The Liberty Beacon

The Liberty Beacon

» Tyranny
 
 

Tyranny

Federal Court 1

By: Roger Landry (TLB)

Updated July 24, 2015

Federal Courts and the Law they dispense within the Sovereign States of America constitutes a felonious enterprise at best, and choreographed  tyranny upon We The People at worst.

Who/what is the harbinger of Law within these Sovereign States of America?

Who/what defines the Law in Said jurisdictions?

Do US federal courts even have jurisdiction within these Sovereign States of America?

Not in accordance with the Act of 1871 they don’t …

When the system of courts we depend on to maintain fairness and justice are operating outside the confines of the Constitution and defined jurisdiction, can We The People have any faith that said courts or their dispensed justice is valid … or merely the agent of those who would gain from such actions.

This video is spot on and a serious wake up call …

When those who would dispense (supposed) justice are operating outside the law, and are aware of this fact, We The People are by default subject to a calculated program of tyranny beyond comprehension and treason becomes the practiced norm!

Please read the information presented below, and follow the provided links in order to fully understand what is said. What is presented here is a serious trip down the rabbit hole.

************

Landmark Income Tax Case: Supreme Court No. 14-1305

Source: May 21, 2015

Relying on the provisions of the Constitution as ultimate proof, the petition presents incontrovertible evidence that no contemporary federal court has jurisdiction anywhere within the exterior limits of any of the 50 freely associated compact states of the Union.

This means that federal law is enforceable only in the District of Columbia and the Territories—and every United States District Judge in every United States District Court throughout the Union is usurping exercise of jurisdiction in extra-constitutional geographic area and culpable for treason to the Constitution:

“We have no more right to decline the exercise of jurisdiction which is given, than to usurp that which is not given. The one or the other would be treason to the constitution. . . .? Cohens v. Virginia, 19 U.S. 264, 6 Wheat. 265, 5 L.Ed. 257 (1821).

THERE IS NO ONE ON EARTH WHOSE LIFE IS NOT AFFECTED BY THIS SITUATION.

************

1 – Supreme Court No. 14-1305, Petition for Writ of Certiorari, filed April 29, 2015

2 – ‘Petition,’ ‘writ,’ and ‘certiorari’ defined

3 – Proof of Service on Solicitor General – April 29, 2015

4 – Solicitor General waives right to file response – May 12, 2015

5 – Update – May 18, 2015

6 – Supreme Court Docket – May 19, 2015

7 – Update – May 21, 2015

8 – Ad runs in Houston Chronicle May 29 – June 3

9 – U.S. Military provided with evidence of felony and treason to the Constitution on the part of all federal judges of all federal courts within the Union

****************

TLB: Today you can either be a citizen of The UNITED STATES, or a citizen of The United States of America … But you cant be both!

Blaze-Magazine-Agenda-21-opening-International-Land-Grab-620x350.jpg460

Flying under the proverbial radar, but something that should concern any who think Big Government should not be allowed to continue getting bigger,  is the rapid pace at which the Obama administration is gobbling up lands and putting it under the control of the federal government. Currently Barack Obama has used the 108 year old  Antiquities Act to shift a million acres over to the Feds, with likely intent to do so several more times before his second term expires.

100812-president-at-la-paz-660-AP.jpg460

The above photo is one such land grab moment when Barack Obama traveled to California’s Tehachapi Mountains to celebrate the new designation of hundreds of thousands of acres as “protected? lands. The area was home to communist labor movement leader Cesar Chavez and the place where Chavez ruled over an odd, cult-like compound with tactics he learned from his mentor, Saul Alinsky.

 

Yes, the same community organizing Saul Alinsky whose ideas spawned the political careers of both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, among many others who now make up the “progressive/communist? Democratic Party.  And like most socialist/communist leaders, Chavez despised the very working class he claimed to represent. His United Farm Workers were forced to toil for 12-14 hours for just five dollars a day under horrible conditions. Chavez described these people to his own inner circle as “dogs?, easily replaceable and in the scheme of his own dreams of increased power, of little actual value. As he grew older, Chavez’s paranoia and obsessive behavior increased as the labor leader barricaded himself in his La Paz compound deep in the Tehachapi Mountains and initiated a series of mandatory mind control programs he called “games.? These were meant to break apart a person’s sense of individuality, and make them more able to simply be part of a single-purpose collective, which for Chavez also meant they would never question his authority over them.

 

This is the location for a cult leader’s home that Barack Obama issued both a monument and protected lands designations to, and it is but one of several examples. In eight years, George W. Bush made six protected federal land designations. In six years, Obama has done so thirteen times, nine of which have come in his second term. While the nation looks to EBOLA and ISIS fears, President Obama declared 350,000 acres outside Los Angeles to now be under the control of the federal government with rumors of another significant land grab in the works for the oil rich lands of North Dakota.

You know, it seems this administration’s obsessive desire for more land and power over others is rather, dare I say…cult like.

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

See article here: http://ulstermanbooks.com/barack-obamas-1-million-acres-federal-land-grab/

TLB Recommends that you read other pertinent articles at: http://ulstermanbooks.com

william-binney

By TLB Contributor: Robin Koerner

Robin KoernerIn a very powerful exclusive interview, I recently had the privilege of speaking to an American hero, William Binney, NSA whistleblower.

We discussed how NSA mass data collection makes us LESS safe; how the intentions behind it are not misguided but positively nefarious; how the lies that have been told about it are snowballing, and how Rand Paul presidential candidacy may uniquely represent an opportunity for change.

Click below for the audio – or read the astonishing transcript that follows.

Transcription:

whistleblower-william-binney-nsa-snooping

ROBIN KOERNER: Welcome to a very important edition of Blue Republican Radio with Robin Koerner. This is all a more appropriate edition considering we have just had the 800th anniversary of the Magna Carta. We are going to be talking today to a man who, to me, is a hero. I imagine he is a hero to many of my listeners. We’ve all heard of Edward Snowden; maybe not so many of us have heard of Bill Binney – we should have – but Bill Binney is the NSA whistleblower of 2002, whom I will be speaking to today, and who performed a great service to our nation when he saw that the NSA was implementing a bastardized version of the technology that he created to protect to security and liberty of Americans – and he saw that that bastardized version was to be used en masse to violate the liberties and privacy of Americans.

ROBIN: Bill Binney – welcome to the show. Thank you so much; this is a privilege. Have I fairly characterized the trigger of your leaving the NSA of which you were a veteran for between 30 and 40 years?

BILL BINNEY: Yes, you pretty much captured it. I mean, when they started spying basically on everybody, first in the United States and then around the world on the entire planet, I mean, that’s something that violated everybody’s privacy and that’s something I couldn’t be associated with, so … I had to get out of there as fast as I could when that happened.

ROBIN: Now, your most senior title – if I can put it that way – at the NSA, and correct me if I am wrong, was Director of World Geopolitical and Military Analysis Reporting Group. Did I get that right?

BILL: Yes, that’s right. Yeah. About 6000 analysts doing all the reporting and analysis around the world.

ROBIN: And so that’s why when I say that it was really your technology, it was technology that you personally, directly managed the development of that is now being deployed – I would say – against United States’ citizens, would that be fair? As I say, a bastardized version with the protections removed.

BILL: Yes, that’s right.

ROBIN: Now, I know, Bill, that you have been asked in countless interviews (many of which can be found online and many of which are excellent) about the details, the factual details, of the violations; what it was that you saw; what you blew the whistle on; what’s happened to you since and I can urge all my listeners to go and check out those interviews and get those facts. It’s shocking and it’s important. As I say, this is important information that is out there in the public domain, thanks entirely in many instances to you. So I don’t want to cover the ground that I know you must’ve covered time and time again – with all these news stations. I am going to try and ask you something a little different. Maybe I’ll fail, maybe I’ll succeed, but I’d like to start off with this simple question because I am guessing you must have thought about this a lot. Why is it that agents…that the security agents on the one hand and our politicians on the other – so consistently want to violate our rights? What do they believe they’re doing? Are they badly informed good guys or are they just bad guys?

BILL: I don’t think it’s quite black and white like that, but if you stop and think about what they’re doing now: it’s like hiding what the government is doing. It’s like trying to keep what the federal government is doing secret from the people when, in fact, our founding principles were that people were supposed to know what the government’s doing not the reverse, and we’ve got exactly the opposite situation now.

ROBIN: Yes.

BILL: What it really boils down to, if you look down through history, this is nothing new. This is since Caesar Augustus. This kind of activity has gone on with central governments around the world with dictatorships and so on. Its whole objective is population control and also control of political enemies, who are people who are doing things that you don’t want to happen. So it’s a way of controlling the environment inside your country and also way of manipulating people. So, I mean, if you have information on everybody on the planet that means you might have material to blackmail them or influence them, one way or the other, to make a decision that you want them to make.

ROBIN: Do you actually think that kind of reasoning was going on in the heads of, let’s say, George W. Bush or Obama? Are they actually consciously thinking that?

BILL: Well, I think it started with Dick Cheney, yes.

ROBIN: Okay.

BILL: Yeah, I think it was because that’s exactly… I mean, Dick Cheney learned under Richard Nixon, and that was Richard Nixon’s policy and what Richard Nixon was doing with the programs, MINARETTE at NSA, COINTELPRO at FBI and CHAOS at CIA, is exactly what the three agencies are doing now under Bush and Obama. They’re doing exactly the same thing except orders of magnitude, more, more, more and in fact if you read the impeachment proceedings, or the articles of impeachment of Richard Nixon, you could apply them directly to what’s going on today.

ROBIN: Absolutely. Now, at least though on the surface, the likes of Cheney were telling us that he was doing it for our own good, obviously… Are you going so far as to say that you think that we are compromising liberty for security? We don’t agree with that, we don’t believe that is necessary, but is that even a cover? Was Cheney politically motivated for his own political ends rather than for a misguided notion of securing his country? Are you going that far?

BILL: I would. I mean, that’s the standard procedure that these dictatorships and despots down through history have always done. They’ve disguised everything in terms of “I’m protecting you, and I’m doing this in your interest? and when in fact they’re not, so, I mean, the Nazis used this. You know, down through history, lots of people have used this kind of attack.

ROBIN: So do you think…?

BILL: This is nothing new really.

ROBIN: Oh no, it’s absolutely not new. That’s clear. As you say, we see it throughout history. I was watching a clip of Obama on his podium a while ago saying different folks can make different decisions, and can argue about where we draw the line and how much we could compromise for liberty, for security. That’s very different from thinking that this guy is trying to collect something that he has a nefarious intention to use against political enemies. I mean, is it…? It just seems astonishing that there are so many evil people in one place, if indeed that’s true.

BILL: Well, I mean, look what the IRS did with the Tea Party or the Occupy group, what they did with them with the FBI and so on. All these organizations have direct access to this data in NSA databases. The IRS has direct access through the SOD and the DEA to get into the database of the NSA, showing the entire social network of everybody in the country, in fact, everybody in the world. Now, they’re supposed to be looking at it to find tax fraud or tax evasion or, you know, money laundering, things like that…but that’s not what they’re doing. They’re doing many other things with it… And the FBI is also doing things with it like they have direct access too, and none of this is being monitored or overseen by the congress or the courts or anybody. This is all done… You don’t hear anybody talking about what FBI is doing with the NSA collected data. That’s because they’re doing it in secret. I mean, they’re also using it to convict people of crimes, and that’s what they’re doing – they’re looking at it for criminal activity.

ROBIN: Okay.

BILL: But I also say that… It’s my personal opinion that they used this data to get rid of Elliot Spitzer when he was going after the bankers on Wall Street for defrauding people in the 2008 financial crisis. And so the probable cause to go after him was “he’s after the bankers, we have to stop him;? that’s the probable cause, so the FBI went into the NSA databases (emails, phone calls, you know, financial transactions – all of that) and found something to embarrass him and get rid of him.

ROBIN: Now, who…?

BILL: And that protected their bankers.

ROBIN: So what would be in it for the people who authorized that? Are you saying that they’re being paid off to abuse this information in this way? Is there financial gain?

BILL: Let’s put it this way: when Mueller of the FBI and Alexander of the NSA retired, they formed a cyber-security consulting group, and they were asking, if you remember, a million dollars a month for their consulting fees. After there was such a reaction to that kind of thing, they reduced it down to $600,000/month for their consulting fee. Well, I think I read somewhere in Washington Post – I believe – that their first customers were the bankers on Wall Street.

ROBIN: I see..

BILL: It does set a very bad image doing that. You see that gives the appearance of things. If you’re in government, that’s one of the one things you have to do is to always avoid even the appearance of a conflict of interest.

ROBIN: Yes indeed. Now, that would be for personal financial gain. In what ways, if any that you know about, has this massive body of information about all Americans that the NSA has collected, how has that been deployed for political purposes? I mean, do you know of any examples? I mean, it’s a big claim we’re making here.

BILL: Yeah, well, I mean, the direct use of it is the IRS gets the Tea Party.

ROBIN: And so who would have authorized that?

BILL: Well, the connection, at least from what’s come out so far from the investigation in congress, is that woman in the IRS (I can’t remember her name) had communications back to the White House.

ROBIN: Yes.

BILL: Don’t know who in the White House but somebody.

ROBIN: Wow. We’re going into break. We’re going into the break. Bill, we’ll come back and discuss this after.

[MUSIC]

ROBIN: This is Robin Koerner with Blue Republican Radio talking to an American hero, William Binney. William, we’ve talked a little bit about the political and personal gain that seems to drive, perhaps, the collection and abuse of data by the NSA. What about you…? I mean, you are a veteran of the agency. You were a very senior employee of America’s secret service. What motivates the folks who turn up to work every day, who aren’t maybe in the White House or in the IRS with decision-making power? They’re doing their jobs. They’ve got to know that they are engaged en masse in a violation of the basic principles of our nation. Are they just “jobsworths?? Do they just think the ideas of the Constitution are quaint and just not something to be bothered with – that they just don’t apply? Is there a certain personality type, is there a cultural issue that is enabling this, by inertia, to continue?

BILL: Actually, they’ve done some studies over the years in NSA the type of employees they have … If you’re familiar with the Myers & Briggs personal character traits.

ROBIN: Indeed.

BILL: And the testing that goes into that.

ROBIN: Yes.

BILL: I believe it came out at one point when they ran the test across the entire agency, they had 85% of the people in NSA working there were characterized as ISTJ. That means introverted, sensing, technical and judgmental.

ROBIN: Yes. Thinking and judgmental.

BILL: Yeah, these are the kind of people who focus on a job right in front of them. They like to isolate themselves, they’re not interactive with others that much, and so these are the kind of people that are easily threatened, which is what’s going on. Internally in NSA, they’re threatening them. In fact, the government’s threatening them, you know, across the board; that’s why Obama’s prosecuting so many people for whistleblowing.

ROBIN: Yes.

BILL: Because he wants to keep a secret government, keep everything secret and no transparency whatsoever, so to speak. You only become transparent when you’re exposed by a whistleblower and that’s what he doesn’t like, so you have to stop that and so that’s what he’s doing. Internally in NSA, they’re also threatening by saying (this is a Stasi tactic) ‘see something, say something’ of your coworkers, and you’re also responsible now to report your coworkers to internal security for any potential…another potential Snowden is what they’re after. But by doing that, they they’re making it totally… they’re totally destroying the work environment internally.

ROBIN: Yes.

BILL: I mean, how can you work with somebody who’s going to be watching you for everything you’re doing, and if you do something that they don’t like, they report you for it. So, I mean, it’s like the Stasi all over again.

ROBIN: Does this give you any – I know this is going to sound like a strange question, Bill – but does that fact give you any cause for optimism? In the sense that this is not a tenable situation in the long run. It doesn’t seem like it can go on indefinitely. Something has to break. Or is that just a naïve thought?

BILL: No, no, no. I think it is fundamentally destroying the work environment, and … you know, we’re paying over a hundred billion dollars a year to the intelligence community inside this country alone. Just ask yourselves, how many times have they warned us in advance of any of these attacks that we’ve been having. The answer is they haven’t, right?

ROBIN: But, but would we know? I remember Clinton, when he left office, saying that the secret services between them stopped some large number of attacks during his presidency. (I can’t remember what the number was.) And he actually did put a number out and it was quite significant. So would folks within the NSA, the CIA, the FBI – I mean, the people who are using these data – would they agree with you or would they just say that Bill’s factually wrong; that we’ve stopped 15 attacks in the last 3 years because, you know, of this information? Would they say that?

BILL: I mean, if you recall Senator Leahy’s investigation into that. Originally, they started claiming there were 54 attacks they stopped, and when the judiciary committee looked into it a little further, they found out, well, the number dropped down to 30-something and then 13-something, and then down to 1.

ROBIN: Right.

BILL: And the 1 they gave was the guy from in the West Coast or somewhere over there in the West Coast who sent $8500 to Al-Shabaab. Well, look at it this way: when you transfer that money, one end is in Africa, so it is not a domestic issue. So zero attacks domestically have ever been prevented. That is the whole point of it. When they came under real scrutiny, they claim any number of things, but as long as you don’t put them under the sunlight and examine what they’re saying, they’re lying to you. I mean, they have a track record of lying to you. Clearly, look what Clapper said, look what Alexander said in front of congress. I mean, they lied to congress, don’t you think they lie to us?

ROBIN: Sure.

BILL: Then congress lies to themselves; that’s what’s going on. That’s why the Amash-Conyers group coalition – that wasn’t even a committee – of Democrats and Republicans got together to try to unfund the NSA activity a year ago. And the reason they did that was because they finally realized that they were being lied to by the committees and by the agencies and by the administration.

ROBIN: So, do we have to…?

BILL: Well, I mean, the whole point was all of this activity was done in secret with a secret court behind closed doors and they were trying to keep an uninformed public and an uninformed congress, so they could manipulate them and pull their strings and say “do this and do that and if you don’t,? you know, “thousands of people are gonna die and this….? And that’s the threat they generally throw out.

ROBIN: So what do you think is the end of all of this? I mean, are there any systemic or systematic ways that We The People or maybe good politicians – if there are such things – can undo this? Or do we actually have to wait for it to eat itself because some of our political class are using this abusively derived information against others in the political class, and they tear themselves apart such that, like you say, eventually the higher-ups even get hurt by this. Is that what happens or is there something that we can do to accelerate the end of this nefarious setup?

BILL: Yeah, well, I think there is. It requires that people stand up. I mean, most people think they are powerless, but they’re not, they have all the power. I mean, they have the power of the vote that fires everybody, and they also have the power of the purse of not giving money to them and also you can influence corporations by saying if you contribute to them, I’m not going to buy your products anymore. Or you can call up your candidates or people running for office and say: ‘if you don’t do this, I’m not going to contribute to you, in fact, I’m going to work against you and contribute to the other side and try to find somebody who’d actually try to terminate this activity.’ The only one so far in congress that seems really willing to stop it all is Rand Paul.

ROBIN: Yes.

BILL: The rest of them seem to be going along with it, and they’re being duped too because they don’t know what they’re talking about. They’re just misinformed or ill-informed about what going on. They don’t really realize that you don’t have to sacrifice any privacy to get security.

ROBIN: And that’s the point that you’ve been making. Soon after you blew the whistle, I know you went to quite some lengths to get people with decision-making power and even the judiciary to understand this fact: that it’s just a myth that we need to trade our liberty/privacy to get our security, right?

BILL: That’s right. The difference is that the path they’ve taken is, like Alexander said, ‘we’re gonna to collect it all.’ Well, that path means it’s an ever-increasing amount of data that you have to collect year after year. That means you’ve committed yourself and congress and the people of the United States to committing more and more money every year to keep up with that ever-increasing amount of data. And so, you have to invest more, the budget grows, you know, you get a bigger budget. And as that grows also, you have to find places to store it so you now have to build more storage facilities like on Fort Meade they’re planning a 2.8 million sq. ft. facility coming up here. We know this because they submitted an environmental impact statement talking about it. So we know they’re putting this huge facility that is 3 times the size of Bluffdale.

ROBIN: That’s the facility in Utah, right? The data storage facility in Utah?

BILL: Yes, the Bluffdale, UT, facility. Yeah, that’s a million sq. ft. facility – this one is 2.8, so that is close to 3 times the size and it’s going on in Fort Meade. Well, you figure it’s going to take 5 or maybe a little more than 5 years to build that and $4bn or $5bn so that’s more to the budget. So once you do that, then you have to capture all the data, needs more communications are transported into the storage and then you have to have more contractors to manage the data and to manipulate it for the analysts, and you need more analysts and so on. So you see this is how you build a big empire, but in the process you sacrifice the ability to do the mission.

BILL: When you lose the professional focus and discipline of finding the targets and finding the bad guys…

ROBIN: Bill, we’re going into the break, so we’ll carry on when we come back…

[COMMERCIAL BREAK]

ROBIN: This is Robin Koerner with Blue Republican Radio, talking to William Binney, NSA whistleblower back in 2002, and he’s been working hard since to get the word out about just how horrendously the government through its secret agencies are violating the rights of Americans. And Bill, I’m sorry. At the end of the last segment, the bumper music there cut you off, and you were in the process of making a critical point about how the more we take in, the worse becomes our ability to actually use the information that we do take in for the benefit of our security.

BILL: Yes. See the point is: the more data you take in, the more you have to look at or sort through or have programs going through to find information. And they don’t have automated analysis programs, so what they do is they do sort routines or selection routines that will pull data out and will give it to much like a Google search, and then they will return that to the analyst to look at, to try to figure things out. Well, I mean, when you take in the entire world and all the contents and metadata of everybody on the planet, you end up with massive amounts of data like a standard Google query, except probably worse than that because they’ve got more data than Google does. See, they have all the transactional data, which Google doesn’t have, so… Google only has a limited amount. In the Google returns, you can get 100,000 to 1 million or 2 returns, and if you get that every day, your analysts could never get through it, so they never really find necessarily what is important to look at.

ROBIN: Yes.

BILL: And another way to look at it is: if you require your analysts to look at everybody in the planet, which is about 4 billion people using electronic devices. Then, assume if you had all these countries —the “Five Eyes,? and the other 8 countries that are participating with the NSA in this kind of data (acquisition and analysis) – then perhaps you could assemble 20,000 analysts among all of them. Once you have that, then you have to divide the 20,000 into 4 billion that means each analyst, if you could uniquely divide it up, would have to monitor 200,000 people. That’s like a, you know, fairly good-sized city.

ROBIN: Yes.

BILL: So it’s kind of hard to imagine how any analyst could possibly do that, so by taking this approach instead of using a disciplined, professional attack, they have made their analysts totally dysfunctional and they can’t succeed. Case in point: the shooting in Texas. Two days before those two gunmen tried to get in to kill people and that cartoon contest down in Texas, a member of Anonymous tipped off the local police that this attack was going to happen two days in advance of it. Now that’s what our intelligence community is supposed to do, but our intelligence community said absolutely nothing. Why? Because they’re looking at massive amounts of people. They don’t have the focused look that Anonymous did.

ROBIN: Yeah.

BILL: If they took that approach, they would succeed virtually every time. I don’t know how they could miss it.

ROBIN: Now, does this tie into what you were saying earlier then, Bill? I mean, you would think that the NSA, out of some form of self-interest, would want to improve their methods so that they could be more successful. Is the reason that they don’t do that – they would rather use this catchall that is failing – because the catchall-that’s-failing method is actually better for the political blackmail, etc., etc., and the self-interest of the higher parties that you mentioned earlier? Is it that they actually don’t really care about the success of their methods in terms of American security, but they have a different agenda altogether? Is that why they stick with it?

BILL: Yes, yes. That’s exactly what, from what I’ve seen, is what they’ve done.

ROBIN: Wow!

BILL: They traded the security of the people of the United States and the free world and our allies around the world for money… The whole idea is that to do a focused, disciplined approach doesn’t cost anywhere near the amount of money, nor would you need any of the storage. They wouldn’t have to build that facility; they wouldn’t have had to build that facility in Bluffdale. There is a money interest to get a bigger budget and a bigger operation so that you can manage more. That’s what their focus is, and they basically assume that if they collect it all, eventually down the road somebody’ll figure out how to get through it and work out things that are smart. And they’ll have algorithms go through it and figure it out for us. So eventually they’re planning somewhere down the road, but in the meantime we’re all vulnerable and much more vulnerable than we’ve ever been.

ROBIN: That makes a lot of sense, Bill. Would you say, again based on your experience with the internal culture of American secret services and of the people that you worked with, that the culture morally corrupts folks? I imagine a lot of people go in to, as I think you did, this work because they’re patriots: they care about their fellow Americans; they care about their country, their people; and they want to do the best they can – they want to apply their skills for the good of their nation. Now, they get in to that culture and they see that the driving intentions aren’t what they thought they were. That there are other interests being pursued. Do many folks get corrupted within the organization?

BILL: Yes. As a matter of fact, I refer to that process as the “cloning process.?

ROBIN: Okay.

BILL: Once you get into management, say it’s a GS-15 starting, maybe 14 – but 15 you really get into. Then at super grades, you’re really being cloned into corporate thinking. I refer to it as “corporate über alles.? It’s like when they had so many programs running that we call “legacy programs,? things that existed. Then, they need get any new ideas to be dependent on the things that they’ve got running already, so they could keep those things funded.

ROBIN: Right. Okay.

BILL: That’s the whole thinking, the whole process of how you build your empire and require more and more money to sustain it.

ROBIN: Yeah.

BILL: That’s really what they’ve been doing, and instead of taking new, fresh approaches, they’ve resorted to trying to sustain everything they’ve got and that they developed over time – even some of the analog systems. It’s just a, you know, a whole way of thinking from a corporate perspective…

ROBIN: That’s fascinating.

BILL: … that doesn’t necessarily have any influence on mission outcomes. In fact, it’s contrary to it. In fact, when I joined the agency, the values of the agency were mission first, then your people, then your organization, and then yourself. And when I left, they were exactly the reverse.

ROBIN: Hmm…okay. That makes sense.

BILL: The mission is last in line for values.

ROBIN: Yeah. Okay, I understand. Interestingly, earlier in the interview –you mentioned Rand Paul, and I want to just ask you a little bit about that because I know for a lot of folks who identify with the liberty movement, there’s a certain hopelessness about the electoral process. They believe that any application of people-power to the electoral process is basically hopeless because that process is hopelessly corrupt. Now, is it fair to say that – given that you offered the name of Rand Paul – that you believe, that you apply effort to supporting candidates like him, to shining the light on candidates like him, and that you think it is worth turning out to support folks like Rand Paul – and that it is possible, at least in theory, that a Rand Paul presidency would not become corrupted in the same way that a George W. or a Barack Obama presidency did? Do you believe that?

BILL: Yes, I do because…actually I’m trying to help as much as I can. I mean, if he gets the right advisors and doesn’t fall for the bamboozling of the intelligence community, then, he would have it right, and I believe that he will not fall for that. At least, so far, he’s evidenced the fact that he wouldn’t. He’s made it pretty clear that all the existing laws that we had would function well as long as we abided by the constitution.

ROBIN: Yes.

BILL: He’s advocating for more intrusive investigation of people who are suspect or in a zone of suspicion around bad guys.

ROBIN: Yeah.

BILL: That’s the disciplined, professional approach that really we need to succeed, and he’s got that focus and he said that on the floor of the Senate in his filibuster basically for 11 hours down there.

ROBIN: Yes.

BILL: He said that, and that’s really pretty clear. I mean, that’s really the way they have to do it. That’s the way Anonymous did it; that’s why they succeeded.

ROBIN: Yeah.

BILL: Our intelligence community is consistently failing on that. I mean, the FBI is really good at entrapping people, but, you know, those aren’t the real threats. I mean the real threats that were coming – fundamentally, most of them succeeded. The ones that failed failed because their devices failed, you know, or some local policeman saw them and stopped them.

ROBIN: Yeah, that makes sense.

BILL: So that should be clear evidence that they’re doing something wrong. I mean, after all, if you’re running an organization that’s not succeeding, you’re doing something wrong. You’ve got to change. That’s really pretty simple.

ROBIN: Now, the beginning of that answer, Bill, just to make sure that I was clear. Did I hear you say that you were advising Rand Paul or talking to him about these matters?

BILL: Yeah, we’re passing advice to people who are working with him…

ROBIN: Okay.

BILL: … so that we can try to contribute to him that way.

ROBIN: I see. That makes a lot of sense. And I should say — full disclosure — I’m the communications director for Ready for Rand PAC at www.readyforrand.com . So I’m actually delighted to hear that you, one of my heroes, is helping Rand. And, actually more importantly to me, I haven’t sat down across the table with Rand Paul and looked the man in the whites of his eyes, and I think it’s always important to do that. So I do feel a little better that you feel that he is a man of integrity and that you could even see him, in your mind’s eye in office, maintaining that integrity and his belief in the constitution. I certainly hope you’re right about that. Now, what about other political engagement? It amazes me and I’m British – as you can tell from my accent, Bill – but it kind of amazes me just how much we now know in the United States about the abuses of individual liberties and, yet, nobody seems to be marching in the street. Nobody is handcuffing themselves to the diggers in Utah building – this massive institution for violation of American rights. Are Americans apathetic? Are we antipathetic? Are we … should we be out in the streets, let’s say, exerting our Second Amendment rights at this point? What’s wrong with us, Bill. What’s wrong with us?

BILL: Okay, I think there are several things, and I said some of this in different meetings and talks and interviews.

ROBIN: Sure.

BILL: We are, we are… We’ve been for the last about 240 years very accustomed to having a country, a government that does the right thing. We wear the white hats; they try to do the right thing by us, and they try at least to be, for the most part, honest with us. And so, we have built up this internal trust in our central government to do the right thing or to try to do the right thing. That’s because we haven’t had a dictator here since George III, I might add. And so what we ended up doing, as I keep saying over and over again, what we ended up doing was trading George III for George the W. And so from there on, it went worse.

ROBIN: And you know I’ve said often, Bill, that George III never signed an executive order in his life. And to find the last English king that signed an executive order, you actually have to go back an entire century before the George III and to get to James, who was actually kicked out for his one executive order. So, I think I’ve got to say: I think our President is more of a monarch, and maybe even in the terms we’re discussing a dictator, than ever George III was.

BILL: I’m basically referring to it now as an imperial presidency.

ROBIN: Indeed.

BILL: For that reason, I mean, because everything is so secret and they don’t want it out in the open and they can’t, you know… they say the right words in public: ‘yes, we wanna have a… it’s not time to have an open discussion about this,’ but they’re not open at all about it. I mean the biggest thing they’ve not talked about is that all of the contents of the communications (emails and phone calls) that they’re doing now. Recently in The Intercept, they published some articles about using automated translations to do some rough translations of voice calls. Well, that means they’re doing it on the orders of millions of calls every day. They’re doing rough translations just to get words out to see if there is some word that might hit their list that they might want to look at that conversation a little more closely. Then they’ll use people to do a full transcription.

ROBIN: Yeah.

BILL: This is basically what I think Adrienne Kinne and David Murphy-Fawkes were doing at Fort Gordon, GA. They were transcribers doing transcriptions of US communications with other US people without a warrant, and according to FISA, those were federal felonies. That was also true when Tom Tamm — Thomas Tamm who was a DOJ lawyer — who was charged to write up request for warrants to the FISA court. And he saw all these warrantless wiretaps and warrantless reading of emails coming through as justification for probable cause. They should have gone through the FISA court, and here they were using the data that they already collected to go through as justification for probable cause to get a warrant from the FISA court. So you know, this is the collection of content that’s been going on all along – even the latest 5IG report came out at the bottom of page 8, the top of page, it says in there where Addington told General Hayden of NSA that (this was in the first 45 days of the authorization of 4 October, 2001, of the President).. he was telling Hayden that the President’s authorization authorized him to collect content of US citizens as well as metadata.

ROBIN: Wow.

BILL: So, I mean, this is the whole point that this has been going on all along and they keep claiming they’re not doing content and that’s just an outright lie.

ROBIN: Presumably, though, there’s also just a very simple motivation about this, which is nobody wants to be caught with their pants down, right? Nobody wants to have been caught in the lie, so we’re now in this kind of rut of having to build lies on lies on lies.

BILL: Right. And then everybody is involved so they all have to support it like McConnell in the Senate, all the leadership in the house and senate, the FISA Court, and the intelligence committees, and the Attorney General. They’re all a part of it, so they have to support it.

ROBIN: Now we’ve only got about a minute left in this segment, Bill, but do you think there is a change in zeitgeist now either among the People or the political class or both? Back towards individual rights? Rand Paul did do his filibuster. We got the USA Freedom Act –not ideal—but is it a step in the right direction? Or is it a whitewash? And again, we’ve only got about 45 seconds left, but what do you think about that?

BILL: It is basically a step in the right direction, but by no means anywhere near something that really, I mean… they’re only doing the surface stuff. They already have separate programs already acquiring most of that data any way. In the upstream acquisition of data, that’s where they’re tapping directly into the fiber lines and taking everything in bulk (content and metadata). For metadata, they probably get about 80% of it with the upstream program, and the Section 215 stuff was illegally acquired but it was the extra 20% that they were missing from the upstream, so it really doesn’t do that much. We need to do a lot more.

ROBIN: Thanks, Bill. We’re going into the final break. This is Robin Koerner with Bill Binney on Blue Republican Radio.

[BREAK]

ROBIN: In the final segment, I just want to ask you, Bill – and thanks again for being here with me on Blue Republican Radio — is it worse in America than everywhere else or is everywhere else catching up? Is this an American anti-civil liberties disease or is it a global one?

BILL: Well, it started all here within the US and it focused on US citizens. Then it spread around the world for the US to do it, but also at the same time the Five Eyes group (Canada, UK, Australia, New Zealand, and the US) went together on this and then other countries were joining it. So that you see that they’re all adopting the same procedures of bulk acquisition of data and information and using it to share…and they’re sharing it back and forth. Just recently the Bundesamt found out that the B&D, the equivalent of the NSA and CIA over in Germany, was also sharing data with NSA, and collecting data on their own citizens. So it’s really a worldwide process that started here but is infecting entire governments, democracies around the world as well. And so it’s really destroying the entire fabric of democracy everywhere on the planet. I mean, Ronald Reagan used to say that “we’re a country with a government,? well, now we’re a government with a country and we’re making everybody else that way too.

ROBIN: My god. That seems to be such a depressing note to end on. I would just say… I mentioned at the beginning of this show that we’ve just marked the 800th anniversary of the Magna Carta. In history, some things keep repeating themselves, and my little contribution to this was to set up at www.magnacarta.us — and I invite any of the listeners to go to magnacarta.us. I have rewritten the Magna Carta for our time in which I’ve listed to a set of grievances and made a set of demands, of those who would rule us, to undo some of the extreme violations of the basic individual liberties that we’ve been fighting for 800 years but are now undergoing in this country, and – if you have been listening to Bill, are affecting citizens around the world. Also, if you care about these issues, please go to www.bluerepublican.org , stick your name in the box, and join the mailing list. Check out the archives: we have some fantastic guests; we discuss issues like this a lot. We had Coleen Rowley, the 2002 Time Magazine Person of the Year, discussing similar issues recently – check that out in the archives. Bill, thank you very much for being with me on Blue Republican Radio.

(With thanks to Hema Gorzinnski for transcribing.)

****************

TLB recommends you visit The Blue Republican for more pertinent articles and information.

See featured article here.

Nazis-460Left to right: Dr. Josef Mengele, Rudolf Höss, Josef Kramer, and an unidentified officer. Photo from United States Holocaust Memorial Museum #34755. See: German Medical Society Apologizes for Nazi-era Atrocities by Doctors

 

by John P. Thomas – Health Impact News

Creating an Elite Class of Super Humans

This is the first part of a two part series exploring the relationship between the controversial eugenics movement of the past and modern genetics. Eugenics was dedicated to cleansing and purifying humanity from “inferior? members with the hope of solving various social problems related to poverty, disability, and illness. To accomplish this, it sought to create a superior race of people and to use forced sterilization and extermination to eliminate future generations of defective human beings. Darwin’s theory of evolution was used to justify the practice of eugenics. Later, when eugenics fell from favor, modern genetics began to grow up from the ashes of the former movement.

When Adolf Hitler applied Darwin’s theory of evolution and the principles of eugenics to the goals of the German state, the result was the murder of eleven million men, women and children. These lives were sacrificed in the name of eugenics. Eugenicists were seeking to improve the conditions of life for humanity by creating a “superior? race of people.

The eugenics movement had a very dark side, which led to social control, loss of reproductive freedom, and the loss of life. Should we be concerned that modern genetic science might have a dark side as well? Will the fruit of genetic research be misused by ill-intentioned people to gain control over others as happened with eugenics in the past? Has modern genetics completely severed itself from its roots? Or, might it become the tool that will be used to try to create a master class of genetically superior human beings in America?

What are the deceptions and dangers of the modern genetics movement? Does true health and true happiness lie in the human genome? Are we really bound to the set of genes that we received from our parents, or can we overcome what we were given? What are the factors that activate or deactivate certain genes, and how can we control the expression of our genetic make-up to promote our health and the health of our children? What are the motivations of certain groups who want us to believe that genes control every aspect of our lives – that we have no other options than to suffer while genetic scientists look for genetic cures for all that ails us? Are we really more than our genes or is our genetic code all there is?

These questions and many more will be examined in these articles. Let’s begin by learning about the development of eugenics.

Eugenics in a Nutshell

Darwinian-evolution-460

The word Eugenics means “good genes.? Eugenicists believe that principles of Darwin’s theory regarding “the survival of the fittest? can be used to support the elimination of weak and undesirable people from society. They believe that human beings are inherently no different than animals, and therefore we can and should be bred like animals. A farmer does not allow deficient cows in his herd to reproduce, and in the same way, eugenicists believe that certain people in our society should control human reproduction.

Simply put, eugenics consists of rational methods for putting evolution on the fast track, so that only the “best? people will reproduce and become superior beings. It is also the fast track for helping inferior families and inferior groups of people to stop their reproduction and to quickly die out.

Eugenicists believe that natural attraction, affection, and love between men and women should not be the basis upon which procreation should be based. Rather, scientists and the medical system should provide scientific and common sense control over the individuals who should be allowed to mate with one another. People with the best traits should be encouraged to reproduce, and those with defective traits should be prevented from producing children by various methods such as sterilization, segregation, and, if necessary, death.

Are We Doomed to a Life of Suffering and Illness, Because of Our Genetics?

A steady stream of information has been distributed in every corner of society for over 150 years telling us that defective germplasm, or “bad genes?, lead to problems of child development, illness, low achievement, alcoholism, and even poverty. We are also told that good genes must be present in order for people to live healthy, prosperous, and happy lives.

The general teaching is that our personal genetic code is the master blueprint that determines nearly everything about us. It determines our intellectual gifts, our artistic gifts, our physical structure, and establishes the parameters through which we will develop certain illnesses and ultimately die. We have been taught that this blueprint is written in stone, and if couples produce children, then their combined genetic material will create a new, unchangeable blueprint for their children. We are also told that the real “cure? for diseases will come from genetic repairs that are just beyond the horizon of modern science.

Scientists are using techniques of genetic engineering to modify plants and animals (GMOs). We are told that human modification is just around the corner. We are promised that the next step in medicine will be a personal one, where our illnesses will be treated with drugs that have been specifically formulated to match the requirements of our genetics. However, until that time comes, we must continue to rely on existing pharmaceutical drugs.

In short, we are being told that in some cases, there isn’t much hope for healing until modern genetics brings us the cure for all that ails us. Thus, some of us and some of our children are doomed to a life of illness and suffering unless we are willing to consider other options.

Aborting “Defective? Children Up to the Age of Five is Another Option

Matteo_di_Giovanni_Massacre-of-innocents-Bethlehem-460The Massacre of the Innocents at Bethlehem, by Matteo di Giovanni, 1487. Source.

 

Some people now believe that if parents decide that they wish to have the life of their child brought to an end before age five, because of disability, illness, inconvenience of the parents, or for any other reason, then the parents should have the right to abort the child. So, if you don’t like the color of his hair, the color of her eyes, the developmental delays that you are observing, the illnesses that are making life difficult, or the behaviors that you cannot control, then you should have the right to have your child aborted (legally killed) up to age 5 or 6. [1, 2, 3]

Historically, killing a child after it is born was called infanticide. This is now being given a new name – “post-birth abortion? or “after-birth abortion.?

Central to this way of thinking is the belief that children are only potential human beings until they reach the age of “self-awareness,? which is believed to happen around age five. Proponents of post-birth abortion see children as disposable until the child becomes aware of its existence as a person and can begin to develop goals and ambitions for life.

It is believed that prior to age 5, children live in a pre-aware state, and have an animal-like existence, which is just like a chimpanzee, a dog, a chicken, or a pig. Thus, killing a young child because of bad genetic composition is no different than killing a sick dog or a mature pig that is ready to be processed into sausage.

Those who believe in post-birth abortion are challenging American society to reconsider how we value human life. They are observing the fact that we already permit babies in the womb to be killed, we encourage the termination of the lives of animals when they are seriously ill, and most of us approve of slaughtering animals to supply food. Based on this, they ask, “Why do we extend special privileges to young children who have the same level of consciousness as animals or babies in the womb? Why do we preserve the lives of defective people who are draining society of its resources??

These groups extend their argument to the elderly as well. If a person with some form of dementia such as Alzheimer’s is no longer aware of his or her own existence as a human being, can no longer understand his or her medical condition, and is so frail and feebleminded that he or she can no longer contribute anything to society, then they would tell us that the termination of that person’s life is no different than euthanizing an animal or aborting a baby in the womb.

“Modern? Thinking is Simply the Old Eugenics Resurfacing as “Science?

The idea that people in authority should have the legal right to terminate the lives of other people in certain circumstances to benefit the greater good of society is not new. These thoughts have a long history, which was part of the original eugenics movement that began in 1859. The human extermination program that was implemented by Adolf Hitler before and during World War II was a prime example of eugenics. He was trying to purify the human race by killing all those who he determined would have an inferior contribution to the human germplasm if they were to reproduce. He and other leaders of the Third Reich believed that only superior human beings should be allowed to reproduce, and the inferior should be eliminated.

The proposal that we legalize the killing of “defective? children is just the reappearance of old style eugenics with a slightly new twist.

What do Eugenicists Believe?

Group-of-geneticists-460

Eugenicists believe that everything about us is determined by genetic composition. Who we are and how we behave is determined almost entirely by our germplasm – our personal genetic code.

If we have bad genes, then there is nothing that can be done about the situation. If our genes are seriously defective, then eugenicists would say that sterilization or termination of life is the best solution to the problem. Both of these options would help preserve future generations from inheriting defective germplasm from defective parents.

What do Eugenicists Desire?

Eugenicists seek to create a class of people who possess superior attributes such as intelligence, physical strength, and physical appearance. They also seek to discourage reproduction by “inferior? people.

When techniques of discouragement fail to reduce the birth of new “defectives,? then forced sterilization of undesirables is pursued under the authority of the state. When sterilization is not practical, then termination of life is used to decrease the surplus population of defectives.

Charles Darwin and the Birth of Modern Eugenics

Charles_Robert_Darwin_by_John_Collier-460Charles Darwin in 1881, by John Collier. Image source.

 

Eugenics historian Edwin Black carefully described the development of the Eugenics movement from the period of time beginning with the work of Charles Darwin in 1859 to our present time. He described the goals of eugenicists and their influence over social policy. His 566 page book records the history of the eugenics movement and shows how eugenics was transformed into modern genetics. The book is filled with quotations in which eugenicists explain their theories and their beliefs in their own words. Here is a taste of what he reported in his book, War Against the Weak: Eugenics and America’s Campaign to Create a Master Race. Mr. Black stated:

On May 2 and May 3, 1911, in Palmer, Massachusetts, the research committees of the ABA’s [American Breeders Association] eugenic section adopted a resolution creating a special new committee. “Resolved: that the chair appoint a committee commissioned to study and report on the best practical means for cutting off the defective germ-plasm of the American population.?

Ten groups were eventually identified [by the American Breeders Association] as “socially unfit? and targeted for ?elimination.? First, the feebleminded; second, the pauper class; third, the inebriate class or alcoholics; fourth, criminals of all descriptions including petty criminals and those jailed for nonpayment of fines; fifth, epileptics; sixth, the insane; seventh, the constitutionally weak class; eighth, those predisposed to specific diseases; ninth, the deformed; tenth, those with defective sense organs, that is, the deaf, blind and mute. In this last category, there was no indication of how severe the defect need be to qualify; no distinction was made between blurry vision or bad hearing and outright blindness or deafness.

Not content to [only] eliminate those deemed unfit by virtue of some malady, transgression, disadvantage or adverse circumstance, the ABA committee targeted their extended families as well. Even if those relatives seemed perfectly normal and were not institutionalized, the breeders considered them equally unfit because they supposedly carried the defective germ-plasm that might crop up in a future generation. The committee carefully weighed the relative value of “sterilizing all persons with defective germ-plasm,? or just “sterilizing only degenerates.? The group agreed that “defective and potential parents of defectives not in institutions? were also unacceptable [to society]. [4]

The notion that certain elite groups should be in charge of cleansing society of defective persons was popular in the United States during the first 45 years of the 20th century. It was only after the full extent of the eugenics program in Nazi Germany was brought to light that eugenicists in the United States began to take a less public position.

When Charles Darwin’s book The Origin of Species was published in 1859, it provided the perfect theory for those who believed in human breeding. Darwin’s cousin, Sir Francis Galton of England, applied The Origin of Species to his concerns about the degenerate state of society. Francis Galton believed social problems were caused by defects in human germplasm (genes). He believed that if “defective? people could be prevented from conceiving and giving birth to children, then problems such as poverty, mental illness, mental retardation, and alcoholism would die out.

Francis Galton – the First Major Leader in the Eugenics Movement

Francis_Galton2-460Francis Galton. Image source

 

Australian researcher and writer Roger Sandall described how Francis Galton’s life was transformed by the theory of Darwinian evolution. Roger Sandall wrote:

Coming at a critical stage of both his scientific career and his domestic life, Darwin’s book shattered Galton’s religious beliefs and turned him towards biological research. He always had what he called “a hereditary bent of mind?, and from 1859 he proceeded to investigate, he said later, matters “clustered round the central topics of Heredity and the possible improvement of the Human Race.? [5]

I will summarize a few additional points drawn from Roger Sandall’s discussion of Francis Galton and the early eugenics movement. These points are not just the old and moldy views of a long dead eugenicist, but are beliefs that continue to influence the thinking of many people today.

Francis Galton taught his followers that only the genetically perfect should be allowed to reproduce. In his 1873 essay “Hereditary Improvement? he insists that those of feeble constitution must embrace celibacy “lest they should bring beings into existence whose race is predoomed to destruction by the laws of nature.?

Galton believed that certain races were superior, and the reproduction of inferior races should be tightly controlled so that only the few best specimens of that race would be allowed to become parents, and only a few of their descendants should be allowed to live.

Galton recommended that his country (England) should be scoured for the names and addresses of gifted people who would be urged to intermarry. This intellectual aristocracy would receive special benefits. Defectives would receive nothing at all. Endowments would be used to maintain a privileged class living in healthy circumstances, which would enable it to multiply in comfort.

Galton declared that the gifted class should treat lower classes with all kindness, so long as they maintained celibacy. But if these lower classes continued to procreate children who are morally, intellectually, and physically inferior, then it is easy to believe the time may come when such persons would be considered to be enemies of the state. As such, he believed that they would forfeit all their claims to kindness from the superior class.

Eugenics Replaces Religion

Roger Sandall summarized Galton’s effect on society and its moral underpinnings. Sandall stated:

When Galton wrote, late in life, that the effect of Darwinism was “to demolish a multitude of dogmatic barriers by a single stroke, and to arouse a spirit of rebellion against all ancient authorities whose positive and unauthenticated statements were contradicted by modern science?, a radical antinomian spirit was unleashed; and when he declared that eugenics “must be introduced into the national conscience, like a new religion,? adding that “it has indeed strong claims to become an orthodox religious tenet of the future,? a kind of displaced religious zeal was put at the service of political compulsion: allied to German nationalism, it is unsurprising that it led, step by step, to policies of racial exclusion and finally annihilation. [6]

Creating an Elite Class of Super Humans

Avengers-comics-300

 

Proponents of eugenics believe that a pure bloodline should be created that contains only the best traits of humanity. They believe that techniques of good breeding should be used to create a race of super humans who are made in the image of the eugenicists. These super humans will all be highly intelligent, strong, healthy, beautiful, talented, prosperous, motivated, and capable of submitting their will to the will and greater good of society.

Physical appearance is also seen as being important. People will need to have a certain skin color, hair color, eye color, and meet high standards for mental acuity and emotional stability. They also must possess “ideal? physical strength and physical form (either male or female) in order to have the right to reproduce.

People with a personal or family history of poverty, chronic illness, addiction, disabilities, lack of motivation, minimal intellectual achievement, and non-conformist thinking would be unwelcome in this new society, and would not be allowed to reproduce.

Why Don’t We Hear the Word “Eugenics? Used Much Today?

Ku_Klux_Klan_Virgina_1922_Parade-460Three Ku Klux Klan members standing at a 1922 parade in Virginia. Image source.

 

Very few people use the word eugenics today when speaking in public, because it is on the list of politically incorrect words. Despite the positive rhetoric of eugenics, it was a highly racist endeavor, which sought to elevate one race above all others. This will be discussed in detail at a later point in this article.

Even though people no longer openly use the word eugenics, the insidious principles of eugenics can still be observed all around us in 21st century America. Eugenics is insidious, because it destroys life, denies reproductive freedom, destroys the functioning of the family structure, and targets certain classes and races of people for destruction. It does all this while seeking to establish a master race which is intended to dominate the world.

The plans of eugenicists closely follow the principles Darwin’s theory of evolution, which tells us that the strongest and fittest should overcome and replace the weak and inferior. Eugenicists have determined that they are the fittest and most able people for managing society and it is their responsibility as the superior beings to actively purge the weak and inferior from society. They believed that defective people need to be prevented from reproducing so that the number of defectives in the world will dwindle and fade away, while they, the fittest group of people, are allowed to survive and flourish.

The Eugenics Enthusiasts in U.S. History

Alexander_Graham_Bell-460American Inventor and Eugenicist Alexander Graham Bell. Image source.

 

Historically, the goals of the eugenics movement were to eliminate poverty, disability, numerous chronic illnesses, and human suffering. These lofty goals were designed to provide the greatest amount of happiness to society. On the surface, this sounds good to most people. These goals led many prominent Americans to support the eugenics agenda.

People such as Nobel laureate George Bernard Shaw, author H. G. Wells, Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger, among many others, were very involved in promoting eugenics. Alexander Graham Bell, the inventor of the telephone, was one of the most zealous participants in the American Eugenics Movement. [7]

College professors were prominent among both the officers and members of various eugenics societies which sprang up in the United States and Europe in the early 20th century. In virtually every college and university, professors were inspired by the new creed of eugenics, and most of the major colleges had credit courses on eugenics. These classes were typically well attended and their content was generally accepted as part of proven science. [8]

Eugenicists believed that the primary determinant of mankind’s behavioral nature was genetic, and various environmental reforms designed to improve living conditions, for example, were largely useless. Further, the eugenics movement believed that those who were at the bottom of the social ladder in society, such as the Black race, were in this position not because of social injustice or discrimination, but as a result of their own inferiority. [9]

The Horrors of Eugenics: Forced Sterilization in the U.S. Upheld by the Supreme Court

carrie-emma-buck-460Carrie Buck sits with her mother, Emma Buck, on the grounds of the Virginia State Colony of Epileptics and Feeble-Minded in Madison Heights, near Lynchburg. This photograph was taken in November 1924 by Arthur H. Estabrook, a eugenics researcher who interviewed the two women before testifying in a legal case that resulted in the forced sterilization of Carrie Buck. Source.

 

In the early 1900s, eugenicists began to use persuasion to gain voluntary cooperation with their new way of thinking about human reproduction. In the United States, the strategy of persuasion was eventually replaced by a strategy of coercion and compulsion.

In 1927, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the State of Virginia’s sterilization plan in Buck Versus Bell, which affirmed that it had the right to sterilize mentally deficient residents to prevent them from “producing more of their kind.? This decision opened the door to forced sterilization in many U.S. states.

At that time, eugenicists believed that human character and behavior was almost completely determined by the germplasm. In contemporary language, we would say everything is determined by one’s genes. Eugenicists believed that every “negative? trait they observed in a person could be passed on to their descendants. For example, a person living in poverty is poor because of his genes, and unless sterilization is pursued, that person will create children who are destined for poverty. They admitted that sometimes defective germplasm might not be seen in every child conceived by “defectives,? but if it was present in one generation, then it will be permanently present in all succeeding generations, and will eventually reappear.

In the Buck vs. Bell decision of May 2, 1927, the United States Supreme Court upheld a Virginia statute that provided for the sterilization of people considered to be genetically unfit. The Court’s decision, delivered by Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., included the infamous phrase “Three generations of imbeciles are enough.? Upholding Virginia’s sterilization statute provided the green light for similar laws in 30 states, under which an estimated 65,000 Americans were sterilized without their own consent or that of a family member. [10]

Eugenics in Nazi Germany: 11 Million “Inferior? People Put to Death

Grave-Bergen-Belsen-German-Concentration-Camp_1945-460A broken and twisted mound of emaciated corpses lay strewn in one of three open burial pits at the liberation of Belsen on 15 April 1945. British troops were faced with over 10 000 dead inmates who required immediate burial to halt the spread of typhus and other diseases. Belsen, one of many Nazi concentration camps of the German Third Reich, was used as an instrument of genocide against Jews and those of other nationalities and categories. Image source.

 

The belief that the state had the right to control human reproduction was taken to the extreme in Nazi Germany in the late 1930s and early 1940s. The Third Reich of Germany extinguished the lives of 6 million Jews, and 5 million other people who were deemed undesirable. Undesirables included Jews (from all levels of society), and people from various other groups. The other groups included outspoken Christians and their pastors who would not submit to Nazi ideology. Gypsies, homosexuals, mentally ill persons, people with low mental functioning, and people who were deaf, blind, crippled, and epileptics were all targeted for extermination. The list of inferiors included all people of Polish ethnicity, people in interracial marriages, and people with dark/African skin color. [11]

For the sake of expediency, extermination of defectives and inferior people was the final solution chosen by Hitler. Forced sterilization of eleven million people was not practical, and it would not remove the influence of such people from society. Extermination, however, would immediately stop reproduction of these people and also would allow their personal resources to be confiscated for the German war effort.

Eugenics: Desensitizing People to the Value of Human Life

Of course, eugenic programs of the past and genetic programs of the present do not begin with mass scale slaughter of unwanted people as happened in Germany. They are marketed as benevolent programs that are designed to help people be happy and prosperous. They subtly condition people to believe that the State has a right to control every aspect of their reproduction for the sake of personal happiness.

This belief is then gradually expanded to show that the government has a similar right to control human reproduction for the sake of creating a happy and prosperous society. It progresses from voluntary programs to involuntary programs – from cooperation to mandatory compliance. The techniques of the eugenics movement involve sterilization and death. The objective of preventing reproduction by undesirables was achieved by all means possible.

Each step in the implementation of an eugenics program desensitizes people to the value of human life. It leads people to accept the idea that some people are inferior and others are superior, because of their genetic makeup. It teaches people to give honor to certain people and to submit to a small group of super people who are considered to be the model race. It teaches people to accept sterilization and the killing of the minority to support the needs and goals of the majority. The proposed killing of children up to the age of 5 years old, for example, is an outgrowth of eugenic thinking, because in that mindset there is no hope for the defective children, and the best thing we can do for everyone is to simply eliminate them before they begin to drain society of its precious resources.

First the weakest and most helpless are targeted by eugenicists, and then certain undesirable people, who have “bad genes,? are marked for destruction. This type of population reduction is called systematic depopulation. Depopulation is also called genocide, which is the killing of large groups of people who share a common trait such as ethnic background or religious affiliation.

The Family is not Compatible with the Practice of Eugenics

Multi-Generation-Family-Praying-Dinner-460

Eugenicists also will seek to destroy the family structure in order to accomplish their goals. The value and functioning of the family unit consisting of a husband/father, wife/mother and numerous children will be attacked on every front.

This is necessary to break the emotional bonds that tie family members together, and replace it with zealous allegiance to the state. Commitment to the power of the state must be stronger than love and commitment to family members so that defectives in the family can be sterilized or removed without a struggle.

The Existence of God is not Compatible with Eugenics

The-end-kkk-460“The End? Referring to the end of Catholic influence in the US. Klansmen: Guardians of Liberty 1926. Image Source.

 

There must also be a breaking of affection and commitment to God. Eugenics is incompatible with true religion. Eugenics and the power of the state must rule over people and not the God of the Bible.

Eugenicists understand that one can only serve one master, and their master must be the god and religion of Darwinian Evolution. The moral absolutes of conservative biblical Christianity stand in direct opposition to Darwin’s theory of evolution and the full implementation of eugenic techniques.

The belief that life is a gift from God, and should be cherished and preserved, is incompatible with the outworking of eugenics, which seeks to put life under the authority of a superior class of people and under the authority of the state.

Specific Methods of How Eugenics is Forced Upon Society

Specifically, these are some of the methods that have been used to implement eugenics programs over the past hundred years. Please note how they start with encouragement and voluntary participation, and end up with involuntary means to control and reduce the population.

1. Convince superior human beings to produce more children. The fruit of this strategy would result in a rapid increase in the number of “superior? people and strengthen the “superior? bloodline. In Nazi Germany, breeding centers were established to produce large numbers of superior blond blue-eyed children. Most of these children were conceived outside of marriage and fathered by Nazi officers. [12]

2. Encourage inferior human beings to have fewer children, or discourage them from having children altogether. This would shrink “undesirable? bloodlines and weaken the possible influence on the superior bloodline.

3. Prevent people with certain inferior qualities from marrying superior people. This means to forbid inter-racial marriage, marriage between disabled and non-disabled people, and marriage of superior people with those of undesirable ethnic, religious, or economic position, because they would weaken the bloodline of the superior group.

4. Physically isolate severely deficient people from the greater society by institutionalizing them in the name of providing compassionate care or simply put them into containment camps. This will prevent them from marrying and reproducing.

5. Impose forced sterilization on feebleminded people, criminals, and on other incurable defectives such as alcoholics and paupers, so they cannot pass on their undesirable flaws to another generation.

6. Give people a low cost or no cost opportunity to use contraceptives and/or to choose pre-birth abortion to prevent the birth of disabled children and to prevent babies from being born into poverty.

7. Terminate the lives of defective children and defective elderly adults who are not able to contribute to the greater good of society, or who threaten the economic status of those who have been declared the superior race. Use genetic screening for babies in the womb and abort those who have defective genes.

8. Implement programs that will weaken the reproductive capacity of the population. Vaccines, pesticides, GMO food, highly processed food, antibiotics and other drugs, etc. all are known to have a negative influence on fertility. [13] (Those who are aware of these influences can avoid exposure and protect their fertility.)

9. Implement economic programs that will decrease the buying power of low-income persons, which will place increasing financial pressure on low-income working families, so that they will choose to limit the number of children they produce. [14]

10. Contain or exterminate anyone who resists the use of eugenics and who would threaten the development of the superior human bloodline.

Who is Superior and Who is Not?

Karl-Brandt-Nuremberg-Doctors-Trial-460War Crimes Tribunal at Nuremberg. Adolf Hitler’s personal physician, 43-year old Karl Brandt. Brandt was also Reich Commissar for Health and Sanitation, and was indicted by the U.S. prosecution with 22 other Nazi doctors. Brandt was found guilty of participating in and consenting to using concentration camp inmates as guinea pigs in horrible medical experiments, supposedly for the benefit of the armed forces. He was sentenced to death by hanging. Image Source.

 

This question is the key to understanding eugenics. It is also the key for uncovering the deceptions and lies that are used to justify eugenics as a socially advanced way of managing society.

Adolf Hitler and his colleagues decided that it was the Nordic or Aryan bloodlines that were superior to all other bloodlines on the Earth. Thus, Adolf Hitler and others like him were to become the superior bloodline. Those with similar physical characteristics/appearance, emotional functioning, and mental capacities, and those who possessed certain ideological convictions were to become archetypes of humanity. They were to be raised up above all other people and others were to be brought into subjection to them.

Hitler found that the most efficient method of preventing reproduction and discontinuing the negative influence on the Aryan bloodline was to terminate the lives of undesirables. These were the people who threatened the racial superiority of the leaders of the German Third Reich and threatened their economic prosperity and social happiness. Eugenicists always seek to protect their own race, their own ethnic group, their own religion (which is now called Social Darwinism), and their own economic prosperity regardless of the country where they live.

In the view of the German leaders of the Third Reich, even inferiors in their own Aryan race needed to be purged from the bloodline. They saw the Darwinian struggle for survival of the fittest in the context of the German war effort. War was a positive force for bloodline purification, not only because it eliminated the “weaker? races which they were attacking, but also because it weeded out the weaker members of their own Aryan race. Hitler was convinced that the strongest people would survive. Nazi Germany, partly for this reason, openly glorified war because it was an important means of eliminating the less fit of the highest race, a step necessary to upgrade the Aryan race. [16]

The Japanese Eugenics Program

Pearl_harbour-460U.S. Battleships in Pearl Harbor bombed by Japanese Aircraft. Image source.

 

While Hitler’s eugenic program was in full force, a similar program was underway in Japan. The Japanese were actively involved in building up and maintaining a pure Japanese bloodline. They were influenced by American eugenicists and used many of the same techniques that were being used by Hitler. They were trying to keep the Japanese bloodline pure for the same reasons other eugenicists named. [17]

Eugenics Goes Hand in Hand with War

The eugenics programs of Germany and Japan shared several similarities. Both believed that there was a superior race (bloodline) and that bloodline must be preserved to strengthen the power of the state and to preserve the prosperity of society.

Of course, the Germans and the Japanese differed on the matter of which race was to be superior. They both believed that their respective race deserved, and was destined, to dominate the world. They were in agreement that active steps must be taken by government to purify the population, and to prevent superior pure-blooded people from intermarrying with inferior people groups. However, they obviously were in disagreement about which bloodline was superior. Should it be Oriental/Japanese blood or Caucasian/German blood?

Eugenicists have Transformed themselves into “Genetic Scientists”

Life-scientist-researching-460

The massive extermination of human life by the Third Reich of Germany cast a dark shadow over eugenics, and people tried to distance themselves from the word eugenics. However, the movement did not die with the death of Adolf Hitler and the Third Reich. Neither did the eugenics movement die when the word eugenics became unfashionable.

There were several decades of transition during which the language of eugenics was transformed into the new language of human genetics.

After the horrors of Hitler’s eugenics program were brought to light, eugenicists realized that they needed to change their tactics. In 1947 the remnant board of directors of the American Eugenics Society (AES) unanimously agreed, “The time was not right for aggressive eugenic propaganda.? Instead, the AES continued quietly soliciting financial grants from such organizations as the Dodge Foundation, the Rockefeller-funded Population Council, and the Draper Fund for the purpose of proliferating genetics as a legitimate study of human heredity. [18]

In 1959, the leaders of the American Eugenics Society understood that reestablishing eugenics was an uphill battle. A draft address written by the president of the American Eugenics Society, Frederick Osborn, confirmed this when he prepared to speak to his Board of Directors. He outlined the future of eugenics, which included an ambitious campaign of behind-the-scenes genetic counseling, birth control, and university-based medical genetic programs. At the same time, President Osborn conceded that the movement’s history was too scurrilous to gain public support. [19]

We now know that the eugenic theories of the past, which said that human breeding would solve all problems of poverty and illness, was not supported by science or even empirical observation. The eugenics movement was based on faulty assumptions about inheritance, and used incomplete observations of family trees to make conclusions that often falsely labeled people as imbeciles, deficient, or defective. The truth about the science of eugenics is that there was no science to eugenics. What passed for scientific method in the former eugenics movement between 1859 and 1959 did not stand the test of time. [20]

Edwin Black continued with his summary of how eugenics was intentionally transformed into genetics to escape the negative history of the past. He wrote:

In a candid 1965 letter, Osborn wrote, “I started hopefully on this course thirty-five years ago and someday would be glad to tell you all of the steps we took—the work we did, the conferences we held, and the money we put into the then Eugenical News—about $30,000 a year, to propagandize eugenics. It got us nowhere, probably because we did not have the backing of the scientific world.?

Edwin Black wrote:

That same year, after numerous genetic counseling and human heredity programs had been established, Osborn was able to confidently write to Paul Popenoe, “The term medical genetics has taken the place of the term negative eugenics.?

Keeping a low profile had paid off. On April 12, 1965, Osborn wrote a colleague at Duke University somewhat triumphantly, “We have struggled for years to rid the word eugenics of all racial and social connotations and have finally been successful with most scientists, if not with the public.?[21]

Edwin Black describes the completion of the transition:

The face lift of the eugenics movement was completed during the sixties, seventies and eighties. Many entities changed their names. For example, the Human Betterment League of North Carolina changed its name to the Human Genetics League of North Carolina in 1984.

In Britain there were name changes as well. The Annals of Eugenics became the Annals of Human Genetics and is now a distinguished and purely scientific publication. The University College of London’s Galton Chair of Eugenics became the Chair of Genetics. The university’s Galton Eugenics Laboratory became the Galton Laboratory of the Department of Genetics. The Eugenics Society changed its name to the Galton Institute. [22]

Insensitivity to Death: Accept Killing as “Necessary? for Advancement of Society

The slippery slope of eugenics rapidly taught people to become insensitive to death. How could the people of Germany become able to tolerate millions of innocent people being killed in the death camps? The answer, I believe, is that they were systematically led, step by step, to accept killing as a necessary reality for the advancement of their people.

Are Americans on the same slippery slope today?

Kevorkian-UCLA-460Dr. Jack Kevorkian. Image source.

 

Twenty years ago, great numbers of Americans were horrified to hear how Dr. Jack Kevorkian was setting up equipment so that totally disabled or terminally ill people could commit suicide. In 1999 this was a crime and he was convicted of that crime. He served an eight year prison sentence. [23]

Today, several states have legalized physician-assisted suicide, and in the minds of many, physician-assisted suicide or euthanasia is just another medical procedure that is available for those who desire it.

On New Year’s Day 1973, human abortion was completely illegal in most U.S. states and only available in other states for a very limited number of reasons. Even though some strongly objected to the ban, others were truly horrified over the thought of killing babies in the womb.

Three weeks later that all changed when the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the prohibition against abortion in Roe versus Wade. Today, abortion on demand is treated as just another medical procedure by most people, even though a small minority still vigorously object to the practice.

In the 40 years that followed the Roe versus Wade decision, over 55 million babies have been aborted in the United States. [24] How many people today are horrified by this statistic?

Our society permits people to terminate the lives of unborn children so that women can have control over their bodies. We permit physicians in some states to assist severely ill patients to commit suicide (euthanasia) so that these patients can have control over their bodies. These “freedoms? are seen as progressive steps that are being used for the “good? of individuals and society.

The problem is that when birth control and death are involved, the rights of certain groups seem to be crushed while the rights of other groups are elevated. Before Roe vs. Wade, the rights of the unborn and the rights of the mother were kept in balance. Today, mothers have nearly all the rights, and children in the womb have almost none. Before Roe vs. Wade, the life of an unborn child was considered to be in the hands of God and should not be tampered with by human intervention. This has now changed, and abortion has become a personal matter, which is up to the decision of the mother.

In a similar way, the time for a terminally ill person’s death was considered to be a sacred matter between that person and God. Physicians were legally and ethically bound to do no harm to a patient. Causing the death of a patient was considered to be harm. Today, the killing of a person who wants to die is no longer seen as “doing harm,? and is now permitted.

When it comes to taking life from others, things always seem to move in a less restrictive direction. Those whose life is taken become a kind of underclass and those who take their lives become a superior class. The rights of the underclass continue to shrink while the rights of the superior class continue to grow.

Going back to the topic of post-birth abortion, which was discussed at the beginning of this article, we see that babies and young children are definitely in the underclass position. I can’t help but wonder how long it will be before post-birth abortion during the first week after birth will be accepted and legalized – being seen as the right of parents exercised for the good of society? How long will it be before post-birth abortion up to the age of five will be hailed as a sign of an advanced society that truly cares about the greater good of its members?

Conclusion: Where is Modern Genetics Leading Us?

If our tolerance for the termination of life in the United States continues to increase, then expanded opportunities to take life will follow. Who will be the next group of “defectives? who will be targeted for either repair or extermination? Perhaps it will be people whose only “defect? is that they are poor, are aliens, or are strangers to us and just don’t seem to fit in with social norms.

People may no longer call themselves eugenicists, but the desire to perfect humanity and create a “better? people remains a strong desire in the hearts and minds of many scientists, politicians, and corporations. Many people have never heard the word eugenics, nevertheless, their grumbling words condemn those they do not like. They speak against the existence of certain groups in society and speak about how things would be better if someone would do something about “those people.? Those who refuse vaccines today, for example, are considered a threat to society, and mandatory vaccine laws are being proposed in many states in 2015.

Will modern genetics respond to the grumblers among us, and be the tool that politicians ultimately use to fix the problems in our society? Will its advances be the stimulus that justifies the termination of healthy, but undesirable people in our society? Will modern genetics become the eugenics of our times? What is the dark side of genetics and how is it being used by corporations to create a new class of people in America? These questions and many others regarding modern genetics will be explored in the next article in this series.

Part 2:

Mapping the Genome and Modern Genetics: Eugenics Repackaged for Modern Times

References

[1] “Some College Students Approve of ‘After-Birth Abortion’… Up to Age 5,? 10/6/2014, Retrieved 6/9/2015. http://cnsnews.com/news/article/some-college-students-approve-after-birth-abortion-age-5

[2] Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva; “After-Birth Abortion: Why Should the Baby Live?? Published 2/23/2011, Retrieved 6/16/2015. http://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2012/03/01/medethics-2011-100411.full

[3] Peter Singer; “Taking Life: Humans,? online excerpts, Retrieved 6/9/2015. http://www.utilitaryan.net/singer/by/1993—-.htm

[4] War Against the Weak: Eugenics and America’s Campaign to Create a Master Race, Edwin Black, Second paperback edition 2012, page 58, ISBN 978-0-914153-29-0.

[5] “How Eugenics Began,? Roger Sandall, Retrieved 6/14/2015. http://www.rogersandall.com/how-eugenics-began/

[6] IBID.

[7] “A History of the Eugenics Movement,? Dr. Jerry Bergman, Retrieved 6/14/2015. http://users.adam.com.au/bstett/BEugenics72Bergman73Potter77.htm

[8] IBID.

[9] IBID.

[10] “Buck vs. Bell Trial,? Eugenics Archive, Retrieved 6/14/2015. http://www.eugenicsarchive.org/html/eugenics/static/themes/39.html

[11] “Non-Jewish Victims of the Holocaust,? Jewish Virtual Library, Retrieved 6/11/2015. https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/NonJewishVictims.html [4]

[12] “Nazi Program to Breed Master Race: Lebensborn Children Break Silence,? David Crossland, SPIEGEL ONLINE, Retrieved 6/18/2015. http://www.spiegel.de/international/nazi-program-to-breed-master-race-lebensborn-children-break-silence-a-446978.html

[13] “Are GMO Foods, Vaccines, and Big Pharma Producing an Infertile Generation?? Health Impact News, 9/13/2014. http://healthimpactnews.com/2014/are-gmo-foods-toxic-chemicals-and-big-pharma-producing-an-infertile-generation/

[14] “For Most Workers, Real Wages have Barely Budged for Decades,? Pew Research Center, 10/9/2014, retrieved 6/20/2015. http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/10/09/for-most-workers-real-wages-have-barely-budged-for-decades/

[15] War Against the Weak: Eugenics and America’s Campaign to Create a Master Race, Edwin Black, Second paperback edition 2012, page 563, ISBN 978-0-914153-29-0.

[16] “Darwinism and the Nazi Race Holocaust – Answers in Genesis,? Dr. Jerry Bergman, First published in Creation Ex Nihilo Technical Journal 13(2):101–111, 1999, Retrieved 6/14/2015. http://www.trueorigin.org/holocaust.php

[17] Jennifer Robertson, “Blood Talks – Eugenic Modernity,? History and Anthropology, 2002 Vol. 13 (3), pp. 191–216, PDF Retrieved 6/11/2015. http://sitemaker.umich.edu/jennifer.robertson/files/blood_talks__eugenic_modernity_anthro___hist_2002.pdf

[18] War Against the Weak: Eugenics and America’s Campaign to Create a Master Race, Edwin Black, Second paperback edition 2012, page 422, ISBN 978-0-914153-29-0.

[19] War Against the Weak: Eugenics and America’s Campaign to Create a Master Race, Edwin Black, Second paperback edition 2012, page 423, ISBN 978-0-914153-29-0.

[20] “Science of Eugenics? Retrieved 6/18/2015. http://iml.jou.ufl.edu/projects/spring02/holland/Science.htm

[21] War Against the Weak: Eugenics and America’s Campaign to Create a Master Race, Edwin Black, Second paperback edition 2012, page 424, ISBN 978-0-914153-29-0.

[22] War Against the Weak: Eugenics and America’s Campaign to Create a Master Race, Edwin Black, Second paperback edition 2012, page 425, ISBN 978-0-914153-29-0.

[23] “Dr. Jack Kevorkian Dies at 83,? The New York Times, 6/24/2011, Retrieved 6/20/2015. http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/k/jack_kevorkian/index.html

[24] “55,772,015 Abortions in America Since Roe vs. Wade in 1973,? Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com, 1/18/2013, Retrieved 6/21/2015. http://www.lifenews.com/2013/01/18/55772015-abortions-in-america-since-roe-vs-wade-in-1973/

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

See featured article here

TLB recommends you visit Health Impact News for more great/pertinent articles and information.

will-you-take-a-stand-or-submit

By John Whitehead

“Who needs direct repression when one can convince the chicken to walk freely into the slaughterhouse??
—Philosopher Slavoj Žižek

Despite the best efforts of some to sound the alarm, the nation is being locked down into a militarized, mechanized, hypersensitive, legalistic, self-righteous, goose-stepping antithesis of every principle upon which this nation was founded.

All the while, the nation’s citizens seem content to buy into a carefully constructed, benevolent vision of life in America that bears little resemblance to the gritty, pain-etched reality that plagues those unfortunate enough to not belong to the rarefied elite.

For those whose minds have been short-circuited into believing the candy-coated propaganda peddled by the politicians, here is an A-to-Z, back-to-the-basics primer of what life in the United States of America is really all about.

A is for the AMERICAN POLICE STATE.

As I point out in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, a police state “is characterized by bureaucracy, secrecy, perpetual wars, a nation of suspects, militarization, surveillance, widespread police presence, and a citizenry with little recourse against police actions.?

B is for our battered BILL OF RIGHTS.

In the cop culture that is America today, where you can be kicked, punched, tasered, shot, intimidated, harassed, stripped, searched, brutalized, terrorized, wrongfully arrested, and even killed by a police officer, and that officer is rarely held accountable for violating your rights, the Bill of Rights doesn’t amount to much.

C is for CIVIL ASSET FORFEITURE

. The latest governmental scheme to deprive Americans of their liberties—namely, the right to property—is being carried out under the guise of civil asset forfeiture, a government practice wherein government agents (usually the police) seize private property they “suspect? may be connected to criminal activity. Then, whether or not any crime is actually proven to have taken place, the government keeps the citizen’s property.

D is for DRONES.

It is estimated that at least 30,000 drones will be airborne in American airspace by 2020, part of an $80 billion industry. Although some drones will be used for benevolent purposes, many will also be equipped with lasers, tasers and scanning devices, among other weapons.

E is for ELECTRONIC CONCENTRATION CAMP.

In the electronic concentration camp, as I have dubbed the surveillance state, all aspects of a person’s life are policed by government agents and all citizens are suspects, their activities monitored and regulated, their movements tracked, their communications spied upon, and their lives, liberties and pursuit of happiness dependent on the government’s say-so.

F is for FUSION CENTERS.

Fusion centers, data collecting agencies spread throughout the country and aided by the National Security Agency, serve as a clearinghouse for information shared between state, local and federal agencies. These fusion centers constantly monitor our communications, everything from our internet activity and web searches to text messages, phone calls and emails. This data is then fed to government agencies, which are now interconnected: the CIA to the FBI, the FBI to local police.

G is for GRENADE LAUNCHERS.

The federal government has distributed more than $18 billion worth of battlefield-appropriate military weapons, vehicles and equipment such as drones, tanks, and grenade launchers to domestic police departments across the country. As a result, most small-town police forces now have enough firepower to render any citizen resistance futile.

H is for HOLLOW-POINT BULLETS.

The government’s efforts to militarize and weaponize its agencies and employees is reaching epic proportions, with federal agencies as varied as the Department of Homeland Security and the Social Security Administration stockpiling millions of lethal hollow-point bullets, which violate international law. Ironically, while the government continues to push for stricter gun laws for the general populace, the U.S. military’s arsenal of weapons makes the average American’s handgun look like a Tinker Toy.

I is for the INTERNET OF THINGS,

in which internet-connected “things? will monitor your home, your health and your habits in order to keep your pantry stocked, your utilities regulated and your life under control and relatively worry-free. The key word here, however, is control. This “connected? industry propels us closer to a future where police agencies apprehend virtually anyone if the government “thinks? they may commit a crime, driverless cars populate the highways, and a person’s biometrics are constantly scanned and used to track their movements, target them for advertising, and keep them under perpetual surveillance.

J is for JAILING FOR PROFIT.

Having outsourced their inmate population to private prisons run by private corporations, this profit-driven form of mass punishment has given rise to a $70 billion private prison industry that relies on the complicity of state governments to keep their privately run prisons full by jailing large numbers of Americans for inane crimes.

K is for KENTUCKY V. KING.

In an 8-1 ruling, the Supreme Court ruled that police officers can break into homes, without a warrant, even if it’s the wrong home as long as they think they have a reason to do so. Despite the fact that the police in question ended up pursuing the wrong suspect, invaded the wrong apartment and violated just about every tenet that stands between us and a police state, the Court sanctioned the warrantless raid, leaving Americans with little real protection in the face of all manner of abuses by law enforcement officials.

L is for LICENSE PLATE READERS,

which enable law enforcement and private agencies to track the whereabouts of vehicles, and their occupants, all across the country. This data collected on tens of thousands of innocent people is also being shared between police agencies, as well as with fusion centers and private companies.

M is for MAIN CORE.

Since the 1980s, the U.S. government has acquired and maintained, without warrant or court order, a database of names and information on Americans considered to be threats to the nation. As Salon reports, this database, reportedly dubbed “Main Core,? is to be used by the Army and FEMA in times of national emergency or under martial law to locate and round up Americans seen as threats to national security. As of 2008, there were some 8 million Americans in the Main Core database.

N is for NO-KNOCK RAIDS.

Owing to the militarization of the nation’s police forces, SWAT teams are now increasingly being deployed for routine police matters. In fact, more than 80,000 of these paramilitary raids are carried out every year. That translates to more than 200 SWAT team raids every day in which police crash through doors, damage private property, terrorize adults and children alike, kill family pets, assault or shoot anyone that is perceived as threatening—and all in the pursuit of someone merely suspected of a crime, usually some small amount of drugs.

O is for OVERCRIMINALIZATION.

Thanks to an overabundance of 4500-plus federal crimes and 400,000 plus rules and regulations, it’s estimated that the average American actually commits three felonies a day without knowing it. As a result of this overcriminalization, we’re seeing an uptick in Americans being arrested and jailed for such absurd “violations? as letting their kids play at a park unsupervised, collecting rainwater and snow runoff on their own property, growing vegetables in their yard, and holding Bible studies in their living room.

P is for PATHOCRACY.

When our own government treats us as things to be manipulated, maneuvered, mined for data, manhandled by police, mistreated, and then jailed in profit-driven private prisons if we dare step out of line, we are no longer operating under a constitutional republic. Instead, what we are experiencing is a pathocracy: tyranny at the hands of a psychopathic government, which “operates against the interests of its own people except for favoring certain groups.?

Q is for QUALIFIED IMMUNITY.

Qualified immunity allows officers to walk away without paying a dime for their wrongdoing. Conveniently, those deciding whether a police officer should be immune from having to personally pay for misbehavior on the job all belong to the same system, all cronies with a vested interest in protecting the police and their infamous code of silence: city and county attorneys, police commissioners, city councils and judges.

R is for ROADSIDE STRIP SEARCHES and BLOOD DRAWS.

The courts have increasingly erred on the side of giving government officials—especially the police—vast discretion in carrying out strip searches, blood draws and even anal probes for a broad range of violations, no matter how minor the offense. In the past, strip searches were resorted to only in exceptional circumstances where police were confident that a serious crime was in progress. In recent years, however, strip searches have become routine operating procedures in which everyone is rendered a suspect and, as such, is subjected to treatment once reserved for only the most serious of criminals.

S is for the SURVEILLANCE STATE.

On any given day, the average American going about his daily business will be monitored, surveilled, spied on and tracked in more than 20 different ways, by both government and corporate eyes and ears. A byproduct of this new age in which we live, whether you’re walking through a store, driving your car, checking email, or talking to friends and family on the phone, you can be sure that some government agency, whether the NSA or some other entity, is listening in and tracking your behavior. This doesn’t even begin to touch on the corporate trackers that monitor your purchases, web browsing, Facebook posts and other activities taking place in the cyber sphere.

T is for TASERS.

Nonlethal weapons such as tasers, stun guns, rubber pellets and the like, have resulted in police using them as weapons of compliance more often and with less restraint—even against women and children—and in some instances, even causing death. These “nonlethal? weapons also enable police to aggress with the push of a button, making the potential for overblown confrontations over minor incidents that much more likely. A Taser Shockwave, for instance, can electrocute a crowd of people at the touch of a button.

U is for UNARMED CITIZENS SHOT BY POLICE.

No longer is it unusual to hear about incidents in which police shoot unarmed individuals first and ask questions later, often attributed to a fear for their safety. Yet the fatality rate of on-duty patrol officers is reportedly far lower than many other professions, including construction, logging, fishing, truck driving, and even trash collection.

V is for VIPR SQUADS.

So-called “soft target? security inspections, carried out by roving VIPR task forces, comprised of federal air marshals, surface transportation security inspectors, transportation security officers, behavior detection officers and explosive detection canine teams, are taking place whenever and wherever the government deems appropriate, at random times and places, and without needing the justification of a particular threat.

W is for WHOLE-BODY SCANNERS.

Using either x-ray radiation or radio waves, scanning devices are being used not only to “see? through your clothes but government mobile units can drive by your home and spy on you within the privacy of your home. While these mobile scanners are being sold to the American public as necessary security and safety measures, we can ill afford to forget that such systems are rife with the potential for abuse, not only by government bureaucrats but by the technicians employed to operate them.

X is for X-KEYSCORE.

One of the many spying programs carried out by the National Security Agency (NSA) that targets every person in the United States who uses a computer or phone. This top-secret program “allows analysts to search with no prior authorization through vast databases containing emails, online chats and the browsing histories of millions of individuals.?

Y is for YOU-NESS.

Using your face, mannerisms, social media and “you-ness? against you, you can now be tracked based on what you buy, where you go, what you do in public, and how you do what you do. Facial recognition software promises to create a society in which every individual who steps out into public is tracked and recorded as they go about their daily business. The goal is for government agents to be able to scan a crowd of people and instantaneously identify all of the individuals present. Facial recognition programs are being rolled out in states all across the country.

Z is for ZERO TOLERANCE.

We have moved into a new paradigm in which young people are increasingly viewed as suspects and treated as criminals by school officials and law enforcement alike, often for engaging in little more than childish behavior. In some jurisdictions, students have also been penalized under school zero tolerance policies for such inane “crimes? as carrying cough drops, wearing black lipstick, bringing nail clippers to school, using Listerine or Scope, and carrying fold-out combs that resemble switchblades.

As you can see, the warning signs are all around us. The question is whether you will organize, take a stand and fight for freedom, or will you, like so many clueless Americans, freely walk into the slaughterhouse?

 

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

 

See article here: http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2015/07/freedom-or-the-slaughterhouse-the-american-police-state-from-a-to-z/

 

TLB recommends that you read other pertinent articles at: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/

robert

By: Arjun Walia

Apart from documents that have outlined supposed terrorist threats, like Al-Qaeda, and their connection to US intelligence agencies, like the CIA, there are a number of whistleblowers that have come out adding more fuel to the fire. Because not many are even aware of these documents, letting people know about a truth that can be hard for people to accept, let alone ponder the possibility is very important. It’s just one aspect of the veil that’s been blinding the masses for quite some time now.

The latest whistleblower is David Steele, a 20-year Marine Corps intelligence officer, and the second-highest-ranking civilian in the U.S. Marine Corps Intelligence. He is a former CIA clandestine services case officer, and this is what he had to say:

“Most terrorists are false flag terrorists, or are created by our own security services. In the United States, every single terrorist incident we have had has been a false flag, or has been an informant pushed on by the FBI. In fact, we now have citizens taking out restraining orders against FBI informants that are trying to incite terrorism. We’ve become a lunatic asylum.?

What Is A “False Flag Attack??

A great example of a false flag attack is 9/11, something that many people believe to be a creation of US intelligence agencies, or some entity above the government (one that controls what Eisenhower called “the military industrial complex?). The idea is that these so called terrorist attacks are created by this group, in order to justify the infiltration of other countries, and to justify a heightened state of “national security.? As a result, in the eyes of the citizenry, war and mass murder are justified, when the intentions behind these actions are something the citizenry has no idea about.

This is why we see a false sense of patriotism programmed into many people, especially in the United States. Men and women join this massive military machine with good hearts, thinking that they are serving their country and fighting terrorism, when they are doing the complete opposite. They are only participating in a fabricated war based on lies and misinformation.

“The truth is, there is no Islamic army or terrorist group called Al-Qaeda, and any informed intelligence officer knows this. But, there is a propaganda campaign to make the public believe in the presence of an intensified entity representing the ‘devil’ only in order to drive TV watchers to accept a unified international leadership for a war against terrorism. The country behind this propaganda is the United States.? – Former British Foreign Secretary, Robin Cook

Today, we might be seeing the same thing with ISIS. Although there are no verified documents like there are when it comes to Al-Qaeda, given what that information shows us, combined with Wikileaks documents and statements from insiders, we could be looking at the same thing.

Not long ago, FBI whistleblower stated that:

“The US is reviving terror scare with ISIS to promote the terror war industry.?

You can read more about that story here:

FBI Whistleblower: “U.S Is Reviving Terror Scare With ISIS To Promote The Terror War Industry?

Again, 9/11 is a great example and you can find out more information about that HERE.

****************

TLB recommends you visit Collective Evolution for more pertinent articles and information.

See featured article here

 

un

By TLB Contributor: Dave Hodges

The United States is the equivalent of a four letter word in the Middle East. Many people in that region of the world detest and loathe our very existence. Why? Because our government, on behalf of the bankers and the oil companies, have plundered their resources, manipulated their governments, killed millions of Muslims without justification as the U.S. has invaded the region three times in recent history. The CIA may be responsible for funding most terrorism in the Middle East, but there is no shortage of willing participants to join such organizations as al-Qaeda, the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas and now the latest threat, ISIS.

In short, the people in the Middle East hate America’s guts, yet the Obama administration is placing hundreds of communities at risk by transplanting the victims of United States tyranny right into American backyards without a thought or care to the welfare for the citizens of this country. This article addresses the insanity and/or the treasonous nature of this issue.

Obama’s Policy of Suicide by Immigration

Presently, there is a tsunami of unscreened Muslims into 190+ American communities from war-torn areas filled with the victims of American imperialism who believe that the only good American, is a dead American. The most striking aspect of this silent invasion is that the Federal government has admitted under oath that they have no idea who these people are and what their intentions consist of.

When we juxtapose Obama’s position to the multiple scenarios of Christian persecution and genocide in some areas of the Middle East, Obama has not lifted a finger to help Christians who are being slaughtered at the hands of Muslim extremist groups such as ISIS. Obama plays golf…

golf obama

Meanwhile, our self-created enemies are engaged in getting even with innocent Christians.

isis ethopia

Paul Sperry’s “Infiltration? How Muslim Spies and Subversives have Penetrated Washington

Researcher, Paul Sperry, the author of Infiltration has detailed the type of immigrants that we are importing from the Middle East. Here, Paul Sperry, details the threat to our communities while appearing on C-SPAN2.

Sperry cites how we know from the testimony offered from the FBI officials who are in charge of that type of vetting  immigrants are not being allowed to perform their duties of protecting American communities from would-be unscreened terrorists as expressed in a recent radio interview in which FBI agents have admitted, under oath, that they have no idea who and what they are letting into the country.

The United Nations and the State Department Are Behind This Invasion of America

The following is one of the most stunning videos I have seen in sometime with regard to the radical unscreened, extremist Muslim invasion of America. The program has its roots with the United Nations and the State Department is its willing accomplice.

The man’s name is Antonio Guterres and the UN High Commissioner for Refugees. His job is the deculturalization of European nations and the United States. Leo Hohmann, from World Net Daily, has another in what is turning into a series on Obama’s plan to change America by changing the people. This invasion has impacted 190 American communities and it is growing by the day. There are over  10,000 anti-American Somali refugees in ten years who have settled in Minnesota, alone. In the first 4 months of this year, we have admitted 4,425 Somalis to America.

ABC News reported the following: 

A mysterious ISIS recruiter known online as “Miski? was in close and repeated social media contact with Elton Simpson for months before the Sunday attack in Garland, Texas, an ABC News investigation has found?. “Miski is well known to FBI officials who say his real name is Muhammed Hassan, a fugitive since 2009 when he fled Minneapolis as a teenager to join terror groups in Africa?. This begs the question: Who are we keeping out?

unhcr-antonio-guterres

Antonio Guterres is the head of the UNHCR and he is responsible for sending 9,000 Muslims from anti-America Syria to Boise and Twin Falls, Idaho. This man and his organization is your enemy!

KerryCalltoAct

Secretary of State, John Kerry and Anne C. Richards are the UN’s accomplices in these devastating immigration policies.

Is this why we are seeing with ever-greater frequency these kinds of scenes inside of the United States?

How long will it be until this picture is commonplace inside of the United States?

How long will it be until this picture is commonplace inside of the United States?

  ....and this?

… and this?

Fifth Column Watch

We have already had an ISIS attack on American soil in Garland, Texas. The FBI Director has admitted to the fact that the FBI has open ISIS in all 50 states. Last summer, I documented the flow of MS-13 gang members into the United States. For 30 months, I have detailed a Russian troop presence in our country, complete with pictures, eye witnesses, government documents and videos. The UN’s Refugee/Resettlement is merely the latest in the implantation of 5th column forces inside of the United States. However, this invasion has reached 190 American cities and towns.  In a future article, these groups will be tied together with regard to their common purpose as well as detailing how Jade Helm will factor into this scenario.

################

TLB recommends you visit Dave at The Common Sense Show for more pertinent articles and information.

See featured article and read comments HERE

vaccine

Kenny Valenzuela breaks down the latest in California’s medical tyranny. First it was SB277 mandating vaccines for children; now it’s SB792 – mandatory adult vaccinations. No personal exemptions and criminal penalties for failure to comply. With 300 new vaccinations coming in the next 6 years, it seems like a good time to eliminate all opt-outs.

Research links:


California legislature SB-792 Day care facilities immunizations exemptions
California Mandates Poisoning Children SB277 Vaccine Bill Passes
California Now Wants to be First State to Mandate Adult Vaccines – Criminal Penalties
300 New Genetically Modified Vaccines by 2023
Mandatory Vaccines for Adults? Leave It to California
New York Measles Outbreak 90% Vaccinated
Senator Richard Pan Caught Lying About Aborted Fetal Cells in Vaccines!
FDA Vaccine Insert Lists Autism as Adverse Reaction

 

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

 

See article here: http://experimentalvaccines.org/

 

TLB recommends that you see more of Kenny Valenzuela’s informative videos at ExperimentalVaccines.org 

 

 

These signs are being carried by truck drivers all over this country.

The above signs are being carried by truck drivers all over this country.

By TLB Contributor: Dave Hodges

Foreign occupation forces are training and will be training to overrun this country in a martial law scenario. Why foreign troops? Because American troops might not be able to be counted upon to carry out the orders of subjugation that will come down from this globalist inspired banker-hijacked administration.

In the past several days, an enormous military exercise has become known to the public. This October over 36,000 troops from more than 30 countries will be gearing up for what NATO calls its largest exercise in over a decade and the exercise is called “TRIDENT JUNCTURE?

Here is a link to a video produced by NATO about TRIDENT JUNCTURE. Watch the video and then ask yourself, “What is missing??

Were you able to answer the question? What is missing in this NATO report on TRIDENT JUNCTURE is that they do not tell you what kind of threat, or where the threat would be specifically coming from. As I have discovered, the answer to the question as to the location of TRIDENT JUNCTURE is that the drill could be carried out in one location, multiple locations anytime and anywhere.

NATO Disclosure

trident juncture

According to NATO, the TRIDENT JUNCTURE DRILL (TJ 15) is put together in two parts. The CPX/CAX aspect of the drill will be conducted between the dates of October 3-16, 2015. However, this will follow three days what they are calling “battle staff warm-up? from September 30th to October 2nd. The official purpose of this drill is that it will serve as a “joint certification venue for NATO Response Force 2016 (NRF 16) and Full Operational Capability (FOC) event for JFCBS?. Please note the geographical location of these actions remains very vague.

NATO speaks of a complement to TRIDENT JUNCTURE in what is being called “LIVEX“. LIVEX will run from October 21st to November 6th. AIRCOM will be the leading component of the drill and it will involve over 200 aircraft from all NATO nations and they will perform in a specified training area in southern Europe. The importance of southern Europe will be explained in the conclusion part of this article.

Meanwhile Back Home

The United States Army plans to cut 40,000 soldiers from its ranks over the next two years. Please keep in mind that the US military is war mode and the targets are primarily Russia and China. This is national suicide!

This is a reduction that will impact all of the Army’s domestic and foreign posts, as this was recently published from a collection of documents obtained by USA TODAY. If the United States is really on war footing, then these actions, led by President Obama, must be looked at under the lens of treason.

Certainly, if the reduction in US military force is in diametrically opposite response to the foreign build up of troops on American soil, then Obama’s actions make perfect sense, although it is still undeniable treason. Why would the globalists want to diminish the size of the U.S. military? There are two reasons that come to mind. First, and in the long-term, America is supposed to lose World War III. Second, and in more in the immediate time frame, American troops may oppose an United Nations/NATO “Peacekeeping? force designed to restore order to an American public and military that will not accept the direct usurpation of national sovereignty. Reducing the size of the American military will reduce the size of the American threat to an United Nations takeover. If you dismiss this as idle speculation, than ask yourself why we are seeing the following on American soil?

Why Are Surface to Air Missile Batteries Popping Up Around Key Defense Faciities?

I am certain that many readers will recall when I first published photographs of these surface to air missiles in Texas. The photos came under a lot of criticism and skepticism.  However, the local media covered the event and the eventually the photos were vetted as authentic. My sources told me that these missiles were part of a defensive scheme to protect the nuclear waste disposal plant, PANTEX from low flying suicide aircraft whose goal it would be to take out the plant and create a holocaust in the region.

These are high resolution photos of the SAM missiles, that many say do not exist. These missiles are located 45 miles southeast of Lubbock, TX and were originally photographed by Texas resident, Travis Kuenstler.  These photos will soon be back in the news at The Common Sense Show, as we have just learned that this represents World War III preparations and the countering of the ISIS threat on or southern border.

These (above) are high resolution photos of the SAM missiles, that many say do not exist. These missiles are located 45 miles southeast of Lubbock, TX and were originally photographed by Texas resident, Travis Kuenstler. These photos will soon be back in the news at The Common Sense Show, as we have just learned that this represents the countering of the ISIS threat on or southern border. and now it seems likely that these missiles are also representative of civil war preparation for the military. The suppression of massive civil unrest following an economic collapse does not require the use of surface to air missiles.

I have reports of similar missiles in Colorado, Missouri and Arkansas. Yesterday, I received photos of more surface to air missile batteries in northern Michigan near Camp Grayling, which is a known FEMA camp facility which also doubles as a training facility for security personnel headed to Guantanamo Bay.

Here is an email I received with regard to a very similar set of circumstances in which a missile launcher was places just outside of a major military aircraft maintenance plant.

Hi Dave,

We live on the old Whurtsmith AFB in Oscoda Michigan.  Kallita Aircraft company has maintenance facility here.  We’ve been seeing F-16s flying over and today heard C130’s. A local man just posted this picture,,,,,My husband is retired Air Force and we have been trying to monitor events in our area.  One comment on the posting is that the National Guard units from Grayling are having exercises.  But a missile launcher?????  Yikes

Sheryl

Reportedly, these are new. What are the powers that be expecting?

Reportedly, these are new. What are the powers that be expecting?

Foreign Troops Continue to Pour Into the United States

In May, I received and published information from trusted sources, that 36,000 Turks assigned to NATO were in the process of being sent to a variety of Texas bases.

I have also previously covered the fact that thousands of Danish soldiers trained at Camp Grayling in April.

Here is a second email on the topic of the construction of large number of barracks being constructed at Ft. Bliss. However, many of the troops at Ft. Bliss are gone and have redeployed to other duty assignments such as the Middle East. Why would they need additional housing facilities?

Dear Mr. Hodges

I am part of a construction crew who is overseeing a multi-company construction of barracks on Ft. Bliss. Some of them are temporary TDY that I have seen with disaster relief.  I estimate that the new facilities could house as many as 20,000 troops based upon my previous experience in these matters.  

What is really strange is that the normal insignias etc. are missing from our construction sites that would normally be added. There is is nothing in this area of the base to indicate that this is a United States military facility. I have not personally seen military from other countries but there isn’t one of us on my team that does not think that this is the case here.  A fellow friend in the field saw the same at Lackland.  In light of what you have been writing on, I thought I would make this information available to you. For obvious reasons, please do not print my name. 

Recently, WNEM TV in Michigan ran a story in which they noted that 3,000 Polish troops were training in the area. We have seen live combat drills in Flint, Michigan complete with explosions and troops movements. In fact, The Common Sense Show has produced documentation that could fill a book with regard to foreign troop activity on American soil.

Gun Confiscation

No doubt that may of saw that yesterday the Obama administration announced that they were going suspend the gun rights of any Social Security recipient who was not the primary executor of their finances because they are obviously mentally infirm. An estimated five million guns could be confiscated. This is the kind of thing tyrants do before they implement martial law.  The VA has been used to go after Veterans guns. Now the Social Security administration is going after the guns of the elderly. Who is next?

Connecting the Dots

In the coming NATO LIVEX drill, we see that southern Europe is identified as the training ground. There is every reason to believe that NATO’s TRIDENT JUNCTURE is involved in this region as well since the two drills are linked together in NATO documents. What countries comprise southern Europe? This is where the dots begin to connect. Southern Europe is comprised in part by the countries, also called Mediterranean Europe, that extends along the Mediterranean Sea on the Southern edge of Europe. It encompasses the major countries of Portugal, Spain, Italy, and Greece. Any listener to The Common Sense Show has heard me interview top economists (e.g. Joseph Meyer) who have said first Greece’s economy will fail first followed by Portugal, Spain, and Italy.What do people do when their economies fail and they lose their money? They riot! 

I recently wrote an article which I detailed how draconian the governments have become in these countries. For example, protesting outside of government buildings in Spain is now illegal. These are always preemptive moves governments with failing economies employ to stay in power. I think it is quite clear that TRIDENT EXPOSURE AND LIVEX drills are a multinational martial law force which is training to suppress revolution as these countries will soon experience an economic meltdown. This is a civil war prevention force.

The deployment of foreign troops on American soil is a gathering of the forces to accomplish the same objective as TRIDENT EXPOSURE AND LIVEX. However, as Steve Quayle mentioned on our July 19th interview, Steve said that America is entering into a civil war period. Steve is absolutely correct. As a case in point, these missile batteries we see that are deployed outside key defense facilities are speaking to the fact some officers in our military are moving to protect critical infrastructure military assets.

What does this all mean? It is likely that the concept of Jade Helm is international and joint international military forces will be used to subdue dissidents and uncooperative military forces in countries as they experience an economic meltdown. I think it likely that Jade is a subset, or a component part of the NATO drills. It is also very coincidental that these drills are taking place in such close proximity to each other. Does this point to an impending event? That is the simplest and mostly likely conclusion. Now we should be able to see where Jade Helm fits into these unfolding events.

****************

TLB recommends you visit Dave at The Common Sense Show for more pertinent articles and information.

See featured article HERE

guns-460

by NRA-ILA

DATE:  July 20, 2015
TO:       USF & NRA Members and Friends
FROM: Marion P. Hammer
USF Executive Director
NRA Past President

In case you didn’t have a chance to see this alert from Saturday, July 18, 2015, the NRA Institute for Legislation issued the following Alert:

View Related Articles

Obama’s Social Security Administration to Strip Millions of Americans of their Right to Keep and Bear Arms

Saturday, July 18, 2015

As the L.A. Times reported this morning, the Social Security Administration (SSA) is currently developing a program to strip the Second Amendment Rights of over four million Americans currently receiving SSA benefits through a “representative payee.?  Not only would this amount to the largest gun grab in American history, but according to the published report, would take place without any due process protections for recipients, amounting to a nullification of Second Amendment rights for millions of Americans who don’t pose a threat to themselves or anyone else.

This new program appears to have been instigated by the SSA in response to a memorandum issued by Obama in January of 2013 which directed all federal agency executives to “improve the availability of records to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).? This memorandum required all agency heads to submit to the Department of Justice (DOJ) a plan for “sharing all relevant Federal records? for submission to the NICS.

Evidently, Obama’s SSA bureaucrats read “all relevant Federal records? to mean all Social Security recipients who have a “representative payee? assigned to their accounts to help them manage their payments and receipts. Obviously, many individuals swept up in this egregious case of bureaucratic over-reach would not otherwise be prohibited from owning, possessing, or acquiring firearms under federal law.

The federal prohibitions against acquiring or possessing firearms apply to those “adjudicated as a mental defective,? among others. The term “adjudication,? however, refers to a determination made after a judicial-type process that includes various due process protections.  In no case does the federal law describe or contemplate the type of prohibition by bureaucratic fiat exercised by the SSA in developing its guidelines for those with “representative payees? assigned to their accounts.

But SSA is not alone in this directive. The memorandum names several agencies, including the Departments of Defense, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, Transportation, and “such other agencies or offices as the Chair may designate.? Potentially, bureaucrats in all these agencies could be working hard to identify and forward “all relevant Federal records,? to the NICS pursuant to the Obama mandate.

In total, this program could easily grow to include many more millions of Americans who have any connection to the Federal government through the various agencies named in the memorandum.

Unfortunately, this fits a pattern of abuse within the Obama Administration which is clearly hell-bent on destroying the Second Amendment in any way possible. As we reported previously (here and here), the Veterans Administration (VA) has already implemented a similar program to designate veterans as “prohibited persons?  when they have a fiduciary assigned to administer their VA benefits.  Like the SSA program described above, the VA procedures are also devoid of significant due process protections or any requirement that the beneficiary be found a danger to self or others. According to the L.A Times article, 177,000 vets have been swept into NICS with the bureaucratic short-cut.

The implications of this policy are too far reaching to fathom at present. Social Security is one of the more prolific and relied upon Federal programs in American history. That Obama’s directive could so easily be implemented within the SSA suggests that bureaucrats could effectively cloak such a program in any agency within the growing leviathan that is the federal government.

Please call or write your members of congress and demand that Obama’s attempts to implement the largest gun grab in American history be stopped in its tracks.  You can contact your U.S. Senators and Representatives at 202-225-3121202-225-3121. You can write your lawmakers by using our “Write Your Representatives” tool.

END

See featured article here




  • Subscribe to Blog via Email

    Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 795 other subscribers