How the Government Conditions Citizens to Obey


Source: TheDailyBell.com
June 27, 2017

Can you count how many ways the government manipulates people to be the type of citizen they can easily control?

I think that would be impossible to come up with an actual number when every facet of government is dedicated to shaping the citizen in ways contrary to his or her nature.

It ranges from tax credits for having kids to increased welfare for being a single mom; from subsidies for growing corn to mandates to eradicate invasive species. The government is changing citizens’ behavior with incentives and disincentives, which destroys the natural spontaneous order society would otherwise fall into.

The government has basically turned society into a pinball machine which bounces citizens from here to there, taking away control of their destiny. And then, they use their own coercion as an example of why we need more coercion: because people cannot control their own outcomes in life!

Governments and corporations alike know that the best way to mold a person is to start in childhood.

That is why children younger than 6 are being prescribed anti-depressants by the government health care system in Great Britain. Almost 200,000 prescriptions for antidepressants are handed out to children under 18 in Great Britain, almost 13,000 of which go to kids from 7-12 and over 600 go to children under 6 years old!

Yet as disconcerting as these figures are, the UK isn’t the first country to have them. In 2009, five deaths have already been linked to antidepressants in Australian children aged 10 to 19; moreover, 89 recorded adverse reactions in children under nine were associated with antidepressants. Dr. Joe Tucci, Chief Executive of the Australian Childhood Foundation, said: “I cannot think of a good reason why any six-year-old, or younger, should be treated with antidepressants. I think it’s gone up because medication is being used to treat the symptoms and not the cause.”

The actual cause is where the story starts. Why are children so young depressed?

Coercion is arguably the leading cause of all mental health issues. In modern society, children start to feel this coercion as soon as they are born into a society shaped like a cattle pen.

Increasing suicide attempts by children are concentrated around the times when school is in session. The unnatural environment in which they are placed causes extreme stress for many children. The “well-adjusted” ones take to the authority like good sheep, and everyone else gets loaded up with drugs to make them a better citizen.

Later in life, a good citizen will take this lesson to heart. Don’t feel like you fit in? Not happy with your job, spouse, environment? Anxiety, depression, helplessness, anger over things that you cannot control because you feel forced into a life you don’t want?

Drugs. Do illegal drugs and enrich the CIA (and give the government an option to lock you up if they want), or do legal drugs and enrich the government connected pharmaceutical corporations.

It is, however, encouraging to see an increase in home-schooling in the USA, (which could actually be inadvertently fueled by forced vaccination for any children attending public school). About 40 years ago, 40 million children attended public school and under 100,000 were homeschooled. By 2005 48 million children attended public school, and a whopping 2 million were being homeschooled.

Parents who raise their kids to not blindly follow authority are doing a great service. It is tempting for parents to snap, “Because I said so!” to children, but it is better to explain why the rules are what they are whenever possible.

The kids rewarded in school are the ones best at following directions, and the teacher always hates the kid that asks why they have to do what they are told when it doesn’t make any sense. I once had to write a letter home because I didn’t wear my coat at recess. My parents responded by letting the teacher know that at the age of 12, my nerve endings had developed enough so that I could choose if a coat was necessary while running around in 50-degree temperatures for 15 minutes.

But police do the same thing to adults conditioned by the public school system.

If you get pulled over or are otherwise unfortunate enough to come into contact with the police, your life is literally in serious danger if you do not immediately and obediently follow all their orders, even when they have no legal standing to make those demands. Moving your hands out of site, asking why you are being arrested, or simply not hearing or understanding an officer are all offenses worthy of execution in the United States.

The teachers and police who expect blind obedience simply because they are an authority figure are programming the same thing into citizens: that the state must be obeyed, or there will be consequences.

And this same philosophy of shaping the citizen is seen everywhere to varying degrees and molded for different types of people. The newest trend is to police thought crimes by claiming that hate speech is not protected free speech. If you offend anyone, you have committed a crime, if you have a contrary opinion, it is fake news, if you desire any internet privacy, you are probably a terrorist.

Great Britain is especially intense on their push to socialize the citizens to behave exactly as the government wishes. The National Health Institute has been key to drugging up kids and programming the citizens to let the government choose when citizens live or die.Individuals must purchase licenses to watch television, and the government is super serious about ferreting out anyone without a license.

But without the little things, people would never have slipped to the point of letting the government decide who will get lifesaving medical procedures and who will be waitlisted to death.

One of these little things is that individuals must purchase licenses to watch television, and the British government is super serious about ferreting out anyone without a license.

Why do they make such a big deal about something so small? Because it trains the citizens to do exactly as they are told, and not bother with any pushback. It ingrains the idea that the state can and should regulate every facet of human behavior.

It is like the old marketing trick, where if you get someone used to saying yes, they will keep saying yes when you ask if they want to buy.

And of course, China has already gone full blown 1984 with their social credit system to regulate the behavior of citizens by taking away rights and extending privileges based on a citizenship score which takes into account what your neighbors think of you, what you say about the government online, and how involved in social life you are.

But the most extreme examples are only possible because for so long people have accepted the government’s authority to regulate the little things. Seatbelt laws, required permits, and even complying with the TSA for illegal searches are all ways that are more about control than keeping you safe.

That is why it is important to push back at every little rule and regulation, and question every authority. People may think you are making a big deal about nothing, but unless you push back on the little things, you will be unable to resist when it comes to the important issues.

Read more At: TheDailyBell.com

Lynching Free Speech: The Intolerant State Of America

CensorshipFreedom
Source: Rutherford.org
John W. Whitehead
June 13, 2017

“What are the defenders of free speech to do? The sad fact is that this fundamental freedom is on its heels across America. Politicians of both parties want to use the power of government to silence their foes. Some in the university community seek to drive it from their campuses. And an entire generation of Americans is being taught that free speech should be curtailed as soon as it makes someone else feel uncomfortable. On the current trajectory, our nation’s dynamic marketplace of ideas will soon be replaced by either disengaged intellectual silos or even a stagnant ideological conformity. Few things would be so disastrous for our nation and the well-being of our citizenry.”—William Ruger, “Free Speech Is Central to Our Dignity as Humans

My hometown of Charlottesville, Va., has become the latest poster child in a heated war of words—and actions—over racism, “sanitizing history,” extremism (both right and left), political correctness, hate speech, partisan politics, and a growing fear that violent words will end in violent actions.

In Charlottesville, as in so many parts of the country right now, the conflict is over how to reconcile the nation’s checkered past, particularly as it relates to slavery, with the present need to sanitize the environment of anything—words and images—that might cause offense, especially if it’s a Confederate flag or monument.

In Charlottesville, that fear of offense prompted the City Council to get rid of a statue of Confederate General Robert E. Lee that has graced one of its public parks for 82 years. In doing so, they have attracted the unwanted attention of the Ku Klux Klan.

Yale University actually went so far as to change the name of one of its residential colleges, which was named after John C. Calhoun, the nation’s seventh vice president, a secretary of state, secretary of war, senator and Yale alum who supported slavery.

New Orleans ran up a $2 million tab in its efforts to remove its four Confederate monuments, with the majority of the funds being used for security to police the ensuing protests and demonstrations.

With more than 1,000 Confederate monuments in 31 states (in public parks, courthouse squares and state capitols), not to mention Confederate battle flags on display in military cemeteries, and countless more buildings and parks named after historic figures who were slaveholders, this isn’t an issue that is going away anytime soon, no matter how much we ignore it, shout over it, criminalize it, legislate it, adjudicate or police it.

The temperature is rising all across the nation, and not just over this Confederate issue.

The “winter of our discontent” has given way to an overheated, sweltering summer in which shouting matches are skating dangerously close to becoming physical altercations.

As journalist Dahlia Lithwick writes for Slate, “These days, people who used to feel free to shout and threaten are emboldened to punch, body-slam, and stab. It is a short hop, we are learning, from ‘words can never hurt us’ to actual sticks and stones and the attendant breaking of bones. That is what has become of free speech in this country.”

Here’s the thing: if Americans don’t learn how to get along—at the very least, agreeing to disagree and respecting each other’s right to subscribe to beliefs and opinions that may be offensive, hateful, intolerant or merely different—then we’re going to soon find that we have no rights whatsoever (to speak, assemble, agree, disagree, protest, opt in, opt out, or forge our own paths as individuals).

The government will lock down the nation at the slightest provocation.

It is ready, willing and able to impose martial law within 24 hours.

Indeed, the government has been anticipating and preparing for civil unrest for years now, as evidenced by the build-up of guns and tanks and militarized police and military training drills and threat assessments and extremism reports and surveillance systems and private prisons.

Connect the dots, people.

The government doesn’t care about who you voted for in the presidential election or whether you think the Civil War was fought over states’ rights versus slavery. It doesn’t care about your race or gender or religion or sexual orientation.

When the police state cracks down, it will not discriminate.

We’ll all be muzzled together.

We’ll all be jailed together.

We’ll all be viewed as a collective enemy to be catalogued, conquered and caged.

Thus, the last thing we need to do is play into the government’s hands by turning on one another, turning in one another, and giving the government’s standing army an excuse to take over.

The police state could not ask for a better citizenry than one that carries out its own censorship, spying and policing.

This is how you turn a nation of free people into extensions of the omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent police state, and in the process turn a citizenry against each other. It’s a brilliant ploy, with the added bonus that while the citizenry remains focused on and distrustful of each other, they’re incapable of presenting a united front against the threats posed by the government and its cabal of Constitution-destroying agencies and corporate partners.

Unfortunately, we have already become a nation of snowflakes, snitches and book burners: a legalistic, intolerant, elitist, squealing bystander nation eager to report fellow citizens to the police for the slightest offense.

Mind you, once the police are called in, with their ramped-up protocols, battlefield mindset, militarized weapons, uniforms and equipment, and war zone tactics, it’s a process that is near impossible to turn back and one that too often ends in tragedy for all those involved.

So how do we stop this train from barreling down the tracks past the police state and straight into martial law?

Let’s start with a little more patience, a lot more tolerance and a civics lesson on the First Amendment.

As my good friend Nat Hentoff, that inveterate champion of the First Amendment, once observed, “The quintessential difference between a free nation, as we profess to be, and a totalitarian state, is that here everyone, including a foe of democracy, has the right to speak his mind.”

What this means is opening the door to more speech not less, even if that speech is offensive to some.

Understanding that freedom for those in the unpopular minority constitutes the ultimate tolerance in a free society, James Madison, the author of the Bill of Rights, fought for a First Amendment that protected the “minority” against the majority, ensuring that even in the face of overwhelming pressure, a minority of one—even one who espouses distasteful viewpoints—would still have the right to speak freely, pray freely, assemble freely, challenge the government freely, and broadcast his views in the press freely.

We haven’t done ourselves—or the nation—any favors by becoming so fearfully polite, careful to avoid offense, and largely unwilling to be labeled intolerant, hateful or closed-minded that we’ve eliminated words, phrases and symbols from public discourse.

The result is a nation where no one really says what they really think anymore, at least if it runs counter to the prevailing views. Intolerance is the new scarlet letter of our day, a badge to be worn in shame and humiliation, deserving of society’s fear, loathing and utter banishment from society.

For those who dare to voice an opinion that runs counter to the accepted norms, retribution is swift: they are shamed, shouted down, silenced, censored, fired, cast out and generally relegated to the dust heap of ignorant, mean-spirited bullies who are guilty of various “word crimes.”

We have entered a new age where, as commentator Mark Steyn notes, “we have to tiptoe around on ever thinner eggshells” and “the forces of ‘tolerance’ are intolerant of anything less than full-blown celebratory approval.”

In such a climate of intolerance, there can be no freedom speech, expression or thought.

We have become a nation of snowflakes.

We have allowed our fears—fear for our safety, fear of each other, fear of being labeled racist or hateful or prejudiced, etc.—to trump our freedom of speech and muzzle us far more effectively than any government edict could. Ultimately the war on free speech—and that’s exactly what it is: a war being waged by Americans against other Americans—is a war that is driven by fear.

By bottling up dissent, we have created a pressure cooker of stifled misery and discontent that is now bubbling over and fomenting even more hate, distrust and paranoia among portions of the populace.

The First Amendment is a steam valve. It allows people to speak their minds, air their grievances and contribute to a larger dialogue that hopefully results in a more just world.

When there is no steam valve to release the pressure, frustration builds, anger grows and people become more volatile and desperate to force a conversation.

The problem as I see it is that we’ve allowed ourselves to be persuaded that we need someone else to think and speak for us. The result is a society in which we’ve stopped debating among ourselves, stopped thinking for ourselves, and stopped believing that we can fix our own problems and resolve our own differences.

Not only has free speech become a “politically incorrect” four-letter word—profane, obscene, uncouth, not to be uttered in so-called public places—but in more and more cases, the government deems free speech to be downright dangerous and in some instances illegal.

As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, the U.S. government has become particularly intolerant of speech that challenges the government’s power, reveals the government’s corruption, exposes the government’s lies, and encourages the citizenry to push back against the government’s many injustices. Indeed, there is a long and growing list of the kinds of speech that the government considers dangerous enough to red flag and subject to censorship, surveillance, investigation and prosecution: hate speech, bullying speech, intolerant speech, conspiratorial speech, treasonous speech, threatening speech, incendiary speech, inflammatory speech, radical speech, anti-government speech, right-wing speech, extremist speech, etc.

The powers-that-be understand that if the government can control speech, it controls thought and, in turn, it can control the minds of the citizenry. In fact, some of this past century’s greatest dystopian authors warned of this very danger.

In Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451, reading is banned and books are burned in order to suppress dissenting ideas, while televised entertainment is used to anesthetize the populace and render them easily pacified, distracted and controlled.

In Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World, serious literature, scientific thinking and experimentation are banned as subversive, while critical thinking is discouraged through the use of conditioning, social taboos and inferior education. Likewise, expressions of individuality, independence and morality are viewed as vulgar and abnormal.

In George Orwell’s 1984, Big Brother does away with all undesirable and unnecessary words and meanings, even going so far as to routinely rewrite history and punish “thoughtcrimes.”

And in almost every episode of Twilight Zone, Rod Serling urged viewers to unlock their minds and free themselves of prejudice, hate, violence and fear. “We’re developing a new citizenry,” Serling declared. “One that will be very selective about cereals and automobiles, but won’t be able to think.”

It’s time to start thinking for ourselves again.

It’s time to start talking to each other. It’s time to start listening more and shouting less.

Most of all, it’s time to start acting like people who will choose dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery.

As Dahlia Lithwick concluded for Slate:

To guarantee an escape from conflict, from violence, requires censorship. To have free speech in this moment, when the stakes are so high, is to live with fear. This is not an easy thing to confront—or to accept… Conversation might still be our best chance of getting out of this mess. Free speech is just free speech. It takes actual humans making the effort to talk to each other to transform speech into something more vital and more valuable. Conversations don’t always work. They may sometimes go wrong—horribly, terribly wrong… The First Amendment will never be able to protect us from horrible words and horrific acts. It does guarantee that we’ll keep talking.

Read More At: Rutherford.org

Police State: These Teens Handcuffed for Selling Bottled Water Is Everything Wrong With Government

water
Source: TheDailySheeple.com
Claire Bernish
June 23, 2017

Lemonade stands, paper routes, and bake sales seem yet destined for the dustbin of history, thanks to an imperious State, which — to its sanctimonious detriment — manages to pull off seemingly impossible PR predicaments of its own making, like the handcuffing of teenagers for selling bottled water on the National Mall without a permit Thursday evening.

Yes. Seriously.

Perched atop chains interlinking fence posts lining the walk near Smithsonian Castle, three justifiably perplexed Black youth, wrists in handcuffs behind their backs can be seen speaking with U.S. Park Police — bottles of water resting in an evidence bin, nearby.

Tweeted by tour guide, Tim Krepp, as he passed the scene, photos of the three, aged 16 and 17, would appear to any casual observer without context to be a possible apprehension of at least petty criminals — not the three kids hawking bottled water for a few extra dollars to willing Washington, D.C., tourists on a hot day, that the incident actually was.

U.S. News reports, “A spokeswoman for the U.S. Park Police, Sgt. Anna Rose, confirms three teenagers were detained for vending without a license, but says she feels ‘this has gotten blown out of proportion.’

“The three teens, ages 16 and 17, were detained for ‘illegally selling water’ but were not charged, Rose says. They were held until their parents arrived. A fourth individual was immediately released after officers determined he was uninvolved, she says.”

For good measure — rather, to deflect the flying conflagration of a rightfully livid backlash hurled in her department’s direction — Rose added, “this was not some hours-long ordeal.”

That’s not the point.

None of that is the point — even though the unnamed, plain clothes officers did not charge the adults-in-making with the crime of not possessing the State’s permission slip to vend water on the apparently sacrosanct National Mall.

Of course this incident whipped the Internet into a fury — these are kids. Selling sealed bottles of water. In the summer. To willing customers. Voluntarily.

There should be anger — as well as indignation, sadness, frustration, vitriol, and action.

In fact, perhaps the sole positive development in this affair is that the collective American rage against this absurdity categorically hemorrhaged at the modern portrait of the childhood lemonade stand, its young vendors in the shackles of a police state, nanny state, and an infinitesimally legislated one — all together, summoning bloody echoes from two centuries of injustice — the spectacle sardonically unfolding in the taxpayer-bloated belly of the beast that is the nation’s capital.

Of course — capping off a week of news mangling every sense of justice, logic, peace, and cooperation only a few of us harbored anyway — of course this scene lit fires under the seats of the otherwise preoccupied.

Placing handcuffs around the wrists of teenagers whose only conceivable guilt lies in the breaking of a code enacted inarguably solely for profit by the District, handily cements several theories on the surreptitious arrival of fascism in America.

To paraphrase a recently viral meme, “If you think you’re free in this country, ask yourself what you can do that isn’t taxed, regulated, or licensed?”

Clearly, selling bottled water on Washington’s stately, pun intended, National Mall isn’t an option — nor is selling lemonade.

Of course, both of those lowly pursuits would also be verboten in most places in the nation — California shut down a little girl’s lemonade stand when authorities found the puny perpetrator remiss in securing a $200 permit … and in need of around $3,500 to bring the stand into compliance with government mandates for continued operation.

But don’t think the issue here pertains only to wares sold without the State dipping its hand in the offenders’ pockets for tax — no, giving away water or lemonade won’t necessarily work either.

Florida harbors a sizable homeless population, given its warmer clime and voluminous beaches, but an epidemic threatens everyone without a house — the stomping out of charitable work, in numerous arrests of people providing them with food.

Feed the homeless, pay a fine — and it’s the same from a lengthening list of state legislatures, which should not only be ashamed, but fired.

History’s legendary human rights advocates tell us to disobey unjust, unethical, and immoral laws for a sound reason far beyond just that it’s the right thing to do — unjust laws beget the same, and more so, ad infinitum.

Giving an inch — allowing ineffectual, misbegotten codes, laws, and regulations to accumulate, unaddressed — results only in the taking of miles by the State. We did this — all of us — we’re responsible for the spectacle of three Black youth detained in cuffs for selling water. Water.

It’s time to stop pretending such a scenario facsimilizes anything even approaching acceptable.

Overcriminalization of everyday life has so invaded mundanity this nation has forgotten its free-spirited and freedom-cherishing soul — for the worst.

It would be unfortunately optimistic to hope images of the three teen water-sellers in cuffs would be a watershed moment — the instant Americans knew that, for security and ease, liberty has been tossed overboard — but that won’t happen.

Tragically, outrage has a short fuse — but apathy and complacency are the bedrock of a totalitarian State.

Encapsulating everything humorous and not so much, Rose explained,

“Vending on the National Mall is illegal without a permit. The National Park Service has a whole office dedicated to permitting.”

Read More At: TheDailySheeple.com

Help Wanted: Desperate Police Departments Ditch Standards


Source: TheDailyBell.com
June 23, 2017

I would take one properly trained officer over 10 thugs any day. Yet while departments across the country are facing police shortages, the only thing they can think to do is cut the standards for hiring.

But with killings by officers forcing a public reckoning over whether the police deserve to be seen automatically as the good guys, departments in major cities are struggling to fill thousands of openings: 1,000 in Chicago, nearly 300 in Phoenix and 200 in Detroit. And with the additional mandate to become as diverse as the communities they serve, police departments are rethinking recruitment standards once considered sacrosanct.

New Orleans, with more than 400 openings, no longer automatically disqualifies those who have injected heroin or smoked crack. Aurora, Colo., has stopped using military-style running tests, but now checks how quickly candidates can get out of a squad car.

Police could stop arresting people for drug crimes, and focus on violent and property crimes if they wanted to get by with less personnel. They could even pull some officers off speed-trap duty and actually respond to desperate calls for help.

But no, the solution is to simply hire heroin addicts and crack heads. That will surely improve the tensions between the public and police. How could this go wrong, hiring even lower quality officers than before?

This is absurd. The whole problem of police abuse stems from a lack of proper training and the wrong people in the job. Now, just to fill their ranks, they are ridiculously relaxing their standards. This will only lead to more corruption, and police less fit to actually help when needed.

Mayor Rahm Emanuel of Chicago, where the police are seeking 970 officers, said in January that he had been rethinking a prohibition on those with juvenile records.

In Chicago, where police data shows African-Americans are stopped by the police far more often than whites, disqualifying applicants for minor or youthful offenses can exclude minority candidates at a time when the department is desperate to attract them.

And there is another feel-good worthless plan to help the situation: relax standards to fill the spots with enough minority police to make it seem like a department isn’t racist. Surely black cops could never shoot an innocent person, or abuse their authority. And if they have to hire those with a criminal record in order to hit their racial quotas, so be it.

All of the government’s solutions are just absurd, while they ignore the actual root of police abuse: that it is a government job. Government jobs do not have the same incentives for good behavior, and deterrents for corruption. Cops need to be fired for wrongdoing, not given a vacation.

And they need to be arrested when they victimize people from the communities they supposedly serve. They are individuals responsible for their actions, and allowing anyone to hide behind a government, uniform, or badge is a recipe for power abuse.

Instead of hiring people that are more likely to abuse the public, based on their past, the very first thing that would improve everything is to stop arresting people for victimless crimes.

Chuck Canterbury, president of the national Fraternal Order of Police, said there was concern about whether the changes would result in a generation of ill-prepared officers.

“People are talking about it, but there is such a recruiting and retention problem — they’re searching for ways to bring bodies in,” he said. “But I’m not sure reducing standards is the best way to do that.”

We don’t need more warm bodies on the streets starting conflicts, we need more detectives actually solving the large percentage of real crimes which go by the wayside in favor of making minor drug arrests.

Read More At: TheDailyBell.com

Puerto Rico Referendum Votes For Statehood…

Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell Ph.D.
June 23, 2017

This is one of those “small stories” that occurred in the last few days, that could have huge repercussions, if my high octane speculation of the day has any merit. The story, such as it is, was noticed by many of you, who sent different versions of it, but this one sent by Mr. V.T. from our friends at The Daily Bell is perhaps one “take” worth considering:

Wrong Way! Why Would Puerto Rico Want to Become a State?

http://www.thedailybell.com/news-analysis/wrong-way-why-would-puerto-rico-want-to-become-a-state/embed/#?secret=zRFUePAMDj

The first four paragraphs say it all:

Secession has been a hot topic lately from Brexit, to Catalonia, to California; so why is Puerto Rico voting on statehood tomorrow?

It is a non-binding referendum which asks Puerto Ricans if they would rather the territory remain as it is now, become an American state, or go entirely independent. But some say the election has been rigged for the pro-statehood group.

And indeed, they seem to have the most power right now. The big fish in a small pond are seeking to form a delegation of two “Senators” and five “Representatives” in order to lobby Congress to admit Puerto Rico as the 51st American State. Puerto Rico already has a Congresswoman who goes to DC, though she is not a voting member. Go figure she supports statehood, as someone who has the most to gain from it.

But the real reason many Puerto Ricans see statehood as appealing: the territory is bankrupt. Somehow it only took $73 billion in debt (about $20,000 per capita) to bankrupt Puerto Rico, as opposed to close to $20 trillion in debt (over $60,000 per capita) the U.S.A. holds. (Puerto Rico cannot simply print more money to pay their debts in inflated currency as the U.S. does–a back door tax.)

Now, since the referendum, as The Daily Bell staff points out, there have been the usual claims of rigging and so on. Indeed, as far as I can tell, approximately 20% of that island’s voting population actually turned out to vote, leaving one to wonder what the non-participating eligible voting population of that island thinks, and why.

Whatever they’re thinking, however, The Daily Bell is correct: Puerto Rico’s mounting debt crisis is driving the move toward statehood, in the hopes that by becoming a state, the debt gets “absorbed” into the US federal debt, and economic woes on the island are relieved at the expense of the US taxpayer. If so, then Puerto Rico becomes another one-party republic, like California or Illinois, in the greater “union.”

So where’s the high octane speculation in that? Consider, for a moment, the current drive in some places for a constitutional convention as the cure-all for America’s ills. Here I’m in four-square agreement with Catherine Austin Fitts: a constitutional convention is the last thing America needs, especially given the “class” and “character” of the people who favor it, for it would be a convenient way to finalize what she has been calling the “financial coup d’etat”, whereby all the liabilities are rolled into the public sector, and all the assets are privatized, thus writing off all the “bad paper” in the financial system, and “privatizing” the assets of the country to do it, turning it into a corporate fiefdom. If you think things are bad with the media, or corporate behavior, now, just wait. And Puerto Rican statehood would, in my opinion, be one way to use a “crisis of opportunity” either to call for such a convention, or to address constitutional issues by Congressional fiat.

And this is why I entertain suspicions about the referendum to begin with: it seems contrived; a “small thing” that could turn into a very “big thing” in very short order, as the swamp seeks to extend itself. We don’t need a new constitution, we need to observe (for once)the one we already have. I shudder to think of the financial and cultural nightmare the country will become if the current political class – the Hillary Clintons and Jeb Bushes and Chuck Schumers get their hands on it: think of the trumpet-nosed man in the Beatles’ movie, The Yellow Submarine, sucking everything out of a lush valley. None of the people talking about the idea are of the stature of a Madison or Hamilton or Jefferson, and none of them have individual freedom and responsibility as their goal. Thus, if anything, the Puerto Rican referendum seems oddly – and in my opinion, suspiciously – out of place, as the Daily Bell points out: in the context of moves of secession in Catalonia in Spain, of BREXITS in Great Britain, of Venezia in Italy, even of Nuttyfornia, Puerto Rico, bucking the trend, wants to join.

True, lifeboats take much less time to sink than the Titantic, but nonetheless, the Titanic still goes down because the crew steams full steam into a field of icebergs.

So, Puerto Rico may have just provided them with the excuse they need to “restructure everything.” Those in steerage, please wait in line while we get first class passengers into the life boats.

See you on the flip side…

Read More At: GizaDeathStar.com
________________________________________________

About Dr. Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.

Germany Begins Raiding Homes For “Freedom”


Source: ActivistPost.com
Dawn Luger
June 21, 2017

In the ever increasing global creep toward totalitarianism, some nations are stepping up punishments for their civilians caught using social media for free speech. Now Germany is in the headlines for raiding the homes of those who the government declared had posted “offensive” content on social media.

It hit the fan when it comes to free speech in Germany. Wasn’t this the country that had to fight tooth and nail to free themselves from the grip of Adolf Hitler’s censorship? It’s like some lessons are never learned. In a coordinated campaign across 14 states, the German police raided the homes of 36 people accused of hateful postings over social media, including “threats,” “coercion,” and “incitement to racism.” The goal of these raids was the confiscation of the “hate posters” Internet connection devices, according to a press release from the German federal police (BKA). 

In the most ironic statement of the century, Holger Münch, president of the Federal Criminal Police Office, said “The still high incidence of punishable hate posting shows a need for police action. Our free society must not allow a climate of fear, threat, criminal violence, and violence either on the street or on the internet.” So in Germany, a free society means “don’t say things the government doesn’t like, or your home will be raided.”

The raids come as German politicians are debating the draft of a new social media law aimed at cracking down on hate speech, a measure that an array of experts said was unconstitutional at a parliamentary hearing on Monday. The law simply dictates what one is allowed to say or not say on social media. That’s, without a doubt, a free speech violation. Of course, the German government is selling it in the name of “freedom.”

Under German law, social media users are subject to a range of punishments for posting illegal material, including a prison sentence of up to five years for inciting racial hatred. Under the draft statute, networks must offer a readily available complaint process for posts that may amount to threats, hate speech, defamation, or incitement to commit a crime, among other offenses.Social media outlets would have 24 hours to delete “obviously criminal content” and a week to decide on more ambiguous cases. The law, approved by Germany’s cabinet in April, would be enforced with fines of up to $53 million.

But even human rights organizations understand that all speech, even that which is disliked, is considered free speech, and any law against it is a human rights violation.

Human rights, including free expression, aren’t just essential to functioning democracies, but to safe and secure societies. While controversial, protecting the expression of even the most disfavored views is how we ensure that free speech is protected for all, including the most marginalized groups. –Human Rights First

Some of the posts were cruel in nature, but still free speech. According to Abendzeitungpolice arrived at one man’s house in Munich at 6 am and confiscated two of his cell phones. The 23-year-old was accused of commenting that gays should hang themselves underneath a Facebook photo of two men kissing. Others were accused of making “anti-government” statements.

It looks like Germany will have to relearn all the lessons they have failed. It wasn’t so long ago that they allowed the government enough power that it exterminated millions of people. But relearning these lessons will be costly at best and disastrous at worst.

Read More At: ActivistPost.com
___________________________________________________________________

Delivered by The Daily Sheeple

We encourage you to share and republish our reports, analyses, breaking news and videos (Click for details).

Contributed by Dawn Luger of The Daily Sheeple.

Dawn Luger is a staff writer and reporter for The Daily Sheeple. Wake the flock up – follow Dawn’s work at our Facebook or Twitter.

Image Credit

Buy your food from the CIA: Amazon buys Whole Foods

fakenews
Source: NoMoreFakeNews.com | JonRappoport.wordpress.com
By: Jon Rappoport
June 19, 2017

When Amazon boss and billionaire Jeff Bezos bought the Washington Post in 2013, he also had an ongoing $600 million contract to provide cloud computing services to the CIA. That meant the Washington Post, which already had a long history of cooperation with the CIA, renewed their wedding vows with the Agency and doubled down on the alliance.

By any reasonable standard of journalism, the Post should preface every article about the CIA, or article sourced from the CIA, with a conflict of interest admission: TAKE THIS PIECE WITH A FEW GIANT GRAINS OF SALT, BECAUSE OUR NEWSPAPER IS OWNED BY A MAN WHO HAS A HUGE CONTRACT TO PROVIDE SERVICES TO THE CIA.

Now Bezos and his company, Amazon, have bought Whole Foods for $13.7 billion. Whole Foods is the premier retailer of “natural” foods in America.

The degree of profiling of Whole Foods customers will increase by a major factor. Amazon/CIA will be able to deploy far more sophisticated algorithms in that regard.

It’s no secret that many Whole Foods customers show disdain for government policies on agribusiness, health, medicine, and the environment. Well, that demographic is of great interest to the Deep State, for obvious reasons. And the Deep State will now be able to analyze these customers in finer detail.

At the same time, the Amazon retail powerhouse will exercise considerable control over the food supply, since it will be selling huge numbers of food products to the public. Amazon will have new relationships with all the farmers Whole Foods has been using as suppliers.

Perhaps this disclaimer posted on every Whole Foods item is now in order: KEEP IN MIND THE FACT THAT THE OWNER OF WHOLE FOODS, AMAZON, HAS A VERY TIGHT RELATIONSHIP WITH THE CIA. USE YOUR IMAGINATION.

Then there is this. The CIA has its own private company, called In-Q-Tel, which was founded in 1999 to pour investment money into tech outfits that could develop new ways to facilitate “data collection,” and service other CIA needs. In-Q-Tel, Jeff Bezos, and Amazon are connected. For example, here is a 2012 article from technologyreview.com:

“Inside a blocky building in a Vancouver suburb, across the street from a dowdy McDonald’s, is a place chilled colder than anywhere in the known universe. Inside that is a computer processor that Amazon founder Jeff Bezos and the CIA’s investment arm, In-Q-Tel, believe can tap the quirks of quantum mechanics to unleash more computing power than any conventional computer chip. Bezos and In-Q-Tel are in a group of investors who are betting $30 million on this prospect…”

Nextgov.com described the deal this way: “Canadian company D-Wave Systems raised $30 million to develop quantum computing systems. Bezos Expeditions, the personal investment company of Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, and CIA venture capital arm In-Q-Tel participated in the latest funding round, the firm announced. The company’s quantum computing technology seeks to speed up data-crunching. If successful, the technology could aid automated intelligence gathering and analysis.”

Yes, automated intelligence gathering and analysis are exactly what outfits like Amazon and the CIA need for profiling the public. Other companies who have purchased products from D-Wave Systems? Goldman Sachs and Lockheed Martin. Let’s see: Amazon, CIA, Goldman, Lockheed—a formidable collection of Deep State players.

“Buy your food from the purest natural retailer in the world, the CIA. Oops, I mean Amazon. Oops, I mean Whole Foods.”

Read More At: JonRappoport.wordpress.com
_______________________________________________________________

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.