War On You: Breaking Alternative News » Fascism

Obama says he doesn’t even need NDAA to indefinitely detain Americans

WarOnYou — Wed, 04 Jan 2012 18:45:56 +0000

Obama says he doesn’t even need NDAA to indefinitely detain Americans

EXCERPT

January 4, 2012

“My Administration has consistently opposed such measures. Ultimately, I decided to sign this bill not only because of the critically important services it provides for our forces and their families and the national security programs it authorizes, but also because the Congress revised provisions that otherwise would have jeopardized the safety, security, and liberty of the American people. Moving forward, my Administration will interpret and implement the provisions described in a manner that best preserves the flexibility on which our safety depends and upholds the values on which this country was founded.”
The president went onto say that the provisions in question – specifically Sect. 1021, which he said merely “affirms the executive branch’s authority to detain persons covered by the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force.” He describes the provision as “unnecessary.”

President Obama stated: “Two critical limitations in section 1021 confirm that it solely codifies established authorities. First, under section 1021(d), the bill does not limit or expand the authority of the President or the scope of the Authorization for Use of Military Force. Second, under section 1021(e), the bill may not be construed to affect any existing law or authorities relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States, or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States.”

In other words, the president is using Washingtonspeak to say he already had the authority to do what the NDAA law merely “codifies.” So the danger that many Americans, lawmakers and advocacy groups are concerned about is why this president claimed the authority to kill an American citizen in… who had not actually carried out any terrorist attacks against the U.S., but was only suspected of wrongdoing.

Obama Signs Indefinite Detention Without Trial Bill Into Law; Claims His Regime Won’t Use It

WarOnYou — Sun, 01 Jan 2012 07:22:16 +0000

Obama Signs Indefinite Detention Without Trial Bill Into Law; Claims His Regime Won’t Use It

January 1st, 2012

Whatever you say, Mr. Hopey Changey.

What about the next resident of the White House and the next?

Via: AFP:

The measure, which passed by wide majorities in Congress, says the US military has the power to detain terror suspects without trial for as long as the US global anti-terror campaign is waged.

Obama was particularly troubled by a section of the bill which appears to leave open the option that a US citizen who is considered a terror suspect could be detained indefinitely in military custody.

“I want to clarify that my Administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens,” Obama said.

“Indeed, I believe that doing so would break with our most important traditions and values as a nation.”

The new law revives debate over the complicated legal thicket surrounding the treatment of terror suspects and over rules hurriedly drawn up by the previous Bush administration after the September 11 attacks in 2001.

Obama has sought to preserve the option of trying some terror suspects in federal courts, or for those accused of plotting new attacks against the United States to be processed through the civilian legal system.

“I reject any approach that would mandate military custody where law enforcement provides the best method of incapacitating a terrorist threat,” Obama said in the signing statement.

U.S. Court Upholds Telecom Immunity for Surveillance of Americans

WarOnYou — Sat, 31 Dec 2011 08:24:39 +0000

U.S. Court Upholds Telecom Immunity for Surveillance of Americans

December 30th, 2011

Searching for Mark Klein on Cryptogon will bring up several references to the NSA’s mass surveillance operations.

Via: Reuters:

A U.S. appeals panel on Thursday upheld the constitutionality of a federal law that grants immunity to telecommunications companies that assist the U.S. government in conducting surveillance of American citizens.

…

Several lawsuits filed in the wake of revelations about warrantless wiretapping alleged that telecom companies provided authorities with direct access to nearly all communications passing through their domestic facilities.

Besides the government itself, defendants included AT&T, Sprint Nextel and Verizon Communications Inc.

In 2008, Congress granted telecoms immunity for cooperating with the government’s intelligence-gathering activities. A district judge in San Francisco upheld the law as constitutional, and dismissed the claims against the companies.

In a ruling on Thursday, a unanimous three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit agreed. The appeals court covers nine Western U.S. states.

…

In a separate ruling, the 9th Circuit on Thursday allowed a separate case against the government to proceed, in which plaintiffs allege a communications dragnet of ordinary citizens.

That lawsuit claims the National Security Agency diverted Internet traffic into secure rooms in AT&T facilities across the country. The proposed class action alleges “an unprecedented suspicionless general search” throughout the communications network.

The transparency problem: the government will not tell you why it’s legal to kill you

WarOnYou — Wed, 28 Dec 2011 06:08:49 +0000

The transparency problem: the government will not tell you why it’s legal to kill you

December 27, 2011

Print Version

By Madison Ruppert
Editor of End the Lie

President Barack Obama has leveraged heavy rhetoric on the subject of transparency for some time now, even going as far as to publish on the official White House website that his “Administration is committed to an unprecedented level of openness in Government.”

If this is open government, I can’t begin to imagine what a closed government is.

After Anwar al-Awlaki was allegedly assassinated in Yemen, the New York Times sought to find out the legal basis for the Obama administration’s secretive “kill list” which apparently can now include United States citizens.

The complaint, made by plaintiffs The New York Times Company, Charlie Savage, Scott Shane, and their undersigned attorney was filed after the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) refused to release agency records in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request.

The plaintiffs contend that the requests were made properly and the DOJ improperly withheld the records which deal with the looming questions that surround the legality of so-called “targeted killing” under both American and international law.

The complaint cites “notable legal scholars, human rights activists, and current and former government officials [who] have called for the government to disclose its legal analysis justifying the use of targeted lethal force, especially as it applies to American citizens.”

I think that these questions are even more important in the aftermath of the House and Senate passing the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (NDAA) which allows American citizens to be indefinitely detained without charge or trial.

The complaint states that the New York Times filed proper FOIA requests seeking memoranda detailing the legal analysis and supposed justification behind killing American citizens, both before and after the al-Awlaki killing.

As of the filing of the complaint on December 20, 2011, the DOJ refused to release any of these memos or even any portions of the memoranda, claiming that they were classified and privileged, and thus are exempt from disclosure under the FOIA guidelines.

Even more absurd, the DOJ has actually refused to either confirm or deny the existence of some of the memos entirely.

This is after the The Washington Post published a story on September 30, 2011 which stated, “The Justice Department wrote a secret memorandum authorizing the lethal targeting of Anwar al-Aulaqi,” which makes one wonder how The Washington Post knew such a thing when the DOJ refuses to even acknowledge any existence of the memo.

Peter Finn, the author of The Washington Post article stated that, “The document was produced following a review of the legal issues raised by striking a U.S. citizen and involved senior lawyers from across the administration. There was no dissent about the legality of killing Aulaqi, the officials said.”

Why are officials willing to anonymously discuss these contentious issues with reporters but not willing to account for their decisions to the American people, in accordance with U.S. law?

Clearly, the Obama administration considers their stance transparency to be as iron clad as the rest of his campaign promises; that is to say, not at all.

Finn’s article stated that the nameless officials refused to elucidate the exact legal analysis that brought them to the decision, including how they considered any Fifth Amendment right to due process.

More importantly, the article quoted a “former senior intelligence official” who said that the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) “would not have killed an American without such a written opinion,” making it very unlikely that the DOJ does not possess such a document or cannot obtain it.

The complaint states that on October 7, 2011, Charlie Savage filed a FOIA request to the DOJ’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) which sought a copy of “all Office of Legal Counsel memorandums analyzing the circumstances under which it would be lawful for the United States armed forces or intelligence community assets to target for killing a United States citizen who is deemed to be a terrorist.”

One thing that this statement doesn’t emphasize is that while al-Awlaki was clearly “radical” in his approach to Islam and rhetoric, there was never a charge or trial that actually proved beyond a reasonable doubt that he was a terrorist.

The entire point of the First Amendment is not that it protects your right to discuss last night’s football game, but instead to protect unpopular speech, which is definitely the type of speech which al-Awlaki was engaging in.

However, the despicable nature of what al-Awlaki was promoting does not somehow strip him of his right to a fair trial under the Fifth Amendment, something which is arguably one of the most vital rights protected by the Constitution, which was gravely injured – if not wiped out completely – by the NDAA.

Just 20 days after Savage filed his FOIA request on October 7, 2011 the DOJ denied his request by letter, leading to this last-ditch effort to bring some semblance of accountability to this issue.

The fact that there are memos of some sort is somewhat undeniable; given that on February 3, 2010, the Director of National Intelligence Dennis C. Blair testified to the House’s Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence that “we take direct actions against terrorists in the intelligence community. If we think that direct action will involve killing an American citizen, we get specific permission to do that.”

This quote is included in the complaint on page 6, clearly indicating that there is some sort of legal basis or analysis that they have utilized to justify their actions, while refusing to actually account for this to the American people.

I am obviously not the only one who finds this deeply unsettling, especially with the recent traitorous activities in the House and Senate which could result in such actions being taken against countless Americans who “officials have deemed … to be terrorists.”

A noteworthy issue to bring up here is that if al-Awlaki was indeed a terrorist – which again, is unproven beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law – the American government has been directly dealing with and supporting terrorists, something which would make anyone involved eligible for indefinite detention under Section 1021 of the NDAA.

Indeed, the fact that al-Awlaki dined at the Pentagon on February 5, 2002, as exposed by – of all news agencies – Rupert Murdoch’s Fox News raises some larger questions about transparency and the so-called War on Terror, which is a total and complete sham.

Keep in mind that by July 2002, al-Awlaki was already under investigation for being sent funds by an individual who was the subject of a U.S. Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) investigation and thus al-Awlaki was placed on a precursor to what is now referred to as the terror watch list.

According to ABC News, “A felony arrest warrant for radical Islamic cleric Anwar al Awlaki was rescinded in 2002 a day before he was intercepted as a terror suspect at New York’s JFK airport, forcing authorities to release him, according to sources familiar with the case. The warrant was cancelled by the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Denver, even though Awlaki was on a terror watch list, and even though the office’s supervising prosecutor for terror cases — who has now been appointed by the Obama administration as the U.S. Attorney in Denver — had been fully briefed on Awlaki’s alleged terror ties, according to investigators.”

al-Awlaki had also been investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in both 1999 and 2000, leading one to ask: how could such an individual be invited to dine at the Pentagon?

More importantly, why did the Department of Defense’s lawyer who vetted al-Awlaki write that she “had the privilege of hearing one of Mr. Awlaki’s presentations in November and was impressed by both the extent of his knowledge and by how he communicated that information and handled a hostile element in the audience”?

When Fox News attempted to reach the Office of General Counsel for comment on the meeting along with their vetting process, the Department of Defense claimed they did not have any additional information to provide.

This is where the transparency problem rears its ugly head once again and makes it hard to ignore the intimate ties between our government, which claims to be fighting terrorism, and the terrorists themselves.

The most absurd part is that Obama continues to claim that they are working towards transparency, and even going as far as to laughably criticize Mitt Romney for a lack of transparency.

Part of Obama’s re-election campaign is attempting to trick gullible Americans into thinking he is a populist, which to anyone who has followed his administration closely is simply ludicrous.

According to Talk Radio News, today the Obama for America campaign published a link to an editorial published in The Washington Post which accused Romney of being “zero for two when it comes to transparency in campaigning.”

This is clearly implying that Obama has a history of transparency, which once again is so obviously false it is almost painful to see his campaign continuing to leverage this absurdist claim.

I am far from the only one who has criticized the Obama administration for their lack of transparency.

Indeed, yesterday The Hill published a lengthy article entitled, “Watchdogs say Obama has not done enough on government transparency,” although the headline is a bit of an understatement given that Obama has in many ways made transparency even worse.

They pointed to the so-called “supercommittee” meeting on deficit reduction behind closed doors as a shining example of Obama’s “failing to keep his word on putting Congress’s work before the public.”

They also pointed out that Obama failed to uphold his promise to air healthcare negotiations live on C-SPAN, although I think the issues surrounding assassination of American citizens are much more pressing and dire than both of these examples combined.

“Over the past three years, federal agencies have gone to great efforts to make government more transparent and more accessible than ever, to provide people with information that they can use in their daily lives,” a spokesman for the White House, Eric Shultz, said in a statement.

Yet when it comes to the most critical issues of all, the federal agencies continue to stonewall the American people while still slyly implying that they indeed have the justification and analysis to back up their decisions all while refusing to provide them.

The brazenness of how our so-called government is refusing to account for killing Americans is nothing short of astounding, especially given the most recent developments which very well could label immense amounts of Americans as “belligerent” and thus “covered persons” under the NDAA.

As I have previously mentioned, the problem is not only that the language in the NDAA explicitly allows for the indefinite detention of American citizens without charge or trial on nothing more than suspicion – not to mention the ability to transfer such “covered persons” to any foreign nation or foreign entity they choose – but that we will likely never even know how the DOJ officially interprets the legislation.

This is far from baseless, empty speculation given that back in May Senator Ron Wyden, a Democrat from Oregon, revealed, “the government applies a far broader legal interpretation [to the PATRIOT Act] – an interpretation that the government has conveniently classified, so it cannot be publicly assessed or challenged.”

The May Wired article said that the FBI passed the buck on commenting on any secret interpretations of the PATRIOT Act to the DOJ – the same agency which is now refusing to even comment on the existence of memos justifying the assassination of Americans.

Unsurprisingly, the DOJ stated it would not comment beyond a brief testimony before Congress from Todd Hinnen, the agency’s top national security official.

Hinnen’s testimony in no way cleared up exactly what this secret interpretation is and instead seemed much more like damage control.

During the testimony he said that the material they collect under the PATRIOT Act is individualized and specific, including: “driver’s license records, hotel records, car-rental records, apartment-leasing records, credit card records, and the like.”

Yet Hinnen also stated that the business-record provision of the PATRIOT Act “also” allowed “important and highly sensitive intelligence-collection operations” to be conducted.

This is the typical ambiguous language utilized by government officials to give them the mammoth wiggle-room to covertly abuse legislation and strip us of our rights at every available juncture.

If the American government has any hope of having legitimacy in the eyes of the citizens of the United States, or for that matter, the world at large, transparency needs to be one of the first issued addressed.

We are at a time of crisis in this nation: with economic collapse looming on the horizon thanks to criminals in the financial industry and the corrupt private Federal Reserve; de facto martial law thanks to a steadily militarized police force; the stripping of our most essential rights under the NDAA; comprehensive surveillance programs that include smartphones, centralized biometric databases, drone surveillance, citizen spying programs, and threat assessments; pending draconian internet legislation; dangerous domestic drone programs; and far too many other disturbing trends.

The total lack of transparency in our government is just one of the many symptoms of a disease which is wracking our nation and the world and to make matters even more absurd, for some strange reason our president was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.

Without making this one simple change, likely the easiest thing to demand from our corrupt government, we will only see increasingly disturbing developments that will continue to undermine the foundations of our nation and put all of our lives – and those of future generations – in danger.

Do you have a tip or a story idea? I’d love to hear from you! Please do not hesitate to send me an email at Admin@EndtheLie.com with anything and everything you have to share. I read all of my emails and why I can’t possibly manage to reply to them all, I guarantee I read them all and apply to as many as humanly feasible.

The American Fascist Sandwich: Indefinite Detention and Internment Camps

WarOnYou — Mon, 26 Dec 2011 08:48:46 +0000

The American Fascist Sandwich: Indefinite Detention and Internment Camps

December 25, 2011

Print Version

By Brennan Browne
Activist Post

The Bill of Rights is no more. On December 15th, 2011 at the hands of a metastasizing malignancy, masquerading as purveyors of freedom, whatever hope we had of liberty and the pursuit of peace was officially assassinated. We are now a police state.

Overwhelming feelings of searing rage and disgust at the wicked abomination that is our Congress and President cannot be contained. Our government, courts, military and law enforcement — which have been controlled by socio/psychopaths for decades — continues to decompose into a rabid, sleazy, moronic, delusional group of arrogant, self-serving, sycophantic, greedy, whores.

It’s time to dispense with semantic subtleties meant to placate and avoid offense. Diplomacy is reserved for those who are worthy. No more time to waste on pandering to, analyzing, intellectualizing or sugar-coating treachery. The State is the enemy of the people. Those responsible for instilling fear, subjugation, humiliation, imprisonment, torture and murder are our own government terrorists–the U.S. Congress, the President of the United States and their minions.

They have betrayed the American citizenry, as they have the rest of the world. They have defiled and destroyed the Constitution. They have committed treason. They are grinding the 99% into the ground with every stroke of the pen; every vote cast in the name of enriching their corporate umbilical cords and bank accounts. They do not deserve respect. They are thieves who have hijacked their positions of power. They deserve exactly what the National Defense Authorization Act will now so freely foist upon the rest of us — to be tossed into a hole to rot somewhere without benefit of charges, trial, or protection from torture and murder, for the rest of their miserable, worthless existences.

One owes no civility to barbarians. No benevolence to fascists. Capitol Hill and the White House have declared war on the American people. Their intent is crystal clear for all paying attention. Conspiracy theory ‘lunatics’ are having the last laugh as their warnings are now bearing fruit. It is no longer outrageous conjecture to believe our own government is intent on our demise.

The United States Army is actively recruiting individuals for internment camp guards. The military does not recruit people for phantom positions for which they intend no future use.

It is time for the populace to withdraw from the mindless euphoria of consumerism that has become their god and WAKE UP. Our chances for survival can only come if we are focused on the threat at hand. We do not have the power to confront the police state head on, but it can and must be circumvented. We must not cooperate. Totalitarianism must be denied legitimacy. It demands defiance. However small or large and in whatever non-complying way each individual finds to do so. We must not allow ourselves to go passively to slaughter. There are no merciful tyrants. No quasi-democracies which do not degrade into homicidal fascism. History has foretold our future. Pol Pot, Mao Tse-Tung, Stalin, Hitler — countless millions met their end without a whimper. For those believing our fate will be any different, you seal your own doom.

The lessons of Germany’s atrocities are barely 66 years behind us. And yet the father of modern fascism in America, Ronald Reagan, began his assault on our liberties a mere 35 years after the smoldering stench of the death camps. We did not rise up as he busted unions, gave multimillionaires and corporations free reign, slashed wages for the working class and took a blowtorch to social safety nets. He militarized our civilian police force by inventing the “War on Drugs” while simultaneously partnering with Colombian drug cartels to import tons of pure cocaine into the U.S. via the CIA; money which was then used — along with his treasonous arms sales to Iran — to fund his covert war in Central America, where Reagan’s henchmen trained “death squads” responsible for massacring hundreds of thousands of pro-democracy villagers. He did no less than target the poor in this country for extermination through legislation. He set the precedent for today’s legislative atrocities.

Every man awarded the top prize of the White House since Reagan, has cranked his torturer’s rack a little tighter; squeezing more blood and sweat from the powerless. One in two citizens is now hovering at poverty level. Homelessness, joblessness and hunger are at an all time high. It’s a monstrous lie to call what we are experiencing a recession. It is a depression for all but the wealthy — no matter the propaganda spewed daily over the corporate airwaves claiming otherwise. Yet, Congress is never at a loss to award itself annual pay raises, even though most have personal wealth in the multiple millions and refuse to set a federal minimum wage above slave levels.

They can easily find another billion to add to the imperial war chest whenever needed, as they continue to siphon off billions more from taxpayers to divvy up between themselves and their cronies. Their gold standard health care coverage and cushy retirement packages along with myriad other perks — not to mention lucrative insider trading and backdoor deals cut with their corporate sponsors to insure millions in future income — assures them 100% protection as they pompously and with overt, contemptuous hypocrisy, demand ever more austerity from those who are shoeless and threadbare. Members of Congress have, without an ounce of shame, labeled the poor “slackers” and “deadbeats,” failing to recognize that this description instead fits these elitist, government welfare parasites to a T.

The mob has more ethics than the collection of human waste occupying most of the government positions in our country today. At the very least, the Mafia never abandons their families to starvation and homelessness. Only those professing “Christian family values” partake in such criminal behavior. With Christians like these, their motto should be: “What a friend we have in Satan!” There is no empathy, compassion, or goodness in them.

Our rights, however fleeting and illusionary they may have been, have now been solidly extinguished. We are at the mercy of the merciless. Our jobs, homes, bellies and very existences are undergoing unprecedented assaults. We have been pushed to the wall; becoming fodder for the psychopaths at the top who are bent on our destruction. NOW IS THE TIME TO RESIST.

There will be many people who believe if they “cooperate” they will be spared the horrors of police state brutality. The world is full of as yet, undiscovered, anonymous ‘pits of death’ housing the remains of those who naively believed exactly the same thing.

There are fates far worse than death; living in constant fear, having one’s dignity repeatedly assaulted, being subjected to humiliating, inhumane conditions, tortured and debased, allowing others to reduce our individual humanity down to pleading, whimpering and groveling. Life at any cost is not “living.”

We have a higher moral allegiance to support our friends, neighbors and local community over and above the self-serving dictates of an evil government. Without the eyes and ears of 313 million people choosing NOT to arbitrarily and without just cause, inform on others, the police state becomes seriously impotent. There are only so many people the government has to man cameras, joysticks, computer screens, eavesdropping and tracking devices and to collate information into their mega-databases. Their numbers comprise, on the high end, multiple thousands.

We can begin our self-empowerment by forming micro resistance groups composed of trusted friends and family who set the same goals and strategize together. Choosing to shut down the personal flow of information about ourselves whenever possible, even if it may mean major inconveniences, can be an effective way to resist police state intrusions.

This may require making several lifestyle changes in order to facilitate making the information the government already has, obsolete; giving up drivers licenses when the state demands fingerprints/biometric info and switching to bicycles, carpools or public transportation; closing banks accounts, using cash and placing money in non-traditional locations; accepting less pay or creating self-employment to remove one’s self from the information requirements of intrusive employers; bartering to reduce paper trails; declining to provide information on a plethora of fronts we are bombarded with daily, i.e., discount “club” card applications, membership and participation in social networking sites, access to library privileges, signing petitions, etc.

In short, every time our personal information is required, for whatever reason, we must have the courage to decline, even if it means accepting some harsh consequences. While some may reject this form of defiance as highly impractical (and in some cases impossible), they must be reminded that the reality of doing nothing may mean being torn from your home, family, friends and livelihood to endure hard labor, torture and possible extermination in an internment camp.

Everyone can do at least some of these things to help protect their privacy and therefore reduce their chance of becoming the government’s prey. We cannot control what a police state does to us, but we do have the power to control how we react to it — making it far more difficult for fascism to operate. As Mahatma Gandhi proved, massive non-cooperation is revolutionary in crushing totalitarianism.

Each of us as Americans has a duty to resist this government. Anything less, virtually assures our total enslavement and death.

If you are one of those who still can’t wrap your head around what is taking place in America, remember the American-Japanese internment camps of WWII. Now fast-forward to December 2002. The Bush administration notified over 10,000 men of Middle Eastern descent to appear for a “special registration.” When they complied, they were promptly arrested and interrogated; strip-searched, denied lawyers and hauled away to detention centers. None of these individuals had committed crimes. Whether 1945 or 2002 nothing has changed — nor will it, until we actively circumvent fascism.

May we find unity, strength, courage and resolve in resisting the forces of evil calling themselves “champions of freedom” — for the darkest days and years have just begun.

New Army Jobs: Internment / Resettlement Specialist (31E)

WarOnYou — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 07:16:53 +0000

New Army Jobs: Internment / Resettlement Specialist (31E)

12-08-2011 • http://www.goarmy.com/careers-and-jobs

Internment/Resettlement (I/R) Specialists in the Army are primarily responsible for day-to-day operations in a military confinement/correctional facility or detention/internment facility. I/R Specialists provide rehabilitative, health, welfare, and security to U.S. military prisoners within a confinement or correctional facility; conduct inspections; prepare written reports; and coordinate activities of prisoners/internees and staff personnel.

Some of your duties as an Internment/Resettlement Specialist may include:

Assist with the supervision and management of confinement and detention operations Provide external security to confinement/corrections facilities or detention/internment facilities Provide counseling and guidance to individual prisoners within a rehabilitative program Prepare or review reports and records of prisoners/internees and programs

Training Helpful Skills Advanced Responsibilities Related Civilian Jobs Related Army Positions Civilian Certifications Earned

TrainingJob training for an Internment/Resettlement Specialist requires nine weeks of Basic Training, where you’ll learn basic Soldiering skills, and eight weeks of Advanced Individual Training. Part of this time is spent in the classroom and part in a field environment. Some of the skills you’ll learn are:

Military laws and jurisdictions Level of Force Procedures Unarmed Self-Defense Techniques Police Deviance and Ethics Procedures Interpersonal Communications Skills Close confinement operations Search and restraint procedures Use of firearms Custody and control procedures

Helpful SkillsHelpful attributes include:

An ability to think and react quickly An ability to remain calm in stressful situations An interest in law enforcement and crime prevention Being physically fit

Advanced ResponsibilitiesAdvanced level Internment/Resettlement Specialist provides guidance, supervises and trains other Soldiers within the same discipline. As an advanced level I/R Specialist, you may be involved in:

Supervise and establish all administrative, logistical and food support operations, confinement/correctional, custodial, treatment, and rehabilitative activities Responsible for all personnel working in the confinement/correctional facility, including security, logistical, and administrative management of the prisoner/internee population Provide command and control, staff planning, administration/logistical services, and custody/control for the operation of an Enemy Prisoner of War/Civilian Internee (EPW/CI) camp Provide command and control, staff planning, administration/logistical services, and custody/control for the operation of detention facility or the operation of a displaced civilian (DC) resettlement facility

Related Civilian JobsThe skills you’ll learn as an Internment/Resettlement Specialist will help prepare you for a future with federal, state, county or city law enforcement agencies or the federal penal system. You might also be able to pursue a career as a security guard with industrial firms, airports or other businesses and institutions.

Related Army Positions Military Police (31B) Criminal Investigations (CID) Special Agent (31D)

Supreme Court Will Hear Case of Man Arrested After Telling Cheney What He Thought About Iraq War

WarOnYou — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 07:52:38 +0000

Supreme Court Will Hear Case of Man Arrested After Telling Cheney What He Thought About Iraq War

December 6, 2011

Print Version

Source: New York Times

The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to decide whether Secret Service agents protecting Vice President Dick Cheney may be sued for violating the free speech rights of a member of the public who made critical remarks about the Bush administration’s war policies.

The case arose from an episode in 2006 at a mall in Beaver Creek, Colo. A Secret Service agent said he heard Steven Howards say into a cellphone that he planned to ask Mr. Cheney “how many kids he’s killed today.” Mr. Howards later approached Mr. Cheney and said the administration’s “policies in Iraq are disgusting.” Mr. Howards then touched Mr. Cheney on the shoulder in a gesture variously described as an open-handed pat, a slap and a strike that caused the vice president’s shoulder to dip.

Confronted by the Secret Service, Mr. Howards denied touching Mr. Cheney and said, “If you don’t want other people sharing their opinions, you should have him avoid public places.” Agents arrested Mr. Howards for assault and turned him over to local authorities. He was charged with harassment under state law, but those charges were later dropped.

Mr. Howards sued several Secret Service agents, saying his arrest was unlawful. He said the agents had violated the Fourth Amendment, which bars unreasonable searches and seizures, by arresting him without probable cause. He added that the arrest had violated his First Amendment rights because, he said, it was made in retaliation for exercising his right to free speech.

Read More…

In Modern America, Questioning War Is Considered Terrorism

WarOnYou — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 08:08:32 +0000

Source: Washington’s Blog

Being Anti-War Is Labeled Terrorism

I noted last year:

According to the Department of Justice’s Inspector General (via AP), the FBI spied on an anti-war rally in Pittsburgh sponsored by a nonviolent anti-war and anti-discrimination group, pretending it was preventing terrorism:

The FBI gave inaccurate information to Congress and the public when it claimed a possible terrorism link to justify surveilling an anti-war rally in Pittsburgh, the Justice Department’s inspector general said Monday in a report on the bureau’s scrutiny of domestic activist groups.

Inspector General Glenn Fine said the FBI had no reason to expect that anyone of interest in a terrorism investigation would be present at the 2002 event sponsored by the Thomas Merton Center, a nonviolent anti-war and anti-discrimination group.

The surveillance was “an ill-conceived project on a slow work day,” the IG stated in a study of several FBI domestic terrorism probes of people affiliated with organizations such as Greenpeace and the Catholic Worker.

Earlier, in statements to Congress and in a press release, the FBI had described the surveillance as related to a terrorism investigation.

***

The FBI has broad definitions that enable it to classify matters as domestic terrorism that actually are trespassing or vandalism, the inspector general said.

Regarding the Pittsburgh rally, controversy erupted in 2006 over whether the FBI had spied on protesters at the event several years earlier because of their anti-war views.

Promoters of peace in Maryland, Minneapolis, Chicago and elsewhere were also considered potential terrorists, as was an individual Quaker peace activist.

The Inspector General’s report confirms that – at least in some instances – anti-war views werespecifically targeted:

The report concluded that, while the FBI probes were not generally predicated simply on the views of the targets, at least one FBI field office was focused on a group “as a result of its anti-war views.” It also found that “FBI agents and supervisors sometimes provided the [Office of the Inspector General] with speculative, after-the-fact rationalizations for their prior decisions to open investigations that we did not find persuasive.”

In addition, anti-war websites like AntiWar.com are listed on various terrorist watchlists: see number 16 here, and number 37 here.

AntiWar’s sin? It is (according to the watchlists):

An unusual site, essentially an isolationist right-wing/libertarian site consciouslydesigned to appeal to anti-war activists from the left as well.

The irony, of course, is:

Americans want to put a stop to perpetual warfare:

Ron Paul is [partly] gaining popularity because he is against the never-ending War On Terror, and wants to bring the troops home. Americans are sick of the never-ending, ever-creeping war. See this, this and this.

As Talking Points Memo reported earlier this month:

“…Only about a quarter say the wars in Iraq (26%) and Afghanistan (25%) have lessened the chances of terrorist attacks in the United States,” the Pew report reads. “In both cases majorities say the wars either have increased the risk of terrorism in this country or made no difference.”

Top American military leaders agree, saying that the war on terror has weakened our national security [and it was planned before 9/11, and has little to do with terrorism.]

And a CBS News poll from November 11th found:

Three-quarters of Americans support US withdrawal from Iraq.

Two-thirds of Americans believe the Iraq War was not worth fighting.

Half of Americans oppose US involvement in Libya.

More than half of Americans want to end the war in Afghanistan.

Seventy per cent of Americans do not support military intervention to change dictatorships into democracies.

55% of Americans say Iran can be contained via diplomacy.

Only 15% of Americans support military intervention in Iran.

And Nobel-prize winning economists say war is destroying our economy.

Top American military and intelligence leaders, economists and the majority of Americans, by this logic, must be terrorists.

Nazi leader Hermann Goering’s famous statement is relevant to this issue:

Why of course the people don’t want war … But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship … Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, anddenounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.

Is Everyone Who Criticizes the Government a Terrorist?

Of course, anti-war protesters shouldn’t take it too personally, since they are in good company:

According to Department of Defense training manuals, protest is considered “low-level terrorism”. And see this, this and this.

***

The government is also using anti-terrorism laws to keep people from learning what pollutants are in their own community. See this, this, this and this.

Claims of “national security” are also used to keep basic financial information – such as who got bailout money – secret. That might not bode for particularly warm and friendly treatment for someone persistently demanding the release of such information.

The state of Missouri tried to label as terrorists current Congressman Ron Paul and his supporters, former Congressman Bob Barr, libertarians in general, anyone who holds gold, and a host of other people.

***

And according to a law school professor, pursuant to the Military Commissions Act:

Anyone who … speaks out against the government’s policies could be declared an “unlawful enemy combatant” and imprisoned indefinitely. That includes American citizens.

***

Government apologists are also eager to label anyone “taking a cynical stance toward politics, mistrusting authority, endorsing democratic practices, … and displaying an inquisitive, imaginative outlook” as worthy of a Stalinist trip to the insane asylum.

Apple iTunes “Flaw” Allowed Government Spying for 3 Years

WarOnYou — Sat, 26 Nov 2011 09:35:47 +0000

Apple iTunes “Flaw” Allowed Government Spying for 3 Years

November 25th, 2011

Via: Telegraph:

An unpatched security flaw in Apple’s iTunes software allowed intelligence agencies and police to hack into users’ computers for more than three years, it’s claimed.

A British company called Gamma International marketed hacking software to governments that exploited the vulnerability via a bogus update to iTunes, Apple’s media player, which is installed on more than 250 million machines worldwide.

The hacking software, FinFisher, is used to spy on intelligence targets’ computers. It is known to be used by British agencies and earlier this year records were discovered in abandoned offices of that showed it had been offered to Egypt’s feared secret police.

Apple was informed about the relevant flaw in iTunes in 2008, according to Brian Krebs, a security writer, but did not patch the software until earlier this month, a delay of more than three years.

“A prominent security researcher warned Apple about this dangerous vulnerability in mid-2008, yet the company waited more than 1,200 days to fix the flaw,” he said in a blog post.

“The disclosure raises questions about whether and when Apple knew about the Trojan offering, and its timing in choosing to sew up the security hole in this ubiquitous software title.”

Courts Rule US Government Above the Law

WarOnYou — Thu, 20 Oct 2011 06:38:28 +0000

Courts Rule US Government Above the Law

October 19, 2011

Print Version

Source: Corbett Report – James Corbett

Manhattan Federal Judge Alvin Hellerstein has declinedto hold the CIA in contempt for destroying videos that it had been ordered by the courts to preserve.

The case revolves around 92 videos, depicting hundreds of hours of interrogations of detainees. The tapes allegedly contained evidence of torture, and the CIA was ordered by numerous courts to produce the videos in relation to lawsuits arising from torture allegations. The 9/11 Commission also demanded that the tapes be produced. Instead, the agency destroyed them.

Although the Obama Justice Department had already decided last year that no criminal charges would be filed for this blatant obstruction of justice, Judge Hellerstein’s recent ruling insures that the agency will not even face civil sanctions or so much as a contempt order for willfully breaking the law.

In his ruling, Judge Hellerstein, the very judge who had ordered the CIA to produce the tapes in September of 2004, notes that the agency had instead provided a description of what they say was on the tapes and “implemented new protocols” to insure that they don’t destroy evidence again, so there is no need to hold them accountable in any way.

Judge Hellerstein’s decision is not without precedent.

In 2010, Obama’s Office of Legal Council wrote a memo arguing the legality of Obama’s secret list of assassination targets, a list that apparently includes American citizens who have not been convicted or even charged of a crime. The memo was used as the legal justification for the extrajudicial assassination of Anwar al-Awlaki, a US citizen who the President ordered murdered early last year.

Now, the Obama White House is arguing that they don’t even have to show the justification for ordering the unconstitutional assassination of one of its own citizens.

Still, concerned citizens are attempting to challenge the Obama regime’s power grabs in court.

Earlier this year, Senator Wyden revealed that the federal government has a secret interpretation of the PATRIOT Act that allows the government much more power than is suggested by the wording of the act itself.

When Charlie Savage of the New York Times filed a Freedom of Information Act request for the interpretation, he was denied on the basis that the interpretation is classified.

Last week, Savage and the Times sued the federal government for refusing to release the documents. The case is currently before Judge William Pauley of the US District Court.

NYTimes Sues The Federal Government For Refusing To Reveal Its Secret Interpretation Of The PATRIOT Act

WarOnYou — Wed, 12 Oct 2011 06:05:38 +0000

NYTimes Sues The Federal Government For Refusing To Reveal Its Secret Interpretation Of The PATRIOT Act

from the secret-laws-and-secret-interpretations dept

We’ve been covering for a while now how Senators Ron Wyden and Mark Udall have been very concerned over the secret interpretation the feds have of one piece of the PATRIOT Act. They’ve been trying to pressure the government into publicly explaining how they interpret the law, because they believe that it directly contrasts how most of the public (and many elected officials) believe the feds are interpreting the law. While the two Senators continue to put pressure on the feds and to hint at the feds’ interpretation, just the fact that the government won’t even explain its own interpretation of the law seems ridiculous.

Given all of this, reporter Charlie Savage of the NY Times filed a Freedom of Information Act request to find out the federal government’s interpretation of its own law… and had it refused. According to the federal government, its own interpretation of the law is classified. What sort of democracy are we living in when the government can refuse to even say how it’s interpreting its own law? That’s not democracy at all.

Julian Sanchez points us to the news that Savage and the NY Times have now sued the federal government for not revealing its interpretation of the PATRIOT Act, pointing out that if parts of the interpretation contain classified material, the Justice Department should black that out and reveal the rest, but simply refusing to reveal the interpretation entirely is a violation of the Freedom of Information Act. You can bet that the feds will do everything they can to get out of this lawsuit, just as they did with the various lawsuits concerning warrantless wiretapping. Here’s hoping the court systems don’t let them. No matter what you think of this administration (or the last one) and how it’s handling the threat of terrorism, I’m curious how anyone can make the argument that the US government should not reveal how it interprets the very laws under which it’s required to operate.

NY State Senators Say We’ve Got Too Much Free Speech; Introduce Bill To Fix That

WarOnYou — Mon, 10 Oct 2011 06:17:04 +0000

TechDirt
By Mike Masnick
October 9, 2011

We’ve been pointing out a variety of attempts to push back on the First Amendment lately.

One fertile ground for such attacks are local politicians carrying the “cyberbullying” banner, in various attempts to magically outlaw being a “jerk” online, usually by making it illegal to offend someone online.

Of course, making someone’s action illegal based on how someone else feels about it is all kinds of crazy.

It also would seem to violate the very principles of the First Amendment, which bar Congress (and local governments) from passing any laws that take away one’s right to free speech.

In the past, lawmakers pushing these laws have tended to simply ignore the First Amendment issue, and focus on screaming “protect the children!” as loudly as possible (never mind the fact that kids seem much less concerned about “bullying” than all these adults seem to think).

However, it appears that some state Senators in NY are trying a new line of attack: going directly after the First Amendment and suggesting that current interpretations are way too broad, and it’s not really meant to protect any sort of free speech right.

In fact, it sounds as though they’re trying to redefine the right to free speech into a privilege that can be taken away. Seriously:

Proponents of a more refined First Amendment argue that this freedom should be treated not as a right but as a privilege — a special entitlement granted by the state on a conditional basis that can be revoked if it is ever abused or maltreated.

Yes, that totally flips the First Amendment on its head. It is not a “more refined First Amendment.” It’s the anti-First Amendment.

It suggests, by its very nature, that the government possesses the right to grant the “privilege” of free speech to citizens… and thus the right to revoke it.

That’s an astonishingly dangerous path, and one that should not be taken seriously.

Of course, given their right to speak freely, state senators Jeff Klein, Diane Savino, David Carlucci and David Valesky have every right to put forth that argument — but similarly, it allows others to point out their rather scary beliefs.

Read Entire Article

Intel Hub Note:

If you move to limit the free speech right of Americans in favor of government or state control over what citizens can or cannot say, you have committed a direct attack on the very foundation of this country.

ALL four of these disgusting excuses for Senators should be voted out of office as quickly as possible.

You can visit their Facebook page and let them know what you think of their freedom hating proposal here.

Monthly Terror Drills Now Required By Law For Students Including Kindergarten And 1st Graders

WarOnYou — Mon, 19 Sep 2011 05:30:08 +0000

Monthly Terror Drills Now Required By Law For Students Including Kindergarten And 1st Graders

September 18, 2011

Print Version

Source: Alexander Higgins

Kindergarten and 1st grade students are now required by law to participate in monthly terrorism drills, including active shooter, bomb threat and evacuation drills.

I recently received my 1st grade students back to school paperwork. Going through the packet I found a letter serving notification that my son is now required by law to participate in monthly anti-terrorism drills.

In fact, after doing more research, I learned that all NJ schools which provide services to children from Kindergarten and up are now required by law to participate in monthly drills.

Schools must hold at least twice a year, in addition to the twice a month fire drills the following:

Active shooter
Evacuation (non- fire)
Bomb threat
and Lockdown

On top of those drills, schools will be required to also hold other security drills, which include the following:

Shelter-in-place
Reverse evacuation
Evacuation to relocation site
Testing of school’s notification system and procedures
Testing of school’s communication system and procedures
Tabletop exercise
and Full scale exercise

With a Full Scale Exercise defined by Law as:

Full Scale Exercise: This is a multi-agency, multi-jurisdictional activity involving actual deployment of resources in a coordinated response as if a real incident had occurred. This exercise tests many components of one or more capabilities within emergency response and recovery, and is typically used to assess plans, procedures and coordinated response under crisis conditions.

The letter, which can be viewed here, reads as follows.

Brick Township Public Schools

101 Hendrickson Avenue
Brick, New Jersey 08724-2599
Telephone (732) 785-3000

Office of the Superintendent

September, 2011

Dear Parent(s) or Guardian(s):

The safety and welfare of our students and staff are our highest priority. To provide schools with the opportunity to practice emergency response procedures, it is necessary to conduct security drills as well as fire drills. The NJ Department of Educations has recently changed the guidelines concerning the frequency of these emergency drills. Each month a school must conduct one fire drill and one security drill which may be a lockdown, bomb threat, evacuation, active shooter, or shelter-in place drill. All schools are now required by law to implement this procedure.

The school district is working closely with the Brick Township Police Department through our school resource officers to correctly implement these procedures. Our staff members have all be trained in our emergency drill procedures and are well prepared should we have to deal with a real emergency. The goals of the training drill are to improve our ability to protect students, save lives, and reduce injuries. They also allow us to evaluate our emergency operations plan and improve our response skills.

In order to protect students, in case of an actual emergency students will only be released to the parents and/or other adults listed on the emergency information sheet. Please be sure that this information is current and accurate. It is a good idea to have several trusted adults listed with the school.

This letter serves as notification that the Brick Township Public Schools will be conducting these drills in accordance with the NJ Department of Education Guidelines. The dates and times of the drills will not be announced. you would only be notified if there were a real emergency.

If you have any questions or need further information, please do not hesitate to call your child’s school office.

Sincerely,
Walter J Hrycenko

Superintendent of Schools

Full article here

Blackberry would close UK service in unrest if ordered

WarOnYou — Fri, 16 Sep 2011 02:59:35 +0000

Blackberry would close UK service in unrest if ordered

September 15, 2011

Print Version

Source: Reuters

(London) – BlackBerry said on Thursday it would close down its hugely popular messenger service in Britain if ordered to at times of civil unrest, after police singled out the system as a key tool used in last month’s riots.

Appearing before politicians investigating the large-scale disorder that swept Britain in early August, executive Stephen Bates of Blackberry-owner Research in Motion said the company would comply with orders given in special circumstances such as threats of terrorism or mass criminality.

“From our perspective we comply with the law and if the instruction … would be to close down the mobile networks which is the method by which that would be enacted, we would then comply, we would then work with those mobile operators to help them meet the obligations as defined by that act,” Bates said.

Police and parliamentarians said at the time of the unrest that social media, in particular Blackberry Messenger (BBM), had been used by rioters and looters to incite and coordinate violence.

Read Full Article

In the Wake of 9/11: 33 of 50 States Are Actively Spying on Americans

WarOnYou — Mon, 12 Sep 2011 06:04:46 +0000

In the Wake of 9/11: 33 of 50 States Are Actively Spying on Americans

September 11, 2011

Print Version

Source: Activist Post

The weekend of the 10th Anniversary of 9/11, has caused many to reflect on the event itself, as well as the decade that we have experienced since. There have indeed been many casualties to recall. One of the saddest casualties is the First Amendment to the nation’s founding document; it is effectively dead in 33 states according to a ACLU compilation of incident reports across America. A targeted program of surveillance and harassment has become fully centered on the population itself.

This was first made evident in the 2009 MIAC report, which cited supporters of prominent political candidates like Ron Paul, as well as an assortment of other activists who support peace, freedom and liberty, as potential threats. Law enforcement has been directed to treat such “dangers” with suspicion and extreme caution.

The ACLU has compiled an interactive map of those states which have logged incidents of police harassment and surveillance of Americans engaging in other apparently un-American activities, namely: peaceful protest, photographing public servants while on duty, questioning American leadership and policy, recording one’s surroundings while in public, and having certain religious or political affiliations that could apparently be tied to extremism.

Here are just a few examples among dozens of incident reports cited by the ACLU that show the range of First Amendment violations.

Maine – FBI Intercepts and Stores E-mails Planning Peaceful Protests.
The FBI intercepted and stored e-mail communications pertaining to protests at the Brunswick Naval Air Show and against the christening of an Arleigh Burke Class destroyer organized by Veterans for Peace and co-sponsored by Pax Christi Maine, PeaceWorks, WILPF, Peace Action Maine, Smilin’Trees Disarmament Farm, Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space, Maine Coalition for Peace & Justice, Island Peace & Justice, Winthrop Area People for Peace, and Waldo County Peace & Justice

New York – Police Detain Muslim-American Journalism Student for Taking Photos for a Class Assignment.
Mariam Jukaku, a 24-year old Muslim-American journalism student at Syracuse University, was stopped by Veterans Affairs police in New York for taking photographs of flags in front of a VA building as part of a class assignment. After taking her into an office for interrogation and taking her driver’s license, the police deleted the photographs from her digital camera before releasing her.

North Carolina — Pentagon Surveils Veteran.
Debbie Clark, who was honorably discharged from the US army after eight years of active duty and who is married to an active duty military man, found herself under Pentagon surveillance when she participated in a protest at Fort Bragg in March 2005 led by veterans and military families.

Texas — Fusion Center Describes Conspiracy to Spread Tolerance.
In February 2009, a DHS-supported North Central Texas Fusion System intelligence bulletin described a purported conspiracy between Muslim civil rights organizations, lobbying groups, the anti-war movement, a former U.S. Congresswoman, the U.S. Treasury Department, and hip hop bands to spread tolerance in the U.S. The bulletin was reportedly distributed to over 100 different agencies.

Colorado — FBI JTTF Monitors American Indian Movement, Peace Groups, and Environmental Groups.
In August 2005, the ACLU obtained the documents in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request containing information on the Colorado American Indian Movement and the Rocky Mountain Peace and Justice Center. The files show that JTTF agents opened “domestic terrorism” investigations after they read notices on web sites announcing an antiwar protest in Colorado Springs in 2003 and a protest against Columbus Day in Denver in 2002.

Arizona Maricopa County Sheriff Department Surveils Political Enemies.
An internal report accuses the Maricopa County’s Chief Deputy Sheriff of using Maricopa’s anti-corruption unit to conduct politically motivated investigations and of surveiling Maricopa County Sheriff Arpaio’s political rivals.

California — Military Monitors Campus Anti-Recruiting Protests. Two Department of Defense (DOD) Threat and Local Observation Notices (TALON) from April 2005 describe anti-recruiting protests by students at the University of California campuses of Berkeley and Santa Cruz. The source for both TALON reports, a “special agent of the federal protective service, U.S. Department of Homeland Security,” relayed protest information he received through email alerts.

Undercover Campus and County Sheriffs Attend Cal State Fresno Lecture on Veganism. On November 10, 2004, the California State Fresno student group Campus Peace and Civil Liberties Coalition (CPCLC) hosted an on-campus lecture by a speaker formerly employed by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA). The lecturer addressed approximately 60 people about the benefits of a vegan diet. Six of those 60 attendees were undercover police officers—three from the county sheriff’s department and three from the campus police department.

The scope of the incidents compiled on the ACLU map reflects a new America; one where the Bill of Rights and Constitution have been re-defined as the most serious threat, rather than the greater threat that exists from promoting an atmosphere of hysteria and fear that is inevitably leading to the eradication of protections afforded by those very documents.

First, do you believe that it is only 33 states? Do you believe that the principles of freedom outlined in the Bill of Rights and Constitution make America less safe in The Age of Terror? Are these incident reports examples of your tax dollars well-spent? Please use the comment section below to give us your thoughts, as well as other incidents that exemplify the loss of our Constitutional rights.

War On You: Breaking Alternative News » Fascism

Obama says he doesn’t even need NDAA to indefinitely detain Americans

Obama says he doesn’t even need NDAA to indefinitely detain Americans

Related Posts:

Obama Signs Indefinite Detention Without Trial Bill Into Law; Claims His Regime Won’t Use It

Obama Signs Indefinite Detention Without Trial Bill Into Law; Claims His Regime Won’t Use It

Related Posts:

U.S. Court Upholds Telecom Immunity for Surveillance of Americans

U.S. Court Upholds Telecom Immunity for Surveillance of Americans

Related Posts:

The transparency problem: the government will not tell you why it’s legal to kill you

The transparency problem: the government will not tell you why it’s legal to kill you

Related Posts:

The American Fascist Sandwich: Indefinite Detention and Internment Camps

The American Fascist Sandwich: Indefinite Detention and Internment Camps

Related Posts:

New Army Jobs: Internment / Resettlement Specialist (31E)

New Army Jobs: Internment / Resettlement Specialist (31E)

Related Posts:

Supreme Court Will Hear Case of Man Arrested After Telling Cheney What He Thought About Iraq War

Supreme Court Will Hear Case of Man Arrested After Telling Cheney What He Thought About Iraq War

Related Posts:

In Modern America, Questioning War Is Considered Terrorism

Is Everyone Who Criticizes the Government a Terrorist?

Related Posts:

Apple iTunes “Flaw” Allowed Government Spying for 3 Years

Apple iTunes “Flaw” Allowed Government Spying for 3 Years

November 25th, 2011

Related Posts:

Courts Rule US Government Above the Law

Courts Rule US Government Above the Law

Related Posts:

NYTimes Sues The Federal Government For Refusing To Reveal Its Secret Interpretation Of The PATRIOT Act

NYTimes Sues The Federal Government For Refusing To Reveal Its Secret Interpretation Of The PATRIOT Act

from the secret-laws-and-secret-interpretations dept

Related Posts:

NY State Senators Say We’ve Got Too Much Free Speech; Introduce Bill To Fix That

Related Posts:

Monthly Terror Drills Now Required By Law For Students Including Kindergarten And 1st Graders

Monthly Terror Drills Now Required By Law For Students Including Kindergarten And 1st Graders

Brick Township Public Schools

Related Posts:

Blackberry would close UK service in unrest if ordered

Blackberry would close UK service in unrest if ordered

Related Posts:

In the Wake of 9/11: 33 of 50 States Are Actively Spying on Americans

In the Wake of 9/11: 33 of 50 States Are Actively Spying on Americans

Related Posts: