Peter Lemkin Wrote:Hardly the time now to even discuss in detail 'how we got here'...
Will you lead and facilitate a thread about how folks can live in a state of austerity -- perhaps even extreme austerity -- in an environment in which surveillance is pervasive, suppression and terror are rampant, torture and detention are available, global warfare appears imminent, local agriculture is increasingly under attack, and most of the capital or real wealth has been neglected, destroyed or evacuated to different purposes, pockets or private accounts... in an environment in which civil disobedience has been weaponized by the likes of Gene Sharp for the CIA (Wall Street's centurions) and Gyorgi Soros for the elite and the Rothschild-driven New World Order (he is one of the 0.5%-ers, no?), heavy weaponry and assault brought to bear on open assembly, the right to own small weapons for self-defense under attack by the zionistas who have infiltrated the governments, propaganda techniques refined over the last century in full flower, and mass mind control in full development by DARPA and IARPA?
Please specify how individuals can provide for themselves and their loved ones, what kinds of activities are underway for the development of resilient communities, and differentiate the tactics and strategies that can be used at the local level, in the community or collective sense. [This can and should be done in a heavily-encrypted way, of course.]
Especially, I am interested in your ideas (or those of others) about how "we" (or you) (or I) can "awaken" individuals, educate and inform them as to the danger and the exit or escape pathways.
These are the thoughts that occupy my mind.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]3360[/ATTACH]
"Where is the intersection between the world's deep hunger and your deep gladness?"
Peter Lemkin Wrote:Hardly the time now to even discuss in detail 'how we got here'...
Will you lead and facilitate a thread about how folks can live in a state of austerity -- perhaps even extreme austerity -- in an environment in which surveillance is pervasive, suppression and terror are rampant, torture and detention are available, global warfare appears imminent, local agriculture is increasingly under attack, and most of the capital or real wealth has been neglected, destroyed or evacuated to different purposes, pockets or private accounts... in an environment in which civil disobedience has been weaponized by the likes of Gene Sharp for the CIA (Wall Street's centurions) and Gyorgi Soros for the elite and the Rothschild-driven New World Order (he is one of the 0.5%-ers, no?), heavy weaponry and assault brought to bear on open assembly, the right to own small weapons for self-defense under attack by the zionistas who have infiltrated the governments, propaganda techniques refined over the last century in full flower, and mass mind control in full development by DARPA and IARPA?
Please specify how individuals can provide for themselves and their loved ones, what kinds of activities are underway for the development of resilient communities, and differentiate the tactics and strategies that can be used at the local level, in the community or collective sense. [This can and should be done in a heavily-encrypted way, of course.]
Especially, I am interested in your ideas (or those of others) about how "we" (or you) (or I) can "awaken" individuals, educate and inform them as to the danger and the exit or escape pathways.
These are the thoughts that occupy my mind.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]3360[/ATTACH]
Was that directed at me? Quite a huge task! I'm not up for a detailed tackling of all that now, except to say that the Occupy Movement if it continues to grow and will include the few important issues it has not yet addressed may be the answer. We simply don't have the time perhaps to form another movement. Things are dire and the complete lock-down could come soon and within a few days of another 9-11 type operation or a war with Iran or many other scenarios - even a declaration of Occupiers as terrorists and their detention etc. Any of these would create a HUGE and angy reaction, followed by the calculated repression. One of the reasons I was booted of of the Education Forum [only one] was my constant mention of our approach to a fascist police state. I nww believe we have certainly passed the 'line', and are now on the other side.
All I know is we must work fast and in coordination actions to undo what has been done, before it is too late and the control is just too severe to deal with without great loss of life and [even greater losses of] liberties than we now see and feel. Dark times as the Empire fights to survive and crush all attempts to make it again a Civil and Democratic rule-based society. it really is for each person to find the place physically that works for them; the group they work with that works for them; the self-education that works for them; the communications that works and can't easily be shut down to communicate with information and friends, etc.
"Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws. - Mayer Rothschild
"Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience! People are obedient in the face of poverty, starvation, stupidity, war, and cruelty. Our problem is that grand thieves are running the country. That's our problem!" - Howard Zinn
"If there is no struggle there is no progress. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and never will" - Frederick Douglass
(KurtNimmoAlexJones) Infowars.com has received a document originating from Halliburton subsidiary KBR that provides details on a push to outfit FEMA and U.S. Army camps around the United States. Entitled "Project Overview and Anticipated Project Requirements," the document describes services KBR is looking to farm out to subcontractors. The document was passed on to us by a state government employee who wishes to remain anonymous for obvious reasons.
Peter Lemkin Wrote:Hardly the time now to even discuss in detail 'how we got here'...
Will you lead and facilitate a thread about .
These are the thoughts that occupy my mind.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]3360[/ATTACH]
Was that directed at me? ....
Well, you were the one that said we don't have time to reflect on how we got to this point, which isn't effective use of one's mind, but the earlier response (here mostly deleted) did suggest that it requires the input of others. You, if I have it right, are an environmentalist, scientist, educator, so I thought some ideas on the environment we find ourselves in might be in order. But the burden does not, thankfully, fall on you alone; others have given much thought to it.
For example:
A superbly valid hunk of congealed insight: the book "Deep Survival: Who Lives, Who Dies, and Why". In today's world, it is worth your time. The Amazon link is here: http://www.amazon.com/Deep-Survival-Who-...0393326152
From the description found there:
"Examining such stories of miraculous endurance and tragic deathhow people get into trouble and how they get out again (or not)Deep Survival takes us from the tops of snowy mountains and the depths of oceans to the workings of the brain that control our behavior. Through close analysis of case studies, Laurence Gonzales describes the "stages of survival" and reveals the essence of a survivortruths that apply not only to surviving in the wild but also to surviving life-threatening illness, relationships, the death of a loved one, running a business during uncertain times, even war."
"Deep Survival was the first scientific book on survival and has been embraced by everyone from the head of training for the Navy SEALs to the Sloan School of Management at MIT. Psychologists, oncologists, business executives, and clergy have brought the principles of Deep Survival to their patients, clients and congregations to help them face adversity, to manage risk, and to enhance decision making in every form."
"Survival is the celebration of choosing life over death. We know we're going to die. We all die.
But survival is saying: perhaps not today. In that sense, survivors don't defeat death, they come to terms with it." "The word 'experienced' often refers to someone who's gotten away with doing the wrong thing more frequently than you have."
"To deal with reality you must first recognize itas such."
****
George Soros, OWS, and the Otpor Fist (An Assortment)
Super-Empowered Individual "A super empowered individual, in my view, is autonomously capable of creating a cascading event that grand strategist Dr. Thomas P.M. Barnett has termed a 'system perturbation'; a disruption of system function and invalidation of existing rule sets to at least the national but more likely the global scale. The key requirements to become 'superempowered' are comprehension of a complex system's connectivity and operation; access to critical network hubs; possession of a force that can be leveraged against the structure of the system and a willingness to use it." -- Mark Safranski, ZenPundit.
Super-empowerment has been defined variously as superior economic empowerment, technological empowerment, materiel empowerment, intellectual empowerment, 'connectivity' empowerment, etc., in which the level of empowerment so far exceeds the norm for any given society or system, individuals possessing the included powers are capable of causing significant and generally irreparable alterations to the environment (system or society.) Super-empowered individuals possess a greater ability to affect systems than the vast majority of others living within those systems.
"...eventually, the application of our military power will mirror the dominant threat to a significant degree. In other words, we morph into a military of superempowered individuals fighting wars against superempowred individuals"
- Vice-Admiral Arthur K. Cebrowski and Dr. Thomas P.M. Barnett(1)
"First, very few people would be needed to carry out the attack. A single individual could spread a nationwide pandemic using a highly contagious virus. A two person team would be sufficient to deploy and detonate a couple of nuclear weapons"
- Dr. Fred C. Ikle, Annihilation From Within
"In fact, we may have seen the the first of 5GW in the anthrax and ricin attacks on Capitol Hill. To date, neither has been solved. Apparently a small group, perhaps an individual, decided to take on the power of the United States."
- Colonel T.X. Hammes, The Sling and the Stone
"Over time, perhaps as little as in twenty years, and as the leverage provided by technology increases, this threshold will finally reach its culmination - with the ability of one man to declare war on the world and win."
John Robb, Brave New War
So what we see above is some thinkers and militarists envisioning the future (which has become the present, especially in terms of people like Gyorgi Soros and his vast financial resources) but
the key here is for the well-meaning not-super-empowered individual to somehow become super-empowered and take away and use the weapons of the attacker/oppressor and apply them to the field of survival, the ability to thrive and the ability to empower or enlighten others.
December 11th, 2011Via: Los Angeles Times:
Armed with a search warrant, Nelson County Sheriff Kelly Janke went looking for six missing cows on the Brossart family farm in the early evening of June 23. Three men brandishing rifles chased him off, he said.
Janke knew the gunmen could be anywhere on the 3,000-acre spread in eastern North Dakota. Fearful of an armed standoff, he called in reinforcements from the state Highway Patrol, a regional SWAT team, a bomb squad, ambulances and deputy sheriffs from three other counties.
He also called in a Predator B drone.
As the unmanned aircraft circled 2 miles overhead the next morning, sophisticated sensors under the nose helped pinpoint the three suspects and showed they were unarmed. Police rushed in and made the first known arrests of U.S. citizens with help from a Predator, the spy drone that has helped revolutionize modern warfare.
But that was just the start. Local police say they have used two unarmed Predators based at Grand Forks Air Force Base to fly at least two dozen surveillance flights since June. The FBI and Drug Enforcement Administration have used Predators for other domestic investigations, officials said.
"We don't use [drones] on every call out," said Bill Macki, head of the police SWAT team in Grand Forks. "If we have something in town like an apartment complex, we don't call them."
The drones belong to U.S. Customs and Border Protection, which operates eight Predators on the country's northern and southwestern borders to search for illegal immigrants and smugglers. The previously unreported use of its drones to assist local, state and federal law enforcement has occurred without any public acknowledgment or debate. Posted in Police State, Rise of the Machines, Surveillance, Technology
"Where is the intersection between the world's deep hunger and your deep gladness?"
ShareThisChains we can believe in: Lawyers: Guantanamo disciplinary block violates Geneva Conventions 09 Dec 2011 U.S. military officials at Guantanamo Bay are defending conditions in a disciplinary block known as "Five Echo," taking the unusual step Friday of releasing photos of a section of the jail not typically shown to outsiders. Lawyers for prisoners... call it inhumane to keep detainees there for 22 hours a day, especially when they have not been convicted of a crime. David Remes, a Washington-based attorney who represents three prisoners who have been held in Five Echo, said this week that the disciplinary unit appears to violate the Geneva Conventions. "Five Echo is really a throwback to the bad old days at Guantanamo," Remes said.
"Where is the intersection between the world's deep hunger and your deep gladness?"
Everyone knows that [url=http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2011/12/ron-paul-"the-patriot-act-was-written-many-many-years-before-911-and-the-attacks-simply-provided-opportunity-for-some-people-to-do-what-they-wanted-to-do".html]the Patriot Act was drafted before 9/11[/url].
But few know that it was Joe Biden who drafted the core provisions which were included in that bill … in 1995.
CNET reported in 2008:
Months before the Oklahoma City bombing took place, Biden introduced another bill called the Omnibus Counterterrorism Act of 1995. It previewed the 2001 Patriot Act by allowing secret evidence to be used in prosecutions, expanding the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and wiretap laws, creating a new federal crime of "terrorism" that could be invoked based on political beliefs, permitting the U.S. military to be used in civilian law enforcement, and allowing permanent detention of non-U.S. citizens without judicial review.* The Center for National Security Studies said the bill would erode"constitutional and statutory due process protections" and would "authorize the Justice Department to pick and choose crimes to investigate and prosecute based on political beliefs and associations."
Biden himself draws parallels between his 1995 bill and its 2001 cousin. "I drafted a terrorism bill after the Oklahoma City bombing. And the bill John Ashcroft sent up was my bill," he said when the Patriot Act was being debated, according to the New Republic, which described him as "the Democratic Party's de facto spokesman on the war against terrorism."
***
Biden's proposal probably helped to lay the groundwork for the Bush administration's Patriot Act.
The Center for National Securities reported in 1995:
On February 10, 1995, a counterterrorism bill drafted by the Clinton
Administration was introduced in the Senate as S. 390 and in the House of
Representatives as H.R. 896.
The Clinton bill is a mixture of: provisions eroding constitutional and
statutory due process protections, selective federalization on political
grounds of state crimes (minus state due process rules), discredited
ideas from the Reagan and Bush Administrations, and the extension of some of
the worst elements of crime bills of the recent past.
The legislation would:
1. authorize the Justice Department to pick and choose crimes to
investigate and prosecute based on political beliefs and associations;
2. repeal the ancient provision barring the U.S. military from civilian
law enforcement;
3. expand a pre-trial detention scheme that puts the burden of proof on
the accused;
4. loosen the carefully-crafted rules governing federal wiretaps, in
violation of the Fourth Amendment;
5. establish special courts that would use secret evidence to order the
deportation of persons convicted of no crimes, in violation of basic
principles of due process;
6. permit permanent detention by the Attorney General of aliens convicted
of no crimes, with no judicial review;
7. give the President unreviewable power to criminalize fund-raising for
lawful activities associated with unpopular causes;
8. renege on the Administration's approval in the last Congress of a
provision to insure that the FBI would not investigate based on First
Amendment activities; and
9. resurrect the discredited ideological visa denial provisions of the
McCarran Walter Act to bar foreign speakers.
* Note: The CNET article contains a typographical error, using the word "detection" instead of "detention" in the sentence: "allowing permanent detection of non-U.S. citizens without judicial review". Not only does this make no sense, but a review of the bill confirms that it provided for permanent detention.
"Where is the intersection between the world's deep hunger and your deep gladness?"
Indefinite Detention of American Citizens: Coming Soon to Battlefield U.S.A. By Matt Taibbi
December 12, 2011 "Rolling Stone" -- There's some disturbing rhetoric flying around in the debate over theNational Defense Authorization Act, which among other things contains passages that a) officially codify the already-accepted practice of indefinite detention of "terrorist" suspects, and b) transfer the responsibility for such detentions exclusively to the military. The fact that there's been only some muted public uproar about this provision (which, disturbingly enough, is the creature of Wall Street anti-corruption good guy Carl Levin, along with John McCain) is mildly surprising, given what's been going on with the Occupy movement. Protesters in fact should be keenly interested in the potential applications of this provision, which essentially gives the executive branch unlimited powers to indefinitely detain terror suspects without trial. The really galling thing is that this act specifically envisions American citizens falling under the authority of the bill. One of its supporters, the dependably-unlikeable Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, bragged that the law "basically says … for the first time that the homeland is part of the battlefield" and that people can be jailed without trial, be they "American citizen or not." New Hampshire Republican Kelly Ayotte reiterated that "America is part of the battlefield." Officially speaking, of course, the bill only pertains to:
"... a person who was a part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners."
As Glenn Greenwald notes, the key passages here are "substantially supported" and "associated forces." The Obama administration and various courts have already expanded their definition of terrorism to include groups with no connection to 9/11 (i.e. certain belligerents in Yemen and Somalia) and to individuals who are not members of the target terror groups, but merely provided "substantial support." The definitions, then, are, for the authorities, conveniently fungible. They may use indefinite detention against anyone who "substantially supports" terror against the United States, and it looks an awful lot like they have leeway in defining not only what constitutes "substantial" and "support," but even what "terror" is. Is a terrorist under this law necessarily a member of al-Qaeda or the Taliban? Or is it merely someone who is "engaged in hostilities against the United States"? Here's where I think we're in very dangerous territory. We have two very different but similarly large protest movements going on right now in the Tea Party and the Occupy Movement. What if one of them is linked to a violent act? What if a bomb goes off in a police station in Oakland, or an IRS office in Texas? What if the FBI then linked those acts to Occupy or the Tea Party? You can see where this is going. When protesters on the left first started flipping out about George Bush's indefinite detention and rendition policies, most people thought the idea that these practices might someday be used against ordinary Americans was merely an academic concern, something theoretical. But it's real now. If these laws are passed, we would be forced to rely upon the discretion of a demonstrably corrupt and consistently idiotic government to not use these awful powers to strike back at legitimate domestic unrest. Right now, the Senate is openly taking aim at the rights of American citizens under the guise of an argument that anyone who supports al-Qaeda has no rights. But if you pay close attention, you'll notice the law's supporters here and there conveniently leaving out those caveats about "anyone who supports al-Qaeda." For instance, here's Lindsey Graham again:
"If you're an American citizen and you betray your country, you're not going to be given a lawyer ... I believe our military should be deeply involved in fighting these guys at home or abroad."
As Greenwald points out, this idea that an American who commits treason can be detained without due process is in direct defiance of Article III, Section III of the Constitution, which reads:
"No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court."
This effort to eat away at the rights of the accused was originally gradual, but to me it looks like that process is accelerating. It began in the Bush years with a nebulous description of terrorist sedition that may or may not have included links to Sunni extremist groups in places like Afghanistan and Pakistan. But words like "associated" and "substantial" and "betray" have crept into the discussion, and now it feels like the definition of a terrorist is anyone who crosses some sort of steadily-advancing invisible line in their opposition to the current government. This confusion about the definition of terrorism comes at a time when the economy is terrible, the domestic government is more unpopular than ever, and there is quite a lot of radical and even revolutionary political agitation going on right here at home. There are people out there I've met some of them, in both the Occupy and Tea Party movements who think that the entire American political system needs to be overthrown, or at least reconfigured, in order for progress to be made. It sounds paranoid and nuts to think that those people might be arrested and whisked away to indefinite, lawyerless detention by the military, but remember: This isn't about what's logical, it's about what's going on in the brains of people like Lindsey Graham and John McCain. At what point do those luminaries start equating al-Qaeda supporters with, say, radical anti-capitalists in the Occupy movement? What exactly is the difference between such groups in the minds (excuse me, in what passes for the minds) of the people who run this country? That difference seems to be getting smaller and smaller all the time, and such niceties as American citizenship and the legal tradition of due process seem to be less and less meaningful to the people who run things in America. What does seem real to them is this "battlefield earth" vision of the world, in which they are behind one set of lines and an increasingly enormous group of other people is on the other side. Here's another way to ask the question: On which side of the societal fence do you think the McCains and Grahams would put, say, an unemployed American plumber who refused an eviction order from Bank of America and holed up with his family in his Florida house, refusing to move? Would Graham/McCain consider that person to have the same rights as Lloyd Blankfein, or is that plumber closer, in their eyes, to being like the young Muslim who throws a rock at a U.S. embassy in Yemen? A few years ago, that would have sounded like a hysterical question. But it just doesn't seem that crazy anymore. We're turning into a kind of sci-fi society in which making it and being a success not only means getting rich, but also means winning the full rights of citizenship. I hope I'm wrong, but I don't see this ending well.
Proof Obama will sign NDAA 1031 Citizen Imprisonment Law in a few days
The video below [the same one posted above, with Sen. Carl Levin] was embedded in this article by ICH and did not appear in the original Rolling Stone item
As soon as December 13, the President will sign NDAA Section 1031 into law, permitting citizen imprisonment without evidence or trial. The bill that passed Congress absolutely DOES NOT exempt citizens. The text of Section 1031 reads, "A covered person under this section" includes "any person who has committed a belligerent act". We only have to be ACCUSED, because we don't get a trial.
- Confusingly, Obama threatened a veto for 1032, but NOT 1031. 1032 is UNRELATED to imprisoning citizens without a trial. He has never suggested using a veto to stop Section 1031 citizen imprisonment -- in fact, it was requested by the Obama administration. Watch the video for proof.
- The Feinstein Amendment 1031(e) is dangerously misleading. Don't be fooled: In the text of 1031(e), "Nothing in this section shall be construed...", the only word that matters is "construed" because the Supreme Court are the only ones with the power to construe the law. The Feinstein Amendment 1031(e) permits citizens to be imprisoned without evidence or a trial forever, if the Supreme Court does not EXPLICITLY repeal 1031.
- Any time you hear the words, "requirement for military custody" this refers to 1032 NOT 1031. We MUST not confuse these two sections. In its statements, the Obama administration has actually contributed to the confusion about 1032's "requirement for military custody", which is COMPLETEY UNRELATED to Section 1031 citizen imprisonment without trial. These tricky, misleading words appear even in major news stories. Don't fall for it!
If we act urgently to tell our friends, family, and colleagues, we may still be able to prevent this. Here is what we can do:
4) Write and call the White House to tell the President you won't sit by and watch NDAA Section 1031 and the dangerously misleading Feinstein Amendment 1031(e) become law:http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/submit...d-comments
"Where is the intersection between the world's deep hunger and your deep gladness?"
This is fully an act of war against the American people and its Constitution by the government. I think a formal movement to impeach president Obama should commence. How this constitutes the promise of "Change" that got Obama elected is beyond bizarre. Time to depose the soccer mom republic and re-install the orginal democracy that is being betrayed by this outrageous act.
Albert Doyle Wrote:This is fully an act of war against the American people and its Constitution by the government. I think a formal movement to impeach president Obama should commence. How this constitutes the promise of "Change" that got Obama elected is beyond bizarre. Time to depose the soccer mom republic and re-install the orginal democracy that is being betrayed by this outrageous act.
There's no talking past this...
Can't disagree with the above. It's so simple, obvious and blatant as to beg the question.
[No personal offense meant to either, or their compatriots or spectators, but while Mssrs. Drago and Fetzer argue about the involvement of one dead person in the assassination of another, I can't help think that I'd like to have all those minds focused -- for at least a little while -- on the present. LBJ could have dashed upstairs, fired the fatal bullet himself, run down stairs to change its trajectory and clone it while simultaneously fanning the air to remove smoke, sounds, and otherwise perturbate the cosmic forces to alter photos and films, but it still doesn't change the fact that the rule of law and the role of the civil rights package in the first ten amendments (which was a package deal to get the whole enchilada put in place, was it not?) have been irrevocably altered and remain under attack. Impeachment is a kind thing to discuss, and it should be extended to most of Congress too.
"Where is the intersection between the world's deep hunger and your deep gladness?"
![[Image: blank.gif]](http://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gif)
iations."