9/11 blog posts on Wordpress

In a drawn out collapse, the Liberty Movement is given a tremendous time advantage.

Winter is slowly melting away here in the U.S., and Spring will soon be upon us.  Wall Street is currently flush with delight at the year long run of the stock market (driven by fiat bailouts), which at first glance appears to be doing quite well, though international incidences such as those in Dubai and Greece have revealed how shaky the market actually is in the face of any unhealthy news.  In the meantime, the dollar, recently on the edge of detrimental value loss, has made a semi-miraculous recovery in the span of a few months, especially as the Euro suffers.  Official employment numbers, despite the continuous loss of jobs monthly, have somehow fallen and are for the moment stabilized.  Is it time for America to dust off the old credit cards and return to the wild and rollicking carefree spending days of pre-2007?  Perhaps not…

While the mainstream media puts on the recovery song and dance, the fundamental problems of the collapse remain the same, and in some cases are growing ever more precarious.  Subsections of the public, unaware of the real issues at hand, are holding a misguided jubilee in the tranquil eye of a hurricane, wrongly assuming that the storm has passed.

The world is breathing a hasty sigh of relief at the beginning of 2010, but what are the facts behind the current “peaceful” economic moment?  In this article, we will examine whether or not the good news is legitimate, or, if are we being lulled into a false sense of security…

Job Market Statistics Manipulated

At the beginning of the year, official unemployment stood at around 10%.  This number of course does not include those people who are off unemployment benefits and still have not found jobs, or those people who are underemployed.  The Labor Department then announced their intention to revise their “birth/death ratio” method of calculating job loss, which would supposedly add a whopping 800,000 lost jobs to their books that were hidden before:

http://money.cnn.com/2010/02/04/news/economy/jobs_outlook/

Directly after this news was released, markets braced for a substantial increase in the unemployment percentage.  Yet, by some act of magic, the unemployment percentage fell to 9.7%!

http://www.epi.org/publications/entry/jobs_picture_20100205/

How is this possible?  Well, those of us who were hoping for greater Labor Department transparency (including myself) should have known better.  With the Labor Department, two-plus-two NEVER equals four…

As the EPI article above indicates, while the government has reportedly changed their dubious “birth/death ratio” method, they also at the same time changed their “home survey” method.  This survey is meant to give the Labor Department an overall view of unemployment percentages, but now the government has sharply reduced the number of households they actually survey, making the results more volatile and easier to manipulate.  This why even though nearly a million jobless people were added to the unemployment rolls, the government was still able to report a drop in unemployment percentages.  Sound like a dirty trick?  Yes, it is…

According to the EPI’s estimates, which are probably still conservative, over 11 million jobs would need to be created in order to bring employment rates to pre-2007 levels.  This is called the “jobs gap.”  To fill the jobs gap by 2013 (which is about the time frame that the government has suggested it would take for a full recovery) the U.S. would need to generate over 400,000 jobs a month for the next three years!  As I think most of you can see, this is not going to happen.  Last month according to official numbers the U.S. lost another 36,000 jobs.  Jobs are not being created, and will not be created anywhere near the 400,000 a month mark required for a three year recovery.

Also not often reported is the span of weeks at which those who are unemployed have to wait until they find another job.  This “lag time” in-between jobs has grown markedly higher in recent months as the chart below shows:

In January of this year alone, 6.3 million people (over half of those unemployed) had been without a job for more than 6 months.  This is an astonishing number, and it shows just how out of touch MSM reports of recovery are.  Anyone who has been unemployed for more than just one month knows how tense and uncertain such a situation makes life.  Imagine the misery of a 6 month hiatus from steady work, not able to fully support ones self and not knowing when you’ll be able to again.  The Labor Department, nor the media, seems to take the factor of ‘duration’ into account when considering whether employment is actually in recovery.  Nor do they take into account the fact that most of the jobs lost over the past two years were high paying and specialized, while most of the scant few jobs created have been low paying service sector positions.

What is most frightening about this information is that it reveals deliberate mishandling of statistics.  Instead of being more open about unemployment numbers, the government is moving to hide them further.  But why would they escalate secrecy on the economy?

The Day The Dollar Died

Last week, Li Ruogu, chairman of Export-Import Bank of China, a lender tasked with supporting the country’s foreign investments, stated that China would continue to support the dollar and that reports of a break from U.S. treasuries were “absolute nonsense.”  Investors in treasuries this week seemed to take the comment as a good sign that the dollar’s place as world reserve currency is assured.  However, one might ask why it was suddenly so important for China to comfort treasury markets?

Interestingly, statements of China’s “affection” for the dollar have come right after their central bank decided to dump $34 billion in U.S. treasuries.  Along with other nations, the U.S. suffered the worst one month treasury dump on record so far at $53 billion:

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Foreigners-cut-Treasury-apf-1402391707.html?x=0

This follows a treasury dump last year by China of $25 billion, after which we predicted that such dumps would occur more frequently and in larger amounts.  Apparently, we were right:

http://neithercorp.us/npress/?p=105

http://english.people.com.cn/90001/90780/91421/6734461.html

Initially, it was reported after their latest dumping of U.S. bonds that China had lost its position as the number one investor in U.S. debt, placing Japan in the top spot.  Strangely, only days later this report was rescinded after the Treasury released a statement claiming that China did indeed dump $34 billion in bonds, but, they were still the number one investor in T-bills:

http://sg.news.yahoo.com/afp/20100217/tbs-us-economy-finance-bonds-china-japan-ec2362a.html

How is this possible?  According to the Treasury, they “forgot” to include Chinese treasury holdings in third markets such as Hong Kong and Britain.  This is very strange.  Who holds these extra bonds and what are they doing sitting in foreign venues?  Is it not convenient that these bonds appeared from thin air just as news of China’s treasury dump was hitting the bond market?  And now we suddenly have a Chinese finance official attempting to reassure the world that China still wants T-bonds while at the same time they are trying to get rid of them?  If this behavior seems confusing it is because this is what occurs when governments lie big; no matter how good they are at it, they can’t make the facts add up.

If one examines Treasury Auctions month-to-month, they would find that “Primary Buyers” of treasuries (who have to buy treasuries when no one else is buying) now dominate auction sales.  Indirect buyers, who cannot be tracked, also make up a large portion of competitive bids on treasury bonds.  It is suspected that most of these indirect buys are made by the Federal Reserve itself in order to prop up the dollar.  The article below explains the process succinctly:

http://community.nasdaq.com/News/2010-02/Something-Very-Strange-Is-Happening-With-Treasuries.aspx

The bottom line is that foreign governments are NOT buying treasuries at volumes necessary to keep the U.S. afloat amidst its ever climbing national debt, and in some cases, they are now trying to quietly and gradually dump what they have so as to not arouse immediate suspicion from the markets.  In fact, the Treasury and the Federal Reserve seem to be helping them do this!

The dollar is, in effect, dead, but disinformation and market manipulation, mainly by the private Federal Reserve, is being used to reanimate it for appearances.  The result is the conjuring of a kind of “zombie currency,” a Weekend at Bernie’s currency that the Fed props up with strings and pulleys to fool everyone at the party.

The most obvious question here is, why go through so much trouble to keep the dollar around at all?

World Government And The SDR

Since the “Great Recession” began, economic forums and conferences such as the G20, and the annual World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos, Switzerland have spoken of little else except the formation of a centralized world economy and the establishment of a legal body that has the power to run it.  At the Davos “workshops,” economists and others present ideas for world governance as if they were the originators of the concept.  It may not be surprising to most of us that there is rarely if ever anyone who participates in the WEF meetings that supports the restoration of national sovereignty.  In fact, nearly all the participants seem to assume that a world government is the solution to all our ills.  It is also important that like the G20, government officials from all over the world attend, including those from the U.S., and that very often the policies developed at these forums end up in legislation and mass media here at home.  Meaning, the laws and propaganda supporting forced globalization and world government are fine tuned at the meetings and then brought to America for mass consumption.  Below are a couple video examples of Davos workshops:

It is important to recognize what exactly is being presented in these two videos because they reveal much about our current economic circumstances.  The goal of the G20 and the WEF, as they have stated on numerous occasions, is to dissolve national sovereignty.  If they had their way, America as we know it would not exist, along with the Constitutional framework that is meant to protect our liberties.  To achieve this end, a carefully engineered breakdown of the U.S. dollar is being enacted.

As we have shown, U.S. treasuries auctions have tanked and those long term treasuries already held by foreign nations are being slowly cast off.  So far, the Federal Reserve has propped up the dollar by purchasing T-bonds in the place of foreign banks who no longer want them.  By continually monetizing this debt, the Fed will inflate an incredible bubble in the treasury market.  When will this bubble burst?  The key lay in the rules governing Special Drawing Rights.

Special Drawing Rights (SDRs) are securities much like treasury bonds.  Their value is determined by a basket of international currencies including the Dollar, the Euro, the Yen, and the Pound Sterling.  The IMF claims that SDRs are not technically considered currency, but SDRs serve nearly all the functions of a currency except that they are not available to the general public (yet).  It walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, but the IMF would rather not call it a duck.  In the end, the SDR is a world reserve currency, and its purpose is to topple the dollar.

Not long after the economic meltdown began, the IMF announced that they would begin the unlimited printing of SDRs.  In 2009, within the span of a few months, SDR circulation went from $21 billion, to nearly $204 billion, and this is only the amount they have admitted to:

http://www.imf.org/external/np/fin/tad/extsdr1.aspx

Governments across the world have purchased SDRs, while at the same time dropping U.S. treasuries.  China in particular has shown sharp interest in the SDR as a replacement for the U.S. dollar:

http://www.chinaeconomicreview.com/dailybriefing/2009_09_03/China_buys__50_billion_in_first-ever_IMF_bonds.html

It may be prudent to mention that China’s heightened dumping of U.S. treasuries began right around the time that the IMF began mass printing SDRs.  And, even more disconcerting, the U.S. Treasury also quintupled its supply of SDRs in August of 2009:

http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/US%20INTL%20RESERVES.jpg

Being that the U.S. dollar is supposedly the undisputed world reserve currency, why would the U.S. Treasury have any need to buy SDRs at all?  Would this not be redundant?  Unless, the Treasury knows that the dollar will not remain the world reserve currency for much longer….

Now we get to the tricky part…

The IMF has instituted new rules governing the SDR and those countries who trade it (called “member countries”).  Drafting the “Fourth Amendment” governing SDR allocation, the IMF now requires member nations to retain a “special allocation” of the currency much higher than previous allocations.  Countries who keep their SDR supply above the required level receive interest payment on their excess.  Countries that fall below the required level have to PAY interest on the shortfall.  That is to say, if the U.S. were to allow its SDR reserves to fall below the level demanded by the IMF, we would be punished monetarily.  Also, under current rules, the interest rates of the currencies that make up the SDR help to determine the interest rates of the SDR.

The IMF claims it only acts as an “intermediary” between countries wishing to trade in SDRs, but since the IMF is the creator and printer of SDR’s, this would ultimately make them the controller of the SDR market, not some outside intermediary.

Participation in the SDR market for now is voluntary.  However, what we are witnessing here is the subtle positioning of the SDR as the only alternative in the event that the U.S. dollar fails, and once again, China is the key.

China’s Slow Dollar Dive

The argument is constantly made by mainstream economists that China could never drop its large supply of U.S. T-bills because if they tried, the dollar would collapse, virtually erasing the value of their dollar holdings.  The suggestion that “they are as dependent on us as we are on them” is rampant in the MSM, but, if we throw in the wild card factor of the SDR, this all changes.

If the Chinese central bank along with certain others amass enough SDRs over an extended period of time while gradually selling off their T-bonds, the SDR’s could act as a cushion to prevent foreign central banks from losing a large portion of their wealth while the dollar sinks.  In fact, in the event that the Federal Reserve raises interest rates on the dollar (perhaps in response to the heightened risk of a mass treasury dump) those holding SDR’s actually benefit, because the interest they receive on their SDR reserves will also go up:

http://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/faq/sdrallocfaqs.htm

This would not absorb all of China’s losses in the event of a dollar collapse, but it would be a very effective stop gap, and ample incentive for them to continue dumping treasuries.  I believe that this is the exact reason why the dollar and the Dow have been held up by the Federal Reserve for so long.  They cannot allow a major dollar depreciation until the SDR is established on the world market as a ready substitute.

A good sign that this process might accelerate would be in the event that China de-pegs the Yuan from the Dollar and allows it to appreciate in value.  This would signal that China is moving away from the traditional export arrangement with the U.S.  Talks of a Yuan appreciation are already hitting the MSM:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/7386391/China-ready-to-end-dollar-peg.html

Investors in the U.S. will foolishly cheer a rise in the value of the Yuan, thinking that this will increase American exports to China.  In reality, China will be preparing to dump the last of its U.S. bonds, and begin exports and imports with the new ASEAN trading bloc:

http://www.nasdaq.com/aspx/stock-market-news-story.aspx?storyid=201002280656dowjonesdjonline000247&title=asean-exports-to-grow-7-to-85-in-2010–indonesia-trade-min

This new bloc has the potential to surpass profit margins in U.S. markets, especially in the face of extremely weak consumer activity in America.  As the U.S. falters under sovereign debt pressure, China will be in prime standing with a ready supply of SDRs and an organized trading bloc to take up the slack of falling exports to the West.

Shock And Awe

The illusion of U.S. recovery seems to be paramount in the plan for Globalist centralization.  Every scam imaginable has been fashioned to lure the public into a sense of false comfort.  In my original observations on the economic collapse, I believed that we would likely see a “trigger” event in 2010, which would set off a “rolling breakdown” that would not fully climax for a few years.  Now, I am not so sure.  After examining the facts behind the implementation of SDRs as well as the potentially explosive situation in the treasury market, I believe that a “shock and awe” scenario is becoming more probable.  The behavior of the Fed, along with that of the IMF seems to suggest that they are preparing for a focused collapse, peaking within weeks or months instead of years, and the most certain fall of the dollar.

As I think of it now, the advantages of a sudden financial flash flood are numerous.  In a drawn out collapse, the Liberty Movement is given a tremendous time advantage, allowing us to double and redouble our membership while the public opinion of the Federal Reserve and the government in general would deteriorate.  In a sudden breakdown, our time will be cut short, and the public will be distracted and fearful, desperate for an organized authority to offer any semblance of “order.”  A slow collapse allows for the Liberty Movement to work peacefully within the system to build a third party capable of dethroning the current two party farce.  A sudden collapse erases all political activity and opens the door to martial law and illegitimate government.  And finally, a fast moving meltdown leaves a much stronger psychological impression; a catastrophic waking nightmare, instead of a slow grinding depression.  A world government could never be brought about due to the “monotony” of a long slow economic burnout.  Too many factors could present themselves in such an extended period that might interfere with the desired end result.  Too many variables to calculate.  In an abrupt collapse, the Globalists would need only to gage and influence the amount of fear in the populace to a sufficient boiling point then leap in with their intended solution to the problem; centralized global governance.

I feel that in either method, the Central Bankers will fail to reach their ultimate goal, but the prospect of a direct monetary break with limited warning does make the atmosphere much heavier.  One can only prepare as much as possible mentally and emotionally, and keep his eyes wide open…

CIA and Taliban working together

Blackwater, US Military Working For Taliban Drug Lords

Are America’s Mercenary Armies Really Drug Cartels?

Congress to probe ‘U.S. funding of Taliban’

War tax proposed to pay for protecting Afghan opium fields, bribing Taliban

U.S. Army paying the Taliban not to shoot at them

Taliban Still Working for the CIA?

CIA Ordered Visas For 15 of The 19 9/11 Hijackers in Jeddah

ABC Reporter Attacks FBI 9/11 Whistleblower

Jesse Ventura on The View – (03/10/2010)

Ventura too bold for Huffington Post

Huffington Post Kills Jesse Ventura’s Piece On 9/11

Jesse Ventura on The View – (03/10/2010)

Ventura too bold for Huffington Post

Huffington Post Kills Jesse Ventura’s Piece On 9/11

The Huffington Post, a site that I visit numerously, and appreciate the work that its doing, recently banned an opinion piece by Jesse Ventura that focuses on the many inconsistencies and errors in the official 9/11 story, and raises troubling questions about the role that the government played in the attacks. In place of Ventura’s article, which can be read in full here, the editors of The Huffington Post posted a note that described their reasoning for deleting the piece:

Editor’s Note: The Huffington Post’s editorial policy, laid out in our blogger guidelines, prohibits the promotion and promulgation of conspiracy theories — including those about 9/11. As such, we have removed this post.

Obviously, The Huffington Post has the right to restrict any opinion which it views as being out of line with its editorial policy, but after showing such a prejudice towards “conspiracy theories,” they can’t be held as a beacon of free speech and free thought, as a place where thinkers converge to test their ideas and theories. They are officially in the censorship business. Bill Maher, who stormed out 9/11 questioners from his show a few years ago, is also in that business. Of course, he too had all the right to do what he did, but he was a coward for doing it. And so are the editors on The Huffington Post. William E. Borah, “The Lion of Idaho,” professed: “I look upon those who would deny others the right to urge and argue their position, however irksome and pernicious they may seem, as intellectual and moral cowards.”

For some reason, one article in favor of the non-government version of 9/11 slipped by the HuffPost censors, and has remained on the site since it was published on March 7. It’s called “Ahmadinejad says U.S is lying about Sept 11 attacks,” by Mike Green. I guess if the president of a religious dictatorship says 9/11 was an inside job then it’s okay, but if a former Governor of Minnesota questions the attacks then the editors of Huff-n-Puff get scared and retreat to the lines of “respectable” debate that have been drawn by the government. But it isn’t just Ahmadinejad or Ventura who have publicly voiced their rejection of the official story, but fire fighters, 9/11 first responders, family members of the victims, former government officials, scientists, architects, engineers, and millions of ordinary Americans. As Green writes:

Ironically, the Iranian president is merely voicing the sentiment of the American people on a platform loud enough for someone in Washington to actually hear it. Any obfuscation or dismissal of Ahmadinejad’s question ultimately results in a dismissal of the voices of the American people who also seek answers to lingering questions about Sept. 11.

Refusing to even contemplate the evidence that has been gathered by various scholars in the 9/11 truth movement is a slap to the face of every American, and every human being living on this planet. At least a third of Americans believe the government orchestrated the attack, or had prior knowledge of an impeding terrorist attack, which should be enough to raise doubt in the minds of the editors of The Huffington Post. Simply calling these conspiracy theorists crazy is a great offense, and a tragic mistake. Sadly, it reflects the madness that is prevalent in mainstream American culture.

People who believe in the government’s version of 9/11 imagine that there is a well of paranoia in American culture, in which poor souls have fallen into; a deep bottom where insane individuals are unable to get back to the top and think clearly again because they are mired in conspiracy rubble, and are banished from all light. According to these “rationalists”, the US government isn’t capable of murder and treachery, nor does it have the resources to keep relevant information from the public sphere about such an important event as 9/11. But if I may ask politely, what world are these people living in? Haven’t they heard of Hiroshima? Vietnam? Iran-Contra? However unpopular it may be, it is a fact is that the American government is capable of murdering innocent people, committing treachery, and lying to the world. It has done all of those of things, and more. It is barbaric, and worse.

The worldview of people who are committed to the government version of events is anti-scientific because it claims that government authorities and media spokespersons always fall on the side of reality when reality is in question. They can never be wrong, or ever lie to the public, and if you believe otherwise, then you endorse crazy theories and conspiratorial misconceptions. But one look at history, and you’ll learn that governments lie most of the time, especially powerful governments that have institutional resources like the CIA, FBI, NSA, FEMA, and Homeland Security. We don’t need to go back too far to give an example of a government conspiracy theory that crumbled in the sight of the truth. Not long ago, it was believed that Saddam had WMDs, and people who questioned the so-called evidence were called conspiracy theorists. But those “conspiracy theorists” turned out to be right. Those same “conspiracy theorists,” that Cass Sunstein, head of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs in the Obama administration, wants to shut up and covertly undermine.

The cover-up of 9/11 will be known in due time, but sites like The Huffington Post are still reluctant to get the cat out of the bag. So what are they afraid of? That the country will never be the same if it is found true that the government was in fact behind 9/11? Well, I got news for them. . . America has never been the same since 9/11. Personal freedoms have been eradicated. The right to protest is no longer upheld. Americans are under constant surveillance. Wall St. Banks are looting the people’s wealth. And the country is mired in two immoral and criminal wars. There is no going back to September 10, 2001. Millions of innocent people have died. The question facing us is how are we going to respond? Shut off debate, and pretend the controversy doesn’t exist, or find answers?

A popular rebuttal to the non-government version of 9/11 is that Bush is stupid so he couldn’t possibly have done it. But that argument immediately falls on its face because it is never suggested that Bush was the sole conspirator in the 9/11 attacks, as if he is some kind of American Bin Laden. Conspiracies are called conspiracies for a reason, more than one person is involved. People that believe the Bush administration wasn’t competent enough to pull off a false flag attack must recognize that an entirely secret network of spies, military fascists, and government operatives sprung up after WWII, and they are well endowed to perform such a complicated procedure when called upon. They represent a black shadow over American democracy. So referring to “administrations” as if they are the only guiders of the country is wrong. The nation’s foreign and domestic policy has been consistently corporatist and militaristic in the past forty years, ever since the death of JFK. The Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush, and Obama administrations have been years of outrage. Voting in another democrat or republican in 2012 is akin to injecting another heavy dose of poison into an already dying patient.

I hope Arianna Huffington and The Huffington Post realize what is at stake. Freedom, justice, and truth, are all hanging in the balance. News censorship and cultural ridicule represents a shrinking wrap on the public mind. The internet is the only breathing hole we have left. If The Huffington Post wants to be recognized as a true journalistic platform in the coming years then it must heed the words of Charles Bradlaugh, Frederick Douglass, and Noam Chomsky.

“If we don’t believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don’t believe in it at all.” - Noam Chomsky

David Ray Griffin weighed in on the Jesse Ventura/Huffington Post matter (Huffgate?) at Mark Crispin Miller’s website, to the effect that:

”[A] conspiracy theory is simply a theory that posits a conspiracy – a secret plan on the part of some group to influence events by partly secret means.” (Charles Pigden, “Conspiracy Theories and the Conventional Wisdom,” Episteme, 4 (2007), 219-32, Sect. 2.)….So, in telling us that the 9/11 attacks resulted from a conspiracy between Osama bin Laden and 19 members of his al-Qaeda organization, Bush and Cheney clearly articulated a conspiracy theory. They and Sunstein, of course, call it a true theory; but all conspiracy theorists claim that their theories are true.

In any case, the HP did not say that it accepted true conspiracy theories and excluded only false ones (and to do this, they would need to do an enormous amount of research). They said they avoid “lending credibility to any conspiracy theories”….What the HP policy amounts to is excluding any allegations that our own government has orchestrated any conspiracy. So they would have had to exclude all allegations about Tonkin Gulf being a hoax; ditto about the Watergate break in; ditto for WMD in Iraq (recall “the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy”?); ditto for the claim that Saddam helped al-Qaeda with the 9/11 attacks; and so on.

Click here to read the comment in its entirety.

I was so annoyed by Grffin’s sophistry that I was moved to post the following rejoinder:

Let’s not play games with semantics. “Conspiracy Theory” does mean something, and it doesn’t mean–as Conspiracy Theorists disingenuously accuse their debunkers of meaning–that anyone who believes in conspiracies is disreputable or a nut. Of course there have been and always will be conspiracies, many of them carried out by people in governments.

Most people understand it in the sense that Karl Popper defined “the conspiracy theory of society” in The Open Society and its Enemies (1952), as “the view that an explanation of a social phenomenon consists in the discovery of the men or groups who are interested in the occurrence of this phenomenon…and who have planned and conspired to bring it about.” Popper went on to attribute this way of thinking to “the secularization of…religious superstition.”

Conspiracy Theory, in other words, is 1) A way of thinking, as opposed to a particular thought; one that presumes causes from their supposed effects; 2) It is a way of thinking that imposes a totalizing, ideologically inflected template on its subject; and 3) One that has more in common with the inductive methods of theology than the deductive methods of science.

Wearing his theologian’s hat, David Ray Griffin has written about the evils of the notion of American Exceptionalism. 9/11 denial provides him with a counter-narrative with which to attack it.

“9/11 serves as a revelation of the nature of the American empire—an empire that has been in the making, on a bipartisan basis, for a long time. 9/11 reveals the nature of the values that have underlay this empire-building project for over a century, especially the past 60 years,” he wrote in “9/11, American Empire, and Christian Faith.”(http://davidraygriffin.com/articles/911-american-empire-and-christian-faith/). “We must ask whether the term “evil,” which US leaders have used so freely to describe other nations, must be applied to our own. There can be no doubt about the application of this term to 9/11. We can here quote President Bush himself, who on the evening of 9/11 said: “”Thousands of lives were suddenly ended by evil, despicable acts of terror. . . . Today, our nation saw evil, the very worst of human nature.” No explanation of why the attacks were despicable was necessary. The proposition was self-evident. This proposition is even more self-evident, of course, if the attacks were orchestrated by our own government.”

And again: “As these parallels between Roman and American imperialism show, we can speak of the latter as evil without even bringing 9/11 into the picture. But the awareness that the attacks of 9/11 were carried out to further America’s global domination project, and hence increase global apartheid, helps us, as I have suggested elsewhere, to “fully grasp the extent to which this project is propelled by fanaticism based on a deeply perverted value system.” 9/11 can thereby serve as a wake-up call to Christians in America, forcing us to ask how to respond to the realization that we are citizens of the new Rome.”

I would venture that Griffin didn’t write his 9/11 books and take to the hustings because he read about nano-thermite or because he timed the buildings’ velocities of collapse or because he noticed a devastating hole in one official account or another. He began with a narrative about the American imperium, then he gathered together whatever forensic evidence he could to support it–evidence that remains so thin, so inconsistent, so circumstantial, that most thoughtful people regard 9/11 Denial as a “conspiracy theory” rather than a conspiracy that is being exposed.

Americans Could Be Locked-Up For Life Without Trial Under New Bill

Dissenters To Be Detained As “Enemy Belligerents”?

A Detention Bill You Ought to Read More Carefully

We don’t get cable TV anymore, which is mostly a good thing. I wish I could watch Jon Stewart and Steven Colbert before I go to bed and I really miss C-SPAN, but at least I don’t have to look into Wolf Blitzer’s smirking face every night–or have my blood pressure spike when I pass Glenn Beck or Bill O’Reilly when I’m changing channels. CNN is actually the reason we disconnected. My wife worked there for years and she couldn’t wait to get it out of our house when she quit. The guys came and took the box away Labor Day week, 2001. It wasn’t much later that we didn’t have any TV at all except what we could find on UHF, because we live in Brooklyn and the TV antenna was on top of the World Trade Center, which we used to look at from our living room window.

Which is a long-winded way of saying that I haven’t been able to watch any of Jesse Ventura’s Conspiracy Theory shows. I read about them, of course, and I watched some interviews on line. There was nothing new there for me, but then again, I’m up to my neck in this stuff. The promos were pretty off-putting to me–too histrionic, too loaded–but some of the interviews were intriguing. Jesse Ventura may be a grandiloquent showman and an egomaniac, but he’s not dumb; if I listen to him long enough, I agree with quite a few of the things he says.

I just went to Amazon to check out the tie-in book that came out this week (it’s #7), and I practically fell out of my chair when I read this five star review from Mark Crispin Miller. Headlined “A Brave and Necessary Book” (click here), Miller doesn’t so much endorse the book’s conclusions (“I doubt that the book’s authors would want anyone just to swallow everything they say (unlike rabble-rousers like Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh, who do promote “conspiracy theories” without any basis in reality)” so much as he attacks the “mainstream voices, both far-right and ‘liberal’” who would rather that we not even consider them for ourselves.

Miller is a writer I genuinely admire; I wondered if something wasn’t up. I checked out his own website, “News From Underground” and found out. Miller, who has written extensively on Republican election fraud, liked what Ventura and his co-writer said about the subject–and about the rumors that Mike Connell, a Republican cyber-consultant who died in a plane crash shortly after a judge compelled him to testify about vote tampering, might have been murdered. He was appalled that the Huffington Post had taken down his blog about 9/11 Truth the other day.

Clearly, even to question the official story of 9/11 is to engage in “conspiracy theories” (as if the official story weren’t itself a “conspiracy theory,” and a preposterous one at that). Such is always the response of the US mainstream media (the foreign media tends to be more open-minded)–and it’s also the response of our left/liberal media, as this amazing act of censorship makes clear.

Miller posted Ventura’s piece so we can make up our minds for ourselves. I read it and, like I said about the show promos, there wasn’t much new there for me and certainly nothing that would change my mind about 9/11 Truth. I am beginning to think of Jones and Gage as grandiloquent showmen too.

If I were a magazine editor I wouldn’t have wanted to pay Ventura for such a tired piece. I’ve posted a few pieces at Huffington and I know they reserve the right to reject what you write; they moderate comments too. I disagree with Miller that the piece wasn’t “conspiracy theory.” But then again blogs are supposed to be personal and opinionated; if they’re going to be of any interest, they shouldn’t be treated like copy.

Miller has been debunking the myth of the liberal media since Boxed In. The mainstream media is all about consensus, he says, about creating a safe zone for consumerism. Blogs are supposed to be different.

I’m not worried that Jesse Ventura won’t find a venue to express his opinions and get paid handsomely for doing so, but I wish that the Huffington Post hadn’t pulled him. I’m not sure that I’m outraged, but I can’t deny that I’m disappointed.

Ive been there. Yea, on the side of the 9/11 truth deniers. Maybe I should explain…..

I originally was introduced to what is now-the truth movement back in 2001 by one of my more serious conspiracy theory friends. (a big sci-fi/ufo junkie) I had already been somewhat interested in the genre because of similar issues. I was what you could call, a fan of William Coopers. I never really took his alien claims all that serious, but he had a wealth of other information we fans of conspiracy theory love. Ive also watched a few of David Ickes films, which while 70% is ‘mainstream’ conspiracy, the other 30% is filled with reptilian alien-shape shifting insanity.

Ya know its funny what you can remember….Have you ever had a grandparent tell you that what you were learning in Social Studies/History class, was wrong? At the time, you figure – eh? maybe my grandfather is forgetting it wrong because thats not whats in my textbook….right? Somehow, this simple generality -and yes, it is a generality- can change the way you look at historic events. It can help you see news headlines and articles differently. It can even help you see trends in what the news covers world-wide.

Anyway……..back to 9/11 truth. I began by looking online at the claims the truthers presented….and found that not all of them were illogical questions. And, you know what else? Their questions have no answers. Their questions wont even be debated by the main stream media. Just why is that?

Why cant we have a civil discussion on our main stream media?

Why is history being changed in front of our eyes? Doesnt anyone remember things that our media told us and how they have attempted to change what was said?

I invite you to watch the video below. And even if you do beleive the 9/11 Commission Report (despite Chairs saying it was set up to fail) at least see what the debate is about.

Russia Today’s CrossTalk. (25 minutes long)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=avtvrtTV1vw&feature=player_embedded

Jesse Ventura has become a non-stop truth machine in the media, going on all the networks to plug his latest bestseller American Conspiracies. He is courageously educating the American public about the criminal government in Washington, and its many dirty works. God bless him.

On Larry King

On NBC Today Show

On Fox News

On The Young Turks

On The View

Epic 9/11 Truth Bannering at 2010 Vancouver Olympics

ABC News Nightline Airs Propaganda Piece on 9/11 Truth

Pentagon Shooting Blamed on 9/11 Truth

Loose Change Creators Destroy ABC ‘Reporter’

The road ahead will be a challenge.

In 2007 the call went out.  Thanks to the Internet many were informed of a radically different presidential candidate aspiring to be elected in 2008.  It was a candidate who spoke directly to fundamental problems that mainstream media and politicians had long ago capitulated to, and in some cases, defended.

Ron Paul, a Republican, no less, offered hope to millions of Americans fed up with meaningless wars, big government disconnect, and shrinking personal wealth.  Beyond slogans of hope and change, the anti-neocon Ron Paul R3VOLution offered answers – restore the Constitution, require our leaders to obey it, prosperity and peace will follow.  Although the GOP establishment, with the help of corporate media, thwarted Dr. Paul’s campaign, the political landscape was changed forever.  A new political paradigm emerged in a big way.                   

Here in Boulder, Colorado, folks of many different stripes responded to that call.  Disgruntled Republicans found themselves shoulder to shoulder with antiwar and 911 Truth activists.  Enthusiastically, we formed a local group, leafleted at local events, and pounded the pavement in our own precincts to get Dr. Paul nominated.  Despite the victory of politics-as-usual, Republicrat, and banker yes man, Obama, we pressed on with Ron Paul’s Campaign for Liberty working to raise awareness for restoring our constitutional republic and building support for future freedom minded candidacies.                   

Yes, that’s right, here in Boulder.  Official sister city of Lhasa, Tibet, and plenty of Free Tibet bumper stickers on ski rack fitted Subarus to prove it, Boulder is a model community for U.N. Agenda 21 and sanctuary city par excellence.  In hyperdrive to eliminate individual and property rights using the sustainability scam and global warming hoax, Boulder is also a case study in how a select population can be convinced that it is hip, trendy, and progressive, to go along with forced incremental collectivization.  Helping in this dumbing down process are plenty of local reactionary individuals and organizations cloaked in banners of ’peace and justice’.  Gatekeepers for Left/Right polarization, they are fond of demonizing Tea Partiers as “racists”, and groups, such as the Oath Keepers, as “right-wing terrorists”.   

Curators of the archaic socialist mindset, they cite greedy, polluting, corporations as the cause of all war and suffering.  Willful stooges serving the power elite agenda they call for more laws and more government to rein in the capitalists conveniently forgetting that we are well past the era of robber baron capitalism.  In this stage of financial capitalism banker owned corporations are melding with banker owned governments ensuring a completion of the fascist model of totalitarianism.     

Despite this antithetical sociopolitical setting, the Boulder Campaign for Liberty continues to grow along with other freedom groups throughout the country.  The message of classical liberalism (limited government, individual liberty) as opposed to the collectivist ideology of the modern liberalism of today is compelling and undeniable.  The phony Left is revealed to be as philosophically bankrupt as the phony Right.  While appearing as opposites, modern establishment Liberals are, in reality, the dialectical partners of Neoconservatives in their shared quest for 21st century fascism.         

Starting a freedom group anywhere is easy.  The hard part lies ahead.                      

The Road Ahead                   

Regardless of the turmoil and confusion caused by attacks from the phony Left and Right, the essence of a legitimate patriot, people’s movement remains intact.  The inappropriate appellations of ”tea baggers” targeting grassroots tax protesters are now seen as the predictably hollow and nervous squeals of the intellectually frustrated.  The prime time television theatrics of Glenn Beck, and other phony conservative disinfo agents, are now exposed as a not so subtle Neocon co-optation attempt.                   

"TRUST ME."

Going forward, the freedom-liberty movement faces still more challenges.  The greatest challenge yet to come is that the movement still needs to clearly define itself and it’s goals independent from special interests.  Establishment GOP party hacks continue their attempt to co-opt the freedom awakening with a new version of Neocon Lite.  Riding the Ron Paul wave and exploiting anti-IRS, anti – Big Govt sentiment, they vilify Obama’s ’socialism’.  At the same time, they extol the virtues of the fascist phony War on Terror along with its destruction of the Bill of Rights.  Let’s all work to restore the Republican Party to its original platform of limited government, they say, and, while we’re at it, bomb the hell outta Iran.  After only a year of Bush’s absence, the Neocons truly expect sane and sober folks to fall for this nonsense.                 

Wall Street parasites pose as born again libertarians and join with other useless talking heads on TV financial news shows.  Preaching the wonders of unfettered capitalism they promote a return to the good old days of limited government.  Noticeably, however, limited government and deregulation for you and me is often missing from the sermon.  Their mantra of; capitalism, capitalism, capitalism, by the way, better captures the linguistic flavor for justifying insider trading and monopoly practices.  It is so much more politically correct than the phrase,  free enterprise - a concept inferred from our Constitution, that speaks to the middle class, and reflects our culture of self-determination.                   

It is said, nature abhors a vacuum.  Nature is not picky and anything will do to immediately fill the void.  The same is true for politics.  Running as ‘Independents’ opportunists are scurrying to pander to an electorate fed up with both Democrats and Republicans.  Hitting all the right notes playing to the populist mood of the day, their charisma is sometimes stunning.  When asked the hard questions about 911 Truth, however, they suddenly go gaga-eyed and do a flip-flop routine rivaling that of contestants on So You Think You Can Dance.  Their obsession with winning, sacrificing true personal patriotism, is revealed.              

Learning From Our Adversaries               

Lenin leads the Bolsheviks out of the R.S.D.L.Party

In Marxist lore it is Lenin credited with the understanding that the most intense ideological struggle happens within the revolutionary party, itself.  It is not with the opposing political parties.  He was keenly aware that the Bolsheviks would not be successful unless there was a common consistent ideology enabling the party to act as a unified disciplined machine.  Amid the chaos of a collapsed Russian government, his insight proved to be valid.  Among the many parties vying for control, it was the Bolsheviks who were the best organized and seized state power because of it.  There were no compromises with other socialist factions.  In the years preceding the 1917 Revolution many Communist politicians lost their lives because they did not recant their beliefs.  The Bolsheviks maintained credibility, respect, and allegiance during crisis.  There were no flip-flops.  Say what you will.             

Government provocateurs and bona fide fringe kooks aside, the genuine freedom movement does not include anyone proposing revolutionary violence.  The infowar and ideological struggle, though, is shaping up to be just as intense.  In order to have credibility and to speak with authority, the Freedom movement must stick with Constitutional values without compromise.  It must not play favorites with the Left or Right.  Sarah Palin and Al Gore should be seen for what they are – two careerist politicians serving the same paymaster.  9/11 and all false flag terror must be acknowledged.  All elements of racism and religious bigotry must be expunged.  Wars of aggression can no longer be acceptable under any circumstance.  A consistent anti-New World Order ideology is sorely needed.          

In our high-tech age of instant gratification telling the truth without compromise and risking electoral defeat is a novel idea.  It will, however, prove to be the standard by which true patriots are separated from phony politicians.  A peaceful Second American Revolution will not happen overnight.  It will demand longterm credibility from ideological consistency.  It will demand speaking the truth.  No compromises.  No flip-flops.                

Further reading:
What Agenda 21 means for your community: http://www.infowars.com/1991-un-policy-paper-describes-exact-purpose-and-trajectory-of-current-copenhagen-treaty/ 
http://www.conspiracyarchive.com/Blog/?cat=11 http://www.crossroad.to/text/articles/la21_198.html       
WSJ article – Boulder – sustainability agenda falling apart as it meets fiscal reality:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704320104575015920992845334.html?mod=WSJ_WSJ_US_News_5 
Oath Keepers: http://oathkeepers.org/oath/
Lenin and the RSDLP: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Social_Democratic_Labour_Party

Source: Washington’s Blog
March 7, 2010

Most Americans don’t know what kind of people 9/11 truthers really are. So they can’t figure out whether or not they are dangerous.

Below is a list of people who question what our Government has said about 9/11.

The list proves – once and for all – that people who question 9/11 are dangerous.

Email this list to everyone you know, to prove to them that 9/11 truthers are all dangerous nut cases.
Senior intelligence officers:

* Former military analyst and famed whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg said that the case of a certain 9/11 whistleblower is “far more explosive than the Pentagon Papers”. He also said that the government is ordering the media to cover up her allegations about 9/11. And he said that some of the claims concerning government involvement in 9/11 are credible, that “very serious questions have been raised about what they [U.S. government officials] knew beforehand and how much involvement there might have been”, that engineering 9/11 would not be humanly or psychologically beyond the scope of the current administration, and that there’s enough evidence to justify a new, “hard-hitting” investigation into 9/11 with subpoenas and testimony taken under oath (see this and this).

* A 27-year CIA veteran, who chaired National Intelligence Estimates and personally delivered intelligence briefings to Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, their Vice Presidents, Secretaries of State, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and many other senior government officials (Raymond McGovern) said “I think at simplest terms, there’s a cover-up. The 9/11 Report is a joke”, and is open to the possibility that 9/11 was an inside job.

* A 29-year CIA veteran, former National Intelligence Officer (NIO) and former Director of the CIA’s Office of Regional and Political Analysis (William Bill Christison) said “I now think there is persuasive evidence that the events of September did not unfold as the Bush administration and the 9/11 Commission would have us believe. … All three [buildings that were destroyed in the World Trade Center] were most probably destroyed by controlled demolition charges placed in the buildings before 9/11.” (and see this).

* A number of intelligence officials, including a CIA Operations Officer who co-chaired a CIA multi-agency task force coordinating intelligence efforts among many intelligence and law enforcement agencies (Lynne Larkin) sent a joint letter to Congress expressing their concerns about “serious shortcomings,” “omissions,” and “major flaws” in the 9/11 Commission Report and offering their services for a new investigation (they were ignored)

* 20-year Marine Corps infantry and intelligence officer, the second-ranking civilian in U.S. Marine Corps Intelligence, and former CIA clandestine services case officer (Robert David Steele) stated that “9/11 was at a minimum allowed to happen as a pretext for war“, and it was probably an inside job (scroll down to Customer Review dated October 7, 2006).

* A decorated 20-year CIA veteran, who Pulitzer-Prize winning investigative reporter Seymour Hersh called “perhaps the best on-the-ground field officer in the Middle East”, and whose astounding career formed the script for the Academy Award winning motion picture Syriana (Robert Baer) said that “the evidence points at” 9/11 having had aspects of being an inside job

* The Division Chief of the CIA’s Office of Soviet Affairs, who served as Senior Analyst from 1966 – 1990. He also served as Professor of International Security at the National War College from 1986 – 2004 (Melvin Goodman) said “The final [9/11 Commission] report is ultimately a coverup.“

* Professor of History and International Relations, University of Maryland. Former Executive Assistant to the Director of the National Security Agency, former military attaché in China, with a 21-year career in U.S. Army Intelligence (Major John M. Newman, PhD, U.S. Army) questions the government’s version of the events of 9/11.

Congressmen:

* According to the Co-Chair of the Congressional Inquiry into 9/11 and former Head of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Bob Graham, an FBI informant had hosted and rented a room to two hijackers in 2000 and that, when the Inquiry sought to interview the informant, the FBI refused outright, and then hid him in an unknown location, and that a high-level FBI official stated these blocking maneuvers were undertaken under orders from the White House (confirmed here)

* Current Democratic U.S. Senator Patrick Leahy said “The two questions that the congress will not ask . . . is why did 9/11 happen on George Bush’s watch when he had clear warnings that it was going to happen? Why did they allow it to happen?”

* Current Republican Congressman Ron Paul calls for a new 9/11 investigation and states that “we see the [9/11] investigations that have been done so far as more or less cover-up and no real explanation of what went on”

* Current Democratic Congressman Dennis Kucinich hints that we aren’t being told the truth about 9/11

* Current Republican Congressman Jason Chafetz says that we need to be vigilant and continue to investigate 9/11

* Former Democratic Senator Mike Gravel states that he supports a new 9/11 investigation and that we don’t know the truth about 9/11

* Former Republican Senator Lincoln Chaffee endorses a new 9/11 investigation

* Former U.S. Democratic Congressman Dan Hamburg says that the U.S. government “assisted” in the 9/11 attacks, stating that “I think there was a lot of help from the inside“

* Former U.S. Republican Congressman and senior member of the House Armed Services Committee, and who served six years as the Chairman of the Military Research and Development Subcommittee Curt Weldon has shown that the U.S. tracked hijackers before 9/11, is open to hearing information about explosives in the Twin Towers, and is open to the possibility that 9/11 was an inside job

9/11 Commissioners:

* The Commission’s co-chairs said that the 9/11 Commissioners knew that military officials misrepresented the facts to the Commission, and the Commission considered recommending criminal charges for such false statements (free subscription required)

* 9/11 Commission co-chair Lee Hamilton says “I don’t believe for a minute we got everything right”, that the Commission was set up to fail, that people should keep asking questions about 9/11, and that the 9/11 debate should continue

* 9/11 Commissioner Timothy Roemer said “We were extremely frustrated with the false statements we were getting”

* 9/11 Commissioner Max Cleland resigned from the Commission, stating: “It is a national scandal“; “This investigation is now compromised“; and “One of these days we will have to get the full story because the 9-11 issue is so important to America. But this White House wants to cover it up”

* 9/11 Commissioner Bob Kerrey said that “There are ample reasons to suspect that there may be some alternative to what we outlined in our version . . . We didn’t have access . . . .”

* And the Senior Counsel to the 9/11 Commission (John Farmer) – who led the 9/11 staff’s inquiry – recently said “At some level of the government, at some point in time…there was an agreement not to tell the truth about what happened“. He also said “I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described …. The tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public for two years…. This is not spin. This is not true.”

Other government officials:

* U.S. General, Commanding General of U.S. European Command and Supreme Allied Commander Europe, decorated with the Bronze Star, Silver Star, and Purple Heart (General Wesley Clark) said “We’ve never finished the investigation of 9/11 and whether the administration actually misused the intelligence information it had. The evidence seems pretty clear to me. I’ve seen that for a long time.”

* Former Deputy Secretary for Intelligence and Warning under Nixon, Ford, and Carter (Morton Goulder), former Deputy Director to the White House Task Force on Terrorism (Edward L. Peck), and former US Department of State Foreign Service Officer (J. Michael Springmann), as well as a who’s who of liberals and independents) jointly call for a new investigation into 9/11

* Former Federal Prosecutor, Office of Special Investigations, U.S. Department of Justice under Presidents Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan; former U.S. Army Intelligence officer, and currently a widely-sought media commentator on terrorism and intelligence services (John Loftus) says “The information provided by European intelligence services prior to 9/11 was so extensive that it is no longer possible for either the CIA or FBI to assert a defense of incompetence.”

* The Group Director on matters of national security in the U.S. Government Accountability Office said that President Bush did not respond to unprecedented warnings of the 9/11 disaster and conducted a massive cover-up instead of accepting responsibility

* President of the U.S. Air Force Accident Investigation Board, who also served as Pentagon Weapons Requirement Officer and as a member of the Pentagon’s Quadrennial Defense Review, and who was awarded Distinguished Flying Crosses for Heroism, four Air Medals, four Meritorious Service Medals, and nine Aerial Achievement Medals (Lt. Col. Jeff Latas) is a member of a group which doubts the government’s version of 9/11

* Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense under President Ronald Reagan (Col. Ronald D. Ray) said that the official story of 9/11 is “the dog that doesn’t hunt”

* The former director of the FBI (Louis Freeh) says there was a cover up by the 9/11 Commission

* Director of the U.S. “Star Wars” space defense program in both Republican and Democratic administrations, who was a senior air force colonel who flew 101 combat missions (Col. Robert Bowman) stated: “If our government had merely [done] nothing, and I say that as an old interceptor pilot—I know the drill, I know what it takes, I know how long it takes, I know what the procedures are, I know what they were, and I know what they’ve changed them to—if our government had merely done nothing, and allowed normal procedures to happen on that morning of 9/11, the Twin Towers would still be standing and thousands of dead Americans would still be alive. [T]hat is treason!”

Numerous other politicians, judges, legal scholars, and attorneys also question at least some aspects of the government’s version of 9/11.

The unedited video is complete pwnage…

Dissenters To Be Detained As “Enemy Belligerents”?

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Monday, March 8, 2010

Since the establishment media is convinced that tea party members, 9/11 truthers, libertarians, Ron Paul supporters, and basically anyone with a dissenting political opinion is a likely domestic terrorist, they should be celebrating the fact that a new bill would allow the government to detain such people as “enemy belligerents” indefinitely and without trial based on their “suspected activity”.

The “Enemy Belligerent, Interrogation, Detention, and Prosecution Act of 2010,” introduced by Senators John McCain and Joseph Lieberman on Thursday with little fanfare, “sets out a comprehensive policy for the detention, interrogation and trial of suspected enemy belligerents who are believed to have engaged in hostilities against the United States by requiring these individuals to be held in military custody, interrogated for their intelligence value and not provided with a Miranda warning,” writes the Atlantic’s Marc Ambinder.

The full bill can be read here (PDF).

The bill does not distinguish between U.S. citizens and non-citizens, and states that “suspected belligerents” who are “considered a “high-value detainee” shall not be provided with a Miranda warning.”

A person is considered a “high value detainee” if they fulfil one of the following criteria.

(1) poses a threat of an attack on civilians or civilian facilities within the U.S. or U.S. facilities abroad; (2) poses a threat to U.S. military personnel or U.S. military facilities; (3) potential intelligence value; (4) is a member of al Qaeda or a terrorist group affiliated with al Qaeda or (5) such other matters as the President considers appropriate

Now that the Southern Poverty Law Center and the federal government, via the MIAC report and innumerable other leaked documents, now consider virtually anyone with a dissenting opinion against the state as “posing a threat,” millions of peaceful American citizens could be swept up by this frightening dragnet of tyranny.

However, according to the bill, an individual doesn’t even have to pose a threat to be snatched, detained and interrogated – they can merely be deemed to be of “potential intelligence value” or come under the vague and sweeping mandate of “such other matters as the President considers appropriate”.

This last designation hands Obama dictator powers to have any American citizen kidnapped, detained, and interrogated on a whim.

The only proviso that even hints at some form of check or balance is the measure that states, “The High-Value Detainee Interrogation Team must make a preliminary determination whether the detainee is an unprivileged enemy belligerent within 48 hours of taking detainee into custody.”

“The High-Value Detainee Interrogation Team must submit its determination to the Secretary of Defense and the Attorney General after consultation with the Director of National Intelligence, the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency. The Secretary of Defense and the Attorney General make a final determination and report the determination to the President and the appropriate committees of Congress. In the case of any disagreement between the Secretary of Defense and the Attorney General, the President will make the determination,” states the bill.

The ACLU has expressed its vigorous opposition to the legislation, labeling it nothing less than a “direct attack on the Constitution”.

“Indefinite detention flies in the face of American values and violates this country’s commitment to the rule of law,” states Laura W. Murphy, Director of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office.

Of course, such positions from the ACLU as well as Amnesty International will only be used as grist for the neo-con propaganda mill about how the bill ought to be passed in order to avoid being “soft on terrorists,” a piece of spin still being swallowed whole by millions of conservatives who are blissfully unaware of the fact that the apparatus of the war on terror is now being aimed squarely at politically active American citizens.

“Torture, indefinite imprisonment, secret trials and limited staged hearings are the stuff of cheap dictatorships,” writes Ian McColgin. “They are the sort of idiocy we scorned in the Soviets, the Koreans and the Vietnamese. It is astonishing that we have senators and citizens even discussing this bill which is not a capitulation to terrorism – it’s the triumph of terrorism.”

Homeland Security is already implementing technology to be enforced at “security events” which purportedly reads “malintent” on behalf of an individual who passes through a checkpoint. Perhaps the video below explains just how “enemy belligerents” will be identified on American soil.