Obama Executive ‘Order’: US can seize any person, any resource, any time

Carl Herman
Washington’s Blog
Monday, March 19, 2012

“A mere demarcation on parchment of the constitutional limits (of government) is not a sufficient guard against those encroachments which lead to a tyrannical concentration of all the powers of government in the same hands.” – James Madison, Federalist Paper #48, 1788.

President Obama signed an Executive Order for “National Defense” yesterday that claims executive authority to seize all US resources and persons, including during peacetime, for self-declared “national defense.”

“American exceptionalism” is the belief that a 200+ year-old parchment in the National Archives has magical powers to somehow guarantee limited government from 1% tyranny, despite the specific and clear warnings of the US Founders, despite world history of repeated oligarchic/1% tyranny claiming to be for the “good of the people,” and despite US history’s descent

into vicious psychopathy (short version here: US war history in 2 minutes) hidden in plain view with paper-thin corporate media propaganda.

I don’t know about you, but both my grandfathers were in the US military during the gruesome WW1. My father, father-in-law, and only uncle were in a brutal WW2. Both wars were functions of colonialism; a 1%’s vicious and rapacious greed.

Now, we’re all looking at WW3 that includes official policy and dark rhetoric for US first-strike use of nuclear weapons on Iran. This, after multiple current lie-started and treaty-violating wars surrounding Iran, increased US military preparations, multiple war-propagandizing US political “leaders,” and recent history of US overthrowing Iran’s democracy and 35 consecutive years of US war on Iran that killed over one million Iranians.

I don’t know about you, but I’m teaching the obvious crimes in war and money, destruction of Constitutional Rights rights (see specific links below), and asking students (of all ages) what they see to do about these clear facts. The first answer people see is to help people get over their “American exceptionalism” to recognize these massive crimes, and demand arrests of the obvious criminal “leadership.”

I don’t know about you, but I refuse to be silent in face of lying and criminal government policies that annually murder millions, harm billions, and loot trillions of the 99%’s dollars.

What will you do?

Here is the US government claiming it can Constitutionally assassinate Americans upon the non-reviewable dictate of the leader, as these criminals take psychopathic steps to murder Americans who expose their crimes.

Here is NDAA 2012 where US government claims it can Constitutionally disappear Americans and then appoint a tribunal with death sentence authority (unless unlimited detention is their choice). Here is the 2006 Military Commissions Act that says the same. This is fascist terrorism to silence Americans from communicating that the 1% are War Criminals to arrest NOW.

Here is US government claiming it can Constitutionally control-drown (waterboard) anyone they declare a “terrorist” as a 1% terror-tactic to silence Americans.

Again, what will you do?

 

Obama Executive Order Paves the Way for Nationalization of Economy

Government greases the skids for America’s Greece-style meltdown

Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones
Infowars.com
Monday, March 19, 2012

The Obama administration’s move to update an executive order to allow the government to seize control of virtually every aspect of society in both emergency and non-emergency situations lays the groundwork for the future nationalization of the U.S. economy.

Entitled “National Defense Resources Preparedness,” Obama signed the executive order late Friday afternoon. Such timing is normally a deliberate ploy to prevent a controversial issue from being picked up by the news cycle. Recall that Obama signed the highly contentious National Defense Authorization Act on New Year’s Eve.

Under section 201, the EO allows the federal government to take control of;

Sec. 201. Priorities and Allocations Authorities. (a) The authority of the President conferred by section 101 of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2071, to require acceptance and priority performance of contracts or orders (other than contracts of employment) to promote the national defense over performance of any other contracts or orders, and to allocate materials, services, and facilities as deemed necessary or appropriate to promote the national defense, is delegated to the following agency heads:

(1) the Secretary of Agriculture with respect to food resources, food resource facilities, livestock resources, veterinary resources, plant health resources, and the domestic distribution of farm equipment and commercial fertilizer;

(2) the Secretary of Energy with respect to all forms of energy;

(3) the Secretary of Health and Human Services with respect to health resources;

(4) the Secretary of Transportation with respect to all forms of civil transportation;

(5) the Secretary of Defense with respect to water resources; and

(6) the Secretary of Commerce with respect to all other materials, services, and facilities, including construction materials.

Although the executive order is an update to the almost identical EO 12919, which was signed by Bill Clinton in 1994, in Section 201(b) of the new version, the words “under both emergency and non-emergency conditions” have been added.

In other words, the federal government is claiming the power to seize totalitarian control of the whole economy – nationalization über alles.

The administration’s move to allow an executive order designed for a time of national crisis to be applied in non-emergency peace time represents a significant ratcheting up on the richter scale of martial law, a measurement Infowars has been upgrading since the late 1990′s.

Just because Obama’s predecessor’s like Clinton and Bush did not use this executive order doesn’t mean it’s not anathema to the U.S. constitution. Obama may not use it either, but just as the President has promised to not use the ‘kidnapping’ provisions of the NDAA which his administration pushed for, that does nothing to prevent a future administration from indefinitely detaining American citizens under the law.

America is already under a state of martial law, but many have been conditioned to accept it because the degree to which it has been implemented has not yet reached its maximum. You don’t have to witness a Waco siege every day with tanks and the government killing citizens to be under a state of martial law.

– We already have the executive branch claiming the power to have Americans abducted and imprisoned without trial under the NDAA.

– We already have the executive branch claiming the power to assassinate American citizens with no legal process whatsoever.

– We already have checkpoints manned by TSA goons as well as other militarized forces spreading across America.

– We already have the Pentagon claiming it doesn’t have to even recognize Congress to launch wars and that the only superior body it has to answer to is the United Nations.

– We already have the Department of Defense characterizing protest as “low level terrorism” while the federal government is busy labeling banal activities and behavior as indicative of terrorism.

Those five things alone illustrate beyond any conceivable doubt that America is already under a degree of martial law.

Martial law is primarily used as a tool of the elite to rob the people blind. Once the next big crisis hits, the degree to which America is under martial law will increase once again.

The fact that this new executive order greases the skids for the government to nationalize the entire economy, placing the means of production of virtually everything under the control of the state, is yet another sign that the feds are preparing for America’s descent into Greece-style austerity hell.

Just as Greece and many countries in Europe have been overthrown by unelected technocrats who have seized control of their economies, America is being primed for the same final act of complete usurpation.

Fifth Amendment Dead in America

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
March 9, 2012

Earlier in the week, Obama’s attorney general admitted that the Fifth Amendment is a dead letter and the president can kill anybody he wants without due process. “In this hour of danger, we simply cannot afford to wait until deadly plans are carried out, and we will not,” Eric Holder said during a speech at Northwestern University’s law school in Chicago.

 

FBI Director Robert Mueller on Wednesday came off as a constitutional illiterate when he said he would have to check with the Justice Department to see if Holder’s criteria for summary execution was permitted on U.S. soil.

“I have to go back. Uh, I’m not certain whether that was addressed or not,” Mueller told Rep. Tom Graves.

Constitutional scholar Francis A. Boyle of the University of Illinois Law School recently put the issue into perspective. “The U.S. government has now established a ‘death list’ for U.S. citizens abroad akin to those established by Latin American dictatorships during their so-called dirty wars,” he told IPS.

Our version of a Latin American fascist dictatorship with Generalissimo Obama presiding has just about finished off the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The NDAA and a long list of constitutional violations predating the Patriot Act are now coming to a head.

After government invests itself with such self-proclaimed power, the next step is usually the disappearance of political enemies and mass graves.

 

FBI Director: I Have to Check to See If Obama Has the Right to Assassinate Americans On U.S. Soil

Washington’s Blog
March 9, 2012

Yes, Obama Claims Power to Kill Americans on U.S. Soil

Fox News reports:

FBI Director Robert Mueller on Wednesday said he would have to go back and check with the Department of Justice whether Attorney General Eric Holder’s “[criteria] for the targeted killing of Americans also applied to Americans inside the U.S.

***

“I have to go back. Uh, I’m not certain whether that was addressed or not,” Mueller said when asked by Rep. Tom Graves, R-Ga., about a distinction between domestic and foreign targeting

Graves followed up asking whether “from a historical perspective,” the federal government has “the ability to kill a U.S. citizen on United States soil or just overseas.”

“I’m going to defer that to others in the Department of Justice,” Mueller replied.

Indeed, Holder’s Monday speech at Northwestern University seemed to leave the door open.

Constitutional expert Jonathan Turley writes:

One would hope that the FBI Director would have a handle on a few details guiding his responsibilities, including whether he can kill citizens without a charge or court order.

***

He appeared unclear whether he had the power under the Obama Kill Doctrine or, in the very least, was unwilling to discuss that power. For civil libertarians, the answer should be easy: “Of course, I do not have that power under the Constitution.”

***

The claim that they are following self-imposed “limits” which are meaningless — particularly in a system that is premised on the availability of judicial review. The Administration has never said that the [Law Of Armed Conflicts] does not allow the same powers to be used in the United States. It would be an easy thing to state. Holder can affirmatively state that the President’s inherent power to kill citizens exists only outside of the country. He can then explain where those limits are found in the Constitution and why they do not apply equally to a citizen in London or Berlin. Holder was not describing a constitutional process of review. They have dressed up a self-imposed review of a unilateral power as due process. Any authoritarian measure can be dressed up as carefully executed according to balancing tests, but that does not constitute any real constitutional analysis. It is at best a loose analogy to constitutional analysis.

When reporters asked the Justice Department about Mueller’s apparent uncertainty, they responded that the answer is “pretty straightforward.” They then offered an evasive response. They simply said (as we all know) that “[t]he legal framework (Holder) laid out applies to U.S. citizens outside of U.S.” We got that from the use of the word “abroad.” However, the question is how this inherent authority is limited as it has been articulated by Holder and others. What is the limiting principle? If the President cannot order the killing of a citizen in the United States, Holder can simply say so (and inform the FBI Director who would likely be involved in such a killing). In doing so, he can then explain the source of that limitation and why it does not apply with citizens in places like London. What we have is a purely internal review that balances the practicality of arrest and the urgency of the matter in the view of the President. Since the panel is the extension of his authority, he can presumably disregard their recommendations or order a killing without their approval. Since the Administration has emphasized that the “battlefield” in this “war on terror” is not limited to a particular country, the assumption is that the President’s authority is commensurate with that threat or limitless theater of operation. Indeed, the Justice Department has repeatedly stated that the war is being fought in the United States as well as other nations.

Thus, Mueller’s uncertainty is understandable . . . and dangerous. The Framers created a system of objective due process in a system of checks and balances. Obama has introduced an undefined and self-imposed system of review ….

Before you assume that Mueller’s comments are being blown out of proportion, remember that it has been clear for some time that Obama has claimed the power to assassinate U.S. citizens within the U.S. As we pointed out in December:

 

I’ve previously noted that Obama says that he can assassinate American citizens living on U.S. soil.

This admittedly sounds over-the-top. But one of the nation’s top constitutional and military law experts – Jonathan Turley – agrees.

***

Turley said [on C-Span]:

President Obama has just stated a policy that he can have any American citizen killed without any charge, without any review, except his own. If he’s satisfied that you are a terrorist, he says that he can kill you anywhere in the world including in the United States.

Two of his aides just … reaffirmed they believe that American citizens can be killed on the order of the President anywhere including the United States.

You’ve now got a president who says that he can kill you on his own discretion. He can jail you indefinitely on his own discretion

***

I don’t think the the Framers ever anticipated that [the American people would be so apathetic]. They assumed that people would hold their liberties close, and that they wouldn’t relax …

Indeed, given that virtually any American could be considered a suspected terrorist these days, no one is safe from an all-powerful president’s whims.

As I noted in another context, circular reasoning provides all the justification needed:

 

The government’s indefinite detention policy – stripped of it’s spin – is literally insane, and based on circular reasoning. Stripped of p.r., this is the actual policy:

• If you are an enemy combatant or a threat to national security, we will detain you indefinitely until the war is over

• It is a perpetual war, which will never be over

• Neither you or your lawyers have a right to see the evidence against you, nor to face your accusers

• But trust us, we know you are an enemy combatant and a threat to national security

• We may torture you (and try to cover up the fact that you were tortured), because you are an enemy combatant, and so basic rights of a prisoner guaranteed by the Geneva Convention don’t apply to you

• Since you admitted that you’re a bad guy (while trying to tell us whatever you think we want to hear to make the torture stop), it proves that we should hold you in indefinite detention

See how that works?

And – given that U.S. soldiers admit that if they accidentally kill innocent Iraqis and Afghanis, they then “drop” automatic weapons near their body so they can pretend they were militants – it is unlikely that the government would ever admit that an American citizen it assassinated was an innocent civilian who has nothing at all to do with terrorism.

 

Virginia State Senate Passes Bill Forbidding Indefinite Detention of Americans

‘Council of Governors’ member McDonnell could try to sabotage anti-NDAA law

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
Friday, March 9, 2012

The Virginia Senate has passed a law that forbids authorities in the state from using the ‘indefinite detention’ provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act against Americans, but whether or not Governor Bob McDonnell will sign it remains to be seen given the fact that he is a member of Barack Obama’s infamous ‘Council of Governors’, whose role it is to increase military involvement in domestic affairs.

Delegate Bob Marshall discusses his bill and Governor McDonnell’s attempts to sabotage it.

“Today, the Virginia State Senate nearly unanimously passed my bill, HB 1160, to prevent Virginia’s state and local government agencies from cooperating with the federal government in the indefinite detention of Virginians under the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 (“NDAA”). I am grateful that the vote in the Senate to accede to the bill as passed by the House of Delegates was 37-1,” said a statement by Delegate Bob Marshall, who was the driving force behind the bill.

“Congress, by including this provision in a must pass bill affecting our Armed Forces, made a terrible mistake in empowering this or any future President and the military to arrest and detain American citizens indefinitely, without charges, without the chance to confront their accusers, without legal counsel, and without a trial.”

Having already passed the Virginia House by a vote of 96-4 last month, the final bill will be sent to Governor Bob McDonnell. However, McDonnell has already attempted to sabotage the legislation using “secretive, backdoor” tactics, according to Marshall, so whether he agrees to sign the bill without trying to weaken its language remains to be seen.

The fact that McDonnell was included on President Obama’s infamous ‘Council of Governors’ probably explains why he has been so reticent to support the bill.

The executive order which established the Council of Governors (PDF), created a body of ten state governors directly appointed by Obama to work with the federal government to help advance the “synchronization and integration of State and Federal military activities in the United States”.

In other words, McDonnell is a key figure in the effort to expand military involvement in domestic security, which explains why he is opposed to a bill that strips the military of the power to arrest and indefinitely detain Americans at the behest of the federal government.

As Joe Wolverton explains, McDonnell has proved to be a roadblock at every stage of Delegate Marshall’s efforts to pass the anti-NDAA bill.

Virginia is just one of numerous states which are fighting back against the indefinite detention provisions of the NDAA. According to the Tenth Amendment Center, which has been tracking the nationwide revolt against the NDAA, a total of nine states have now introduced resolutions or bills in opposition to the indefinite detention of American citizens.

Last week President Obama issued a ‘Presidential Policy Directive’ that forbids the indefinite detention provisions from being used against US citizens.

However, as we documented at the time, it was the administration itself that lobbied for the ‘kidnapping provisions’ to be included in the NDAA in the first place.

Obama’s policy directive has done nothing to calm fears that the law could be used to incarcerate Americans under a future administration, which could be in power in as little as ten months.

Obama Issues ‘Policy Directive’ Exempting American Citizens From Indefinite Detention

Skeptics fear future administration could still incarcerate US citizens under NDAA

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
Wednesday, February 29, 2012

Despite the fact that it was his administration that specifically demanded the controversial ‘indefinite detention’ provisions of the NDAA be applied to Americans, President Obama has issued a ‘Presidential Policy Directive’ that forbids the law from being used against US citizens.

A “fact sheet” released by the White House last night contains details of a “Presidential Policy Directive” which explains that the administration will not seek to use the so-called ‘kidnapping provision’ of the National Defense Authorization Act to incarcerate American citizens without trial.

“Section 1022 does not apply to U.S. citizens, and the President has decided to waive its application to lawful permanent residents arrested in the United States,” states the White House fact sheet (PDF).

Obama’s PDD contains a number of other circumstances in which people would be exempt from indefinite detention, but the language concerning American citizens states that to be exempt, a US citizen must be “arrested in this country or arrested by a federal agency on the basis of conduct taking place in this country,” meaning Americans arrested abroad could still be kidnapped and held without trial.

The NDAA bill, which was signed into law by President Obama under the radar on New Years Eve while he was on vacation in Kailua, hands the federal government the power to “allow the military to indefinitely detain terror suspects, including American citizens arrested in the United States, without charge.”

There’s no doubt that this represents a victory for civil libertarians on both sides of the political spectrum, but skeptics will be keen to stress that just because the Obama administration, which could be out of office by this time next year, has indicated it will not indefinitely detain Americans under the NDAA, doesn’t necessarily mean that future administrations will also refrain from doing so.

Indeed, if the administration was so concerned about the indefinite detention provisions, why did it specifically lobby for them to be applied to American citizens in the first place?

As we documented at the time, shortly before the bill was signed into law, Senator Carl Levin revealed that it was the administration which demanded the removal of language that would have protected Americans from the ‘kidnapping’ provisions of the NDAA.

“The language which precluded the application of Section 1031 to American citizens was in the bill that we originally approved…and the administration asked us to remove the language which says that U.S. citizens and lawful residents would not be subject to this section,” said Levin, Chairman of the Armed Services Committee.

Don’t expect Obama’s PDD to be the end of the matter. Senators John McCain (Ariz.), Lindsey Graham (S.C.) and Kelly Ayotte (N.H.) have already indicated that they will argue against exempting American citizens from indefinite detention.

“Although we have not been able to fully examine all the details of these new regulations, they raise significant concerns that will require a hearing in the Senate Armed Services Committee,” they said in a joint statement. “We are particularly concerned that some of these regulations may contradict the intent of the detainee provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act passed by Congress last year.”

In issuing the policy directive, Obama is attempting to head off a potential states’ rights rebellion against the federal government. With Virginia already having passed a bill in the House and Senate that nullifies the indefinite detention provisions of the NDAA, Utah has introduced a resolution with the ultimate intention of doing the same, along with several other states.

FEMA Puts Out Contract For Emergency Camps to House “Displaced Citizens”

Solicitation calls for camps to be ready for occupancy within 72 hours

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
Monday, February 27, 2012

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is looking for contractors to construct temporary emergency camps inside the United States which can be ready for occupancy within a 72 hour time period and used to house emergency responders as well as “displaced citizens”.

The National Responder Support Camp contract, posted on the Federal Business Opportunities website, calls on contractors to “provide all necessary supervision, professional staff, labor support, material, supplies and equipment as necessary to make a RSC within a disaster-impacted area anywhere within the CONUS (Continental United States) within 72 hours after notification.”

The camps are primarily designed to house emergency responders, but will also be utilized to shelter “displaced citizens,” who will be “given the first opportunities for employment within the camp,” according to the solicitation. The camps will be able to service up to 2,000 people at one time.

As well as natural disasters, the 72-hour camps are designed to deal with terrorist attacks, National Response Framework activities of federal agencies, National Special Security Events, “or any other situation where FEMA or an agency working through FEMA needs a RSC.”

The camps will be secured with fencing and barricades that will also serve to create areas that are “off limits” to certain occupants. Entry to the camp will be controlled through a photo ID system for all occupants and visitors.

Medical treatment facilities, dining facilities, mobile showers and “morale welfare and recreation” facilities are all required as part of the contract.

FEMA’s latest efforts to satisfy the demand for emergency camps represents a continuation of preparations on behalf of the federal government to prepare for civil emergencies and potential social disorder.

Last December, Department of Homeland Security chief Janet Napolitano directed ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) to prepare for a mass influx of immigrants into the United States, calling for the plan to deal with the “shelter” and “processing” of large numbers of people.

In 2006, Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg, Brown and Root was contracted by Homeland Security to build detention centers designed to deal with “an emergency influx of immigrants into the U.S,” or the rapid development of unspecified “new programs” that would require large numbers of people to be interned.

Last year we received a leaked memo from a state government employee detailing KBR’s efforts to hire subcontractors to provide services required for temporary “emergency environment” camps located in five regions of the United States, indicating that many of the camps have now been constructed and are ready for use.

The construction of new detention camps inside the United States has provoked fears that the facilities could also be used to intern American citizens in the aftermath of a national emergency.

Rex 84, short for Readiness Exercise 1984, was established under the pretext of a “mass exodus” of illegal aliens crossing the Mexican/US border, the same pretense used in the language of the KBR request for services.

During the Iran-Contra hearings in 1987, however, it was revealed that the program was a secretive “scenario and drill” developed by the federal government to suspend the Constitution, declare martial law, assign military commanders to take over state and local governments, and detain large numbers of American citizens determined by the government to be “national security threats.”

A provision within the National Defense Authorization Act, signed into law by President Obama on New Years Eve, hands the government power to have American citizens arrested and detained without trial.

 

Virginia House Passes NDAA Nullification 96-4

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
February 17, 2012

In a move completely ignored by the establishment media, the Virginia House of Delegates has voted in favor of House Bill 1160 (HB1160), legislation that codifies in Virginia law noncompliance with the “kidnapping provisions” of section 1021 and 1022 of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 (NDAA).

The final vote, held on February 14, was 96-4. The bill was sponsored by Delegate Bob Marshall and was introduced on January 16th of this year.

Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell is on record as opposing the legislation.

HB 1160 reads as follows: “A BILL to prevent any agency, political subdivision, employee, or member of the military of Virginia from assisting an agency of the armed forces of the United States in the conduct of the investigation, prosecution, or detention of a citizen in violation of the United States Constitution, the Constitution of Virginia, or any Virginia law or regulation.”

Passing the legislation demonstrates the power of local grassroots activism. A number of groups opposed to the federal NDAA bill petitioned the government in Virginia and motivated a Sub-Committee #2 Civil vote followed by a vote of 16-0 by the Courts of Justice Committee which led to the passage of Bob Marshall’s final bill earlier this week.

“Under the recently passed 2012 federal Defense Authorization Act American citizens may be indefinitely detained, incarcerated, not presented with charges and denied counsel based on an accusation by federal agents of collaboration with or support of terrorists,” Marshall told the Tenth Amendment Center. “While Virginia cannot directly undo this purported law which undermines the Sixth Amendment, I introduced HB 1160 which will prevent the use of any Virginia agency or member of the Virginia National Guard or Virginia Defense Force to assist in any way to unlawfully detain a citizen of Virginia on behalf of the United States Government in violation of the Constitution of Virginia.”

The Tenth Amendment Center is currently tracking the progress of legislation in opposition to the NDAA in other states.

The legislation “is inimical to the liberty, security and well-being of the people,” the Tenth Amendment Center states, “and was adopted by the United States Congress in violation of the limits of federal power in United States Constitution.”

 

New FBI ‘spot the saboteur’ guide: Cash, Snorkel, US Constitution

Elena Medvedeva, Vitaliy Matveev
RT
February 13, 2012

Fancy a quick scuba lesson before going on a last-minute trip to Hawaii? Paying in cash for a snorkel? Just shaved mustache because it doesn’t go with a dive mask? Big Brother will spot a terrorist: “See something, say something” policy in action.

­The 25 flyers issued by the FBI and the Department of Justice give no mere Orwell creeps. Every area seems to be bursting with bombers: airports, beauty shops, construction sites, banks and internet cafes. Your tattoos master meets a bunch of them every day. Terrorists have taken to your favorite shop with train models across the street – remember how you pressed your nose against the glass after school? Now press harder: see something, say something, do something for your country.

­’Constant vigilance!’ – from fiction to action

The FBI and Department of Justice have streamed the “terrorist profiles” to every federal, state and local law enforcement agency across the country previous week. No one wants armed dangerous freaks invading a shopping mall on a Sunday, but now think about this. Are you:

– constantly impatient with your hair color?
– nervous in public spaces?
– inclined to show off before your girlfriend, even when taking your first ever dive?
– prone to staring around?
– obsessed with taking pictures?
– eager to keep your passwords to yourself in an internet cafe?

If yes, then you have all the chances to fall on the wrong side with the community and be referred to the police.

No encryption, no anonymity (forget about Skype, patriots), no cash, no hanging around, no heritage disputes at construction sites. Know your shopping list, show genuine interest, don’t avoid talking to assistants, but don’t ask for exits and sales days – you are not looking for crowds.

So the War on Terror is getting inward-bound and tens of millions of law abiding Americans will get a flavor of it. Putting aside proper instructions to identify a potential terrorist (nervous, sweating, unsure of own name and story, wearing too much clothing) and terrorist activity (using abandoned houses to store unidentified goods, driving a car without number plates, leaving packages in public areas) – where is the bottom line to assess “extreme” behavior?

The handouts stress to Americans that people who “make suspicious comments regarding anti-US, radical theology, vague or cryptic warnings that suggest or appear to endorse the use of violence in support of a cause” are, well, terrorists. So, bye Occupy Wall Street, you won’t be flashing headlines any more soon. Not after several arrests on “assaulting police” charges.

Be careful to forget your Constitutional rights, too. Only those, who are looking for a thrashing from homeland security, know them by heart. And never, ever speak ill of Washington’s policies:

“Fury at the West for reasons ranging from personal problems to global policies of the US” is an attitude indicator of a “sleeper,” a person who “camouflages their involvement in terrorist activity.”

By the way, you will never believe who fits the description of a sleeper as an adjoining puzzle piece. War veterans! Consider those who have spent quite some time in “countries where militant Islam rules,” are “missing hand/fingers,” have “burns” and are inclined to show undesired interest in all security stuff – like “hey, which is the police frequency over here?” So, welcome home, Afghan troops.

Think wider – stay in limits

The leaflets conclude with two disclaimers fitting quite neatly with each other. First, “just because someone’s…way of life is different, it does not mean that he or she is suspicious.”

Then, “The activities outlined on this handout are by no means all-inclusive.”

So if you see a guy, meddling in the shop with a lobster, a witch’s hat he is using as a bag and a newspaper he is holding upside down, and somehow you feel he is conspiring for a delayed bombing out, tip him off to the police.

But if your dad has given you a hooked nose and dark curls and then one morning you trade for a model plane with the “maximum range remote control” for your little bro… Just don’t get a nasty shock if your neighbor reports you. It is not the FBI’s fault that Mr. Thompson is such a raging xenophobe, who does not care what next door people look like.

With the new 25 lists of security commandments, Americans now have a handout for every trip to the outer space. Still the new instructions daze even some ex-law enforcers:

“I spent some years in law enforcement, and some of those devoted to counter-terrorism. I can assure you that most federal, state and local law enforcement personnel abide by their oath to ‘support and defend the Constitution’ and are steadfastly accountable to that oath. In other words, they understand that broadly labeling as ‘terrorists’ those who support constitutional limits on government is offensive to that oath,” reads the dedicated story in the Patriot Post.

 

The State Has Declared War On The American People

U.S. citizens are now the primary target of the war on terror

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
Friday, February 10, 2012

With the announcement that 30,000 drones are expected to fill American skies within ten years, the U.S. government has officially declared war on the American people, turning to technology normally used to hunt down insurgents abroad as the whole arsenal of the war on terror is re-focused domestically.

“The Federation Aviation Administration said up to 30,000 drones could be in airspace shared with airliners carrying passengers,” reports UPI.

Once signed by president Obama, the FAA Reauthorization Act allows for the FAA to permit the use of drones and develop regulations for testing and licensing by 2015.

Some types of surveillance drones are already being used by police departments across the country, including in Montgomery County, Texas, where the Department of Homeland Security recently gave the go-ahead for law enforcement in the United States to deploy the ShadowHawk mini drone drone helicopter that has the ability to taze suspects from above as well as carrying 12-gauge shotguns and grenade launchers.

US law enforcement bodies are already using drone technology to spy on Americans. In December, a Predator B drone was called in to conduct surveillance over a family farm in North Dakota as part of a SWAT raid on the Brossart family, who were suspects in the egregious crime of stealing six missing cows. Local police in this one area have already used the drone on two dozen occasions since June last year.

The DHS also recently announced a plan to spend up to $50 million dollars on a spy system that has been used to hunt insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan for the purposes of “emergency and non-emergency incidents” within the United States.

While preparing the use of surveillance drones against Americans, the U.S. government is also keen to characterize a myriad of behaviors and activities, no matter how normal or mundane, as potential indicators of terrorism, encouraging citizens to spy on each other in a chilling throwback to how people were hired as informants under the East German Stasi.

As part of its Communities Against Terrorism program, the FBI is encouraging business owners from across the spectrum to spy on their customers.

Lists of examples of “suspicious behavior” being sent out to everything from Internet Cafes to tattoo parlors define things like paying for a cup of coffee with cash, buying food in bulk, and showing an interest in online privacy as evidence of potential terrorist activity.

The DHS has also released numerous PSAs that depict routine activities as potential signs of terrorism, including using a video camera, talking to police officers, wearing hoodies, driving vans, writing on a piece of paper, and using a cell phone recording application.

The federal agency attracted much derision last week when it announced that Super Bowl vendors, including hot dog sellers, had been trained to spot terrorists under the First Observer program.

Even more chilling, the feds have also begun to characterize perfectly legitimate political and economic beliefs as those held by terrorists, effectively denouncing them as thought crimes.

As Reuters reported on Monday, authorities are now treating those who “believe the United States went bankrupt by going off the gold standard” as extremists who are a potential violent threat to law enforcement. The DHS has also previously characterized returning veterans, Ron Paul supporters, gold investors, and people who display political bumper stickers as potential domestic terrorists.

All this serves to underscore the fact that the American people have now been targeted as the number one terror threat in the eyes of the authorities. The state has declared war on U.S. citizens. Not only will they be subject to surveillance and intimidation campaigns, but with the recent passage of the indefinite detention provision of the NDAA, the government has afforded itself the power to hold Americans without trial.