Posts Tagged ‘United States’

 It might be time to get our people and our stuff back from Americanized Nazi’s.

I noticed today how much better I would feel about working with local offices if I was merely spared the indignity of their recording my every interaction.  They can’t seem to perform the most rudimentary of actions without fear of being strung up for allowing a potential terrorist an opportunity.  Most of these offices are required to behave towards the public like everyone is a potential terrorist. Everyone they know is a potential terrorist. It’s still just Bob the plumber, and their Mom, but try telling that to the “federal authorities”.

They are equipped with meta tracking software; which pushes them to the discomfort of being inappropriate towards the majority of the public.  I use the word inappropriate because not every orifice of our society should be retrofitted for the National Security aperture. It occurred to me these local officials feel as bored down upon, if not more, as we do.  Due to the nearly inexhaustible demands of the National Security state they are urged to document every jot and tittle of every person’s movement in their immediate society or else.

I think one of the most glaring examples of where excesses of militarized status interferes with local life is our education system.  Children growing up in America are already firmly challenged in their ability to trust themselves and trust others. Their job is to recognize their responsibility to perform in their roles at learning institutions.  However, when the rules are arbitrarily administrated at the end of a gun by SROs, it takes a whole different tone.  If a permanent record is scribbled down in their National Security chart, you get the idea children can’t necessarily be who they are. A mark for throwing a ball when they should have tossed it or turning their head to the right or left against the unspoken wishes of a demoralized teacher.  Zero tolerance of what?  Children? For the crime of existing and being compelled to come to a school?  There are now crimes that aren’t crimes! We all get a vague feeling that we did something wrong.  That is certainly intentional.

The National Security state seems to be creating a subtier of crime where none existed so a certain segment of their employees have data to move around. We now worry about rules that are manufactured to coerce us into doing what the security state wants when no law exists to substantiate their claims. So don’t be surprised when someone with a gun and a security badge shows up and demands that you do something they have no right to ask you to do. They might try to refuse us the right to be where we are doing things that are clearly normal without a need to qualify it with a law.

The DNI expects too much from the innocent. The DoD does not respect the heiros of their charge to protect their citizens from enemies foreign and domestic.  When an agency abuses their potential and invents rules to rob, kill and demoralize otherwise productive decent citizens they become a self-defeating prospect for their own existence. It makes you quite curious about what is going on inside their closed doors.

I suspect, for living with someone who was used by the clandestine state for civil service, they are routinely terrorized and interrogated for the most nominal things and are themselves afraid to look to the right or the left for the paranoia of their bosses.  So I would say we lost the War on Terror before we ever took up arms to make it someone elses issue.  Our government committs acts of terrorism upon themselves every single day as Standard Operating Procedure.

Many active duty, reservists, former and current military dependents recognize patterns of militarism and on-base protocols. They know there is a difference between military life and civilian life.  They know when there is scope creep of operational security when it is applied to civilian networks. Unfortunately, this whole of the United States is being treated like one giant military base, by a handful of agencies.  For the sake of argument, it will not be legal if someone from the National Security blog patrol reads this and decides to correct us all tomorrow, saying, this whole of the United States, is in fact, declared to them a military base. Your person and property now their assets. Resistance is futile. Give up now and it will go easier on you?

That violates the 3rd Amendment in the US bill of Rights.

Now it’s a weird feeling to consider US martial forces occupying their own country, because your grocery store and the mall are not PXs. Surprisingly, for pointing out agenda potential of this I will be shouted at from three different directions the same message, “Be grateful for your security!!”  No. No, because I don’t feel safe.  Why don’t I feel safe?

I don’t feel safe because there are enforcement authorities behaving as if there is a war going on when there is none. Militarists are inserting their agenda into the most benign areas of my life without a discussion, or consent of the governed. I feel as if they are going to continue to barge into my life, my computer and my home to take what is mine so they will have it and I will be left without it.  That is a distinct feeling of insecurity.  So you can’t expect a ‘Thank You’ for undoing what securities were legitimate to expand the range of a military base, illegitmately at that.

The majority of us are not enrolled in any sort of military convention.  We don’t rely on military networks.  We don’t think we are in a war. People selling T-shirts on the beach are not in any kind of war in America.  I’m not at war with anyone. However, when a nation’s military leadership decides you are in a war, unless diverse diplomats and a lawfare army shows up to challenge that assertion, you are, unfortunately, in a war. It’s coming to you.


We cannot reasonably be expected to take military orders when we are not soldiers. There is no kinetic war on US soil, except for what may be maufactured on paper secretly by “experts”.  If they intend to spread the cause of war to us, The People, by way of an offensive to take what is yours to make it theirs, they will start with your dependencies: the safety of your family, your economic flows and your communications networks.  First, they must gather intelligence.

Let’s start with the martial takeover of your Internet interactions. That seems to be the least bloodless.  They have digital eyes quartered in every online store you visit. Daily, they rummage through your mail and listen to your phone calls. It’s not because they need the Intel.  It’s so you will feel owned, intimdated and demoralized.  If you cease to use conventions they spy on, then it’s a temporary win for your peace of mind. It won’t stop their intent.


I see a problem. It’s not the usual problem other people see with this scenario. It’s the problem that US government networks are themselves compelled to do unnatural and abusive things against the commission of their oath to serve The People.  So the guilt for them is tremendously corrosive. They are forced hands. You can’t expect a whole lot of reason from within. The standard for US military compliance is austerely absolute, even among themselves.  For instance, “Lay down and do not resist,” was rape prevention advice in literature given to their own soldiers working amongst each other.

They are not given good excuses to do things against the US people.  They are urged to comply or face firing, or worse, jail time for refusing a military command.  What’s weirder than threatening a civil servant or a civilian for disobeying a military order when they are not a soldier, with an indefinite sentence in a brig?  This military always behaves as if there is absolutely no one who will defend them if they refuse the US military whatever it is they demand. It’s just not true. That’s a lie. The whole premise is a lie.  It’s a tactical mind game. They mean to defeat you mentally, to minimize your grounded right of refusal, when and if they show up to take what is yours or take you away.

The POTUS can scribble out and sign off 5 EO’s tomorrow; which defy the 3rd Amendment. Every single one will be shut down in a legitimate court.  Militarists have to resort to threatening you, Normal Guy, with a military court system and the peril of being submerged their seemingly bottomless dark state. To the credit of the legitimate courts, we have no small numbers of people who need not comply with an undeclared war on American soil.  They can walk away a free American and not worry about the use of force. They just have to know they can.

Do they still argue that the military MAY disappear anyone in broad daylight? Yes. The NDAA 2012 and the NDRP are still being contested in the courts.

There are definitely people in the press who lick the hands of the military and eat their table scraps because they’re “into power”. They will print propaganda as news; which is legally fake, but seems as real as any Hollywood set. On their propaganda sets they get their cast of expert actors to shake down scapegoats like criminal crash test dummies in courts, to make all the children fearful they are next. This military may take a few more “examples” to shock you with the absoluteness of their propaganda power. They may kill the victim in front of you, and say, “You’re next, if you say anything!”  Sounds a lot like, “Lay down and don’t resist,” to me.

If so, just know that’s their in-house literature. It doesn’t apply to you. Walk away. You’re not a soldier. You’re not in a war on your own land. If you can’t walk away, it’s because you work there.

What is this whole scenario about?  Fear. Intimidation. Power.

Why is this chicanery being levied onto us?  We didn’t think enough of our armed service members and civil servants to place more limits on interagency abuses when we had the chance.  It didn’t get this way overnight. However, it might have had something to do with the fact that we brought over thousands of defeated Nazis, to continue their worst crimes against humanity while the ink was still wet on Truman’s National Security Act.  If a lot of today’s spy complex looks like Nazi policy to you, there’s a good reason for that.

What do we do?  Refuse to be afraid. Don’t submit to unauthorized military force in strange areas of your life like your police departments and your schools.  Support agency watchdogs and get them private legal and physical protection when confronting abuses. Get behind legal contests to those who want to gather endless military intelligence on US citizens as potential targets. Repeal the NDAA indefinite detention clauses. Don’t pick fights you can’t win. Stay out of their prison cages.

Don’t share your mind with cowards who already forfeited their rights. You know who they are. They’re the ones who gave up before there was even a fight. They always believe you should give away your rights to serve the ones in power, just like they do. They obey whoever without much explanation, as long as they are in power. They don’t stand up for anyone. They always suck at defending rights. They act a lot like Adrian Llamo, who turned out PFC Manning for true public service. If this were 1775, they would be milquetoast crown loyalists cowering in their basements, while patriots were out their getting their asses handed to them and dying. The go-alongs-to-get-alongs get inherited into every population. Surprisingly, the only way to piss them off is commit the blasphemy of refusing the powerful what they want, because they believe they have to comply, even when they don’t! There will always be people like that. So don’t share and politely acknowledge their impotent advice without event of argument.


If you’re not a soldier, you shouldn’t get suckered into a fake, undeclared unending war on American assets. The State might try to pick a fight with you in 2015, because they’re used to winning over Americans. They’re very used to “winning” over the bureaucrats and other people they’re legally allowed to terrorize all day long in their ranks.  Those are, in fact, the people who are legally compelled to comply with their demands. They are told frequently how they are government property because they have a GS prefix on their HR documents or they signed up for the armed or clandestine forces.  It’s the lie they spread around like scat to mark their territory.

I feel very sorry how things went for them.  It’s very sad the way they surrendered their blood, DNA, fingerprints and every iota of privacy and sacred boundary in their life to perform public service. No good deed went unpunished.

However, they need to realize, I am not them. They don’t get to surrender my boundaries and my rights for me because they did. That’s not fair to Americans who are sure to prevail in other destinies other than government service.

The US National Security State does not really have the right to treat citizens like government serfs. The truth I can tell today is they never really had the right to treat one single American citizen like their property. They never had they right to compel soldiers to break their oath to this public or Geneva human rights conventions. I guess I can draw the line today. Maybe you will too.

You may not be their employee. However, now you might know what it’s like to work for the government these days.  It’s filled with Nazi exploits and Nazi enforced dark corporations who export hushed up Nazi policy. They want America to be one big Nazi farm in exchange for some clandestine stuff we can never know about.  The only way you can truly know if you’re dealing with an Americanized Nazi, is when they tell you precisely how your Bill of Rights do not matter and then tell you that you are a terrorist, if you choose to resist them.

All the space junk and military technology on this planet cannot give me my Liberty. I have to get that myself. However, I do know as Americans we can take our people and our stuff back from Nazis.  We’re proven.

You can call their bluff.

That’s the truth.

Syria displays layers of complexity and high drama the week of the G-20 Summit in Russia amid peaking  global economic dysfunction, surveillance

ZillaMod — All eyes rest on the United States the week world leaders are flown into Russia for the G-20 Summit.  US presence is in question for attempts to consequence to Syrias democidal government.  To date, the Senate has 90 days to evaluate Secry. John Kerry’s proposal to launch a “limited military strike” on the Syrian government.  This comes without direct calls to do so by the Syrians themselves and overwhelming opposition by America’s constituencies, Britain, UN and NATO partnering allies abroad.  The incidence of a US led military strike is seen as very sudden as the Assad regime has persisted for at least 2 years to date. As foreign reporting surfaces, multiple layers of influence in the region become apparent.

The matter is over use of chemical weaponry vs. the legality of invading a sovereign nation to to remedy a humanitarian crisis.  Most sense the intent to manufacture war cause for unconfirmed evidence of a chemical weapons attack during Syria’s civil war.

First let’s look at who supports a pre-emptive move on Syria. Israel is busy baiting the United States to move on the Syria because they have sent in war planes to bomb. France’s Prime Minister attempts to act alone but only to follow a decisive lead of the United States. The UAE fully supports a military move on Syria.  Until other notice, dignitaries from these countries will make an appearance at G-20.

Radicalized tribes of Islamists also want the US to move so the can seat themselves conveniently as Syria’s government.  There is significant doubt they will be greeted as revolutionary liberators by the Syrians. There are reports of hundreds of radicalized Islamists applying to work at the CIA, according to KBTC-TV.  Apparently doubling up as a radical Islamist/Westernized informant is an employable position in todays Middle East.   If that isn’t confusing enough, there are abundant reports of Syrian strongholds on the ground saying a sovereign led revolution to depose Assad is within reach. This news comes despite thousands of Syrian refugees leaving  the nation to avoid death and violence.  No future Syrian leadership is available to be coached or vetted in the midst of their civil war by Western interests; which many fear will keep the country destabilized with or without US involvement.

Yet, Secretary Kerry is busy busy busy defending his actions urging the US to move on Syria.  He may not make it to Russia personally to discuss G-20 issues this week.  He’s certainly got a good excuse as he is currently stationed in Congressional war hearings at the moment. That still may not successfully distract G-20 nations from confronting the United States about invasive surveillance practices with the UN and European allies and the future of the US dollar as a global currency standard.  At some point someone might complain about the duplication of data surveillance efforts, similar to the US Echelon program amid English speaking countries.  Not to mention the humilation of submitting attendance in the same country that hosts US intelligence whistleblower, Edward Snowden, for political asylum. It really is an awkward time for US-Russian relations right now.

While not directly apparent, the United States and some proponents of global currencies are in the percussive section of a call to war in Syria. If you get past the noise of Assad’s immediate troublemaking, you can see financial pressures coming from global markets. Germany is hosting a puppetted election where no one chooses to discuss the crippled Euro currency responsible for massive foreign debt leverages.  France maintains faith that Euro will work, as in fact it continues to bankrupt and decimate weak or broken economies like Cyprus, Spain and Greece. In the meantime, the value of Canada’s loonie, shot up within days of a US announcement to move a military strike into Syria.

Russia has the unfortunate burden of playing host to this International bag of cats.  Ironically, they are also one of Syrias few allies defending thier State’s soverignty, with defined interest.  Russia, China and Turkey maintain energy independence from Western oil interests due to a petroleum pipeline bordering Syria.

US national security interests in a destabilized Syria now clarifies as the perennial partnership of middle eastern oil mobsters and the US military industrial complex.  The UAE, Israel and France are agitating US dominance over oil interests which could very well stoke a 3rd and unending world war.

The problem with world wars is they invade global borders. The UN and various NATO partners have had limited success in public disarmament endeavors of the American people.  If a global war arrives in the Contential US, these interests know the US people are armed to the teeth. They will defend themselves, some in tandem with refusal to participate willingly in a global war led by oil and fiat financial interests.

As fattened buzzards of Middle Eastern war circle from abroad, one this is sure: the American people are still recieving their war wounded from Iraq and Afghanistan. They remember “yellow cake” as the unconfirmed excuse why they hold broken and suicidal family members in their arms one minute, to be redeployed to endless personal damage in corporatized military service the next.

The American people aren’t burying yellow cake from Iraq. They are burying  family members.  They don’t have any to spare for Kerry’s oil hegemony in Syria.

Thousands of Americans Are Sending IOUs to Washington, D.C. Protesting the Outrageous Sums of Income Going Towards the War in Afghanistan; I.O.U.s Part of Rethink Afghanistan Campaign

What: April 14 Press Conference A bipartisan group of Members of Congress will discuss the thousands of I.O.U.s they have received from constituents on the war in Afghanistan and the escalating costs of the war to the American taxpayer. Members of Congress will be accompanied by participating organizations and veterans. This press event in reaction to  Rethink Afghanistan’s War I.O.U. campaign ( Rethink Afghanistan is a project of Brave New Foundation. 

Who: Members of Congress include:
  • Walter Jones (R-N.C.),
  • Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.),
  • John Conyers (D-Mich.),
  • Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.)
  • Mike Honda (D-Calif.),
  • Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-Texas),
  • Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), and
  • James McGovern (D-Mass.)
  • Others TBD
Organizations and veterans attending include:
  • Jacob Diliberto (Veterans for Rethinking Afghanistan),
  • Bruce Fein, Author and Columnist,
  • Matthew Hoh (Afghanistan Study Group),
  • Michael Ostrolenk (Liberty Coalition),
  • Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer (Center for Advanced Defense Studies), and
  • Rev. Jim Wallis (Sojourners)
When: Thursday, April 14, from 2:30-3 p.m.
Where: 441 Cannon House Office Building

Online Action: Rethink Afghanistan’s new Afghanistan War Tax Calculator    ( lets users see the impact of the Afghanistan War and other out-of-control military spending on their pocketbooks. Users can enter the amount of income they earned this year and receive an „I.O.U.‰ for the amount of their income taxes that get spent on war. The tool lets them forward their I.O.U. to Congress, urging representatives to rethink the excessive levels of war spending on the Afghanistan conflict and other ventures that are wrecking our federal budget.

More than 54,000  people have used the calculator to date.

Background: Tax Day is just around the corner (April 18), and the costs to the taxpayer from the Afghanistan War have never been higher. Total direct costs just for 2011 alone are expected to exceed $107 billion.

Rethink Afghanistan, together with a variety of other groups and elected   officials from across the ideological spectrum (see below) is working to focus Americans‚ attention on excessive military spending on Afghanistan and other ventures and to put them in touch with their representatives in Congress.
Brave New Foundation, a 501(c)3 non-profit organization whose mission is to use video and new media to amplify stories that inform the public, change attitudes and motivate people to make a difference. To find out more, please visit

COMMENTARY c/o Downsize, Inc.


by  James Leroy Wilson

The U.S. is fighting three wars — in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya — even though we’re going broke.

Each is a “War of Choice,” not necessity. None of these countries threatens us. Afghanistan did host Al Qaeda, but that crime was punished years ago.

So how does the U.S. end up fighting “wars of choice?” Other countries don’t do this.

It’s true that Britain and France want to enforce a no-fly zone in Libya, but why do we have to participate? Britain and France have a combined population of 128 million, and rank 3rd and 4th in military spending –ahead of Russia.

By comparison, Libya has a population of only 6.4 million, the same as Indiana. Did we really need to be involved?

The world treats the U.S. like Daddy Warbucks because of the following disparities . . .

Although Britain and France have a large population density, combined they have only a little more than 40% of the U.S. population, and they spend only 2.5% and 2.3% percent of GDP on their military, compared to 4.3% for the U.S. In 2008, Britain and France combined spent less than a quarter of what we spent on the military.

In fact . . .

Our biggest “competitor,” China, spends barely 1/7 of our military budget, and less than half in terms of GDP. China and India combined — with one-third of the world’s population – spend less on their military than Britain and France combined, which is less than a quarter of what the U.S. spends.

In fact, the United States accounts for 48% of the entire world’s military spending!

While other countries may have large armies – a man with a gun is cheaper than the sophisticated hardware U.S. politicians like to buy — they do NOT have the means to impose their will on other countries. They can provide manpower and equipment for auxiliary roles to support U.S.-led wars, or for UN peace-keeping missions, but they lack the ability to wage Wars of Choice on other countries. They can’t afford it. Well . . .

We Americans must now realize that we can’t afford it either.

But even if we could afford it, we shouldn’t do it, because the results are so bad. There’s little evidence these wars are making us more secure, but they’re definitely making us poorer.

Last week, the Hoover Institution’s George Schultz, Gary Becker, and John B. Taylor proposed a “Budget Game-Changer.”

Their proposal didn’t even talk about Defense, but their evidence applies as much to defense as to any other area of federal spending . . .

  • Higher federal spending is NOT associated with higher employment rates
  • When federal spending fell as a share of GDP in the 1990s, employment rose!
  • And higher federal spending since 2000 has been associated with job losses, NOT increased employment.

The reasons for this should be obvious. Federal spending is less efficient than private spending, because the The State pays no penalties for waste and failure. This means that inefficient government spending crowds out more efficient private spending, resulting in a net loss of jobs and wealth.

In short, increased federal spending decreases both jobs and social affluence. And this applies to defense spending just as much as any other kind of statist spending.

In December, I used the Independent Institute’s tool to measure some of the negative impact.

I learned that for persons of median age, education level, and income, statist spending could cost $500,000 in lost wealth over a lifetime. $85,000 of that will be lost due to so-called defense spending, and wars of choice, like Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya.

These numbers are deliberately conservative. The younger you are, the more The State and its wars of choice will cost you. And the more you earn the more you’ll pay. But for someone with 40 years to live, every dollar that the Federal State takes from you could have created $5 in increased wealth, if saved and invested.

It’s easy to say that the Federal State is needed for some things, and that defense is at the top of this list, but how much “defending” do we actually need? After all . . .

  • The U.S. has no hostile neighbors
  • We have oceans to protect us
  • No other nation on Earth has offensive capabilities that can reach us (other than with ICBMs that are relatively cheap to deter)
  • It’s fundamentally impossible for any nation to invade and conquer the United States, even if we abandoned our large defense establishment entirely, and went to a Swiss-style reserve army instead.

If we had just one-third of the current defense budget, the $400 billion saved could increase private job and wealth creation dramatically. This would be the best “stimulus” we could have, because this money would be available for the private sector to use as it sees fit, instead of as the politicians prefer.

Even then, the U.S. would still spend more than twice what China does. That’s more than enough to keep America safe.

What it likely wouldn’t permit is for U.S. politicians to station troops in wealthy countries like South Korea or Germany.

And, more importantly, it wouldn’t be enough money to bomb, invade, or occupy countries like Serbia, Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya.

This means we’d benefit even more . . .

  • Fewer war dead
  • Lower costs and less emotional turmoil due to fewer disabled veterans
  • Better relations with more countries as we intervene less
  • No more Wars of Choice

So what’s your verdict? Can you afford more wars of choice? Do you want to continue funding a bloated defense establishment, or would you like to keep more of your money to pursue your own goals and benevolent purposes?