Home

Twilight of the Courts: The Elusive Search for Justice in the American Police State

4 Comments

 

This commentary is also available at www.rutherford.org.

By John W. Whitehead
June 5, 2017

“As nightfall does not come at once, neither does oppression. In both instances, there is a twilight when everything remains seemingly unchanged. And it is in such twilight that we all must be most aware of change in the air – however slight – lest we become unwitting victims of the darkness.”—Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas We have entered a new regime and it’s called the American police state. More

MANY GUN OWNERS, POLITICIANS AND MEDIA AGREE

Leave a comment

The Rebel Madman

Thoughts and Comments of a Rebel nature maddening to the status quo.

REBEL MADMAN

By Michael Gaddy

(Author’s note: I originally wrote this article some 7 1/2 years ago, thus the reference to Obama. I have made a few modifications to the original article for clarification purposes and removed broken links. Many states legislatures are still proposing more and more restrictions on our inalienable right to have the necessary tools to defend ourselves and our loved ones. Many times they offer to the uninformed partial rights based on age or the ability to pay for the privilege. For this reason, I believe the tenets of this message to still be most relevant. Our rights are inalienable because they were granted by our creator. Why do we continue to beg and pay government to exercise the rights we already have? 

“If the First Amendment rights follow the pattern of the Second Amendment, only those who have been vetted by the state will be allowed to speak or write publicly, and then only after passing the prerequisite courses, state scrutiny, and of course, pay the required amount for the privilege.”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

As a government grows more and more intrusive on individual liberties, that government’s fear of the armed citizen increases exponentially, just as an armed robber fears a well-armed potential victim. Here, in America, in the last seventy plus years, our government and their stooges in the media have sought to relegate the right of a free people to keep and bear arms into a privilege, subject to government approval, rather than an inalienable right. Sadly, many gun owners have agreed to participate in this madness. More

Government censorship has begun: Google actively participating

4 Comments

Breaking: infowars and natural news under attack

by Jon Rappoport

Breaking: infowars and natural news under attack

By Jon Rappoport

Alex Jones’ infowars and Mike Adams’ naturalnews.com are both under attack.

Infowars has been dropped by its ad platform, which spreads ads for infowars products to many, many media outlets. Last year, that ad operation accounted for more than $3 million in sales for infowars.

Natural news has been “delisted” by Google. Google appears to have wiped out 140,000 pages of listings for Mike’s website. I just typed in “natural news” at Google and what came up was something different, natural.news, another tiny site owned by Mike.

The Empire is striking back. This isn’t debate or discussion or even baseless accusation. This is war by attrition. And censorship.

This is part of the elite mantra: if we don’t like it, wipe it out.

If you’ve been awake for the past year, you’ve seen an escalation, along many fronts, of the so-called “Progressive” forces to censor what they don’t want to read or hear.

It’s taken a new turn. They want to take down key independent media outlets.

They want to narrow down the “information superhighway” to a one-lane road that runs directly into their headquarters, where all the big-time fake news is dispensed, every day, to the hypnotized masses.

Don’t let them win. At the very least, take the independent news you judge is vitally important and spread it out far and wide.

Finally, for now, a message to those individuals who, by work and sweat and intelligence, by their own efforts, have built and created independent news sites:

WHATEVER DIFFERENCES YOU MAY HAVE HAD, FROM TIME TO TIME, WITH ONE ANOTHER, THIS IS BIGGER THAN THAT. MUCH BIGGER. THIS IS ABOUT CENSORSHIP OF FREE SPEECH. THIS IS ABOUT A WAR AGAINST THE FREEDOMS WE HOLD DEAR, THE FREEDOMS THAT MEAN THE MOST WHEN THEY ARE UNDER ATTACK. DEFEND EACH OTHER. (emphasis, mine)

Jon Rappoport | February 22, 2017 at 5:26 pm | Categories: Uncategorized | URL: http://wp.me/pFTDT-4wr

THE RISE AND FALL OF THE INTERNET

3 Comments

new-logo25 Author, Chuck Frank

The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, also known as ICANN, is a non-profit, public-benefit corporation formed in 1998, which has a limited, yet unique and critical role that coordinates the administration of the Internet’s logistical infrastructure layer and delivers “One Internet’ for the world.”

Besides creating three sets of unique identifiers, namely, Domain names, Internet Protocol (IP) addresses, and Protocol parameters, their responsibilities do not stop there.  Though ICANN does not run the internet system directly, it plays a central, administrative role in concert with technical operation community actors, while ensuring the security, stability, resiliency, and integrity of this critical
layer.

To keep pace with the dynamic technologies and rapid innovation on the Internet, ICANN also facilitates the process of policy development that will enable technical changes which is a fundamental part of the organizations mission.
More

FORBIDDEN: POLITICAL INCORRECTNESS UNDER FIRE

4 Comments

new-logo25Author, Chuck Frank

As a reference to this article, the initial part of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is used below.

 “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of RELIGION,
or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of
SPEECH or of the PRESS…”    

And now that we have covered the First Amendment as our template, it is time to move on to the next topic, and in case the people have not kept up with some of the latest changes since the Obama administration took over, censorship of texts and  speech are now part of the plan.  Fasten your safety belt.   

For the record, a huge amount of money has been used for the purpose of “programming” the masses by changing the definitions of what people consider to be “acceptable” words or speech and also what people consider to be “unacceptable”.  More and more, the trend of political correctness, AKA, a  government agenda. intends to shape the way that people think and also communicate with each other, day by day.    More

‘We the Prisoners’: The Demise of the Fourth Amendment

Leave a comment

speak truth

By John W. Whitehead

June 28, 2016

“Our carceral state banishes American citizens to a gray wasteland far beyond the promises and protections the government grants its other citizens… When the doors finally close and one finds oneself facing banishment to the carceral state—the years, the walls, the rules, the guards, the inmates—reactions vary. Some experience an intense sickening feeling. Others, a strong desire to sleep. Visions of suicide. A deep shame. A rage directed toward guards and other inmates. Utter disbelief. The incarcerated attempt to hold on to family and old social ties through phone calls and visitations. At first, friends and family do their best to keep up. But phone calls to prison are expensive, and many prisons are located far from one’s hometown… As the visits and phone calls diminish, the incarcerated begins to adjust to the fact that he or she is, indeed, a prisoner. New social ties are cultivated. New rules must be understood.”—Ta-Nehisi Coates, The Atlantic

In a carceral state—a.k.a. a prison state or a police state—there is no Fourth Amendment to protect you from the overreaches, abuses, searches and probing eyes of government overlords.

In a carceral state, there is no difference between the treatment meted out to a law-abiding citizen and a convicted felon: both are equally suspect and treated as criminals, without any of the special rights and privileges reserved for the governing elite.

In a carceral state, there are only two kinds of people: the prisoners and the prison guards.

With every new law enacted by federal and state legislatures, every new ruling handed down by government courts, and every new military weapon, invasive tactic and egregious protocol employed by government agents, “we the people”—the prisoners of the American police state—are being pushed that much further into a corner, our backs against the prison wall.

This concept of a carceral state in which we possess no rights except for that which the government grants on an as-needed basis is the only way I can begin to comprehend, let alone articulate, the irrational, surreal, topsy-turvy, through-the-looking-glass state of affairs that is being imposed upon us in America today.

As I point out in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, we who pretend we are free are no different from those who spend their lives behind bars.

Indeed, we are experiencing much the same phenomenon that journalist Ta-Nehisi Coates ascribes to those who are banished to a “gray wasteland far beyond the promises and protections the government grants its other citizens” : a sickening feeling, a desire to sleep, hopelessness, shame, rage, disbelief, clinginess to the past and that which is familiar, and then eventually resignation and acceptance of our new “normal.”

All that we are experiencing—the sense of dread at what is coming down the pike, the desperation, the apathy about government corruption, the deeply divided partisanship, the carnivalesque political spectacles, the public displays of violence, the nostalgia for the past—are part of the dying refrain of an America that is fading fast.

No longer must the government obey the law.

Likewise, “we the people” are no longer shielded by the rule of law.

While the First Amendment—which gives us a voice—is being muzzled, the Fourth Amendment—which protects us from being bullied, badgered, beaten, broken and spied on by government agents—is being disemboweled. More

ALTERNATIVE NEWS REVISITED

1 Comment

new-logo25Author,Chuck Frank

 

Gutenberg Press1The Recreated Johann Gutenberg Press International Printing Museum, Carson, California

The printing revolution, was without a doubt, the main catalyst behind the Renaissance of Europe along with the Age of Enlightenment. Apart from the early periods of painstaking handwritten papers and scrolls, the invention of the Gutenberg printing press catapulted a new era of mass communications into orbit, which began in the 1440’s. Johann Gutenberg’s primary objective was a printing press that would mass produce the Holy Bible. Yet, this remarkable invention also brought a mountain of additional old and new knowledge to the ends of the earth which had never been read by most people in the history of the world.

The relatively unrestricted circulation of information and also any revolutionary and philosophical ideas, began to cross borders and oceans and opened the eyes of millions who had for centuries been either living in the dark ages or had been subjects to rogue political and religious orders that lorded their authority over the masses for centuries on end, but for the sake their own power, control and money. And for those who were either lords, kings or priests, the new “information age” of newspapers and books threatened not only the elite’s comfort zone, but their own authority which they exercised upon the people. Thus, Kings, Emperors, and the Church of Rome, sought ways to deal with the increasing literacy rate that was now muddying the waters of secular, political and religious doctrinal beliefs. As a consequence, and which may be of great interest to many today is this. These royal elite’s then devised a culture of censorship which in effect guarded their agendas and was very similar to what our own mainstream media is presently doing today, whether it be in America or any other country in the modern world.

Historically, one example of the early examples of censorship occurred in the early period during the reign of the German Emperor Charles V (1500–1558) At that time, censorship was primarily driven by the Protestant Reformation which gave rise to a flood of pamphlets and contentious and argumentative texts which raised tensions among the population of the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation. The primary aim of censorship which followed saw resolutions passed by various Imperial entities in order to suppress these publications.
More

Warning Against Efforts to Muzzle Citizens & Avoid Transparency, Rutherford Institute Issues 1st Amendment Guidelines for Public Meetings

Leave a comment

For Immediate Release: March 9, 2016

RutherfordHeader_2

CHARLOTTESVILLE, Va. —Warning that representative government works best when the government’s actions are fully disclosed and citizens are allowed to speak honestly and openly to their elected representatives and other citizens without fear of retribution, The Rutherford Institute has issued guidelines for local boards, commissions and councils to consider and follow in order to best assure that the fundamental First Amendment rights of citizens are respected.

In recent years, numerous local boards and commissions have attempted to establish rules and regulations governing speech at public meetings that limit the content and manner of public expression in an attempt to “dial down” the intensity of these meetings and impose a more “civil” discourse. However, these restrictions on expression often run afoul of the First Amendment, making local officials self-appointed censors and arbitrary arbiters of what speech is and is not proper.

The Rutherford Institute’s Public Meetings Guidelines are available at www.rutherford.org.

“Until recently, local government meetings have remained one of the few legitimate forums available to citizens to personally address their government representatives about decisions that have immediate and substantial impact on their day-to-day lives,” said constitutional attorney John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute and author of Battlefield America: The War on the American People. “Unfortunately, officials at all levels of government have succeeded in insulating themselves from their constituents through the use of free speech zones, electronic town hall meetings, security barriers, regulations restricting what is said at public meetings, and other tactics that run afoul of the First Amendment’s safeguards for free speech, public assembly and the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances. These guidelines are intended to empower citizens to push back against those who would stifle the ardor of citizens, arbitrarily silence critics and impede efforts to assure transparency in government.”

The Rutherford Institute issued its guidelines after being contacted by residents of Charlottesville, Va., who were concerned about draconian changes to the City’s public comment rules regarding the content, duration and protocol for making public comments at City Council meetings. The City’s revised procedures include restrictions on video recording, a prohibition on “improper” comments, exclusion of individuals for disruptive or disorderly conduct, and limitations on who may be addressed. In denouncing the guidelines as overly vague and ambiguous, Institute attorneys have advised City officials that the changes to their meeting procedures violate the letter and spirit of Constitution by imposing obstacles to transparency and citizen engagement.

In calling on the Charlottesville City Council to revoke the rules it has adopted in order to ensure that Council meetings remain a forum for free speech, the Institute warned that if the City is serious about being a leader in the fight for open government, it must demonstrate a commitment to public participation in the democratic process. In 2015, Rutherford Institute attorneys advised the Greene County Board of Supervisors (also in Virginia) against rules adopted governing the open forum public comment period during Board meetings that could be used to censor unpopular but constitutionally protected speech.

The Rutherford Institute, a national nonprofit civil liberties organization based in Charlottesville, Va., defends individuals whose constitutional rights have been violated and educates the public about threats to their freedoms. The Institute has spent more than 30 years advocating for transparency in government and championing the First Amendment right of the citizenry to speak candidly and openly to their elected representatives and other citizens.

This press release is also available at www.rutherford.org.

Exclusive: an interview with fired Professor James Tracy

1 Comment

While all the questions and posturing about professor Tracey……….did anyone but me notice at no time have any one of his accusers stated emphatically that he was WRONG? That the research was in error? Instead they claimed copyright infringement of what is supposed to be their sons picture! Who the hell does that if this tragedy actually happened?

Joy Karega Pokes 800 Pound Jewish Gorilla

1 Comment

apparently the admin at Oberlin have something those at FAU have been unable to acquire…a spine! And an understanding of the 1st Amendment of free speech.

Rutherford Institute Warns Against Government Attempts to Intimidate Journalists by Prosecuting Radio Shock Jock Pete Santilli Over Oregon Standoff

2 Comments

RutherfordHeader_2

PORTLAND, Oregon — Warning against attempts by the government to intimidate journalists whose reporting portrays the government in a negative light or encourages citizens to challenge government injustice and wrongdoing, attorneys for The Rutherford Institute have weighed in on the government’s arrest and ongoing prosecution of radio shock jock Pete Santilli. Santilli, a new media journalist who broadcasts his news reports over YouTube and streaming internet radio, was arrested and has been charged along with seven other individuals connected to the recent occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in Burns, Oregon. Santilli is the only journalist among those who have been charged with conspiracy to impede federal officers from discharging their duties by use of force, intimidation, or threats. In advising the public defender about the First Amendment principles at play in Santilli’s case, Rutherford Institute attorneys took issue with the government’s case against Santilli as laid out in its Criminal Complaint, which makes clear that Santilli is being charged solely as a reporter of information and not as an accomplice to any criminal activity.

The Rutherford Institute’s memorandum on the First Amendment rights of journalists and the government’s complaint regarding Santilli are available at www.rutherford.org.

“The FBI’s prosecution of this radio shock jock is consistent with the government’s ongoing attempts to intimidate members of the press who portray the government in a less than favorable light,” said constitutional attorney John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute and author of Battlefield America: The War on the American People. “This is not a new tactic. During the protests in Ferguson, Missouri, and Baltimore, Maryland, numerous journalists were arrested while covering the regions’ civil unrest and the conditions that spawned that unrest. These attempts to muzzle the press were clearly concerted, top-down efforts to restrict the fundamental First Amendment rights of the public and the press. Not only does this tactic silence individual journalists, but it has a chilling effect on the press as a whole, signaling that they will become the target of the government if they provide reporting on these events with a perspective that casts the government in a bad light.” More

The Emergence of Orwellian Newspeak and the Death of Free Speech

3 Comments

RutherfordHeader_2
By John W. Whitehead
June 29, 2015

This commentary is also available at www.rutherford.org.

“If you don’t want a man unhappy politically, don’t give him two sides to a question to worry him; give him one. Better yet, give him none. Let him forget there is such a thing as war. If the government is inefficient, top-heavy, and tax-mad, better it be all those than that people worry over it…. Give the people contests they win by remembering the words to more popular songs or the names of state capitals or how much corn Iowa grew last year. Cram them full of noncombustible data, chock them so damned full of ‘facts’ they feel stuffed, but absolutely ‘brilliant’ with information. Then they’ll feel they’re thinking, they’ll get a sense of motion without moving. And they’ll be happy, because facts of that sort don’t change.” ― Ray Bradbury, Fahrenheit 451

How do you change the way people think? You start by changing the words they use.

In totalitarian regimes—a.k.a. police states—where conformity and whitehad bokcompliance are enforced at the end of a loaded gun, the government dictates what words can and cannot be used. In countries where the police state hides behind a benevolent mask and disguises itself as tolerance, the citizens censor themselves, policing their words and thoughts to conform to the dictates of the mass mind.

Even when the motives behind this rigidly calibrated reorientation of societal language appear well-intentioned—discouraging racism, condemning violence, denouncing discrimination and hatred—inevitably, the end result is the same: intolerance, indoctrination and infantilism.

It’s political correctness disguised as tolerance, civility and love, but what it really amounts to is the chilling of free speech and the demonizing of viewpoints that run counter to the cultural elite.

As a society, we’ve become fearfully polite, careful to avoid offense, and largely unwilling to be labeled intolerant, hateful, closed-minded or any of the other toxic labels that carry a badge of shame today. The result is a nation where no one says what they really think anymore, at least if it runs counter to the prevailing views. Intolerance is the new scarlet letter of our day, a badge to be worn in shame and humiliation, deserving of society’s fear, loathing and utter banishment from society.

For those “haters” who dare to voice a different opinion, retribution is swift: they will be shamed, shouted down, silenced, censored, fired, cast out and generally relegated to the dust heap of ignorant, mean-spirited bullies who are guilty of various “word crimes.”

We have entered a new age where, as commentator Mark Steyn notes, “we have to tiptoe around on ever thinner eggshells” and “the forces of ‘tolerance’ are intolerant of anything less than full-blown celebratory approval.”

In such a climate of intolerance, there can be no freedom speech, expression or thought.

Yet what the forces of political correctness fail to realize is that they owe a debt to the so-called “haters” who have kept the First Amendment robust. From swastika-wearing Neo-Nazis marching through Skokie, Illinois, and underaged cross burners to “God hates fags” protesters assembled near military funerals, those who have inadvertently done the most to preserve the right to freedom of speech for all have espoused views that were downright unpopular, if not hateful.

Until recently, the U.S. Supreme Court has reiterated that the First Amendment prevents the government from proscribing speech, or even expressive conduct, because it disapproves of the ideas expressed. However, that long-vaunted, Court-enforced tolerance for “intolerant” speech has now given way to a paradigm in which the government can discriminate freely against First Amendment activity that takes place within a government forum. Justifying such discrimination as “government speech,” the Court ruled that the Texas Dept. of Motor Vehicles could refuse to issue specialty license plate designs featuring a Confederate battle flag. Why? Because it was deemed offensive.

The Court’s ruling came on the heels of a shooting in which a 21-year-old white gunman killed nine African-Americans during a Wednesday night Bible study at a church in Charleston, N.C. The two events, coupled with the fact that gunman Dylann Roof was reportedly pictured on several social media sites with a Confederate flag, have resulted in an emotionally charged stampede to sanitize the nation’s public places of anything that smacks of racism, starting with the Confederate flag and ballooning into a list that includes the removal of various Civil War monuments.

These tactics are nothing new. This nation, birthed from puritanical roots, has always struggled to balance its love of liberty with its moralistic need to censor books, music, art, language, symbols etc. As author Ray Bradbury notes, “There is more than one way to burn a book. And the world is full of people running about with lit matches.”

Indeed, thanks to the rise of political correctness, the population of book burners, censors, and judges has greatly expanded over the years so that they run the gamut from left-leaning to right-leaning and everything in between. By eliminating words, phrases and symbols from public discourse, the powers-that-be are sowing hate, distrust and paranoia. In this way, by bottling up dissent, they are creating a pressure cooker of stifled misery that will eventually blow.

For instance, the word “Christmas” is now taboo in the public schools, as is the word “gun.” Even childish drawings of soldiers result in detention or suspension under rigid zero tolerance policies. On college campuses, trigger warnings are being used to alert students to any material they might read, see or hear that might upset them, while free speech zones restrict anyone wishing to communicate a particular viewpoint to a specially designated area on campus. Things have gotten so bad that comedians such as Chris Rock and Jerry Seinfeld refuse to perform stand-up routines to college crowds anymore.

Clearly, the country is undergoing a nervous breakdown, and the news media is helping to push us to the brink of insanity by bombarding us with wall-to-wall news coverage and news cycles that change every few days.

In this way, it’s difficult to think or debate, let alone stay focused on one thing—namely, holding the government accountable to abiding by the rule of law—and the powers-that-be understand this.

As I document in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, regularly scheduled trivia and/or distractions keep the citizenry tuned into the various breaking news headlines and entertainment spectacles and tuned out to the government’s steady encroachments on our freedoms. These sleight-of-hand distractions and diversions are how you control a population, either inadvertently or intentionally, advancing a political agenda agenda without much opposition from the citizenry.

Professor Jacques Ellul studied this phenomenon of overwhelming news, short memories and the use of propaganda to advance hidden agendas. “One thought drives away another; old facts are chased by new ones,” wrote Ellul.

Under these conditions there can be no thought. And, in fact, modern man does not think about current problems; he feels them. He reacts, but he does not understand them any more than he takes responsibility for them. He is even less capable of spotting any inconsistency between successive facts; man’s capacity to forget is unlimited. This is one of the most important and useful points for the propagandists, who can always be sure that a particular propaganda theme, statement, or event will be forgotten within a few weeks.

Already, the outrage over the Charleston shooting and racism are fading from the news headlines, yet the determination to censor the Confederate symbol remains. Before long, we will censor it from our thoughts, sanitize it from our history books, and eradicate it from our monuments without even recalling why. The question, of course, is what’s next on the list to be banned?

It was for the sake of preserving individuality and independence that James Madison, the author of the Bill of Rights, fought for a First Amendment that protected the “minority” against the majority, ensuring that even in the face of overwhelming pressure, a minority of one—even one who espouses distasteful viewpoints—would still have the right to speak freely, pray freely, assemble freely, challenge the government freely, and broadcast his views in the press freely.

This freedom for those in the unpopular minority constitutes the ultimate tolerance in a free society. Conversely, when we fail to abide by Madison’s dictates about greater tolerance for all viewpoints, no matter how distasteful, the end result is always the same: an indoctrinated, infantilized citizenry that marches in lockstep with the governmental regime.

Some of this past century’s greatest dystopian literature shows what happens when the populace is transformed into mindless automatons. In Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451, reading is banned and books are burned in order to suppress dissenting ideas, while televised entertainment is used to anesthetize the populace and render them easily pacified, distracted and controlled.

In Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World, serious literature, scientific thinking and experimentation are banned as subversive, while critical thinking is discouraged through the use of conditioning, social taboos and inferior education. Likewise, expressions of individuality, independence and morality are viewed as vulgar and abnormal.

And in George Orwell’s 1984, Big Brother does away with all undesirable and unnecessary words and meanings, even going so far as to routinely rewrite history and punish “thoughtcrimes.” In this dystopian vision of the future, the Thought Police serve as the eyes and ears of Big Brother, while the Ministry of Peace deals with war and defense, the Ministry of Plenty deals with economic affairs (rationing and starvation), the Ministry of Love deals with law and order (torture and brainwashing), and the Ministry of Truth deals with news, entertainment, education and art (propaganda). The mottos of Oceania: WAR IS PEACE, FREEDOM IS SLAVERY, and IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH.

All three—Bradbury, Huxley and Orwell—had an uncanny knack for realizing the future, yet it is Orwell who best understood the power of language to manipulate the masses. Orwell’s Big Brother relied on Newspeak to eliminate undesirable words, strip such words as remained of unorthodox meanings and make independent, non-government-approved thought altogether unnecessary. To give a single example, as psychologist Erich Fromm illustrates in his afterword to 1984:

The word free still existed in Newspeak, but it could only be used in such statements as “This dog is free from lice” or “This field is free from weeds.” It could not be used in its old sense of “politically free” or “intellectually free,” since political and intellectual freedom no longer existed as concepts….

Where we stand now is at the juncture of OldSpeak (where words have meanings, and ideas can be dangerous) and Newspeak (where only that which is “safe” and “accepted” by the majority is permitted). The power elite has made their intentions clear: they will pursue and prosecute any and all words, thoughts and expressions that challenge their authority.

This is the final link in the police state chain.

Having been reduced to a cowering citizenry—mute in the face of elected officials who refuse to represent us, helpless in the face of police brutality, powerless in the face of militarized tactics and technology that treat us like enemy combatants on a battlefield, and naked in the face of government surveillance that sees and hears all—we have nowhere left to go. Our backs are to the walls. From this point on, we have only two options: go down fighting, or capitulate and betray our loved ones, our friends and our selves by insisting that, as a brainwashed Winston Smith does at the end of Orwell’s 1984, yes, 2+2 does equal 5.

WC: 1909

 

Howard Lyman (featured in “Cowspiracy” and author of “Mad Cowboy”) on Wild Horse & Burro Radio (Wed., 5/13/15)

7 Comments

painy

Wild_Horse_Burro_Radio_LogoJoin us on Wild Horse Wednesday (*SM) , May 13, 2015

1:00 pm PST … 2:00 pm MST … 3:00 pm CST … 4:00 pm EST

Listen to the live show Here!

You can also listen to the show on your phone by calling (917) 388-4520.

This is a 1 hour show.  It will be archived so you can listen to it anytime.

If you have a question for Howard, please email it to ppj1@hush.com More

Fake Disney measles outbreak: send in the clowns

1 Comment

Jon Rappoport's Blog

Fake Disney measles outbreak: send in the clowns

by Jon Rappoport

February 15, 2015

NoMoreFakeNews.com

“Lacking any real science proving we have a serious 2015 measles outbreak, and lacking any science supporting the idea that the measles vaccine is safe and effective, we’re looking at a psyop called The Disney Story. A fake horror movie happening at ‘the happiest place on Earth,’ Disneyland. It’s a perfect way to scare the moms into vaccinating their kiddies. If the happiest place on Earth isn’t safe, then where is safety? ‘Mickey Mouse infects children.’ Cue the ominous music. ‘Cotton candy dream turns into nightmare.’ ‘Send in the clowns, carriers of the virus.’” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

150 measles cases. No deaths.

Dangerous outbreak? Are you kidding?

Mainstream media recalling past problems with the measles vaccine? Are you kidding? The news brushes off what happened 24 hours ago.

Medical scholars and historians are no…

View original post 683 more words

Nevada’s Waco: BLM more violent than the FBI?

14 Comments

strip banner

new-logo25Marti Oakley        © copyright 2014 All rights reserved

_____________________________________________________________________

As “troops” are assembled against one lone rancher, the assault on private property rights and 1st Amendment rights are being ratcheted up at the Bundy Ranch in Nevada.

~~~~~~~~

 From Ben Swann:

UPDATE: Strike teams of 15-20 agents are attempting to take the cattle and often in the process killing and burying the cattle in the desert. A group of roughly 100 peaceful protestors attempted to stop them and got in front of a convoy of agents in an attempt to call in the local sheriff as they perceived this as an illegal action. BLM agents began violently attacking the protestors, throwing women to the ground with a number of men being tazed. Agents ended up retreating after their initial attack. Protestors are awaiting and anticipating a more forceful response and requesting assistance from all freedom fighters/lovers in the SW U.S. and nationwide.”

~~~~~~~~

Across the country, but most especially in the Western states, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has revealed itself to be nothing more than an uncontrollable and direct threat to the sovereignty and economic stability of the states. At issue currently, is the massive militarized preparation for the assault on the Clive Bundy ranch in Nevada, orchestrated by the BLM.

Having already illegally seized 277 of the Bundy’s 900 head of cattle, the BLM with the cooperation of so-called “professional cowboys” and with the willful blindness of Nevada’s governor, state representatives and senators, the Bundy’s stand prepared to defend themselves, their land and property rights, even to the point of death. The BLM has indicated it is more than willing to oblige the Bundy’s, setting an example to other ranchers or property rights activists that the BLM will do what it pleases and no one will stop them.

This is what the BLM and its agents are doing to other Americans.  Regardless of your  position on the Wild horse & Burro’s, or your position on cattle operations, your focus here should be the violent assault on a private property owner by agents employed by a federal corporation that routinely violates property rights, and rights of the individual to benefit the federal government.  If this man loses this battle, if we do not support him in his efforts to protect what is rightfully his, we all lose!

As the preparations by the BLM and its thugs continues, the level of testosterone oozing from every pore of agents dressed in military gear, flying military style helicopters overhead and brandishing weaponry and personal gear more suited for a military conflict, is literally dripping off the mesquite. Nothing is quite as invigorating as being part of a military style operation against one lone individual, knowing that that individual has little or no defense against the assault you are about to launch against them. And, also knowing that regardless of how unwarranted, illegal or heinous your actions are, you will never be held accountable. More

Older Entries

%d bloggers like this: