Do you like the "A-ha!" experience?

Gentlemen, we gave you a Republic -- if you can keep it! -Benjamin Franklin at conclusion of the Continental Congress

N+N:Reprise: "Today Americans would be outraged if UN troops entered Los Angeles to restore order; tomorrow, they will be grateful. This is especially true if they were told there is an outside threat from beyond, whether real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well-being by their world government." Henry Kissinger, June 8, 1992, Evian, France, Media Protects Bilderberg, Spotlight.org

N+N:Reprise: With roughly 100 new stories warning of terrorism in the mainstream media just today, the possibility cannot be ignored that the American people are being pre-conditioned to accept as real a terrorist event manufactured by our own government, a terrorist event no more real than those created by powerful leaders through the ages to sell an agenda to a populace which would otherwise not accept it. Dictatorship through Deception by Michael Rivero, First posted on New Republic Forum Xmas 'Eve 1999 [1]

N+N:Reprise: NEW YORK, May 1--In the early 1960s, America's top military leaders reportedly drafted plans to kill innocent people and commit acts of terrorism in U.S. cities to create public support for a war against Cuba. Code named "Operation Northwoods", the plans reportedly included the possible assassination of Cuban emigres, sinking boats of Cuban refugees on the high seas, hijacking planes, blowing up a U.S. ship, and even orchestrating violent terrorism in U.S. cities. The plans were developed as ways to trick the American public and the international community into supporting a war to oust Cuba's then new leader, communist Fidel Castro. -David Ruppe, FRIENDLY FIRE: U.S. Military Drafted Plans to Terrorize U.S. Cities to Provoke War With Cuba, ABCNEWS.com, May 1, 2001 [and thanks to Bronco!!] NEXIALIST N+E+W+S: Standard Operating Procedure?

George Soros, the billionaire financier, accused the Bush administration of deliberately manipulating the aftermath of September 11 and the arrest of ["dirty nuke" suspect José Padilla] to promote an authoritarian agenda.
+
"I feel that what happened was that Ashcroft (the attorney general) basically detonated a 'dirty bomb' plot. The plot is his. The detonation is his. The Bush administration is exploiting the terrorist threat for its purposes, to generate fear and to overcome constitutional constraints on the use of force,'' he said. War on terror: FBI 'guilty of cover-up' over anthrax suspect, NICK PETERS IN WASHINGTON, NEWS.scotsman.com, Sun 16 Jun 2002

...last week's much ballyhooed arrest of the "dirty bomb" suspect José Padilla now seems, like other developments in the "war against terror", to have been a political device of the Bush administration - designed to distract attention from US intelligence failures and solidify support behind President Bush.
+
... No plot and no accomplices have been discovered, despite Mr Padilla having been in detention for more than a month before his existence was revealed ... As the New York Times said on Thursday ... he was "an unlikely terrorist, a low-level gang member with no technical knowledge of nuclear materials" ... For "enemy of the people" read "enemy combatant", as Mr Padilla, a US citizen, has now been designated. He sits in a naval prison in South Carolina, presumed guilty but not charged with any criminal offence. Indeed, Donald Rumsfeld, the Defence Secretary, has acknowledged that he may never be charged. detention without time limit or the right to counsel should be "a constitutional concern to everyone". A dirty bomb from Pakistan? Or a dirty trick from Washington?, Rupert Cornwell, Independent (UK), 16 June 2002

Fifth Amendment: No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury ... nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; ... -U.S. Constitution, Bill of Rights, Amendment V [2]

Even as [U.S. Justice Department] prosecutors began preparing criminal charges against [so-called "American Taliban" John Walker] Lindh last December, the department's own ethics advisers were raising red flags.
+
INTERNAL E-MAIL, obtained by NEWSWEEK, show that two Justice Dept. lawyers concluded that FBI plans to interrogate Lindh without the presence of a lawyer would violate the department's ethical guidelines and "is not authorized by law." ... "At present we have no knowledge that he did anything other than join the Taliban," one wrote. ...
+
Prosecutors have acknowledged that Lindh's confessions to Reimann, along with earlier ones to military interrogators, are the basis for their 10-count indictment ... "I consulted with a Senior Legal Advisor here … and we don't think you can have the FBI agent question Walker," lawyer Jesselyn A. Radack wrote back that day. But the following Monday, the lawyers learned that an FBI agent "went and interviewed Walker over the weekend." Radack noted: "The interview may have to be sealed or only used for national security purposes"-not for a criminal case.
+
But Radack warned there might still be a "residual issue" as to whether there was a "coerced confession." Lindh's lawyers have now raised the same issue, arguing in new court papers that Lindh was "sleep deprived," "in pain"-and was never told his family had retained a lawyer. The Lindh E-Mails, The Justice Department's own lawyers have raised questions about the government's case against the American Taliban, NEWSWEEK, June 24 issue

Sixth Amendment: In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury ... and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence. -U.S. Constitution, Bill of Rights, Amendment VI

NEW: ALEXANDRIA, Va., May 31 - The government argued today that Yasser Esam Hamdi , a prisoner from the Afghan war who was born in Baton Rouge, La., and is in custody in Norfolk, should not be allowed to see a lawyer for national security reasons. ... He has not been charged with any crime and has not been allowed to see a lawyer on the grounds that he is an enemy combatant. U.S. Argues War Detainee Shouldn't See a Lawyer By KATHARINE Q. SEELYE, NEW YORK TIMES, June 1, 2002

June 20 - Prisoners declared enemy combatants do not have the right to a lawyer and the American judiciary cannot second-guess the military's classification of such detainees, the Justice Department argued yesterday in a brief to an appeals court.
+
... The document signals the government's intent to assert broad presidential authority in the cases of terrorist suspects apprehended overseas. ... It raises the likelihood that similar authority will be sought in the case of José Padilla, a Brooklyn, N.Y., native arrested in Chicago in May on suspicions that he was planning to participate in a "dirty bomb" attack. Padilla ... has been declared an enemy combatant. ... Some legal scholars ... warned that President Bush is seeking unfettered authority to lock up U.S. citizens with no external review.
+
"This is really an astounding assertion of authority," said David Cole, a Georgetown University law professor. "It's not just that you have no right to a lawyer, it's that you have no right to even have a hearing. . . . If that is true, then there is really no limit to the president's power to label U.S. citizens as bad people and then have them held in military custody indefinitely."
+
Dunham, who has until tomorrow to respond, agreed. "It is scarier than the dirty bomb," he said. "Now the government can label somebody something and then throw the key away forever. . . . The idea that a court can't inquire into these detention situations, to determine whether they are reasonable or not, is downright scary to me."
+
The filing also asserts the government's right to declare a prisoner an enemy combatant whether that person was captured on the battlefield-such as Hamdi and Lindh- or anywhere else, such as Padilla. 'Combatants' lack rights, U.S. argues, By Tom Jackman and Dan Eggen, THE WASHINGTON POST, June 20, 2002

Fourth Amendment: The right of the people to be secure in their persons ... against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. -U.S. Constitution, Bill of Rights, Amendment IV

Eighth Amendment: Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. -U.S. Constitution, Bill of Rights, Amendment VIII

In a bleak block in Sunset Park, under the BQE, looms the Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC) ... It is a black hole, they say, where immigrants disappear for months into extreme isolation and deprivation, only to come out the other end accused of no crime that justifies their jail time. Shakir Baloch was one of those who vanished into the MDC "hole"-solitary confinement-for many months ... A limo driver at the time, he was arrested in New York on September 19, not charged with anything, and confined in solitary for five molths. For several months, no one knew where he was.
+
"After a while, I was like, why are they taking so long, not giving me the right to call people, not giving me a lawyer?" he said. Baloch spent 23 and a half hours a day alone in his cell under bright lights that were always on ... He was shackled hand and foot when outside. ... His wife eventually tracked him down ... Worse than the confinement itself was the injustice of it, said Baloch. ... he thought nothing of signing a piece of paper waiving his right to seek the Canadian consulate's help. "I didn't know they were going to keep me for seven months," he said. ... A court document his lawyer filed cites physical abuse by guards.
+
... he discovered that a letter he'd written his daughter three months earlier had never been sent by the prison. "They gave me the letter back." The warden and the Department of Justice (DOJ) have denied MDC detainees any visits with press and sometimes, advocates say, family. Amnesty International was refused a tour of the facility in a recent investigation into detention abuses. ... Adem Carroll, an advocate with the Islamic Circle of North America, told the Voice about a Pakistani green-card holder who was taken to MDC last week by FBI agents originally looking for his neighbor. ... Not one detainee arrested since September 11 has been charged in connection with a terrorism-related crime. The ACLU and other rights groups have filed court complaints about the poor conditions and secretiveness of the detentions. A Prison Where Detainees Disappear, Black Hole in Brooklyn, by Chisun Lee, Village Voice, Week of June 26 -July 2, 2002

First Amendment: Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; ... -U.S. Constitution, Bill of Rights, First Amendment

"[Louis Guiffrida, former head of FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency), currently] The deputy attorney general of California commented at a conference that Anyone who attacks the state, even verbally, becomes a revolutionary and an enemy by definition." Hidden threats -- Part 2, Geoff Metcalf, WorldNetDaily.com, May 11, 1998

A central question of the modern era is when, if ever, the state may act to interdict the content of communications. ...One critical element is seditious libel, the idea that the state can be criminally assaulted by speech, "the hallmark of closed societies throughout the world," legal historian Harry Kalven observes. A society that tolerates laws against seditious libel is not free, whatever its other virtues. In late 17th century England, men were castrated, disemboweled, quartered and beheaded for the crime. Through the 18th century, there was a general consensus that established authority could be maintained only by silencing subversive discussion, and "any threat, whether real or imagined, to the good reputation of the government" must be barred by force (Leonard Levy). "Private men are not judges of their superiors... [for] This wou'd confound all government," one editor wrote. Truth was no defense: true charges are even more criminal than false ones, because they tend even more to bring authority into disrepute. Deterring Democracy Copyright 1991, 1992 by Noam Chomsky. Published by South End Press. Chapter 12: Force and Opinion Segment 19/20, 6. The Untamed Rabble

Even the truth regarding government activities or operation can be deemed seditious and its dissemination to the public prevented. ... Life Magazine from 1968 to 1972 was formally declared a "seditious publication" by the FBI because of its photo exposé of the horrors of Vietnam. They were showing a lot of dead and twisted American bodies. The FBI considered this "anti-patriotic" and "seditious" because it was fomenting unrest and thus aiding those who didn't want to see US involvement in the war. From the United States of America to the National Security States of America by Al Martin, ~Oct. 12, 2001

A provision in the bill seeking to create a Homeland Security Department will exempt its employees from whistleblower protection, the very law that helped expose intelligence-gathering missteps before September 11. "Whistleblowers are key to exposing a dysfunctional bureaucracy," Mr. [Iowa Sen. Charles E.] Grassley says. ... "With these restrictions come a greater danger of stopping the legitimate disclosure of wrongdoing and mismanagement, especially about public safety and security. Bureaucracies have an instinct to cover up their misdeeds and mistakes, and that temptation is even greater when they can use a potential security issue as an excuse." ... [According to ACLU Legislative Council Tim Edgar] The [Homeland Security] department would not be required to release information under the Freedom of Information Act. ... Advisory committees that normally include public input would be immune, and the Cabinet secretary would have veto power over inspector general audits and investigations. [3] "We need to know real facts, and not just spin from the agency," he says. Security bill bars blowing whistle, By Audrey Hudson, THE WASHINGTON TIMES, June 22, 2002

I attended the SDP [Finland's "Social Democratic Party"] convention the day after Bush announced the Department of Homeland Security. Sitting on a comfortable sofa in Tampere Hall, I chatted with Reino Paasilinna, a popular Finnish member of the European Parliament. ... And he trashed the concept of a Department of Homeland Security. Actually, his point was quite interesting. Even the Soviets during their worst days in the 1930s never dared combine security and intelligence under one government apparatus, he said. Too dangerous. And doing it in a democracy might be even worse, he speculated, given all the people who have access to our records. Howard Mortman , Jewish World Review, July 2, 2002 / 22 Tamuz, 5762

WASHINGTON, June 14 (UPI) -- ... Wednesday, the Florida Department of Law Enforcement contributed the 1 millionth DNA profile to the National DNA Index System, known as NDIS.
+
Authorized by the DNA Identification Act of 1994, the national index is administered by the FBI. ...
+
When the DNA profiles are uploaded to the central lab, they are searched against other DNA profiles submitted by other participating states, the FBI said.
+
Since its inception in October 1998, the NDIS network has grown from a handful of participating state and local forensic laboratories to include more than 130 federal, state and local laboratories representing 42 states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico. System gets millionth DNA profile, UPI - the Washington Politics & Policy Desk, 6/14/2002 1:48 PM

NEW: William Rehnquist, chief justice of the United States, on June 15 gave a speech before a gathering of federal judges in which he condoned the suppression of democratic rights in wartime. ... Rehnquist told a national judicial conference in Virginia, "One is reminded of the latin maxim, inter arma silent leges. In times of war, the laws are silent." ... The Supreme Court justice said he was offering "only a historical perspective," but his choice of topic and what he had to say about it were obviously intended to bolster the Bush administration's attack on constitutional guarantees of free speech, assembly, privacy and due process, which is being carried out under the cover of the government's "war on terrorism." US chief justice signals support for White House assault on constitutional rights, By John Andrews and Don Knowland, 24 July 2002

NEW: Associate Justice Sandra Day O'Connor said she foresaw unprecedented restrictions on democratic rights in the wake of the September 11 terrorist attacks. She declared flatly, "We're likely to experience more restrictions on our personal freedom than has ever been the case in our country." ... O'Connor went on to say, "It is possible, if not likely, that we will rely more on international rules of war than on our cherished constitutional standards for criminal prosecutions in responding to threats to our national security." The outbreak of World War II was accompanied by the internment of Japanese-Americans in concentration camps, a flagrant violation of constitutional rights that was upheld by the Supreme Court in Korematsu v. United States (1945). US Supreme Court Justice O'Connor says "personal freedom" will be curbed, By John Andrews, 10 October 2001

NEW: The Terrorism Information and Prevention System, or TIPS, means the US will have a higher percentage of citizen informants than the former East Germany through the infamous Stasi secret police. The program would use a minimum of 4 per cent [one in every twenty-five] of Americans to report "suspicious activity" US planning to recruit one in 24 Americans as citizen spies By Ritt Goldstein, July 15 2002

NEW: WASHINGTON -- Homeland security chief Tom Ridge says the threat of terrorism may force government planners to consider using the military for domestic law enforcement, now largely prohibited by federal law. President Bush has called on Congress to thoroughly review the law that bans the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines from participating in arrests, searches, seizure of evidence and other police-type activity on U.S. soil. The Coast Guard and National Guard troops under the control of state governors are excluded from the Reconstruction-era law, known as the "Posse Comitatus Act." [This means The Coast Guard and National Guard can legally be used on U.S. soil in times of emergency. There are good practical reasons for the Posse Comitatus Act which prohibits use of U.S. Military on U.S. soil -- see Whatever Happened to Posse Comitatus? -LRW] U.S. Mulls Military's Domestic Role, By Scott Lindlaw, Associated Press Writer, Sunday, July 21, 2002; 7:09 PM

Stunned by the universal outpouring of public outrage from the ACLU on the left and Internet commentators on the right, the Bush administration is quickly moving to downplay its Citizen Corps initiative, which was designed to create a million snitches out of private and public workers in 10 cities who regularly visit people's homes. Homeland Security Czar Tom Ridge indignantly whined, "the last thing we want is Americans spying on Americans." He's playing the artful liar, engaging in Owellian doublespeak. Euphemistically, the program carries the acronym TIPS (Terrorism Information and Prevention System), but it's a civilian informant program just the same. Is there anything that can't be justified under the aegis of terror? Apparently there is--for now. American's are reacting very negatively to this idea, but it doesn't mean the administration will back down. They will just implement it through the back door, just like the 'know your [customer]' rules for turning banks into snitches. ... GOVERNMENT REACTS TO CRITICISM OF "TIPS", by Joel Skousen, www.joelskousen.com

NEW: Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals rules U.S. citizen Yasser Esam Hamdi "enemy combatant" and upholds the government's right to hold him indefinitely without council or hearing. -CNBC, July 12, 2002, 19:01:00

Find out just what the people will submit to and you have found out the exact amount of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them; and these will continue until they are resisted with either words or blows, or with both. The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress. -Frederick Douglass, civil rights activist, Aug. 4, 1857

RELATED:

SEE Attacks on Free Speech in Context for a broader perspective on government vs. free speech.

SEE S.O.P? (Standard Operating Procedure) for how governments, particularly the U.S. Government, has used -- and sometimes more -- incidents like 9-11 in the past.

How did this happen? Who's really running things. Why, it's our Silent Partners.

What about 9-11? Are we getting the straight story from U.S. media? Or is something else going on? Something we may look back on as The Biggest ONE.

NOTES:

[1] THIS IS AN ABSOLUTE CLASSIC MUST-READ INCREDIBLY ENTERTAINING HISTORY LESSON, BEGINNING WITH THE ROMAN CRASSUS, WHO'S NOTORIOUS BEHAVIOR IS MEMORIALIZED IN THE WORD "CRASS," APPROPRIATELY DERIVED DIRECTLY FROM HIS NAME. -LRW] return

[2] All the excerpts from the U.S. Constitution quoted here are from: -Transcription of the first ten Amendments to The Constitution of the United States of America from National Archives and Records Administration Note: The capitalization and punctuation in this version is from the enrolled original of the Joint Resolution of Congress proposing the Bill of Rights, which is on permanent display in the Rotunda of the National Archives Building, Washington, D.C. return

[3] See excerpts from Al Martin, From the United States of America to the National Security States of America for details on the Gestapo-like powers and immunities of the proposed "Homeland Security" agency. -LRW return

N+N: Home Page

mailto: L. Reichard