GLOBAL POLITICAL AWAKENING

---

• Survival Basics: Preparing for a Grid Down Power Outage
• Syria: Washington’s Latest War Crime
• Down Goes Britain: The UK Economy Tumbles Deep Into Recession
• US Military and Local Police Working Together on American Streets
• MI5, CIA and TSA at the 2012 London Olympic Games
• CFR Globalists Say Don’t Worry - “Your Guns Are In Safe Hands”
• In Syria, Obama Fights Bush's Wars
• Can the TSA search your phone?
• 911 caller accidentally exposes illegal NYPD spying operation
• British Government Encouraging Kids To Report Tax Evaders?

Survival Basics: Preparing for a Grid Down Power Outage Posted: 26 Jul 2012 04:23 PM PDT Gaye Levy, Contributor Activist Post Recent storms in my own area reminded me that power outages resulting in a grid down can happen anytime, to anybody, anywhere. Some outages are planned, some are the result of mother nature kicking up a storm, and some are the unexpected result of a natural or man-made crisis. Whatever the reason, there are various measures you should take now to insure your comfort and safety when the power blows.  Some of the basic items you need to have on hand to get through a power outage are quite simple and are things you probably have on hand: Flashlights  Batteries  Candles  Matches  Blankets  This is a very short list, relatively speaking and unless you have been living in a cocoon in Siberia, chances are that these items have already been set aside so that they will be readily available when the lights blink off. And for a three or four hour outage, you will be just fine with these items. But what if the power is lost for a longer period of time – for whatever reason – how will you cook your food? How will you keep warm? How will you insure your safety in dark? These are just a few of the issues you will face if there is an extended power outage. Add infants, the elderly or the infirm to the mix and you have a big problem on your hands. Preparing in advance for a power outage Today I want to get back to survival basics and offer some suggestions and ideas for preparing your household for an extended power outage. My goal is to get those wheels cranking (in your brain, that is) and to provide you with a starter checklist of suggestions that can be implemented in stages as your needs and budget allow. 1. Store foods that require very little of no warming or cooking. These foods should b items that your family normally eats. Suggestions? Canned meats, cold cereals, peanut butter, crackers, canned fruits and veggies. If you are a coffee drinker, include some instant coffee as well. The list is endless but let me caution you: if you gag at the thought of cold ravioli out of a can now, you will also gag if you have to eat it in an emergency, power out situation. Don't be silly – store foods that are meant to be eaten cold or at room temperature. And don't forget the manual can opener and some disposable plates and utensils. 2. Acquire one or more alternate cooking sources such a fire pit, charcoal barbeque or camp stove. We are lucky that we have a propane cook top in our kitchen that can easily be lit with a match. In addition, we have Volcano II Collapsible Stove, and EcoZoom rocket stove that burns biomass,Patina Cast Iron Fire Pit that is set up for cooking, a couple of butane stoves, and a gas grill. 3. Have at least one lantern that will cast a wide beam that is large enough to fill a room with brightness when the sun goes down. We have both a Coleman propane lantern and a Coleman battery driven lantern. Coleman's are a timeless choice because they last forever and replacement parts – even for older models, are readily available. 4. Store fuel for your chosen energy device. This could be wood for the fire pit, propane cylinders for the gas grill, or 100 pounds of charcoal. It could also be large bucket of pinecones or twigs to use as biomass in your rocket stove. The point is to store fuel – you are going to need it. One more point: educate yourself on the proper storage of fuel. All of the food in the world will not help you one bit if you blow yourself to bits. 5. Blankets are good but a nice toasty sleeping bag or down comforter is better. And a heavy jacket, plus socks are good, too. It is easy to strip down when the temperatures soar – not that that is the optimal way to keep cool – but when you are cold, you need to bundle up and stay warm. 6. Invest in a generator. We recently invested in a 10 kw whole house generator that will automatically power our home during the frequent outages on our island. Think it won't happen to you? A few years back, the city of Seattle was dark for almost a week. It happens. A portable generator can be purchased for as little as $500 or $600 and the sky is the limit after that. Just keep in mind that the installation by a qualified electrician is probably going to cost as much as the generator itself. Also, make sure you test the installation! I can not stress this too much. In my own recent experience I was caught with no refrigerator power during a short term outage because I stupidly trusted the electrician to get things right. Wrong. The wiring from the refrigerator to the master panel was not connected. So whatever you do, test and test again every few months or so. 7. If you have the proper sun exposure, the budget and the space, consider solar power as a backup to your local power grid. Many local utilities, states, and yes, even the federal government offer financial incentives and policies that promote renewable energy. It is worth checking in to. 8. Fill empty milk or juice jugs with water then store them in your freezer so that all of the spare nooks and crannies are filled. This will serve a variety of purposes: the freezer will operate more efficiently because it is full, plus, if there is an outage, the frozen jugs of ice will hold the contents cool for a longer period of time. You can even move some of the jugs of ice to your refrigerator to keep things cold for a short term following an unexpected outage. Note: the water stored in this manner, when thawed, can be used for cleaning or flushing but not for drinking unless it is purified or filtered. Other useful stuff Okay. So we have covered basic power needs. But what are some of the other essentials that you will want to have on hand during a power outage?How about the following: Battery operated or hand crank radio. Remember, without power, there may be no way to use your computers plus your DSL or cable service is likely to be kaput at well. Solar battery charger. Very handy for charging cell phones although many hand crank radios can also charge cell phones. Chemical light sticks. Amusements. Books, games and playing cards. My favorite? A couple of decks of Canasta cards. The Spirit of Adventure. Okay, I had to throw that in. Let's face it, a positive attitude plus your emergency preps will help you soldier through an extended power outage. The Final Word I hope these ideas will start you on the road to thinking about a power outage and how you can prepare to keep yourself warm, light, and well during a power outage. And once you are prepared, I suggest you pop up a big pot of popcorn and get yourself a copy of the movie "The Trigger Effect". I saw this film when it first came out and still find it chilling. Here a synopsis: Do yourself a favor and buy some canned goods, a flashlight, and a radio before you watch this film. Unfairly dismissed by the critics and missed by the public, this pre-Y2K suspense film is a chilling, sobering experience that will turn any practical person into a paranoid, apocalyptic loon. When the power goes out in the big city and society starts to break down, husband and wife Matthew and Annie find out that not even suburbia is safe. Read other articles by Gaye Levy here. Enjoy your next adventure through common sense and thoughtful preparation! Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine. You can also support this information by voting on AllVoices and Current.   Gaye Levy, the SurvivalWoman, grew up and attended school in the Greater Seattle area. After spending many years as an executive in the software industry, she started a specialized accounting practice offering contract CFO work to emerging high tech and service industries. She has now abandoned city life and moved to a serenely beautiful rural area on an island in NW Washington State. She lives and teaches the principles of a sustainable, self-reliant and stylish lifestyle through emergency preparation and disaster planning through her website at BackdoorSurvival.com. SurvivalWoman speaks her mind and delivers her message with optimism and grace, regardless of mayhem swirling around us. Enter your email address to subscribe to our newsletter: Delivered by FeedBurner Be the Change! Share this using the tools below. Sharing on Reddit and Newsvine will help the most.

Syria: Washington’s Latest War Crime Posted: 26 Jul 2012 12:29 PM PDT image source Paul Craig Roberts Activist Post One wonders what Syrians are thinking, as "rebels" vowing to "free Syria" take the country down the same road to destruction as "rebels" in Libya. Libya, under Gaddafi a well-run country whose oil revenues were shared with the Libyan people instead of monopolized by a princely class as in Saudi Arabia, now has no government and is in disarray with contending factions vying for power. Just as no one knew who the Libyan "rebels" were, with elements of al Qaeda reportedly among them, no one knows who the Syrian "rebels" are, or indeed if they are even rebels (Antiwar.com). Some "rebels" appear to be bandit groups who seize the opportunity to loot and to rape and set themselves up as the governments of villages and towns. Others appear to be al Qaeda. (Antiwar.com) The fact that the "rebels" are armed is an indication of interference from outside. There have been reports that Washington has ordered its Saudi and Bahrain puppet governments to supply the "rebels" with military weaponry. Some suspect that the explosion that killed the Syrian Defense Minister and the head of the government's crisis operations was not the work of a suicide bomber but the work of a US drone or missile reminiscent of Washington's failed attempts to murder Saddam Hussein. Regardless, Washington regarded the terror attack as a success, declaring that it showed the rebels were gaining "real momentum" and called on the Syrian government to respond to the attack by resigning. (reuters.com) The following is from a leaked intelligence document describing a previous Western terrorist intervention in Syria just in case any reader is so naive as to think that "our government would never do that." In order to facilitate the action of liberative (sic) forces, …a special effort should be made to eliminate certain key individuals. …[to] be accomplished early in the course of the uprising and intervention, …  Once a political decision has been reached to proceed with internal disturbances in Syria, CIA is prepared, and SIS (MI6) will attempt to mount minor sabotage and coup de main (sic) incidents within Syria, working through contacts with individuals. …Incidents should not be concentrated in Damascus …  Further: a "necessary degree of fear .. frontier incidents and (staged) border clashes", would "provide a pretext for intervention… the CIA and SIS [MI6] should use … capabilities in both psychological and action fields to augment tension." (Joint US-UK leaked Intelligence Document, London and Washington, 1957) (globalreasearch.ca) Obama has not said why his government is so desperate to overthrow the Syrian government. The current president was an eye doctor in London who was brought back to Syria to replace his father, who had passed away, as president of the country. Washington is reticent about its real motives, which it masks with high-sounding humanitarian rhetoric, but Washington's motives are transparent. One motive is to get rid of the Russian naval base in Syria, thus depriving Russia of its only Mediterranean base. A second motive is to eliminate Syria as a source of arms and support to Hizbullah in order that Israel can succeed in its attempts to occupy southern Lebanon and acquire its water resources. Hizbullah's fighters have twice defeated the Israeli military's attempts to invade and to occupy southern Lebanon. A third motive is to destroy the unity of Syria with sectarian conflict, as Washington destroyed Libya and Iraq, and leave Syria to waring factions to dismember the country, thus removing another obstacle to Washington's hegemony. Syria, a secular Arab state, like Iraq was, is ruled by a political party composed of Alawis, more or less Shia Muslims. The Alawis comprise about 12% of the Syrian population and are regarded as heretics by the Sunni Muslims who comprise about 74% of the Syrian population. Thus the orchestrated "uprising" appeals to many Sunnis who see the opportunity to take over. (In Iraq it was a Sunni minority that ruled a Shia majority, and in Syria it is the opposite.) The divisions among Arabs make Arabs vulnerable to Western interference and rule. The Sunni-Shia split makes it impossible for an Arab country to unite against an invader or for one Arab country to come to the aid of another. In 1990 the Shia Syrian government lined up with the US against the Sunni Iraq government in the First Iraq War. Neither Lawrence of Arabia, Nasser, nor Gaddafi succeeded in creating an Arab consciousness. Washington's cover for its violent overthrow of other governments is always moralistic verbiage. First the target is demonized, and then Washington's naked aggression is described as "bringing freedom and democracy," "overthrowing a brutal dictator," "protecting women's rights." Any assortment of cant words and phrases seems to work. Hillary Clinton has been especially strident in advocating the overthrow of the Syrian government. The silly woman even issued threats to Russia and China for daring to block Washington's attempt to use a UN resolution as cover for invading Syria. Washington misrepresents the Syrian government's resistance to being overthrown as a government conducting terror against its own people. But Washington had no condemnation for the terror attack, whether its own or that of a suicide bomber, that killed high-level Syrian government officials. Washington's double standard prompted the Russian Foreign Minister, Sergey Lavrov, to accuse Washington of having "a sinister position." Indeed, Washington does. But what is surprising about Washington's sinister position after Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Somalia, Yemen, and Pakistan? Undoubtedly, after Syria is overthrown, Washington will move on to Iran. Russia itself is already being surrounded by US missile bases, and the Russian government has a disloyal and traitorous political opposition financed by American money. China is confronting a rapid buildup of US air, naval, and troop bases in the Pacific. How long before China's government has a disloyal opposition financed by Washington? The hegemon is on the march, but what Syrian Sunnis see is a chance to overthrow the Alawite Shia. The Syrian Sunnis will ally with Washington despite the fact that Washington overthrew the Iraqi Sunnis. Few Arabs, it seems, mind being puppets of a foreign regime that hands out billions of dollars. Washington loosely refers to Syrian President Assad as a "dictator" or "brutal dictator," but obviously if Assad is a dictator he is not very effective in that role. Normally, dictators don't permit an opposition to rise, much less arm itself. It would be more accurate to say that the ruling party is authoritarian, but the ruling party has introduced elements of democracy with the new constitution. As Iraq has proved, Arab governments have to be authoritarian if their Sunni and Shia populations are not to be constantly engaged in civil war. Both Bush and Obama claim that Washington brought "freedom and democracy" to Iraq. However, the ongoing violence in Iraq is as intense or more intense than under the American occupation. Here are the reports for the last three days: July 23: "A wave of bomb attacks and shootings in Baghdad and north of the capital has killed at least 107 people. At least 216 were wounded." July 24: "A second day of intensified attacks left at least 145 Iraqis killed and 379 more wounded." July 25: "Attacks continue across Iraq: 17 killed, 60 wounded." This is what Washington did for Iraq. Far from bringing "freedom and democracy," Washington brought endless mayhem and death. And this is precisely what Washington is in the process of bringing to Syria. This article first appeared at Paul Craig Roberts' new website Institute For Political Economy.  Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy and associate editor of the Wall Street Journal. He was columnist for Business Week, Scripps Howard News Service, and Creators Syndicate. He has had many university appointments. His Internet columnshave attracted a worldwide following. Donations are much appreciated. Enter your email address to subscribe to our newsletter: Delivered by FeedBurner Be the Change! Share this using the tools below. Sharing on Reddit and Newsvine will help the most.

Down Goes Britain: The UK Economy Tumbles Deep Into Recession Posted: 26 Jul 2012 10:04 AM PDT Image Michael Snyder, Contributor Activist Post The economic crisis that is sweeping Europe is starting to hit Britain really hard. Over the last couple of years economists have been warning that we can't let the "contagion" spread from troubled nations such as Greece and Portugal to the rest of Europe. Well, it is too late for that now. Spain and Italy are coming apart at the seams at this point, and even "stronger" nations such as the UK and France appear to be deeply troubled.  According to numbers that were released just this week, the UK economy has now contracted for three quarters in a row. During the second quarter of 2012, the UK economy shrunk by 0.7 percent. That was a much larger contraction than the 0.2 percent contraction that economists were forecasting. At this point we have got a definite trend going. During the fourth quarter of 2011, the UK economy shrunk by 0.4 percent. During the first quarter of 2012, the UK economy shrunk by 0.3 percent. And now in this latest quarter the contraction of the UK economy appears to be accelerating.  This economic downturn in the UK is being called "the longest double-dip recession for more than 50 years". So will Britain soon look like Greece and Spain and Italy or will it be able to pull out of this nosedive in time? The UK construction sector was hit particularly hard during the second quarter. It contracted by 5.2 percent, which was the biggest decline since the first quarter of 2009. Consumer confidence has reached a historic low in Britain and economic gloom is seemingly everywhere. So what does the future hold for Britain? Unfortunately, things do not look promising at all right now. At this point, the budget deficit of the UK government is still about 8 percent of GDP, and British politicians are promising to reduce that significantly. That means that more austerity measures are coming for Britain and less government money will be flowing into the economy. So the economic slowdown is very likely to get even worse. But of course we have been seeing the same kind of thing happening all over Europe. Economists are warning once again that Greece is on the verge of declaring bankruptcy. On Tuesday, the Telegraph ran a story with the following startling headline: "Debt crisis: Greece to run out of money by August 20". Haven't we heard this before? Yes, we have. And every time, European leaders have gotten together and "fixed" the problem. But of course they didn't really fix anything. They just kicked the can down the road a little while and things just kept getting worse. At this point the Greek economy has been in a depression for several years. In fact, the Prime Minister of Greece is now even openly using the word "depression" to describe the state of the Greek economy. So just how bad are things in Greece right now? It is being projected that the Greek economy will contract by a total of 7 percent during 2012. Ouch. But Greece is not alone. Other southern European nations are on the exact same path that Greece is on. For example, Italy is rapidly becoming a gigantic mess as well. The national government is drowning in debt, the economy is in recession and today came a warning that 10 major Italian cities are on the verge of bankruptcy.... The cities at risk of running out of money include Naples, Palermo in Sicily and Reggio Calabria, on the toe of the Italian boot, according to the Italian press.  "The situation is becoming worse by the day," said Graziano Del Rio, the president of a national association of municipal councils. The warning came just days after Mario Monti, the prime minister, expressed fears that Sicily, which has a high degree of fiscal autonomy, was on the brink of a default. But the country making the biggest headlines this week has been Spain. Spanish bond yields have been soaring, the Spanish stock market has been crashing, the Spanish banking system is on the verge of collapse and now regional governments all over Spain are coming forward and asking for bailouts. As the national government attempts to impose even more austerity measures on the Spanish people, violent protests are erupting all over the country. You can see footage of some of the recent violence in Spain right here. So why is all of this happening? Well, the truth is that this is not a liquidity crisis. If it was, the central banks could flood the system with money and solve the problem. No, what Europe is facing is an insolvency crisis. There is way, way too much debt in the system and it is inevitable that an "adjustment" is going to happen. A recent Marketwatch article detailed how the global debt bubble has continued to grow even in the midst of the economic problems of the past few years.... Balance sheets of major central banks have increased to $18 trillion from around $6 trillion, reflecting an unprecedented 30% of global gross domestic product.  Mr. Economy is now addicted to monetary heroin. Increasing doses are necessary for the patient to function at all.  Mr. Economy has not made the changes necessary for a return to full health. He seems to have taken rock star Steven Tyler's advice: "Fake it until you make it." Borrowing levels remain unsustainable. Debt levels for 11 major nations have increased to 417% of GDP in 2012 from 381% of GDP in 2007. Debt has increased in Canada, Germany, Greece, France, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Spain, Portugal, the U.K. and the U.S. These debt levels are not sustainable. A collapse is going to happen. Hopefully the collapse will be at least somewhat orderly, but there is also a good chance that it could be completely chaotic. Some that have analyzed the situation are very pessimistic at this point. For example, the following is from a recent article by Graham Summers.... In simple terms, today we are facing a Crisis that is far, far worse than 2008. Before it ends, it is quite possible that we will see the entire Western Financial System collapse and a new system put into place.  This will mean: Many major banks disappearing, as well as numerous potentially lengthy bank holidays (think Argentina in 2001) Multiple sovereign defaults as well as broad economic contractions and their commensurate unemployment/ civil unrest/ erasure of retirement accounts/ pensions (this process has already begun in some US municipals, e.g. San Bernandino and Stockton California as well as Harrisburg Pennsylvania). Possibly new currencies being introduced or new denominations of currencies (say one new unit being worth 1,000 of the old one) Massive wealth destruction to the tune of tens of trillions of Dollars (think MF Global i.e. the money is gone… only systemically… in fact we just had another such instance with PF) A global contraction that will result in new political/ power structures being implemented as well as the breakup of various countries/ unions. Very serious trade wars to begin (see Obama's recent attack on China) and very possibly a real war. Many Americans do not pay much attention to what is going on over in Europe because they do not believe that it will affect them much. But the truth is that Europe has a bigger population than we do, a bigger economy than we do, and a much bigger banking system than we do. The global financial system is more interconnected than ever, and what goes on over in Europe is going to have a dramatic impact on the United States. In fact, already there are a whole host of signs that the U.S. economy is starting to tip into another recession. So let us definitely hope for the best, but let us also get prepared for the worst. A great storm is on the horizon, and it would be quite foolish to ignore it. This article first appeared here at the American Dream.  Michael Snyder is a writer, speaker and activist who writes and edits his own blogs The American Dream and Economic Collapse Blog. Follow him on Twitter here.  Enter your email address to subscribe to our newsletter: Delivered by FeedBurner Be the Change! Share this using the tools below. Sharing on Reddit and Newsvine will help the most.

US Military and Local Police Working Together on American Streets Posted: 26 Jul 2012 09:55 AM PDT Susanne Posel, Contributor Activist Post The US military is being used to protect civilian events, like the 2012 Democratic and Republican Party National Conventions in Tampa, Florida and Charlotte, North Carolina. USNORTHCOM and Leon Panetta, US Secretary of Defense, has readily admitted that US armed forces will collaborate with local law enforcement "if called upon". In fact, more than 20,000 troops were brought home and readied for deployment within the US to assist in "civil unrest and crowd control". The US military will prop up the US Secret Service "for operational security reasons we do not discuss the numbers of military personnel and resources that are involved. Additionally, we do not share our operational plans," said U.S. Navy Lt. Cdr. William G. Lewis. The extent of use of military forces on civilian matters, as reported by mainstream media (MSM) have included the reallocation of hundreds of military police officers being trained to "assist local authorities" in investigation, crime scene and case building. An estimate 500 military police and dogs will be used as "law enforcement battalions". These soldiers, having served on tours in Afghanistan, will now be activated and based out of military bases across America to help local police forces.National Guard has been witnessed in Virginia conducting "wellness checks" and patrolling residential neighborhoods as well as downtown city areas. In Southern California, the TSA have been caught patrolling train stations and bus terminals. The US Congress has given over $25 million in more funding to support unannounced TSA checkpoints. According to one whistleblower: "We're doing patrols in the parking lot with dogs, we're even going as far out to the train station because the train station is connected to the airport here and we have guys walking around the train station, walking around the rental cars, we're inspecting cars coming into the parking garage, I mean we've fully expanded – we're no longer just at the gate and just at the security checkpoint." Military soldiers and TSA checkpoints are not the only tricks up the US government's sleeve. Researchers at the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory, led by Roland Brockers, have developedmicro-aerial vehicles (MAVs) that utilize a camera pointed at the ground to navigate, choose landing destinations and identify people and targets. Operators have only to command the MAVs to a location, beginning with the starting point, and thespecialized GPS system will guide the micro-drone through mapped out sites, dimensions and landscapes. Other military defense contractors like Lockheed Martin and LaserMotive have combined to preform drone testing with the use of wireless energy technology. While the US government is facilitating the military on American streets and the TSA are beefing up their range with new checkpoints and areas of patrol, the national debate over gun control continues. The National Rifle Association (NRA) are bringing attention to the anti-gun purveyors like New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg who are calling for immediate restriction of gun sales to average Americans. Thomas Menino, Mayor of Boston and member of Mayors Against Illegal Guns, commented: "The best way to honor the memory of those who senselessly lost their lives in Aurora is to make it harder for this to ever happen again. Our political leaders need to lead – and we demand they act now." NRA members are reporting, according to a new survey, that they are not only purchasing more guns because of recent events like the Batman shooting, but recognize that their purchases may put them on a terrorist watch list.  John Velleco, director of federal affairs for Gun Owners of America, acknowledges that gun control is a heated topic "in the wake of this horrible shooting" but that "more gun control could actually make situations worse by making it harder for law-abiding folks to own and carry guns, which means for lunatics that there are more unarmed, potential victims."Velleco admits that as of now, legislation is lacking in the gun control debate, however he recognizes that these anti-gun advocates are "kind of like vultures to take advantage of a situation to further an agenda that doesn't get traction and that people don't support." The NRA has political pull in swing states, which is being suggested by the MSM as a deterrent from Obama to support stricter gun laws; however Obama and Clinton have both publicly stated their support of the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) being discussed by the UN in conference in New York until July 27th.  Susanne Posel is the Chief Editor of Occupy Corporatism. Our alternative news site is dedicated to reporting the news as it actually happens; not as it is spun by the corporately funded mainstream media. You can find us on our Facebook page. RELATED ACTIVIST POST ARTICLE: The Ultimate Betrayal: Police and Military Working Together to Oppress Americans Enter your email address to subscribe to our newsletter: Delivered by FeedBurner Be the Change! Share this using the tools below. Sharing on Reddit and Newsvine will help the most.

MI5, CIA and TSA at the 2012 London Olympic Games Posted: 26 Jul 2012 09:47 AM PDT Susanne Posel, Contributor Activist Post The UK government has deployed an extra 1,200 more troops to aid in protection measures at the 2012 Olympic Games. The lack of confidence in the G4S security firm has prompted the use of military forces. The opening ceremony will provide an estimated 18,200 UK military personnel. Another 5,500 troops will be stationed outside the venue. Jeremy Hunt, Olympics Secretary released a statement explaining: On the eve of the largest peacetime event ever staged in this country, ministers are clear that we should leave nothing to chance. The Government continues to have every confidence that we will deliver a safe and secure Games. The armed forces will be soldiers formerly stationed in Afghanistan. Security at the Games is beginning to be referred to as "the biggest peacetime security operation in Britain's history." Surveillance at the Games promises to rival any other Big Brother monitoring as of yet. More than4.2 million CCTV cameras will be used to watch the general public while the Games commence. Licensed software used for spying has been provided by the CIA, FBI and TSA. In fact, TSA cronies will be monitoring airports in London to aid in the search for terrorists scheming. At London's Heathrow airport the TSA will be molesting British citizens. The TSA is scheduled to assist US and British airlines; however, they are supposedly restricted from screening passengers, conducting inspections, or go beyond the gates, but this promise will most likely be broken at some point for security's sake. Lt. Colonel Brian Fahy, senior army officer, seems to believe that it is "feasible" that unmanned drones equipped with poison could be flown over-head at the Games and used for biological warfare in London. Fahy explained: An unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) can be put in a backpack. They come in all sorts of sizes and it's feasible they could be filled with something noxious and flown by remote-control. Threats of the spread of infectious diseases looms as the Europe Center for Disease Control and Prevention (ECDC) reports that global mass gatherings are rife for bacteria and viruses to infect thousands of people at once due to proximity and exposure. The ECDC and the Health Protection Agency (HPA) will be monitoring spectators and provide "risk assessment" of the potentials with regard to public health and communicable disease. According to the ThreatMatrix, an integrated cybercrime prevention software program, mobile phones (including smartphones and tablets) are a significant threat to the Games.Andreas Baumhof, chief technology officer, ThreatMatrix, says: With such a large audience seeking information on the Olympic Games, cybercriminals will seize this opportunity to attack PCs, mobile devices and even tablets. Cybercrime today is so advanced that in many cases users are completely unaware they are being attacked.  The Olympic audience needs to be vigilant when browsing the Internet and researching the games. Whether you are searching for Michael Phelps or real-time medal count updates, make sure you are using sites that can be trusted – mainstream news sites, or better yet the official Olympics website. The London Organizing Committee of the Olympic Games, in preparation for cyber threats, has allocated an estimated $3.1 billion to spend on technology securitization alone. Terrorists using blended attacks, which is the application of simultaneous destruction of physical targets, could be carried out as an attack on the Games and London. The security agents and military forces may be pulled in opposite directions to mitigate damage. MI5, British internal counter-intelligence and security agency, will collaborate with the Secret Intelligence Service to focus on minimizing foreign threats. Mainstream media is claiming that MI5 may have to worry about: Organized plots hatched by al-Qaeda or affiliated jihadist groups. An individual with an Islamist background intent on carrying out a "lone wolf" attack. An attempt by a rogue Irish Republican group to do something attention-getting on the mainland. Dissident groups from other countries who see an opportunity to strike at the head of a hated government while he is in London. The "lone wolf" is being touted as the biggest threat to the Games. Islamic extremist, plants of al-Qaeda or other Irish dissidents could, according to Will Hartley, defense specialist at HIS Jane's, who warns that the lone wolf "by definition, they are unpredictable and could be potentially motivated by any number of causes." Hartley refers to "chatter" that specifies a target at the Games that militant Islamic online forums have revealed points to anarchists who represent a clear and obvious threat to the Games.Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine. You can also support this information by voting on AllVoices and Current.  Susanne Posel is the Chief Editor of Occupy Corporatism. Our alternative news site is dedicated to reporting the news as it actually happens; not as it is spun by the corporately funded mainstream media. You can find us on our Facebook page. Enter your email address to subscribe to our newsletter: Delivered by FeedBurner Be the Change! Share this using the tools below. Sharing on Reddit and Newsvine will help the most.

CFR Globalists Say Don’t Worry - “Your Guns Are In Safe Hands” Posted: 26 Jul 2012 09:11 AM PDT Brandon Smith, Contributor Activist Post It's funny, I was worried about my Second Amendment rights just a moment ago, but now that the Council On Foreign Relations, a global governance think tank and inbred cesspool of despotic elitism, has explained the situation to me, I suddenly feel at ease… In preparation for the fast approaching UN summit on "international conventional arms trade" in New York, the CFR has published yet another disinformation piece skewing the facts and twisting reality to lull Americans into a state of apathy:  http://blogs.cfr.org/patrick/2012/07/20/your-guns-are-in-safe-hands/ Am I surprised that the CFR would rehash the talking points of the UN and declare uninhibited support for their worldwide gun grabbing bid? Of course not. The CFR and the UN are part and parcel of the same nefarious sea monster; each tentacle does its duty to rend sovereign ships asunder. However, such propaganda articles from establishment organizations do give us an opportunity to dissect and annihilate a host of lies and misdirections in one fell swoop. There may not be much sport in pulling apart the CFR's poorly composed arguments, but, it has to be done…CFR writers Stewart Patrick and Emma Welch begin with a kind of red herring distraction, immediately bringing up the internal conflicts in Syria as some kind of rationale for the UN putting its nose into the gun buying habits of sovereign countries. I would like to point out that most of the "illegally procured" firearms being shipped into Syria are coming from the U.S. to supply an insurgency which is now looking more and more like a bought and paid for destabilizing false flag army rather than a true and honest revolution for freedom: http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/syrian-rebels-get-influx-of-arms-with-gulf-neighbors-money-us-coordination/2012/05/15/gIQAds2TSU_story.html I am highly doubtful that the UN has any intention of stopping this activity on the part of the U.S., primarily because they have never declared opposition to the covert support of Syrian rebels. On top of this, the guidelines of the UN Small Arms Treaty are so broad that they could be interpreted any number of ways to fit any number of desired outcomes. If the UN wanted to label the supply of U.S. arms to Syrian insurgents "legal" within the bounds of the treaty, they could. The injection of Syria into the treaty issue by the CFR is an obvious ploy designed to make you falsely associate the UN action as being useful in combating Syrian destabilization, even though this is in no way the UN's goal. Ironically, after slipping the Syrian crisis into the discussion to manipulate readers, without mentioning the U.S. government's involvement in the clandestine supply of arms to the opposition movement, the CFR then attacks Iran's involvement in the treaty as hypocritical, because of their alleged funneling of arms to the Assad regime. So, within the first two paragraphs of their article, the Council on Foreign Relations has dishonestly tied Syria to the gun treaty debate with cherry-picked data and criticized Iran for supposed crimes of which the U.S. is also guilty. This kind of disinformation truly boggles the mind… The article continues by outlining the "horrors" of the small arms trade, which it immediately associates with terrorism, rogue states (of which they apparently include Iran, but not the U.S.), and criminal syndicates. When, in fact, most of the arms deals taking place in shadow markets around the world are consistently discovered to be facilitated by governments themselves (as the Syria crisis clearly illustrates as well as the Fast and Furious scandal). I still have not seen any indication from the UN that this is a problem for them as long as participating governments play the globalist game. You can read the text of the Small Arms Treaty here: http://iapcar.org/?p=970 The only thing the UN treaty accomplishes is a double standard in favor of establishment entities to which the rules do not apply. A destabilized Syria serves globalist interests, and so, the insurgency WILL get U.S. arms, and the United Nations WILL look the other way, treaty or no treaty.  The CFR goes on to claim that: "…participating countries generally agree that a treaty is desperately needed and long overdue…" This is to paint a false image of consensus in the minds of readers. It is as if we are supposed to say "well, if everyone is for it, then I am too…" Only a few lines later, the article contradicts itself by lamenting: "…despite three years of preparations and nearly a decade of advocacy campaigns, there remains a lack of consensus on the scope, criteria, and implementation of the treaty. The usual suspects, Russia, China, and—to a certain extent—the United States, are among the most influential of a handful of countries raising objections, particularly over the proposed inclusion of small arms and ammunition, human rights criteria, and regulatory measures. And to compound matters, the United States continues to face domestic opposition to its participation in the treaty negotiations…" So, we finally get to the heart of that which chaps the CFR's behind, and the primary reason the article was written: Domestic opposition to U.S. participation in the UN treaty. Government opposition to the treaty is not what worries the UN. Barack Obama will sign the accord in a heartbeat and salivate while doing it. What does concern the globalists is the fact that so many Americans, millions of them, are largely against the proposition. This fact, in itself, is very revealing of their true intentions. Why is it that, though the UN has clear support from our President and our Secretary of State, they are so adamant about public support and acceptance? Senate ratification may become a stumbling bloc, but their arguments do not address the senate; they address us as citizens. Why is the CFR so concerned with convincing us that the treaty is "harmless"? If the treaty is going to be signed regardless of what we feel, and if it is truly not a threat to our rights, then why not simply pass the resolution, and show us through action that our right to own firearms is not under threat? Why are the UN and the CFR so interested in manufacturing our consent? The reality is, laws and treaties, domestic and international, are mostly implemented to achieve psychological acceptance from the populace. If a law or set of principles is written down and praised by the bureaucratic circus, but the people do not embrace the action, then the lawmakers have ultimately accomplished nothing. They are not satisfied with codification. They want cultural identification. They want people to love the new law.  I have found in my time tracking and analyzing corrupt law, the harder the shills work to convince you that a particular regulation is innocuous, the more dangerous it ends up becoming.  The CFR continues by giving a deliberately weak sided opposing view to the treaty by quoting arguments from the NRA and Mitt Romney, of all people. The NRA has many times in the past actually contributed to the support of laws in the U.S. which are undermining to the 2nd Amendment and has long been considered by knowledgeable gun right advocates to be controlled opposition. Mitt Romney's (flip-flopper extraordinaire) record on gun control is no better than Obama's:  http://www.businessinsider.com/mitt-romney-gun-conrol-nra-assault-weapons-colorado-shooting-theater-2012-7 The CFR would of course never quote true and intelligent proponents of gun rights, like Gun Owners of America, for instance. Otherwise, their string of logical fallacies would be completely disrupted.  That said, the threat to American sovereignty and Constitutional protections is indeed on the minds of many in this country. The CFR labels these concerns "inflammatory" and "unfounded". They list the stock responses and talking points which have no doubt been composed and passed around by the UN. I have listed them below, along with the reasons why they are disingenuous: 1) The treaty is limited to the international trade of conventional arms, which pertains to the buying, selling, transshipping, transferring, or loaning across borders.  Don't worry America, the UN treaty only covers the importation and exportation of firearms, says the CFR. I would like to remind you, though, of similar situations that have been exploited by the Federal Government here in the U.S. in the name of the Commerce Clause. The original intent of the Commerce Clause was to allow the Federal Government some oversight over the FOREIGN and INTERSTATE trade of goods. Sovereign states were meant to retain governance over all internal commerce. Unfortunately over time, especially since FDR's presidency and the New Deal, the government has used and abused the commerce clause, subjugating the rights of states and claiming authority over ALL trade, not just external trade. Even when a state takes a stand on a particular form of commerce, as Montana has with firearms or medical marijuana, the Federal Government has ignored local law and unleashed alphabet agencies like the FBI, ATF, and FDA to crush dissenters. I have no doubt that the UN will eventually abuse the Small Arms Treaty just as our Federal Government has abused the Commerce Clause. 2) The draft text of the treaty explicitly recognizes "the exclusive right of States to regulate internal transfers of arms and national ownership, including through the constitutional protections on private ownership. As stated above, there are no guarantees on this. Also, there has been a consistent push by globalist academia to assert that treaties somehow "supersede" Constitutional protections. This argument comes primarily from a misguided interpretation of the Supremacy Clause in the Constitution by men like Chief Justice John Marshal, who said in 1829: "A treaty is, in its nature, a contract between two nations, not a legislative act. It does not generally effect, of itself, the object to be accomplished; especially, so far as its operation is intraterritorial; but is carried into execution by the sovereign power of the respective parties to the instrument…In the United States, a different principle is established. Our constitution declares a treaty to be the law of the land. It is, consequently, to be regarded in courts of justice as equivalent to an act of the legislature…" Marshal was a very confused and foolish interpreter of the Constitution, at least in this instance. In regards to treaties and the Supremacy Clause in general the Constitution clearly states: "This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding." Meaning, all laws and treaties are subject to the guidelines of Constitutional rights and the laws of the states first and foremost. If a law or treaty violates those rights, it is null and void. Period. Sadly, this fact has not stopped the use of treaties by certain government officials and think tanks as an argument for an end run around the Constitution. 3) In response to the charges that the treaty would co-opt U.S. national sovereignty, arms control experts argue that the treaty would have "little to no impact" on existing regulatory processes… By signing this treaty, the U.S. would indeed lose sovereignty. The CFR acts as if the UN is simply handing out a short list of guidelines and giving regulatory control to nation states. It would seem they have not read the fine print. Article 13 of the UN treaty establishes what they call the "Implementation Support Unit". This group collects data from member countries, oversees the enforcement of treaty provisions, asserts final authority over the interpretation of said provisions, collects financial obligations from member countries, and centralizes the entire process under one roof. The ISU will be a UN agency that administrates over the U.S. and other countries when it comes to the trade of small arms. For the CFR to claim that the U.S. will not lose sovereignty is a flagrant falsehood. 4) In an attempt to diminish concerns that the UN will overstep its bounds when it comes to U.S. sovereignty, the CFR states: "The United States already has in place a rigorous export control system, defined as the "gold standard." Instead, the treaty is primarily aimed at countries in which rigorous controls and oversight are absent, in an attempt to harmonize and coordinate standards worldwide…" My question is, if the United States ALREADY has a rigorous export control system, then why is it necessary for us to join the UN gun treaty at all? The CFR moves forward by stating that the U.S. must use its position to "set an example", but it would appear that we already have set that example according to the CFR's own words. What purpose then does a UN treaty on guns serve? Why do we need the UN to mediate anything? Does anyone have a logical explanation for this? I would enjoy hearing it. I believe that the UN Small Arms Treaty is another step, perhaps an important step, in the imposition of a subversive philosophy: that gun ownership is an affront to the "globally conscious". That it is a barbaric relic of a bygone era, and that it is no longer practical in our modern times. The mass shooting in Colorado this past week has been used as a rallying point for the anti-gun fervor, but what that event really showed us is what the world would be like if law abiding citizens were totally disarmed (as they were in Aurora by anti-carry laws within the city). Criminals will always be able to get weapons, and they will almost always choose targets that are unarmed and low risk. If Americans lose their right to bear arms, I can promise that we will see massacres like the Aurora Theater attack on a regular basis. As far as national sovereignty is concerned, the CFR is completely unqualified to comment. CFR members have in the past openly admitted the true purpose of their organization, which is to eliminate national sovereignty and institute global governance: "The sovereignty fetish is still so strong in the public mind, that there would appear to be little chance of winning popular assent to American membership in anything approaching a super-state organization. Much will depend on the kind of approach which is used in further popular education." -- CFR "American Public Opinion and Postwar Security Commitments", 1944. "The Council on Foreign Relations is the American branch of a society which originated in England ... [and] ... believes national boundaries should be obliterated and one-world rule established…I know of this network because I have studied it for twenty years and was permitted for two years in the early 1960s to examine its papers and secret records. I have no aversion to it or to most of its aims and have, for much of my life, been close to it and to many of its instruments. I have objected, both in the past and recently, to a few of its policies ... but in general my chief difference of opinion is that it wishes to remain unknown, and I believe its role in history is significant enough to be known." Dr. Carroll Quigley, CFR Member, Mentor to Bill Clinton, from Tragedy and Hope "In the next century, nations as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single, global authority. National sovereignty wasn't such a great idea after all." Strobe Talbott, CFR Member In light of this information, I find the Council On Foreign Relations' attempts to reassure us on the safety of our sovereignty rather hilarious. Their blind stab at defending the UN's gun treaty tells me all I need to know. Where there is smoke, there is fire, and no quarter should be given to these people. None. Their intentions are not honorable, and they often seek to deceive to get what they want. Our safest bet is to stand in the way of any action they choose to support. If it's good for them, it will invariably be bad for us. This article first appeared at Alt-Market. You can contact Brandon Smith at: brandon@alt-market.com.  Alt-Market is an organization designed to help you find like-minded activists and preppers in your local area so that you can network and construct communities for mutual aid and defense. Join Alt-Market.com today and learn what it means to step away from the system and build something better. Enter your email address to subscribe to our newsletter: Delivered by FeedBurner Be the Change! Share this using the tools below. Sharing on Reddit and Newsvine will help the most.

In Syria, Obama Fights Bush's Wars Posted: 26 Jul 2012 09:07 AM PDT Syrian Opposition Signs Pro-War Neo-Con Letter to Obama.  image source Tony Cartalucci, Contributor Activist Post Neo-Conservatives have "called on" US President Barack Obama to assist in the establishment of "safe zones" inside of Syria in a recent letter published by the "Foreign Policy Initiative" (FPI) and the "Foundation for the Defense of Democracies" (FDD). Both faux-institutions are corporate, foundation, and government funded clearinghouses, extensions of larger think-tanks like the American Enterprise Institute, for corporate-financier driven agendas, more specifically, wars. They serve the sole purpose of manufacturing consensus behind an agenda that has little or no support within the general public.  The letter covered by Foreign Policy's article, "Conservatives call on Obama to establish 'safe zones' in Syria," not only parrots Fortune 500-funded Brookings Institution's report, "Assessing Options for Regime Change," recently repeated almost verbatim by US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, but was signed by co-conspirators in the invasion of Iraq including Elliott Abrams, Karl Rove, Paul Bremer, Robert Joseph, and Douglas Feith, along with advisors to the Mitt Romney, including Eric Edelman, Jamie Fly, Robert Kagan, and Stephen Rademaker, as well as Syrian National Council member, Radwah Ziadeh. Radwah Ziadeh, it should be remembered, is also a "senior fellow" of the US State Department's US Institute for Peace (USIP) which has just revealed it is behind training, coaching, and tutoring Syria's opposition leaders as well as preparing Syria's new constitution, currently being called a, "transition strategy document."  Perhaps the most disturbing aspect of the Neo-Cons' letter is that it essentially calls for a no-fly zone: We urge you to take immediate steps, in close and continuing consultation with the Congress, to work with regional partners to establish air-patrolled "safe zones" covering already liberated areas within Syria, using military power not only to protect these zones from further aggression by the Assad regime's military and irregular forces, but also to neutralize the threat posed by the Syrian dictatorship's chemical and biological weapons.Basically an amalgamation of every false pretext the United States has used to wage war upon its enemies in the last 20 years, and the dirty tricks used to inch Americans into another war, the letter reveals who is once again behind US foreign policy, and that warmongering, corporate-financier interests, not humanitarian concerns, seek to spend American blood and treasure in their pursuit of global hegemony. It has been covered extensively that the campaign against Syria began as early as 2007, during the Bush administration. With this list of signatories (at bottom), which also includes Paula Dobriansky, Max Boot, Eric Edelman, William Kristol, and Danielle Pletka, we literally have 2007's agenda coming full circle, and leaving us at the doorstep of war with Iran. In essence, our so-called Democratic, progressive-liberal President Obama, is fighting our so-called Republican Neo-Conservative former-President Bush's wars. Wars plural, because Libya was also on the long list of nations targeted by the Neo-Conservatives - and was also the subject of a letter to President Obama (and one to House Republicans) urging him to intervene militarily - which the US did. Video: Seven nations, five years - US Army General Wesley Clark exposes in 2007 Neo-Conservative ambitions dating back to 2001, that involved the destruction of seven nations: Iraq, Syria Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Iran. That Iraq, Libya, and Somalia have suffered direct military intervention by the United States, with Lebanon and Sudan having suffered and Syria now suffering covert destabilization, and open threats of war being made against Iran, there is no doubt that this plan is underway.That the Neo-Cons are literally articulating the next leg, in letters to the US president, indicates that they and the interests they represent, never left the driver's seat in 2008.  Syria is not about its people rising up against a dictator. It is about neo-imperialists couching their long-harbored dreams of global hegemony within the ideals of humanitarianism, democracy promotion, freedom - and if that fails, fearmongering over terrorism and violence of their own design. They, the Neo-Cons and the corporate-financier interests they present, along with their willing helpers on both sides of the aisle, including Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, constitute the greatest threat to world peace - not the government and people of Syria who have not once threatened the US and its people in any conceivable way, nor possesses the capacity to do so if they desired.  And while the West's megalomania may only be sated by defeat at the hands of their enemies abroad, we may yet reclaim our destiny at home by identifying, boycotting, and replacing the monolithic corporations and financial institutions that have so lent them the unwarranted influence with which they plague the world. Tony Cartalucci's articles have appeared on many alternative media websites, including his own atLand Destroyer Report.  Read other contributed articles by Tony Cartalucci here. Enter your email address to subscribe to our newsletter: Delivered by FeedBurner Be the Change! Share this using the tools below. Sharing on Reddit and Newsvine will help the most.

Can the TSA search your phone? Posted: 26 Jul 2012 09:04 AM PDT Youtube Enter your email address to subscribe to our newsletter: Delivered by FeedBurner Be the Change! Share this using the tools below. Sharing on Reddit and Newsvine will help the most.

911 caller accidentally exposes illegal NYPD spying operation Posted: 26 Jul 2012 09:02 AM PDT Madison Ruppert, Contributor Activist Post With the release of the tape of a 911 call in New Brunswick, New Jersey, originally taped in June 2009, the public can now hear a somewhat hilarious instance of the "See Something, Say Something" campaign actually doing something positive. Salil Sheth, a building superintendent at an apartment complex near Rutgers University, just happened to stumble upon a secret New York Police Department (NYPD) safe house far from the department's jurisdiction during an inspection. This type of activity isn't all that surprising seeing as an NYPD officer was locked in a psych ward by his superiors after exposing massive corruption and the NYPD has arrested and detained a couple for 23 hours for dancing, called people who film police "professional agitators," lied about their counter-terrorism record, spied on Muslims across the northeast, falsified drug charges to meet quotas, to just mention a few incidents. Sheth had notified the tenants of unit 1076 of the upcoming inspection weeks earlier but his notice was still in the door, so he let himself in and quickly realized that there was something incredibly suspicious.One of Sheth's colleagues called 911 and Sheth proceeded to describe the situation.   "We've been doing the five year state inspection and came across an apartment where there's some suspicious activity," said Sheth. "What's suspicious?" asked the New Brunswick police dispatcher. Sheth responded, "Suspicious in the sense that the apartment has about – has no furniture except two beds, has no clothing, has New York City Police Department radios." The dispatcher was clearly surprised and asked "Really?" "There's computers in there," said Sheth. "There's computer hardware, software, you know just laying around. There's pictures of terrorists." At this point it becomes quite obvious that Sheth thinks he has stumbled on a terrorist hideout when in reality he has discovered damning evidence of illegal law enforcement activities. "There's pictures of our neighboring building that they have," continued Sheth, to which the dispatcher asked, "In New Brunswick?" "Yes," replied Sheth. "And pictures of our neighboring buildings?" asked the dispatcher. "Yes, the Matrix building," Sheth responded, speaking of a local developer. "There's pictures of terrorists. There's literature on the Muslim religion." The NYPD, having been trained and guided by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), has gone on the offensive since September 11, 2001, spying on Muslims not only in New York but also well outside their jurisdiction. Undercover NYPD officers would hang around mosques, listen in on conversations in cafes and even spy on Muslim student groups, apparently using the apartment discovered by Sheth as a safe house. This was no minor operation, mind you. The NYPD maintained files on sermons, recorded names of political organizers, and created databases tracking where Muslims lived, shopped and even frequent spots where they would watch sports together. When the New Brunswick police and agents with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) showed up, they were quite surprised by the discovery since none were informed of the NYPD's presence. As the Associated Press points out, "At the NYPD, the bungled operation was an embarrassment. It made the department look amateurish and forced it to ask the FBI to return the department's materials." The attempts at arguing for the legitimacy of the practice of NYPD officers moving far out of their jurisdiction – as far away as New Orleans in one case where they were spying on liberal groups – have been nothing short of pathetic. Andrew Schaffer, the deputy commissioner for legal matters for the NYPD said in February that the detectives are totally justified in operating outside of New York because they are not in the course of conducting official police duties. "They're not acting as police officers in other jurisdictions," said Schaffer. Yet this is hardly a defensible position when Lieutenant Commander William McGroarty of the NYPD and Assistant Chief Thomas Galati both called for the New Brunswick police to not release the recording since it "would jeopardize investigations and endanger people and buildings." "Such identification will place the safety of any officers identified, as well as the undercover operatives with whom they work, at risk," wrote Galati in a letter to New Brunswick. Does this sound like they were not acting as police? Hardly, especially when one considers that according to New Brunswick attorneys, the apartment was actually rented by an undercover NYPD officer using a fake name. Michael Bloomberg, the Mayor of New York City, has been a defender of the NYPD's supposed right to go anywhere in the country without telling police, so long as they claim they are searching for a terrorist. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem like individuals in New Jersey care all that much, since New Jersey Attorney General Jeffrey Chiesa stated that he is not aware of any evidence showing that the NYPD's activities were in violation of the law. That being said, Muslim groups are taking a stand and have filed a lawsuit in an attempt to get the NYPD's program shut down. Lawyers have requested that a federal judge decide if the spying is in violation of federal rules put in place after the NYPD engaged in similar activities in the 1950s in an attempt to find communists. Hopefully the federal judge will actually pay attention to how serious this issue is and see beyond the emotionally charged post-September 11, 2001 language which is so readily leveraged by those who seek to hold on to these powers. Please support our work and help us start to pay contributors by doing your shopping through our Amazon link or check out some must-have products at our store. This article first appeared at End the Lie.  Madison Ruppert is the Editor and Owner-Operator of the alternative news and analysis database End The Lie and has no affiliation with any NGO, political party, economic school, or other organization/cause. He is available for podcast and radio interviews. Madison also now has his own radio show on Orion Talk Radio from 8 pm -- 10 pm Pacific, which you can find HERE.  If you have questions, comments, or corrections feel free to contact him at admin@EndtheLie.com Enter your email address to subscribe to our newsletter: Delivered by FeedBurner Be the Change! Share this using the tools below. Sharing on Reddit and Newsvine will help the most.

British Government Encouraging Kids To Report Tax Evaders? Posted: 26 Jul 2012 08:59 AM PDT Judge HMRC (credit: jamesreekie.co.uk) Brit Dee, Contributor Activist Post HM Revenue and Customs, the UK government's tax and customs department, has been accused of encouraging schoolkids to report tax evaders in their local area. The allegation relates to a document available on the HMRC website, used as a 'Citizenship' module in schools to teach kids why they should become responsible taxpayers. Page 2 of the Key Stage 4 lesson plan, designed for use by 14 to 16 year olds, involves a classroom discussion in which students debate "whether it is good to pay the tax we do, considering the benefits we receive. If it is good, then why do people try not to pay?" The teacher must then ask what students "think of those who refuse to pay tax or try and defraud the benefits system? Can they think of any example they may have heard of in their local area?" The independent thinktank Civitas, an institute for the study of civil society, has described the lesson as reminiscent of George Orwell's novel 1984, in which kids snoop on their parents and report them to Big Brother. Civitas' David Green said, "People 'in their local area' are most likely to be parents or close relatives. Turning children into state spies is un-British." In a blog for The London Telegraph, Rev Dr Peter Mullen describes how the story reminds him of an experience he had in Prague, Czechoslovakia, a year after the fall of Communism in 1989. Rev Mullen recounts a local hotel proprietress describing how, during the Communist dictatorship, teachers would try and get schoolchildren to inform on their parents by asking questions such as, "Did your parents have anyone to dinner last night? Do you know who they were? What did they talk about?"  He concludes by warning: Spying, snooping and informing on your neighbours are the institutionalised paranoia which is the natural accompaniment of totalitarianism. That's the way we're going in the EU in general and in Britain in particular: Eastern Europe pre-1989. HMRC has dismissed the accusations, saying that "We certainly don't use this to collect information on tax evaders from children. These materials are solely designed to help children to learn about how tax works in Britain." The controversy comes in the same week that Treasury minister David Gauke described paying for services 'cash in hand' as "morally wrong" - despite leading politicians, including prime minister David Cameron, admitting to having made cash payments to tradesmen. This article first appeared at ResistRadio.com Brit Dee's ResistRadio.com is an independent media website approaching global news, politics and conspiracy theory from a radical, but critical and rational perspective.  Enter your email address to subscribe to our newsletter: Delivered by FeedBurner Be the Change! Share this using the tools below. Sharing on Reddit and Newsvine will help the most.

You are subscribed to email updates from Global Political Awakening To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now.	Email delivery powered by Google
Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610