Filed under: 9/11 Truth, Anti-War, bill of rights, Congress, Dictatorship, Dissent, domestic terror, domestic terrorist, Empire, end the fed, enemy combatants, John McCain, mandatory detention, mccain, Military, Military Industrial Complex, Protest, rendition, tea party, Torture, truth movement, US Constitution, War On Terror
Americans Could Be Locked-Up For Life Without Trial Under New Bill
Filed under: afghan casualties, airstrikes, Anti-War, civil disobedience, civilian casualties, Dissent, drone, Genocide, Hamid Karzai', karzai, military strike, nation building, NATO, occupation, Protest, State Sponsored Terrorism, uav, War On Terror | Tags: Garmsir district, Helmand province
13 Afghan Protesters Killed by NATO Forces
Filed under: 1984, 9/11 Truth, Anti-War, Barack Obama, Big Brother, brownshirts, Censorship, CIA, climate change, climategate, cointelpro, Communism, Concentration Camp, conspiracy theories, corruption, CRU, Dictatorship, Dissent, Empire, end the fed, enemy combatant, Fairness Doctrine, False Flag, Fascism, FBI, FCC, FEMA, free speech, Global Warming, global warming hoax, government bureaucracy, government bureaucrat, government control, government crimes, Hadley CRU, hoover, Internet 2, internet censorship, internet police, JFK, journalism, Martial Law, MK ultra, MLK, nanny state, Nazi, New World Order, NWO, obama, obama czar, obama deception, Oliver North, orwell, Police State, political dissidents, progressive, Protest, provocateur, scandal, Sean Hannity, stasi, stasi tactics, Sunstein, Surveillance, tax, trilateral commission, truth movement, u.s. constutiton, warrantless wiretap, White House, ww1, WW2 | Tags: Alien and Sedition Acts, Church Committee
Obama Advisor: BAN Conspiracy Theories Against U.S. Government
Sunstein: Taxation and censorship of dissenting opinions “will have a place” under thought police program advocated in 2008 white paper
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
January 14, 2010
The controversy surrounding White House information czar and Harvard Professor Cass Sunstein’s blueprint for the government to infiltrate political activist groups has deepened, with the revelation that in the same 2008 dossier he also called for the government to tax or even ban outright political opinions of which it disapproved.
Sunstein was appointed by President Obama to head up the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, an agency within the Executive Office of the President.
On page 14 of Sunstein’s January 2008 white paper entitled “Conspiracy Theories,” the man who is now Obama’s head of information technology in the White House proposed that each of the following measures “will have a place under imaginable conditions” according to the strategy detailed in the essay.
- 1) Government might ban conspiracy theorizing.
2) Government might impose some kind of tax, financial or otherwise, on those who disseminate such theories.
That’s right, Obama’s information czar wants to tax or ban outright, as in make illegal, political opinions that the government doesn’t approve of. To where would this be extended? A tax or a shut down order on newspapers that print stories critical of our illustrious leaders?
And what does Sunstein define as “conspiracy theories” that should potentially be taxed or outlawed by the government? Opinions held by the majority of Americans, no less.
The notion that Lee Harvey Oswald did not act alone in killing JFK, a view shared by the vast majority of Americans in every major poll over the last ten years, is an example of a “conspiracy theory” that the federal government should consider censoring, according to Sunstein.
A 1998 CBS poll found that just 10 per cent of Americans believed that Oswald acted alone, so apparently the other 90 per cent of Americans could be committing some form of thought crime by thinking otherwise under Sunstein’s definition.
Sunstein also cites the belief that “global warming is a deliberate fraud” as another marginal conspiracy theory to be countered by government action. In reality, the majority of Americans now believe that the man-made explanation of global warming is not true, and that global warming is natural, according to the latest polls.
But Sunstein saves his most ludicrous example until last. On page 5 he characterizes as “false and dangerous” the idea that exposure to sunlight is healthy, despite the fact that top medical experts agree prolonged exposure to sunlight reduces the risk of developing certain cancers.
To claim that encouraging people to get out in the sun is to peddle a dangerous conspiracy theory is like saying that promoting the breathing of fresh air is also a thought crime. One can only presume that Sunstein is deliberately framing the debate by going to such absurd extremes so as to make any belief whatsoever into a conspiracy theory unless it’s specifically approved by the kind of government thought police system he is pushing for.
Despite highlighting the fact that repressive societies go hand in hand with an increase in “conspiracy theories,” Sunstein’s ’solution’ to stamp out such thought crimes is to ban free speech, fulfilling the precise characteristic of the “repressive society” he warns against elsewhere in the paper.
“We could imagine circumstances in which a conspiracy theory became so pervasive, and so dangerous, that censorship would be thinkable,” he writes on page 20. Remember that Sunstein is not just talking about censoring Holocaust denial or anything that’s even debatable in the context of free speech, he’s talking about widely accepted beliefs shared by the majority of Americans but ones viewed as distasteful by the government, which would seek to either marginalize by means of taxation or outright censor such views.
No surprise therefore that Sunstein has called for re-writing the First Amendment as well as advocating Internet censorship and even proposing that Americans should celebrate tax day and be thankful that the state takes a huge chunk of their income.
The government has made it clear that growing suspicion towards authority is a direct threat to their political agenda and indeed Sunstein admits this on page 3 of his paper.
That is why they are now engaging in full on information warfare in an effort to undermine, disrupt and eventually outlaw organized peaceful resistance to their growing tyranny.
Sunstein’s Paper Provides More Evidence COLINTELPRO Still Operational
Kurt Nimmo
Prison Planet.com
January 14, 2009
Cass Sunstein’s white paper, entitled “Conspiracy Theories,” is an exclamation point in the latest chapter of a long history of government tyranny against citizens who organize in opposition to the government. Sunstein argues that individuals and groups deviating from the official government narrative on a number of political issues and events are a national security threat. The administrator of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs formulates “a plan for the government to infiltrate conspiracy groups in order to undermine them via postings on chat rooms and social networks, as well as real meetings, according to a recently uncovered article Sunstein wrote for the Journal of Political Philosophy,” writes Paul Joseph Watson.
 FDR, an icon for many liberals, sent the FBI after citizens who opposed his war policies. |
Sunstein’s plan is a reformulation of a long-standing effort to subvert the First Amendment and the Bill of Rights. Concerted government attacks against organized political opposition began soon after the founding of the republic — specifically with the passage of the Alien and Sedition Acts in 1798 by the Federalists — but have gained critical momentum in the modern era.
During the First World War, the government created the Bureau of Investigation, predecessor to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and appointed J. Edgar Hoover as its head. Hoover’s Bureau of Investigation, with the assistance of police and the military — described as a “citizens auxiliary” — conducted mass raids against the anti-war movement of the time, according to documents released by the Church Committee in the 1970s. The Bureau, specifically designed as a national political police force, “rounded up some 50,000 men without warrants of sufficient probable cause for arrest” for the crime of opposing the First World War.
In 1920, Attorney General A. Mitchell Palmer conducted a massive program in 33 cities and rounded up over 10,000 people. The Church Committee report (p.384) talks of “the abuses of due process of law incident to the raids.” According to Robert Preston (Aliens And Dissenters), the Palmer Raids involved “indiscriminate arrests of the innocent with the guilty, unlawful seizures by federal detectives” and other violations of constitutional rights. The Church Committee (p.385) “found federal agents guilty of using third-degree tortures, making illegal searches and arrests, using agents provocateurs.” Palmer and Hoover found no evidence of a proposed Bolshevik revolution as they claimed but a large number of the rounded up suspects continued to be held without trial.
The Second World War brought a new wave of government terrorism against political opponents. President Franklin D. Roosevelt in a 1940 issued a memorandum giving the FBI the power to use warrantless wiretaps against suspected subversives, that is to say activists opposed to U.S. involvement in the war. FDR not only unleashed the FBI on activists, but concerned citizens as well. After giving a speech on national defense in 1940, FDR had his press secretary, Stephen Early, send Hoover the names of 128 people who had sent telegrams to the White House criticizing the address. “The President thought you might like to look them over,” Early’s note instructed Hoover.
Following the Second World War, the government engineered the immensely profitable (for the military-industrial complex) Cold War and the attendant Red Scare. In 1956, the FBI established COINTELPRO, short for Counter Intelligence Program. COINTELPRO was ostensibly manufactured to counter communist subversion, but as a numerous documents reveal the program focused almost exclusively on domestic opposition to government policies.
The Church Committee explains that COINTELPRO “had no conceivable rational relationship to either national security or violent activity. The unexpressed major premise of much of COINTELPRO is that the Bureau has a role in maintaining the existing social order, and that its efforts should be aimed toward combating those who threaten that order.”
“This is a rough, tough, dirty business, and dangerous,” former Assistant to Director Hoover, William C. Sullivan, told the Church Committee. “No holds were barred.”
This “rough, tough, dirty business” included infiltration of political groups, psychological warfare, legal harassment, and extralegal force and violence. “The FBI and police threatened, instigated and conducted break-ins, vandalism, assaults, and beatings. The object was to frighten dissidents and disrupt their movements,” write Mike Cassidy and Will Miller. “They used secret and systematic methods of fraud and force, far beyond mere surveillance, to sabotage constitutionally protected political activity. The purpose of the program was, in FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover’s own words, to ‘expose, disrupt, misdirect, discredit and otherwise neutralize’ specific groups and individuals.”
After the Church Committee exposed COINTELPRO, the government claimed it had dismantled the program. However, in the 1980s, the Reagan administration legalized the tactics by signing Executive Order 12333.
“There is every reason to believe that even what was not legalized is still going on as well. Lest we forget, Lt. Col. Oliver North funded and orchestrated from the White House basement break-ins and other ‘dirty tricks’ to defeat congressional critics of U.S. policy in Central America and to neutralize grassroots protest. Special Prosecutor Walsh found evidence that North and Richard Secord (architect of the 1960s covert actions in Cambodia) used Iran-Contra funds to harass the Christic Institute, a church-funded public interest group specializing in exposing government misconduct,” Cassidy and Miller continue.
In addition, North worked with FEMA to develop contingency plans for suspending the Constitution, establishing martial law, and holding political dissidents in concentration camps. Since the false flag attacks of September 11, 2001, the government has worked incessantly to fine tune plans to impose martial law. It has also worked to federalize and militarized law enforcement around the country.
Brian Glick (War at Home) argues that COINTELPRO is a permanent feature of the government. “The record of the past 50 years reveals a pattern of continuous domestic covert action,” Glick wrote in the 1990s. “Its use has been documented in each of the last nine administrations, Democratic as well as Republican. FBI testimony shows ‘COINTELPRO tactics’ already in full swing during the presidencies of Democrats Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Harry Truman. COINTELPRO itself, while initiated under Eisenhower, grew from one program to six under the Democratic administrations of Kennedy and Johnson… After COINTELPRO was exposed [by the Church Committee], similar programs continued under other names during the Carter years as well as under Nixon, Ford, and Reagan. They have outlived J. Edgar Hoover and remained in place under all of his successors.”
Sunstein’s call for authoritarian action against government critics — including outright censorship in addition to the established tactics mentioned above — reveals that COINTELPRO has indeed outlived Hoover.
“Some conspiracy theories create serious risks. They do not merely undermine democratic debate; in extreme cases, they create or fuel violence,” writes Sunstein. “Even if only a small fraction of adherents to a particular conspiracy theory act on the basis of their beliefs, that small fraction may be enough to cause serious harms.”
Sunstein’s analysis dovetails with that of the Department of Homeland Security. In its now infamous report on “rightwing extremism,” the DHS insists members of the constitutionalist movement (including Libertarians and advocates of the Second Amendment) are not only violent but also virulent racists (a conclusion provided pre-packaged by the ADL and the SPLC).
If realized, Cass Sunstein’s call for outright censorship and the absurd proposal to impose fines and taxes on people who hold political views contrary to those of our rulers will naturally result in a redoubling of political activity on the part of the truth movement (specifically mentioned as “kooks” by Sunstein) and Libertarians and Constitutionalists.
As history repeatedly demonstrates, when faced with a strong and determined political opposition government invariably turns to more brutal and violent methods to enforce its will. Our rulers understand this and that is why they are hurriedly finishing their high-tech police and surveillance grid.
Filed under: Afghanistan, Anti-War, Colonialism, Dictatorship, Dissent, Empire, IED, impirialism, mrap, nation building, obama surge, obamas war, occupation, Protest, Soviet Union, Taliban, Troops, u.s. soldiers, war crime, War Crimes, War On Terror
U.S. Soldier: ‘The Afghans Just Want To Be Left Alone’
Filed under: Afghanistan, Anti-War, Barack Obama, Colonialism, Dictatorship, Dissent, Empire, Europe, free speech, impirialism, london, Military, Military Industrial Complex, nation building, obama, obama deception, occupation, Protest, Troops, United Kingdom, veterans, war crime, War Crimes, War On Terror | Tags: court martial, Joe Glenton, Ministry of Defence, Stop the War Coalition
British soldier faces 10 years in jail after being arrested during anti-war demonstration
UK Daily Mail
November 11, 2009
A soldier facing charges of desertion for refusing to return to Afghanistan has been arrested and charged with five further offences after joining an anti-war demonstration.
Lance Corporal Joe Glenton led a protest in London last month against the continued presence of British troops in Afghanistan.
He was already facing a court martial but according to the Stop the War Coalition the new charges carry a maximum of 10 years imprisonment.
The group’s convener Lindsey German said last night : ‘This is not about breach of military regulations. In the last few days a range of military personnel have been speaking in the media in defence of this appalling war. I doubt if any of them have been arrested.
‘This is about the persecution of a soldier who believes in telling the truth in accordance with his conscience.
‘He is saying what the majority of the population believes – that this war is unwinnable and immoral. The anti-war movement will be doing everything possible to get him released.’
Lance Corporal Glenton, 27, from the Royal Logistic Corps, addressed a rally of more than 5,000 anti-war protesters packed into London’s Trafalgar Square in October.
He told the crowd he had witnessed sights during his time in Afghanistan that forced him to question the morality of his role.
The married soldier, from Norwich, told onlookers: ‘I’m here today to make a stand beside you because I believe great wrongs have been perpetrated in Afghanistan.
‘I cannot, in good conscience, be part of them. I’m bound by law and moral duty to try and stop them.
‘I’m a soldier and I belong to the profession of arms. I expected to go to war but I also expected that the need to defend this country’s interests would be legal and justifiable. I don’t think this is too much to ask.
‘It’s now apparent that the conflict is neither of these and that’s why I must make this stand.’
The Ministry of Defence refused to comment when asked about the further charges.
But spokesman confirmed Lance Corporal Glenton is currently subject to disciplinary action. He said: ‘I can confirm that disciplinary action against a serving soldier from the Royal Logistic Corps is currently in progress.
‘As this matter is subject to court martial proceedings, it would be inappropriate to comment further at this stage.’
The soldier, based in Abingdon, Oxfordshire, is facing a court martial, adjourned to January, for alleged desertion after going absent without leave in 2007.
He is charged with disobeying a lawful command. He joined the Army in 2004.
If convicted, he faces two years in prison.
Speaking during last month’s rally, he said: ‘The occupation in Afghanistan is at best dubious in terms of legality and morality.
‘I can’t be involved in it on that basis and, not only that, I am also bound to try and stop it, try and change things.
‘That’s the law, the occupation of a country like that, regime change, these things are all illegal.’
He said military personnel told him not to appear at the rally.
But despite the threat of prison, he said he was determined to speak out.
He said: ‘People keep telling me I’m brave but I don’t feel brave at all – I feel fairly terrified. It’s not going to stop me, I’m going to keep going.
‘I won’t be silenced. I’ll keep talking and doing what I think is right.
‘I have to or I’ll have to live with this forever if I don’t.’
Filed under: 1984, 1st amendment, 2nd Amendment, 9/11 Truth, Anti-War, Barack Obama, Big Brother, bill of rights, Bloggers, civil disobedience, civil liberties, civil rights, Communism, Congress, Control Grid, DHS, Dictatorship, Dissent, domestic terror, domestic terrorism, Empire, enemies list, Fascism, free press, free speech, gay rights, gestapo, Gun Control, hate crimes, Hate Crimes Bill, Hitler, Homeland Security, House, Illegal Immigration, internet, internet police, internet regulation, iron fist, MIAC report, nanny state, Nazi, Neolibs, New World Order, obama, obama deception, One World Government, Oppression, orwell, patriot movement, Police State, political dissent, political prisoner, political prisoners, political terrorism, precrime, preventative detention, Protest, Senate, socialism, sovereignty, Surveillance, thought crime, thought crimes, thought criminal, Truth Action, truth movement, US Constitution, War On Terror, White House
Hate Crime Bill Is A Trojan Horse Against Free Speech
NoWorldSystem.com
October 23, 2009
The U.S. Senate has passed the homosexual hate-crimes bill and will now send it to President Obama to sign it into law. This bill is a trojan horse to legitimize the creation of more laws that will completely obliterate the 1st amendment of the United States.
Many homosexual organizations say this is a victory, however they are just being used to further infringe on Americans rights to free speech.
In a 68-29 vote, senators passed 2010 National Defense Authorization Act, which includes the hate crimes measure that adds “sexual orientation” and “gender identity,” as well as disability, to the current categories — such as race, religion and gender — protected from hate crimes. The House of Representatives voted 281-146 on Oct. 8 for the same defense legislation, which was used as a vehicle for the hate-crimes measure though it is not directly related to the controversial provision. President Obama has said he would sign the bill.
Any “hate crimes” bill is a disaster for the 1st amendment and leads into the direction of a nanny government.. we are all grown-ups, correct? When someone puts you down whether it’s about race, gender, sexual orientation do we really want the federal government and the police to get involved in such petty affairs? And shouldn’t the police and the government be investing their time on more serious situations? Any ‘hate crimes’ bill is just a step towards the end of the 1st amendment and stepping into the direction of a nanny government, handing out fines and putting people in prison for hate speech.
I’m not implying that gay rights aren’t a good thing, I think anyone of any sexual orientation, gender, etc. should have a right to marry, but this hate crimes bill is nothing more than a foot-in-the-door for other tyrannical regulations that will criminalize any type of speech.
This bill could lead to an age of “Pre-Crime” and “Preventative Detentions“, if say the FBI suspects you of potentially committing a hate crime you can be prosecuted and detained even if no crime was even committed. It can also lead to cyber-bullying laws which could mean an expensive fine or prison-time for internet bullying, this bill can also lead to ‘political hate laws’ where any dissent against the government or its policies could make you a political prisoner.
The White House is already planning to create an “enemies list” where any dissent against its policies can land many into a permanent White House database. The U.S. Government and Homeland Security have established its hatred for dissidents in this country, they have established that anti-New World Order groups, Alternative Media Outlets (like this one) are potential violent terrorist tools. Anything about the U.S. Constitution, any partisan activists or any civil disobedience of any kind is now considered potential violent extremism by Homeland Security.
The unclassified Homeland Security memo even says people who are concerned about loss of U.S. sovereignty, illegal immigration and gun-control who are genuinely upset about encroaching freedom may be considered a potential insurgents against the U.S. government! Even liberal environmental activism, anti-war activism is considered potential violent extremism.
When you think of the phrase “hate crimes” remember that hate speech is a form of free speech and protected by the 1st amendment of the Bill of Rights and Constitution. The whole point of free speech is to protect unpopular speech like hate speech. When Obama signs this hate crimes bill into law the government will officially turn free speech into a criminal act, and soon it will become a terrorist/extremist act if Homeland Security (aka: the American Gestapo) gets its way.
Filed under: 2-party system, Afghanistan, airstrikes, Anti-War, army, Barack Obama, China, CIA, CNN, Colonialism, Coup, death squads, destabilization, destabilize, Dictatorship, El Salvador, Empire, Eugenics, Fascism, federal crimes, Genocide, human rights, ISI, Islamabad, kidnapping, left right paradigm, McChrystal, middle east, Mike Mullen, Military, military base, military bases, military insustrial complex, military strike, nation building, NATO, Nazi, neocons, Neolibs, obama, occupation, Pakistan, Pentagon, Population Control, proxy war, Richard Holbrooke, Senate, Seymour Hersh, soldiers, Stanley McChrystal, State Sponsored Terrorism, Taliban, Torture, Troops, u.s. military, u.s. soldiers, Vietnam, war crime, War Crimes, War On Terror, Waziristan | Tags: Joint Special Operations Command, North West Frontier Province, NWFP
Ex-Intel officer: U.S. Seeks Occupation of Pakistan
Press TV
Seppember 14, 2009
The US seeks to establish new military bases in Pakistan to keep the country destabilized and control its nuclear weapons, says a former head of Pakistan’s intelligence service.
In an exclusive interview with Press TV on Sunday, Hamid Gul said that Washington planned to expand its embassy and increase its security guards in Pakistan.
“There are already three thousand five hundred of them [US security guards] and one thousand more are coming,” Gul said.
He also noted that Americans seek to set up a large intelligence network inside Pakistan under the pretext of giving financial aid to the country.
“They [Americans] are going to set up a large intelligence network inside Pakistan. They say because we are spending money directly on projects, therefore we need the security guards and we are bringing in the contractors,” said Gul.
US officials “want to go for Pakistan’s nuclear assets. They are inching close to those nuclear assets day by day,” he added.
When asked about Washington’s long-term goal in Pakistan, the former Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) said that the United States wants to keep the country destabilized.
Washington’s decision to expand its embassy in Pakistan has also rung alarm bells in China with Chinese Ambassador to Pakistan, Luo Zhaohui, expressing concern over the planned measure.
“China has concerns over the expansion of the US Embassy in Islamabad and the United States should expand its Embassy by materializing rules and regulations of Pakistan,” Zhaohui said at a news conference.
Washington’s “good war”
Death squads, disappearances and torture in Pakistan
WSWS
September 16, 2009
As the Obama administration prepares a major escalation of the so-called AfPak war, reports from Pakistan’s Swat Valley, near Afghanistan’s eastern border, provide a gruesome indication of the kind of war that the Pentagon and its local allies are waging.
While touted by Obama and his supporters as the “good war,” there is mounting evidence that the Pentagon and the CIA are engaged in a war against the population of the region involving death squads, disappearances and torture.
The Pakistani army sent 20,000 troops into Swat, part of the country’s North West Frontier Province (NWFP), last April to wage war against ethnic Pashtun Islamist movements (routinely described as the Pakistani Taliban) that have supported fellow Pashtuns across the border who are resisting the US-NATO occupation of Afghanistan.
This offensive, which was carried out on the direct and highly public insistence of US envoy Richard Holbrooke and senior American military officers during repeated trips to Islamabad, unleashed a humanitarian catastrophe. In what amounted to a massive exercise in collective punishment, many civilians were killed or wounded and some 2.5 million people were driven from their homes.
Now, the Pakistani military continues to occupy the area, carrying out a reign of terror in which individuals identified as opponents of the government and the US occupation across the border are being picked up and tortured to death.
According to a report published September 15 in the New York Times, with the military occupation of the Swat Valley “a new campaign of fear has taken hold, with scores, perhaps hundreds, of bodies dumped on the streets in what human rights advocates and local residents say is the work of the military.”
While the Pakistani military has denied responsibility for this wave of killings—blaming them on civilians seeking revenge against the Islamists—the Times quotes local residents, politicians and human rights workers as blaming the army. They point, the article states, to “the scale of the retaliation, the similarities in the way that many of the victims have been tortured and the systematic nature of the deaths and disappearances in areas that the military firmly controls.”
In addition to bearing marks of brutal torture, many of the bodies are discovered with their hands tied behind their backs and with a bullet in the back of the neck. In some cases corpses have been beheaded.
On September 1, the Pakistani newspaper Dawn quoted government officials as saying that 251 bodies had been found dumped along the roadside in the Swat Valley since July. On August 27, the newspaper reported that 51 bodies had been found in the area in the space of just 24 hours.
Dawn has also reported the discovery of a number of mass graves containing victims of the military and referred to local residents who had “witnessed the crude and inhuman lumping together of the living and the dead.”
The Times cites the case of Akhtar Ali, 28, arrested by the military at his electrical repair shop on September 1. While military officials repeatedly told his family that he would be released, four days later his corpse was dumped on their doorstep, bearing cigarette burns and with nails hammered into his flesh. “There was no place on his body not tortured,” his family said in a petition seeking justice.
American officials have praised the Pakistani military for its campaign in the Swat Valley, with US Ambassador Anne Patterson visiting Mingora, Swat’s largest town, last week to congratulate the army.
Now US officials are pressing the Pakistani government to replicate this bloody campaign in South Waziristan. A similar offensive is already underway in the Khyber Agency, site of the Khyber Pass, a key route for supplies to the US occupation force in Afghanistan. UN officials report that 100,000 people have been displaced by the attack.
Washington stands behind the atrocities being carried out against the Pakistani people. It is funding the Pakistani military operations, with some $2.5 billion in overt military aid this fiscal year. Meanwhile, CIA drone attacks continue, having claimed nearly 600 Pakistani victims over the past year, the majority of them civilians.
There is every reason to suspect that the wave of disappearances, torture and death squad assassinations in Pakistan is also “made in the USA.”
Before becoming the US commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley McChrystal headed the military’s Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC), the secret special operations unit that investigative journalist Seymour Hersh described as an “executive assassination wing.”
US special forces “trainers” are operating on Pakistani soil, instructing Pakistani forces in the kind of tactics favored by JSOC—tactics that yield the bound and battered bodies dumped in the streets of Swat.
These tactics fit a long pattern of US counterinsurgency warfare, from Operation Phoenix in Vietnam to the US-backed death squads that terrorized the population of El Salvador in the 1980s.
Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen warned again Tuesday in testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee that the military will almost certainly seek an increase in troop levels over the 70,000 American soldiers and Marines that are to be deployed in Afghanistan by the end of this year.
Citing diplomatic sources, Dawn reported that Gen. McChrystal is calling for a shift in the war’s focus to the Afghanistan-Pakistan border area.
Having lost control of most of Afghanistan after nearly eight years of US occupation, the Pentagon is preparing to launch a new wave of bloodletting and terror against the population on both sides of the border in the hope of breaking popular resistance.
The administration of Barack Obama, elected on a wave of antiwar sentiment, is already implicated in war crimes that rival those carried out by his predecessor. Support for the war within the US has declined to levels approaching those reached over Iraq, with the latest CNN poll showing 58 percent of Americans opposing the US occupation of Afghanistan and only 39 percent supporting it.
Driven by the interests of the US ruling elite, the escalation of this dirty war, together with the escalating assault on jobs and living standards at home, is creating the conditions for the emergence of a mass political movement of working people against the Obama administration and the profit system which is the driving force of imperialist war.
Filed under: 1984, 1st amendment, Ahmadinejad, Anti-War, army, Big Brother, big pharma, biometrics, brain manipulation, Checkpoints, Control Grid, CS Gas, Darpa, Department of Defense, Detainee, Dictatorship, Dissent, DoD, domestic terror, domestic terrorism, Empire, free speech, Iran, medical industrial complex, mental health screening, Military, Military Industrial Complex, MKultra, nerve gas, Oppression, orwell, Pentagon, Police State, Protest, protests, Psychotronic weapons, riot, robot, Science and technology, strange news, super weapons, Surveillance, Tehran, Torture, Troops, urban warfare, US Constitution, War On Terror | Tags: lie detection, lie detector, mind drugs, mind reading, neuroscience, pharmacological land mines, soldier, telekinesis, telepathy, u.s. soldiers
Should we fear neuro-war more than normal war?
FP
September 7, 2009
A new opinion piece in Nature (ungated version via a somewhat dubious Website) takes biologists to task for allowing the militarization of their work for the development of neuro-weapons — chemical agents that are weaponized in spray or gas form to induce altered mental states.
The Russian military’s use of fentanyl to incapacitate Chechen terrorists — and kill 120 hostages in the process — during the 2002 Nord-Ost seige was something of a wakeup call in this area. It’s no secret that the U.S. and other militaries are interested in these potential weapons (I wrote about a 2008 DoD-commisioned study on cognitive enhancement and mind control last November.) According to the Nature story, some companies are now marketing oxytocin based on studies showing that in spray form, it can increase feelings of trust in humans, an application discussed in the 2008 study.
Blogger Ryan Sager wonders what would have happened if the Iranian government had had such a weapon during this summer’s protests. He continues:
Now, some would argue that the use of non-lethal agents is potentially desirable. After all, the alternative is lethal measures. But the author of the opinion piece, Malcolm Dando, professor of International Security in the Department of Peace Studies at Bradford University in the UK, doesn’t see it that way:
At the Nord-Ost siege, for instance, terrorists exposed to the fentanyl mixture were shot dead rather than arrested. Likewise, in Vietnam, the US military used vast quantities of CS gas — a ‘non-lethal’ riot-control agent — to increase the effectiveness of conventional weapons by flushing the Viet Cong out of their hiding places.
While we might want to believe that we would use such weapons ethically going forward, the idea of a dictator in possession of such weapons is rather chilling — moving into science-fiction-dystopia territory.
I suppose. Though I think I’m going to continue to be most worried about them having nuclear weapons. The Iranian regimes rigged an election; killed tortured and hundreds of protesters; and coerced opposition leaders into giving false confessions. I don’t think it would have been that much worse if they had had weaponized oxytocin on their hands.
Sager is right that this is a topic worthy of debate, but I find it strange that research on weapons designed to incapacitate or disorient the enemy seems to disturb people a lot more than research on weapons designed to kill them. As for the idea that neurological agents could facilitate other abuses, Kelly Lowenberg writes on the blog of the Stanford Center for Law and the Neurosciences:
Or is our real concern that, by incapacitating, they facilitate brutality toward a defenseless prisoner? If so, then the conversation should be about illegal soldier/police abuse, not the chemical agents themselves.
I think this is right. New technology, as it always does, is going to provoke new debates on the right to privacy, the treatment of prisoners, and the laws of war, but the basic principles that underly that debate shouldn’t change because the weapons have.
Filed under: 2-party system, activists, Afghanistan, Anti-War, Barack Obama, David Petraeus, fallen soldiers, George Bush, gordon brown, Iraq, left right paradigm, nation building, neocons, Neolibs, obama, obama surge, obamas surge, obamas war, occupation, Pentagon, Robert Gates, soldiers, Stanley McChrystal, surge, Troops, war casualties, War Crimes, War On Terror, White House | Tags: Sir David Richards, Stanley McChrystal, Tommy Vietor, war of necessity
Obama Urged to Rally Support for War
Wall Street Journal
September 7, 2009
The White House is facing mounting pressure from lawmakers to work harder to rally flagging public support for the war in Afghanistan.
With casualties rising, the administration is struggling to persuade voters that the war can be won or is worth the human and financial costs. Afghanistan is President Barack Obama’s top foreign-policy priority, but recent polls show that a majority of voters oppose the war for the first time since the conflict began eight years ago.
The politics of the war are getting trickier for key American allies as well. A junior minister in Britain’s Ministry of Defense resigned Thursday, criticizing his government’s strategy in Afghanistan on the eve of a major speech by Prime Minister Gordon Brown about Britain’s efforts there.
In the U.S., a growing number of lawmakers say that Mr. Obama needs to make the case for Afghanistan more forcefully — and more frequently — than he has done to date.
“The president, unfortunately, because of the crush of everything else, hasn’t talked about Afghanistan all that much,” said Sen. Bob Casey, a centrist Democrat from Pennsylvania, in an interview. “There’s so much on his plate that it has an adverse impact on his ability to spend enough time on Afghanistan.”
The president’s most extensive recent comments about Afghanistan came in an Aug. 17 speech to a Veterans of Foreign Wars convention in Phoenix, where he devoted less than three minutes of a half-hour speech to a conflict he described as “a war of necessity.” Since then, most of Mr. Obama’s public remarks have focused on health care.
White House officials said there were no plans for Mr. Obama to address the Afghan war in a major speech in the near future. Tommy Vietor, an administration spokesman, said that “the president talks about Afghanistan all the time.”
“There are a lot of critical issues the president deals with every day, and a lot of critical issues he talks about,” Mr. Vietor said. “Afghanistan is on the top of his list.”
Still, a raft of recent polls shows that support for the war is falling rapidly, especially among Mr. Obama’s core Democratic and independent constituencies. A CNN/ORC poll late last month found that 74% of Democrats and 57% of independents opposed the war, dragging overall support for the conflict down to 42%.
The CNN poll found that Republican support for the conflict was holding solid at 70%, highlighting the awkward fact that Mr. Obama’s strongest allies on the war are Republican lawmakers who oppose most other parts of his agenda.
“If the president asks for more troops based on the recommendation of the commanders in the field, I expect virtually every House Republican would support the increase,” said a GOP leadership aide. “This is a fight that will be almost entirely among Democrats.”
Some Republicans say they wish Mr. Obama would make a stronger case for the U.S. role in Afghanistan. Asked recently on CNN’s “State of the Union” whether the president had sufficiently explained U.S. strategy in Afghanistan, Sen. Richard Lugar (R., Ind.) said, “No.”
“The president really has to face the fact that his own leadership here is critical,” said Mr. Lugar, the top Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations panel.
The Afghan war’s shifting political fortunes could make it harder for the administration to sell the public on the need for further expanding the U.S. military presence in Afghanistan.
Mr. Obama has already agreed to send 21,000 American reinforcements, pushing U.S. troop levels there to a record 68,000, and the top American commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, is expected to ask for tens of thousands of additional troops later this month.
Speaking to reporters at the Pentagon, Defense Secretary Robert Gates sounded more amenable to such a request than he has in the past. “I’m very open to the recommendations and certainly the perspective of Gen. McChrystal,” Mr. Gates said.
The White House’s relative silence on Afghanistan comes as a surprise to many military and civilian officials at the Pentagon, who witnessed firsthand in 2007 and 2008 how the Bush administration employed Gen. David Petraeus as an effective public advocate for the Iraq war.
Gen. Petraeus, then the top U.S. commander in Iraq, testified at high-profile congressional hearings and regularly addressed large audiences at think tanks and other public venues.
The appearances helped to shore up flagging congressional support for the Bush administration’s handling of the conflict, and to prevent lawmakers from making a serious push to force a drawdown of troops.
“There’s a blueprint for how to do this,” a senior defense official who began serving in the Pentagon during the Bush administration said in an interview. “The Bush team knew that Petraeus was a great public face for the war, and they put him out there as often as they could.”
A second senior military official said he believed the Obama administration erred earlier this week by failing to publicly release a new strategic assessment of Afghanistan prepared by Gen. McChrystal. The official argued that a public presentation of the new commander’s strategic vision would have helped rally support for the war effort.
“Americans want to see a plan and how we’re going to achieve success,” the official said. “We owe it to them.”
Gen. McChrystal’s gloomy assessment was classified only at the “confidential” level, rather than the more sensitive “secret” or “top secret” classifications, meaning it could have been easily scrubbed for public release.
Mr. Gates told reporters that he was comfortable with the administration’s efforts to rally support for the war, and said Mr. Obama’s public explanations of his strategy for the conflict had been “crystal clear.”
“The nation has been at war for eight years,” he said. “The fact that Americans would be tired of having their sons and daughters at risk and in battle is not surprising.”
Filed under: 1984, 1st amendment, 9/11 Truth, Airport Security, Alex Jones, alternative media, anti-abortion, Anti-War, Big Brother, bill of rights, blackops, bob barr, brain manipulation, campaign for liberty, chuck baldwin, civil disobedience, civil liberties, civil rights, Conditioning, Control Grid, DHS, Dictatorship, Dissent, DoD, domestic terror, domestic terrorism, Echelon, Empire, fake alqaeda, Fascism, FBI, Founding Fathers, free speech, Homeland Security, Martial Law, MIAC report, militarization, Military, nanny state, Nazi, New World Order, NWO, Oppression, orwell, patriot movement, Police State, Posse Comitatus, precrime, Propaganda, Protest, Psyops, Ron Paul, stasi, stasi tactics, terror drill, thought crime, Troops, truth movement, US Constitution, us military, War On Terror
Troops And Police Take On Protesters in “Anti-Terrorism” Drill
Steve Watson
Infowars.net
September 4, 2009
Soldiers teamed up with police at Fort Lee, Virginia this week for a three day long “anti-terrorism drill” that involved defending themselves from actors playing the part of “agitated” protesters.
A report from CBS affiliate WTVR provides details of the drill, which centered on containing and quelling a staged demonstration.
The volunteer protesters held aloft signs, one of which declared a “racist free zone” (see opposite, click to enlarge).
“We train our solders as realistically as we can, to protect for us as a garrison, other soldiers and families on the post” Fort Lee’s Garrison Commander Colonel Mike Morrow told reporters.
Combining active duty soldiers with civilian police has taken weeks of planning according to the report. The drill involved “all aspects of protecting of the military installation whether its protesters or terrorists.”
Fort Lee Chief of Police Joe Metzger told WTVR that in times of emergency the military and the police must work together. “We forget one’s wearing blue, one’s wearing a uniform. We all come together for the same cause”. Metzger stated.
Apparently that cause involves the prevention of people exercising their First Amendment rights.
One participating soldier was quoted as saying “I learned over here we also have missions back in the US to protect our families and friends and this is a part of doing so”.
It has been the case for a number of years now that the police and the armed forces are being trained, in this case TOGETHER, to treat protesting US citizens as a threat to security.
Now it is clear that the American people are the classed on same threat level as “terrorists” by the military and the police. Why else would such an exercise be part of an “anti-terrorism” drill?
Back in June we covered the news that current Department of Defense anti-terrorism training course material states that the exercise of First Amendment rights in the US constitutes terrorist activity.
The ACLU wrote a letter of protest to the DoD regarding its Antiterrorism and Force Protection Annual Refresher Training Course, which advises personnel that political protest amounts to “low-level terrorism”. All DoD personnel are required to complete the course on a yearly basis.
Over the last few years we have also seen countless examples of security assessment reports from the likes of the Department of Defense, the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI, as well as police training manuals, which state that anti-war protesters, gun owners, veterans, Ron Paul supporters and those who merely cite the Constitution should be equated with extremists.
The latest evidence of such training was sent to us last week in the form of a 2006 FBI training video produced as part of a program to train police how to spot and apprehend terrorists.
The “terrorists” in the presentation were people carrying video equipment, cell phones and sleeping bags in their cars, along with people taking photographs of structures.
Watch Alex Jones’ breakdown of the training video below (begins at 6.20 mins):
Filed under: 2-party system, activists, Afghanistan, Anti-War, Barack Obama, Britain, british troops, code pink, Congress, Dissent, fallen soldiers, George Bush, Iraq, IVAW, left right paradigm, london, nation building, neocons, Neolibs, obama, obama surge, obamas surge, obamas war, occupation, Pentagon, poll, Protest, protests, rally, soldiers, Stanley McChrystal, surge, Troops, Uncategorized, United Kingdom, veterans, War Crimes, War On Terror | Tags: Sir David Richards, war of necessity
Anti-war groups turn against Obama after Afghan surge
UK Telegraph
August 31, 2009
There is rising disillusion among liberals and peace activists that a president who built his campaign on his opposition to the war in Iraq now views America’s other conflict as a “war of necessity”.
Mr Obama has already added 21,000 extra troops to the 38,000 stationed there by George W Bush. In the next few weeks, he is likely to receive requests from the Pentagon for more when Gen Stanley McChrystal, the US commander in Afghanistan, submits a report on the progress of the war.
It is expected to paint a grim picture and offer the president three options for action: increase troop numbers dramatically, increase them less dramatically or leave them as they are.
Some organizations that campaigned against the Iraq war are biding their time or are more inclined to side with the president’s argument that a stronger counter-insurgency effort in Afghanistan is in US national interests.
But others have run out of patience, and though they know they will not yet fill city centre streets with protestors, they plan to hold marches and smaller events such as forums with war veterans and troops’ families, as well as lobbying members of Congress.
“As progressives feel more comfortable protesting against the Obama administration and challenging Democrats as well as Republicans in Congress, then we’ll be back on track,” Medea Benjamin of the anti-war group Code Pink said.
Perry O’Brien, president of the New York chapter of Iraq Veterans Against the War, said: “In the next year, it will more and more become Obama’s war. He’ll be held responsible for the bloodshed.”
Though public opinion in the US has not turned against the war as sharply as in Britain, for the first time a majority of respondents (51 per cent) in a recent Washington Post-ABC poll said the war was not worth the fight. Among liberals, strong approval of the war plummeted by 20 per cent.
On Friday the Pentagon confirmed that August was the deadliest month for US troops since the start of the war in October 2001 to remove the Taliban government, which had refused to hand over Osama bin Laden after the September 11 attacks.
Two thirds want British troops home from Afghanistan
UK Telegraph
August 29, 2009
The public’s growing opposition to the conflict comes after the number of British deaths in Afghanistan rose above 200 earlier this month.
Yesterday, Gen Sir David Richards took over as Chief of the General Staff and vowed to get better equipment for troops and improved care for those injured fighting for Britain.
A Daily Telegraph/YouGov poll showed 62 per cent of people opposed British troops staying in Afghanistan, while 26 per cent were in favour.
Previous polls had shown that most people backed the conflict in Afghanistan, unlike the war in Iraq. They accepted the argument espoused by ministers and the opposition that it was part of the fight against terrorism that could be exported to British streets.
But increasingly voters appear unwilling to accept that claim.
Filed under: 1984, Airport Security, Anti-War, Big Brother, Britain, Camera Ban, CCTV, civil liberties, civil rights, curfew, Dictatorship, Dissent, domestic terror, domestic terrorism, Empire, european union, Fox News, free speech, jose torres, london, Martial Law, Media, nanny state, new jersey, New York, Oppression, Police State, Protest, sexual abuse, Surveillance, thought crime, thought criminal, u.s. constitution, United Kingdom | Tags: Paterson
New Jersey Mayor Considers Martial Law Curfew
EOK Parliament: Attempted Shutdown
Filed under: 2-party system, activists, Afghanistan, Anti-War, Barack Obama, Cindy Sheehan, Dissent, George Bush, Iraq, left right paradigm, Military, Military Industrial Complex, nation building, neocons, Neolibs, obama, occupation, Pakistan, Protest, Troops, war casualties, War On Terror, White House | Tags: Martha’s Vineyard, obama vacation
Cindy Sheehan To Lead Protest Against Obama Continuing Bush Wars
Infowars
August 18, 2009
For immediate release:
Next week, Cindy Sheehan will join other like-minded peace activists to have a presence near the expensive resort on Martha’s Vineyard where President Obama will be vacationing the week of August 23-30.
From her home in California, Ms. Sheehan released this statement:
“There are several things that we wish to accomplish with this protest on Martha’s Vineyard.
“First of all, no good social or economic change will come about with the continuation or escalation of the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan. We simply can’t afford to continue this tragically expensive foreign policy.
“Secondly, we as a movement need to continue calling for an immediate end to the occupations even when there is a Democrat in the Oval Office. There is still no Noble Cause no matter how we examine the policies.
“Thirdly, the body bags aren’t taking a vacation and as the US led violence surges in Afghanistan and Pakistan, so are the needless deaths on every side.
“And, finally, if the right-wing can force the government to drop any kind of public option or government supported health care, then we need to exert the same kind of pressure to force a speedy end to the occupations.”
Cindy Sheehan will arrive on the Vineyard on Tuesday, August 25th.
Filed under: 1984, 1st amendment, 2-party system, 9/11 Truth, activists, Afghanistan, Air Force, Anti-War, army, Barack Obama, Big Brother, CIA, civil disobedience, co-intel pro, Dick Cheney, Dictatorship, Dissent, domestic terror, domestic terrorism, Empire, Fascism, free speech, George Bush, Iraq, left right paradigm, Military, nation building, Nazi, neocons, Neolibs, obama, occupation, Oppression, orwell, Police State, Posse Comitatus, Protest, Provocateurs, stasi, stasi tactics, Surveillance, Troops, u.s. military, US Constitution, War On Terror, warrantless surveillance, warrantless wiretap, washington | Tags: Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, Fort Lewis Army Base, glenn spagnuolo, John J. Towery II, John Jacob, kenneth sanchez, olympia, olympia police, PMR, Port Militarization Resistance, SDS, Students for a Democratic Society
Army Caught Spying on Anti-War Activists
Filed under: 1984, 1st amendment, 2-party system, 2008 Election, 2nd Amendment, 9/11 Truth, anti gun, Anti-War, Barack Obama, Big Brother, civil disobedience, civil liberties, civil rights, Dictatorship, domestic terror, domestic terrorism, Empire, eric holder, False Flag, Fascism, firearms, free speech, gun confiscation, Gun Control, Gun Owners, h.r. 2159, handgun ban, handguns, Homeland Security, hr 2159, inside job, left right paradigm, nanny state, Nazi, neocons, Neolibs, obama, Oppression, orwell, patriot movement, Police State, Protest, stasi, stasi tactics, US Constitution, War On Terror, Washington D.C.
HR 2159 Seeks To Disarm Individuals The Government Suspects Of Being Terrorists
Lee Rogers
Rogue Government
May 11, 2009
The terrorists in the federal government are continuing their push to infringe on everyone’s natural right to defend themselves. More specifically, a new bill has been introduced that would allow the Attorney General to deny the transfer of a firearm or the issuance of a firearm to a known or suspected dangerous terrorist. The bill is HR 2159 or the Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2009. This legislation is incredibly disturbing because since the 9/11 false flag terror attacks, the government has been utilizing the bogus war on terror as a pretext to label a myriad of people as domestic terrorists. In this Orwellian world that we live in, supporters of the Constitution, liberty oriented individuals and even anti-war protesters are now being considered domestic terrorists. With this in mind, this legislation will allow the government to deny an individual the right to bear arms by simply stating that they are a suspected terrorist. In this world we are moving into, everyone will be a suspected terrorist, so it is convenient that something like this would be proposed.
The purpose of the bill is described below. The language clearly states that its purpose is to authorize the government to deny firearms to anyone who they consider to be a known or suspected terrorist.
To increase public safety by permitting the Attorney General to deny the transfer of a firearm or the issuance of firearms or explosives licenses to a known or suspected dangerous terrorist.
Section 2 of the bill grants the Attorney General the authority to deny the sale or transfer of firearms or firearms/explosives licenses to so-called dangerous terrorists. They can do this based on the sole discretion of the Attorney General. So if the Attorney General believes that an individual is in some way, shape or form engaged in terrorism or suspected of terrorism, they will be given the authority to deny access to firearms from this person.
SEC. 2. GRANTING THE ATTORNEY GENERAL THE AUTHORITY TO DENY THE SALE, DELIVERY, OR TRANSFER OF A FIREARM OR THE ISSUANCE OF A FIREARMS OR EXPLOSIVES LICENSE OR PERMIT TO DANGEROUS TERRORISTS.
(a) Standard for Exercising Attorney General Discretion Regarding Transferring Firearms or Issuing Firearms Permits to Dangerous Terrorists- Chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, is amended–
(1) by inserting the following new section after section 922:
‘Sec. 922A. Attorney General’s discretion to deny transfer of a firearm
‘The Attorney General may deny the transfer of a firearm pursuant to section 922(t)(1)(B)(ii) if the Attorney General determines that the transferee is known (or appropriately suspected) to be or have been engaged in conduct constituting, in preparation for, in aid of, or related to terrorism, or providing material support thereof, and the Attorney General has a reasonable belief that the prospective transferee may use a firearm in connection with terrorism.’;
In Section 922B the bill provides a definition for terrorism which is defined as the following.
‘(36) The term ‘terrorism’ means ‘international terrorism’ as defined in section 2331(1), and ‘domestic terrorism’ as defined in section 2331(5).
The Attorney General would use this definition of terrorism in their decision making process. Looking at just the definition of domestic terrorism in U.S. Code, it becomes obvious why we should be concerned. Below is the definition of domestic terrorism.
(5) the term “domestic terrorism” means activities that –
(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;
(B) appear to be intended –
(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
(C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.
With this broad definition of domestic terrorism in mind, a radio talk show host or an individual operating a web site could be considered a domestic terrorist because they could be considered to be coercing a civilian population. This bill would then authorize the Attorney General to disallow someone from owning a firearm based upon this insane definition of what constitutes a domestic terrorist.
This is an incredibly insane piece of legislation. Unquestionably anyone who attempts to undermine an individual’s natural right to defend themselves by owning a firearm using lawyer tactics and hard to understand legislative language and references is a terrorist. An unarmed population is an enslaved population, and that’s exactly what these nihilistic scumbags in Washington DC want to do. They want to make all of us slaves.
Filed under: 1984, 1st amendment, 9/11 Truth, Airport Security, Alex Jones, alternative media, anti-abortion, Anti-War, Arizona, Big Brother, bill of rights, Black Bloc, blackops, Bloggers, bob barr, campaign for liberty, cashless society, chuck baldwin, civil disobedience, civil liberties, civil rights, Control Grid, DHS, Dictatorship, domestic terror, domestic terrorism, Echelon, Empire, Fascism, free speech, George Bush, global elite, global government, hackers, hate crimes, Hate Crimes Bill, Homeland Security, House, Illegal Immigration, internet, internet regulation, kentucky, las vegas, lou dobbs, Louisiana, Media, MIAC report, michigan, microchips, Military, missouri, nanny state, Nazi, New World Order, North American Union, NWO, Oppression, orwell, patriot movement, Police State, precrime, Psyops, Ron Paul, Senate, Spy, Surveillance, Texas, thought crime, Troops, Truth Action, truth movement, UN, united nations, US Constitution, us military, veterans, virginia, War On Terror | Tags: Domestic Extremism Lexicon, h.r. 1913, h.r. 1966, Megan Meier Cyber-bullying Prevention Act, national strategy for combating terrorism, Texas Department of Public Safety Criminal Law Enforcement Pamphlet, The Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Act of 2009
Homeland Security Calls Free Speech Terrorism
Noworldsystem.com
May 11, 2009
The American way of life is under attack by the Department of Homeland Security and the U.S. Government. There are 2 pending bills in the U.S. House of Representatives that may eventually pass the Senate and become law. These bills will make “hostile speech” and prejudice a felony, it is the first step in ensuring the destruction of the 1st Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
The House already passed a bill titled “The Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Act of 2009” (HR 1913) allowing the federal government to aid local/state and tribal governments to prosecute any crime motivated by prejudice (in terms of race, religion, personal sexual orientation, gender identity and disability). The whole point of the 1st amendment is to protect offensive speech, not polite speech. If this bill passes the Senate this will mean the official end of free speech in America as we know it.
This bill could lead to an age of “Pre-Crime”, if say the FBI suspects you of potentially committing a hate crime you can be prosecuted even if no crime was even committed. But still this remains to be seen.
The other bill that was introduced by the House recently is called the “Megan Meier Cyber-bullying Prevention Act” (HR 1966) if passed the Senate it will lead to fines and up to 2 years in prison if anyone uses popular online media outlets (such as blogs, myspace, facebook, twitter etc.) to cause “substantial emotional distress through severe repeated and hostile speech”. In other words, if you hurt someones feelings on the internet you could be put in prison or fined!
There was a somewhat similar Orwellian piece of legislation that never passed the Senate called the “Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007” (S.1959, otherwise known as the Thought Crimes Bill) which would have given Homeland Security the authority to fund Universities to study ways to stop “extremist belief systems” and “radical ideologies” of Americans. [Source]
Homeland Security released 3 new memos claiming civil disobedience, the alternative news media and dissent against the U.S. government are extremist activities.
The most recent memo titled the “Domestic Extremism Lexicon”, mixes peaceful activists in with prison gangs and criminals. Here is a small list of so-called extremists according to the DHS and I&A:
Alternative Media – Various information sources (online) that interpret events that are different from the mainstream media.
Rightwing Activists – Those who are anti-income tax, pro-sovereignty, anti-illegal immigration, support the U.S. Constitution and bill of rights, pro-militias, anti-new world order, anti-north american union, anti-abortion protesters.
Leftwing Activists – Those who support animal rights, environmentalism, anti-war activism, those who are communist/socialist or anti-capitalists and anarchists. (black bloc are agent provocateurs)
Civil Disobedience – The things Martin Luther King and Ghandi have done are now considered extremism according to Homeland Security! Protesting and the right to assemble in a peaceful manner is now considered an EXTREME act, amazing!
Leaderless Resistance – Individuals acting independently and anonymously outside formal organizational structures. This probably means groups like the Truth/Patriot Movement who fight against the New World Order and question things like the Federal Reserve and 9/11. We are totally non-violent and only seek to wage an information-war against One World Government. But like any leaderless group we are prone to violent infiltrators and Black-ops/Psy-Ops by the mainstream media to paint us as evil and dangerous terrorists.
Hackers – Script kiddies, website defacers, DOS’ers are now a potential extremist threat.
All of these non-violent groups are being lumped-up with prison gangs, criminals, racist groups like white supremacists, black power advocates, Mexican pro-atzlan separatists. They want to demonize 1st amendment activists, blurring the line between free speech and terrorism, blurring the line between crime and terrorism. Basically they are conditioning the public to believe that all crime is now terrorism!
Another new, yet very similar unclassified memo by Homeland Security called the “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment” states the: “prolonged economic downturn” could lead to “fertile recruitment” of returning Iraq veterans by “rightwing extremists” to cause violence against the U.S. Government.
The memo says the increase of concern of loss of sovereignty, illegal immigration, emerging gun-control treaties will cause rightwing groups to turn to terrorism, the memo states: “they are highly critical of the U.S. government’s response to illegal immigration and oppose government programs that are designed to extend rights to illegal aliens, such as issuing driver’s licenses or national identification cards and providing in-state tuition, medical benefits or public education.”.
2 points id like to make; 1) There was never a case where a rightwing group has caused terrorism at the southern border, and 2) how else does the government expect Americans to react when our own government supports people who break the law?
The memo also outlandishly claims anti-New World Order “conspiracy theorists” are violent rightwing extremists and the memo claims the New World Order is only based on Communism and has nothing to do with the Anglo-American internationalist’s quest for a world system. They further claim that anti-New World Order theorists are violent and strongly anti-Jewish. They also claim the April 4th shooting of 3 police officers in Pittsburgh was carried out by a conspiracy theorist that was against “Jewish-controlled One World Government”. This is just some more demonization of people who are having an effect and speaking truth to power.
This memo is a lot similar to a 2006 document revealing the Bush Administration was targeting 9/11 “conspiracy theorists” claiming al-qaeda terrorism springs from: “subcultures of conspiracy and misinformation,” and that “terrorists recruit more effectively from populations whose information about the world is contaminated by falsehoods and corrupted by conspiracy theories. The distortions keep alive grievances and filter out facts that would challenge popular prejudices and self-serving propaganda.” [Page 10]
The last new-memo I will summarize is the MIAC Strategic Report that was given to Missouri law enforcement officers indicated that presidential candidates; Chuck Baldwin, Ron Paul and Bob Barr are terrorists!
Infowars.com broke the story when radio talk-show host Alex Jones received a copy of the MIAC report from an anonymous source in the Missouri police department. Infowars.com writes: “The MIAC report specifically describes supporters of presidential candidates Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin, and Bob Barr as ‘militia’ influenced terrorists and instructs the Missouri police to be on the lookout for supporters displaying bumper stickers and other paraphernalia associated with the Constitutional, Campaign for Liberty, and Libertarian parties,”. [Source]
State law enforcement across the nation already have “fusion centers” to crack down on the patriot/liberty movement. [Source]
These are stunning events in the history of America, more and more ordinary peaceful Americans are being hassled for having a belief that freedom is an individual’s inalienable constitutional right and should not be controlled by the bureaucracy of big government.
This month in Louisiana a driver was stopped, questioned and detained for having a “Don’t Tread On Me” bumper sticker on his car. The driver’s sister-in-law reported that the police officer told him “he had a subversive survivalist bumper sticker on his car.” and that the driver was suspect of “extremist” activities, she continued: “They proceeded to keep him there on the side of the road while they ran whatever they do to see if you have a record, keeping him standing by the side of the road for 30 minutes,”. [Source] Another bumper sticker stop happened in Las Vegas in 2008, a driver was pulled over and questioned. After, the driver headed to his car and the officer said “you know why we had to do this right?”, the officer repeated his comment and pointed at RON PAUL and INFOWARS.COM bumper stickers on the back of his vehicle. [Source]
Want more? A Michigan man stopped, handcuffed, assaulted and branded “unpatriotic” and was subjected to a search of his car, during the search drugs were allegedly planted, all for distributing DVD’s about 9/11 Truth. [Source] In 2004 a Kentucky carpenter distributed Ron Paul and Alex Jones videotapes to a state trooper. A week later he was pulled over, arrested and almost faced a year in jail. [Source] A bible college student in Texas was accused by Homeland Security and FBI agents of “committing acts of terror and espionage” after talking to Boy Scouts about the U.S. Constitution! [Source]
I hope many of you feel dejected enough by this information to take some action. But if not, there are a few other documents you should take a look at:
The “Texas Department of Public Safety Criminal Law Enforcement Pamphlet” identifies citizens who buy baby formula, beer, wearing Levi’s Jeans, traveling with a drivers license and traveling with women and children to considered to be dangerous terrorists! A Virginia Training Manual used to help state employees help identify terrorists, it lists anti-government, property rights activists, people who use binoculars, video cameras and notepads. And last but not least, a Pheonix 9/11 Manual disseminated amongst federal employees revealed potential terrorist as “defenders of the U.S. Constitution against federal government and the United Nations,” and individuals who “make numerous references to the U.S. Constitution.”.
The U.S. Government has become so tyrannical, so corrupt, it has transformed from a “government of the people” into a bureaucratic big brother police state because we allowed ourselves to become distracted from what is of utmost importance; freedom and the preservation of liberty for future generations.
We are now entering the final phase of a New World Order, where internationalist elite control all government to be in favor of a One World Fascist Dictatorship, worse than what George Orwell ever wrote about. A modern era of totalitarianism maintained by a technology-driven control grid, where infra-red spy satellites used by law enforcement can see through your house, drones that can keep an eye on your vehicle, taxing you by the mile, ticketing you when you run a red light. Iris-scanners and bio-scanner cameras at airports measuring your body temperature, pulse and breathing to make sure you aren’t a terrorist. Microchips that control every aspect of your daily life.
George Orwell’s chilling warning of a regime out of control seeking to rule every waking moment of a persons life is not so far off from today and the future of the 21st century. The question is, will this be the picture of what is to come.
“If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face –forever.” -George Orwell.
Filed under: 1984, 1st amendment, 9/11, al-qaeda, Anti-War, Big Brother, Bloggers, Britain, Concentration Camp, Conditioning, Congress, Continuity of Government, Control Grid, death camps, DHS, Dictatorship, Dissent, domestic terror, domestic terrorism, Empire, enemy combatant, Europe, european union, facism, Fascism, fema camp, Fema Camps, Fox News, free speech, George Bush, glenn beck, H.R. 645, halliburton, Homegrown Terrorism, Homeland Security, house senate, HR 1955, HR 6166, hr1955, internet, KBR, Martial Law, maryland, Media, Military, Nazi, obama, operation endgame, orwell, Police State, Popular Mechanics, Propaganda, Protest, Psyops, Romans 13, Ron Paul, Senate, Spy, Surveillance, thought crime, Thought Crime Bill, thought crimes, thought criminal, United Kingdom, US Constitution, War On Terror | Tags: Henry Waxman, Jane Harman, National Defense Authorization act, National Security Presidential Directive 51, NDAA, NSPD 51, Peter Dale Scott
Glenn Beck on Fema Concentration Camps
San Francisco Chronicle
February 4, 2008
Since 9/11, and seemingly without the notice of most Americans, the
federal government has assumed the authority to institute martial law,
arrest a wide swath of dissidents (citizen and noncitizen alike), and
detain people without legal or constitutional recourse in the event of
“an emergency influx of immigrants in the U.S., or to support the rapid
development of new programs.”
Beginning in 1999, the government has entered into a series of
single-bid contracts with Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg, Brown and
Root (KBR) to build detention camps at undisclosed locations within the
United States. The government has also contracted with several
companies to build thousands of railcars, some reportedly equipped with
shackles, ostensibly to transport detainees.
According to diplomat and author Peter Dale Scott, the KBR contract
is part of a Homeland Security plan titled ENDGAME, which sets as its
goal the removal of “all removable aliens” and “potential terrorists.”
Fraud-busters such as Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Los Angeles, have
complained about these contracts, saying that more taxpayer dollars
should not go to taxpayer-gouging Halliburton. But the real question
is: What kind of “new programs” require the construction and
refurbishment of detention facilities in nearly every state of the
union with the capacity to house perhaps millions of people?
Sect. 1042 of the 2007 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA),
“Use of the Armed Forces in Major Public Emergencies,” gives the
executive the power to invoke martial law. For the first time in more
than a century, the president is now authorized to use the military in
response to “a natural disaster, a disease outbreak, a terrorist attack
or any other condition in which the President determines that domestic
violence has occurred to the extent that state officials cannot
maintain public order.”
The Military Commissions Act of 2006, rammed through Congress just
before the 2006 midterm elections, allows for the indefinite
imprisonment of anyone who donates money to a charity that turns up on
a list of “terrorist” organizations, or who speaks out against the
government’s policies. The law calls for secret trials for citizens and
noncitizens alike.
Also in 2007, the White House quietly issued National Security
Presidential Directive 51 (NSPD-51), to ensure “continuity of
government” in the event of what the document vaguely calls a
“catastrophic emergency.” Should the president determine that such an
emergency has occurred, he and he alone is empowered to do whatever he
deems necessary to ensure “continuity of government.” This could
include everything from canceling elections to suspending the
Constitution to launching a nuclear attack. Congress has yet to hold a
single hearing on NSPD-51.
U.S. Rep. Jane Harman, D-Venice (Los Angeles County) has come up
with a new way to expand the domestic “war on terror.” Her Violent
Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 (HR1955),
which passed the House by the lopsided vote of 404-6, would set up a
commission to “examine and report upon the facts and causes” of
so-called violent radicalism and extremist ideology, then make
legislative recommendations on combatting it.
According to commentary in the Baltimore Sun, Rep. Harman and her
colleagues from both sides of the aisle believe the country faces a
native brand of terrorism, and needs a commission with sweeping
investigative power to combat it.
A clue as to where Harman’s commission might be aiming is the Animal
Enterprise Terrorism Act, a law that labels those who “engage in
sit-ins, civil disobedience, trespass, or any other crime in the name
of animal rights” as terrorists. Other groups in the crosshairs could
be anti-abortion protesters, anti-tax agitators, immigration activists,
environmentalists, peace demonstrators, Second Amendment rights
supporters … the list goes on and on. According to author Naomi Wolf,
the National Counterterrorism Center holds the names of roughly 775,000
“terror suspects” with the number increasing by 20,000 per month.
What could the government be contemplating that leads it to make
contingency plans to detain without recourse millions of its own
citizens?
The Constitution does not allow the executive to have unchecked
power under any circumstances. The people must not allow the president
to use the war on terrorism to rule by fear instead of by law.
Source: San Francisco Chronicle
http://noworldsystem.com/2009/02/0..horizes-fema-camps-in-us/
http://www.prisonplanet.com/art..2006/240506femaplan.htm
Filed under: 1984, 1st amendment, 9/11 Truth, Airport Security, Anti-War, Australia, Big Brother, biometrics, Bloggers, Britain, California, cashless society, cell phones, Censorship, China, Cold War, Congress, Control Grid, copyright, Darpa, data mining, DHS, Dictatorship, Dissent, Echelon, Empire, Europe, european union, facebook, False Flag, free speech, George Bush, Germany, global elite, global government, Globalism, google, gps, Homeland Security, inside job, internet, Internet 2, internet blackout, internet censorship, Internet Filtering, internet of things, internet police, IOT, IP, ISP, John McCain, john roberts, korea, london, Media, michael chertoff, microchip, microchips, Microsoft, nanny state, New World Order, New York, Oppression, orwell, Pentagon, Police State, Propaganda, RFID, RIAA, Science and technology, south korea, Spy, Surveillance, Tony Blair, uav, United Kingdom, US Constitution, Verichip, War On Terror, White House | Tags: HP, incheon, intel, internet regulation, john reid, korea, motorola, National Intelligence Council, new songdo city, NIC, NWO, paul otellini, privacy, Recording Industry Association of America, seoul, u-city, Ubiquitous computing, Ubiquitous living, Ubiquitous positioning, utopia, Video and Image Retrieval and Analysis Tool, VIRAT
Australia To Enforce Mandatory Chinese-Style Internet Censorship
Government to block “controversial” websites with universal national filter
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
October 29, 2008
The Australian government is set to impose Chinese-style Internet censorship by enforcing a universal national filter that will block websites deemed “controversial,” as part of a wider agenda to regulate the Internet according to free speech advocates.
A provision whereby Internet users could opt out of the filter by contacting their ISP has been stripped from the legislation, meaning the filter will be universal and mandatory.
The System Administrators Guild of Australia and Electronic Frontiers Australia have attacked the proposal, saying it will restrict web access, raise prices and slow internet traffic speeds.
The plan was first created as a way to combat child pornography and adult content, but could be extended to include controversial websites on euthanasia or anorexia,” reports the Australian Herald Sun.
Communications minister Stephen Conroy revealed the mandatory censorship to the Senate estimates committee as the Global Network Initiative, bringing together leading companies, human rights organisations, academics and investors, committed the technology firms to “protect the freedom of expression and privacy rights of their users”. (Complete black is white, up is down, double talk).
Human Rights Watch has condemned internet censorship, and argued to the US Senate “there is a real danger of a Virtual Curtain dividing the internet, much as the Iron Curtain did during the Cold War, because some governments fear the potential of the internet, (and) want to control it.”
Speaking from personal experience, not only are “controversial” websites blocked in China, meaning any website that is critical of the state, but every website the user attempts to visit first has to pass through the “great firewall,” causing the browser to hang and delay while it is checked against a government blacklist.
This causes excruciating delays, and the user experience is akin to being on a bad dial-up connection in the mid 1990’s. Even in the center of Shanghai with a fixed ethernet connection, the user experience is barely tolerable.
Not only are websites in China blocked, but e mails too are scanned for “controversial” words and blocked from being sent if they contain phrases related to politics or obscenities.
Googling for information on certain topics is also heavily restricted. While in China I tried to google “Bush Taiwan,” which resulted in Google.com ceasing to be accessible and my Internet connection was immediately terminated thereafter.
The Australian government will no doubt insist that their filter is in our best interests and is only designed to block child pornography, snuff films and other horrors, yet the system is completely pointless because it will not affect file sharing networks, which is the medium through which the vast majority of such material is distributed.
If we allow Australia to become the first “free” nation to impose Internet censorship, the snowball effect will only accelerate – the U.S. and the UK are next.
Indeed, Prime Minister Tony Blair called for Internet censorship last year.
In April 2007, Time magazine reported that researchers funded by the federal government want to shut down the internet and start over, citing the fact that at the moment there are loopholes in the system whereby users cannot be tracked and traced all the time. The projects echo moves we have previously reported on to clamp down on internet neutrality and even to designate a new form of the internet known as Internet 2.
Moves to regulate the web have increased over the last two years.
– In a display of bi-partisanship, there have been calls for all out mandatory ISP snooping on all US citizens by both Democrats and Republicans alike.
– In December 2006, Republican Senator John McCain tabled a proposal to introduce legislation that would fine blogs up to $300,000 for offensive statements, photos and videos posted by visitors on comment boards. It is well known that McCain has a distaste for his blogosphere critics, causing a definite conflict of interest where any proposal to restrict blogs on his part is concerned.
– During an appearance with his wife Barbara on Fox News in November 2006, George Bush senior slammed Internet bloggers for creating an “adversarial and ugly climate.”
– The White House’s own de-classified strategy for “winning the war on terror” targets Internet conspiracy theories as a recruiting ground for terrorists and threatens to “diminish” their influence.
– The Pentagon has also announced its effort to infiltrate the Internet and propagandize for the war on terror.
– In an October 2006 speech, Homeland Security director Michael Chertoff identified the web as a “terror training camp,” through which “disaffected people living in the United States” are developing “radical ideologies and potentially violent skills.” His solution is “intelligence fusion centers,” staffed by Homeland Security personnel which will are already in operation.
– The U.S. Government wants to force bloggers and online grassroots activists to register and regularly report their activities to Congress. Criminal charges including a possible jail term of up to one year could be the punishment for non-compliance.
– A landmark November 2006 legal case on behalf of the Recording Industry Association of America and other global trade organizations sought to criminalize all Internet file sharing of any kind as copyright infringement, effectively shutting down the world wide web – and their argument was supported by the U.S. government.
– A landmark legal ruling in Sydney goes further than ever before in setting the trap door for the destruction of the Internet as we know it and the end of alternative news websites and blogs by creating the precedent that simply linking to other websites is breach of copyright and piracy.
– The European Union, led by former Stalinist John Reid, has also vowed to shut down “terrorists” who use the Internet to spread propaganda.
– The EU data retention bill, passed after much controversy and implemented in 2007, obliges telephone operators and internet service providers to store information on who called who and who emailed who for at least six months. Under this law, investigators in any EU country, and most bizarrely even in the US, can access EU citizens’ data on phone calls, sms’, emails and instant messaging services.
– The EU also proposed legislation that would prevent users from uploading any form of video without a license.
– The US government is also funding research into social networking sites and how to gather and store personal data published on them, according to the New Scientist magazine. “At the same time, US lawmakers are attempting to force the social networking sites themselves to control the amount and kind of information that people, particularly children, can put on the sites.”
Governments are furious that their ceaseless lies are being exposed in real time on the World Wide Web and have resolved to stifle, regulate and control what truly is the last outpost of real free speech in the world. Internet censorship is perhaps the most pertinent issue that freedom advocates should rally to combat over the course of the next few years, lest we allow a cyber-gag to be placed over our mouths and say goodbye to our last medium of free and open communication.
DARPA building search engine for video surveillance footage
Ars Technica
October 21, 2008
The government agency that birthed the Internet is developing a sophisticated search engine for video, and when complete will allow intelligence analysts to sift through live footage from spy drones, as well as thousands of hours worth of archived recordings, in order to spot a variety of selected events or behaviors. In the past month, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency announced nearly $20 million in total contracts for private firms to begin developing the system, which is slated to take until at least 2011 to complete.
According to a prospectus written in March but released only this month, the Video and Image Retrieval and Analysis Tool (VIRAT) will enable intel analysts to “rapidly find video content of interest from archives and provide alerts to the analyst of events of interest during live operations,” taking both conventional video and footage from infrared scanners as input. The VIRAT project is an effort to cope with a growing data glut that has taxed intelligence resources because of the need to have trained human personnel perform time- and labor-intensive review of recorded video.
The DARPA overview emphasizes that VIRAT will not be designed with “face recognition, gait recognition, human identification, or any form of biometrics” in mind. Rather, the system will search for classes of activities or events. A suggested partial list in the prospectus includes digging, loitering, exploding, shooting, smoking, following, shaking hand, exchanging objects, crawling under a car, breaking a window, and evading a checkpoint. As new sample clips are fed into the system, it will need to recognize the signature features of new classes of search terms.
EU Set to Move ‘Internet of Things’ Closer to Reality
Daniel Taylor
Old-Thinker News
November 2, 2008
If the world-wide trend continues, ‘Web 3.0′ will be tightly monitored, and will become an unprecedented tool for surveillance. The “Internet of Things”, a digital representation of real world objects and people tagged with RFID chips, and increased censorship are two main themes for the future of the web.
The future of the internet, according to author and “web critic” Andrew Keen, will be monitored by “gatekeepers” to verify the accuracy of information posted on the web. The “Outlook 2009″ report from the November-December issue of The Futurist reports that,
“Internet entrepreneur Andrew Keen believes that the anonymity of today’s internet 2.0 will give way to a more open internet 3.0 in which third party gatekeepers monitor the information posted on Web sites to verify its accuracy.”
Keen stated during his early 2008 interview withThe Futurist that the internet, in its current form, has undermined mainline media and empowered untrustworthy “amateurs”, two trends that he wants reversed. “Rather than the empowerment of the amateur, Web 3.0 will show the resurgence of the professional,” states Keen.
Australia has now joined China in implementing mandatory internet censorship, furthering the trend towards a locked down and monitored web.
The Internet of Things
Now, the European Union has announced that it will pursue the main component of Web 3.0, the Internet of Things (IoT).
According to Viviane Reding, Commissioner for Information Society and Media for the EU, “The Internet of the future will radically change our society.” Ultimately, the EU is aiming to “lead the way” in the transformation to Web 3.0.
Reporting on the European Union’s pursuit of the IoT, iBLS reports,
“New technology applications will need ubiquitous Internet coverage. The Internet of Things means that wireless interaction between machines, vehicles, appliances, sensors and many other devices will take place using the Internet. It already makes electronic travel cards possible, and will allow mobile devices to exchange information to pay for things or get information from billboards (or streetlights).”
The Internet of Things consists of objects that are ‘tagged’ with Radio Frequency Identification Chips (RFID) that communicate their position, history, and other information to an RFID reader or wireless network. Most, if not all major computer companies and technology developers (HP, Cisco, Intel, Microsoft, etc.) are putting large amounts of time and money into the Internet of Things.
Cisco and Sun Microsystems have founded an alliance to promote the Internet of Things and further its implementation.
South Korea is at the forefront in implementing ubiquitous technology and the Internet of Things. An entire city, New Songdo, is being built in South Korea that fully utilizes the technology. Ubiquitous computing proponents in the United States admit that while a large portion of the technology is being developed in the U.S., it is being tested in South Korea where there are less traditional, ethical and social blockades to prevent its acceptance and use. As the New York Times reports
“Much of this technology was developed in U.S. research labs, but there are fewer social and regulatory obstacles to implementing them in Korea,” said Mr. Townsend [a research director at the Institute for the Future in Palo Alto, California], who consulted on Seoul’s own U-city plan, known as Digital Media City. ‘There is an historical expectation of less privacy. Korea is willing to put off the hard questions to take the early lead and set standards.’”
An April 2008 report from the National Intelligence Council discussed the Internet of Things and its possible implications.
A timeline shown in the April 2008 NIC report
The report outlines uses for the technology:
“Sensor networks need not be connected to the Internet and indeed often reside in remote sites, vehicles, and buildings having no Internet connection. Smart dust is a term that some have used to express a vision of tiny, wireless-connected sensors; more recently, others use the term to describe any of several technologies that range from the size of a pack of gum to a pack of cigarettes, and that are widely available to system developers.
Ubiquitous positioning describes technologies for locating objects that may reside anywhere, including indoors and underground locations where satellite signals may be unavailable or otherwise inadequate.
Biometrics enables technology to recognize people and other living things, rather than inanimate objects. Connected everyday objects could recognize authorized users by means of fingerprint, voiceprint, iris scan, or other biometric technology.”
These trends towards internet censorship and the internet of things are undoubtedly going to continue, but restricting your free speech and violating your privacy will be harder with your outspoken resistance.
DARPA spies on analyst brains; hopes to offload image analysis to computers
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20..-image-analysis-to-computers.html
Security services want personal data from sites like Facebook
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/oct/15/terrorism-security
UK.gov says: Regulate the internet
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/10/20/government_internet_regulation/
Filed under: 1st amendment, 2008 Election, Animal Abuse, animal cruelty, Anti-War, Chicago, Dissent, free speech, Iraq, IVAW, John McCain, Oklahoma, Oppression, police brutality, Police State, Protest, riot, sarah palin, Taser Guns, US Constitution, veterans | Tags: Hofstra University, iraq war veterans, Nassau County Hospital, Nick Morgan, police horseback, salem police
Veterans Trampled And Crushed By Police On Horses
Indy Bay
October 17, 2008
One hour before the final presidential debate of the 2008 campaign, fourteen members of IVAW marched in formation to Hofstra University to present questions for the candidates. IVAW had requested permission from debate moderator Bob Schieffer to ask their questions during the debate but got no response.
The contingent of veterans in dress uniforms and combat uniforms attempted to enter the building where the debate was to be held in order to ask their questions but were turned back by police. The IVAW members at the front of the formation were immediately arrested, and others were pushed back into the crowd by police on horseback. Several members were injured, including former Army Sergeant Nick Morgan who suffered a broken cheekbone when he was trampled by police horses before being arrested.
Puppycide in Oklahoma
Police drag protesters away from Palin motorcade
Cop Choke Slams Unarmed Youth
http://thehill.com/index2.php?option=..=0&Itemid=70
Man dies after Chicago police use taser on him
http://www.chicagobreakingnews..eportedly-use-taser-on-west-side.html
Filed under: 2-party system, 2008 Election, Anti-War, chuck baldwin, Cynthia McKinney, election fraud, left right paradigm, New World Order, ralph nader, Ron Paul, UN, US Constitution, vote scam, voter fraud | Tags: constitution party, League of Women voters
Ron Paul Endorses Chuck Baldwin
Ron Paul
Campaign for Liberty
September 22, 2008
The press conference at the National Press Club had a precise purpose. It was to expose, to as many people as possible, the gross deception of our presidential election process. It is controlled by the powerful elite to make sure that neither candidate of the two major parties will challenge the status quo. There is no real choice between the two major parties and their nominees, only the rhetoric varies. The amazingly long campaign is designed to make sure the real issues are ignored. The quotes I used at the press conference from insider Carroll Quigley and the League of Women voters strongly support this contention.
Calling together candidates from the liberal, conservative, libertarian and progressive constituencies, who are all opposed to this rigged process, was designed to alert the American people to the uselessness of continuing to support a process that a claims that one’s only choice is to choose the lesser of two evils and reject a principle vote that might challenge the status quo as a wasted vote.
In both political education and organization, coalitions are worthwhile and necessary to have an impact. “Talking to the choir” alone achieves little. I have always approached political and economic education with a “missionary” zeal by inviting any group in on issues we agree upon.
This opens the door to legitimate discourse with the hope of winning new converts to the cause of liberty. This strategy led to the press conference with the four candidates agreeing to the four principles we believe are crucial in challenging the political system that has evolved over many years in this country.
This unique press conference, despite the surprising, late complication from the Libertarian Party Presidential Candidate, hopefully will prove to be historically significant.
This does not mean that I expect to get Ralph Nader or Cynthia McKinney to become libertarians, nor do they expect me to change my mind on the issues on which we disagree. In the meantime, why can’t we be friends, respectful of each other, and fight the corrupt process from which we suffer, and at the same time champion the four issues that we all agree upon which the two major candidates won’t address?
Many practical benefits can come from this unique alliance. Our cause is liberty —freedom is popular and is the banner that brings people together. Since authoritarianism divides, we always have the edge in an intellectual fight. Once it’s realized that the humanitarian goals of peace and prosperity are best achieved with our views, I’m convinced we win by working with others. Those who don’t want to collaborate are insecure with their own beliefs.
In the past two years at the many rallies where I talked and shook hands with literally thousands of people, I frequently asked them what brought them to our campaign. There were many answers: the Constitution, my consistency, views on the Federal Reserve, the war, and civil liberties. The crowds were overwhelmingly made up of young people.
Oftentimes I welcomed the diverse groups that came, mentioning that the crowd was made up of Republicans, Democrats, Independents, Liberals and Progressives with each group applauding. Even jokingly, I recognized the “anarchists” and that, too, was met with some applause. In conversations, many admitted to having been Democrats and members of the Green Party and supporters of Ralph Nader, yet they came to agree with us on all the issues once the entire philosophy was understood. That’s progress.
Principled people are not shy in participating with others and will defend their beliefs on their merits. Liberals and progressives are willing to align themselves with us on the key issues of peace, civil liberties, debt and the Federal Reserve. That’s exciting and very encouraging, and it means we are making progress. The big challenge, however, is taking on the establishment, and the process that is so well entrenched. But we can’t beat the entrenched elite without the alliance of all those who have been disenfranchised.
Ironically the most difficult group to recruit has been the evangelicals who supported McCain and his pro-war positions. They have been convinced that they are obligated to initiate preventive war in the Middle East for theological reasons. Fortunately, this is a minority of the Christian community, but our doors remain open to all despite this type of challenge. The point is, new devotees to the freedom philosophy are more likely to come from the left than from those conservatives who have been convinced that God has instructed us to militarize the Middle East.
Although we were on the receiving end of ridicule in the reporting of the press conference, I personally was quite satisfied with the results. True revolutions are not won in a week, a month, or even a year. They take time. But we are making progress, and the momentum remains and is picking up. The Campaign for Liberty is alive and well, and its growth and influence will continue. Obviously the press conference could have been even more successful without the last-minute change of heart by the Libertarian Party candidate by not participating. He stated that his support for the four points remains firm. His real reason for not coming, nor letting me know until forty minutes before the press conference started, is unknown to me. To say the least, I was shocked and disappointed.
Yet in the long run, this last-minute change in plans will prove to be of little importance. I’m convinced that problems like this always seem bigger at the moment, yet things usually work out in the end. Recovering from the mistakes and shortcomings of all that we do in this effort is not difficult if the message is right and our efforts are determined. And I’m convinced they are. That’s what will determine our long-term success, not the shortcomings of any one person.
The Libertarian Party Candidate admonished me for “remaining neutral” in the presidential race and not stating whom I will vote for in November. It’s true; I have done exactly that due to my respect and friendship and support from both the Constitution and Libertarian Party members. I remain a lifetime member of the Libertarian Party and I’m a ten-term Republican Congressman. It is not against the law to participate in more then one political party. Chuck Baldwin has been a friend and was an active supporter in the presidential campaign.
I continue to wish the Libertarian and Constitution Parties well. The more votes they get, the better. I have attended Libertarian Party conventions frequently over the years.
In some states, one can be on the ballots of two parties, as they can in New York. This is good and attacks the monopoly control of politics by Republicans and Democrats. We need more states to permit this option. This will be a good project for the Campaign for Liberty, along with the alliance we are building to change the process.
I’ve thought about the unsolicited advice from the Libertarian Party candidate, and he has convinced me to reject my neutral stance in the November election. I’m supporting Chuck Baldwin, the Constitution Party candidate.
Filed under: 1st amendment, 2008 Election, Abu Ghraib, Anti-War, brazil, Britain, civil liberties, civil rights, demonstration, Detainee, Dictatorship, Dissent, Empire, Europe, european union, Extraordinary Rendition, Fascism, free press, free speech, Guantanamo, human rights, london, Minneapolis, Nazi, Oppression, pain compliance, police brutality, rendition, RNC, Taser Guns, Toll Roads, Torture, United Kingdom, US Constitution, War On Terror | Tags: Delaware, Elliot Hughes, minneapolis police department, peter willimae, queensland, queensland police department, Ramsey County, ramsey county jail, Rio de Janeiro, st. paul police, st. paul police department
RNC police brutality and torture victims speak out
Queensland Police Brutality
Aiken County Sheriff stops group for saggy pants
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/skynews/20080916/twl-rio-cops-kill-three-people-a-day-3fd0ae9.html
Cop who arrested TV cameraman has been fired
http://kob.com/article/stories/S578979.shtml?cat=500
Delaware Bridge cops want toll cheats’ money, or their cars
http://www.pressofatlanticcity.com/186/story/260008.html
Filed under: 1984, 1st amendment, 4th amendment, Anti-War, Big Brother, CIA, civil liberties, civil rights, Control Grid, demonstration, DHS, Dictatorship, Dissent, DNC, Empire, Fascism, FBI, free speech, Homeland Security, Minneapolis, nanny state, Nazi, Oppression, orwell, Police State, Protest, RNC, secret service, stasi, stasi tactics, Surveillance, telecoms, US Constitution, verison, War On Terror | Tags: excell, fusion center, minneapolis police department, quest, Ramsey County, st. paul police, st. paul police department
Secret Service & FBI Intel Center Oversees RNC Protests
Colorado ’fusion center’ to step up intelligence gathering during DNC
http://www.coloradoindependent.com/4424/colo..elligence-gathering-during-dnc/
ACLU Weighs In On Attempt to Expand Law Enforcement Intelligence Systems
http://www.aclu.org/natsec/spying/36598prs20080829.html?s_src=RSS
ACLU Slams Classified FBI Memorandum Directing Law Enforcement to Engage in Protest Suppression Tactics
http://www.aclu.org/safefree/general/16960prs20031123.html
noworldsystem.com 