5 votes

300 Thousand UN Troups to surround Washington DC Oct. 1st? Karen Hudes interview.

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I ...

... told you so

Life is a sexually transmitted disease with a 100% fatality rate.
Don't Give me Liberty, I'll get up and get it myself!


I wish someone would have bet you the 20 silver rounds or whatever it was.

This is so worth listening through

Karen Hudes may not bear model-symmetry looks, but I see her feisty love of truth and liberty as truly beautiful.

Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have the exact measure of the injustice and wrong which will be imposed on them. - Frederick Douglass

Look people


Divide and conquer is easier to recognize than it is to explain.

I can offer two cases in point, or two examples, and I hope the effort to get at least one person (human being) to look, and see, works, in these cases.

Law versus Anarchy

Intelligence versus ignorance

In the first example there can be an illustration that works where Earnest Hancock represents anti-law or anarchy (so called) and Karen Hudes takes up the side, divided, and opposite, the other side, which is this Law side, and why, where, is this divide?

If a person listens to the interview between Hancock and Hudes the divide can clearly be seen, and it is never resolved.

Resolving the divide may answer the why and where the divide exists.

I can offer that olive branch to both sides, and that will conclude this first example, and I can then move onto the second example.

Karen Hudes explains how Law is simple enough to inspire consensus, agreement, or willful thoughts and actions that each person within this Law network obey, without question, and this will constitute a monopoly of power based upon that simple fact of universal agreement among those connected in that way.

Those are my words, not Karen Hudes, and my guess is that I won't be able to connect to Karen Hudes to get an agreement from her as to the viewpoint she shares in that network of law abiding members of that monopoly of defensive force.

I can explain that viewpoint in much greater detail if anyone cares to listen.

On the other side is confusion concerning how the power of law works whereby the other side will not admit to, or agree to, this power being what it is, how it works, and why support for it is vital as human beings make crime pay less, and less, and less, so as to reach a point whereby the fewest number of people can afford to be criminals.

The side represented in this power struggle act, this theater, this interview, by Earnest Hancock has no actual answer, no power, by which any criminal GANG of any significant POWER could be over POWERED were such as POWER to be actively consuming victims, other than, and this is important, to say that freedom is the answer, what is the question?

So, Karen offers a way to get to freedom, while there is this criminal power actively consuming victims at a fantastic rate, and this criminal power is set to consume victims at an even faster rate, while Earnest Hancock fails to acknowledge that LAW is the POWER of Defense, with guns if necessary, that glues each defender's individual POWER into one POWER that is greater than the sum of all the parts disconnected.

So that may not be easy to understand, and if not then the reader can either work to understand how that divide and conquer works, or the reader can just give up, remain on one side, or the other side, and keep on wasting defensive power.

Whatever works for you, will work that way.

Moving on.

Intelligence versus ignorance

Karen Hudes repeatedly refers to mathematical models by which rule of law, Golden rule, Liberty, whatever you want to call a human network where no one gains more "legal" power than any other person, where everyone is equal in the eyes of everyone, where no one is exempted from rule of law, by any means including deception, threat, and aggressive, willful, violence upon innocent people, no one is above Rule of Law, and Karen Hudes says the model, the formula, the math, supports the idea that now is the time when Rule of Law returns, and now is the time when criminals who took over Rule of Law are going out, being paid less, whereby crime is no longer going to pay so well with bonuses for lying, cheating, stealing, raping, torturing, and mass murdering are not checks that will be cashed at banks anymore.

Those are my words, not Karen Hudes words, and again I can't expect to be acknowledged by her, personally, as being in agreement with her viewpoint. I can only offer.

The program used by Karen Hudes, or the Model, or the Formula, is likely to be very complicated and very difficult to understand by any human being other than someone of extreme intelligence or training.

The average person could not agree to such a thing as being a true thing, since such a thing would be beyond their capacity, beyond their POWER to know, and therefore they would be set with a choice to trust or distrust the information.

That need not be the case, and I can offer an experiment to prove it.

Look here:


If you cannot figure out how to get the applet to work, and you refuse to get help so as to get the applet to work, they you may miss out on a very good illustration of how human interaction works from a simplified mathematical calculation.

You don't have to see it to believe it, you can read the words that explain The Prisoner's Dilemma.

Any independent human being can understand the Prisoner's Dilemma, if they are in it, realize it, and are then seeking a way out of it, and are thoughtful, caring, enough to accept the right way out, and are not weak, powerless, and in a position to take the easy way out, which is a false way out, which does not actually constitute a way out of The Prisoner's Dilemma.

Those few among us who are rich because they were born with a silver spoon stuck up their bum, or wherever they hide their "means of support," by Crime made Legal, investors in War, making War good for their exclusive economy, may be those few among us who will never admit to there being a Prisoner's Dilemma working as it does work in our time, in reality.

Those of us actually in it, working to find effective ways out of it, can see it clearly, if we care to look, and once it is seen, for what it is, a light bulb moment may occur. God help those who can't see it, and can't see the way out, clearly.

It is a numbers game.

Those who see the way out have to be of a number that is sufficient to reach critical mass, and then there is no turning back, we get Liberty.

See it, know it, and then you won't have to trust, or believe, in how cooperation works so much better than defection, if the idea is more POWER for everyone, an abundance of POWER, rather than POWER being so scarce that only the few have it, and those few use what is left to steal their "Lions share".

Another good way to express The Prisoner's Dilemma may exist in something I found, something offered by another person who can obviously see how The Prisoner's Dilemma works.

Warning Strong Language:


Look for "How the government solves it's cases"

Read it.

Consider how each victim of any crime, no matter how much license, or how many badges are worn by the criminal, can see how things work, in real time, in fact.

There is no better educator as to what is, or is not, crime than the criminal who defines the meaning of crime upon the victim.

Many victims are not innocent, many victims are innocent, but does that matter to the criminal?

No, the criminal makes a deal, offers a deal, and you can call it the lesser of two evils, or any word in English you care to use, but while you are in the hot seat, you know what it is, without question.

Criminals teach, even the least fortunate among us, the meaning of crime, what it is, how it works, and there is no room left for doubt.

As low as an education can get, in terms of productive capacity to end the day with more power than the power available at the start of the day, without resort to crime, is an unfortunate place to be in, in any case, but even that low, is not low enough to fail to realize exactly how crime works. Criminals set the bar lower every time, down to that base of lies, that base of threats, and that base of violence, every time.

So who claims to be too stupid to see the facts, and is that a false claim made for some very interesting reason that won't be confessed?

Summing up:

Law versus Anarchy

Intelligence versus ignorance

In the first case it turns out that Law is Anarchy when Law is defined as a voluntary association whereby the volunteers volunteer to make crime pay less for good reason.

It the second case it turns out that once crime pays very well it may be a good idea for the remaining innocent victims to learn a thing or two from those criminals who cooperate so well among themselves.


Everyone, it's not happening

After all, she keeps saying, "It's not happening".

I don't know what's not happening, but it's not happening! Can she be any more emphatic?

In my opinion if a person says a bunch of good things, and says one false thing it can discredit all the other good things they say in the eyes of the public. That's the danger always with spokespeople. You're right to worry especially when it's an outlandish "prediction" of future events that seemingly only they know about.

Terrible interviewer. He'd

Terrible interviewer. He'd ask a question and then interject 1.4 seconds later. She would be in a train of thought, and he would change the subject.

Be Your Own Media!!!

Debbie's picture

He said to her the same thing he says to lots of other guests:

"We've seen this before" or "We've been through this before", but if he really understood, I don't think he would say that, because he has not been through what she's talking about before.


If he's talked about it all before

If he's talked about it all before, then what is the point of this interview? Is this self-indulgence?

It sounds crazy, but

I don't doubt the massive UN troops part of her story. I think back to statements by Rockefeller and Kissinger. Rockeller's undying love for the Chinese slave model, and Kissingers assertion that UN troops would be a welcome solution in the US should the right crisis present itself. Could the grand chessboard be that we are being set up for a takeover? Let's look at some facts:

1. China is a historic enemy.
2. China's one child policy has created a lopsided society of a huge male population.
3. We are extremely dependent on Chinese imports.
4. Our production capability has been significantly reduced and handicapped.
5. China is a major US debt buyer.
6. Chinese now own the Panama Canal.
7. Chinese are now building key US infrastructure (e.g., San Francisco Bay Bridge)
8. Our military is spread about as thin as can be, served multiple tours, etc.
9. Prescott bush was on record attempting a banker takeover of the US. George Bush, Sr. Signed us on to the UN Agenda 21 plan in the early 90's ( a new world order)
10. Goldman Sachs (rothschild) owns key US supply ports.
11. The US is being demonized worldwide as the capitalist scourge.
12. The UN is a device to create world neofuedalistic government.
13. We are being railroaded into conflict with Russia and China via a Syrian false flag campaign (99 plus percent of us want nothing to do with it!)
14. The gun grabbers have gone wild this past couple years.
15. Homeland security's massive buildup of ammo, guns, MRAPs, etc.
16. We are treated like terrorists and constantly monitored in our own country, and have lost most of our constitutional protections via treasonous fiat in the name of false security.

I'm not saying we will be taken over from the inside, but the facts are that we are way more vulnerable than we should be and all the key people in power are historically tyranical and psychopathic. We are open to the perfect shit storm of seige.

Anybody else getting a funny feeling that things are adding up, or are all of these things easily explained by greed, continuity of government, etc. I hope it is the latter.

I'll take the opposite side

I'll take the opposite side of that bet and just to make it interesting, I'll bet $50,000 of my own money that this is not going to happen.

My money is on

"Karen Hudes" being exactly what Cass Susstein ordered.

Infiltration into movements.

"If this mischievous financial policy [greenbacks], which has its origin in North America, should become endurated down to a fixture, then that government will furnish its own money without cost. It will pay off its debts and be without debts. It will hav

Clear this up for me.

I'm not sure what you are saying. What are you doubting about what she has said. I can't defend everything because some of it's new, but I HAVE researched her history, and everything I've found has fit with everything I KNEW was true about the banking system.

And I'd love to be proven wrong.

hudes gives me a bad vibe

dont get me wrong, I am happy she is whistle blowing on the banksters.

But I got an impression from one of her more recent videos that she is an obama apologist.

She mentioned something like this "Obama doesn't want to be killed, there fore he is leaving it up to us to reign in the banksters" I am paraphrasing of course.

Can someone please clarify and correct me if I am wrong. I highly doubt Obama is doing a crappy job just to focus our attention.

Same vibe

I think there is a struggle at this point between trust in each individual mind concerning trust in any other human being at all.

If an individual human being falls into the trap of trusting that no other human being can be trusted, then that trap is exactly the same viewpoint used by every criminal who believes in the concept of might making right.

If, on the other hand, there remains within an individual the concept of trust in other human beings, then such ideas as a person being innocent until proven guilty emerges as a powerful idea.

So which idea is shared, agreed upon, and accepted?

In context of your question I think that Karen Hudes is well aware of the crimes perpetrated by Obama, but she is not willing to claim that Obama is nothing but a willful criminal who will never be anything but a willful criminal, as if saying, again in context to my offer to you, as if Karen Hudes is willing to say that Obama can't be trusted to be anything other than a force of destruction upon everyone else, or to say that Obama, like everyone else, is a true believer in the lie that might makes right.

In other words, from this moment forward, it may be true that Obama would support Liberty, Rule of Law, The Golden Rule, Trial by Jury, everyone is allowed to be protected the same way by the same laws, and no one is above the law, if given the chance, if Liberty does overpower Crime made Legal (might makes right: a fraud), and that may be Karen Hudes considered opinion.

In other words: Obama is only perpetrating willful crimes because he thinks there are no other alternatives.

I do not share the opinion; hence my agreement on the bad vibes.

Suppose Obama does something similar to what Kennedy did, not that there is any intent upon my part to grade what Kennedy did with any moral judgement at all, but suppose Obama does something that ends up with Obama taking a few well aimed bullets.

Would such events, were such events to happen, shuffle the deck some?


great points

thanks Josf

You are Ron Paul Supporter

And Karen Hudes, exposing the very system he has educated so many of us about.

Gives you a Bad Vibe. If you are truly an American that stands for those principles that binds us together, .... do you even realize how stupid your comment is?

no reason to be an A'hole

You did read that I was glad she was blowing the whistle right. And I was genuinely asking if my feeling was off base.

I thought Ron Paul supporters were supposed to ask questions and not blindly follow.

Do you even realize what a d-bag you are being?

Chillax freebase

She's referring to what happened to JFK

...I'm guessing.

No kidding.

She has been blowing the whistle on the interlocking directorships of 43,000 international corporations. Wonder where the Mom and Pop shops went?

I agree she tried to defend the world bank and was naive when she was first waking up. But if people don't have the internal fortitude to do a little research on their own, they deserve slavery. And they will be too stupid to even realize they are slaves. Many of you folks are so used to it, you never knew a free moment in your life.

Get out of the corrupt system, watch the matrix.

And watch this. It is not Ancient history, and it explains a Lot.

I watched the video as promised.

The overarching thesis appears to be that there are spiritual powers behind the drive towards world government and that there is a "grand design" inherent in the US foreign policy aimed at accomplishing this goal notwithstanding any public announcements to the contrary. In other words the grand design is being implemented by those in power and it is being done deceptively.

G. Edward Griffin used the then current understanding of Communism as the ideology being implemented in the US and indeed around the world. He also mentioned that socialism is essentially soft Communism. He now uses the catch-all term of collectivism to describe the form of governance that is being implemented under the rubric of the New World Order.

This name also appears on the Great Seal of the United States of America and on the Federal Reserve one dollar bill as the "Novus Ordo Seclorum"..."The New Order of the Ages" which reveals the provenance of this plan. Another revealing interview was the one Griffin had with 83 year old Norman Dodd in 1982.

This rare interview exposes the infiltration of government institutions by large corporations that are merging the USA into a world government (New World Order). Norman Dodd explains the infiltration of banking and the infiltration of the public education system that he personally witnessed. His testimony is particularly important I believe since he has actually read the original records of the men who deliberately planned these events, including the intention to involve the United States in world wars. This infiltration technique was mentioned by G. Edward Griffin in the video you linked to.

Dodd served as the chief investigator for Congressman Reece's Special Committee on Tax Exempt Foundations (commonly referred to as the Reece Committee).

Here is the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c5eHdTk5hjw

I strongly advise anyone to watch this interview since it is a key building block in understanding the entire strategy of the New World Order and identifies who is behind it.

"Jesus answered them: 'Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is a slave to sin. The slave does not remain in the house forever; the son remains forever. So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed.'" (John 8:34-36)

I will watch the video this evening.

In the meantime let me say I do not accept that there will be a world government under the spiritual powers and principalities of darkness, the prince of this world that works in symbiotic relationship with a cabal of wicked men. Any suggestion that they will win betrays a blindness to the will of God and His assurances and promises to us.

I do accept that they have been planning this denouement for two thousand years in tandem with the growth of the Kingdom of God, as a physical counterfeit of God's Kingdom. They will however be defeated and indeed already have been. Their unveiling is already underway and has been for the past thirty years but especially in the past six years since mid 2007.

Karen Hudes is likely part of that unveiling and there are many, many others in the visible realm. The real power and authority to defeat these principalities however is in the invisible realm which is where victory has been and is being gained.

My advice is always to look UP, your redemption is drawing nigh. This short piece of writing might help you to do that:


"Jesus answered them: 'Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is a slave to sin. The slave does not remain in the house forever; the son remains forever. So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed.'" (John 8:34-36)

Dear Lord, I Hope Not

We must not allow the UN to assume power over the US, it is imperative that we regain control from within, else liberty will be swept away in favor of a new world order.


There's a gun and AR-15

There's a gun and AR-15 behind ever blade of grass in the USA. Could that be a problem?

Apparently,November 13-14 is an active drill

for a total grid shut down scenario and Oct 1 is just the deadline for preparation/training. I would like more solid info,not just hearsay. It's an interesting subject and worth thinking about,if true.

this equates the daily paul web page with

the visitation / AREA 51 CROWD..what does this have to do with the real issues at hand ..oops, the tangible real issues..?????? the world bank operates in a shadowy manner that is hard to measure as to its impact on the citizen /voter here......where are 300,000 coming from..outer space is the only place which has that quantity of trained combatants...

Name that dogma?

Guilt by Association.

Rather than either expose the error of the information, assuming that the dogmatist makes such a claim, there is instead a diversion by which the individuals reading the information are falsely connected to some nebulous fault.


I read information offered by people in places where I think I might find accurate information that is useful, current, and powerfully defensive. I read information here on this web site.

I found, read, and evaluated the information offered on this Topic.

Now I find out that "this equates the daily paul web page with the visitation / AREA 51 CROWD..."

So the meaning of such dogma, as far as my understanding goes (hence the question asked in the title of my comment here), is such that my choice to listen to, and evaluate, the information offered by Karen Hudes, offered by the Forum member base1aransas, is my connection to lunatics?

Again I use the question mark, since my understanding is often not accurate.

If I connect to information associated with Karen Hudges, then I am connecting to "visitation / AREA 51 CROWD" stuff, which means, I guess, some discredit of some kind.

I think that is clearly a case of guilt by association.

That is clearly a tactic used by people who are well practiced at the art of deception.

If they know it, then it is willful use of deception.

If they don't know it, then it is parroting deception.

If I am wrong, someone could spell out how I am wrong, without resort to even more deception.

False discredit is being used here instead of an actual, accurate, explanation as to why the information is, in any way, worthy of discredit.

The information offered on this Forum, in this Topic, by the Forum Member base1aransas, concerning current World News, from Karen Hudes, is worthy of consideration by anyone caring to connect to that information through this Web Page, and therefore there is no Discredit to this Web page, whatsoever in this case.

This Topic is, in fact, the same as someone claiming to be visited by little green men from mars, so anyone reading this information is, in fact, mentally unstable, and therefore the reader of this information is as dangerous as a terrorist, and therefore it is Obama's job to find those readers of this information, and have those readers of this information either droned to death or have those readers of this information taken by Extraordinary Rendition to a place to be tortured until a confession is extracted and then those readers of this information must be burned alive until those readers of this information are no longer terrorizing the rest of us good people.

That last comment (3) is an example of hyperbole, in case someone might want to put an accurate label on it.



That is how they do it. Marginalize and discredit through basically unsupported assertions. "Conspiracy theorist!!!"

Thanks for the reply

I can cross post here. I hope that you don't mind.



Uh, Base1...

Didn't you criticize the schitt out of me for my "NWO=Russian troops on US Soil" thread?

Now you're posting 300,000 U.N. Troops, which actually was part of my thread, with someone chiming in with a comment about Chinese Troops in Mexico with U.N. vehicles and logos.

Care to re-think your position on either that thread, or this one?


I have not yet watched your vid, and I will, and have not up-voted yet, but I will if it's good. Just wondering if you're re-thinking that earlier post at all?

Are you a POT or a PET - Person Embracing Tyranny?

My apologies for that Mr. Lawman,

I was in a foul mood because of race baiting and being called a hater, and when I went to write an apology I started looking at your other posts and getting to know more about you. It was still on my list to do but I hadn't done it. Thank you for the opportunity, both to learn more about you, and the respect to allow the appology.