noworldsystem.com


Neocons: 2nd Amendment Has Restrictions

Neocons: 2nd Amendment Has Restrictions

Kurt Nimmo
Truth News
January 15, 2008

Fbiiraqisbein_mn

In Bushzarro world, up is down, black is white, and the Second Amendment permits the government to make firearm possession illegal.

“Since ‘unrestricted’ private ownership of guns clearly threatens the public safety, the 2nd Amendment can be interpreted to allow a variety of gun restrictions, according to the Bush administration,” reports . “The argument was delivered by U.S. Solicitor General Paul D. Clement in a brief filed with the U.S. Supreme Court in the ongoing arguments over the legality of a District of Columbia ban on handguns in homes, according to a report from the Los Angeles Times.”

Clement was an understudy of the neocon Laurence H. Silberman, a federal judge appointed co-chair of the Iraq Intelligence Commission — the official excuse making body designated to minimize the impact of neocon lies about Iraq — and the reactionary Supreme Antonin Scalia, a member of the Federalist Society, a fascist club aligned with the American Enterprise Institute, the CIA asset Richard Mellon Scaife, and a smattering of neocons, including Bill Kristol, the latest edition to the “liberal” New York Times. “Clement clerked for Associate Justice Antonin Scalia and worked as chief counsel to the U.S. Senate Subcommittee on the Constitution, Federalism and Property Rights. He joined the Department of Justice in 2001 and moved into his current position in 2005.”

“Clement is the Bush administration’s chief lawyer before the court, and submitted the arguments in the case that is to determine whether the D.C. limit is constitutional. He said the 2nd Amendment, ‘protects an individual right to possess firearms, including for private purposes unrelated to militia operations,’ and noted the D.C. ban probably goes too far,” WorldNetDaily continues.

However, Clement argues that nothing “in the 2nd Amendment properly understood… calls for invalidation of the numerous federal laws regulating firearms.” In other words, according to Clement and the neocons, you have a right to possess firearms under the Constitution while at the same time the government has the right to make possession of firearms illegal. In Bushzarro world, up is down, black is white, and Orwellian doublethink – the ability to hold two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously – rules the day.

It should come as no surprise the neocons are gun-grabbers while at the same time claiming to be conservatives. “Stop throwing the Constitution in my face,” the neocon sock puppet Bush told Republican Congressional leaders back in 2005 when some of them complained about the USA Patriot Act. “It’s just a goddamned piece of paper!”

Neocon guru Leo Strauss “abhorred liberal democracy,” not the modern version of lefty liberalism, but classic liberalism, i.e., natural rights of the sort at the bedrock of the Constitution. He engendered this hatred of individual rights in his followers, including Allan Bloom, Henry Jaffa, Irving Kristol, Paul Wolfowitz, and many others, a handful now at the very pinnacle of power and pulling Bush’s strings. Strauss’ vision was of “a hierarchical society based on natural inequalities and welded together with the fanatical devotion state religion engenders,” writes Michael Doliner.

Strauss’s political program is designed to counter the ills of liberalism. He believed in, and proposed, a state religion as a way of reviving absolutes, countering free thought, and enforcing a cohesive unity. Strauss argued against a society containing a multiplicity of coexisting religions and goals, which would break the society apart. He thought that ordinary people should not be exposed to reason. To rely on reason is to look into the abyss, for reason provided no comforting absolutes to shield one against the blank sky. Strauss opposed not reason itself, but reason stripped of its secrecy. Reason is for the few, not the many. The Enlightenment, the exposing of reason, was the beginning of the disaster. A reliance on reason, as opposed to religion, produced “modernity” which is nothing more than nihilism made political.

Jeffrey Steinberg expands on this:

The hallmark of Strauss’ approach to philosophy was his hatred of the modern world, his belief in a totalitarian system, run by “philosophers,” who rejected all universal principles of natural law, but saw their mission as absolute rulers, who lied and deceived a foolish “populist” mass, and used both religion and politics as a means of disseminating myths that kept the general population in clueless servitude. For Strauss and all of his protégés (Strauss personally had 100 Ph.D. students, and the “Straussians” now dominate most university political science and philosophy departments), the greatest object of hatred was the United States itself, which they viewed as nothing better than a weak, pathetic replay of “liberal democratic” Weimar Germany.

It stands to reason, then, that the hated, resented, and feared masses should be stripped of all rights, including the bedrock right promised by the Second Amendment, as they may eventually come to their senses, abandon Faux News and propaganda catapulted, storm the castle, and bring the warmongering and liberty hating protégés of Strauss to justice.

As Hitler, Mao, and Stalin realized — in fact as all dictators and tyrants understand — in order to run roughshod over the people and enslave them, you have to disarm them first and foremost.

It is the job of U.S. Solicitor General Paul D. Clement to begin this process.

Public ‘threatened’ by private-firearms ownership
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=59674

Bush Administration Backs Gun Control
http://noworldsystem.com/..tration-backs-gun-control/

 



Wolfowitz Back in Bush Administration

Bush Administration Offers Paul Wolfowitz Top State Department Job

Michael Isikoff
Newsweek
December 2, 2007

Don’t ever say the Bush administration doesn’t take care of its own. Nearly three years after Paul Wolfowitz resigned as deputy Defense secretary and six months after his stormy departure as president of the World Bank—amid allegations that he improperly awarded a raise to his girlfriend—he’s in line to return to public service. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has offered Wolfowitz, a prime architect of the Iraq War, a position as chairman of the International Security Advisory Board, a prestigious State Department panel, according to two department sources who declined to be identified discussing personnel matters. The 18-member panel, which has access to highly classified intelligence, advises Rice on disarmament, nuclear proliferation, WMD issues and other matters. “We think he is well suited and will do an excellent job,” said one senior official.

Wolfowitz, now a visiting scholar at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, will replace former senator Fred Thompson, who quit over the summer to run for president. Although officials declined to say how Rice came to choose him, Wolfowitz began his government career in the 1970s in the State Department as an arms-control expert; he forged a relationship with Rice during the 2000 presidential campaign, when they both served as top foreign-policy advisers to the then candidate Bush. But his selection has raised more than a few eyebrows within State because he’ll be providing advice on some of the same issues that critics say the administration got spectacularly wrong when Wolfowitz was pushing the case for the Iraq War at the Pentagon. (One of the department sources called the appointment “amazing.”) At least Wolfowitz, who did not return calls seeking comment, will have like-minded company: other panel members include Robert Joseph, the former National Security Council official in charge of Iraq WMD intelligence, and ex-CIA director James Woolsey, both strong allies during the Iraq debate.

The sources said Wolfowitz has already accepted Rice’s offer to fill the part-time position, though it won’t be announced until the completion of a standard check for conflicts of interest. But he won’t have to worry about any complaints from pesky Democrats. The position doesn’t require Senate confirmation.

 

Bush Lays Secrecy Defense Over Abramhoff

AP
December 2, 2007

The Bush administration is laying out a new secrecy defense in an effort to end a court battle about the White House visits of now-imprisoned lobbyist Jack Abramoff.

The administration agreed last year to produce all responsive records about the visits “without redactions or claims of exemption,” according to a court order.

But in a court filing Friday night, administration lawyers said that the Secret Service has identified a category of highly sensitive documents that might contain information sought in a lawsuit about Abramoff’s trips to the White House.

The Justice Department, citing a Cold War-era court ruling, declared that the contents of the “Sensitive Security Records” cannot be publicly revealed even though they could show whether Abramoff made more visits to the White House than those already acknowledged.

“The simple act of doing so … would reveal sensitive information about the methods used by the Secret Service to carry out its protective function,” the Justice Department argued.

“This is an extraordinary development and it raises the specter that there were additional contacts with President Bush or other high White House officials that have yet to be disclosed,” said Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, a conservative watchdog group that filed the suit. “We’ve alleged that the government has committed misconduct in this litigation and frankly this is more fuel for that fire.”

A response by White House spokesman Trey Bohn referred to the Secret Service, saying, “We have nothing to add to the USSS. position as stated in the court filing.”

Sensitive Security Records are created in the course of conducting more extensive background checks on certain visitors to the White House. In sworn statements accompanying the filing, two Secret Service officers said the extra attention is paid to some visitors because of their background, “the circumstances of the visits” or both.

The Sensitive Security Records were discovered in the course of another lawsuit seeking similar records, the court papers state.

Another private group, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, also has requested Secret Service records of Abramoff’s White House visits. On Friday, the Justice Department asked for a consolidation of the two cases. Such a move would take the CREW case from U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth and give it to Judge Rosemary M. Collyer, an appointee of the current president who is hearing the Judicial Watch case. Lamberth, a federal judge for two decades, has taken both Republican and Democratic administrations to task during his tenure.

To date, the government has turned over Secret Service records referring to seven White House visits by Abramoff — six of them in the early months of the Bush administration in 2001 and the seventh in early 2004 just before Abramoff came under criminal investigation.

The White House has released little information about the visits, but none of them appears to involve a small group meeting with President Bush.

Nearly two years ago, just after Abramoff had pleaded guilty in the influence peddling scandal, Bush told reporters, “I can’t say I didn’t ever meet” Abramoff, “but I meet a lot of people.”

“I don’t know him,” Bush said at the presidential news conference in January 2006. “I’ve never sat down with him and had a discussion with the guy.”

After Bush’s comments, Abramoff wrote an e-mail to the national editor of Washingtonian magazine saying that Bush had seen him “in almost a dozen settings, and joked with me about a bunch of things, including details of my kids. Perhaps he has forgotten everything, who knows.”

Time magazine reported that its reporters had been shown five photographs of Bush and Abramoff. Most of them, the magazine said, had “the formal look of photos taken at presidential receptions.”

In an attempt to bolster its case, the Justice Department is citing a lawsuit on a secret operation of the Cold War, the attempted raising of a sunken Soviet submarine. In a 1976 ruling, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit allowed the CIA to refuse to confirm or deny its ties to Howard Hughes’ submarine retrieval ship, the Glomar Explorer.

“A refusal to either confirm or deny the existence of responsive records is a well-recognized and accepted response in circumstances such as these,” the Bush administration’s court filing states.

The Justice Department probe of Abramoff and his team of lobbyists has led to convictions of a dozen people, including former Rep. Bob Ney, R-Ohio, former White House official David Safavian and former Deputy Interior Secretary Steven Griles.

Abramoff is serving six years in prison on a criminal case out of Florida. He has not yet been sentenced on charges of mail fraud, conspiracy and tax evasion stemming from the influence-peddling scandal in Washington.

 



FBI Wants Its Own Stasi

FBI Wants Its Own Stasi

Steve Watson
Infowars.net
July 26, 2007

In a move startlingly similar to that of the East German government during the Cold war, the FBI wants to recruit thousands of covert informants in the US and work with the CIA to train them in an effort to expand and adopt more aggressive intelligence capabilities.

ABC’s The Blotter reports that according to a recent unclassified report to Congress, the FBI, driven by a 2004 directive from President Bush, wants to recruit more than 15,000 informants in the US, entailing a complete overhaul of its database systems at a cost of around $22 million.

The FBI expects its informants to provide secrets about possible terrorists and foreign spies, although some may also be expected to aid with criminal investigations, in the tradition of law enforcement confidential informants. The FBI did not respond to requests for comment on this story.

The move comes in addition to other proposals to expand the collection and analysis of data on U.S. persons , retain years’ worth of Americans’ phone records and even increase so-called “black bag” secret entry operations, the Blotter reports.

Though the FBI has decided not to completely adopt CIA training methods on recruiting informants, which include bribery, extortion, and other patently illegal acts, the two are to work closely together on the program.

Though the reasoning is, as ever, to target terror cells in the US, the report also states that “some may also be expected to aid with criminal investigations, in the tradition of law enforcement confidential informants”.

Within the last two years it has come to light that the FBI, along with the Pentagon and the NSA has been spying on antiwar activists, rights groups and peace campaigners within the US, labeling some of them as “terrorists” and placing them within their databases.

It appears operations are now to be stepped up to include the Stasi like recruiting of informants within such groups to report what is deemed to be politically subversive behavior among American citizens.

In 2004 the ACLU revealed that after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 sparked the Bush administration’s “war on terrorism,” Attorney General John Ashcroft scrapped an FBI guideline—enacted after the agency infiltrated numerous groups during the 1960s and 1970s Civil Rights Movement—that blocked its agents from spying on groups and individuals unless they were investigating a crime.

By scrapping that policy, Gen. Ashcroft was, “essentially encouraging FBI agents to do fishing expeditions to spy in mosques, in anti-war meetings … without any reasonable suspicion that a crime was being committed,” ACLU attorney Ben Wizner said.

In late 2005 lawmakers expressed concern that the FBI was aggressively pushing the powers of the anti-terrorist USA Patriot Act to get access to private phone and financial records of ordinary people.

Around the same time it was revealed that the Bush administration had secretly authorized the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on Americans and others inside the United States to search for evidence of terrorist activity without [obtaining] court-approved warrants.

Though this was dubbed by the corporate mainstream media to be “a major shift in American intelligence-gathering practices”, eavesdropping on citizens is nothing new, the only shift that has occurred is that the government can now TELL us that they’re spying on us and it will slowly be accepted.

If the mainstream media is to be believed, the National Security Agency engages in “some eavesdropping inside the country,” There are hundreds of sources that prove however that the intelligence services have been operating similar programs for decades.

The FBI itself has been targeting domestic groups since its inception, the most notorious example being Hoover’s COINTELPRO (Counter-Intelligence Program) which covertly spied on all manner of organizations and individuals from Dr. Martin Luther King to the National Lawyers Guild .

Operation CHAOS under the CIA highlights another example of domestic spying:

“In June 1970 Nixon met with Hoover [FBI], Helms [CIA], NSA Director Admiral Noel Gaylor, and Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) representative Lt. Gen. Donald V. Bennett and told them he wanted a coordinated and concentrated effort against domestic dissenters,” Verne Lyon – former CIA undercover operative .

For over fifteen years, the CIA, with assistance from numerous government agencies, conducted a massive illegal domestic covert operation called Operation CHAOS. It was one of the largest and most pervasive domestic surveillance programs in the history of this country. Throughout the duration of CHAOS, the CIA spied on thousands of U.S. citizens. The CIA went to great lengths to conceal this operation from the public while every president from Eisenhower to Nixon exploited CHAOS for his own political ends.”

There are also multiple Pentagon projects in operation that involve the collection of intelligence through domestic eavesdropping. One example is the Defense Department’s Counterintelligence Field Activity (CIFA)

Consider this from William M. Arkin of the Washington Post :

“CIFA already has these authorities, has its own agents, and collects information on common American citizens under the guise of “sabotage” and “force protection” threats to the military. Since 9/11, functions that were previously intended to protect U.S. forces overseas from terrorism and protect U.S. secrets from spies have been combined in one super-intelligence function that constitutes the greatest threat to U.S. civil liberties since the domestic spying days of the 1970’s.”

“On May 2, 2003, Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz signed a memorandum directing the military to collect and report “non-validated threat information” relating to U.S. military forces, installations or missions. His memorandum followed from the establishment of the Domestic Threat Working Group after 9/11, the intent of which was to create a mechanism to share low-level domestic “threat information” between the military and intelligence agencies.”

Then we have the ” Total Information Awareness ” program whereby every purchase you make with a credit card, every magazine subscription you buy and medical prescription you fill, every Web site you visit and e-mail you send or receive, every academic grade you receive, every bank deposit you make, every trip you book and every event you attend — all these transactions and communications will go into what the Defense Department describes as “a virtual, centralized grand database.”

Shortly after the announcement of TIA, the Pentagon backtracked and told us that TIA was shutting down, but on reading the second paragraph in this article , it becomes clear that the tools are there waiting to be used. The Pentagon has since started up multiple programs all bearing exact similarities to TIA.

The Tools of TIA include “LifeLog” which is described as “a multimedia, digital record of everywhere you go and everything you see, hear, read, say and touch”. Another tool is the MATRIX database , A federally funded crime database run by multiple states at once.

Operation TIPS and similar programs were geared towards turning citizens themselves into domestic spies.

Then of course there is the joint NSA / Government Communications Head Quarters of England (GCHQ) Project Echelon . This long running operation was first exposed in the mid nineties and then again most prominently by author James Bamford in his 1999 book Body of Secrets. Bamford comments, “The cooperation between the Echelon countries is worrying. For decades, these organizations have worked closely together, monitoring communications and sharing the information gathered. Now, through Echelon, they are pooling their resources and targets, maximizing the collection and analysis of intercepted information.”

In the greatest surveillance effort ever established, the NSA global spy system captures and analyzes virtually every phone call, fax, email and telex message sent anywhere in the world. Quite obviously they cannot listen to everyone anywhere ALL the time, but they have the capability to choose when to listen and who to listen to, wherever they may be.

James Bamford famously recalled how the NSA successfully intercepted satellite calls from Osama Bin Laden in the late nineties as he was talking to his mother.

“I don’t want to see this country ever go across the bridge. I know the capacity that is there to make tyranny total in America, and we must see to it that this agency and all agencies that possess this technology operate within the law and under proper supervision, so that we never cross over that abyss. That is the abyss from which there is no return.” – Senator Frank Church, quoted in ECHELON: America’s Secret Global Surveillance Network

Under the Clinton Administration Echelon certainly turned its attention to citizens of countries everywhere and monitored millions of calls and other communications.

Echelon expert Mike Frost, who spent 20 years as a spy for the Canadian equivalent of the National Security Agency, told CBS’s “60 Minutes” that the agency was monitoring “everything from data transfers to cell phones to portable phones to baby monitors to ATMs.”

Domestic spying is nothing new, there has been at least half a century of such activity in America. However, the general public will believe that government spying on them is new, and secondly, they will just accept it because they are being told in a very unsophisticated fashion, that it is keeping them safe.

On Tuesday current Attorney General Alberto Gonzales once again gave testimony concerning the ongoing investigations into the legality of “terrorist surveillance program” and seemed to confirm that numerous domestic surveillance programs are in operation.

The fact that less than 0.01% of Homeland Security cases are related to terrorism in America begs the question why does America need an army of secret police to keep tabs on its own citizens?

Domestic government surveillance is becoming accepted as the norm. The fact remains however that you cannot have a free state that relies upon a covert network of government spies and recruited informants to maintain law and order within its own borders.