Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 76 to 78 of 78
  1. #76
    Suspended from News & Speakers Corner

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Online
    15-02-2014 @ 09:44 PM
    Location
    Muzzled for excessive truthiness
    Posts
    922
    The EyeOpener- Police State Gadgets & the Technology of Enslavement

    Tuesday, 10. January 2012


    ^ click to read article above, here's the 4 min video inside,



    I like what Paul Craig Roberts, former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan Administration, and also dubbed the "Father of Reaganonmics", had to say last year in this essay about 9/11 and "Conspiracy Theories"




    - 21. Jun, 2011

    Let’s take a minute to re-acquaint ourselves with the 9/11 official explanation, which is not regarded as a conspiracy theory despite the fact that it comprises an amazing conspiracy.

    by Paul Craig Roberts


    While we were not watching, conspiracy theory has undergone Orwellian redefinition.

    A “conspiracy theory” no longer means an event explained by a conspiracy. Instead, it now means any explanation, or even a fact, that is out of step with the government’s explanation and that of its media pimps.

    For example, online news broadcasts of RT have been equated with conspiracy theories by the New York Times simply because RT reports news and opinions that the New York Times does not report and the US government does not endorse.


    In other words, as truth becomes uncomfortable for government and its Ministry of Propaganda, truth is redefined as conspiracy theory, by which is meant an absurd and laughable explanation that we should ignore.

    [...]

    If you believe that America was attacked by Muslim terrorists and is susceptible to future attacks, then a “war on terror” and a domestic police state to root out terrorists become necessary to make Americans safe. The idea that a domestic police state and open-ended war might be more dangerous threats to Americans than terrorists is an impermissible thought.

    A country whose population has been trained to accept the government’s word and to shun those who question it is a country without liberty in its future.

    entire article:
    9/11 and the Orwellian Redefinition of




  2. #77
    Suspended from News & Speakers Corner

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Online
    15-02-2014 @ 09:44 PM
    Location
    Muzzled for excessive truthiness
    Posts
    922
    see Icke message below article:


    Money Insider: US Will See Violent Civil Unrest In 2012


    Armed, irritated and vocal majority will react to worsening economic decline
    Paul Joseph Watson
    Infowars.com
    Thursday, January 19, 2012

    Money insider Charles Ortel has warned that a worsening economic picture across the globe will see civil unrest hit the streets of America, not on behalf of leftist OWS types, but by an armed, “irascible and vocal Majority”.


    Ortel, a managing partner with Newport Value Partners, LLC in New York City, predicts that a failure of the so-called financial recovery will precipitate “A painful re-calibration of economic strength and geo-political standing during 2012 in the midst of widespread civil insurrection and cross-border war.”

    Noting that Americans’ access to firearms will cause such riots to be bloodier than anything seen in Europe, Ortel predicts that a contented and silent Majority will be turned into “an irascible and vocal Majority,” as a result of numerous macro-economic and geo-political threats facing the country, including the collapse of the euro, the bursting of the financial bubble in China, and the looming debt crisis, all of which will contribute to weak economic growth.

    “Some will manage to contain their activities to peaceful protests. However, we believe the far more likely scenario is that violence will result, especially in the United States where the wider population has more ready access to weaponry and where mobs have proven impossible to restrain,” Ortel writes.

    The crisis will also be exacerbated by a shift in “the governing pole of political discourse,” which will see the usual right-left paradigm replaced by a clash between young and old, with the youth of developed nations increasingly irate at seeing the elderly enjoy the security of retirement benefits while their own economic futures look increasingly bleak.

    Despite widespread protests and civil unrest sweeping almost all corners of the globe aside from America over the past two years, the prospect of disorder unfolding in the United States in a broader context than the Occupy Wall Street demonstrations is widely expected.

    Indeed, with trust in both the executive and legislative branches of government at an all time low, pollster Pat Caddell warns that Americans’ lack of confidence in their leadership is so fervent that they are now “pre-revolutionary.”

    Fully aware that Americans’ disenfranchisement with the political system, allied with falling living standards, is provoking people to become more radical in their outlook, U.S. authorities have been preparing for civil dislocation.

    Halliburton subsidiary KBR is seeking sub-contractors to staff and outfit “emergency environment” camps located in five regions of the United States follows preparations over the last three years to deal with riots inside the United States that have already spread throughout Europe, North Africa and the Middle East.
    Major police departments like the NYPD staging “mobilization exercises” to train police to prepare for civil disorder in the United States.

    A report produced by the U.S. Army War College’s Strategic Institute warns that the United States may experience massive civil unrest in the wake of a series of crises which it termed “strategic shock.”

    “Widespread civil violence inside the United States would force the defense establishment to reorient priorities in extremis to defend basic domestic order and human security,” stated the report, authored by [Ret.] Lt. Col. Nathan Freir, adding that the military may be needed to quell “purposeful domestic resistance”.

    » Money Insider: US Will See Violent Civil Unrest In 2012 Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!

    ***

    David Icke: Don't Riot And Don't Be Violent - That`s What They Want

    We just need to stop cooperating en masse with our own enslavement


  3. #78
    Dislocated Member
    Neo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Online
    31-10-2021 @ 03:34 AM
    Location
    Nebuchadnezzar
    Posts
    10,609

    NDAA in court over indefinite detention of Americans

    Published: 30 March, 2012, 21:42
    Edited: 30 March, 2012, 21:42


    After much debate on a new law signed by President Barack Obama, House Republicans are throwing around the idea of reviewing the National Defense Authorization Act after the law was challenged in court.

    Seven witnesses appeared in front of US District Judge Katherine Forrest in New York on Thursday.

    Among the seven individuals,a Pulitzer-prize winning journalist Chris Hedges was responsible for filing the lawsuit believes the “indefinite detention” portion of the law could result in his imprisonment at Guantanamo Bay for merely doing his job.

    Hedges a repeated guest on RT is an author, columnist for TruthDig.Com and a Middle-East expert, expressed in Federal court that the NDAA would have an effect on journalists and activists worldwide.

    I think its [NDAA] clearly unconstitutional, certainly the lawyers Bruce Afran and Carl Mayer who are bringing the case believe it is unconstitutional,” Hedges said to RT.

    Hedges who comes in contact with several individuals from the Middle-East fears the US government will attempt to link him to a terrorist network when in fact he is merely reporting.
    It’s quite a frightening piece of legislation,” he added.

    The defense bill passed by Congress and signed by Obama into law on New Year’s Eve, permits the detention of Americans and denies suspected “terrorists” the right to a trial and subjects the individual to be held indefinitely.

    During the signing of the NDAA Obama claimed he had serious reservations about the provisions on detention, interrogation and prosecution of suspected terrorists.

    "My administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens," Obama said in a statement regarding this law.

    "Indeed, I believe that doing so would break with our most important traditions and values as a nation," he added.

    Obama originally opposed the act but signed it anyway.

    The NDAA has caused a lot of commotion among civil rights groups and many feel the resentment towards the bill has pushed lawmakers to take action.

    "I intend to help put as much political pressure on this issue as possible," said Rep. Justin Amash (R-Mich.) in a Huffington Post report.

    "I intend to spend a lot of time – and I already have been doing so – making the public aware of this issue so we can get the change we need to address it," he added.

    The only change Obama has brought regarding the issue came in February.

    The Obama administration defined new rules on the law saying when it is appropriate for the FBI to arrest suspected terrorists rather than the US military.

    According to the Huffington Post, “the new procedures spelled out seven circumstances in which the president could place a suspect in FBI, rather than military, custody, including a wavier when it could impede counterterrorism cooperation with another government or when it could interfere with efforts to secure an individual’s cooperation or confession.”

    Still the changes by the Obama administration are insufficient critics say.

    It is a decimation of the most basic civil liberty that Americans have taken for granted it overturns two-hundred years of domestic law which has prohibited the military from functioning as a police force…and it removes due process,” Hedges said.

    The GOP majority in the House Armed Services Committee who are considering numerous plans to revise the provision on indefinite detention haven’t gone public with their potential changes, but added they could be completed as early as this summer.

    Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.) and Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.) have presented legislation that would abolish the provision on indefinite detention and have the mandatory military custody for extraneous terrorist suspects not Americans.

    "I will continue to push that bill," Smith said in an interview.
    "I know the majority is also putting together some ideas. They're very process-focused. … I have not seen specifics of that proposal yet and we'll talk to them about it, but obviously I have a much stronger position on that and think that we don't need to have indefinite detention or military custody for the people in the US," Smith added.

    "There clearly has been some blowback and that's what the Republicans are trying to address," Smith said.


    NDAA in court over indefinite detention of Americans — RT
    Life should not be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside in a cloud of smoke, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming "Wow! What a Ride!"

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •