Paul Joseph Watson Infowars.com Thursday, August 18, 2011 Two new videos recently released by the Department of Homeland Security add to the mountain of evidence that proves Big Sis has now dispensed with all pretense of the war on terror being focused on Al-Qaeda Muslims, as tools that were designed to catch foreign terrorists are now being targeted against Americans who are opposed to big governmentFar from representing some superficial nod to political correctness, this is in fact a deliberate effort by the feds to characterize predominantly white, middle class, politically engaged Americans as domestic extremists. It’s all part of the agenda to frame dissent against big government as dangerous radicalism. Contrary to claims by the DHS that it does not profile, the bulk of literature and other training tools issued by the federal government over the last decade clearly go to great lengths to demonize informed, middle class, and predominately white Americans as the most likely terrorists, despite the fact that the 126 people who were indictedon terrorist-related charges in the United States over the last two years were all Muslim. In addition to recent rhetoric from the likes of Vice-President Biden that Tea Partiers are akin to “terrorists,” other legitimate grass roots activists such as End the Fed protesters have also been labeled as dangerous extremists by the federal government. In March 2009 it came to light that the End the Fed protests, which took place at banks and regional Federal Reserve branches across the country the previous year on November 22, were being monitored closely by the United States Army Reserve Command, who implied that those protesting against the Fed and the bankster bailout were essentially terrorists. On November 22, 2008, Alex Jones led a rally at the Federal Reserve Bank in Dallas Texas. The Dallas protest is specifically mentioned in the official Army document. Ron Paul’s brother was also in attendance. The FBI has also gone out of its way to characterize returning veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan as a major domestic terrorist threat. Additionally, Janet Napolitano said she stood by an April 2009 DHS intelligence assessment that listed returning vets as likely domestic terrorists. Just a month later, the New York Times reported on how Boy Scout Explorers were being trained by the DHS to kill “disgruntled Iraq war veterans” in terrorist drills. In March 2009 we broke the story of the infamous MIAC report, leaked to us by two concerned Missouri police officers. The report listed Ron Paul supporters, libertarians, people who display bumper stickers, people who own gold, or even people who fly a U.S. flag and equates them with radical race hate groups and terrorists. Indeed, the MIAC report is just one in a series of similar threat assessment documents released over the last decade that list average American citizens as dangerous extremists and potential terrorists. We have highlighted previous training manuals issued by state and federal government bodies which identify whole swathes of the population as potential terrorists. A Texas Department of Public Safety Criminal Law Enforcement pamphlet gives the public characteristics to identify terrorists that include buying baby formula, beer, wearing Levi jeans, carrying identifying documents like a drivers license and traveling with women or children. A Virginia training manual used to help state employees recognize terrorists lists anti-government and property rights activists as terrorists and includes binoculars, video cameras, paper pads and notebooks in a compendium of terrorist tools. Such training documents are manifesting real-life situations where people are being harassed, assaulted and arrested by law enforcement simply for owning material or discussing topics related to the Constitution and the bill of rights. In May 2008, a student of a large bible college in east Texas was accused by federal agents of committing an “act of terror and espionage” after he gave a talk to a group of Boy Scouts in which he encouraged them to educate themselves about the U.S. constitution. In July 2007, the Kuhns, a North Carolina couple were terrorized by sheriff’s deputy Brian Scarborough, who broke into their house, assaulted them and then arrested the couple for the crime of flying an upside down U.S. flag. The couple were handcuffed, arrested and bundled into a squad car, to the protests of numerous neighbors who demanded to know why the Kuhns were being incarcerated, but were told to leave by police. As is supported by the United States Flag Code as well as a similar incident in 2001, flying the flag upside down is not a mark of disrespect, and in fact is considered by many to be the highest form of patriotism. Despite this fact, the upside down flag is equated in the MIAC report with terrorist paraphernalia. Alex Jones’ 2001 documentary film 9/11: The Road to Tyranny featured footage from a FEMA symposium given to firefighters and other emergency personnel in Kansas City in which it was stated that the founding fathers, Christians and homeschoolers were terrorists and should be treated with the utmost suspicion and brutality in times of national emergency In 2004, Kelly Rushing was charged with making “terroristic threats” after he handed out Alex Jones videos and recordings of a Congressman Ron Paul speech on C-Span to Lyon County, Kentucky officials and Kentucky State Trooper Lewis Dobbs. A jury later ruled in favor of Rushing but he continues to be harassed by authorities and local law enforcement. In August 2008, a Las Vegas couple were stopped by police, detained and searched as cops demanded to know if there was anything illegal inside the vehicle. When the couple asked why they had been stopped, the police officer pointed at “Infowars” and “Ron Paul” bumper stickers on their car. In 2001, housewife Abbey Newman was assaulted and arrested by police at a checkpoint for exercising her 4th amendment rights. Cops looked through literature which included a copy of a pocket constitution and debated whether or not the material was illegal The federal government’s clear intent to profile politically active middle class Americans as likely terrorists is manifestly provable from their own internal and public documents. Only when conservatives become cognizant of the fact that they too are as much of a target in the “war on terror” as Muslims, whether it’s a Republican or a Democrat in the White House, will we have any hope of dismantling the Homeland Security police state. ********************* Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a regular fill-in host for The Alex Jones Show.
Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: Federal Reserve System, Janet Napolitano, Ron Paul, Texas Department of Public Safety, United States, United States Army Reserve Command, United States Department of Homeland Security, United States Flag Code
Categories : Constitution, Personal Liberty, Police State Control, Politics, States Rights
How appropriate that California is home to the newest ban on caffeinated beer. This haven of busy-body progressivism has long been a national leader in the war against liberty and property. Talk-radio conservatives are mocking Governor Jerry Brown’s crusade against the dread alcohol-caffeine combo, lamenting the implications for our dwindling personal responsibility, freedom and common sense. This is classic California, they seem to agree. But they do not appear to realize the origin of these terrible anti-liberty attacks, even when the answer is most obvious. Indeed it was in California that the war on drugs began. The 1875 Opium Dens Ordinance, mostly targeting Chinese immigrants, forever marked San Francisco as a pioneer among prohibitionist municipalities.
A state-level law in 1891 mandated warning labels for opium. In 1907 California required prescriptions for opium sales and the drug and paraphernalia were banned statewide in 1909. The same year the U.S. sent Hamilton Wright to the Opium Commission in Shanghai to contemplate a global ban. On a national level, the United States was a radically free country, as far as drugs were concerned, until the early 20th century. A 1906 federal law involved small interventions into the drug market but it wasn’t until 1914, in the middle of the horrible Wilson administration, that the Harrison Narcotics Act was signed, signifying the beginning of the end for American drug freedom and so many other liberties that have fallen as collateral damage. For almost a century it’s been a nearly uninterrupted avalanche of prohibitionist nonsense and despotism. The 1914 Act regulated opium and cocaine and banned heroin outright. Before that, even a child could walk into a pharmacy and buy heroin in measured doses, and there was virtually no associated societal problem to speak of. The next drug nationally prohibited was alcohol, which was constitutionally possible thanks to the 18th Amendment, after many decades of agitation by social reformers, progressives, puritans, and others who incredibly believed they could eliminate sin through the state’s salvation. Throughout the 1920s the Noble Experiment only proved that neither human nature nor economic law could be overturned by federal legislation. Violent crime skyrocketed. The prison population doubled. Almost half the law enforcement apparatus became dedicated to stamping out liquor. Police departments became even more corrupt than usual. Hundreds of federal officials were fired over bribery and misconduct. By the end of the decade even some former abolitionists saw that prohibition was destroying the country and worked to end it through the 21st Amendment. That should have been the end of the prohibitionist impulse forever, but it wasn’t. Some of the same social reformers and bureaucrats stuck around and began a new crusade against marijuana. This time another progressive of Woodrow Wilson’s ilk, Franklin Roosevelt, signed the prohibition into law. The Constitution was left unaltered and from then on the national government recognized no limits on its general power to ban substances. The propaganda surrounding the ban on marijuana was so unbelievably ludicrous that we should be embarrassed of our forebears for buying into it – almost as embarrassed as we should be of today’s Americans repeating the government’s drug war propaganda as though there’s any significant truth to it. Marijuana was said to make people uncontrollably violent, while somehow also pacifying them and thus rendering them poor candidates for the military. It was said to turn its users into irredeemable crazed rapists and murderers. In truth this is probably the most benign popular drug in human history. Surely alcohol and tobacco are far more dangerous. But reformers who focus on the relative harmlessness of pot and thus argue for legalizing it while keeping other drugs illegal are missing the point. It was the ban on heroin that led to this huge decline in our liberty. Every drug that was outlawed from then on was simply the next domino in line. Psychedelics like LSD were targeted in the mid-1960s (yes, they were actually perfectly legal before that). In 1970 the federal government adopted the tyrannical Controlled Substances Act, a comprehensive scheduling scheme to give the government carte blanche over every substance. A 1984 law banned any drug “substantially similar” to Schedule I or II drugs in either effect or molecular configuration. Ecstasy, or MDMA, one of the most demonized chemicals in recent years, was used legally for over seventy years since it was first synthesized in 1912, then banned by the DEA in the mid-1980s over the protests of many in the medical community who cited its beneficial therapeutic effects. Even though no one else is allowed to buy or use it, the U.S. military began experimenting with it a few years ago as a remedy for post-traumatic stress disorder afflicting returning troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. Hysteria akin to the reefer madness of the 1930s has struck again several times in recent memory. GHB, a substance not so different in its effects from alcohol, with some additional risks but also some comparative benefits over liquor, is a chemical found naturally in the human brain. It was perfectly legal but then banned by the FDA in 1990. Ephedra, a stimulant with both advantages and disadvantages compared to caffeine, was banned in 2004. In recent years the drug warriors have targeted Salvia divinorum as a threatening party drug – a complete fantasy for anyone who knows anyone who’s tried it. They’ve also been fretting day and night about the great threat of Qat – a relatively harmless thing used by millions worldwide. Even as the establishment happily subsidizes prescription drugs that kill many thousands of Americans a year, they are attempting to stamp out the last substances that can’t be patented, no matter how little risk they pose. Slippery slope arguments don’t always convince, and yet history bulges with examples of the logic behind one bad policy leading to another. For many years opponents of the drug war have argued that prohibitionist reasoning would conquer one freedom after another until the many pleasures of mainstream life were under attack. Of course there is the attack on cigarette smokers – from bans on smoking in bars to the paternalistic prohibition of flavored cigarettes that happened just two years ago. Now the politicians are targeting whatever food they deem unhealthy. This has brought us restrictions on salt and transfats, attacks on commercial freedom in the form of un-American Happy Meal bans, and, perhaps most obscene of all, police-state measures to stamp out raw milk and other nutritious and natural foods. People are being jailed and shut down for growing natural, normal food on their own land. We have slid right to the bottom of the slippery slope. After 9/11, Americans put up with a massive assault on their civil liberties that would have been impossible without the conditioning and warming up to the police state that transpired during decades of the war on drugs. Now we see that in every area of our lives we are losing liberties faster than we can take account of the loss. The prohibitionist mindset – the principle that the government can outlaw whatever it determines should be verboten – has infested everything: commercial activities, firearms, lightbulbs, foods, and dozens of other pleasures of life enjoyed by average Americans. Every year tens of thousands of Mexicans die and hundreds of thousands of peaceful Americans are jailed all to sustain a fundamentally evil and totally unwinnable crusade against drugs. This political program of nearly unparalleled destruction has infected every corner of public policy and, just as important, has destroyed the American spirit of freedom inside and out. We are not allowed to buy as much pseudoephedrine as we want – one of the only over-the-counter drugs that we all know works – because of the war on meth. We are restricted from carrying our own cash in and out of the country. We are always at risk of being shot by a paramilitary police force, roaming the streets or conducting one of America’s dozens of unconstitutional daily raids. In a million ways our freedom has been undermined and incrementally we see everything in society we love face the threat of being stripped from us. Everything is in danger of being rationed, prohibited, seized. Where did this all begin? Bourgeois Americans see the walls caving in, the last bits of pleasure and their favorite, mostly harmless sins being targeted for eradication by the planners lurking in the state capitals and Washington. They see we are losing something important every time plastic bags are banned or driving while chatting on a cell phone is attacked. They find it absurd that alcohol and caffeine are both permitted but the combination is made illegal. I feel for all of them but must plead them to see the real problem here. This is what happens when you ban heroin: A state that can stamp out one person’s liberty, however peripheral he and his activities may seem to mainstream society, can and will continue to trample on all of us until all our freedom is a mangled corpse, a translucent shadow of what it once was. You want to restore civil society? Call for the legalization of all drugs. Only a society that does not seek something as irredeemably stupid and wicked as a drug war has any hope for liberty. Only those who are willing to defend the liberty of the junkie fully deserve to see their own liberty restored.
Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: California, Controlled Substances Act, Hamilton Wright, Harrison Narcotics Tax Act, Jerry Brown, MDMA, United States, Woodrow Wilson
Categories : Personal Liberty, Police State Control, States Rights
Every couple of years the same drearily predictable charade repeats itself. This time we’re really going to limit government! Or so they tell us. We on the Right then dutifully compose our letters to the editor, attend rallies, and vote for candidates without whom, we are breathlessly assured, we shall all revert instantly to barbarism. And no matter who wins, the federal government grows and grows. The Right gets a bunch of pretty speeches, and the Left gets the victories. The passive approach of crossing our fingers and hoping Washington will follow the Constitution has not worked.The only surprising thing about it is that anyone could have expected it to work in the first place. It is long past time for those of us who want to confine the federal government to its constitutional limits to try something different. The time has come to revisit nullification, the quintessentially American mode of resistance against federal lawlessness that Thomas Jefferson urged as an essential ingredient of our political system. In the Kentucky Resolutions of 1798, Jefferson insisted that the states needed a way to defend themselves against unconstitutional exercises of power by the federal government. Jefferson’s fear was that if the federal government had a monopoly on defining the scope of its own powers, it would be constantly discovering new ones. Likewise, James Madison urged in the Virginia Resolutions of 1798 that the states were “duty bound to resist” when the federal government violated the Constitution. (The reader will not be surprised to learn that Bill Clinton held no White House soiree in honor of the two hundredth anniversary of these documents in 1998.) These principles were used for honorable purposes throughout antebellum American history. Virginia and Kentucky used them on behalf of free speech. The New England states employed them against unconstitutional searches and seizures. Numerous northern states used them against fugitive slave laws, provisions of which they considered unconstitutional notwithstanding the Constitution’s fugitive-slave clause. More than six decades after Jefferson penned the immortal words of the Kentucky Resolutions, the legislature of Wisconsin quoted them word for word in defense of its defiance of such laws. Do American schoolchildren read about any of this? The question answers itself. They are about as likely to read that I, Tom Woods, am the king of England. But all of a sudden, out of the clear blue, nullification is back. Fiscal conservatives and civil libertarians joined hands in 2005 to oppose the REAL ID Act, which involved the
centralization and standardization of identification procedures. They had no idea how successful they would be. Two dozen states pledged to defy the law. Stung by this degree of resistance, the federal government gave up trying to enforce the Act. Now, states are banding together to devise resistance measures against Obamacare, cap and trade, and a whole raft of constitutionally offensive legislation. Several states have already instituted Firearms Freedom Acts, which pledge the state to prevent the enforcement of federal gun regulations when the guns in question have never entered interstate commerce. (Color me skeptical that the recent Supreme Court decision means Americans’ Second Amendment rights are safe forever.) So far, most conservative radio and television hosts have shied away from the issue. That’s a shame, to be sure, but it doesn’t change much. The Tea Party folks are going to nullify with or without them. Within six months these same media personalities will be huffing and puffing to catch up with what has been going on right under their noses. But you, dear reader, ought to get in on the ground floor. The Tenth Amendment Center, for example, is sponsoring a tour of America called Nullify Now! (NullifyNow.com), which will bring these important ideas to major American cities and force them back into the American political discussion where they belong. My new book, Nullification: How to Resist Federal Tyranny in the 21st Century, gives you all the ammunition you need to understand and defend nullification as an essential defense mechanism for a free people. And my “Interview with a Zombie” YouTube video shows you how the mainstream media will handle the issue, and how we should respond. The rebirth of nullification is not welcome news to everyone. MSNBC and the New York Times do not want us to say or do these things. They like the situation just the way it is: we make lots of noise, and they rack up the victories. They are happy if we persist in the same failed and flawed strategy that has gotten us exactly nowhere. I for one would prefer not to give them the satisfaction. It’s fine to hold conferences, write letters to the editor, and sign petitions. But at some point it becomes morally (and practically) necessary to do more than just wring our hands about the behavior of the federal government. At some point we in our states must say: we are not going to do it. Never did I suspect that the American people would grow angry and politically aware enough to put these great principles back on the table. Ideas I once covered as a historian I am now discussing as a commentator on current events. This is the healthiest development in American politics I have seen in my life. Everyone reading these words owes it to the cause of freedom to be a part of it. We have been played for fools long enough.
Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: United States, Thomas Jefferson, United States Constitution, Tenth Amendment Center, REAL ID Act, Nullification, Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions, Nullification: How to Resist Federal Tyranny in the 21st Century
Categories : Constitution, Personal Liberty, Politics, States Rights
Last month the United Nations issued a report admitting that the worldwide war on drugs has failed. Richard Nixon was the first president to use such terminology back in 1971, and subsequent presidents have been hard at it — all with mixed results. When I served in the Bush, senior White House, it was the common belief that what was needed was an even bigger hammer for the drug problem.A good combination of focused military power and CIA ingenuity would do the trick. We even invaded Panama. But today, the crisis is worse than ever before with no end in sight. Mexico is only a collateral causality. That country has been ruined by addiction. Albert Einstein once quipped that “insanity was doing the same thing over and over again, expecting a different result.” Barack Obama and all of the new serious GOP presidential candidates offer only more of the same, proving that our drug policy is indeed insane. That is, all presidential candidates except for one. The one exception is Ron Paul, who would decriminalize drugs. This was one of the big reasons I woke up to the Ron Paul revolution. I liked what he said about a return to constitutional government, about stopping the endless wars, about balancing the budget, about reigning in America’s Empire and paying its bills at home. But what was with this idea of decriminalizing drugs? Wouldn’t that make it worse? Actually, studies have shown that it is exactly how we will one day solve the problem. And that’s why even leaders on the religious right, like Pat Robertson, are touting it as a solution. Imagine us trying to end the use of tobacco in this country by declaring war. Imagine arresting young people selling cigarettes on the street corners. Imagine policemen going into hospitals and arresting people dying of lung cancer and throwing them in jail. Imagine defoliating the tobacco fields of Virginia and North Carolina. Just how far would we have gotten? Instead, we educated the nation and now the smoke has cleared. Laws do not solve such problems. Prohibition of alcohol didn’t work either. It created a criminal underclass that corrupted the American judicial system and ran some of our largest cities. Drugs are doing the same thing. Last month we discovered that a single border guard had been paid $ 5 million to let the drugs pass her station. According to a study by a Harvard economist decriminalizing drugs would pump more than $76 billion into the American economy. Our country has the second highest incarceration rate in the world. Close to 1.5 million Americans are arrested each year for drug use. In the last twenty years almost half of all arrests in America were for marijuana possession or marijuana use. In most states, a three time felon will spend his whole life in prison at a cost of millions of dollars to taxpayers. We are warehousing people on a massive scale.
To give you a sense of perspective, in the Soviet Union in1934, just before the Great Terror and the massive killing began in Stalin’s famous Gulag camps, he had gathered close to one million prisoners. This is less than the population of our own prison system in America today. Now, I am not for decriminalizing drugs because I want to use them. I have never tried marijuana or any other illegal substance, which is interesting when you consider that my name is Wead. But I know that our nation’s war on drugs hasn’t worked. And there is no use pretending otherwise. I appreciate the good intentions of those who fought this war and their sacrifices and service and their wonderful ideas. For a time, it may have held back the tide and saved lives. But the stakes are higher than ever. Even more lives now hang in the balance. I supported Ron Paul because of his prescient understanding of the American economy. His warnings, which seemed farfetched when I first heard them, started happening right before my eyes. Now, I understand that what he has been saying about the war on drugs is equally true. We are in trouble. It is time to do this right and quit playing politics with such a serious issue. It is time to do the things we need to do and get this done before another generation burns out.
Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: Albert Einstein, Barack Obama, Doug Wead, Pat Robertson, Richard Nixon, Ron Paul, United States, War on Drugs
Categories : Personal Liberty, Police State Control, Politics, Ron Paul 2012, States Rights
Gun Owners of America chief Larry Pratt warns that the new “Super Congress” created by the debt deal will lead America into dictatorship, labeling the move a “coup d’état” by the political class aimed at transforming the entire structure of government in the United States.
Comparing the super committee to Plato’s council, Pratt pointed out that it would take just 34 Senate votes to sustain a bill put forward by the group, noting that it has been set up specifically to prevent lawmakers getting in the way of its agenda by necessitating a super majority to overturn anything introduced by the committee. “The first act of the next Congress hopefully is going to be to repeal this horrible piece of legislation, Pratt told the Alex Jones Show, adding that the committee could be used to target gun owners, property owners, taxpayers and businesses. “This is a game changer, they’ve decided that we don’t need the House of Representatives to originate revenue bills, we’ll just have the ‘super 12′ do that,” said Pratt, adding that Barack Obama would become the de facto deciding 13th member. Legislation decided on by the Super Congress would be immune from amendment and lawmakers would only be able to register an up or down vote, eliminating the ability to filibuster. Pratt warned that John Boehner and Mitch McConnell would appoint “wusses” to the committee, a point emphasized by reports which indicate lawmakers who voted against the debt hike will be barred from selection for the Super Congress. Just two weeks ago McConnell himself argued that the power of the purse, constitutionally ascribed to Congress, should be turned over wholesale to Barack Obama. “They’re going to put ‘reasonable people’ on there – and these reasonable people will be the ones that continue to lead us into dictatorship,” said the Gun Owners chief, adding that the move represented a coup d’état by the ruling political class, who are now busy characterizing those who oppose their agenda as “terrorists”. Pratt noted how the debt bill was passed on the back of similar threats made before the 2008 bailout vote that warned of an economic apocalypse if an agreement was not reached. “They had us all breathless that the country, if we didn’t have something happening today, was going to default. That was a lie and they continued to use it even after members of Congress explained many times, no we don’t default….they stampeded a lot of members of Congress into this,” said Pratt, adding that lawmakers figuratively had a gun put to their head.
Republican David Vitter of Monroe, LA, shares Pratt’s concern over the intentions of the so-called Super Congress. He has introduced a bill that will “require the real time disclosure of campaign contributions to members” of the committee. The bill requires members of the Super Congress to report campaign contributions over $1000 dollars within 48 hours. The legislation is aimed at discovering “what special interests are trying to influence the committee,” according to Vitter. “We’re talking trillions in cuts, and there are already threats to increase taxes on many job creators. We need to see full transparency and accountability because these committee members will be making huge decisions with a lot on the line,” he added. The whole partisan theater behind the debt debate appears to have been largely “manufactured,” as President Obama himself labeled it, as a smokescreen behind which to implement the unconstitutional Super Congress. The so-called “cuts” enshrined in the debt deal aren’t even cuts. Talking points based around the notion that the “Tea Party won the debt battle” are a complete misnomer. All the bill does is put spending caps on already planned expenditures towards the end of a ten year period. The “spending cuts” are virtually non-existent, yet a further crippling $9.5 trillion will be added in debt over the next decade
Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: Barack Obama, David Vitter, Gun Owners of America, John Boehner, Larry Pratt, Mitch McConnell, United State, United States Congress
Categories : Constitution, Personal Liberty, Police State Control, Politics, States Rights