There was a discussion of terrorism. Terrorism would be used widely in Europe and in other parts of the world. Terrorism at that time was thought would not be necessary in the United States. It could become necessary in the United States if the United States did not move rapidly enough into accepting the system. But at least in the foreseeable future it was not planned. And very benignly on their part. Maybe terrorism would not be required here, but the implication being that it would be indeed used if it was necessary.

Along with this came a bit of a scolding that Americans had had it too good anyway and just a little bit of terrorism would help convince Americans that the world is indeed a dangerous place... or can be if we don't relinquish control to the proper authorities.

By Darren Weeks

Your privacy rights are again under attack.

First we had Echelon, a world-wide technological snooping system, which gathers data from faxes, telephone conversations, and e-mails and stores the data in a huge database. This is done to purportedly locate potential terrorists, despite the fact that the program was developed prior to September 11th. So either I am right — along with the rest of the "kooks" out here in cyberspace who are saying that September 11th was orchestrated by those who control our government — or their Echelon network is basically worthless at stopping any kind of an attack against our country. Either way, we should be demanding to know why our government is spending this money to invade our privacy.

The fact is, our privacy rights were under attack by our government long before September 11th. It just so happens, that the "attack" on the World Trade Center and Pentagon that fateful day, provided just the perfect opportunity (where have we heard that word before? Read my earlier post, talking about how they create the opportunity, then seize upon it!)

On the heels of Echelon, came September 11th and the U.S.A. Patriot Act, which was written prior to the "terrorist attacks," and which we are told was not even read by the Congressmen and women who voted for it. The traitors in congress just pulled the "Yes" lever, and like Nero watching Rome burn, figuratively fiddled and said to hell with individual liberty and the Fourth Amendment — not that legislation can usurp the Constitution, but you'd better believe that they will pretend that it does.

Just as our outrage over one incredible infringement of our privacy begins to subside, we are slapped again by another.

It seems as though the monsters who control our country — as well as most of the rest of the world — won't be satisfied until every last corner of your life has been illuminated with the bright lights of their watchful eyes.

The latest assault is one which makes the government's Total Information Awareness program look like a trip to the zoo.

And by the way, speaking of Total Information Awareness, I just noticed that they have now changed the name of that program to "Terrorism Information Awareness." This is a clever public relations move, to try to dispel public concerns that our government really wants to spy on every aspect of your life. By changing "Total Information Awareness" to "Terrorism Information Awareness," they hope to continue to foster the lie that you are not their enemy, that some Muslim, taking flight lessons is, instead.

Make no mistake, if you are an American who loves your freedom, you are their enemy. You don't have to do anything but breathe. These people seek to enslave you, and take away your individual liberty, and control you totally and completely — right down to the very thoughts that you think and the words that you speak.

And judging from the attitudes of the average American, they are doing a pretty effective job at controlling people's minds.

Very few people are asking the necessary questions about September 11th. There are countless descrepancies, and a myriad of unanswered questions with regard to the official government story about what occurred that day, and how it supposedly happened. Yet the average American believes everything that the hi-jacked television networks tell them. The addage seems to be, If it's on the TV news, it must be true. If Rather, Brokaw, or Jennings said it, then that settles it. It might as well have come from God, himself.

As Dr. Richard Day, an insider with the controlling elite, in his speech before a group of pediatric physicians 1969 said:

"People are too trusting. People don't ask the right questions."

The mental conditioning begins in the government-controlled school systems, and is constant in media, and academia. And it is so effective, that people, "Don't ask the right questions." Or any questions.

But just because you trust your government, doesn't mean your government trusts you. The fact that they plan to eliminate your freedom and any wealth that you possess is an issue with which, they believe, you ultimately might have a problem. And you might respond, in kind (or not so kind).

Hence, revokation of your firearms, and the absolute elimination of any privacy to which you currently lay claim.

And hence, "Homeland Security." Securing the homeland. What do they mean by "security?"

The word, "security" is a derivitive of the word, "secure." Webster's New World Dictionary, copyright 1966, defines "secure" as:

noun - 1. Safe from harm, loss, attack, etc. [a secure hiding place.]

This is the definition that you are intended to accept.

2. Free from fear, worry

Again, the intended definition. Of course, placing your faith in government to protect you is fine, as long as the protector doesn't become the aggressor.

3. Fastened or fixed in a firm way [a secure knot.]
4. Sure; certain. [His success is now secure.]

The first and second definitions of "secure" are intended for your consumption, while numbers three and four, I suggest, are their real intentions. Again, quoting from Webster's as we examine the verb definitions of the same word:

verb - 1. To make safe; guard or protect [Secure your house against burglars.]
2. To tie or fasten firmly. [Secure the boat to the dock.]
3. To make sure; guarantee [to secure a loan with a pledge]
4. To get; obtain [to secure an appointment]

In this case, it is #2, #3, and #4 that we need to view as the controllers uses of the word, while #1 would be the definition for public consumption.

Does all of this sound fantastic? Hard to believe? Have I gone off the deep end?

Well, if you don't believe me, then perhaps you should take a gander at an article from Wired News, a magazine that specializes in technology reporting.

The Pentagon is about to embark on a stunningly ambitious research project designed to gather every conceivable bit of information about a person's life, index all the information and make it searchable .... The embryonic LifeLog program would dump everything an individual does into a giant database: every e-mail sent or received, every picture taken, every Web page surfed, every phone call made, every TV show watched, every magazine read.

All of this – and more – would combine with information gleaned from a variety of sources: a GPS transmitter to keep tabs on where that person went, audio-visual sensors to capture what he or she sees or says, and biomedical monitors to keep track of the individual's health ...

This gigantic amalgamation of personal information could then be used to "trace the 'threads' of an individual's life," to see exactly how a relationship or events developed, according to a briefing from the Defense Advanced Projects Research Agency, LifeLog's sponsor.

Someone with access to the database could "retrieve a specific thread of past transactions, or recall an experience from a few seconds ago or from many years earlier ... by using a search-engine interface."

And think of the "benefits" such a technological leap forward could provide us! Crime would virtually disappear! If a woman was raped, the perpetraitor of the violent act could be swiftly and severely punished, because the government would only have to "pull the tape" of his life recording and watch him commit the act. Case closed!

We could completely do away with the protections built into the American justice system. No longer would we have to worry about an individual being innocent until proven guilty. We'd know that they were guilty. We'd just pull up their file out of the database, and hit "play." There'd be all of the incriminating evidence, transmitted via micro-chip to the powerful GPS satellite, then back down to the Information Awareness Office, or whatever name that they happened to be calling it on that given week.

Of course, if a person dared object to anything this beast of a big brother was trying to do, then of course maybe a few extra sections of computer code could be added to the electronic file. Perhaps, a few thoughts that he/she didn't really think. A few statements could be added that weren't really said by the individual. Or maybe they had been said, but in a moment of anger or frustration.

Folks, do you really want to allow the government to have this much involvement into your life?

Here's another thing to consider. If they can build a system that will monitor you so closely as to record your every word, thought, and deed, then it isn't such a far stretch to suggest that they might use it to input thoughts into your mind. Imagine trying to sleep while your big brother keeps talking to you in your head!

Do you think that I'm crazy to suggest these things? Read the article for yourself.

Sure, LifeLog could be used to train robotic assistants. But it also could become a way to profile suspected terrorists, said Cory Doctorow, with the Electronic Frontier Foundation. In other words, Osama bin Laden's agent takes a walk around the block at 10 each morning, buys a bagel and a newspaper at the corner store and then calls his mother. You do the same things – so maybe you're an al Qaeda member, too!

Let me tell you that we're all suspected terrorists. Just by virtue of the fact that you are a living, breathing human being with a mind that can think independent thoughts, is a threat to their Global (Homeland) Security — otherwise referred to as the securing (taking; tying down, firmly) of the Homeland (that is, the entire world).

"The more that an individual's characteristic behavior patterns -- 'routines, relationships and habits' -- can be represented in digital form, the easier it would become to distinguish among different individuals, or to monitor one," Aftergood, the Federation of American Scientists analyst, wrote in an e-mail.

In its LifeLog report, DARPA makes some nods to privacy protection, like when it suggests that "properly anonymized access to LifeLog data might support medical research and the early detection of an emerging epidemic."

But before these grand plans get underway, LifeLog will start small.

They always do, folks. Liberty is never revoked in one fell swoop. It is always in steps. Sometimes, baby steps, sometimes giant leaps. Often, they'll take two steps forward, then one step back, when people get a little upset. But they will always keep moving.

Perhaps, this is what Samuel Adams meant when he said, "The truth is, all might be free if they valued freedom, and defended it as they ought. ... If therefore a people will not be free; if they have not virtue enough to maintain their liberty against a presumptuous invader, they deserve no pity, and are to be treated with contempt and ignominy."

Unless we learn to turn off the tube, quit caring so much who wins or who loses in the next Tigers game, and tailor our craving for "reality television," we are going to be faced with a real reality. The reality that we have lost our precious privacy and our freedoms.

Then, as you watch the contestants on the CBS reality show, Big Brother, you may not know it, but the real Big Brother will be watching you.

Hey, George Orwell, call your office!

By Darren Weeks

Here is something that really irritates me...

Here in Michigan, we were promised that the seatbelt law would never become a primary offense. They used that promise to lure the masses into accepting the secondary-offense seatbelt law.

And so it was that police supposedly had to stop you for some other offense first, in order to write you a ticket for not wearing a seatbelt. I say "supposedly," because if a cop really wants to stop you for something, they'll find a reason — even if it means pulling one out of their posterior. Which, by the way, they do.

After getting everyone accustomed to the nanny-ism of the secondary-offense law, the insurance companies and the law-enforcement agencies managed to successfully push through the legislature, the primary-offense law. No longer did the police have to pretend to pull you over for anything other than seatbelts.

Now that they have passed this law, removing our freedom to choose whether or not to use restraint during travel, they are shoving it down our throats at every turn.

The Michigan Office of Highway Safety Planning is using our hard-earned tax dollars in a massive media campaign aimed at threatening Michiganders with hefty fines of up to $100, if they don't knuckle under and buckle up.

It's interesting to note that the fines didn't start out that high, either. The maximum fine under the initial legislation was $25. So, even if you disliked the law, it was mainly an annoyance if you were cited for a lack of seatbelt use.

My point is that whenever the government wants to separate you from your cash, and your freedom, they'll nearly always do it in small, baby steps. And they'll tell you that it's for your own good.

Just like the federal "Homeland Security" frenzy that is being thrust upon us, the seatbelt laws across the country are being peddled as a benefit to you, because government cares about you. "It's for your own good," they'll tell you.

Well, nothing could be further from the truth.

Before I continue, let me say that I'm not going to argue that it is probably a good idea to wear your seatbelts. I believe that seatbelts probably do save quite a few lives, when used properly.

However, my quarrel is with being told that I have to wear my seatbelt or otherwise my public servants are going to pull me over and steal more of my hard-earned cash. I have a real problem with public officials who say that they have an eye on my safety, when in reality, they are only eyeing my wallet.

We ran a story on the news tonight which featured a state cop saying, "We will not tolerate people not wearing their seatbelts." Does that not sound like the most hideous demonstration of government arrogance?

What's worse is when people sigh and say, "Well, I guess it's for our own good, anyway." Or, "We should be using our seatbelts, anyhow." THAT'S NOT THE POINT!

When you allow your government to play the part of nanny, you surrender personal liberty — and an awful lot of cash along with it. Once surrendered, history tells us that it is very difficult to get liberty back. It isn't impossible, but very difficult — especially, given the mindset of the average Jerry Springer watcher.

As if we don't pay enough money in the form of taxes, the bureaucrats, along with their partners in the state legislature and the Governor, are always attempting to find new ways of taking more.

In this case, it's "highway robbery."

By Darren Weeks

Knowing the truth carries with it an extrordinary burden. The burden of being aware of the condition of the world in which I live can be overwhelming at times.

The "War on Terror" continues as does the bullying of the United States and Israel, and the killing of innocent people in other parts of the world.

Our economy is failing, and I'm not sure it will be able to come back because — thanks to NAFTA and GATT — we no longer have much of an industrial economy.

Also, the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 — which fraudulently authorized the private international banking elite to have the exclusive right to issue our currency — has caused inflation of the monetary system. As a result, we now have deflation, which is the last stop before the bottom falls out of our monetary system.

We have the possibility of SARS spreading to America, which threatens to kill a bunch of people, as it has in other parts of the world. It was probably cooked up in a laboratory somewhere.

It is a bleak picture, a cruel dark, evil world. It is a horrendous place in which to raise my children. I wonder about their future.

Especially, when I read press releases like this one from a satanic company hell-bent on implanting microchips in each one of us.

I wonder sometimes if God has forsaken us. If He hasn't, then why doesn't He do something to stop the demonic imps that seek to profit from killing us, and stealing everything that we have from us, while robbing our children of a future worth living.

I cannot help, as I ponder the successes of the wicked controllers, to wonder, Who are these people? And how do they accomplish so much in favor of their fiendish plan?

As I sit at work this night, I ponder these thoughts. I wonder, God, are you there? Is this it? Are we seeing the death of our country and our way of life?

Absorbed in my own thoughts, I wasn't paying too much attention to the program that I was running on our station. That is, until they announced that a band called Sixpence, None The Richer was going to sing. I had recognized the name of the band as one that was played on a local Christian station. I even had one or two of their CDs.

They began to sing a song called Don't Dream It's Over.

There is freedom within
there is freedom without
Try to catch the deluge in a paper cup
There's a battle ahead
many battles are lost
But you'll never see the end of the road while you're travelling with me

Hey now, hey now
Don't dream it's over
Hey now, hey now
When the world comes in
They come, they come
To build a wall between us
We know they won't win.

Just those few lines were as if God was speaking to me. It was almost as if He was telling me that it isn't over. It was as if He was saying, My child, you may see some battles lost, you may feel like you're trying to catch the deluge in a paper cup. But don't give up! Keep travelling the road. Don't dream it's over, because it isn't! Though your enemy may try to divide and conquor, and build walls, they'll never build a wall between you and me. I will always be with you. You can know that they won't win because I am the one who is in control of the battle.

The song really spoke to me at that moment, when I needed it. I don't know what the intention of the original songwriter was, nor do I know what that person meant by the words that were written. But the words meant something specific to me this night. I believe that is the work of the Holy Spirit.

He reminded me that this life is only a preliminary step in God's overall plan. We are not called by Him to be successful in all of our endeavors. We are called by God to only be faithful. We must "travel the road." As we are faithful to Him, He will be faithful to us.

Even though there are many battles that are lost, we must not think that it's over. We have to keep in mind that it is He, who controls the battle. It is He who holds the future. When we realize Who is ultimately in control, we can be encouraged. He has the final say, not the wicked rulers.

This world is only to prepare us for the life that is to come. We may have to endure suffering and heartache in this life, but there is coming a day, when the evil will be punished. In God's court, there is real justice. I have to believe that.

And those who are faithful to Him, those who fought the good fight will be rewarded. Those who kept their eye on the prize, who refused to become distracted by things that are not important, will receive the greatest blessing.

God has not abandoned us. But we must not abandon Him.

As tempting as it may be to become discouraged, we have to keep pressing on. We must work to preserve our own liberty, as well as that of future generations. The cost of being unfaithful is high.

Don't dream it's over, originally performed by Crowded House.

By Darren Weeks

The date was September 11th, as President Bush stood before a joint session of Congress, and, by television, the nation. A fresh wind of patriotism had swept from sea to shining sea, as the Bush administration had begun a military operation against Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein. As he spoke, the President's comments were repeatedly interrupted by applause from both sides of the political aisle.

"If there ever was a time to put country before self and patriotism before party, the time is now ... We stand today at a unique and extraordinary moment. The crisis in the Persian Gulf, as grave as it is, also offers a rare opportunity to move toward an historic period of cooperation. Out of these troubled times, our fifth objective, a new world order, can emerge: a new era — freer from the threat of terror, stronger in the pursuit of justice, and more secure in the quest for peace. An era in which the nations of the world, East and West, North and South, can prosper and live in harmony. A hundred generations have searched for this elusive path to peace, while a thousand wars raged across the span of human endeavor. Today that new world is struggling to be born, a world quite different from the one we've known. A world where the rule of law supplants the rule of the jungle. A world in which nations recognize the shared responsibility for freedom and justice. A world where the strong respect the rights of the weak. This is the vision that I shared with President Gorbachev in Helsinki. He and other leaders from Europe, the Gulf, and around the world understand that how we manage this crisis today could shape the future for generations to come."

Yes, the date was September 11, 1990. And the President was George Herbert Walker Bush, the 41st President of the United States. The crisis of which he spoke, was the first Gulf War.

The opportunity that he so eagarly hoped to seize, was the progress in building a "new world order." It was a socialist utopia, whereby individual liberties — "the law of the jungle" — are supplanted by "the rule of law" — or in other words, a communist police state.

It is the undying dream of every socialist throughout the history of mankind since Karl Marx and Frederich Engels. A society where "freedom" and "liberty" mean the freedom and liberty to do as your government tells you, without question or dissention of any kind. A world where participation in the governmental process is at the behest of those in power. And individual liberties — that is, real liberties — are dissolved in favor of a "secure" nanny state. That is, secure until the protector becomes the aggressor. Indeed, it is as Bush said, "a world quite different from the one we've known."

Is it any wonder why former Soviet leader, communist Mikhail Gorbachev, shared Bush's utopian ideas?

And as Bush spoke, the plans were already being drawn for a second Iraqi invasion. A second and final war, that would put the final pieces of the plan in place.

As the twin towers of the World Trade Center collapsed, eleven years later to the day, the arrival of yet another "opportunity" would emerge. It would be another era, another Bush administration, another Arab demon state, a myriad of Mohammads, and another undeclared war.

This time, it was British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, who spoke of how marvelous an "opportunity" that the attack had presented.

In an October 2, 2001 speech that The Guardian called "the most powerful speech of his career," Blair expounded upon his desire to use the corpses of the victims, as an opportunity to "reorder" the world, and build a world "community."

"This is a moment to seize. The kaleidoscope has been shaken, the pieces are in flux, soon they will settle again. Before they do let us reorder this world around us and use modern science to provide prosperity for all ... Science can't make that choice for us, only the moral power of a world acting as a community can."

Prosperity for all! A chicken in every pot! Thus, are the rallying cries of the socialists, to sell their plan to the naive and uneducated masses. It is the age-old promise of those in power, that if you will only allow them to direct your lives, they will provide prosperity for everyone. Everyone will be rich! And everything will be fair. It is the clarion call of every modern politician when they tell you that a tax cut wouldn't be "fair" because it might benefit one class more than another.

Nevermind the fact, that this form of government has failed to deliver on the promise of prosperity in every country in which it has ever been tried. These socialists now seek to attempt it on a world-wide scale.

In 1997, then Defense Secretary, William Cohen, hinted at what the overall plan would entail.

In a September 10th interview with the military publication, Times of the Ark-LA-Tex, Cohen said:

"Terrorism is escalating to the point that Americans soon may have to choose between civil liberties and more intrusive means of protection."

He went on to describe an America that would include armored vehicles surrounding civilian hotels or government buildings. And the Posse Comitatus laws — which prevent the government from using the military in domestic law-enforcement roles — would be revoked. Mr. Cohen was describing the agenda for the Office of Homeland Security, Total Information Awareness, and the U.S.A. Patriot Act (pdf format) — key elements of the effort to establish an Orwellian communist police state in America.

Two years later, in 1999, the Justice Department published a booklet on Terrorism, which depicted the twin towers of the World Trade Center with a bulls-eye target over them.

The agenda to move America into a police state, would be to create an atmosphere of fear in America, caused by a catastrophic act of terrorism. Then, when the public mindset was properly conditioned with the fertilizer of fear, the idea would be planted in their heads that their liberty would have to be forfeited in favor of their security.

This agenda was covertly referenced by Henry Kissinger in a Bilderberg Conference in Evians, France in 1991. According to one of the Swiss delegates, Kissinger stated:

“Today, Americans would be outraged if U.N. troops entered Los Angeles to restore order. Tomorrow, they will be grateful. This is especially true, if they were told there was an outside threat from beyond — whether real or promulgated — that threatened our very existence. It is then that all the peoples of the world will pledge with world leaders to deliver them from this evil. The one thing that every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished with the guarantee of their well-being, granted to them by their world government.”

And once the world government is in place, so will be fulfilled their communist dream of a utopian world order. America will have ceased to exist, as will the sovereignty of every nation-state. And that, my friends, is the real reason for September 11th, and the "War on Terror."

Lest we fall prey to the logic that most certainly the powerful wish for us to adopt, let us remember the words of Benjamin Franklin.

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

Or Patrick Henry...

"Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God, I know not what course others may take, but give me liberty or give me death!"

The Founding Fathers knew the value of liberty. If they were alive today, they might ask, How valuable is your liberty to you?

By Darren Weeks

The phony conservative groups are again showing their true colors.

Apparently, the National Rifle Association has had one of its own members — a pro-gun activist — arrested for handing out this leaflet, promoting the Free State Project.

Timothy Condon, an attorney, and a Marine Corps Vietnam veteran, is Director of Member Services at the Free State Project. The Project seeks to enlist thousands of freedom-loving individuals to agree to move to the same state, to work together to reduce the size and scope of government. Working within the framework of the legislative and political systems, their goals include lowering or completely eliminating state taxes, ending federal "mandates" upon the states, and to basically reshape the state government so that they can live free from government intrusion into their lives.

A naive observer would think that the NRA — an organization purportedly promoting freedom — would be all in favor of such an idea. Apparently, they aren't.

According to a press release, issued by the Project, Condon "was arrested by the Orange County Sheriff's Department Sunday for 'trespassing' outside the Orange County Convention Center when he refused to leave or cease handing out the Free State Project literature."

He was "trespassing" on public property. Talk about a trumped up charge!

Said Condon:

"I believe there is a First Amendment problem with prohibiting people from passing out political literature on public property where there is no problem caused by it ... What is even more bizarre to me is that the National Rifle Association would have one of its own members arrested for passing out literature that supports the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms."

Bizaare until you realize who the National Rifle Association and the many other phony conservatives really are. They are Wolves in Sheep's Clothing.

That is how the phony conservatives work. Whenever someone attempts to make a real difference, the anti-freedom crowd will always raise up someone to yell more loudly against whatever issue happens to be the point of contention. Since they control the media, and are are always well-funded, the controlled opposition groups attract more of a following, and often those who would go along with a real patriot, will end up following the phonies, instead. The phonies often say a lot of things which sound good, and they will even do some good things. But they will never get to the root of the problem, nor will they enact their constituents to pursue real solutions.

"It appears that the NRA only supports the First and Second Amendments to the Constitution if it's done according to their orders. I really think members of the NRA need to question their loyalty to an organization that would have one of its own members arrested for passing out pro-gun literature at its own convention ... It looks as if the Free State Project is a stronger supporter of the Second Amendment, not to mention the First Amendment, than the NRA."

Actually, Mr. Condon, they don't support the Constitution at all. Now, quit giving your money to them.