Tag Archives: Terrorism

DHS Declares War: “Homegrown Terrorists Fueled by the Internet”

Thu Feb 10 2011 20:43 


https://ephraiyim.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/tsa2bnazi2b777.jpg?w=600

by Zen Gardner

Give me a freakin’ break. They get away with this fascist hype and no one screams?

This tripe from the insatiable stooge Napoleon-itano was on ABC News:

“One of the most striking elements of today’s threat picture is that plots to attack America increasingly involve American residents and citizens,” Napolitano said, referring to so-called homegrown terrorists fueled by the Internet and connections with operatives overseas.

What?

They haven’t done anything but decimate Afghanistan and Iraq, murder millions of people in pursuit of a fabricated enemy, while sacrificing our own youth in the process with no “victory” in sight! All with the pretense of “fighting terrorism”.

And now? “Sorry, our bad. The real enemy is at home after all.”

All with the obvious target of real truth and freedom loving Americans and our communication line – theinternet. Funny it was developed by DARPA. I wonder what else is going to backfire on them? As it is we’re more empowered than ever.

But couch potato America will buy it. Why not? The American “image-ination” was founded on Disneyesque story telling. It goes right along with 24, the Superbowl, CSI, (etc. etc.) and every flippin’ news and talk show you can imagine…

It’s Mind-boggling!

More from Napoleon-itano:

“The terrorist threat facing our country has evolved significantly in the last ten years — and continues to evolve — so that, in some ways, the threat facing us is at its most heightened state since those attacks,” she said before the House Homeland Security Committee.

Her comments were a sobering reminder that the potential of another attack is real and growing, most notably from individuals radicalized inside the United States, despite elaborate security measures implemented by the government since 2001. Source

Don’t have to say much more.

Grab your boots boys and girls, they’re coming after us. If you DARE to question ANYTHING that might be considered “suspicious” you are now, and have been for awhile, liable for questioning and detention, for as long as they like.

As this hype grows they’re only counting the days.

Next False Flag Near?

Always. They can nuke one of our own cities, a la Oklahoma City, only meaner; they can do something nasty overseas, and blame anyone they want. The unaware world is a sitting duck.

And yes, it’s also to grease the wheels for the Patriot Act extension. Congress is in the tank–it’s the American people they don’t want coming out of their coma.

www.zengardner.com

Want to share YOUR story with our dynamic and rapidly growing audience?
Click here to become a Contributor.

 


Let It Cut Both Ways: US Foreign Aid and State-Sponsored Terrorism

As a reminder to those who read here and an explanation for those new to my site. I post a lot of varying opinions on many topics. Just because I put an article up does not necessarily mean I am in agreement with all that a particular author says.

We learn truth through a large variety of opinions. Just because I am not in agreement with a person’s politics or religion does not mean they have nothing important to contribute to my understanding of what is going on in the world!

NKJV

 

Prov11:14
“Where there is no counsel, the people fall; But in the multitude of counselors there is safety.”


 

by Sibel Edmonds
BoilingFrogsPost.com

Recently by Sibel Edmonds: The Not So Gradual Degradation of a Nation

Material Support to Dictators Who Inflict Terror

In June 2010 our rights and liberties suffered a major setback. The United States Supreme Court upheld the broad application of a federal law making it a crime to provide “material support” to designated “foreign terrorist organizations” (FTOs). Under this law individuals face up to 15 years in prison for providing “material support” to FTOs, even if their work is intended to promote peaceful, lawful objectives. “Material support” is defined to include any “service,” “training,” “expert advice or assistance” or “personnel.” This setback should cut both ways, that is, if we had a bit more application of justice and a tad less of hypocrisy, and of course, far more straightforward information delivery. What do I mean by having this setback cut both ways? Terrorism is not limited to individual(s), groups, organizations; it includes nation states. A bunch of ego-driven scholars or a few anal-retentive political analysts may want to split hairs as to whether or not “state sponsored terrorism” constitutes terrorism, but hey, since 2002 their elected presidents have been accusing nations of being terrorists or axis of evil, and for this, for now, I am going to go with that.

State terrorism refers to acts of terrorism conducted by a state against a foreign state or people. It can also refer to widespread acts of violence by a state against its own people. Based on this definition and based on what the puppet court recently ruled on what constitutes “material support” to terrorism, our government, those who have sanctioned US Foreign Aid to dictators inflicting violence against their own people, should be brought to trial. I am talking about Egypt. I am talking about Uzbekistan. I am talking about Jordan, Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan, Pakistan, Israel …To be more accurate, I am talking about Billions of dollars being continuously provided to dictators for half a century who in turn are terrorizing their own people. Egypt and where our tax dollars, US Foreign Aid, went is only one example. All you have to do is line check dozens of our foreign aid recipients against their established human rights (terrorism) record. Here are examples:

In September 2008, the U.S. and Jordanian governments reached an agreement whereby the United States will provide a total of $660 million in annual foreign assistance to Jordan over a 5-year period.

Then, check the dictator’s record in Jordan:

Domestic and international NGOs reported cases of arbitrary deprivation of life, torture, poor prison conditions, impunity, arbitrary arrest and denial of due process through administrative detention, prolonged detention, and external interference in judicial decisions. Citizens continued to describe infringements on their privacy rights. Restrictive legislation and regulations limited freedom of speech and press, and government interference in the media and threats of fines and detention led to self-censorship, according to journalists and human rights organizations. The government also continued to restrict freedoms of assembly and association.

Local human rights organizations reported widespread violence against women and children. The government restricted labor rights, and local and international human rights organizations reported high levels of abuse of foreign domestic workers.

Shouldn’t the persons in our government who have sanctioned and provided financial and material support to the dictators of these terrorist regimes who’ve been terrorizing their people be held liable?

Do I hear a whisper in the background…those who are saying,

Well, the terror practices of those dictators do not inflict or in any way affect our people here in the United States, thus, the criminal liability does not apply to our government officials who’ve been providing material and financial support to those state terrorists. The victims are not Americans.

Let me respond to this point: Actually, yes, Americans do fall victims to terrorism practiced by these dictators which is made possible by our government’s material and financial support. Here is a fairly sound analysis published in 2008 at Terrorism Monitor

A great deal of debate surrounds the factors driving the brand of radical Islam in the Middle East that inspires some individuals to commit acts of violence. A recurring theme in extremist discourse is opposition to incumbent authoritarian regimes in the Middle East. For radical Islamist groups such as al-Qaeda, unwavering U.S. support for the autocracies that rule Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and elsewhere in the region tops a list of grievances toward what amounts to pillars of U.S. foreign policy in the region. In addition to al-Qaeda, however, most Muslims in the Middle East also see these regimes as oppressive, corrupt and illegitimate. Authoritarian regimes in the region are also widely viewed as compliant agents of a U.S.-led neo-colonial order as opposed to being accountable to their own people.

And here is a real life example they present:

There is ample evidence that a number of prominent militants – including al-Qaeda deputy commander Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri and the late al-Qaeda in Iraq leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi – endured systematic torture at the hands of the Egyptian and Jordanian authorities, respectively (see Terrorism Monitor, May 4, 2006). Many observers believe that their turn toward extreme radicalism represented as much an attempt to exact revenge against their tormentors and, by extension, the United States, as it was about fulfilling an ideology. Those who knew Zawahiri and can relate to his experience believe that his behavior today is greatly influenced by his pursuit of personal redemption to compensate for divulging information about his associates after breaking down amid brutal torture sessions during his imprisonment in the early 1980s [3]. For radical Islamists and their sympathizers, U.S. economic, military, and diplomatic support for regimes that engage in this kind of activity against their own citizens vindicates al-Qaeda’s claims of the existence of a U.S.-led plot to attack Muslims and undermine Islam. In al-Qaeda’s view, these circumstances require that Muslims organize and take up arms in self-defense against the United States and its allies in the region.

And this point:

Brutal and humiliating forms of torture are common instruments of control and coercion by the security services in police states intent on rooting out all forms of dissent. Previously the domain of human rights activists, researchers investigating the many pathways toward radicalization in the Middle East are increasingly considering the impact of torture and other abuses at the hands of the state during periods of incarceration in an effort to better understand the psychology of the radicalization process. Many researchers see these kinds of experiences as formative in the path toward violent radicalization.

Now, let me repeat again, our government, using our tax dollars, is providing material and financial support to dictators who terrorize their own people, and this terrorization plays a major role in creating radicalism that justifiably directs its wrath towards the United States responsible for sustaining these terrorist dictators by providing material and financial support, aka US Foreign Aid. Thus, with Americans becoming targets (since the money and consent originate from them) and victims, those in our government who sanction and execute these material and financial supports should be held criminally liable. Well, the Supreme Court says so.

The around the clock US media’s coverage of the uprising in Egypt and its domino effect in the region is more and more resembling the Hollywood-esque performance delivered to us during the Iraq war. Remember “Operation Shock & Awe”? Very similar.

Think-Tank experts are popping up at the rate of eight per hour; never mind their agenda-driven foundations and bosses. Academic experts thirsty to dump their 24 letter-per-word academic jargon cache are competing with each other in making Americans dizzier and more confused; never mind their ego-driven hypothesis-based nonsense rarely put to use in real life. A few are talking about “this” as a real opportunity for “that” part of the world to take hold of their destiny and make their dream of change come true. However, not many, if any, are talking about “this” being a good opportunity for “our” part of the world to grasp what has been exercised in “that” part of the world on our behalf, in ourname, and with our money. By talk I mean “straight” talk: free of all the agenda, twists, denials, jargons, mischaracterizations and misinterpretations. If their intentions were noble, these analysts and experts, we’d get the plain truth (however painful or ego-bruising that may be) minus the bull sh..

Let me illustrate what I mean, and please chip in with your straight talk to make this a real straight forward discussion. Let’s talk about US Foreign Aid, and I’ll try to make it brief (“they” may try to persuade you otherwise but trust me, it is not that complicated).

The majority of our people have this romantic notion of what’s called “US Foreign Aid.” When they hear “US Foreign Aid,” they picture hungry naked children with ribs showing, and bowls of Corn Flakes delivered to them by angelic faced men and women wearing bright colored t-shirts with the “US Department of State” logo.

When they read the phrase “US Foreign Aid,” they envision groups of American men and women with rolled up sleeves hammering away: building bridges, digging wells, paving roads…Helping poor nations put infrastructure in place or fight diseases… images similar to what they may have seen in posters and advertisements for volunteer organizations such as the Peace Corp.

When they think of “US Foreign Aid,” they imagine money, their tax dollars, being sent to desperate and needy nations to purchase primary survival ingredients, or, to help with their primary Education… Basically, many Americans think of “US Foreign Aid” as noble intentions and actions made possible by their tax dollars and delivered by their government to help the needy in some unfortunate part of the world.

Believing this false notion has been made easy for our people, thanks to our government, media, and fairytale books subscribed to by many academicians. And let’s admit it, believing this makes people feel good; real good. This unfounded notion of being the good guys makes people feel proud and patriotic, and more importantly, more nationalistic, even more importantly, more governable. This false belief even satisfies our religious and spiritual sides; we, the altruistic Americans, who help the world.

While holding on to this false and romantic notion of “US Foreign Aid,” complications, or, questions bringing on complications, are consciously or subconsciously avoided. Questions like,”hmmmm, let’s see, we have over one trillion dollar deficit, yet we give several billion dollars to Egypt, several billion dollars to Israel, several billion dollars to Pakistan, hundreds of millions of dollars to …then, how do we even afford giving these billions of dollars every year?!” Or, “I don’t understand, nearly fifty percent of our people struggle to obtain healthcare, our veterans can’t get needed medical assistance, many are finding it harder and harder to put aside college funds for their kids, the conditions of our schools are worsening…and we are giving billions of dollars to nations like Israel, Jordan, Pakistan, Georgia, Turkmenistan?! Huh?!

See, those kinds of questions would mess up this entire romantic notion of “US Foreign Aid” held by the majority, and that in turn would put our government in the position of having to explain and present the public with some very basic justification.

Then, there are other questions; the kind that require a little bit higher level of attention, critical thinking, and of course, the ever absent information withheld by the culprit US media. The questions of: Who gets those tax dollars? Why? Who benefits? Why?

Remember, unlike our irate minority group over here, the majority is clueless when it comes to: where is Turkmenistan, and who gets our tax dollars, aka “US Foreign Aid” there? How was our $60 billion aid spent in Egypt? How come Israel gets all these billions every year, when we are pondering about the rising poverty rate in the US and many without healthcare? Why are we bombing Pakistan every day, sending drones after drones to hit them, and then, turning around and giving them billions of dollars every year?

So, with a little bit of common sense and a dash of inquisitiveness we can get the majority to start questioning this entire notion of “US Foreign Aid.” Now imagine the opportunity for some badly needed positive changes here in our country if we had a real media who presented real facts in a straight forward fashion, taking our majority to the next level of consciousness?

Reprinted with permission from BoilingFrogsPost.com.

February 10, 2011

Sibel Edmonds is the founder and president of the National Security Whistleblowers Coalition (NSWBC), a nonprofit organization dedicated to aiding national security whistleblowers. She has appeared on national radio and TV as a commentator on matters related to whistleblowers, national security, and excessive secrecy & classification, and has been featured on CBS 60 Minutes, CNN, MSNBC, NPR, and in the New York Times, Washington Post, Vanity Fair, The American Conservative, and others. Her book, Shooting the Messenger, co-authored with Professor William Weaver, is forthcoming from Kansas University Press in the fall of 2010.

Copyright © 2011 BoilingFrogsPost.com


What Can We Do About Terrorism?

by Harry Browne

The late Harry Browne wrote three articles on terrorism, here collected into one, immediately after 911. At a time when other libertarians stayed silent or championed the regime, he – as usual – spoke truth to power.

The Ground Rules for Fighting Terrorism

This 3-part series will propose the actions I believe our government should take to fight terrorism.

Before looking at those proposals, however, we need to establish some ground rules.

Perfection Isn’t an Option

Rule #1: No solution is going to be perfect.

Our government has created ill will in many parts of the world. It has bullied smaller countries, imposed new governments upon people who didn’t want them, and demanded that other governments do what our government wants. It’s unrealistic to think that there’s anything that can be done now to quickly undo all the ill will.

I have been criticized for dwelling on what our government has done that led to the terrorist attacks. But if we don’t understand what provoked this, we can’t evaluate any response to it – and we can expect that the faulty policies will continue and provoke more such attacks against Americans.

Foreign Policy Is the Issue

Rule #2: It is American foreign policy that has provoked the attacks, not anything inherent in Muslim fundamentalism.

There are hundreds of millions of Muslims in the world who don’t believe in killing non-Muslims. In fact, Muslims have been killed in Arab terrorist attacks, just as non-Muslims have.

In an interview conducted by John Miller for Esquire in February 1999, Osama bin Laden said: “This is my message to the American people: to look for a serious government that looks out for their interests and does not attack others, their lands, or their honor. And my word to American journalists is not to ask why we did that but ask what their government has done that forced us to defend ourselves.”

The fact that bin Laden uses bad means to achieve his ends doesn’t excuse our own government’s mistakes; nor does it justify our government doing the same things he does.

Bombing Doesn’t Work

Rule #3: Bombing foreign countries doesn’t end terrorism, it provokes it.

Our government has bombed Libya, Iraq, the Sudan, and Afghanistan, among other countries, supposedly to teach terrorists a lesson. But the bombings haven’t caused terrorists or foreign governments to change their policies.

This Is a Crime, Not War

Rule #4: The terrorist attacks are a criminal matter, not a war.

War is by definition an armed conflict between governments. No government has claimed responsibility for the September 11 attacks, and no government has been so accused.

Calling the present situation a war is an excuse to impose wartime policies against Americans and foreigners – including violations of the Bill of Rights and killing foreign civilians.

Because the September attacks were a crime, the government’s job is to locate and bring to trial any perpetrators who didn’t die in the attacks. If some of them are located in foreign countries, our government should request extradition – not threaten to bomb the foreign country if we don’t get our way.

If not all the criminals are found and brought to trial, it doesn’t mean that bombing innocent people would have brought the criminals to justice.

Reverse Positions

Rule #5: If you think you or America is entitled to something, reverse the positions and see how you’d react.

If Afghanistan doesn’t turn bin Laden over to our government, ask yourself whether you’d want your government to turn you over to the Iranian government if it accused you of a crime.

If you don’t think that American troops in almost a hundred foreign countries are a source of resentment, ask yourself how you’d feel if Chinese troops were stationed in your city.

If you believe America has a right to bomb foreign countries for the actions of a few, ask yourself whether you’d want foreign governments to bomb your city because of something Bill Clinton did. (Haven’t we already established that the terrorists were wrong to kill innocent civilians because of their hatred for American foreign policy?)

Government Is Incompetent

Rule #6: Government does not do anything well – even those functions delegated to it by the Constitution.

The government has the constitutional authority to operate a Post Office. But if it’s urgent that a package get to the other side of America by tomorrow morning, will you trust the constitutional Post Office or will you use Federal Express?

Don’t assume that just because the government has the legal authority to do something that it will actually succeed. So be careful what you ask for.

What Is the Object?

Rule #7: There’s no way to eliminate all terrorism in the world.

Terrorists have existed since Biblical times. There will always be such criminals – people who will kill innocent bystanders to make a social or political statement, or to bring pressure on a government to change its policies.

Saying that terrorism will be eradicated is not only unrealistic, it is asinine. It indicates that the speaker shouldn’t be trusted in anything else he says.

What is realistic is the goal of reducing considerably the threat of terrorism against the U.S.

In my next two articles, I’ll present proposals for achieving this.

Do We Choose Death or Peace?

“All that’s necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do the wrong thing.”

~ Lawrence Block, The Evil Men Do

Americans have been sold a fantasy by their government and by the “experts” on television.

The fantasy is that our government will flex its muscles overseas, make demands, kill a lot of people, demonstrate that we don’t tolerate terrorism, “bring the terrorists to justice,” and end terrorism forever.

But for decades, our government has been flexing its muscles overseas, making demands, killing people, and teaching terrorists a lesson. And what did it achieve?

It brought about the deaths of 3,000 Americans on September 11.

Those policies by our government have brought us to where there now are only two choices for the future. And you may not like either one of them.

The Choice for War

Choice #1 is to bomb Afghanistan “back to the stone age,” and maybe Iraq, and maybe any other country our government accuses of harboring terrorists. (Except the U.S., of course, where many of the terrorists lived safely for several years.)

This choice won’t eliminate all the terrorists. It probably won’t eliminate any of them. But it will make the politicians feel good. And it will satisfy the understandable lust for vengeance that so many Americans feel right now.

But not only will foreigners die by the thousands, it will feed the desire for vengeance on the part of the terrorists – and inspire other people to help them. The result? . . .

  • We will be attacked on planes, in subways, buildings, schools, sports arenas – in any place innocent Americans can be cornered like lab rats.
  • Our economy will sink further and further downward as people become more and more afraid to lead normal lives.
  • We will see Americans die from bombs, from biological warfare, from assassinations, and from causes we can’t even imagine now.

Our government will react by escalating the violence still further. And that will cause the terrorists to escalate their violence. And with every escalation, more of our friends and relatives will die – and more people around the world will come to hate America.

Choice #1 doesn’t lead to anything very pretty. It will be disastrous for America. But that’s where our politicians are taking us right now.

The Choice for Peace

Choice #2 is for our President to be a man and acknowledge to the world that our government has made some horrible mistakes in the past – but that our policy is changing.

He must tell the world that our government will no longer impose its will on places like Iraq, Serbia, Afghanistan, the Middle East, Panama, Guatemala, Nicaragua, and Colombia. He must say that we’re returning to the peaceful foreign policy that America followed for its first century – until President McKinley took the country into the Spanish-American War and down the road to empire.

Americans are loved all over the world for what they’ve done – producing low-cost food and medicines, great entertainment, and the kind of voluntary charity that only free and prosperous people can bestow.

At the same time, foreigners hate our government because it uses “foreign aid” and military muscle to impose its way upon the rest of the world.

Our politicians say that most of the world supports the American military campaign. But what they mean is that our government is bribing foreign governments to support the military campaign. Meanwhile, a recent Gallup poll revealed that individual human beings in 35 major countries oppose American military retaliation by better than 3 to 1.

If American leaders would call a halt to the violence, condemn the terrorist attack, and condemn the killing of innocent foreigners by previous U.S. administrations, there’s a very good chance the cycle of death and destruction could end immediately.

We’re at a Crossroads

Can I guarantee that Choice #2 will lead to peace? Of course not, but it is very likely to do so. And what terrorism remains will be relatively minor compared to the awful future we face now.

And I can assure you that Choice #1 will lead to the deaths of many more Americans – most likely, tens of thousands (or hundreds of thousands) of Americans, in ugly and tragic ways.

It’s very possible the terrorists who weren’t killed in the September 11 attacks will never be caught – whether we pick Choice #1 or Choice #2. So let’s focus instead on ensuring that such a thing never happens again.

But first we must recognize that the fantasy our government is peddling now – of bringing peace by killing foreigners – is just that: a fantasy.

We have only two choices – death or peace. It’s unfortunate that it will take far more courage to choose peace.

Preventing Future Terrorism

Government’s role shouldn’t be to police the world – or even to win wars. Government’s role should be to keep us out of wars – to protect us from foreign enemies, not create them.

In fact the main reason most people tolerate high taxes and invasions of our liberty is because they hope the government will protect them from domestic criminals and foreign problems. And yet, despite a $2 trillion budget, our government protects us from neither.

A libertarian foreign policy would rest on a simple principle:

We’re always ready to defend ourselves, but we threaten no one.

Such a foreign policy should have four elements.

1. Non-Interference

Our government should never interfere in other countries’ disputes, never arm nor aid foreign governments, and never give terrorists a reason to pressure our government.

When the politicians drag us off to someone else’s war, they offer plenty of reasons. The reasons usually include: stopping the conflict from spreading, heading off the emergence of a new Hitler, protecting our allies, doing the moral thing, and ending violations of human rights.

But rarely do they come even close to achieving any of the goals.

Any American who wants to volunteer to fight for a foreign government or revolutionary movement, to negotiate its peace, or to send money to help it should be free to do so. (It is currently illegal for you to help a foreign government or revolutionary movement.) But our government should stay out of such battles.

2. No Foreign Aid or Military Assistance

The Constitution grants our government no authority to use your money for the support of foreign governments.

Not only is it unconstitutional, it is unfair by almost any standard. As Fred Smith pointed out, foreign aid taxes poor people in rich countries for the benefit of rich people in poor countries.

Foreign aid originally was justified as a way of arming countries against Communist aggression. But Cuba, China, and Vietnam all became Communist after receiving American money and weapons.

And so much money and military hardware have been given to Israel’s enemies that it allows the politicians to say we have to give massive aid to Israel to keep it from being destroyed.

Every American should be free to send money or weapons to any government in the world. But you shouldn’t be taxed for the benefit of any foreign government.

3. Security against Attack

How could the bad people of the world conquer America?

They’d have to pulverize American cities to the point that we submit to being occupied – or they’d have to threaten to do that.

In 1983 Ronald Reagan made the most sensible military suggestion of the past 50 years – that America should protect itself against missile attacks. Unfortunately, he gave the job to the Department of Defense – which is really the Post Office in fatigues. And so 18 years later we’re no closer to being protected than we were in 1983.

We should rely as little as possible on politics and bureaucracy to achieve anything. The government should simply post a reward – say, $25 billion – to go to the first private company that produces a functioning, fool-proof missile defense. With such an offer, we’d probably have a missile defense within five years.

Will that make us perfectly secure? Of course not. Nothing will.

But it will make us far safer than we are today and eliminate a principal excuse for meddling in other countries’ affairs.

4. Target the Aggressors, Not the Innocent

Even with a missile defense, suppose America truly were threatened by a foreign ruler.

A Libertarian President would target the aggressor himself. He wouldn’t order bombers to kill the aggressor’s innocent subjects.

He would warn the ruler that an actual attack would trigger the posting of a reward of, say, $100 million for the person who kills the ruler. Everyone would be eligible to collect the reward – including the ruler’s guards and wives.

This response would spare both innocent foreigners and innocent Americans. Only those who try for the reward would be at risk. Americans wouldn’t be drafted to fight and die invading a foreign country – nor taxed to pay for volunteers.

This isn’t a way to force dictators to change their spots or submit to U.S. dictation. It’s only a way to discourage a direct attack on America. If the dictator withdrew his threat, the U.S. would withdraw the reward.

With a libertarian foreign policy, it’s unlikely any foreign ruler would threaten us. So such a reward probably would never be posted. But if a foreign ruler were tempted to threaten us, the fear of assassination would be more of a deterrence than the threat to bomb his civilian subjects.

If you don’t believe assassination is a nice way to handle this, what’s the alternative? Would you rather kill thousands of innocent foreigners and innocent Americans?

Peace for All Time

When America can defend itself against missile attack, the politicians will lose their best excuse for butting into the affairs of other countries and making demands upon you.

And when our government no longer interferes in other countries with military adventures and foreign aid, foreign terrorists will have little reason to threaten your city.

If some foreign leader still tried to make trouble for America, we should target the leader for assassination, not target innocent civilians for bombing. But an American government that minded its own business and had a secure defense isn’t likely to need to resort to assassination.

The policies I’ve outlined are the only ones that will produce a strong national defense, instead of a strong national offense, and leave terrorists with no reason to attack us.

Once they’re in place, we must find a way to keep politicians away from loaded weapons forever.

Here’s a start – a proposed constitutional amendment:

Section 1. The United States shall be at war only after a declaration of war, naming the specific enemy nations, is approved by the President and by a two-thirds vote of the eligible members in both houses of Congress.

Section 2. The only members of the House of Representatives and the Senate eligible to vote on a declaration of war are those who are between the ages of 18 and 35, or who have children, grandchildren, or great-grandchildren between those ages.

Section 3. In the absence of a Congressional declaration of war, the President may deploy the military to repel an invasion of United States territory, but may not deploy troops or engage in hostilities outside the United States.

Section 4. The United States shall enter into no treaty with any nation or organization if such treaty could oblige the United States to be at war without a declaration of war by Congress, and the United States shall not be bound to engage in war by any action taken by any organization of which they are a member.

Section 5. Except in time of war, as specified in Sections 1 and 2, the United States will provide no weapons or other resources to foreign governments, will engage in no military action outside the borders of the United States, and shall deploy no military personnel or weapons outside the boundaries of the United States except that at any one time up to one thousand members of the military may be outside the United States for no longer than thirty days.

Section 6. Upon any violation of this article by the President, Congress shall institute impeachment proceedings within 14 days.

Sections 3 and 5 don’t preclude a missile defense or any other kind of defense of this nation. It requires only that the President wait before attacking a foreign nation until a declaration of war has been issued. Even if some incapacity prevents Congress from making a declaration quickly, America could still defend itself. It just couldn’t attack anyone else.

War is too dangerous an enterprise to leave in the hands of people who routinely lie in their own self-interest.

I welcome any suggestions for making the Amendment more precise.

The late Harry Browne, the author of Why Government Doesn’t Work and many other books, was the Libertarian presidential candidate in 1996 and 2000. See his website.

Copyright © 2001 Harry Browne

Harry Browne Archives


Original Article Here: http://www.lewrockwell.com/browne/browne63.html

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Terrorists Dumping Poisons Into US Food Supply

If you’re a terrorist looking to poison the U.S. food supply, get in line, buddy! The food companies have beat you to it! (Ed)

YEP!

Link to Article: http://www.naturalnews.com/030811_terrorists_food_supply.html

`~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Muslims Are Not The Enemy!

I am so tired of people, especially supposed believers in Yahshua, saying that all muslims are our enemies. Look folks Messiah came for everyone. We need to accept that  He came for them as much as us. They are not all terrorists. as a matter of fact only a tiny portion are involved in terrorism. Although the American governments’ actions against innocents in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen and who knows where else is contributing to the recruiting efforts of the few.

That is not terrorism though. That is defending your homeland and people. Open your eyes people. You are being duped. While the elitists continue to enslave you they keep you focused on a contrived enemy. One day you will wake up and realize who the real enemies are. But IT WILL BE TOO LATE…

For more information on who the real terrorists are listen and watch to some of William Cooper’s audio on this blog as well as Dr. Bill Deagle’s videos

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Al Quada-The Russian Connection

Recently, a friend forwarded a very good article that was at the site Financialsense.com that spoke about the link between the former Soviet Union and Al Quada. While I suspect his information is correct there is a bigger, even darker picture behind the scenes that goes beyond political and ideological views. You can read that article here: http://tinyurl.com/2buyzvk

My own comments which I emailed to my friend follow:


“While I agree that the Russians are probably involved is these things, I am equally certain that the US, or at least elements of it, are just as deeply involved. I tend to try to look beyond leaders of nations to those pulling the strings behind them.
No government today exists without the support and control of these dark forces behind the scenes. Whether one thinks of the Bilderburg group, trilateral comission, illuminati or others there are forces that go beyond the political and ideological differences of various governments.
All government is evil. Government exists to control resources and people. Government is a tool of the enemy and it’s elitist puppets to destroy God‘s beloved. Destruction of all human life is the end goal. Except, of course, the enemy’s servants who have sold themselves over to him, (they are deceived into believing they are an exception to his hatred of humanity).
It is easy for us, and I do mean myself as well, to get caught up in ideology. The fact is that whether Republican or Democrat, Communist or Monarchist all of them are evil. Obama and Bush are equally evil. Every president we have ever had was controlled behind the scenes.
Obama is only able to do the things he has done as a result of Bush’s efforts to have Congress put in place laws, (patriot act) that allow the Executive branch to spy on and coerce American citizens. 9/11 was a strategic plan used by elitist forces to bring fear to Americans so they would allow more control over their daily lives.
Terror has been used from the beginning by governments to convince the masses to allow themselves to be, “protected”. It is as old as government itself. There must always be an enemy for government to exist.
Whether the enemy og The Greeks, the Persians (Iran), or our own, the British, The South,  Hitler, or the Soviets, ad infinitum. If there is an enemy, those evil germans, those japs, those russians, those muslims…then we can rally the patriotism of the citizens to allow themselves to be taxed. “We must support our troops. After all they are keeping the world safe for us”. We, as good, patriotic citizens will allow the FBI, NSA and CIA to spy on our private lives to “protect us fom terrorism“.
After all “if you have nothing to hide it should be OK for the government to spy on you”. Sorry, but there are inalienble rights given by God that should not be taken from me by any government.
I have come to the conclusion that nearly everyone elected and most beaureacrats should be tried and imprisoned for treason. Most swear to uphold the Constitution and defend it from enemies both foreign and domestic. They are doing neither and are, in most cases, actually domestic enemies themselves and should, by revolution, preferably a non-violent one, be overthrown and at the least imprisoned where their treasons can be proven.
After that we go after the people and forces behind them. We are no less slaves today than Israel was in Egypt. We must cry out to Daddy in repentance for participating in the enemy’s plans to enslave us. We must ask Him to help us to let go of our other gods. To forgive us for trusting in man’s ways of government in place of His government. We would rather let men rule over us than obey The Creator.
As believers we have allowed the majority to decide what is best for us instead of God. Just as Israel, we prefer to be like the other people around us and have trusted in their ways of deciding what is right instead of hearing from the Holy Spirit. Until the Body of Messiah repents of this, and we will, there is great difficulty coming. Since we are in Egypt we will suffer along with them, at least initially, until we are willing to truly come out from among them.”

It Is Official: The US Is a Police State

by Paul Craig Roberts

Recently by Paul Craig Roberts: The True Cost of the War

On September 24, Jason Ditz reported on Antiwar.com that “the FBI is confirming that this morning they began a number of raids against the homes of antiwar activists in Illinois, Minneapolis, Michigan, and North Carolina, claiming that they are ‘seeking evidence relating to activities concerning the material support of terrorism.’”

Now we know what Homeland Security (sic) secretary Janet Napolitano meant when she said on September 10: “The old view that ‘if we fight the terrorists abroad, we won’t have to fight them here’ is just that – the old view.” The new view, Napolitano said, is “to counter violent extremism right here at home.”

“Violent extremism” is one of those undefined police state terms that will mean whatever the government wants it to mean. In this morning’s FBI’s foray into the homes of American citizens of conscience, it means antiwar activists, whose activities are equated with “the material support of terrorism,” just as conservatives equated Vietnam era anti-war protesters with giving material support to communism.

Anti-war activist Mick Kelly whose home was raided, sees the FBI raids as harassment to intimidate those who organize war protests. I wonder if Kelly is underestimating the threat. The FBI’s own words clearly indicate that the federal police agency and the judges who signed the warrants do not regard antiwar protesters as Americans exercising their Constitutional rights, but as unpatriotic elements offering material support to terrorism.

“Material support” is another of those undefined police state terms. In this context the term means that Americans who fail to believe their government’s lies and instead protest its policies, are supporting their government’s declared enemies and, thus, are not exercising their civil liberties but committing treason.

As this initial FBI foray is a softening up move to get the public accustomed to the idea that the real terrorists are their fellow citizens here at home, Kelly will get off this time. But next time the FBI will find emails on his computer from a “terrorist group” set up by the CIA that will incriminate him. Under the practices put in place by the Bush and Obama regimes, and approved by corrupt federal judges, protesters who have been compromised by fake terrorist groups can be declared “enemy combatants” and sent off to Egypt, Poland, or some other corrupt American puppet state – Canada perhaps – to be tortured until confession is forthcoming that antiwar protesters and, indeed, every critic of the US government, are on Osama bin Laden’s payroll.

Almost every Republican and conservative and, indeed, the majority of Americans will fall for this, only to find, later, that it is subversive to complain that their Social Security was cut in the interest of the war against Iran or some other demonized entity, or that they couldn’t have a Medicare operation because the wars in Central Asia and South America required the money.

Americans are the most gullible people who ever existed. They tend to support the government instead of the Constitution, and almost every Republican and conservative regards civil liberty as a coddling device that encourages criminals and terrorists.

The US media, highly concentrated in violation of the American principle of a diverse and independent media, will lend its support to the witch hunts that will close down all protests and independent thought in the US over the next few years. As the Nazi leader Joseph Goebbels said, “think of the press as a great keyboard on which the Government can play.”

An American Police State was inevitable once Americans let “their” government get away with 9/11. Americans are too gullible, too uneducated, and too jingoistic to remain a free people. As another Nazi leader Herman Goering said, “The people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. Tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peace-makers for lack of patriotism and for exposing the country to danger.”

This is precisely what the Bush and Obama regimes have done. America, as people of my generation knew it, no longer exists.

September 25, 2010

Paul Craig Roberts [send him mail], a former Assistant Secretary of the US Treasury and former associate editor of the Wall Street Journal, has been reporting shocking cases of prosecutorial abuse for two decades. A new edition of his book, The Tyranny of Good Intentions, co-authored with Lawrence Stratton, a documented account of how Americans lost the protection of law, has been released by Random House.

Copyright © 2010 Paul Craig Roberts

The Best of Paul Craig Roberts

Related Video




Hamilton and Kean Call for Domestic Terrorism Agency

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
September 10, 2010

The federal government needs an agency specifically charged with identifying radicalization or working to prevent terrorist recruitment of U.S. citizens and residents, according to a report issued by Tom Kean, Lee Hamilton, and the Washington-based Bipartisan Policy Center’s National Security Preparedness Group. Kean and Hamilton led the effort to blame cave-dwelling Muslims for the attacks of September 11, 2001.

ham-kean.jpg
Tom Kean and Lee Hamilton led the effort to blame cave-dwelling Muslims for the attacks on September 11, 2001.

The Kean and Hamilton report on domestic terror and “radicalization” dovetails with an effort by the Obama administration. Obama’s national security strategy includes a “new interagency effort that brings together key stakeholders” and continued “outreach to communities across the country,” according to Ben Rhodes, the White House’s deputy national security adviser.

“Our long-held belief that homegrown terrorism couldn’t happen here has thus created a situation where we are today stumbling blindly through the legal, operational and organizational minefield of countering terrorist radicalization and recruitment occurring in the United States,” claims the report, which cites Anwar al-Awlaki as an example of the “Americanization” of terrorism. Other examples cited include the “failed” Times Square non-bombing, the Christmas day fizzled underwear non-bombing, and the highly suspicious Fort Hood shootings.

As Webster Tarpley notes, the “fiery double agent” and “imam-provocateur” al-Awlaki played a key role in entrapping patsies in the Fort Dix and Toronto non-terror cases. His email exchange with the Fort Hood shooter, Army Major Nidal Hasan, was not considered important enough to warrant action by the government.

The report also mentions David Headley, a man of “conflicted loyalties” (in other words, he worked for an intelligence agency) who was linked to the the Lashkar-e-Taiba attacks on Mumbai in late 2008 that killed more than 160. Lashkar-e-Taiba is a creation of Pakistan’s ISI, the intelligence agency that collaborated with the CIA to create the Taliban and the Afghan Mujahideen, later to become al-Qaeda.

The FBI has worked to “reach out” to Somali communities “in an effort to counter the radicalization of the youth,” the Associated Press reports. In 2009, however, a coalition of Arab and Muslim groups said the FBI was infiltrating mosques and using agents provocateurs. “It is exactly what the FBI did in the ‘60s and ‘70s under its discredited and outlawed COINTELPRO policy. It seeks to disrupt, discredit and criminalize the Muslim community,” said Jim Lafferty, the executive director of the National Lawyers Guild in Los Angeles.

The FBI is notorious for recruiting and setting up patsies who are then used by the government and corporate media as examples of over-blown domestic terrorism.

The prospect of scary Muslim suicide bombers — never mind the absurdity of the Christmas day and Times Square non-bombings — is being used to go after the real threat to the government: patriotic Americans. As the Department of Homeland Security report on “right-wing extremism” leaked to the media last year reveals, the government considers constitutionalists and returning veterans the primary terrorist threat, not Muslims. The corporate media has led the effort to demonize the Tea Party movement as violent white supremacists while portraying coverage of supposed Muslim terror as Islamophobia.

Fresh food that lasts from eFoods Direct (Ad)

Any “new interagency effort” to combat domestic terrorism — in large part contrived by the government and instigated by FBI agents provocateurs — will primarily concentrate not on clueless Muslims and wanna-be al-Qaeda shoe bombers, but the American people.

According to the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI, it is not the Koran that leads to “radicalization,” but the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the will of an increasing number of politically active Americans demanding the nation return to its roots as a constitutional republic.

Phony Muslim terror — invariably snipped in the bud and then blown out of proportion for propaganda purposes — will be used as an excuse to create yet another bureaucratic agency assigned to attack the American people and put the finishing touches on a police state control grid.

Kurt Nimmo edits Infowars.com. He is the author of Another Day in the Empire: Life In Neoconservative America.


%d bloggers like this: