"What do you call a person who speaks three languages? ... Trilingual. What do you call a person who speaks two languages? ...Bilingual. What do you call a person who speaks one language? ...American!"This is very funny because it is spot on target. Americans seem to think that they are the lords of the world. The keepers of the knowledge, and the believers in the righeous. But nothing is further from the truth...
"Americans are wonderfully courteous to strangers, yet indiscriminately shoot kids in schools. They believe they are masters of the world, yet know nothing about what goes on outside their shores. They are people who believe the world stretches from California to Boston and everything outside is the bit they have to bomb to keep the price of oil down. Only one in five Americans hold a passport and the only foreign stories that make their news are floods, famine, and wars, because it makes them feel good to be an American. Feeling good to be American is what they live for. "
- Brian Reade, London columnist
(I fully realize that this is confusing to anyone reading this. I do not care. I am placing this on the Internet for posterity. Eventually it will make sense to others.)The first time I entered the transport portal, I was off-planet for 5 days. I entered at 1:30 pm on Monday, and returned at 5:20 pm on friday of the same week. I have absolutely no recollection of what transpired during that time, with the exception of about 20 seconds as I reentered the Earthside return portal at the ELF facility. It was, surprisingly at a 90 degree angle to whence I entered. It was in the same room.
First mode is "normal". That is our visual cortex sees what the eys see normally.
The next mode is "Calibraion". In this mode, a pastel map is presented that we see to the exclusion of what we are looking at. We use this mode to calibrate the probbes.
The next mode is "Diagonistic", here a picture is overlaid over the vew the eyes see. The operator uses their mind to control the diagonistic menu. It is this menu that permits the person to program, alter, or reprogram specific coding of the probes inside the body. Curiously enough, the picture that is overlaid in the visual cortex is the album art of the agents favorite song when he filled out the questionaire prior to entering the field portal. Yeah, pretty strange. When I experienced it for the first time, I was floored!
Death. I know that some operatives die as a result of their missions. This is extremely common for those involved in domestic operations. But, this is different from a high-risk assignment. Being a target for termination in this way is ruthless and very, very rare.
- Death. By "accident", or by "natural Causes".
- Incarceration. Includes deactivation of the ELF probes while in a Prison "sorting" and medical facility. With post-prison monitoring.
- Mothballing. This includes registration at a government ELF facility, with a debriefing and a stern warning towards non-disclosure.
As an example... I remember an incident that occured during my college days. I had spent my summer vacation working in the coal mines of western Pennsylvania. My job position was as a tipple Loader. Basicly, I loaded crushed coal into railroad hoppers. I related to my fellow students about how sometimes, the breaks on these cars failed to work, and as a result, I woruld ride the runaway car down a grade until it slammed and smashed up to the other cars resting at the bottom of the hill.. IF the break failed, we would have to ride the car down hill, often approaching 55 MPH until it hit.
ObamaCARE new taxes...
And what about all the new taxes...H.R. 3590, The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, to give it its full title, is rammed full of tax increases which will further economically cripple Americans already laboring under the worst financial crisis since the great depression.
The partnering Reconciliation Act, currently in the Senate, also contains a raft of pork barrel and tax hikes, there to fund the trillion dollar cost of nationalizing medicine.
As reported by Bloomberg News today, analysis by the nonpartisan congressional Joint Committee on Taxation reveals that the bill will generate $409.2 billion in additional taxes by 2019.
In addition, the Congressional Budget Office states that the bill also levies almost $69 billion more in penalties for those who fail to meet mandates to buy insurance.
The Journal of Accountancy boils down some of the tax hikes and penalty fees in H.R. 3590 and the Reconciliation Act – the highlights include:
Excise Tax on Uninsured Individuals – Individuals who fail to maintain minimum essential coverage will be subject to a penalty equal to $750. The fee for an uninsured individual under age 18 is one-half of the adult fee.
Excise Tax on High-Cost Employer Plans – The federal government would impose a 40% tax on the value of employer-sponsored health coverage exceeding certain thresholds. Those levels are projected to be $8,500 for self only and $23,000 for any other level by the year 2013. This excise was announced with fanfare by the White House and labor unions in January and remains in the final bill.
Increase in additional tax on distributions from Health Savings Accounts and Archer Medical Savings Accounts not used for qualified medical expenses – An increase from 10% to 20% on taxes of money in a health savings account not used for qualified medical expenses. For Archer medical savings accounts, an increase from 15% to 20%.
Additional Hospital Insurance Tax on High-Income Taxpayers – High income tax payers, making on a joint return over $250,000 and a standard return over $200,000, are required to pay an additional 0.5% of wages. This applies to both self-employed, and regularly employed individuals.
Fees on Health Plans – A fee applied to all health insurance providers based upon net premiums and any third party fees associated with the administration of those programs. The fees will total $6.7 billion annually. This figure begins at $8 billion in the Reconciliation Act and rises to $14.3 billion by 2018.
Tax on Indoor Tanning Services – The act imposes a 10% tax on amounts paid for indoor tanning services. Like a sales tax, the tax will be collected from the person tanning when payment for the tanning services is made.
Business Insider boils down 15 more tax hikes here – highlights include:
Tax on individuals without acceptable health care coverage – A 2.5% income tax on individuals who do not have health care coverage, limited to a cost less than the average national health care premium.
Excise tax on elective cosmetic medical procedures – A tax of 5% is levied upon the am mount paid for any cosmetic surgery. This does not include the need for such surgeries created by trauma or a disfiguring disease. If the tax is not collected by that professional completing the procedure, their business is still liable for the requirement.
The Reconciliation Act also legislates for the following surcharges: 1% surcharge on individuals making more than $350,000, 1.5% surcharge on individuals making more than $500,000, 5.4% surcharge on individuals making more than $1 million.
Yet more tax provisions in the bill are highlighted by INvestors Business Daily in their piece titled 20 Ways ObamaCare Will Take Away Our Freedoms – highlights include:
Taxes On Employers – If you are a large employer (defined as at least 101 employees) and you do not want to provide health insurance to your employee, then you will pay a $750 fine per employee (It could be $2,000 to $3,000 under the reconciliation changes) (Section 1513).
Taxes on Pharmaceutical Companies – The government will extract a fee of $2.3 billion annually from the pharmaceutical industry (Section 9008 (b)).
Taxes on medical device manufacturers – The government will extract a fee of $2 billion annually from medical device makers (Section 1405).
"All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills."This, of course, means that Obamacare is plainly unconstitutional because it did not originate in the House of Representatives…except that it barely did. All Harry Reid did (or ever has to do) is find any bill that has ever passed the Congress, “amend” it by stripping out all the original language and change it to say anything he wants and bam! it “originated” in the House. These types of bills are called “shell” bills.
Girls, please be yourself. Do not fall for the illusions that are promoted in media. The beauty magazines are all photoshopped, and are designed to sell magazines and products. All the actors use plastic surgery and digital enhanced extras to promote their own 'ideal' image. Don't fall for it.
Today we have words for the various types and kinds of saddness. We have identified the causes, and have classified it. We know the causes and treatments of all kinds of states of emotion. We can fix these things. But, unfortunately, when you are in a state to true and real dispair, you dont have the energy or the inclination to seek help. You just thrash about blindly, or hold it inside.
Maybe you know that you need help, or that it is only temporary. But that is what your mind says. It has no connection to the pain, and the real and actual hurt that you are experiencing. The sharp biting sobbing, and the headache. The emptiness inside and the bleak outlook where nothing is good. Where food has no taste, and you can't see joy or purpose in anything...
So, what do you do when you want to scream and let all the hurt out? What do you do when it seems that everyone hates or, or even worse, doesn't care about you. What do you do, if you are tormented on the Internet, or abused by people you throught were your friends? What do you do when every waking moment of your life seems to be falling apart? What do you do?
Sometimes, we can't walk down this road alone. Yet, we don't know where to turn. Sometimes, telling our best friends, our parents, or classmates, or even a professional counseler is not sufficient. We don't know where to turn. I know that it is difficult. What do you do when you can't find anyone... anyone to talk to?
I go to a non-human. I go to a cat. Or, a dog. I go to the Animal Shelter. These poor creatures are alone, and scared. They lost everything. Their owners whom they trushed are now gone, and they spend their days alone in stark wire cages. They pace about. But you can visit them. You can go and the workers will put you in a room with the animal of your choice and you two can comfort each other. Try it. They are going through what you are... just in a different way. try it.
Chances are you are suffering right now, or are in a state of dispair. Hold on and ride it out. It will be uncomfortable and very scary. It will, but please trust me... it will end. Do not end your life over it. Do not do anything drastic. Calm down, and seek help. Calm down and spend time away from people and things made by man. Go to the beach, the park, or near animals. Give your mind a break. It is your mind that is making your life horrible. Ride it out, and don't give up.
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. (This is an updated version of an essay we wrote in February. Unfortunately, a lot of information has come out since then.)
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.
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.
For example, the following actions may get an American citizen living on U.S. soil labeled as a “suspected terrorist” today:
- Criticizing the government’s targeting of innocent civilians with drones (although killing innocent civilians with drones is one of the main things which increases terrorism. And see this)
- Stocking up on more than 7 days of food (even though all Mormons are taught to stockpile food, and most Hawaiians store up on extra food)
- (Not having a Facebook account may soon be added)
And holding the following beliefs may also be considered grounds for suspected terrorism:
- Reporting, in a Negative way, any DHS or Government official.
- Liking the Founding Fathers
- Being “anti-abortion”
- Being “anti-Catholic”
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.
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:
Many academics are happy to blissfully ignore the Second Amendment. As it does not fit neatly into their socially liberal agenda.
The government fears the second amendment. An armed population is the greatest deterrent to tyranny and government opposition. So in order to enact legilation, laws and rules that run counter to what the people want, the second amendment must be rendered useless, if not totally destroyed. To this end, the current administration has been flooding the country with literally thousands of laws and regulations designed to do just that... to reduce the second amendment into obscurity.
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.
Those who view the second amendment as a collective right and not an individual right, has not read the Preamble to the Bill of Rights. The Preamble clearly, states that the ten amendments are individual rights designed to protect the individual from the USA government. Surprise!
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 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.
Because of the flood of laws and regulations being pushed to isolate the 2nd amendment from the Bill of Rights, and it's Preamble, the Supreme court took the task to hand and ruled on it. They decided, on a 5 to 4 ruling, that the 2nd Amednment did indeed affirm the right of an individual to own a gun. [DF1]. You can find McDonald v. Chicago (561 U.S._(2010) the text of the ruling [here]. And, a summary [here].
The gun control debate, in which what restrictions the government can put on the private ownership of weapons is still in debate. In other words, at what point does the government restrictions reach a point of violation of the law? This would include such things as which weapons and magazines are able to be banned.
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.
Hey … we’re still honoring one of the Amendments... Right? ... or are we? Not so. In fact, the 3rd amendment is being routinely violated. Surprise!
In fact, the quartering Police Officers and other personnel in your house is deemed necessary to conduct criminal investigations. Many times, neighbors to an alledged criminal enterprise are required to let the police use their house (without compensation) to condust sting operations. It is not just the local police, but can and does include DHS personnel, FBI, CIA, NSA or IRS officers in your house against your wishes... is a flagrant violation of this amendment. Yet is is being done. It is being done in the name of fighting crime, preventing terrorism, and for protecting children. [here] [here] [here] [here] [here]
The governments defense is simple. The amendment applies only to Army solders. Not to members of the Air Force, Marines, Coast guard, Homeland Security, or any government agency. They argue that any government agency, other than one associated with the US Army, can take over your house and possesion for their use at will, without justification, or court order.
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.
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.
Senator Rand Paul correctly notes:
The domestic use of drones to spy on Americans clearly violates the Fourth Amendment and limits our rights to personal privacy.
Paul introduced a bill to “protect individual privacy against unwarranted governmental intrusion through the use of unmanned aerial vehicles commonly called drones.”
Emptywheel notes in a post entitled “The OTHER Assault on the Fourth Amendment in the NDAA? Drones at Your Airport?”:
As the map above makes clear–taken from this 2010 report–DOD [the Department of Defense] plans to have drones all over the country by 2015.
Many police departments are also using drones to spy on us. As the Hill reported:
"...At least 13 state and local police agencies around the country have used drones in the field or in training, according to the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International, an industry trade group. The Federal Aviation Administration has predicted that by the end of the decade, 30,000 commercial and government drones could be flying over U.S. skies..."
“Drones should only be used if subject to a powerful framework that regulates their use in order to avoid abuse and invasions of privacy,” Chris Calabrese, a legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union, said during a congressional forum in Texas last month.
He argued police should only fly drones over private property if they have a warrant, information collected with drones should be promptly destroyed when it’s no longer needed and domestic drones should not carry any weapons.
He argued that drones pose a more serious threat to privacy than helicopters because they are cheaper to use and can hover in the sky for longer periods of time.
A congressional report earlier this year predicted that drones could soon be equipped with technologies to identify faces or track people based on their height, age, gender and skin color.
Even without drones, Americans are the most spied on people in world history: [here]
The American government is collecting and storing virtually every phone call, purchases, email, text message, internet searches[here], social media communications[here], health information, employment history, travel and student records[here], and virtually all other information of every American. [And see this.]
American cities installing ominous surveillance tech despite NSA scandal Mass surveillance isn’t something only being conducted by the likes of the National Security Agency anymore. Despite growing concerns brought on by the Summer of Snowden, cities around America are adopting high tech spy tools. Not just in San Diego, but also in other cities. Seattle has implemented a system of tracking its residents and residents that even George Orwell could not have imagined[here].
The government is also using facial recognition software and surveillance cameras to track where everyone is going[here]. And [here], and truly frightening [here]. The TACIDS is an amazing and horrifying system!
Moreover, cell towers track where your phone is[here] at any moment, and the major cell carriers, including Verizon and AT&T, responded to at least 1.3 million law enforcement requests[here] for cell phone locations and other data in 2011. (And – given that your smartphone routinely sends your location information[here] back to Apple or Google – it would be child’s play for the government to track your location that way.) Your iPhone, or other brand of smartphone is spying on virtually everything you do[here] (ProPublica notes: “That’s No Phone. That’s My Tracker[here]“).
As the top spy chief at the U.S. National Security Agency explained this week, the American government is collecting some 100 billion 1,000-character emails per day, and 20 trillion communications of all types per year.
He says that the government has collected all of the communications of congressional leaders, generals and everyone else in the U.S. for the last 10 years.
He further explains that he set up the NSA’s system so that all of the information would automatically be encrypted, so that the government had to obtain a search warrant based upon probably cause before a particular suspect’s communications could be decrypted. [He specifically did this to comply with the Fourth Amendment's prohibition against unreasonable search and seizure.] But the NSA now collects all data in an unencrypted form, so that no probable cause is needed to view any citizen’s information. He says that it is actually cheaper and easier to store the data in an encrypted format: so the government’s current system is being done for political – not practical – purposes.
He says that if anyone gets on the government’s “enemies list”, then the stored information will be used to target them. Specifically, he notes that if the government decides it doesn’t like someone, it analyzes all of the data it has collected on that person and his or her associates over the last 10 years to build a case against him.
Transit authorities in cities across the country are quietly installing microphone-enabled surveillance systems on public buses that would give them the ability to record and store private conversations….
The systems are being installed in San Francisco, Baltimore, and other cities with funding from the Department of Homeland Security in some cases ….
The IP audio-video systems can be accessed remotely via a built-in web server (.pdf), and can be combined with GPS data to track the movement of buses and passengers throughout the city.
The systems use cables or WiFi to pair audio conversations with camera images in order to produce synchronous recordings. Audio and video can be monitored in real-time, but are also stored onboard in blackbox-like devices, generally for 30 days, for later retrieval. Four to six cameras with mics are generally installed throughout a bus, including one near the driver and one on the exterior of the bus.
Privacy and security expert Ashkan Soltani told the Daily that the audio could easily be coupled with facial recognition systems or audio recognition technology to identify passengers caught on the recordings.
Street lights that can spy installed in some American cities
America welcomes a new brand of smart street lightning systems: energy-efficient, long-lasting, complete with LED screens to show ads. They can also spy on citizens in a way George Orwell would not have imagined in his worst nightmare.
With a price tag of $3,000+ apiece, according to an ABC report, the street lights are now being rolled out in Detroit, Chicago and Pittsburgh, and may soon mushroom all across the country.
Part of the Intellistreets systems made by the company Illuminating Concepts, they have a number of “homeland security applications” attached.
Each has a microprocessor “essentially similar to an iPhone,” capable of wireless communication. Each can capture images and count people for the police through a digital camera, record conversations of passers-by and even give voice commands thanks to a built-in speaker.
Ron Harwood, president and founder of Illuminating Concepts, says he eyed the creation of such a system after the 9/11 terrorist attacks and the Hurricane Katrina disaster. He is “working with Homeland Security” to deliver his dream of making people “more informed and safer.”
Fox news notes that the government is insisting that “black boxes” be installed in cars to track your location.
The TSA has moved way past airports, trains and sports stadiums, and is deploying mobile scanners to spy on people all over the place. This means that traveling within the United States is no longer a private affair. (And they’re probably bluffing, but the Department of Homeland Security claims they will soon be able to know your adrenaline level, what you ate for breakfast and what you’re thinking … from 164 feet away.)
And Verizon has applied for a patent that would allow your television to track what you are doing, who you are with, what objects you’re holding, and what type of mood you’re in. Given Verizon and other major carriers responded to at least 1.3 million law enforcement requests for cell phone locations and other data in 2011, such information would not be kept private. (And some folks could be spying on you through your tv using existing technology.)
And the spying isn’t being done to keep us safe … but to crush dissent and to smear people who uncover unflattering this about the government … and to help the too big to fail businesses compete against smaller businesses (and here).
In addition, the ACLU published a map in 2006 showing that nearly two-thirds of the American public – 197.4 million people – live within a “constitution-free zone” within 100 miles of land and coastal borders:
The ACLU explained:
Computer World reports today:
Border agents don’t need probable cause and they don’t need a stinking warrant since they don’t need to prove any reasonable suspicion first. Nor, sadly, do two out of three people have First Amendment protection; it is as if DHS has voided those Constitutional amendments and protections they provide to nearly 200 million Americans.
Don’t be silly by thinking this means only if you are physically trying to cross the international border. As we saw when discussing the DEA using license plate readers and data-mining to track Americans movements, the U.S. “border” stretches out 100 miles beyond the true border. Godfather Politics added:
But wait, it gets even better! If you live anywhere in Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Hawaii, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Hampshire, New Jersey or Rhode Island, DHS says the search zones encompass the entire state.
Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) have a “longstanding constitutional and statutory authority permitting suspicionless and warrantless searches of merchandise at the border and its functional equivalent.” This applies to electronic devices, according to the recent CLCR “Border Searches of Electronic Devices” executive summary [PDF]:
The overall authority to conduct border searches without suspicion or warrant is clear and longstanding, and courts have not treated searches of electronic devices any differently than searches of other objects. We conclude that CBP’s and ICE’s current border search policies comply with the Fourth Amendment. We also conclude that imposing a requirement that officers have reasonable suspicion in order to conduct a border search of an electronic device would be operationally harmful without concomitant civil rights/civil liberties benefits. However, we do think that recording more information about why searches are performed would help managers and leadership supervise the use of border search authority, and this is what we recommended; CBP has agreed and has implemented this change beginning in FY2012.
Some critics argue that a heightened level of suspicion should be required before officers search laptop computers in order to avoid chilling First Amendment rights. However, we conclude that the laptop border searches allowed under the ICE and CBP Directives do not violate travelers’ First Amendment rights.
The ACLU said, Wait one darn minute! Hello, what happened to the Constitution? Where is the rest of CLCR report on the “policy of combing through and sometimes confiscating travelers’ laptops, cell phones, and other electronic devices—even when there is no suspicion of wrongdoing?” DHS maintains it is not violating our constitutional rights, so the ACLU said:
"...If it’s true that our rights are safe and that DHS is doing all the things it needs to do to safeguard them, then why won’t it show us the results of its assessment? And why would it be legitimate to keep a report about the impact of a policy on the public’s rights hidden from the very public being affected?
***"... Your constitutional rights have been repealed in ten states. No, this isn’t a joke. It is not exaggeration or hyperbole. If you are in ten states in the United States, your some of your rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights have been made null and void.”
The ACLU filed a Freedom of Information Act request for the entire DHS report about suspicionless and warrantless “border” searches of electronic devices. ACLU attorney Catherine Crump said"... “We hope to establish that the Department of Homeland Security can’t simply assert that its practices are legitimate without showing us the evidence, and to make it clear that the government’s own analyses of how our fundamental rights apply to new technologies should be openly accessible to the public for review and debate.”
Meanwhile, the EFF has tips to protect yourself and your devices against border searches. If you think you know all about it, then you might try testing your knowledge with a defending privacy at the U.S. border quiz.
Wired pointed out in 2008 that the courts have routinely upheld such constitution-free zones:
Federal agents at the border do not need any reason to search through travelers’ laptops, cell phones or digital cameras for evidence of crimes, a federal appeals court ruled Monday, extending the government’s power to look through belongings like suitcases at the border to electronics.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sided with the government, finding that the so-called border exception to the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition on unreasonable searches applied not just to suitcases and papers, but also to electronics.
Travelers should be aware that anything on their mobile devices can be searched by government agents, who may also seize the devices and keep them for weeks or months. When in doubt, think about whether online storage or encryption might be tools you should use to prevent the feds from rummaging through your journal, your company’s confidential business plans or naked pictures of you and your-of-age partner in adult fun.
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.
The government claims the right to assassinate or indefinitely detain any American citizen on U.S. citizen without any due process. And see 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.
Protection against being tried twice for the same crime after being found innocent (“double jeopardy”) seems to be intact. Or is it? Apparently, many proscutors across the USA seem to have forgotten this clause.
You can see examples of this abuse... [here] [here] [here] [here]
The 6th Amendment guarantees the right 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 jury trial. In both cases, the defendants is “disposed of” without ever receiving a trial … and often without ever hearing the charges against them.
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.
Indeed, even the laws themselves are now starting to be kept secret. And it’s about to get a lot worse.
True – when defendants are afforded a jury trial – they are provided with assistance of counsel. However, the austerity caused by redistribution of wealth to the super-elite is causing severe budget cuts to the courts and the public defenders’ offices nationwide.
Moreover, 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 main business model adopted by Wall Street. Indeed, 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.
And some of the nation’s most powerful judges have lost their independence … and are in bed with the powers-that-be.
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.
As far as we know, this right is still being respected, BUT it is being ignored. Instead of a trial by Jury we have a system of Plea Bargains, and high bail that effectively locks out the accused from protection from this right. If this right were being followed properly, there would be little need for plea bargains, and excessive bail situations.
In fact, there is an absolute rewriting of the rules associated with bail, and plea bargains. There is complete collusion between lobbists and those in Congrss to guarantee that the Prisons are full, and that an industry of supporting bail related incomes for Judges and DA's thrive at the state level. It is WRONG that most legal cases result in Plea bargains instead of a Trial Jury by ones peers. It is wrong that Bail is set at an amount far greater than what one has in their bank savings and the value of their property... thus necessitating the need to use a Bail Bondsman.
However – as noted above – the austerity caused by redistribution of wealth to the super-elite is causing severe budget cuts to the courts, resulting in the wheels of justice slowing down considerably.
The 8th Amendment prohibits cruel and unusual punishment:
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
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.
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.
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.
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.
As thethe 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]
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]
Oh America, what has happened to you? Why has it come to this? What is going on, and how can it change? I greatly lament what the country has become.
In the United States, it has become against the law to be secretive. To keep you private life secret and personal. It is not simply a general feeling that one has, it has become the LAW. Wearing masks in public will have you stopped by the police. Attaching devices to your face to obscure face-recognition devices is illegal. If you walk about, and are stopped by the police, and you do not have a phone, they will ask you why. They will want to know why you do not have a GPS enabled cell phone on you. This is not freedom.
In America you will be stopped for ANY reason what-so-ever. There will be an associative excuse, of course. "We were searching for drugs", "This is a DUI check-point", "This is a terror alert", "There is a Amber alert", "You are not from this neighborhood", "You are acting suspecious", "Your car inspecion sticker is out of date"... They are all just excuses. A free people are never questioned by the police. They are NEVER questioned by the police.
There is hope that things can be reversed. But the action to do so much come from within the government. It means that the players who operate the govenment must change. And, soon.
There are some positive signs...
There might be hope. Maybe. With every change, there are unexpected, associative changes that occur. This is most especially true with complex plans, organizations, and government policies. With the advent of the great Police State, and the policies and technologies to enforce it, comes a undertow-backlash. And this effect, may be but one of the symptoms of positive change to combat the victorian mindset relative to world domination, that the USA seems to be so hell-bent on inflicting...
"Yes, I believe it is in the nation's best interest to put all the phone records into a lockbox that we could search."
General Keith B. Alexander
Director of the NSA
Despite an interminable series of embarrassing scandals, the US government just dig its heels in further.
(They still don't understand the cause. But who cares, it's just taxpayer money that's being wasted...) The NSA's actions... and incompetence... is creating a sort of new war that will be waged online. It's a war pitting an authoritative, out-of-control government against savvy tech rebels who believe that privacy is a fundamental right.
“Without accountability, America is finished. Not only will Americans live in a police state with no civil liberties, but the rest of the world is already looking at America with a jaundiced eye.
The US is being reconstituted as an authoritarian state.
All it takes is one failure of accountability for the police state to become entrenched, and we have had numerous failures of accountability. Does anyone really believe that some future government is going to make restitution to persecuted truth-tellers, such as Bradley Manning, Julian Assange, and Edward Snowdon, as was done for Japanese Americans?”
— Paul Craig Roberts
Dean Acheson declared 51 years ago that power, position, and prestige are the ingredients of national security and that national security trumps law. In the United States democracy takes a back seat to “national security,” a prerogative of the executive branch of government.
National security is where the executive branch hides its crimes against law, both domestic and international, its crimes against the Constitution, its crimes against innocent citizens both at home and abroad, and its secret agendas that it knows that the American public would never support.
“National security” is the cloak that the executive branch uses to make certain that the US government is unaccountable.
Without accountable government there is no civil liberty and no democracy except for the sham voting that existed in the Soviet Union and now exists in the US.
There have been periods in US history, such as President Lincoln’s war to prevent secession, World War I, and World War II, when accountable government was impaired. These were short episodes of the Constitution’s violation, and the Constitution was reinstated in the aftermath of the wars. However, since the Clinton regime, the accountability of government has been declining for more than two decades, longer than the three wars combined.
In law there is the concept of adverse possession, popularly known as “squatters’ rights.” A non-owner who succeeds in occupying a piece of property or some one else’s right for a certain time without being evicted enjoys the ownership title conveyed to him. The reasoning is that by not defending his rights, the owner showed his disinterest and in effect gave his rights away.
Americans have not defended their rights conveyed by the US Constitution for the duration of the terms of three presidents. The Clinton regime was not held accountable for its illegal attack on Serbia. The Bush regime was not held accountable for its illegal invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. The Obama regime was not held accountable for its renewed attack on Afghanistan and its illegal attacks on Libya, Pakistan, and Yemen, and by its proxies on Syria.
We also have other strictly illegal and unconstitutional acts of government for which the government has not been held accountable. The Bush regimes’ acts of torture, indefinite detention, and warrantless spying, and the Obama regime’s acts of indefinite detention, warrantless spying, and murder of US citizens without due process. As the Obama regime lies through its teeth, we have no way of knowing whether torture is still practiced.
If these numerous criminal acts of the US government spread over the terms of three presidents pass into history as unchallenged events, the US government will have acquired squatters’ rights in lawlessness. The US Constitution will be, as President George W. Bush is reported to have declared, “a scrap of paper.”
Lawlessness is the hallmark of tyranny enforced by the police state. In a police state law is not a protector of rights but a weapon in the hands of government. [see Roberts & Stratton, The Tyranny of Good Intentions] The accused has no recourse to the accusation, which does not require evidence presented to a court. The accused is guilty by accusation alone and can be shot in the back of the head, as under Stalin, or blown up by a drone missile, as under Obama.
As a person aware of the long struggle against the tyrannical state, I have been amazed and disheartened by the acceptance not only by the insouciant American public, but also by law schools, bar associations, media, Congress and the Supreme Court of the executive branch’s claim to be above both law and the US Constitution.
As Lawrence Stratton and I show in our book about how the law was lost, liberals and conservatives chasing after their favorite devils, such as child abusers and drug pushers, and prosecutors, judges, and police devoted to conviction and not to justice, have gradually eroded over time the concept of law as a protection of the innocent, With the atmosphere of threat created by 9/11, the final destruction of the protective features of law was quickly achieved in the name of making us safe from terrorists.
The fact that we are no longer safe from our own government did not register.
This is how liberty was lost, and America with it.
Can liberty be regained? Probably not, but there is a chance if Americans have the necessary strength of character. The chance comes from the now known fact that the neoconservative Bush/Cheney regime took America and its puppet states to war in Afghanistan and Iraq entirely on the basis of lies. As all evidence proves, these wars were not the results of mistaken intelligence. They were the products of intentional lies.
The weapons inspectors told the Bush regime that there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Despite this known fact, the Bush regime sent Secretary of State Colin Powell to the UN with fabricated evidence to convince the world that Saddam Hussein had “weapons of mass destruction” and was a threat to the world. Even if such weapons had existed in Iraq, many countries have them, including the US and Israel, and the presence of weapons does not under the Nuremberg Laws justify unprovoked aggression against the possessor.
Under the Nuremberg Laws, unprovoked military aggression is a war crime, not the possession of weapons that many countries have. The war crime was committed by the US and its “coalition of the willing,” not by Saddam Hussein.
As for the invasion of Afghanistan, we know from the last video of Osama bin Laden in October 2001, attested by experts to be the last appearance of a man dying of renal failure and other diseases, that he declared that he had no responsibility for 9/11 and that Americans should look to their own government.
No truthful explanation for these wars exist.
“A new iron curtain is descending. It covers a million streets and hundreds of millions of people. Its shadow passes over stores, factories, homes and schools. It is not a physical wall. As yet, no border guards with rifles wait to shoot those wanting to leave. There are no watchtowers or leashed dogs keeping an eye on the inner frontier. It is a Wall of Words - a wall of laws, regulations, mandates. The American iron curtain is made of paper, but in time it will be made out of cement and iron.”
— Daniel Greenfield (via timlebsack)
The Bill of Rights is GONE.
One of the most extraordinary documents in human history -- the Bill of Rights -- has come to an end under President Barack Obama. Derived from sacred principles of natural law, the Bill of Rights has come to a sudden and catastrophic end with the President's signing of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), a law that grants the U.S. military the "legal" right to conduct secret kidnappings of U.S. citizens, followed by indefinite detention, interrogation, torture and even murder. This is all conducted completely outside the protection of law, with no jury, no trial, no legal representation and not even any requirement that the government produce evidence against the accused.
It is a system of outright government tyranny against the American people, and it effectively nullifies the Bill of Rights.
In what will be remembered as the most traitorous executive signing ever committed against the American people, President Obama signed the bill on New Year's Eve, a time when most Americans were engaged in the consumption of alcohol. It seems appropriate, of course, since no intelligent American could accept the tyranny of this bill if they were sober.
"...Moving forward, my administration will interpret and implement the provisions described below in a manner that best preserves the flexibility on which our safety depends and upholds the values on which this country was founded..."
"...the breadth of the NDAA’s detention authority violates international law because it is not limited to people captured in the context of an actual armed conflict as required by the laws of war" says the ACLU.In 1789, today's NDAA law would have been called "treasonous," and those who voted for it would have been shot dead as traitors. This is not a call for violence, but rather an attempt to provide historical context of just how destructive this law really is. Men and women fought and died for the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights. People sacrificed their lives, their safety and risked everything to achieve the freedoms that made America such a great nation. For one President to so callously throw away 222 years of liberty, betraying those great Americans who painstakingly created an extraordinary document limiting the power of government, is equivalent to driving a stake through the heart of the Republic.
That all men are by nature equally free and independent and have certain inherent rights, of which, when they enter into a state of society, they cannot, by any compact, deprive or divest their posterity; namely, the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety."(http://www.constitution.org/bcp/virg_dor.htm)(http://www.constitution.org/bcp/virg_dor.htm) Section Three of the declaration speaks to the duty of the Citizens to abolish abusive government:
"That government is, or ought to be, instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security of the people, nation, or community; of all the various modes and forms of government, that is best which is capable of producing the greatest degree of happiness and safety and is most effectually secured against the danger of maladministration; and that, when any government shall be found inadequate or contrary to these purposes, a majority of the community hath an indubitable, inalienable, and indefeasible right to reform, alter, or abolish it, in such manner as shall be judged most conducive to the public weal."By any honest measure, today's U.S. government, of course, has overstepped the bounds of its original intent. As Mason wrote over 200 years ago, the People of America now have not merely a right but a duty to "reform, alter or abolish it," to bring government back into alignment with its original purpose -- to protect the rights of the People.
The illusion of choice. Only ten companies control 95% of everything that you buy in a grocery store. It is all an illusion.Obama violates his Presidential Oath, sworn before God
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."In signing the NDAA law into office, Obama has blatantly and unambiguously violated this sacred oath, meaning that his betrayal is not merely against the American people, but also against the Divine Creator.
Today, we are now a nation led by evil, and threatened with total destruction by those who would seek to rule as tyrants. This is America's final hour. We either defend the Republic starting right now, or we lose it forever.The U.S. government has just declared all Americans to be "enemy combatants," and that the USA is now a "battleground" over which the military has total control. We are now a nation living under military dictatorship, whether you realize it or not.
Alternatives to GOOGLE
To Google’s credit, you can opt out — if you know where to look. Head over to the Shared Endorsements page, sign in with your Google account and make sure the option at the bottom is not checked. Still, it’s a reminder where Google’s focus is. It’s keeping track of what you do so it can use that information in advertising. And don’t forget that your information is one subpoena away from ending up in a government database.
But it’s not like there’s a better alternative for search, right? Bing and Yahoo do the same thing. That’s true, but those aren’t the only alternative search sites around. Here are some that do the job and take your privacy seriously. Take a look at DuckDuckGo . Though it’s similar to Google, it doesn’t collect any information about you when you search. It matches Google Search in features and performance with a similar simple layout. Its “Goodies” features offer geographic search, calculators and more. You could literally spend hours checking out DuckDuckGo’s cool features.
Maybe there’s just one feature about Google’s search you really can’t live without, though. In most cases, you can find search sites tailored to that feature. Wolfram Alpha , for example, runs circles around Google when it comes to research and calculations. Just type in a question and it can usually figure out what you mean. You can even upload images to get more information about them.
For quick answers, Blekko is usually easier to use than Google. Instead of returning advertisers and other iffy results first, it sends you links that actually answer your question. The links are even broken down into categories, such as Top results, Shopping and Latest. You can expand a category to see more of just what you want. Blekko is more private than Google in normal mode. However, I recommend you use its “SuperPrivacy” mode for maximum privacy. This blocks ads and takes you to secure, encrypted sites by default. You can turn it on by clicking “Prefs” in the right corner of the site.
If you like how quickly Blekko gives results, you can try IxQuick, too. It encrypts your search for privacy while giving you pre-approved results from other top search sites for a faster answer. You can rate results to help other searchers find what they’re looking for faster, too. Are you concerned about search results showing up with inappropriate content? It happens quite a bit, and — thanks to Murphy’s Law — usually when a child is present.Yippy detects adult content and blocks it automatically. That makes it great for the family computer.
I could write pages and pages on American taxes. I could show you how outrageous it is, and how they truly compare with the rest of the world. I could show you that, in general, taxes are but one way to collect revenue... but not the only, nor the best way. I could show you how many 'hidden' and 'secretive' taxes     [-5-]    exist in the United States...
You would either believe me, or you won't. So, why waste my time. Suffice it to say that the United States is wholly out of control with the concept of taxiation. I contend that the 16th amendment authorizing taxiation was improperly ratified   [-11-]   , and done so under the guise of the lifting of prohibition. I contend that every time YOUR money is taken from you or your employer (on your behalf) is also taxiation. I contend that the bulk reason for the huge costs for the basic necessities of life are due to the additional taxes and levies placed upon them by the govenment.
I also contend that the clearest way to see the effect of the increased tax burden on people is to compare the data for savings and investments for typical Americans. THe two charts are linked together in a frightening way. They are inversely proportional. In fact, since the Democrats and their economic advisors believe that raising taxes increase prosperity, that they are illiterate when it comes to reading raw data and charts.
many people on Tumblr are young and have not yet entered the work force. Therefore they do not understand taxes, nor taxiation. I once asked a boy how much taxes does he think the government takes out of a $100 paycheck. He said "Oh, maybe $2". That is how out of touch many on Tumblr are with reality. The USA takes about $80 out of every $100 paycheck. Oh... not directly mind you. It's all in bites and pieces. Many hidden taxes, delayed taxes, and surprise taxes... oh, he'll find out. Yessur... he most certainlky will.
Death of the American Dream
We live today in slavery. Most of us aren’t even aware of the subtlety of the situation. We are slaves of consumption, slaves of debt, slaves of possessions.
Children are told to go to college, get a good job, earn money, and spend money, saving for retirement. Every fiscal action within this empty so-called capitalist society is meant to further tighten the chains around the neck of the common man and woman. Intelligence is looked upon with contempt, a concern for the well-being of others is seen as suspicious, and conformity is the golden rule.
Our rights have been systematically destroyed, sometimes quietly, sometimes very publicly. Everything is a criminal act, enforced by an ever-increasing militarization of the police force. When we were in school, we were taught about the horrors that occurred in other countries- a pervasive police or military force bent on punishing those who speak out or act out against the government. Those people in America were at one time called patriots. Today, those same people are “radicals.”
America is not a nation by the people, for the people. It is a nation by the corporations for profit, with no regard to the rights of the workers on which those corporations so carelessly tread. When a person faces fines in the tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars for downloading music, while white collar crime is punished by a slap on the wrist, it is easy to see for whom the law works for. Lobbyists spend billions of dollars stuffing the pockets of our government, who in turn churns out law after law protecting special interest industries at the expense of every working-class person.
Education for education’s sake is taboo. Why bother going to college for a degree that one can’t use? Why bother going to college at all? So you can drown in debt when you enter the job market and find out that no one’s willing to pay you a living wage? So you have a piece of paper that shows you’re able to be trained?
We are in the bondage of a consumption-at-all-costs lifestyle. Credit cards, mortgages, student loans, car payments, insurance, internet access, cell phone, food, clothes, electricity, water. On and on. Living paycheck to paycheck is not living, it’s surviving.
When you turn on the news and see that it’s nothing more than who’s dating who and the latest Hollywood controversy, while wars rage both in America and around the world, you are being conditioned to care about the shallow, the mundane, the boring.
The government, as a whole, does not care about you. The government believes that if it ceased to exist, so would humanity. In this sense, I agree with them, as we live in a nation of selfish, self-seeking, self-important individuals who frown upon charity while not considering what it’s like to be in the shoes of another, even for a brief moment. There is not empathy. Our society is a greed-driven, sociopathic state which values the money in a person’s bank account more than the value of that individual’s contribution to society.
We send soldiers around the world to fight the ghosts of imagined enemies, bankrupting the nation while killing the bravest of our nation’s youth. We fall into the farce of religion, promising that dead soldiers go to heaven, while somehow thinking that Islamic terrorists’ 72 virgins is somehow any more ridiculous than our own vision of the afterlife. Children are vacuumed directly out of school and onto the front line, with promises of college tuition dangled in front of them like a carrot on a string. That’s a fairly strong endorsement for the inelasticity of demand for a college education- people are willing to put their lives at risk to learn, killing others for a better life for themselves.
Nothing changes. Although the party names may differ, their goals are the same- control the populace and condemn any who stand up against the corrupt and criminal acts of those in power. Criminalize those who leak information about the government’s own criminal endeavors. Call them treasonous, call for their heads, and make sure the people think it’s in their best interest for the government to trample upon inalienable rights under the guise of national security, that it’s somehow better that there is no transparency.
Just because something is legal does not make it moral, and just because something is illegal does not make it immoral. Exposing the criminal acts of a government isn’t treason; it is one’s duty to bring the truth to light, no matter how ugly.
Let Your Life Be a Friction to Stop the Machine
Nightmare and insanity are akin: mysterious and involuntary states that skew and distort objective reality. One wakens from nightmare; from insanity there is no awakening. Whether Americans live in the one state or the other is the paramount question of this era.
For two hundred years Americans have been indoctrinated with a mythology created, imposed and sustained by a manipulating cabal: the financial elite that built its absolute control on the muscle and blood, good will, ignorance and credulity, of its citizenry.
America began with the invasion of a populated continent and the genocide of its native people. Once solidly established, it grafted enslavement of another race onto that base. With those two pillars of state firmly in place it declared itself an independent nation in a document that nobly proclaimed the equality of all mankind. In that act of monumental hypocrisy America’s myth had its beginning.
The Constitution: A Constitution was written that came to be regarded as American Holy Writ. Its central purposes were to defend private property and suppress mass democracy. It has fulfilled both those mandates beyond the wildest dreams of its creators.
Once the existing oligarchy was secure in law and native people largely exterminated, the ruling class increased its wealth and power fantastically in the 19th century, using the government as its enabler, exploiting to the limit the device of chartered corporations. With its phenomenal money power, the financial elite began to use the military to expand its sway beyond the continent. Regions, territories, islands, and whole countries were annexed, invaded, and possessed outright, their peoples crushed, suppressed, and ruled.
Because ordinary Americans, like any people, need to believe that whatever the ruling elite undertakes in their nation’s name must be essentially benevolent, noble in purpose and justified in fact, the myth had to be radically modified for imperial expansion.
This face-off of giants in the Cold War necessitated further refinement of the American myth. Now, instead of simply intervening in situations where despotism or tyranny required America to forcefully implant our just and ethical democracy, America had to become the shield and bulwark of the sacred capitalist system in which “free enterprise” was magically and increasingly identified with democracy and equally to be defended.
It is the millions of us with no work and no hope in middle age whose jobs and homes have been devoured by the heartless fraud machine of Wall Street. It is the trashed and demolished weedlots of our major cities eroding in crumbling, fire-gutted ruin. It is the many towns and cities with industries shut down and factories deserted or dismantled and shipped overseas. It is our decaying, disintegrating public schools, our bankrupt states and counties, our overtaxed, antiquated public transportation systems, our obsolete, dissolving infrastructure, our bloated, irrational prisons complex, our punishing and inadequate health care disaster, and over it all, the repressive mechanism of our police state, armed and empowered, ready for use against the American people themselves.
“If injustice is of such a nature that it requires you to be the agent of injustice to another, then, I say, break the law. Let your life be a counter friction to stop the machine.”To attempt to break the hold of the American Myth will be a titanic, daunting challenge. To even begin to openly rebel against the might of the National Security State will require the courage to face much more than official disapproval and denunciation. Imperial America will not respond to even the most peaceful and orderly protest with anything less than hard police repression and the level of punishment will rise in relation to the scope and seriousness of the action undertaken.
What If Democracy Is Bunk?
by Judge Andrew Napolitano
What if you are only allowed to vote because it doesn’t make a difference? What if no matter how you vote, the elites get to have it their way? What if “one person, one vote” is just a fiction created by the government to induce your compliance? What if democracy is dangerous to personal freedom? What if democracy erodes the people’s understanding of natural rights and the foundations of government, and instead turns elections into beauty contests?
What if democracy allows the government to do anything it wants, as long as more people bother to show up at the voting booth to support it than to oppose it? What if the purpose of democracy is to convince people that they could prosper not through the creation of wealth but through theft from others? What if the only moral way to acquire wealth – aside from inheritance – is through voluntary economic activity? What if the government persuaded you that you could acquire wealth through political activity? What if economic activity included all the productive and peaceful things we do? What if political activity included all the parasitical and destructive things the government does?
What if governments were originally established to protect people’s freedom, but always turn into political and imperialist enterprises that seek to expand their power, increase their territory and heighten their control of the population? What if the idea that we need a government to take care of us is actually a fiction? What if our strength as individuals and durability as a culture are contingent not on the strength of the government but on the amount of freedom we have from the government?
What if we’re seeing civil unrest around the world precisely because government is out of control? What if the cocktail of big government and democracy brings dependence and destruction? What if big government destroys people’s motivations and democracy convinces them that the only motivation they need is to vote and go along with whatever the government does?
What if the Republican primaries we’re seeing unfold aren’t actually as democratic as they may appear to be? What if the results you have seen from the states that have voted thus far don’t match the composition of the delegates those states send to the Tampa convention this summer because the polls aren’t what counts, but what counts are the secret meetings that come after the voting? What if Joe Stalin was right when he said the most powerful person in the world is the guy who counts the votes?
What if the greatest tyrant in history lives among us? What if that tyrant always gets its way, no matter what the laws are or what the Constitution says? What if that tyrant is the majority of voters? What if the tyranny of the majority in a democracy recognizes no limits on its power?
What if the government misinforms voters so as to justify anything the government wants to do? What if the government bribes people with the money it prints? What if it gives entitlements to the poor, tax breaks to the middle class and bailouts to the rich just to keep all of us dependent upon it? What if a vibrant republic requires not just the democratic process of voting, but also informed and engaged voters who understand first principles of limited government and free-market economics, and the divine origin of natural rights?
What if we could free ourselves from the yoke of big government through a campaign of education and information and personal courage that leads to a revolutionary return to first principles? What if the establishment doesn’t want this? What if the government remains the same no matter who wins elections?
What if because of Ron Paul’s presidential campaign, because he isn’t campaigning just for votes as his competition is, because he is educating the population and winning the hearts and minds of a once free people and inspiring them to fight for their freedom once more, freedom wins? What if we can be free again? What will it take to make that happen?
...Numbers don’t lie. From 1790 to 1913, when the federal government existed without a Federal Reserve to print money and lend to the government whatever it wanted, the value of the dollar rose by 8 %. From 1913 to 2011, in the 98 years we have had a Federal Reserve, the value of the dollar has decreased by 93%."-Judge Andrew Napolitano
"The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the large centers has owned the government of the U.S. since the days of Andrew Jackson."- U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt
"...Everytime I see a justification from the Administration, I think about Communist Korea. Today I saw a Tumblr post about ObamaCARE enrolments up, and another about Wind Power use up 500%!
It all reminds me of the increases in the yearly Potato harvest under Stalin's farming Initative.
The truth is that there is only the illusion of choice. Both the DNC and the RNC are the same party. The members are friends, and eat and dine together. They ahve the same hobbies, and their children attend the same schools. The political differences are illusionary for but the most hard core political figure.
The illusion of choice is a very powerful tool. It enable those in power to give the illusion that they are trying to change things... but in reality this is just a pantamine used to mimic repetative actions to eliminate any dissent. Their true agenda is something else. Never, in the history of the USA have the political mightly been so self-centered, selfish and egotistic.
Oh, the USA has taxes! My God, does the USA have taxes. There are so many taxes and they under so many different names, and administered by so many different organizations that it is difficult to quantify just how much taxes Americans pay. To a school child, or a student, the taxes don't seem to bad. It an illusion, or it is a kind of abstract idea. Certainly something that seems remote and notimportant.
“In 1913, the average personal income was $621. Only 2 percent of the population was liable for the [income] tax between 1913 and 1915. Eighty percent of the returns were filed by people involved in business; 17 percent were in the professions, 3.3 percent in agriculture, and 0.5 percent were laborers. Businessmen reported 85 percent of the income and paid almost 90 percent of the revenues.*note: Richman wrote this in 1999 and the starred numbers have been adjusted for inflation to reflect their 2013 values.
Given the level of incomes in those days, it was a tax aimed strictly at the richest people in the country. If the system were in place today, a single person making less than about $65,000* would pay no tax. A couple earning less than $86,000* would pay nothing. Incomes up to $430,000* would be in the 1 percent bracket. Someone would have to make $11 million* before paying the top 7 percent rate. In  dollars, the exemptions of 1913 would be worth $65,000* for single people and $86,000* for married couples.”
— Sheldon Richman
Born in the BEST place in the world!
W think that the USA elections are fair and not rigged. We believe that Gun Control actually works, and it will stop crime. We think that more taxes gives people more money to spend. We think that the government would never get involved in an unjust war. We think that our government would never hurt Americans. Never. Not here!
Let me strive every moment of my life, to make myself better and better, to the best of my ability, that all may profit by it.Not only did Doc Savage challenge his readers to be men and women of value, honor, and integrity, but he also gave them an example of physical and mental conditioning. According to the sagas, Doc spent 2 hours every day honing and expanding his abilities. He also spent time away at the Fortress of Solitude in research and mediation.
Let me think of the right and lend all my assistance to those who need it, with no regard for anything but justice.
Let me take what comes with a smile, without loss of courage.
Let me be considerate of my country, of my fellow citizens and my associates in everything I say and do.
Let me do right to all, and wrong no man.
Oh, it all started innocently enough, but over time, the accelerated pace of corruption, half-hearted management, and malfeasance has taken it's toll. Even the littlest ventures toward the ideal perfection of governmance is viewed upon with great skepticism.
As these events unfold, this will become the biggest story of our time. The end of the US dollar hegemony will affect nearly every human being on the planet. And if history is any guide, what follows will be incredibly tumultuous...
The wonderful and Helpful US Government.
Other people are not your property. In other words: They are not yours to boss around. Their lives are not yours to micromanage. The fruits of their labor are not yours to dispose of. It doesn’t matter how wise or marvelous or useful it would be for other people to do whatever it is you’d like them to do.
It is none of your business whether they wear their seat-belts, worship the right god, have sex with the wrong people, or engage in market transactions that irritate you. Their choices are not yours to direct.
They are human beings like yourself. You possess no legitimate authority over them. As long as they do not themselves step over the line and start treating other people as their property, you have no moral basis for initiating violence against them ‘ nor for authorizing anyone else to do so on your behalf.
America has become a gigantic gulag
America has become a gigantic gulag over the past few decades and most of its citizens don’t know, or just don’t care. One of the primary causes of the over incarceration in the U.S. is the absurd, tragic failure that is the “war on drugs”, and indeed nearly half of the folks in prison are there for drug related offenses. Making matters worse is a rapidly growing private prison system, which adds a profit motive to the equation. Recently, I wrote an extensive rant against the private prison system and provided details on how it works in: A Deep Look into the Shady World of the Private Prison Industry.
Now here are some of the sad facts. There are 1.57 million people in federal and state prison (does not even include county and local jail) according to the Department of Justice. That’s above the nation’s 1.53 million engineers and 1.05 million high school teachers.
Americans in Poverty
"If you live in the United States, there is a good chance that you are now living in poverty or near poverty. Nearly 50 million Americans, (49.7 Million), are living below the poverty line, with 80% of the entire U.S. population living near poverty or below it.
That near poverty statistic is perhaps more startling than the 50 million Americans below the poverty line, because it translates to a full 80% of the population struggling with joblessness, near-poverty or reliance on government assistance to help make ends meet.”
This is from PRAVADA in RUSSIA...
The Bill of Rights is moribund in today's America because in the view of many powerful people it should never have been born. James Madison said two centuries ago,
"We are free today substantially, but the day will come when our Republic will be an impossibility. ... A Republic cannot stand upon bayonets, and when the day comes, when the wealth of the nation will be in the hands of a few, then we must rely upon the wisdom of the best elements in the country to readjust the laws of the nation to the changed conditions."Has this day arrived?
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. So a system of "checks-and-balances" was devised to ensure that no individual, or branch of government, would obtain absolute power.
But a conflict arose over what rights and freedoms, if any, should be extended to the governed. Some delegates believed the "checks-and-balances" system alone guaranteed that the government would never abuse its authority, and were distrustful of vesting too much freedom in the common people, whom Alexander Hamilton described as "...a great beast."
"Show me that age and country where the rights and liberties of the people were placed on the sole chance of their rulers being good men, without a consequent loss of liberty! I say that the loss of that dearest privilege has ever followed, with absolute certainty, every such mad attempt."
First, the Bill of Rights only dictates what the government CANNOT do. (For example, it cannot interfere with an individual’s right to freedom of speech or religion, and it cannot deprive a person of the right to vote because of race or gender). It does not (with limited exceptions regarding the rights of criminal defendants) place any affirmative duties upon the government;
Second, the Bill of Rights (again with limited exceptions) does not apply to the private economic sector. Just because somebody composes a song does not mean any radio station is obligated to play it; Just because somebody writes a Letter to the Editor does not mean any newspaper is obligated to print it; Just because somebody authors a book does not mean any company is obligated to publish it; And just because somebody produces a motion picture does not mean any movie theater or television station is obligated to show it.
" They pay you a certain amount each year until you need that amount to live on. Then you spend the rest of your life afraid they’ll take it away from you."Therefore, if the exercise of a Constitutional right, such as freedom of speech, could result in the loss of employment and the inability to provide food, clothing, health care, education and shelter for one's loved ones, all but the most intrepid will remain silent.
This consistently confines the ability to exercise basic Constitutional rights to those individuals or groups wealthy enough to weather any economic reprisals. That reality was dramatically accentuated during the "Red Scare" of the 1950s, when Joseph McCarthy’s Senate Committee, in conjunction with the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC), employed a tactic known as "prescriptive publicity." People summoned before these committees who were perceived as hostile or uncooperative were routinely fired from their jobs and "blacklisted" from future employment. The late Mark Goodson, a television game show producer during the McCarthy era, stated in a 1991 New York Times article
If I’d Stood Up Earlier . . . that I had even been asked to fire an employee simply because she had the same name as a suspected communist.Although occasional concerns were raised about the devastating impact McCarthyism was having on the Bill of Rights, critics were hastily silenced by the fear of being labeled "communist sympathizers, fellow-travelers, or un-American." Tragically, as McCarthy informant Harvey Matusow detailed in his book FALSE WITNESS, informants who had been encouraged and/or paid to lie were the primary accusers of many of the people whose lives were destroyed during this period.
And, just a few days ago, Sinclair Broadcasting Group, owner of sixty-two television stations throughout the United States, fired its Washington Bureau Chief Jon Leiberman after Leiberman criticized Sinclair’s plans to broadcast over public airwaves, roughly two weeks before the election, a documentary hostile to presidential candidate John Kerry. (In a case of ironic justice, Sinclair itself, after suffering economic retaliation from its shareholders, chose not to air the anti-Kerry documentary in its entirety).
Although those filing SLAPP suits know they have little chance of winning, their strategy is to inflict emotional distress and financial hardship upon those engaged in speech activities, thereby discouraging others from engaging in similar speech.
This leads to the second problem: While the wealthy and powerful are often the ones most capable of exercising their constitutional rights, they are also the ones most capable of denying those rights to others through the use of censorship.
"...Misleading a smaller audience of viewers is not a noble response to the legitimate concerns raised about this program."True to this right-wing tradition, the previously mentioned Sinclair Broadcasting Group refused to let its ABC affiliates air a "NIGHTLINE" news segment where the names of Americans killed in Iraq were read, claiming the segment was making "a political statement." Also some theater chains, primarily in the Midwest, refused to air Michael Moore's documentary FAHRENHEIT 9/11, allegedly for the same reason.
"This is an abuse of the public trust. And it is proof positive of media consolidation run amok when one owner can use the public airwaves to blanket the country with its political ideology--whether liberal or conservative. . . . This is the same corporation that refused to air Nightline’s reading of our war dead in Iraq. . . . Sinclair and the FCC, are taking us down a dangerous road."Naturally what Sinclair, Powell, the GOP, the FCC and their right-wing media sycophants hope the public will overlook is the fact that neither George W. Bush nor Dick Cheney even served in Vietnam. Bush avoided the war by using his family's influence to get into the National Guard, and Cheney obtained five deferments.
Bandwagon speech has been primarily responsible for the "dumbing down of America," as the focus of the corporate-controlled media has shifted from substance to superficiality. Many media conglomerates also own movie studios, and thus use their television stations, newspapers and magazines to promote celebrity "culture." As a result, America has become a society where people are cognizant of minor trivialities regarding the lives of celebrities, yet are unaware of laws, like the Patriot Act, that decimate their Constitutional rights. Materialistic vamps like Paris Hiltonand Britney Spears inundate the airwaves, yet many Americans cannot recite the name of a single person killed in Iraq.
Some may claim it is hypocritical to write an article supporting the Bill of Rights while complaining about the abuses of the corporate-controlled media or applauding the protests that altered Sinclair’s plan to air the anti-Kerry documentary. These media, after all, will claim they are only providing what the public wants to see, read and hear. But a child may want to eat ice cream and cake everyday for breakfast, lunch and dinner. For good health, however, a child needs to eat a balanced diet. Corporate-controlled media also need to, without regard for ratings or profits, feed the people the information they need.
With the increased concentration of media ownership, Americans and perhaps the most ill informed people on earth, and, as the rush to invade Iraq illustrates, much more susceptible to government or media lies. Although there are alternative media sources, Americans are often too harried, too tired, or too apathetic to pursue them unless they are available at the touch of a remote control or delivered to one’s mailbox or doorstep.
"... We are free today substantially, but the day will come when our Republic will be an impossibility. It will be an impossibility because wealth will be concentrated in the hands of a few. A Republic cannot stand upon bayonets, and when the day comes, when the wealth of the nation will be in the hands of a few, then we must rely upon the wisdom of the best elements in the country to readjust the laws of the nation to the changed conditions..."Perhaps that day has arrived.
Here are 15 quotes from Fyodor Dostoyevsky, born 11 November 1821, died 9 February 1881. Dostoyevsky was a Russian novelist, short story writer, essayist and philosopher. His works include Crime and Punishment (1866), The Idiot (1869), and The Brothers Karamazov (1880). He wrote 11 novels, three novellas, and 17 short novels.
Nullify NSA: The Resistance Begins Now.
Prior to the Revolution, the British claimed the authority to issue Writs of Assistance allowing officials to enter private homes and businesses to search for evidence of smuggling. These general warrants never expired and were considered a valid substitute for specific search warrants. With British tyranny fresh on their minds many states’ Ratifiers insisted on a Bill of Rights to the U.S. Constitution, and among those fundamental rights, the founders included a provision protecting the people from the arbitrary 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.
Note the Fourth Amendment includes NO exceptions for the kind of blanket warrantless monitoring and data collection that the NSA has engaged in for years. Not for catching “terrorists.” Not for super secret intelligence agencies. Not to “keep us safe.”
Yet the NSA spies on Americans incessantly. It digs through emails, collects Internet data and sifts through phone records. No warrants. No specification. No restraint. British tyranny pales in comparison. So what do we do?
We could wait on Congress, but it has had plenty of chances to shut it down. Our representatives and senators keep rubber stamping it. We could rely on the courts. But when was the last time those black-robed federal employees did anything to limit federal power? They rubber stamp it too. Maybe the president will save the day. But the commission Obama formed to review NSA surveillance was packed with government insiders. More rubber stamps.
James Madison, known as the Father of the Constitution, gave us a blueprint for stopping federal overreach.
In Federalist 46, he argued that action at the state and local level, such as “a refusal to cooperate with officers of the Union,” should be used in response to unconstitutional federal acts, or even constitutional ones that are just very unpopular.
Taking his suggestions, he wrote, would create “serious impediments” for the federal government. And when several states join together doing the same, Madison said it would “present obstructions which the federal government would hardly be willing to encounter.” (You can read more about Madison’s blueprint HERE.)
In the Virginia Resolutions of 1798, Madison wrote that “in case of a deliberate, palpable, and dangerous exercise” of power by the federal government, states “have the right, and are in duty bound, to interpose for arresting the progress of the evil.”
NSA spying represents just the kind of dangerous, palpable evil Madison was talking about.
It’s time for states to act.
Northern states successfully followed this blueprint to resist federal fugitive slave acts. Between 1820 and 1860, most northern states passed personal liberty laws to resist these acts that denied due process to any black person accused of escaping slavery. Personal liberty laws included provisions prohibiting state or local officials from cooperating with fugitive slave rendition and denying use of state or local facilities, such as jails. They were so successful, several southern states cited northern noncooperation with the fugitive slave acts in their declaration of causes for secession.
“...This is such a familiar story. Empires throughout history have always gone through this life cycle of rise, peak, decline, and collapse. Rome. Egypt. The Habsburg Empire. The Ottoman Empire. And the salient points are almost always the same– out of control government spending, a rapidly debased currency, costly foreign military campaigns, burdensome regulations, etc.
More importantly, in almost every instance, there’s always been a tiny elite who thinks they should control the entire system. Yet history is very clear: societies that organize themselves in this way suffer a 100% failure rate, without exception.”
— Zero Hedge (via thefreelioness)
We Are Already In Stage One Of Martial Law.
In a nation that prides itself on being the “Land of the free” and “Home of the brave”, a cursory (and realistic) look at the developments in this country since 9/11 will illustrate that America can no longer back up those lofty claims.
In a land where all of our communications and internet activities are recorded and scrutinized, where government and corporations control the food we eat, regulate our health care and control the media, where any one of us can be arrested and detained indefinitely for the mere suspicion of terrorist ties without the Constitutional protection of due process, where surveillance drones criss-cross the skies, where international banksters control our currency, where our president maintains a “kill list” and cowardly executes American citizens and innocent bystanders with impunity from thousands of miles away – and most telling – when the government agencies and departments that are supposed to protect us from external threats are hurriedly arming themselves to the teeth as they attempt to remove our right to protect ourselves, I would posit that America is no longer free and the powers that be are nothing even resembling brave.
I believe the groundwork for martial law has been being laid for over a decade now. Incrementalism is the preferred tactic of the cowards who endeavor to enslave us – keeping us docile, distracted and brainwashed as the hand of tyranny slowly tightens its grip around the throat of liberty.
I believe that martial law is already here. And I am not alone…
The following is an article by fellow RBN host; Dave Hodges (host of “The Common Sense Show” on Sunday nights – right after Survival and Beyond) detailing a recent interview he gave for “The Voice of Russia” radio program.
Stage one of martial law consists of the gradual roll-out of government controls over citizen liberties.
Travel is restricted through inland border checkpoints and travel restrictions carry over into Stage two. The internal DHS VIPR programs which randomly search citizens at public events and on the highways are now in place. Citizens are conditioned by the TSA that they do not control or own their bodies as the flying public is molested by the TSA everyday in our nation’s airports in an extreme violation of our citizens Fourth Amendment rights. Stage one also begins to create an enemies list and we have already seen this in the MIAC report in which Christians, Ron Paul supporters, Second Amendment supporters, Libertarians and Constitutionalists have been branded as domestic terrorists. The enemies list has been created and will be acted upon at a future date.
In Stage one, the government elevates itself above any pretense of constitutional liberties.
In Stage one, the legal mechanisms are put into place which will allow for a more orderly transition to martial law.
In the United States there are two distinct provisions which will firmly place the United States under martial law. On December 31, 2011, while the country was preparing to celebrate, Congress passed the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). The NDAA permits the government to arrest anyone without the due process of law and detain them indefinitely without any legal representative.
Although I did not have the time to tell the Russians about Eric Holder and Jeh Johnson’s legal opinions which legitimize unconstitutional arrests but also sanctioned the unwarranted executions of American citizens. Referring to Attorney General’s legal opinion, Eric Holder has stated that Obama can order the execution of Americans. This legal opinion was based upon a legal brief prepared by newly nominated DHS director, Jeh Johnson, when as senior legal counsel to the Pentagon, he had previously issued the same legal opinion.
The NDAA will allow the administration the legal right to secretly remove any burgeoning leadership of citizen opposition forces. The second provision which will allow this country to quickly transition to martial law is Executive Order (EO) 13603 which allows the President to take control over any resource, property and even human labor within the United States. This EO gives the President unlimited authority including the ability to initiate a civilian draft as well as a military draft. In short, this spells the potential enslavement of the American people. The Russian host was uncomfortable with my recitation of these two draconian dictates.
America has been firmly under Stage one martial law governance and it started in the aftermath of 9/11.
In Stage two, martial law implementation becomes obvious to all citizens.
With the exception for the ones who invoke cognitive dissonance as a psychological coping mechanism. Stage two is marked by increasing restrictions on travel, the loss of free speech and the right to assemble to air grievances against the government. Stage two also witnesses some level of pushback by the citizens through various forms of civil disobedience.
Press release date: April 4, 2012The TSA “grope granny” approach to airline security greatly intensifies in this stage. The Russian host posited the view that airline security is a normal part of life and a necessary part of airline security. Having our genitals groped by pot-bellied perverts in blue uniforms is a normal part of life? Control of the media is the same regardless of the country of origin.
Owner: Department of Homeland Security
Shelters Direct provided the Department of Homeland Security with this 4×13 Steel UL 752 Level 3 Bullet Resistant Booth.
This guard building features a standing seam hip roof, a thru-wall HVAC unit, (2) UL 752 BR Level 3 sliding doors, UL 752 Bullet Resistant Level 3 glass and a Low]E coating.
DHS bullet proof checkpoint. “Papers Please”
The MERS mortgage fraud inspired thievery of legitimate home titles and the MF Global theft of privately secured investment accounts are cases in point. Stage two is often preceded by a false flag attack (e.g. burning of the Reichstag) designed to create a perceived enemy which serves as the excuse for the encroachment of “necessary” tyranny in a society in which “we must trade our liberty for security” approach to governance.
First they tortured a U.S. citizen and gang member …
I remained silent;
I wasn’t a criminal
Then they tortured a U.S. citizen, whistleblower and navy veteran …
I remained silent;
I wasn’t a whistleblower
Then they locked up an attorney for representing accused criminals …
I remained silent;
I wasn’t a defense attorney
Then they arrested a young father walking with his son simply because he told Dick Cheney that he disagreed with his policies …
I remained silent;
I’ve never talked to an important politician
Then they said an entertainer should be killed because she questioned the government’s version of an important historical event …
I remained silent;
I wasn’t an entertainer
Then they arrested people for demanding that Congress hold the President to the Constitution …
I did not speak out;
I’ve never protested in Washington
Then they arrested a man for holding a sign …
I held my tongue;
I’ve never held that kind of sign
Then they broke a minister’s leg because he wanted to speak at a public event …
I said nothing;
I wasn’t a religious leader
Then they shot a student with a taser gun and arrested him for asking a question of a politician at a public event …
I remained silent;
I wasn’t a student
Then they started labeling virtually every innocent and normal behavior as marking Americans as “potential terrorists” …
I remained silent;
I didn’t want to be called a terrorist
Then they threw political dissenters in psychiatric wards …
I remained silent;
I didn’t want to be seen as crazy
Then they declared that they could label U.S. citizens living on U.S. soil as “unlawful enemy combatants” and imprison them indefinitely without access to any attorney …
I remained silent;
I didn’t want to be labeled an enemy
Then they declared that they could assassinate U.S. citizens living on U.S. soil without any due process of law …
I remained silent;
I didn’t want to be on the list
When they came for me,
Everyone was silent;
there was no one left to speak out.
Inspired by the poem First They Came by Martin Niemöller, which was written about the Nazis.
The Indians Weren't Defeated by White Settlers
There's a pretty important detail our movies and textbooks left out of the handoff from Native Americans to white European settlers: It begins in the immediate aftermath of a full-blown apocalypse. In the decades between Columbus' discovery of America and the Mayflower landing at Plymouth Rock, the most devastating plague in human history raced up the East Coast of America. Just two years before the pilgrims started the tape recorder on New England's written history, the plague wiped out about 96 percent of the Indians in Massachusetts.
In the years before the plague turned America into The Stand, a sailor named Giovanni da Verrazzano sailed up the East Coast and described it as "densely populated" and so "smoky with Indian bonfires" that you could smell them burning hundreds of miles out at sea. Using your history books to understand what America was like in the 100 years after Columbus landed there is like trying to understand what modern day Manhattan is like based on the post-apocalyptic scenes from I Am Legend.
Historians estimate that before the plague, America's population was anywhere between 20 and 100 million (Europe's at the time was 70 million). The plague would eventually sweep West, killing at least 90 percent of the native population. For comparison's sake, the Black Plague killed off between 30 and 60 percent of Europe's population.
While this all might seem like some heavy shit to lay on a bunch of second graders, your high school and college history books weren't exactly in a hurry to tell you the full story. Which is strange, because many historians believe it is the single most important event in American history. But it's just more fun to believe that your ancestors won the land by being the superior culture.
European settlers had a hard enough time defeating the Mad Max-style stragglers of the once huge Native American population, even with superior technology. You have to assume that the Native Americans at full strength would have made shit powerfully real for any pale faces trying to settle the country they had already settled. Of course, we don't really need to assume anything about how real the American Indians kept it, thanks to the many people who came before the pilgrims. For instance, if you liked playing cowboys and Indians as a kid, you should know that you could have been playing vikings and Indians, because that shit actually happened. But before we get to how they kicked Viking ass, you probably need to know that ...
Mr. Snowden's Statement
"...In the last four months, we’ve learned a lot about our government. We’ve learned that the US Intelligence Community secretly built a system of pervasive surveillance. Today, no telephone in America makes a call without leaving a record with the NSA. Today, no Internet transaction enters or leaves America without passing through the NSA’s hands.
Our representatives in Congress tell us this is not surveillance. They’re wrong..."
"...We’ve also learned this isn’t about red or blue party lines. Neither is it about terrorism. It is about power, control, and trust in government; about whether you have a voice in our democracy or decisions are made for you rather than with you.
We’re here to remind our government officials that they are public servants, not private investigators. This is about the unconstitutional, unethical, and immoral actions of the modern-day surveillance state and how we all must work together to remind government to stop them. It’s about our right to know, to associate freely, and to live in an open society..."
"...We are witnessing an American moment in which ordinary people from high schools to high office stand up to oppose a dangerous trend in government. We are told that what is unconstitutional is not illegal, but we will not be fooled.Edward Snowden, in a statement read at the “Stop Watching Us” Rally against mass surveillance in Washington,DC. It was read by Justice Department whistleblower and attorney with the Government Accountability Project
We have not forgotten that the Fourth Amendment in our Bill of Rights prohibits government not only from searching our personal effects without a warrant but from seizing them in the first place.
Holding to this principle, we declare that mass surveillance has no place in this country. It is time for reform. Elections are coming and we’re watching you..."
I hope that Mr. Snowden is right. But, personally, I believe that the elections are all rigged. After all, how can ome of the people who get elected year after year still continue to do so, like Sen. Dianne Feinstein...?
“A “democracy” is not what the Founders intended when they finished writing the Constitution. It was a rights-defending republic whose political structure was designed to stave off or frustrate all “democratic” legislation and collectivist popular sentiment. The American Constitution did not fail in that purpose. Its defenders in the person of our political leadership failed it.”
— Edward Cline (via timlebsack)
“If the U.S. national debt continues to grow, the collapse of the dollar system will take place in 2017,” said Mr. Degtyarev, a member of the nationalist Liberal Democrat Party who lost in Moscow’s recent mayoral election. “The countries that will suffer the most will be those that have failed to wean themselves off their dependence on the dollar in time. In light of this, the fact that confidence in the dollar is growing among Russian citizens is extremely dangerous.”— Mikhail Degtyarev, Russian Lawmaker, who proposed the bill, compared the dollar to a Ponzi scheme. He warned that the government would have to bail out Russians holding the U.S. currency if it collapses.
20 Things I Should Have Known at 20
This classic attack on political prohibition and moralistic law-making was first published anonymously in 1875, as a chapter in the anthology “Prohibition a Failure: or, the True Solution of the Temperance Question.” It was revealed as the work of the radical legal theorist Lysander Spooner soon after his death in 1887, but posthumous collections of his works failed to include it. After the essay was rediscovered and circulated by Carl Watner in 1977, it quickly became one of Spooner’s most popular essays — but remained notoriously difficult to find in print. Until now.
VICES are those acts by which a man harms himself or his property. Crimes are those acts by which one man harms the person or property or another… . For a government to declare a vice to be a crime, and to punish it as such, is an attempt to falsify the very nature of things. It is as absurd as it would be to declare truth to be falsehood, or falsehood truth… .
It is only those persons who have either little capacity, or little disposition, to enlighten, encourage, or aid mankind, that are possessed of this violent passion for governing, commanding, and punishing them.The USA government, if it were to be truly free, would permit people to live their lives as they choose. IF they want to smoke, ride a car without a seatbelt, eat fatty foods with transfats, not get innoculated, ride a motorcycle without a helmet...etc, it would be their business. And, theirs alone. No matter how foolish another might think their actions were, a land that is truly free would permit the endulgences in vices.
If, instead of standing by, and giving their consent and sanction to all the laws by which the weak man is first plundered, oppressed, and disheartened, and then punished as a criminal, they would turn their attention to the duty of defending his rights and improving his condition, … enabling him to stand on his own feet, and withstand the temptations that surround him, they would, I think, have little need to talk about laws and prisons for either rum-sellers or rum-drinkers, or even any other class of ordinary criminals.
If, in short, these men, who are so anxious for the suppression of crime, would suspend, for a while, their calls upon the government to aid in suppressing the crimes of individuals, and would call upon the people for aid in suppressing the crimes of the government, they would show both their sincerity and good sense in a much stronger light than they do now… .
R.I.P. Bill of Rights 1789 - 2011
One of the most extraordinary documents in human history -- the Bill of Rights -- has come to an end under President Barack Obama. Derived from sacred principles of natural law, the Bill of Rights has come to a sudden and catastrophic end with the President's signing of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), a law that grants the U.S. military the "legal" right to conduct secret kidnappings of U.S. citizens, followed by indefinite detention, interrogation, torture and even murder. This is all conducted completely outside the protection of law, with no jury, no trial, no legal representation and not even any requirement that the government produce evidence against the accused. It is a system of outright government tyranny against the American people, and it effectively nullifies the Bill of Rights.
In what will be remembered as the most traitorous executive signing ever committed against the American people, President Obama signed the bill on New Year's Eve, a time when most Americans were engaged in the consumption of alcohol. It seems appropriate, of course, since no intelligent American could accept the tyranny of this bill if they were sober.
This is the law that will cement Obama's legacy in the history books as the traitor who nullified the Bill of Rights and paved America's pathway down a road of tyranny that will make Nazi Germany's war crimes look like child's play. If Bush had signed a law like this, liberals would have been screaming "impeachment!"
Why the Bill of Rights matters
While the U.S. Constitution already limits the power of federal government, the Bill of Rights is the document that enumerates even more limits of federal government power. In its inception, many argued that a Bill of Rights was completely unnecessary because, they explained, the federal government only has the powers specifically enumerated to it under the U.S. Constitution. There was no need to have a "First Amendment" to protect Free Speech, for example, because there was no power granted to government to diminish Free Speech.
This seems silly today, of course, given the natural tendency of all governments to concentrate power in the hands of the few while destroying the rights and freedoms of their own people. But in the 1780's, whether government could ever become a threat to future freedoms was hotly debated. By 1789, enough revolutionary leaders had agreed on the fundamental principles of a Bill of Rights to sign it into law. Its purpose was to provide additional clarifications on the limitation of government power so that there could be absolutely no question that government could NEVER, under any circumstances, violate these key principles of freedom: Freedom of speech, the right to bear arms, freedom from illegal searches, the right to remain silent, the right to due process under law, and so on.
Of course, today's runaway federal government utterly ignores the limitations placed on it by the founding fathers. It aggressively and criminally seeks to expand its power at all costs, completely ignoring the Bill of Rights and openly violating the limitations of power placed upon it by the United States Constitution. The TSA's illegal searching of air travelers, for example, is a blatant violation of Fourth Amendment rights. The government's hijacking of websites it claims are linking to "copyright infringement" hubs is a blatant violation of First Amendment rights. The government's demand that all Americans be forced to buy private health insurance is a blatant violation of Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution -- the "commerce clause."
Now, with the passage of the NDAA, the federal government has torpedoed the entire Bill of Rights, dismissing it completely and effectively promising to violate those rights at will. As of January 1, 2012, we have all been designated enemies of the state. America is the new battleground, and your "right" to due process is null and void.
Remember, this was all done by the very President who promised to close Guantanamo Bay and end secret military prisons. Not only did Obama break that campaign promise (as he has done with nearly ALL his campaign promises), he did exactly the opposite and has now subjected all Americans to the possibility of government-sponsored kidnapping, detainment and torture, all under the very system of secret military prisons he claimed he would close!
"President Obama’s action today is a blight on his legacy because he will forever be known as the president who signed indefinite detention without charge or trial into law,"Obama's signing statement means nothing
said Anthony D. Romero, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union.
Moving forward, my administration will interpret and implement the provisions described below in a manner that best preserves the flexibility on which our safety depends and upholds the values on which this country was founded..."Anyone who reads between the lines here realizes the "the flexibility on which our safety depends" means they can interpret the law in any way they want if there is a sufficient amount of fear being created through false flag terror attacks. Astute readers will also notice that Obama's signing statement has no legal binding whatsoever and only refers to Obama's momentary intentions on how he "wishes" to interpret the law. It does not place any limits whatsoever on how a future President might use the law as written.
"The statute is particularly dangerous because it has no temporal or geographic limitations, and can be used by this and future presidents to militarily detain people captured far from any battlefield," says the ACLU .What this means is that the next President could use this law to engage in the most horrific holocaust-scale mass round-up of people the world has ever seen. The NDAA legalizes the crimes of Nazi Germany in America, setting the stage for the mass murder of citizens by a rogue government.
"...the breadth of the NDAA’s detention authority violates international law because it is not limited to people captured in the context of an actual armed conflict as required by the laws of war" says the ACLU .In 1789, today's NDAA law would have been called "treasonous," and those who voted for it would have been shot dead as traitors. This is not a call for violence, but rather an attempt to provide historical context of just how destructive this law really is. Men and women fought and died for the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights. People sacrificed their lives, their safety and risked everything to achieve the freedoms that made America such a great nation. For one President to so callously throw away 222 years of liberty, betraying those great Americans who painstakingly created an extraordinary document limiting the power of government, is equivalent to driving a stake through the heart of the Republic.
"That all men are by nature equally free and independent and have certain inherent rights, of which, when they enter into a state of society, they cannot, by any compact, deprive or divest their posterity; namely, the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety." [Here]Section Three of the declaration speaks to the duty of the Citizens to abolish abusive government:
"That government is, or ought to be, instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security of the people, nation, or community; of all the various modes and forms of government, that is best which is capable of producing the greatest degree of happiness and safety and is most effectually secured against the danger of maladministration; and that, when any government shall be found inadequate or contrary to these purposes, a majority of the community hath an indubitable, inalienable, and indefeasible right to reform, alter, or abolish it, in such manner as shall be judged most conducive to the public weal."
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."In signing the NDAA law into office, Obama has blatantly and unambiguously violated this sacred oath, meaning that his betrayal is not merely against the American people, but also against the Divine Creator.
In their own words, 60 House Democrats who promised you could keep your insurance plan
Democrats in Congress have been trying their best to memory-hole the promises they made to their constituents regarding Obamacare, but in today’s glorious information age, you can’t run far enough to escape your own words. GOP Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy has compiled a list of 60 House Democrats who have violated their own promises to their constituents by telling them they could keep their health insurance plan under Obamacare.
Rep. Butterfield: “For North Carolinians who already have health insurance, the only changes you will see under the Affordable Care Act are new benefits, better protections from insurance company abuses, and more value for every dollar you spend on health care. If you like your plan you can keep it, and you don’t have to change a thing due to the health care law.” ("Health Care Resources," as seen on 10/24/2013)
Rep. Cárdenas: “If you have insurance right now, your plan stays the same. This means if you get your health insurance through work, if you have Medicare or if you are a member of California Healthy Families, you keep that coverage.” ("What Valley Residents Need to Know about Health Care Reform")
Rep. Castor: “…If you like your health insurance, you can keep it. Keep your current doctor as you see fit.” ("What Does Health Insurance Reform Mean for You?")
“Nothing in this bill will force you to drop your current coverage. Rest assured, if you like your health insurance, you can keep it.” (Press Release, 7/31/2009)
Rep. Clarke: “IF YOU HAVE HEALTH INSURANCE…You can keep your doctor and your plan.” (“What Health Care Reform Means for You”)
Rep. Clay: “Under the legislation, individuals and families with employer-based coverage can keep the health insurance coverage they have now, and it will get better.” (Congressman Clay’s Capitol Hill Report, 11/10/09)
Rep. Cleaver: “I am committed to a health care plan that covers every single American, reduces the cost of care, allows people to keep their insurance if they like” (Press Release, 8/20/2009)
Rep. Connolly: “I already have insurance through an employer, a union, Medicare, Medicaid, TriCare, the VA, COBRA, or a retirement plan. Do I need to do anything? No. If you have coverage from any of these sources, you can keep it. Nothing in the Affordable Care Act requires you to change plans.” (Obamacare FAQ)
Rep. Conyers: “Your premiums and other costs will not increase as a result of health care reform and if you like the coverage you have now, you’ll be able to keep it. In fact, you’ll get some additional help paying for premiums and out-of-pocket costs.” (“How Will Obamacare Affect Me?” Questionnaire)
Rep. Costa: “I currently have an insurance plan that works. How will the new health care law affect me? Health reform protects existing coverage, and encourages employers to maintain it. It also improves current coverage by strengthening consumer protections.” (Obamacare FAQ)
Rep. Crowley: “Our health care plan provides stability and security for those who have health insurance. If you like what you have, you can keep it.” (Press Release, 11/7/2009)
Rep. Cuellar: “Keep your doctor, and your current plan, if you like them.” (Health Care Reform Summary, prepared by House Democratic Leadership, 8/10/2009)
Rep. Davis, Danny: “It protects current coverage allowing individuals to keep the insurance they have if they like it and preserves choice of doctors, hospitals, and health plans. It achieves these reforms through…” (Health Care Reform Summary)
Rep. DeFazio: “The legislation is not a government takeover of health care. It will not get between anyone and their doctor. If you have insurance, you can keep your current plan.” (Press Release, 3/24/2010)
Rep. DeGette: Not a quote attributed to her, but part of a news article she posted on her website: “Mr. Obama has said repeatedly, as he told the American Medical Association in June: “If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor, period. If you like your health care plan, you’ll be able to keep your health care plan, period. No one will take it away, no matter what.” These assurances reflect an aspiration, but may not be literally true or enforceable.” (In the News, 8/10/2009)
Rep. Deutch: “If you have job-based health insurance you like, you can keep it.” (Health Care FAQ)
Rep. Doggett: “If you already have coverage through your employer, Medicare, TRICARE, or some other source, you can keep that insurance and you are not required to buy additional coverage.” (The Affordable Care Act)
Rep. Ellison: “If you like the insurance you have, you can keep it. Don’t listen to that stuff you heard in the last hour, Mr. Speaker. The truth is, you get to keep your health insurance if that’s what you want.” (Floor Speech)
Rep. Engel: “This is a great day for all Americans from all walks of life – seniors, youth, the sick and the healthy. If you have health insurance, you can keep your doctor and your health plan. You like it, you keep it. It’s that simple.” (Press Release, 11/9/2009)
Rep. Eshoo: “Q. My employer already provides coverage for me and my family and I like my plan. Do I need to do anything differently? A. No. You just keep the coverage you have.” (Press Release, as seen on 10/22/2013)
Rep. Farr: “If you have job-based health insurance you like, you can keep it. You’re considered covered. You may be able to change to Marketplace coverage if you prefer.” (Obamacare FAQ)
Rep. Fattah: ““This plan means that those who are satisfied with their current coverage and doctor can keep their plan and their physician. However, if they aren’t happy with their coverage then this plan will help them find and afford quality healthcare.” (Press Release, 7/14/2009)
Rep. Garamendi: “Just six months after our historic health insurance reforms were signed into law, important consumer protections are going into effect. These protections mean that never again will your insurance run out or be taken away from you when you need it the most.” (Press Release, 10/20/2010)
Rep. Green, Gene: “If you have job-based health insurance you like, you can keep it. In fact, with new regulations and standards, the insurance you currently have will include new consumer protections like no lifetime limits, minimum coverage standards, and limits on administrative costs.” (Obamacare FAQ)
Rep. Grijalva: “No one is forced to do anything. The entire premise of this legislation is to build on what works in today’s system. If you have employer sponsored health care today - as do most insured people – than little to nothing will change, except that your premiums will no longer subsidize coverage for the uninsured. If you are covered in the individual insurance market, you can keep your plan permanently and it will count as acceptable coverage even if it doesn’t meet those terms under the new law.” (Obamacare FAQ)
Rep. Hastings (FL): “Individuals who already have health insurance through their employers or are self-insured will keep their insurance. There is absolutely no provision within the ACA that would remove existing coverage from individuals and families. Furthermore, the law will make existing plans more secure and affordable.” (Obamacare FAQ)
Rep. Honda: “Under the bill, if you are covered by a large employer, you are not likely to see many changes to your healthcare coverage.” (Blog Release, 4/5/2010)
Rep. Hoyer: "We need to build upon the current system of employer-sponsored care, with a system that provides patients their choice of insurance coverage and their choice of doctors. In other words, if you like what you have, you should be able to keep it." (Town Hall Meeting, 4/21/2009)
Rep. Jeffries: “But I’m happy with my health care. What does this change for me?
Nothing. You can keep the plan you have, and will enjoy many of the benefits of the Affordable Care Act, including the prohibiting of insurance companies from dropping your coverage just because you are sick.” (Obamacare FAQ)
Rep. Johnson (GA): “It is important to note that nothing will change for those who are happy with the insurance they already have from their employer, seniors on Medicare, TRICARE or people on Medicaid.” (E-Newsletter, 7/24/2013)
Rep. Johnson, E. B.: “If you have health insurance you like, I want you to be able to keep it,” she continued.” (Telephone Townhall, 5/6/2009)
Rep. Kaptur: “The goal is to try to get you into a plan that you pick, where you feel you have very carefully monitored care, that you participate in, so nobody’s left out, nobody’s rejected and you have choices. That sounds like a much better system than we have today for so many people. If you like what you have, you keep it…” (Press Release)
"The whole intention of the law is to relieve some of the worries that seniors face," Congresswoman Kaptur said. And, "you keep the insurance that you have if you like it.” (Telephone Townhall)
Rep. Kennedy: “If you have job-based health insurance you like, it is not necessary to change your plan. You may be able to change to Marketplace coverage if you prefer. Any job-based health plan you currently have qualifies as minimum essential coverage.” (Obamacare FAQ)
Rep. Kind: “In order to increase access to affordable coverage we must make sure no one is denied coverage, specifically due to pre-existing conditions. Reform seeks to build on the existing system so that if you like your employer sponsored health insurance, you can keep it.” (Press Release, 7/22/2009)
Rep. Langevin: “Keep your doctor, and your current plan, if you like them.” (Newsletter, 8/10/2009)
Rep. Larsen (WA): “This bill will give the power back to the American consumer. It preserves choice and creates competition in the insurance market. If you like your plan, you can keep your plan. If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. If you change jobs, you can keep your coverage.” (Press Release, 3/21/2010)
Rep. Larson (CT) “I am committed to health care reform that allows you to keep your current plan if you like it, reform that puts you and your doctor in charge of your care. The cost of inaction on health care will continue to debilitate our families, small businesses, and our nation.” (Press Release, 8/24/2009)
Rep. Levin: “If you like your current health plan, you will be able to keep it. But it is clear that our nation wants us to fix what’s not working by reducing costs, increasing prevention, improving quality, and covering uninsured Americans,” said Rep. Levin.” (Press Release, 6/9/2009)
Rep. Lewis: “This bill does not replace employer-sponsored coverage, it actually adds to the choices people have. If people like their insurance, they can keep it.” (E-Newsletter, 10/10/2009)
Rep. Lujan Grisham (NM): “If you are already receiving coverage through eligible employer-sponsored insurance, eligible individual insurance, grandfathered health plans, and federal programs such as Medicare, Medicaid, VA Health Care, CHIP and others, you do not need to purchase new health insurance.” (Blog Post, 11/6/2013)
Rep. Matsui: “If you are insured and already have a “qualified” health insurance plan through your employer, nothing changes. You can keep your plan. You can keep your doctor.” (Obamacare FAQ)
Rep. McNerney: “Reforming health care is a fiscally responsible course of action that will build on the best of the American system by making sure people can keep their current insurance if they like it and choose what doctors they want see.” (Press Release, 3/22/2010)
Rep. Miller, George: “If you get insurance through your job or have Medicare, you don’t need to do anything — you can keep your insurance.” (Blog Post, 9/30/2013)
Rep. Nolan: “If you like the plan you have, you can keep it. And in fact, you’ll get a host of other built-in new consumer protections.” (ACA Resources)
Rep. Palone: “Our health plan fulfills commitments made by this Congress and President Obama to reform health care. The plan … Keeping your doctor and your plan if you like them.” (Press Release, 7/19/2009)
Rep. Pocan: I have health insurance from my employer, and I like the plan that I have. Do I get to keep it? “You can keep the plan you have, and will enjoy many of the benefits of the Affordable Care Act, including the prohibiting of insurance companies from dropping your coverage just because you got sick.” (ACA FAQ)
Rep. Polis: “If you are currently insured and like the plan you have, you’ll likely be able to stick with your current plan.” ("Obamacare Enrollment Begins Today," 10/1/2013)
Rep. Price (NC): “Just as in the past, if you like your doctor, you can choose to stay with your doctor.” (Constituent Mailing, 7/14/2013)
Rep. Quigley: “Allows you to keep your coverage and doctor if you like them.” (Press Release, 8/20/2009)
Rep. Rangel: “This plan tells every American – if you have coverage and a doctor you like, keep it.” (Press Release, 7/15/2009)
Rep. Sarbanes: “Keep your doctor, and your current plan, if you like them.” (Health Care Reform E-Newsletter, 8/12/2009)
Rep. Schwartz: “If you already have health coverage you like, you can keep it.” (ACA: Update)
Rep. Sires: “If people like their current plans, they will be able to keep them.” (Constituent Mailing)
Rep. Swalwell (CA): “If you have employer-provided health insurance, public program insurance such as Medicare, or are a veteran receiving VA health care, you are considered covered and can keep your current plan.” (ACA FAQ)
Rep. Tsongas: The legislation takes significant steps towards covering all Americans, while enabling anyone happy with their current plan to keep it.” (Press Release, 3/21/2010)
Rep. Van Hollen: “If you like your doctor and your plan, you can keep them.” (Press Release, 7/14/2009)
Rep. Wasserman Schultz: “Let me be clear: if you like your current plan, you’ll be able to keep it. Rather, we will build on our current system, so we can give you the freedom to choose what works best for you and your family. If you like your doctor, keep your doctor. If you like your current plan, keep your current plan. If you don’t, or if you don’t have one, then get one that works for you.” (Press Release, 7/1/2009)
Rep. Watt: “Under the ACA, those who already have health insurance coverage under the following plans will continue to enjoy their coverage without interruption and without taking any action: Employer-sponsored plans” (Obamacare FAQ)
Rep. Waxman: “If you like your doctor and your current plan, you keep them. But we fundamentally reform the insurance company practices that are failing our families.” (Press Release, 3/21/2013)
Rep. Welch: “Under the legislation, individuals with insurance can keep the coverage they have now, and it will get better.” (Obamacare FAQ)
Rep. Yarmuth: “Keep your doctor, and your current plan, if you like them.” (Obamacare FAQ, as seen on August 23, 2013)
I would like to add to this list Nancy Pelosi, who still insists that “If you like your plan you can keep it” was not a lie, despite the obvious evidence to the contrary.
"...There will be people who will BENEFIT from ObamaCARE. Just as there will be people who will not benefit. The question that is on my mind is a simple one. Is violating the FREEDOM and LIBERTY of Americans worth it?
Or, in other words, at what cost Freedom? When you make a place better or safer, or nicer, or cleaner (by your standards) is it really better?
“The vision on which the all-encompassing and all-controlling welfare state was built is a vision of widespread helplessness, requiring ever more expanding big government. … The last thing the political left needs, or can even afford, are self-reliant individuals. If such people became the norm, that would destroy not only the agenda and the careers of those on the left, but even their flattering image of themselves as saviors of the less fortunate. …— Thomas Sowell addresses Tumblr (via laliberty)
The very word “achievement” has been replaced by the word “privilege” in many writings of our times. Individuals or groups that have achieved more than others are called “privileged” individuals or groups, who are to be resented rather than emulated.”
In Scorecard terms...
In scorecard terms, once the Edward Snowden revelations began and the vast conspiracy to capture a world of communications was revealed, things only went from bad to worse. Here’s just a partial list of some of the casualties from Washington’s point of view:
And the list of post-Snowden fallout only seems to be growing. The NSA’s vast global security state is now visibly an edifice of negative value, yet it remains so deeply embedded in the post-9/11 American national security state that seriously paring it back, no less dismantling it, is probably inconceivable.
- The first European near-revolt against American power in living memory (former French leader Charles de Gaulle aside), and a phenomenon that is still growing across that continent along with an upsurge in distaste for Washington.
- A shudder of horror in Brazil and across Latin America, emphasizing a growing distaste for the not-so-good neighbor to the North.
- China, which has its own sophisticated surveillance network and was being pounded for it by Washington, now looks like Mr. Clean.
- Russia, a country run by a former secret police agent, has in the post-Snowden era been miraculously transformed into a global peacemaker and a land that provided a haven for an important western dissident.
- The Internet giants of Silicon valley, a beacon of U.S. technological prowess, could in the end take a monstrous hit, losing billions of dollars and possibly their near monopoly status globally, thanks to the revelation that when you email, tweet, post to Facebook, or do anything else through any of them, you automatically put yourself in the hands of the NSA. Their CEOs are shuddering with worry, as well they should be.
"Secrecy is anathema to a democratic republic. If we ever had one, it is long gone. The only real question left is what the unelected fourth branch of government, created inadvertently by Harry Truman, is really up to. It is clearly involved in a great deal of industrial espionage, but how are its discoveries transferred to US corporations? Who do the mostly right wing NSA bureaucrats really report to if not to Obama? And, what are they really doing with our cell phone records, which reveal to whom we speak, how often, and where exactly we are? How are these being data-mined and for what purposes?”