Deep into the US Police State

[Kat Kanning]

"Staged protests might make sense in oppressive police states"  Don Gorman



Drifting towards a Police State

Mike Whitney | November 4 2005

?Those who scare peace-loving people with phantoms of lost liberty, my message is this: Your tactics only aid the terrorists for they erode our national unity and diminish our resolve. They give ammunition to America's enemies and pause to America's friends?
Former Attorney General, John Ashcroft

Did you know that under the terms of the new Patriot Act prosecutors will be able to seek the death penalty in cases where ?defendants gave financial support to umbrella organizations without realizing that some of its adherents might eventually commit violence?? (NY Times; editorial 10-30-05) So, if someone unknowingly gave money to a charity that was connected to a terrorist group, he could be executed.

Or, that the Senate Intelligence Committee is fine-tuning the details of a bill that will allow the FBI to secretly procure any of your personal records without ?probable cause? or a court order giving them ?unchecked authority to pry into personal and business matters?? (New York Times, ?Republicans seek to widen FBI Powers, 10-19-05)

Or, that on June 29, President Bush put ?a broad swath of the FBI?
under his direct control by creating the National Security Service (aka; the ?New SS?)? This is the first time we?ve had a ?secret police? in our 200 year history. It will be run exclusively by the president and beyond the range of congressional oversight.

Or, that on October 27, 2005 president Bush created the National Clandestine Service, which will be headed by CIA Director Porter Goss and will ?expand reporting of information and intelligence value from state, local and tribal law enforcement entities and private sector stakeholders"? This executive order gives the CIA the power to carry out covert operations, spying, propaganda, and ?dirty tricks? within the United States and on the American public. (?The New National Intelligence Strategy of the US? by Larry Chin, Global Research)

Or, that Pentagon intelligence operatives are now permitted to collect information from US citizens without revealing their status as government spies? (?Bill would give Cover to Pentagon Spies?, Greg Miller, Times Staff writer, ?The Nation?)

Or, that within 2 years every American license and passport will be made according to federal uniform standards including microchips (with biometric information) that will allow the government to trace every movement of its citizens?

Or, that recent rulings, the DC District Court unanimously decided in two different cases that foreign prisoners have no rights under international law to challenge their indefinite imprisonment by the United States and, (in Rumsfeld vs. Padilla) that the president can lock up an American citizen ?without charges? if he believes he may be an ?enemy combatant?? Both verdicts overturn the fundamental principles of ?inalienable rights?, habeas corpus, and the presumption of innocence; replacing them with the arbitrary authority of the executive.

The American people have no idea of the amount of energy that has been devoted to stripping them of their constitutional protections and how stealthily that plan has been carried out. It has required the concerted efforts of the political establishment, the corporate elite, and the collaborative media. For all practical purposes, the government is no longer constrained in its conduct towards its citizens; it can do as it pleases.

The campaign to dismantle the Bill of Rights has focused primarily on the key amendments; the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, 8th and 14th. These are the cornerstones of American liberty and they encompass everything from due process to equal protection to free speech to a ban on the ?cruel and unusual? treatment of prisoners. Freedom has little tangible meaning apart from the safety provided by these amendments.

At present, there?s no reason for the administration to assert its new powers. That would only dispel the widely-held illusion of personal freedom. But, the existing climate of ?well being? will not last forever. The poisonous effects of war, tax cuts, burgeoning budget deficits, and inflation indicate that darker days lie ahead. The middle class is stretched paper-thin and disaster could be as close as a hike in interest rates. The new repressive legislation anticipates the massive political unrest that naturally follows a tenuous and volatile economic situation.

Is this why Congress has rubber stamped so many of the administration?s autocratic laws, or does Bush simply ?hate our freedoms??

The members of America?s ruling elite carefully follow the shifting of policy in Washington. They have the power to access the mainstream media and dispute the changes in the law that they oppose. Regrettably, there?s been no sign of protest from the bastions of the corporate, financial and political oligarchy; just an ominous silence.

Does this mean that American Brahmins have abandoned their support for personal liberty and the rights of man?

America is undergoing its greatest metamorphosis. It has been severed from its constitutional moorings and is drifting towards a police state. If Samuel Alito is appointed to the Supreme Court then Bush will be able to solidify his ?unchecked? power as executive and 50 years of progressive legislation will be up for review. Everything from abortion to Miranda will be reconsidered through the hard-right lens of the new majority.

Americans still seem blissfully unaware of the fundamental changes to the political system. The cloak of disinformation and diversion has successfully obscured the perils of our present course. Freedom is no longer guaranteed in Bush?s America nor is liberty everyman?s birthright. The rickety scaffolding that supports the rule of law has been replaced by the unbridled authority of the supreme presidency. The country is slipping inexorably towards the Orwellian nightmare; the National Security State.

[tracysaboe]

Drifting? Compaired to a vast majority of other countries we're already there!

Tracy

[Kat Kanning]

 The Grave Threat Is the Bush Administration

by Paul Craig Roberts
by Paul Craig Roberts

Save a link to this article and return to it at www.savethis.comSave a link to this article and return to it at www.savethis.com  Email a link to this articleEmail a link to this article  Printer-friendly version of this articlePrinter-friendly version of this article  View a list of the most popular articles on our siteView a list of the most popular articles on our site 

According to news reports, at a US Naval Academy speech on Wednesday, President Bush will announce plans for withdrawing US troops from Iraq. It will be diverting to watch the propagandists at Fox "news" flip-flop with the White House line and explain that now is the time to cut and run after all.

A month ago the administration?s line was that cutting and running was the dastardly act of cowards and traitors who would abandon our troops and all they have fought for. A month ago senior US commanders in Iraq said that the US-trained new Iraqi army only had 700 troops who could operate independently of US support.

Now suddenly the new Iraq has the troops to do the job and America?s soldiers can come home. What this means is that Republican pollsters have made it clear that the Republicans cannot win next year?s congressional elections if the US is still mired in Iraq. The war is unpopular. A large majority of Americans do not believe the war was justified, and they no longer support it. Republicans have no prospect of rehabilitating Bush if he keeps the country bogged down in a pointless war.

The war, in other words, no longer serves the Republicans? political interest and must be got rid of. So much for "staying the course."

What will happen to Iraq and the Middle East no one knows. Our concerns need to be directed at what happens here in the US. Bush?s war against Iraq might be over, but the police state Bush built at home is still in place.

On November 27 Walter Pincus reported in the Washington Post that the Pentagon is expanding its domestic surveillance activity and that all sorts of proposals are afoot to allow military agencies to spy on law-abiding Americans and to build secret dossiers on citizens. The demand for police state powers is said to be necessary in order to fight the "war on terror."

Considering the drastic gestapo-type activities for which Washington is clamoring, a person would think that America is being overwhelmed by terrorist attacks. Yet, despite an aggressive and brutal war that Bush has been waging in Iraq for going on three years, terrorist attacks in America are even more rare than an honest politician. There has not been a terror attack since September 11, 2001, more than four years ago!

The Bush administration?s hype about terrorism serves no purpose other than to build a police state that is far more dangerous to Americans than terrorists.

Ever since the "war on terror" was initiated by the Bush administration, the US has been holding large numbers of "detainees." By chance or the laws of probability, a few of these people might fit some definition of "terrorist." The vast majority, however, are innocents picked up in the equivalent of Stalin-era KGB street sweeps. Many are hapless people sold by warlords to the US in order to receive cash awards for turning in "terrorists."

Despite the large number of alleged "terrorists" or "enemy combatants" that are being held, the Bush administration simply hasn?t a shred of evidence with which to bring "detainees" to trial. If truth be known, the "detainees" are merely props for Bush?s hype about the "terrorist threat." The "detainees" were arrested in order to make Americans feel safe and at ease with the police state.

Perhaps the most famous of the alleged terrorists, a man held for more than three years, is the "dirty bomber" Jose Padilla. Padilla was the "grave threat" who was going to set off a radioactive dirty bomb in a US city.

The charge never made any sense. If al Qaeda had a dirty bomb, they certainly would not entrust it to the loud-mouthed Padilla, who was being followed around by FBI agents. Such a weapon would be kept secret and entrusted only to the most competent and proven hands. Who could possibly believe that top al Qaeda operatives would meet and plot with Jose Padilla?

The Bush administration has itself given up its Padilla fantasy. After three years of hype about this most dangerous of terrorists who allegedly intended to kill large numbers of Americans, the government?s indictment doesn?t mention dirty bombs or the murder of Americans. Instead, Padilla is indicted for conspiring "to commit at any place outside the United States acts that would constitute murder" for the purpose of advancing "violent jihad." Padilla is also charged with "conspiracy to provide material support for terrorists."

In other words, the government has no case against Padilla and is putting him on trial in the US for conspiring to kill unidentified foreigners in an effort to overthrow an unidentified foreign country. His case is lumped in with a case against four other persons, one or more of whom may have committed an actual crime that can be used to tar them all.

Both the Attorney General and President of the United States branded Padilla a "grave threat" to the lives of Americans. After three years of this propaganda, all the US government can come up with is the trumped up charge of conspiracy to kill foreigners and to provide support for terrorists.

A police state has to catch enemies in order to keep the people frightened and appreciative of the watchful eye of the police state. Now that the Padilla case has evaporated, the Bush administration has come up with a replacement. An American student of Arab descent, who was studying at a Saudi Arabian university, has been indicted by a federal grand jury for conspiracy to assassinate President Bush. The indictment rests on the confession wrung out of the young man by torture in a Saudi prison.

Does anyone really believe that al Qaeda leaders would conspire with an American college student to assassinate President Bush? Indeed, President Bush has been Osama bin Laden?s greatest benefactor. Why would al Qaeda want to kill the man who is doing them so much good? Before Bush launched his war on terror and invaded Iraq, the vast majority of Muslims thought bin Laden was a nut case and supported the US. Today Muslims think Bush is a nut case and support bin Laden.

What kind of a country have we become when we put a citizen on trial on the basis of a confession obtained under torture by a foreign government? Is the case against this student anything other than an attempt to enlist the sympathy factor for Bush in order to repair his standing in the polls?

Americans need to understand that a police state has to produce results in order to justify its budget and its powers. It doesn?t really care who it catches. Stalin?s police state caught the wife of Stalin?s foreign minister in one of its street sweeps.

The Bush administration justifies torture and threatens to veto congressional attempts to restrain its use. The Bush administration justifies indefinite detention of American citizens without charges. It asserts the power of indefinite detention based on its subjective judgment about who is a threat. An American government that preaches "freedom and democracy" to the world claims the powers of tyrants as its own.

Americans need to wake up. The only danger to Americans in Iraq is the one Bush created by invading the country. The grave threat that Americans face is the Bush administration?s police state mentality.

November 28, 2005

Dr. Roberts [send him mail] is John M. Olin Fellow at the Institute for Political Economy and Research Fellow at the Independent Institute. He is a former associate editor of the Wall Street Journal, former contributing editor for National Review, and a former assistant secretary of the U.S. Treasury. He is the co-author of The Tyranny of Good Intentions.

[AlanM]

   This should be a wake-up call. Mr. Roberts is not some lunatic conspiracy theorist. He is a former assistant secretary of the Treasury.
   I said to my brother a while back, that Bush just might attempt to become a dictator, if he, and his cabal of power hungry friends, can't find a suitable candidate in their midst for a presidential candidate. They have certainly prepared the groundwork well.

[BaRbArIaN]

If all this comes to the fore, even places like this will be monitored and then shut down.   We need to find a way to setup a "blacknet", i.e. hidden datapackets used to run a board like this w/o obivous tracks.  I don't know enough to do it, only that the capacity exists within the network equipment if you write the right firmware for it.  Would be interesting to attempt tho dangerous maybe.

[Pat McCotter]

Tim May and Blacknet

THE CRYPTO ANARCHIST MANIFESTO (1993)
Untraceable Digital Cash, Information Markets, and BlackNet (1998)

[Kat Kanning]

Judge OKs Police Subway Searches in NYC

By LARRY NEUMEISTER, Associated Press Writer 15 minutes ago

NEW YORK - A federal judge Friday upheld the police department's practice of randomly searching subway riders' bags, saying the intrusion on people's privacy is minimal while the threat of a terrorist bombing is "real and substantial."

Police tightened security in the nation's largest subway system in July after the deadly terrorist attacks in London's underground.

"The risk of a terrorist bombing of New York City's subway system is real and substantial," U.S. District Judge Richard M. Berman said.

The New York Civil Liberties Union had challenged the searches, arguing that riders were being subjected to a pointless and unprecedented invasion of their privacy.

The judge cited the testimony of police officials who said the search policy might cause terrorists to choose a different target.

"Because the threat of terrorism is great and the consequences of unpreparedness may be catastrophic, it would seem foolish not to rely upon those qualified persons in the best position to know," Berman said.

Gail Donoghue, a city lawyer, called the searches a "life-and-death" necessity and said the city should not wait for a specific threat or an attack to crack down.

"That kind of complacency is a very dangerous thing," she said. "The threat is immediate. It is real and of extreme concern to those who run the counterterrorism in this city."

During the trial, Deputy Police Commissioner David Cohen said the searches keep terrorists guessing.

"Unpredictability is the enemy of terrorists and the ally of those trying to prevent an attack," said Cohen, who joined the police department after a three-decade career at the
CIA analyzing the threat of terrorism.

[Russell Kanning]

During the trial, Deputy Police Commissioner David Cohen said the searches keep terrorists guessing.

"Unpredictability is the enemy of terrorists and the ally of those trying to prevent an attack," said Cohen, who joined the police department after a three-decade career at the CIA analyzing the threat of terrorism.

CIA .....hmmmm

[BaRbArIaN]

http://freenetproject.org/

This is an interesting software, sounds like an excellent thing to investigate and possibly use.  It lets people network their computers, trade files and communicate without outside observation.  It is already the bane of regimes and censors, who assume it must only be used by criminals.  China has blocked it's website (tho it is being used there surrepticiously).

[AlanM]

The goal of the ruling class is complete supremacy. One way to do this is to have so many laws that you can't help but break one once in a while. They want you to feel guilty. If you do, they've got you.

[BaRbArIaN]

http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/news/nation/13686123.htm

Even in little Vermont the city govt. hears the siren song of total control via networks of surveillance cameras.  Despite such a small town really not needing them at all, they get matching funds so they buy them.

[AlanM]

Suggest folks who live near Bellows Falls boycott the town. Let their Police Dept. know it is because of the cameras.
I already boycott the whole state because of a traffic stop at 2:00 AM for no reason.

[Tom Sawyer]

Suggest folks who live near Bellows Falls boycott the town. Let their Police Dept. know it is because of the cameras.
I already boycott the whole state because of a traffic stop at 2:00 AM for no reason.

You probably wouldn't like alot of the people in the town anyway... it is full of miscreant adolescents from families on the dole. Real bad drug, alcohol and petty crime problems. One of those situations where government involvement leads to more problems and thus more government involvement.

A potentially nice town on the river ruined by socialist policies.

[KBCraig]

http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/news/nation/13686123.htm

Even in little Vermont the city govt. hears the siren song of total control via networks of surveillance cameras.  Despite such a small town really not needing them at all, they get matching funds so they buy them.

"In the southwestern Virginia town of Galax, for instance, police have no policy for their two downtown cameras and haven't put up signs alerting passers-by that they're being watched.

"'What you do in public, you've got no expectation of privacy,' Police Chief Rick Clark said."

I suggest the chief review the law. You do not have an expectation of privacy wherever your words or actions are open to an ordinary street-level observer. That means: no telephoto lenses, no direction or shotgun mikes, no hidden cameras, no special vantage points. This is Journalism Law 101 stuff, and "expectation of privacy" is the same for the police as for the press.

Kevin

[Pat McCotter]

http://www.epodunk.com/cgi-bin/genInfo.php?locIndex=25081
Crime: The number of violent crimes recorded by the FBI in 2003 was 11. The number of murders and homicides was 0. The violent crime rate was 3.5 per 1,000 people.