“In the postmodern, post-everything world view, there is no objectivity or truth. Everything is relative. Nothing is better or truer than anything else. Knowledge is politically constructed, an extension of power.” US News and World Report, August 7 1995
Western governments are now controlled ostensibly by actors; governments being fully controlled from behind the scenes. The outward facade of government is now the managed stage presentation of a Hollywood style reality show which itself is faked using paid actors in a simulation of the reality.
Our political reality is nearly fully evolved — Theresa May for example, claiming the Russians poisoned Sergei V. Skripal, is outstanding lunacy, nothing a real head of state, concerned in anyway for the well being of her people or by necessity, the well being of all people, could possibly conclude.
Her foolish, and mindless assertion, is then acknowledged as true and her reactions are followed in lock step by most of Western nations including, The United States; we are witnessing suicidal insanity.
(Jack Mullen) – Gun-free zones are a magnet for those who want to kill many people quickly. Even the most ardent gun control advocate would never put “Gun-Free Zone”signs on their home. Let’s stop finally putting them elsewhere. – John Lott Jr.
Theorem: There are NO GUN FREE ZONES
“Gun Free Zones” are bounded regions where law abiding people are not allowed to be armed – formally being disarmed before entering. Gun Free Zones in Public Spaces (GFZPS) are a violation of the Constitution for the United States, violate many State Constitutions, and, more importantly, violate Natural Law.
Read the whole article here... http://www.thegovernmentrag.com/there-is-no-such-thing-as-a-gun-free-zone.html#.Vo8h1_krLIX
Please share and support The Government Rag – http://www.thegovernmentrag.com/tgr-needs-your-help-and-donation.html
(Jack Mullen) – Driving around the State of Maryland (State slogan: “The Free State”) one could get the impression he or she has passed into an alternative universe where the State had morphed into a dystopic, Orwellian-Jumbo-Tron surveillance state complete with big screen outdoor billboards advising ‘citizens’ to be ever vigil of possible terrorist activities and encouraging ‘citizens’ to report any ‘suspicious’ activities they might observe.
Orwell’s “1984” can be viewed as the Bible of Tyranny, Mind Control, and Scientific Enslavement, the entire book is a explanation of today’s manufactured false reality, culture and expression of a totalitarian State supported on fear; a mind crushing, thought controlling, humanity limiting, IQ damaging, containment cube, squashing the life and potential out of the ‘citizen’ while confining the soul to a prison of impossible self-actualization.
The State of Maryland and other states now under the control of nationalist hating, Constitution ignoring, One World Government promoting, agents of a foreign occupation force are participating in a giant psychological operation (psy-op) trying to give credibility to the phony terrorism narrative being pushed on the public mind by the Usurped Federal Government.
13 years have come to pass since the 9/11/01 attacks on the World Trade Center towers. Americans have been left with an ‘official report’ and unanswered questions. Post 9/11legislation has had enormous consequences for this country.
One of the biggest post 9/11 deceptions awaiting Americans following the tragedy of the attacks on the World Trade Centers was the PATRIOT ACT (an act of Congress) signed into law in 2001 by President George W. Bush. The act expands and gave to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and other federal agencies the power to search business and homes and to obtain any records without any knowledge or consent. Recently, the act has come under fire when Edward Snowden, former CIA employee and NSA contractor, exposed secret documents of how the NSA collects telephone records of virtually all Americans under the power of the Patriot Act.
Unannounced drills blasted as “outrageous” by city councilor
(Paul Joseph Watson) – The U.S. Army is set to continue training exercises involving low flying “black helicopters” over Minneapolis and St. Paul tonight despite residents and local officials expressing outrage at the danger posed by the unannounced drills.
With the agreement of local police departments, the 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment out of Fort Campbell Kentucky has been conducting the exercises, which involve low flying Night Stalker black hawk helicopters buzzing over rooftops and in between buildings, since Monday and will continue with the drills through until Thursday evening.
Similar drills were conducted over the twin cities in 2012, before which police gave residents three days notice. This time the exercises were completely unannounced, prompting panicked locals to flood 911 and non-emergency lines.
With both law enforcement and the Army refusing to divulge precisely what the exercise is supposed to accomplish, residents and city councilors complained bitterly at taxpayer money being wasted on the exercise.
“I think it’s outrageous,” said St. Paul City Council member Chris Tolbert. “We’re going to have Black Hawks flying at a low level over a densely populated urban area without any notice at all? I had helicopters shaking my house at 11:57 last night. They were right over the trees.”
His sentiments were echoed by city council member Dave Thune, who slammed the drills as “incredibly unsafe.”
“When you’ve got Blackhawk helicopters flying between buildings full of people in the middle of the night, it’s just not safe … It’s absolutely wrong for us as a civilian police department to engage in military exercises. It shouldn’t happen here,” said Thune.
Pioneer Press reporter Joe Soucheray, who described how the low flying choppers literally shook his house, criticized authorities for failing to provide advance warning or information about the training program.
“We are supposed to be good and quiet little citizens who don’t ask too many questions,” wrote Soucheray. “Go back into your basements, folks. We’re just doing a little buzzing over your roof, maybe dropping a SEAL down a rope or whatever we feel like doing. You all just move along.”
Soucheray took issue with residents being treated like “guinea pigs,” writing, “These exercises have to be incredibly dangerous. Large, fast, essentially blacked-out helicopters are flying over a packed urban center, between downtown St. Paul buildings where people live.”
Minneapolis resident Daniel Feidt told CBS Minnesota that the training was “a waste of taxpayer money,” remarking, “It’s inappropriate for Special Forces to be operating in American cities.”
Tonya Tennessen, spokeswoman for St. Paul Mayor Chris Coleman, justified the exercises by citing 9/11, commenting, “In a post-9/11 world, this is how homeland security happens. … These exercises are taking place in cities all over the country.”
Maj. Allen Hill denied eyewitness reports that military personnel were seen rappelling onto the top of the Federal Reserve building in downtown Minneapolis.
Back in May we reported on similar drills in Kentucky and Cincinnati which were described by eyewitnesses as resembling something out of a war zone.
In 2012, Miami residents were shocked to be awoken by a military exercise in the middle of the night which involved helicopters, fighter jets, along with simulated gunfire and grenades. Black Hawk helicopters also flew low over Los Angeles during a military drill the same year.
Back in March, we reported on Department of Defense exercises in Broward County during which low flying military helicopters landed on city buildings in Fort Lauderdale. According to a local reporter, the drills were centered around, “scaring the crap out of people”.
As we have previously explained, many see the drills as a means of acclimatizing people to accept the prospect of martial law. Some in Minneapolis and St. Paul have suggested that police departments agreed to host the drills in return for military equipment from the Pentagon.
As we have seen in Ferguson, Missouri over the last 10 days, such gear is being used to target protesters, journalists and silence the First Amendment as America increasingly begins to resemble a banana republic.
The Tucson Police Department announced on their Facebook page to notify the public there will be increased military presence in and around the City of Tucson through the end of today. There will be increased military presence and helicopter traffic during the urban warfare training. These exercises will be coordinated with City and County officials.
Read more here: http://www.arizonadailyindependent.com/2014/08/12/weve-only-just-begun-carpenters/#sthash.Bhx2fISl.dpuf
( Jeremy Scahill and Ryan Devereaux) – The Obama administration has quietly approved a substantial expansion of the terrorist watchlist system, authorizing a secret process that requires neither “concrete facts” nor “irrefutable evidence” to designate an American or foreigner as a terrorist, according to a key government document obtained by The Intercept.
The “March 2013 Watchlisting Guidance,” a 166-page document issued last year by the National Counterterrorism Center, spells out the government’s secret rules for putting individuals on its main terrorist database, as well as the no fly list and the selectee list, which triggers enhanced screening at airports and border crossings. The new guidelines allow individuals to be designated as representatives of terror organizations without any evidence they are actually connected to such organizations, and it gives a single White House official the unilateral authority to place “entire categories” of people the government is tracking onto the no fly and selectee lists. It broadens the authority of government officials to “nominate” people to the watchlists based on what is vaguely described as “fragmentary information.” It also allows for dead people to be watchlisted.
Over the years, the Obama and Bush Administrations have fiercely resisted disclosing the criteria for placing names on the databases—though the guidelines are officially labeled as unclassified. In May, Attorney General Eric Holder even invoked the state secrets privilege to prevent watchlisting guidelines from being disclosed in litigation launched by an American who was on the no fly list. In an affidavit, Holder called them a “clear roadmap” to the government’s terrorist-tracking apparatus, adding: “The Watchlisting Guidance, although unclassified, contains national security information that, if disclosed … could cause significant harm to national security.”
In 2012 Tim Healy, the former director of the FBI’s Terrorist Screening Center, described to CBS News how watchlists are used by police officers. “So if you are speeding, you get pulled over, they’ll query that name,” he said. “And if they are encountering a known or suspected terrorist, it will pop up and say call the Terrorist Screening Center…. So now the officer on the street knows he may be dealing with a known or suspected terrorist.” Of course, the problem is that the “known or suspected terrorist” might just be an ordinary citizen who should not be treated as a menace to public safety.
Until 2001, the government did not prioritize building a watchlist system. On 9/11, the government’s list of people barred from flying included just 16 names. Today, the no fly list has swelled to tens of thousands of “known or suspected terrorists” (the guidelines refer to them as KSTs). The selectee list subjects people to extra scrutiny and questioning at airports and border crossings. The government has created several other databases, too. The largest is the Terrorist Identities Datamart Environment (TIDE), which gathers terrorism information from sensitive military and intelligence sources around the world. Because it contains classified information that cannot be widely distributed, there is yet another list, the Terrorist Screening Database, or TSDB, which has been stripped of TIDE’s classified data so that it can be shared. When government officials refer to “the watchlist,” they are typically referring to the TSDB. (TIDE is the responsibility of the National Counterterrorism Center; the TSDB is managed by the Terrorist Screening Center at the FBI.)
In a statement, a spokesman for the National Counterterrorism Center told The Intercept that “the watchlisting system is an important part of our layered defense to protect the United States against future terrorist attacks” and that “watchlisting continues to mature to meet an evolving, diffuse threat.” He added that U.S. citizens are afforded extra protections to guard against improper listing, and that no one can be placed on a list solely for activities protected by the First Amendment. A representative of the Terrorist Screening Center did not respond to a request for comment.
The system has been criticized for years. In 2004, Sen. Ted Kennedy complained that he was barred from boarding flights on five separate occasions because his name resembled the alias of a suspected terrorist. Two years later, CBS News obtained a copy of the no fly list and reported that it included Bolivian president Evo Morales and Lebanese parliament head Nabih Berri. One of the watchlists snared Mikey Hicks, a Cub Scout who got his first of many airport pat-downs at age two. In 2007, the Justice Department’s inspector general issued a scathing report identifying “significant weaknesses” in the system. And in 2009, after a Nigerian terrorist was able to board a passenger flight to Detroit and nearly detonated a bomb sewn into his underwear despite his name having been placed on the TIDE list, President Obama admitted that there had been a “systemic failure.”
Obama hoped that his response to the “underwear bomber” would be a turning point. In 2010, he gave increased powers and responsibilities to the agencies that nominate individuals to the lists, placing pressure on them to add names. His administration also issued a set of new guidelines for the watchlists. Problems persisted, however. In 2012, the U.S. Government Accountability Office published a report that bluntly noted there was no agency responsible for figuring out “whether watchlist-related screening or vetting is achieving intended results.” The guidelines were revised and expanded in 2013—and a source within the intelligence community subsequently provided a copy to The Intercept.
“Concrete facts are not necessary”
The five chapters and 11 appendices of the “Watchlisting Guidance” are filled with acronyms, legal citations, and numbered paragraphs; it reads like an arcane textbook with a vocabulary all its own. Different types of data on suspected terrorists are referred to as “derogatory information,” “substantive derogatory information,” “extreme derogatory information” and “particularized derogatory information.” The names of suspected terrorists are passed along a bureaucratic ecosystem of “originators,” “nominators,” “aggregators,” “screeners,” and “encountering agencies.” And “upgrade,” usually a happy word for travellers, is repurposed to mean that an individual has been placed on a more restrictive list.
The heart of the document revolves around the rules for placing individuals on a watchlist. “All executive departments and agencies,” the document says, are responsible for collecting and sharing information on terrorist suspects with the National Counterterrorism Center. It sets a low standard—”reasonable suspicion“—for placing names on the watchlists, and offers a multitude of vague, confusing, or contradictory instructions for gauging it. In the chapter on “Minimum Substantive Derogatory Criteria”—even the title is hard to digest—the key sentence on reasonable suspicion offers little clarity:
“To meet the REASONABLE SUSPICION standard, the NOMINATOR, based on the totality of the circumstances, must rely upon articulable intelligence or information which, taken together with rational inferences from those facts, reasonably warrants a determination that an individual is known or suspected to be or has been knowingly engaged in conduct constituting, in preparation for, in aid of, or related to TERRORISM and/or TERRORIST ACTIVITIES.”
The rulebook makes no effort to define an essential phrase in the passage—”articulable intelligence or information.” After stressing that hunches are not reasonable suspicion and that “there must be an objective factual basis” for labeling someone a terrorist, it goes on to state that no actual facts are required:
“In determining whether a REASONABLE SUSPICION exists, due weight should be given to the specific reasonable inferences that a NOMINATOR is entitled to draw from the facts in light of his/her experience and not on unfounded suspicions or hunches. Although irrefutable evidence or concrete facts are not necessary, to be reasonable, suspicion should be as clear and as fully developed as circumstances permit.”
While the guidelines nominally prohibit nominations based on unreliable information, they explicitly regard “uncorroborated” Facebook or Twitter posts as sufficient grounds for putting an individual on one of the watchlists. “Single source information,” the guidelines state, “including but not limited to ‘walk-in,’ ‘write-in,’ or postings on social media sites, however, should not automatically be discounted … the NOMINATING AGENCY should evaluate the credibility of the source, as well as the nature and specificity of the information, and nominate even if that source is uncorroborated.”
There are a number of loopholes for putting people onto the watchlists even if reasonable suspicion cannot be met.
One is clearly defined: The immediate family of suspected terrorists—their spouses, children, parents, or siblings—may be watchlisted without any suspicion that they themselves are engaged in terrorist activity. But another loophole is quite broad—”associates” who have a defined relationship with a suspected terrorist, but whose involvement in terrorist activity is not known. A third loophole is broader still—individuals with “a possible nexus” to terrorism, but for whom there is not enough “derogatory information” to meet the reasonable suspicion standard.
Americans and foreigners can be nominated for the watchlists if they are associated with a terrorist group, even if that group has not been designated as a terrorist organization by the U.S. government. They can also be treated as “representatives” of a terrorist group even if they have “neither membership in nor association with the organization.” The guidelines do helpfully note that certain associations, such as providing janitorial services or delivering packages, are not grounds for being watchlisted.
The nomination system appears to lack meaningful checks and balances. Although government officials have repeatedly said there is a rigorous process for making sure no one is unfairly placed in the databases, the guidelines acknowledge that all nominations of “known terrorists” are considered justified unless the National Counterterrorism Center has evidence to the contrary. In a recent court filing, the government disclosed that there were 468,749 KST nominations in 2013, of which only 4,915 were rejected–a rate of about one percent. The rulebook appears to invert the legal principle of due process, defining nominations as “presumptively valid.”