Tag: police state

Congress ‘Can Regulate Virtually Anything’

Two years after Harvard gave him the boot and three years before Congress banned LSD, Timothy Leary set out on a road trip from Millbrook, New York, in a rented station wagon. The 45-year-old psychologist and psychedelic enthusiast was accompanied by his girlfriend, Rosemary Woodruff, and his two teenaged children, Susan and Jack. They had planned a month-long family vacation in Yucatan, Mexico, after which Leary and Woodruff would stay behind to work on his newly commissioned autobiography. Leary and his companions arrived in Laredo, Texas, on the evening of December 22, 1965, and crossed the international bridge to Nuevo Laredo, Mexico.

At the customs station on the Mexican side of the bridge, Leary recalled in his 1983 memoir Flashbacks, he learned that the visa he needed would not be approved until the next day. That turned out to be the least of his troubles.

“All the grass is out of the car, right?” Leary asked as he started driving the station wagon back across the bridge. Jack had flushed his, but Woodruff said she had been unable to retrieve her “silver box” of pot from her bag because “there were two uniformed porters leaning against the car.” Since trying to toss the contraband off the side of the bridge seemed inadvisable, Susan hid it in her clothing.

At the inspection point on the U.S. side, Leary explained that he “didn’t enter Mexico” and had nothing to declare. After a suspicious customs agent picked up what looked like a cannabis seed from the car floor near Leary’s feet, the encounter escalated into searches of the vehicle, the passengers, and their luggage. A “personal search” of Susan discovered what the U.S. Supreme Court would later describe as “a silver snuff box containing semi-refined marihuana and three partially smoked marihuana cigarettes”—about half an ounce, all told.

Leary claimed ownership of the stash, which earned him a 30-year prison sentence. That astonishingly severe penalty was based on two federal charges: transportation of illegally imported marijuana and failure to pay a transfer tax on the contraband.

Those puzzling charges provide a window on the constitutionally dubious origins of federal drug prohibition, which was smuggled into the U.S. Code disguised as tax legislation. Federal gun control laws followed a similar route, expanding along with conventional conceptions of congressional power.

Keep reading

Whistleblower says FBI abuses security clearance process to ‘purge’ conservative agents

The Security Division of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) is abusing security clearance approval to oust agents believed to be politically conservative, according to a whistleblower complaint reviewed by the New York Post.

(Article by Calvin Freiburger republished from LifeSiteNews.com)

The Post reported that the unidentified whistleblower alleges that the nation’s top law enforcement agency suspends or revokes clearances of agents on the basis of their political affiliations or lack of COVID-19 vaccination, because “if an FBI employee fit a certain profile as a political conservative, they were viewed as security concerns and unworthy to work at the FBI.”

The allegations directly contradict sworn testimony denying the practice to Congress last year by Jennifer Leigh Moore, the Security Division’s assistant director.

A nonprofit called Empower Oversight is representing the whistleblower and submitted his claims to the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Office of the Inspector General (OIG) and Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) on June 28. Empower president Tristan Leavitt also told Congress in a letter that the FBI is also retaliating against the agent for what he is trying to expose.

“The outcomes of clearance investigations and adjudications were often pre-determined by the Division’s acting Deputy Assistant Director and the acting Section Chief responsible for security clearance investigations and adjudications, who often overruled line staff and even dictated the wording of documents in the clearance process,” Leavitt wrote. “Over the last few years, the FBI has used the clearance process as a means to force employees out of the FBI by inflicting severe financial distress: suspending their clearance, suspending them from duty without pay, requiring them to obtain permission to take any other job while stuck in this unpaid limbo, and delaying their final clearance adjudication indefinitely – even years.”

One victim of such practices was former FBI staff operations specialist Marcus Allen, who last year was revealed to have lost his security clearance for circulating news articles and opinion videos related to the January 6, 2021, U.S. Capitol riot for “situational awareness,” according to an interim report by the House Judiciary Committee and Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government. “Because these open-source articles questioned the FBI’s handling of the violence at the Capitol, the FBI suspended Allen for ‘conspiratorial views in regard to the events of January 6th.’”

Keep reading

Tennessee Woman’s ‘Fuck Em’ Both 2024′ Sign Is Protected Speech, Rules District Court

A federal judge has ruled a Tennessee woman can’t be fined for saying what we’re all thinking, even if it’s in the form of a yard sign.

This past week, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Tennessee ruled that the town of Lakeland, Tennessee, violated resident Julie Pereira’s First Amendment rights when it fined her for placing a “Fuck Em’ [sic] Both 2024″ sign in her yard.

According to her First Amendment lawsuit filed last month, Pereira’s sign “simply and cogently” expressed her own opinion that neither major party candidate was an acceptable choice for president. A Lakeland code enforcement official disagreed, slapping Pereira with daily fines of $50 for violating the city’s prohibition on “obscene” signs.

The city only stopped fining Pereira after she covered the u on her sign with tape. By that point, she’d wracked up $688 in fines and other fees because of her sign.

But, unwilling to either pay those fees or dilute the “potency” of her message, Pereira sued the city of Lakeland for violating her First Amendment rights.

“In the interest of protecting not only my rights, but all citizens in the state of Tennessee this case has been taken to the next level because of its constitutional impacts,” she wrote on Facebook, per the New York Post‘s reporting.

In a brief, three-page ruling, the U.S. district court agreed with Pereira. The court barred the city from taking any further enforcement action over her sign and instructed the city to reimburse Pereira for the fines she’d paid, plus $31,000 in attorneys fees, and $1 in nominal damages for having her constitutional rights violated.

Keep reading

The Rise of the FALSE False Flag

Afalse flag operation is generally defined as ”an act committed with the intent of disguising the actual source of responsibility and pinning blame on another party”

The phrase originates in naval warfare, when ships would literally fly a flag of another nation’s navy.

Historically speaking, they are covert military operations carried out with the aim of creating a cassus belli, either initiating, justifying or perpetuating a war.

The attack is very real, only the flag is false.

But recent years have seen the rise of a new idea – the false false flag.  That is to say – entirely fake “events” with only the barest relationship to objective reality. Blanks and crisis actors, fake victims and fake shooters.

This concept has been the subject of discussion recently, with the civil suit against Alex Jones for calling Sandy Hook a “hoax” and the on-going trial of journalist Richard D Hall in the UK for suggesting the Manchester Arena bombing was fake. Similar suggestions have been raised about the Boston bombing of 2013 as well. Others, including Riley Waggaman, have raised questions about the recent “terrorist attack” in Moscow too.

Now, I’m not definitively claiming any or all of those events were faked – though of course they may have been. What I’m pointing up is the shift in discussion.

But then, we don’t need to look far for the greatest provably “fake event” in recent times: “Covid”, which was purely a construction of media hype and corrupt science creating an entirely fake pandemic.

Once you’ve absorbed all the facts of the case, that’s the only interpretation that stands up to scrutiny.

In fact it was such a vast infestation of fakery it spawned mini-fakes. It wasn’t so much a fake event as a flock of fakes of varying sizes.

Covid alone proves that the powers-that-be certainly do engage in staged or faked events. And, as highlighted in the first part of this series, it’s been known for decades that news reports are regularly faked, on both the small and large scale.

Yet, still, the question that gets asked whenever the possibility of fakery is invoked is “why?”

Why would a state apparatus with the power to really do something, opt to only pretend to do it?

This is a standard argument made against the idea of state-sponsored fakery, and although it is logically flawed as being purely an argument from incredulity, it is a question we can and probably should endeavour to answer.

So – why would the state, or powerful actors within the state, choose to fake something rather than simply do it? 

Keep reading

UN’s Antonio Guterres unveils global game plan for surveillance, control and censorship

United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres recently released a framework program titled “Global Principles for Information Integrity,” which outlines key recommendations on population control, surveillance and censorship.

The said project promotes the globalist rhetoric of ending “harmful misinformation, disinformation and hate speech” online. It claims to make information spaces safer while “upholding human rights such as the freedom of speech.”

“At a time when billions of people are exposed to false narratives, distortions and lies, these principles lay out a clear path forward, firmly rooted in human rights, including the rights to freedom of expression and opinion,” Guterres said, addressing the media at the UN headquarters in New York.

Guterres urged governments, tech companies, advertisers and the public relations (PR) industry to take responsibility for spreading and monetizing content that results in harm. He also demanded that the media and advertisers take control and establish official narratives while suppressing opposition.

For SHTF Plan‘s Mac Slavo, the international organization is building an information surveillance and control system that crafts authoritarian narratives that limit access to the truth. These will not only censor but will dictate and will police people on what to say and think and how to behave.

“The UN wants to create a world of simps who surrender their sovereignty and bow down to manipulative and abusive entities and false authorities,” Slavo said.

He added that Big Tech’s algorithms or automated review processes will be programmed to filter and remove content deemed objectionable or politically sensitive, including blocking websites, social media posts or entire platforms that would criticize their chosen stakeholders. Slavo further predicted possible internet shutdowns or access restrictions to specific websites in times of political unrest or during manufactured crises.

Keep reading

“It’s a wrong policy”: Questions arise after Buffalo Outer Harbor takes down kites

Questions are being raised about kite rules after a man was surrounded by five park police officers at Buffalo Outer Harbor State Park on Sunday.

“A park ranger came and said you need to take those down. And we were nice to him and said no sir it’s a special day, it doesn’t come around in Buffalo that often where you have a perfect sunny day and 10 mph winds” said Jim Emanuele, who was flying about 10 kites with a friend in the park.

After refusing to take down the kites, the situation escalated.

“I’ve been here before and they told me to take it down. That’s why I don’t come here often” said Emanuele.

As it turns out, kite flying is not allowed in Buffalo State Park without a permit.

“It’s a wrong policy, why you can’t fly kites here right here on the outer harbor. People enjoy, there’s no risk, there’s no powerlines there’s no airport around here so what is the reason that you cannot fly kites here”

Channel Two reached out to New York State Parks for an answer. In a statement released to us, they said quote:

“large kites such as the ones in question can pose a safety risk to park patrons or result in property damage, which is why state park regulations require permits to fly such kites. In this case, no permit was requested or granted.”

Jim says that for him and many other kite flyers, permits are not ideal because you just never know when a perfect kite day will be – but despite the unpredictability, the rule still stands. 

Keep reading

GOP Lawmakers Push Justice Department To Reverse Course On Marijuana Rescheduling

Republicans in Congress sent a public comment letter this week opposing the Biden administration’s planned rescheduling of marijuana under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), alleging the government’s recommendation was based on politics rather than science.

Led by Rep. Pete Sessions (R-TX) and Sen. James Lankford (R-OK), the letter opposing the move of cannabis to Schedule III was signed 23 other House and Senate GOP congressional lawmakers. It was addressed to U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland at the Department of Justice (DOJ).

“The decision to disregard public safety and medical concerns to reclassify marijuana is strictly political,” Sessions claimed in a press release about the letter. “This egregious proposed rule fails to provide sufficient science and data in support. Senator Lankford and I are leading the charge in raising the alarm from Congress.”

The letter itself says it should be irrelevant to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) analysis of marijuana that 38 states and Washington, D.C. have legalized medical cannabis under state law.

“It is clear that HHS and DOJ chose the desired conclusion first and worked backwards, since the rule does not provide sufficient reason to move marijuana to schedule III,” the letter says, further alleging that the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) “was not properly consulted in the drafting of the Proposed Rule.”

To that end, the letter amplified rumors that DEA is not on board with the administration’s rescheduling plan.

“DEA Administrator [Ann] Milgram did not sign the rule, and it states many times that DEA believes additional information is needed regarding the appropriate schedule for marijuana,” it says. “The Proposed Rule references DEA’s findings from 2016, when it rejected two petitions to remove marijuana from schedule I. It seems that DEA stands by its findings from 2016- all the more reason why this rule should not have been published without sign off from the DEA Administrator.”

Since the government’s rescheduling plan was made public in April, SAM and others have amplified rumors that DEA officials might oppose the proposed change—rumors that a top Biden administration official appeared to acknowledge last month.

Asked by a reporter whether there was resistance to the move at DEA, HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra responded: “Talk to the DEA.”

“Our scientists reviewed the evidence,” he added. “FDA bases its action on the science and the evidence before us. We took action.”

The GOP lawmakers claim in the new letter that despite the popularity of medical marijuana nationwide, cannabis isn’t medicine.

Keep reading

Europol Seeks to Break Mobile Roaming Encryption

EU’s law enforcement agency Europol is another major entity that is setting its sights on breaking encryption.

This time, it’s about home routing and mobile encryption, and the justification is a well-known one: encryption supposedly stands in the way of the ability of law enforcement to investigate.

The overall rationale is that police and other agencies face serious challenges in doing their job (an argument repeatedly proven as false) and that destroying the internet’s currently best available security feature for all users – encryption – is the way to solve the problem.

Europol’s recent paper treats home routing not as a useful security feature, but, as “a serious challenge for lawful interception.” Home routing works by encrypting data from a phone through the home network while roaming.

We obtained a copy of the paper for you here.

Keep reading

Total Control: Weaponized Psyops And How The Government Normalizes Totalitarianism

“The biggest mistake I see is people waiting for A Big Sign that’ll tell them that things have gone too far. One Big Thing that police or lawmakers or the president/leaders will do that will cross the line. It’ll never come because they won’t cross it. They’ll move the line. That line you think you stand behind is shifting everyday with little actions, bills, legislations… That line will stop moving one day, & it’ll be too late… Every day, your sensitivity is being eroded by these willful atrocities. The envelope for what you’ll accept is being pushed. One day, all of these things will be your new normal.”—Nigerian writer Suyi Davies Okungbowa

The U.S. government is working to re-shape the country in the image of a totalitarian state.

This has remained true over the past 50-plus years no matter which political party held office.

This will remain true no matter who wins the 2024 presidential election.

In the midst of the partisan furor over Project 2025, a 920-page roadmap for how to re-fashion the government to favor so-called conservative causes, both the Right and the Left have proven themselves woefully naive about the dangers posed by the power-hungry Deep State.

Yet we must never lose sight of the fact that both the Right and the Left and their various operatives are extensions of the Deep State, which continues to wage psychological warfare on the American people.

Psychological warfare, according to the Rand Corporation, “involves the planned use of propaganda and other psychological operations to influence the opinions, emotions, attitudes, and behavior of opposition groups.”

For years now, the government has been bombarding the citizenry with propaganda campaigns and psychological operations aimed at keeping us compliant, easily controlled and supportive of the government’s various efforts abroad and domestically.

The government is so confident in its Orwellian powers of manipulation that it’s taken to bragging about them. For example, in 2022, the U.S. Army’s 4th Psychological Operations Group, the branch of the military responsible for psychological warfare, released a recruiting video that touts its efforts to pull the strings, turn everything they touch into a weapon, be everywhere, deceive, persuade, change, influence, and inspire.

Keep reading

Gassy cows and pigs will face a carbon tax in Denmark, a world first

Denmark will tax livestock farmers for the greenhouse gases emitted by their cows, sheep and pigs from 2030, the first country to do so as it targets a major source of methane emissions, one of the most potent gases contributing to global warming.

The aim is to reduce Danish greenhouse gas emissions by 70% from 1990 levels by 2030, said Taxation Minister Jeppe Bruus.

As of 2030, Danish livestock farmers will be taxed 300 kroner ($43) per ton of carbon dioxide equivalent in 2030. The tax will increase to 750 kroner ($108) by 2035. However, because of an income tax deduction of 60%, the actual cost per ton will start at 120 kroner ($17.3) and increase to 300 kroner by 2035.

Keep reading