Paramilitary Jackbooted Thugs Literally Make Me Sick to My Stomach
Via this interesting piece:
Dedicated to fighting authoritarianism, bigotry, greed, corruption, climate change denial, white supremacy, racism, stupidity and general evil, as well as the exploration of interesting ideas and conspiracy theories including 9/11, UFOs, ET's, the paranormal and the general unknown.
Modern liberalism is a mixture of two elements. One is a support of Federal power – what came out of the late 1930s, World War II, and the civil rights era where a social safety net and warfare were financed by Wall Street, the Federal Reserve and the RFC, and human rights were enforced by a Federal government, unions, and a cadre of corporate, journalistic and technocratic experts (and cheap oil made the whole system run.) America mobilized militarily for national priorities, be they war-like or social in nature. And two, it originates from the anti-war sentiment of the Vietnam era, with its distrust of centralized authority mobilizing national resources for what were perceived to be immoral priorities. When you throw in the recent financial crisis, the corruption of big finance, the increasing militarization of society, Iraq and Afghanistan, and the collapse of the moral authority of the technocrats, you have a big problem. Liberalism doesn’t really exist much within the Democratic Party so much anymore, but it also has a profound challenge insofar as the rudiments of liberalism going back to the 1930s don’t work.More on this point from Glenn Greenwald here.
This is why Ron Paul can critique the Federal Reserve and American empire, and why liberals have essentially no answer to his ideas, arguing instead over Paul having character defects. Ron Paul’s stance should be seen as a challenge to better create a coherent structural critique of the American political order. It’s quite obvious that there isn’t one coming from the left, otherwise the figure challenging the war on drugs and American empire wouldn’t be in the Republican primary as the libertarian candidate. To get there, liberals must grapple with big finance and war, two topics that are difficult to handle in any but a glib manner that separates us from our actual traditional and problematic affinity for both. War financing has a specific tradition in American culture, but there is no guarantee war financing must continue the way it has. And there’s no reason to assume that centralized power will act in a more just manner these days, that we will see continuity with the historical experience of the New Deal and Civil Rights Era. The liberal alliance with the mechanics of mass mobilizing warfare, which should be pretty obvious when seen in this light, is deep-rooted.
What we’re seeing on the left is this conflict played out, whether it is big slow centralized unions supporting problematic policies, protest movements that cannot be institutionalized in any useful structure, or a completely hollow liberal intellectual apparatus arguing for increasing the power of corporations through the Federal government to enact their agenda. Now of course, Ron Paul pandered to racists, and there is no doubt that this is a legitimate political issue in the Presidential race. But the intellectual challenge that Ron Paul presents ultimately has nothing to do with him, and everything to do with contradictions within modern liberalism.
According to the Associated Press article, “Iowa GOP worried by hacker threat to caucus vote“, the Iowa State GOP committee is concerned that people who call themselves “Anonymous” will ‘hack’ the vote count during the tabulation of the 2012 Presidential caucus. Whether or not Anonymous is to blame is irrelevant. It could be a false-flag hacking event, in which Anonymous gets the blame for some other group’s nefarious activities. What is being proposed is that the results of the Iowa caucus will be tainted with scandal. In my opinion, if one particular candidate wins the Iowa caucus, then the State GOP committee will declare the ‘hack’ successful and discount the votes; that candidate is Representative Ron Paul.
In general, Anonymous, a leaderless group, has been seen as anti-establishment, pro-democracy, anti-corruption and pro-justice, from an individual liberty point of view. From a goose-stepping statist point of view, Anonymous is the scourge of the Internet.
Also, establishment players have already made noise about how a Ron Paul win would discredit his win. Chris Wallace said so much in some on-camera banter about how things may turn out in Iowa, at the pre-Fox debate interview in December.
The administration has said that its covert, targeted killings with remote-controlled aircraft in Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia and potentially beyond are proper under both domestic and international law. It has said that the targets are chosen under strict criteria, with rigorous internal oversight.
It has parried reports of collateral damage and the alleged killing of innocents by saying that drones, with their surveillance capabilities and precision missiles, result in far fewer mistakes than less sophisticated weapons.
Yet in carrying out hundreds of strikes over three years — resulting in an estimated 1,350 to 2,250 deaths in Pakistan — it has provided virtually no details to support those assertions.
In outlining its legal reasoning, the administration has cited broad congressional authorizations and presidential approvals, the international laws of war and the right to self-defense. But it has not offered the American public, uneasy allies or international authorities any specifics that would make it possible to judge how it is applying those laws.
Dimon, 55, whose 2010 compensation was $23 million, joined billionaires including hedge-fund manager John Paulson and Home Depot Inc. (HD) co-founder Bernard Marcus in using speeches, open letters and television appearances to defend themselves and the richest 1 percent of the population targeted by Occupy Wall Street demonstrators.The thing is, these guys in the piece are really the 0.1% or 0.01% -- and their incomes have skyrocketed in the past 30 years or so.
If successful businesspeople don’t go public to share their stories and talk about their troubles, “they deserve what they’re going to get,” said Marcus, 82, a founding member of Job Creators Alliance, a Dallas-based nonprofit that develops talking points and op-ed pieces aimed at “shaping the national agenda,” according to the group’s website. He said he isn’t worried that speaking out might make him a target of protesters.
“Who gives a crap about some imbecile?” Marcus said. “Are you kidding me?” (snip)
The top 1 percent of taxpayers in the U.S. made at least $343,927 in 2009, the last year data is available, according to the Internal Revenue Service. While average household income increased 62 percent from 1979 through 2007, the top 1 percent’s more than tripled, an October Congressional Budget Office report showed. As a result, the U.S. had greater income inequality in 2007 than China or Iran...
Director of the Center for Research on Globalization Michel Chossudovsky has told RT that calling Iran’s officials - including the supreme leader - guilty of helping the 9/11 attackers is nothing but “a ploy.”
On Thursday, families of victims of the September 11th 2001 attacks won a default judgment against Iran, the Taliban, Al-Qaeda and Lebanon-based Hezbollah. According to the lawsuit, people in Iran – including Ayatollah Ali Khamenei- provided support to the terrorists who went on to attack civilians on US soil.But Mr. Chossudovsky told RT he believes it’s nothing but a cover-up, with Iran as a convenient fall guy.
“There is absolutely no evidence that Iran aided the 9/11 attacks. There is ample evidence after collection that there was conspiracy and the complicity of the US government… There is absolutely no evidence that Al Qaeda or the Taliban were involved in the 9/11 attacks. In fact, if there is anyone behind Al Qaeda, it was the Central Intelligence Agency, going back to the Soviet Afghan war”, Chossudovsky said.
And this latest court ruling is part of the plan, according to Chossudovsky. “We are dealing with fabrications whereby a war agenda, which has been on the Pentagon’s drawing board for many years, is now seeking justification to go live – and we’ve seen the drone attacks, we’ve seen the sanctions.”
By The Anonymous Physicist
First I present my review of the 2011 printing of “Murder From Within: [Subtitle]: Lyndon Johnson’s Plot Against President Kennedy” by Fred T. Newcomb and Perry Adams.
The history of this book is that the authors began researching the JFK Assassination in the 1960s and by 1974 had written their book, that three publishers backed out of printing at the last minute. The authors then photocopied some 100 copies and mailed them to the US Senate and House leaders. From these, others made bootleg copies and more people were able to read it, in the ensuing years. (I had unsuccessfully tried for years to get a copy, but am disappointed now.)
For 1974, it was ahead of its time for revealing the Federal Govt involvement and cover-up in the Assassination. Other books have since supplanted it. Of course, the near totality of those other books deliberately deny what anyone can see in a decent version of the Zapruder film, that SS Agent Greer fired the fatal head shot that killed Kennedy. So in that sense it is still good; however it also contains much disinformation and omitted information, and has not been updated except perhaps for one or two things only.
Some of the fascinating claims made in this book regarding the assassination itself are that SS Agent Greer deliberately shot and tried to kill Texas Gov. Connally. And that Connally had a gun and shot back at the driver. Newcomb and Perry also wrote that the first shot in the plot was fired from the V-P’s car by that SS Agent/driver. And that this was to start the whole assassination and also caused everyone to turn toward the back as a distraction, while the PLANNED murder of President Kennedy was to be by the driver.
So there are many false statements interspersed with some good important facts in the book. I have made clear that while Greer definitely shot Connally, that was an accident, and indeed was the reason why Greer then brought the limo to a standstill! Their claim that Connally was deliberately shot is absurd. E.g., it is well know about the heated argument JFK and LBJ had the night before when LBJ tried to get his cohort Connally exchanged in the limos with Senator Yarborough. And also how Connally was involved in picking the precise route and speaking sites. Also I am sure that Greer doing the final deed was a contingency plan only, and was only needed as Clint Hill disobeyed orders and ran up to try to save JFK.
The book was a huge let down, as it did not have more detail on the witnesses who said they saw Greer shoot Kennedy. A disappointment, as this is what I bought the book for and expected to read. I do not know if this was excised from the 1974 version or if there never was more on that. The online sources, in this matter, have almost as much as is in the book on the witnesses who were near the limo or who overlooked it. Of course, these online sources got that from the earlier version of this book. But it seems that the authors only took the witnesses quotes from the Warren commission documents or had phone conversations with those witnesses. Nonetheless they were the first ones to point this out to the American people and the world.
Then despite having some 40 years to get the book typed and edited or proofread, it is printed with many errors. From its opening “Forward” [sic], to its missing illustrations (Figures) or mislabeling of some, to pages improperly ordered and numbered, there are so many errors herein. (A book can have a foreword, there is no noun called a forward.) But before I could get perturbed about that, I deduced the clever PsyOp with this new/old book. By not making (m)any changes, the new author/publisher, Tyler Newcomb makes it look like the original asserted that LBJ was the mastermind alone; when I believe that was not the subtitle in the original.
Curiously, there is very little to be found online, or in the book, on the biographies of the two authors. Fred Newcomb, now 82 or 83, and ill, was in a Hospital (his son had indicated elsewhere that it was a V.A. Hospital, not in the new book); and therefore he was in the US military. I wonder if he was in military intelligence like, JFK “researcher” James Fetzer. As I have many times explained, the entire industry of JFK Assassination authors, books, articles, museums, websites, forums, blogs, etc. are run by the intel agencies.
In communications with Fred’s son, Tyler Newcomb, the latter wrote that both he and his father believe that the whole assassination and follow up was the work of some 6-10 “rogue” people. This is one of the most obvious and stupid lies one can imagine. The book itself names more people than that, and all the circumstances indicate how widespread this all is. The book implicates Secretary of State Dean Rusk, Air Force people and many others.
And I have made clear to people how pervasive and massive secret society control of the USA —and the world is—and how far back and where it ultimately leads to. I had also wondered how, back in the 60’s and 70’s, extending to this day (regarding Fred, as Perry died decades ago), the two authors were not killed for stating that SS Agent Greer fired the fatal head-shot that killed President Kennedy. Just as with the writings of Medical Examiner, Dr. Cyril Wecht, the “rogue element:” palaver is put out along with elements of their story that are incorrect and perhaps ludicrous, and meant to destroy the truth from within. Just as the book’s title itself says!
Here for completeness is a website and eyewitness quotes.
“These are the witnesses whose statement to Mr. Newcomb and sometimes the Warren commission included the words "in the car."
2. Jean Hill - Jean Hill saw what happened too, but when she tried to bring up the subject of a gun being fired in the car, Senator Arlen Spector (a 33rd degree Mason) would change the subject or say "it's time for a cup of coffee."
3. Austin P. Miller - Texas Louisiana Freight Bureau, who stood on the railway overpass overlooking Elm Street was asked by Arlen Spector where the shots came from: His reply was "from right there in the car." Senator Spector just went on to the next question, never asking Miller any specifics. From: Warren Report, New York Times edition, p. 82.
4. Clinton J. Hill. Jacqueline Kennedy's bodyguard reports in Vol. II, pp 138-139 of the Warren Commission Volumes: "I jumped from the car, realizing that something was wrong, and ran to the presidential limousine. Just as I reached it, there was another sound. I think I described it in my statement as though someone was shooting a revolver into a hard object...it seemed to have some type of echo."
5. Hugh Betzner - Had picture published in Life magazine and was standing right next to the drivers side of the motorcade: He saw a gun in the hand of one of the secret service agents and heard a sound "like firecrackers going off in the car.”
Regarding the current JFK Assassination meme that LBJ was the sole mastermind, the book omits that LBJ threw himself to the floor of his limo at the outset, and thus in no way was in charge, as he feared he might be killed as well. And his later resignation also gives the lie to the nonsense that he was in charge of anything. LBJ was just another perp following orders. But certainly was integral to the plans of the PTB in killing Kennedy, in doing the War on Vietnam, and primarily in creating massive numbers of nuclear bombs and ICBMs. The latter being part of the hidden designs of those in ultimate control of Mankind.
At the end of the book, the authors actually make some decent proposals. They would like to see the elimination of both the Vice-Presidency and the SS (Secret Service). They cite the US Constitution and indicate that the Founders only wanted the VP to temporarily fulfill the duties of the Presidency, until an actual new President would be elected. They assert that taking over the Office of the Presidency was not in the Constitution. Somewhat of a moot point now, after the passing of the 25th Amendment. They would like to see the Office of the V-P eliminated or certainly to not have that office be “next in line,” as that is too conducive to the assassination of a President. Of course, all that again begs the issue of total secret society control of the US Govt.
The authors wrote that the Secret Service should also be abolished, and that the President should be afforded the right to have his/her own protection. This would prevent the SS from killing (or facilitating the killing) of any more Presidents, as it is all too easy for them to do now. To those that are naïve, even Jackie when asked why she didn’t say what she knew said, “The Secret Service have my children.” Indeed, this book details the massive Secret Service “protection” that Gov. Connally was “afforded” in Parkland Hospital, with SS agents with machine guns even on the roofs at all times. Connally was a prisoner the book asserts until he parroted the lies the SS and the regime put out about the murder, cover-up and takeover.
This photo actually made it to the cover of the NY Times the next day. It was a bit cropped, but nearly all of it was published. Then for years, all books on the Assassination either left it out or printed it cropped so as to hide what is there. And to this day, to my knowledge, ALL books that print the full picture STILL do not mention what is there!
And that is once again the case with “Murder From Within.”
Now we clearly see that the lead car had first sped up well ahead of the JFK limo—when it was supposed to be directly in front. Then we see it has its break lights on. As 20 witnesses have stated the JFK limo came to a stop, so did this lead car. In that car were driver, Dallas Police Chief Jesse Curry, Secret Service Agent in charge of the route Winston G. Lawson, Secret Service Agent in charge of the Dallas office, Forrest V. Sorrels, and Dallas Sheriff Bill Decker who had ordered all his man not to protect the President or help with the route. Their vehicle was a closed one.
Then note the man we see in front of the back of the stopped lead car. No one ever mentions him. It appears that half of his body is above ground, and that perhaps half is in a sewer. The Secret Service were supposed to solder closed all manhole covers beforehand. Note that he is either holding a rifle, or a bazooka, or has a very long right arm and is pointing. This photo alone proves that the Secret Service, the Dallas Police and the Dallas Sheriff were involved in killing President Kennedy. And you can be sure with the full weight of the Federal Govt coming down on them if those in control of the Federal Govt were not calling the shots in Dallas, no local Police Chief would be part of a small plot.
Final verdict: Much of the upper echelon of the Federal Govt was in on the Assassination, as were the upper echelons of the Dallas Govt and Police Depts All part of Secret Society control of the USA and the world.
Bill of Rights (1791-2011) R.I.P.?Also this -- Obama anti-immigration policies leading to imprisonment of citizens.
Well, 220 years is a pretty good run, eh? Just in time for Thursday's Bill of Rights Day, Congress has included in a massive war and weapons funding bill an authorization of presidents and the military to imprison you or anyone else forever without a trial.
Step One: Call your representative and your two senators and demand that they vote No on final passage of the "Defense Authorization Act." 202-224-3121
Get the staffer you speak with to tell you why their boss would even consider voting yes on imprisonment with no trial. Post what they tell you at http://warisacrime.org/nomohabeas
Step Two: Tell the president to veto.
The conference committee made changes to the bill to answer President Obama's concerns, not ours. The bill now leaves the president free to imprison or kill individuals without handing them over even to a military tribunal. The White House calls this "flexibility." The authors of the Bill of Rights called it tyranny.
Obama won't prosecute CIA torturers, Wall Street crooks, other corporate criminals, lawless war profiteers, or other venal high-level civilian or government officials.
Instead, expect him to sign into law (or at least tacitly approve) indefinite military detentions of US citizens allegedly associated with terrorist groups, with or without corroborating evidence.
Post-9/11, US freedoms and other democratic values dramatically eroded. Enactment of police state provisions in the FY 2012 National Defense Authorization Act comes closer to ending them entirely.
On December 5, the ACLU headlined, "Indefinite Detention, Endless Worldwide War and the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)," saying:
Enactment of this measure will authorize "the military to pick up and imprison people, including US citizens, without charging them or putting them on trial."
Secretly with no hearings, both Houses are rushing to complete a "joint version" before leaving for Christmas break. "Fundamental American values and freedoms are on the line." Given the stakes, they're perilously hanging by a thread.
On December 13, the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) urged Obama to veto NDAA in its present form. Otherwise, he'll "be responsible for signing into law one of the greatest expansions of executive power in our nation's history, allowing the government to lock up citizens and non-citizens without the right to fair trials."
Indefinite detentions violate core democratic freedoms, including fundamental Bill of Rights ones already gravely eroded.
On November 27, 1941, Franklin Roosevelt issued Proclamation 2524, declaring December 15 Bill of Rights Day to commemorate its 150th 1791 ratification.
At the time, he hailed "America('s) charter of personal liberty and human dignity," including "freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, and the free right to petition the Government for redress of grievances."
Although American freedom then was far less than he claimed, today it hangs by a thread and may pass entirely any time for any reason.
In response to global imperial wars, corporate favoritism, unbridled private sector criminality, and political corruption at the highest levels, causing economic crisis conditions at home, thousands began protesting nationwide for social justice.
In response, militarized police confront them violently as NDAA heads for enactment to stop anyone from challenging US hegemony and corporate power by throwing them indefinitely in military dungeons to rot.
Equity and justice are fast eroding entirely to advance America's imperium. On May 26, the House passed HR 1540, 322 - 96. Doing so took a giant step toward abolishing freedom entirely.
On December 1, the Senate's S. 1867 followed suit, 93 to 7. Both versions assure no one anywhere is now safe, including law-abiding US citizens.
Enactment means anyone anywhere, including US citizens, may be indefinitely held without charge or trial, based solely on suspicions, baseless allegations or none at all.
No reasonable proof is required, just suspicions that those detained pose threats. Under subsection (b)(1), indefinite detentions can follow mere membership (past or present) or support for suspect organizations.
Presidents will have unchecked authority to arrest, interrogate and indefinitely detain law-abiding citizens if accused of potentially posing a threat.
Constitutional, statute and international laws won't apply. Presidential diktats will replace them.
US military personnel will be authorized to arrest and indefinitely detain anyone globally, including US citizens. No one anywhere will be safe.
Due process, civil protections, and judicial fairness will be null and void. Presidents could order anyone arrested and imprisoned for life without charge or trial. Abuse of power will replace rule of law protections. It can happen in days.
Ahead of their holiday break, leaders from both Houses are meeting secretly to resolve final language differences before sending NDAA to Obama to sign.
Promising a veto, he lied. He broke every major promise made. This one's no exception at a time he can go either way, given enough congressional votes to override him.
Moreover, Senate bill sponsor Carl Levin said administration officials, in fact, lobbied against language excluding US citizens from indefinite military detentions without trials or due process. According to Levin:
"The language which precluded the application of Section 1031 to American citizens was in the bill that we originally approved....and the administration asked us to remove (it) which says that US citizens and lawful residents would not be subject to this section."
"It was the administration that asked us to remove the very language which we had in the bill which passed the committee. (W)e removed it at the request of the administration....It was the administration which asked us to remove the very language, the absence of which is now objected to."
In other words, Obama wants US citizens indefinitely detained in military prisons whether or not charged. He fully supports police state repression. Only his disingenuous rhetoric says otherwise.
Earlier by Executive Order, he authorized indefinite detentions with or without military commission trials for persons designated national security threats. Intended specifically for Guantanamo detainees, it could be stretched to include anyone.
In addition, he authorized CIA operatives and Special Forces death squads to kill targeted US citizens abroad. As a result, they may be hunted down and murdered in cold blood for any reason or none at all.
Outspoken Muslim cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, a US citizen living in Yemen at the time, was killed for opposing Washington's imperium, not alleged or committed crimes. His murder comes perilously close to replicating assassinations at home, whether covertly or openly.
In fact, administration lawyers called US citizens legitimate targets if deemed national security threats, with or without corroborating evidence. As a result, indeed no one's safe, whether or not NDAA passes in its current form.
According to CIA counsel Stephen Preston and Pentagon lawyer Jeh Johnson, US citizens at war with America have no immunity. Executive branch officials, not courts, will decide guilt or innocence issues.
In other words, anyone voicing opposition to America's imperium risks being targeted for arrest, detention or assassination.
With regard to Obama's NDAA position, his White House November 17 Statement of Administration Policy said:
"The Administration supports Senate passage of (NDAA) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2012."
"Section 1031 attempts to expressly codify the detention authority that exists under the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40) (the "AUMF"). The authorities granted by the AUMF, including the detention authority, are essential to our ability to protect the American people from the threat posed by al-Qaida and its associated forces...."
"Because the authorities codified in this section already exist, the Administration does not believe codification is necessary and poses some risk....While the current language minimizes many of those risks, future legislative action must ensure (against) unintended consequences that could compromise our ability to protect the American people."
Senate bill S. 1867, Section 1031, affirms the "authority of the armed forces of the United States to detain covered persons," including US citizens.
Section 1032 requires suspects held in military custody, outside constitutionally mandated civil protections, without habeas rights, due process, and other judicial procedures.
Obama may object to legislative language, not its intent. As a result perhaps, wiggle room wording changes may assuage his concerns, while leaving sweeping indefinite military detention authorization unchanged.
In other words, presidents henceforth may order anyone indefinitely detained in military prisons uncharged, including US citizens.
A Final Comment
Even before 9/11, Washington began militarizing police forces nationwide. Sophisticated weapons and training are provided, including military robots, M-16 assault rifles, helicopters, armored vehicles, grenade launchers, and other weapons previously used only by military forces.
In 1997, the so-called 1033 Program (formerly the 1208 Program) let the Defense Secretary "transfer, without charge, excess US Department of Defense (DoD) personal property (supplies and equipment) to state and local law enforcement agencies (LEAs)."
As a result, they've been supplied with land, air and sea vehicles, weapons, computer equipment, body armor, fingerprint equipment, night vision equipment, radios and televisions, first aid equipment, tents, sleeping bags, photographic equipment, and more.
In 2011 alone, about $500 million in military related hardware was supplied. Next year's amounts are expected to increase fourfold. Doing so coincides with OWS crackdowns.
More than ever, America is being militarized to quash popular social justice protests at a time equity and justice are fast disappearing. Moreover, military forces may intervene if local cops need help.
Post-9/11, police state terrorism was institutionalized. It's being hardened more than ever to crush dissent.
Constitutional, statute, and international law protections no longer apply. Planned tyranny will replace them, leaving no one safe anywhere henceforth.
It's a bill to dump over $650 billion into wars and aggressive weaponry, continue the slaughter in Afghanistan, ramp up the creation and use of drones, and expand U.S. military bases around the globe.
When these bills move through the Congress, they are so enormous and yet so routine that almost all attention is drawn to one or more peculiarly putrid or pretentiously benevolent little attachments. Either the bill simply must be passed because it contains hurricane relief or veterans aid or unemployment insurance or because it finally allows GLBT Americans to join in our crusades of mass murder. Or, alternatively, the bill desperately needs amending because it sanctions torture or lawless imprisonment or expands an especially hated war or an especially transparent investment in unwanted weaponry manufactured by some campaign donor. But the underlying insanity of the bill itself never makes it into the corporate conversation.
In the case of this latest National Defense Authorization Act, there has been a toothless rhetorical amendment passed asking the president to end his warmaking in Afghanistan in something less than three years if it's not too much trouble. But that positive measure has been absolutely overwhelmed in what little discussion of the bill exists by a section of the bill giving presidents and the military the power to lock you away without any of the process guaranteed you by the U.S. Constitution. Now, President Obama may veto the bill because he would prefer that section to be even worse than it is. He has expressed concern that it limits, rather than expands, his options. He should veto it because it rips out the heart of our Bill of Rights and grinds it into the dirt.
But a bill like this should not be passed simply because the latest erosion of our civil liberties is removed and the even worse un-codified understanding and practice is left to continue. A bill like this one should be rejected in its entirety. This bill kills human beings in large numbers, endangers us all through encouragement of foreign hostility, contributes to the development and proliferation of genocidal weaponry, creates massive environmental destruction, advances a foreign policy built around an unsurvivable energy policy, funds both sides of an unending Afghan occupation, funds prisons where we already hold many hundreds of men behind bars without charge or trial, and gives presidents de facto power to ignore our rights for the duration of a global war that has no end. And this bill destroys our economy through unfathomable wasteful spending in the midst of a manufactured deficit crisis and an actual humanitarian crisis at home and abroad.
Military spending is worse for job creation and retention than any other kind of spending or even tax cuts. Jobs is not the silver lining in militarism. There is a choice that confronts us between militarism or jobs, militarism or human services, militarism or a safety net for the ill and the elderly and the impoverished. We're dumping over a trillion dollars a year into "security" spending in "defense" and other bills combined, well over half of discretionary spending. The deficit "crisis" is not the creation of sick people getting old and multiplying without having had the decency to bribe their way into major government contracts or bailouts from the Federal Reserve. Single-payer health coverage, not cuts to Medicare, is the solution there. The deficit is not purely the result of the Obama tax cuts (sorry, Bush is gone now) or of the bad economy. There is a way to improve the actual economy by spending existing public dollars in different ways.
The God-given human right to freely cultivate food is under attack in New Zealand (NZ) as special interest groups and others are currently attempting to push a “food security” bill through the nation’s parliament that will strip individuals of their right to grow food, save seeds, and even share the fruits of their labor with friends and family members.Except, that I just looked at the bill and it says nothing about people growing their own food. The bill only seems to apply to people who sell food, and even then, there seem to be exemptions. So, this may be a classic case of misinfo, perhaps part of a psy-op to get people to distrust the government. Certainly, this law would place some new regulations on certain food growers, and I'm sure they don't like that. But I don't see the evidence for the over-arching claims of the piece.
In accordance with the World Trade Organization’s (WTO) Codex Alimentarius scheme for global food control, the NZ Food Bill, if passed, will essentially transfer primary control of food from individuals to corporations under the guise of food safety. And unless massive public outcry and awakened consciences within the NZ government are able to put a stop to it, the bill could become law very soon.
According to NZ Food Security, a group working to protect the food freedom of New Zealanders, the bill will turn growing and sharing food into a government-granted privilege rather than a human right. It will also make it illegal to distribute any type of food based on the bill’s language. This includes seeds, nutrients, natural medicines, minerals, and even water — without expressed government permission.
You see, agribusiness giants like Monsanto want full control of the food supply, which means putting an end to small-scale agriculture systems that operate “off the grid,” so to speak. This is why they have worked so hard in places like the US to convert conventional, staple crop systems to genetically-modified (GM) ones that are continually reliant upon new seeds and chemical interventions.
Fourth Amendment –
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Fifth Amendment –
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.