Police State

Europe: Welcome to a United Police State

Posted on Updated on

New Eastern Outlook
by Konrad Stachnio

124534The next step of the change from the current European Union to what could be called a European Police State might be the infectious diseases which are coming to us from Asia and Africa. It’s not just about long-extinct epidemics such as the plague, cholera, diphtheria, tuberculosis, smallpox, polio, hepatitis, scabies etc. It’s also about endemic and relatively new diseases, such as Ebola, SARS and MERS. Germany is dealing with this threat in the same matter-of-fact way as they do with the so-called refugee problem, by having local authorities forcing students to clean garbage and waste left behind by migrants. In this context, the threat of mass outbreaks can lead to the fact that the European Police State may soon come up with the idea that, for “our own good”, all EU members must be forcibly vaccinated – taking, for example, into consideration the fact that recently, in a refugee camp in Belgium, a person was found to be sick with tuberculosis.

Parallel societies

In addition to the emerging disease in Europe, with it also comes an increase in criminal activities by the so-called ‘immigrants’, something governments and the corporate media, of course, deliberately do not inform us about. Immigrants create their own so-called ‘parallel societies’, living their separate lives and not assimilating into the countries they find themselves in. Those ‘parallel societies’ are now an incubator for emerging and increasingly well organised criminal groups. Currently, in countries besieged by refugees, rape, sexual harassment and physical attacks on houses, robberies, burglaries, drug trafficking and street robberies are a daily occurrence. As reported by the German Bild, twelve Arab clans have control over the criminal world of Berlin. The authors say that the clans that buy and sell drugs, rob banks and break into houses. They also introduced a “parallel justice” system, resolving conflicts with the help of mediators from other crime families.

If this trend is not stopped, these so-called refugees will become one of the most organized crime groups in Europe. Firstly, because they are treated on preferential terms in relation to the indigenous inhabitants of the communities they live in. Secondly, because even after arrest they are often immediately released. Thirdly, German police is becoming less and less effective, because of the number of refugees.

In a confidential report, “leaked” to Die Welt, it was revealed that the Hamburg police force has virtually capitulated to the teenage migrants, who are more numerous than the officers and whose actions are just too much to deal with. Franz Solms-Laubach, the author of the book “Das Ende der Sicherheit: Warum die Polizei uns nicht mehr schützen kann” (“The End of Security: Why the police are no longer able to protect us”), blames the German legislators for budget cuts and reductions of jobs, which have led to a situation in which the police are simply unable to do their job.

Underfunded and with deteriorating morale, the German police force certainly cannot be effective. Especially in a situation in which ‘parallel societies’ are increasingly expanding their spheres of influence. This happens due to the preferential terms offered by governments for refugees in relation to indigenous peoples. And that for many of them joining organized crime is the only way of making a living in another country, seeing as they do not know the language, have any qualifications or show any real desire to assimilate with the community in which they live.

In connection with the situation in Germany and other countries, “street games” are now joined so-called hooligans who naively think that, when faced with Islamist extremists trained in the Middle East, they have any sort of chance.

Sven Lau, a German Islamic campaigner, commented on this in a humorous fashion: “I am astonished that they were able to incite this mob against us we have never had any problems we have nothing to do with soccer and they have nothing to do with religion – Islam. But if they are looking for problems they can gladly have them. This isn’t a soccer game. If they get to close to us they need to know that this is a game of life and death.”

A Police Union

Russia’s win in Syria could lead to a situation in which ISIS shave off their beards and dress up as women to arrive to Europe. Here, in safe and comfortable conditions, and most importantly without Russian bombing over their heads, they will be able to continue their ‘war’. Except that this time mainly against European ‘infidel’ civilians and the number one enemy: Rome, and the Pope.

If it comes to this scenario, Putin will take the blame for smoking them out from Syria and bringing them to Europe, as well as for having the impudence to ‘annoy’ US ‘assets’ in the Middle East, that now with Putin to blame they will seek to have their revenge on all of us. This kind of propaganda leads to a fear of terrorists in Europe and the blaming for their potential attacks on Putin who ‘unduly’ ‘teased’ them. This is the kind of narration, through the example of CNN, we are dealing now.

“We cannot let them (the Islamic terrorists) return to their homes and use their Syrian experience there,” Putin said at the meeting of Heads of Member States of the Community of Independent States.

However Europe, flooding itself with untested masses of refugees is using quite the opposite tactic. However this time, Putin cannot clean up after everybody.

The so-called crisis of refugees, as well as setting people in Europe against each other as supporters and opponents, introducing destabilization by the threat of terrorism from ISIS and the threat of mass pandemic, also introduces some new ‘pro-democracy’ solutions:

The new Paris proposal, which is to be named “smart borders”, involves fingerprinting and facial scanning of all citizens of EU member states. The French want to use the migration crisis and the related threat of terrorism as an excuse to build a database, which will include biometric data of every citizen of the EU.

Bremen authorities allowed the temporary confiscation of vacant properties, even against the wishes of the owners, in the absence of other accommodation sites for immigrants. And those ran out some time ago. According to the law, unused buildings and land plots with an area exceeding 300 square meters can be taken over by the authorities. The owners of the confiscated property is entitled to compensation. Because it is not limited facilities for farm buildings, theoretically, it could also apply to private housing.


As we can see on the side prisonplanet.com “Those found guilty of “refugee baiting” remarks will be hit with fines up to €5000 euros or 120 days in jail. The program will be overseen by Network Against Nazis (Netz gegen Nazis), a group led by left-wing activist Anetta Kahane.

As we previously reported, Kahane worked as a Stasi informant under the codename “Victoria” from 1974-1982. The Stasi’s role was to spy on the population of East Germany and to use its vast network of informants to hunt down political dissidents.”

In Poland, for example, the Stefan Batory Foundation, founded by the famous Jewish speculator, George Soros, gained as much as 150 million zlotys for a program which will be one of the pillars of the fight against homophobia, anti-Semitism, xenophobia and all forms of discrimination. Criticism of the Islamic invasion may soon be strictly prohibited, as it shall be construed as ‘hate speech’.

This leads to a situation in which you might be reported to the police for being critical of Islam, or the so-called refugee issue, when making entries on Facebook or commenting under online articles, through the monitoring of these entries by different ‘pro-democracy foundations’.

An example of this is what recently happened to the Polish emeritus Professor Boguslaw Wolniewicz. After the publication of his recordings on You Tube, in which he says that one must “sink the boat with so-called immigrants, and not save it! “, the police paid him a visit after they made him a denunciation of the prosecution.

All of these forms of support for so-called refugees are happening at the moment of the underfunding of the German police, jobs cuts, declining morale and social authority as well as increasing inefficiency. Added to this, it is also a matter of growing of silence by the mainstream media and governments of serious crimes committed by the so-called refugees in Europe. An example is the outrage caused by the lack of reaction from the Swedish government to the murder of a mother and her son; Caroli and Emil Herlin in swedish IKEA. As a result, on the 15th of September on Sergels Torg, the main market in Stockholm, hundreds of protesters demanded the resignation of the government.

However perhaps Germany will be able to reverse this trend. Recently, the German Bild published information that Germany has to take responsibility for deporting immigrants by military aircraft as well as introduce limits for intake of refugees.

At the end of having to prove that they are no longer Nazis, the Israeli Prime Minister Banjamin Nataniahu released them from this by saying that Hitler did not want the genocide of the Jews until he met with the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Muhammad Amin al-Husanim.

This is judging by comments made by the German government spokesman Steffen Seibert.

‘I see no reason we changed our view of the story in any way. We know that the responsibility for a crime against humanity is a German and our very great extent “.

So we see that Germany very much cherishes its memory of the role they played in history. As a consequence, their abandonment of the process of ‘repenting’ for their Nazi past can now go a little more laboriously.

Konrad Stachnio is an independent Poland based journalist, he hosted a number of radio and TV programs for the Polish edition of Prison Planet, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

New Eastern Outlook

How Do You Prepare a Child for Life in the American Police State?

Posted on Updated on

The Rutherford Institute
By John W. Whitehead


“Fear isn’t so difficult to understand. After all, weren’t we all frightened as children? Nothing has changed since Little Red Riding Hood faced the big bad wolf. What frightens us today is exactly the same sort of thing that frightened us yesterday. It’s just a different wolf.” ― Alfred Hitchcock

In an age dominated with news of school shootings, school lockdowns, police shootings of unarmed citizens (including children), SWAT team raids gone awry (leaving children devastated and damaged), reports of school resource officers tasering and shackling unruly students, and public schools undergoing lockdowns and active drills, I find myself wrestling with the question: how do you prepare a child for life in the American police state?

Every parent lives with a fear of the dangers that prey on young children: the predators who lurk at bus stops and playgrounds, the traffickers who make a living by selling young bodies, the peddlers who push drugs that ensnare and addict, the gangs that deal in violence and bullets, the drunk drivers, the school bullies, the madmen with guns, the diseases that can end a life before it’s truly begun, the cynicism of a modern age that can tarnish innocence, and the greed of a corporate age that makes its living by trading on young consumers.

It’s difficult enough raising a child in a world ravaged by war, disease, poverty and hate, but when you add the police state into the mix—with its battlefield mindset, weaponry, rigidity, surveillance, fascism, indoctrination, violence, etc.—it becomes near impossible to guard against the toxic stress of police shootings, SWAT team raids, students being tasered and shackled, lockdown drills, and a growing unease that some of the monsters of our age come dressed in government uniforms.

Children are taught from an early age that there are consequences for their actions. Hurt somebody, lie, steal, cheat, etc., and you will get punished. But how do you explain to a child that a police officer can shoot someone who was doing nothing wrong and get away with it? That a cop can lie, steal, cheat, or kill and still not be punished?

Kids understand accidents: sometimes drinks get spilled, dishes get broken, people slip and fall and hurt themselves, or you bump into someone without meaning to, and they get hurt. As long as it wasn’t intentional and done with malice, you forgive them and you move on. Police shootings of unarmed people—of children and old people and disabled people—can’t just be shrugged off as accidents, however.

Tamir Rice was no accident. Cleveland police shot and killed the 12-year-old, who was seen playing on a playground with a pellet gun. Surveillance footage shows police shooting the boy two seconds after getting out of a moving patrol car. Incredibly, the shooting was deemed “reasonable” and “justified” by two law enforcement experts who concluded that the police use of force “did not violate Tamir’s constitutional rights.”

Aiyana Jones was also no accident. The 7-year-old was killed after a Detroit SWAT team launched a flash-bang grenade into her family’s apartment, broke through the door and opened fire, hitting the little girl who was asleep on the living room couch. The cops weren’t even in the right apartment. Ironically, on the same day that President Obama refused to stop equipping police with the very same kinds of military weapons and gear used to raid Aiyana’s home, it was reported that the police officer who shot and killed the little girl would not face involuntary manslaughter charges.

Obama insists that $263 million to purchase body cameras for police will prevent any further erosions of trust, but a body camera would not have prevented Aiyana from being shot in the head. Indeed, the entire sorry affair was captured on camera: a TV crew was filming the raid for an episode of The First 48, a true-crime reality show in which homicide detectives have 48 hours to crack a case.

While that $263 million will make Taser International, the manufacturer of the body cameras, a whole lot richer, it’s doubtful it would have prevented a SWAT team from shooting 14-month-old Sincere in the shoulder and hand and killing his mother.

No body camera could have stopped a Georgia SWAT team from launching a flash-bang grenade into the house in which Baby Bou Bou, his three sisters and his parents were staying. The grenade landed in the 2-year-old’s crib, burning a hole in his chest and leaving him with scarring that a lifetime of surgeries will not be able to easily undo.

No body camera could have prevented 10-year-old Dakota Corbitt from being shot by a Georgia police officer who tried to shoot an inquisitive dog, missed, and hit the young boy, instead.

When police shot 4-year-old Ava Ellis in the leg, shattering the bone, it actually was an accident, but it was an accident that could have been prevented. Police reported to Ava’s house after being told that Ava’s mother, who had cut her arm, was in need of a paramedic. Cops claimed that the family pet charged the officer who was approaching the house, causing him to fire his gun and hit the little girl.

Alberto Sepulveda, 11, died from one “accidental” shotgun round to the back, after a SWAT team raided his parents’ home. Thirteen-year-old Andy Lopez Cruz was shot 7 times in 10 seconds by a California police officer who mistook the boy’s toy gun for an assault rifle. Christopher Roupe, 17, was shot and killed after opening the door to a police officer. The officer, mistaking the Wii remote control in Roupe’s hand for a gun, shot him in the chest.

These children are more than grim statistics on a police blotter. They are the heartbreaking casualties of the government’s endless, deadly wars on terror, on drugs, and on the American people themselves.

Not even the children who survive their encounters with police escape unscathed. Increasingly, their lives are daily lessons in compliance and terror, meted out with every SWAT team raid, roadside strip search, and school drill.

Who is calculating the damage being done to the young people forced to watch as their homes are trashed and their dogs are shot during SWAT team raids? A Minnesota SWAT team actually burst into one family’s house, shot the family’s dog, handcuffed the children and forced them to “sit next to the carcass of their dead and bloody pet for more than an hour.” They later claimed it was the wrong house.

More than 80% of American communities have their own SWAT teams, with more than 80,000 of these paramilitary raids are carried out every year. That translates to more than 200 SWAT team raids every day in which police crash through doors, damage private property, terrorize adults and children alike, kill family pets, assault or shoot anyone that is perceived as threatening—and all in the pursuit of someone merely suspected of a crime, usually some small amount of drugs.

What are we to tell our nation’s children about the role of police in their lives? Do you parrot the government line that police officers are community helpers who are to be trusted and obeyed at all times? Do you caution them to steer clear of a police officer, warning them that any interactions could have disastrous consequences? Or is there some happy medium between the two that, while being neither fairy tale nor horror story, can serve as a cautionary tale for young people who will encounter police at virtually every turn?

No matter what you say, there can be no avoiding the hands-on lessons being taught in the schools about the role of police in our lives, ranging from active shooter drills and school-wide lockdowns to incidents in which children engaging in typically childlike behavior are suspended (for shooting an imaginary “arrow” at a fellow classmate), handcuffed (for being disruptive at school), arrested (for throwing water balloons as part of a school prank), and even tasered (for not obeying instructions).

For example, a middle school in Washington State went on lockdown after a student brought a toy gun to class. A Boston high school went into lockdown for four hours after a bullet was discovered in a classroom. A North Carolina elementary school locked down and called in police after a fifth grader reported seeing an unfamiliar man in the school (it turned out to be a parent).

Better safe than sorry is the rationale offered to those who worry that these drills are terrorizing and traumatizing young children. As journalist Dahlia Lithwick points out: “I don’t recall any serious national public dialogue about lockdown protocols or how they became the norm. It seems simply to have begun, modeling itself on the lockdowns that occur during prison riots, and then spread until school lockdowns and lockdown drills are as common for our children as fire drills, and as routine as duck-and-cover drills were in the 1950s.”

These drills have, indeed, become routine.

As the New York Times reports: “Most states have passed laws requiring schools to devise safety plans, and several states, including Michigan, Kentucky and North Dakota, specifically require lockdown drills. Some drills are as simple as a principal making an announcement and students sitting quietly in a darkened classroom. At other schools, police officers and school officials playact a shooting, stalking through the halls like gunmen and testing whether doors have been locked.”

Police officers at a Florida middle school carried out an active shooter drill in an effort to educate students about how to respond in the event of an actual shooting crisis. Two armed officers, guns loaded and drawn, burst into classrooms, terrorizing the students and placing the school into lockdown mode.

What is particularly chilling is how effective these lessons in compliance are in indoctrinating young people to accept their role in the police state, either as criminals or prison guards. If these exercises are intended to instill fear and compliance into young people, they’re working.

Sociologist Alice Goffman understands how far-reaching the impact of such “exercises” can be on young people. For six years, Goffman lived in a low-income urban neighborhood, documenting the impact such an environment—a microcosm of the police state—on its residents. Her account of neighborhood children playing cops and robbers speaks volumes about how constant exposure to pat downs, strip searches, surveillance and arrests can result in a populace that meekly allows itself to be prodded, poked and stripped.

As journalist Malcolm Gladwell writing for the New Yorker reports:

Goffman sometimes saw young children playing the age-old game of cops and robbers in the street, only the child acting the part of the robber wouldn’t even bother to run away: I saw children give up running and simply stick their hands behind their back, as if in handcuffs; push their body up against a car without being asked; or lie flat on the ground and put their hands over their head. The children yelled, “I’m going to lock you up! I’m going to lock you up, and you ain’t never coming home!” I once saw a six-year-old pull another child’s pants down to do a “cavity search.”

Clearly, our children are getting the message, but it’s not the message that was intended by those who fomented a revolution and wrote our founding documents. Their philosophy was that the police work for us, and “we the people” are the masters, and they are to be our servants. Now that has been turned on its head, fueled by our fears (some legitimate, some hyped along by the government and its media mouthpieces) about the terrors and terrorists that lurk among us.

It’s getting harder by the day to tell young people that we live in a nation that values freedom and which is governed by the rule of law without feeling like a teller of tall tales. Yet as I point out in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, unless something changes and soon for the young people growing up, there will be nothing left of freedom as we have known it but a fairy tale without a happy ending.

The Rutherford Institute

The Crisis of the Now: Distracted and Diverted from the Ever-Encroaching Police State

Posted on Updated on

The Rutherford Institute
By John W. Whitehead


“When a population becomes distracted by trivia, when cultural life is redefined as a perpetual round of entertainments, when serious public conversation becomes a form of baby talk, when, in short, a people become an audience and their public business a vaudeville act, then a nation finds itself at risk: culture-death is a clear possibility.”—Author Neil Postman

Caught up in the spectacle of the forthcoming 2016 presidential elections, Americans (never very good when it comes to long-term memory) have not only largely forgotten last year’s hullabaloo over militarized police, police shootings of unarmed citizens, asset forfeiture schemes, and government surveillance but are also generally foggy about everything that has happened since.

Then again, so much is happening on a daily basis that it’s understandable if the average American has a hard time keeping up with and remembering all of the “events,” manufactured or otherwise, which occur like clockwork and keep us distracted, deluded, amused, and insulated from reality while the government continues to amass more power and authority over the citizenry.

In fact, when we’re being bombarded with wall-to-wall news coverage and news cycles that change every few days, it’s difficult to stay focused on one thing—namely, holding the government accountable to abiding by the rule of law—and the powers-that-be understand this. As investigative journalist Mike Adams points out:

This psychological bombardment is waged primarily via the mainstream media which assaults the viewer by the hour with images of violence, war, emotions and conflict. Because the human nervous system is hard wired to focus on immediate threats accompanied by depictions of violence, mainstream media viewers have their attention and mental resources funneled into the never-ending ‘crisis of the NOW’ from which they can never have the mental breathing room to apply logic, reason or historical context.

Consider if you will the regularly scheduled trivia and/or distractions in the past year alone that have kept us tuned into the various breaking news headlines and entertainment spectacles and tuned out to the government’s steady encroachments on our freedoms:

Americans were riveted when the Republican presidential contenders went head-to-head for the second time in a three-hour debate that put Carly Fiorina in a favored position behind Donald Trump; Hillary Clinton presented the softer side of her campaign image during an appearance on The Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon; scientists announced the discovery of what they believed to be a new pre-human species, Homo naledi, that existed 2.8 million years ago; an 8.3 magnitude earthquake hit Chile; massive wildfires burned through 73,000 acres in California; a district court judge reversed NFL player Tom Brady’s four-game suspension; tennis superstar Serena Williams lost her chance at a calendar grand slam; and President Obama and Facebook mogul Mark Zuckerberg tweeted their support for a Texas student arrested for bringing a homemade clock to school.

That was preceded by the first round of the Republican presidential debates; an immigration crisis in Europe; the relaxing of Cuba-U.S. relations; the first two women soldiers graduating from Army Ranger course; and three Americans being hailed as heroes for thwarting a train attack in France. Before that, there was the removal of the Confederate flag from the South Carolina statehouse; shootings at a military recruiting center in Tennessee and a movie theater in Louisiana; the Boy Scouts’ decision to end its ban on gay adult leaders; the first images sent by the New Horizons spacecraft of Pluto; and the victory over Japan of the U.S. in the Women’s World Cup soccer finals.

No less traumatic and distracting were the preceding months’ newsworthy events, which included a shooting at a Charleston, S.C., church; the trial and sentencing of Boston Marathon bomber suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev; the U.S. Supreme Court’s affirmation of same-sex marriage, Obamacare, lethal injection drugs and government censorship of Confederate flag license plates; and an Amtrak train crash in Philadelphia that left more than 200 injured and eight dead.

Also included in the mix of distressing news coverage was the death of 25-year-old Freddie Gray while in police custody and the subsequent riots in Baltimore and city-wide lockdown; the damning report by the Dept. of Justice into discriminatory and abusive practices by the Ferguson police department; the ongoing saga of Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email account while serving as secretary of state; the apparently deliberate crash by a copilot of a German jetliner in the French Alps, killing all 150 passengers and crew; the New England Patriots’ fourth Super Bowl win; a measles outbreak in Disneyland; the escalating tensions between New York police and Mayor Bill de Blasio over his seeming support for anti-police protesters; and a terror attack at the Paris office of satire magazine Charlie Hebdo.

Rounding out the year’s worth of headline-worthy new stories were protests over grand jury refusals to charge police for the deaths of Eric Garner and Michael Brown; the disappearance of an AirAsia flight over the Java Sea; an Ebola outbreak that results in several victims being transported to the U.S. for treatment; reports of domestic violence among NFL players; a security breach at the White House in which a man managed to jump the fence, cross the lawn and enter the main residence; and the reported beheading of American journalist Steven Sotloff by ISIS.

That doesn’t even begin to touch on the spate of entertainment news that tends to win the battle for Americans’ attention: Bruce Jenner’s transgender transformation to Caitlyn Jenner; the death of Whitney Houston’s daughter Bobbi Kristina Brown; Kim Kardashian’s “break the internet” nude derriere photo; sexual assault allegations against Bill Cosby; the suicide of Robin Williams; the cancellation of the comedy The Interview in movie theaters after alleged terror hack threats; the wedding of George Clooney to Amal Alamuddin; the wedding of Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt; the ALS ice bucket challenge; and the birth of a baby girl to Prince William and Kate.

As I point out in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, these sleight-of-hand distractions, diversions and news spectacles are how the corporate elite controls a population by entrapping them in the “crisis of the NOW,” either inadvertently or intentionally, advancing their agenda without much opposition from the citizenry.

Professor Jacques Ellul studied this phenomenon of overwhelming news, short memories and the use of propaganda to advance hidden agendas. “One thought drives away another; old facts are chased by new ones,” wrote Ellul.

“Under these conditions there can be no thought. And, in fact, modern man does not think about current problems; he feels them. He reacts, but he does not understand them any more than he takes responsibility for them. He is even less capable of spotting any inconsistency between successive facts; man’s capacity to forget is unlimited. This is one of the most important and useful points for the propagandists, who can always be sure that a particular propaganda theme, statement, or event will be forgotten within a few weeks.”

But what exactly has the government (aided and abetted by the mainstream media) been doing while we’ve been so cooperatively fixated on whatever current sensation happens to be monopolizing the so-called “news” shows?

If properly disclosed, consistently reported on and properly digested by the citizenry, the sheer volume of the government’s activities, which undermine the Constitution and in many instances are outright illegal, would inevitably give rise to a sea change in how business is conducted in our seats of power.

Surely Americans would be concerned about the Obama administration’s plans to use behavioral science tactics to “nudge” citizens to comply with the government’s public policy and program initiatives? There would be no end to the uproar if Americans understood the ramifications of the government’s plan to train non-medical personnel—teachers, counselors and other lay people—in “mental first aid” in order to train them to screen, identify and report individuals suspected of suffering from mental illness. The problem, of course, arises when these very same mental health screeners misdiagnose opinions or behavior involving lawful First Amendment activities as a mental illness, resulting in involuntary detentions in psychiatric wards for the unfortunate victims.

Parents would be livid if they had any inkling about the school-to-prison pipeline, namely, how the public schools are being transformed from institutions of learning to prison-like factories, complete with armed police and surveillance cameras, aimed at churning out compliant test-takers rather than independent-minded citizens. And once those same young people reach college, they will be indoctrinated into believing that they have a “right” to be free from acts and expressions of intolerance with which they might disagree.

Concerned citizens should be up in arms over the government’s end-run tactics to avoid abiding by the rule of law, whether by outsourcing illegal surveillance activities to defense contractors, outsourcing inhumane torture to foreign countries, causing American citizens to disappear into secret interrogation facilities, or establishing policies that would allow the military to indefinitely detain any citizen—including journalists—considered a belligerent or enemy.

And one would hope American citizens would be incensed about being treated like prisoners in an electronic concentration camp, their every movement monitored, tracked and recorded by a growing government surveillance network that runs the gamut from traffic cameras and police body cameras to facial recognition software. Or outraged that we will be forced to fund a $93 billion drone industry that will be used to spy on our movements and activities, not to mention the fact that private prisons are getting rich (on our taxpayer dollars) by locking up infants, toddlers, children and pregnant women?

Unfortunately, while 71% of American voters are “dissatisfied” with the way things are going in the United States, that discontent has yet to bring about any significant changes in the government, nor has it caused the citizenry to get any more involved in their government beyond the ritualistic election day vote.

Professor Morris Berman suggests that the problems plaguing us as a nation—particularly as they relate to the government—have less to do with our inattention to corruption than our sanctioning, tacit or not, of such activities. “It seems to me,” writes Berman, “that the people do get the government they deserve, and even beyond that, the government who they are, so to speak.”

In other words, if we end up with a militarized police state, it will largely be because we welcomed it with open arms. In fact, according to a recent poll, almost a third of Americans would support a military coup “to take control from a civilian government which is beginning to violate the constitution.”

So where does that leave us?

As legendary television journalist Edward R. Murrow warned, “Unless we get up off our fat surpluses and recognize that television in the main is being used to distract, delude, amuse, and insulate us, then television and those who finance it, those who look at it, and those who work at it, may see a totally different picture too late.”

The Rutherford Institute

If You Don’t Think Americans Have Lost Our Freedoms, READ THIS

Posted on Updated on

Washington’s Blog

http://www.theispot.com/images/source/FredaLibertyUpended1.jpgPainting by Anthony Freda: www.AnthonyFreda.com

The Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave  The Land of the Fleeced and the Home of the Slave

This post explains the liberties guaranteed in the Bill of Rights – the first 10 amendments to the United States Constitution – and provides a scorecard on the extent of the loss of each right.

First Amendment

The 1st Amendment protects speech, religion, assembly and the press:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The Supreme Court has also interpreted the First Amendment as protecting freedom of association.

However, the government is arresting those speaking out … and violently crushing peaceful assemblies which attempt to petition the government for redress.

A federal judge found that the law allowing indefinite detention of Americans without due process has a “chilling effect” on free speech. And see this and this.

There are also enacted laws allowing the secret service to arrest anyone protesting near the president or other designated folks (that might explain incidents like this).

Mass spying by the NSA violates our freedom of association.

The threat of being labeled a terrorist for exercising our First Amendment rights certainly violates the First Amendment. The government is using laws to crush dissent, and it’s gotten so bad that even U.S. Supreme Court justices are saying that we are descending into tyranny. (And the U.S. is doing the same things that tyrannical governments have done for 5,000 years to crush dissent.)

For example, the following actions may get an American citizen living on U.S. soil labeled as a “suspected terrorist” today:

And holding the following beliefs may also be considered grounds for suspected terrorism:

And see this. (Of course, Muslims are more or less subject to a separate system of justice in America.)

And 1st Amendment rights are especially chilled when power has become so concentrated that the same agency which spies on all Americans also decides who should be assassinated.


Despite the clear protections found in the First Amendment, the freedoms described therein are under constant assault. Increasingly, Americans are being arrested and charged with bogus “contempt of cop” charges such as “disrupting the peace” or “resisting arrest” for daring to film police officers engaged in harassment or abusive practices. Journalists are being prosecuted for reporting on whistleblowers. States are passing legislation to muzzle reporting on cruel and abusive corporate practices. Religious ministries are being fined for attempting to feed and house the homeless. Protesters are being tear-gassed, beaten, arrested and forced into “free speech zones.” And under the guise of “government speech,” the courts have reasoned that the government can discriminate freely against any First Amendment activity that takes place within a government forum.

Second Amendment

The 2nd Amendment states:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Gun control and gun rights advocates obviously have very different views about whether guns are a force for violence or for good.

But even a top liberal Constitutional law expert reluctantly admits that the right to own a gun is as important a Constitutional right as freedom of speech or religion:

Like many academics, I was happy to blissfully ignore the Second Amendment. It did not fit neatly into my socially liberal agenda.


It is hard to read the Second Amendment and not honestly conclude that the Framers intended gun ownership to be an individual right. It is true that the amendment begins with a reference to militias: “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” Accordingly, it is argued, this amendment protects the right of the militia to bear arms, not the individual.

Yet, if true, the Second Amendment would be effectively declared a defunct provision. The National Guard is not a true militia in the sense of the Second Amendment and, since the District and others believe governments can ban guns entirely, the Second Amendment would be read out of existence.


More important, the mere reference to a purpose of the Second Amendment does not alter the fact that an individual right is created. The right of the people to keep and bear arms is stated in the same way as the right to free speech or free press. The statement of a purpose was intended to reaffirm the power of the states and the people against the central government. At the time, many feared the federal government and its national army. Gun ownership was viewed as a deterrent against abuse by the government, which would be less likely to mess with a well-armed populace.

Considering the Framers and their own traditions of hunting and self-defense, it is clear that they would have viewed such ownership as an individual right — consistent with the plain meaning of the amendment.

None of this is easy for someone raised to believe that the Second Amendment was the dividing line between the enlightenment and the dark ages of American culture. Yet, it is time to honestly reconsider this amendment and admit that … here’s the really hard part … the by Text-Enhance” href=”http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/02/top-liberal-constitutional-law-expert-gun-ownership-is-an-individual-constitutional-right-as-important-as-freedom-of-speech-or-religion.html#”>NRA may have been right. This does not mean that Charlton Heston is the new Rosa Parks or that no restrictions can be placed on gun ownership. But it does appear that gun ownership was made a protected right by the Framers and, while we might not celebrate it, it is time that we recognize it.

The gun control debate – including which weapons and magazines are banned – is still in flux …


Americans remain powerless to defend themselves against SWAT team raids and government agents armed to the teeth with military weapons better suited for the battlefield than for a country founded on freedom. Police shootings of unarmed citizens continue to outrage communities, while little is really being done to demilitarize law enforcement agencies. Indeed, just recently, North Dakota became the first state to legalize law enforcement use of drones armed with weapons such as tear gas, rubber bullets, beanbags, pepper spray and Tasers.

Third Amendment

The 3rd Amendment prohibits the government forcing people to house soldiers:

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

A recent lawsuit by a Nevada family – covered by (Mother Jones, Fox News and Courthouse News – alleges violation of the Third Amendment.

Moreover, the military is arguably quartering “digital” troops within our homes.


With the police increasingly training like the military, acting like the military, and posing as military forces—complete with military weapons, assault vehicles, etc.—it is clear that we now have what the founders feared most—a standing army on American soil. Moreover, as a result of SWAT team raids (more than 80,000 a year) where police invade homes, often without warrants, and injure and even kill unarmed citizens, the barrier between public and private property has been done away with, leaving us with armed government agents who act as if they own our property.

 In America, Journalists Are Considered Terrorists
Painting by Anthony Freda: www.AnthonyFreda.com.

Fourth Amendment

The 4th Amendment prevents unlawful search and seizure:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

But the government is spying on everything we dowithout any real benefit or justification.

Indeed, experts say that the type of spying being carried out by the NSA and other agencies is exactly the kind of thing which King George imposed on the American colonists … which led to the Revolutionary War.

And many Constitutional experts – such as Jonathan Turley – think that the police went too far in Boston with lockdowns and involuntary door-to-door searches.

In reality:

The Fourth Amendment has suffered the greatest damage in recent years and been all but eviscerated by an unwarranted expansion of police powers that include strip searches and even anal and vaginal searches of citizens, surveillance and intrusions justified in the name of fighting terrorism, as well as the outsourcing of otherwise illegal activities to private contractors. Case in point: Texas police forced a 21-year-old woman to undergo a warrantless vaginal search by the side of the road after she allegedly “rolled” through a stop sign.

The use of civil asset forfeiture schemes to swell the coffers of police forces has also continued to grow in popularity among cash-strapped states. The federal government continues to strong-arm corporations into providing it with access to Americans’ private affairs, from emails and online transactions to banking and web surfing. Coming in the wake of massive leaks about the inner workings of the NSA and the massive secretive surveillance state, it was revealed that the government threatened to fine Yahoo $250,000 every day for failing to comply with the NSA’s mass data collection program known as PRISM. Meanwhile, AT&T has enjoyed a profitable and “extraordinary, decades-long” relationship with the NSA.

The technological future appears to pose even greater threats to what’s left of our Fourth Amendment rights, with advances in biometric identification and microchip implants on the horizon making it that much easier for the government to track not only our movements and cyber activities but our very cellular beings. Barclays has already begun using a finger-scanner as a form of two-step authentication to give select customers access to their accounts. Similarly, Motorola has been developing thin “digital tattoos” that will ensure that a phone’s owner is the only person who may unlock it. Not to be overlooked are the aerial spies—surveillance drones—about to take to the skies in coming years, as well as the Drive Smart programs that will spy on you (your speed, movements, passengers, etc.) while you travel the nation’s highways and byways.

Paintings by Anthony Freda: www.AnthonyFreda.com.

Fifth Amendment

The 5th Amendment addresses due process of law, eminent domain, double jeopardy and grand jury:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

But the American government has shredded the 5th Amendment by subjecting us to indefinite detention and taking away our due process rights.

The government claims the right to assassinate or indefinitely detain any American citizen on U.S. citizen without any due process. And see this.

For example, American citizens are being detained in Guantanamo-like conditions in Chicago … including:

  • Brutality
  • Being held in secret
  • Not even telling a suspect’s lawyer whether his client is being held?

And see this, this and this.

As such, the government is certainly depriving people of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.

There are additional corruptions of 5th Amendment rights – such as property being taken for private purposes. And the right to remain silent is gone.

The percentage of prosecutions in which a defendant is denied a grand jury is difficult to gauge, as there is so much secrecy surrounding many terrorism trials.

HUNG LIBERTY (NYSE)Image by William Banzai

Sixth Amendment

The 6th Amendment guarantees the right to a speedy ad public trial, by an impartial jury in the location where the crime allegedly occurred, to hear the criminal charges levied against us and to be able to confront the witnesses who have testified against us, as well as speedy criminal trials, and a public defender for those who cannot hire an attorney:

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

Subjecting people to indefinite detention or assassination obviously violates the 6th Amendment right to a speedy and public jury trial. In both cases, the defendants is “disposed of” without ever receiving any trial at all … let alone a speedy or public one.    In neither case do they get a jury, a defense lawyer, or the right to call their own witnesses.  And they often never even hear the charges against them.

Indefinite detentions usually don’t occur where the alleged crime occurred, but at a black site.

More and more commonly, the government prosecutes cases based upon “secret evidence” that they don’t show to the defendant … or sometimes even the judge hearing the case.

The government uses “secret evidence” to spy on Americans, prosecute leaking or terrorism charges (even against U.S. soldiers) and even assassinate people. And see this and this.

Secret witnesses are being used in some cases. And sometimes lawyers are not even allowed to read their own briefs.

Indeed, even the laws themselves are now starting to be kept secret. And it’s about to get a lot worse.

Moreover, government is “laundering” information gained through mass surveillance through other agencies, with an agreement that the agencies will “recreate” the evidence in a “parallel construction” … so they don’t have to admit that the evidence came from unconstitutional spying. A former top NSA official says that this is the opposite of following the Fourth Amendment, but is a “totalitarian process” which shows that we’re in a “police state”.

And there are two systems of justice in America … one for the big banks and other fatcats, and one for everyone else. The government made it official policy not to prosecute fraud, even though fraud is the ; by Text-Enhance” href=”http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/12/even-the-mainstream-media-finally-awakens-to-the-fact-that-big-banks-are-criminal-enterprises.html#”>criminal fraud is the main business model adopted by Wall Street. Indeed, the ; by Text-Enhance” href=”http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/07/11869.html”>giant banks.

The perpetrators of the biggest financial crime in world history, the largest insider trading scandal of all time, illegal raiding of customer accounts and blatant financing of drug cartels and terrorists have all been committed recently without any real criminal prosecution or jail time.

On the other hand, government prosecutors are using the legal system to crush dissent and to silence whistleblowers.

And some of the nation’s most powerful judges have lost their independence … and are in bed with the powers-that-be.

Constitutional lawyer John Whitehead explains:

The Fifth Amendment and the Sixth Amendment work in tandem. These amendments supposedly ensure that you are innocent until proven guilty, and government authorities cannot deprive you of your life, your liberty or your property without the right to an attorney and a fair trial before a civilian judge. However, in the new suspect society in which we live, where surveillance is the norm, these fundamental principles have been upended. Certainly, if the government can arbitrarily freeze, seize or lay claim to your property (money, land or possessions) under government asset forfeiture schemes, you have no true rights. That’s the crux of a case before the U.S. Supreme Court challenging the government’s use of asset forfeiture to strip American citizens of the funds needed to hire a defense attorney of their choosing.

Seventh Amendment

The 7th Amendment guarantees trial by jury in federal court for civil cases:

In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

But there are two systems of justice in Americaone for the big banks and other fatcats, and one for everyone else. So good luck going after the powers-that-be.

And the World Justice Project – a bipartisan, independent group with honorary chairs including numerous current and former Supreme Court Justices – released a report saying that Americans have less access to justice than most wealthy countries … and many developing nations. The report finds that Americans have less access to justice than Botswanans, and that only the wealthy have the resources to protect rights using the court system:

For example, Germans sue equally whether they are rich or poor … but in America, only the wealthy have the resources to protect rights using the court system:

(And the austerity caused by the highest levels of inequality in world history – which are in turn is caused by socialist actions by our government, which have destroyed the Founding Fathers’ vision of prosperity – is causing severe budget cuts to the courts, resulting in the wheels of justice slowing down considerably.)

Federal judges have also recently decided that they can pre-judge cases before the plaintiff even has the chance to conduct discovery … and throw cases out if they don’t like plaintiff’s case.


The populace has no idea of what’s in the Constitution—civic education has virtually disappeared from most school curriculums—that inevitably translates to an ignorant jury incapable of distinguishing justice and the law from their own preconceived notions and fears. However, as a growing number of citizens are coming to realize, the power of the jury to nullify the government’s actions—and thereby help balance the scales of justice—is not to be underestimated. Jury nullification reminds the government that it’s “we the people” who can and should be determining what laws are just, what activities are criminal and who can be jailed for what crimes.

Painting by Anthony Freda: www.AnthonyFreda.com

Eighth Amendment

The 8th Amendment prohibits cruel and unusual punishment:

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Indefinite detention and assassination are obviously cruel and unusual punishment.

The widespread system of torture carried out in the last 10 years – with the help of other countriesviolates the 8th Amendment. Many want to bring it back … or at least justify its past use.

While Justice Scalia disingenuously argues that torture does not constitute cruel and unusual punishment because it is meant to produce information – not punish – he’s wrong. It’s not only cruel and unusual … it is technically a form of terrorism.

And government whistleblowers are being cruelly and unusually punished with unduly harsh sentences meant to intimidate anyone else from speaking out.


A California appeals court is being asked to consider “whether years of unpredictable delays from conviction to execution” constitute cruel and unusual punishment. For instance, although 900 individuals have been sentenced to death in California since 1978, only 13 have been executed. As CBS News reports, “More prisoners have died of natural causes on death row than have perished in the death chamber.”

Ninth Amendment

The 9th Amendment provides that people have other rights, even if they aren’t specifically listed in the Constitution:

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

We can debate what our inherent rights as human beings are. I believe they include the right to a level playing field, and access to non-toxic food and water. You may disagree.

But everyone agrees that the government should not actively encourage fraud and manipulation. However, the government – through its malignant, symbiotic relation with big corporations – is interfering with our aspirations for economic freedom, safe food and water (instead of arsenic-laden, genetically engineered junk), freedom from undue health hazards such as irradiation due to government support of archaic nuclear power designs, and a level playing field (as opposed to our crony capitalist system in which the little guy has no shot due to redistribution of wealth from the middle class to the super-elite, and government support of white collar criminals).

By working hand-in-glove with giant corporations to defraud us into paying for a lower quality of life, the government is trampling our basic rights as human beings.

Tenth Amendment

The 10th Amendment provides that powers not specifically given to the Federal government are reserved to the states or individual:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Two of the central principles of America’s Founding Fathers are:

(1) The government is created and empowered with the consent of the people


(2) Separation of powers

Today, most Americans believe that the government is threatening – rather than protecting – freedom. We’ve become more afraid of our government than of terrorists, and believe that the government is no longer acting with the “consent of the governed“.

And the federal government is trampling the separation of powers by stepping on the toes of the states and the people. For example, former head S&L prosecutor Bill Black – now a professor of law and economics – notes:

The Federal Reserve Bank of New York and the resident examiners and regional staff of the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency [both] competed to weaken federal regulation and aggressively used the preemption doctrine to try to prevent state investigations of and actions against fraudulent mortgage lenders.

Indeed, the federal government is doing everything it can to stick its nose into every aspect of our lives … and act like Big Brother.

Conclusion: While a few of the liberties enshrined in the Bill of Rights still exist, the vast majority are under heavy assault.

Other Constitutional Provisions … and The Declaration of Independence

In addition to the trampling of the Bill of Rights, the government has also trashed the separation of powers enshrined in the main body of the Constitution.

The government is also engaging in activities which the Founding Fathers fought against, such as taxation without representation (here and here), cronyism, deference to central banks, etc.

As the preamble to the Declaration of Independence shows, the American government is still carrying out many of the acts the Founding Fathers found most offensive:

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures. [Background here and here]

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power. [Background here, here, here, here and here]


He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation: [Background]


For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences [Background]


He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation. [Background]


He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us. [Background here, here and here]

Washington’s Blog

Former U.S. General Calls For Rounding Up and Interning “Radicalized” and “Disloyal” Americans

Posted on Updated on

by Mac Slavo

Creative Commons Photo Credit: KamrenB Photography

Thank your lucky stars that the former Supreme Allied Commander For Europe and one-time U.S. Presidential candidate Wesley Clark never made it to the highest office in the land. Because if he had, there is a distinct possibility that he would have used our military to take the so-called domestic war on terror to a level not seen since World War II.

Clark shows his true colors and justifies why Americans should be rounded up and interned if they disagree with government policies. As you watch the following video keep in mind that there are thousands of people just like him, many with dreams of one day becoming powerful politicians and high level government bureaucrats.

In World War II, if someone supported Nazi Germany at the expense of the United States we didn’t say that was freedom of speech, we put them in a camp. They were prisoners of war.

So, if these people are radicalized, and they don’t support the United States, and they’re disloyal to the United States as a matter of principle, fine that’s their right. It’s our right and our obligation to segregate them from the normal community for the duration of the conflict.

I think we’re going to have to increasingly get tough on this.

Kurt Nimmo of Infowars notes that the difference between World War II and now is that we actually declared war against a uniformed enemy, whereas in the war on terror the government arbitrarily picks and chooses who to classify as a potential threat to the United States:

Clark is in essence advocating a life sentence for people who have not committed a crime but merely engaged in speech — often reprehensible, yet constitutionally protected — the government considers radical and in opposition to its foreign policy.

Within the context of this interview Clark is talking specifically about Islamic religious extremism. But it is important to keep in mind that terrorism in America has been redefined to mean whatever people like Wesley Clark think it should mean.

No matter what topic the training session concerns, every DHS sponsored course I have attended over the past few years never fails to branch off into warnings about potential domestic terrorists in the community.  While this may sound like a valid officer and community safety issue, you may be disturbed to learn how our Federal government describes a typical domestic terrorist.

Source: Do You Qualify as a Domestic Terrorist?

Scores of seemingly innocuous activities are now red flags for the federal government. If you home school your child, discuss big government policies in a negative light, or simply declare the U.S. Constitution as the law of the land, you are a threat.

A federal prosecutor who recently prosecuted a man for selling gold and silver coins as an alternative to the U.S. dollar said the man was engaging in a conspiracy against the United States and treated the case as domestic terrorism.

Congressman Rand Paul has previously warned that even people who store food in their closets or keep extra ammunition are now suspected of terrorism.

Given the broad definitions purposely included within laws such as The Patriot Act millions of Americans could be identified as threats to national security and subsequently imprisoned without cause should people like Wesley Clark have their way.

And perhaps that is exactly where all of this is going.

As we’ve noted previously, the Jade Helm 15 military exercises taking place over the next couple of months across the United States include training for the rounding up of dissidents and subversives. There is a significant amount of evidence and insider information indicative of a scenario that includes Gestapo-style tactics like secret arrests, interrogations and detentions. In fact, a Texas Ranger recently dropped a bombshell and said that train cars with shackles were part of this summer’s military training.

Obviously, this training isn’t designed for foreign threats in rural areas of the middle east.

Perhaps Wesley Clark is already privy to the plan and it is now being seeded into the minds of millions of sheeple who will be convinced of the need to round up dissident Americans should the right crisis strike.

And be assured that, just like the German people under the Nazis, the majority will not question their patriotic duty to turn in suspected enemies of the state when told to do so.


Wesley Clark Calls for Interning “Disloyal” Americans

Posted on Updated on


Advocates life sentence for people who have not committed a crime

Retired US Army General and the former Supreme Allied Commander of Europe for NATO Wesley Clark advocates rounding up “radicalized” and “disloyal” Americans and putting them in internment camps for the “duration” of the war on terror.

“In World War II if someone supported Nazi Germany at the expense of the United States, we didn’t say that was freedom of speech, we put him in a camp, they were prisoners of war,” Clark told MSNBC.

The difference is that World War II was a war declared under Article I, Section 8, Clause II of the Constitution whereas the war on terror is undeclared and thus illegal.

Clark is in essence advocating a life sentence for people who have not committed a crime but merely engaged in speech — often reprehensible, yet constitutionally protected — the government considers radical and in opposition to its foreign policy.

The Bush administration declared the war on terror would last a generation or more. Senior officials with the Obama administration meanwhile have said — when formulating “disposition matrix” to determine how terrorism suspects will be disposed of — they had reached a “broad consensus that such operations are likely to be extended at least another decade” or more.

The Edward Snowden “leaks reveal that the war on terror at home continues to grind on, capturing in its dragnet millions of Americans and foreigners, many of them innocent of any crime. The war on terror has become institutionalized, and the domestic costs of this war continue to mount: privacy is being eroded; communications are being monitored; and dissent is being cracked down on. The primary targets of the domestic war on terror continue to be Muslims and Arabs, though it is now clear that the sweep of the domestic war has ensnared millions of other Americans. And there is no end in sight to this domestic juggernaut,” writes Alex Kane.

Clark’s remarks reveal the mindset of the upper echelon of government. Those who disagree with the government are now to be rounded up and shut up indefinitely in political internment camps.

Mass internment of official enemies on par with Nazi Germany and Stalin’s Soviet Union is now “on the table” and openly discussed as suspicious attacks and FBI orchestrated and grandstanded terror plots continue to grab headlines and build a reactionary consensus as the designed result of an incessant, decades-long propaganda campaign.


Military Reveals Martial Law and Dissident Extraction Plans for US Citizens

Posted on Updated on

The Common Sense Show
by Dave Hodges

raider focus

Over the past two months, many of us in the Independent Media have said it again and again, Jade Helm is about subjugating the American people who will one day rise up to what is coming.

As the American people are kept in the dark about the true nature of Jade Helm, members of the Independent Media have been very consistent about pointing out that Jade Helm, because of its involvement of Special Operations Forces, the “drill” is clearly designed to practice political dissident extractions which would be executed prior to the imposition of martial law. This is a simple and logical conclusion to draw because this is what Navy Seals, Green Berets, etc. do in pre-combat activities. The involvement of ARSOF in Jade Helm as a primary player, speaks clearly to intent.

What I never counted on would be the fact that Jade Helm would ever let any part of these kinds of activities to ever become public. The military has now allowed planned political dissident extractions to become verifiably public, and most amazingly, they did so with the release of video that the military, itself, would make, produce and then disseminate.

Gigantic war games, along with a massive military convoy, are commencing in Colorado, prior to the start of the supposed start of Jade Helm 15 exercises in July which has now been officially moved up to June 15th. This ancillary Jade Helm drill is called “Raider Focus” and it is turning Southern Colorado and the Independent Media on its ear.

Vehement Mainstream Media Denials Regarding Jade Helm

Raider Focus, which I am told, is merely a subset of Jade Helm, has been the sold to the citizenry as merely war preparations in the Middle East and this has nothing to do with the imposition of martial law.

There is no Jade Helm conspiracy.

There is no Jade Helm conspiracy.


Courtesy of Fox and Friends

Courtesy of Fox and Friends

Fox and Friends actually referred to the drill as “Jed Helm”. And anyone who dares to profess the belief that “Jed Helm” is about martial law also is dumb enough “to believe in Chemtrails and we all know that is not true”, said Fox and Friends in a recent broadcast. Fox and Friends further stated that Alex Jones scares people and that nobody should listen to him as they invoked the “giggle factor” to discredit what clearly is a martial law exercise directed towards the American people. And of course there are the sloppy disinformation agents at KHOU TV, in Houston, who told the blatant lie in which they stated that I claimed that Americans were “being slaughtered inside of Death Domes in Texas”. Who could forget that the Washington Post actually had an article pinned to the top of Google for five days which proclaimed the insanity of linking Jade Helm to martial law and political extractions in an attempt to discredit Jade Helm naysayers.

I could go on and on with the near universal media ridicule of Jade Helm detractors, but you get the idea. Yet, despite the extreme obfuscation of the truth about Jade Helm by the six corporations that control the vast majority of the dinosaur media, the military is now providing the public with evidence which serves to validate the concerns that Jade Helm is a clear and present danger to the American people.

In a sight in which I could not believe my eyes, at the 3:40 mark in the following video, we see military forces rehearsing extraction drills on citizens.


Why would the military release video-taped images of what are clearly extractions drills? In the video, they even refer to the captured citizens as “detainees”. Check out the martial law manual, FM 3-39.4 nd FM 3-39.33 and the reader will see that this is the universal term for individuals who will be incarcerated in what are commonly referred to as FEMA camps. Again, I ask, why would the military provide the Independent Media with such smoking gun evidence which serves to validate our allegations that Jade Helm is directed at the American people? This question will be analyzed at the end of this article. Just for now, let’s suffice it to say that this is a planned leak of very damning information.

In another leak of information, we have yet another video which demonstrates that a permanent martial law force is being prepared to be unleashed upon the American public in a matter of months and the source of the information is stunning.

Amy Goodman and Democracy Now

Amy Goodman, the host of the PBS show, Democracy Now, has recently reported that a permanent martial law occupying force that will go live in October of 2015. The martial law enforcement unit is the 3rd Infantry Division, 1st Brigade Combat Team. The mission is to serve as “an on-call Federal response in times of emergency”.

According to the PBS report, the unit will be placed under the control of Northern Command. The martial law unit will be responsible for  stopping civil unrest and engaging in crowd control. As an aside, when the terms “civil unrest” and “crowd control” are used, this can only mean that the 3rd Infantry Division, 1st Brigade Combat Team is rehearsing to subdue the American people in a martial law action.

Goodman reported that the weapons of interest for this unit are primarily nonlethal. The first 50 seconds of the following Democracy Now video tells one all that anyone needs to know about what is coming and how this is being practiced for as I write these words.


Connecting the Dots

Even Fox and Friends would have a difficult time denying what is on video in this article as we have seen clear and demonstrable proof that Jade Helm related activities are connected with political dissident extractions of American citizens and this will be followed up with the roll out of a martial law occupation force.

So, despite the fact that the MSM has embarrassed themselves in denying what is so painfully obvious, the military undoes all of this work designed to obfuscate the truth and basically admits to the fact that America is going under martial law and political dissidents are about to be treated as extreme enemies of the state.

Why would the military engage in such a self-defeating revelation and sacrifice the element of surprise prior to subjugating the American public? I have a hard time believing that the military is not on board with the ulterior motives behind Jade Helm and this release of information is intentional in that they want to see a public backlash. Based on the available information, this is the only thing that makes any sense.

History Repeats Itself

These stunning revelations by our military are not unprecedented and they have happened before. On November 3, 2012, I wrote an article in which I detailed how elements of our military unsuccessfully attempted to rescue Ambassador Stevens just prior to his eventual murder. This action was an attempt at a soft coup directed at the Obama administration and came at a time when Obama was firing command officers at a time faster than their replacements could be seated.

For 30 months, elements of the military abandoned employing another soft coup attempt because, as I have been told, they did not feel that they enjoyed the popular support of the public which would be a prerequisite for regime change. I would encourage the reader to read this article which demonstrates the extremely strained relationship between military command officers and the Commander-In-Chief.


It now appears that elements of the Jade Helm task force are not fully on board with the full implementation of the objectives and we are seeing a moderate attempt to warn the American people.

These warnings may be subtle, but to the trained eye, they are undeniable. The best possible outcome with regard to these revelations is to spread these revelations far and wide and see what develops by exposing much of the public to the realizations that “we are not in Kansas anymore”.



The Common Sense Show