top of page

Myron Coureval Fagan

(October 31, 1887 - May 12, 1972)


In about 1967, Myron Fagan's recorded the story of the beginning of the One World plot to enslave the world which  was launched two centuries ago by Adam Weishaupt, an apostate Catholic Priest, who was Financed by the House of Rothschild. He created what he called: "The Illuminati."


Mr. Fagan describes how the Illuminati became the instrument of the House of Rothschild to achieve a "One World Government" and how every War during the past two centuries was fomented by this Illuminati. He describes how Jacob H. Schiff was sent to the United States by the Rothschilds to get control of both the Democratic and the Republican Parties,  how Schiff seduced our Congress and our Presidents to achieve control of our entire Money-System and create the income tax and how Schiff and his co-conspirators created the "Council on Foreign Relations" to control our elected officials to gradually drive the U.S. into becoming an enslaved unit of a United Nations One World Government.

Origins of the New World Order

Origins of the NWO

Leo Strauss

(September 20, 1899 – October 18, 1973)


Leo Strauss (1899-1973) was a Jewish student of philosophy forced to flee Germany and ended up teaching philosophy at the University of Chicago. He was an atheist who believed there were only rewards and punishments in this life. Strauss longed to return to a previous era of imperial domination and authoritarian rule. The students of Leo Strauss joined the Republican party, formed neo-conservatism and became known as Neocons. Strauss believed in tyranny or rule by a society of elitists, demonstrated by the rhetoric and behavior of the George Bush neocon administration which announced the New World Order in 1992. Neo-conservatism is the ultimate stealth weapon of mass destruction whose purpose is to destroy liberty and affluence. American neoconservatives have decided to conquer the world in the name of liberty and democracy, but they are turning the world into the Nazi Germany Leo Strauss fled from.

The Straussian disciples formed the neoconservative manifesto of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) which was a neoconservative think tank based in Washington, D.C. that focused on US foreign policy. It was established as a non-profit organization in 1997 whose goal was "to promote American global leadership". The organization stated that "American leadership is good both for America and for the world," and sought to build support for a policy of military strength. The PNAC played a key role in building support for the Iraq War. See Wiki PNAC.

What is the NWO doing to Targets?  Many Targets are Christians and they are targeted because they are devout Christians.


Many TI's are devout Christians and have no talent for joining sadistic torturers who run the NWO.  These people are totally dedicated to their God and practice their faith in their every day lives. These people do not make good corruptible citizens. They are marked for extermination, just like the religious zealots in Germany. They were sent to extermination camps along with the Jews, handicapped, elderly and all those who would not "serve" the state's evil plans.


Targeted Individuals are forced them out of society, just like the Jews. Hitler would not let them own businesses, teach in schools, attend the theater, eat in public or own pets. They were herded into ghettos, they couldn't buy food, and then they were carted off in cattle cars to the death camps where they were separated from their lives entirely. They were shot, bled to death, gassed and burned.  The United States of America shows signs of planning to do the same to Targeted  Individuals by placing them in the Extermination Matrix (Watchlist).


We are in a silent civil war where TI's are the innocent children sitting on the beach, looking out to sea and the stalkers come up behind us and slice us to death with machetes (beams of energy). This was actually the case with a tribe of people in Africa whose religion required a sacrifice of an innocent victim as a ritual.  The entire tribe had to be removed from the earth to stop the slaughter. The New World Order is also a religion that believes in human sacrifice. They are willing to sacrifice all that is human for the evil of greed and power.


This is a great place to add a tagline.


                                                 Are we becoming a police state? Five things

                                                 that have civil liberties advocates nervous

                                                                   By Sal Gentile, December 7, 2011


                                                                                 Oakland police officers in riot gear line Frank H. Ogawa plaza, the site of an

                                                                                 Occupy Wall Street encampment, Tuesday, Oct. 25. (AP Photo/Ben Margot)


                                                             Is our Constitution under siege?


Many civil liberties advocates fear it might be. They’re worried about a provision tucked into the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act, approved by the Senate last week, that would allow the military to detain without a trial any American citizen accused of being a terrorist, or of supporting terrorists who plot attacks against the United States. The ACLU called the proposal “an extreme position that will forever change our country.”

The indefinite detention provision is just one of many trends in policing and law enforcement that have civil liberties advocates alarmed. New external threats, as well as technological advancements, are posing new challenges to our Constitutional rights, advocates say. Policymakers are debating those issues in Congress and in the courts right now, and the decisions they make could have fundamental consequences for what it means to be an American.


Here are five issues that are especially worrisome to civil liberties watchdogs:


1. Indefinite military detentions of U.S. citizens


The provision, part of the bill that authorizes Pentagon spending for 2012, was drafted by Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan and Sen. John McCain of Arizona, and has bipartisan support in the Senate. The thinking, according to supporters, is that “America is part of the battlefield” in the so-called war on terror, as Sen. Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire put it, so Americans should be fair game when it comes to finding and arresting terrorists.

The bill, however, takes the power to arrest and detain terrorists away from law enforcement officials, like the police or FBI, and gives it to the military, which, under the law, would have the power to imprison an American who “substantially supports” Al Qaeda, the Taliban or “associated forces” indefinitely, “without trial until the end of the hostilities.” And those hostilities aren’t likely to “end” any time soon, since the law that authorizes the use of military force against terrorists has no expiration date.


2. Targeting U.S. citizens for killing


Last week, lawyers for the Obama administration defended for the first time the administration’s decision to target radical Yemeni cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, an American citizen, for killing. Awlawki, who was born in New Mexico, was killed in an American missile strike in September; the ACLU has criticized the targeted killing program as blatantly violating the Fifth Amendment, which guarantees that no American citizen shall “be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.”


At a national security conference last week, the lawyers for the Obama administration, CIA counsel Stephen Preston and Pentagon counsel Jeh Johnson, said American citizens are legitimate targets for killing when they take up arms against the U.S., according to the Associated Press. Jameel Jaffer, a deputy legal director for the ACLU, said in an interview in September that the targeted killing program sets up a precedent in which “U.S. citizens far from any battlefield can be executed by their own government.”


3. Arresting witnesses for recording police actions


The raids at Occupy Wall Street encampments across the country have earned media attention primarily for their glaring instances of police brutality. But they’ve also tested the boundaries of police authority when it comes to limiting media access to police operations. As many as 30 journalists have been arrested covering Occupy protests, including many who clearly identified themselves as credentialed members of the media. Officials in New York and L.A., for example, have also tried to tightly restrict media access to the Occupy encampments, setting up barricades far away from the actual raids and allowing only hand-picked journalists to go behind police lines.


Civil liberties advocates have decried these tactics as attempts to stifle media coverage of the raids. But the media blackouts are representative of a broader trend in law enforcement in recent years in which the police have been arresting citizens simply for recording official police actions in public places. Twelve states, for example, have adopted “eavesdropping” laws that prohibit people from videotaping police actions without the officers’ consent. And in California, police officials have openly stated that they will arrest people taking photographs without “apparent esthetic value” if those people seem suspicious. Several courts have ruled these policies unconstitutional.


4. Using GPS to track your every move


The Supreme Court is scheduled to rule soon on a case that could have far-reaching consequences for privacy in the 21st Century. The justices were asked to decide whether the police could use GPS devices to track people suspected of crimes without first obtaining a warrant. Police across the country use GPS devices to track the movements of thousands of criminal suspects every year, but critics say the practice violates the Fourth Amendment prohibition against “unreasonable searches and seizures.”


In oral arguments in November, several justices expressed concern that, as technology improves, the power to track a U.S. citizens’ every move would only become more dangerous. “If you win this case, then there is nothing to prevent the police or the government from monitoring 24 hours a day the public movement of every citizen of the United States,” Justice Stephen Breyer told the lawyer for the Justice Department, which is defending warrantless GPS tracking. That, Breyer added, “sounds like ’1984.’”


5. Surveillance drones spying on American soil


The use of drones to spy on states like Pakistan and Iran has become so popular in national security circles that many domestic law enforcement agencies are now considering using these spy planes to conduct covert surveillance on American soil. Drones are already used to patrol the U.S.-Mexico border, but now many police officials across the country are advocating for the use of drones in other types of police actions, like hunting fugitives, finding missing children and monitoring protest movements.


These drones, advocates note, can not only monitor large urban expanses, they can also use artificial intelligence “seek out and record certain types of suspicious behavior,” whatever that may be. The Orlando police, for example, initially requested two spy drones to help police the Republican National Convention next year, before changing their minds for budgetary reasons. Some police officials have even openly discussed arming the spy planes with “non-lethal weapons” like Tasers or bean bag guns.


These drones, and other tactics imported from battlefield to American soil, are an example of how the “war on terror” has threatened core protections guaranteed to American citizens by the Constitution, civil liberties advocates say. The erosion of these protections has been supported by both Democrats and Republicans alike. And, as the ACLU put it, the debate over these tactics “goes to the very heart of who we are as Americans.”

Website  Oakland police.JPG
bottom of page