The Pentagon’s Destruction of the Bill of Rights

It is supremely ironic that Pentagon officials take an oath to support and defend the Constitution because they intentionally destroyed the Fifth and Sixth Amendments to the Constitution when they set up their “judicial” system at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. In fact, the very reason the Pentagon established its system in Cuba, rather than the United States, was to circumvent and avoid the provisions of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

Prior to the 9/11 attacks, whenever someone was charged with terrorism or any other criminal offense, U.S. officials would secure a grand-jury indictment and then prosecute him in a U.S. District Court. The accused in the federal court system is guaranteed certain procedural protections, many of which were carved out during centuries of resistance by British citizens to the tyranny of their own government. Our American ancestors demanded that many of those procedural protections be expressly enshrined in the Bill of Rights so that everyone would know that federal officials would have to abide by them whenever they charged people with federal crimes.

Examples of procedural guarantees include no cruel and unusual punishments, the right to confront adverse witnesses, the right to counsel, the right to due process of law, the right of trial by jury, the right to be presumed innocent, the right to remain silent, the right of speedy trial, the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures, the right to be free of coerced confessions, and the right to counsel.

After 9/11, the Pentagon established its own “judicial” system at Gitmo to try terrorism cases, as an alternative to the federal judicial system in the United States. Yet, one searches in vain for any authority in the Constitution for the Pentagon to do that. When one reads the Constitution, the intent of the Framers is clear: one judicial system — the federal system — for trying all cases involving the commission of federal offenses.

Contrary to what some people maintain, terrorism is not an act of war. It is a federal criminal offense. That’s why it’s listed in the U.S. Code, which enumerates federal criminal offenses. It’s also why terrorism cases have long been tried in federal district court. It’s also why the Pentagon is prosecuting terrorism defendants in its “judicial” system in Cuba.

The establishment of the Pentagon’s system now enables federal officials the option of sending people who are accused of terrorism into two different systems — one run by the federal courts and the other run by the Pentagon. Thus, if two different people are charged with participating in the same terrorism offense, one can be sent into the federal court system and the other can be sent into the Pentagon’s system.

Read the entire article

How the Judiciary Is Chipping Away at the War on Terror

In times of war, the law often does fall silent.

The U.S. Supreme Court, in all its independence and courage, has endorsed concentration camps, censorship, sham military tribunals, and guilt by association at various points in its history. Textbooks and television sell us the caricature of heroic judges and inspiring courtroom debates, but in truth, a simple cry of “national security” frequently overpowers even the most eloquent defenses of constitutional rights.

Of course, the prevailing mythology is far from baseless. In New York Times Co. v. United States (1971), for instance, the Supreme Court condemned President Nixon’s attempts to block publication of the Pentagon Papers, with Justice Hugo Black emphatically declaring, “The word ‘security’ is a broad, vague generality whose contours should not be invoked to abrogate the fundamental law embodied in the First Amendment.”

Over a century earlier, in Ex Parte Milligan (1866), Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase found a similar mix of passion and erudition while invalidating the application of martial law to civilians. “The Constitution of the United States,” he wrote, “is a law for rulers and people, equally in war and in peace, and covers with the shield of its protection all classes of men, at all times.”

Even in the half-decade after 9/11, as George W. Bush and Dick Cheney rode a violent and unprecedented wave of executive power, the judiciary provided spirited support for Americans and foreigners ensnared in the Guantanamo Gulag.

In general, though, judges are wary of confronting politicians armed with a major crisis. Deference and capitulation are the safe options. There are many reasons for this tendency, but the simplest is that no judicial opinion can enforce itself. Especially when the president and Congress take a unified position, judges are smart enough to avoid picking unwinnable fights.

In other words, a wartime president needs to do something incredibly egregious and unilateral before fearing the law and the Constitution – and then he still might win, as Trump has on his absurd border wall “emergency” and transparently racist travel ban.

Signs of Impatience

Nevertheless, there are growing indications of judicial displeasure with the endless “War on Terror.”

Read the entire article

Students of the Chinese University of Hong Kong stage rally to demand political reform

Judge Jeanine Lacerates the Deep State Ahead of the Much Anticipated IG Report

REPORT: HONG KONG POLICE ARE RANDOMLY ARRESTING BYSTANDERS AT PROTESTS

A report in the South China Morning Post Monday claimed that the Hong Kong police in cracking down on demonstrations are grabbing innocent bystanders and arresting them without due process.

The report notes that the police are accusing people who are there to document the events, or even just observing, of participating in “unlawful assemblies.”

The Post notes that in some cases people are being imprisoned for days without being granted legal counsel:

Hong Kong police have claimed that protesters are causing violence, and that officers are showing restraint.

“I must emphasize the officers demonstrated great restraint. Their use of force was indeed necessary and reasonable. It was to protect any person, including our officers themselves, from death or serious bodily injury,” said Assistant Commissioner of Police Operations Mak Chin Ho on Monday.

Read the entire article

U.S. Americans Should Be Very Skeptical Of Calls For New “Terrorism” Laws

Two mass shootings have rocked the United States in less than 24 hours, leaving dozens dead and many more wounded. The first in El Paso, Texas was allegedly perpetrated by a white supremacist whose racist motives are outlined in a rambling “manifesto”, the second allegedly by a self-described “leftist” whose motives, like the 2017 Las Vegas shooter, are presently unknown. These incidents occurred a week after another mass shooting in Gilroy, California.

All the usual US gun control debates have of course reignited, which is understandable. Alongside this debate, however, we are seeing another, far more pernicious agenda being raised that I would like to address here.

In an interview with MSNBC’s Joy Reid, notorious liar and propagandist Malcolm Nance claimed that existing laws aren’t sufficient for prosecuting the El Paso shooter, because there are no laws designating his act of mass murder as “domestic terrorism”.

“I think that Congress needs to take up right away a series of domestic terrorism laws,” Nance said. “It’d be very simple: just match them to the words ‘international terrorism’, so that a member of al-Qaeda and a member of a white nationalist terrorist cell or a militia that thinks they’re going to carry out international acts of terrorism are equal all the way around. Right now there are no laws called ‘domestic terrorism law’. They can get you for firearms, they get you for hate crimes, but you are not treated as a terrorist. This act in El Paso was clearly by all definitions a terrorist attack in the United States, but of course by the nature of the person being white and American he can’t be treated like a member of ISIS or al-Qaeda. He can’t even be detained, he can only be treated as a murderer.”

(The accused, for the record, is in fact under arrest currently, and prosecutors say that they are treating it as a domestic terrorism case for which they are seeking the death penalty. This is in Texas; he’ll be dead before the next Fast & Furious movie. Nance’s notion that prosecutors’ hands are somehow tied here is silly.)

Read the entire article

Hong Kong protests: China military breaks silence to warn unrest should not be tolerated

The head of the Chinese army in Hong Kong has spoken on the protests for the first time, saying the unrest has “seriously threatened the life and safety” of the people and should not be tolerated.

The commander of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) garrison in Hong Kong warned it was “determined to protect national sovereignty, security, stability and the prosperity of Hong Kong”.

The remarks were made by Chen Daoxiang on Wednesday at a reception celebrating the 92nd anniversary of the PLA. They came the day after 43 protesters were charged with rioting and released on bail. Some of those charged were as young as 16 and included a Cathay Pacific pilot.

The PLA chief also gave his “firm” support to Hong Kong’s chief executive, Carrie Lam, as well as to to the Hong Kong police force for “rigorously enforcing the law”.

At the reception, the PLA released a dramatic video showcasing the army. In one scene, an anti-riot drill was shown where ranks of marching soldiers holding riot shields advanced and fired on fleeing “citizens”. The scene included footage of tanks rolling in, water cannon being used, and “handcuffed” citizens being led away

Read the entire article

USA @ Doorstep of a Civil WAR Conservative Patriots vs Liberal domestic terrorists July 2019 News

Tom Fitton: JW Sues CIA for Inspector General’s Report on Mena, AK Airport Allegations

Cern - It's About Time - Their Endgame Exposed

People Will Never, Ever Rebel As Long As They’re Successfully Propagandized

Since the dawn of civilization, powerful individuals have controlled the stories people tell themselves about who they are, who’s in charge, how a good citizen behaves, what groups should be loved, what groups should be hated, and what’s really going on in the world. When you study what we call history, you’re mostly just reading the ancient proto-propaganda of whatever kingdom happened to win the last war during that period of time. When you study what we call religion, you’re mostly reading stories that were advanced by ancient governments explaining why the people should be meek, forgiving taxpayers instead of rising up and killing their wealthy exploiters.

This continues to this day. We fill our children’s heads with lies about how the world works, how the government works, how the media works, and, on a deeper level, how their own consciousness works, and the entire process is shaped to funnel power toward the people who control our stories. The modern schooling system was largely formed by John D Rockefeller, widely considered the wealthiest person in modern history, in order to create generations of docile gear-turners for the industrial plutocratic machine. Modern schooling is essentially mainstream media in a building; it promotes authorized narratives day in and day out to ensure that children will have a reaction of cognitive dissonance and rejection when confronted with information which contradicts those narratives.

This funnels the populace seamlessly into the narrative control matrix of adulthood, where childhood indoctrination into mainstream narratives lubricates the way for continual programming of credulous minds with mass media propaganda. All the print, TV and online media they are presented with supports the status quo-supporting agendas of the same plutocratic class that John D Rockefeller dominated all those years ago. This ensures that no matter how bad things get, no matter how severely our spirits are crushed by end-stage metastatic neoliberalism, no matter how many stupid, pointless wars we’re duped into, no matter how much further we are drawn along the path toward extinction via climate chaos or nuclear war, we will never revolt to overthrow our rulers.

Read the entire article

Rendition Plane, Increased Police Presence Raise Fears for Assange

In four days, it will be a full year since WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange was severed from contact with the outside world by the government of Ecuador. 

Concern for Assange was heightened as the anniversary approaches after a U.S. Department of Justice jet previously used for the rendition of an accused Russian hacker landed in London on Tuesday and remained there for days, only to return to the U.S. on Saturday. The flight reportedly departed from Manassas, Virginia. 

WikiLeaks stated via Twitter regarding the flight: “Note that the Edward Snowden DoJ grab team plane N977GA also departed from Manassas, Virginia.” 

WikiLeaks tweeted regarding the flight: “What is US Department of Justice jet ‘N996GA’ doing in London? The jet arrived on Tuesday from DC and was last noted rendering alleged Russian hacker Yevgeniy Nikulin to the US last year from the Czech Republic, causing a diplomatic incident with Russia.” 

Assange’s Twitter account, run by members of his legal team, also tweeted: “Note that the Edward Snowden DoJ grab team plane N977GA also departed from Manassas, Virginia.”

Read the entire article

Coup D’Etat: Andrew McCabe Admits Deep State Officials Discussed Recruiting Cabinet Members to Push Trump Out of Office

Fired Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe told CBS News today that top officials at the Department of Justice and FBI discussed recruiting cabinet members to push President Trump out of office.

McCabe, James Comey, Rod Rosenstein and the top officials at the DOJ were actively strategizing how to remove the duly elected President of the United States.

In third world banana republics they call this a coup d’etat.

Treason is punishable by death in the United States.

The New York Times reported:

Andrew G. McCabe, the former deputy F.B.I. director, said in an interview aired on Thursday that top Justice Department officials became so alarmed by President Trump’s decision in May 2017 to fire James B. Comey, the bureau’s director, that they discussed whether to recruit cabinet members to invoke the 25th Amendment to remove Mr. Trump from office.

Read the entire article

French Prime Minister Proposes Government Registry of Demonstrators

Following the large turnout throughout France for the eighth week of “yellow vest” (Gilets jaunes) protests this past Saturday, French Prime Minister Edouard Philippe announced on French television Monday night the imposition of an extraordinary law to suppress the demonstrations. Taking up measures initially put forward by the neo-fascists, he proposed that demonstrators be placed on government subversive lists and subjected to financial sanctions.

Philippe admitted that the “yellow vest” protests express social anger shared by workers throughout France, and indeed across Europe.

“From the beginning, in the statements of the ‘yellow vests’, there were demands for more purchasing power, speaking for French people who felt forgotten and ignored,” he declared.

But despite this admission, Philippe stressed that his government would not change its widely hated policy, but rather would seek to suppress the movement by putting in place additional obstacles to the right to demonstrate and strengthening the vast police apparatus for use against the population.

Read the entire article

Federal Judge Strikes Down Affordable Care Act As ‘Unconstitutional’

France’s Yellow Vests: Fuel Tax Hike Triggers Poverty, Finances War and Repayment of the Public Debt

The Western media in chorus upholds France’s President Macron against the Yellow Vests Movement, which it describes as “Climate Deniers”.

The New York Times casually describes the fuel tax hike as a carefully formulated economic policy to fight global climate change.

It’s a lie. 

Hikes in the fuel tax applied Worldwide in more than 120 countries are part of a package of deadly macro-economic reforms which serve to impoverish large sectors of the World population. 

The hike in gasoline prices translates into increases in the price of food, transportation and essential goods and services. It undermines the productive structure. It leads to the collapse of the standard of living.  

Read the entire article

Information “Project Mockingbird” (Secret Eyes Only)

US Government Preparing To Prosecute WikiLeaks' Assange

BOOOM.. Arrest Of White House Defense Official

John Brennan Voted Communist in 1976, Then Entered CIA in 1980

Barack Obama’s CIA chief, John Brennan, told the Annual Legislative Conference of the Congressional Black Caucus, on 15 September 2016, in Washington DC, that when he had applied in 1980 to join the CIA, he admitted to them that in the 1976 Presidential election, when Jimmy Carter was running against Gerald Ford, Brennan had voted instead for the candidate of the U.S. Communist Party, Gus Hall, and that he was then greatly relieved to find that this information didn’t cause rejection of his CIA-application. This had happened 11 years before the 1991 end of the Cold War (which ended actually only on the Russian side, but not also on the U.S.-NATO side, where it continues without stop, and has accelerated since 2014, now finally being joined by both sides).

The Caucus made no mention of Brennan’s having spoken there, nor did the CIA include in its public archives any indication that he had spoken there, though, for example, they did include the complete transcript of “Director Brennan Delivers Keynote at Miles College” on 13 September 2016, in Birmingham Alabama, at which event he said nothing at all that was newsworthy. (The Miles College event was mentioned by CBS, in this brief video.)

Furthermore — though there is online a webpage devoted to, and covering each day of, the 2017 Annual Legislative Conference, on 20-24 September of last year — the webpage for the 2016 Conference, on September 14th-18th, mentions events only on September 14th and September 17th, as if Brennan hadn’t even appeared there at all. The entire day’s events on September 15th are missing. So: both the Caucus, and the CIA, blacked-out his 15 September 2016 presentation, and the transcript of it isn’t publicly available (nor is any video or audio of it available publicly).

However, a little coverage of Brennan’s remarkable statement did appear in the press, first, as a sparse and poorly written news-report on CNN that didn’t even mention where Brennan had made the remark (nor in which year he had voted that way), and, then, finally a week later, in a professionally competent news-report, at Buzzfeed, titled “Congress Doesn’t Really Care That The CIA Chief Once Voted Communist”, and reporting, on September 22nd, that, “Brennan copped to the vote in little-noticed remarks last week [September 15th] at the Congressional Black Caucus’s annual conference. The spy chief spoke of his stomach-turning fear while undergoing the vetting process to be employed at the CIA in 1980 — strapped to a polygraph during the height of the Cold War,” and “Brennan said he came clean about the his 1976 ballot during the polygraph, expecting it to disqualify him from a clearance. But to the director’s surprise, he was offered admission to the agency, and, nearly 40 years later, landed in the top office.” Furthermore, when Buzzfeed’s reporter, Ali Watkins, asked some U.S. Senators what they thought about Obama’s having selected to run the CIA a man who only a few years prior to joining the CIA had voted for the communist candidate, Gus Hall, none seemed to care. Whereas the war against communism had ended, the war against Russia still has not, and so Senators from both Parties didn’t want to talk about the matter — didn’t want to draw the public’s attention to the clear fact now, that the ideological excuse for the Cold War had been merely a fake, a rationalization, all along, on the American-NATO side; that the Cold War was never really about communism at all, but about conquest, on the American side — that Soviet, and then Russian, leaders had been conned into thinking that abandonment of communism and ending the Warsaw Pact mirror to America’s NATO military alliance, would bring peace with The West. Increasingly since 1991, it has been made clear that Russian leaders had been swindled.

Read the entire article