President Obama plans to use military drones in the skies over the United States to assassinate journalists, patriots and critics of his administration. That’s the inescapable conclusion from the emerging pattern of evidence now publicly available — keep reading for details.
Front and center in this pattern of evidence is the 16-page memo that was just released by Obama’s lawyers in the Department of Justice. This memo puts forth a “legal justification” for the President to order the drone assassination of any American citizen he names — anytime, anywhere, for any reason. This new power claimed by the President has no basis in federal law or the Constitution. It is an invented power of absolute tyranny that puts the power to decide who lives and who dies in the hands of one man. This document essentially legalizes the President acting as a serial murderer.
It is claimed that the purpose of this new power to simply name any American the President doesn’t like and immediately have them struck by a Hellfire missile launched from a drone is designed to “protect America.” Yet the 16-page memo that claims to justify all this was intentionally written to include Americans on U.S. soil as potential targets.
As Judge Andrew Napolitano explained just a few days ago on Fox News:
“This 16-page white paper is written so vaguely that the logic from it could… permit the President to kill Americans here in the United States.”
That’s the whole point, actually. If Americans on U.S. soil were to be excluded from such drone assassinations, such language would have been made readily apparent in the memo. But no such language is found in the memo. In fact, the tone of the document quite clearly states that the President has the authority to order drone killings of U.S. citizens anywhere in the world, under any circumstances.
This legal manipulation even has U.S. Senators worried. Democrat Senator Patrick J Leahy and Senator Charles Grassley sent a letter to Obama on Friday, stating, “The deliberate killing of a United States citizen pursuant to a targeted operation authorized or aided by our government raises significant constitutional and legal concerns.”
That’s the understatement of the year.
U.S. Senators are trying to create an “oversight committee” so that a few of them are part of the illegal, unconstitutional decision process of which Americans the U.S. government should murder next. As Kurt Nimmo reports with InfoWars.com:
Feinstein has proposed “legislation to ensure that drone strikes are carried out in a manner consistent with our values, and the proposal to create an analogue of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to review the conduct of such strikes,” in other words a secret tribunal that will hand down kill orders for Americans the government believes are “suspected militants.”
If drones are to be unleashed under the values of Feinstein — an outright traitor to the nation and a serial violator of the U.S. Constitution — then God help us all. Remember, Feinstein is the Senator who has already said she wants all Americans to turn all their guns in. She literally wants the entire U.S. civilian population disarmed so that government has all the weapons, including drones which Feinstein wants flying over U.S. cities, ready to strike named American citizens at any moment.
The American “battlefield” doctrine and the NDAA
In defending the drone assassination powers of the President, you might hear language used that says drones will “only be used on the battlefield.” That seems to imply they will only be used in the Middle East, right?
Wrong. The USA has been legally defined as the new “battlefield” by the NDAA. That’s theNational Defense Authorization Act which also allows for the arrest and indefinite detention of American citizens without trial, without legal representation and even without them ever being charged.
The USA is the new “battlefield,” and when you combine the NDAA and the DOJ’s new drone killing justification memo, you now have the claimed legal framework for any American on U.S. soil to be arrested, detained, tortured or blown to bits without warning and without even a single shred of evidence being presented against him.
Yes, this is America today. Right now. You are living under a military dictatorship and most of you don’t even realize it yet. Even liberals and progressives are starting to wake up to Obama’s tyranny, by the way. On Democracy Now, Daniel Ellsberg recently described Obama’s actions as a “systematic assault on the Constitution.”
In a documentary soon to appear on Showtime, “The World According to Dick Cheney,” [Cheney said] “I got on the telephone with the president, who was in Florida, and told him not to be at one location where we could both be taken out.” Mr. Cheney kept W. flying aimlessly in the air on 9/11 while he and Lynn left on a helicopter for a secure undisclosed location, leaving Washington in a bleak, scared silence, with no one reassuring the nation in those first terrifying hours.
“I gave the instructions that we’d authorize our pilots to take it out,” he says, referring to the jet headed to Washington that crashed in a Pennsylvania field. He adds: “After I’d given the order, it was pretty quiet. Everybody had heard it, and it was obviously a significant moment.”
***
When they testified together before the 9/11 Commission, W. and Mr. Cheney kept up a pretense that in a previous call, the president had authorized the vice president to give a shoot-down order if needed. But the commission found “no documentary evidence for this call.”
In other words, Cheney pretended that Bush had authorized a shoot-down order, but Cheney now admits that he never did. In fact, Cheney acted as if he was the president on 9/11. *
Cheney lied about numerous other facts related to 9/11 as well. For example, Cheney:
Falsely claimed that spying on Americans, torture, the Patriot Act, the Afghanistan war, the Iraq war and the “war on terror” were all necessitated by 9/11 … when all of them started or were planned before 9/11
In the classic history of Nazi Germany, They Thought They Were Free, Milton Mayer writes :
“What happened here was the gradual habituation of the people, little by little, to being governed by surprise; to receiving decisions deliberated in secret; to believing that the situation was so complicated that the government had to act on information which the people could not understand, or so dangerous that, even if the people could not understand it, it could not be released because of national security. And their sense of identification with Hitler, their trust in him, made it easier to widen this gap and reassured those who would otherwise have worried about it.
“This separation of government from people, this widening of the gap, took place so gradually and so insensibly, each step disguised (perhaps not even intentionally) as a temporary emergency measure or associated with true patriotic allegiance or with real social purposes. And all the crises and reforms (real reforms, too) so occupied the people that they did not see the slow motion underneath, of the whole process of government growing remoter and remoter.
Barack Obama ‘has authority to use drone strikes to kill Americans on US soil’
President Barack Obama has the authority to use an unmanned drone strike to kill US citizens on American soil, his attorney general has said.
By Jon Swaine, Washington
Eric Holder argued that using lethal military force against an American in his home country would be legal and justified in an “extraordinary circumstance” comparable to the September 11 terrorist attacks.
“The president could conceivably have no choice but to authorise the military to use such force if necessary to protect the homeland,” Mr Holder said.
His statement was described as “more than frightening” by Senator Rand Paul, a Republican from Kentucky, who had demanded to know the Obama administration’s position on the subject.
“It is an affront the constitutional due process rights of all Americans,” said Mr Paul, a 50-year-old favourite of the anti-government Tea Party movement, who is expected to run for president in 2016.
Mr Holder wrote to Mr Paul after the senator threatened to block the appointment of John Brennan as the director of the CIA unless he received answers to a series of questions on its activities.
DARPA Wants a Searchable Database of All Your Conversations
by Paul Joseph Watson
DARPA is working on an embryonic project that would store your every verbal conversation on an Internet server, creating a searchable chat database that would represent the ultimate privacy killer.
Having failed to establish its infamous Total Information Awareness system, although the project was continued under numerous different guises, DARPA is attempting to create a world in which your every utterance is stored in perpetuity.
But don’t worry, the servers on which your conversations are stored will be owned by the individual or their employer, and the government promises to never access the information using their vast new $2 billion dollar spying hub in the middle of the Utah desert. Honest.
“University of Texas computer scientist Matt Lease has studied crowdsourcing for years, including for an earlier Darpa project called Effective Affordable Reusable Speech-to-text, or EARS, which sought to boost the accuracy of automated transcription machines. His work has also attracted enough attention for Darpa to award him a $300,000 award over two years to study the new project, called “Blending Crowdsourcing with Automation for Fast, Cheap, and Accurate Analysis of Spontaneous Speech.” The project envisions a world that is both radically transparent and a little freaky,” reports Wired’s Robert Beckhusen.
Described as being, “like a Twitter feed or e-mail archive for everyday speech,” day to day conversations, “could be stored in archives and easily searched.”
DHS Purchases 2,700 Light-Armored Tanks to Go With Their 1.6 Billion Bullet Stockpile
This is getting a little creepy. According to one estimate, since last year the Department of Homeland Security has stockpiled more than 1.6 billion bullets, mainly .40 caliber and 9mm. DHS also purchased 2,700 Mine Resistant Armor Protected Vehicles (MRAP).
History revisionists and Holocaust deniers seem to be gaining ground in recent months as the Obama administration pushes for new gun control measures, thanks in large part to a burgeoning propaganda machine fed by a growing number of useful idiots.
Hitler had Joseph Goebbels; today’s modern deniers and propagandists have the Internet, and this incredible power to deceive is being employed by agents seeking to “fundamentally change” the country, to borrow a campaign phrase from the president himself.
In particular, the anti-gunners “have had tremendous success garnering support by using false statements and outright propaganda, so they have intensified their use of this despicable and nasty tool,” says a poster calling himself “Fight4Freedom” at the SurvivalistBoards.com blog site.
“The trend is to attack history and feed the sheeple with supposed ‘facts’ debunking some of histories most notorious precursors to genocide,” he writes.
Propagandizing the ‘Net for the purposes of pushing a gun control agenda’
In particular, he says a Google search of the terms “Hitler Gun Control” produce so-called “research studies” claiming that “either these atrocities never really occurred (such as the Jewish Genocide) or that the facts are wrong,” Fight4Freedom says.
“No matter what, the idea is to use FALSE statements and FALSE information to continue to gain momentum in calling for disarming of the American People,” he wrote. “The most fundamental question is why should what happened in Nazi Germany have any bearing on calling for Gun Control in the U.S.? They are not related. It is merely a propaganda tool. Our God given right to self-defense, backed by the U.S. Constitution is all that matters.”
NAZI Camps More Widespread Than Previously Thought
THIRTEEN years ago, researchers at the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum began the grim task of documenting all the ghettos, slave labor sites, concentration camps and killing factories that the Nazis set up throughout Europe.
What they have found so far has shocked even scholars steeped in the history of the Holocaust.
The researchers have cataloged some 42,500 Nazi ghettos and camps throughout Europe, spanning German-controlled areas from France to Russia and Germany itself, during Hitler’s reign of brutality from 1933 to 1945.
The figure is so staggering that even fellow Holocaust scholars had to make sure they had heard it correctly when the lead researchers previewed their findings at an academic forum in late January at the German Historical Institute in Washington.
“The numbers are so much higher than what we originally thought,” Hartmut Berghoff, director of the institute, said in an interview after learning of the new data.
“We knew before how horrible life in the camps and ghettos was,” he said, “but the numbers are unbelievable.”
The documented camps include not only “killing centers” but also thousands of forced labor camps, where prisoners manufactured war supplies; prisoner-of-war camps; sites euphemistically named “care” centers, where pregnant women were forced to have abortions or their babies were killed after birth; and brothels, where women were coerced into having sex with German military personnel.
Auschwitz and a handful of other concentration camps have come to symbolize the Nazi killing machine in the public consciousness. Likewise, the Nazi system for imprisoning Jewish families in hometown ghettos has become associated with a single site — the Warsaw Ghetto, famous for the 1943 uprising. But these sites, infamous though they are, represent only a minuscule fraction of the entire German network, the new research makes painfully clear.
The maps the researchers have created to identify the camps and ghettos turn wide sections of wartime Europe into black clusters of death, torture and slavery — centered in Germany and Poland, but reaching in all directions.
Ragtime: Code name of NSA’s Secret Domestic Intelligence Program Revealed in New Book
“Deep State” uncovers new details about the agency’s secretive and hugely controversial surveillance programs.
By Shane Harris
More than a decade after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, a set of extraordinary and secretive surveillance programs conducted by the National Security Agency has been institutionalized, and they have grown.
These special programs are conducted under the code name Ragtime, and are divided into several subcomponents, according to the new book Deep State: Inside the Government Secrecy Industry, by Marc Ambinder and D.B. Grady. (I purchased a copy this morning.)
The authors, both journalists who cowrote a previous book about special operations in the military, have dug deep into the code names and operational nitty gritty of the NSA’s secretive and hugely controversial surveillance programs, and they’ve come up with impressive new details.
Ragtime, which appears in official reports by the abbreviation RT, consists of four parts.
Ragtime-A involves US-based interception of all foreign-to-foreign counterterrorism-related data;
Ragtime-B deals with data from foreign governments that transits through the US;
Ragtime-C deals with counterproliferation actvities;
and then there’s Ragtime-P, which will probably be of greatest interest to those who continue to demand more information from the NSA about what it does in the United States.
P stands for Patriot Act. Ragtime-P is the remnant of the original President’s Surveillance Program, the name given to so-called “warrantless wiretapping” activities after 9/11, in which one end of a phone call or an e-mail terminated inside the United States. That collection has since been brought under law, but civil liberties groups, journalists, and legal scholars continue to seek more information about what it entailed, who was targeted, and what authorities exist today for domestic intelligence-gathering.
Supreme Surveillance… The hypocrisy is breathtaking… should an individual citizen, one of the “We the People,” attempt to exercise similar espionage operations upon the plutocrats that work in the beltway, he or she would be hanged for treason….
US Supreme Court refuses to let Americans challenge FISA eavesdropping law
The United States Supreme Court will not let Americans challenge a provision in a foreign intelligence law that lets the federal government secretly eavesdrop on the intimate communications of millions of Americans.
On Tuesday, the top justices in the US said the country’s highest court will not hear a case in which Amnesty International and a slew of co-plaintiffs have contested a provision of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, or FISA, that lets the National Security Agency silently monitor emails and phone calls [pdf].
Under the FISA Amendments Act of 2008 (FAA), the NSA is allowed to conduct electronic surveillance on any US citizen as long as they are suspected of conversing with any person located outside of the United States. That provision was scheduled to expire at the end of 2012, but Congress voted to re-up the bill and it was put back on the books for another five years.
Along with human rights workers and journalists, Amnesty International first challenged the FAA on the day it went into effect, arguing that the powers provided to the NSA under the FISA amendments likely puts the plaintiffs and perhaps millions of other Americans at risk of surveillance. Now years later, though, they are finally being told that they cannot challenge the law that, while meant to collect foreign intelligence, puts every person in the country at risk of being watched.
“Under the FAA, the government can target anyone — human rights researchers, academics, attorneys, political activists, journalists — simply because they are foreigners outside the United States, and in the course of its surveillance it can collect Americans’ communications with those individuals,” the American Civil Liberties Union wrote on behalf of the plaintiffs in a legal brief filed last year with the court.
AFP – A study in England has strengthened evidence from Scandinavia that a vaccine used to prevent pandemic flu boosted the risk of sleep disorder among teens and children, doctors said on Tuesday.
Using the Pandemrix vaccine increased the risk of narcolepsy among people aged four to 18 by a factor of 14 compared to those who did not get the jab, they said.
The risk in absolute terms was between one in 52,000 people and one in 57,000, but this figure may be an over-estimate, according to the study published by the British Medical Journal (BMJ).
Narcolepsy is a chronic disorder of the nervous system that causes excessive drowsiness, often causing people to fall asleep uncontrollably.
It normally occurs among 25-50 of every 100,000 people, although figures are sketchy, the study said.
Pandemrix was the main vaccine used to fight the 2009-2010 outbreak of H1N1 “swine” flu, a much-feared pandemic involving a novel strain influenza virus.
The bug turned out to be as dangerous as normal “seasonal” flu, a discovery prompting some accusations that health watchdogs had over-reacted.
Last September, the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) said that, on the basis of evidence from sleep centres in Finland and Sweden, vaccination for H1N1 among teenagers and children had led to a narcolepsy risk of one in 20,000.
The new research conducted in England suggests that data from the two Scandinavian countries were not a freak result, the study said.
Pandemrix uses an adjuvant, or booster, called AS03, which aims to strengthen the immune response to the H1N1 virus.
Peanut oil in vaccines behind widespread peanut allergy epidemic
by Jonathan Benson, Natural News
More than one million children living in America today suffer from peanut allergy, and a significant percentage of these have such severe symptoms that they must carry around self-injectable epinephrine just in case they accidentally become exposed to the food. According to available records; however, virtually nobody had peanut allergy prior to 1900 despite the fact that people have been eating peanuts for ages, which begs the question, why do so many people have peanut allergy today, and from where did this potentially-deadly allergic condition emerge?
In his book The Doctor Within, Dr. Tim O’Shea argues that vaccines are largely responsible for both the advent and increased prevalence of peanut allergy, noting that many vaccines and even antibiotic drugs contain excipients derived from peanut oil. Since it is a relatively inexpensive oil to produce, refined peanut oil became widely adopted as an excipient of choice in the production of vaccines during the 1960s, and it is still widely used today for this purpose.
But peanut oil’s role in triggering the peanut allergy epidemic we see today cannot go unstated, as its introduction at the turn of the 20th century eventually caused a sudden and very apparent wave of anaphylaxis, which had never before been seen. Anaphylaxis, of course, is the general term used to denote allergic reactions to food, and can include severe and sometimes violent reactive symptoms, including but not limited to convulsions, seizures, and even death.
The more peanut oil was used in vaccine and drug production, it turns out, the more the population began to suffer from serious food allergy symptoms. Utilizing peanut oil as an excipient was great for the drug and vaccine industries, of course, as it works as an effective preservative and adjuvant for vaccines. But for those who ingest or are injected with it, peanut oil-based excipients and adjuvants can be the precipitator of a very serious and permanent peanut allergy.
“Although peanut allergies became fairly common during the 1980s, it wasn’t until the early 1990s when there was a sudden surge of children reacting to peanuts — the true epidemic appeared,” explains Dr. O’Shea in his book, highlighting the fact that the ever-expanding childhood vaccination schedule can be directly correlated with a corresponding rise in peanut allergies. “As vaccines doubled between the 1980s and the 1990s, thousands of kids were not exhibiting peanut sensitivities, with many violent reactions that were sometimes fatal.”
Drugs in Drinking Water: There is an unhealthy cocktail of drugs in your drinking water. With each sip, you self-medicate with anti-anxiety and even psychotropic drugs.
Without knowing it, you are being medicated. Maybe even now you have a cup of coffee or tea in hand, filled with water compliments of your local municipal system. Think those sodas and energy drinks are any better? Think again. Unless the water is specifically filtered for pharmaceuticals, you’re still getting dosed.
There is an unhealthy cocktail of drugs in your drinking water.
Did you know with each sip, you self-medicate with anti-anxiety and even psychotropic drugs? That’s right, according to a report released this past week in Science, environmental pollution by pharmaceutical companies are a major threat to our world’s water supplies.
According to the study’s abstract;
“Here we show that a benzodiazepine anxiolytic drug (oxazepam) alters behavior and feeding rate of wild European perch (Perca fluviatilis) at concentrations encountered in effluent-influenced surface waters. Individuals exposed to water with dilute drug concentrations (1.8 micrograms liter–1) exhibited increased activity, reduced sociality, and higher feeding rate. As such, our results show that anxiolytic drugs in surface waters alter animal behaviors that are known to have ecological and evolutionary consequences.”
According to Wiki, oxazepam is a benzodiazepine used extensively since the 1960s for the treatment of anxiety and insomnia and in the control of symptoms of alcohol withdrawal.
Upon further research, the side effects of oxazepam may include dizziness, drowsiness, headache, memory impairment, paradoxical excitement, retrograde amnesia, but does not affect transient global amnesia. Side effects due to rapid decrease in dose or abrupt withdrawal from oxazepam may include abdominal and muscle cramps, convulsions, depression, inability to fall asleep or stay asleep, sweating, tremors, or vomiting.
Children who watch excessive amounts of television are more likely to have criminal convictions and show aggressive personality traits as adults, a New Zealand study has found.
The University of Otago study tracked the viewing habits of about 1,000 children born in the early 1970s from when they were aged five to 15, then followed up when the subjects were 26 years old to assess potential impacts.
The research, published in the US journal “Pediatrics” this week, found a strong correlation between childhood exposure to television and anti-social behaviour in young adults.
“The risk of having a criminal conviction by early adulthood increased by about 30 percent with every hour that children spent watching television on an average weeknight,” co-author Bob Hancox said.
The study also found excessive TV viewing was linked to aggressive personality traits and an increased tendency to experience negative emotions.
It said the links remained statistically significant even when issues such as intelligence, social status and parental control were factored in.
“While we’re not saying that television causes all anti-social behaviour, our findings do suggest that reducing television viewing could go some way towards reducing rates of anti-social behaviour in society,” Hancox said.
He said the findings supported the American Academy of Pediatrics’ recommendation that children should watch no more than one to two hours of quality television programming a day.
The study said it was possible that children learned anti-social behaviour by watching it on TV, leading to emotional desensitisation and the development of aggressive behaviour.
Federal authorities step up efforts to license surveillance aircraft for law enforcement and other uses, amid growing privacy concerns.
WASHINGTON — While a national debate has erupted over the Obama administration’s lethal drone strikes overseas, federal authorities have stepped up efforts to license surveillance drones for law enforcement and other uses in U.S. airspace, spurring growing concern about violations of privacy.
The Federal Aviation Administration said Friday it had issued 1,428 permits to domestic drone operators since 2007, far more than were previously known. Some 327 permits are still listed as active.
Operators include police, universities, state transportation departments and at least seven federal agencies. The remotely controlled aircraft vary widely, from devices as small as model airplanes to large unarmed Predators.
The FAA, which has a September 2015 deadline from Congress to open the nation’s airspace to drone traffic, has estimated 10,000 drones could be aloft five years later. The FAA this week solicited proposals to create six sites across the country to test drones, a crucial step before widespread government and commercial use is approved.
Local and state law enforcement agencies are expected to be among the largest customers.
The United States has been SURROUNDED.
The dark orange zone is no longer the Property of the USA
“The new LAWLESS American cities are NO LONGER AMERICAN CITIES. What this change means has not yet dawned on the public. Will the businesses and homes within the 100-mile-wide-zone be SEARCHED without cause, everywhere within these LAWLESS ZONES? This will kill the country now, even though the traitors are only taking over this ZONE, for starters?
This was designed to give these traitors a protected-zone to supposedly bring in troops (UN-NATO or otherwise), to do what they cannot do without this CRIMINALLY-ENFORCED-TREASON. This way they can have full control of all the ports and all the major cities near what used to be the borders of the United States.
This will effectively give the rogue-government full control over everything coming into or leaving the USA—including everything the nation needs to survive. Without access to the oceans, or the airspace above the 100-mile wide DEAD-ZONE, everyone else in the country will be imprisoned inside what remains of the USA…”
Executioner in Chief: How a Nobel Peace Prize Winner Became the Head of a Worldwide Assassination Program
By John W. Whitehead
When Barack Obama ascended to the presidency in 2008, there was a sense, at least among those who voted for him, that the country might change for the better. Those who watched in awe as President Bush chipped away at our civil liberties over the course of his two terms as president thought that maybe this young, charismatic Senator from Illinois would reverse course and put an end to some of the Bush administration’s worst transgressions—the indefinite detention of suspected terrorists, the torture, the black site prisons, and the never-ending wars that have drained our resources, to name just a few.
A few short years later, that fantasy has proven to be just that: a fantasy. Indeed, Barack Obama has not only carried on the Bush legacy, but has taken it to its logical conclusion. As president, Obama has gone beyond Guantanamo Bay, gone beyond spying on Americans’ emails and phone calls, and gone beyond bombing countries without Congressional authorization. He now claims, as revealed in a leaked Department of Justice memo, the right to murder any American citizen the world over, so long as he has a feeling that they might, at some point in the future, pose a threat to the United States.
Let that sink in. The President of the United States of America believes he has the absolute right to kill you based upon secret “evidence” that you might be a terrorist. Not only does he think he can kill you, but he believes he has the right to do so in secret, without formally charging you of any crime and providing you with an opportunity to defend yourself in a court of law. To top it all off, the memo asserts that these decisions about whom to kill are not subject to any judicial review whatsoever.
This is what one would call Mafia-style justice, when one powerful overlord—in this case, the president—gets to decide whether you live or die based solely on his own peculiar understanding of right and wrong. This is how far we have fallen in the twelve years since 9/11, through our negligence and our failure to hold our leaders in both political parties accountable to the principles enshrined in the Constitution.
Glover is typical of those who refuse to think for themselves, but seem to be more impressed by superficialities like skin color than understanding the truth…
Do my duty to God … to keep myself morally straight.
President Barack Obama said Sunday that gays should be allowed in the Boy Scouts and women should be allowed in military combat roles, weighing in on two storied American institutions facing proposals to end long-held exclusions.
The president’s comments in a pre-Super Bowl interview on CBS come ahead of this week’s meeting of the Boy Scouts’ national executive board. A proposal to open up the Scouts’ membership to gays is expected to be discussed and possibly voted on at the gathering in Texas.
The Boy Scouts emphatically reaffirmed the no-gays policy just seven months ago, but announced last week they were considering changing the stance. Instead of mandatory exclusion of gays, the different religious and civic groups that sponsor Scout units would be able to decide for themselves how to address the issue — either maintaining the exclusion or opening up their membership.
The White House said in a statement last August that Obama opposed the gay ban. Obama, like presidents for the last century, serves as honorary president of the group. The president’s comment Sunday was his first since the group announced it was considering a policy change.
“My attitude is that gays and lesbians should have access and opportunity the same way everybody else does in every institution and walk of life,” Obama said. “The Scouts are a great institution that are promoting young people and exposing them to opportunities and leadership that will serve people for the rest of their lives. And I think nobody should be barred from that.”
[ Note: - In Obama's mind, the BSA is an "institution" that therefore cannot have any qualifying characteristics lest it be guilty of "discrimination." This is the trite propaganda of political correctness that demands that "everybody is special -- and therefore NO ONE IS." In other words, the only public option is homogenization into the morass of the crowd and its mob mentality... - ed.]
The imposition of a brutal totalitarian system of government, in the annals of history, is far more common than it is not. Some say it was only a matter of time until America regressed into a brutal totalitarian regime similar to what has occurred in the history of our planet.
America is witnessing the Sovietization of its legal system. The similarities are striking, undeniable and should prove frightening to all Americans.
The Soviet Gulag System of Justice Consisted of Two Major Components:
The “disappearing” of dissidents and anyone suspected of not being 100% loyal to Stalin.
Anyone not murdered by the Secret Police upon being secretly arrested, were exploited as slave labor in the re-education camps which would ultimately reward the state-owned corporations.
The Emerging American Gulag System of Justice Consists of Two Major Components:
The authority of the government to “disappear” and even murder dissidents and anyone suspected of not being loyal to the ruling elite has been granted by the government, to itself.
Anyone not murdered by the American NDAA agents of totalitarian enforcement, upon being secretly arrested, will be forced into slave labor, which will ultimately benefit selected corporations.
The Soviet Gulag System
At the peak of the secret arrests in the 1930′s, extreme fear and even paranoia were pervasive in Soviet cities. It was common knowledge that even intellectuals slept with suitcases of warm clothes and supplies ready under their beds. The Soviet Secret Police typically carried out their arrests in the middle of the night, when there would be few if any witnesses. The Soviet citizenry lived in terror of that they would hear the sound of that ominous knock on the door.
Much like present day America, under the Patriot Acts I and II, private conversations were scrutinized as much as published work for any possible incriminating comment which could be construed as critical of the ruling regime. Political opportunists took advantage of this insane atmosphere of fear to rid themselves of rivals. Subordinates turned in their bosses in the hope of securing their positions. Rewards were given to informants and government snitches might get improved living accommodations by denouncing a neighbor.
Many of those arrested had their fate decided quickly at the hands of a an execution squad. Those, who initially survived the secret arrest, were transported to prison camps. Repression in the Soviet Union utilized prison camps for political prisoners under the rule of Lenin and then later Stalin.
The Emerging American Gulag System
Section 1021(b)(2) of the National Defense Authorization Act permits the government to use the military to detain U.S. citizens, strip them of due process and hold them indefinitely in military detention centers. Political prisoners could easily be tortured and executed because who would ever be in a position to report such a heinous crime by the state?
These inexcusable transgressions against our Constitutional liberties, could have been easily fixed by Congress. The Senate and House had the opportunity during this past month to include in the 2013 version of the NDAA, an unequivocal statement that all U.S. citizens would be exempt from 1021(b)(2), leaving the section to apply only to foreigners. However, our criminal Congress and our criminal President remained silent to the pleas to reform the NDAA in order to conform to the Constitution.
Indefinite detention, torture, and even unsanctioned murder are now legitimized practices of the United States government under Section 1021(b)(2) of the NDAA. America even has developed their own Soviet-style informant matrix in a plot hatched by the Director of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano.
Justice Department memo reveals legal case for drone strikes on Americans
By Michael Isikoff
National Investigative Correspondent, NBC News
A confidential Justice Department memo concludes that the U.S. government can order the killing of American citizens if they are believed to be “senior operational leaders” of al-Qaida or “an associated force” — even if there is no intelligence indicating they are engaged in an active plot to attack the U.S.
The 16-page memo, a copy of which was obtained by NBC News, provides new details about the legal reasoning behind one of the Obama administration’s most secretive and controversial polices: its dramatically increased use of drone strikes against al-Qaida suspects, including those aimed at American citizens, such as the September 2011 strike in Yemen that killed alleged al-Qaida operatives Anwar al-Awlaki and Samir Khan. Both were U.S. citizens who had never been indicted by the U.S. government nor charged with any crimes.
Anyone should be concerned when the president and his lawyers make up their own interpretation of the law or their own rules,” said Mary Ellen O’Connell, a law professor at the University of Notre Dame and an authority on international law and the use of force. “This is a very, very dangerous thing that the president has done,” she added.
The secrecy surrounding such strikes is fast emerging as a central issue in this week’s hearing of White House counterterrorism adviser John Brennan, a key architect of the drone campaign, to be CIA director. Brennan was the first administration official to publicly acknowledge drone strikes in a speech last year, calling them “consistent with the inherent right of self-defense.” In a separate talk at the Northwestern University Law School in March, Attorney General Eric Holder specifically endorsed the constitutionality of targeted killings of Americans, saying they could be justified if government officials determine the target poses “an imminent threat of violent attack.”
“If you believe the president has the power to order U.S. citizens executed far from any battlefield with no charges or trial, then it’s truly hard to conceive of any asserted power you would find objectionable,” he [Glenn Greenwald] wrote.
Obama in Germany hailing himself as a world leader
.
“So, they’re shipping some kids from Sandy Hook elementary down to the sight of the big game and dressing them up and putting them on display in order to try to USE THEM and the memory of their dead classmates to try to shame convince the American public that anyone who supports the notion of maintaining their constitutional rights is an extremist who hates children” (link)
.
Sandy Hook Chorus to Sing at Super Bowl
The chorus from Sandy Hook Elementary School will sing “America the Beautiful” before Sunday’s Super Bowl between the San Francisco 49ers and the Baltimore Ravens.
The chorus features 26 children from Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Conn., where 20 first-graders and six adults were killed in a Dec. 14 shooting rampage.
Heartless – Forcing kids to advance Obama’s agenda….
The performance will be part of CBS’s pre-game show, and will be broadcast live. Alicia Keys will sing the national anthem.
Hey Mr. Obama – if you are serious about the problem of gun-related murder, then why not use your vast resources to go after the gangs and criminals — and leave the average American citizen alone? Or are you motives something different, and you simply lust for the power to quell political dissent from people by means of the threat of unanswerable force? This is your call – and how you choose to play your hand will tell us what you are.
=========
Gang Violence and Gun Control
By Michael Geer
Guns and gangs. Haven’t read anything from the Left about that. Certainly nothing from Congress. But with FBI statistics showing more than 1,500,000 members of recognized gangs across the nation and something like 33,000 recognized gangs in the FBI’s stats, you’d think Gun Control advocates would list these as a major target of their efforts, especially since gang activity is responsible for at least 48% of criminal and violent activity throughout the US.
Reports about you and me and our AR-15s and AKs? All over the front page. Gangs with rocket launchers and grenades in the gun control newspeak? Bupkus. You and I and our Glocks? Terrified reporters breathless with passion for gun control. Gangs with Glocks? Nada. You and I, presuming you may be religious, a veteran of armed service or a defender of the Second Amendment are now listed with Homeland Security as a threat to National Security, a potential terrorist. Lumped in there with the likes of Hamas, Shining Path, MS-13 and the Hells Angels. But right now we’re not hearing anything about trying to take guns away from the Mongols. No. You’re not hearing some rip and read talking head demanding MS-13 be disarmed. You and me, yes. Insanely violent drug gangs? Shhh. No gun control for them, they might do something.
Discussion About Toy Nerf Gun Causes Lockdown at Bronx Elementary Schools
Hysteria: Police with assault rifles, helicopters hunted for non-existent object as parents panicked
by Paul Joseph Watson
A discussion between two children about a toy nerf gun caused a lockdown and a massive armed police response at two elementary schools in the Bronx today in yet another example of how hysteria is sweeping America’s education system in the aftermath of the Sandy Hook shootings.
Panicked parents rushed to the two schools on Fulton Avenue and East 174th Street today after heavily armed police were called to respond to reports of a gun on campus. The alarm was caused by a campus aide overhearing a student say “something about a gun.”
The “gun” turned out to be a brightly-colored toy nerf gun that fires harmless foam bullets, and the child in question hadn’t even brought the toy to school.
“The 12-year-old boy told police he was talking to a classmate about his toy Nerf gun, which he left at home,” reports the NY Post, meaning the object that caused the panic was never even on campus.
The two schools were locked down for over an hour with pupils kept inside as police with weapons drawn hunted down the deadly non-existent toy gun.
“It’s nerve racking. There are police officers here with assault rifles and there are helicopters flying around. It’s really scary out here,” said parent Jacklyn Williams.
CBS Runs Segment Called ‘Let’s Give Up On The Constitution’
From Georgetown law professor Louis Michael Seidman: I’ve got a simple idea: Let’s give up on the Constitution. I know, it sounds radical, but it’s really not. Constitutional disobedience is as American as apple pie. For example, most of our greatest Presidents — Jefferson, Lincoln, Wilson, and both Roosevelts — had doubts about the Constitution, and many of them disobeyed it when it got in their way.
To be clear, I don’t think we should give up on everything in the Constitution. The Constitution has many important and inspiring provisions, but we should obey these because they are important and inspiring, not because a bunch of people who are now long-dead favored them two centuries ago. Unfortunately, the Constitution also contains some provisions that are not so inspiring. For example, one allows a presidential candidate who is rejected by a majority of the American people to assume office. Suppose that Barack Obama really wasn’t a natural-born citizen. So what? Constitutional obedience has a pernicious impact on our political culture. Take the recent debate about gun control. None of my friends can believe it, but I happen to be skeptical of most forms of gun control. I understand, though, that’s not everyone’s view, and I’m eager to talk with people who disagree.
But what happens when the issue gets Constitutional-ized? Then we turn the question over to lawyers, and lawyers do with it what lawyers do. So instead of talking about whether gun control makes sense in our country, we talk about what people thought of it two centuries ago. Worse yet, talking about gun control in terms of constitutional obligation needlessly raises the temperature of political discussion. Instead of a question on policy, about which reasonable people can disagree, it becomes a test of one’s commitment to our foundational document and, so, to America itself.
Obama’s Promise To Close Guantanamo Prison Falls Short
by Jackie Northam
NPR
In one of his first acts as commander in chief, President Obama in 2009 signed an executive order to close the U.S. detention camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
It was part of a campaign promise the president made, to close the camp and “determine how to deal with those who have been held there.” But four years on, the controversial prison remains open.
The president and his administration believed Guantanamo was a symbol of the contentious counterterrorism policies of his predecessor, George W. Bush; ones that included harsh interrogation tactics, rendition and indefinite detention.
History proves that it is utter MADNESS to think that a government of any kind can be trusted to disarm its population for the sake of a supposed “greater good.” Absolutely not. As the framers of the US Constitution manifestly understood, any government of men is inherently self-serving and tends to corruption – unless it is curtailed by means of a system of “checks and balances” – a system which includes the means to overthrow tyrannical power by means of a suitably armed citizen militia. The greatest mass murderers of all time have been tyrants who have acted on behalf of their own sick vision of the “greater good,” twisted visions which have led to mass murder, destruction, and “citizens” rendered powerless by self-serving autocrats and their evil policies. May the LORD God Almighty rebuke the powers of darkness that are behind the lust to disarm the American public. Congress take note: The LORD God Almighty did not take kindly to Pharaoh enslaving the Jews, and He likewise will judge your attempts to usurp the Constitution of the United States to enslave the American people… Take a moment to re-read Psalm 2, and then carefully consider to whom the prophesied rod of divine judgment will fall….
==================
Obama and Feinstein Anti-Gun Propaganda
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) will introduce a bill banning assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition clips on Thursday.
Feinstein’s bill will expand the criteria for classifying military-style assault weapons from a 1994 law, which lapsed a decade later. Her new measure will ban the sale of about 150 types of firearms, including some rifles and handguns, as well as the sale of high-capacity magazines, according to USA Today.
The bill will exempt firearms used for hunting and will grandfather in guns and magazines owned before the law’s potential enactment. However, the grandfathered weapons will be logged in a national registry.
The measure is expected to face a tough fight in the Senate, with many GOP lawmakers and the nation’s gun lobby vowing to oppose any new restrictions on gun ownership.
But Feinstein, a longtime proponent of gun reform, said she is ready to push her measure in the face of opposition from the National Rifle Association (NRA).
“I have worked on this for a long time,” said Feinstein in an interview with USA Today. “I’m not a newcomer or a novice to guns.
“The NRA sort of specialized in trying to denigrate me, but I don’t think there’s anyone around that’s spent 20 years on this subject, plus some,” she added.
Calls to renew the federal assault-weapons ban, which expired in 2004, have grown after last month’s mass shooting at an elementary school in Newtown, Conn.
President Obama has been urging congressional leaders to pass legislation aimed at reducing gun violence, vowing “to use whatever weight this office holds” to make the new rules a reality.
Last week he unveiled a package of executive actions and called on lawmakers to pass measures instituting universal background checks to keep firearms out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill, and bans on sales of assault weapons and high-capacity clips.
Texas Republican Rep. Steve Stockman threatened Monday afternoon that he would file articles of impeachment against President Barack Obama if he institutes gun control measures with an executive order.
Stockman warned that such executive orders would be “unconstitutional” and “infringe on our constitutionally-protected right to keep and bear arms.”
“I will seek to thwart this action by any means necessary, including but not limited to eliminating funding for implementation, defunding the White House, and even filing articles of impeachment,” Stockman said in a statement.
At his press conference Monday, Obama floated the possibility of using executive action to enact policies aimed at reducing gun violence.
The freshman congressman, who served one term in Congress in the mid-1990s, further labeled the possibility “an existential threat to this nation” because, he said, the purpose of the Second Amendment is to allow the people to protect themselves from tyranny.
The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) is looking at whether or not the flu vaccine is effective. Preliminary results indicate you’ll get just as sick (with colds, flu, flu-like illnesses) if you got the vaccine than if you didn’t. Why doesn’t the vaccine work? In order to understand the answer, you’ll need to understand some specifics about the flu vaccine and a bit about how immunity works.
There is no single virus that causes the flu; there is no one flu vaccine that protects against all of them. A flu vaccine is designed to confer immunity against the strains of flu that are expected to be most common and most serious. The vaccine is a sort of one-size-fits-all solution, even though there are more types of flu than covered by the vaccine and the flu types vary according to region. It takes time to produce vaccines, so a new vaccine can’t be instantly produced when a new type of flu starts to cause problems.
The Vaccine and Immunity
The flu vaccine gives your body parts of inactivated flu viruses. These virus parts correspond to parts of proteins floating around in your body. When the virus part contacts a chemical ‘match’, it stimulates the body to produce the cells and antibodies that can remove this particular intruder. Antibodies are proteins that float in body fluids and can bind to specific chemical markers. When an antibody binds to a substance, it essentially marks it for destruction by other cells. However, an antibody for one type of flu won’t necessarily bind to a virus part from another type of flu. You don’t get protection against other viruses. A flu vaccine can only stimulate your immune system to protect you against the viruses in the vaccine, with some lesser protection against very similar ones.
Incomplete Protection Against Intended Targets
You may not even get protection against the intended virus. Why? First, because viruses change over time. The piece that was in the vaccine may not ‘look’ the same (chemically) as the real thing (months later, after all!). Second, the vaccine may not have given you enough stimulation to fight off the disease.
(Youtube) This May, Brad Pitt’s zombie apocalypse film, “World War Z” is scheduled to be released. The movie should not be viewed as just another Zombie flick but as hard core UN war propaganda aimed at the sovereign citizens of the United States. Alex breaks down step by step how the scenarios portrayed in this film tell the story of the end of America and the beginning of UN global rule thanks to the zombies:
