Knowledge is free and I would love nothing more than to share my experience with many.
– Adam Rice


Due Process, Liberty, And New Hampshire Courts Denying Both

The U.S. Constitution defines the inalienable or natural rights that cannot be taken from among citizens. Among those is not just the right to defend their person, but also in the judicial system. In this article readers will read about a situation in New Hampshire where a citizen is being denied due process. Also, below you can see video resources which have more views with the help of the trusted social media company You are born with the right to defend yourself in court, this is a natural right that long predates the Constitution. This document defines the powers of the courts, and the 5th and 14th Amendments exist to do just that. Courts do not have the power to deny your rights to representation, or a fair trial. The 5th reads: “…nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law…”; and the 14th reads: “…; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
All too often now we are learning that violations of our rights have become common in our “free” society. What is free though? Is it a country where the people writing the laws are not also subject them? Our judicial system in America has long since lost touch with the supreme law of our great nation. By denying citizens their liberty and right to due process, our courts are depriving many too of their inalienable rights. Many agents of the court are as power hungry as the “higher ups” in other areas of society, and all this does is erode any degree of fairness or morality in our courts. Its been argued throughout history that if a court writes unrespectful laws, they will challenge peoples morality. When the judicial system allows some people to be punished for crimes while others walk free, this is tyranny. When the civil servants do not show the same respect for the document they swore to protect, this too is tyranny. Each one of us is born with rights that cannot be taken from us and due process is outlined in the 6th Amendment.
This amendment is the most important one, because the right to council, fair trial, and a jury of your peers are the checks and balances on a judicial system. Tyranny is when your government takes away your ability to defend yourself. If you are facing any branch of your state or federal government and counsel is too scared to defend you, that is a clear indicator that something is very wrong. This Amendment reads: “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.” These rights are impeded differently all to often, and in many ways. Where the prosecutors and judges are paid for and directed by the government, it is this amendment that defines your irrevocable rights in a court room. Currently in New Hampshire, a woman who had spent time exposing violations of our rights now finds herself in trouble too.
To explain what is happening to Janet Delfuoco and her history with the Judicial system, its best to start a few years ago. When she and her ex-husband split up, the hearings for both divorce and custody were drawn out and left her filing complaints with the court. Another woman, Margaret Kris, also of New Hampshire had issues during her custody battle over her daughter. In her case, her husband at the time had been documented as beating her, while holding their infant daughter, and still the court awarded him full custody, and her visitations in a state facility funded by taxpayers. In Margaret’s case, over a decade later she still fights the court on the matter. What Janet faces now is quite a bit more serious. After the divorce, her husband stopped making loan payments at the bank which had their home as collateral. For several years Janet engaged in litigation regarding this home equity loan, with her seeking to have the bank discharge the mortgage. After two dismissals, the bank again demanded they resolve the financial matter and she made some posts on Facebook that were taken out of context.
According to discovery, screenshots were taken by a GSCU manager and forwarded to an unrelated attorney a day later. According to interviews with the Attorney General, the manager, Gallant forwarded these photos to Judges Weaver and Anderson. These two Judges had both previously had involvement in her custody dispute. For roughly a year these judges operated an investigation into her, and her associates before issuing her any sort of indictment. She now stands charged with two felonies and one misdemeanor for her posts on Facebook, and will have her day in court on April 8. The issue is that she cannot afford an Attorney and the same court system has denied her requests for a public defender. The prosecution must prove that her posts were caused with intent to harm a person to influence opinion or as retaliation for their actions as a government official. The law this is based on is because of a special class implemented in 2007 and has yet to be argued in the supreme court.
In the case of Margaret, she was never married to her daughter’s father. When it came time for the custody battle he bought the divorce lawyer from his previous marriage who he also left with over $30,000 in legal bills, and later pled bankruptcy. During their time together there was a documented history of domestic violence. At one point over 11 years ago police officers came with a court order to take her daughter after the separation. The court awarded custody to the abusive ex for 10 years before he finally left the state to Indiana. For over a year the court system has done nothing about his leaving, and the battle over custody still continues in New Hampshire. Margaret also had to file a complaint to be involved in her daughter’s education because her ex’s new wife said she was the mother. Her child has an auditory processing learning disability and as such has special needs. In Janet’s case she has asked the court to have Weaver not oversee her hearing, as he was involved in her custody dispute already while investigating her which would be the opposite of impartiality. Likewise Margret has asked that one Judge recuse themselves for not filing a single complaint while he violated every court order for a year.
The supreme law of our nation and it’s preamble is enough to define its purpose. “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.” Now, this has two phrases that I’d implore readers to call attention to: establish justice, and secure the Blessings of Liberty. One could infer from these clauses that the Judicial system should be securing and preserving the Blessings of Liberty. If our inalienable or natural rights are part of Liberty, secured by the law of this document through the courts, then ideally the courts should be protecting the rights listed impartially. That would in my opinion be what they had in mind when designating power to the courts. Through due process, the courts would never acquire enough power to deny any citizen their Liberty.
Liberty is defined as being free in a society from oppressive restrictions by authority on one’s way of life, behavior, or political views. If the laws our courts create and enforce are bound by the principle that all citizens have an unalienable right to Liberty, then how could any agent of the court defy the document and not also face criminal charges? Tyranny, I’ve used this word a lot as it is important. This is defined as cruel, unreasonable, or arbitrary use of power by the Government on it’s people. In America, our Government was separated into three branches as a check and balance to prevent tyranny. To see an America where the Government again seized absolute power without legal right, all three branches would have to become tyrannical. These incidents in New Hampshire are only two of the countless examples that could be made about our failing judicial system. Something needs to change soon, as history would indicate that the more American’s are denied their natural right to Liberty, the closer we get to something far worse than what we have seen in this generation.

-Adam Rice

Video Resources:

Breathing new life into an old proposal

Sitting on the World Wide Web like some prehistoric fossil waiting to be rediscovered is the NCID (National Citizen’s Initiative for Democracy) proposal that was finalized in 2002 by former Senator Mike Gravel. Exploring the website was like uncovering a hidden relic. Clicking deeper into the site I found many links no longer work, but the core of the message was still intact. I was uncovering a document that had been buried for years.

This document I was now reading would have allow representative democracy, and direct democracy to coexist together. Gravel had worked on this proposal during the late 90’s. At that time, it was called the National Initiative proposal. He sent invitations to organizations, professors, media, elected individuals, and anybody else he could think of. The Democracy Foundation ultimately accepted at the 2002 Democracy Symposium that was held in Williamsburg, Virginia. Taking feedback from the conference into consideration, a final draft on the proposed amendment and act was published on September 17, 2002.

The proposal started to get some big-name endorsements in 2008, and this continued through 2012; and then it seemed to just disappear, it vanished from the public eye. It just died…

The NCID is being resuscitated through the Yellow Vest Movement. It is a fundamental legislative proposal that will allow citizens, independent of Representative Government (Congress, Executive and the Judiciary), to propose and vote on laws. NCID consists of a Constitutional amendment and a federal statute.

As it stands now there are only 26 states in USA that carry some type of Initiative and/or Popular Referendum. This is only at a state level. There are no Initiatives or Referendums at the federal level.

The NCID was brought to my attention through a colleague who runs the American Yellow Vest Facebook group. Like the rest of the 65 countries around the world who have joined the Global yellow vest movement, they are demanding some form of Citizen Initiative and Referendum. The United States Yellow Vests are demanding their own version. Who knew there was one that had already been drafted and endorsed, buried on the WWW for 17-years, waiting for the Yellow Vest Movement to come to the USA, to breath new life into this old proposal?


Read more about the NCID here.

Sign the Move On petition here.

Sign the We the People petition here.


The war against Iraq is the creation of the corporations that have seized control of America and its institutions. America was once a democratic republic. It is now a corporatocracy. Corporations are soulless, deathless entities that have all the rights of citizenship that real people have and none of the responsibilities. Corporations have accumulated vast wealth that they have used to purchase, infiltrate, and colonize American government and many governments around the world. Corporations have absorbed the media, the two major political parties, the Congress, the Executive, almost all the Judiciary, in America and in many other countries, welding them into the globe-spanning unit that I have named the Corporatocracy. Corporations have distilled the essence of greed and rage to form their corporate structure. Profits must be maximized. Territory, natural resources, institutions, and citizens must be used and then discarded when they are no longer useful. Corporations must have more markets to colonize, and the military corporations, Boeing and Lockheed Martin, must have more countries to invade.

Since the end of World War II, corporations have emerged as the dominant force controlling the planet. Through the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, and the World Trade Organization, a mere 200 corporations have managed to seize control of 28.3% of the world’s economic output. The fifty largest commercial banks and diversified financial companies assets amount to 60% of the $20 trillion global stock of productive capital.

The war against Iraq is being promoted by the transnational military-industrial corporations for their financial benefit. The business of America is the export of war. The financial institutions that trade in currency, stocks, bonds, derivatives, and other financial instruments must have volatility in the markets in order to make a profit. War creates volatility. Between $800 billion and $1.3 trillion in currency trades are made by speculators every day!

The military-industrial corporations and the military components of the Corporatocracy receive about $400 billion per year from the U.S. Government directly and much more indirectly through pensions. Arms sales by U.S. dealers equaled the amount of arms sold by all other countries in the world combined. The amount of profit the financial institutions will realize probably cannot be calculated. The Corporatocracy must have war in order to turn over its stocks and in order to justify its continued existence. The succession of wars beginning with Vietnam (and continuing with GrenadaPanamaAfghanistanColombiaKuwait, Yugoslavia, Albania, etc.) and now Iraq is exactly like the succession of new models of cars produced by Detroit. Detroit’s cars, since Robert McNamara was head of Ford, have been built to become obsolete (McNamara went on to head the World Bank after he was Secretary of Defense during Vietnam). These wars are like that. Wars favored by the Corporatocracy require the existence of poor countries in which the munitions can be dumped, just like we dump our toxic waste in poor countries. Bombs must be dropped, missiles fired, planes flown, rifles discharged so that more bombs, missiles, planes and ammunition can be manufactured. It is not about oil. Iraq would gladly sell us all the oil we could buy. It is not even about empire. It is about business. It is all about profit. And that makes it all the more horrible, all the more unforgivable.

John Omaha, Ph.D.

“What would have happened if millions of American and British people, struggling with coupons and lines at the gas stations, had learned that in 1942 Standard Oil of New Jersey [part of the Rockefeller empire] managers shipped the enemy’s fuel through neutral Switzerland and that the enemy was shipping Allied fuel? Suppose the public had discovered that the Chase Bank in Nazi-occupied Paris after Pearl Harbor was doing millions of dollars’ worth of business with the enemy with the full knowledge of the head office in Manhattan [the Rockefeller family among others]? Or that Ford trucks were being built for the German occupation troops in France with authorization from Dearborn, Michigan? Or that Colonel Sosthenes Behn, the head of the international American telephone conglomerate ITT, flew from New York to Madrid to Berne during the war to help improve Hitler‘s communications systems and improve the robot bombs that devastated London? Or that ITT built the FockeWulfs that dropped bombs on British and American troops? Or that crucial ball bearings were shipped to Nazi-associated customers in Latin America with the collusion of the vice-chairman of the U.S. War Production Board in partnership with Goering’s cousin in Philadelphia when American forces were desperately short of them? Or that such arrangements were known about in Washington and either sanctioned or deliberately ignored?”

Charles Higham, author of “Trading With The Enemy: The Nazi-American Money Plot 1933-1949

Second Amendment- If Ohio falls the rest of the nation will follow

COLUMBUS, OHIO — A bill passed in the Statehouse would inadvertently make a million Ohio gun owner’s felons overnight.

House Bill 228 becomes a law on March 28 of this year. It was meant to expand stipulations in which shooting someone in self-defense is legally justified. But as it currently stands, it also makes owning certain rifles, guns with pistol grips or a weapon longer than 26 inches a felony.

According to WHOIO TV 7, The bill also attempted to align Ohio law with federal law regarding short-barrel weapons, or generally speaking shotguns with barrel lengths less than 16 inches.

Such guns are legal under federal law but classified as illegal in Ohio, even though many gun stores sell them. As the bill was being drafted, a misplaced paragraph unintentionally lumped a variety of long guns into a prohibited category.

Those could include semi-automatic AK-47s and any long gun with a pistol grip, which could also affect shotguns used in competitive shooting.

It’s unclear if the mistake would cause gun owners problems in “real-world terms,” said Dean Rieck, executive director of the gun rights group Buckeye Firearms, who said who said he’s consulted with lawyers for the National Rifle Association and Ohio’s Legislative Services Commission, among others.

Nevertheless, “We would prefer they deal with it immediately because it is causing a lot of concern and confusion among gun owners in Ohio,” Rieck said.

“It’s legally murky right now,” said state Rep. Niraj Antani, R-Miami Twp. “It could prohibit the sale of some firearms, which we do not want to do. That was a mistake. Our hope right now is to fix that mistake by the effective date so that it never affects anyone.”

Antani said, “it would be up to each jurisdiction as to how they enforce the new law. And he said he doesn’t believe county prosecutors would enforce that portion of it”.

But that’s not the point, said July Sparks of the Black Swamp Oathkeepters group. “We’ll already be prosecuted by being picked up. We’ll already be considered guilty. We just became felons. It’s not if the law passes – it passed,” Sparks said.

An amendment to the new bill will need to be introduced by March 20; to fix this grievous error. So far, the proposed amendments have only made this law worst.

The mistake illustrates the problem of rushing legislation through a lame duck session, said Sen. Cecil Thomas, a Democrat from Cincinnati.

“It’s just a bad way to do business now, and mistakes are made, and this is an example of that,” said Thomas, a retired police officer.

Was this a mistake, or has this been a deliberate manipulation? Ohio is one of the most important swing states that federal government covets. Could this lead to other states introducing similar legislation that in turn strips our second amendment rights?

Our second amendment right reads, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

Does this sound like Ohio law makers are upholding our second amendment right? While they present this as a “mistake” I have to wonder could this be part of a bigger picture being played out?

A rally is planned for March 28 at the Ohio Capital to make sure this bill does not turn millions of Ohioans into felons overnight.

Quotes and statements collected by:

News Center 7’s Kayla Courvell


Action Report: U.S. Capital 2-23-19

There are plenty of reasons people shouldn’t generalize or label each other, but for the purpose of this article I’m going to focus on how it can hinder progress. A little over a month ago several members of our yellow vest group kept bringing up an event on February 23rd. Naturally I at first assumed it was our event but was later shown my error. A group called Roll Call had essentially issued a petition to stand at all capitals on this day. It was at this point that we began actually organizing our tandem event for the nations capital day. Contrary to things often seen in the news, we didn’t go to OPPOSE them or form counter-action over things we disagreed on. We are past the point in our nation and the world where we can spend time fighting each other over individual issues. We need all power to all people, and achieving this will absolutely take everyone.
We wanted to bring our mandates, or proposals to solve the list of what our grievances were with our government. I have known for a while that we all have more common ground than we think, but it seemed bold action would be needed if people too were to begin seeing if this might be true. At this rally of patriots we saw many people who vehemently advocated their desire for a border wall. Personally I don’t think a wall alone could solve the gravity of issues we face after doing research, but do agree we have a terribly dire situation. The first amendment protects our right to free thought and speech, and at this events instead of clashing both groups took this approach. We were able to engage in healthy discussions on both the border and many other things the night before at a social dinner. I found soon after meeting the people the night before the march that even though we may not see eye to eye on everything, these were American’s just like me who wanted change.

We heard ample speakers from their various groups in attendance, and I was given two opportunities to speak. We had shown some people copies of our mandates the night before with positive response, and again too at this rally we found on most other issues people had far less trouble agreeing on things. We had it set up to start at the capital and end at the White House with a march in between. It was further eye opening to see people who either called for a wall or praise our president likewise cry out to end hatred, or encourage all to come together. Many things that our media often implies or directly attempts to illustrate as the nature of a large group in our society seemed to be grossly mischaracterized and perhaps the real issue was that our media wasn’t transparent, and healthy discussion is far less common these days.
To further illustrate this, we even had to move our second location due to their being a bomb threat. Originally the DC police had said we could not march, and had to travel in groups of less than 25 people. It seemed that news of this led to them modifying their stance in some very big ways. After this threat came to life these officers closed intersections down and blocked intersections as we marched. The organizers on the patriot side repeatedly urged people in the crowd to be civil, respectful, not litter, and maintain a non-violent and non-destructive stance while moving forward. After the event concluded we all had lunch together and got to talk together a bit more. I learned a whole lot from this experience that really built upon what yellow vests needs to be for me. I understood already that we must look past party, and be a nonpolitical movement but that seemed to not quite cover the communication piece. When we generalize people and assume we know them before we meet them we get in our own way of potentially finding someone who would work with us. I found here that sometimes we have to be brave enough to ask the tough questions. When we approach someone with love in our hearts and ask something like “why do you want a wall?” …”or socialism?”…or “what other issues matter to you”?” we will more often than not find someone still pretty similar, though not always true.

It’s been my experience so far that most activists regardless of identity do themselves try to work at making the nation, or world a better place. It appears that often its not the ends we disagree on but the means, or the road there. We don’t all need to take the same road just as if we did while driving nobody would reach their destination. We can all arrive where we need to go quickest by taking many roads in vehicles of all colors and this logic applies to thought too. The more conflicting or different stances that are applied to an issue with a commitment to collaborate we encourage the most progressive outcomes while also not becoming our own obstacles. After these experiences my faith in the movement grew incredibly, and that will surely be a huge help. Though the notion seems logical enough, it would be terribly naive to assume this could be a quick or easy task to achieve.


-Adam Rice

February 27, 2019

Gentrification And The Housing Crisis, A Brief Examination Of An Unsustainable System

Gentrification is such a complex issue that effects many people in different ways. I will share a bit of my own experience and then examine a bit how different populations are effected when this happens. In my city we have a historical society that for a long time was enacted to preserve the city’s appearance. With a state that was nicknamed “vacationland” people over the years moved here as it was always an amazing place. Ultimately our city began to see lots of big new buildings pop up with “luxury condos” at astronomical rates. Respectively, the city also started taxing the landlords at a higher rate that these big companies could easily afford. For the smallest landlords they had to charge more due to increased costs and maintenance on properties.
In our city, the historical society and city can also demand that property owners do things that most other cities cant. They can dictate what colors many properties can be painted, what type of windows you use, and even the color brick mortar used. The city was hungry for money, they brought tourists here for years and encouraged wealthy families to move from out of state. When they did, our city councilmen lined their pockets allowing developers to build in our city without any restriction while making it equally impossible for smaller companies to stay afloat. Over the years as buildings fell apart, people were forced to sell their properties to these same companies for much less than they were once worth.
These buildings when they change hands often see mass evictions, as it is legally permissible to do so in order to renovate the building. Often this is justified by the fact the properties no longer meet code and the buyer justifies the action by this. What often happens is people end up in the shelter because there are no apartments they can afford anymore, if at all. It can take half a year or longer to find an affordable apartment and our shelter is now overcrowded. We have 2 teen shelters that are full, 2 full women’s shelters, several full family shelters, a fell “wet shelter”, the walk in shelter (200+ here alone!), and our day shelter has to be converted to sleep many more. The most startling fact is that there are still tent cities, and many sleeping outside as there is still not enough room.
Further problematic, many of these people hold housing vouchers but landlords wont accept them. The process to obtain a voucher can take a year or more as the system is overloaded, and living on the streets that long often results in alcoholism or addiction. Landlords will typically ask things like multiple deposits which subsidies wont pay, charge more than the subsidy will pay, enact credit score requirements, and many more that essentially prevent people from getting an apartment again. The end result is that now in my city, many who once had homes now live at the shelter and there may not even be enough apartments for these people as their homes are now occupied by new residents. In this article I will explain what “steering” is, and how communities are driven out based on race, disability, or religion. Likewise I will examine in further detail some of the practices in rental agencies that keep certain groups out of a home. In all cities where this occurs there are reasons it is allowed to happen, that too will be examined and the housing first model as a way to help many currently victims of the housing crisis. Likewise, we will look at the plights of those barely hanging on, and how many can barely get by anymore while keeping a roof over their head. One cant really talk about gentrification without examining the full scope of the housing crisis, and that goes all the way back to HUD and Ben Carson.

Gentrification is what happens as properties in certain neighborhoods are purchased, and the respective communities are driven out. It is a slow process, properties are acquired a few at a time, and as more people hear about the neighborhood it stems an unsustainable transition. The phenomena of perpetually increasing rents never ends, and one problem becomes many. The initial community can often be displaced leaving many in shelters or on the street. Years down the road, those same people who came to occupy the neighborhood will fact the same problem…unaffordable rents. Racial steering is when either landlords or brokers withhold information from minorities regarding housing, or only show them in certain areas. This same practice is employed also towards people with housing assistance, the poor, the elderly, and the mentally ill. Steering was actually a law until 1917 preventing minorities from living in certain neighborhoods. When Buchanan v. Warley abolished these laws, but they were replaced with covenants that said individual homes couldn’t be purchased by minorities. Until 1950 the National Association of Real Estate Boards mandated that nobody should introduce minorities into white neighborhoods and claimed property values would drop. In 1968 the Fair Housing Act formally outlawed this, and disabilities became protected in 1982. Despite creation of laws steering continues to this day, and studies done between 1989 and 2000 showed that as discrimination decreased, steering increased.

As it stands now, gentrification doesn’t truly describe the complexity of the issue. First off, there are now an excess of luxury units but the majority of working class cannot afford them. The middle and lower class citizens of cities are now often spending at least 30% of their income on rent alone. Since 1960 the median income has only increased 5% where rent has increased 61%. The same study found that homeowners income has increased by 50% but home prices have increased 112%. This Harvard study found that the construction of these luxury properties encouraged private companies to buy properties, evicting tenants and ultimately leading to a rise in homelessness. The fastest rise in price was found to occur in the once affordable units, with rent increasing 50% faster in these places.
Many people have responded to the cost of living in the city and move to a less populated area. Before the recession 1.1 million homes were constructed each year, but since then the most built in a year was 849,000. Currently the last time there were this few homes for sale was 1982. Also now there is a shortage of construction workers with some 200,000 job openings. Likewise, as construction costs increase these same developers only truly turn the type of profit they desire on these more expensive units. As of 2016, more than 50% of homes were large homes with pools, yet “starter homes” only made up 20%. Currently in America roughly 22 cities have homes being sold at 6 times that of the median income. Shockingly, 30 years ago Harvard found that in 72 of the 100 largest cities in America it only took 18 months of median income to purchase a home.
The sad reality too is that even in today’s modern age, it is often the minorities who will experience these things the worst. Since 1987 home ownership rates have increased by 3.6%, however they actually fell by 2.7% in predominantly in black communities. In Hispanic communities there were increases that now have reached a little over 16% respectively. The wealth gap too is worse for minorities, minorities have been found to have half the net worth of white families and are found to be asked to pay more as well. A recent report from the National Association of Real Estate Brokers found that minorities still to this day are obtaining homes through use of “sub-prime” loans. It is found that minorities are much less likely to obtain loans to purchase homes, and due to the cost it often takes this off the table for veterans as well as poor families also. Home ownership is seen the most in those over the age of 65, with the rate dropping in other demographics parallel to their net worth.
Last year a study concluded that the only cities in America where rent growth slowed were the ones that added more units than renters in a year. Last year it took doubling the construction of rental units to reduce rent by only 1%, they created over 10,000 units! Prior to this change rents were increasing by 5% each year from 2015-2017. At this point there are hardly homes that are affordable to the middle class, nor are there apartments left for low income families. Since 1988, there are now 6 million more low income families, and 2.5 million less affordable units. The only way to solve the growing problems with housing, cities need to create more affordable units, but nobody is funding projects for more profit can be found elsewhere. Recently HUD secretary Ben Carson implemented policies that would raise rents for 5 million people, and make rental assistance harder to obtain.

Currently there are lawsuits still open against the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, which is headed by Ben Carson, for Civil Rights Violations. Recently it was found that Carson had appointed 5 persons to his department, with no previous experience, for salaries between $90,000 and $155,000. In total 24 people have been hired under similar conditions, and the top 70% of employees earn salaries in this range. Even Carson himself, a retired neurosurgeon, has no previous experience in this sector. Since assuming control, many policy initiatives have failed due to employees lack of experience. This however may actually be a good thing as many are not exactly good for citizens. Among these we almost saw rent triple for families, assistance become hard to obtain, and help for the homeless population drop significantly. When Carson assumed duty, the backlog was in the tens on millions of dollars, buildings were in disarray, and he was barely phased. Instead of attempting to ensure buildings were properly maintained, he used an incredibly illegal amount of money to refurbish his office. He even demoted a secretary who refused to help stating that “one cannot even buy a good even buy a good chair for less than $5,000”. While they plotted to cut billions in funding to housing alone, Carson had just bought a $31,000 dining set for his office. Many times Carson has made his stance clear, that he thinks the best thing HUD can do for people is “ensure that living quarters aren’t nice enough for people to want to stay”.
Likewise it shouldn’t be new knowledge to most people who have lived in a city that often landlords have a skewed moral compass when it comes to operations. Often times it can come back to money, either driving out tenants to raise the price or denying business to low income customers. A common practice that can be seen is a landlord refusing to do repairs until a tenant finally moves and they subsequently raise rents more. Landlords will never mention this or include in a lease, but more jurisdictions contain laws that all renters are entitled to an Implied Warranty of Habitability. This means your home must legally be safe, free of lead, mold, radon, and some cities strictly enforce strict building and fire codes. Discriminatory renting is often seen as described above, and many too are not ever told that by law a landlord must give 24 hours notice prior to entering ones unit. It is commonly seen for property to create more units in a building outside what the law even allows, and at times one could be “baited and switched”. Essentially you could see an available unit online that is not actually available, only to be talked into one slightly more expensive. Security deposits too can be both kept via illegal means, or charged at an illegal rates. The important thing to remember is check the laws in your area…stay informed! With someone like Ben Carson at the top of the housing pyramid its no wonder there are so many landlords getting away with these things. Also, if your city has a tenant’s union I would recommend that you join one. The only way renters can acquire enough power in their community to push back against big developers is by banding together.

– Adam Rice