Skip to comments.Big Media Won't Touch Agenda 21
Posted on 02/03/2005 10:37:05 PM PST by hedgetrimmer
click here to read article
Exerpted from the Asia Times, 2 Feb 05:
The Homeland Security State
Asia Times | February 2, 2005
By Nick Turse
THE MILITARY HALF
If you're in the United States and reading this on the Internet, the Federal Bureau of Information (FBI)may be spying on you at this very moment.
Under provisions of the USA Patriot (Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism) Act, the Department of Justice has been collecting e-mail and IP (Internet protocol, a computer's unique numeric identifier) addresses, without a warrant, using trap-and-trace surveillance devices ("pen-traps"). Now, the FBI, Justice's principle investigative arm, may be monitoring the web-surfing habits of Internet users - also without a search warrant - that is, spying on you with no probable cause whatsoever.
In the wake of September 11, 2001, with the announcement of a potentially never-ending "war on terror" and in the name of "national security", the administration of President George W Bush embarked on a global campaign that left behind it two war-ravaged states (with up to 100,000 civilian dead in just one of them); an offshore "archipelago of injustice" replete with "ghost jails", and a seemingly endless series of cases of torture, abuse and the cold-blooded murder of prisoners. That was abroad. In the US, too, things have changed as America became "the Homeland" and an already powerful and bloated national security state developed a civilian corollary fed by fear-mongering, partisan politics, and an insatiable desire for governmental power, turf and budget.
A host of disturbing and mutually reinforcing patterns have emerged in the resulting new Homeland Security State - among them: a virtually unopposed increase in the intrusion of military, intelligence, and "security" agencies into the civilian sector of US society; federal-government abridgment of basic rights; denials of civil liberties on flimsy or previously illegal premises; warrantless sneak-and-peak searches; the wholesale undermining of privacy safeguards (including government access to library circulation records, bank records, and records of Internet activity); the greater empowerment of secret intelligence courts (such as the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court) that threaten civil liberties; and heavy-handed federal and local law-enforcement tactics designed to chill, squelch, or silence dissent.
While it's true that most Americans have yet to feel the brunt of such policies, select groups, including Muslims, Arab immigrants, Arab-Americans and anti-war protesters have served as test subjects for a potential Homeland Security juggernaut that, if not stopped, will only expand....
I was watching a documentary last night about intelligence. The F.B.I. was handed information about Mossouie(spel?)> They wanted a search warrant to search his home and computer. The search warrant was turned down by a judge who said there wasn't enough evidence to obtain one.
Imagine how different a day 9-11 would be if they had gotten that warrant.
Let them snoop on my IP, if it can stop terrorist by doing so, so be it.
Do a search on Sibel Edmonds, a former translator for the feds, if you want to get boiling angry this afternoon.
"You don't kill spiders by crushing a couple of their legs, you have to crush their head to make sure they'll die. The UN is guiding all of these other communist agencies ......." http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1335656/posts?page=302#302
We need to kill America's participation in the UN and the UN's participation in how the American legislative process funtions if we expect to ever regain what we once had..... well deserved national pride.
Going after these groups that support land grabs probably is a waste of time, money and effort.
I will support killing the UN 150%, with cash, time and certainly a much more concerted effort than mt wife will appreciate. Just being better than the other guy isn't my goal. I want America's REPUBLIC to glow as the sole light of example in the worlds skies.
Thanks, I'll do it now..bbl
2330 fps/2400 ft/lbs
Most powerful revolver in the world.
I found Sibel Edmonds......it's in another language. All I could make out was 'whistle blower' that was it.
All the usual suspects. It makes me want to spit.
Thanks, I'll have a look.
I think the Statue of Liberty is safely in the hands of the Hertiage Foundation = UN = Agenda 21....as is the Liberty Bell.
So as not to hijack this wonderful thread......you have FReepmail.
Reagan saw what treaties such as the L.O.S.T. would do to our country. L.O.S.T. is merely an extention of Agenda 21. They are all linked to handing over control of this country to the UN.
"We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty. When the loyal opposition dies, I think the soul of America dies with it."
- Edward R. Murrow
"In this administration, you don't have to wear a turban or speak Farsi to be an enemy of the United States. All you have to do is disagree with the president."
- White House aide quoted in Capitol Hill Blue, June 4
When I write a column on an issue about which folks hold passionate views, I get a lot of feedback. Most of the feedback is usually from readers who are supportive of my perspective; some is from those who disagree. And of course, I welcome both. The right to freely express our opinions is one of the things that makes America great.
After my May 29 column featuring Sgt. Jimmy Massey telling of his experiences in Iraq, in addition to the kudos and messages of support for Massey's courageous stand, I got some e-mail messages from readers ardently taking issue with my column. Several of them asked: "Would you rather fight them over there or over here?" Whether they knew it or not, these readers were setting up what is known as a "false dilemma," providing a limited number of options (usually two), when there are actually more than that, in this case dozens, perhaps hundreds more. Fighting them over there and over here for one. Fighting them neither place for another. And it would be helpful to know who "them" is. Another famous example of a false dilemma is President Bush's statement "You're either with us or with the terrorists." Again, many more possibilities exist here than the "either/or" option put forward by Bush.
Another question that was posed by a reader after my last column: "Why do you hate George Bush?" Indeed, it seems that if you disagree with any decision made by George W. Bush, you open yourself to the accusation of Bush-bashing. Former President Teddy Roosevelt had this to say about those who believe we should march lock step with the president: "To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."
If we don't stand up and show our rifles they will be successful. We must let them know that this is our country and we are the worlds worst terrorists when it comes to protecting our home.
"Patriotism is supporting your country all the time and your government when it deserves it." - Mark Twain
Looks to me like a few different states are represented in this post. Lets brainstorm ways we can work together on this issue.
I like that. It says all that needs to be said.
Sounds like a plan to me.
I think the Statue of Liberty is safely in the hands of the Hertiage Foundation = UN = Agenda 21....as is the Liberty Bell.
lol - exactly.
tx for the info.
Ahhh, If you have anything detrimental to say you must be part of the conspiracy, right?
Ohhhh. This is a fun game.
Clock it. Dime of Death...
DU insanity has infected the FreeRepublic Blog.
You really are doing the liberals a great service by posting this insane crap here. Thanks a pantload, Chet.
"There are none so blind as those who will not see".
Sorry to bother you again, but posters like TriggerHippie will make me bring more and more to this thread.
Wake up and look around you, TH.
Are you really that dense?
Post # 43 hit the nail on the head. It appears there are spinners here.
What a difference in our ideals. I don't recall seeing their name on any other post, do you?
I can name the names of the people who wrote this local version of the UN plan. Are you saying they don't exist?
The insanity is pretending this stuff doesn't exist and if you have read any of the posts on this thread you will see ample evidence. Or is it that you're afraid that the American people might wake up to the harm the UN and Agenda 21 causes to our liberty and reject its influence? I dare you to find a state or county goverment that isn't infected with this stuff and show it to everyone here on this forum.
I dare you to find a state or county goverment that isn't infected with this stuff and show it to everyone here on this forum.
It could not be done in the State of Texas, County of Travis, OR, the People's Republic of Austin, for dang sure.
The sad thing is, that with the power of the internet, even the most in denial among us could find the information, and inform themselves about what is going on right in their own back yards - but instead, they just blast out criticisms of those who are trying to get our country back.
Here's a radio interview about Sibel Edmonds where Fintan Dunne, editor of Break for News, discusses the Sibel Edmonds travesty.
With some people they don't want to see certain things, they are happy in their naivete.
Pay him no never mind.
PS......He took the 'Blue Pill'. lolol
Don't get me started on this POS city, please.
Cheers, HT, and thanks for starting this discussion here. Other than my "social" threads, this is the most I've posted on fr in several years - it's been fun. Seen some old friends, and might have made some new ones.
Maybe you should drop into one of their meetings sometime?
Maybe you can bust the facilitators and save your county.
I hope we've all made some new friends on this thread. Best having a buddy watching your back when the battle begins.
Unfunded mandates are more of politicians helping themselves then us letting them happen.
Remember, there is one thing that we have to prevent things being forced upon us. It is our 1st Amendment.
Say it loud and say it proud! If we disagree let it be known and be aware there are people who will do anyting to stop us in resisting their objectives.
Well said, folks.
Most of us have been too busy "making a living," and trying to do what was the right thing, and ignoring the "loonie-lefties" as they slowly, but surely, got their agenda out there with their feel good slogans and propaganda.
I believe that we're gaining ground.
They've been doing their thing since the '30s...we've just been doing ours for less than ten years.
The more that we can expose what's going on to the light of truth, the better shot that we have in turning this thing around. I hope and pray.
God bless all, who are seeking the truth.
Types of men:
Joe Sensitive - "After I wash the dishes, let's cuddle, OK?"
Also known as: Mr. Nice Guy, Family man, Honey, Darling, Soft-boiled Egg, Snugglepup
Advantages: Well-behaved; irons own shirts.
Disadvantages: Irritatingly compassionate, wimpy.
Old Man Grumpus - "People are stupid. The world can go to hell. Let's stay home and watch TV."
Also known as: Grumbles, Sour puss, Stick-in-the-mud, Old Fogey, Slow Mover, Jerk
Advantages: Stays put; predictable
Disadvantages: Royal pain in the ass.
Flinchy - "I--I'm sorry for whatever it was I did."
Also known as: Trembly, Creampuff, Hey you.
Advantages: Jumps entertainingly when startled
Disadvantages: Easily spooked; surrenders without a struggle.
Bigfoot - "Shut yer trap, I'm thinkin'."
Also known as: Chunk-style, Lummox, Ignoramus, Galoot, the Hulk, Big 'n' Dumb
Advantages: Can tote bales; is easily fooled
Disadvantages: Can break you in half, sweats like a pig.
Lazybones - "Zzzzzz"
Also known as: Lucky Dog, Parasite, Bum, Sponge, Snoozebucket, Drug Addict
Advantages: Well rested; easy target
Disadvantages: Unlikely to fulfull your dreams.
The Sneak - "Who, me?"
Also known as: Love Pirate, Snake, Rat, Slime, G-D Son of a Bitch
Advantages: May feel pangs of guilt
Disadvantages: May be having time of his life.
Ace of Hearts - "After I wash the dishes let's make love like crazed weasels, OK?"
Also known as: The Sizzler, Handyman, Dreamboat, Casanova, Monster
Advantages: Perpetually aroused
Disadvantages: Perpetually aroused.
The Dreamer - "Someday I'm going to be rich and famous. I don't know how, but--"
Also known as: Struggling Artist, Philosopher, Buffoon, Bag of Wind
Advantages: Tells good stories
Disadvantages: Will turn into "Old Man Grumpus".
Mr. Right - "While the servants wash the dishes, let's make love like crazed weasels in my new yacht, ok?"
Also known as: Mr. Perfect, Jim Dandy
Advantages: Answer to a woman's prayer
Disadvantages: Hunted to extinction.
I read some about the LOST treaty. Makes my blood boil. God help us if we get HITLERy in 2008.
I know. ANyone who would support the LOST treaty is not just an enemy of the state, but an enemy of FREEDOM.
I rarely listen to internet radio but I will give RBNLive a try.
I am going to practice at the shooting range more from now on.
You said that Kofi Annan and the UN have called for a new definition of sovereignty and set up organizations for that purpose. Do you have some links to share on the subject? I'm aware that elitist groups have long sought to replace our Constitution, eliminate our borders, and replace the current U.N. with one even more fearful, etc. but I haven't heard of a new definition of sovereignty. Every scheme of this wretched cabal is bad news for America.
L.O.S.T. is coming up for a vote in about 60 days. Lugar will try and sneak it in when no one is watching. If he does, Bush will sign it.
Here's a former US diplomat, Edward Marks,
Summing up in the words of the secretary general of the UN, state sovereignty is no longer the absolute be-all and end-all of the international system. This thought, explicitly introduced by the secretary general to the 1999 Session of UN General Assembly, has opened a debate on the character of the international political environment.
The secretary general's comment reflects the recent evolution in international law with respect to intervention and the rights and privileges of nation states. One major component of international law is customary law, based on what governments and officials actually do over a period of time and more or less accepted by consensus and practice. The other major component consists of treaties and other agreements, including the Charter of the United Nations. In both of these areas we have in the last decade changed the way in which we regard international law in general and the role of the UN Charter in particular.
Prior to the UN Charter, international law focused on state practice within which war was lawful as state-to- state practice. States were sovereign in law as well as practice. The UN Charter modified that situation, at least with respect to law, by proposing restrictions to the use of war and force, that is, in self-defense or when authorized by Chapter 7. In practice, unfortunately, the Charter prohibitions did not significantly inhibit actual practice by states in the use of force, with the dynamics of the Cold War effectively precluding the use of Chapter 7 by the world community. Except for the Congo operation in the 1960's, the UN until I990 engaged only in Chapter 6 operationswhat has become known as traditional peacekeeping -- in which multinational forces may use force only in self-defense.