TODAY’S NEWS : March 31, 2012
450+ major bank resignations; arrests of economic & War Criminals next?
March 30, 2012
A little over three weeks ago, 116 major bank resignations was startling news. Now with over 450 resignations and David Wilcock’s compelling documentation, the question is whether the 1% criminal oligarchy face imminent arrest.
I can’t predict the future. I don’t know what the resignations mean. I don’t know if these arrests and end of the criminal 1% is here.
That said, I can account for recent 1% criminal history that demands arrests for the murder of millions, harm to billions, and looting of trillions of the 99%’s dollars:
The most damning legal violation are unlawful wars; in “emperor has no clothes” obvious violation of the Kellogg-Briand Treaty and UN Charter.
Here is the US government claiming it can Constitutionally assassinate Americans upon the non-reviewable dictate of the leader.
Here is NDAA 2012 where US government claims it can Constitutionally disappear Americans and then appoint a tribunal with death sentence authority (unless unlimited detention is their choice). Here is the 2006 Military Commissions Act that says the same.
Here is US government claiming it can Constitutionally control-drown (waterboard) anyone they declare a “terrorist” as another terror-tactic to silence dissent.
Here is the US government claiming it can seize any resource, any person, at any time for “national defense.”
Here is documentation of the economic 1% using criminal fraud to loot trillions of the 99%’s wealth every year.
Here is documentation of how a 1% corporate media lie by commission and omission to keep these damning crimes obfuscated to the 99%.
I can also account for US history extending back over 160 years: Occupy This: US History exposes the 1%’s crimes then and now.
I also make these suggestions to you:
Be proud of what you think, say, and do about these “emperor has no clothes” obvious crimes in war and money.
This is an important test for what you stand for when it counts.
Explore your unique, beautiful, and powerful self-expression for virtue as you best see it. You value virtue far more than whatever you fear.
I recommend David Wilcock’s website under “LATEST ARTICLES” for updates on the status of arresting the criminal 1%. This is the latest info as of now.
ISRAEL FEARS LOSING ITS VICTIM STATUS
March 27, 2012
Take for example, the recent Human Rights Council resolution to form a fact-finding mission to investigate the implications of “ Israeli settlements on the civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights of the Palestinian people” passed last week.
Israel began ranting about how the HRC was hypocritical and biased and had an “automatic majority” against Israel. Obviously predicting what Israel would try to do, the decision also called on Israel “not to obstruct the process of investigation and to cooperate fully with the mission.”
Editorial written FOR
Ignoring Israel’s complete domination
By Amira Hass
Israel’s position in its periodic report to the donor-coordination group for the Palestinian Authority reminds one of the boy who kills his parents and then demands an orphan’s pension. Israel describes the failings of the Palestinian economy as if the colonialist occupation is not their primary cause.
The authors of the report express the view that the dependence of the Palestinian Authority on foreign aid will not diminish in the coming years.
In doing so, they are showing disrespect for the intelligence of the donor countries’ representatives, who met last week in Brussels.
Who better than these delegates knows the great service the family of nations is doing to Israel by providing massive, ongoing aid to the Palestinians?
Taxpayers around the world are the ones who are relieving Israel of its obligations as an occupying power and repairing the damage it is causing.
It turns out it’s easier for the family of nations to fund the occupation than to force Israel to put an end to it. The guys in our finance and defense ministries – upon whose data the report is based – state, in fact, that the donor countries should get their checkbooks ready, because our policy this year won’t be different.
With smug arrogance, the report’s authors ignore Israel’s complete domination over the resources essential to economic progress and expansion: land, water, time, a Palestinian population registry, currency, territorial expanse, air space, radio-frequency spectrums, territorial contiguity, banking services and television broadcasts, freedom of movement, border crossings, foreign nationals who are allowed entry and the duration of their stay, highways, and personal and communal security.
With all the precision of a shopkeeper, the drafters of the report recount all of the measures that Israel, in its great magnanimity, has taken “to support economic growth in the West Bank.”
But beyond all the means of support detailed in the report, there are the unmentioned hours wasted by Palestinian, American and European bureaucrats seeking to convince their Israeli counterparts to put them into practice.
The number of tourists coming to the West Bank city of Bethlehem last year, for example, was 1,174,280 (compared to 1,092,811 – note the precision! – in 2010 ), according to the report.
Then there was the extension of the hours of operation at checkpoints; the agreement over the Palestinian police presence in Area B (which is under Israeli military control and Palestinian civil responsibility ); construction of a visitors’ lounge for meetings between Palestinian and Israeli business people at one of the checkpoints; the drilling of four wells in a nature reserve’s eastern aquifer;
17 (again, note the precision! ) preparatory meetings (regarding water infrastructure ) with representatives of the U.S. State Department and USAID; one meeting with a Dutch representative over Israeli-Palestinian cooperation; 434,382 cars,
owned by Palestinian citizens of Israel, that were allowed passage via the West Bank town of Jenin; consideration of a Palestinian request for a customs exemption for cars owned by foreign investors and the disabled; and approval of 2,777 requests for changes of address on ID cards from Gaza to the West Bank (of 3,857 people who sought approval ).
With a whiff of the theories of economist Milton Friedman, the report sneers at the size of the Palestinian public sector. But if there is anything that assures Palestinian social stability – and in turn quiet and prosperity for Israel – it is the regular (if unreasonably low ) salaries paid to that public sector.
Since the Oslo Accords between Israel and the PLO were drafted in the 1990s, payment of wages has been a major means by which support of and dependence on the PA leadership has been buttressed.
The adaptability of the Palestinian leadership to Israel’s policy of carving out Palestinian territorial enclaves was based in part on that very internal instability.
And what about the bloated Palestinian security forces, which are an inseparable part of the public sector?
They are subcontractors for the Israeli Shin Bet security service and the Israeli army, who have tasked them with participating in controlling, suppressing and containing the various manifestations of Palestinian resistance.
It’s as if the big Israeli boss is not only benefiting from the workers supplied by the subcontractor, but is also complaining that there are too many of them.
Feds Using NDAA To Silence Journalists Critical Of Government
Posted by Alexander Higgins - March 29, 2012
The NDAA is being challenged in a lawsuit by journalists accused of supporting terrorism for reporting facts that challenge the official US government narrative.
March 29th, 2012
A coalition of prominent journalist known for being critical of the United States in the War on Terror have joined forces to file a lawsuit against Barack Obama and Leon Panetta to challenge the National Defense Authorization act.
The NDAA, also known as the Homeland Battlefield Bill, has legalized a wide variety of totalitarian measures against US citizens by declaring the entire world, including the United States, a battleground in the war against terrorism and is a clear and present danger to the US Constitution.
As I reported before the bill was passed into law:
The United States Congress is set to vote on legislation that authorizes the official start of World War 3.
The legislation authorizes the President of the United States to take unilateral military action against all nations, organizations, and persons, both domestically and abroad, who are alleged to be currently or who have in the past supported or engaged in hostilities or who have provided aid in support of hostilities against the United States or any of its coalition allies.
The legislation removes the requirement of congressional approval for the use of military force and instead gives the President totalitarian dictatorial authority to engage in any and all military actions for an indefinite period of time.
It even gives the President the authority to launch attacks against American Citizens inside the United States with no congressional oversight whatsoever.
Just to recap:
Endless War – The war will continue until all hostilities are terminated, which will never happen.
No Borders – The president will have the full authority to launch military strikes against any country, organization or person, including against U.S citizens on U.S soil.
Unilateral Military Action – Full authority to invade any nation at any time with no congressional approval required.
No Clearly Defined Enemy – The US can declare or allege anyone a terrorist or allege they are or have been supporting “hostilities” against the US and attack at will.
Authorization To Invade Several Countries – The president would have full authority to invade Iran, Syria, North Korea, along with several other nations in Africa and the Middle East and even Russia and China under the legislation all of which are “known” to have supported and aided hostilities against the United States.
In accordance with the NDAA, we have seen the US government argue that it can now impose military detention on US citizens.
That means US citizens can be arrested and thrown in jail indefinitely without a right to a trial or even a lawyer.
The US government has also asserted they can ship US citizens they detain to secret overseas prisons where they can be tortured.
The government has even asserted NDAA they are now allowed to preemptively assassinate US citizens they decide t add to a top-secret kill list with no judicial oversight.
The NDAA authorizes the government to do these things based merely on accusations with no need to provide evidence or even proof of their allegations.
Americans were tricked into supporting the NDAA by being assured the legislation would only be used to fight enemy combatants engaged in terrorism.
The government has quickly used vague language in the bill to broaden definition of terrorism and what constitutes supporting terrorism.
In two cases KNOWN cases against US citizens we have seen the enemy combatant label being charged for simply uploading videos to YouTube.
Another US citizen has been charged as an enemy combatant for providing a link to classified information.
That classified information was publicly available on the whistle blowing website WikiLeaks.
Speaking of WikiLeaks, they are now also accused of supporting Al Qaeda because they leaked evidence of US war crimes overseas.
Even Bradley Manning, who the US alleges gave WikiLeaks the classified files, now also qualifies under the broadened definition of supporting Al Qaeda.
Some law enforcement officials in the US and in the UK are operating under the opinion that the Occupy Wall Street movement is a terrorist organization.
Remember, in each of these cases all that is needed to invoke the NDAA to infinitely detain, torture, or even assassinate any of these US citizens is an assassination.
Now journalists critical of US government policies are being accused of providing support for terrorism.
Prominent journalist Chris Hedges learned about being placed on the US terror watch list after he was interrogated by Federal government officials apparently because his reporting of facts that oppose the official scripted narrative that is echoed by the corporate media reports is somehow being interpreted as supporting terrorism.
Can you see where this is heading?
Those who question, dissent or expose the government are being treated as providing support for terrorism even when they have no connections to Al Qaeda or any other terrorist organizations.
Furthermore, journalists are being silenced in fear that by reaching by even reporting on certain stories or contacting certain organizations they will become a target of the NDAA.
Chris Hedges how now filed a lawsuit against the government challenging the NDAA.
He is also being joined by a coalition of prominent journalists who have signed on to the lawsuits and issued affidavits in support of his claims.
Included on the lawsuit are Daniel Ellsberg and Noam Chomsky among others.
Naomi Wolf has also signed an affidavit in support of the lawsuit detailing how the NDAA is being used to prevent her from reporting on stories critical of the government because such stories can easily be considered as supporting terrorism.
Today they held a press conference in New York about the lawsuit.
From Truth Out, Chris Hedges details the incident that sparked the Lawsuit.
Chris Hedges | Totalitarian Systems Always Begin by Rewriting the Law
I spent four hours in a third-floor conference room at 86 Chambers St. in Manhattan on Friday as I underwent a government deposition. Benjamin H. Torrance, an assistant U.S. attorney, carried out the questioning as part of the government’s effort to decide whether it will challenge my standing as a plaintiff in the lawsuit I have brought with others against President Barack Obama and Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta over the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), also known as the Homeland Battlefield Bill.
The NDAA implodes our most cherished constitutional protections. It permits the military to function on U.S. soil as a civilian law enforcement agency. It authorizes the executive branch to order the military to selectively suspend due process and habeas corpus for citizens.
The law can be used to detain people deemed threats to national security, including dissidents whose rights were once protected under the First Amendment, and hold them until what is termed “the end of the hostilities.” Even the name itself—the Homeland Battlefield Bill—suggests the totalitarian concept that endless war has to be waged within “the homeland” against internal enemies as well as foreign enemies.
Judge Katherine B. Forrest, in a session starting at 9 a.m. Thursday in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, will determine if I have standing and if the case can go forward. The attorneys handling my case, Bruce Afran and Carl Mayer, will ask, if I am granted standing, for a temporary injunction against the Homeland Battlefield Bill.
An injunction would, in effect, nullify the law and set into motion a fierce duel between two very unequal adversaries—on the one hand, the U.S. government and, on the other, myself, Noam Chomsky, Daniel Ellsberg, the Icelandic parliamentarian Birgitta Jónsdóttir and three other activists and journalists. All have joined me as plaintiffs and begun to mobilize resistance to the law through groups such as Stop NDAA.
The deposition was, as these things go, conducted civilly. Afran and Mayer, the attorneys bringing the suit on my behalf, were present. I was asked detailed questions by Torrance about my interpretation of Section 1021 and Section 1022 of the NDAA. I was asked about my relationships and contacts with groups on the U.S. State Department terrorism list.
I was asked about my specific conflicts with the U.S. government when I was a foreign correspondent, a period in which I reported from El Salvador, Nicaragua, the Middle East, the Balkans and other places. And I was asked how the NDAA law had impeded my work.
It is in conference rooms like this one, where attorneys speak in the arcane and formal language of legal statutes, that we lose or save our civil liberties. The 2001 Authorization to Use Military Force Act, the employment of the Espionage Act by the Obama White House against six suspected whistle-blowers and leakers, and the Homeland Battlefield Bill have crippled the work of investigative reporters in every major newsroom in the country.
Government sources that once provided information to counter official narratives and lies have largely severed contact with the press. They are acutely aware that there is no longer any legal protection for those who dissent or who expose the crimes of state. The NDAA threw in a new and dangerous component that permits the government not only to silence journalists but imprison them and deny them due process because they “substantially supported” terrorist groups or “associated forces.”
Those of us who reach out to groups opposed to the U.S. in order to explain them to the American public will not be differentiated from terrorists under this law. I know how vicious the government can be when it feels challenged by the press.
I covered the wars in El Salvador and Nicaragua from 1983 to 1988. Press members who reported on the massacres and atrocities committed by the Salvadoran military, as well as atrocities committed by the U.S.-backed Contra forces in Nicaragua, were repeatedly denounced by senior officials in the Reagan administration as fellow travelers and supporters of El Salvador’s Farabundo Marti National Liberation (FMLN) rebels or the leftist Sandinista government in Managua, Nicaragua.
The Reagan White House, in one example, set up an internal program to distort information and intimidate and attack those of us in the region who wrote articles that countered the official narrative. The program was called “public diplomacy.” Walter Raymond Jr., a veteran CIA propagandist, ran it.
The goal of the program was to manage “perceptions” about the wars in Central America among the public. That management included aggressive efforts to destroy the careers of reporters who were not compliant by branding them as communists or communist sympathizers. If the power to lock us up indefinitely without legal representation had been in the hands of Elliott Abrams or Oliver North or Raymond, he surely would have used it.
Little has changed. On returning not long after 9/11 from a speaking engagement in Italy I was refused entry into the United States by customs officials at the Newark, N.J., airport. I was escorted to a room filled with foreign nationals. I was told to wait. A supervisor came into the room an hour later.
He leaned over the shoulder of the official seated at a computer in front of me. He said to this official: “He is on a watch. Tell him he can go.” When I asked for further information I was told no one was authorized to speak to me. I was handed my passport and told to leave the airport.
Glenn Greenwald, the columnist and constitutional lawyer, has done the most detailed analysis of the NDAA bill. He has pointed out that the crucial phrases are “substantially supported” and “associated forces.” These two phrases, he writes, allow the government to expand the definition of terrorism to include groups that were not involved in the 9/11 attacks and may not have existed when those attacks took place.
It is worth reading Sections 1021 and 1022 of the bill. Section 1021 of the NDAA “includes the authority for the Armed Forces of the United States to detain covered persons (as defined in subsection (b)) pending disposition under the law of war.” Subsection B defines covered persons like this:
“(b) Covered Persons—A covered person under this section is any person as follows: (1) A person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored those responsible for those attacks.
(2) A person who was a part of or substantially supported Al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the U.S. or its coalition partners.” Section 1022, Subsection C, goes on to declare that covered persons are subject to:
“(1) Detention under the law of war without trial until the end of the hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force.” And Section 1022, Subsection A, Item 4, allows the president to waive the requirement of legal evidence in order to condemn a person as an enemy of the state if that is believed to be in the “national security interests of the United States.”
The law can be used to detain individuals who are not members of terrorist organizations but have provided, in the words of the bill, substantial support even to “associated forces.” But what constitutes substantial? What constitutes support? What are these “associated forces”? What is defined under this law as an act of terror?
What are the specific activities of those purportedly “engaged in hostilities against the United States”? None of this is answered. And this is why, especially as acts of civil disobedience proliferate, the NDAA law is so terrifying. It can be used by the military to seize and detain citizens and deny legal recourse to anyone who defies the corporate state.
From The Guardian, Naomi Wolf explains why she is helping with the Lawsuit.
The reason I’m helping Chris Hedges’ lawsuit against the NDAA
By placing journalists in jeopardy for reporting on ‘terrorists’, the Homeland Battlefield Bill has had a chilling effect on media work.
I have discussed the terms of the Homeland Battlefield Bill – also known as the National Defense Authorization Act – with numerous other journalists, writers, and members of democracy-supporting organizations across the political spectrum, from the Bill of Rights Defense Committee to the Tenth Amendment Center.
I have also discussed the bill with various political leaders, including city council members and legislators, who span the political spectrum in the United States. They all agree that the bill can potentially affect an American journalist who meets with and publishes reports on individuals connected to organizations deemed terrorist by the United States government.
To state the obvious, I do not support terrorism or any terrorist groups. I do not believe acts of violence against civilian populations are an appropriate way to achieve political, or any other change. I have never supported or condoned the actions of any terrorist organization.
I do, however, believe that a properly functioning media should report on newsworthy items, including discussions with and beliefs professed by various groups, including persons whom the United States government has labeled as terrorists.
I believe part of my job involves meeting with, discussing ideas with, and publishing stories about persons and groups who have, or are under threat of being, labeled a terrorist or terrorist group.
My understanding of the bill, however, has forced me to decline to meet with certain newsworthy individuals, and groups of people, for fear that my communications with them and publishing articles on these individuals could be considered to be providing material support to a terrorist or terrorist organization.
I have forgone meeting with individuals, and reporting on facts and stories, that I otherwise believe are newsworthy, and contribute to a healthy national discourse – for no other reason than to avoid potential repercussions under the bill.
I wish to highlight several instances of my having had to decline to meet with individuals in situations in which, under the normal conditions of my profession, meeting them, and potentially interviewing them, would have led to investigative articles for publication that I believe would have served the public interest.
In November 2011, I declined, in writing, a proposed meeting with Vaughan Smith and Julian Assange, because of statements made by high-level United States officials regarding their belief that Assange is a terrorist, as well as the ongoing Department of Justice investigation, which, as I understand it, could lead to terrorism and/or espionage charges against him.
I have declined to meet directly with members of Occupy Wall Street, because that group is being threatened with being named as terrorists in Miami. As a result, I have ceased conducting one-on-one interviews with them.
I have declined, in writing, to follow up with a proposed meeting with a support group in London that serves former prisoners, released without charge by the US government from the US detention center at Guantánamo Bay.
Because some of these prisoners were released without government determination of whether they were connected to a terrorist organization, I declined to meet with this group for fear that this story could conceivably be considered some form of support to a group affiliated with terrorists.
I declined, in writing, to give additional media attention to a reporter who produced a documentary based on the bombardment of Gaza, and its effect on the Palestinian civilian population.
Since I did not know who else, or which other entities, may have contributed to its production, I was concerned that my shining a media spotlight on the film, and gathering other members of the press to see it, might lead to wider attention and further fundraising that could conceivably fall under the term “material support”.
Thus the Homeland Battlefield Bill has already a chilling effect upon my ability to investigate and document matters of national controversy that would ordinarily be subject to my professional inquiry.
It has therefore prevented my readers from receiving the full spectrum of truthful reporting which, in a functioning democracy, they have a right to expect.
• This article is based on an affidavit in support of journalist Chris Hedges’ lawsuit against Barack Obama and Leon Panetta, regarding the National Defense Authorization Act. Other plaintiffs in the case include Daniel Ellsberg and Noam Chomsky
Former Navy SEAL: “Cold Civil War, but for how long?”
From Poor Richard’s Blog
By Benjamin Smith at radiopatriot.wordpress.com
On the heels of NDAA, ObamaCare, Stimulus, Son of Stimulus, Patriot Act, takeover of auto, energy, media and movie industries, and the relentless implementation of Agenda 21… the Obama regime running our country into the ground has issued an updated Executive Order which suggests the probability of impending MARTIAL LAW.
We are left to scratch our heads and ask……… Why now?
The only possible answer is…
America is in fact, right now, in the vicious throes of a Cold Civil War.
Cold as in non-violent and Civil as in nationwide; an attempt to force a new government-controlled ideology upon an unwilling public.
And the forces implementing this agenda are relentless.
The National Defense Resources Preparedness Executive Order is nothing more than a blatant attempt to stir trouble of the highest intensity. The regime is looking to see who jumps and to see the movement that happens amongst the most vocal defenders of our rights, (you and me).
They are poking us to see if we will go over the edge and do something so stupid that there will be a crisis… it will be our fault… and if any of our number are provoked enough to rise to the proverbial bait — they will finally lower the hammer… all in the name of “national security and public safety.”
These are classic Soviet style tactics designed and implemented in an effort to make us react, get us to either flinch and shut up, or overreact and get suppressed. It is also an exercise so they can gather intel on who is who and who has pull.
Many of us are trained. We know this game.
But we cannot stand down. We cannot be silent. We MUST stand together as one…WITHOUT VIOLENCE, for there is no going back from that; we MUST speak out with the conviction and the authority granted by our unalienable rights and the United States Constitution!
Remember Martin Niemöller and his immortal wisdom about the failure of courage in speaking out; “Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak for me.”
The regime is limiting our speech on a daily basis, so speak up while you still can. But be smart about what you say. Do not be tempted to phrase your words in terms of violence. For this is the way of the enemy and we should never stoop to their low and bloody tactics, whether in word or deed.
Keep preparing for rough times ahead. Stock your pantry in preparation for lean days, even as the regime attempts to make such things illegal. Focus your mind on liberty, that it should never die.
I cannot tell you exactly what is coming but I know, as do you, that something unprecedented in American history, perhaps even all human history, is coming soon.
This is the common theme in most of all the conversations that I hear… there is something coming, no one really knows what it is; they just know that whatever it is, it will be momentous.
The discussions range from quantifying this “something” to describing what we will do after “IT” happens. I even hear serious open conversation of the Biblical “End of Times.” People, even those outside the grassroots Tea Party movement, feel it in their bones.
Speculation runs rampant as people ponder the feeling in their gut. It could begin with something as simple as personal unemployment. It may be the 2012 general election — or NOT. Or it could be any number of events that will trigger Martial Law and the now legal occupation of America by her own troops, under the un-Constitutional NDAA.
Those types of events are limitless and terrifying. It could be a full scale crash of our economy and dollar. It could be a new World War launched by Israel attacking Iran, or vice versa.
It could be the launch of the rumored North Korean EMP attack designed to hurl America 100 years back into pre-electronic time. It could be Islamic jihadists succeeding in a catastrophic terrorist attack.
It could be the enemy within if the Obama Administration’s aided and abetted “Occupy” movement transfers and escalates the violence witnessed in Oakland to the rest of the country.
Whatever the trigger might be, we are about to get the education of a lifetime on what it is to struggle. It will either make us more committed Americans, earning the Latin communitas – or it will literally tear us apart. I believe that the source of this struggle springs from the complex sublimity of global despotic tyranny – ultimate oppression.
Our culture is in the midst of a moral dilemma where bad is now good and what was deemed originally American by our Founders is now un-American.
The Founders are all but outlawed because soon, unless those who hate freedom are halted, after the regime finishes destroying the Bill of Rights they will also totally erase the Founders from the educational curriculum.
They will outlaw the works of our Founding Fathers and destroy their very existence, burning books and erasing American liberty from history. It will be done incrementally and they will transform our history into one that aligns with their totalitarian views.
Every single day we have now turned to reacting to what the regime is putting out instead of looking to where they are taking us.
The powers pulling the levers of tyranny are every day more draconian and daring in scope as they usurp our institutions and drain the power from our Constitution and Bill of Rights.
Most all of the stories that are important and should be seen are buried by the complicit media at the end of the weekly news cycles and under the cloak of darkness.
In Quantum Theory there is a concept called a singularity or a black hole. Just as a black hole cannot be seen in space, the actual truth and facts of the world situation and the intentions of the U.S. government must be judged by the influence exerted on the objects around it — extortion, manipulation, intimidation, czars, fascist over- regulation designed to purposefully strangle an economy and legislate away your right to defend and provide for yourself — all in an effort to force you into their food line dependency and powerlessness!
The gravity of a black hole is so monumental that even light collapses upon itself. And in the same way, the lights of liberty are also collapsing upon themselves as media, government officials and useful idiots corrupt our understanding of American Exceptionalism so we can never really know the nefarious plot that seeks to turn our good country into an empty carcass they can declare the “failed” American Experiment.
Their answer to the great philosopher’s question, “Can man govern himself” will surely be no.
It must be noted that this current Administration is not the only perpetrator. A long history of Administrations, both Republican and Democrat, have eaten away at our freedom. This Obama Administration, so fatally attacking our liberty, is just the one closing the noose.
The broad strokes of true Communism were tightly woven into the ObamaCare and Stimulus bills, yet most Americans had no clue. The technocratic, lawyer-istic drool contained within those bills made it even harder to comprehend that Soft Tyranny was the true intent.
And Soft Tyranny always ends in Hard Tyranny — a horror not yet experienced by Americans never exposed to adversity and real stress — where tyrannical forces purposefully separate us from each other, turn us against each other (compulsory service, Ready Reserve, NDAA and the coercions in 5201 of ObamaCare) and control every aspect of our lives… lives which then become CRUEL because YOUR life will now be totally and completely ruled by THEIR choice.
IF THEY WIN, even the passion to be free and ultimately the reality itself of being free will be as if these blessings have never existed. Tyranny can never allow such powerful ideas to remain in the collective consciousness.
They will burn our books and they will attempt to erase our God.
Because without the concept of freedom codified in books by the brilliant minds of Cicero, Locke and Montesquieu; without the inspiration and institutions from our Founders; without the guidance of God to the understanding that there is a higher power than the government, there would never have been our nation “conceived in liberty.”
But while I believe this struggle in which we are engaged is the struggle of the century, nay, the struggle of all centuries, I also believe in American Exceptionalism.
I believe that the heart and soul of America is strong and vibrant and that we shall not falter in our commitment to liberty.
We live NOW in the times that will try men’s souls.
Are you a Summer Soldier, a Sunshine Patriot only to speak out when times are easy and there is no risk?
Or are you an American Exceptionalist who will STAND with me, RIGHT NOW to preserve our liberty, our beliefs and the American Way?
About Benjamin Smith:
Former Navy SEAL, Benjamin Smith took an oath to defend our Constitution from enemies both foreign and domestic. That oath has no expiration date.
As a writer, speaker, political strategist and ardent Constitutionalist, Benjamin Smith continues to battle tyranny and defend the freedoms that enabled American exceptionalism. Benjamin is a regular contributor to multiple news outlets including Breitbart and Fox News.
All facts prove US War Crimes, there is no refutation, so where are the arrests?
March 16, 2012
War law and Constitutional Rights are central to competence in government, citizenry, and military. The US Constitution provides multiple protections of the first Unalienable Right of Life from government murder. The US Constitution is the very definition of what it means to be an American, as you know.
Because all facts prove beyond doubt that a “1%” in government with complicit liars in corporate media have engaged in criminal Wars of Aggression, and to date there is no documented refutation of these facts, the elegantly simple solution to War Crimes is arrests of its obvious leaders.
Justice under law works with prima facie evidence; that is, if obviously valid facts are unchallenged, they are our best understanding. When law enforcement that currently serve the criminal 1% achieve this “emperor has no clothes” transformation, they will exercise their arrest authority.
Here is war law; my colleagues and I have not found refutation of what it says or means: it is unlawful for a nation to use armed attack unless another nation’s military has attacked. Our connections are throughout government, academia, and our collective readership is is in the literal millions.
That link also explains the facts from our own government agencies’ official reports of wars on Afghanistan and Iraq. Those facts reveal those two wars as not even close to lawful. My colleagues and I have never found refutation of the case of unlawful wars, or a clear explanation of how the wars are lawful given what war law means.
Please submit links (and summaries if you’d like to communicate to the readers) of any known refutations to the documented facts here. US military have Oaths to protect and defend the US Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Military are also trained to refuse unlawful orders, with officers trained to arrest those who issue them (there are no lawful orders in an unlawful war). I’ll address all claimed refutations; again here.
Here is a summary of the tragic-comic “official reasons” for wars that claim self-defense. These “reasons” are damning testimony of official guilt:
The US admitted the Afghan government had nothing to do with 9/11. The UN Security Council resolved twice for international cooperation for factual discovery and arrest of the 9/11 criminals. The US demanded military access into Afghanistan; Afghanistan agreed to arrest anyone upon evidence of criminal involvement (Bush: “There’s no need to discuss evidence”), and of course refused another nation’s military into their country. The US violated the legally-binding resolutions and Constitutionally-binding treaty by armed attack, invasion, and occupation.
The US admitted Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. The UN Security Council had a standing ceasefire that only they had authority to remove. The US lied about enriched uranium, aluminum tubes, links to terrorism, and weapons; all in Orwellian contradiction to all 16 US Intelligence Agencies’ written work. The US lied about all best intelligence to push lies for months, then violated war law to attack, invade, and occupy.
This cites the official US position that war on Libya was lawful and its easy refutation as the opposite of lawful. This is an important addition to anyone interested in the first unalienable right of Life from government murder.
Here is the US government claiming it can Constitutionally assassinate Americans upon the non-reviewable dictate of the leader, as these criminals take psychopathic steps to murder Americans who expose their crimes.
Here is NDAA 2012 where US government claims it can Constitutionally disappear Americans and then appoint a tribunal with death sentence authority (unless unlimited detention is their choice). Here is the 2006 Military Commissions Act that says the same. This is more fascist terrorism to silence Americans from communicating to the 99% that the 1% are War Criminals to arrest NOW.
Here is US government claiming it can Constitutionally control-drown (waterboard) anyone they declare a “terrorist” as a 1% terror-tactic to silence Americans.
So let me be perfectly clear:
Citizens of the 99%: command the facts of these War Crimes and demand arrests of the obvious criminals in government and their lying media accomplices.
Military and law enforcement of the 99%: please end the war-murders of millions, harm to billions, and looting of trillions of the 99%‘s wealth to the criminal 1%. Exercise your arrest authority for obvious criminals engaged in the worst crimes a nation can commit: war and looting.
Professional educators of the 99%: how are you teaching US War Crimes and destruction of the US Constitution? Or can you refute the facts my colleagues and I find as “emperor has no clothes” obvious? Have the intellectual integrity and moral courage to do your job of teaching facts and refuting obvious and egregious lies.
With great respect and appreciation for the contribution you’ll all make to justice under law,
Big Government Seeks New Ways to Manage “Big Data”
From Activist Post
March 30, 2012
Government continues to grow, while the amount of data they amass about the lives of citizens grows exponentially. We have seen major corporations in the areas of advertising, social media, defense contracting, and computing form partnerships with government agencies to compile virtual dossiers on all humans.
The fact that we are tracked, traced and databased is indisputable, but even many privacy advocates seem to believe that the sheer amount of data being collected is itself the Achilles Heel of the surveillance-industrial complex; that it is a sort of protection, as who or what could ever sift through it all?
John P. Holdren, Obama’s science czar, and author of the controversial eugenics tome, Ecoscience, is one of those directing the solution to the data overload problem. Enter “Big Data.”
It was recently announced that the NSA is constructing a massive new $2 billion data center that aims to expand its spy activities.
At this facility the NSA will be spying on every single form of communication, ranging from the entirety of private emails, cell phone calls, Google searches and other Internet activity, to data on travel, parking receipts, purchases at bookstores, and anything and everything they can get their hands on. (Source)
This data collection initiative is one taking place across the board in our largest federal agencies and departments such as the National Institutes of Health, Department of Defense, National Science Foundation, the Department of Energy, the U.S. Geological survey, and DARPA.
As government data collection ramps up, the Obama administration through the Office of Science and Technology Policy has announced a $200 million investment in taking this information “from data to decisions.”
This scientific and national defense endeavor is all-encompassing as it seeks data input and sharing between government and private companies, such as Amazon, as well as public universities. The overall goals are stated as follows:
Advance state-of-the art core technologies needed to collect, store, preserve, manage, analyze, and share huge quantities of data.
Harness these technologies to accelerate the pace of discovery in science and engineering, strengthen our national security, and transform teaching and learning; and
Expand the workforce needed to develop and use Big Data technologies. (Source PDF)
The initiative is heavily focused on education and workforce training, and serves to establish a framework where the next generation will be acclimated to data mining and distribution. This will be done by:
Encouraging interdisciplinary graduate programs.
Turning data into information — machine learning, cloud computing, and crowd sourcing;
Support for “EarthCube” a system that will allow geoscientists to access, analyze and share information about our planet;
Support for a focused research group of statisticians and biologists to determine biological pathways.
The Department of Defense is merged with the overall initiative, and goes a step further by investing $250 million annually across military departments in support of “truly autonomous systems that can maneuver and make decisions on their own.” DARPA is listed as essentially continuing its research into areas of human-computer interaction.
We are witnessing nothing short of the next stage of evolution for the scientific dictatorship, as it moves from total surveillance and information awareness toward implementing its permanence through autonomous systems that will collectivize all human experience into data sets that can be tracked, analyzed and immediately acted upon to affect social structures, economies, war, science, health and education.
Read other articles by Activist Post here.
Coping With Twitter’s Unfollow Bug
By JEREMIAH OWYANG
March 27, 2012
If you’re like me, you may have noticed that Twitter may be arbitrarily, randomly, and haphazardly, unfollowing people you fully intended to follow.
Similarly, if you’ve ever noticed your friends and contacts unfollowed you, it may have caused a sense of confusion, dread, or self-insecurity. Before one spirals into a series of apologies or deep-depression, it’s likely not your fault, (whew!).
What’s causing this? I’m not sure, so I asked my proper contacts at Twitter who responded “This is a bug, and our team is working to fix it.” They also sent me a link to their support FAQ, which indicates the known issue.
I’ll leave it to the team at Twitter to get this resolved, but in the meantime, let’s discuss how we can cope with this industry phenomenon.
Imagine this bug in the physical world: Your dear Aunt Margaret wasn’t invited to your wedding due to mail parcels gone missing, or your executive wasn’t invited to your big presentation meeting because your address book deleted him, or you couldn’t call your best friend to let them know about your funding announcement because his contact info went missing.
The act of following someone in Twitter is an important social indicator for at least three reasons:
1) A follow suggests the individuals content is worthy of listening to and you want to hear their thoughts –even the most mundane ones
2) It’s an important indicator that you’re willing to engage in deeper conversations by receiving direct messages and
3) At a broader social perspective, this is a gesture this person is in your broader social clan, your kin, your affinity.
Importantly, in my line of work (and probably in yours too), direct messages have become a mainstay of communications with clients; in fact, some overloaded executives ask me to DM them, rather than email them.
In more than one case has a qualified business request come by direct messages requesting my research and advisory services. Unlike the overloaded email channel, direct messages are an important opt-in business communication channel of higher quality signal.
Despite the business communication opportunity losses, there are broader social impacts that may relationships around you.
Just a few days ago, one of my dear colleagues Susan (@Setlinger) pointed out that she wanted to send me some information, but noticed I had unfollowed her and half-jokingly wondered if she’d offended me.
This wasn’t any passive-aggressive maneuver by me, I had full intentions to follow her, and quickly apologized and refollowed her.
Yet, I wonder how many business, personal, and casual relationships are strained by the bug haphazardly unfollowing.
It causes us to give pause and question the stability of the Twitter infrastructure, usage of my personal data and social network, and what important messages I may have missed from my trusted Twitter network.
So what can you do?
If you find that you’ve arbitrarily unfollowed someone in Twitter (or maybe you need an excuse to escape the ex), and you’re in a potential embarrassing situation, I recommend bookmarking this blog post, and sending it your apparent victim, explaining the situation was out of your hands. Hopefully no relationships were damaged, and we can continue happily twitter-ing with relationships salvaged.
I’d love to hear from you, have you been a victim of the bug? How are you coping?
Jeremiah Owyang is an industry analyst with the Altimeter Group. You can follow him on Twitter at@jowyang.
( Fair Use Notice ):
This web site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance the understanding of humanity’s problems and hopefully to help find solutions for those problems. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. A click on a hyperlink is a request for information. Consistent with this notice you are welcome to make ‘fair use’ of anything you find on this web site. However, if you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. You can read more about ‘fair use’ and US Copyright Law at the Legal Information Institute of Cornell Law School. This notice was modified from a similar notice at Information Clearing House.} ~~ Xaniel777