$1 Trillion Approved by House to Fund the Tyrannical Takeover of America

$1 Trillion Approved by House to Fund the Tyrannical Takeover of America

congress-in-sessionSusanne Posel
Occupy Corporatism
March 11, 2013



The US House of Representatives have approved HR 933 , the appropriations bill for Fiscal Year 2013 to allocate $982 billion to the Department of Defense (DoD), Military Construction (MC), the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and Planned Parenthood.

The passage of this legislation “provides[s] necessary funding flexibility to ensure that our military is well-equipped, our veterans receive the care they have earned, and tax dollars are used wisely and where they are most needed.”

Hal Rogers, chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, said: “The House did the right thing today by passing this legislation. As we try to get our fiscal house in order, it’s important to come together on issues where we can agree – avoiding a government shutdown, providing our people with essential services, and supporting our troops and veterans. This bill sets the stage for a meaningful – and needed – discussion on how we can best address our nation’s finances. Now, I urge the Senate to pass H.R. 933 quickly and send it to the President for his signature. Congress must do its duty to ensure that our national defense remains sound at all times, and our economy continues on the path to growth and recovery.”

Inside the bill a provision that the DoD divulge information about the classified drone surveillance program and is seeking answers to questions from the Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel.

In the text of the bill cites that Hagel must provide reports on active policies and procedures with regard to surveillance drone missions within the domestic US that are conducted by the Pentagon.

The bill reads: “The conferees understand that the Air Force has policies and procedures in place governing the disposition of UAV collections that may inadvertently capture matters of concern to law enforcement agencies. These policies and procedures are designed to ensure constitutional protections and proper separation between the military and law enforcement,” begins the measure. “However, it is unclear if other Services and Defense agencies have similar policies and procedures in place, or if these policies and procedures need to be revised or standardized. Therefore, the conferees direct the Secretary of Defense to report to the congressional defense committees on the policies and procedures in place across the Services and Defense agencies governing the use of such collections and to identify any additional steps that need to be taken to ensure that such policies and procedures are adequate and consistent across the Department of Defense.”

In 2005 Department of Homeland Security (DHS) initiated the process of obtaining drones to be specially equipped to become encompassing surveillance tools to use against the American people.

These specific drones are used to monitor US southern and northern borders; yet are now being utilizes by the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI), the Secret Service (SS), the Texas Rangers, and local law enforcement to identify citizens carrying firearms and tracking them through cell phone use.

The very same day of the approval by House, Senator Rand Paul preformed a theatrical filibuster of John Brennan’s nomination for director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), demanding that Attorney General Eric Holder and President Obama clarify whether or not they believed Americans could be murdered by the US government using “lethal force” i.e. drones.

After the 13 hour spectacle, Paul was informed during an interview with Megan Kelly on FoxNews that Holder had written a second letter addressed to Paul. Convienently it was delivered to the FoxNews station and not Paul himself.

The letter stated that Obama does not have the right to kill unarmed and non-combative Americans on American soil.

Paul claimed a victory with this “answer”; however it is glossed over in the mainstream media that the response from Holder did not clarify who is a combatant. Based on the National Defense Authorization Act, anyone can be suspected of being a combatant by having alleged ties to a terrorist group.

Without further inquiry, Paul was suffice with Holder’s answer, yet the public is now wondering what the federal government’s definition of combatant is?
Last week the Southern Poverty Law Center published propaganda document entitled, “The Year in Hate and Extremism” was recently published by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC). This report criticizes Patriots are a viable threat to the US government and places them in the same category as other right-wing extremists.

The report reads: “Capping four years of explosive growth sparked by the election of America’s first black president and anger over the economy, the number of conspiracy-minded antigovernment “Patriot” groups reached an all-time high of 1,360 in 2012, while the number of hard-core hate groups remained above 1,000. As President Obama enters his second term with an agenda of gun control and immigration reform, the rage on the right is likely to intensify.”

SPLC states that Patriots are convinced of a movement toward One World Government which causes them to act out in an extreme manner, organize against the current administration and recruit more citizens at an all-time high.

SPLC has redefined extremism to include the Patriot Movement as groups of Americans that believe conspiratorially that the US government will confiscate the guns, redact their 2nd Amendment rights and impose tyrannical regime controls.

According to a White House Blog website, the Obama administration is working to “counter online radicalization” by “violent extremist groups” such as “al-Qaeda and its affiliates and adherents, violent supremacist groups, and violent ‘sovereign citizens’.”

The White House claims that “these groups use the Internet to disseminate propaganda, identify and groom potential recruits, and supplement their real-world recruitment” with “resources to propagate messages of violence and division.” Through the exploitation of “popular media, music videos and online video games”, allegedly there are “countless opportunities “to draw targets into private exchanges” and provide “violent extremists with access to new audiences and instruments for radicalization.”

The US government stated they will combat these extremist groups by “raising awareness about the threat and providing communities with practical information and tools for staying safe online.” They are solidifying their relationships with private sector corporations involved in technology to implement “policies, technologies, and tools that can help counter violent extremism online.”

In early 2012, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) released a report entitled “Homeland Security and Intelligence: Next Steps in Evolving the Mission” which outlined in part on how to redirect efforts of the federal government from international terrorism toward home-grown terrorists and build a DHS-controlled police force agency that would control all cities and towns through the use of local police departments.

DHS maintains that “the threat grows more localized” which necessitates the militarization of local police in major cities in the US and the training of staff from local agencies to make sure that oversight is restricted to the federal government.

Countering online extremism is a task allocated to the DHS who have identified “behaviors, tactics, and other indicators that could point to potential terrorist activity.” DHS will host conferences for local police departments and federal partners to attend that will provide education on countering extremism.

Other “training initiatives” include “hundreds of thousands of front line officers” who are the ground-force infantry needed by DHS to “prevent” extremist activities.

Tags assigned to this article:
congressgovernmentpolice state