You can't handel the truth's

The Truth Will Make You Free

Archive for the tag “agenda21”

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta: I Answer To The New World Order, Not America

Senator Sessions: “We spend our time worrying about the UN, the Arab League, NATO, and too little time, in my opinion, worrying about the elected representatives of the United States.”

 

Pentagon Launches Desperate Damage Control Over Shocking Panetta Testimony 
The United States has ceded control of its affairs to international bureaucrats

Paul Joseph Watson 
Infowars.com 
Thursday, March 8, 2012 

Alex Jones: “This represents absolute 100 per cent proof that the military industrial complex which runs the United States is under the control of foreign central banks who are imposing a military dictatorship.” 

The Pentagon is engaging in damage control after shocking testimony yesterday by Defense Secretary Leon Panetta at a Senate Armed Services Committee congressional hearing during which it was confirmed that the U.S. government is now completely beholden to international power structures and that the legislative branch is a worthless relic.

Homeland Security monitors journalists

US Dept. of Homeland Security.

Published: 07 January, 2012, 01:56

US Dept. of Homeland Security.

TAGS: Internet, Information Technology, USA, WikiLeaks, Media, Social networks

 

Freedom of speech might allow journalists to get away with a lot in America, but the Department of Homeland Security is on the ready to make sure that the government is keeping dibs on who is saying what.

Under the National Operations Center (NOC)’s Media Monitoring Initiative that came out of DHS headquarters in November, Washington has the written permission to retain data on users of social media and online networking platforms.

Specifically, the DHS announced the NCO and its Office of Operations Coordination and Planning (OPS) can collect personal information from news anchors, journalists, reporters or anyone who may use “traditional and/or social media in real time to keep their audience situationally aware and informed.”

According to the Department of Homeland Security’s own definition of personal identifiable information, or PII, such data could consist of any intellect “that permits the identity of an individual to be directly or indirectly inferred, including any information which is linked or linkable to that individual.” Previously established guidelines within the administration say that data could only be collected under authorization set forth by written code, but the new provisions in the NOC’s write-up means that any reporter, whether someone along the lines of Walter Cronkite or a budding blogger, can be victimized by the agency.

Also included in the roster of those subjected to the spying are government officials, domestic or not, who make public statements, private sector employees that do the same and “persons known to have been involved in major crimes of Homeland Security interest,” which to itself opens up the possibilities even wider.

The department says that they will only scour publically-made info available while retaining data, but it doesn’t help but raise suspicion as to why the government is going out of their way to spend time, money and resources on watching over those that helped bring news to the masses.

The development out of the DHS comes at the same time that U.S. District Judge Liam O’Grady denied pleas from supporters of WikiLeaks who had tried to prevent account information pertaining to their Twitter accounts from being provided to federal prosecutors. Jacob Applebaum and others advocates of Julian Assange’s whistleblower site were fighting to keep the government from subpoenaing information on their personal accounts that were collected from Twitter.

Last month the Boston Police Department and the Suffolk Massachusetts District Attorney subpoenaed Twitter over details pertaining to recent tweets involving the Occupy Boston protests.

The website Fast Company reports that the intel collected by the Department of Homeland Security under the NOC Monitoring Initiative has been happening since as early as 2010 and the data is being shared with both private sector businesses and international third parties.

Ron Paul Calls National Defense Authorization Act “Slip Into Tyranny”

Written by Joe Wolverton, II   
Friday, 30 December 2011 10:48

 

A dictator enjoys unrestrained power over the people. The legislative and judicial branches voluntarily cede this power or it’s taken by force. Most of the time, it’s given up easily, out of fear in time of war and civil disturbances, and with support from the people, although the dictator will also accumulate more power with the use of force.” Those prescient words of Republican presidential candidate Congressman Ron Paul (R-Texas) are taken from his book Liberty Defined: 50 Essential Issues That Affect Our Freedom. The tyrannical assumption of power by the President and the cession of unheralded power to him by the Congress has taken place precisely as Dr. Paul warned.

The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) is an unprecedented, unconstitutional, and unchecked grant of dictatorial power to the President in the name of protecting the security of “the homeland.” Ron Paul described the bill (soon to be signed into law by the President) as a “slip into tyranny,” one that will almost certainly accelerate “our descent into totalitarianism.”
What of the NDAA? Are there indeed provisions contained therein that so ferociously tear at the constitutional fabric of our Republic?
In a word — yes.
This liberty-extinguishing legislation converts America into a war zone and turns Americans into potential suspected terrorists, complete with the full roster of rights typically afforded to terrorists — none.
A key component of this reconciled bill mandates a frightening grant of immense and unconstitutional power to the executive branch. Under the provisions of Section 1021, the President is afforded the absolute power to arrest and detain citizens of the United States without their being informed of any criminal charges, without a trial on the merits of those charges, and without a scintilla of the due process safeguards protected by the Constitution of the United States.
Further, in order to execute the provisions of Section 1021 described in the previous paragraph, subsequent clauses (Section 1022, for example) unlawfully give the President the absolute and unquestionable authority to deploy the armed forces of the United States to apprehend and to indefinitely detain those suspected of threatening the security of the “homeland.” In the language of this legislation, these people are called “covered persons.”
The universe of potential “covered persons” includes every citizen of the United States of America. Any American could one day find himself or herself branded a “belligerent” and thus subject to the complete confiscation of his or her constitutional civil liberties and nearly never-ending incarceration in a military prison.
In his assessment of the danger inherent in such acts, Paul is in good company. This suspension of habeas corpus, a right central to Anglo-American freedom from despotism for over 500 years, was described by Alexander Hamilton as one of “the favorite and most formidable instruments of tyranny.”
Congressman Paul eloquently expressed his assessment of such an assault on liberty:
The president’s widely expanded view of his own authority to detain Americans indefinitely even on American soil is for the first time in this legislation codified in law. That should chill all of us to our cores.
As reported by The Hill, in a phone message to supporters, Paul cited the Founders and their intent to bequeath to their descendants a government fettered in such a way as to threaten as little as possible man’s innate freedom:
The founders wanted to set a high bar for the government to overcome in order to deprive an individual of life or liberty. To lower that bar is to endanger everyone. When the bar is low enough to include political enemies, our descent into totalitarianism is virtually assured. The Patriot Act, as bad as its violation against the Fourth Amendment was, was just one step down the slippery slope. The recently passed National Defense Authorization Act continues that slip into tyranny, and in fact, accelerates it significantly.
Adding insult to injury, Congress has stuffed the bill full of funding for illegal and unconstitutional foreign wars so that the American people will pay over $670 billion dollars for the privilege of being deprived of their God-given rights and for the building of the American empire.
This appalling story doesn’t end there, however. The NDAA’s rap sheet of crimes against the Constitution is long. As Congressman Paul explained:
The Fifth Amendment is about much more than the right to remain silent in the face of government questioning. It contains very basic and very critical stipulations about the due process of law. The government cannot imprison a person for no reason and with no evidence presented and without access to legal counsel. The danger of the NDAA is its alarmingly vague, undefined criteria for who can be indefinitely detained by the U.S. government without trial.
While all the foregoing is harrowing and enough to make any reasonable man fear for the future of this Republic, there is another aspect of the law that is perhaps more frightening still. That is the vagueness of the terms. Terms so ill-defined are ripe for the wresting and within the penumbras of these provisions could be found lurking the tools of tyranny. Wrenches that could force anyone into a predetermined “terrorist” hole.
Ron Paul sets forth the source of such chilling concern as contained in the NDAA:
It is no longer limited to members of al Qaeda or the Taliban, but anyone accused of substantially supporting such groups or associated forces. How closely associated, and what constitutes substantial support? What if it was discovered that someone who committed a terrorist act was once involved with a charity? Or suppose a political candidate? Are all donors of that candidate or supporters of that candidate now suspects and subject to indefinite detainment? Is that charity now an associated force?
Despite the bipartisan and bicameral support for the defense budget bill, President Obama originally vowed to veto the measure over his disagreement with the delegation of power over the cases of detainees.
He has since withdrawn his objection and has signaled his intent to sign the bill into law.
The crux of the White House’s opposition to the NDAA was President Obama’s desire that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) should have plenary power over the disposition of issues related to the custody and prosecution of all terror suspects detained domestically.
The Obama administration insisted that cutting out the FBI would reduce the overall effectiveness of investigations, as well as hamstring the efforts of intelligence officers from gathering reliable intelligence from those believed to be fighting against the United States in Afghanistan or Iraq.
Specifically, the White House promised to veto the legislation if it “challenges or constrains the President’s critical authorities to collect intelligence, incapacitate dangerous terrorists, [or] protect the nation.”
Such swords disguised as shields are reminiscent of the words of James Madison. The Father of the Constitution warned, “The means of defense against foreign danger historically have become instruments of tyranny at home.”
Again, Ron Paul finds himself in the company of the Founders. In his closing remarks, Congressman Paul cited very succinctly the indictment that should be handed down by the American people against the NDAA:
The Bill of Rights has no exceptions for really bad people or terrorists or even non-citizens. It is a key check on government power against any person. That is not a weakness in our legal system; it is the very strength of our legal system. The NDAA attempts to justify abridging the Bill of Rights on the theory that rights are suspended in a time of war, and the entire United States is a battlefield in the war on terror. This is a very dangerous development, indeed. Beware.

America’s farmlands to be carpet-bombed with Vietnam-era Agent Orange chemical if Dow petition approved

(NaturalNews) A key chemical of one of the most horrifying elements of the Vietnam War — Agent Orange — may soon be unleashed on America’s farmlands. Considered by world nations to be a “Weapon of Mass Destruction” (WMD), Agent Orange was dropped in the millions of gallons on civilian populations during the Vietnam War in order to destroy foliage and poison North Vietnamese soldiers. The former president of the Vietnamese Red Cross, Professor Nhan, described it as, “…a massive violation of human rights of the civilian population, and a weapon of mass destruction.”

A key chemical in that weapon — 2,4-D — is just months away from being dropped on agricultural land across the United States. Dow AgroSciences, which along with DuPont and Monsanto is heavily invested in genetically engineered crops, has petitioned the U.S. government to deregulate a variety of GE corn that’s resistant to 2,4-D, which comprises 50% of the recipe of Agent Orange.

NaturalNews broke this story yesterday and published the details:
http://www.naturalnews.com/034492_D…

If the petition is approved by Washington, it would turn America’s corn fields into chemical warfare zones targeted for mass pesticide poisoning with 2,4-D chemicals. The corn, of course, would be immune to 2,4-D, so it would uptake the chemical and transport it right into the structure of the corn kernels, creating “Agent Orange corn bombs” that would be chemically unleashed when consumed by human beings.

This is just the latest example of how industrial chemical giants and GMO companies of the world are committing acts of genocide against innocents. The introduction of 2,4-D-resistant GE corn is, essentially, an act of war against humanity.

FOOD CROPS SPRAYED WITH CHEMICAL WEAPONS

Agent Orange, which contains roughly 50% 2,4-D, is also cited in numerous war crimes lawsuits. Even the BBC has reported on it:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3…

The use of such chemicals on civilian targets is a violation of the 1907 Hague Convention, the 1927 Geneva Convention, and the 1949 Geneva Convention (http://www.iadllaw.org/en/node/353).

The International Tribunal of Conscience in Support of the Vietnamese Victims of Agent Orange has published a document briefly describing the war crimes committed by the U.S. government in its use of Agent Orange: http://www.iadllaw.org/files/charge…

That document states:

The chemical warfare waged by the United States against Vietnam though the use of Agent Orange and other dioxin laced chemicals from 1961 to 1971 has caused severe, massive and prolonged consequences for the environment, ecology and health of the people of Vietnam.

See the photos of Agent Orange victims

Shocking pictures of Agent Orange victims can be seen at the following pages (WARNING, extremely graphic):
http://oraclesyndicate.twoday.net/s…

http://www.spingola.com/power_elite…

http://antiwar.com/orig/austin.php?…

http://legacy.bhopal.net/opinions/a…

http://vietnamartwork.wordpress.com…

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2010/0…

http://thetheologianscafe.xanga.com…

http://www.commondreams.org/headlin…

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3…

Watch the video of children affected by Agent Orange:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9zay…

Hear the Agent Orange song by Country Joe. Visit: http://countryjoe.com/jukebox.htm and click on “Agent Orange Song” on the top left. You’ll be able to hear the full song.

First Vietnam, now  America

Even walking around America today, many Americans are born as mutants thanks to the chemicals used in foods, medicines, lawn care and personal care products. That crime against humanity is about to be made far, far worse with the unleashing of 2,4-D on America’s farmlands.

The gross deformities, birth defects, neurological disorders and physical retardation we have seen in Vietnamese children affected by Agent Orange could soon arrive at America’s doorstep thanks to 2,4-D.

Dow, of course, is widely regarded as one of the most evil corporations on the planet, having already poisoned countless victims with toxic chemicals. Remember the Bhopal pesticide factory explosion in India? That was Union Carbide, owned by Dow. It killed thousands of people, maimed tens of thousands and injured over half a million (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhopal…).

Read more about Bhopal: http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/…

And learn more about Dow here:
http://www.thetruthaboutdow.org/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dow_Ch…

Remember: If chemical weapons are used to produce food, then those who consume such foods become casualties of war.

Food production was once an honorable art, but at the hands of greed-driven globalists, it quickly became a system of profit seeking and then a tool for corporate domination over the People. Now it has become a weapon of mass destruction, and it is being used to decimate the health of both the population and the farmlands.


Learn more:
http://www.naturalnews.com/034500_Agent_Orange_Dow_2-4-D.html#ixzz1hkQOSBaN

Terrorist Congress Declares War on American People

TheAlexJonesChannel
December 3, 2011

The passage of S. 1867, the National Defense Authorization Act, declares war on Americans, boldly claiming the right to indefinitely detain anyone deemed an enemy of the state, including citizens. Darrin McBreen gets reactions from people on the street about what they think of the passing of the draconian NDAA Bill by the Senate.

Senate Wants the Military to Lock You Up Without Trial


Here’s the best thing that can be said about the new detention powers the Senate has tucked into next year’s defense bill: They don’t force the military to detain American citizens indefinitely without a trial. They just let the military do that. And even though the leaders of the military and the spy community have said they want no such power, the Senate is poised to pass its bill as early as tonight.

There are still changes swirling around the Senate, but this looks like the basic shape of the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act. Someone the government says is “a member of, or part of, al-Qaida or an associated force” can be held in military custody “without trial until the end of the hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force.” Those hostilities are currently scheduled to end the Wednesday after never. The move would shut down criminal trials for terror suspects.

But far more dramatically, the detention mandate to use indefinite military detention in terrorism cases isn’t limited to foreigners. It’s confusing, because two different sections of the bill seem to contradict each other, but in the judgment of the University of Texas’ Robert Chesney — a nonpartisan authority on military detention — “U.S. citizens are included in the grant of detention authority.”

An amendment that would limit military detentions to people captured overseas failed on Thursday afternoon. The Senate soundly defeated a measure to strip out all the detention provisions on Tuesday.

 

So despite the Sixth Amendment’s guarantee of a right to trial, the Senate bill would let the government lock up any citizen it swears is a terrorist, without the burden of proving its case to an independent judge, and for the lifespan of an amorphous war that conceivably will never end. And because the Senate is using the bill that authorizes funding for the military as its vehicle for this dramatic constitutional claim, it’s pretty likely to pass.

It would be one thing if the military was clamoring for the authority to become the nation’s jailer. But to the contrary: Defense Secretary Leon Panetta opposes the maneuver. So does CIA Director David Petraeus, who usually commands deference from senators in both parties. Pretty much every security official has lined up against the Senate detention provisions, from Director of National Intelligence James Clapper to FBI Director Robert Mueller, who worry that they’ll get in the way of FBI investigations of domestic terrorists. President Obama has promised to veto the bill.

Which is ironic. After all, Obama approved of the execution without trial of Anwar al-Awlaki, al-Qaida’s YouTube preacher, based entirely on the unproven assertion that Awlaki was dangerous. Awlaki was an American citizen. So Obama thinks he has the right to kill Americans the government says are terrorists, but he doesn’t want the military to lock them up forever without trial. OK then.

Weirder still, the bill’s chief architect, Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), tried to persuade skeptics that the bill wasn’t so bad. His pitch? “The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States,” he said on the Senate floor on Monday. The bill would just let the government detain a citizen in military custody, not force it to do that. Reassured yet?

Civil libertarians aren’t. Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) said it “denigrates the very foundations of this country.” Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) added, “it puts every single American citizen at risk.”

But there’s a reason this measure goes into the defense bill: Voting against the defense bill is usually considered political suicide. That’s why the bill will almost certainly pass tonight. If Obama backs down from his veto threat, get ready to see Americans at Guantanamo Bay.

Photo: U.S. Army

Post Navigation