Saturday, March 13, 2010

House Bill Aims to Strip “Rightwing Extremists” of Second Amendment Right

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars
May 9, 2009
A sinister bill working its way through the House may eventually serve as a companion piece to the Department of Homeland Security’s “Rightwing Extremist” report that labels veterans and advocates of the Second Amendment as dangerous terrorists — H.R. 2159, The Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2009, sponsored by Rep. Peter King of New York.



The bill would “increase public safety by permitting the Attorney General to deny the transfer of a firearm or the issuance of firearms or explosives licenses to a known or suspected dangerous terrorist.”


On April 29, with little fanfare or corporate media coverage, H.R. 2159 was introduced and referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. The bill would “increase public safety by permitting the Attorney General to deny the transfer of a firearm or the issuance of firearms or explosives licenses to a known or suspected dangerous terrorist.” The entire bill can be read on the Govtrack website.
A similar bill was introduced in the Senate in 2007 but did not make it out of committee.
As noted above, the DHS has compiled a long list of folks the government considers terrorists. The bill, if enacted, would allow the attorney general, a documented gun-grabber, to deny millions of Americans due process. “[Rep. King] would deny citizens their civil liberties based on no due process,” Larry Pratt, executive director of Gun Owners of America, tells WorldNetDaily.
Pratt worries that the new bill will be used in conjunction with the DHS “Rightwing Extremism” report. “By those standards, I’m one of [DHS Secretary] Janet Napolitano’s terrorists,” Pratt continues. “This bill would enable the attorney general to put all of the people who voted against Obama on no-gun lists, because according to the DHS, they’re all potential terrorists. Actually, we could rename this bill the Janet Napolitano Frenzied Fantasy Implementation Act of 2009.”
On May 1, 2009, Infowars reported on the existence of another DHS document, the “Domestic Extremism Lexicon.” It adds more suspected terrorists to the government’s list, including people working in the alternative media, anarchists, pro-life activists, skinheads, lone terrorists, members of the militia movement, “decentralized” terrorists, and others.
The DHS reports were distributed to “federal, state, local, and tribal counterterrorism and law enforcement officials so they may effectively deter, prevent, preempt, or respond to terrorist attacks against the United States.”
Earlier this week, a man was stopped in Louisiana and detained by police for the crime of displaying a “Don’t tread one me” bumper sticker on his car. A background check was conducted to determine whether he was a member of an “extremist” group, according to The American Vision website. “Don’t tread on me” was originally displayed on a flag designed by general and statesman Christopher Gadsden during the Revolutionary War. It is depicted as a terrorist symbol in the DHS “Rightwing Extremist” report.



Stephen Halbrook, Independent Institute Research Fellow and author of the book The Founders’ Second Amendment, testifies before the Senate Judiciary Committee in opposition to Attorney General nominee Eric Holder.


During Holder’s shoo-in confirmation hearings earlier this year, Stephen Halbrook, Second Amendment attorney, detailed Holder’s vehement opposition to the right to bear arms. Holder’s role in the Waco massacre and Ruby Ridge were expected to be brought up during the hearings but were not.
Shortly after 9/11, Holder penned a Washington Post op-ed entitled “Keeping Guns Away From Terrorists.” In the article, the future Attorney General argues that a new law should give “the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms a record of every firearm sale.” He also states that prospective gun buyers should be checked against the secret “watch lists” compiled by various government entities. In order to make his point, Holder makes the ludicrous hypothesis that Osama bin Laden would be able to purchase an unregistered firearm at a gun show in America.
The government now possesses the appropriate “watch lists” and has designated specific categories of Americans as domestic terrorists. If H.R. 2159 becomes law the Obama administration and the Justice Department will go after opponents to their far-reaching plan to disarm the nation and deliver it defenseless into the clutches of bankers and corporatists determined to reduce a once proud constitutional republic to the status of a fuedalist backwater.

Source: infowars.com

The UN, Eugenics and the Mass Media

Jurriaan Maessen
Infowars
May 8, 2009
A March 2009 policy brief by the United Nations Population Division reveals that the long-term plan for worldwide population reduction is not going fast enough, not by a long shot. Under the desperate headline ‘What would it take to accelerate fertility decline in the least developed countries?’ the policy brief gives an overview of the progress made by developing countries in regards to the globalists set goal of reducing population and proposes several ways of speeding up the death. Richly draped with graphic illustrations on the state of global population and the progress made by the UN to bring back fertility to ‘acceptable’ levels, the policy brief advises an increased effort on the part of governments to commit to a strict family planning- policy and other measures designed to bring a halt to life.



In New York in December 1994, the United Nations’ participants came up with some practical solutions to the ‘population problem’ — one of which is the integration of population issues with matters of ‘environment’ and ‘human development.’

‘The persistence of high fertility in the majority of the least developed countries and the slow fertility reductions observed among them are associated with high levels of unmet need for family planning.(…) The reduction of fertility could be accelerated if effective measures were taken to satisfy the existing unmet need for family planning.’
After these recommendations, the authors plunge into a long, wailing lament about the slow progress of the desired reducing of the population. They also point the finger to a lack of commitment of the governments concerned and, as expected, the need for a global intervention in order to avoid certain destruction.
This recent policy brief was just one update out of many in regards to the long-term plan by the elite to significantly bring down the numbers of the existing earth population. From the moment the Rockefeller funded ‘family planning’-machine was widely kicked off in the 1960s and 70s, numerous meetings have been held in the last couple of decades where various strategies were discussed to implement population-reduction on as large a scale as possible. The strategies in question were especially directed towards the third world as the globalists had virtual carte blanche in the impoverished developing countries. The famous 1994 population conference in Cairo outlined some of the proposed strategies to be implemented. Then Secretary-General of the UN, Boutros Boutros-Ghali in his opening statement on the International Conference on Population and Development, stated that:
‘I am not exaggerating when I say that not only does the future of the human society depend on this Conference but also the efficacy of the economic order of the planet on which we live.’
During a follow-up-meeting held in New York on December 1994, the United Nations’ participants came up with some practical solutions to the ‘population problem’ - one of which is the integration of population issues with matters of ‘environment’ and ‘human development.’ Another part of the agenda of pressing people to cut down on the number of children was to combine the issue of family-planning with environmental issues:
‘Several priority areas were identified that needed immediate action by the participants. These included creation of awareness of the interrelationships between environment, population and development; advocacy; education; training; population management; gender concerns; monitoring and evaluation; and information dissemination and networking.’
Under the headline: ‘Youth NGOs Agree to Integrate Environment and Population Issues in their Activities’ were mentioned the following activities to brainwash young NGO’s into the right mindset by, again, mixing in environmental issues with population issues:
‘To cooperatively address development problems from the youth perspective, which will ensure their maximum participation, a Working Group of the Regional Consultation of Youth NGOs in Asia and the Pacific was organized in 1994 to mobilize a network of youth NGOs in the region. Among the current issues identified by the Working Group as requiring priority attention were the problems dealing with population, environment and sustainable development. Hence, a Working Group Meeting of the Regional Consultation of Youth NGOs in Asia and the Pacific was held from 19-21 April 1995 at the UNESCO PROAP to discuss and shape a plan of action integrating issues on environment, population and development for consideration by the youth NGOs. (…) To help them develop a relevant plan of action, the participants were exposed and sensitized to the current policies and programmes adopted by FAO, UNEP, UNFPA, and UNESCO in the areas of population, environment and development.’
Further on the use of mass-media is being proposed as effective ‘carriers of population-information’ to hammer dehumanization into the collective consciousness:
‘With more than 2 billion radios in the world, roughly one for every three people, and growing number of televisions, the electronic media plays an increasingly important and influential role in building awareness of population and other development issues.’
The report continues with a prime example of predictive programming:
‘Radio and television soap operas featuring family planning themes, popular songs on population-related issues, and phone-in question-and-answer sessions have all had an impact in different countries. The use of such media can be very important where literacy is low or where written information is not widely circulated. A TV soap opera series is credited with bringing thousands to family planning clinics in Mexico, and night-time drama series integrating family planning themes have proved successful in Egypt, Nigeria and Turkey.‘
In a January 1994 preparation meeting for the Cairo conference called ‘Family Planning Communications Strategies Examined’ the issue was discussed how best to use the media to create tolerance among the general public and ‘how attitudes and beliefs could be changed through the innovative use of traditional and mass media.’
‘The meeting featured case studies and presentations by communication practitioners and covered a wide range of subjects, such as: the use of folk tradition and drama to organize community action in Egypt; the use of micro-communications to encourage acceptance of family planning in the Philippines; the use of traditional and modern media in Ghana; and the use of songs to propagate family planning messages in Latin America. The success in India and Mexico of radio and television soap operas and films on family planning subjects was also discussed.’
During the meeting the Executive Coordinator of the ICPD, Jyoti Shankar Singh, stressed the importance of using mass media to ‘convey family planning and reproductive health messages’:
‘Electronic media, print media (and) interpersonal interventions were all part of the kind of comprehensive information, education and communication (IEC) strategies we need in pursuit of population goals.’
In another technical report (‘Guidelines on Basic Education with special attention to Gender Disparities for the UN Resident Coordinator System’) the message is repeatedly conveyed that:
‘It is important that information be disseminated through various channels including traditional means and packaged in various forms to allow both literate and illiterate persons to understand the key messages.’
In 1997 the UNFPA organized a ‘Regional Media Seminar on Population and Development’ for the role of the mass media in (euphemistically called) ‘Information Repackaging’ for the Pacific islands. The UN officials boasted on the success of the seminar:
‘The seminar brought together journalists in the print and radio media from 9 countries of the South Pacific to explore both the role and potential of mass media as a vehicle for population advocacy, information, education and communication. (…) The seminar explored the role of the media in developing and packaging population materials for identified target groups. The meeting also provided development partners with an opportunity to forge networks with media personnel and develop effective strategies to better address population and development goals and accelerate the implementation of the ICPD (International Conference on Population and Development) Programme of Action.’
In other words: every possible resource should be utilized for propagandizing different target audiences. But the people burdened with designing and implement population education on a large scale emphasized the need for a common tongue and sequence of arguments with which the different UN-divisions sell the people on the idea of dehumanization.
‘Mr. Michael Vlassoff, Senior Technical Officer, Technical and Evaluation Division, UNFPA, introduced the work of the Working Group on Policy-Related Issues. He explained that the Working Group had decided to address the “common advocacy” concern by drawing up a Statement of Commitment that would then be issued by all agencies and organizations involved in the IATF. The aim of such a statement would be to ensure that all UN agencies and organizations use the same language regarding population and development issues.’
The report goes on to list these arguments with which populations worldwide should be lured into embracing modern-day eugenics as a sensible policy:
‘The “Statement of Commitment on Population and Development by the United Nations System”, drafted by the Working Group, is divided into three sections: a general introduction stressing the commitment by the UN agencies and organizations to implement ICPD (International Conference on Population and Development); a section on the linkages between population issues and other development issues; and a concluding section calling for global partnership in addressing these interrelated issues.’
In short- a great part of the 1990s were occupied with a great mobilization of mass media for propaganda purposes by the global elite, a test case so to speak, before implementing the same strategies worldwide in the first decade of the 21st century. And lo and behold! The great global warming swindle arrives just in time as an environmental as well as a development issue to attach the basic message to: there are too many of us- and our numbers should be reduced before the planet is destroyed. Because the warming is global, the response should be so as well. However eloquently the message may be presented by hopelessly compliant media outlets, it is the tyrant’s voice we discern amidst the chatter- and all with ears to hear should educate their neighbor in this all-out information war. Let’s not forget what the elite who have funded the UN from the moment of its very conception have always aspired. In the words of the aristocratic fiend Prince Philip:
‘If I were reincarnated, I would wish to be returned to earth as a killer virus to lower human population levels.’

Source: infowars.com

Military Police Document Reveals Integration with Local Law Enforcement

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars
May 8, 2009
On May 5, the WikiLeaks website posted a document entitled “Concept of Operations for Police Intelligence Operations” produced by the U.S. Army and dated March 4, 2009. The 60 page PDF is a “For Official Use Only” intelligence manual from the U.S. Army’s Military Police School.



“PIO [Police Intelligence Operations] supports the homeland defense goals of detecting, deterring, preventing and defeating threats and attacks,” the document states. “PIO supports the range of homeland defense operations and civil support protection capabilities. A CONUS [Contiguous United States] based PIO network that is integrated with local, country, tribal, state and federal, law enforcement entities will ensure a federated approach to enable a unified effort for defense support to civil authorities (DSCA) [Defense Support of Civil Authorities] as well as support (within legal constraints) development and exchange of data assisting in the production of watch lists that deny adversaries access to the homeland, fixed installations/facilities, or expeditionary forces in-transit.”
In short, the document explains how the U.S. military, in violation of the Posse Comitatus Act, has “integrated” with local law enforcement under the rubric of the GWOT, or so-called Global War on Terrorism. It stresses the need for military police to collect “information that identifies trends, patterns and associations that indicate a possible nexus disrupting or targeting Army operations” within the United States. The “criminal intelligence produced from this analysis should be focused on future coordination” with local law enforcement, again a direct violation of Posse Comitatus.
In 2005, NBC revealed the existence of a DoD database containing information on the antiwar activities of American citizens. “A secret 400-page Defense Department document obtained by NBC News lists the Lake Worth meeting as a ‘threat’ and one of more than 1,500 ’suspicious incidents’ across the country over a recent 10-month period,” Lisa Myers, Douglas Pasternak, and Rich Gardella reported on December 14, 2005. “Other documents obtained by NBC News show that the Defense Department is clearly increasing its domestic monitoring activities.”
According to Robert Dreyfuss, writing for Rolling Stone, the Pentagon has assembled a nationwide domestic spying machine that rivals the NSA’s warrantless surveillance of telephone and email traffic. “Operating in secret, the Defense Department is systematically gathering and analyzing intelligence on American citizens at home — and a new Pentagon agency called Counterintelligence Field Activity (CIFA) is helping to coordinate the military’s covert efforts with federal, state and local law enforcement agencies.” The Pentagon insists the effort is aimed at preventing another attack by al-Qaeda, but as Dreyfuss notes “the military’s efforts at domestic spying have caught few, if any, terrorists.”
In 2008, in response to negative publicity, the Pentagon’s illegal CIFA unit was shuttered, or so the media was told. CIFA maintained a databased called TALON, short for Threat and Local Observation Notice. An ACLU Freedom of Information Act lawsuit in 2006 revealed that the Department of Homeland Security, the FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force and local police departments had supplied the Pentagon with information that aided intelligence operations against the antiwar movement.
It is not merely the antiwar movement the feds and the military are spying on. During the Tea Party antitax protests held last month, a number of people reported the presence of DHS’ Federal Protective Service at the rallies. “The Department of Homeland Security has an important public safety mission,” says spokesman Russ Knocke. “In a post 9/11 world, I think the public would be comforted to know that part of our mission is to maintain situational awareness of possible vulnerabilities to public safety or even security, such as, for instance, at large public gatherings. The department will, as a routine matter, maintain situational awareness of large public gatherings and share that with state and local partners.”
As it turns out, CIFA was not closed down. It was outsourced to QinetiQ, a major British-owned defense and intelligence contractor based in McLean, Virginia. “Pentagon ‘outsourcing’ of intelligence operations to corporations provide yet another layer of ‘plausible deniability’ to the DoD as it wages the administration’s odious ‘war on terror’ against the American people,” writes Tom Burghardt.
During the Republican National Convention, military intelligence teamed up with federal, state, and local law enforcement to violate the civil liberties of Americans and disregard Posse Comitatus. In late 2008, WikiLeaks posted a DHS document detailing how security forces worked together during the RNC. Many federal, state and local organizations are mentioned in this document and a number of these agencies are military based. NORTHCOM figures prominently in the document (see Did Feds Use Military Intelligence to Spy On RNC Protesters? where there is a link to the DHS document).
The “Concept of Operations for Police Intelligence Operations” document is instrumental because it provides additional information on how this “theater of operation” network operates. Intelligence “fusion cells,” the document explains, are now more prevalent in “operational environments” and these cells enable “commanders to have a ’see, decide and act’ advantage over criminal networks, terrorist groups, cells, and individuals [as noted above, consisting primarily of American citizens opposed to government policies] by ensuring police information and police intelligence is integrated as vital pieces of the overall battlefield visualization.”
As documented on the Infowars and Prison Planet website and covered by Alex Jones on his nationally syndicated radio show, military collaboration with local law enforcement has increased substantially since the false flag terror attacks of September 11, 2001. Most recently, military police have patrolled civilian events such as the Kentucky Derby and the Boston Marathon. DHS, federal agencies, and military police have participated in illegal (under Posse Comitatus) checkpoints in Tennessee, California, Texas, and elsewhere. These operations are designed primarily to acclimate the populace to the presence of uniformed and armed soldiers in our midst — in essence, a standing army — a notion completely antithetical to the sensibilities of the founders.
The “Concept of Operations for Police Intelligence Operations” document is another indication that the military is in the process of incrementally imposing a military dictatorship by stealth in the United States under cover of the bogus GWOT. As then General Tommy Franks told Cigar Aficionado magazine in December, 2003, the next terrorist attack will result in a cancellation of the Constitution and the imposition of a military dictatorship.
The next terrorist attack will be pulled off by the same people as the first one — not a distant organization of patsies and dupes created by the CIA and hiding out in caves, but forces within the shadow government. Before this can happen, however, the military and police state apparatus must be in order. “Concept of Operations for Police Intelligence Operations” provides us with another glimpse of the operational plans now underway.

You can veiw this document for your self via this link: http://www.scribd.com/doc/15071238/Concept-of-Operations-CONOPS-for-Police-Intelligence-Operations-PIO

Source: infowars.com

The Future Break Up of the United States of America

Posted by sakerfa on May 7, 2009

The United States of America is really 50 sovereign states in a union and that union can dissolve just like the Soviet Union did. This article will give some possibilities how that break up can occur but there certainly could be other scenarios for this to happen.The major possibility is that after national elections socialist/liberal/progressive forces take control of the executive and legislative branches of government and soon thereafter the Supreme Court. They then would proceed to pass and uphold every sort of socialist legislation such as: hate speech laws, gun laws, immigration laws, socialized medicine, social activism and secular humanism agendas in schools and places of work, outlawing of home schooling, expanding social give-away programs, passing tax laws that burden the middle-class, implementing carbon restrictions and fees, increasing big brother/nanny state police powers and many other laws and regulations that subvert individual freedoms given under the Constitution of the United States for what they will claim to be the greater good of society.
They will increase efforts to redefine the Constitution through activist judges. The courts will also rule that some rights under the Constitution are superseded by international treaties and law.
They will muzzle politically incorrect speech and Christian proselytizing, subvert and brainwash our children with state approved text books and school programs and use national media for political and social propaganda. They will establish unfair tax burdens on the middle class in order to redistribute wealth to the lower class — specifically to those on welfare programs, poor foreign nations and those people who arrived in this nation illegally. They will irresponsibly expand the money supply to pay increasing budget shortfalls, causing the dollar to lose much of its value. Their socialistic polices will create stagflation or hyper-inflation that will effectively wipe out much of the savings of ten’s of millions of people.
At some point in the not too distant future I surmise that a significant segment of the population will rebel against this government and start a secession scenario similar to what I suggest later in this article.
U.S. Vulnerability – Liberals make up the majority populations living in large population states in big cities along both coasts. Those that will oppose this move to communistic fascist-like socialism will be those who make up the majority populations living in the conservative Christian rural heartland of America.
A schism becomes likely between the two worldviews when it becomes obvious to the heartland people that the liberal coastal states will continue to control the American government and that this government will continue to pass and enforce despised amoral laws throughout the United States, regardless of state and local laws. It will especially irk those who believe in biblical moral standards and those who are strict constitutionalists. The heartland people will see national laws and regulations passed and enforced that will ever increase in scope to oppress the rights of freedom loving Bible believing people, corrupt their children, and rob them through unfair federal taxes and irresponsible federal monetary policy.
Some in the heartland of America will not endure these things for long after they realize that the liberal controlled political, educational and media propaganda systems have stacked the deck so that the heartland people will not be able to have a major voice in the policies of this nation through any kind of civil democratic system.
The likelihood that this break up of the union will happen before 2025 A.D.
The likelihood of some kind of breakup of the union is about an eight on a scale of one to ten. The likelihood that the U.S. will fragment into many new nation states, in my opinion, is about fifty-fifty.
The counter-revolution from the heartland may start as a rebirth of the anti federal Government American Patriot Movement and the Libertarians that all but died out after 9/11. The leaders of the movement will address government circumvention of U.S. constitutional rights and it will gain an increasingly large following when muzzled Christian conservatives also identify with their message and some support the movement.
The federal government will obviously oppose these constitutional militias or whatever they decide to call themselves and overreact against them with Homeland Security directed raids that will dwarf Waco. This will only help enlighten more people in the Heartland to the creeping government fascism that is taking control of government and it will spark secession movements in conservative states.
As with prior federal agendas, they will threaten to withhold federal funds and use other coercion techniques against states that will not fully comply with locally unpopular federal laws. That will only alienate state representatives and legislators who will be under much pressure by the local people and cause them to threaten to cut off sending federal taxes to Washington. At some point one northern mountain state will put secession from the union to a emergency state referendum and it will pass. They will declare themselves a free state (like Kosovo) and invite international recognition. Other northern mountain states and some mid-western farming states might soon join with them and create a new union of states.
The federal government will use every means possible to outlaw all this but any federal police-state like actions will only bring violence from both sides and bring international scrutiny. The U.S. government will not be able to use the military to resolve the split because the military will also be totally split on these issues.
Shortly thereafter the Southwest states with large Latino populations will see this as their opportunity for their own nation. Even most of the Anglos living in the Southwest will not oppose the movement because most of them will be totally fed up with the way things are going.
Indian nations will then secede.
As the United States union fails, other regions of the country will see that they will need to form their own group of states. The east coast states could form one union and the west coast states another. The southern bible belt states will also start their own union.
Some Canadian provinces could join with certain former U.S. states, Others provinces might stay Canadian or form their own independent nation. A northern Mexican state or two might join with the Southwest states and Mexico may have their own secessionist movement in the Indian regions of the South.
For a while there will be the Balkanization of North America but at some point for the common good of everyone in North America most states will agree to join a new North American Union of states. It will start as a very limited form of federal government that will control trade, money and some limited social programs. It will not at first be dictating internal federal polices to the individual states.
Much of the world will be having their own economic disasters and separatist movements and the weakened nation states will begin to look more toward regional branches of a world government. The regional branches of world government will allow local autonomy for nation states within global treaties. At least it will start out that way.
By the way, although this would be more unlikely, the break up of the United States could come about from a completely different direction. The Conservatives could take control of America and return it to constitutional law and biblical moral codes. The liberal socialist states might then secede from the union.
Other possibilities are that after terrorist attacks or a national economic crisis, the U.S. becomes a police state and a counter revolution develops against federalized police powers.
Another possibility is that federal and police drug wars against increasingly powerful minority gangs could get out of control. There would be even larger incarceration of minorities then there is now with increased police powers taking away constitutional rights of even innocent people, resulting in a predictable backlash.
The real point is not exactly how this breakup might happen. The point is that America is becoming increasing polarized between liberals and conservatives, religious and irreligious, law abiders and criminals, police and citizens, educators and parents, tax payers and deadbeats, control freaks and freedom lovers, perverts and non perverts etc. If this polarization of America continues to increase we will either have a union break up or we will soon be living under martial law.
It is even likely that some states, counties and cities will break up into smaller local governments because the existing government will no longer reflect the people within.

Source: dprogram.net

Suspect detained over ‘extremist’ bumper sticker

Posted by sakerfa on May 8, 2009

A Louisiana driver has been stopped and detained for having a “Don’t Tread on Me” bumper sticker on his vehicle and warned by a police officer about the “subversive” message it sent, according to the driver’s relative.
The situation developed in the small town of Ball, La., where a receptionist at the police department told WND she knew nothing about the traffic stop, during which the “suspect” was investigated for “extremist” activities, the relative said.It followed by only a few weeks the release of a Department of Homeland Security “Right-wing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment” report, which prompted outrage from legislators and a campaign calling for the resignation of DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano.
The report cites individuals who sport certain bumper stickers on their vehicles as suspect, and it was delivered to tens of thousands of local law enforcement officers across the nation.
WND is withholding the driver’s name and the relative’s name at their request.
However, the situation was described on the American Vision blog, too.
According to the relative, the situation happened this way:
Her brother-in-law was driving home from work through the town that has a local reputation for enhancing its budget by stopping speeders and ticketing them. He was pulled over by police officers who told him “he had a subversive survivalist bumper sticker on his car.”
Are you ready for a second Declaration of Independence? Sign the petition promoting true freedom once again!
“They proceeded to keep him there on the side of the road while they ran whatever they do to see if you have a record, keeping him standing by the side of the road for 30 minutes,” she told WND.
Finding no record and no reason to keep him, they warned him and eventually let him go, she said.
The company that sells the bumper sticker that was on the car is The Patriot Depot, where Chief Operating Officer Jay Taylor told WND the woman had told his staff about the situation while ordering more bumper stickers.
“It’s rather shocking,” he said. “We supposedly have freedom of speech in our country.
Get your own Gadsden Flag here!
“We joke around every now and then how our spouses will come to visit us in jail,” he continued, citing his products that say, “The Audacity of Nope,” “Taxed Enough Already,” “Born Free, Taxed to Death,” “Bring Home Our Troops: Send the Democrats” and “I’ll Keep my Guns and Money, You Keep the ‘Change’.”
“We hope people realize this is serious,” he said.
American Vision cited the “background check” that was done on the driver.
“Why? [He] had purchased and displayed a conservative ‘Don’t Tread on Me’ bumper sticker.”"
The commentator wrote, “The bumper sticker is based on the famous flag designed by American Revolution era general and statesman Christopher Gadsden. The yellow flag featured a coiled diamondback rattlesnake ready to strike, with the slogan ‘Don’t Tread on Me!’ underneath it. Benjamin Franklin helped make the rattlesnake a symbol of Americans’ reluctance to quarrel but vigilance and resolve in defense of their rights. By 1775 when Gadsden presented his flag to the commander-in-chief of the Navy, the rattlesnake was a symbol of the colonies and of their need to unite in defense of threats to their God-given and inherited rights. The flag and the bumper sticker symbolize American patriotism, the need to defend Americans’ rights, and resistance to tyranny’s threats to American liberty. Those threats included-and include-illegal taxation, profanation of Americans’ rights, and violation of the fundamental principles of American law.”
American Vision continued: “The notorious Department of Homeland Security memo, which was apparently based on the infamous Missouri State Police Report that described supporters of presidential candidates Bob Barr, Ron Paul, and Chuck Baldwin as ‘militia’-type potential extremists and potential terrorists, is not the first effort of leftist radicals to slander their political opponents as ‘extremists.’”
“‘Liberals’ and other leftists have been calling defenders of traditional American limited, constitutional government, free enterprise, and individual liberty ‘extremists’ since at least the 1964 election,” the Vision America statement said. “Small town police misled by phony left wing ‘reports’ are bad enough. Federal government agencies and their armed agents under the direction of leftist radicals are exponentially worse.”
WND reported earlier on the DHS report, which advised about the “extremism” that could be expected from returning veterans, those who support homeschooling and oppose abortion, post certain bumper stickers on their vehicles and other factors.
The DHS not only issued that report, but also an earlier memo defining dozens of groups, members of animal rights organizations, black separatists, tax protesters and others as “threats.”
That item, the “Domestic Extremism Lexicon” reportedly was rescinded almost immediately, but Benjamin Sarlin of The Daily Beast recently obtained and published online a copy of the unclassified memo, dated March 26, 2009.
It defines the “tax resistance movement” – also referred to in the report as the tax protest movement or the tax freedom movement – as “groups or individuals who vehemently believe taxes violate their constitutional rights. Among their beliefs are that wages are not income, that paying income taxes is voluntary, and that the 16th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which allowed Congress to levy taxes on income, was not properly ratified.”
It states that tax protesters “have been known to advocate or engage in criminal activity and plot acts of violence and terrorism in an attempt to advance their extremist goals.”



Apparently, the DHS analyzes the “threat” level of Internet news websites like WorldNetDaily, for the lexicon defines “alternative media” as “a term used to describe various information sources that provide a forum for interpretations of events and issues that differ radically from those presented in mass media products and outlets.”

Source: WND

After Bailout, GM to Ship Jobs Overseas

By Peter Whoriskey
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, May 8, 2009
The U.S. government is pouring billions into General Motors in hopes of reviving the domestic economy, but when the automaker completes its restructuring plan, many of the company's new jobs will be filled by workers overseas.



This Story
According to an outline the company has been sharing privately with Washington legislators, the number of cars that GM sells in the United States and builds in Mexico, China and South Korea will roughly double.
The proportion of GM cars sold domestically and manufactured in those low-wage countries will rise from 15 percent to 23 percent over the next five years, according to the figures contained in a 12-page presentation offered to lawmakers in response to their questions about overseas production.
As a result, the long-simmering argument over U.S. manufacturers expanding production overseas -- normally arising between unions and private companies -- is about to engage the Obama administration.
Essentially in control of the company, the president's autos task force faces an awkward choice: It can either require General Motors to keep more jobs at home, potentially raising labor costs at a company already beset with financial woes, or it can risk political fury by allowing the automaker to expand operations at lower-cost manufacturing locations.
"It's an almost impossible dilemma," said former labor secretary Robert B. Reich, now a professor at the University of California-Berkeley. "GM is a global company -- so for that matter is AIG and the biggest Wall Street banks. That means that bailing them out doesn't necessarily redound to the benefit of the U.S. or American workers.
"More significantly, it raises fundamental questions about the purpose of bailing out these big companies. If GM is going to do more of its production overseas, then why exactly are we saving GM?"
The administration has aroused similar complaints by shepherding a merger between Chrysler and Italian automaker Fiat. But it has extracted a promise from Fiat that it will build small cars in the United States.
The complaints about GM's operations portend a potentially larger argument, a political dispute led in part by the United Auto Workers.
"The bottom line is GM would rather pay $2 an hour -- and it's a slippery slope downward," said Alan Reuther, the UAW's legislative director. "If GM is going to be getting government assistance, they ought to be maintaining their manufacturing footprint in the U.S. rather than going off to China, Mexico and South Korea."
Labor costs in those countries are far lower. While paying a U.S. autoworker with benefits costs about $54 an hour, a South Korean worker earns about $22 an hour, a Mexican worker earns less than $10 an hour and some Chinese workers can earn as little as $3 an hour, industry sources said.
On Tuesday and Wednesday, GM chief executive Fritz Henderson met with legislators and sought to ease their concerns over the overseas operations.






He emphasized that the company, which is shuttering factories at home, is also canceling projects in Mexico, Russia and India.
This Story
He also assured legislators that none of the figures are final, and that negotiations with the union are ongoing.
"We continue to work closely with GM, UAW, and all the stakeholders to further refine and develop GM's plan," a Treasury spokesman said.
The U.S. government has loaned GM $15.4 billion. But billions more are expected to be invested, and under the current plan, it will be the majority owner of the company.
The company forecasts that between 2010 and 2014, as the recession recedes, its U.S. sales will rise from 2.4 million to 3.1 million.
Most of that growth -- about two-thirds of it -- will occur in the United States. But about one-third of that growth will come from other countries, mostly Mexico and South Korea.
Those proportions roughly reflect how GM builds the cars it sells in the United States today -- about two-thirds come from the United States and one-third from other countries.
According to the figures shared with lawmakers, the percentage of GM's U.S. sales of cars built in the United States dips from 67 percent in 2009 to 61 percent in 2012. Yet the company projects that by 2014 the percentage will rebound to 66 percent.
Under the viability plan, "the U.S. percentage stays roughly the same," Henderson said in an interview last week.
But the union and some legislators object that the company's U.S.-funded revival should not help pay for expanding foreign operations. Moreover, they believe that planned cuts in Canadian production -- down 23 percent -- will have direct effects on U.S. jobs because the U.S. and Canadian auto industries are so intertwined.
"If you are shutting down plants in this country, U.S. tax dollars should not go for building plants in other countries," said Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), who was among those who met with Henderson.
But company officials and industry analysts have long argued that, even putting aside the issue of labor costs, it makes logistical sense to build some cars in other countries, even if they are destined for sale in the United States.
Take, for example, the Chevrolet Spark, a tiny car that GM sells in South Korea and elsewhere in Asia. In the next few years, the company plans to send some of those cars -- which are built in Changwon -- to the United States for sale.
But since only about 5 percent of the car's market will be in the United States, the manufacturing will remain in South Korea.
Analysts who study the auto companies and their global operation warn against allowing political passions to obstruct GM's efficiency.
"If we start making political decisions with the auto industry, we're going to be in tremendous trouble," said Michael Robinet, vice president of global vehicle forecasts at CSM Worldwide.

Source: Washington Post

Chaos by design?

by Olga Chetverikova

As the world teeters on the brink of financial disaster, leaders are calling for a new world order. As early as the late 1990s, David Rockefeller, author of the idea of private power that is due to replace the governments, said that the world was on the threshold of global changes. He invoked the need of "some large-scale crisis that will make people accept the new world order..." Is the current crisis being used as a mechanism to stoke civil fear and unrest, inducing people to succumb to a system of transnational private power? Olga Chetverikova believes we are in the final stage of that long-time planned ’global control’ agenda.



The champions of the New World Order. David Rockefeller is on the far right.

by Olga Chetverikova

As the world financial and economic crisis comes into its own, the Western community leaders are seeking to impress on mankind the idea that this upheaval will end up ‘turning the world into something different’.

Even though the picture of the ’new world order’ remains vague and fuzzy, the main idea is quite clear: A single global government, goes the argument, has to be established if we don’t want general chaos to prevail.

Every now and again, Western politicians mention the need for a ‘new world order’, a ‘new world financial architecture’, or some kind of ‘supranational control’, calling it a ‘New Deal’ for the world. Nicolas Sarkozy was the first to say so, while addressing the UN General Assembly in September 2007 (that is, before the crisis).

During the February 2009 meeting in Berlin convened to prepare the G20 summit, this was echoed by Gordon Brown, who said that a worldwide New Deal was needed. We are conscious, he added, that where the world financial flows were concerned, we would not be able to emerge from this situation with the help of purely national authorities alone. We need the authorities and world watchdogs to make the activities of financial institutions operating in the world markets totally open to us. Both Sarkozy and Brown are protégés of the Rothschilds. Statements made by certain representatives of ‘the global elite’ indicate that the current crisis is being used as a mechanism for provoking some deepening social upheavals that would make mankind – plunged as it is already into chaos and frightened by the ghost of an all-out violence – urge of its own free will that a ‘supranational’ arbitrator with dictatorial powers intervene into the world affairs.

The events are following the same path as the Great Depression in 1929-1933: a financial crisis, an economic recession, social conflicts, establishing totalitarian dictatorships, inciting a war to concentrate power, and capital in the hands of a narrow circle. This time, however, the case in point is the final stage in the ‘global control’ strategy, where a decisive blow should be dealt to the national state sovereignty institution, followed by a transition to a system of private power of transnational elites.

As early as the late 1990s, David Rockefeller, author of the idea of private power that is due to replace the governments, said that we (the world) were on the threshold of global changes. All we need, he went on, is some large-scale crisis that will make people accept the new world order.

Jacques Attali, Sarkozy’s adviser and former EBRD chief, claimed that the elites had been incapable of dealing with the currency problems of the 1930s. He was afraid, he said, that a similar mistake would be made again. At first we’ll wage wars, he went on, and let 300 million people perish. After that reforms will follow and a world government. Shouldn’t we better think about a world government already at this stage, he asked?



Henry Kissinger: "The President-elect is coming into office at a moment when there are upheavals in many parts of the world simultaneously ... But he can give new impetus to American foreign policy ... I think that his task will be to develop an overall strategy for America in this period, when really a ’new world order’ can be created. It’s a great opportunity."

The same was stated by Henry Kissinger: In the final analysis, the main task is to define and formulate the general concerns of the majority of countries, as well as of all leading states with regard to the economic crisis, considering the collective fear of a terrorist jihad. Next, all of that should be converted to a common action strategy… Thus, America and its potential partners are getting a unique chance for turning the moment of the crisis into a vision of hope.

The world is being led to accept the “new order” idea step by step to avoid provoking events that are likely to make the universal protests against the worsening conditions of human existence take ‘a wrong course’ and become uncontrolled. The main thing that Stage One managed to achieve was to start a wide-ranging discussion on ‘global government’ and the ‘inadmissibility of protectionism’ with an emphasis on the ‘hopelessness’ of the national-state models for emerging from the crisis.

This discussion is proceeding against the background of information pressures that help to build up human anxieties, fear, and uncertainty. Some of those information actions are the following: WTO forecasts to the effect that 1.4 billion people are likely to sink below the poverty line in 2009; a warning by the WTO director general that the biggest world trade slide in postwar history is in the offing; a statement by the IMF’s Dominique Strauss-Kohn (a protégé of Sarkozy’s) that a world economic crash is impending unless a large-scale reform of the financial sector of the world economy is implemented, and a crash that is most likely to bring in its wake not only social unrest but also a war.

Against this background, the idea to introduce a as a cornerstone of the ‘new world order’ was put forward. The real masterminds of this long-standing project are as yet in the shadow. Let us note that some or other representatives of Russia are pushed to the fore. This is reminiscent of the situation before World War I, where the Anglo-French circles that possessed some well-elaborated plans for a new division of the world instructed the Russian Foreign Minister to draw up a general program for the Entente Cordiale. It went down in history as the ‘Sazonov program’, even though Russia did not play an independent role in that war and was from the start built into the system of interests of the British financial elite.

On March 19, Henry Kissinger came to Moscow as a member of The Wise Men (James Baker, George Schultz, and others), who had meetings with the Russian leaders before the G20 summit. Dmitry Trenin, director of the Moscow Carnegie Center and participant in the latest US meeting of the Bilderbergers, called that meeting a ‘positive signal’. On March 25, Moskovsky Komsomolets published an article ‘The Crisis and the World Problems’, by Gavriil Popov (currently President of the International Union of Economists) that openly voiced what was normally discussed behind closed doors.

The article mentioned World Parliament, World Government, World Armed Forces, World Police Force, World Bank, the necessity of placing under international control the nuclear weapons, nuclear power generating capacities, the entire amount of space rocket technology, and the planet’s minerals, the imposition of birth-rate limits, the cleansing of humanity’s gene pool, the fostering of people intolerant to cultural and religious incompatibility, and the like.

The “countries that will not accept the global prospects,” says Popov, “must be expelled from the world community.”

Of course, the Moskovsky Komsomolets article conveys nothing new that would enable one to understand the strategy of the global elite. Another thing is important. The establishment of a totalitarian police order and the elimination of national states is being suggested as an open program of action, and what both the liberals, and the socialists, and the conservatives always viewed as ‘new fascism’ is being recommended as the only possible salutary path for the whole of mankind. Someone wants the discussing of these projects to become a norm. In this context, some ‘particularly trusted’ representatives of Russia are pushed to the fore, Russia that will become the main victim of the policy of total plunder should the ‘global government’ become a reality.

The G20 did not discuss the common world currency issue, since time had not yet come for that. The summit itself was a step forward on the way to chaos, because its decisions, if followed blindly, will only worsen the world socioeconomic situation and, to quote Lyndon LaRouche, will “finish off the patient.”

In the meantime, the crisis is being exacerbated, and analysts are predicting an era of mass-scale unemployment. The most pessimistic predictions come from LEAP/Europe 20201, which regularly publishes them in its bulletins and even set them out in an open letter sent to the leaders of the Twenty before the London summit.

As early as February 2006, LEAP was surprisingly precise in describing the prospects for the ‘systemic global crisis’ as a consequence of the financial illness caused by the US debt. LEAP analysts are viewing the current events in the context of the general crisis that began in the late 1970s and is now in its fourth, final and most grave stage, the so-called ‘elutriation phase’, where the collapse of real economy begins. According to LEAP’s Frank Biancheri, it is not simply a recession but the end of the system, in which its main pillar, the US economy, collapsed. “We are witnessing the end of an entire epoch before our own eyes.”

The crisis may lead to some most difficult consequences. LEAP forecasts a rise in unemployment to 15-20% in Europe and as much as 30% in the United States. If the key dollar problem fails to be solved, the world events will take a most dramatic turn. The dollar collapse may take place as early as July 2009, and the potentially decades-long crisis will trigger off “a world-wide geopolitical disintegration” with social upheavals and civil conflicts, with the division of the world into separate blocs, with the world coming back to Europe’s1914, with military clashes, etc. The most powerful popular unrest will take place in countries with the least developed social security systems and the biggest concentrations of weapons, primarily in Latin America and the United States, where social violence is already now manifest in the activities of armed gangs. Experts note the beginning of US population fleeing to Europe, where the direct threat to life is for the time being not so great. Aside from armed conflicts, LEAP analysts forecast power, food and water shortages in areas dependent on food imports.

LEAP experts describe behavior demonstrated by the Western elites as absolutely inadequate: "Our leaders have failed to understand what happened, and show the same amount of incomprehension to this day. We are amid a period of protracted recession, and it was necessary to engage in introducing some long-term measures to cushion the blows, whereas our leaders still hope to avoid a prolonged recession… All of them have been formed around the American pillar and cannot see that the pillar is a shambles…"

But this is not seen by the mid-level leaders, while the top-level world managers are, on the contrary, informed quite well; it is they who are implementing the ‘controlled chaos’ and general disintegration policy, including a civil war and the disintegration of the United States planned for the end of 2009, a scenario that is being widely discussed both by American and world media.

On the threshold of conflicts planned in various areas of the planets, a system is being established that will give a supranational center relying on a large-scale punitive machine total political, military, legal, and electronic control over the population. That system uses the network management principle that allows embedding into any society parallel structures of authority that report to external decision-making centers and are legalized through the doctrine of prevalence of international law over national law. The shell remains national, while real power becomes transnational. Jacques Attali calls this a ‘global law-based state’.

The ruling center of the global law-based state is located in the US. While its fundamentals began to emerge in the 1990s, the fight against terrorism after the 9/11 events has led to radically new phenomena. The passing of the 2001 Patriot Act not only allowed security services to control the American population and suspected foreigners, but also accelerated the passing of state responsibilities into the hands of transnational corporate structures.

Intelligence activities, trade of war, penitentiary system, and information control are passing into private hands. This is done through so-called outsourcing, a relatively new business phenomenon that consists of trusting certain functions to private firms that act as contractors and relying on individuals outside an organization to solve its internal tasks.

In 2007, the American government found out that 70% of its secret intelligence budget is spent on private contracts and that “Cold-War intelligence bureaucracy is transforming into something new, where contractor’s interests dominate.” For American society (Congress included), their activities remain classified, which allows them to gather more and more important functions in their hands.

Former CIA employees say that nearly 60% of their staff are on contracts. Those people analyze most of the information, write reports for those who make decisions in state authorities, maintain communications among various security services, help foreign stations, and analyze data interception. As a result, America’s National Security Agency is becoming more and more dependent on private companies that have access to classified information. No wonder, then, that it is lobbying a bill in the Congress that is supposed to guarantee immunity to corporations that have worked with NSA for the last five years.

The same is happening to private military companies (PMCs), which have been assuming more and more army and police functions. On a significant scale, it started in the nineties in former Yugoslavia, but contract workers were especially widely used in Afghanistan and other conflict zones. They did the ‘dirtiest’ actions, as was the case during the war in South Ossetia, where up to 3000 mercenaries were involved. At the moment, PMCs are real armies, each up to 70,000 strong, that operate in over 60 countries, with annual revenues of up to $180 billion (according to Brookings Institution, USA) For example, over 20,000 employees of American PMCs work in Iraq along with the 160,000 American military contingent.

The system of private prisons is also growing rapidly in the US. The prison industry complex, which uses slave labor and sweatshop practices, is flourishing, and its investors are based on Wall Street. The use of convict labor by private corporations has been legalized in 37 states already, and it is used by major corporations such as IBM, Boeing, Motorola, Microsoft, Texas Instrument, Intel, Pierre Cardin, and others. In 2008, the number of inmates in US private prisons was about 100,000, and it is growing rapidly, along with the total number of inmates in the country (mostly African-Americans and Latin Americans), which is 2.2 million people, or 25% of all convicts in the world.

After Bush came to power, privatization of the system for transportation and retention of migrants in concentration camps began. In particular, a branch of the notorious firm Halliburton, Kellog Brown and Root (once headed by Dick Cheney), did just that.

The biggest achievements have been made over the last few years in the area of establishing electronic control over people’s identities, carried out under the pretext of counterterrorism. Currently, the FBI is creating the world’s biggest database of biometric indexes (fingerprints, retina scans, face shapes, scar shapes and allocation, speech and gesture patterns, etc.) that now contains 55 million fingerprints. The latest novelties include the introduction of body scanning system in US airports, tracking of literature read by passengers in flight, and so on. A new opportunity to gather detailed information on people’s private lives follow from the NSA Directive N59, passed in summer 2008, ‘Identification and tracking biometry for the purpose of strengthening national security’, and the classified ‘Homeland Terrorism Preparedness Law’.

Evaluating the policy of America’s authorities, ex-Congressman and 2008 presidential candidate Ron Paul said that America is gradually turning into a fascist state, “We are approaching not a Hitler-type fascism, but one of a softer type, which shows in the loss of civil freedoms, when corporations rule everything and… the government lies in the same bed with big business.” May we remind you that Ron Paul is one of the few American politicians speaking for the closing of the Federal Reserve System as a secret unconstitutional organization?

With Obama’s coming to power, the police order in America is getting tighter and tighter in two directions – strengthening internal security and militarization of civilian institutions. Tellingly, having condemned the infringements on individual freedoms done by the Bush administration, Obama has put his own staff under total control by making them fill out a 63-question form that touches upon the most intricate details of their private lives. In January, the US President signed bills that enable the continuation of the illegal practice of abducting people, keeping them secretly in prisons, and moving them to countries where tortures are used. He also proposed a bill called National Emergency Help Center Establishment Act, which stipulates the establishment of six such centers in US military bases to provide help to people who are displaced due to an emergency situation or disaster and thus get into military jurisdiction. Analysts connect this bill with possible disturbances and consider it proof that the US administration is preparing for a military conflict which may follow after the provocation that is being planned.

The American system of police control is actively implemented in other countries, primarily in Europe – through the establishment of American law hegemony on its territory by means of closing various agreements. A big part here was played by US–European talks out of the glare of publicity on creation of the common ‘area of control over the population’ that were held in spring 2008, when the European Parliament adopted resolution that ratified creation of the single transatlantic market abolishing all barriers to trade and investments by 2015. The talks resulted in the classified report prepared by the experts from six participating countries. This report described the project to create the ‘area of cooperation’ in the spheres of ‘freedom, safety and justice’.

The report dwells upon the reorganization of the system of justice and internal affairs of the EU member states in such a manner that it would resemble the American system. It concerns not only the ability to transfer personal data and cooperation of police services (which is already being carried out), but also, for example, extradition of EU immigrants to US authorities in accordance with the new mandate that abolished all the guarantees the European procedure of extradition provided. In the US the Military Commissions Act of 2006 is in force, and it allows persecution or imprisonment of any person who is identified as an ‘illegally fighting enemy’ by the executive authorities and extends to immigrants from any country not at war with the US. They are persecuted like “enemies” not based on some evidence but because they were labeled so by the governmental agencies. No foreign governments have protested against this law which is of international importance.

Soon they will sign the agreement on personal data communication, in accordance with which the American authorities will be able to obtain such personal information as credit card numbers, bank account details, investments, travel routes or communication via Internet, as well as the information concerning race, political and religious beliefs, habits, etc.. It was under the US pressure that the EU countries have introduced biometric passports. The new EU regulation implies the overall switch of EU citizens to electronic passports from the end of June 2009 by 2012. New passports will contain a chip with not only passport info and a photo, but also fingerprints.

We are witnessing the creation of the global electronic concentration camp, and crisis, conflicts and wars are used to justify it. People tend to tremble in the face of an imaginary danger and are too lazy to see the real one.


Source ; Voltairenet.org - Olga Chetverikova