Occupied America: SB 1867allows military to detain and murder anti-government demonstrators

BORG, Cartels, Democracy, Federal Reserve, Government, hierarchy, occupy, police state, unethical No Responses »
Dec 052011

SB 1867 allows military to detain and murder anti-government demonstrators in America

by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger
Editor of NaturalNews.com

(NaturalNews) I don’t know if you’re all getting this through your heads yet, but Senate Bill 1867 — the National Defense Authorization Act — would openly “legalize” the U.S. government’s detainment and murder of OWS demonstrators  and the assassination of talk show hosts, bloggers, journalists and anyone who holds a so-called “anti-government” point of view. This is the open and blatant declaration of war against any who do not going along with TSA thugs reaching down your pants, the Goldman Sachs economic takeover of nations, the secret arrest and torture of American citizens, and other acts of outright tyranny waged by an out-of-control government.

Those who have been burying their heads in the sand over the coming police state need to wake up and face the music. That U.S. Senators would knowingly and willfully attempt to pass a bill that legalizes the indefinite detainment, torture and killing of American citizens with no due process whatsoever — and on American soil! — is nothing less than a traitorous betrayal of the once-free American people. These are, our founding fathers would have said, acts of war against the People. They reveal the insidious plan to put in place a legal framework to end the Bill of Rights, murder protesters, and overrun America with total police state brutality.

And yet the sheeple are still asleeple

I grow weary of trying to warn the American people to wake up and see what is now right in front of their eyes, so for those who want to read these words themselves — right in the Senate bill — you can read it at: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query…

And YES, it has now been confirmed that the indefinite detainment and murder provisions do apply to American citizens on the streets of American cities. As Sen. Lindsey Graham explained in plain language on the Senate floor: “…1031, the statement of authority to detain, does apply to American citizens and it designates the world as the battlefield, including the homeland.”

That means America, for those of you who are still wondering what “homeland” means. It’s a phrase borrowed from Nazi Germany, of course, which is the source of much of this legislation as you might have noticed.

“The power is so broad that even U.S. citizens could be swept up by the military and the military could be used far from any battlefield, even within the United States itself,” says the ACLU (http://www.aclu.org/blog/national-s…).

Homefront: The U.S. government’s war against the People

If this bill passes and is signed into law, it would mean that America’s war machine could then be turned against the American people — liberal, conservative, libertarian… it doesn’t matter. If you question the government, you are suddenly an “enemy combatant” and they will cite this law as the legal justification for putting a bullet in your head, fire-bombing your little protest group, or literally running over you and your buddies with tanks. (And they won’t stop like China did in Tiananmen Square when that one brave citizen stood up against tyranny there in 1989.) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6inW…)

The premeditate murder of U.S. protesters (Occupy Wall Street, anyone?) is now being codified into law as the government’s “right.” Of course, your rights to Free Speech, due process, owning a firearm and other rights are being obliterated in the process. Only the government has “rights” now, didn’t you know? The slaves of the nation (i.e. the citizens) are being stripped of all rights, including the right to grow your own food, have a picnic or even buy fresh dairy products from a farmer.

Governments routinely murder far more people than terrorists

Right now, every history teacher in America should be absolutely outraged about all this, as they know what always comes next in the history of nations. Once any government “legalizes” the murder of its own citizens, it is inevitably followed by a mass-murder holocaust-style event.

Tyrants, you see, always like to “legalize” their mass murder before they pull the trigger. Just read the history of Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, Mao and others. In every case, they worked diligently to put into place a legal framework for the mass murder that was about to be unleashes on their own citizens. That legal framework looks strikingly similar to Senate Bill 1867, which is about to be passed.

This also brings to mind the mathematical reality that, statistically speaking, governments are orders of magnitude more deadly than terrorists. While terrorists sometimes success in taking out a few thousand people at a time, governments routinely murder tens of MILLIONS of people.

It’s called GENOCIDE, and there’s a long and well-documented history of how governments have committed genocide year after year, one nation after another:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genoci…

See more statistics at:
http://www.scaruffi.com/politics/di…

So if the People of America had any courage at all, they would be running the People’s road blocks and searching government vehicles for weapons! It is the government agents, after all, who are statistically at the highest risk of engaging in mass murder, and very soon the U.S. Senate looks likely to effectively legalize that mass murder.

At the airports, We the People should be searching the TSA employees and checking them for illegal drugs, child pornography and stolen electronics. At government buildings, We the People should be searching all the government employees who come and go to make sure they don’t stage the demolition of their own buildings as a way to blame whatever convenient enemy they want to discredit — patriots, conservatives, “conspiracy theorists” or what have you.

It’s no longer a conspiracy theory, you see, that the government wants to have the legal right to openly murder U.S. citizens right on the streets of America. It’s written right into the Senate bill. It’s public record. So all those out there still clinging to their pathetic denialist “conspiracy theorists” rants can now clamp shut their pie holes and throw themselves off a cliff or something. It’s time to face the reality of the total police state tyranny that’s now written in black and white, plain as day.

All of you who are still obsessed with your narrow world view of fashion, dancing with the stars, microwaveable processed food and fake mainstream news are about to be rocked out of your easy chairs and dumped into the cesspool of tyranny at your doorstep. Just know that when they come for you, there will be nobody left to speak for you, because you remained silent as all this was rolled out. And I won’t be there for you, either, because I’ll be holed up in Texas, handing out emergency food supplies to the local churches and performing emergency medicine procedures on those protesters wounded by U.S. government military attacks — the ones that are still alive, anyway.

You think none of this is coming? Why would the U.S. Senate write this into law if they didn’t intend on using it to murder Americans? Maybe you need to clear the cobwebs out of your head and open your eyes to what’s really happening right now in the U.S. Senate.

Read between the lines, folks. It’s not that difficult to get the full picture here. The very idea that the U.S. Senate is even considering such a law to “legalize” the detainment and murder of U.S. citizens on U.S. soil by U.S. troops is, all by itself, a complete and utter crime against the American people.

The U.S. Senate is about to declare WAR on the American people. And I don’t mean that metaphorically. They are trying to make this a military war where anyone who opposes the U.S. government — even if they have nothing at all to do with “terrorism” — is now a fair game target for precision bombings, assassinations and heavy military armor (i.e. tanks rolling down your driveway).

Some good news: Congressman Dennis Kucinich has publicly spoken out against the bill (even though he’s not in the Senate). So has Sen. Rand Paul. His father, Ron Paul, has also stated his opposition to the illegal detainment provision of the bill. There are hints that if the bill passes, President Obama may veto it. If he did, that would be one of the most profound freedom-protecting actions of his administration, but don’t hold your breath on that count. You never know what these politicians will do when they think they have the power to murder their own citizens — they’re drunk with power, after all, and they love to rule over the masses with a kind of devilish insanity. Remember: Obama already has a “kill list” of Americans to be murdered overseas, but this new Senate Bill 1867 would legalize that right on U.S. soil.

So one day you call in to talk radio and express your discontent with the President, let’s say, and the next day a U.S. marine scout sniper sets up his .338 sniper rifle a couple hundred yards from your house, waits for you to sit down to watch Anderson Cooper vomit out the evening’s news propaganda, and then he pulls the trigger and blows your neck off, causing your head to land smack dab in that bowl of Kraft Macaroni and Cheese you were just trying to shovel down your threat because someone told you it was “food.” This will all be LEGAL under the new Senate bill 1867 because they will claim you were a “terrorist collaborator” who questioned the wisdom of the executive leadership of America. Once due process is stripped away, anything can be justified by the government, including the open murder of its own citizens.

This is the whole point of a nation of LAW. The laws describe specific legal rights afforded to citizens, but most importantly they describe the LIMITS of power of government. It is those limits that the government is now trying to completely obliterate, turning America into a complete military dictatorship / fascist nation where laws are only applied to the People, not to the government itself. These are practically the exact words recently uttered by Newt Gingrich during a recent debate, in which he said due process and the Bill of Rights should only apply to people who engage in common criminal acts such as stealing or robbing people. But no such rights or due process privileges should exist when there is a “war” going on, Gingrich insisted! And the U.S. Senate is about to declare the entire USA “homeland” to be a battlefield of a never-ending war, get it?

Are you grokking all this yet? These tyrants are about to declare the entire USA a battlefield where NO ONE has any due process, no Bill of Rights, no protections under any law, nothing! And if Gingrich becomes President — oh my God please don’t let this happen — then we are looking at the runaway militarization of everything in America, including a huge ramping up of the so-called “war on drugs” which we’ve already exposed as a total failure and a complete hoax (http://www.naturalnews.com/034289_A…).

If this bill passes and is signed into law by the President, the USA is officially at war with its own People, and you can expect the government will immediately begin staging false flag bombings so they can justify a multi-year campaign of total genocide against all who refuse to cower down to the (now admitted) anti-freedom tyrants in Washington.

We are on the verge of losing America, my friends. I ask: What the hell are YOU going to do about it?

Here’s the list of traitors in the U.S. Senate who have supported this bill:
http://www.truthistreason.net/sb-18…

Posted by admin at 12:13 am Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Police State Will Be Videoed and Youtubed

BORG, Democracy, Government, hierarchy, police state, Slavery, unethical 1 Response »
Sep 102011

BORG Police StateAccountability! This is the one thing many people want when it comes to justice. I would say it was something the vast majority of people want. It is the one thing those in charge do not want. It is one thing those in charge want their enforcers to avoid. They have, in essence, created an atmosphere where the common folk are asked to live by one set of rules while the enforcers and those working for the elite live by another. There has been created an abused class and a privileged class and the divide between the two is becoming more obvious as time goes by.

Modern technology has provided ways to hold those who would claim authority over us accountable. It seems to me, however, that whenever the common folk attempt to hold accountable anyone with supposed authority they run into roadblocks. There have been numerous examples of this throughout history, even in the short history of the United States of America. I believe the proper moral stance on this should be that if something is wrong for the individual to do, then it is wrong for government agents to do. If a government agent is caught doing something wrong, then he should be held to the same standard and treated just the same as anyone who is not a government agent. If anything, police and judicial officials should be held to a higher standard of ethics.

We live in a society where more and more often we hear of police and other government officials abusing their power. Years ago, people scoffed at this notion. Even after such famous, well covered events as the Rodney King case people would claim that such happenings were isolated incidents. They would claim that most law enforcement officers were good people and such incidents were perpetrated by a few bad apples. Some even claimed that police are justified in beating people who have already been put to the ground because, somehow, they are still a threat. Nowadays, I hear of such beatings and misdeeds on almost a daily basis. Nowadays, such occurrences are no longer the exception, they are the rule.

A cursory search on Youtube for police brutality will turn up more than a few hits. Yet there are far too few prosecutions and even fewer convictions for the wrongs done by these abusive individuals. There are still far too many apologists defending these violent actions. Too many seem to have been brainwashed into believing that the police are all angelic persons who mean well and would never purposefully harm someone who didn’t deserve it. Too many still seem to believe that it’s just a “few bad apples” ruining it for the rest of the group. Well, it seems to me that it’s more than just a few bad apples, that the entire barrel is rotten and if anything one would be lucky to find a single good apple in the entire group. Worse than that, it seems that the most corrupt rise to the top of the bureaucratic totem pole, thus corruption is rewarded and honesty punished.

It is more disturbing that those in “authority” would move to make it a crime to record or video their actions or the actions of their enforcers. Of course, one could ask if they are not doing anything wrong, why would they be afraid of being recorded or videoed, as indeed they would ask of you. Of course the common folk know that the main reason they are being videoed is as an excuse to collect revenue for victimless crimes. The reason the “authorities” don’t want to be videoed is because they are doing wrong things. They are committing crimes with victims. They are hurting people, and they know it. They just don’t want to admit it. They don’t want to have to look at the evidence and see the harm they cause others and the violence they create. They want to tell themselves little stories about how good they are, how they’re protecting society from the bad guys, and how anyone they harm got what they deserved.

The unblinking eye of the camera has become ubiquitous. It catches those who don’t come to a complete stop before proceeding with a right turn on red as well as those who would put a man to the ground, handcuff him and then shoot him in the back of the head. Whereas those who haven’t even necessarily endangered anyone by their driving habits will grumble as they pay their fines and move along to get along, those who have harassed, beaten, tasered, and even shot other human beings will use their power and the same intimidation techniques to prevent those who would hold them accountable from recording or even confiscate, steal or destroy video evidence.

That ability, however, is quickly fading. The seemingly obvious right the public should have to record public officials who are being paid with public dollars and are doing their public duties while in public is being honored by judges, surprisingly in a manner that seems to be not as reluctant as one might think. Could this be because the unjust nature of not allowing such crimes to be recorded is so obvious that even judges know that such laws would create unrest amongst the masses? Now if only those same judges in Illinois would allow the public to record video in their public courts where they do their public jobs taking public dollars then maybe we could hold them accountable for their legal chicanery and unjust practices.

Even if laws forbidding the recording of public officials while doing their public jobs were to be instituted and upheld by courts, technology would still try to hold them accountable for their crimes, misdeeds and unethical behaviors. Applications such as Qik which allow people to stream live video right to the Internet will see to that. The common folk are not quite as stupid as the privileged class would like to believe. As more people make the Internet their primary source of information and begin to understand just how real the tyranny has become, more people will demand an end to that tyranny. These same people will, hopefully, become inspired to look for ways to peacefully take power away from these unaccountable bureaucrats and empower the common folk. I believe that for the most part most people just want to be left alone to live their lives. When they are continuously harassed and not allowed to do so, they at least want to be able to gather evidence of those doing the harassing so they can hold them accountable.

People instinctively know right from wrong. They understand when someone has been railroaded or wrongfully treated by someone in authority. Yet sometimes they still have trouble reconciling in their minds that those people in authority are doing wrong. They have been brainwashed into believing that only decent people obtain positions of power and that they have the public’s best interests at heart and would never do anything to harm an innocent person who was not hurting others. Video is showing these people that they are wrong in making such assumptions. Even if one at first denies that such evil has penetrated the institutions of justice, one cannot remain in denial forever as the preponderance of evidence shows the tyranny growing.

The police state is here. It has been recorded for your perusal. It is already on Youtube. You can deny it all you want, go and stick your head in the sand and pretend it doesn’t affect you, or you can admit it and do nothing anyway as you go along to get along, or you can pick up a video recording device and go try to hold some corrupt officials accountable. Whatever the case, it seems to me that we’re all being swept into an upcoming storm in one way or another. Hopefully we can come up on the other side freer, more independent, and not as afraid of the camera’s unblinking eye.

Posted by admin at 10:50 pm Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

BORG agents from Pima County Sheriffs Office MURDER Iraq Marine War veteran Jose Guerena!

BORG, Cartels, Court Rulings, Government, hierarchy, Slavery No Responses »
May 292011

BORG agents from Pima County Sheriffs Office MURDER Iraq Marine War veteran Jose Guerena!

By Thomas Mario Costanzo

Tucson Arizona  Jose Guerena, marine with  2 tours of duty in Iraq gunned down in cold blood by BORG agents in his castle.  The victim had a wife, Vanessa Guerena and  2 sons one 4 the other 6.  Only one of his family members, his 6 year old son, did not suffer the trauma from being at the scene where his father was executed.

As the MURDERING gang known in some circles as SWAT forced its way into his home, Guerena, a former Marine who served two tours of duty in Iraq, armed himself with his AR-15 rifle and told his wife and son to hide in a closet. As the gang members entered, the  perpetrators said that “Guerena confronted them from a hallway”. In the gangland shooting the thugs, shot 26 year old Guerena with more than 70 rounds in about 7 seconds, at least 60 of which struck Guerena. He was pronounced dead a little over an hour later.

The BORG Gang known as “the Pima County Sheriff’s Department” lied (PDF) in their statement saying, “Guerena fired his weapon at the SWAT team”. They have changed their story acknowledge that not only did he not fire, the safety on his gun was still activated when he was murdered. Guerena had no prior criminal record, and the gang of thugs found nothing illegal in his home. The MAFIA gangsters’ police state records show they refused to allow paramedics give medical attention to Guerena for more than hour, leaving the young father to bleed to death, alone, in his own home.

The BORG GANG from the Police State of Pima County has now changed its story several times over the last few weeks. They have made a criminal confession (PDF) scolding the BORG media and critics for questioning the legality of the raid, the department’s account of what happened, and the department’s ability to fairly investigate its own officers. In typical MAFIA style they all refuse to talk or comment about their criminal history and to prevent their prosecution. They have obtained a BORG court order sealing the search warrants and police affidavits that led to the raids, and they’re now refusing any further comment on the case at all. When BORG Propaganda Officer Jason Ogan was contacted with some questions, he replyed via email that the gang won’t be releasing any more information. On Saturday, the head of the gang, Clarence Dupnik told Arizona Daily Star columnist Josh Brodesky that he may never release the search warrants and police affidavits in an effort to cover the asses and protect the pensions of his subordinate criminals.

The department’s excuses for keeping all of this information under wraps makes absolute sense, when you understand that the gang has a monopoly on VIOLENCE and MURDER and need to protect their monopoly of force, by legitimizing their existence. In his May 18 press release (PDF), for example, Ogan wrote, “The investigation that lead to the service of the search warrants on May 5 is a complicated (meaning WE THE PEOPLE are too stupid to understand important MAFIA THUGS business) one involving multiple people suspected of very serious crimes. Sometimes, law enforcement agencies must choose between the desire of the public to quickly know details, and the very real threat to innocent lives if those details are released prematurely.” Being they work for the same gang of criminals, they both have the same story.  Dupnik used the same line of reasoning as Brodesky. “Those are the real sensitive parts of why we are having difficulty with trying to put information out publicly–because we don’t want somebody getting killed, (However when it is one of WE THE PEOPLE it’s not that bad, we really only care about our fellow gang members).” Dupnik said.

The problem with that explanation is that the search warrants and affidavits weren’t sealed until four days after the gangland raids were executed, when Jose Guerena’s MURDER made national headlines.  If revealing the details of this investigation, which was initially described by the Sheriff’s Department as a marijuana investigation, could endanger lives, why weren’t the warrants and affidavits sealed from the start?  They are actually saying this poor marine was gunned down and murdered in front of his wife and 4 year old over a freaking PLANT for god’s sake?

Posted by admin at 4:23 pm Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , ,

Robert Podolsky, Physicist The laws of thermodynamics and 9/11

BORG, Cartels, Government, interview, logic, Science No Responses »
May 272011

AE911Truth’s EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW with Robert Podolsky, Physicist, Engineer

Mr. Podolsky explains how the Official Fire Story violates the Laws of Thermodynamics.

This is raw footage from one of the experts appearing in our upcoming, hard-hitting documentary of evidence for the destruction of the 3 World trade Center skyscrapers — “9/11: Explosive Evidence — Experts Speak Out”

Robert Podolski, Physicist, Engineer
Runtime
5:53
Keywords
Robert Podolski ae911truth 9/11 Physicist physics architect structural engineer high-rise demolition incendiaries explosive wtc wtc7 Architects Engineers world trade center new york terror attacks FEMA NIST controlled thermate nanotechnology destruction September 11 CDI Experts Speak Out Richard Gage tower building elevator towers
Views
2,018
Description
Mr. Poldolski explains how the Official Fire Story violates the Laws of Thermody...

Posted by admin at 9:29 pm Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , ,

What Did Osama bin Laden ‘Deserve’?

BORG, Bureaucracy, Cartels, hierarchy, Uncategorized No Responses »
May 162011

What Did Osama bin Laden ‘Deserve’?

by Butler Shaffer

Recently by Butler Shaffer: How Perverted Have We Become?

Gabriela: And you believe everything the authorities tell you?
Franz Kafka: Well, I have no reason to doubt.
Gabriela: They’re authorities! That’s reason enough.
~ From the movie Kafka

My recent article on the U.S. government’s assassination of Osama bin Laden elicited many favorable responses, along with a negative one that advised me that this man “got what he deserved.” The reader went on to ask “how dare you imply that we owed him the ‘right’ to be captured and brought to justice.” How effortlessly we make our judgments when our minds are in the default mode, and we need only parrot the words of those in authority!

The media has long been an echo chamber for the avoidance of independent thought and judgment. It is easy to repeat the party line that the state’s enemy du jour “got what he deserved” when one refuses to ask the question “what does any of us ‘deserve’?” What do I “deserve?” Do you know what you “deserve,” and for what actions? From what set of facts do we draw when we make such judgments about the conduct of others? I am neither a fan nor a defender of bin Laden, but those who are so anxious to invoke “closure” as an excuse for evading inquiries into the nature of governmental policies, might ask themselves why they are so willing to embrace his murder.

An answer to the question “what did bin Laden deserve?” depends upon one’s perspective. Even leaving aside the obvious responses that his Al Qaeda sympathizers would make, even patriotic Americans might have differing opinions, depending upon the time period of one’s assessment. When the Reagan administration found bin Laden and Al Qaeda useful agents to help rid Afghanistan of Soviet military forces, American politicians took turns posing with these “freedom fighters” for self-serving photo-ops. Their combined efforts drove the Soviets from that country, and helped bring about the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War. For his part in all of this, did bin Laden “deserve” having a statue built to him in Washington, D.C., or a boulevard named for him?

But when his usefulness to American interests terminated – or even became hostile – he was quickly relegated to the character of “villain.” This is a tactic long predating Machiavelli, having been useful, in recent years, to transform Saddam Hussein from Donald Rumsfeld’s smiling photo-op “friend” to a linch-pin in the axis of evil; to Muammar Gaddafi’s mercurial foe/friend/foe role of convenience in American foreign policy. That most Americans insist on remaining so dupable – if not outright stupid – as the state plays out its games of “endless enemies” at their expense, is remarkable.

What did bin Laden “deserve” in all of this? What do any of us “deserve” in our dealings with one another? Is there any principle to which we can turn to help us answer such questions? Do we “deserve” to be coerced, robbed, or killed whenever someone with superior strength is able to do these things to us? Is this the highest social standard to which we can repair? Have the playground bully and the brutalizing parent become the “founding fathers” of our “New World Order?”

If the defenders of state assassinations believe they have found a defensible tactic for resolving disputes – or just promoting their own preferences – should it become more widely available for all of us to employ? If two neighbors have a long-standing dispute as to the ownership of rose bushes along their property boundaries, should they resort to murder to settle the matter? Do we not understand that the problem of urban street-gangs is but politics on a different scale; that Obama’s drive-by shooting in a house in Abbottabad differs from such a killing in south-central Los Angeles more in terms of geography than substance? If the political establishment is willing to embrace such methods as a way of eliminating political enemies in foreign countries, should the same practices be acknowledged as appropriate within America? Might we want to rethink the “lone-nut-with-a-gun” explanations most of us eagerly swallowed to explain the deaths of the Kennedy brothers, Martin Luther King, Malcolm X, et. al. as well as the failed attempts on the lives of Ronald Reagan and George Wallace?

For decades, I have tried to discover whether there is some principle upon which all people can agree to define the propriety of our actions; a proposition that rises above arbitrary subjective preferences. Politically-defined laws will not suffice, since the state – being defined by its use of violence – exists to promote and enforce conflicts among people. Neither have I found so-called “natural law” principles much help, as their content seems to vary from one advocate to another.

The one standard to which I am able to find a virtual consensus is this: no one wants to be victimized. No one accepts that their life or other property interest should be subject to trespass by another. Sadly, most of us have internalized our regular victimization by the state, sanctioning such predations provided (a) we believe everyone else to be so bound – the vicious doctrine of “equality,” and (b) if we are to be singled out for maltreatment, that we be accorded “due process of law.”

The idea that the military and/or the police – the enforcement arms of the state – could undertake arbitrary and deadly force against any person, finds support among most conservatives. This is why the market for flags and “support the troops” decals blossoms whenever the emperor finds a new “enemy” to attack. It is also why so many conservatives – and even a number of so-called “liberals” – can get their diapers so knotted over the suggestion that Osama bin Laden should have been brought to trial rather than murdered. It is the same mindset that allows police officers to gun down “suspects” without, themselves, being held to account in a court of law.

Suppose a man is “suspected” of having committed a heinous crime (e.g., sexually assaulting and then murdering a small child)? Suppose this man is found and arrested by the police, who then take him into a back alley and kill him? Did he “get what he deserved?” Would you raise any objection to this – unless, of course, you were the suspect – or would you regard demands for a public trial to be only a “loophole” that might allow him to “escape” his punishment? Is a jury determination of “innocence” to be regarded as a “legal technicality?” Is “suspicion” or “accusation” the equivalent of “guilt?” Should “criminal procedure” classes in law school be required to address such matters as “how to organize a lynch mob?” Should a Ku Klux Klan Grand Dragon square off with an ACLU activist to debate the question “is justice delayed, justice denied?”

Given the grisly history of lynching in this country – in which the race of the victim was often all that mattered – President Obama who, regardless of where he was born, has more melanin in his system than most Americans, ought to have resisted the self-righteous impulse that has led some people to respond to fear by pulling sheets over their heads!

Don’t you understand that if the bin Ladens of the world can be “brought to justice” by government hit-men who, like their Mafia counterparts, then dump the bodies into the ocean, so can you? Insistence upon state-defined “due process of law” is no guarantee that the innocent shall not be punished, but it’s an improvement over assassinations, torture, trips to hidden prisons around the world, and the denial of habeas corpus. Jury trials often result in wrongful convictions, but I’d rather take my chances with twelve men and women with no sinister agendas of their own, than with decisions made behind closed doors by the politically unscrupulous. Bin Laden “deserved” a public trial for the same reasons you and I would.

With each passing month, it becomes increasingly evident that the United States of America – as a formal system – is about finished. The Constitution has become virtually meaningless as a means of conducting the business of the state. The “separation of powers” of the various branches of government – which we used to pretend would limit the ambitions of each – has given way to notions of “empire,” with the president playing the role of “emperor,” able to start wars on his own motion (and without congressional approval); to torture or imprison without trial, or order the assassination of any persona non grata of his designation; to give away hundreds of billions of dollars to his corporate friends; ad nauseum. Over many decades, the powers granted to government in the Constitution – which, far from being limited, speak of “general welfare,” “necessary and proper,” and “reasonable” – have been given very expansive definitions by the courts. By contrast, the rights reserved to individuals have been accorded very restrictive meanings. In the treatment of bin Laden – as well as the continuing incarcerations at Guantanamo – we see further confirmation that what we once thought of as an inalienable right to a public trial is another illusion sacrificed to the empty rhetoric of “national security.”

Though the “United States of America” is in a terminal condition, “America” – as a social system – may yet survive. America preceded the nation-state and, if we can revisit the basic assumptions that underlay the “founding fathers” efforts, we may discover why conditions in which peace, liberty, and respect for life must take precedence over edicts offered by rulers who smirk and strut as they demand obedience to their every whim.

In the course of such inquiries, we may discover why bin Laden – along with every one of us – deserved to not be dealt with in such an arbitrary, coercive manner. Institutionalized violence is the essence of every political system, and is in the process of destroying Western Civilization. But as secession and nullification enjoy an increasing interest among thoughtful people, members of the establishment power structure may find themselves regarded as the new “Red Coats.” Like their predecessors – and in the words of Lysander Spooner – they may then be urged “to go home and content themselves with the exercise of only such rights and powers as nature has given to them in common with the rest of mankind.”

May 14, 2011

Butler Shaffer [send him e-mail] teaches at the Southwestern University School of Law. He is the author of the newly-released In Restraint of Trade: The Business Campaign Against Competition, 1918–1938 and of Calculated Chaos: Institutional Threats to Peace and Human Survival. His latest book is Boundaries of Order.

Copyright © 2011 by LewRockwell.com. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given

Posted by admin at 2:20 am Tagged with: , , , , , , ,

Indiana: Full Frontal Fascism

BORG, Bureaucracy, Cartels, Court Rulings, Government, hierarchy, Slavery No Responses »
May 142011

Indiana: Full Frontal Fascism

Something huge–huge and not good–just happened in Indiana, which will be little more than a blip in the propaganda that passes for national news. The Supreme Court of Indiana just ruled that in Indiana, when a police officer decides to illegally come into your house, you’re not allowed to do anything to stop him. According to “Justice” Steven David, resisting an admittedly “unlawful police entry into a home” is against “public policy.” Got that? If you live in Indiana, and a cop decides to invade your home without a shred of legal justification, it is considered a crime for you to do anything to stop him.

Bizarrely, “Justice” David also said that resisting law-breaking cops goes against “modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence.” You see, only judges are wise enough to know that when the Fourth Amendment says you have a right to be free from “unreasonable searches and seizures,” it actually means that the cops have the right to commit “unreasonable searches and seizures,” and you have no right to do anything to stop it.

Please allow me to toot my own horn here, by pointing out that in my novel, “The Iron Web” (page 231), I predicted this step occurring. It is an essential, major step towards totalitarianism, for the control freaks to decide that even when they break their own laws, their victims have no right to resist. There is a huge principle at stake here, and what these three Indiana jackass “judges” have just done is guarantee either complete totalitarianism, or a bloody revolution (or both, in that order). Because this ruling means, quite literally, that residence of Indiana have no rights at all. What would it possibly mean to say you have a “right” to not have your home illegally invaded by a jackbooted thug, while also saying that you cannot do anything to defend that right? To say that you are legally required to allow your rights to be violated means that they aren’t rights. (Duh.)

But never fear, because, according to the Supreme Jackass Court of Indiana, you can always come crawling to your masters, after you’ve been illegally victimized by one of their jackboots, to beg for some restitution. (Good luck with that.) “Justice” David says that, after you let the cop illegally invade your home, you can always “protest the illegal entry through the court system.” That’s almost straight out of my novel the Iron Web, where a new (fictional) law would “mak[e] it a crime to forcibly resist any arrest, while also providing legal remedies to those who have been subjected to improper arrest.” (This isn’t the first thing in my novel that later became either proposed legislation or a new court ruling.)

If anyone considers this reasonable, keep in mind that by the exact same “reasoning” (and I use that term extremely loosely), they might as well also rule that if a cop decides to shoot your dog, or steal your car, or rape your wife, you have to quietly stand by and let him do it, and then later file a complaint, or a lawsuit. In other words, the jackboots can do absolutely anything they damn well please, “legal” or not, and your only recourse is to later whine to the very control freaks that the jackboots work for.

What was the rationale for this? In case all of the above wasn’t Orwellian enough, check this out. “Justice” David argued that “allowing resistance [to law-breaking cops] unnecessarily escalates the level of violence and therefore the risk of injuries to all parties involved.” Holy smokes! Why wouldn’t this psychotic reasoning (a.k.a. “retroactive tyranny justification”) also mean that if anyone breaks into your house, or assaults you, or steals your stuff, or otherwise attacks you, you’d better let him do it in order to avoid “escalat[ing] the level of violence”? Using defensive violence to combat aggressive violence is completely justified and righteous, notwithstanding the opinions of the tyranny apologists appointed by the parasite class. If a cop illegally barges into your home, you have every right to escalate the level of violence to any extent necessary to stop him, including blowing the fascist’s damn head off.

I’m glad I don’t live in Indiana, because if some cop decided to barge into my house without a shred of legal justification, I’d now know that if I tried to hold him back, or push him out, I’d be arrested and prosecuted. So I’d just have to shoot the bastard instead. And since it’s tough to do that sort of thing without anyone noticing, I would then be a fugitive, for having defended my home and family against an invading criminal. And if that much happened, and I was forced to become a fugitive, I might feel obliged to go pay a visit to the three stupid, tyrant-loving fascist jackasses on the Indiana Supreme Court who just decided to declare it a crime for someone to defend himself against illegal trespassing, breaking and entering, and assault, if the scumbag attacker happens to have a badge.

Hmmm, I have an idea. If there are any Indiana cops who still respect the Constitution, please do your state a huge favor, and go barge into the home of “Justice” Steven David–during supper would probably be a good time. Barge in, without a warrant, and without any legal justification, guns drawn, and start ordering people around. See if “Justice” David does anything to resist. If he does, lock his fascist ass up for violating his own idiotic legal ruling. In fact, since he just declared it to be illegal for him to resist your illegal invasion of his home, if he lifts a finger to stop you, shoot the bastard, or at least give him a good tasering. (That’s exactly what happened in the case where “Justice” David sided with the law-breaking cop.) After all, we can’t just let people assault police officers, now can we? If some Indiana cop had the spine to do that, I know several thousand people who would be thrilled beyond words.

(P.S. Incidentally, in U.S. vs. John Bad Elk, the U.S. Supreme Court made it clear that resisting an unlawful arrest, even if doing so requires killing the cop, can be legal. Whether this conflict between the Supreme Court and the Indiana Nazi Brigade will be resolved in court remains to be seen. But whatever any black-dress-wearing, wooden-hammer-wielding narcissist says, if someone decides to barge into your home, you have the right to evict him, with a harsh word, a fist, or a 12-gauge–whichever you deem necessary.)

 

Posted by admin at 5:47 pm Tagged with: , , , , , , ,

Cell Phones “Fema Special Chip” Tracks YOU!

BORG, Bureaucracy, Cartels, Government, hierarchy, Slavery No Responses »
May 132011

Cell Phones “Fema Special Chip” Tracks YOU!

Cell Phones providers will now be required to install special chips that no one but those in the government want.  The consumers of the cell phones with be forced to pay for a service they may not want, but because of Mafia government.  As of May 10, 2011 all providers are mandated through their licenses to enable the government to send them text messages and alerts.  Being this technology is already  possible the questionable activity is why do these phones need a”Special Chip”?  Many authorities on the mafia Government have reason to believe these chips will transmit all data on the phone to the government, no different than the special databases that exist for EVERY SINGLE CREDIT CARD TRANSACTION YOU MAKE!

There is no word on the chip’s other abilities (i.e. instant shut down?). This announcement was made directly from Ground Zero, again milking 9/11 to promote a high-tech police state.

Cellphone Alert System Announced in NYC
Runtime
2:19
Keywords
cell_phone_alerts
Views
16,700

What Else Will The Government’s “Special Chip” In Your Cellphone Do?

The announcement that Americans are set to be bombarded with mandatory government propaganda via their cellphones represents a shocking lurch forward in the Obama administration’s bid to launch a total takeover of all communications as part of a wider move towards controlling the Internet, developing an omnipresent wiretap system, and creating a constant environment of suspicion and distrust by enlisting citizens to spy on each other.

Short of implanting a microchip in people’s heads, the US government has opted for the next best thing, a chip in your cellphone. But what else will these “special chips” be used for?

“Presidential and local emergency messages as well as Amber Alerts would appear on cell phones equipped with special chips and software,” under the new program which was launched today in New York and is set to be rolled out across all major cities by the end of next year, reports CBS New York.

Cellphone users would not be able to opt out of “presidential messages,” with Verizon and AT&T, the nation’s largest cell phone carriers, already on board.

“For now, the alerts are capable on certain high-end cell phones but starting next year, all cell phones will be required to have the chip that receives alerts,” adds the report.

The messages will supersede all other phone traffic and have a unique signal and vibration, meaning that your private conversation could be cut off to make way for government propaganda in a program that resembles Minority Report-style invasiveness on steroids.

What else these “special chips” that will be mandatory in all cellphones will do is not explained, but given the recent scandal where it emerged that cell phone companies were building location databases of where their users had traveled, the sky’s the limit.

Cell phone providers already have the capability to send out text messages to all their subscribers instantly, so why the government needs a “special chip” to be installed will only heighten suspicions that this is a trojan horse for an omnipresent wiretap that will feed every scintilla of information from your phone directly to big brother.

As one respondent to the story put it, “Surely you only need a database of all phone numbers to send out text messages. Am I only person wondering why all handsets need to be fitted with “special chips” in order to receive text messages? The “special chips” can only be being introduced to serve other purposes.”

“This seems very suspicious. Why can people not opt out of the president’s messages?” asked another. “They pay for their phones – they should dictate what it does, not Obama.”

Would the “special chips” also empower Obama to shut down all cell phone traffic on a whim in a time of declared “national emergency”?

Obama already has the power to override all radio and television networks under the recently expanded Emergency Alert System, which allows FEMA to break in on live broadcasts to send out alerts.

His administration is also pushing cybersecurity legislation that would hand Obama a figurative kill switch for the Internet. The term “kill switch” is an oversimplification, what the agenda actually revolves around is the ability to impose Chinese-style censorship over the world wide web and develop an ID system that would force users to have their access controlled by a state-run licensing procedure.

The government-mandated chips would also help achieve the Department of Transportation’s aim of blocking all cellphone use in cars. The chip would allow authorities to prevent use of the phone by measuring the speed you are traveling via GPS technology and shutting down the handset.

This trifecta of broadcast media, Internet, and cellphone traffic represents a total takeover of the entire spectrum of communications in the United States by the Obama administration.

Aside from the terror fearmongering, the system is also wide open for abuse in more prosaic terms, with some fearing that the messages could include PR talking points and political electioneering. Indeed, the image that accompanies a USA Today piece about the story is of a cellphone displaying an infomercial about Obama’s 2012 campaign.

The plan to harass cell phone users with specious terror alerts is part of a larger agenda of fear-based social conditioning by the government. As we noted last month, the Department of Homeland Security announced a new system to replace the old color-coded one. Now so-called terror threats that inevitably turn out to be either false alarms or politically motivated scams will be posted on Facebook and Twitter pages in addition to broadcast over television, radio and cell phones.

As we have exhaustively documented, the move has nothing whatsoever to do with keeping Americans safe from terrorism. More Americans are killed every year by bumble bees or peanut allergies than they are by terrorists.

“Even with the September 11 attacks included in the count, the number of Americans killed by international terrorism since the late 1960s (which is when the State Department began counting) is about the same as the number of Americans killed over the same period by lightning, accident-causing deer, or severe allergic reaction to peanuts,” writes Ohio University’s John Mueller in a report entitled A False Sense Of Insecurity.

The real agenda behind the program manifests itself in numerous ways. On the one hand, this is a further intensification of the Big Sis “see something say something” campaign, it’s designed to condition Americans that terrorists are lurking around every corner and that they must spy on their community to prevent attacks, when in reality every major terror plot that has been uncovered in the United States was either staged or provocateured by the federal government itself.

This is also about capitalizing on the dubious Bin Laden raid to return Americans to a state of post-9/11 intellectual castration, corralling subservience to a system that utilizes fear to control the population and eviscerate constitutional rights.

With the compliant and castrated media increasingly distrusted, Americans are either moving to alternative news sources or tuning out altogether. This has necessitated the government to launch a wide spectrum takeover of all communications in its bid to keep the population under the firm control of state-issued propaganda.

We are now just a few steps away from having literal telescreens installed in our homes that beam directly into our brains the latest government fables about who we’re bombing now, what level chocolate rations are this month, as well as Michelle Obama’s mandatory exercise program.
- Source

Posted by admin at 12:28 pm Tagged with: , , , , , , ,

Bush not welcome at Osama murder festivities

Cartels, Government, hierarchy No Responses »
May 122011

Mafia War Criminal and Former President George W. Bush’s was persona non grata at ground zero with Mafia Usurper President Barack Obama after the criminal murder of Osama bin Laden.  The Propaganda ministers for the Mafia government planned festivities, did not want their plan to misdirect the emotional response from the unlawful criminal act of murdering in cold blood, Osama bin Laden, spoiled by having the former criminal president appearing at the event.

The spin was presented that George Bush wants to LAY LOW! As evidence with the statement by his wife “He’s made the real decision not to enter into politics or the public eye,” Laura Bush told The Associated Press on Thursday.  The real reason is everywhere the war criminal Bush goes, he is confronted by demonstrators who are looking to arrest him.  Now because he has no diplomatic immunity he has not visited certain countries.

Handlers and Propaganda ministers for both presidents agree George Bush is more of a liability than an asset.  Funny Osama bin Laden and Sadam Hussien were both CIA assets.   The Propaganda ministers didn’t want the festivities to turn into a gigantic George Bush Demonstration like in Phoenix where many came to remind that the former Mafia President is a war criminal

Piss On george w. bush
Runtime
14:29
Keywords
george w. bush Phoenix Arizona Piss on
Views
224

Bush said she and her husband were out to dinner Sunday night when they received word that Obama wanted to speak with him. The former president went home to take the call informing him that U.S. military forces had killed Osama bin Laden in a raid of his compound in Pakistan, she said.

The former mafia first lady said “We’re very, very proud of our military and our intelligence services. It was risky and it was dangerous for our members of the military,” she said at a Dallas elementary school after announcing grants from her foundation for school libraries.  The Bush’s believe that helping some children learn how to read somehow absolves them of the criminal act of killing over one million Iraqi’s, in an unconstitutional war.   The fact remains as well, that more than 6000 coalition military forces have been MURDERED, because of Bush’s foreign policy.  Also need to account are the 32000 troops with serious brain and spinal injuries and the 30% of the troops with Post Traumatic Stress disorder, PTSD, These shape shifting reptiles somehow believe there isn’t a special place in hell reserved just for the Bush’s and their ilk.

The spin over the cold blooded murder of Osama and the dumping of the evidence in the ocean, was thought to be mitigated by the war criminal and former president Bush, by calling bin Laden’s death “a victory for America.”, when it is in fact an egregious breach of justice.

Posted by admin at 2:37 am Tagged with: , , , ,

Copyright and the End of Internet Freedom

Government No Responses »
May 112011

by Stephan Kinsella on May 10, 2011

It is obvious to advocates of liberty that modern communications and technology–cell phones, twitter, texting, video, youtube, email, and the Internet–are crucially important in the fight to delegitimze, expose, and fight against the state. Of course the state always works to hijack and corrupt various institutions and aspects of life in order to increase its control and power. As I discuss here, Professor Hans-Hermann Hoppe, in his classic paper Banking, Nation States and International Politics: A Sociological Reconstruction of the Present Economic Order, explains how and why the state insidiously arrogates to itself the control of roads, communications, law and justice, healthcare, money, defense, police, finance and banking, and education.

So it is no surprise that they are coming for the Internet next, under the guise of tax law (it’s “unfair” if Amazon doesn’t pay the sales taxes that brick-and-mortar shops are forced to), prohibitions on gambling and child porn, and, of course, copyright and “piracy.” The latter is probably the biggest threat to Internet freedom, as can be seen in this chilling article: The Pirate Bay: “The Battle of Internets is About to Begin”. The Internet must remain free and unregulated. If Internet freedom disappears, we will lose one of our most crucial weapons against the state. And it will have been because of copyright law, the fascist nature of which is becoming increasingly obvious to all libertarians except for the most stubborn pro-IP holdouts.

I used to think IP was bad, but way down on the list of priorities. But since 1995 or so (see my The Four Historical Phases of IP Abolitionism), IP’s abuses have increased and become more visible. IP does not include only patent and copyright and the other classical and modern forms of IP (trademark, trade secret, semiconductor maskwork, etc.). It also includes defamation law/reputation rights, which, like copyright, also censors speech, and one can even view other statist policies as variants of or close cousins to IP law–such as the state’s prohibition on counterfeiting its fiat currency (this is copyright like in that the state claims the right to make these copies but no one else), and even the drug war (the state can produce drugs or authorize people to do so, etc.). So at this point I’d have to put the state’s insidious and increasingly draconian and outrageous IP policies just behind the other obvious state evils: war, income tax, central banking/fiat money, drug war/police state, and government schools.

Posted by admin at 12:43 am Tagged with: , ,
Older Entries
© 2012 Creativity and Ethics Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha
SEO Powered by Platinum SEO from Techblissonline p-2aCpFRwwOYzPA