TYReads about NDAA “program 1033”

A hidden process, perhaps related to the rising inequality in american society, is discussed by The Guardian in America’s police are looking more and more like the military where it explores how, quietly, America’s government is militarizing it’s own homeland, expecting perhaps, widespread civil unrest. Some excerpts:

“A little-known Pentagon program has been quietly militarizing American police forces for years.”

“In the fine print of the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 1997, the “1033 program” was born. It allows the Defense Department to donate surplus military equipment to local police forces.”

“Though the program’s existed since the 1990s, it has expanded greatly in recent years, due, in part, to post-9/11 fears and sequestration budget cuts. The expanse, however, seems unnecessary given that the Department of Homeland Security has already handed out $34bn in “terrorism grants to local polices forces – without oversight mind you – to fund counter-terrorism efforts.”

“...the program is transforming our police into a military. The results of such over-militarized law enforcement are apparent from the dispersion of Occupy protesters in Oakland to the city-wide lockdown in Boston.”

“But when local police forces carry assault weapons and patrol America’s main streets with tanks and drones, the lines blur between the military and law enforcement. The growing militarization of the United States appears to be occurring at home as well as abroad, a phenomenon which is troublesome and sure to continue without decisive action. Scaling back the 1033 program is a much-needed start and would cast some light on the blurring line between military forces and the local police who are meant to protect and serve.”

Advertisements

TYReads about Cognitive Infiltration

It seems we’ll have to get used to a new neologism, “Cognitive Infiltration”, after the Obama administration is proposing to pick Cass Sunstein to serve on the NSA Oversight Panel, the body responsible for reviewing allegations of NSA privacy abuses.

As The Washington Post reports in Obama pick for NSA review panel wanted paid, pro-government shills in chat rooms, “while at Harvard in 2008, Sunstein co-authored a working paper that suggests government agents or their allies “cognitively infiltrate” conspiracy theorist groups by joining ”chat rooms, online social networks or even real-space groups” and influencing the conversation.”

“Sunstein’s paper defined a conspiracy theory as “an effort to explain some event or practice by reference to the machinations of powerful people, who have also managed to conceal their role,” and acknowledges that some conspiracy theories have turned out to be true. It also specifically notes that his plan of “cognitive infiltration” should only be used against false conspiracy theories that could be harmful to the government or society.”

“But even the suggestion that the government should infiltrate groups that are not actively participating in criminal acts is troubling. ”

“The paper also suggests that the government “formally hire credible private parties to engage in counterspeech.”

“A man with such a credulous view of government power might not be the best choice to review allegations of NSA privacy abuses.”

The man in his full glory trying to avoid uncomfortable questions:

TYReads “Snowden’s future”

Snowden’s future @ Financial Times

With this article brimming with doublespeak, the Financial Times tries to convince the western and the global public opinion, shocked by the realization that the old USA is no longer a democracy but “something else”, into believing that Edward Snowden is a criminal and not what a growing body of public opinion thinks he is: a smart and articulate idealistic man, that to the best of his ability has tried to warn the world of what the USA is doing and of what that country has turned into.

The article subliminally addresses the floating and growing meme that America no longer stands for goodness and the Rule of Law, but for something darker, and tries to blur, dilute and deactivate this growing and well founded suspicion.

FT starts by declaring that Edward Snowden deserves being prosecuted:

“Whether Edward Snowden finds refuge in Ecuador, or elsewhere, the US government has no choice but to seek his extradition. Having violated his secrecy contracts, Mr Snowden has broken serious laws and should face the music. What he disclosed to The Guardian and Washington Post highlights the breadth of the US National Security Agency’s eavesdropping operation. But he did not uncover any breach of US law.”

This is highly debatable. He did not uncover any breach of US law? What about the US Constitution’s First and Fourth Amendments? Read this and make up your mind:

27 Edward Snowden Quotes About U.S. Government Spying That Should Send A Chill Up Your Spine @ Zerohedge

Pentagon Papers’ Ellsberg Says Snowden Saves Us From The “United Stasi Of America” @ Zerohedge

Snowden’ Second Interview To Hong Kong Paper: “I Am Not Here To Hide From Justice; I Am Here To Reveal Criminality” @ Zerohedge

Who Are The Real Traitors? @ The Burning Platform

Bush Lets U.S. Spy on Callers Without Courts @ NYT

FT continues: “Comparisons to Daniel Ellsberg, the celebrated leaker of the Pentagon Papers in 1971, are particularly inapt.”

As you probably know, Daniel Elsberg is a former United States military analyst who, while employed by the RAND Corporation, precipitated a national political controversy in 1971 when he released the Pentagon Papers, a top-secret Pentagon study of U.S. government decision-making in relation to the Vietnam War, to The New York Times and other newspapers.

Can Edward Snowden be compared with Daniel Elsberg? We believe he can. They have both risked their careers and well-being in order to warn public opinion about facts that the american government did try to hide. In Mr. Snowden’s case, his revelations uncover practices that conflict with the American Constitution. Mr. Snowden has not revealed any national security secrets beyond airing the fact that the NSA is listening to and reading everything about everybody…in the world.

FT concludes: “But before we treat Mr Snowden as a heroic whistleblower, it is worth remembering that he has reached out to governments that care little for the rights of their own people.” Unfortunately, his own government, that of the USA, is one of them.

.

TYR reads “those who care, have known about this for a long, long time.”

Government Is Tracking Verizon Customers’ Records @ The Wall Street Journal. Some excerpts:

“The National Security Agency is obtaining a complete set of phone records from  all Verizon U.S. customers under a secret court order, according to a published account and former officials.”

“Verizon is required to provide NSA with “all call detail records” of customers, including all local and long-distance calls within the U.S., as well as calls between the U.S. and overseas…”

“Mr. Drake said call records are just a fraction of the data NSA is collecting, which also includes data about emails and data on any type of electronic communication, which includes iPads, Kindles and other mobile devices. All can be used to track the owner’s location. “It’s a total violation of the Fourth Amendment,” he said.”

“The Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable searches and seizures.”

“Congress voted last December to extend the expanded FISA surveillance law for another five years.”

White House Defends Its Wiretapping Of Millions Of US Citizens @ Zerohedge. One excerpt is enough:

“those who care, have known about this for a long, long time.”

War is peace

When reading the article published today in The Financial Times, Pentagon sees ‘war on terror’ lasting 20 years, it is difficult not to get reminded of George Orwell’s well-known doublespeak sentence in his novel “1984”: “War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength“. Gore Vidal does deserve some credit too, having warned in his book “Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace” about the situation described in the Financial Times’ article.

Some excerpts:

“The US “war on terror” against al-Qaeda and its affiliates could last “at least 10 to 20 years”, a senior Pentagon official warned on Thursday, an indication of the concern in the Obama administration about the spread of Islamist radicals in the Middle East and north Africa.”

“Speaking at a congressional hearing, the Pentagon officials said threats from “murky” groups linked to al-Qaeda justified the continued application of the 2001 law that underpins the “war on terror” despite criticism from some senators of the way the law had been used.”

“The comments about the terrorist threat contrast with the tone of official discussion last year when senior administration officials talked about how the “core” of al-Qaeda had been “decimated”, even if some of its affiliates remained active in places such as Yemen.”

“Asked how long he believed the “war on terror” would last, Michael Sheehan, assistant secretary for special operations at the defence department, replied: ‘I think it’s at least 10 to 20 years.'”

“Robert Taylor, the Pentagon’s acting general counsel, said the US remained in a state of armed conflict with both al-Qaeda and “associated forces”, a phrase the administration now uses to justify military operations in places very distant from the initial battlefield in Afghanistan.”

“The expansive interpretation of the law used by the Pentagon was sharply criticised by senators who said it contradicted Congress’s power to declare wars. Angus King, an independent from Maine who sits with the Democrats, said the evidence from Pentagon officials was “the most astounding and most astoundingly disturbing” he had witnessed at a hearing. “You guys have essentially rewritten the constitution here today,” he said.”

“John McCain, the Republican senator who supports expanding the law to cover new threats, told the Pentagon officials their legal interpretation meant ‘basically you’ve got carte blanche as to what you are doing throughout the world‘.”

False Flag im Oktoberfest?

“If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.”
– U.S. President James Madison

According to Wikipedia, “False flag (or black flag) describes covert military or paramilitary operations designed to deceive in such a way that the operations appear as though they are being carried out by other entities, groups or nations than those who actually planned and executed them. Operations carried during peace-time by civilian organisations, as well as covert government agencies, may by extension be called false flag operations if they seek to hide the real organisation behind an operation.”

“The name “false flag” has its origins in naval warfare where the use of a flag other than the belligerent’s true battle flag as a ruse de guerre, before engaging an enemy, has long been acceptable. Such operations are also acceptable in certain circumstances in land warfare, to deceive enemies in similar ways providing that the deception is not perfidious and all such deceptions are discarded before opening fire upon the enemy.”

It might be more than a coincidence that, around the same dates as the recent Boston Marathon bombings, Google Trends  measured a peak in interest in cyberspace in the expression “false flag”, as the article Awareness of “False Flag” Terrorism at All-Time High @ Washiington’s Blog explains.

In this other very recent article, Everyone’s Talking about “False Flags … Isn’t that Another Bogus Historical Conspiracy Theory? Washington’s Blog explores the history of False Flag operations and mentions some proven examples. He ends the article saying that “Any discussion about a specific terrorist attack cannot start with the assumption that it couldn’t be a false flag attack, or that it must be a false flag attack. The facts of each attack must be examined on their own merits before reaching any conclusion.”

In this context, the recent declarations of Andreas Kramer, son of the member of the former (?) NATO-sponsored Gladio-stay behind organization,  testifying under oath before court in Luxemburg ,  in which he accuses his father of helping organize the 1980 Oktoberfest Bombing in Munich, in which 13 people were killed, see this and this, are of interest, and question quite a few of the accepted “truths” of post war Europe.