U.S. a Police State? It has already happened

By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS | IPE | FEBRUARY 8, 2013

The Bush regime’s response to 9/11 and the Obama regime’s validation of this response have destroyed accountable democratic government in the United States. So much unaccountable power has been concentrated in the executive branch that the US Constitution is no longer an operable document.

Whether a person believes the official story of 9/11 which rests on unproven government assertions or believes the documented evidence provided by a large number of scientists, first responders, and structural engineers and architects, the result is the same. 9/11 was used to create an open-ended “war on terror” and a police state. It is extraordinary that so many Americans believe that “it can’t happen here” when it already has.

We have had a decade of highly visible evidence of the construction of a police state: the PATRIOT Act, illegal spying on Americans in violation of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, the initiation of wars of aggression–war crimes under the Nuremberg Standard–based on intentional lies, the Justice Department’s concocted legal memos justifying the executive branch’s violation of domestic and international laws against torture, the indefinite detention of US citizens in violation of the constitutionally protected rights of habeas corpus and due process, the use of secret evidence and secret “expert witnesses” who cannot be cross-examined against defendants in trials, the creation of military tribunals in order to evade federal courts, secret legal memos giving the president authority to launch preemptive cyber attacks on any country without providing evidence that the country constitutes a threat, and the Obama regime’s murder of US citizens without evidence or due process.

As if this were not enough, the Obama regime now creates new presidential powers by crafting secret laws, refusing to disclose the legal reasoning on which the asserted power rests. In other words, laws now originate in secret executive branch memos and not in acts of Congress. Congress? We don’t need no stinking Congress.

Despite laws protecting whistleblowers and the media and the US Military Code which requires soldiers to report war crimes, whistleblowers such as CIA agent John Kiriakou, media such as Julian Assange, and soldiers such as Bradley Manning are persecuted and prosecuted for revealing US government crimes. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article33804.htm The criminals go free, and those who report the crimes are punished.

FULL ARTICLE →

NSA Whistleblower: “We are headed towards a Police State”

By LUIS MIRANDA | THE REAL AGENDA | SEPTEMBER 24, 2012

According to former National Security Agency employee, Kirk Wiebe, the agency had the capability to grab everyone’s data even before 9/11. He said that the terrorist events of 2001 were a trigger for the NSA to act with complete disregard for the US Constitution and mainly the Forth Amendment.

Wiebe and his fellow whistleblower Thomas Drake, explain that the terrorist attacks gave the NSA and the US government an excuse to get military contractors involved in the creation of a broader surveillance state that provides no limits whatsoever to what government agencies such as the NSA can do with any piece of information from US citizens or even people who reside abroad.

As it stands today, the power of the NSA is simply unchecked. Drake says that inside the agency there is a widely held belief that it is necessary to trade anonymity for security, which is the opposite of what the United States founding fathers advised people to do. When asked about whether the United States could unwind the powers afforded to the NSA and other government agencies, he referred viewers to the secretive ways in which the NSA misbehaved in 1960s and 70s to conclude that it is not possible to simply trust the agency or anything it does today.

The questions back in the 60s and 70s was whether or not the availability of a technical capacity to spy on everyone, as it is done today, could be manageable to avoid abuse, or even further, if it could be rolled back. According to Drake, the question is why would people trust the NSA anymore than it did in the 60s and 70s, when it was well-known that the agency was operating above the law?

When questioned about whether the United States was moving towards becoming a tyrannical state, just as other nations like North Korea or China, Kirk Wiebe was clear and succinct: “In my estimation we are. We are headed towards a Police State.” Wiebe candidly recounted how the current intelligence operations led by the NSA look a lot like Gestapo or like Stasi in Germany. “We are moving in that direction. People are trashing the Constitution. They’ve lost their respect for it.

He also told viewers how he had written congressman Rosco Bartlet about his concerns and how the answer he got back from Mr. Bartlet was as astonishing as the concerns he posed on the letter regarding privacy and legislation. Congressman Bartlet responded that the thing that gave him confidence about the creation and approval of spectacular powers given to the NSA and other government agencies was that “everything was being done in good faith.”

 

The Real Agenda encourages the sharing of its original content ONLY through the use of the tools provided at the bottom of every article. Please DON’T copy articles from The Real Agenda and redistribute by email or post to the web, unless you request and receive written permission to do so. If permission is granted, you must publish the article EXACTLY as it appears on The Real Agenda.

Why is the US Army Mobilizing Troops and Equipment around the Country?

BY SUSAN POSSEL | OCCUPY CORPORATISM | AUGUST 8, 2012

Informants and military personnel are coming forth anonymously to confirm that martial law “is right around the corner.” However, right now we are under a silent martial law and citizens are reporting strange and unexplainable activity from the US armed forces and multiple federal agencies that point to a covert preparatory operation to completely lock down America in the very near future.

Sources from multiple locations across the nation have independently confirmed that the US military are repositioning soldiers in conjunction with allied foreign troops in the initial stages of martial law.

The US military are secretly moving massive amounts of “equipment” across the country consistently for more than a year. In Phoenix, Arizona, tractor-trailers transporting tanks on public highways have been spotted. One witness stated that he saw these flatbeds multiple times in the month of June. Eye witness reports are coming primarily from the northern and southern Border States.

Peter Santilli, an ex-marine informant who was a specialist in aviation deployed weapons, explains that a refrigerated truck, allocated by the administration department on base, was directed to the commissary, where the unsuspecting driver believed that he was transporting food. The weapon was placed at the head of the trailer, and covered up with either food stores (like cans of soup) or body bags. In the event that the truck is stopped en route, the weapon would be well hidden and go undetected by inspectors on the public highways.

Santilli, who was assigned to ride in the cab of the truck with the driver, says that his orders were to make sure the truck arrived at its destination. If there were problems concerning potential civil unrest, he was to radio into his superiors for aid by either air or ground support. Should the situation warrant serious attention; crowd control methods would be implemented.

One possible scenario was the use of cluster bomb units (CBUs) that will emit upon detonation, a “sleep and kill” chemical weapon that will not disturb infrastructure, but is lethal to all living things within the effected zone. Santilli describes these particular 3 unit CBUs as shaped like water-heaters with a coned top and plunger-like device. Once deployed in the air, a parachute assists these CBUs to the targeted area. And when detonated, a deadly chemical gas will kill every human and animal in the specified cordoned area.

The acquisition of armory by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and contracts for bullet-proof glass for check-point booths to be positioned strategically throughout the nation on public highways have heightened awareness that the US government is preparing for a well-planned domestic military action. DHS armored vehicles have been sighted on highways in Kentucky.

When citizens attempt to capture the activity on film, some have their cameras confiscated; sometimes after a physical altercation.

On Google Maps, where known military bases were once visible, some strategic areas are now blurred out.

Read Full Article →

Obama Signs the “National Defense Authorization Act

By Michel Chossudovsky
Global Research
January 1, 2012

With minimal media debate, at a time when Americans were celebrating the New Year with their loved ones,  the “National Defense Authorization Act ” H.R. 1540 was signed into law by President Barack Obama. The actual signing took place in Hawaii on the 31st of December.According to Obama’s “signing statement”, the threat of Al Qaeda to the Security of the Homeland constitutes a justification for repealing fundamental rights and freedoms, with a stroke of the pen.The controversial signing statement (see transcript below) is a smokescreen. Obama says he disagrees with the NDAA but he signs it into law.

“[I have] serious reservations with certain provisions that regulate the detention, interrogation, and prosecution of suspected terrorists.”

Obama implements “Police State USA”, while acknowledging that certain provisions of  the NDAA are unacceptable. If such is the case, he could have either vetoed the NDAA (H.R. 1540) or sent it back to Congress with his objections.

The “National Defense Authorization Act ” (H.R. 1540) is Obama’s New Year’s “Gift” to the American People.

He justifies the signing of the NDAA as a means to combating terrorism, as part of a counter-terrorism agenda.  But in substance, any American opposed to the policies of the US government can –under the provisions of the NDAA– be labelled a “suspected terrorist” and arrested under military detention.

“Moreover, I want to clarify that my Administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens. Indeed, I believe that doing so would break with our most important traditions and values as a Nation. My Administration will interpret section 1021 in a manner that ensures that any detention it authorizes complies with the Constitution, the laws of war, and all other applicable law.”

Barack Obama is a lawyer (a graduate from Harvard Law School). He knows fair well that his signing statement –which parrots his commitment to democracy– is purely cosmetic. It has no force of law.

The signing statement does not in any way invalidate or modify the actual signing by President Obama of NDAA (H.R. 1540) into law.

“Democratic Dictatorship” in America

The “National Defense Authorization Act ” (H.R. 1540) repeals the US Constitution. While the facade of democracy prevails, supported by media propaganda, the American republic is fractured. The tendency is towards the establishment of a totalitarian State, a military government dressed in civilian clothes.

The passage of  NDAA is intimately related to Washington’s global military agenda. The military pursuit of Worldwide hegemony also requires the “Militarization of the Homeland”, namely the demise of the American Republic.

In substance, the signing statement is intended to mislead Americans and provide a “democratic face” to the President as well as to the unfolding post-911 Military Police State apparatus.

The “most important traditions and values” in derogation of the US Constitution have indeed been repealed, effective on New Year’s Day, January 1st 2012.

The NDAA authorises the arbitrary and indefinite military detention of American citizens.

The Lessons of History

This New Year’s Eve December 31, 2011 signing of the NDAA will indelibly go down as a landmark in American history.

If we are to put this in a comparative historical context, the relevant provisions of the NDAA HR 1540 are, in many regards, comparable to those contained in the “Decree of the Reich President for the Protection of People and State”, commonly known as the “Reichstag Fire Decree” (Reichstagsbrandverordnung) enacted in Germany under the Weimar Republic on 27 February 1933 by President (Field Marshal) Paul von Hindenburg.

Implemented in the immediate wake of the Reichstag Fire (which served as a pretext), this February 1933 decree was used to repeal civil liberties including the right of Habeas Corpus.

Article 1 of the February 1933 “Decree of the Reich President for the Protection of People and State” suspended civil liberties under the pretext of “protecting” democracy: “Thus, restrictions on personal liberty, on the right of free expression of opinion, including freedom of the press, on the right of association and assembly, and violations of the privacy of postal, telegraphic, and telephonic communications, and warrants for house-searches, orders for confiscations, as well as restrictions on property rights are permissible beyond the legal limits otherwise prescribed.” (Art. 1, emphasis added)

Constitutional democracy was nullified in Germany through the signing of a presidential decree.

The Reichstag Fire decree was followed in March 1933 by “The Enabling Act” ( Ermächtigungsgesetz) which allowed (or enabled) the Nazi government of Chancellor Adolf Hitler to invoke de facto dictatorial powers. These two decrees enabled the Nazi regime to introduce legislation which was in overt contradiction with the 1919 Weimar Constitution.

The following year, upon the death of president Hindenburg in 1934, Hitler “declared the office of President vacant”  and took over as Fuerer, the combined function’s of Chancellor and Head of State.

Obama’s New Year’s Gift to the American People

To say that January 1st 2012 is “A Sad Day for America” is a gross understatement.The signing of NDAA (HR 1540) into law is tantamount to the militarization of law enforcement, the repeal of the Posse Comitatus Act and the Inauguration in 2012 of Police State USA.As in Weimar Germany, fundamental rights and freedoms are repealed under the pretext that democracy is threatened and must be protected.The NDAA is “Obama’s New Year’s Gift” to the American People. …

America is One Signature away from a ‘Lawful’ Police State

After Senate Bill 1867, also known as the Indefinite Detention legislation made its way through the House of Representatives earlier this week and through the Senate tonight, Americans are that much closer to becoming legal enemies of the state.

By Luis R. Miranda
The Real Agenda
December 15, 2011

On the way to a place called Police State America

UPDATE 12/16/11 12:00 S.1867 will also allow the Department of Defense to ‘lawfully’ wage war on the internet. The law will permit the government to attack cyber enemies. Congress confirms that the Pentagon has the capacity to, at the request of the president, will conduct cyberwar operations to “defend the Nation, Allies and other interests”. (1) the policy principles and legal regimes that the Department follows for kinetic capabilities, including the law of armed conflict; and (2) the War Powers Resolution (50 U.S.C. 1541 et seq.). Read more on the cyber Police State here. END OF UPDATE

It is not new that run-away oppressive states tend to employ illegal practices by stealth before they implement them widely. The passage of legislation that partially or fully destroy constitutional and civil rights is simply the codification  of an already well established status quo. This happened many times in recent history, but people don’t learn from it because they ignore history.

The introduction and passage of S.1867 and its consequent approval by both the House and Senate of the once free and brave America is the completion of what those in power have been working on for decades; maybe more. S.1867 legalizes the apprehension, imprisonment and if necessary, torture and murder of anyone who the United States president decides poses a threat to the continuity of government. It just happens that this government is not the people’s government anymore, but His or Her government.Although president Barack H. Obama warned with vetoing the bill if it survived the legislative process, he back-pedaled on that threat in less than a month. But Obama did not warn senators and representatives about the veto because he thought it was illegal or unconstitutional to waive all the legal framework that kept America free and brave. He threatened with the veto because the passage of S.1867 would legally strain powers that the office of the president already possesses; or at least Obama thinks it does. “The White House explained it would veto the bill because these provisions, mandating military custody amount to a restriction of president’s authority,” explained John Glaser, assistant editor at Antiwar.com on Russia Today television.

It was Senator Carl Levin, one of the sponsors of the approved bill, who explained on the Senate floor that it had been president Obama who had requested that S.1867 included Americans who lived in the United States in the bill, so that all of its provisions could also apply to them. The bill already contemplated applying its rules to Americans living abroad as well as anyone captured on American soil or overseas, who was deemed a terrorist. It was also Obama, who harshly criticized George W. Bush for what he called the illegal detention of people who were held without a formal accusation and were denied a proper trial. Obama also made it one of his campaign promises to close the Guantanamo Bay prison.

If S.1867 is signed by Obama into law, which could happen in the next 24 to 48 hours, it will give the  US military the power to “disappear” American citizens for crimes that will never be made public. “If you look carefully at this legislation, if you have a family or a friend who publicizes that you’ve disappeared they too can be detained. If anybody helps you with a taxi ride or attempts to give assistance to your family in the circumstances of your disappearance, they too can be detained. This is the architecture of the fascist state,” says radio host Ralph Schoenman.

One of the most contested parts of the bill, which was challenged by at least 40 senators, says that “Congress affirms that the authority of the President to use all necessary and appropriate force pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force, includes the authority for the Armed Forces of the United States to detain covered persons pending depositions under the law of war.” Exactly 220 years after the U.S. Bill of Rights was approved, the Senate voted 86-13 in favor of giving the president and the Army the powers described above. Adding insult to injury, Senator Lindsey Graham, a Republican from South Carolina, spoke on the Senate floor right after the vote tool place and said with a straight face that he hoped that his colleagues believed America was part of the battlefield in the fight against… well, he did not say who; and that from now on, anyone alleged to be in opposition to the United States would be the subject of military-style detention. Graham’s speech resembled that of George W. Bush, who after 9/11 publicly announced that those who did not stood by the side of the United States, would stand against it in the fight against what he called terror.

The difference between Bush’s and Graham’s speeches is that Graham’s did not specify who would be granted more attention as suspects of terrorism or of supporting terrorist groups. He left it more open, more vague. He said: “anyone alleged to be in opposition to the United States”. Will public protest be considered as opposition? Will publishing articles that oppose the government’s policies be deemed as opposition? What does the government deem as opposition? Only the president and the military know that. Indeed, what S.1867 does is to legitimize the president’s authority to indefinitely detain an individual who is deemed a threat. It recognizes that the president, whoever it is, can hold anyone label as an enemy combatant, no matter where they are captured. “…because that only makes sense,” said Senator Carl Levin. Meanwhile, Lindsey Graham further taunted the civil and constitutional liberties now being destroyed by saying that denying Americans their due process would make everyone less safe. “It would serve as an unprecedented threat to our constitutional liberties.”Lindsey Graham went further to attack America’s legal system as inadequate because it allowed alleged terrorists to be treated as common criminals.

Putting it simply, what S.1867 does is to militarize the United States of America, as citizens who oppose government will be met with all the might of the Armed Forces. Although no one expects the government to enforce the new legislation against a conservative radio talk show host, people who don’t maw their lawns or Occupy Wall Street protestors just yet, it is clear the U.S. government will make its case to begin enforcing it as soon as it has a chance. Obama will use the same military that he  commanded to war in Libya, without asking Congress to declare war, to catch fictitious terrorists who may have a plan -that no one will be able to verify- to blow a building or kill Americans.

As reported by Russia Today, under the legislation, a literal police state will be installed over the United States. Republican Congressman Ron Paul said earlier this week that “this should be the biggest news going right now,” as the legislation would allow for “literally legalizing martial law. This step where they can literally arrest American citizens and put them away without trial….is arrogant and bold and dangerous,” said congressman Paul.

None of the other Republican presidential candidates manifested their opposition to the indefinite detention bill. In fact, Newt Gingrich had already shown his support for practices that mirrored the provisions contained in the legislation just approved by Congress.

When a government gets away with capturing anyone without any proof that such person -citizen or not citizen- committed a crime; when it gives itself the prerogative to hold him/her indefinitely without a formal accusation; when it decides that is has the power to torture and murder because it considers it an effective measure to prevent or preempt a crime that has not happen, hope is lost. But worse than everything, when people let a government do all of this without a challenge; everything is lost.

Terror and the terrorists are everywhere and the world is the battlefield against them. That is both insane and clever. It is to prevent terror and terrorists from attacking us!, claim many willful ignorants. Al-Qaeda is everywhere and we need to be vigilant and protected!, claim the accomplices. That is why we must give away our human rights! We need to give liberty in exchange for security.

At our own peril! And if we do, we deserve everything we get!

Luis R. Miranda is the Founder and Editor of The Real Agenda. His 15 years of experience in Journalism include television, radio, print and Internet news. Learn  more about Luis here.