Thanks to Posse Comitatus, the US military are forbidden from responding on the streets of America whenever the whim is announced.
The problem is that it's not the "U.S." military anymore.
Thanks to decades of
lesser-evil voting, it's now the
NWO military.
---------------------------
http://www.prisonplanet.com/detention-camp-order-follows-preparations-for-civil-unrest.htmlDetention Camp Order Follows Preparations For Civil UnrestKBR seeks sub-contractors to outfit “emergency environment” centers Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Wednesday, December 7, 2011
The revelation that 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.
As Infowars reported last night, a document sent to us by a state government employee confirms that Kellogg Brown & Root Services are looking to activate camps built for FEMA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers across the United States.
This follows the Senate’s passage of Section 1031 of the National Defense Authorization Act which allows American citizens to be snatched off the street and held in detention camps without trial.
In 2006, KBR was contracted by Homeland Security to build detention centers designed to deal with “an emergency influx of immigrants into the U.S,” or the rapid development of unspecified “new programs” that would require large numbers of people to be interned.
Since 2006, the world has been beset by riots and civil unrest as a result of the fallout from the economic collapse. From the United Kingdom, to continental Europe, to the Middle East and North Africa, almost every corner of the globe has experienced social dislocation.
Now U.S. authorities are preparing for such eventualities on home soil, with
major police departments like the NYPD staging “mobilization exercises” to train police to prepare for civil disorder in the United States.
Warnings and preparation for civil unrest coming to the United States have been voiced on a regular basis.
Back in 2008, U.S. troops returning from Iraq were earmarked for “homeland patrols” with one of their roles including helping with “civil unrest and crowd control”.
In December 2008, the Washington Post reported on plans to station 20,000 more U.S. troops inside America for purposes of “domestic security” from September 2011 onwards, an expansion of Northcom’s militarization of the country in preparation for potential civil unrest following a total economic collapse or a mass terror attack.
A report produced that same year by the U.S. Army War College’s Strategic Institute warned 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 [.pdf], authored by [Ret.] Lt. Col. Nathan Freir, adding that the military may be needed to quell “purposeful domestic resistance”.
The United States has continuity of government plans in place should martial law be declared by the President. However, the details of those plans have been so tightly guarded that even Congressman and Homeland Security Committee member Peter DeFazio (D – OR), who has the necessary security clearance, was
denied access to view the material when he requested to do so back in July 2007.
Under the terms of the the National Emergency Centers Act or HR 645, first introduced in January 2009 and still awaiting passage, emergency camps are to be made available to “meet other appropriate needs, as determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security,” an open ended mandate which many fear could mean the forced detention of American citizens in the event of widespread rioting after a national emergency or total economic collapse.
With many Americans now becoming “pre-revolutionary” as a result of their fury at the Obama administration and equally unpopular lawmakers in Washington, potential civil unrest could spring not just from a poverty-stricken underclass, but also the shrinking middle class.
Indeed, top elitist
Zbigniew Brzezinski warned earlier this year that middle class unrest caused by economic disenfranchisement would soon hit America.
Perhaps that’s why the Department of Homeland Security is increasingly focusing its anti-terror apparatus on white middle class Americans,
portraying them as domestic terrorists in a series of PSA videos. In addition, ‘Occupy’ protesters are also now being
characterized as terrorists.
The fact that detention camps have been constructed inside America and are now being staffed and readied for “emergency” situations can no longer be ignored or ridiculed as a
conspiracy theory.
[
Continued...]
http://www.prisonplanet.com/government-says-it-can-assassinate-or-indefinitely-detain-americans-on-american-soil-without-any-due-process-of-law.htmlGovt. Says It Can Assassinate or Indefinitely Detain Americans on American Soil Without Any Due ProcessWashington’s BlogWednesday, December 21, 2011
I’ve previously
noted that Obama says that he can assassinate American citizens living on U.S. soil.
This admittedly sounds over-the-top. But one of the nation’s top constitutional and military law experts – Jonathan Turley – agrees.
Turley:
- Is the second most cited law professor in the country
- Has worked as both the CBS and NBC legal analyst during national controversies
- Ranks 38th in the top 100 most cited ‘public intellectuals’ in a recent study by a well-known judge
- Is one of the top 10 lawyers handling military cases
- Has served as a consultant on homeland security and constitutional issues
- Is a frequent witness before the House and Senate on constitutional and statutory issues
Turley said yesterday on C-Span (starting at 15:50):
President Obama has just stated a policy that he can have any American citizen killed without any charge, without any review, except his own. If he’s satisfied that you are a terrorist, he says that he can kill you anywhere in the world including in the United States.
Two of his aides just … reaffirmed they believe that American citizens can be killed on the order of the President anywhere including the United States.
You’ve now got a president who says that he can kill you on his own discretion. He can jail you indefinitely on his own discretion
***
I don’t think the the Framers ever anticipated that the American people would be so apathetic. They assumed that people would hold their liberties close, and that they wouldn’t relax …
[Embedded video omitted - see
original article]
The Government Has Never Given a Rationale for AssassinationWhile one might assume that the government has given a valid justification for the claim that it can assassinate anyone anywhere, the Washington Post noted yesterday:
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.
***
“They’ve based it on the personal legitimacy of President Obama — the ‘trust me’ concept,” American University law professor Kenneth Anderson said. “That’s not a viable concept for a president going forward.”
***
Under domestic law, the administration considers assassinations to be covered by theAuthorization for Use of Military Force that Congress passed days after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. In two key sentences that have no expiration date, the AUMF gives the president sole power to use “all necessary and appropriate force” against nations, groups or persons who committed or aided the attacks, and to prevent future attacks. But the government just broadened the authorization for use of military force from those who attacked us on 9/11 to include the Taliban and the vague category of "associated forces".
***
The authorization did not address targets’ nationality or set geographical boundaries, and there was “nothing about the permission of the government” of any country where a terrorist might be found, the former official said.
And
see this.
Almost Any American Could Be Arbitrarily Labeled a “Terrorist”As I’ve
previously noted, this is especially concerning when almost any American could be labeled a “terrorist” if the government doesn’t happen to like them:
[
Continued...]
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2011/12/new-bill-authorizes-rendition-of-american-citizens-living-within-the-united-states-to-other-countries-for-torture.htmlNew Bill Authorizes Rendition of American Citizens Living within the United States to Other Countries for TortureWashington's Blog
December 21, 2011
Top experts – including the sponsors of the bill – say that the newly-passed National Defense Authorization Act authorizes
indefinite detention of Americans living within the United States.
Top legal experts point out that the government claims the right to
assassinate American citizens on U.S. soil without any charges, trial or other constitutional protection.
I noted last month that Congress was considering
repealing prohibitions against torture. (I wrote to attorneys at the ACLU, but haven’t received word yet on whether such a provision has been enacted).
However, Mother Jones notes today that
Congress has explicitly authorized rendition, allowing American Citizens on U.S. soil to be sent to other countries which do torture:
[
Continued...]
http://www.prisonplanet.com/obamas-ndaa-signing-statement-is-meaningless.htmlObama’s NDAA Signing Statement Is MeaninglessAdministration itself demanded power to detain American citizens without trialPaul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones
Prison Planet.com
Monday, January 2, 2012
Barack Obama’s signing statement that was added to the passage of the NDAA bill in an effort to dampen concerns over the ‘indefinite detention’ provision of the bill is smoke and mirrors for a number of reasons – prime amongst them the fact that it was the White House itself – not lawmakers – who demanded Section 1031 be expanded to empower the government to detain U.S. citizens without trial.
On first reading, Obama’s signing statement appears to assuage fears that American citizens could be targeted for arrest and detention without trial.
“My administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens … Indeed, I believe that doing so would break with our most important traditions and values as a nation,” wrote Obama.
However, the statement is meaningless for a number of reasons.
Firstly, even if Obama manages to fulfil one of the rare occasions on which he keeps his word, this does nothing to stop future administrations from exercising the power to indefinitely detain American citizens without trial.
Secondly, the Obama administration is already carrying out even more egregious measures than those supposedly authorized within the NDAA, by
targeting American citizens worldwide for state-sponsored assassination with no legal process whatsoever.
Thirdly, Obama has reversed almost every single promise he made to get elected – his word is no good. Given the right civil emergency, Obama could turn to indefinite detention of citizens without hesitation.
Crucially, Obama’s promise that he will not use the law to detain Americans without trial is completely hollow – because it was his administration that demanded the power to do so in the first place.
As the bill’s co-sponsor
Senator Carl Levin said during a speech on the floor last month, it was the Obama administration that demanded the removal of language that would have precluded Americans from being subject to indefinite detention.
“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 the language which says that U.S. citizens and lawful residents would not be subject to this section,” said Levin, Chairman of the Armed Services Committee.
“It was the administration that asked us to remove the very language which we had in the bill which passed the committee…we removed it at the request of the administration,” said Levin, emphasizing, “It was the administration which asked us to remove the very language the absence of which is now objected to.”
If the Obama administration is so opposed to the idea of detaining Americans without trial, why did they push for such powers to be included in the final version of the National Defense Authorization Act?
It’s also necessary to highlight the fact that just because this bill has been passed into law, that shouldn’t bestow any kind of legitimacy to it given that indefinite detention is anathema to the bill of rights and the constitution. It was once a law that black people were not human – that doesn’t mean it’s right or should be given credence.
[
Continued...]
http://www.prisonplanet.com/myth-busted-yes-the-ndaa-does-apply-to-americans-and-heres-the-text-that-says-so.htmlMyth busted: Yes, the NDAA does apply to Americans, and here’s the text that says soMike Adams
Natural News
Monday, January 2, 2012
In the aftermath of the signing of the NDAA by the traitorous President Obama, some citizens remain completely hoodwinked by the language of the bill, running around the internet screaming that the law “does not apply to American citizens.”
This is, naturally, part of the side effect of having such a dumbed-down education system where people can’t even parse the English language anymore. If you read the bill and
understand what it says, it clearly offers absolutely no protections of U.S. citizens. In fact, it affirms that Americans are subjected to indefinite detainment under “existing authorities.”
Let’s parse it intelligently, shall we?
First off, the offending section of the bill that used to be called 1031 was moved to 1021. Here is the title:
(
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112hr1540enr/pdf/BILLS-112hr1540enr.pdf)
SEC. 1021. AFFIRMATION OF AUTHORITY OF THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES TO DETAIN COVERED PERSONS PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE.The two relevant sections to consider are titled and stated as follows:
(d) CONSTRUCTION. — Nothing in this section is intended to limit or expand the authority of the President or the scope of the Authorization for Use of Military Force.By PARSING the language here, we must split it into two sentences based on the “or” operator. This statement essentially means:
• Nothing in this section is intended to LIMIT the authority of the President or the scope of the Authorization for Use of Military Force.
• Nothing in this section is intended to EXPAND the authority of the President or the scope of the Authorization for Use of Military Force.
In other words, this section places no limits whatsoever of the “authority of the President” to use military force (against American citizens). Keep that in mind as you read the next section:
(e) AUTHORITIES. — Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect existing law or authorities relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States, or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States.This section “e” is the section that the hoodwinked people on the internet are running around saying “protects American citizens” from the NDAA. But where do they dream up such language? If you read section (e) again, you’ll discover it says nothing whatsoever about protecting American citizens from the NDAA. Instead, here’s what it really says when parsed into two sentences based on the “or” operator:
•
Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect existing LAW relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States, or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States.•
Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect existing AUTHORITIES relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States, or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States.In other words, section (e) only says that it does notalter“existing authorities” relating to the detention of US citizens.
So to answer the question about whether this affects U.S. citizens, you have to understand “existing authorities.”
What are those “existing authorities?”
Existing authorities already allow indefinite detainment and the killing of American citizensAs everyone who studies history well knows, the Patriot Act already establishes an “existing authority” that anyone suspected of being involved in terrorist-related activities can be arrested and detained without trial. If you don’t believe me, just Google it yourself. This is not a debated issue; it’s widely recognized.
Furthermore, President Obama already insists that he has the authority
to kill American citizens merely by decree! As Reuters reported on October 5, 2011, a “secret panel” of government officials (who report to the President) can decide to place
an American citizen on a “kill list” and then murder that person, without trial, without due process, and without even being arrested. (
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/05/us-cia-killlist-idUSTRE79475C20111005)
Importantly, as Reuters reports, “Two principal legal theories were advanced [in support of the kill list authority] — first, that the actions were permitted by Congress when it authorized the use of military forces against militants in the wake of the attacks of September 11, 2001.”
Are you getting this yet? So
the authority ALREADY exists for the President to order the killing of an American citizen. All that is required is that they be
suspected of being involved in terrorism in any way, and not a shred of evidence is required by the government to support that. There is no trial, no arraignment, no evidence and not even a hearing. You are simply accused and then disappeared.
Thus, the authority already exists, you see, and the NDAA openly states that “Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect existing AUTHORITIES…”
In other words, the NDAA does nothing to protect American citizens, and it piggy-backs on the Patriot Act as well as Obama’s executive “kill list” justifications to essentially place all Americans in the crosshairs of government murderers or military action.
Rep. Justin Amash, a Congressman from Michigan, explains:
[
Continued...]
http://www.prisonplanet.com/the-state-has-declared-war-on-the-american-people.htmlThe State Has Declared War On The American PeopleU.S. citizens are now the primary target of the war on terrorPaul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Friday, February 10, 2012
With the announcement that 30,000 drones are expected to fill American skies within ten years, the U.S. government has officially declared war on the American people, turning to technology normally used to hunt down insurgents abroad as the whole arsenal of the war on terror is re-focused domestically.
“The Federation Aviation Administration said up to 30,000 drones could be in airspace shared with airliners carrying passengers,”
reports UPI.
Once signed by president Obama, the FAA Reauthorization Act allows for the FAA to permit the use of drones and develop regulations for testing and licensing by 2015.
Some types of surveillance drones are already being used by police departments across the country, including in Montgomery County, Texas, where the Department of Homeland Security recently gave the go-ahead for law enforcement in the United States to
deploy the ShadowHawk mini drone drone helicopter that has the ability to taze suspects from above as well as carrying 12-gauge shotguns and grenade launchers.
US law enforcement bodies are already using drone technology to spy on Americans. In December, a Predator B drone was called in to
conduct surveillance over a family farm in North Dakota as part of a SWAT raid on the Brossart family, who were suspects in the egregious crime of stealing six missing cows. Local police in this one area have already used the drone on two dozen occasions since June last year.
The DHS also recently announced a plan to spend up to $50 million dollars on a spy system that has been used to hunt insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan for the purposes of “emergency and non-emergency incidents” within the United States.
While preparing the use of surveillance drones against Americans, the U.S. government is also keen to characterize a myriad of behaviors and activities, no matter how normal or mundane, as potential indicators of terrorism, encouraging citizens to spy on each other in a chilling throwback to how people were hired as informants under the East German Stasi.
As part of its Communities Against Terrorism program, the FBI is encouraging business owners from across the spectrum to spy on their customers.
Lists of examples of “suspicious behavior” being sent out to everything from Internet Cafes to tattoo parlors define things like paying for a cup of coffee with cash, buying food in bulk, and showing an interest in online privacy as evidence of potential terrorist activity.
The DHS has also released numerous PSAs that depict routine activities as potential signs of terrorism, including using a video camera, talking to police officers, wearing hoodies, driving vans, writing on a piece of paper, and using a cell phone recording application.
The federal agency attracted much derision last week when it announced that Super Bowl vendors, including hot dog sellers,
had been trained to spot terrorists under the First Observer program.
Even more chilling, the feds have also begun to characterize perfectly legitimate political and economic beliefs as those held by terrorists, effectively denouncing them as thought crimes.
As Reuters reported on Monday, authorities are now treating those who “believe the United States went bankrupt by going off the gold standard” as extremists who are a potential violent threat to law enforcement.
The DHS has also previously characterized returning veterans, Ron Paul supporters, gold investors, and people who display political bumper stickers as potential domestic terrorists.
All this serves to underscore the fact that the American people have now been targeted as the number one terror threat in the eyes of the authorities. The state has declared war on U.S. citizens. Not only will they be subject to surveillance and intimidation campaigns, but with the recent passage of the indefinite detention provision of the NDAA, the government has afforded itself the power to hold Americans without trial.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/holder-to-justify-killing-americans-on-foreign-soil.htmlHolder To Justify Killing Americans On Foreign SoilObama administration firms up support for state-sponsored assassinationPaul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Monday, March 5, 2012
Attorney General Eric Holder will today attempt to justify the Obama administration’s policy of state-sponsored assassination, as he prepares to give a speech explaining how the U.S. government can arbitrarily kill U.S. citizens on foreign soil.
“Holder plans to say in a major speech on Monday at Northwestern University law school in Chicago that lethal force is legal under a Sept. 18, 2001, joint congressional resolution,”
reports the Associated Press.
The notion that the White House can target Americans for summary execution by merely claiming that they are associated with terrorism is chilling given the fact that Americans who
engage in political activism or even banal behaviors have been characterized as potential terrorists by U.S. authorities.
The White House has asserted the right to carry out state-sponsored assassination anywhere in the world without having to provide any evidence or go through any legal process. The administration merely has to state that the target is a terrorist and it doesn’t matter whether they are an American citizen or not, as we saw in the case of
American-born Anwar al-Awlaki and his son, who were both killed last year.
In December,
Obama administration lawyers reaffirmed their backing for state sponsored assassination, claiming that “U.S. citizens are legitimate military targets” and do not have the right to any legal protection against being marked for summary execution.
During a CBS 60 Minutes interview in January, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta revealed that Obama himself personally approves the policy to kill American citizens suspected of terrorism without trial on a case by case basis.
“So it’s the requirement of the administration under the current legal understanding that the president has to make that declaration, not you?” Panetta was asked, to which he replied, “That is correct.”
The administration’s support for state-sponsored assassination without a shred of legal oversight puts into context
the worthlessness of an Obama ‘policy directive’ last week that promised the White House would not indefinitely detain American citizens under the National Defense Authorization Act, which Obama signed on New Years Eve.
As we documented at the time, it was the administration itself which demanded the controversial detention without trial provisions of the NDAA be applied to American citizens.
The NDAA defines the entire planet, including America, as a “battlefield,” meaning Americans could also hypothetically be assassinated without any legal process on
U.S. soil under the legal framework that has been codified under Obama.
The recent announcement that up to 30,000 drones will be in American skies within ten years, allied to the
DHS plan to spend up to $50 million dollars on a spy system that has been used to hunt insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan for the purposes of “emergency and non-emergency incidents” within the United States, makes it clear that Americans are being targeted as terrorists at both home and abroad.
---------------------------
Unfortunately there are millions of intellectual cowards in this country who are so emotionally wedded to their fairy-tale worldview that they'd rather climb Mount Everest to be told yet another comforting lie by the
banker-owned political establishment in which they've invested so much blind faith over the years than stand still and be told a discomforting truth by an
informed critic of that establishment.
Real men seek to know the whole truth of what's really going on, no matter how unpleasant that truth may happen to be.
Cowards
posing as "men" seek
this instead:
Right, Romney supporters?
Right, Obamanoids?
