That’s when the first overt attempt at establishing the framework of a One World Government will occur.

The U.N. Climate Change Conference is currently drafting a treaty that, if signed by President Barack Obama and ratified by the U.S. senate, would place the U.S. under an unelected, undemocratic world body that could impose taxes and place limits on industry, transportation, mining and energy production in order to limit carbon emissions.

Global warming zealots from around the world are scheduled to gather in Copenhagen, Denmark to try and suck billions of dollars from the U.S. economy and the economies of other industrialized nations and spread that money around to developing countries, all in the name of saving the planet.

As The Washington Times editorialized on Oct. 27:

“The treaty’s text is not yet finalized but its principles are aimed at regulating all economic activity in the name of climate security, with a side effect that billions of dollars would be transferred from productive countries to the unproductive.
“The control lever is the regulation of carbon emissions, which some purport are causing global warming. The treaty would establish a carbon market Regulatory Agency and “global carbon budget for each country.
“In effect, this would allow the treaty’s governing bodies to limit manufacturing, transportation, travel, agriculture, mining, energy production and anything else that emits carbon—like breathing.”

One of the few people sounding the alarm on this sinister conference is climate expert and foe of global warming alarmist Al Gore, Lord Christopher Monckton, former science advisor to British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher.

“I read that treaty,” Monckton told the Minnesota Free Market Institute as posted on wattsupwiththat.com, “And what it says is this, that a world government is going to be created. The word ‘government’ actually appears as the first of three purposes of the new entity. The second purpose is the transfer of wealth from the other countries of the West to third world countries, in satisfaction of what is called, coyly, ‘climate debt,’ because we’ve been burning CO2 and they haven’t. We’ve been screwing up the climate and they haven’t. And the third purpose of this new entity, this government, is enforcement.”

The most recently-released copy of the treaty can be found here. Section 38 mentions government and outlines how it will be framed and financed.

The treaty is still a work in progress even though the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change had planned to have it finalized before the opening of the conference.

Obama first said he wouldn’t attend the conference unless the treaty is finalized. But he began backtracking on that statement last week, saying if his presence could push the deal through he would attend.

Hoping to spur a deal, California Senator Barbara Boxer in early November decided to pass a climate change bill out of committee without Republican support.

Without a clear indication from legislation of how much the U.S. is willing to contribute, the treaty probably won’t be finalized in time. Some other industrialized nations are also balking at the cost and regulations in the treaty, prompting U.N. climate Chief Yvo de Boer to say he didn’t think a legally binding agreement could be passed during the upcoming conference, but he thought one could be reached within a year.

Notice his use of the term, “legally binding.” That’s what they’re after, because once the treaty is signed by the president and ratified by the senate, any hope of America extricating itself from the agreement is gone.

“You can’t resign from the treaty unless you get agreement from all the other state parties,” Monckton said. “And because you’ll be the biggest paying country, they’re not going to let you out of it.”

And don’t think Obama won’t sign an agreement if it can be finalized. He’s signified he’s all in on the global warming boondoggle. And the Democrats only need to persuade six Republicans to join them to ratify the treaty.

Arizona Senator John McCain, South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham (who began working Nov. 5 to help draft compromise Cap and Trade legislation) and Maine Senators Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins are likely defectors.

Signing such a treaty and ratifying it into law would be an unconstitutional ceding of U.S. sovereignty to another entity. But what’s one more unconstitutional act in Washington?

 The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is fighting a Nevada U.S. Attorney who is seeking the names and personal information of anonymous posters responding to a Las Vegas Review-Journal newspaper story.

The story about a federal case against Nevada businessman Robert Kahre, drew some caustic—some have said possibly threatening—comments about U.S. Assistant District Attorney J. Gregory Damm and the jury hearing the case.

Kahre, a construction company executive, was charged with income tax evasion, fraud and criminal conspiracy for paying contractors with gold and silver U.S. coins based on their precious metal value but using the much lower face values on the coins for tax purposes.

Ironically, those coins are considered legal tender by the big government boys and girls, but they don’t like the coins being used that way. But that’s an article for another day.

The story ran May 26, 2009, and within days had more than 200 comments posted on the story. By June 2 the paper had the subpoena in hand requesting the information, according to press reports.

The U.S. Attorney initially sought the names of all who posted remarks about the article. But the paper resisted and the government backed down and singled out two it didn’t like. The newspaper was willing to relent on those two, but the ACLU filed court documents to stop it.

In the comments, one of the posters called the jury members “dummies” and said they should be “hung” if they convicted Kayre. The other wanted to bet the U.S. Attorney wouldn’t celebrate his next birthday.

There were others, too. In them Damm was called a fascist and other names. In response, Damm did what any self-respecting fascist would. He sought to intimidate, if not arrest, those who so labeled him.

Freedom of speech in America is supposed to mean people are free to express themselves regardless of who gets their feelings hurt. But of late the government boys and girls don’t seem to like that idea. Hence we get terms like hate speech and terrorism and threats lumped into one big category that makes one person’s speech unacceptable—meaning no longer free.

I wonder what the British government thought about Thomas Paine? Probably thought his Common Sense was hate speech. He wrote it anonymously and it helped to foment the ideas that led to a revolution. That should be a particularly poignant thought coming off the 233rd birthday of our Republic.

And I’m sure that if someone wanted to be offended some of the comments posted on Personal Liberty Digest could be considered offensive, what with names like right wing nut job and commie pinko—and some worse—being slung around willy-nilly.

But America is not Iran. Americans can still—today at least—lean on the First Amendment when they want to express themselves.

They can even hold Tea Party protests—although Tea Parties upset liberals and government boys and girls who like to use free speech to call the Tea Party participants ugly names and then turn around and claim hate speech when the names are turned back on them.

On July 4, 1776, after months of heated debate, representatives of the Continental Congress voted unanimously that, “These United Colonies are and of right ought to be Free and Independent States.”

Thirteen colonies voted to become something new in history—the United States of America. Now, all they had to do was to win their independence from a government that would consider them traitors.

Fifty-six men bravely affixed their signatures to the Declaration of Independence. What sort of men were they? And what became of them?

Twenty-four were lawyers and jurists, 11 were merchants, nine were farmers or plantation owners. They were well-educated men of means. All of them had a great deal to lose when they voted to defy what was then the most powerful nation on earth. Yet they willingly risked everything when they pledged to each other “our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.”

As I said, all of us can explain why we celebrate Independence Day on July 4th. But how many of us can name even a handful of the signers of the Declaration of Independence? What do we know, really, about the men who risked their lives, and everything they owned, in the cause of freedom?

Because the story of the signers is so inspiring, we’ve arranged a special treat for you today—a free copy of a wonderful little book called They Signed For Us.

Half a century ago two patriotic ladies in the Midwest wanted to help others learn more about the remarkable men who signed the Declaration. Merle Sinclair and Annabel Douglas McArthur wrote a delightful book about the events of that time, including a history of each of the signers. They called it, They Signed For Us.

At the end of today’s column you’ll find a link that will take you to a copy of the book. You may read it online or download it and print your own copy. The file also includes a list of all of the signers and the states they represented, plus the complete text of the Declaration of Independence.

To whet your appetite a bit, here’s an excerpt from They Signed For Us.

“SUDDENLY THE BIG BELL in the State House steeple pealed joyously. The appointed signal! Cheers rose from the waiting crowds.

“‘Proclaim liberty throughout the land….’

“Cannon boomed, drums rolled. Church bells rang, sounding the death knell of British domination!

“News of the adoption of the Declaration of Independence spread like wildfire. Ready messengers leaped into their saddles to ride and spread the word. The Declaration had been ordered printed on a single large sheet, ‘45.5 x 37.5 cm.,’ or approximately eighteen by fifteen inches. These broadsides were distributed with all possible speed, to be read in the provincial assemblies, pulpits, market places, and army camps.”

The story continues:

“On July 8, the Liberty Bell summoned citizens of Philadelphia to the State House yard for a public reading of the document. Colonel John Nixon mounted a high platform and spoke the noble lines in a strong, clear voice. The crowd, now hushed, listened intently throughout.

“‘…for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.’

It was almost a month later that the Declaration was engrossed on parchment and ready for signing by the delegates to the Continental Congress. Members gathered on August 2 for the ceremony.

The only person who had signed the Declaration on July 4 was John Hancock, a delegate from Boston who had been elected president of the Continental Congress. He wrote his signature in large, bold letters and as he did, in a reference to the near-sightedness of the British king, he declared, “There! John Bull can read my name without spectacles and may now double his reward of £500 for my head. That is my defiance.”

As the delegates gathered around a desk to sign the Declaration, William Emery, one of the representatives from Rhode Island, moved as close as he could. “I was determined to see how they all looked as they signed what might be their death warrants,” he later wrote. “I placed myself beside the secretary, Charles Thomson, and eyed each closely as he affixed his name to the document. Undaunted resolution was displayed on every countenance.”

Contrasting with Hancock’s confident signature was the shaky scratch of Stephen Hopkins from Rhode Island. Hopkins was the second-oldest signer and suffered from palsy. As he handed the quill to the next person, he valiantly proclaimed, “My hand trembles, but my heart does not!”

As one or two delegates hung back, seemingly reluctant to add their signatures to such a momentous declaration, John Hancock encouraged them. “We must be unanimous,” he said. “There must be no pulling different ways. We must all hang together.”

Legend has it that Benjamin Franklin replied, “Yes, we must all hang together. Or most assuredly, we shall all hang separately.”

Happily, none of the signers was hanged by the British. But all of them were considered traitors to the Crown. And many of them suffered terribly for the cause they so ardently supported.

When New Jersey signer Richard Stockton returned to his home after signing the Declaration, he learned that British troops were coming to arrest him. He fled to a neighbor’s house with his wife and children. But a Loyalist, as supporters of the British cause were called, betrayed the family’s hiding place. Here is how Merle Sinclair and Annabel Douglas McArthur describe what happened to him:

“The judge was dragged from bed and beaten, then thrown into prison. This distinguished jurist, who had worn the handsome robes of a colonial court, now shivered in a common jail, abused and all but starved.

“A shocked Congress arranged for his parole. Invalided by the harsh treatment he had received, he returned to [his home at] Morven to find his furniture and clothing burned, his fine horses stolen, and his library—one of the finest private collections in the country—completely destroyed. The hiding place of exquisite family silver, hastily buried, had been betrayed by a servant.

“The Stockton’s were so destitute that they had to accept charity. For the judge’s fortune was gone, too. He had pledged it and his life to his country. He lost both. He did not live to see the Revolution won.”

John Morton, a delegate from Pennsylvania, was the first of the signers to die. His last words for his family, before his death in April 1777 (just eight months after he signed the Declaration), were, “…tell them that they will live to see the hour when they shall acknowledge it to have been the most glorious service I ever rendered to my country.”

The following month, Button Gwinnett, the commander in chief of Georgia’s militia, was badly wounded in a duel with a political opponent. He died a few days later—the second signer to die.

But by and large, the signers of the Declaration of Independence were a hardy bunch. Three of them lived until their 90s—a remarkable accomplishment in a time when most men did not see their 50th birthday.

Only two of the signers were bachelors. Sixteen of them married twice. Records indicate that at least two, and perhaps as many as six, were childless. But the other 50 signers were a prolific lot, having a total of 325 children between them! William Ellerey of Rhode Island had 17 children; Roger Sherman of Connecticut had 15.

Fifty years after the united colonies declared their independence from Britain, plans were made for jubilant celebrations on July 4, 1826. Only three of the original signers were still alive—Charles Carroll, Thomas Jefferson, and John Adams. Here is how Sinclair and McArthur describe what occurred that day:

“In a dramatic climax that even their agile minds would not have contemplated, these two principals in the struggle for Independence left the nation awestricken and touched, by dying hours apart on the Fourth of July. Jefferson died at one o’clock in the afternoon, Adams toward evening.”

Ten days earlier, Jefferson had written the mayor of Washington, expressing his regret that ill health prevented him from coming to the nation’s new Capitol to join the festivities.

“I should, indeed, with peculiar delight, have met… with the small band, the remnant of that host of worthies, who joined with us on that day, in the bold and doubtful election we were to make for our country, between the submission or the sword.”

And he concluded by writing, “Let the annual return of this day forever refresh our recollection of these rights, and an undiminished devotion to them.”

As part of that “undiminished devotion,” we are delighted to provide you with a copy of They Signed For Us. Please click here for it.

And please share this copy of Straight Talk with others you know, so they may enjoy it as well. Just forward this column with a short note, urging them to read about the incredibly brave patriots who won our freedom for us when They Signed For Us.

Until next time, keep some powder dry.

Chip Wood

But modern warfare is seductively esoteric. I will describe it. It goes directly to the psychic

• It is almost totally invisible to the natural eye.
• It is almost totally invisible to the human spirit.
• It cannot be measured and calculated by the human I.Q. because it operates above the threshold of intelligence.
• It is an organism that suppresses the human intellect.
• It is not a phenomenon that the natural mind can confront and deal with.
• But it can be discerned by those prolific readers with background information.

When one comes to understand this cause of human motivation, all frivolity is stripped away and the Emperor has no clothes.

Within the world ruling elite is a death cult. These are simply humanoids who do not reproduce themselves and they worship death. They love warfare and killing. They want to spill blood. “Some men love death more than they love life because their deeds are evil.” John 3:19.

They have survived through the ages and they are modern-day throw backs of Old Testament animal sacrifices. They love death more than they love life.

But the second type of warfare can only be described as above. Let’s expand: The modern-day political and economic arena is a stage and a front for socialism. It is called many things such as democracy, representative government, and a few diehards occasionally refer to modern America as a Republic.

These names (democracy, etc.,) are foolish and child-like frivolity. They are fog, not substance. Their purpose is to cloud the mind and reality.

There are many serious and honest economists and analysts who are very astute at reading the circus of American politics and economics. Many of them, like Marc Faber, see very clearly that the so-called financial and economic “solutions” to the current credit crisis (really a dollar crisis) are made to fail. In fact the bailout “solutions” will move the system further toward collapse.

A thought here on psychological warfare: Since the American system poses as an “open society” with a “free press,” there is the pretension to allow open debate, but only on spurious issues. The effect is that as long as the issues are not real or are spurious they are welcomed and promoted as open debate and commentary. The people do not have a clue that all public commentary is spurious.

Shakespeare wrote in As You Like It, “All the world’s a stage.”

What then is the issue that even very savvy commentators fail to understand or even mention?

The problem is that all of them are trying to see and understand the American system as free enterprise when in fact it has been socialist for a hundred years.

“The world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined.” —Benjamin Disraeli.

This is a most sensational testimony of the power of naming government systems something that they are not and imposing it on the public mind and psyche by a long process of “public education” and highly sophisticated and organized propaganda on a world-wide basis. There has never been an equal and even at this moment it is more powerful than ever, deceiving more people than ever.

Socialism in America today is seen as a raving success because its hidden handlers call it by other names. Hitler indeed made an attempt to call Nazi Germany “the great democracy.” Through his effort to put a pretty face on an ugly system, he certainly must have understood the propaganda significance of the sensational power of people persuasion with names, fronts, and high-sounding human freedom terms.

Alas, for the record, you historians will not, I hope, see national socialism as any different from American democracy today or even at the time of World War II when the two (U.S. and Germany) were locked into mortal combat.

In fact, except for their different names bestowed upon each by their hidden elite masters, they are more identical than identical twins. The bad guys versus the good guys propaganda was meaningless and ridiculous but served well to drive millions to their deaths on all sides as well as motivated parents to sacrifice their young in total ignorance of reality.

All is a disgrace before God, as my mother used to say, that the human race will allow itself generation after generation to be twisted and perverted like animals to the slaughter and precious few ever question “why” about anything.

In fact the more learned and “educated,” the less capacity to think outside the prescribed system.

Few ever conclude that the system that they grew up in is neither legal nor illegal as taught by the system itself. It is manipulated fraud in which the owners of the system do not live within their own law but above the law. The law is for you! Things may not be nice just because they have a pretty face.

The major combatants of World War II were identical, making the Nuremberg Trials a sham and a disgraceful spectacle. Of course this perspective bears directly on the current financial crisis.

The world systems hide their dirty deeds by hiding the issues. They don’t dare let the real issues arise. All kinds of stupid and meaningless debates are fostered to throw sand in the eyes of the uninitiated. This satisfies the people that they are in the know because they saw it on Bloomberg. My friends, it is the esoteric that runs the system. Frustrate not yourself with crass frivolity and ridiculous drivel. This nonsense is for the crowd who loves deception and who gets mad at the truth.

Back to the issue of World War II, for it is the issue today: WorldWar II was prosecuted and carried out with fiat paper money on all sides. It would never have happened otherwise.

There would have never been any Hitler Germany or four-term Franklin Roosevelt without paper money. This should have been the issue at the Nuremberg Trials with all sides on trial as equal defendants, including the money creators. This issue was oblivious to everyone without exception at the Nuremberg Trials. These deceptions carry forward to generation after generation.

It carries to this very day as it lies at the heart of the so-called “debt bailout.” This drama could not be more deceptive or more satanic. It is difficult to find a nice or polite word to fit any of this monumental fraud and deception.

This is the grandstand and easily qualifies as fraud, theft, and deception without historical precedent.

Here is what has happened to the American people: The money creators, the Federal Reserve, and the U.S. Treasury as symbiotic partners, are creating non-substance (fiat money) and “buying” (stealing) substance with it.

Has anyone wondered why “Federal money” never gives out? As admitted in Congressional testimony and in Federal Reserve publications, the Federal money creators can create any amount of “money.” Of course this money is non-substance fiat. It is imaginary numbers that appear either on green pieces of paper called dollars, or as computer symbols.

The key word to describe fiat non-substance is infinity. This imaginary money system can be created to infinity and indeed is on its way. The American people (and the world) believe that this non-substance is real money. This is an exercise in an unbelievable and unimaginable delusion that is accepted by the mind as real.

This is socialism at its most perfect creation and it is doing exactly socialism’s work of transferring the wealth and savings of the American people to the state without payment.

My friends, you may have title to your home, your savings, and your accumulated wealth but the state is the owner without compensation to you.

Why? Everything that you “own” is denominated in fiat U.S. dollars. As the Fed creates fiat to buy up America (euphemism for bailout), the nominal dollar ownership of your property diminishes. This system allows no escape from its fiat. Remember I said that if you buried your pile of fiat 40 miles deep in a concrete vault, the Fed system can diminish your purchasing power and real savings by simply multiplying the dollars (numbers) in circulation.

The Fed is creating fiat to buy up (bailout) the American bankrupt system. All this wealth flows to the system for FREE without payment. This dilution of fiat money equally diminishes your personal savings and retirements.

What about this scenario causing a huge government debt? Listen and read closely my friends. Remember the key word used above to describe the nature of fiat creation? That key word is infinity. This word defies, voids, and cancels the word debt. Now how can the system have debt (as advertised and propagandized) when it creates fiat money to infinity as revealed in the Federal Reserves’s own publications.

Debt implies that there are limits to money and spending. This applies to government at all levels except the Federal Government. Debt is not a concept that can be applied to Fed Government so-called accounting. This is one of the system’s deep dark secrets. The whole Federal System is a fiat paper Ponzi.

What Should You Do?

Stop thinking conventional thoughts. They are not your own. If you will digest completely what is in Personal Liberty Digest or subscribe to The Bob Livingston Letter, you will be catapulted into the real world. You will not spend your life with frivolity and off point. In fact this column should alert you to know how far from reality you really are and have been.

Preserve your labor, savings and retirement with gold and silver in your possession.

You will know what to do with your precious metals when the time comes, and it will come.

Precious metals don’t pay interest, you say? This is conventional thinking backed by the paper money myth. Gold and silver are the only real money in existence. They are real money as well as intrinsic wealth. Moreover, gold and silver appreciate in purchasing power as paper money depreciates. That is your real interest.

All understanding of hard money has been lost down the memory hole of the fiat paper world money regime.

I am proud to be an American but I know that my government and my country have been stolen by the money creators.

But census workers are already on the streets of America, and they’re doing more than just seeking the number of people in each household. They’re tasked with marking the Global Positioning System (GPS) coordinates of every house in America.

According to the U.S. Census Bureau website, “This GPS technology allows us to reduce the amount of time spent by census workers in locating addresses while increasing productivity. Most importantly, by adding a GPS coordinate to each housing unit, the Census Bureau is able to ensure that residents are counted in the right location. This is important as the data are used to apportion congressional representation and used to draw redistricting lines.”

But the idea of mapping GPS coordinates for every front door in America reeks of Big Brother intrusion. And it’s just a continuation of Big Brother Government’s efforts to compile more and more data on each individual.

Already the census goes far beyond its Constitutional charter of counting the population. Census forms ask intimate questions that are not the government’s business.

Information such as income, description of your property, whether you have running water, a shower or bathtub, type of heating system, the type of fees you have to pay in your community, rental or mortgage payment amounts, education level, whether you have insurance, whether you have a disability, how you get to work and much more is requested on some forms. All of it beyond the scope of what our Founders had in mind when they set up the enumeration.

All that information is great for pencil-pushing, snooping bureaucrats and newspaper editors writing statistical stories. But it’s much too much information for the government to have on its citizens.

Now comes the GPS coordinates as a further intrusion. As blogger Douglas V. Gibbs wrote on his American Daily Review, “GPS coordinates of your front door will make it easier for the government to monitor you. The U.S. Census Bureau is simply an excuse—a harmless-looking means of obtaining the front door coordinates. The creation of GPS coordinates for front doors has nothing to do with the Census, in all honesty, no matter how much the United States Government tries to convince you that it does.

“Why would the U.S. Government desire the exact location of your front door to be entered into their GPS data base when they already have the location of your home in the system?” Gibbs asked.

How’s this for a scenario? With the military stretched thin by fighting a two-front war, what’s going to happen in the case of a national emergency?

Gibbs posits that perhaps United Nations troops, many non-English speaking and certainly unfamiliar with U.S. communities, would use them to locate the neighborhoods they are required to police or the houses of people they are sent to take into custody.

Certainly foreign troops would be more willing than U.S. soldiers to quell an uprising of U.S. citizens fed up with an increasingly socialist/fascist government.

And who can forget the scenes of smart bombs and tomahawk missiles, guided by GPS coordinates, going through the windows and doors of buildings during the invasion of Iraq?

Who thinks this is what the Founding Fathers had in mind when they wrote the census into the Constitution?

What is clear is that these scanners reveal far more than hidden weapons. They reveal every curve, nook and cranny in the human body and throw that image up on a computer screen for a TSA agent to view.

Called millimeter wave scans, the devices are set to replace the traditional metal detectors that passengers must go through to get from the ticketing to the boarding area of the airport.

The technology was first implemented a couple of years ago as a trial in the airport in Phoenix, Ariz. Similar machines were later put into operation in New York and Los Angeles.

When the TSA first began pushing the new technology it did so saying it would be used on a voluntary basis by those who didn’t want to have a more invasive physical pat down during a secondary screening.

In other words, those suspicious-looking white-haired grandmothers who didn’t want a TSA agent touching and feeling them all over would step into the machine so a TSA agent could instead ogle their image.

But now it’s not just the white-haired ladies, it’s everyone—children, teenagers, 20-somethings, middle agers and old-timers—going through the image scanners. There remains an option for those too squeamish to have their image made. You can step off to the side and a TSA agent can pat you down.

TSA says that the scanners will blur faces so no one will know whose body is being revealed. And TSA assures you the image is deleted the instant the passenger is cleared through the checkpoint. It also says only male TSA agents will view the males and only female agents will view the females.

Well that’s encouraging. We know there’s never been a man or woman who got their jollies from looking at naked members of his own sex.

Besides, the idea that the TSA is going to go to the trouble of separating the males and females into special lines once the checkpoints get backed up during peak travel times is unbelievable. And, in a news report demonstrating the working technology at an airport there was but one computer terminal in the room and the female agent was viewing a male scan. Later in the report a male agent was viewing a female image.

While news articles about the technology showed mixed reactions to the scanners by passengers, the very idea that one would have to submit to a virtual strip search just to travel on an airline should throw up all kinds of red flags. Big brother government already has too much data on your finances, medical records and shopping habits. This will give them a digital photo to go with it.

Thankfully the American Civil Liberties Union is considering filing a lawsuit against the TSA. Hopefully they’ll follow through.

If not, expect to have to reveal your naked body at every public venue in the near future because, coming soon to a subway station, stadium, concert hall and shopping mall near you, enhanced body scanners for the viewing pleasure of government agents.

That’s a question posed in a report compiled by Ronald D. Utt, Ph.D., of The Heritage Foundation after he received a press release from the two government agencies announcing the formation of their pact.

According to the release, the partnership was formed to create “affordable, sustainable communities.” Included among its many goals are projects to:

• Develop a new cost index that combines housing and transportation costs into a single measure to better illuminate the true costs by “redefining affordability and making it transparent.”
• Encourage transportation choice.
• Require even more planning by the many federally funded regional planning entities that are already attempting to guide Americans toward a supposedly better life.

According to Utt, liberals have long—it began in the 1950s—held a bias against suburbanites and urban sprawl. They believe people should live in municipalities with strict zoning laws, impact fees and regulations to ensure something called smart growth while making greater use of public transportation and forgoing automobiles.

Data show that many Americans rejected that idea, preferring instead to move away from the city center where they found more affordable housing, better public services and education systems. What they sacrificed with longer commutes, they benefited from the savings in housing and what they believed was a more comfortable lifestyle.

Now advocates of the smart growth movement are taking a different tack, and they have enlisted the Federal Government in their efforts. Although reams of data exist showing that the cost of suburban living is comparable to—if not less than—living in a municipality, smart growth advocates contend the data overlook many hidden costs of suburban lifestyles. These asserted costs, according to Utt, rely on unsubstantiated allegations of greater infrastructure costs, environmental degradation and the high cost of automobile operation.

Smart growth advocates contend that essential services can better be delivered to Americans living in higher density developments—such as town houses and high rise apartments—through public transportation, thereby freeing commuters from their cars. Additional benefits come through the preservation of land, reduced carbon footprints, greater social interaction through forced proximity, and higher aesthetic standard in community and housing design as government planners and politicians assume greater responsibility for artistic choices, according to Utt.

The DOT’s own data, from a study conducted in 2004, shows that public transportation is not an inexpensive mode of transit, as its proponents claim, and in fact is far more expensive than travel by automobile. Begun as an annual report to Congress, the DOT was forced to cancel further studies after it revealed that public transit survives only on massive taxpayer subsidies that are generally hidden and excluded from any discussion of the costs and benefits of different modes of travel.

According to The Heritage Foundation, data from 2006 (the most recent year for which data is available) shows that the federal subsidy for public transportation was $165.61 per 1,000 passenger miles, while automobiles earned the federal government a profit of 93 cents per 1,000 passenger miles through federal fuel taxes.

Currently, HUD requires states, counties and cities to conduct five-year Consolidated Plans estimating housing status and needs, and DOT requires the federally funded Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO) to develop Long-Range Transportation Plans and four-year Transportation Improvement Programs.

Yet, despite billions of dollars of spending on these plans, housing is less affordable than ever and traffic congestion is worse and infrastructure continues to dilapidate, Lott writes.

Now, through the partnership, the agencies have more money and more clout with which to press more of a smart growth agenda on the American people.

But the smart growth idea, writes Utt, exhibits a child-like faith in government planning, a concept that half the world quickly abandoned in the late 1980s when all of the formerly socialist countries (except, of course, for Cuba and North Korea) rejected state planning in favor of private-sector initiative, economic freedom and market solutions.

While some may hope this effort is nothing more than the President’s attempt to use the White House as a bully pulpit to encourage Americans to mimic the urbane lifestyle he experienced in an upscale Chicago neighborhood, the record of past such efforts by the federal government is more troubling, Utt writes.

In January 1998, President Bill Clinton’s Envi­ronmental Protection Agency threatened to with­hold federal transportation funds from the Atlanta region because it did not meet federal air-quality standards and said that it would agree to restore the funding only if the state of Georgia dramatically altered its land-use and transportation policies in ways similar to those characteristic of the smart growth polices that discourage single-family detached housing and encourage public transit use and investment. Georgia agreed to do this, at least through the waning days of the Clinton administra­tion, but soon abandoned the policies when leader­ship in Washington changed.

Carol Browner headed the EPA when the threat was imposed on Atlanta under Clinton. Today, she is assistant to the president for Energy and Climate Change. With the prospect of even worse to come from this new DOT-HUD partnership on sustain­able communities, Utt suggests that those who are skeptical of the President’s grandiose efforts at social engineering should be on the alert.

The National Weather Service has warned that the Red River may reach record levels after new snowfall following six months of wet weather, according to media reports.

"What makes this snowfall special is the water content it holds," said Adnan Akyuz, assistant professor of meteorology at North Dakota State University in Fargo, quoted by Bloomberg.

"The wind is blowing 10 to 12 miles an hour, and that’s enough to create drifts up to four feet," he adds.

Meanwhile, the American Red Cross has been getting ready for what could be a long disaster relief operation.

Volunteer teams have been preparing shelters, healthcare and mental health counseling. Neighboring chapters are also sending cots and blankets to help supply those shelters.

According to disaster expert Amanda Ripley, quoted by UK’s Daily Record, people in areas affected by flooding should get to high ground as quickly as possible without stopping for belongings.

They should make sure they get out of their cars before the doors become stuck, unless they are in moving water or do not know how deep it is. In that case, they should wait for help.

It is dangerous to walk in moving water as fast currents can knock a person over.

If swept away, a person should not fight the current but rather swim on their back, feet first, keeping feet up to avoid debris or obstacles.

The National Weather service has issued an ash warning, and residents are advised to have clean water supplies on hand because the ash may contaminate drinking water, according to Associatedcontent.com.

In addition to that, doors and windows should be thoroughly sealed as volcanic ash can be harmful if inhaled.

It is a good idea to wear disposable face masks, goggles and protective gear – or at least long sleeves – when outdoors, even after the eruption has ceased. However, the best option is to stay indoors until the danger has passed and secure livestock and pets.

The office of the mayor of Anchorage furthermore advises contact lens wearers to switch to traditional glasses to minimize eye irritation.

It also emphasizes that infants, children and those with asthma or chronic lung diseases such as emphysema are at particular risk from exposure to ash and should be careful to seek shelter during ash events. They should be evaluated by a heath provider if they experience any adverse symptoms.

Finally, volcanic eruptions are known to cause power outages and disrupt radio transmission in certain cases, so residents should be prepared for that contingency as well.

Most of the necessary equipment such as dust masks and flashlights can be purchased at local hardware stores.

Launched by a former Marine and veteran of the 1991 Gulf War, it responds to the needs of those interested in disaster preparedness by offering first aid kits, water filter systems, colloidal silver and Meals Ready to Eat (MRE).

"Rescue personnel can’t respond instantaneously to everyone who needs help," says Tom Sciacca, president of JHL Supply which runs CampingSurvival.com. "An emergency survival kit or ‘go bag’ provides essential items individuals or families should have in the event of a disaster."

He adds that people should choose survival kits with items that are likely to be most useful given their geographic location and living environment.

This and many other resources are particularly important in the current environment when the economic crisis threatens families across America with losing their jobs and houses.

Moreover, those living in the Southeast of the U.S. may be well advised to prepare for the upcoming hurricane season that starts on June 1.