Welcome Eagles to the New Crusade!
Will thou help defend the Fortress of Faith?

BOOKMARK us & check in DAILY for the latest Endtimes News!

"And I beheld, and heard the voice of one eagle flying through the midst of heaven,
saying with a loud voice: Woe, woe, woe to the inhabitants of the earth....
[Apocalypse (Revelation) 8:13]

Monday, March 14, 2016

Call It What It Is: America Is a Police State

Call It What It Is: America Is a Police State

Brandon Turbeville

This blog includes all the latest as it relates to this topic... 

Over the years in my own articles, I have used the terms “creeping fascism,” “growing police state,” and “descent into totalitarianism” among others to describe the domestic situation in which we find ourselves. I have often written that, if Americans do not stand up to the myriad of laws being passed by federal, state, and local governments we will soon wake up to find ourselves in an Orwellian police state nightmare.

Now, however, I cringe whenever I read those words in contemporary articles. This is because such warnings are so far past their time they are utterly useless. In fact, they may do more to hurt any potential for change in American society than they do to promote it.
These warnings work on the supposition that the U.S. is not a police state yet but, if things do not change, it will become one in the future. Thus, the readers are left with the impression that, while their freedoms are being taken away, the police state is somewhere down the road – in the future – and they have plenty of time to entertain themselves until it comes knocking on their door with a uniform and a bright flashing neon sign that says “ATTENTION!!! POLICE STATE!!!”
But the police state is not coming – it is here.

The United States is a police state.
Americans may not be able to admit it to themselves but the military soldiers parading on the streets as police officers, police-operated tanks, and horrifying number of imprisoned citizens have spoken for them. The number of Americans brutalized physically and mentally by those who are sworn to “serve and protect” are speaking clearly enough.
The relatively recent concept of “pain compliance,” “rough interrogation,” and “rough rides” coupled with the long held tradition but fast increasing commonality of direct beatings, shootings, murders, and “on-site executions” by police in America have had the final say. Since 2003, police have killed more American citizens than were killed by “insurgents” in Iraq, a country whom the US invaded illegally and subsequently imposed a reign of terror upon.


The United States is now a country where millions of people are locked away in inhuman conditions of confinement, the overwhelming majority of them for crimes in which there was no victim.
From the federal, state, and local levels, behavior previously considered normal and innocuous is now mandated and regulated by a tangled web of government agencies. Of course, any disagreement or defiance of those mandates will result in a clash from the militarized police forces mentioned above and an eventual confinement to a cage where the offender is treated like an animal at best.
In the United States of 2016, children are regularly removed from parents by the State simply because of the parents’ economic status, political beliefs, or methods of upbringing. Surely no country that imprisons as many people as America, “enforces” oppressive law with military-style troops, and snatches children away from loving homes simply because those homes are not the ideal model of what the state desires can be called a free country.
With the recent increase of PC fascism enveloping the nation, even free speech and expression, no matter how ineffectual, is becoming regularly silenced by the long arm of the law.
Children are being routinely arrested for acting out in elementary school while citizens learn that their first “duty” in America is to “obey” police authority lest they be subject to brutal takedowns, torture, and possibly death.
This is the America many warned about years ago when they protested the militarization of police but were met with responses citing “officer safety” and “growing crime rates.” It is the America they warned about when they opposed the drug war but were met with programmed responses of a “drug-addicted youth” and “drug-related crimes.” It is the America many could see coming a mile away when the State-sponsored threat of terrorism was used to justify any and all means of “keeping us safe” and providing “security” to the frightened citizens of the world empire.
Those warnings were ignored and now we have the result.
It is now time to call the United States what it is – a police state.

Rise of the Warrior Cop: The Militarization of America’s Police Forces
Police State – Ten Secrets The Police Don’t Want You To Know! “How To Survive Police Encounters!”
Police State USA: How Orwell’s Nightmare is Becoming Our Reality

Pentagon admits it has deployed military spy drones over the U.S.

The Pentagon has deployed drones to spy over U.S. territory for non-military missions over the past decade, but the flights have been rare and lawful, according to a new report. The report by a Pentagon inspector general, made public under a Freedom of Information Act request, said spy drones on non-military missions have occurred fewer than 20 times between 2006 and 2015 and always in compliance with existing law.
The report, which did not provide details on any of the domestic spying missions, said the Pentagon takes the issue of military drones used on American soil “very seriously.” A senior policy analyst for the ACLU, Jay Stanley, said it is good news no legal violations were found, yet the technology is so advanced that it’s possible laws may require revision. “Sometimes, new technology changes so rapidly that existing law no longer fit what people think are appropriate,” Stanley said. “It’s important to remember that the American people do find this to be a very, very sensitive topic.” READ MORE


Are You A 'Religious Extremist'?

Are you a religious extremist?  For years, world leaders have been endlessly proclaiming that we need to eradicate “extremism”, but what actually is “extremism”?  Many would point to the ISIS jihadists over in the Middle East that are beheading people that don’t agree with them as examples of religious extremists, and I think that very few people would argue with that.  But our politicians (especially the liberal ones) rarely use the term “Islamic terrorists” anymore.  Instead, they tend to use the term “religious extremists”, and that has a much, much broader connotation.  In fact, if you are a Bible-believing Christian, you are probably included in that category.
Most Bible-believing Christians would never think of themselves as being similar to radical jihadists in the Middle East, but that is precisely how many of their fellow Americans very them.  The Barna Group has just released a shocking new study which found that 45 percent of all “non-religious” Americans believe that “Christianity is extremist”…
The perception that the Christian faith is extreme is now firmly entrenched among the nation’s non-Christians. A full forty-five percent of atheists, agnostics, and religiously unaffiliated in America agree with the statement “Christianity is extremist.” Almost as troubling is the fact that only 14 percent of atheists and agnostics strongly disagree that Christianity is extremist. The remaining four in ten (41%) disagree only somewhat. So even non-Christians who are reluctant to fully label Christianity as extremist, still harbor some hesitations and negative perceptions toward the religion.
Even more troubling is what the study discovered about how the general population views specific religious activities.  There has been a tremendous shift in society, and behaviors that were considered to be completely mainstream a few decades ago are now considered to be “extremism”.
Are you ready to take a test? Look over the Barna infographic that I have shared below very carefully.  Have you ever participated in any of these “extremist activities”?…

If you have ever participated in any of the activities listed in category 1 or category 2, you are a “religious extremist” according to most Americans.
Of course every single one of the behaviors in category 2 would potentially apply to me, so I guess that would make me an “extremist” according to this definition.
This is where our society is heading.  Of course “Christian extremists” are not normally put into prison in the United States quite yet, but hatred toward our faith in rapidly rising in society.  Church attendance is dropping like a rock, the Christian faith is relentlessly mocked in movies and on television, and incidents of hostility toward Christians have doubled over the past three years.
And the truth is that even the federal government and the military are rapidly turning against Bible-believing Christians.  For example, the slide that I have posted below comes from a U.S. Army Reserve Equal Opportunity training brief that described “Evangelical Christianity” and “Catholicism” as examples of “religious extremism”…

Once this came out, there was a huge uproar and some people got into trouble over this.  But it should be exceedingly alarming to people of faith that U.S. military personnel were being trained that evangelical Christians are on the same level as the Ku Klux Klan.
And of course this is far from the only example of this phenomenon.  In fact, Christians have regularly been described as “extremists” and “potential terrorists” in official U.S. government documents since the day that Barack Obama first stepped into the White House.
The following is an extended excerpt from my previous article entitled “72 Types Of Americans That Are Considered ‘Potential Terrorists’ In Official Government Documents“…
Below is a list of 72 types of Americans that are considered to be “extremists” and “potential terrorists” in official U.S. government documents.  To see the original source document for each point, just click on the link.  As you can see, this list covers most of the country…
1. Those that talk about “individual liberties”
2. Those that advocate for states’ rights
3. Those that want “to make the world a better place”
4. “The colonists who sought to free themselves from British rule”
5. Those that are interested in “defeating the Communists”
6. Those that believe “that the interests of one’s own nation are separate from the interests of other nations or the common interest of all nations”
7. Anyone that holds a “political ideology that considers the state to be unnecessary, harmful,or undesirable”
8. Anyone that possesses an “intolerance toward other religions”
9. Those that “take action to fight against the exploitation of the environment and/or animals”
10. “Anti-Gay”
11. “Anti-Immigrant”
12. “Anti-Muslim”
13. “The Patriot Movement”
14. “Opposition to equal rights for gays and lesbians”
15. Members of the Family Research Council
16. Members of the American Family Association
17. Those that believe that Mexico, Canada and the United States “are secretly planning to merge into a European Union-like entity that will be known as the ‘North American Union’”
18. Members of the American Border Patrol/American Patrol
19. Members of the Federation for American Immigration Reform
20. Members of the Tennessee Freedom Coalition
21. Members of the Christian Action Network
22. Anyone that is “opposed to the New World Order”
23. Anyone that is engaged in “conspiracy theorizing”
24. Anyone that is opposed to Agenda 21
25. Anyone that is concerned about FEMA camps
26. Anyone that “fears impending gun control or weapons confiscations”
27. The militia movement
28. The sovereign citizen movement
29. Those that “don’t think they should have to pay taxes”
30. Anyone that “complains about bias”
31. Anyone that “believes in government conspiracies to the point of paranoia”
32. Anyone that “is frustrated with mainstream ideologies”
33. Anyone that “visits extremist websites/blogs”
34. Anyone that “establishes website/blog to display extremist views”
35. Anyone that “attends rallies for extremist causes”
36. Anyone that “exhibits extreme religious intolerance”
37. Anyone that “is personally connected with a grievance”
38. Anyone that “suddenly acquires weapons”
39. Anyone that “organizes protests inspired by extremist ideology”
40. “Militia or unorganized militia”
41. “General right-wing extremist”
42. Citizens that have “bumper stickers” that are patriotic or anti-U.N.
43. Those that refer to an “Army of God”
44. Those that are “fiercely nationalistic (as opposed to universal and international in orientation)”
45. Those that are “anti-global”
46. Those that are “suspicious of centralized federal authority”
47. Those that are “reverent of individual liberty”
48. Those that “believe in conspiracy theories”
49. Those that have “a belief that one’s personal and/or national ‘way of life’ is under attack”
50. Those that possess “a belief in the need to be prepared for an attack either by participating in paramilitary preparations and training or survivalism”
51. Those that would “impose strict religious tenets or laws on society (fundamentalists)”
52. Those that would “insert religion into the political sphere”
53. Anyone that would “seek to politicize religion”
54. Those that have “supported political movements for autonomy”
55. Anyone that is “anti-abortion”
56. Anyone that is “anti-Catholic”
57. Anyone that is “anti-nuclear”
58. “Rightwing extremists”
59. “Returning veterans”
60. Those concerned about “illegal immigration”
61. Those that “believe in the right to bear arms”
62. Anyone that is engaged in “ammunition stockpiling”
63. Anyone that exhibits “fear of Communist regimes”
64. “Anti-abortion activists”
65. Those that are against illegal immigration
66. Those that talk about “the New World Order” in a “derogatory” manner
67. Those that have a negative view of the United Nations
68. Those that are opposed “to the collection of federal income taxes”
69. Those that supported former presidential candidates Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin and Bob Barr
70. Those that display the Gadsden Flag (“Don’t Tread On Me”)
71. Those that believe in “end times” prophecies
72. Evangelical Christians
Are you starting to get the picture?


“Fingerprints for Food”: Venezuela Now Requires Biometric Scanning into Government Database to Purchase Food


It was nicknamed the “Fingerprints for Food” program, but it represented a dire new twist in the ongoing struggle for the socialist Venezuelan government to provide basic nourishment and products for its citizens.
As reported by the Miami Herald in May 2014, President Nicolas Maduro ordered the implementation of biometrics to allow the government to track what customers of state-owned grocery stores were purchasing and, perhaps as importantly, how much.
Maduro, the paper reported, said that the measure was necessary to prevent hoarding, and to help keep price-controlled food from being resold at a profit. Even then, food was increasingly in short supply, and that was before global oil prices collapsed due to a glut; Venezuela receives 95 percent of its revenues from oil.
In order to convince hungry Venezuelans to voluntarily register for the program, Food Minister Felix Osorio promised that anyone who signed up and give the government their fingerprints, would be eligible for discounts and prizes.
Military necessary to guard stores
The scheme was not made mandatory when it was first implemented, but critics warned that it would become just another way for the state to keep tabs on its people, and could even serve as a precursor to rationing.
The Herald reported further:
The initiative, called the Superior System for Secure Supplies, comes amid a raft of economic measures rolled out amid anti-government protests that have dragged on for almost two months leaving at least 39 dead on both sides of the political divide.
The program came amid some of the worst inflation suffered by Venezuela at the time (it has only gotten worse since).
“This is a government that attacks the people not only with weapons but with the worst tax: inflation,” Luis Florido, a national officer of the Voluntad Popular opposition party, told the Herald at the time. “The government is creating economic [chaos] for the people of Venezuela.”
In January 2015, NaturalNews reported that food shortages had become so commonplace in Venezuela, that consumers were forced to wait for hours in food lines, with many opting to sleep in line so as not to lose their place.
In addition, Maduro, by then, was also forced to deploy the Venezuelan army to keep peace and ensure social stability at state-run stores.
Bloomberg News also reported:
Inside a Plan Suarez grocery store … in eastern Caracas, shelves were mostly bare. Customers struggled and fought for items at times, with many trying to skip lines. The most sought-after products included detergent, with customers waiting in line for two to three hours to buy a maximum of two bags. A security guard asked that photos of empty shelves not be taken.” [Emphasis added]
By August of last year things had not improved much. As The Wall Street Journal noted, violence permeated the country, punctuated by the torching of a National Guard command post that was set aflame by a “mob infuriated by worsening food shortages.” After they burned the command post they rammed trucks into the smoldering ruins, reducing it to a pile of rubble.
‘It’s a national crisis’
That incident was just one of many throughout the country, mostly brought on by chronic shortages of basic foods, goods and products.
“What’s certain is that we are going very hungry here and the children are suffering a lot,” Maria Palma, a 55-year-old grandmother, told the WSJ. On that day she had awakened at 3 a.m. to go stand in a food store line, which she finally abandoned around noon – empty-handed.
One non-profit group recorded more than 500 instances of violent protests throughout Venezuela, along with 56 instances of looting, and scores of attempted lootings of grocery stores, pharmacies and warehouses – all in the first half of 2015. Even delivery trucks were targeted.
“It’s a national crisis,” Marco Ponce, head of the Venezuela Observatory of Social Conflict, the non-profit group that did the study, told the WSJ.
Delivered by The Daily Sheeple

Obama To Expand Surveillance State Powers By Signing A 21 Page Memo

The New York Times reports:
WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is on the verge of permitting the National Security Agency to share more of the private communications it intercepts with other American intelligence agencies without first applying any privacy protections to them, according to officials familiar with the deliberations.

The change would relax longstanding restrictions on access to the contents of the phone calls and email the security agency vacuums up around the world, including bulk collection of satellite transmissions, communications between foreigners as they cross network switches in the United States, and messages acquired overseas or provided by allies.

The idea is to let more experts across American intelligence gain direct access to unprocessed information, increasing the chances that they will recognize any possible nuggets of value. That also means more officials will be looking at private messages — not only foreigners’ phone calls and emails that have not yet had irrelevant personal information screened out, but also communications to, from, or about Americans that the N.S.A.’s foreign intelligence programs swept in incidentally. 

Robert S. Litt, the general counsel in the office of the Director of National Intelligence, said that the administration had developed and was fine-tuning what is now a 21-page draft set of procedures to permit the sharing.

Until now, National Security Agency analysts have filtered the surveillance information for the rest of the government. They search and evaluate the information and pass only the portions of phone calls or email that they decide is pertinent on to colleagues at the Central Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and other agencies. And before doing so, the N.S.A. takes steps to mask the names and any irrelevant information about innocent Americans.

The new system would permit analysts at other intelligence agencies to obtain direct access to raw information from the N.S.A.’s surveillance to evaluate for themselves. If they pull out phone calls or email to use for their own agency’s work, they would apply the privacy protections masking innocent Americans’ information — a process known as “minimization” — at that stage, Mr. Litt said.

Executive branch officials have been developing the new framework and system for years. President George W. Bush set the change in motion through a little-noticed line in a 2008 executive order, and the Obama administration has been quietly developing a framework for how to carry it out since taking office in 2009.
Of course. After all, Obama’s entire Presidency has merely been George W. Bush’s third and fourth terms.
The executive branch can change its own rules without going to Congress or a judge for permission because the data comes from surveillance methods that lawmakers did not include in the main law that governs national security wiretapping, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA.

FISA covers a narrow band of surveillance: the collection of domestic or international communications from a wire on American soil, leaving most of what the N.S.A. does uncovered. In the absence of statutory regulation, the agency’s other surveillance programs are governed by rules the White House sets under a Reagan-era directive called Executive Order 12333.

Mr. Litt declined to make available a copy of the current draft of the proposed procedures.

“Once these procedures are final and approved, they will be made public to the extent consistent with national security,” Mr. Hale said. “It would be premature to draw conclusions about what the procedures will provide or authorize until they are finalized.”

FOOD POLICE ON PATROL: Seattle to start inspecting residents' trash and fining them for food waste

The overreaching hands of Big Government extend out from all sides like octopuses surrounding us in a cesspool of murky water. Flailing our arms, we swim to get out of their controlling gaze, but their tentacles reach out to block our path. It's eight to two; for every hand we try to move freely, there are four more tentacles to hold it back. This is the scenario that America is creating today, using government legislation to control one another's movements, behaviors and lifestyles.

These overreaching octopuses crawl under our bedroom sheets. They tell us what we can put in our body. They squirm in our brains, restricting our free speech, what we say and what we type. Now, this nanny state of control is crawling into our trashcans, sorting out what we throw away. Does legislating against each person's trash make the world a better place?

Are government-enforced trash inspections, including food waste fines, a positive strategy to encourage people to change their behavior? Will these fines really make everyone compost more and waste less? What are the unintended consequences of using force to mold and shape behavior in society?

Seattle government turning garbage collectors into trash inspectors with the power to fine

In Seattle, Washington, a new ordinance beginning next July will target residents and businesses for throwing away too much food. The local government there is turning garbage collectors into trash inspectors -- acolytes for government force. If the garbage collector deems that 10 percent of the trash is compostable food waste, then the resident or business is to be fined, the money returned to the state. While recycling trash and composting is an extraordinary idea, using force and fines never accomplishes the goal. It backfires into a nanny state of division, accusations and extortion.

Sadly, the city council approved the measure with a 9-0 vote. Fines begin next July and start at $1.00 for residents and $50.00 for apartment buildings and businesses. According to the The Seattle Times, the city fell short of its recycling goal. They recycled 56 percent of trash in 2013, 4 percent short of citywide goals. Apparently, the council members think that fining their way forward will close the gap.

Legislating behavior and lifestyle always backfires, dividing and perpetuating accusations

If everyone had the power to fine others for behavior that they didn't like, then life would become a giant witch-hunt police state, with people pointing fingers and extorting money from others whom they don't agree with or understand. In this way, society becomes divided into cliques that only fight against one another, opposing each other's lifestyles and decisions. By creating a nanny state government, society devolves into a state of perpetual accusation. Sadly, this is what American government has morphed into today at both the local and federal levels. It has become a pit of glaring octopuses, empowering politicians with eight tentacles that are used to control the free will of human hands.

That's right, liberty is the answer. Instead of empowering a bureaucracy built on fine money and accusations, it's better to empower the individual with information. Why couldn't we encourage educational classes about composting and inspire learning about landfill waste? This would be a better long-term strategy than picking through each other's trash and fining those who throw too much food away. Educating a free people has a more lasting impact. Learning from mistakes, a free people can then move away from what didn't work, opening up to what does work for the progress of mankind. Force can't achieve these goals rightfully.

Through the years, we've suppressed powerful information and controlled the learning process, trying to legislate behavior and mandate compliance using government force. Forcing and fining people's personal lives is never the answer. It causes backlash, and it divides people against one another. In this way, people see their own lifestyle and belief system through egotistical eyes, thinking it's the only right way. We learn to go after people whom we don't understand and don't agree with instead of embracing others for who they are and learning something from them.

Instead of understanding where people come from, we've learned to point out what we think is wrong with others, often accusing them when we don't agree with the way that they are living. In lawmaking, we've emboldened our differences in behavior and lifestyle as a way to target those we don't agree with. These laws, which now target the bad behavior of throwing away food, only perpetuate more bad behavior by dividing and extorting each other as human beings.

What do you think? Is picking through your neighbors' garbage and fining them the way to reduce waste?

‘A bit creepy’: New billboard technology could soon track your movements, behavior

With digital advertising long tapping into users’ mobile habits, traditional advertisers have felt left in the dark ages. But billboards are about to get smart, and technology would allow them to know where you’ve been and where you go after you see them.
Advertising giant Clear Channel Outdoor Americas, which owns tens of thousands of billboards across the country, announced Monday that it will be debuting a new kind of consumer-tracking system called Radar.
Following in the footsteps of targeted advertisements seen on the web, Radar will tap into data from several partner companies to determine what kinds of advertisements will be displayed on a billboard screen. Just as importantly, the system will also track how good of a job the ads are doing at convincing people to look up the brand on their phones, or go out and shop.
“In aggregate, that data can then tell you information about what the average viewer of that billboard looks like,” Andy Stevens, senior vice president for research and insights at Clear Channel Outdoor, told the New York Times. “Obviously that’s very valuable to an advertiser.”
While Stevens admitted that the system “does sound a bit creepy,” he pointed out that mobile advertisers have been using the same data mining techniques for years to deliver targeted advertisements.
To take advantage of this trove of information, Clear Channel is partnering with AT&T Data Patterns, the telecom giant’s data collection unit; Placed, which pays consumers for the right to track their movements; and PlaceIQ, which uses location information from apps to predict consumer behavior. All data used by Radar will be anonymous and aggregated, Clear Channel says, seeking to allay at least some concerns over privacy.
The system was recently tested in Orlando, Florida, displaying advertisements for the shoe company Toms. Clear Channel said that it used Radar to determine that people who saw the ads were 44 percent more likely to buy a pair of Toms shoes, according to Fortune.

READ MORE: AT&T captures users' internet browsing habits to personalize ads

While the new tech could help revamp billboards, which look like dinosaurs compared to the algorithmically sophisticated online ads, privacy advocates have concerns about tracking the online behavior of consumers in the real world.
Jeffrey Chester, executive director of Center for Digital Democracy, told the NY Times that most people don’t realize that they are being monitored, even if they agree to allow companies to track their behavior and movements.
“It is incredibly creepy, and it’s the most recent intrusion into our privacy,” Chester said.
Clear Channel is set to bring Radar to major population centers such as New York and Los Angeles, and eventually plans to make the technology available across the country.

Police appeal to lawmakers for future options on arming drones

The drone discussion has been buzzing around the state Capitol for hearings this week. Monday, a bill to ban the weaponization of drones was discussed, and on Tuesday, a bill to control the use of drones in many ways, including by law enforcement agencies, was debated.
Lawmakers listened to testimony concerning restrictions on drones with cameras versus expectations of privacy. The bill would also require police to get a warrant to use drones in many cases. Police made the argument that armed drones in law enforcement could be an effective weapon for public safety. READ MORE 


Random Searches In America Are A Violation Of The 4th Amendment – 5 Video’s



FBI Instructs High Schools to Inform On ‘Anti-government’ Students

A new FBI initiative based on Britain’s “anti-terror” mass surveillance program instructs high schools across America to inform on students who express “anti-government” and “anarchist” political beliefs. “High school students are ideal targets for recruitment by violent extremists seeking support for their radical ideologies, foreign fighter networks, or conducting acts of targeted violence within our borders.
High schools must remain vigilant in educating their students about catalysts that drive violent extremism and the potential consequences of embracing extremist belief,” states an unclassified document released in January by the FBI’s Office of Partner Engagement, the agency’s primary liaison for the law enforcement community. The document claims public school educators “are in a unique position to affect change, impart affirmative messaging, or facilitate intervention activities,” including informing on students. READ MORE


War On Terror Turns Inward – NSA Surveillance Will Be Used Against American Citizens

Submitted by Mike Krieger via Liberty Blitzkrieg blog,
In time of actual war, great discretionary powers are constantly given to the Executive Magistrate. Constant apprehension of War, has the same tendency to render the head too large for the body. A standing military force, with an overgrown Executive will not long be safe companions to liberty. The means of defence against foreign danger, have been always the instruments of tyranny at home. Among the Romans it was a standing maxim to excite a war, whenever a revolt was apprehended. Throughout all Europe, the armies kept up under the pretext of defending, have enslaved the people.

– James Madison, Founding Father and 4th President of these United States
Our founding fathers studied power structures over the millennia and knew exactly what they were doing when solidifying the Bill of Rights into the U.S. Constitution. All it took was a couple hundred years, an extraordinarily ignorant and apathetic American public, and a major terror attack to roll back this multi-generational gift.
For many years, I and countless others have been screaming from the rooftops that a society should never trade civil liberties for security. Life on earth has always been dangerous for us humans, and what has historically separated free and noble civilizations from stunted tyrannies is a willingness to acknowledge such a precarious existence while at the same time demanding and defending one’s dignity and liberty. In the aftermath of the attacks of 9/11 (seemingly carried out by U.S. ally Saudi Arabia), the American public has demonstrated no such strength of character or historical maturity, thus allowing a corrupt, deceptive and lawless government to run roughshod over freedom with very little resistance.
Well now the chickens are coming home to roost. The tyrannical powers granted to government in order to stop foreign terrorists are rapidly being turned inward against an ever servile and apathetic American public.
As Radley Balko at the Washington Post notes:
A while back, we noted a report showing that the “sneak-and-peek” provision of the Patriot Act that was alleged to be used only in national security and terrorism investigations has overwhelmingly been used in narcotics cases. Now the New York Times reports that National Security Agency data will be shared with other intelligence agencies like the FBI without first applying any screens for privacy. The ACLU of Massachusetts blog Privacy SOS explains why this is important:

What does this rule change mean for you? In short, domestic law enforcement officials now have access to huge troves of American communications, obtained without warrants, that they can use to put people in cages. FBI agents don’t need to have any “national security” related reason to plug your name, email address, phone number, or other “selector” into the NSA’s gargantuan data trove. They can simply poke around in your private information in the course of totally routine investigations. And if they find something that suggests, say, involvement in illegal drug activity, they can send that information to local or state police. That means information the NSA collects for purposes of so-called “national security” will be used by police to lock up ordinary Americans for routine crimes. And we don’t have to guess who’s going to suffer this unconstitutional indignity the most brutally. It’ll be Black, Brown, poor, immigrant, Muslim, and dissident Americans: the same people who are always targeted by law enforcement for extra “special” attention.

This basically formalizes what was already happening under the radar. We’ve known for a couple of years now that the Drug Enforcement Administration and the IRS were getting information from the NSA. Because that information was obtained without a warrant, the agencies were instructed to engage in “parallel construction” when explaining to courts and defense attorneys how the information had been obtained. If you think parallel construction just sounds like a bureaucratically sterilized way of saying big stinking lie, well, you wouldn’t be alone. And it certainly isn’t the only time that that national security apparatus has let law enforcement agencies benefit from policies that are supposed to be reserved for terrorism investigations in order to get around the Fourth Amendment, then instructed those law enforcement agencies to misdirect, fudge and outright lie about how they obtained incriminating information — see the Stingray debacle. This isn’t just a few rogue agents. The lying has been a matter of policy. We’re now learning that the feds had these agreements with police agencies all over the country, affecting thousands of cases.
This parallel construction concept is extraordinarily important, and most people are completely unaware of its meaning and usage. To get up to speed, see last year’s post:
How the DEA Uses “Parallel Construction” to Hide Unconstitutional Investigations
Of course, this is just one example of how the “war on terror” is slowly but surely transitioning into a “war on the citizenry.” A war that will only intensify as the public mood toward the status quo deteriorates further.
For example, we recently learned a little bit about how military drones are being used on U.S. soil for domestic non-terrorism related purposes. USA Today reports:
The Pentagon has deployed drones to spy over U.S. territory for non-military missions over the past decade, but the flights have been rare and lawful, according to a new report.

The Pentagon has publicly posted at least a partial list of the drone missions that have flown in non-military airspace over the United States and explains the use of the aircraft. The site lists nine missions flown between 2011 and 2016, largely to assist with search and rescue, floods, fires or National Guard exercises.

But the policy said that any use of military drones for civil authorities had to be approved by the Secretary of Defense or someone delegated by the secretary. The report found that defense secretaries have never delegated that responsibility.
While use thus far apparently has been measured, this is always how it starts. The following paragraphs should make it clear where it’s headed.
The report quoted a military law review article that said “the appetite to use them (spy drones) in the domestic environment to collect airborne imagery continues to grow, as does Congressional and media interest in their deployment.”

Military units that operate drones told the inspector general they would like more opportunities to fly them on domestic missions if for no other reason than to give pilots more experience to improve their skills, the report said. “Multiple units told us that as forces using the UAS capabilities continue to draw down overseas, opportunities for UAS realistic training and use have decreased,” the report said.
Unless there’s significant pushback to the use of military drones domestically, the practice is likely to expand and expand and expand until you can’t go out for a coffee without a camera dangling above your head.

UN Troops to Kill Americans Who Won’t Give Up Their Guns

 There is a crisis coming. A false flag of epic proportions. Trump will provide the background and the pretext. Gun confiscation, by the UN, will be taking place on US soil. It was practiced in New Orleans in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. They will show up at 3AM, kick in your door, seize your gun and kill you if you offer any kind of resistance. Follow the progression.

The UN will be the enforcement agency. Why do you think that Quayle, Hagmann and Hodges have talking to you about foreign troops training on our soil?
Don't let this man take your gun. Don’t let this man take your gun. He wants a third term.
We have been down this road before.
 US State Department Memo validates all claims in this article.