Home

MISS LIBERTY AND THE SURVEILLANCE FACTOR

Leave a comment

Author, Chuck Frank

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

While millions are glued to their cellphones and national and international news clips rule, the mainstream people are distracted by a psycho-political assault upon their minds.  The club of mind benders from Silicon Valley, the New York Times and other other lackluster cellphone news outlets are meant to program and indoctrinate hundreds of millions with political correctness and thought control but will also fleece the flock with advertisements galore.  So, while the a polluted river of information floods the nations to keep the people glued to either their cellphone, TV, movies or a PC Game, our dear Miss Liberty and freedom continues to slip away at light speed.  And how is it that so many people are either oblivious to this fact or perhaps not even aware of it?  Well, it is high time that we the people come together and deal with the greatest worldly heist of freedom that has ever  happened in the history of the world.  One may say that this is not possible when looking at past regimes where Kings and tyrants had ruled their kingdoms with tyranny and terror, however, I disagree with this assessment.

Since 9/11, when the towers fell, a massive warrant-less surveillance system imposed by George W. Bush became the beginning of the framework for a society which has now been retooled, so to speak, as a post 1984 Big Brother state. The U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights remain under attack by certain factions within the government, whether it be the courts, the deep state,, the federal and state agencies, universities, former Presidents, or certain members of Congress within the two party system.  And as the American people try to navigate through a world which has greatly changed since the last century they find it harder and harder to remain free in a nation that fought for freedom abroad but now no longer offers the very lesson and life that originally came with more compassion, fewer laws and greater opportunity for all.

With the rising surveillance factor, in regard to cellphones, the governments of the world, such as America, are already invading our privacy with unconstitutional warrant-less surveillance, whether our cellphone is either on or off.  So if a person’s texts or their private conversations are being recorded and placed in a database cloud to where one day that information may be used against them in a court hearing, and possibly  with “no jury”, then my friend, this nation and other countries would have fallen into the greatest tyrannical New World Order plot of all time.  And while China is already creating a surveillance super state, has not America been working at building a high tech, post 1984 Super State before Red China even had super computers?  And guess how China got their first super computers?  You got it.  American corporations sold them to China years ago.  It’s all in the game.  And lest all of the world becomes part of the China syndrome, to where nations tap into their own super sinful surveillance systems, ALL FREEDOM WILL BE LOST.

Police can get access to your cellphone data even after a Supreme Court ruled in favor of digital privacy advocates.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/police-can-get-access-to-your-cellphone-data-even-after-the-supreme-court-ruling/

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

IN SEARCH OF THE MORAL COMPASS

3 Comments

new-logo25Author,
Chuck Frank

A Ship's Compass 1No matter who wins the election in November and whether it is rigged or not, we the people of America still have a major job to do and it is all dependent upon not how we vote but it all comes down to what is within our own selves and what we believe in. Therefore, the integrity and the character of a person needs to be fashioned though careful choices and finding their own way through the storms of life.

Yet, how can this be accomplished?

In the last 50 or more years there has been a major shift in the norms of the country to where political correctness, philosophical theories and man made principles have entered into the equation, but has this been for the people’s benefit or ended up being harmful?
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

 

The “Ruthie Report”

Leave a comment

The Ruthie Report on Thursdays! More

The OCCUPATION FORCES are Marxist Progressives:A True Tale of Treason, Tyranny and Looting.

Leave a comment

  Newswithviews.com

by: Andrew C. Wallace

“Now a word to those ignorant followers of the Marxist Progressives in both parties who say that we can’t return to an unlimited manufacturing based prosperity when we also have the largest protected free market in the world to absorb the production, and the government has been taken off our backs. Of course this is the guaranteed, and proven result of a Constitutional Free Enterprise System, read your history”

The super rich Elites and their Forbearers have controlled the corporations, media, and our government officials for more than 100 years allowing them, with the help of foundations to ignore the Constitution, resulting in looting, tyranny, treason and death. These Occupation Forces are greedy, power mad Marxist Progressive enemies of the people, but you must rejoice because for the first time in history our people know they are being unconstitutionally screwed. More

Where Did Political Correctness Come From?

4 Comments

I recall the first time I heard the term “political correctness.” I was with my then (1990) girlfriend in a restaurant when she invited one of her friends to come over and sit with us.

As it turned out, the fellow was a gay neolib type, with, not one, but two wire hoop earrings. During our conversation, as I was in the middle of saying something (I don’t recall what), he blurted out, “Why, you’re politically incorrect!” I was a bit taken aback by this and said, “I’m what?” He repeated himself and it was then that I got an inkling of what he meant. I said, “You know, many years ago, we used to call it being a ‘non-conformist’.” Then I went on with what I had been saying before I was so rudely interrupted by this self-appointed speech Nazi.

Since then, our entire culture has become so saturated with this “P.C.” virus that few people question it anymore and almost no one has any idea what its origins are. Most assume it is a product of the sixties “counter-culture,” but that culture was, itself, a product of the CIA, the Establishment and cultural Marxism. The actual origins of the concept go back much earlier, though, to 1917 and the beginnings of the Soviet Union (which, by the way, was the creation of the same international bankers who gave us the Federal Reserve and the income tax three years earlier).

Basically, the concept of “political correctness” is part of the same Soviet dogma that gave us such terms as “defect,” used to mean dropping out of Soviet society or defying the rule of the state. The implication was that one must surely be insane or mentally defective to want to leave the Soviet Union or to rebel against the state’s authority. With this concept firmly established, the Soviet state found it quite easy to lock away dissidents in gulags – or to silence them permanently with a bullet through the head. What made this so easy was that the Soviet state had instilled in its enslaved people a self-policing mindset in which individuals were so brainwashed as to eventually accept that such anti-statist thinking must surely be a sign of mental illness. Indeed, Soviets who rebelled were sent to state-run “mental hospitals,” which were little more than prisons. It is from this self-imposed mental straight jacket that the concept of political correctness emerged.

Today, political correctness has become firmly established in our culture and the same self-policing mindset is at work among millions of people who have no conscious awareness that they are practicing it. An entire generation has now grown up with it and has unquestioningly accepted it as the norm. This makes those individuals who are susceptible to its influence much more vulnerable to manipulation than those of us grew up at a time when no such fetters were placed on our minds and our free expression.

%d bloggers like this: