“America’s a police state. It’s ruthless. Iron fist authority rules. International law’s quaint and out-of-date. US statute protections aren’t worth the paper they’re written on.
Constitutional rights don’t matter. They never did for most people. It’s truer now than ever. They’re null and void. Executive diktat power rules. Congress and federal courts go along. They’re complicit.
They support sweeping lawlessness. It’s unprecedented. It affects domestic and geopolitical issues. No one’s safe anywhere.
Obama has life and death powers. He can order anyone murdered. He can do so on his say alone. US citizens are as vulnerable as foreign nationals.
He can order anyone indefinitely detained. He can throw them in military dungeons. He can deny them due process and judicial fairness.
They can remain there uncharged and untried. They can stay there forever. They can be brutally tortured. It’s OK. Federal courts said so. More on that below.”
Via Activist Post
“Big Brother is watching everything that you do on the Internet and listening to everything that you say on your phone. Every single day in America, the U.S. government intercepts and stores nearly 2 billion emails, phone calls and other forms of electronic communication. Former NSA employees have come forward and have described exactly what is taking place, and this surveillance activity has been reported on by prominent news organizations such as the Washington Post, Fox News and CNN, but nobody really seems to get too upset about it. Either most Americans are not aware of what is really going on or they have just accepted it as part of modern life. But where will this end? Do we really want to live in a dystopian “Big Brother society” where the government literally reads every single thing that we write and listens to every single thing that we say? Is that what the future of America is going to look like? If so, what do you think our founding fathers would have said about that?”
“The events of the last week were unprecedented in the history of the United States.
After Islamic terrorists detonated two improvised explosive devices at a highly populated public venue, Americans bore witness to something they’d never seen before – a complete lock down of an entire American metropolitan area that can only be described as a de facto state of martial law.
Stores were closed. Train stations weren’t running. Armored vehicles patrolled neighborhood streets. Military helicopters circled overhead. All the while police and national guard troops performed sweeps across cookie cutter homes in suburban America.
The government and local law enforcement would have us believe that all of this was executed in full compliance of the law.
While that may be true, one can’t help but ask… under which laws, exactly, were the Department of Homeland Security, FBI, and local police operating?”
“Pay attention, because this is now precedent. Under the Patriot Act and the National Defense Authorization Act, anyone deemed to be acting in a manner that seeks to subvert the laws of the United States can be declared a terrorist. So, the next time a criminal is on the loose in your town, you, too, may end up getting the same treatment as the peaceful residents of Boston.”
Via SHTF Plan
” On Sept. 14, 2001, the U.S. Congress in effect declared war when it passed the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) as a joint resolution. The vote was overwhelmingly one-sided. In the House, the vote was 420 Ayes, 1 Nay, and 10 Not Voting. In the Senate, the vote was 98 Ayes, 0 Nays, and 2 Present/Not Voting. Rep. Barbara Lee was the nay vote in the House.
One may argue about the wisdom of this measure and the logic of this measure. One may evaluate the quality of the measure as law. One may argue about the conduct of the military operations under the Executive that has been enabled by this measure. One may evaluate the ramifications for the U.S. government, for the world, and for Americans. Indeed, one may form innumerable opinions from many perspectives about this measure. But one cannot deny that this AUMF set in motion the ongoing war on terror that is being conducted by the U.S. government.
The Obama administration has made an effort to change the terminology describing the war. For example, it doesn’t like the words “war on terror”, and it has used substitutes. This effort is not central to the conduct of the military operations enabled under this resolution. As long as the resolution remains in place, its existence is what is central.
The Obama administration was critical of how the Bush administration was conducting military operations. After it took power, it changed the military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. It also began to use more drone attacks and to use them in countries that Bush had not. These changes in military operations are also not central to their existence. What matters is that the resolution authorizes military operations of broad scope, in ways to be determined by the President. What matters is that this resolution exists at all.”
Via Lew Rockwell
“In response to Rand Paul’s letter asking whether “the President has the power to authorize lethal force, such as a drone strike, against a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil, and without trial,” we now have an answer. Attorney General Holder responds, in a word “Yes.” Of course, it is caveated with ‘extraordinary circumstances’ and ‘necessity’ but as Mike Krieger so subtly summarizes: “the military can assassinate U.S. citizens on U.S. soil.” As NBC reports, the letter from Holder surfaced just as the Senate Intelligence Committee was voting 12-3 to approve White House counter-terrorism adviser John Brennan to be CIA director. The vote came after the White House agreed to share additional classified memos on targeted drone strikes against U.S. citizens overseas. As Rand Paul commented, “this is more than frightening… it is an affront to the Constitutional due process rights of all Americans.”"
Via Zero Hedge
“Civil liberties are theoretically a bipartisan concern. Conservative Republicans who don’t like Obamacare’s “death panels” should be outraged by presidential kill lists. Liberal Democrats who defend due process ought to be offended by secret surveillance law. Protectors of the First and Second Amendments should have a high regard for the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth.
Yet restricting civil liberties is what actually commands bipartisan support in Washington. The same Congress that barely averted the fiscal cliff swiftly passed extensions of warrantless wiretapping and indefinite detention, assuring Americans that only the bad guys will be affected but evincing little interest in establishing whether this is really the case.
The same Congress that failed to come up with an agreement to avoid sequestration appears to have bipartisan majorities in favor of profligate drone use at home and abroad. Lawmakers are generally less exercised about the confirmation of likely CIA chief John Brennan than Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel.”
Via Alt Market
” Most of the drones that have begun to appear in the skies above the U.S. homeland don’t resemble the Predators or Reapers flown by the U.S. military and CIA above Afghanistan and Pakistan. Instead, these smaller versions of flying, unmanned vehicles almost rival the animal kingdom in their diversity.
Government agencies such as NASA and U.S. Customs and Border Protection operate aircraft-size military drones that take off from runways like airplanes. Labs in the United States have even built tiny drones that look like hummingbirds. But most drones resemble the radio-controlled aircraft and toy helicopters flown by hobbyists for decades, capable of taking off horizontally, vertically or by being thrown into the air like a trained falcon or hawk.”
Via Yahoo News
“The Bush regime’s response to 9/11 and the Obama regime’s validation of this response have destroyed accountable democratic government in the United States. So much unaccountable power has been concentrated in the executive branch that the US Constitution is no longer an operable document.
Whether a person believes the official story of 9/11 which rests on unproven government assertions or believes the documented evidence provided by a large number of scientists, first responders, and structural engineers and architects, the result is the same. 9/11 was used to create an open-ended “war on terror” and a police state. It is extraordinary that so many Americans believe that “it can’t happen here” when it already has.
We have had a decade of highly visible evidence of the construction of a police state:
the PATRIOT Act, illegal spying on Americans in violation of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, the initiation of wars of aggression–war crimes under the Nuremberg Standard–based on intentional lies, the Justice Department’s concocted legal memos justifying the executive branch’s violation of domestic and international laws against torture, the indefinite detention of US citizens in violation of the constitutionally protected rights of habeas corpus and due process, the use of secret evidence and secret “expert witnesses” who cannot be cross-examined against defendants in trials, the creation of military tribunals in order to evade federal courts, secret legal memos giving the president authority to launch preemptive cyber attacks on any country without providing evidence that the country constitutes a threat, and the Obama regime’s murder of US citizens without evidence or due process. “
Via Activist Post
“They say technology is making the world smaller, and that is especially true of surveillance technology, as Google Earth proved once again recently by exposing the location of scores of North Korean gulags where as many as 250,000 political prisoners considered enemies of the regime may be held.
More than just simple prison compounds, the search giant’s satellite images provide indisputable evidence of the existence of the rarely-seen camps, giving new ammunition to human rights groups who have long described as “deplorable” Pyongyang’s record of citizen abuses.
Not surprisingly, the North Korean government has always vehemently denied the existence of the camps, insisting that any claims to the contrary are merely foreign propaganda. But “the advent of high-resolution, free images from outer space has disproved those claims,” Britain’s Telegraph newspaper reported.”
Via Natural News
“There is a destructive, delusional meme spreading like a virus among many misguided Americans. It pushes the idea that government can pick and choose which rights codified in the Bill of Rights it wishes to recognize or discard on any given day.
This delusion is predicated on the concept that if a popular majority can be emotionally whipped into a frenzy over one particular right, then that right can simply be discarded and stricken from the Bill of Rights.
But no such power exists to discard any portion of the Bill of Rights, at least not without proper ratification by three-fourths of the fifty states. There is no such power found solely in the federal government. There is no such power placed solely in the executive branch, nor in Congress, nor in the White House.
The Bill of Rights describes a set of individual rights and liberties which are not granted by government, but recognized as DIVINE rights given to use by our Creator. Because government never granted the rights in the first place, it has no authority to take them away.
“The Framers of the Bill of Rights did not purport to “create” rights. Rather, they designed the Bill of Rights to prohibit our Government from infringing rights and liberties presumed to be preexisting.” – William J Brennan Jr.”
Via Natural News