Americans – Like Nazi Germans – Don’t Notice that All of Our Rights Are Slipping Away

Americans Are Acting Like Slowly Boiling Frogs

In the classic history of Nazi Germany, They Thought They Were Free, Milton Mayer writes:

“What happened here was the gradual habituation of the people, little by little, to being governed by surprise; to receiving decisions deliberated in secret; to believing that the situation was so complicated that the government had to act on information which the people could not understand, or so dangerous that, even if the people could not understand it, it could not be released because of national security. And their sense of identification with Hitler, their trust in him, made it easier to widen this gap and reassured those who would otherwise have worried about it.

“This separation of government from people, this widening of the gap, took place so gradually and so insensibly, each step disguised (perhaps not even intentionally) as a temporary emergency measure or associated with true patriotic allegiance or with real social purposes. And all the crises and reforms (real reforms, too) so occupied the people that they did not see the slow motion underneath, of the whole process of government growing remoter and remoter.

The German citizens were boiling frogs … the water heating up so gradually that they didn’t realize they had to jump out of the pot to safety.

Because the exact same thing is happening to Americans (fear of terror makes people stupid no matter what country they live in), let’s remember exactly what we’ve lost in recent years …

First Amendment

The 1st Amendment protects speech, religion, assembly and the press:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

However, the government is arresting those speaking out … and violently crushing peaceful assemblies which attempt to petition the government for redress.

A federal judge found that the law allowing indefinite detention of Americans without due process has a “chilling effect” on free speech. And see this and this.

There are also enacted laws allowing the secret service to arrest anyone protesting near the president or other designated folks (that might explain incidents like this).

The threat of being labeled a terrorist for exercising our First Amendment rights certainly violates the First Amendment. The government is using laws to crush dissent, and it’s gotten so bad that even U.S. Supreme Court justices are saying that we are descending into tyranny.

For example, the following actions may get an American citizen living on U.S. soil labeled as a “suspected terrorist” today:

And holding the following beliefs may also be considered grounds for suspected terrorism:

Of course, Muslims are more or less subject to a separate system of justice in America.

And 1st Amendment rights are especially chilled when power has become so concentrated that the same agency which spies on all Americans also decides who should be assassinated.

Second Amendment

The 2nd Amendment states:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Gun control and gun rights advocates obviously have very different views about whether guns are a force for violence or for good.

But even a top liberal Constitutional law expert reluctantly admits that the right to own a gun is as important a Constitutional right as freedom of speech or religion:

Like many academics, I was happy to blissfully ignore the Second Amendment. It did not fit neatly into my socially liberal agenda.


It is hard to read the Second Amendment and not honestly conclude that the Framers intended gun ownership to be an individual right. It is true that the amendment begins with a reference to militias: “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” Accordingly, it is argued, this amendment protects the right of the militia to bear arms, not the individual.

Yet, if true, the Second Amendment would be effectively declared a defunct provision. The National Guard is not a true militia in the sense of the Second Amendment and, since the District and others believe governments can ban guns entirely, the Second Amendment would be read out of existence.


More important, the mere reference to a purpose of the Second Amendment does not alter the fact that an individual right is created. The right of the people to keep and bear arms is stated in the same way as the right to free speech or free press. The statement of a purpose was intended to reaffirm the power of the states and the people against the central government. At the time, many feared the federal government and its national army. Gun ownership was viewed as a deterrent against abuse by the government, which would be less likely to mess with a well-armed populace.

Considering the Framers and their own traditions of hunting and self-defense, it is clear that they would have viewed such ownership as an individual right — consistent with the plain meaning of the amendment.

None of this is easy for someone raised to believe that the Second Amendment was the dividing line between the enlightenment and the dark ages of American culture. Yet, it is time to honestly reconsider this amendment and admit that … here’s the really hard part … the NRA may have been right. This does not mean that Charlton Heston is the new Rosa Parks or that no restrictions can be placed on gun ownership. But it does appear that gun ownership was made a protected right by the Framers and, while we might not celebrate it, it is time that we recognize it.

The gun control debate – including which weapons and magazines are banned – is still in flux …

Third Amendment

The 3rd Amendment prohibits the government forcing people to house soldiers:

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

Hey … we’re still honoring one of the Amendments! Score one for We the People!

 In America, Journalists Are Considered Terrorists
Painting by Anthony Freda:

Fourth Amendment

The 4th Amendment prevents unlawful search and seizure:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

But the government is flying drones over the American homeland to spy on us.

Senator Rand Paul correctly notes:

The domestic use of drones to spy on Americans clearly violates the Fourth Amendment and limits our rights to personal privacy.

Paul introduced a bill to “protect individual privacy against unwarranted governmental intrusion through the use of unmanned aerial vehicles commonly called drones.”

Emptywheel notes in a post entitled “The OTHER Assault on the Fourth Amendment in the NDAA? Drones at Your Airport?”:


As the map above makes clear–taken from this 2010 report–DOD [the Department of Defense] plans to have drones all over the country by 2015.

Many police departments are also using drones to spy on us. As the Hill reported:

At least 13 state and local police agencies around the country have used drones in the field or in training, according to the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International, an industry trade group. The Federal Aviation Administration has predicted that by the end of the decade, 30,000 commercial and government drones could be flying over U.S. skies.


“Drones should only be used if subject to a powerful framework that regulates their use in order to avoid abuse and invasions of privacy,” Chris Calabrese, a legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union, said during a congressional forum in Texas last month.

He argued police should only fly drones over private property if they have a warrant, information collected with drones should be promptly destroyed when it’s no longer needed and domestic drones should not carry any weapons.

He argued that drones pose a more serious threat to privacy than helicopters because they are cheaper to use and can hover in the sky for longer periods of time.

A congressional report earlier this year predicted that drones could soon be equipped with technologies to identify faces or track people based on their height, age, gender and skin color.

Even without drones, Americans are the most spied on people in world history:

The American government is collecting and storing virtually every phone call, purchases, email, text message, internet searches, social media communications, health information, employment history, travel and student records, and virtually all other information of every American. [And see this.]

Some also claim that the government is also using facial recognition software and surveillance cameras to track where everyone is going. Moreover, cell towers track where your phone is at any moment, and the major cell carriers, including Verizon and AT&T, responded to at least 1.3 million law enforcement requests for cell phone locations and other data in 2011. (And – given that your smartphone routinely sends your location information back to Apple or Google – it would be child’s play for the government to track your location that way.) Your iPhone, or other brand of smartphone is spying on virtually everything you do (ProPublica notes: “That’s No Phone. That’s My Tracker“).

As the top spy chief at the U.S. National Security Agency explained this week, the American government is collecting some 100 billion 1,000-character emails per day, and 20 trillion communications of all types per year.

He says that the government has collected all of the communications of congressional leaders, generals and everyone else in the U.S. for the last 10 years.

He further explains that he set up the NSA’s system so that all of the information would automatically be encrypted, so that the government had to obtain a search warrant based upon probably cause before a particular suspect’s communications could be decrypted. [He specifically did this to comply with the Fourth Amendment's prohibition against unreasonable search and seizure.] But the NSA now collects all data in an unencrypted form, so that no probable cause is needed to view any citizen’s information. He says that it is actually cheaper and easier to store the data in an encrypted format: so the government’s current system is being done for political – not practical – purposes.

He says that if anyone gets on the government’s “enemies list”, then the stored information will be used to target them. Specifically, he notes that if the government decides it doesn’t like someone, it analyzes all of the data it has collected on that person and his or her associates over the last 10 years to build a case against him.


Wired reports:

Transit authorities in cities across the country are quietly installing microphone-enabled surveillance systems on public buses that would give them the ability to record and store private conversations….

The systems are being installed in San Francisco, Baltimore, and other cities with funding from the Department of Homeland Security in some cases ….

The IP audio-video systems can be accessed remotely via a built-in web server (.pdf), and can be combined with GPS data to track the movement of buses and passengers throughout the city.


The systems use cables or WiFi to pair audio conversations with camera images in order to produce synchronous recordings. Audio and video can be monitored in real-time, but are also stored onboard in blackbox-like devices, generally for 30 days, for later retrieval. Four to six cameras with mics are generally installed throughout a bus, including one near the driver and one on the exterior of the bus.


Privacy and security expert Ashkan Soltani told the Daily that the audio could easily be coupled with facial recognition systems or audio recognition technology to identify passengers caught on the recordings.

RT notes:

Street lights that can spy installed in some American cities

America welcomes a new brand of smart street lightning systems: energy-efficient, long-lasting, complete with LED screens to show ads. They can also spy on citizens in a way George Orwell would not have imagined in his worst nightmare.

­With a price tag of $3,000+ apiece, according to an ABC report, the street lights are now being rolled out in Detroit, Chicago and Pittsburgh, and may soon mushroom all across the country.

Part of the Intellistreets systems made by the company Illuminating Concepts, they have a number of “homeland security applications” attached.

Each has a microprocessor “essentially similar to an iPhone,” capable of wireless communication. Each can capture images and count people for the police through a digital camera, record conversations of passers-by and even give voice commands thanks to a built-in speaker.

Ron Harwood, president and founder of Illuminating Concepts, says he eyed the creation of such a system after the 9/11 terrorist attacks and the Hurricane Katrina disaster. He is “working with Homeland Security” to deliver his dream of making people “more informed and safer.”

Fox news notes that the government is insisting that “black boxes” be installed in cars to track your location.

The TSA has moved way past airports, trains and sports stadiums, and is deploying mobile scanners to spy on people all over the place. This means that traveling within the United States is no longer a private affair. (And they’re probably bluffing, but the Department of Homeland Security claims they will soon be able to know your adrenaline level, what you ate for breakfast and what you’re thinking … from 164 feet away.)

And Verizon has applied for a patent that would allow your television to track what you are doing, who you are with, what objects you’re holding, and what type of mood you’re in. Given Verizon and other major carriers responded to at least 1.3 million law enforcement requests for cell phone locations and other data in 2011, such information would not be kept private. (And some folks could be spying on you through your tv using existing technology.)

Of course, widespread spying on Americans began before 9/11 (confirmed here and here. And see this). So the whole “post-9/11 reality” argument falls flat.

And the spying isn’t being done to keep us safe … but to crush dissent and to smear people who uncover unflattering this about the government … and to help the too big to fail businesses compete against smaller businesses (and here).

In addition, the ACLU published a map in 2006 showing that nearly two-thirds of the American public – 197.4 million people – live within a “constitution-free zone” within 100 miles of land and coastal borders:

The ACLU explained:

  • Normally under the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, the American people are not generally subject to random and arbitrary stops and searches.
  • The border, however, has always been an exception. There, the longstanding view is that the normal rules do not apply. For example the authorities do not need a warrant or probable cause to conduct a “routine search.”
  • But what is “the border”? According to the government, it is a 100-mile wide strip that wraps around the “external boundary” of the United States.
  • As a result of this claimed authority, individuals who are far away from the border, American citizens traveling from one place in America to another, are being stopped and harassed in ways that our Constitution does not permit.
  • Border Patrol has been setting up checkpoints inland — on highways in states such as California, Texas and Arizona, and at ferry terminals in Washington State. Typically, the agents ask drivers and passengers about their citizenship. Unfortunately, our courts so far have permitted these kinds of checkpoints – legally speaking, they are “administrative” stops that are permitted only for the specific purpose of protecting the nation’s borders. They cannot become general drug-search or other law enforcement efforts.
  • However, these stops by Border Patrol agents are not remaining confined to that border security purpose. On the roads of California and elsewhere in the nation – places far removed from the actual border – agents are stopping, interrogating, and searching Americans on an everyday basis with absolutely no suspicion of wrongdoing.
  • The bottom line is that the extraordinary authorities that the government possesses at the border are spilling into regular American streets.

Computer World reports today:

Border agents don’t need probable cause and they don’t need a stinking warrant since they don’t need to prove any reasonable suspicion first. Nor, sadly, do two out of three people have First Amendment protection; it is as if DHS has voided those Constitutional amendments and protections they provide to nearly 200 million Americans.


Don’t be silly by thinking this means only if you are physically trying to cross the international border. As we saw when discussing the DEA using license plate readers and data-mining to track Americans movements, the U.S. “border” stretches out 100 miles beyond the true border. Godfather Politics added:

But wait, it gets even better! If you live anywhere in Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Hawaii, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Hampshire, New Jersey or Rhode Island, DHS says the search zones encompass the entire state.

Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) have a “longstanding constitutional and statutory authority permitting suspicionless and warrantless searches of merchandise at the border and its functional equivalent.” This applies to electronic devices, according to the recent CLCR “Border Searches of Electronic Devices” executive summary [PDF]:

Fourth Amendment

The overall authority to conduct border searches without suspicion or warrant is clear and longstanding, and courts have not treated searches of electronic devices any differently than searches of other objects. We conclude that CBP’s and ICE’s current border search policies comply with the Fourth Amendment. We also conclude that imposing a requirement that officers have reasonable suspicion in order to conduct a border search of an electronic device would be operationally harmful without concomitant civil rights/civil liberties benefits. However, we do think that recording more information about why searches are performed would help managers and leadership supervise the use of border search authority, and this is what we recommended; CBP has agreed and has implemented this change beginning in FY2012.

First Amendment

Some critics argue that a heightened level of suspicion should be required before officers search laptop computers in order to avoid chilling First Amendment rights. However, we conclude that the laptop border searches allowed under the ICE and CBP Directives do not violate travelers’ First Amendment rights.

The ACLU said, Wait one darn minute! Hello, what happened to the Constitution? Where is the rest of CLCR report on the “policy of combing through and sometimes confiscating travelers’ laptops, cell phones, and other electronic devices—even when there is no suspicion of wrongdoing?” DHS maintains it is not violating our constitutional rights, so the ACLU said:

If it’s true that our rights are safe and that DHS is doing all the things it needs to do to safeguard them, then why won’t it show us the results of its assessment? And why would it be legitimate to keep a report about the impact of a policy on the public’s rights hidden from the very public being affected?


As ChristianPost wrote, “Your constitutional rights have been repealed in ten states. No, this isn’t a joke. It is not exaggeration or hyperbole. If you are in ten states in the United States, your some of your rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights have been made null and void.”

The ACLU filed a Freedom of Information Act request for the entire DHS report about suspicionless and warrantless “border” searches of electronic devices. ACLU attorney Catherine Crump said “We hope to establish that the Department of Homeland Security can’t simply assert that its practices are legitimate without showing us the evidence, and to make it clear that the government’s own analyses of how our fundamental rights apply to new technologies should be openly accessible to the public for review and debate.”

Meanwhile, the EFF has tips to protect yourself and your devices against border searches. If you think you know all about it, then you might try testing your knowledge with a defending privacy at the U.S. border quiz.

Wired pointed out in 2008 that the courts have routinely upheld such constitution-free zones:

Federal agents at the border do not need any reason to search through travelers’ laptops, cell phones or digital cameras for evidence of crimes, a federal appeals court ruled Monday, extending the government’s power to look through belongings like suitcases at the border to electronics.


The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sided with the government, finding that the so-called border exception to the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition on unreasonable searches applied not just to suitcases and papers, but also to electronics.


Travelers should be aware that anything on their mobile devices can be searched by government agents, who may also seize the devices and keep them for weeks or months. When in doubt, think about whether online storage or encryption might be tools you should use to prevent the feds from rummaging through your journal, your company’s confidential business plans or naked pictures of you and your-of-age partner in adult fun.

Paintings by Anthony Freda:

Fifth Amendment

The 5th Amendment addresses due process of law, eminent domain, double jeopardy and grand jury:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

But the American government has shredded the 5th Amendment by subjecting us to indefinite detention and taking away our due process rights.

The government claims the right to assassinate or indefinitely detain any American citizen on U.S. citizen without any due process. And see this.

As such, the government is certainly depriving people of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.

There are additional corruptions of 5th Amendment rights – such as property being taken for private purposes.

The percentage of prosecutions in which a defendant is denied a grand jury is difficult to gauge, as there is so much secrecy surrounding many terrorism trials.

Protection against being tried twice for the same crime after being found innocent (“double jeopardy”) seems to be intact.


Sixth Amendment

The 6th Amendment guarantees the right to hear the criminal charges levied against us and to be able to confront the witnesses who have testified against us, as well as speedy criminal trials, and a public defender for those who cannot hire an attorney:

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

Subjecting people to indefinite detention or assassination obviously violates the 6th Amendment right to a jury trial. In both cases, the defendants is “disposed of” without ever receiving a trial … and often without ever hearing the charges against them.

More and more commonly, the government prosecutes cases based upon “secret evidence” that they don’t show to the defendant … or sometimes even the judge hearing the case.

The government uses “secret evidence” to spy on Americans, prosecute leaking or terrorism charges (even against U.S. soldiers) and even assassinate people. And see this and this.

Secret witnesses are being used in some cases. And sometimes lawyers are not even allowed to read their own briefs.

Indeed, even the laws themselves are now starting to be kept secret. And it’s about to get a lot worse.

True – when defendants are afforded a jury trial – they are provided with assistance of counsel. However, the austerity caused by redistribution of wealth to the super-elite is causing severe budget cuts to the courts and the public defenders’ offices nationwide.

Moreover, there are two systems of justice in America … one for the big banks and other fatcats, and one for everyone else. The government made it official policy not to prosecute fraud, even though fraud is the main business model adopted by Wall Street. Indeed, the largest insider trading scandal of all time, illegal raiding of customer accounts and blatant financing of drug cartels and terrorists have all been committed recently without any real criminal prosecution or jail time.

On the other hand, government prosecutors are using the legal system to crush dissent and to silence whistleblowers.

And some of the nation’s most powerful judges have lost their independence … and are in bed with the powers-that-be.

Seventh Amendment

The 7th Amendment guarantees trial by jury in federal court for civil cases:

In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

As far as we know, this right is still being respected. However – as noted above – the austerity caused by redistribution of wealth to the super-elite is causing severe budget cuts to the courts, resulting in the wheels of justice slowing down considerably.

Painting by Anthony Freda:

Eighth Amendment

The 8th Amendment prohibits cruel and unusual punishment:

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Indefinite detention and assassination are obviously cruel and unusual punishment.

The widespread system of torture carried out in the last 10 years – with the help of other countriesviolates the 8th Amendment. Many want to bring it back … or at least justify its past use.

While Justice Scalia disingenuously argues that torture does not constitute cruel and unusual punishment because it is meant to produce information – not punish – he’s wrong. It’s not only cruel and unusual … it is technically a form of terrorism.

And government whistleblowers are being cruelly and unusually punished with unduly harsh sentences meant to intimidate anyone else from speaking out. They are literally being treated as terrorists.

Ninth Amendment

The 9th Amendment provides that people have other rights, even if they aren’t specifically listed in the Constitution:

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

We can debate what our inherent rights as human beings are. I believe they include the right to a level playing field, and access to safe food and water. You may disagree.

But everyone agrees that the government should not actively encourage fraud and manipulation. However, the government – through its malignant, symbiotic relation with big corporations – is interfering with our aspirations for economic freedom, safe food and water (instead of arsenic-laden, genetically engineered junk), freedom from undue health hazards such as irradiation due to government support of archaic nuclear power designs, and a level playing field (as opposed to our crony capitalist system in which the little guy has no shot due to redistribution of wealth from the middle class to the super-elite, and government support of white collar criminals).

By working hand-in-glove with giant corporations to defraud us into paying for a lower quality of life, the government is trampling our basic rights as human beings.

Tenth Amendment

The 10th Amendment provides that powers not specifically given to the Federal government are reserved to the states or individual:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Two of the central principles of America’s Founding Fathers are:

(1) The government is created and empowered with the consent of the people


(2) Separation of powers

Today, most Americans believe that the government is threatening – rather than protecting – freedom … and that it is no longer acting with the “consent of the governed”.

And the federal government is trampling the separation of powers by stepping on the toes of the states and the people. For example, former head S&L prosecutor Bill Black – now a professor of law and economics – notes:

The Federal Reserve Bank of New York and the resident examiners and regional staff of the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency [both] competed to weaken federal regulation and aggressively used the preemption doctrine to try to prevent state investigations of and actions against fraudulent mortgage lenders.

Indeed, the federal government is doing everything it can to stick its nose into every aspect of our lives … and act like Big Brother.



So the use of social networks AND/OR the fact of having no Facebook account are both considered potential terrorist behaviors? Talk about covering all grounds...

Creeping Socialism

42,500 sites in Europe served the NAZI agenda. There is no way people didn't know what was going on.

Do not avert your eyes.
Resist creeping Socialism.


It is Not Socialsm: You Can't Tell the Players Without a Program; You Can't Discuss Politics Without a Dialectic

In a socialist or communist system the state is the corporation and owns the means of production. In a fascist system the corporations are privately held, outside of state control, which in turn gives them the power to regulate the state by the assiduous concentration of political and monetary influence and control into private power centers. This is an important distinction. Now, in WWII between Hitler and Stalin the distinction was quite clear, however, they each borrowed aspects from their polar opposite which muddied the waters a little and this has led to confusion among some people: one major similarity would be totalitarianism which is the end product of the extremes of both poles. Another example is found among the Nazi's with their National Socialism (NSDAP). There were left wing elements within the early formation of the Nazi Party, after all, it was the National Socialist German Workers Party, its formal name. When the Nazi Party coalesced into a national front only lip service was payed to the socialist aspects of the party. This was reinforced with the falling out of favor of Julius Streicher, publisher of Der Stürmer (The Attacker) who early on was quite influential in the formation of the Nazi party. Streicher merged the membership Deutsch-Sozialistische Partei, DSP (German Socialst Party) with the Nazi Party which formed a short term power sharing coalition. The DSP was a rabidly anti-Semitic party which espoused genuine socialist ideals that were coopted and subverted once the membership was subsumed into that of the Nazi Party, much in the way that the brown shirted Sturmabteilung (SA) were cut off at the knees after they had served their purpose. One reason for this is: what could be better for the workers than full employment? The other reason that the socialist elements were downplayed was nationalism. The N is NSDAP stood as much for nationalism as national: nationalism is one of the benchmarks by which fascism is measured; communists and socialists tend to be more universal in their approach, the communist anthem is The Internationale . But despite any rhetoric to the contrary, the Nazis were fascists. They were controlled and funded from outside the government by enormous cartels, the aristocracy (Germany has two classes of aristocrats), the acquiescence of the churches, and the cooperation of the military. Now, in Stalinist Russia the state is the corporation. Businesses are nationalized, farms collectivized, citizens are platooned, all for the benefit of the state. Where many become confused is that the next step in either system is authoritarianism and both systems cited above were leaning heavily towards that end, although not completely. So which one sounds relevant to us? Is Goldman Sachs a nationalized corporation like Amtrak? No, the banks and the corporations are all outside of the government manipulating the levers of the state.

So why quibble about semantics? Here is why: if you screw up in this country, for whatever reason, and go to jail; the chances are that you will wind up in a corporate prison. In CORRECTIONAL SEVICES CORP. v MALESKO The Supreme Court of the United States has ruled that a convict had no standing to sue in Federal Court for damages. So, in other words you are remanded to Federal Government with no Federal remedy. The Justices decided that remedy could be available within the State that the prisoner was incarcerated. What has happened here is that the government has "disappeared" you as much as someone who is put into the "Shoe." The court remanded this prisoner to the Federal Prison who in turn "remanded" him to a corporate entity. That is fascism at work. The Malesko case, cited above, and the detention of prisoners in torturous solitary confinement like the shoe is already with us. Now they want to ratchet it up a notch and get the military involved. Why, because they have such a good track record in prisoner management? Just look at Bradley Manning, Gitmo, and whatever other black cites that they have. It is important to understand exactly what systems we are dealing with now and where we are heading in the future.

Books on the Subject:

American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War on America by Chris Hedges
Friendly Fascism: The New Face of Power in America by Bertram Gross
America: Freedom to Fascism by Aaron Russo
Legacy: The Secret History of Proto-Fascism in America's Greatest Little City by Scott Smith
The Puzzle of Fascism: Could fascism arise in America or could it already be a Fascist State? by Eric D Williams

Uncommon Sense

Uncommon Sense by William Murray is my basis for understanding. I'm a layman. This book makes sense to me.

There is only Americanism and Socialism. Communism and Fascism are variants of Socialism.

I like Americanism. Anything less is creeping socialism.

Here's a good video.

I Beg Your Pardon

I hate to be hypercritical but watching YouTube videos is a poor excuse for research. That video was produced by The John Birch Society one of the founding members of which was Fred G. Koch of Koch Industries and The Koch Foundation: "The foundation is financed via the oil and gas fortunes of Fred G. Koch (father of Charles G. Koch and David H. Koch) , a founding member of the John Birch Society. Koch 'wrote admiringly of Benito Mussolini’s suppression of Communists in Italy, and disparagingly of the American civil-rights movement.'" One of the tired old saws of the John Birch Society is that there is really no right wing in politics and that is because they are defensive of being placed there. These politics were so distasteful to the old CIA retainer and publisher of the ultra right wing The National Review that: "After an early rise in membership and influence, efforts by people like conservative William F. Buckley, Jr. and the National Review led the JBS to be identified as a fringe element of the conservative movement." In other words he was too fascist for the political sensibilities of someone who Gore Vidal called a "crypto-fascist!" While I must admit that the divide of the left/right paradigm is used as a mass manipulation tool it serves as a function for delineating political divides and is still used by political scientists who will occasionally add other axis in order to nuance a situation. I took a look at Uncommon Sense by William J. Murray Jr and I am just sorry to say that I found his prose laughable: "Socialist-Americans are philosophical decedents of English King George, the colonial Tories or Loyalists, and traitor Benedict Arnold, who all loved governmental power and who wished to use it to control other people's lives. Words to identify so-called Americans such as liberal, conservative, Republican, Democrat, left winger, right winger, union, non-union, and others, are totally useless and should be ignored. Drop them from your vocabulary." In his not so nuanced reasoning Murray goes on to distill his political cosmography down to three insipid choices: " You will have only three choices: A Real-American, a Pseudo-American, or a Socialist-American. That's all." You are either with the "real Americans" or you are against them;give me a break!

Mind blowing speech by Robert Welch in 1958 predicting Insiders

Mind blowing speech by Robert Welch in 1958 predicting Insiders plans to destroy America

Uploaded on Apr 27, 2009

Proof that the NEW WORLD ORDER has been planned by the elite. Robert Welch, Founder of The John Birch Society, predicted today's problems with uncanny accuracy back in 1958 and prescribed solutions in 1974 that are very similar to Ron Paul's positions today. This is proof that there are plans in place by the elite to systemically disassemble US sovereignty. I wonder who those elite are.


As if 9/11 and anthrax weren't enough to blow one's mind and world apart, then I discovered this:

John Taylor Gatto is a former NY Teacher of the Year and very thoroughly researched.

John Taylor Gatto - The Scientific Management of Children

Uploaded on Jul 22, 2011

John Taylor Gatto - The Scientific Management of Children

This is a talk given by John Taylor Gatto on what the modern school system is really all about.

See also this excellent and comprehensive interview with Richard Grove of

The Ultimate History Lesson: A Weekend with John Taylor Gatto (Intro + Hour 1 of 5) - 1hr 18mins - (notes, transcript, links, and more) (all of John's books, and current projects) (episodes 041-045 cover The Ultimate History Lesson + Analysis) (an online community which provides educational media by independent producers)

Good links


I figured you likely knew of Gatto's work (you do) and just wanted to get it out to a wider audience. Thanks.

I think Gatto's insights provide an essential framework for understanding how pervasive and long range the elite/corporate agenda is.

P.S. What's the html code for embedding a video here? I can't seem to get the diction right.

I knew very little but that speech was incredible.

I will be looking further into Gatto's research and insights. WOW!

select a youtube video, click "share" beneath the vid, click "embed", select "video size", COPY code that appears in rectangular box,
PASTE code as is into comment.SAVE!

Hitler Was Often Right Too

Can I Get a Witness?

Robert Welch was a huckster selling his own brand of rabid nationalism that was not unlike that of McCarthyism. One of his special tools, despite the fact the he was a avid anti-communist was to "own the means of production," of the debate that is. I had a Jehovah's Witness girlfriend. "How did that work out for you, you might ask?" Well it didn't. I didn't have much choice in the matter as we both were daily squeezed together into a small office cubicle and then things kind of took on a life of their own. One thing I did "learn" from her is that Jehovah's Witnesses believe that Jesus was killed not on a cross but at a torture stake. There are many interesting things about this premise. One is that most Christians adhere, whether Protestant or Catholic, to more or less the same code, the Nicene Creed, which states that Jesus was killed on a cross. The Witnesses claim that Jesus was killed at a "torture stake." By changing the accepted meaning of the text the "Witness" has now gained ascendancy in the argument if you grant them this concession. Anything about the subject that you thought you knew has now gone by the boards and you are awash and ready for instruction. The other consequence of this game changing technique is to usurp any power that the "great thinkers" on the topic have engendered. Think of it: the grandeur of Christianity all brought down by the simple "torture stake," phrase. What profit a man who builds the Great Cathedrals, monasteries, universities and created great philosophers like Thomas Aquinas, Erasmus, Calvin, and Descartes? None of what they say is right and we are better and the grandeur and intellectual pretense matters not; because we have all the answers and we do it all from Brooklyn! Caveat: none of the above is an endorsement of any religious creed, nor the the existence of a god or the historic person of Jesus Christ; it is merely a demonstration of how ideas are hijacked.

Yes, Virginia, there is a Hegelian Dialectic.

The first thing that the Birchers do is to, like in the example of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society, is to start by changing the definitions of things. As I mentioned above, in another comment, the left/right paradigm is not the Hegelian divide but merely a yardstick for measuring polemics, alone it inert. Suppose I say: "5000 degrees" in and of itself it is meaningless but contextualized and dropped into Gaza City or Fallujah in the form of white phosphorous then the number gains dimension and serves as a polemic all its own. The same goes for the left/right paradigm it is merely a rule of thumb and a argument for the stasis of things like the Nicene Creed example. Tampering with the language, the vernacular, are benchmarks of cultist behavior. The cult invents a new vocabulary, giving well-known words special new meanings, making them into trite clichés. The clichés become "ultimate terms", either "god terms", representative of ultimate good, or "devil terms", representative of ultimate evil. Totalist language, then, is repetitiously centered on all-encompassing jargon, prematurely abstract, highly categorical, relentlessly judging, and to anyone but its most devoted advocate, deadly dull: the language of non-thought. 1

There is Everyone Else, Then There is Us: Authoritarianism

The above model is the standard model for addressing polemics in politics. By the way many refinements to this model are credited to an Oxford Scholar: Important contributions to the theory of the paradigm were made by British social anthropologist Rodney Needham, who saw it as a basic human classifying device. It shares affinity with the cultural "romantic-classic" paradigm. There is nothing wrong with the model per se although it needs to be tweaked. Everything has shifted to the right and we are moving rapidly toward fascism. Anyone that is disputing this is working from a non-standard model and I suspect that it is the one that the John Birchers use. In an anti-intellectual coup d'état the Birchers place everything willy nilly on one end of the spectrum and the Birchers are alone on the right side (where they actually belong) and this they call Americanism . This is nothing but sheer authoritarianism, a sort of "my way or the highway" postulation. These changes were made because the Birchers, like my Witness girlfriend, don't rely on scholarship; it is all gut-work to them. By the way, this is the same model used by Libertarians, they'll have to answer for that I guess. What kind of America is this and what kind of Americanism? Why a Christian one by God!

From The Blue Book , by Robert Welch:

"In fact I wish to end this grim argument today on quite a religious note. For whether you
believe it or not, we are far along in a gathering crisis that is going to make us all search
deeply into our beliefs, and into the values and loyalties that motivate our actions. This is
a world-wide battle, the first in history, between light and darkness; between freedom and
slavery; between the spirit of Christianity / and the spirit of anti-Christ for the souls and
bodies of men. Let's win that battle by alertness, by determination, by courage, by an
energizing realization of the danger, if we can; but let's win it even with our lives, if the
time comes when we must. Let's even keep in mind, against that time, an inspiration
which we hope we shall not need. It comes from the end of a great and stirring hymn,
written to inspire men to fight against a far less extensive slavery of their fellow men."2.

"The greatness of this nation is traceable to this new concept of government, a system which should be known by the name Americanism. It includes the belief in God from whom all rights proceed. It affirms the innate dignity of every individual. And it insists on strict limitation of government as a fundamental guarantor of freedom."3.

Somehow I am not getting the sort of deist endowed by their creator vibe of that last statement. Lacking any kind of Christian ardor myself, I will see what Chris Hedges has to say:

By the late 1950s these radical Christians had drifted to the
fiercely anticommunist john Birch Society. Many of the ideas
championed by today's dominionists-the bizarre conspiracy theories,
the calls for unrestrained capitalism, the war against "liberal"
organizations such as the mainstream media and groups
such as the ACLU, along with the calls to dismantle federal agencies
that deal with housing or education-are drawn from the ideology
of this rabid anticommunist enclave. Timothy LaHaye used
to run john Birch Society training seminars in California. And
Nelson Bunker Hunt, a member of the john Birch Society's national
council, worked with LaHaye to help found the CNP. ((CNP), a secretive, right-wing organization that brought together
dominionists such as R. J. Rushdoony, Pat Robertson and Jerry
Falwell with right-wing industrialists willing to fund them, such
as Amway founder Richard DeVos Sr. and beer baron Joseph
Coors. As DeVos quipped. the CNP "brings together the doers
with the donors.")4. (CNP is The Council for National Policy Nation magazine has called it a secretive organization that "networks wealthy right-wing donors together with top conservative operatives to plan long-term movement strategy."(Source: Wiki).

Anti-Intellectualism With a Vengeance
Robert Welch was a strict isolationist, that is a good thing. I have never seen a just war. We had colonial wars with Vietnam and Korea. Then we had "practice wars" against countries that couldn't organize a picnic: Haiti, Granada, Panama to say nothing of all the covert wars and dirty wars that we have participated in. If you consider WWI as the Haemophiliac war wherein the "Christian Monarchies," blue-bloods, riddled with that disease bled their subjects white in a forced solidarity with them then you would be remiss to then not question the "good war," World War II as anything but right in line with the others and fitting right into that pattern. So yes, staying home is good but not if your goal, then, is to wreck havoc on your own tribe and this is what the Birchers did. Remember, this is an anti-intellectual movement. Concomitantly and as an extension of McCarthyism they couldn't recognize that they were the self-same enemy that they feared: the John Birch Society emulates Communist cells and quasi-secret operation through “front” groups, and preaches a ruthless prosecution of the ideological war along lines very similar to those it finds in the Communist enemy. 5. Bircherism and McCarthyism have been in many ways a veiled attack on the intelligentsia of the country because those who they were going after were mainly writers: they were trying to stifle ideas . And despite the fact that the HUAC hearings had failed to turn up any evidence that Hollywood was secretly disseminating Communist propaganda, but the industry was nonetheless transformed, 6. many lives were ruined in the balance. But this Americanism doesn't extend to the workers. During the Red Scare in 1941, producer Walt Disney took out an ad in Variety, the industry trade magazine, declaring his conviction that "Communist agitation" was behind a cartoonists and animators' strike. 7. And forces aligned with the John Birch Society concurred: the National Right to Work Committee shares numerous affinities with the John Birch Society, and both are mainstays of ultraconservative organizing stretching back into the 1950s. Edwin S. Dillard was the National Right to Work Committee’s first chairman back in 1955, and he became an endorser of the John Birch Society after it was founded in 1959.8. In his book Anti-intellectualism in American Life Richard Hofstadter, a Professor of history at Columbia, sets the tone by stating: the American intellectual has usually been regarded with considerable suspicion or resentment by his countrymen, has usually in our own times the old matter-of-fact designation of him as the "highbrow" has been succeeded by the more derisive "egghead." 9. He goes on to say: The more recent resurgence of the right wing in the John Birch Society and various "Christian Crusades" has made the fundamentalist orientation of a large segment of the right wing more conspicuous than at any time in the past; the movement has been led, to a great extent, by preachers. 10. This is not the face that the John Birch Society wants portrayed and while it must be recognized that much of the derision heaped on them by their right wing ideological brothers stems from the fact that those others were actively hawkish and the Birchers reticence to support the Vietnam war, for one, did not in any way assuage or ameliorate their war against us so that we would be like them American, and Christian and with no unions. But Welch was sharply criticized by both the left and the right or in his paradigm everyone on the left that didn't agree with him; well that is he and his 80,000 or so members. And remember they are right because they espouse Americanism. But the biggest fault of Welch's umwelt is his rabid and untutored attack on liberalism. By doing this he makes cartoon characters of the Patriots and Founding Fathers that he pretends to love. By pushing liberalism aside and confusing all isms with one another Welch has succeded in forging some kind of New America; one of empty sloganeering.

We Are Right and Everyone is Left
So Welch did succeed in a way. Because what we have now is a form of his Americanism. By divorcing thought from the political arena and replacing it with knee jerk reactionism, and decades of fearing an internal enemy that didn't exist. In October 1965, William F. Buckley, Jr. denounced Welch in his magazine National Review as promoting conspiracy theories far removed from common sense, and for working with racists like University of Illinois Classics Professor Revilo P. Oliver. (Professor Oliver had been ousted from the Society in a purge of antisemitic and racist members in the early 1960s. 11.


This is called Talkin' John Birch Blues
And there ain't nothing wrong with this song

Well, I was feelin' sad and kind o' blue,
I didn't know what I was gonna do,
The Communists wus comin' around,
They wus in the air,
They wus on the ground.
They wus all over. . .

So I run down most hurriedly
And joined the John Birch Society,
Got me a secret membership card
And went back home to the yard.
Started looking on the side walk,
under the hedges

Well, I got up in the morning
Looked under my bed
I was looking every place
For them goddarn Reds
Looked behind the sink
And under the floor
Looked into the glove compartment of my car
Couldn't find any

Looked behind the clothes, behind the chair
Looking for them Reds everywhere
Looked up my chimney hole,
Even deep down inside my toilet bowl.
They got away!

I heard some footsteps by the front porch door
So I grabbed my shotgun from the floor
Snuck around the house with a huff and a hiss
Saying 'Hands up you communists!'
It was a male man!
He punched me out.

Well, I wus sittin' home alone an' started to sweat,
I figured they wus in my T.V. set.
I peeked behind the picture frame,
Got a shock from my feet that hit my brain.
Them Reds did it!
Hootenanny television!

Well, I quit my job so I could work alone,
Got a magnifying glass like Sherlock Holmes.
Followed some clues from my detective bag
And discovered ... red stripes on the American flag!
Betsy Ross . . .

Now Eisenhower, he's a Russian spy,
Lincoln and Jefferson and that Roosevelt guy.
To my knowledge there's just one man
That's really an' truely an American: that's George Lincoln Rockwell.
I know for a fact he hates Commies cus he picketed the movie Exodus.

Well, I fin'ly started thinkin' straight
When I run outa things to investigate.
Couldn't imagine nothin' else,
And I'm home investigatin' myself!
Hope I don't find out too much . . . good God!

1. Cult Info

2.The Blue Book (1959)


4. American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War on America , Chris Hedges

5. The Paranoid Style in American Politics : Harper’s Magazine, November 1964, pp. 77-86.

6. Hollywood blacklist


8. Organized Wealth

9. Anti-intelectualism in American Life , Richard Hofstadter, Alfred A. Knopf, New York


11. Robert W. Welch, Jr.,_Jr.

The Nazi party with its

The Nazi party with its "National Socialist" tag had anything but a "socialist" agenda. Those who "didn't ft" the Nazi blue-eyed, white Aryan ideal were dealt with brutally, with the aim of total extermination - Jews, blacks, Romani, gays, the handicapped, and many other minority groups. The Nazi agenda is/was the 180º opposite of the inclusive ideals of real socialism, in which the right wing tenet of "if you're not one of us, then your unwelcome" was taken to the ultimate extreme. In addition, the Nazis were closely allied to Mussolini's Fascist Italy (right wing), were propped up by (right wing) élites on the right in the US, such as the Bush and Harriman families, and were at war *against* the Communist USSR.

Naziism ain't socialism..'s anti-socialism!


The thrust of my argument went towards a call for polemic accuracy. I have noted a trend which I am sure you have seen toward calling Obama and the Democrats "socialist," which couldn't be further from the truth. To the best of my understanding those entities are part of a monopole party (comprised of the Democrats and Republicans) with, as one wag put it, "two right wings." The platforms of "both" parties as well as the candidates selected are, again to the best of my understanding, dictats by the state working in the interest of some yet unnamed entity. On a personal level, I have spoken with a member of the Democratic National Committee and my feeling was that she, and her peers, had no influence in national policy. Also, I have a friend who has an intimate association with his employer. The employer was instrumental in the election of a Representative to Congress. It is my friends feeling that his employer has some nefarious connections. The latter is hearsay of course but the discussion I had with the DNC representative left me cold. Of note, the reps of the Democratic party wax very maudlin when confronted with war excesses, insisting on trying to control the local level where they feel like they have a choice. This is much like the argument I get from news paper salesmen who, after I have stated I don't like their editorial policies say: "think about the coupons!" Any port in a storm, I guess.

The Nazi party with its "National Socialist" tag had anything but a "socialist" agenda. Precisely! That was the "End Phenomena" as the Scientologists say. You have to remember though that these were "parliamentary" countries, Germany and Italy, and the politics were in violent flux,Mussolini started out as a leftist, for example. There was a cadre of socialists within the Nazi party as well as labor unionists. From the Nazi Party also ensued, much as from the Marxists, very stern and pointed anti-bourgeois rhetoric. This was not a perception as Ernst Röhm was summarily executed for it after Hitler abandoned that course. I pointed out these similarities as a cautionary tale. Of course, once the party coalesced into an national front all these influences were extirpated. You go on to mention the diametric opposition between Socialism and Nazism stating: Nazism ain't socialism..'s anti-socialism! This is a point with which I completely concur as I stated: "But despite any rhetoric to the contrary, the Nazis were fascists." That was the aim of my argument: "don't let the posturing fool you."

Military Internment Camps in U.S to be Used for Political Dissid

Leaked Document: Military Internment Camps in U.S to be Used for Political Dissidents

Published on Mar 4, 2013

Internment camps for political dissidents in the U.S. aren't a conspiracy theory. The Department of Defense document entitled "INTERNMENT AND RESETTLEMENT OPERATIONS" or FM 3-39.40 proves this beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Follow us on Facebook:
Follow us on Twitter:
If you support our work please consider making a donation:
Visit our website:
Get weekly email updates:

Download link for FM 3-39.40:

Army hiring for these internment camps:

Last 3 links broken.....


Never-Ending Expansion of War On Terror

Government Wants to Expand Assassination Program to Cover “ASSOCIATES of ASSOCIATES” of Al Qaeda
The U.S. government already claims the power to assassinate, indefinitely detain or torture anyone in Al Qaeda or “associated forces”:

Excellent post. Thank you

Excellent post. Thank you

'Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power.' -Benito Mussolini

How is this any different from what we have in America today? I suggest people check out the Power Principle by Scott Noble (All his films are worth seeing, free online)
for a good overview of how we got here. Another is, WAR MADE EASY.

This is real, don't be fooled. This is happening.

I think it basically comes down to that 9/11 was their Reichstag Fire. The Patriot Act was their Enabling Act of 1933 or Reichstag Fire Decree. Blackwater, Xe, Academi is basically their SS.

I'm not sure how accurate or how far this analogy is going to go, but they've improved on their tactics and I don't see an enemy that is going to stop them at hand. If we don't expose the truth about 9/11 we don't stand a chance in my opinion. The truth stands the test of time.

This whiteboard animation shows what happened when Hitler lied to get elected and people don't care or pay attention to the lies of their leaders, until they do care...and at that point, it is too late. Parts of this video are narrated by a man who served as a German soldier and a German woman who lived right by the railroad tracks the cattle trains ran on that carried the Jews to their deaths.

Based on Andy Andrews' book, How Do You Kill 11 Million People?

Wesley Clark calls for internment camps.

Important Post


Bad history in the service of bad politics

To help make his case for taking Orwellian though-crime measures, Wesley Clark resorts to inventing history, claiming that in World War II, people in the U.S. were interned in camps based on whether they had expressed support for Nazi Germany ('In World War 2, if someone supported Nazi Germany at the expense of the United States, well, we didn’t say that was freedom of speech, we put ’em in a camp').

This is not true. Some German-Americans and Italian-Americans were interned, to go along with the better known case of Japanese-Americans on the west coast. But in these cases, it was ethnicity that was at issue--i.e., that was considered the basis of potential danger--not expressed ideological sympathies or political opinions. Otherwise, people like Henry Ford and Prescott Bush would have found themselves in a camp! But that didn't happen.

And of course, Clark was not challenged on this twisting of the historical record.

Discussed here: