By Michael Hampton, Homeland Stupidity March 27, 2010
“People don’t know what fusion centers are,” says Catherine Bleish, who was the opening speaker at the 2010 New Hampshire Liberty Forum on March 19.
Fusion centers were created after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks as a way for local and state law enforcement agencies to share terrorism related information with the federal government, and vice versa. The idea quickly ran into problems, first among them the fact that there simply isn’t enough terrorist activity to justify the concept. Instead of shutting down as pointless, fusion centers gradually began expanding into sharing information about all crimes.Fusion center activity over the years has also raised concerns about government surveillance of legally protected political activity.
Bleish, who was led into becoming an activist by the 2008 Ron Paul presidential campaign, said she was informed of a report published by the Missouri Information Analysis Center, leaked in March 2009, which stated among other things that people with Gadsden flag and Ron Paul bumper stickers could be militia members or potential terrorists. Bleish, who is the executive director of the Liberty Restoration Project, spearheaded further investigation and activism, eventually leading to MIAC retracting the report.
“MIAC is a Department of Homeland Security fusion center,” she said during her speech. “These institutions are doing a lot of damage to the relationship between the general public and the law enforcement community.”
Bleish also runs Operation Defuse, a project to inform the public about the nature and activities of fusion centers and how those activities contribute to the federalization and militarization of law enforcement.
The New Hampshire Liberty Forum is an annual conference held by the Free State Project, a movement to bring 20,000 activists to New Hampshire to work toward reducing the size, scope and power of government and increasing individual liberty and responsibility.The project has signed over 10,000 participants, and over 800 have already moved. The Liberty Forum, and the project’s summer camping event, PorcFest, allow people undecided about the project to see the state firsthand and observe and participate in local activism.
A new institution is emerging in American life: Fusion Centers. These state, local and regional institutions were originally created to improve the sharing of anti-terrorism intelligence among different state, local and federal law enforcement agencies. Though they developed independently and remain quite different from one another, for many the scope of their mission has quickly expanded — with the support and encouragement of the federal government — to cover "all crimes and all hazards."
The types of information they seek for analysis has also broadened over time to include not just criminal intelligence, but public and private sector data; and participation in these centers has grown to include not just law enforcement, but other government entities, the military and even select members of the private sector.
These new fusion centers, over 40 of which have been established around the country, raise very serious privacy issues at a time when new technology, government powers and zeal in the "war on terrorism" are combining to threaten Americans' privacy at an unprecedented level.
Moreover, there are serious questions about whether data fusion is an effective means of preventing terrorism in the first place, and whether funding the development of these centers is a wise investment of finite public safety resources.Yet federal, state and local governments are increasing their investment in fusion centers without properly assessing whether they serve a necessary purpose.
There's nothing wrong with the government seeking to do a better job of properly sharing legitimately acquired information about law enforcement investigations — indeed, that is one of the things that 9/11 tragically showed is very much needed.
But in a democracy, the collection and sharing of intelligence information — especially information about American citizens and other residents — need to be carried out with the utmost care. That is because more and more, the amount of information available on each one of us is enough to assemble a very detailed portrait of our lives. And because security agencies are moving toward using such portraits to profile how "suspicious" we look.
New institutions like fusion centers must be planned in a public, open manner, and their implications for privacy and other key values carefully thought out and debated. And like any powerful institution in a democracy, they must be constructed in a carefully bounded and limited manner with sufficient checks and balances to prevent abuse.
Unfortunately, the new fusion centers have not conformed to these vital requirements.
Since no two fusion centers are alike, it is difficult to make generalized statements about them. Clearly not all fusion centers are engaging in improper intelligence activities and not all fusion center operations raise civil liberties or privacy concerns. But some do, and the lack of a proper legal framework to regulate their activities is troublesome.
This report is intended to serve as a primer that explains what fusion centers are, and how and why they were created. It details potential problems fusion centers present to the privacy and civil liberties of ordinary Americans, including:
Ambiguous Lines of Authority. The participation of agencies from multiple jurisdictions in fusion centers allows the authorities to manipulate differences in federal, state and local laws to maximize information collection while evading accountability and oversight through the practice of "policy shopping."
Private Sector Participation. Fusion centers are incorporating private-sector corporations into the intelligence process, breaking down the arm's length relationship that protects the privacy of innocent Americans who are employees or customers of these companies, and increasing the risk of a data breach.
Military Participation. Fusion centers are involving military personnel in law enforcement activities in troubling ways.
Data Fusion = Data Mining. Federal fusion center guidelines encourage whole sale data collection and manipulation processes that threaten privacy.
Excessive Secrecy. Fusion centers are hobbled by excessive secrecy, which limits public oversight, impairs their ability to acquire essential information and impedes their ability to fulfill their stated mission, bringing their ultimate value into doubt.
The lack of proper legal limits on the new fusion centers not only threatens to undermine fundamental American values, but also threatens to turn them into wasteful and misdirected bureaucracies that, like our federal security agencies before 9/11, won't succeed in their ultimate mission of stopping terrorism and other crime.
The information in this report provides a starting point from which individuals can begin to ask informed questions about the nature and scope of intelligence programs being conducted in their communities. The report concludes with a list of recommendations for Congress and state legislatures.
Agencies across the state are working together to fight crime. The Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) held a dedication Thursday morning for what is known as a Fusion Center.
The center sits inside a building at the DPS headquarters complex in North Austin.
DPS allowed media inside for a rare look at how the agencies work together to solve crimes. Large screens and rows of computers fill one room after another at the center. Each room is dedicated to a type of intelligence gathering including border security and gang activity.
The purpose of a fusion center is to create a central location where local, state, and federal agencies can work together to share the information they have gathered about different crimes or threats, in particular terror threats or trends in organized crime.
“This is a great day for the State of Texas. It's going to make us safer," said Congressman Michael McCaul, R-Texas. "Fusion centers, sharing information, sharing intelligence is what is going to detect, deter and prevent a future terrorist attack.”
McCaul is one of the heads of the Homeland Security Committee. He visited the Fusion Center on Thursday for its dedication. It is one of about 70 in the nation.
The center has actually been under development for about a year now. The dedication marks the official launch joining multiple state and local agencies.
A majority of the group was working during the recent shooting on the University of Texas campus, as well as during the suicide plane crash into the Echelon building earlier this year.
The Austin Police Department is part of the group working at the center. APD secured city approval in May to create a center within the complex to coincide with the fusion facility.
Money to fund the center comes from Homeland Security Grants.
Several rights groups have expressed concerns regarding a possible over-sharing of information. APD officials say they will allow watch groups certain access to oversee any potential concerns.
Secretary Janet Napolitano and other officials from the Department of Homeland Security testified today on the growing threat of homegrown terrorists and small-scale attacks.
There’s a growing chorus from the homeland security community on this trend, and Napolitano testified that although for many years Al Qaeda and its allies seemed to be waiting for the opportunity to stage an attack on the dramatic scale of 9/11, these days, a looser network of groups is more willing to resort to tactics like planting IEDs:
It is clear that the threat of al Qaeda-style terrorism is not limited to the al-Qaeda core group, or organizations that have close operational links to al Qaeda. While al Qaeda continues to threaten America directly, it also inspires its affiliates and other groups and individuals who share its violent ideology and seek to attack the United States claiming it is in the name of Islam – a claim that is widely rejected.
One of the ways DHS is approaching this threat is by beefing up the country’s network of fusion centers — groups that fuse local law enforcement work with national-level intelligence.Napolitano has made the centers a major focus of the department’s FY11 grant cycle. The idea is, as Napolitano said today, is that
“In an environment where operatives may not have close links to international terrorist organizations – and where they may, in fact, be based within this country – these levels of law enforcement may be the first to notice something suspicious.”
Fusion centers don’t have the strongest records of keeping their focus on international terrorist organizations, though. As G.W. Schulz reports for the Center for Investigative Reporting:
One of the nation’s oldest fusion centers, known as the El Paso Intelligence Center, accidentally caused a California couple that owns a flight training school to be falsely held at gunpoint by police for the second time. Twice now EPIC has failed to clean up incorrect data that led authorities to believe a plane owned by the pair was stolen.
The FBI is assembling a massive database on thousands of Americans, many of whom have not been accused of any crime, the Washington Post'sDana Priest and William Arkin report. The reporters' latest look at the country's ballooning national security system focuses on the role that local agencies -- often staffed by people with little to no counter-terrorism training -- have played in combating terrorism since 2001.
Here are five striking revelations in their piece:
The FBI's Nationwide Suspicious Activity Reporting Initiative currently contains 161,948 suspicious activity files, into which authorities can put information they've gathered about the people at the center of the files: employment history, financial documents, phone numbers, photos. In many cases, the people in the files have not been accused of any crime but have attracted the suspicions of a local cop, FBI agent or even fellow citizen. The files have led to five arrests but no convictions, the FBI says. Some of the files are unclassified so that local police agencies and even businesses can submit reports on anyone they deem suspicious.
The Department of Homeland Security does not know how much it spends in funding state fusion centers, which synthesize security information from all state agencies and feeds information to the FBI's "Nationwide Suspicious Activity Reporting Initiative." But since 2001, DHS has doled out $31 billion to states and localities for homeland-security initiatives.
Conspiracy Theory with Jesse Ventura: Police State (Season 2, Episode 4):
Local officials at these fusion centers are tasked with understanding terrorism with little or no training. To fill the void, self-styled experts with fairly extreme views on the scope of the Muslim terrorist threat are asked to come in and train local authorities, the Post reports.
Expert Walid Shoebat told a group at the first annual South Dakota Fusion Center Conference in Sioux Falls this year that they should monitor local Muslim student groups and mosques and try to tap their phones. "You can find out a lot of information that way," he said.
National intelligence officials told the Post they preferred that people with "evidence-based" approaches to Islam were lecturing instead, but that no guidelines are in place to determine the qualifications of a given speaker.
The localities are often left without guidance from DHS, which can lead to confusion about the counter-terror activity they're supposed to be carrying out. Virginia's fusion center named historically black colleges as a "potential" terrorism hub, Maryland State Police infiltrated local groups that lobbied for bike lanes and human rights, and a contractor in Pennsylvania writing an intelligence bulletin flagged meetings of the Tea Party Patriots Coalition and environmental activists.
Many states and towns are taking the unprecedented amounts of money handed out to fight terrorists and are using it instead to fight crime.
"We have our own terrorists, and they are taking lives every day," Memphis Police Director Larry Godwin, said.
(Screenshot: The Post's interactive map of state and local counterterrorism agencies.)
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and National Security Agency host a joint groundbreaking ceremony for the first Intelligence Community Comprehensive National Cyber-security Initiative (CNCI) Data Center Thursday, Jan. 6, 2011, at Camp Williams. Construction of the $1.2 billion Data Center is scheduled to be completed in October 2013.
Deseret News January 6, 2011
Thursday's groundbreaking for a $1.5 billion National Security Agency data center is being billed as important in the short term for construction jobs and important in the long term for Utah's reputation as a technology center.
"This will bring 5,000 to 10,000 new jobs during its construction and development phase," Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, said on Wednesday. "Once completed, it will support 100 to 200 permanent high-paid employees."
Officially named the Utah Data Center, the facility's role in aggregating and verifying dizzying volumes of data for the intelligence community has already earned it the nickname "Spy Center." Its really long moniker is the Community Comprehensive National Cyber-security Initiative Data Center — the first in the nation's intelligence community.
A White House document identifies the Comprehensive National Cyber-security Initiative as addressing "one of the most serious economic and national security challenges we face as a nation, but one that we as a government or as a country are not adequately prepared to counter." The document details a number of technology-related countermeasures to the security threat.
Hatch said Utah was chosen for the project over 37 other locations. He characterized the cyber-security center as the "largest military construction project in recent memory."
Hatch said he promoted Utah's favorable energy costs, Internet infrastructure, thriving software industry and proximity to the Salt Lake City International Airport in the bid process that ended up with Camp Williams earning the data center.
The Army Corps of Engineers is overseeing the project that is under contract to a joint venture between Big-D Construction in Salt Lake City, U.K.-based Balfour Beatty Construction and DPR Construction out of California.
"This project is going to give an opportunity for an awful lot of Utahns" who have seen construction jobs in Utah drop from 100,000 in 2008 to about 66,000 today, said Rob Moore, president and COO of Big-D and chairman of the Associated General Contractors in Utah. "My subcontractors, suppliers and vendors are very appreciative of the work that will be available on this project."
Grading work is already under way for the complex, which is scheduled to include 100,000 square feet for the data center and 900,000 square feet for technical support and administrative space. The center is designed to be capable of generating all of its own power through backup electrical generators and will have both fuel and water storage. Construction is designed to achieve environmentally significant LEED Silver certification.
"It is so unique and so intensive," Hatch said. "This will establish our state as one of the leading states for technology."
The majority of state and local counterterrorism centers across the country do not have federally approved plans to ensure they are protecting the privacy rights and civil liberties of U.S. citizens, raising concerns among privacy advocates that they lack proper oversight.
The issue reveals the tension between government efforts to collect and analyze intelligence inside the United States in order to prevent terrorist attacks and fears that innocent Americans and law-abiding groups are being improperly spied upon.
After the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the U.S. government encouraged and funded a proliferation of domestic counterterrorism centers, commonly referred to as state and local homeland security fusion centers.
Although 72 centers now exist, only 28 have privacy and civil liberties plans approved by the Homeland Security Department, National Journal has learned. DHS serves as the lead federal agency coordinating and funding the centers.
To address the issue, DHS this year began restricting the ability of centers to use state homeland security grants until they have an approved privacy and civil liberties plan.
"We've been complaining about the lack of a governance structure over fusion centers for a few years now," Michael German, policy counsel for the ACLU and former FBI special agent, said in an interview.
"That the process is taking too long is worrisome, and we'll be watching to see how effective DHS is in enforcing this requirement, particularly because having a written privacy policy is only a first step toward accountability," he added.
Tom Monahan, president of the National Fusion Center Association, said candidly that he shares the concerns of privacy groups like the ACLU. The association is a nonprofit organization based in Alexandria, Va., that represents the 72 fusion centers.
"We understand that concern. We absolutely agree with that concern," Monahan said. He said all fusion centers are required to have approved plans by March 31.
Even though DHS has not approved privacy and civil liberties plans for most fusion centers, they still must comply with federal, state and local laws protecting people's rights, Monahan said.
"Much of the content of the privacy policy will simply be restating existing statutes, laws and regulations," he said. "However, it's imperative that it be codified and trained for everybody who works in the fusion centers because well-intentioned employees of the fusion centers could run afoul of the laws despite their well intentions."
But a major challenge for centers to get approval from DHS has been that state and local laws can vary widely, Monahan added.
"There is no standardized language to construct this," said Monahan, who also directs the Southern Nevada Counter-Terrorism Center.
He added: "I'm not aware of any fusion center that hasn't even started. Everybody understands the importance of this; everybody understands the magnitude of not getting this done."
He also said he does not believe it would be unrealistic for DHS to define a standard policy for fusion center privacy and civil liberties plans.
DHS spokesman Bobby Whithorne said DHS is working with fusion centers to meet the privacy requirements as quickly as possible.
"Over the past several years, federal, state, and local officials have worked tirelessly to ensure that robust privacy, civil rights, and civil liberties protections are integrated into fusion center policies," he said.
The ACLU views the funding restriction by DHS as a good start, but believes more needs to be done.
"There is still no formal mechanism to oversee the fusion centers to ensure they are complying with these privacy policies, much less with other laws and regulations governing how law enforcement intelligence operations collect and handle personally-identifiable information," German said.
One homeland response force unit will be based in each of the 10 Federal Emergency Management Agency regions. Eight more units will be established in fiscal year 2012, Defense Department and National Guard Bureau officials said here today. The units are regional forces that will cross state lines when needed. The forces are part of a larger reorganization of the Defense Department's domestic consequence management enterprise recommended in the 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review. This reorganization will ensure DoD has a robust ability to respond rapidly to domestic CBRNE incidents while recognizing the primary role that the governors play in controlling the response to incidents that occur in their states, Guard officials said. [Source]
The 10 Federal Regions:
Region 1 - Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island and Vermont
Region 2 - New Jersey, New York, the territory of Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands
Region 3 - Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia and the District of Columbia
Region 4 - Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, N. Carolina, S. Carolina and Tennessee Region 5 - Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio and Wisconsin
Region 6 - Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma and Texas
Region 7 - Iowa, Kansas, Missouri and Nebraska
Region 8 - Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah and Wyoming
Region 9 - Arizona, California, Hawaii, Nevada, and the territories of Guam and American Samoa
Homeland Response Forces are descending upon Missouri and nine other states,where National Guard units will be the face of Federal power in the regions in the event of a terrorist attack or disaster.
The Sedalia Democrat reports that, along with Missouri, the state where the report was written, Massachusetts, New York, Pennsylvania, Georgia, Texas, Utah and California will also host the National Guard Homeland Response Forces in the name of fighting terrorism.A unit will be placed within each of the regions established by FEMA, effectively implementing Federal powers at the state level premptively.
The U.S. Department of Defense announced Monday that Missouri will be one of 10 states to host National Guard Homeland Response Force units to help coordinate federal response to a terrorist attack.
According to the DoD announcement, the move came about following the 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review — a congressionally mandated report put together every four years that highlights changes and challenges in national defense strategy. The 2010 report calls for improved coordination with civilian officials and providing resources for large-scale emergency response.
Other states that have announced participation in the program include Ohio.
This roll-out of National Guard is not new, but is being phased in at an accelerated pace. The publicly-presented mandate for these National Guard troops continues to revolve around the “disasters” and “terrorism” theme. However, the RAND Corp., an authoritative think tank that has proven close to the political agendas actually being implemented, has prepared the nation for riots within the United States and control of widespread domestic unrest. Their 2009 report “A Stability Police Force for the United States” [PDF] proposes a “hybrid” military/law enforcement unit that would respond to disasters, but effectively act as a Federally-controlled policing force implemented within the bounds of States under the guise of controlling domestic riots, preparing for terrorism and even training for overseas deployment.
“The USMS [U.S. Marshalls Service] hybrid option … provides an important nondeployed mission for the force: augmenting state and local agencies, many of which currently suffer from severe personnel shortages.”
“Furthermore, the USMS has the broadest law enforcement mandate of any U.S. law enforcement agency…. [This model] provides significant domestic policing and homeland security benefits by providing thousands of additional police officers across the United States.”
It is clear that while these events seemingly take place independently, and trickle out of the news without alarm, it is part of a larger plan to implement National Guard in duties never meant for them to undertake across the country, functioning, in essence, as another layer of “authority” over the states and inviduals, and taking power under the pretense of national disaster, terror attack, biological or chemical warfare, the drug war or general domestic unrest.
The U.S. Department of Defense announced Monday that Missouri will be one of 10 states to host National Guard Homeland Response Force units to help coordinate federal response to a terrorist attack.
The Defense Department will place one unit in each of the 10 Federal Emergency Management Agency regions. Missouri is located in Region VII, which administers FEMA programs and coordinates federal disaster response in Missouri, Iowa, Kansas and Nebraska.
The units will include about 570 personnel composed of chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear and high-yield explosive response specialists, as well as command and control and security forces.
According to a news release from Rep Ike Skelton’s (D-Mo.) office, the Missouri Homeland Response Force will be established in Fiscal Year 2012. The units will be ready to respond within six to 12 hours of an event, bringing medical, search and extraction, decontamination, security, and command and control capabilities to bear in a regional response.
“I am very pleased Missouri will host a National Guard Homeland Response Force. Keeping Americans safe is our number one priority, and this new Homeland Response Force is part of DoD’s efforts to improve emergency response,” Skelton said.
According to the DoD announcement, the move came about following the 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review — a congressionally mandated report put together every four years that highlights changes and challenges in national defense strategy.The 2010 report calls for improved coordination with civilian officials and providing resources for large-scale emergency response.
Gov. Jay Nixon applauded the move in a statement released on Monday afternoon.
Nixon said the move “will create as many as 90 new full-time National Guard positions under the leadership of Adjutant General Stephen L. Danner, and reaffirms our state’s commitment to supporting and encouraging the United States military here at home.”
Scott Holste, a Nixon spokesman, said officials were still reviewing the best community to base the new unit in. The new units should be established between September 2011 and October 2012.
The NYPD has begun to implement iris scanners to create a bio-metric database of criminal suspects as they are processed through central booking. NYPD says this new identification program is a fail-safe measure to prevent escapes as suspects move through the court system and that this technology is in response to two suspects escaping police custody by impersonating lesser offenders.
Jeff Carter, CDO of Global Rainmakers Inc. a leader in the biometrics field says,
“In the future, whether it’s entering your home, opening your car, entering your workspace, getting a pharmacy prescription refilled, or having your medical records pulled up, everything will come off that unique key that is your iris. Every person, place, and thing on this planet will be connected [to the iris system] within the next 10 years.”
Global Rainmakers Inc. has partnered with the city of Leon, Mexico to build “the most secure city in the world” by installing iris scanners. The eye scanners will be implemented in law enforcement facilities, security check-points, police stations, detention areas, jails and prisons, and will eventually make their way into mass transit, medical centers, banks and other public and private locations will also join the program.
Fast Company reports that the city is creating a database of irises. Criminals will automatically be enrolled, their irises scanned once convicted. Law-abiding citizens will have the option to opt-in. When these residents catch a train or bus, or take out money from an ATM, they will scan their irises, rather than swiping a metro or bank card. Police officers will monitor these scans and track the movements of watch-listed individuals.
Back in the U.S. at a Border Patrol station in McAllen, Texas the Department of Homeland Security beta tested iris scanners and in one Missouri county, the sheriff’s office is using an Iris scanner purchased with U.S. Department of Justice funds. Unknown by most, the technology is reportedly already being used by law enforcement in 40 states throughout the country.
There is even an app for that. B12 Technologies has equipped police with iPhones armed with facial recognition software linked to fusion center databases.
Amusement parks like Disney World and Sesame place have implemented biometric ticketing as well.How long before under the auspice of anti-terror legislation the federal government requires these corporations to turn over their customers biometric data? Even the controversial “naked body scanners” store biometric data as has been revealed by Freedom of Information (FOIA) Act Requests, contrary to what the TSA has been telling the main stream media.
The iris scanners have also been used in airports. The TSA will allow you to skip to the head of the line if you submit to being included in a biometric database. It all comes in the name of convenience. Trade your privacy to save a few minutes on line at the airport amusement park.
The NYPD program is being paid for by a grant from the Department of Homeland Security. The NYPD already shares its database information with DHS through its NYPD Intelligence Division, which is actually a known “fusion center.” These fusion centers act as hubs of information, merging databases from the NYPD, DHS, Motor Vehicle and many other sources to create a searchable catalog of the entire population.
There are over 70 fusion centers in the United States according to Catherine Bleish founder of Operation Defuse whose goal is to create a rapport between civil liberty groups and the fusion centers that will “defuse” the conflict of security and rights violations.
“That’s not our intention here, but it has potential,” Police Commissioner Ray Kelly said in reference to using the iris scanners for counter terrorism purposes.
“The NYPD can now photograph the irises of suspects arrested for any reason and they implemented this without any legislative oversight or public discourse. There are also no reports on how authorities plan to protect this collected biometric data from misuse.” said David Perecman a civil liberties attorney in New York.
That is probably because the NYPD Intelligence division has no plans to protect this information from being disseminated through the NY fusion centers allowing access to any law enforcement agency in the network.
“This type of data collecting is not authorized by any New York statute. Collecting fingerprints is specifically allowed. DNA evidence has had more legislative debate and its usage is only limited to certain types of cases.” said Perecman.
This information dovetails with another recent controversy over “stop and frisk” databases. Ray Kelly and Mayor Bloomberg pushed to keep the recently banned NYPD policy to keep a database of New Yorkers who were stopped and frisked but not found guilty of any violation. You read that correctly. Mayor Bloomberg wanted to keep a list of innocent people who the NYPD stopped and frisked with no probable cause in a direct violation of their Constitutional rights. Incidentally only 6 percent of those random stop and frisks lead to an arrest, the conviction rates were not readily available. That means that more than 94% of people in that database are innocent.
The “250” List as it is referred to because of the UF-250 form that officers use to file stop-and-frisk reports has over 3 million names on it. Eighty seven percent of those stopped were black or Latino.
Governor Paterson signed into law a ban on this policy, although that only stops the NYPD from keeping their names in an electronic database. The NYPD is still keeping a paper record of these stops even if no evidence of a crime has been found and no arrest made. The NYPD continues to violate the constitutional rights of New Yorkers randomly stopping people for reasons as innocuous as spitting on the ground or dropping a cigarette butt. It should also be noted that the Mayor Bloomberg has been lobbying for British style video surveillance in NYC. Britain has one CCTV camera for every 14 citizens.
So where do we see all of this going? If Mayor Bloomberg and Commissioner Ray Kelley get there way Police officers will be stopping, frisking and taking retinal scans of millions of innocent New Yorkers then data sharing with the Federal government, Homeland Security and other law enforcement agencies in violation of the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights.
On November 1, boarding an aircraft in the United States will become more intrusive. That’s when the Department of Homeland Security’s Transportation Security Administration will begin enforcing something called “Secure Flight.”
“100 percent of passengers traveling within the United States and its territories are now being checked against terrorist watchlists through the Transportation Security Administration’s (TSA) Secure Flight program,” as recommended by the 9/11 white wash commission.
Under the program, destined to be a bureaucratic nightmare, TSA goons wearing blue latex gloves will prescreen a passenger’s name, date of birth, and gender against government watchlists for domestic and international flights, according to a TSA press release.
“Individuals found to match watchlist parameters will be subjected to secondary screening, a law enforcement interview or prohibition from boarding an aircraft, depending on the specific case.”
If you think only Muslims and shady characters from Yemen or Pakistan will be double checked, think again. Recall the nightmare experienced by Jan Adams and Rebecca Gordon, two peace activists who were detained in San Francisco in September, 2002, a couple weeks after the first anniversary of the day we were told cave-dwelling Muslims made NORAD stand down. The pair were searched and interrogated after the TSA claimed their names resembled “those of suspected criminals or terrorists,” the San Francisco Chronicle reported son September 27, 2010.
“One detainment forced a group of 20 Wisconsin anti-war activists to miss their flight, delaying their trip to meet with congressional representatives by a day. That case and others are raising questions about the criteria federal authorities use to place people on the list — and whether people who exercise their constitutional right to dissent are being lumped together with terrorists,” the newspaper also reported.
Meanwhile, supposed terrorists are allowed to board planes, for instance Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the fizzle pants non-bomber. It was no secret Abdulmutallab had “multiple communications” with Islamic extremists in Londonistan, the home base of MI6 groomed patsies, dupes, and mental deficeints.
Abdulmutallab was also allowed to get a visa, just like Sheikh Omar Abdul-Rahman, the blind Egyptian cleric who was on a terrorist watch list at the time and would later as a star patsy be convicted in the first WTC bombing case. In 2006, investigative reporters discovered that the CIA and the Defense Intelligence Agency specialized in deliberately keeping some suspected terrorists off the US international no-fly list. In order to make sure its dupes and patsies are allowed to travel unrestricted, the CIA has operatives inside the Federal Air Marshal Service.
It is not a coincidence the absurdly over-hyped fizzle pants non-bombing was staged on Christmas day over Detroit as Congress was talking about reforming the Constitution nullifying Patriot Act. Moreover, in the months following the orchestrated event, the government’s no-fly list doubled, from about 3,400 people to about 6,000 people, a senior intelligence official told USA Today in March.
The TSA also used the Times Square non-bombing to tweak its no-fly list procedures.
“The Transportation Security Administration has implemented a new rule requiring airlines to check the no-fly list within two hours after being notified of a special update,” Fox News reported after Faisal Shahzad’s cobbled together barbeque canister bomb failed to explode.
The Secure Flight program was not designed to prevent terrorists from boarding planes. It will be implemented next month as part of an effort to expand the government control grid and get commuters acclimated to submitting to absurd mandates that are obviously unconstitutional.
As Paul Joseph Watson noted earlier today, the government is moving forward in its efforts to impose its police state control and submission grid on the American people. It has now moved its naked body scanner technology from airports to the streets and highways of America.
“Body and vehicle scanners are just one tool authorities plan to implement on a widespread basis as part of our deepening decline into a hi-tech militarized police state,” writes Watson. “The implementation of ‘Checkpoint USA’, where citizens are routinely stopped, searched and radiated by federal VIPER teams is further evidence of how America is crumbling into a Soviet-style police state where the presumption of innocent until proven guilty is abolished and the 4th amendment eviscerated.”
Secure Flight is yet another step in that direction.It may appear innocuous, but is in fact designed to get citizens accustomed to government officials micromanaging every aspect of their daily lives, be it at the airport or at the local mall.
In the U.S., the Military Commissions Act of 2006 is in force, and it allows persecution or imprisonment of any person who is identified as an ‘illegally fighting enemy’ by the executive authorities and extends to immigrants from any country not at war with the U.S. They are persecuted like “enemies” not based on some evidence but because they were labeled so by the governmental agencies. No foreign governments have protested against this law which is of international importance. - Olga Chetverikova, Final Stage in the ‘Global Control’ Strategy, Global Research, April 23, 2009
The Department of Homeland Security Is a Constitutional Black Hole Created to End the Human Rights of Everyone Except for the Ruling Class The PPJ Gazette
April 20, 2011
For most Americans, at least those paying any attention, the threat of Homeland Security (HSD) and its Gestapo agenda represent a far bigger threat to the nation than some nameless, faceless, unidentifiable person or group in some foreign land.
Created on the back of the fear mongering by our own government using 9/11 as the excuse, this trophy of the Bush regime is morphing into the greatest threat we face, which is exactly what it was intended to do.
According to HSD these days . . . we are all unique terrorists, each of us representing a threat to the ever expanding global efforts to end human rights except for those afforded to the elite.Somehow, those who possess great wealth, those who operate as a corporation, are somehow exempt from regulation and government-sponsored terrorism.
Out here in no-man’s land where jobs have been systematically shipped out of the country to slave labor markets and where the homeless population is rising daily as a result of massive unemployment — and while our border remains unsecured and millions of illegal immigrants are encouraged to enter the country further depressing the job market and wages across the board — it seems we have no rights as these are being eroded on a daily basis not only by our elected officials, but also by Homeland Security, an unelected bureaucracy loaded with overpaid bureaucrats.
HSD is a Constitutional black hole.
HSD now claims that violence does not have to be part of the criteria for defining terrorism or for defining you as a terrorist.You just have to simply object to what government is doing. Maybe you joined a group which meets and discusses the abuses of power, the abrogation of rights, or the preferential treatment afforded the affluent and corporations. Maybe you realize that all of our rights, our freedom and liberty are being taken away under the false premise of “it’s the only way we can keep you safe”. Too bad for you! You are now a “unique terrorist”.
It goes even further than this. An article sent to me recently originating on Survivalist Blog included the criteria now used to identify “unique terrorists”. This criteria was supplied by a former law enforcement officer, and includes:
Self-sufficiency (stockpiling food, ammo, hand tools, medical supplies)
Fear of economic collapse (buying gold and barter items)
Religious views concerning the book of Revelation (apocalypse, anti-Christ)
Expressed fears of Big Brother or big government
Homeschooling
Declarations of Constitutional rights and civil liberties
Belief in a New World Order conspiracy
In another section of this article,
These people grow their own food, raise livestock and plot attacks on commercial food production facilities
This last one would have made me laugh had it not been for the attached “plot attacks on commercial food production facilities”. This was added on to the fear mongering over gardeners and livestock owners in an attempt to tie those who grow their own food to, terrorism.
What is clearly an episode of government brainwashing, our law enforcement is being trained to connect growing a garden and/or raising livestock with plotting attacks on corporate industrialized farming and ranching operations. This has to be one of the biggest stretches of fear mongering to come along in some time.
It is apparent the government does not approve of us growing our own food but can’t come out and criminalize it in and of itself (although “Dirty Harry” Reid (D) made a valiant effort to do just that with his fake food safety bill) so a fictional connection has to be made between gardeners and livestock growers and potential attacks on corporate producers. There! Are you scared of your local farmer or maybe your neighbor, now?
While I would like to think and believe that our law enforcement officials would be smarter than this I have only to look at the menace many of these departments across the country have become now that they are under HSD control. Add to this the military war equipment now being assembled by many departments and the now “badge heavy” and armed to the teeth personnel who are virtually operating with immunity no matter how many laws they themselves break and no matter how many of your rights are violated as the police state a.k.a. Homeland Security moves forward and the recipe for disaster is almost complete.
The idea that Libertarian philosophies (i.e. belief in a Constitutional Republic) and any belief expressed concerning your rights including the second amendment, along with acknowledging that Big Brother is not only a threat, but is here, are all viewed as “unique terrorist” activities.
Thinking about all of this I, of course, have to wonder who is being terrorized by my belief in the Constitution? In what way does my belief threaten them? The answers of course are that the only individuals or institutions who view my beliefs as terroristic are the same individuals and institutions that operate the Big Brother police state.
I don’t know how hard we will have to be hit in the head as a nation, but the terrorists we need to fear the most are all sitting in some very fine offices in Washington D.C..As a country we are being systematically deconstructed as privately-owned corporate agencies, all created by government, all unlawfully empowered to write and enforce laws they make up themselves (rules and regulations, codes are lawmaking) take more of our freedom and rights away from us, virtually criminalizing everything we could possibly do.
Once this power is transferred by Congress to the privately owned corporate agency, neither Congress, nor the president can dictate to them what they can or cannot do.They may only make suggestions which do not have to be adhered to.
The only power Congress has at this point is defunding the agency or program. Not that it makes much difference, as an autonomous private corporation, these agencies can and do contract with other corporations even against the interests of the people.
As always, what bothers me most is the willingness of some Americans to slap on a government badge and forget who they are and where they come from.I suppose it shouldn’t be a surprise that so many are willing accomplices in the government-sponsored terrorism that is eating away at the core of our country.History is full of these cowards who will do anything to save themselves even if it means harming you.
What better place for a coward to hide than behind a government badge?
By Giordano Bruno, Neithercorp Press
April 9, 2010
The word “terrorist” has assumed numerous presumptive connotations over the decades, and this trend of “redefining” the vicious label to suit certain governmental needs has only intensified in recent years, especially since 9/11.
Its graduation as widely-used political terminology gives it an almost archetypal quality, because it has the ability to trigger abundant and subconscious emotional reactions in the populace. However, these reactions are usually based on mass delusions: false ideas of what terrorism is, what it is not, and who is actually guilty of these loosely classified crimes.It is a weighted word, filled with projections, biases, and faulty perceptions.
Governments across the world, and organizations such as the UN, have considered “officially” categorizing what a terrorist actually is, but claim that they have been unable to reach an accord that satisfies everyone.
I feel it is much more likely that ruling bodies, most especially the UN, would like nothing better than to keep the specifics of the term as hazy as possible for as long as possible.The more elusive it is, the more powerful it becomes to those elite minorities who wish to retain and centralize political control.
While we tend to associate terrorism with Muslim extremism, because this is the image we have been force-fed for the past ten years, that association can just as easily be swayed or redirected to someone else depending on which person or people become most obstructive to the government’s immediate desires.At bottom, under the current cultural climate, anyone can be labeled a terrorist for any reason, even American Citizens liable for nothing more than exercising their Constitutional rights.
As our country spirals towards certain monetary derailment, scathing discontentment with the establishment is sure to arise.When trusted leadership betrays, when criminality becomes a political guideline, when the corrupt loot the world, burning the people alive in their ever expanding grip, invariably, defiance is born.The Globalists know this well. They have seen it time and again, and have learned from past mistakes. Instead of immediately attempting to crush this opposition of individualists, the Elites now preempt violence with “false cultural identification;” the public demonization of those who would inevitably rebel BEFORE they even do so, much like a murderer who admonishes his future victims for wanting to defend themselves. The wise man would find this tactic absurd, or insane, but wisdom is in short supply these days.
In this article, we will explore the steps that the Elites are taking to prime the masses for the label we will soon be hearing daily: “Homegrown Terrorist.”We will also take a look at the organizations and think tanks that manufacture this propaganda and mold it for public consumption…
Hutaree and Pavlov’s Dog
Though the “Hutaree Militia” and their arrest have been widely publicized in the media, and the mainstream media (MSM) has all but sentenced them as guilty in the eyes of the nation before a trial has even begun, I will retain judgment until all the facts are in.
The incident has all the characteristics of a “Trojan Horse” disinformation maneuver, in which groups who oppose the government are infiltrated by men posing as members. A common occurrence in the 60’s and 70’s during the anti-Vietnam War movement, these federal moles would then purposely lure groups into illegal acts, or frame them outright.The main goal of this tactic is to topple the moral high ground that the challenging movement stands on, making them appear as corrupt as the governments they defend against. However, the manipulation goes much further.
Whether or not the Hutaree are actually guilty of the crimes they have been accused is really not the most relevant issue.What is relevant, are the false associations and connections made by the MSM in an attempt to not only demonize the Hutaree, but the entire Liberty Movement along with them.
While it is not uncommon for the globalist-controlled media to attack the Liberty Movement, the widespread anger over the recent passing of Obama’s unconstitutional health care bill and the Hutaree incident have opened certain doors for exploitation. The news is now awash in anti-patriot misinformation.Here are a few of the most prominent falsehoods being presented:
The Liberty Movement Is An Extremist Right Wing Element?
During the presidency of George W. Bush, the Liberty Movement railed against the Republican Party for tripling the size of federal government, for going to war in Iraq on false pretenses, for refusing to allow a truly independent investigation of 9/11 despite numerous inconsistencies and scientifically erroneous evidence in the official reports, and for illegal expansion of domestic wire tapping and spy programs against American citizens, including FISA, not to mention the Patriot Act and PDD 51, which give the executive branch legal authority to assume full control over the functions of government without checks and balances under any circumstance they see fit.
In response, the MSM and others called us “liberal fanatics” and “communists.” Only a few years later, they now have the audacity to label us “right wing extremists,” as we call out the Obama Administration for supporting the exact same policies as Bush. [This Time Magazine article illustrates this well.]
Many Americans do not comprehend the position of the Liberty Movement because they are still trapped in the fabricated world of the false “left / right” paradigm. The leadership of both parties, Democrat and Republican, are under the influence of the same corporate globalist interests, and this is evident in the fact they support nearly identical executive legislative actions that erode civil liberties and U.S. sovereignty. The illusion of the Left and Right is not substantiated by fact, but by the theater of media. Barack Obama’s rhetoric, for instance, has never matched his actions, and few if any of his campaign promises to end Bush-era injustices have been fulfilled.
As a country, we must stop living in the fantasy world of celebrity politics, a world in which what people say is more important than what they really do. This is where the Liberty Movement exists; in the plane between the phony realities of Left and Right, where “taking sides” is meaningless, where the only thing that is important is what is TRUE, and what is dishonest.
The attempt by the media today to brand us as “Right Wing” is merely a ruse to associate us with the much hated Neo-Con ideology (which is really socialist), and to continue perpetuating the lie of the current two party apparatus. In this way, they can marginalize us as a fringe element of a fake party, an element that people can be made to dread, instead of the birth of a new third party, which is what we really are.
The Liberty Movement’s Anger Over The Health Care Debate Makes Us “Dangerous”?
Last year, Neithercorp reported on the developments surrounding Obamacare and our personal belief that not only was the bill not practical, but that it was not meant to work at all:
‘ObamaCare’ will not come to fruition, for many reasons, but most of all because the U.S. is beyond indebted. The costs involved in nationalizing health care are enormous. The sales of U.S. treasury debt to foreign banks have plummeted over the past year, and they will continue to do so. Like Greece to the tenth power, America is on the verge of sovereign debt default.
The government and the private Federal Reserve’s only recourse has been to create massive amounts of currency out of thin air to cover the mushrooming expense of keeping the economy afloat. Without the constant injections of liquidity into treasuries, our government would no longer be able to operate.
Very soon, these injections will inflate the money supply to levels which will destroy our currency, throwing the financial system into chaos.And, in the midst of all this, the Obama administration decides to increase our budget deficit to record levels and introduce socialized health care? Of course people are angry! It is my suspicion, however, that this was the goal all along.
ObamaCare can be used to create intense divisions in the citizenry, as well as distract us from the economy. It can also be used to redirect the debate over expansion of government power.
By introducing ObamaCare, the elites change the dynamic of the argument. Before, the contention was that the government’s size was unsustainable and would bankrupt the nation. Now, the argument is over the ethics of leaving people without healthcare, and the “necessity” of large government in supplying that care. The debate morphed from a clean cut examination of what we could afford, into a foggy morality play in which those who oppose government expansion are “uncaring,” “greedy,” or perhaps “evil.” [Here is an article that alludes to such accusations.]
The message here is that proponents of private healthcare are “overreacting” to the legislation. Arguments that Obamacare is no more insidious than Medicare are highly disingenuous. Medicare is government ASSISTED health care, not government CONTROLLED health care. There is a very big difference, one which we refuse to ignore.
The Liberty Movement’s position on any issue has always been do we have the money, and does the Constitution allow it? While it is unfortunate that the poor (I have been one of them) cannot afford health insurance, the cold hard reality is that we do not have the savings to fund collectivist healthcare, nor does the Constitution allow for government to dominate the healthcare industry or force people to buy insurance they don’t want.
This is not about little orphan Annie who needs a kidney transplant. Obama couldn’t care less.This is about putting those who call for smaller government in the position of being the “bad guy,” as well as making Federal influence over our private lives that much easier.
The goal is to paint the movement as unfeeling, and without compassion, thus making it easier for the average American to see us as “terrorists” in the near future.
The Liberty Movement Is Driven By Racism?
This has to be my favorite disinfo talking point, mainly because of its blatancy. There was a time when all propaganda was so straight forward, simple, and shameless. [Here is a Time Magazine article which is obviously trying to connect Constitutionalists and militias with racism and white power organizations.]
This tactic does not need much explaining. First, I’ve been going to the Tea Parties for years, long before they were co-opted by Fox News, and I can say from firsthand experience that the Liberty Movement is composed of people from all racial, religious and political backgrounds. Many militias are also organized the same way.
The fact that the movement is fully opposed to illegal immigration is often used by the establishment to draw more false associations. The connection to which they allude is that since we are against illegal immigration, we are against all immigrants, especially Hispanic immigrants. This is nonsensical. We are against illegal immigration, for one, because it is ILLEGAL. I am not sure what is so complicated about this concept, but for some people, especially those who place themselves on the left end of our fake political spectrum, it is difficult to comprehend.
There are in fact legal channels one can take to immigrate to the U.S., as there are for any other country. If an American wishes to immigrate to Canada, he does not simply skip across the border and declare it so. He must follow legal guidelines, or be deported. This does not make Canadians biased against Americans; it makes them rational. If millions of us decided to lumber into Quebec and begin collecting on government programs that we never paid into, it would throw their entire economy into disarray.If we all offered our services to employers there at discount prices under the table, it would destroy their jobs market.
It has nothing to do with race and everything to do with what makes sense. This is why polls show that a large percentage of minorities in the U.S. are also against illegal immigration, not just whites.
The purpose behind the racist label is evident. No one likes a racist, especially not a militant racist. The tactic is designed to plant assumptions in the minds of those unaware of the facts, especially Democrats, so that when a Liberty Movement representative engages them in discussion, they will automatically refuse to listen, regardless of how reasonable that representative may be. The blunt nature of the method reveals how desperate globalists are to keep as many Democrats as possible from joining the movement.
People Who Spread Liberty Movement Information Are As Threatening As Those In Militias?
The sudden push on the part of the current administration for the institution of the Fairness Doctrine is no fluke. It is also even less of a fluke that they are attempting to apply the Fairness Doctrine to the internet.
The Fairness Doctrine accomplishes two things for the establishment: First, it forces all media to define themselves as either Left, or Right, and then balances them accordingly —meaning all media would be strong armed into playing out the false paradigm forever, neither side ever changing or gaining an advantage. Second, it allows government to dictate what acceptable political discussion is and shut down those that stray from their guidelines.
If the Fairness Doctrine were to be applied, it would not affect those gatekeeper news outlets that play the paradigm game: Fox, MSNBC, CNN, etc. In reality, the only news sources that would be dealt a drastic blow would be those that straddle the line between left and right, or that deny the paradigm altogether — Liberty Movement sources.
I have noticed that this development has occurred in tandem with another more subtle strategy. While government moves to gain more influence over what news providers are allowed to operate, the MSM has moved to infer that Liberty Movement news sources are “instigating” violence, simply because they exist. While most of us are aware of the attempts to connect Alex Jones and his Infowars radio show with any violent gunman that happens to stumble out of the woodwork, there has also been an endeavor to link all Constitutionally-based websites and radio with “extremist behavior,” as this article shows.
All societies that are advancing towards fascism begin by singling out certain ideas as “dangerous” to the greater good.The very fabric of American life is centered on the protection of ideas, regardless of their origin. We do not prosecute people for their beliefs, no matter how much we might disagree. This is beginning to change though, and one can feel it in the air.
The MSM is now producing a low droning hum of propaganda aimed at accusing liberty-based news as accomplices in “extremist crime.” As if the general disenchantment and opposition to collectivist government would somehow disappear if we were not here to write our views and report on the facts.
The above list of establishment talking points demonstrates a discernable pattern. This pattern is engineered around the concept of “conditioning.” Like Pavlov’s dog, Americans are being prepared mentally to react to certain bells and whistles in a way that serves Elitist interests. In this case, instead of salivating every time they hear the words “militia,” “truth movement,” “patriot,” “Liberty Movement,” “Constitutionalism,” etc., they are meant to think “Hutaree,” they are meant to think “homegrown terrorist.”
Of course, unlike Pavlov’s dog, human beings cannot be conditioned if they are aware, and they can even break their own conditioning if given the opportunity.This is why we are pummeled daily with a constant barrage of misinformation, so that we never get a chance to open our eyes and see who is hitting us. So, who is hitting us…?
The ADL and SPLC: Propaganda Machines Extraordinaire
Whenever you see a news story on almost any mainstream news channel, or read one in almost any newspaper dealing with the Liberty Movement and parallel movements, the chances are very high that the ADL (Anti Defamation League) or the SPLC (Southern Poverty Law Center) had a hand in it.
The ADL was founded in 1913 (coincidentally, the same year as the private Federal Reserve), and poses as a sort of civil rights group and non-profit corporation. In truth, it is a multifaceted propaganda arm for globalists, much like the Council on Foreign Relations, which has been involved in, and implicated in, domestic spying as well as other illegal activities.
In 1993, the ADL was caught red handed employing spies like Roy Bullock, who infiltrated organizations ranging from the White Aryan Resistance, to the NAACP and Greenpeace. Interestingly, they were also caught spying on other anti-discrimination groups, such as the Arab-American Anti-Discrimination Committee.
These spies compiled dossiers on thousands of American citizens and hundreds of non-violent groups. In the mid-80’s, they also terrorized certain peaceful assemblies for nothing more than free-speech.A method they are now applying to us.
Because the ADL is organized around the Jewish fraternal order of B’nai B’rith, some people make the mistake of assuming that they are a purely Israeli construct; however, they are actually a tool for Elitist activities, not just Israeli, and alphabet agencies such as the FBI and the CIA collude with them constantly. In fact, the government has only supported the ADL more since they were exposed in 1993, and the MSM reports their skewed statistics and baseless opinions as undeniable fact.
When interviewed by the MSM, ADL and SPLC representatives are rarely challenged by their interviewers on any issue, and an interviewee with an opposing viewpoint is almost never present.When they are present, the “journalist” and the SPLC/ADL representative attack them maliciously, using dishonest Alinsky Tactics, such as attempting to keep the person from speaking, or attacking the person’s character instead of addressing the information he presents.
A good example is this interview on MSNBC with Chris Mathews and director of the SPLC, Mark Potok against Stewart Rhodes of Oath Keepers:
Oath Keepers is an organization of military and police members who are openly re-stating their support for the Constitution, over the shifting of government mandates, as all people in the armed forces are supposed to do. Yes, they must truly be a menace…
Notice that Potok and Matthews (video above) immediately generalize and dismiss every one of the Oath Keeper concerns on government as “dark conspiracy theory” without actually providing any tangible reasoning to support their claims, nor providing Rhodes any real opportunity to counter their accusations.
The “conspiracy theory” redirection relies on an ignorant public, unaware of the numerous facts and evidence that support the Liberty Movement view.The ADL and SPLC hope that you and your family will take them at their word, instead of investigating the truth for yourself.
That the term “conspiracy theory” will trigger a Pavlov’s dog reaction, a knee-jerk response that causes your mind to immediately close. They also commonly use terms like “white supremacist,” “Oklahoma City,” or names like “Timothy McVeigh” in the same breath as “Oath Keepers” and “Patriot Movement.” This is done deliberately; and if you watch a number of interviews involving the ADL/SPLC, you will notice that they do it as a rule. Again, the attempt is to link the unseemly actions of one man, or one small group, to the whole of the movement, and to the ideology of liberty.
When reason is applied, and research is undertaken, Mark Potok’s arguments appear juvenile and lazy. The government’s own legislation is what created the Liberty Movement’s concern over martial law and loss of Constitutional freedoms.This legislation includes those mentioned above, like the Patriot Act and PDD 51, along with the Civilian Inmate Labor Program, and new legislation drafted by Republican, John McCain, and Democrat, Joe Lieberman (another example of the fake left/right working together), called the “Enemy Belligerents Act.”
This new act [S.3081: Enemy Belligerent, Interrogation, Detention, and Prosecution Act of 2010] allows, among other things, for the treatment of U.S. citizens who dissent as enemy combatants, for the indefinite detention of these citizens without trial, and to be held under military jurisdiction. It also allows for “enhanced interrogation techniques”, i.e. torture.
Bills like this are introduced to Congress yearly, and yet I have to watch Mark Potok on MSNBC call my concerns and the Liberty Movement’s concerns “conspiracy theory”?
When We Are All Homegrown Terrorists…
Anyone who can’t see where all this is leading would have to be cognitively impaired. I, for example, am just a writer, but under the broad definitions laid out in government legislation, I could easily be considered a threat to national security. Could my articles not inspire resentment in someone? Could the facts I present not instill a need for “dissent,” or even self defense in the event that the establishment does institute martial law? What about people who aren’t writers, but regular Americans who happen to speak openly about their suspicions of where the country is heading?Are they “enemy belligerents” and combatants?
If the ADL and the SPLC had existed in the early days of the American Independence Movement, before a shot was ever fired, they would have called men like John Adams and Thomas Jefferson “terrorists,” good men who only wanted to be free. There is little difference between our situation then, and our situation now, except that the terminology has changed; and, indeed, we know even more about who we are fighting.
While being categorized as a homegrown terrorist may be a frightening prospect, what other people are led to believe about us is not so important. What is important is that we do not start to believe it ourselves.That we are not made to feel guilty for wanting to determine our own destinies, for wanting to keep government out of our lives and our children’s lives. We are not the instigators of this conflict, we are not the antagonists of this story. In the end, we are the deciders of this conflict. We are the authors of this story.
It is possible we will soon see an acceleration of our own malignment over the coming year.We will be ridiculed, condemned, and perhaps some of us even incarcerated.Violent attacks against innocent Americans will likely be carried out, some by real and misguided people, some engineered by government.
We cannot allow these acts to be forced upon us as implied persona. We cannot allow others to speak for us, because others are unlikely to speak the truth. And most crucial of all, we cannot ever be afraid to speak for ourselves. The ultimate triumph for the Elites would be our silence.
Affirm your freedoms as an unbound man, cut the air, forceful and clear, let the world listen, and never stop.
The establishment is determined to take out the Tea Party political movement prior to the November election. In order to do this, they will unleash a corporate media campaign designed to portray patriotic Americans opposed to an increasingly leviathan and autocratic government as “far right” lunatics and fringe elements. The centerpiece of this effort is a mini-documentary produced by MSNBC and hosted by Chris Matthews. According to MSNBC: “Chris Matthews takes a hard look at the recent surge of anger on the political right, particularly the outpouring of support for the Tea Party, which helped secure Rand Paul’s victory in Kentucky. Who are the people on the New Right? What do they want? And how do they intend to get it?” - Kurt Nimmo, Chris Matthews' “Rise of the New Right” Portrays Patriots as Extremists, Infowars.com, June 9, 2010
The first Joint U.S.-EU Seminar on Preventing Violent Extremism was held in Brussels, Belgium, on June 16-17, 2010. The following is an excerpt of the speech given by Ambassador William E. Kennard on June 16. [Editor's Note: the transcript of the speech from the U.S.-EU website does not quite match the actual speech, so please watch the video below]:
This gathering is the culmination of many months of discussions, planning and hard work by representatives of the United States and the European Union. I am delighted that this day has finally arrived. I am particularly gratified that the conference has attracted participants from many departments and agencies of my government, including the White House National Security Council, the Departments of Justice, State and Homeland Security, the FBI, our military joint commands, and the United States Agency for International Development. They are joined by Representatives from civil society, academia, and local law enforcement in the United States.
The depth and variety of participants from the European Union is equally impressive. I thank all of the organizers, particularly my colleague Joe Pomper from the U.S. Mission to the European Union, for bringing this group together on a topic of vital importance to all of us.
We are all here today to learn from one another, to share the experiences that we bring from around the world.
As I was thinking about what I might say to open this conference, I thought about my own experiences, and what I might bring to the discussion today. I am certainly not an expert in this field – not like most of you here today. But, like all of you, my outlook has been shaped by personal memories of violence in my own country.
As a child growing up in Los Angeles, California, I was profoundly affected by the shock of learning that Robert F. Kennedy had been assassinated at a hotel not far from my home -- an event that happened only seven years after the assassination of his brother, President John Kennedy, also shocked the world. And later that year, my city erupted in racial violence in the wake of the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr.
I suspect that much of the discussion at this conference will involve a type of violence that I did not know as a child – acts of terrorism motivated by extreme political or religious views. It has produced heinous crimes, many made famous by the names of the places they occurred: Oklahoma City, Fort Hood, Madrid and London, the Taj Mahal Hotel in Mumbai.
These acts of terrorism are quite different from the violence of my youth. They are certainly more random and unpredictable. As such, I find them more chilling and senseless in the way that they target innocents. But fundamentally, they share a common heritage. Both are born of the same underlying cause - a sense of hopelessness and despair, particularly among the youth, especially immigrants and minorities who feel isolated from the cultural mainstream.
Here I think it is important to emphasize that violent extremism is not the sole province of immigrants and minorities. Of course, not all immigrants are violent extremists, nor are all violent extremists immigrants. Take James Earl Ray. Ray was a white man living in the American South during the Civil Rights movement; Southern white segregationist culture was becoming politically marginalized in 1968; Ray’s response to this marginalization was a violent one: to assassinate Martin Luther King, Jr.
I arrived in Brussels about six months ago, and as a new arrival I have tried to understand the immigrant experience in Europe. Inevitably, I have drawn comparisons to my own experience as an African American growing up in the United States, despite the obvious differences. I have also tried to understand how, in the United States, we have succeeded in integrating immigrant populations into the mainstream of our society...
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights. The amendment prohibits the making of any law "respecting an establishment of religion," impeding the free exercise of religion, infringing on the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble, or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances. - Wikipeida
The Associated Press
May 1, 2010
ANN ARBOR, Mich. – In a blunt caution to political friend and foe, President Barack Obama said Saturday that partisan rants and name-calling under the guise of legitimate discourse pose a serious danger to America's democracy, and may incite "extreme elements" to violence.
The comments, in a graduation speech at the University of Michigan's huge football stadium, were Obama's most direct take about the angry politics that have engulfed his young presidency after long clashes over health care, taxes and the role of government.
Not 50 miles from where Obama spoke, the GOP's 2008 vice presidential nominee, Sarah Palin, denounced his policies as "big government" strategies being imposed on average Americans.
"The fundamental transformation of America is not what we all bargained for," she told 2,000 activists at a forum in Clarkston, sponsored by the anti-tax Americans for Prosperity Foundation.
Obama drew repeated cheers in Michigan Stadium from a friendly crowd that aides called the biggest audience of his presidency since the inauguration. The venue has a capacity of 106,201, and university officials distributed 80,000 tickets — before they ran out.
In his 31-minute speech (video above), Obama didn't mention either Palin or the tea party movement that's captured headlines with its fierce attacks on his policies. But he took direct aim at the anti-government language so prevalent today.
"What troubles me is when I hear people say that all of government is inherently bad," Obama said after receiving an honorary doctor of laws degree. "When our government is spoken of as some menacing, threatening foreign entity, it ignores the fact that in our democracy, government is us."
Government, he said, is the roads we drive on and the speed limits that keep us safe. It's the men and women in the military, the inspectors in our mines, the pioneering researchers in public universities.
The financial meltdown dramatically showed the dangers of too little government, he said, "when a lack of accountability on Wall Street nearly led to the collapse of our entire economy."
But Obama was direct in urging both sides in the political debate to tone it down.
"Throwing around phrases like 'socialists' and 'Soviet-style takeover,' 'fascists' and 'right-wing nut' — that may grab headlines," he said. But it also "closes the door to the possibility of compromise. It undermines democratic deliberation," he said.
"At its worst, it can send signals to the most extreme elements of our society that perhaps violence is a justifiable response."
Passionate rhetoric isn't new, he acknowledged. Politics in America, he said, "has never been for the thin-skinned or the faint of heart. ... If you enter the arena, you should expect to get roughed up."
Obama hoped the graduates hearing his words can avoid cynicism and brush off the overheated noise of politics. In fact, he said, they should seek out opposing views. His advice: If you're a regular Glenn Beck listener, then check out the Huffington Post sometimes. If you read The New York Times editorial page the morning, then glance every now and then at The Wall Street Journal.
"It may make your blood boil. Your mind may not be changed. But the practice of listening to opposing views is essential for effective citizenship," he said.
The speech was part of a busy weekend for the president: the White House Correspondents' Association dinner Saturday evening near the White House and visit the Gulf Coast on Sunday morning for a firsthand update on the massive oil spill.
Obama's helicopter landed on a grass practice football field next to the stadium on a damp, overcast day. Students and their families had been streaming in since early morning, many toting rain gear.
The president's appearance in Michigan — a battleground in the 2008 White House race that's likely to play a big role in the fall congressional campaign — comes as the state struggles with the nation's highest unemployment rate, 14.1 percent.It's also has an unhappy electorate to match.
In the Republican's weekly radio and Internet address, Rep. Pete Hoekstra, R-Mich, said Obama's visit was a chance "to show the president, firsthand, the painful plight of the people of Michigan."
Many of the graduates Obama addresses will soon learn how tough it is to find a job in this economy, Hoekstra said, adding that the share of young Americans out of work is the highest it's been in more than 50 years.
Speaking before Obama was Gov. Jennifer Granholm, who's known to be on his short list of possible Supreme Court nominees. She said Michigan residents owe him thanks for "delivering on health care reform" and "for supporting our auto industry. General Motors, Ford, Chrysler, they all have bright futures now, where a year ago, much darker clouds than these loomed overhead."
Obama's speech was the first of four he is giving this commencement season.
On May 9, he'll speak at Hampton University, a historically black college in Hampton, Va., founded in 1868 on the grounds of a former plantation.
He's also addressing Army cadets at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, N.Y., on May 22, continuing a tradition of presidents addressing graduates at the service academies. He announced his Afghanistan troop surge at West Post last December.
Also this year, for the first time, Obama plans a high school commencement.It's part of his "Race to the Top" education initiative, with its goal of boosting the United States' lagging graduation rate to the world's best by 2020.
High schools across the country have competed for the honor, submitting essays and videos. A vote on the White House website yielded three finalists, and Obama will choose among them next week.
There's a new narrative taking hold in the wake of the recent tea party protests and the anniversary of the Oklahoma City bombing:The tea partiers' intense opposition to the Obama administration has led to overheated political rhetoric, which could in turn lead to violence.
Former President Clinton has emerged as a leading voice of this new narrative. In interviews, Clinton said it's "legitimate" to draw "parallels to the time running up to Oklahoma City and a lot of the political discord that exists in our country today."
"Watch your words," warned ABC News, reporting that Clinton "weighed in on the angry anti-government rhetoric, ringing out from talk radio to tea party rallies."
The reports dovetailed with earlier media that stories also depicted tea party gatherings as angry mobs, accusing protesters of throwing racial epithets at black lawmakers and of making threats of violence. The implication is that all this could be part of a nationwide trend.
"Just this month, the Southern Poverty Law Center reported that it had tracked an explosion in extremist anti-government patriot groups fueled, in large part, by anger over the economy and Barack Obama's presidency," NBC's David Gregory said in early April.
"In this highly charged political atmosphere, where you've got so much passion, so much disagreement, this takes it, of course, to a different level."
How did this story line grow?
Many of the claims that extremism is on the rise in America originate in research by the Southern Poverty Law Center, an Alabama-based group that for nearly 40 years has tracked what it says is the growing threat of intolerance in the United States. These days, the SPLC is issuing new warnings of new threats. But today's warnings sound an awful lot like those of the past.
In 1989, the SPLC warned of the growing threat of skinheads, saying:
"Not since the height of Klan activity during the civil-rights era has there been a white supremacist group so obsessed with violence."
In 1995, the SPLC warned of the growing threat of right-wing militias.
In 1998, the SPLC warned of the growing threat of Internet-based hate groups.
In 2002, the SPLC warned of the growing threat of post-Sept. 11 hate groups.
And just a few weeks ago, the SPLC warned of the growing threat of "patriot" groups.
But in the world of the Southern Poverty Law Center, the threat is always growing. Ronald Reagan's policies led to a growing threat. The election of Bill Clinton led to a growing threat. Is it any wonder that Obama's presidency has, in the SPLC's estimation, led to a growing threat?
Hate groups exist across the political spectrum, and have for a long time. But they have nothing to do with the frustration over deficits, taxes and Obamacare that we have heard at tea party gatherings. That frustration, felt by Republicans, independents and even some Democrats, is a mainstream reaction to the activist course the president and Congress have taken.
It's important to distinguish between a political threat and a physical one.
Ron Paul and Andrew Napolitano, along with Michele Bachmann and Glenn Beck, are anti-government patriot movement “enablers,” according to the Southern Poverty Law Center.
The SPLC insinuates that Paul and Napolitano are “enablers” for domestic terrorism.
“These men and women have helped to put key Patriot themes — the idea that President Obama is a Marxist, that he and other elites in the government are pushing a socialist takeover, that the United States plans secret concentration camps and so on — before millions of Americans, many of whom actually believe these completely false allegations,” declares the SPLC in a recent web posting. “Whether these people tell such tall tales because they believe them or simply because they are willing to shamelessly pander for votes or ratings, is anyone’s guess; but the noxious effect on the body politic is the same.”
More lies. In fact, Ron Paul has deemed Obama a corporatist, not a Marxist. During the Southern Republican Leadership Conference in New Orleans, Dr. Paul said:
“The question has been raised about whether or not our president is a socialist. I am sure there are some people here who believe it. But in the technical sense, in the economic definition of a what a socialist is, no, he’s not a socialist…. He’s a corporatist. And unfortunately we have corporatists inside the Republican party and that means you take care of corporations and corporations take over and run the country.”
“Whether he’s advocating pulling out of the United Nations, trashing the Fed, or returning to the gold standard, Paul’s views have scored him plenty of points among the Patriot crowd,” writes the SPLC, and these mainstream Libertarian ideals “stoke fears of an overreaching government on the far right.” The SPLC fear-mongering machine has long claimed the patriot movement is associated with white supremacists and militias and may engage in violence.In fact, there is plenty of evidence that the SPLC itself has “enabled” the miniscule and completely irrelevant white supremacist movement in order to magnify the ludicrous threat they claimthese fringe groups pose.
In 2004, a declassified FBI memo obtained by an Oklahoma newspaper revealed that the SPLC had operatives inside the Identity settlement in Elohim City, Oklahoma.
“References to an informant working for the SPLC at Elohim City on the eve of the Oklahoma City bombing raises serious questions as to what the SPLC might known about McVeigh’s activities during the final hours before the fuse was lit in Oklahoma City – but which the SPLC has failed to disclose publicly,” the Daily Gazette reported.
In order to defame Ron Paul and characterize him as a racist fellow traveler, the SPLC dredges up comments published in The Ron Paul Survival Report in 1996.
“The quotations in The New Republic article [the neocon publication that attempted to discredit Paul with the accusation] are not mine and do not represent what I believe or have ever believed. I have never uttered such words and denounce such small-minded thoughts,” Paul said. “In fact, I have always agreed with Martin Luther King, Jr. that we should only be concerned with the content of a person’s character, not the color of their skin.”
“Paul claimed in 2001 that ghostwriters had penned the newsletters that bear his name but acknowledged he bore ’some moral responsibility,’” adds the SPLC in a crude attempt to make the controversy stick and portray Paul as a racist.
The SPLC has completely ignored Ron Paul’s denouncement of racism.
“Racism is simply an ugly form of collectivism, the mindset that views humans only as members of groups and never as individuals. Racists believe that all individual who share superficial physical characteristics are alike; as collectivists, racists think only in terms of groups,” he has said.
Former New Jersey judge Andrew Napolitano, according to the SPLC, “missed out on rubbing elbows with neo-Confederates, conspiracy theorists and antigovernment Patriot activists” when he failed to show as a keynote speaker in February at the first annual Tenth Amendment Summit in Atlanta.
“It seems the TV judge is vying to become a fixture on the far-right lecture circuit” and his very presence of Fox weakens the network’s credibility, according to the SPLC.
For the SPLC, any defense of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights represents far-right kookiness– It is a bellwether of violence, racial hatred, and “antigovernment extremism.”
The SPLC characterizes Napolitano as a conspiracy nut for pointing out Obamacare contains death panels. In fact, the legislation does contain provisions for moving the elderly off the mortal coil, although it does not specifically mention death panels. In late March, the so-called economist Paul Krugman admitted Obamacare contains language providing for what amounts to death panels.
The SPLC slams Sarah Palin on her death panel comments but fails to put the remarks in a larger context. “Government health care will not reduce the cost; it will simply refuse to pay the cost. And who will suffer the most when they ration care? The sick, the elderly, and the disabled, of course,” Palin wrote on her Facebook page.
The SPLC is tasked with destroying the patriot movement by portraying it as a fringe phenomenon consisting of dangerous radicals and even psychopathic domestic terrorists who have supposedly teamed up with white supremacist militias and other violent miscreants.Of course, this is nothing more than propaganda, character assassination, slander, and defamation.
Both Ron Paul and Andrew Napolitano are dedicated constitutionalists who demand that the federal government return to the principles of the founding document and stop imposing mandates on the states in violation of the Tenth Amendment and the Commerce Clause of the Constitution. They have consistently defended the Bill of Rights against the tyrannical actions of both the Republicans and Democrats.
The SPLC and its ideological twin, the Anti-Defamation League, are engaged in a desperate effort to silence the patriot movement through baseless and slanderous accusations. It will not work. Millions of Americans have arrived at the conclusion that the federal government is indeed an authoritarian leviathan. In response, increasing numbers support the Tea Party movement and other patriot groups.
The New World Order Plan is spiritually based: it is a conflict between God and His forces, on the one hand, and Satan and his demonic forces on the other side. Anyone who does not know Biblical doctrine about God and Satan, and who does not know Scriptural prophecy, cannot comprehend the nature of the struggle facing the world today. - David Bay, Cutting Edge Ministries
For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. - Ephesians 6:12
For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence... Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried, not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed. - President John F. Kennedy, April 27, 1961
The book in which they are embodied was first published in the year 1897 by Philip Stepanov for private circulation among his intimate friends. The first time Nilus published them was in 1901 in a book called The Great Within the Small and reprinted in 1905. A copy of this is in the British Museum bearing the date of its reception, August 10, 1906. All copies that were known to exist in Russia were destroyed in the Kerensky regime, and under his successors the possession of a copy by anyone in Soviet land was a crime sufficient to ensure the owner's of being shot on sight. The fact is in itself sufficient proof of the genuineness of the Protocols. The Jewish journals, of course, say that they are a forgery, leaving it to be understood that Professor Nilus, who embodied them in a work of his own, had concocted them for his own purposes.
Fair Use Notice
This site contains copyrighted material, the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more detailed information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.