"No Go Zones" in America? A Look at the Reality and the Possibility

Following my recent article on "sanctuary cities", I came across an article on "no go zones" here in the United States. Well, that certainly got my attention since these so-called "no go zones" were all Muslim in nature. Some were apparently just a small community centered around a mosque while others were said to be much more sinister in their purpose. Typically these were described as Muslim "terrorist training camps". If true, then that's certainly something I wanted to know more about.

According to the articles (I say "articles" since, in my research, I came across other articles which made similar claims), there are somewhere around nine states which harbor these encampments. These include the West Coast states of California, Oregon, and Washington, along with Florida, Arizona, Colorado, Texas and Oklahoma. In addition, the Mid-West states of Missouri, Indiana, Illinois, Ohio, and Michigan were included. Other states, such as New York, Alaska, Massachusetts, Virginia, and North Carolina also appear. A few articles mention Alabama, Tennessee and Kentucky.

The articles reminded me of the same type of fear generated by claims of neo-Nazi/White Supremacists having similar types of closed off communities in places like Idaho or Montana back in the 70's and early 80's, as well as Black Supremacists living in de-facto sealed off urban neighborhoods in Detroit, Philadelphia, Chicago, and elsewhere during the late 60's and early 70's; places where even the cops allegedly feared to tread. Of course, from the late 1960's through the 1990's there were numerous religious or cult communities which were closed to outsiders scattered all the country, though mostly in the Western states.

The idea of wanting to live in a community of like minded individuals isn't new to this country. Almost from the beginning, Quakers, Puritans, and even Catholics segregated off together. Later, as the population grew, we saw Jews, Poles, Germans, Irish, Lithuanians, Italians, and others settle in their own ethnic/religious communities. Some groups, like Blacks and Chinese, followed suit, although this was partly the desire to be together (safety in numbers) and partly due to bigotry.

In fact, it's actually only been relatively recent that these type of communities have begun to break up, although newer groups such as Hispanics, Africans, Bosnians, and, yes, Muslims, have tended to cluster together (Hispanics from poorer and less educated countries like Costa Rica, Honduras, and El Salvador) tend to stay close to Spanish speaking Roman Catholic parishes while Muslims may remain close to a particular mosque which has connections to their hometown, sect, family, etc. That's also why small ethnic businesses are usually established nearby; everyone likes familiarity. We are, after all, a tribal species.

So, is there any truth to these articles, particularly that they are engaged in terrorist training? That's hard to say. Certainly, the FBI, ATF (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms) along with Homeland Security would want to know (I would imagine the IRS would also have more than a passing interest too). Naturally, we all remember how well the Feds handled Ruby Ridge and the Branch Davidian Compound in Waco (sarcasm intended).

In the past, terrorist acts in this country have tended to be either comprised of a small group (usually two or three individuals, with the exception of the cowardly 9/11 attack), or more often than not, the lone individual. In fact, the majority of these individuals described themselves as "self radicalized"; usually starting with a psychological "kinship" with the terrorist group's cause, and then become increasingly more radicalized through articles, books, and especially the internet; particularly via websites produced by these groups. These websites are usually very well designed with terrific graphics, and typically done in wide range of languages to give them that "personal" touch.

As a rule, the websites are divided into three segments: propaganda, ideology, and the "how to" section. The first two are pretty self explanatory. They are designed to attract those who may have a curiosity (perhaps under the auspices of trying to find out the "other side" of the story). They also present a skewed worldview as you might expect, complete with images of throngs of cheering well-wishers as their conquering heroes march into a newly "liberated" neighborhood or town complete with smiling men and happy children (a surefire tug at the ole heartstrings). They include "correct" religious instruction, especially for those interested in a do-it-yourself religious conversion, along with the proper religious diet and even physical training programs for that jihadi on the go!

The last part is where the newly recruited ideologue comes in. These individuals are typically encouraged to come and join the fight against--insert cause "here"-- where you'll be rewarded with whatever lights your fuse. However, if you are unable to make the trip, no problem! These websites come complete with videos instructing the dumbest of would-be terrorists with information on how they too can be become a mass murderer in just a few easy-to-learn lessons! They can learn everything from simple harassment techniques, improving their shooting skills, to the ever popular improvised bomb making. Perhaps the best thing about these sites are the ease at which they can be setup and accessed at little to no risk to the actual terrorists.

Nevertheless, while these type of sites do exist, they are pretty closely monitored by the NSA, FBI, Homeland Security, and Interpol (and thankfully so). Naturally, there are certain mosques where Imams (religious leaders similar to a minister) of questionable moral character may secretly operate their own illegal terrorist training cells. These rarely ever contain anymore than just a small handful of utterly devout students. The goal is to create as many disconnected and independent cells as possible. That way, if one is compromised, it doesn't affect the others (as expected, these eventually show up on the radar too). As an aside, this technique was used to great success by the various resistance groups in Nazi occupied Europe; India during British colonial rule; Vietnam and Southeast Asia.

However, it's important to point out here that the majority of terrorist attacks in the U.S. haven't come from Muslim or any other religious groups. They tend to be the loner with their own unique cause, be it being snubbed by students at school or a girl, feeling like an outcast, pissed off at an employer or fellow employees, and so forth. Despite media propaganda, not all mass shooters are "Right Wingers" either. The man who attacked the Congressional Baseball Charity game singled out Republicans. The latest two mass murders were done by individuals who were members of Antifa, the so-called "Anti-Fascist" group which acts more like Hitler's Brownshirts or the Communist "Red Faction" than not. Nevertheless, in terms of voter registration, the majority are Democrats. More importantly, they are also usually young, male, disenchanted with life, and more often than not, mentally ill.

Europe, on the other hand, does have "no go zones" in truest sense where Sharia law is enforced, whether you're a Muslim or not. In fact, there is an active and ongoing attempt to spread its influence beyond the localized Muslim communities. There is little doubt that religious radicalization is alive and well, along with the possibly active terrorist training (we know rape gangs not just exist, but that there is actual training on how to organize rape gangs). Without a question, the attacks which have taken place in Europe have had a strong religious extremist undertone whether the governments there have the courage to admit it or not.

As for the "no go zones" in the U.S., they really don't exist, at least not like they do in Europe. Yes, some are restricted to some religious or some other denominator, but as I've said, that's hardly new nor does it constitute an actual "no go zone" since law enforcement and first responders have access. Historically, the biggest concern has not been keeping out but in preventing people from leaving (the "Moonies" and Jim Jones' "People's Temple" come to mind), which is why it's important for police access. Perhaps the most often overlooked "no go zones" are Native American reservations, which are defacto separate and semi-independent nations within the U.S. though they are freely visited.

Do they stockpile weapons, ammo, or conduct paramilitary training? Perhaps, but so far nothing has surfaced by the Feds, but that doesn't mean that something isn't happening. After all, both the White and Black supremacists groups back in the day conducted paramilitary training. On the other hand, perhaps their training involves is no more than of a matter of providing internal security (reservations have their own police for instance). Unfortunately, until they either act or the Feds find something that's pretty compelling, it's virtually impossible to know for sure. Not very comforting is it?

Personally, I don't really have an issue with a group of like minded individuals deciding to set up their own little community and living a peaceful existence off the grid. During the late 60's and early 70's, there was a proliferation of so-called "Hippie communes" which attempted to do the same thing. Their goal was to self-sufficiency; grow their own food (sell or trade any excess), make their own clothes, and so forth. The vast majority of these failed after a few months or years, but a couple did succeed and lasted for a couple of decades.

Of course, they lacked the defining religious element. If that element is benign, then there should be no problem. If it's not, then it could become a breeding ground for disaster. The treatment of White and Black supremacists communities in the past have tended to be more than a little heavy handed as well. Given how the Federal Government has acted in the past, there is always the possibility that one misstep could trigger another Waco or worse.

The Bill of Rights is perhaps one of Mankind's greatest accomplishments, along with the Constitution. They are also uniquely American. We were born out of a desire to be free from government's interference. That included the right to associate with whom we want, to protect ourselves, and to believe in what we wanted. However, time has tempered those ideals. For instance, felons aren't free to associate with other felons. Perhaps that's a good idea. Perhaps not. We are free, in theory at least, to live with whomever we want, which would include those of like race or faith. But how about practice? Can a neighborhood association specifically say only Chinese or Hispanics are allowed? Nope. What about only Jews or Baptists in a particular neighborhood? Hardly.

Can we buy machine guns, flamethrowers, or landmines to protect ourselves? Not a chance. In fact, while the Second Amendment is one of the most important amendments, especially from the perspective of our Founding Fathers, it is also perhaps the most heavily restricted amendment with everything from what you can own, how old you have to be, and where you are allowed to carry it.

In terms of religion, we're free to believe as we choose. We're even allowed to follow certain social and dietary laws without paying a "pew tax" like in some countries. However, what if that religion allowed pedophilia? What about covering covering your face for official identification? What if it allowed so-called "honor killings" (religiously sanctioned murder to "protect" a family's "honor")? How would you feel about the right---and duty---to beat your wife or of restricting her rights under the Bill of Rights? Does their religious laws supplant our secular natural laws (laws bequeath to us simply for being human beings)? What about their religious belief that everyone must conform to their religious laws and traditions regardless of your personal beliefs?

This is what potentially makes these communities different. It's an entirely different culture which follows entirely different laws (in fact, they hold that our secular laws have absolutely no value whatsoever). They believe they have the right to exclude others who do not follow their laws and traditions. They believe in the right and obligation to impose their beliefs on others by any means at their disposal.

Yet, those very things---freedom of association, religion, and even the Second Amendment---are fundamental to America. How are we going to handle this as the Muslim population in America grows and the risk of radicalization increases as we admit those from areas where religious extremism is common along with an anti-West or anti-American sentiment?

Hopefully, it will never become an issue. Hopefully a peaceful coexistence will prevail as it has between others of different races, ethnic groups, and religions. Of course, this worked because we operated under the old "melting pot" concept where immigrants were strongly encouraged to integrate. Today, it's "multiculturalism" where assimilation isn't encouraged or even considered necessary! Obviously this hasn't worked well at all in Europe. Can the American temperament prevail where the European has thus far failed? So far these communities have been peaceful. Let's hope it stays that way.



Muslim Terrorist Training Camp Found In Alabama

Muslim of the Americas: Enclaves in the U.S.

Center for Immigration Studies: No Go Zones and Assimilation

No Go Zones: Alt Right fantasy or a new face of Europe?

The Catholic World Report: Raheem Kassem's No Go Zones is unsettling, necessary reading

The Significance of Julian Assange and His Arrest

On April 11th, the co-founder of WikiLeaks, Julian Assange was arrested by British Police. Assange spent seven years living in an Ecuadorian consulate compound in London to avoid extradition to Sweden originally, and to the US on conspiracy charges and computer hacking. The conspiracy charges are in conjunction with former Army private and intelligence analysis Bradley Manning, who now goes by the name Chelsea Manning. Assange, who is 47 years old, had originally sought sanctuary over alleged rape charges of two women in Sweden and skipping bail. As it turned out, neither of the women actually filed rape charges, but were attempting locate Assange, whom they claimed knowingly transmitted a STD. However, those charges were dropped long ago and Sweden has shown no interest in reopening them.

Over the years, there's been several attempts to force Assange out, including attempts to kidnap him from the London compound. However, yesterday, Equator withdrew its "invitation" and the London Metropolitan Police were finally successful in "getting their man" just as Ecuador signed a 4.2 billion loan deal with the International Monetary Fund (the IMF). Assange is expected to be extradited back to the US as quickly as possible in order to stand trial. His crime, authorities claim, is collusion with the Russians (yes, them again) using hacked documents, some of which were allegedly classified and secret. Assange has maintained for years that none of the documentation came as a result of Russian espionage and that the documentation had been secretly provided by a third party.

The real "crime" that Julian Assange stands accused of...and for which he is no doubt guilty...is releasing the information he acquired to the public; information which reveals just how corrupt the US and other governments are. His information "leaks" mentions names, dates, places, and amounts. Assange has outed agencies as well as high profile individuals. Obviously, that makes him a dangerous man, and potentially one with a very short life expediency ahead of him.

Julian Assange is not unlike Edward Snowden, who revealed government secrets; mostly about secret surveillance of individuals like you and me by the federal government and made it public. Meanwhile, social platforms like Facebook, collected volumes of confidential information on its users and in turn either gave or sold it the various government intelligence and other agencies. As a result, Edward Snowden was forced to flee to Russia, where he now lives in exile while others, such as Mark Zuckerberg, the owner of Facebook, are hailed as "patriots" by the ruling political elites.

Thus, I have to wonder if it's not the fact that confidential information was compromised, but the fact that information affecting the ruling elites and government agencies, illegal though it may be, is to remain private and out of the public eye, while our information, regardless of how private and personal, is free and readily available to the government or can be sold without out knowledge or consent. Therefore, we have a situation where there is privacy and the veil of secrecy for some, but not for all.

Some would argue that releasing classified government information, regardless of how it's obtained, or information about public officials, even if it involves criminal activity, is somehow different from making available the private information of ordinary citizens who could, after all, could allegedly be plotting some possible terrorist act or other crime-in-the-making. Enter the "thought police" and where you are presumed guilty first. Meanwhile, wars for profit, running illegal arms deals or taking bribes to the tune of millions or even billions by government officials are seen as somehow okay or beyond public scrutiny. So too is using unsecured servers for the receipt and transfer of classified communication pertaining to national security is apparently permissible.

What we have is obviously a double standard. One set of rules and laws for the ruling Oligarchy and political class of plutocrats, and an entirely different set for you and me. Privacy, as we know, has become largely a thing of the past. Something that once existed decades ago, in the time of our grandparents or great grandparents. We are monitored virtually 24/7. Every time we go out to a public venue, there are cameras, be they security cameras on nearly every corner, in stores, or someone videotaping someone else. Overhead satellites are constantly looking down on us. Their sophistication is to the point where they can literally read the text on our cell phone, but of course, every electronic signal we generate, be it a cell phone call, text, email, landline call, computer log on and site search is tagged and monitored. In fact, every electronic message sent anywhere in the world is monitored. Every single one. We know this, in part, thanks to individuals like Julian Assange, Edward Snowden and groups like Anonymous, bloggers, and vloggers. They ratted out the rats regardless of the political leanings. For the Oligarchy and ruling political elites, people like Assange and Snowden are every bit as dangerous as Osama bin Laden or Saddam Hussein, and his capture is viewed by them in the same light.

So, what is the significance of Julian Assange's arrest and future trial (assuming he makes it that far)? No doubt that first and foremost, government authorities are going to want to know where...precisely...his information comes from. If it's the Russians or Chinese, they are going to want to know name, dates, and times. They will then conduct an exhaustive internal search for a possible mole. Obviously, this could result in a major international fallout. Alternatively, they will want to know if the information comes from a disgruntled employee or someone seeking a little private revenge for some perceived wrong. Perhaps too, the information comes from someone who feels they are a true patriot and was just serving their country by outing secret crimes against this country. Either way, government prosecutors and intelligence agencies are going to want to know who. That potentially put other lives in danger.

But there's something else at risk here, which is far more important and dangerous, and that's freedom of speech as protected by the 1st Amendment. Julian Assange views himself as a investigative journalist (whereas Edward Snowden was a government employee and Whistle-blower). Journalist have long enjoyed "journalistic privilege" which allows them to protect their sources, regardless of who those sources are or where that information comes from (with the possible exception of information which is potentially libelous). Government authorities will likely argue that Assange is no journalist and that he runs a extortion racket or perhaps even a spy operation whose goal is to spread disinformation.

Just as important, if not more so, is what information Assange is still privy to? What "dirt" is he still sitting on, and on whom or what government agency? The reason they'd want to know is to bury or discredit the information, eliminate any leaks or potential threats (in the literal sense of the word), and ensure that there are no further leaks ever again (if this was a movie, it would be something like "The Empire Strikes Back"). In the parlance of the intelligence community, this is about "identification and clean up". Assange's trial will be public. That much is true, but there will be much the public will not be allowed to see or hear. Behind the scenes, the "empire" will be mobilized to snuff out any "resistance" to the status quo; anything which prevents the expansion of its control, which especially includes keeping secrets from the public.

Fascism, as I've often mentioned, didn't die in 1945 in the ashes and rubble of World War II. It survived. If you strip away the racial and nationalistic ideology, it works because it's very effective. Fascism is a partnership between the government and big business. In the past, government acted essentially as the senior partner. Today, that partnership is much more balanced because they very same people routinely move between senior private and public sector positions. Wealthy corporate CEOs and presidents run for office, getting elected with the help of other wealthy and powerful individuals and groups in and out of politics. They serve for a while, often with the aid of these very same folks. When they retire, they go to work as lobbyists or "consultants", calling on their friends still in office and helping other like minded individuals into office, and so the cycle repeats. Partisanship and ideology doesn't really matter. Government contracts and profit do.

Fascism has generally been viewed as "Right-wing" historically because of its nationalism, although in truth it's a merger of elements from the Left as well as the Right, based on a particular country's history, traditions, values, and political structure. That's why the Fascism of Italy differed from the Fascism of Hungary or Romania, which in turned was different from the fascism of Spain, Argentina, Uruguay, Paraguay, or even Nazi Germany.

As modern Fascism's founder, Benito Mussolini once said, Fascism would be better named as corporatism. America have evolved (or "devolved" would be a better description) into an Oligarchy comprised of these super wealthy individuals and their corporations, alongside a professional political class of plutocrats into a modern Fascist state. Instead of pushing a solely nationalistic agenda, it pushes brand loyalties. Something we, a tribalistic human beings, can belong to, be it a product or a sports team. It's something we can rally around while remaining controlled. That's the point of today's political parties. We fight "wars" against "opponents" and reap a sense of victory or defeat. We defend our victory or revenge the defeat. We humiliate or "assassinate " the other side's leaders.

Of course, the more we can be divided, the easier it is to manipulate and control us; playing each other off the other. The more divided we become, the more focused we are on each other and other differences---real or manufactured---and the less attention we pay to the real changes happening around us; the wars over the control of resources or assets, the loss of freedoms such as free speech and the right to privacy along with the growth of a surveillance state, which is nothing more than a neo-police state.

The last thing the ruling Oligarchy and political class wants is for us to know the truth and to unite. That is what is behind the arrest of Julian Assange and others like him, be it vloggers on different ideological sides like Lauren Southern, Abby Martin, Bill Whittle, Stormcloudsgathering.com, or groups like Anonymous, as well as certain bloggers and local talk radio hosts. Government whistle-blowers like Edward Snowden pose a special threat to them because they are on the inside. The arrest of Julian Assange is also as much a message as anything to those who expose light into places where the ruling class wants darkness. It's as much about government transparency and the right of the public to know what's being done in its name as it is about protecting your personal and financial privacy.



Julian Assange: WikiLeaks co-founder arrested in London

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange arrested in London, facing possible US extradition

Ecuador inks 42 billion financing deal with IMF-Moreno

The Groups Anonymous Inspired Are More Powerful than Anonymous Ever Was

5 of the most famous federal whistleblowers

My 2016 Review Which Didn't Go As Planned

I had originally thought about writing a nice summary of the year's event; you know, kind of a wrap up for 2016. However, whenever I started to sit down and get started, something else would catch my attention, usually relating to this, for lack of a better expression, systematic shock by the Left that Donald Trump won and Hillary Clinton, despite the near foregone conclusion that she would crowned as the first female American President, lost and the subsequent trauma which has ensued beginning with denial and then quickly into the anger stage. Now, we seem to be well into the blame stage where, in an effort to find some reason---no matter how absurd or illogical---how America was denied its "queen", how "The Donald" won (never mind the mood of the country for the last eight or even 16 years with Establishment politics), the open takeover of the country by the Oligarchy not to mention international embarrassments--American officials don't bow damn it---and apology tours, a never-ending wars complete with illegal gun deals, the murder of an ambassador as well as open borders for illegals and potential terrorists and so on and so on.

So, now, in a quest to ignore the obvious and distract Americans (again) from the reality of what's actually happening, the DNC and members of the Democratic Party Establishment have, at Hillary's urging, started to fix the blame for Hillary's loss (and there has to be somebody to blame other than the candidate herself) on the Russians. Apparently, according to the current narrative, Russian President Vladimir Putin personally directly Russian intelligence agencies to find ways to "rig" the election against Hillary (you know, like she and Debbie Wasserman did against Bernie Sanders) and to find ways to discredit her (like her failure to use secured servers and cell phones, using the office of Secretary of State to garner "pay-to-play" donations to the Clinton Foundation, attempts to cover-up unauthorized arms deals, failure to come to the assistance of a US Ambassador in Benghazi resulting in his death, the death of three other high value Embassy individuals and destruction of the Embassy itself and the subsequent cover-up, and literally thousands and thousands of pages of other "trivial points" in her words).

The story the current Regime is trying to sell to us via the corporate media, Russian intelligence operatives were able to bypass the National Security Agency, which is the largest and most powerful global communications monitoring network on the planet bar none and can literally monitor, record, and analyze every piece of electronic communication on in near real time; they broke through the communications net of the FBI, Homeland Security, the Defense Intelligence Agency and its electronic monitoring capabilities, as well as the internal security features of the DNC, the US State Department (Hillary's repeated refusal to use secure cell phones or servers surely didn't help). Of course, let's not forget that most of what was released was from the very fingers of Hillary, her campaign staff, her SoS staff, the DNC, and so forth. In other words, what repeatedly damn them was their own words from their own sites, not manufactured emails or other electronic communications---but themselves. Yet, their complaint has been that someone else sabotaged Hillary's chances. Their arrogance is simply amazing, and then to demand an Congressional investigation and enlist the help of the aforementioned intelligence agencies to help find a scapegoat, and who better to blame than the one world leader who saw through both Obama and Hillary than Vladimir Putin.

According to Mr. Putin, he was less than disappointed that Hillary Clinton lost, especially given her oft repeated promises of continuing with President Obama's foreign policies, which has seen a refreeze of relations between Russia and the US, especially in the Middle East where Obama has repeatedly pushed for "boots on the ground" against Russia long standing regional ally, Syria. In addition, Russia has proven to be very successful with the efforts to target and remove terrorists operations, namely ISIS and Al Qaeda, in Syria while the US regards them as "allies" and refers to them as "rebels" since they are opposing President Assad's government and continued to arm and equipment them while outside Syria these same groups are the our enemies. Trump has expressed a willingness to work with Putin in eliminating these individuals wherever they are located or under whatever name they are currently using.

Nevertheless, Putin has repeatedly stated that neither he nor Russian intelligence was involved in rigging the US Presidential Election. Besides, if Russia could bypass our national intelligence network to this degree, I think our priorities need to be reexamined and we need to be more concerned how we could have a failure of this proporation than Hillary's loss. Next, we have Julian Assange, the Founder of WikiLeaks who, you know, actually leaked the information in question. According to Mr. Assange, Russian was not involved in any way in helping WikiLeaks in obtaining any of the volumes of emails and other documents which they've been making available to the public. Mr. Assange has stated, however, that most of his sources have been disillusioned staffers at the DNC, former Clinton associates and campaign volunteers, as well as former Bernie Sanders supporters. Huh. So, here we have a organization with the history of obtaining and releasing information and its presidents admitting to the leaks but this isn't acceptable to Hillary, the DNC, and the Political Establishment? I always thought that the keys to solve any crime were "motive, means, and opportunity", which WikiLeaks has, and here we have a public confession too but that's somehow not acceptable? Could it be that Hillary Clinton was ultimately responsible for her own failure?

Lastly, we now have what I'm calling the "Revenge of the Talking Heads". From early on in the presidential race, it became more than clear that this was going to be about the two Establishment parties going through the formulated campaign with all the usual sound bites, glad-handing and scripted speeches as one cardboard candidate pretended to get indignant with the other cardboard candidate, and in the end you and I got to go vote for the one which sounded like they cared the most but didn't. You know, "the illusion of choice" which is American Politics these days. In this case, it was corporate owned Democrat Hillary Clinton vs. whoever the Pretender-to-the-Throne the other side would present. In the end, Hillary would emerge victorious after a "hard fought" but "honorable" race and call for the country to "come together" behind her administration and policy...blah, blah, blah. Well, it didn't work out that way did it?

Instead, we had a political outsider who the Establishment called a "clown", "the circus", and "didn't deserve to be there". Interesting. I thought anyone could run for President and it was up to us---the People---to decide who "deserved" to be there or not, but perhaps I'm mistaken. That must have been a cartoon from my youth. Throughout the campaign, the corporate media and its "talking heads" couldn't have been more non-transparent in their contempt for the non-establishment candidate or in the foregone conclusion that this "formality" of the election process was just the prelude to Hillary's coronation. No one, and I mean no one was any more dumbfounded than the camera perfect heads on NBC, CBS, FOX, MSNBS, CNN, and the rest of the corporate owned media outlets, but of those who were actually listening to the American People---the non-traditional media (including yours truly), we weren't surprised at all. In fact, most of us had been saying so all along!

Now, we the corporate media with its image and credibility irrevocably tarnished, has launched an all out campaign to shut down sites it regards as promoting "fake news". This includes not only trying to ignore them but removing them from sites like Facebook and YouTube because, well, you know, you can trust them with telling the "truth" not independent bloggers, writers, talk shows and other alternative news sites. Of course, to be sure, there are more than a few news sites, etc who put "questionable" stories out there---some of which sounding quite legit---but then so has and does the corporate media. Kettle meet pot, although I think those of us in the alternative media are more honest since we aren't often beholden to a paycheck and making some corporate powerbroker happy or necessarily towing some party line.

Regardless, I find it dangerous that the very same media outlets, 96% of which who are controlled by just six corporations---yes six---and beholden to corporate interests just like the two primary corporate political parties are should be allowed to "police" those who are trying to do an honest job and provide real news which they aren't even trying to report. To me, and I admit that I'm obviously biased on this point, but it reminds me of when the old Fascist and Communist regimes began imposing their propaganda machine on the countries, be it Nazi Germany, Franco's Spain, Stalin's Russia, Tojo's Japan or more recent dictatorships in Libya, Iraq or some of the countries in Latin America. As I think everyone knows by now, America isn't the Constitutional or democratic Republic it once was. It's an Oligarchy, and like most oligarchies, it's neo-fascist in its political ideology though it really doesn't care as long as they obtain and maintain control, be it the economy, the government, the military (which it uses as its enforcer), or control over our lives and, ultimately, our thoughts---our opinions and values---because as long as this illusion of choice continues, they still need to go through the formality of elections. It's, of course, much easier if they can predict our behavior triggers on certain issues and channel that in a certain direction to get the "official" results they wanted in the first place.

By the way, there's also another shift taking place which most Americans may be unaware of. In addition to this "witch hunt" against alternative media, there is a subtle (and sometimes not so subtle) attempt to delegitimize Trump and his incoming Administration underway; innuendos, understated questions, backhanded slurs against certain individuals, attempts to place doubts and undercut public trust going on by the corporate media. It's "as if" they are trying to plant in the mind of Americans that somehow the Presidential election was "stolen" or wasn't "legitimate" and that Trump isn't the "real" President. Some have started campaigns using the slogan "Not my President" and encouraging members of Congress, the military, the political bureaucracy to ignore Trump, his polices, and Executive Orders; a kind of passive aggressive resistance. Even Obama has been doing his best to undercut Trump by taking steps, especially in regards to foreign policy and immigration, that will hamper the new administration. Traditionally, the outgoing President didn't do much of anything as a courtesy to the incoming President, knowing firsthand how difficult it is hitting the ground running. It's part of the "peaceful transition" of administrations that we were known for. It appears those days are gone and we're witnessing yet another attempt by the Obama Regime to divide and disrupt America.

So, instead of looking back at the year, I decided that taking a closer look at how it ended was an excellent coda to the year and look forward toward 2017, and perhaps beyond. Of course, if we were to look back, I might suggest something more appropriate...like 1984. Have a healthy and safe 2017 everyone.

Hillary's Presidential Campaign Failure: The Russians Did It!

This is getting beyond amusing and into the realm of the absurd. Hillary Clinton, in one of her first talks since losing the 2016 Presidential Election, is now claiming that the reason for her loss was that Russia's Vladimir Putin had a "personal beef" with her. Seriously? Her loss had nothing to do with Benghazi and the deaths of an ambassador or three former Navy SEALs and CIA operatives? It had nothing to do with her repeated lying to Congress, or the Senate or the American People? It had nothing to do with arrogant disregard for security procedures regarding classified emails and other communications: her attempts to withhold or destroy evidence? Her defeat had zero to do with using the office of Secretary of State as a gatekeeper in a multimillion dollar "pay to play" scheme involving countries and corporations and their bribes....err..."donations" to her Clinton Foundation, not to mention attempts to avoid taxes by making substantial donations to her own fun. How about doing illegal arms smuggling deals to groups like ISIS and Al Qaeda (you know---9/11 and the butchering of thousands of Kurds, Christians, and Yazidi or the selling of hundreds of young women into sex slavery). What about the selling of uranium to Russia? Do you think that miffed Putin?

Let's not forget that all of this started off with allegations by the CIA and others in the intelligence community that Russia somehow manipulated our federal election system against Hillary. They also allege that the thousands of WikiLeaks originated from the Russians and more recently, since Putin was a former KGB station chief, that he had both the time and expertise to be directly involved in helping to the "throw" the election to Donald Trump. And if that wasn't enough, we've had to endure efforts to "recount" votes in key states and cities, which was initiated by Green Party Presidential Candidate Jill Stein, who almost magically was able to raise some five million dollars in a week whereas she could only come up with three millions for her campaign during the entire course of the election! What's more, it appears that much of the money raised for the recount came from the Hillary supporters. When it turned out that the recount wasn't going to work (and was resulting in the loss of votes mistakenly counted for both Stein and Hillary), it was quietly dropped. Of course, Stein got to keep the money left over. I wonder what you would call that anyway---a payoff? Whatever it's called, it destroys the credibility of not just Jill Stein, but the Green Party too, not to mention the integrity of the third parties who may now be viewed as pawns of the two corporate parties, the Democrats and Republicans (I guess if Trump had lost, it would have been Libertarian Party Candidate Gary Johnson who would have demanded a recount on behalf of the Establish Republicans, though I would hope he has more character than that).

Now if that wasn't a big enough farce, the corporate media has been nonstop in their attempts to delegitimize Trump's victory and criticizing every move Trump or someone in his camp makes, from who he interviews for various Cabinet posts to opting to conduct the interviews in the privacy of his own residence (Trump maintains a luxury apartment in Trump Towers, which he owns). Naturally, they'll do the same to anyone he chooses. Finally, with their failure to generate any interests in the recounts, Hillary supporters and members of the DNC, as wells as members of other groups, are trying to intimidate the members of the Electoral College into not doing their sworn duty and casting their votes for the winner of the election, Donald Trump. Some, if not all by this point, have received thousands of death threats, harassing phone calls, letters, and emails. They are demanding that they vote for Hillary Clinton instead.

As if this isn't insane enough, Hollywood's Leftwing; these so-called "celebrities" are also lending their voices to this hue and cry. Some, are even doing short commercials insisting that the Electoral College both be done away with (which would throw all future presidential elections to those states with the largest populations) and to ignore their state's election outcome and vote for Hillary. By law, the candidate who wins the most states receive that state's allotted Electoral votes. Approximately a month after the election, those members of the Electoral College gather to cast their votes for the winner in their state. In theory, they are under no specific obligation to vote the way their state intended, but traditionally they've always done so. Lastly, there has been threats by buttercups and snowflakes...I mean...Left leaning Millennial college students...to boycott classes, disrupt public activity (such as transportation) and hold protests. Some have promised to cause problems at the inauguration (wow, I hope it's not as bad as it was the last two times. Oh yeah, that's right. Conservatives and the GOP didn't riot, stage protests, disrupt public activity or makes jackasses of themselves at Obama's inaugurations). I swear, the Left is teetering on having a collective epileptic fit. So, let's get down to the point of all this.

First off, these are ALLEGED cyber attacks, and secondly, what a crock of BS. Now "St. Hillary" is claiming there was an international plot---lead by Putin--to deprive her of the coronation, to which she believes she was entitled. Wasn't it Hillary who said there was not rigging of elections? Yet, she and Debbie Wassermann-Schultz were found to be rigging the Primary and DNC Convention against Bernie Sanders (and for which Debbie was fired and then hired the next day by her ole pal Hillary)? And wasn't it Hillary who said "in our system of democracy, some win and some lose"? And wasn't it also Hillary who said that Trump had to accept the "Will of People" and results of the election? It's time for Mrs. Clinton to shuffle off to the "dustbin of History" where she belongs and let this nation try and repair the damage of the last eight years.

Secondly, it's time for Obama to acknowledge that Donald Trump won and Hillary Clinton loss. He needs to start acting like a President and stop with his efforts to stir up hated and discontent, which seems to be about the only things he's actually accomplished in his eight years. Enough with the implied threats and innuendos; of warning Trump to keep his hands off of certain policies and so on. Obama has been acting like a spoiled little brat who didn't get his way, and so now he's acting like a little snot. Obama is acting as if Trump's election was a personal affront; a reflection of his regime and is policies (well, actually it was, especially since Hillary said that she intended to carry on some of Obama's objectives). Well, like Hillary, it's time for Obama to put on his big boy underwear and act like an President (or at least an adult). Obama had his time. Now, like Hillary, it's time to go. "The Donald" may fall flat...or he might be one of America's greatest Presidents ever. Only time will tell, but we, as a nation, owe that to Trump for no other reason than the fact that he is the incoming President. Let "The Donald" prove himself one way or the other without trying to sabotage him before he even gets started.

Lastly, if any of what Hillary, Obama, the corporate media, the CIA says is true, then we have much more serious problems than worrying about the Electoral College. If...and that's a really big "If"...Russia did manipulate the election of an American President, then we have a complete and catastrophic failure of our entire intelligence infrastructure from the NSA, CIA, DIA to Homeland Security and the FBI. We also have an utter failure of the internal electoral safeguards from the manufacturers of the voting machines to the County Clerks who count the ballots all the way up to the offices of every single Secretary of State responsible for tabulating and verifying the votes casts in this country. I'm not saying that it is entirely impossible. There are numerous instances of paper ballots and sometimes machine ballots being miscounted, of the unregistered and occasionally illegal individuals voting, people selling their votes, and of course, the dead voting. Don't forget that the DNC worked to rig results in certain specific locations against Sanders, but still, there was no nationwide voter fraud as now being alleged by Hillary supporters.

Meanwhile, as some sort of punitive backlash, the corporate media is going after alternative news and radio media sites, including Conservative and Right leaning bloggers and YouTube Channel hosts. These are some of the same corporate media outlets which almost openly campaigned for Hillary and was often the source of actual "fake news". They are claiming that alternative "fake news" sites led to Hillary's defeat and Obama's dismissal approval ratings (and, I suspect, the pathetic approval ratings of Congress and Supreme Court which have been in the dumpster for decades). Therefore, in an effort to control public information content, corporate and some social media outlets like Facebook are joining forces. I know that somewhere both Joseph Goebbels and Joseph Stalin have found something to smile about together.

So, let's face facts. The Russians aren't responsible for Hillary Clinton's loss. Hillary was. It was her arrogance and her actions that caused her to lose the election. I think one could successfully argument that it was also Obama and his policies which contributed to her loss as well. Julian Assuage, founder of WikiLeaks and Edward Snowden have both said that their information did not come from the Russians, or any other government for that matter. It came from with the DNC and the political system that was fed up with the corrupt status quo. In 1980, Ronald Reagan asked Americans in his campaign for President if, after four years of Carter's Presidency, they were better now than four years go. The answer was no, and Reagan became our 40th President. A similar, but unspoken question was put to Americans again in this election, and once more, the answer was a collective "no". Yes, it's true that Putin doesn't like Hillary Clinton. He also doesn't like Obama, Joe Biden, or John Kerry but so what? It's time Hillary, the DNC, and yes, the Obama Regime, take ownership of their loss. They repeatedly ignored the American People, as has the Establishment Republicans.

Trump's victory wasn't your victory. You worked just as hard against Trump as did the Left. Both corporate parties assumed we were asleep. We weren't. We were vitally awake and we were tired of seeing our nation destroyed bit by bit. Trump might not do any better, which is ok. We'll vote him out too. We are tired of the Oligarchy ruling our nation. We're fed up with their corporate owned media which spins, misdirects and misleads us at every opportunity. We're tired of the "unsweetened blue Kool-Aid" Republicans and the "sweetened red Kool-Aid" Democrats; both bought and paid for by the neo-fascist Oligarchs who do everything in their power to divide us. Regardless of our political leanings or race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, or any other factors, we must come together and focus our energy on rebuilding this country in our image; to serve our needs; to represent us, not the uber-rich or the political class, and most certainly, not the Oligarchy.



Hillary Clinton talks election loss, Vladimir Putin's "personal beef" with her
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/hillary-clinton-talks-election-loss-vladimir-putin-personal-beef/


Obama says Russian 2016 election tampering ended after warning to Putin
http://www.aol.com/article/news/2016/12/16/obama-says-russian-2016-election-tampering-ended-after-warning-t/21629714/


Putin didn't win this election for Trump. Hillary Clinton did
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/dec/13/putin-trump-election-hillary-clinton


FBI back CIA assessment of Russian's 2016 election hack
http://www.aol.com/article/news/2016/12/16/fbi-backs-cia-assessment-of-russia-2016-election-hack/21629706/

Privacy: Do We Still Have It?

Don Sterling was busted when his girlfriend allegedly went public with a recording of a rant against her for bringing blacks to his games (he's owner of the LA Clippers, at least for the moment). The comments were made in what was supposed to be a private conversation in his home, which now raises the question----is there any privacy left? Can we assume that nothing we say or do at any time anywhere is private? We have long been accustomed to accepting what we say and do in public is, well, public and potentially can come back and bite us on the butt. But what about in the privacy of our own home? The second issue is whether Mr. Sterling or anyone else has the right to express their opinions regardless if it's politically or socially correct or not, so long as there is no threat made or implied. In short, can we reasonably expect to be protected by the Bill of Rights, especially the 1st, 4th, and 5th amendments? Is "free speech" or our right to expect privacy a thing of the past?

We've long accepted that whatever we did or said in public was likely to end up in the news or YouTube or some other social media site, but what about what we say or do in private? We know that Google, Yahoo and other web providers track us, as do stores (all in the name of improving and individualizing customer service), so does the government. Once we could expect reasonable protect under the 1st, 4th or 5th amendments, but since 9/11, those rights have largely been circumvented in the name of national security. Today, we're all now considered potential terrorists by those whose job is to protect us.

There is no privacy at work nor should one expect there to be since the Bill of Rights doesn't apply there (it only protects individuals from the federal government). Our employers have a right to see and hear everything we do during business hours, and many are now asserting that they have a right to know everything about the private us too, including our personal habits, health condition, diet, hobbies, and even memberships. We are increasingly viewed as to the "value" we add to the company just like any other asset. And when we start becoming a liability, we're terminated. Banks look at us not as individuals, but as credit risks. They too look at our "data portfolio" just as insurance companies do in determining our "cost risk" and potential impact on their bottom line based not just on our incomes and payment histories, but where we live, our medical histories, our buying habits and so forth. Soon we'll be evaluated as to our potential "value" to the company or society before a medical procedure is approved. It seems our "own time" isn't our own any more.

We have drones in sky, watching us like cyber vultures out of a Sci-Fi novel. I can see the day when insurance companies or employers start doing flyovers to see if we're really hurt when we fill a worker's compensation claim or when we call in sick. Maybe our car or cell phone monitors will alert HR as to whether we really went to the doctor that day, and then they can check the insurance cloud to see what doctor we saw and what prescriptions were written for us. And with all this increase on technology, we're finding that not our cell phone and cars, but our Smartphone, Ipad, and who knows what else is monitoring everything we do. In place of a heaven watching us, we now have the data cloud, and it knows if we being bad or good for goodness sake! For me, another image comes to mine, such as "HAL" from the movie, "2001: A Space Odyssey" or perhaps the super computer "Colossus" in the movie "The Forbin Project".

We're consistently be asking for our opinions through surveys and polls, as well as indirectly through monitoring and our sites visited and our searches. Have you noticed that as soon as you've searched for a product, that product or similar ones start appearing through ads and emails? All this is designed to increase the data file on us---individually and collectively. I recently read an article where new homes are being equipped with monitoring devises; they sense who's there, our wants and our preferences. It turns our lights on and off, fixes our coffee, regulates the temperature, gives us a verbal update on traffic, weather, and the news. Heck, I recently read a story about development of sex robots (called sexbots) in Japan which records and stores our likes and dislikes! Seriously. Come on, whatever happened to a good old fashion hookers? Are they becoming an obsolete profession? Surgeries can be done remotely through robotics and there is even monitoring robots who visit patients. Is there nothing sacred from technology? Of course, be it medical, financial, employment, or even personal, all data is stored. To be evaluated for "the net time".

Express an opinion and soon it will no doubt be recorded somewhere. As it is now, the closest most of us will ever get to immortality is to put something on the internet, and you can bet it will find its way into some database somewhere for who knows what purpose. It seems we have finally created the perfect beast, and it is us.

Exploring the Constitution: Privacy
http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/rightofprivacy.html

Legal Information Institute
http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/privacy

It's Time For Americans to Flex Their Political Muscle

The government shutdown of 2013 costs us, the American Taxpayer, around $24 billion dollars. The ongoing fiasco with the Obamacare website, which had years to be checked out, has costs taxpayers $1 billion dollars since the October 1st rollout. That's more than Microsoft or Apple has spent on their recent media platforms. Rather than take responsibility, the White House is trying to shift the blame to the contractors on retainer (yes, on retainer, at a rate of $1 million dollars per day). The contractors cite constant changes and a lack of opportunity to "test drive" the site before it went live. The bottom line is that it doesn't work and the meter is still running, and let's not forget, the overwhelming majority of Americans opposed Obamacare from the get go. The Supreme Court even had to change their reading of the bill into a tax...a tax....in order to implement it.

Let's also not forget that we were repeatedly promised by Obama there would be no taxes associated with this bill; there would be no additional costs associated with this bill; nothing would change; we could even keep our existing insurance. But that's not what's happening is it? Employers are dropping their insurance coverage. Many are cutting back on hours, and some are even laying people off. Premiums are proving so high that many can't afford even the cheapest coverage. Those under 30, the financial backbone of Obamacare, are finding that it makes more sense to pay the monthly fine.

The Department of Defense is considering an $8 million change over in the covers (dress hats) for the US Marines. They want to go from a pattern which has been effect since the 1920's and has given the Marine Corps its unique and distinguished look into a "unisex" form similar to what the Women Marines are currently wearing. And here's the kicker, no one wants it. No one even asked for it. Marines polled hate it. One senior Marine Commander even pointed that they are having trouble acquiring bullets, and yet they are considering spending $8 billion to change hats? The next move by the Obama Adminstration is expected to be amnesty for the 11 to 13 million illegal immigrants now living in the US; something else no body wants. Are you detecting a pattern yet?

Now we hear that the US Government has been spying on our closest allies, and not just on their official communications. Americans have been repeatedly lied to as to the scope of domestic surveillance. Apparently, the NSA has been tapping in on the private emails and cell phone conversations of America's friends (the spying on Germany's Angela Merkel has been going on since 2002) too. This has set off a worldwide fire storm of condemnation. Brazil, Germany, and France, among others, are planning on introducing a proposal at the United Nations, aimed at limiting the electronic invasion of an individual's privacy. Although the resolution will be nonbinding, it will register as another global hand smacking of the Obama Administration. Meanwhile, we're watching our allies taking a second look at us in terms of support. Many are starting to seriously question Americas commitments in the Middle East and Asia, as well as in other parts of the world. China has stepped up and publically called for an end of "Pax Americana".

In the announcement, China has suggested that not only Asia, but the West as well begin considering new alliances and economic relationships; perhaps even replacing the US Dollar as the "go to" global currency with the Chinese Yuan or a combination of currencies (China is the largest holder of US debt--$1.28 trillion in US Treasuries and $3.5 trillion in US dollar dominated assets).
What's going on here? Where's the leadership...in either party? The answer is an uncomfortable, "not present". All we have are poll-driven primadonnas; all jockeying to get in the most media face time and sound bites. What is needed are non-partisan statesmen who are willing to put the needs of the average working man and women above personal and political ambition. However, the American political system doesn't seem capable of producing those kind of individuals. Not that they aren't out there, they are. They're usually found in schools or volunteering in some community organization. However, the system has been rigged through gerrymanding by a diarchy and near unlimited corporate financing. The media, which once served as the public's watchdog, now produces infotainment rather than true news. They're just as driven by ratings as Washington's political hacks are.

Until we can put America back on the right track (assuming that's even still possible), we need to renew our push for term limits. Barring that, we need to vote for challengers so that no incumbents feels so secure that they can ignore the will of the American People. It's time for Americans to flex their political muscle.

Obama wants Marines to wear 'girly' hats
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/10/24/obama-wants-marines-to-wear-girly-hats/

Brazil, Germany Drafting UN Anti-Spying Resolution To General Assembly
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/26/un-anti-spying-resolution_n_4165470.html

US Allies In Middle East From Saudi Arabia to Israel Frustrated
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/26/us-allies-middle-east_n_4165164.html?ref=topbar

China Says Debt Debacle Is the End of Pax Americana
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-15/china-says-debt-debacle-is-the-end-of-pax-americana.html

China Calls for World to Be "De-Americanized"
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/513431/20131013/china-debt-ceiling-shutdown-xinhua-de-emericanised.htm

For Your Own Good: Government Surveillance

What has become of America? You know--"home of the free and land of the brave" and all that? Is it really necessary that we have to have a government that monitors our phones calls, be it landline or cell, or our emails? Do they need to record our banking transactions or credit card use? Is there a point to checking out our Facebook or LinkedIn pages to see what we're reading; who we're "friends" with; or what games we're playing? Is it especially important to US national security to know what news articles, videos, or jokes we're reading or watching? Is our credit history reports all that important? Do we really need satellites or drones watching and photographing us? We have the NSA and other federal agencies spying not just on ordinary citizens, but on the governments of our allies (and quite probably their citizens as well). No honor among thieves I suppose. I always thought their job was keeping an eye on the bad guys intent on doing harm to Americans. Apparently, somewhere along the way, the American People morphed into the "bad guys". That's seems to always be the trouble with "protectors of the common good", be it spymasters or the self appointed "defenders of public morals". There's always an evildoer hiding behind every tree (see Robespierre or Stalin, or Cromwell, or the Salem Witch Trials, or even more recently, the Senate hearings of Joe McCarthy for examples of how quickly things can snowball out of control). Even our friendly local police officer has become a real life "Robocop" who increasingly sees everyone not for what they are---people going about their lives---but potential criminals waiting to be caught.

Don't think it stops there. We have the federal pit bulls, the IRS, going after individuals and/or groups viewed as a "threat" (a threat by just who, I don't know) and then threatened with all sorts harassment from simply delays to audits to possible fines or jail time. Of course, one is still free to defend their selves, but at what cost? It takes an enormous amount of time, preparation and money to fight back; money and often time that many of these groups simply don't have. Why is that? Whatever happened to our right---our duty---to question the government and its leaders? When did the tools given to us by our Founding Fathers get tossed overboard?
Did you ever notice that while our Founding Fathers specifically said that when the government failed to act in the best interest of its citizens, and when all else failed, we not only had the right, but the duty, to overthrow that government, but no one today will either actually say it out loud and direct? Why you wonder? Because it's against the law. Seriously. It's called "sedition". The government said, in effect, that yes, while it's true the Founding Fathers told us we had a duty as citizens to preserve our freedoms, your action in doing so would be deemed as "un-American" and treasonous against the American People. Now, just how can the American People's action against a government which is infringing on the rights of its citizens (which in itself, could be considered treasonous), turn around and say the American People were being treasonous against themselves? It would be like getting punched in the mouth and then being denied the right to punch back. So, we're left with empty words and bravado.

What's more, our Founding Fathers gave us the tools to fight back. Most notably, the 1st Amendment (freedom of speech), the 2nd Amendment (the right to own and bear arms), the 4th Amendment (illegal search and seizure), and the 6th Amendment (the right to know the charges, a speedy trial---that means no undefined seizure and/or detention of a individual). Well, if you thought sedition was bad, steps are actively being taken to usurp those rights as well.

The current administration is acting as the purveyor of public safety and morals (once again, on actually whose behalf I can only guess), by using the press and media to push an agenda contrary to the truth; that is, their definition of the "truth" by alledging the old tried and true "villains behind every tree and under rock". But, to be sure, this has been going on for awhile both parties. Having "exposed" the crime, they also have a ready solution at hand. We will limit your freedoms---for your own good and protection naturally. It worked in Ancient Greece and late Republican Rome. It worked in Fascist Spain and Italy. It worked in 1933 Germany. It worked in 1917 Russia, and later in China. The sad fact about the human condition it that historically, a free people has always been willing to sacrifice their freedom in the name of security, especially when it's someone willing to take responsibility.

The next logical step would be to secure the means of self-defense. In this case, guns. To do so, it's necessary to convince the masses that by surrendering their right to self-protection, the State could better protect you. After all, since only the criminals will have guns, you, as an unarmed citizen, could much more easily be identified as an "innocent" in need of protection. Only those still with guns will need to bear closer watching in anticipation of their yet to be committed crimes. But since we don't know who all the potential new criminals are, the police will have to be prepared for anything, and therefore, are morphed into a para-military state security force. Naturally too, the State will need to increase its monitoring of populace in order to anticipate an act of violence...all in the name of the nation's welfare of course.

The State too has reserved what it believes to be its right (which supersedes our individual right) against illegal entry and seizure. All the State needs is the hint of what it deems to be "probable cause"; that is, it suspicion there may be something illegal going on. What was once used only sparingly and after intense verification, military style entry has become almost commonplace. The same is true about electronic monitoring. The trouble is that when they've kicked down the wrong door (and usually injured or murdered the occupant in the process), there's not much that can be done. More recently, under the Patriot Act, the State can now arrest an individual without naming the charges and hold them almost indefinitely in a undisclosed location. No attorney. No phone call. No notifying their families. Nada. You simply vanish into the night. And in case you thing this applies just to terrorists or non-citizens, thing again. It applies to everyone. But don't worry, it's for your own good.

So, now don't you feel better? The State is here to protect us. Sleep tight.


President Obama signed the National Defense Authorization Act.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2012/01/02/president-obama-signed-the-national-defense-authorization-act-now-what/

Few Companies Fight Patriot Act Gag Orders FBI Admits
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/05/nsl-challenges/

NSA Spying: How it Works
https://www.eff.org/nsa-spying/how-it-works

FAQ: What You Need to Know About the NSA's Surveillance Programs
http://www.propublica.org/article/nsa-data-collection-faq

They Can Hear You Now: NSA Taps Americans

"Nothing to about worry friends. It was all Bush's fault. Help yourself to free glass of Cool aid. Go back to playing your video games. Nothing to see here". That seems to be the message ABC, CBS, NBS, MSNBC, CNN, and the other media outlets are giving us. Even Obama offers us reassurance when he claims that the only data being seized is "mega data". No one's individual emails, phone calls, or photos were compromised. "Trust us" he implies. After all, "we can't have 100% security and 100% privacy" as the President says, and besides, it was only a "minor" infraction of Bill of Rights, and look how much we're getting for your patriotic sacrifice---we're capturing bad guys; you know, "terrorists". Why, the Feds have caught three or four by now using the millions and millions phone calls and internet site searches. So, just what the heck is going on here?

Well, it seems that a British news journal, The Guardian, published a leak that the National Security Agency, which is the American Government's version of the nosy neighbor, managed to get its hands on millions of phone records belonging to Verizon. The phone records include outgoing and incoming calls. That's right. Anyone using Verizon, or who called you through Verizon, got tapped. Of course, this comes just a few weeks after NSA Chairman, James Clapper (seriously, that's his name) testified before the Senate that they were playing nice and no one's records were being snatched. It seems, however, that he lied (to the collective "duh" of the American People). Now, it seems that not only did they go after Verizon, the NSA has also gone after T-Mobile, AOL, Google, AT&T, YouTube, Skype, and just about every other electronic media service out there. Yeah, we hear you now.

While Obama campaigned on ending Bush's use of wiretaps and electronic media taps of known or suspected terrorists, apparently he warmed up to the idea after being elected and has expanded the bugging to include everyone everywhere. Gee, does that mean the Feds think that all Americans are potential terrorists? Are now presumed guilty before even being charged? Think about it. Why else would the NSA be interested in your Facebook posts? Why would they care who you follow on Twitter? Are those family photos you posted a matter of national security? What about those amateur radio shows on Blogtalk radio? Secret Commie propaganda sites? (Never mind. Scratch that).

Right now, the Obama Administrations is scurrying around like proverbial wet rats trying to find where the leak came from. Only a very small handful of Congressmen, Senators, and selected bureaucrats, had excess to this kind of hush-hush screwing of the American Public. Of course, this follows on the cheeky admission of the Justice Department, Eric Holder (who gutted anti-illegal immigration enforcement with his buddy, Homeland Security Director, Janet Napolitano, and sued the State of Arizona for enforcing existing federal immigration laws) that they backdoored the Associated Press in trying to get a reporter's phone records. Why? Because of their investigation of the Benghazi Massacre and Cover-up. Oh, and that followed on a similar "oopsie" when it came to light that they did the same thing to Fox News. And while we're at it, let's not overlook the Infernal Revenue Service's harassment of the various Tea Party and other conservatives groups, including requesting overwhelming and often irrelevant information that sometimes included requesting the names and ages of members or mailing addresses of contributors, as well as holding up approval for tax exempt status for months. Not only that, but it turns out that some of this information was turned over their liberal opposites. Kinda handy information to have don't you think? And... (here comes the surprise)...they initially lied about it. Of course, just before all this, we had the Obama Administration wanting to curtail our ability to defend ourselves. "For our own good" they told us. There's that "trust me" again.

I don't care who you are or what your political leaning is, as an American, you've got to admit that this is not only (exceptionally) dirty and underhanded, it's criminal. It's a violation, if not outright, then the intent of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Republics and democracies throughout history have voluntarily surrendered their freedoms..inch by inch...in the name of security. No crimes. Complete economic stability. Peace. But no freedom of press. No freedom of expression. Limited freedom to travel. No freedom to think as you please. Economic stagnation. No dissention. Absolute conformity.

So, here's my take on the whole situation. First off, the head of the IRS need to be fired, along with the department heads and individuals involved. Not only that, they lose their federal benefits and are prohibited from working for any federal agency or from securing a federal lobbying job. And all those Tea Party and other groups need to be automatically granted tax exempt status and reimbursed in full any and all costs. Second, use the opportunity to overhaul the IRS. I would personally love to see either a flat tax or consumption tax. It would make life easier for everyone and would end much of the tax cheating, the reams of tax laws, and ensure everyone pays their fair share.

Eric Holder should be fired. While he should be brought up on criminal charges, that isn't likely to happen. However, he should received the same penalty as the IRS chief. No retirement. No benefits. Nothing. James Clapper lied to Congress. Ok, well that's actually part of his job as "Spy-in-Chief". However, he should be reprimanded. Understand too that the FBI was doing this. They need their hands slapped just as hard. Lastly, whoever was responsible for ordering the massive seizure of private and personal data should be pursued criminally for not only an unauthorized invasion of privacy, but for a blatant violation of our Bill of Rights. However, I don't think that will ever happen. "Messiahs" seem to be exempt somehow.

Clapper denied NSA Surveillance before Senate panel in March testimony
http://thehill.com/blogs/defcon-hill/policy-and-strategy/304009-clapper-denied-nsa-surveillance-in-us-weeks-before-verizon-tracking-program-began-

NSA Collecting Phone Records of Millions of Verizon Customers Daily
http://visiontoamerica.com/15125/nsa-collecting-phone-records-of-millions-of-verizon-customers-daily/

Obama Administration defends 2nd mass surveillance project
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/06/07/intelligence-officials-reportedly-mining-data-from-us-internet-companies/

Press Blames George W Bush for Obama's Unprecedented Eavesdropping
http://visiontoamerica.com/15137/press-blames-george-w-bush-for-obamas-unprecedented-eavesdropping/

US, British intelligence mining Data from 9 US Internet companies
http://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/us-intelligence-mining-data-from-nine-us-internet-companies-in-broad-secret-program/2013/06/06/3a0c0da8-cebf-11e2-8845-d970ccb04497_story.html