“D” Weapons Use Appliances to Spy on Homes, Internet as Cyber Battleground: “World War III is a Guerrilla Information War”

SHTFplan
by Mac Slavo

digital-cyberwar

Though it has remained officially unsaid, the powers that be have all-but-officially designated the American people as their enemy in a foggy battleground that has become global, nebulous, highly technological and extremely paranoid.

Homeland Security and FBI protocol have set the stage for profiling Americans as potential threats, while the rising police state have often cracked down with a heavy hand and perhaps a SWAT raid. The War on Terror, global jihad, cyber attacks and a new Cold War have all contributed the necessary pretexts for an atmosphere of control and preemptive suspicion that seemingly justifies total surveillance of the population.

USCYBERCOM, activated by the federal government in 2009 and operated by the director of the NSA, adds a whole new dimension to that, by bringing home – to computer screens and devices everywhere – the cyberwar.

And since that time, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange became the first civilian designated, according to declassified information, as a military-designated “enemy of the state.” Many SWAT raids, FBI and police visits have now resulted from alleged threatening or offensive Internet activity. Likewise, StuxNet became the first major cyber attack against Iran, a (perceived) military threat. More recently, we’ve seen major cyber warfare exchanges with North Korea, resulting in an Internet blackout there following the SONY hacking scandal and diplomatic standoff over a Hollywood film.

As Daniel Taylor, of Old Thinker News, points out, the militarization and weaponization of the digital space has been a long time coming, and it might mutate into a conflict wide enough to involve you and your online activities. His article, “NSA Cyber War Will Use Internet of Things as Weapons Platform; Your Home is the Battlefield” argues:

As time goes on it will be readily apparent to the masses that the monumental surveillance architecture that will catalog and track the population is nothing more than an attempt at full spectrum domination.

[…]

New Snowden documents recently revealed that the NSA is getting ready for future digital wars as the agency postures itself in an aggressive manner towards the world. “The Five Eyes Alliance“, a cooperation between United States, Canada, Britain, Australia, and New Zealand, is working hard to develop these weapons of Cyber Warfare.

So called “D” weapons, as reported by Der Spiegel, will paralyze computer networks and infrastructure that they monitor. Water supplies, factories, airports, as well as the flow of money are all potential targets.

Simultaneously, while handing out tech goodies to consumers, the American people have also become their dupes, their sheep and their eyes. Through the digitalization of the planet, cyberspace has brought home a front that is equal parts transformative, enticing and eerily grim.

The Edward Snowden leaks constituted notice to the world that all things digital are subject to surveillance – a total and complete surveillance that includes the participation of the population who, through carrying various “smart” devices that capture data, images and audio for meta-analysis – are feeding the powers that be with vast catalogs of spy information – including valuable proprietary consumer data. Taylor notes:

The NSA’s Cyber Weapons program will undoubtedly exploit these devices, which include household appliances, and, frighteningly, medical devices that can be hacked. Pacemakers can be remotely stopped, and insulin pumps can be made to deliver a lethal dose of insulin. With the advent of implantable devices that communicate via Wifi, the potential for manipulation and hacking is growing exponentially.

If the developers of these internet connected devices don’t willingly work with the NSA to place back-doors in the technology, the agency is hard at work trying to find and exploit them.

Through the emerging Internet of Things (IoT), household appliances, smart meters, street lights and more will create a total digital picture of life, capturing real time data per appliance that creates a total information grid. Taylor writes:

The Der Spiegel report does not mention the wider issue of the expanding network of everyday objects and appliances that are connected to the internet. According to CIA chief David Patraeus the Internet of Things will have a monumental impact on “clandestine tradecraft.” Richard Adhikari writes for Tech News World that the Internet of Things is “…ripe for exploitation by the NSA”

Consumer appliances are now becoming activated and “smart.” RFID chips and wireless internet connections enable devices like televisions, refrigerators, printers, and computers to communicate with each other and generally make life easier for us. This comes at a price, however. Your privacy is eliminated.

[…]

Think the idea of your appliances spying on you is crazy? According to Samsung’s new privacy policy, their smart TV can monitor your conversation. The policy states, “Please be aware that if your spoken words include personal or other sensitive information, that information will be among the data captured and transmitted to a third party through your use of Voice Recognition.”

This digital surveillance age does not make spying on persons of interest merely possible or probable in any theoretical sense. Instead, it is a living matrix that defaults to spying. It is set up to flag aberrant and eccentric behavior and patterns, and will prompt a due response – whether you have done anything wrong or not.

The scheduled blurring of legitimate military targets and average civilian members of the population will present a different type of war, with weaponized information and data. Putting it all in perspective, Taylor cites a media pioneer from a time before the digital age had dawned:

World War III is a guerrilla information war with no division between military and civilian participation.” – Marshall McLuhan, Culture is Our Business, 1970

Such a war will likely be the ultimate battle between the individual and the state. Unless stopped or slowed, it will  accomplish, systematically, what no Cold War secret agency working on the ground and in the shadows could ever hope to gain.

SHTFplan

New Police Radars Can ‘See’ Inside Homes

USA Today
by Brad Heath

At least 50 U.S. law enforcement agencies have secretly equipped their officers with radar devices that allow them to effectively peer through the walls of houses to see whether anyone is inside, a practice raising new concerns about the extent of government surveillance.

Those agencies, including the FBI and the U.S. Marshals Service, began deploying the radar systems more than two years ago with little notice to the courts and no public disclosure of when or how they would be used. The technology raises legal and privacy issues because the U.S. Supreme Court has said officers generally cannot use high-tech sensors to tell them about the inside of a person’s house without first obtaining a search warrant.

The radars work like finely tuned motion detectors, using radio waves to zero in on movements as slight as human breathing from a distance of more than 50 feet. They can detect whether anyone is inside of a house, where they are and whether they are moving.

Current and former federal officials say the information is critical for keeping officers safe if they need to storm buildings or rescue hostages. But privacy advocates and judges have nonetheless expressed concern about the circumstances in which law enforcement agencies may be using the radars — and the fact that they have so far done so without public scrutiny.

“The idea that the government can send signals through the wall of your house to figure out what’s inside is problematic,” said Christopher Soghoian, the American Civil Liberties Union’s principal technologist. “Technologies that allow the police to look inside of a home are among the intrusive tools that police have.”

Agents’ use of the radars was largely unknown until December, when a federal appeals court in Denver said officers had used one before they entered a house to arrest a man wanted for violating his parole. The judges expressed alarm that agents had used the new technology without a search warrant, warning that “the government’s warrantless use of such a powerful tool to search inside homes poses grave Fourth Amendment questions.”

By then, however, the technology was hardly new. Federal contract records show the Marshals Service began buying the radars in 2012, and has so far spent at least $180,000 on them.

Justice Department spokesman Patrick Rodenbush said officials are reviewing the court’s decision. He said the Marshals Service “routinely pursues and arrests violent offenders based on pre-established probable cause in arrest warrants” for serious crimes.

The device the Marshals Service and others are using, known as the Range-R, looks like a sophisticated stud-finder. Its display shows whether it has detected movement on the other side of a wall and, if so, how far away it is — but it does not show a picture of what’s happening inside. The Range-R’s maker, L-3 Communications, estimates it has sold about 200 devices to 50 law enforcement agencies at a cost of about $6,000 each.

Imgur

Other radar devices have far more advanced capabilities, including three-dimensional displays of where people are located inside a building, according to marketing materials from their manufacturers. One is capable of being mounted on a drone. And the Justice Department has funded research to develop systems that can map the interiors of buildings and locate the people within them.

The radars were first designed for use in Iraq and Afghanistan. They represent the latest example of battlefield technology finding its way home to civilian policing and bringing complex legal questions with it.

Those concerns are especially thorny when it comes to technology that lets the police determine what’s happening inside someone’s home. The Supreme Court ruled in 2001 that the Constitution generally bars police from scanning the outside of a house with a thermal camera unless they have a warrant, and specifically noted that the rule would apply to radar-based systems that were then being developed.

In 2013, the court limited police’s ability to have a drug dog sniff the outside of homes. The core of the Fourth Amendment, Justice Antonin Scalia wrote, is “the right of a man to retreat into his own home and there be free from unreasonable governmental intrusion.”

Still, the radars appear to have drawn little scrutiny from state or federal courts. The federal appeals court’s decision published last month was apparently the first by an appellate court to reference the technology or its implications.

That case began when a fugitive-hunting task force headed by the U.S. Marshals Service tracked a man named Steven Denson, wanted for violating his parole, to a house in Wichita. Before they forced the door open, Deputy U.S. Marshal Josh Moff testified, he used a Range-R to detect that someone was inside.

Moff’s report made no mention of the radar; it said only that officers “developed reasonable suspicion that Denson was in the residence.”

Agents arrested Denson for the parole violation and charged him with illegally possessing two firearms they found inside. The agents had a warrant for Denson’s arrest but did not have a search warrant. Denson’s lawyer sought to have the guns charge thrown out, in part because the search began with the warrantless use of the radar device.

Three judges on the federal 10th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the search, and Denson’s conviction, on other grounds. Still, the judges wrote, they had “little doubt that the radar device deployed here will soon generate many questions for this court.”

But privacy advocates said they see more immediate questions, including how judges could be surprised by technology that has been in agents’ hands for at least two years. “The problem isn’t that the police have this. The issue isn’t the technology; the issue is always about how you use it and what the safeguards are,” said Hanni Fakhoury, a lawyer for the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

The Marshals Service has faced criticism for concealing other surveillance tools. Last year, the ACLU obtained an e-mail from a Sarasota, Fla., police sergeant asking officers from another department not to reveal that they had received information from a cellphone-monitoring tool known as a stingray. “In the past, and at the request of the U.S. Marshals, the investigative means utilized to locate the suspect have not been revealed,” he wrote, suggesting that officers instead say they had received help from “a confidential source.”

William Sorukas, a former supervisor of the Marshals Service’s domestic investigations arm, said deputies are not instructed to conceal the agency’s high-tech tools, but they also know not to advertise them. “If you disclose a technology or a method or a source, you’re telling the bad guys along with everyone else,” he said.

Follow investigative reporter Brad Heath on Twitter at @bradheath

USA Today

Advertisers, Feds Want Data Automakers Collect From High-Tech Cars

InfoWars
by KIT DANIELS

Data reveals when a car carrying a child is passing by McDonald’s and when a driver is speeding

tracking cars
Image Credit: NHTSA (Public domain)

Advertisers, tech companies and the government want the data automakers collect from their customer’s cars.

Every BMW rolling off the assembly line, for example, collects data on location, speed, acceleration and even the weight of the passengers in the car, and the data is so comprehensive, it could tell advertisers when a car carrying a child is passing by a McDonald’s and it could also tell the government when a driver is speeding.

“There’s plenty of people out there saying: ‘give us all the data you’ve got and we can tell you what we can do with it’,” he told the Financial Times. “And we’re saying: ‘No thank you’.”

But given time, the data will likely be taken through a hack attack, a business deal or government pressure.

For one thing, ever-expanding governments are always looking for more funding, especially as gas tax revenues continue to fall with the price of oil.

If they could ticket a driver for speeding every time it happens according to GPS, governments could increase ticket revenue tenfold while saving money on police.

“We know everyone who breaks the law, we know when you’re doing it,” Ford’s global vice president, Jim Farley, said at a recent trade show. “We have GPS in your car, so we know what you’re doing.”

The government has already forced automakers to put black boxes in new cars.

“Way back in 2006, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) mandated that all new vehicles be equipped with EDR ‘black boxes’ by the 2013 model year,” Darlene Storm of Computer World reported. “Eighty-five percent of U.S. vehicles now have EDR devices that ‘must capture and preserve at least 15 types of crash data, including pre-crash speed, engine throttle, changes in forward velocity and airbag deployment times.’”

But governments yearn for real-time data. Last year, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration announced it wanted new vehicles to have trackable GPS “safety” devices known as vehicle-to-vehicle communications which could easily track drivers.

One government official involved in the proposal admitted hackers could abuse the system to create mass havoc on the road.

“Who has access and how do you secure the data?” David Wise of the Government Accountability Office asked.

Real time data can also be collected through toll tags, which several state governments are already doing.

For example, both the New York City Department of Transportation and Transcom, a traffic management agency, admitted that for nearly 20 years they have been using antennas to connect to E-ZPass toll tags in vehicles traveling not just in New York but neighboring states as well.

“We’re being watched in ways that I think none of us would have imagined,” the executive director of the New York Civil Liberties Union, Donna Lieberman, told WBGO.org. “It’s happening without any public scrutiny, without any decision that’s consistent with checks and balances.”

InfoWars

The Government Mafia Will Steal Everything You Own

The Common Sense Show
by Dave Hodges

We are coming for your boat, house, car and bank account.

We are coming for your boat, house, car and bank account.

 
The G20 told you on November 20, 2014, they plan to steal your bank account. Secretary of Treasury, Jack Lew, has positioned the federal government to steal back federal pensions and now your local police can rob you blind for the crime of going out in public.

When the American Police Become As Corrupt As the Mexican Federal Police

After moving to the border state of Arizona, I learned quickly that it isn’t prudent to drive a car into Mexico because the Federal Police like to pull over “American-looking” tourists  and shake them down for cash (yes, Virgina, the Mexican national police force does profile).

federale stopping carThe practice of Mexican police harassing traveling Americans for their cash is so prevalent, most insurance companies require a special rider on one’s insurance policy before covering a car trip into Mexico.

I used to think that this abuse of traveling Americans was just a “Federal Police” problem and could never happen here. However, as I opened both of my eyes and saw the big picture, I realized that American law enforcement was doing the same thing and that the American officers were much more efficient at theft by cop than are the Mexicans.

While a Mexican Federal Policeman might shakedown a tourist for $50 in cash, the American officials are more adept at stealing houses, businesses and large amounts of cash even when the cash is not connected to a crime. In short, the government mafia is determined to steal your every asset.

What Is RICO?

uncle same civilian asset forfeitureThe American government never runs out of clever ways to separate its citizens from their money. There is a relatively new game in town that has really picked up steam and this American game is called theft by law enforcement, (aka RICO). Much of the growth of federal criminal procedures has been tied to the expanded use of RICO. RICO stands for the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act of 1970. RICO has succeeded in blurring the lines between state and federal law enforcement and in overturning the protections inherent in the due-process guarantees of the U.S. Constitution, namely due process. The Fifth Amendment states that government cannot deprive citizens of life, liberty and property without due process of law. As the Patriot Act negates the Fourth Amendment protections, RICO does the same with the Fifth Amendment due process rights.

RICO is essentially the seizure of goods and assets obtained as a result of ACCUSED criminal activity. At the inception of RICO in 1990, there were only three named federal criminal acts subject RICO confiscation of assets and they were treason, piracy, and counterfeiting. Now there are literally thousands of federal laws and regulations related to RICO. The mere violation of any one of them, no matter how unintentional and harmless the transgression, can lead to years of imprisonment for the convicted person and the forfeiture of all personal assets.

Here is where the police and federal law enforcement are no better than the criminals they purport to fight. Even when an individual is not charged or found innocent, their confiscated assets are still the property of the law enforcement agency. If a person is found not guilty in court, or the charges are dropped, the person can spend years trying to recover their assets. And sometimes, they never recover their stolen property.

 Even Canada Condemns America’s Theft By Law Enforcement

American law enforcement is so out of control that even Canada has issued a public service announcement that warns Canadian travelers that American road pirates, meaning American police officers, might rob them upon their entry into the United States. The Canadian government states that there has been 61,000 incidents of road piracy; resulting in a booty of over $2.5 billion.

American law enforcement is adept at pulling over a motorist, subsequently finding cash, culminating in the unwarranted seizure of that cash. The government does not have to charge one with a crime in order to seize any cash and the burden of proof is on the citizen to get their money back. About 16% of people suffering through government initiated cash forfeitures ever challenge the seizures in court because of the legal expense involved.

 

Some might try and say that this money and property is obviously “taken from criminals” in order to rationalize this theft on a massive scale. However, as is evident in the case of Mr. Willis, the government does not have to charge you with a crime, let alone convict you, to take your property and after they steal your property the burden of proof is on you to get it back.

 

Gangster Cops in Meridian MS.

During a July 9 traffic stop in Meridian, Mississippi, police found $360,000 tucked away in an obscure compartment of a man’s car. Certainly the amount of money in question would get our collective attention, however, the driver was let go. And if the Meridian city government has a problem with large amounts of cash, then pass a law forbidding the carrying of cash over a certain amount. Until then, this man committed no crime.

The cops simply stole the man’s money. The unidentified motorist may or may not get that cash back.

Under RICO all cops can seize your property, and it’s up to you to prove that the money isn’t connected to a crime. This is an obvious violation of the Fifth Amendment which requires the government to prove in court that the accused is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

This application of RICO is unconstitutional on its face and it is still being allowed. Why? Because RICO money is being used by the law enforcement agencies to enrich their department as well as to host lavish department/agency parties. This is no different than what the Mafia or the Mexican Federal Police does. And you can count the Federal Reserve in on being part of this new mafia. Because of the practice (i.e. fractional reserve banking) which allows banks to loan out $9 dollars for every dollar deposited, the banks have a vested interest in keeping as much of your cash as possible in the bank and not in your pockets.

Your Property Is Not Safe

For those who think that the Meridian, MS. motorist got what he deserved because nobody should be carrying that kind of cash on them, consider the Russell Caswell case which demonstrates that, under RICO statutes, one can lose everything even when they have never been suspected of a crime.

motel caswellMotel owner Russell Caswell, of Fitchburg, Massachusetts, has fought with government for three years over his right to keep his own motel. Caswell has never been charged with a crime, yet he faces the loss of his business. Caswell, having successfully managed to keep his property, is the victim of guilt by association. From 1994 to 2008, police have made 15 drug busts at his motel. That come to only one drug bust per year in a motel. This is a remarkably low number. However, it is not stopping law enforcement for trying to get their hands on the motel by stating that under RICO, the motel is considered to be part of a criminal enterprise.

One does not have to be the owner of a motel or carry large amounts of cash to be a victim of the law enforcement Mafia. If you give a ride to someone who has marijuana in their possession, you can lose your car. If your teenage daughter brings drugs into your house, you could lose your house. This is no more than criminal theft committed by criminal law enforcement agencies.

Motives for RICO Enforcement

The money that law enforcement seizes, is money that goes towards the purchase of office equipment, new vehicles, larger expense accounts and the list goes on. However, agency assets are not the only destination for RICO obtained assets.

 

Sheriff Bill Smith

Sheriff Bill Smith

Sheriff Bill Smith in Camden County, Georgia, spent $90,000 on a Dodge Viper for the county’s Drug Awareness and Resistance Education (DARE) program. According to a sheriff’s spokesman, the whole point of this car is to grab the kids’ attention and by impressing kids, they would stay off of drugs. In the past two decades, Bill Smith’s department brought in over $20 million in asset forfeiture proceeds. The motive to arrest and steal assets is quite clear.

In Romulus, MI., the police chief, Michael St. Andre, spent more than $40,000 in asset forfeiture funds on marijuana, booze, and prostitutes. In many of our communities, the ones with the badges are the prostitutes. And this is not just a case of a few bad apples spoiling the whole bunch. It would be difficult to find an agency or department that is not experiencing RICO corruption.

In a clear violation of the 10th Amendment, the Federal government has made local law enforcement partners in these crimes being perpetrated against the American people through the practice of “equitable sharing agreements” between the Department of Justice and local or state law enforcement. Just like a Mafia protection racket, the Feds typically are taking 10 to 20% of all profits connected to local seizures.

Conclusion

when did this become thisMany of the cash seizures are result of a drug dog tipping off an officer that there are drugs in the car. The is a bogus lead to follow since most cash is tainted with drugs. Eve the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has ruled that no portion of the government has the right to seize cash from motorists based only upon a drug-detection dog’s reaction because most money in circulation contains drug residue.

Whether it is your bank account, retirement or your legitimately hard earned cash, government officials are hell-bent on separating American citizens from their cash. Again I say, except for a marginal amount of money needed to pay bills, your cash should reside in your hidden safe at home.

CSS Offical-New-Logo2

The Common Sense Show

FBI Thwarts Terror Plot on Capitol (That They Planned)

Activist Post
By Eric Blair

manufactured terrorism

The FBI is at it again. Creating fake terror plots to justify their existence. And this plot hits on all the themes one would expect from a good fake terror plot.

The FBI initially found a patsy by trolling Twitter for support of ISIS. That’s exciting because finding someone retarded enough to admit support for murderers is really difficult. Then they sent an in-house jihadist to team up with the patsy to plan a grand terror attack on the nation’s Capitol. Heroically, the moment the 20-year-old patsy said he would “go forward with violent jihad” the FBI steps in and declares a victory in the war on terror.

NBC News reports:

Ohio man was arrested Wednesday and accused of planning to attack the U.S. Capitol, U.S. officials told NBC News. But the officials said the man, identified as Christopher Cornell, 20, was dealing with an undercover agent the entire time and was never in a position to carry out his plan.

“There was never a danger to the public,” an official told NBC News.

The officials said that starting in August, Cornell began posting comments on Twitter in support of ISIS under an alias, Raheel Mahrus Ubaydah. Shortly after those posts began appearing, the FBI sent an undercover operative to meet with him.

During a meeting with the operative, court documents say, Cornell said he wanted “to go forward with violent jihad” and that Anwar al-Awlaki — the U.S.-born Muslim cleric who was killed by a U.S. drone in September 2011 and was the first U.S. citizen publicly known to have been added to the U.S. kill-or-capture list — and others had encouraged that kind of action.

Seriously, Anwar al-Awlaki again? Hasn’t his name become synonymous with “false flag”? He’s a proven federal asset who also supposedly handled the Fort Hood Shooter, the Underwear Bomber and even the recent Paris Shooters – all incredibly shady events that served to advance the “war on terror” agenda.

The FBI has incubated fake terror plots over and over: See thisthisthisthisthisthisthis, and this. Surely they’d never let an event go live, would they? What would they have to gain?

Well, the only reason this story exists at all is to make the public feel that there are genuine terror threats targeting the US Capitol. That is then used to justify spying on the Internet and funding the huge terrorism-industrial complex that has nothing better to do than make up the reasons to keep giving them money.

The police state is a ruthless business, and false flag terror is its most effective marketing tool.

Activist Post

From Neighborhood Cops to Robocops: The Changing Face of American Police

Washington’s Blog
By John Whitehead, constitutional and human rights attorney, and founder of the Rutherford Institute.

militarized-police

“Technological progress has merely provided us with more efficient means for going backwards.” ― Aldous Huxley, Ends and Means

If 2014 was the year of militarized police, armored tanks, and stop-and-frisk searches, 2015 may well be the year of technologized police, surveillance blimps and scan-and-frisk searches.

Just as we witnessed neighborhood cops being transformed into soldier cops, we’re about to see them shapeshift once again, this time into robocops, complete with robotic exoskeletons, super-vision contact lenses, computer-linked visors, and mind-reading helmets.

Similarly, just as military equipment created for the battlefield has been deployed on American soil against American citizens, we’re about to see military technology employed here at home in a manner sure to annihilate what’s left of our privacy and Fourth Amendment rights.

For instance, with the flick of a switch (and often without your even being aware of the interference), police can now shut down your cell phone, scan your body for “suspicious” items as you walk down the street, test the air in your car for alcohol vapors as you drive down the street, identify you at a glance and run a background check on you for outstanding warrants, piggyback on your surveillance devices to listen in on your conversations and “see” what you see on your private cameras, and track your car’s movements via a GPS-enabled dart.

That doesn’t even begin to scrape the surface of what’s coming down the pike, with law enforcement and military agencies boasting technologies so advanced as to render everything up until now mere child’s play.

Once these technologies, which used to belong exclusively to the realm of futuristic sci-fi films, have been unleashed on an unsuspecting American public, it will completely change the face of American policing and, in the process, transform the landscape of what we used to call our freedoms.

It doesn’t even matter that these technologies can be put to beneficial uses. As we’ve learned the hard way, once the government gets involved, it’s only a matter of time before the harm outweighs the benefits.

Imagine, if you will, self-guided “smart” bullets that can track their target as it moves, solar-powered airships that provide persistent wide-area surveillance and tracking of ground “targets,” a grenade launcher that can deliver 14 flash-bang grenade rounds, invisible tanks that can blend into their surroundings and masquerade as a snow bank or a soccer mom’s station wagon, and a guided mortar weapon that can target someone up to 12 miles away.

Or what about “less lethal weapons” such as the speech jammer gun, which can render a target tongue-tied; sticky foam guns, which shoot foam that hardens on contact, immobilizing the victim; and shock wave generators, which use the shockwaves from a controlled explosion to knock people over.

Now imagine trying to defend yourself against such devices, which are incapable of distinguishing between an enemy combatant and a civilian. For that matter, imagine attempting to defend yourself or your loved ones against police officers made superhuman thanks to technology that renders them bullet-proof, shatter-proof, all-seeing, all-knowing and all-powerful.

Does rendering a government agent superhuman make them inhuman, as well, unable to relate to the mass of humanity they are sworn to protect and defend?

Pointing out that the clothes people wear can affect how they act, Salon magazine reporter Geordie Mcruer notes that “when clothing has symbolic meaning – such as a uniform that is worn only by a certain profession – it prepares the mind for the pursuit of goals that are consistent with the symbolic meaning of the clothing.”

Mcruer continues:

When we dress our police officers in camouflage before deploying them to a peaceful protest, the result will be police who think more like soldiers. This likely includes heightening their perception of physical threats, and increasing the likelihood that they react to those threats with violence. Simply put, dressing police up like soldiers potentially changes how they see a situation, changing protesters into enemy combatants, rather than what they are: civilians exercising their democratic rights…

When police wear soldiers’ clothing, and hold soldiers’ weapons, it primes them to think and act like soldiers. Furthermore, clothing that conceals their identity – such as the helmets, gas masks, goggles, body armor and riot shields that are now standard-issue for officers at peaceful protests – will increase the likelihood that officers react aggressively to the situation. As a result of the fact that they are also dressed like soldiers, they are more likely to interpret the situation as hostile and will more readily identify violence as the best solution.

While robocops are problematic enough, the problem we’re facing is so much greater than technology-enhanced domestic soldiers.

As I make clear in my book A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State, we’re on the cusp of a major paradigm shift from fascism disguised as a democracy into a technocratic surveillance society in which there are no citizens, only targets. We’re all targets now, to be scanned, surveilled, tracked and treated like blips on a screen.

What’s taking place in Maryland right now is a perfect example of this shift. With Congress’ approval and generous funding (and without the consensus of area residents), the Army has just launched two massive, billion dollar surveillance airships into the skies over Baltimore, each airship three times the size of a Goodyear blimp, ostensibly to defend against cruise missile attacks. Government officials claim the surveillance blimps, which provide highly detailed radar imaging within a 340-mile radius, are not presently being used to track individuals or carry out surveillance against citizens, but it’s only a matter of time before that becomes par for the course.

In New York, police will soon start employing mobile scanners that allow them to scan people on the street in order to detect any hidden objects under their clothes, whether it be a gun, a knife or anything else that appears “suspicious.” The scanners will also let them carry out enhanced data collection in the field—fingerprints, iris scans, facial mapping—which will build the government’s biometric database that much faster. These scanners are a more mobile version of the low radiation X-ray vans used to scan the contents of passing cars.

Google Glass, being considered for use by officers, would allow police to access computer databases, as well as run background checks on and record anyone in their line of sight.

One program, funded by $160 million in asset forfeiture funds, would equip police officers and vehicles with biometric smartphones that can scan individuals’ fingerprints and cross check it against criminal databases. The devices will also contain real-time 911 data, warrant information from federal, state and city databases, photographs of missing persons, suspects, Crime Stoppers posters and other persons of interest, and the latest cache of information on terror suspects.

Stand-off lasers can detect alcohol vapors in a moving car. “If alcohol vapors are detected in the car, a message with a photo of the car including its license plate is sent to a police officer waiting down the road. Then, the police officer stops the car and checks for signs of alcohol using conventional tests.”

Ekin Patrol cameras, described as “the first truly intelligent patrol unit in the world,” can not only detect the speed of passing cars but can generate tickets instantaneously, recognize and store the license plates of stopped, moving or parked vehicles, measure traffic density and violation data and engage in facial recognition of drivers and passengers.

Collectively, all of these gizmos, gadgets and surveillance devices render us not just suspects in a surveillance state but also inmates in an electronic concentration camp. As journalist Lynn Stuart Parramore notes:

The Information Age … has turned out rather differently than many expected. Instead of information made available for us, the key feature seems to be information collected about us. Rather of granting us anonymity and privacy with which to explore a world of facts and data, our own data is relentlessly and continually collected and monitored. The wondrous things that were supposed to make our lives easier—mobile devices, gmail, Skype, GPS, and Facebook—have become tools to track us, for whatever purposes the trackers decide. We have been happily shopping for the bars to our own prisons, one product at a time.

Unfortunately, eager as we are for progress and ill-suited to consider the moral and spiritual ramifications of our planned obsolescence, we have yet to truly fathom what it means to live in an environment in which we are always on red alert, always under observation, and always having our actions measured, judged and found wanting under some law or other intrusive government regulation.

There are those who are not at all worried about this impending future, certain that they have nothing to hide. Rest assured, soon we will all have nowhere to hide from the prying eyes of a government bound and determined to not only know everything about us—where we go, what we do, what we say, what we read, what we keep in our pockets, how much money we have on us, how we spend that money, who we know, what we eat and drink, and where we are at any given moment—but prepared to use that information against us, whenever it becomes convenient and profitable to do so.

Making the case that we’re being transformed as citizens, neighbors and human beings, Parramore identifies six factors arising from a society in which surveillance becomes the norm: a shift in power dynamics, in which the “watcher” becomes all-seeing and all-powerful; an incentive to turn citizens into outlaws by criminalizing otherwise lawful activities; diminished citizenship; an environment of suspicion and paranoia; a divided society comprised of the watchers and the watched; and “a society of edgy, unhappy beings whose sense of themselves is chronically diminished.”

As Parramore rightly concludes, this is “not exactly a recipe for Utopia.”

Washington’s Blog

‘The Republic is No More’ Ron Paul Warns: “Police brutality and militarization may induce a violent event far beyond Ferguson”

SHTFplan
by Mac Slavo

ronpaulpolicestateshtf

In a stark outlook and set of predictions for 2015, former Congressman and presidential candidate Ron Paul cautioned that America has descended into a police state where liberties are “under siege” and further violent events and inner city turmoil, such as that seen in Ferguson, were likely to occur:

If Americans were honest with themselves they would acknowledge that the Republic is no more. We now live in a police state. If we do not recognize and resist this development, freedom and prosperity for all Americans will continue to deteriorate. All liberties in America today are under siege.

It didn’t happen overnight. It took many years of neglect for our liberties to be given away so casually for a promise of security from the politicians. The tragic part is that the more security was promised — physical and economic — the less liberty was protected.

[…]

This is especially noticeable in the police war on the lawbreakers — real and unreal — in America. The failures of social and economic policy of the past 50 years have led to a mounting friction between the local police and the rights of the people. Local police have been militarized and have become an integral part of the national police state. A police culture that accepts the principle of initiating unjustified violence against citizens has become a serious problem.

The news is constant. If it’s not Ferguson, it’s New York City. If not New York City, it’s Chicago or Detroit or Cleveland. And I believe the violence in our cities is only in its early stages. We had a taste of the conflict in the 1960s, but the fundamental values of equal justice and economic opportunity have receded further from reality. Failing to understand why the past 50 years of government expansion to eradicate poverty has only worsened the conditions of our cities will guarantee that the violent conflicts we see erupting today will only get worse.

In a lengthy essay, Ron Paul spells out much of the bigger picture problems that have created fractures in a system that is doomed to fail, and designed to divide and conquer the population as it comes apart through an orchestrated game of musical chairs. Paul argues:

Many factors are involved in the crisis of our cities, including the following:

Police brutality, militarization of the police, excessive laws, courts and law enforcement efforts ignoring the principles of equal justice,

Racism that exists to some degree on both sides of the conflict,

Rampant crime reflecting structural poverty,

Absence of an understanding of the difference between earned and stolen wealth,

Race baiting,

The entitlement mentality, self-reliance not being a goal for many, and the breakdown of the family unit,

The war on drugs, and

[especially, the elephant in every room and street riot]

The lack of economic understanding regarding the Federal Reserve, taxes, welfare, economic consequences of constant war, deficits, and excessive government spending.

The tyranny of a militarized police crackdown is ultimately a symptom of transferring far too much power to a centralized, federal government in the name of increasing “security” at the expense of “liberty.” Thanks to lobbyists for defense contractors, Big Pharma and the prison industry, the military industrial complex has put weapons of war in the hands of police, while using the drug war to upend impoverished communities and justify a crackdown:

This social disruption has motivated the enthusiastic growth and militarization of our local police departments. The law and order crowd thrives on excessive laws and regulations that no US citizen can escape. The out-of-control war on drugs is the worst part, and it generates the greatest danger in poverty-ridden areas via out-of-control police. It is estimated that these conditions have generated up to 80,000 SWAT raids per year in the United States. Most are in poor neighborhoods and involve black homes and businesses being hit disproportionately. This involves a high percentage of no-knock attacks. As can be expected many totally innocent people are killed in the process. Property damage is routine and compensation is rare. The routine use of civil forfeiture of property has become an abomination, totally out of control, which significantly contributes to the chaos. It should not be a surprise to see resentment building up against the police under these conditions.

The overreaction by both sides continues to make the situation much worse. As a result, policing in general is out of control, and anything suggesting racial confrontation leads to rioting, looting, and property destruction. Civil liberties are ignored by the police, and the private property of innocent bystanders is disregarded by those resenting police violence. When police overreact and unfairly enforce the law, it elicits a violent reaction from those on the receiving end. This only escalates the problem. It’s an invitation for outside provocateurs to rush in and aggravate the racial tensions…

Why do the race baiters have so much success in making this type of conflict a racial problem alone? Unfortunately many of them make a living off stirring up trouble. If the situation were understood in terms of police brutality and poverty, the evening news would be dramatically different. Turning it into strictly a racial conflict narrows the discussion, and the idea of responsibility for one’s action no longer needs to be discussed.

[…]

The economic and moral decay of American society is reflected in the loss of liberties. This problem affects all Americans and not just the poor in the inner city. Gradual erosion of personal and economic liberty has proceeded for a century. The loss of our liberty has sharply accelerated since the 9/11 attacks. We have done to ourselves what no foreign enemy could have possibly accomplished.

Government surveillance provides the state with information that enables it to know our every move. The protection of the Fourth Amendment is gone. Many Americans are comfortable with the sacrifice of liberty for safety and accept the notion that government’s key responsibility is to keep us safe.

Society has been trained to expect government to provide everything – unlimited safety and security, free money and benefits and benevolent control over all areas of society. But the illusion is dangerous and cannot provide these things.

Cheap prosperity for the rich and benefits and handouts for the poor come at the expense of more and more taxes, money printing, surveillance and control over everything from education to medicine, food, media and information.

In short, Ron Paul argues that the Welfare State, and the perpetual War State, have made tighter police controls a requirement.

Welfare, which is the use of force to transfer wealth from one group to another, is based on a moral principle of equality that in fact is not moral and does not work. The wealthy special interests, such as banks, the military-industrial complex, the medical industry, the drug industry, and many other corporatists, quickly gain control of the system. Crumbs may be thrown to the poor, but the principle of wealth transfer is hijacked and used for corporate and foreign welfare instead of wealth transfers to the poor.

[…]

The very expensive war on poverty has after 50 years only made matters worse, compounding the problems of poverty and inflation while hurting most of the people the “war” was supposed to help. Currently our government spends over $1 trillion per year on anti-poverty programs. Over the past 50 years, over $16 trillion was spent, i.e., wasted. And yet poverty and dire economic conditions remain the major factor in the violence that persists, which incites or gives the police the excuse to overreact to maintain order. The plans and expectations for the war on poverty must have been seriously flawed.

Although the degree of poverty is different for the various races in the United States, all categories — Asian, white, Hispanic, and black — have had a steady increase in real median income from 1964 until the year 2000, when the first of many bubbles started bursting. In all four race categories incomes are lower since then. With the economy moving into the next stage of liquidation of bad investment and debt, we should expect this trend to continue. Economic setbacks and a decrease in real income are not limited to blacks in the inner city.

[…]

Reality is now setting in for America and for that matter for most of the world. The piper will get his due even if “the children” have to suffer. The deception of promising “success” has lasted for quite a while. It was accomplished by ever-increasing taxes, deficits, borrowing, and printing press money. In the meantime the policing powers of the federal government were systematically and significantly expanded. No one cared much, as there seemed to be enough “gravy” for the rich, the poor, the politicians, and the bureaucrats.

As the size of government grew and cracks in the system became readily apparent, a federal police force was needed to regulate our lives and the economy, as well as to protect us from ourselves and make sure the redistribution of a shrinking economic pie was “fair” to all. Central economic planning requires an economic police force to monitor every transaction of all Americans. Special interests were quick to get governments to regulate everything we put in our bodies: food, medications, and even politically correct ideas. IRS employees soon needed to carry guns to maximize revenue collections.

The global commitment to perpetual war, though present for decades, exploded in size and scope after 9/11. If there weren’t enough economic reasons to monitor everything we did, fanatics used the excuse of national security to condition the American people to accept total surveillance of all by the NSA, the TSA, FISA courts, the CIA, and the FBI. The people even became sympathetic to our government’s policy of torture.

In a fundamental way, the naive calls to expand government power in Washington over a period of decades has made the resulting police state, increasing federal control over local police and the rise of a national police force a predictable reciprocation to undue power that cannot meet the needs of the people:

To keep the people obedient to statism that originated at the federal level of government, control of education was required. It is now recognized that central control of education has actually ruined education, while costs have skyrocketed. National control of medical care has brought a similar result. This has meant more money for bureaucrats, as well as drug, insurance, and health management companies, and less money for medical care. Constantly more police are required to run our lives at greater costs while providing less benefit. “Nationalizing” both medical care and education has provided a great incentive to increase the policing powers of the federal government.

The predictable poverty that results from such a terrible system is now upon us and is a strong motivation for the militarization of local police as part of the expansion of the national police state. Temporary and perceived benefits of government overreach and expanded policing powers end up becoming the real problem.

Basically a vacuum has been created for total control to fill.

To escape this nightmarish cycle of increased poverty met with increased police response, the root of the economic problems must be realized – allowing the central government to plan the economy, and enrich wealthy insiders who are supposed to manage vast programs to benefit the many is certain to end in greater disparity in wealth and a concentrated of more government power at the expense of the civil liberties of the individuals of society.

The killing of Michael Brown in Ferguson plus many similar incidents are signs of a serious economic and political crisis that is not limited to police brutality and runaway violence.

Police brutality and militarization may well induce a violent event far beyond what we have seen in Ferguson. It also can serve as an excuse. But it is not the root cause of turmoil. The real cause is poverty, the entitlement mentality, and the breakdown of the rule of law. Moral decay and the national police state are the real culprits.

More police with improved training will not do much to deal with this growing conflict. Bowing to entitlement demands from the “victims” will not be helpful in a bankrupt system. We have too many police, too many laws, and too much exemption of government officials from the crimes they commit. Both adding police and increasing entitlements involve expanding the role of government in an effort to solve problems that too much government has already caused. Government can only be expanded by diminishing the people’s liberty. This problem can only be ended by maximizing liberty and getting people to realize that self-reliance, hard work, and the absence of coercive force by individuals and government is the only way to reverse the downward trend from which we are suffering.

Instead of keeping us safe, and redistributing the wealth to make everyone more equal, and the poor better off, government control has lead to an all out federal government war on all Americans, according to Ron Paul:

It’s the federal government that leads the charge in all our domestic wars, which, in addition to the global war on terrorism, include the war on drugs, taxpayers, and poverty, all of which contribute to the constant war on our privacy. Today every American is a suspect. Our president has established a policy that an American citizen can be assassinated without even being charged with a crime. The national police are made up of over 100,000 bureaucrats and police officials who carry guns to enforce federal law on the American citizens. The Founders and our Constitution intended that policing powers would be the responsibility of the individual states. That was forgotten a long time ago.

Not only do employees of agencies like the CIA, FBI, and BATF carry guns, employees of OSHA, EPA, Fish and Wildlife, and many other agencies enforcing regulations do so as well. The notion of total homeland security being provided by a heavily armed Department of Homeland Security was foreign to America up until just recently. Today, whether it’s riots in our cities or chaos after a national disaster like a hurricane, the Feds are there taking charge over all local officials and property owners. It shouldn’t surprise us that our local police departments have become an arm of a runaway federal police mentality that mimics an army.

The Founders did not even want a standing army. They wanted only a militia. Today we endure, at the expense of our liberties, a national police force armed like an invading military force. We are destined to see a continued escalation of violence in our cities as the internal conflicts grow. Instead of the police quelling the violence, they unfortunately have become part of it.

2015 holds promise of worsening conditions, including inner city uprisings and police violence. The economic shoe, too, will fall, if not in 2015, then at some point, unless these policies are abandoned.

Ron Paul urges:

We must get people to reject flawed economic policy if we want a real war on poverty. LBJ’s war on poverty was no more successful than his Vietnam War — or any war since, for that matter. A national government that can print money as needed to finance extraordinary extravagance can function longer than a city, state, or private entity, but it too must eventually “file for bankruptcy” albeit in a different fashion. As we are now seeing, the bankruptcy of a nation also involves poverty for many. This situation will continue to worsen. Since poverty is a major contributing factor to the violence of excessive police militarization, some fundamentals must be understood. The economic theories of Paul Samuelson, Paul Krugman, John Maynard Keynes, and all those who claim to know how to “regulate” the economy to benefit the poor, must be challenged and abandoned.

Read Ron Paul’s entire essay at the Ron Paul Institute, including the above excepts and much more about the underlying causes of American unrest that many have seen coming for some time, but are now here, and worsening with each new crisis and each new demand for greater control and fewer freedoms.

Will anyone wake up and stop this before it is too late?

SHTFplan

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,560 other followers

%d bloggers like this: