Many of us saw it coming a long time ago — increasing confrontation between liberty proponents and the corrupt federal establishment leading to increasing calls by political elites and bureaucrats to apply to American citizens the terrorism countermeasures designed for foreign combatants. It was only a matter of time and timing.
My stance has always been that the elites would wait until there was ample social and political distraction; a fog of fear allowing them to move more aggressively against anti-globalists. We are not quite there yet, but the ground is clearly being prepared.
Economic uncertainty looms large over our fiscal structure today, more so even than in 2008. Global instability is rampant, with Europe at the forefront as mass migrations of “refugees” invade wholesale. At best, most of them intend to leach off of the EU’s already failing socialist welfare structure while refusing to integrate or respect western social principles. At worst, a percentage of these migrants are members of ISIS with the goals of infiltration, disruption and coordinated destruction.
With similar immigration and transplantation measures being applied to the U.S. on a smaller scale (for now) the ISIS plague will inevitably hit our shores in a manner that will undoubtedly strike panic in the masses. I believe 2016 will be dubbed the “year of the terrorist,” and ISIS will not be the only “terrorists” in the spotlight.
While scanning the pages of mainstream propaganda machines like Reuters, I came across this little gem of an article, which outlines plans by the U.S. Justice Department to apply existing enemy combatant laws used against ISIS terrorists and their supporters to “domestic extremists,” specifically mentioning the Bundy takeover of the federal refuge in Burns, Oregon as an example.
“Extremist groups motivated by a range of U.S.-born philosophies present a “clear and present danger,” John Carlin, the Justice Department’s chief of national security, told Reuters in an interview. “Based on recent reports and the cases we are seeing, it seems like we’re in a heightened environment.”
“Clear and present danger” is a vital phrase implemented in this statement from Carlin and he used it quite deliberately. It refers to something called the “clear and present danger doctrine or test,” a doctrine rarely used except during times of mass panic, such as during WWI and WWII. The doctrine applies specifically to the removal of 1st Amendment rights of free speech during moments of “distress.”
What does this mean, exactly? “Clear and present danger” is a legal mechanism by which the government claims the right not only to prosecute or destroy enemies of the state, but also anyone who publicly supports those same enemies through speech or writing.
Recently, the prospect of allowing the Federal Communications Commission to target and shut down websites related to ISIS has been fielded by congressional representatives. Many people have warned against this as setting a dangerous precedent by which the government could be given free license to censor and silence ANY websites they deem “harmful” to the public good, even those not tied to ISIS in any way.
Of course, overt hatred of Islamic extremism amongst conservatives is at Defcon 1 right now, and with good reason. Unfortunately, this may lead constitutional conservatives, the most stalwart proponents of free speech, to mistakenly set the stage for the erasure of free speech rights all in the name of stopping ISIS activity. The greatest proponents of constitutional liberties could very well become the greatest enemies of constitutional liberties if they fall for the ploy set up by the establishment.
The Reuters article outlines the future implications quite plainly:
The U.S. State Department designates international terrorist organizations to which it is illegal to provide “material support.” No domestic groups have that designation, helping to create a disparity in charges faced by international extremist suspects compared to domestic ones.
It has been applied in 58 of the government’s 79 Islamic State cases since 2014 against defendants who engaged in a wide range of activity, from traveling to Syria to fight alongside Islamic State to raising money for a friend who wished to do so.
Prosecutors can bring “material support” terrorism charges against defendants who aren’t linked to groups on the State Department’s list, but they have only done so twice against non-jihadist suspects since the law was enacted in 1994. The law, which prohibits supporting people who have been deemed to be terrorists by their actions, carries a maximum sentence of 15 years in prison.”
The Justice Department goes on to explain that they are “exploring” options to make “material support” charges more applicable to “domestic extremists.”
So what constitutes “material support?” Well, as mentioned earlier, John Carlin just told us. His use of the phrase “clear and present danger” denotes that 1st Amendment speech will be restricted, ostensibly because some speech will be labeled “material support” of terrorist organizations. The liberty movement, likely in the near future, is about to be outwardly defined by the establishment as a terrorist movement, and those who support it through speech will be designated as material supporters of said terrorism.
To be utterly clear, this could apply to any and everyone who promotes anti-government sentiments online, and will likely be aimed more prominently at liberty analysts and journalists. The argument for this move is rather humorous in my view — bureaucrats and others complain that it is “not fair” that Islamic terrorists are being treated more harshly than “white rural domestic extremists” and that material support laws should be enforced against everyone equally.
Yes, that’s right, the 1st Amendment is under threat because the Justice Department does not want to appear “racist.” At least, that is their public excuse…
I'm not sure whether it is depressing or hilariously ironic that the U.S. government (along with many other governments) is preparing the groundwork for prosecution of liberty activists for material support of terrorism when it is the government that has been proven time and again to be by far the most generous material supporter of terrorist organizations.
Will this all take place in a vacuum? Of course not. Something terrible is brewing. Another Oklahoma City-stye bombing, perhaps. Or a standoff gone horribly awry. The standoff in Oregon continues without Ammon Bundy and is about to get worse in the next week according to my information (you will see what I mean). The point is, the narrative is being finalized in preparation for whatever trigger events may be in store, and that narrative closely associates ISIS with liberty activists as being in the same category.
“As law enforcement experts confront domestic militia groups, “sovereign citizens” who do not recognize government authority, and other anti-government extremists, they also face a heightened threat from Islamic extremists like the couple who carried out the Dec. 2 shootings in San Bernardino, California.”
This is why I have consistently argued against giving any extra-judicial powers to our already bloated federal system. I am a staunch opponent of Islamic immigration and terrorism, but some people are so desperate to fight one monster that they are willing to give unlimited powers to another monster thinking it will give their minds ease. These people are fools, and they are putting the rest of us at risk.
If you want to fight ISIS, then fight them yourself. Do not give the same government that helped create ISIS and then deliberately transplanted them to Europe and the U.S. even more legal authority over our lives to supposedly “stop” ISIS. This would be absurd.
In the meantime, I would point out that regardless of how the federal government wishes to label us, the liberty movement could not be more different from the Islamic State:
1) We don’t enjoy covert funding and training from the government at large as ISIS does. (Though according to leftists, we all take our marching orders from the Koch Brothers).
2) Most of us were born in this country and are rather attached to it.
3) ISIS fights to dismantle traditional Western values. We fight to restore traditional Western values, and we will not only fight ISIS but also cultural Marxists and collectivists who share the same disdain for liberty.
4) Many of us are far better trained than ISIS goons, so if anything, we are a more severe threat to the enemies of free society. (We actually look down our sights when we shoot rather than hiding behind cars with the rifle over our head and squatting like a constipated dog. We can also operate their AK-47s better than they can).
5) We are as opposed to Sharia Law as we are to martial law. In fact, we see them as essentially the same unacceptable circumstance.
6) We don’t cannibalize our enemies. (Who would want to take a bite out of Henry Kissinger’s spleen?)
7) We might look down on the insane ramblings of today’s feminists, but at least we would not stone them, enforce female circumcision, then rape them, then throw acid in their faces, then slap a hijab on them and take away their driver’s licenses. So maybe, just maybe, we toxic masculine conservative barbarians aren’t as bad as they seem to think we are.
8) We understand that black pajamas are not the best camouflage, but ISIS may have better fashion sense than we do.
9) Our beards are all-American. Their beards are just plain creepy.
10) They fight to be martyred. We fight to win.
When all is said and done, who is the greater threat to you and your freedoms? A psychotic theocrat that has taken his religion so far into the forbidden zone that any evil, no matter how heinous, is justified through the circular logic of zealotry? The criminal government that funded that psycho, trained him, slapped a rocket launcher in his hands and then gave him a free plane ride to your favorite shopping mall? Or, some weirdo that stores lots of food and gas masks in his basement and every once in a while talks to you about 9/11? Come on, think about it…
If you would like to support the publishing of articles like the one you have just read, visit our donations page here. We greatly appreciate your patronage.
You can contact Brandon Smith at:
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
written by Black cat , February 10, 2016
Thanks for picking up on this article. I read it the other day on drudge and couldn't (really I could) believe that 1. What the article said 2. That no Alt. Media had really pick up on it other than the article itself.
This rhetoric from the establishment has gradually increased over the course of the last decade, deliberately of course to socially engineer the public mind into not seeing any difference between "foreign terrorist & domestic extremist." Legalese painting every desenting voice with an all encompassing brush lumping the "enemies of the state" into one big corral for round up.
How many other dictatorships have done the same thing, word for word, step by step. I am ashamed!
written by Jack Hinson , February 10, 2016
“If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be in the disguise of fighting a foreign enemy. Of all the enemies to public liberty, war is perhaps the most to be dreaded because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. The loss of liberty at home is to be charged to the provisions against danger, real or imagined, from abroad.”
— James Madison
written by TheRealityChecker , February 10, 2016
"Those that give up liberty for the sake of security will have neither" (paraphrased - sorry about that!)
written by TheRealityChecker , February 10, 2016
"From my cold dead hand!!!"
written by TheRealityChecker , February 10, 2016
Brandon,
Keep up the great work and definitely keep the faith brother! IMHO there are a LOT more people out there that have views along the lines of yours (and mine) but unfortunately they are scared to speak out in support due to the false stigma against those of the Liberty Movement, created by .gov with the total support of the MSM. Until a couple of years ago I was an extreme frequent flyer and to pass time I went out of my way to raise the issues that the liberty movement is concerned with with my fellow travelers. The fact of the matter is I estimate 75% of the people I talked to were in total support of what you and I hold dear, particularly when those people were confronted with facts that were in total opposition to the BS they have been continually fed by .gov and the MSM. The moral of that story is if we can get the information out in a personable, non-confrontational, way to most Americans then the chances of our long term success will rise dramatically. By getting the information out I am not referring to just the internet (which is important) but by more person to person and person to group dialogue wherever possible . . . .
written by rahrog , February 10, 2016
The fascists who run America will for seek to destroy anyone who opposes their agenda. They are a disease. Secession is the cure.
written by Sheldon Adelson , February 10, 2016
All these designations of USA citizens as Terrorists come form SPLC ( southern poverty law center ) since the 1980's fed directly to the FBI.
SPLC is just a front for NEO-LIBERAL AIPAC.
There is only one heart or brain-bug behind this entire charade.
written by Ty , February 10, 2016
@ TheRealityChecker. I hear you about informing/ educating people but, I've only had arguments with "friends and family" in which the Lord inspired me to write this
The unveiling of truth begets gnashing of teeth and sharpened tongues, like arrows. From the quiver of the mouth, this rending volley can stop armies and destroy nations. Ye must take care in where one treads, for I have seen the battle ground of truth and know both it's peril and beauty
written by Justathought , February 10, 2016
Brandon
With the evidence of the US Govt hand in the creation, and the continuing support of ISIS, becoming more and more readily available, couldn't the Liberty Movement bring a charge of "Material Support" for a terrorist organisation against the Govt, or at least the CIA.
While the odds of winning the case would be small, the increase in public awareness from such a move would be huge.
written by TheNetRangerYouKnow , February 10, 2016
...they need to at least turn it upside down before they light it.
But, regardless, the real desecration is taking place within the confines of the District of Criminals while the next round of Team Sports Voting takes place.
America has become a very strange place for those who pay attention. Most don't.
Hey, Mr. Bruno! I'm still loving your articles. ...like fine wine.
written by justaguy , February 11, 2016
When listening to govt, remember the proper axiom,
"The more nobler the language, the more nefarious the legal instrument."
written by Sheriff Bufford Justice , February 11, 2016
@Brandon
Here is a call to arms.
In Grant County the Sheriff who stood up for Lavoy is being rail-roaded out of his job by the BLC/FED/NEO in John Day, Oregon ( Grant County ), just north of Harney County ( Burns, Oregon ).
Sheriff Ward in Burns is "One of Them", but Grant County sheriff is a good guy.
State of Oregon is trying to Identify all the "Constitutional/Liberty Sheriff's" and get them booted out of office.
http://www.carbonated.tv/news/oregon-sheriff-glenn-palmer-bundy-family-malheur-wildlife-refuge
People need to stand up for these Sheriff's.
Is the "Militia" listening?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/02/10/fbi-closes-in-on-last-oregon-refuge-occupiers/
written by Brandon Smith , February 11, 2016
@Sheriff
The stragglers at the refuge have made their bed and now they are going to have to lay down in it. Hopefully, no more lives are lost over that meaningless piece of ground. That said, the sheriff situation may be another matter entirely. I will have to look into it more thoroughly.
Also, the manner in which the feds grabbed Cliven Bundy and the charges they are using (from 2014) are a serious powder keg situation. The refuge was a complete waste, but there are certainly federal oversteps that need to be countered elsewhere.
written by Governor Tom McCall , February 11, 2016
@Brandon
As someone who has been involved in this 'Oregon' game for 40+ years, let's remember that this is an act of Brilliance, for Cliven Bundy to give up and be a 'martyr' in PDX.
Oregon has the strongest Constitution in USA
1.) All People have the right to bear arms, nothing about 'militia' in oregon constitution
2.) All People have the right to alter and/or abolish the government
Once the Bundy war goes to court, the status quo can be destroyed.
Now Bundy has brought the war to Oregon to be held in Oregon Court and the son's are held in solitary in PDX.
Note that the veneer of 'liberalism' in PDX is very thin, the majority of hipster's and such in PDX youth, know the jig is up, they know the Neo-Liberal bile of Salem is status-quo, and they know that they have legal marijuana, and lots of craft beer, but that is all they have.
Just saying, that if the Mormon's play this right, and hold the war in PDX that the majority of youth will go to the side of the moral-high-ground, for no other reason than the left Salem crowd murdered Lavoy Finicum, and everyone in PDX knows the truth.
For the Mormon's and all the ranchers to fight the war in PDX is brilliant, because this is the house-of-cards, where the deck is held, if this house fall's, then all the card's fold.
written by sodbuster , February 11, 2016
We have a good form of government, it's just been taken over by the psychopaths. So if all politics is local it begins in our communities, not the national level, RUN FOR YOUR LOCAL DOGCATCHER. We need the true sons of God to step forward.
The psychopaths at the, Fed, State, Local Levels and ISIS have a huge problem as long as we have the 2nd Amendment.
Fear not, one day at a time.
written by Governor Tom McCall , February 11, 2016
Easy to say that good people come forward, but sadly by design the majority of citizens will sit in front of their TV, and wait for the GOV check to be delivered, and/or EBT to be deposited. Over 60% of USA citizens today are dependent upon 'dole' from Fed Gov.
There is a reason the 3% call themselves such, because during the American Revolution of say 1776, no more than 3% of the USA public ever got up from the arse and participated in the revolution.
3% I hate to tell all is a minority, this is why the revolution can NEVER be fought by conventional political means, such as voting, and/or taking over the humane society, and controlling animal control in your county.
When in all USA history no more than 3% get off their arse, now and prior, the war to be won will be fought when a minority out-thinks the majority of psychopaths.
written by ArnieLerma2 , February 11, 2016
The last time the public successfully interfered with the cash flow of the military industrial complex was Vietnam. It is not an accident that no war has been stopped or prevented BY the public since then.
There has been a covert full spectrum war against thinking.
Drugs were used to destroy the minds of the opposition, Public education has been dumbed down. Cults were created to attract those who saw through one layer of the onion of deception we live in called the American Dream... ...and then their lives were wasted while their their minds were filled with rubbish, and then turned to mush.
Authority of any opposition thinkers has been attacked, sometimes killed, at least depopularized, from JFK down to the family unit, because the only authority will be the state, big brother. Terrorists were created using techniques for controlling what a person believes to be true, to create a tolerance for a security apparatus whose aim is to protect the one tenth of one percent after the coming collapse and the war for profit money for misery machine. The liberty minded constitutionalists were the target from the beginning... but they should not take it personally, it is the fact of thinking that is the enemy of totalitarian states.
Example of ONE method being used to control what you believe to be true. Anything (shock, awe, horror, insult, etc) that even temporarily STOPS your thinking, makes YOU temporarily more suggestible. When thinking stops, the door to your subconscious is left unguarded. What is said to you just after the instant thinking stops goes in as a direct hypnotic suggestion.
"Anything said to a hypnotized subject is true for them" said Dr. George Estabrooks, the father of covert military hypnosis in 1943 More here arnielerma.wordpress.com
Hypnotic suggestions wear off after a few weeks. UNLESS there is repetitive reenforcement - subliminal reminders such as key words, flags, or logos.
^^^^ THIS ^^^^ is why they chose the date 9/11!!!!!
Note: This writer was tear gassed on the steps of the Pentagon in 1969, protesting that war..
written by Pietro Perroni , February 12, 2016
sedition, n. (l4c) 1. An agreement, communication, or other preliminary activity aimed at inciting treason or some lesser commotion against public authority. 2. Advocacy aimed at inciting or producing - and likely to incite or produce - imminent lawless action.
Black's Law Dictionary Ninth Edition
18 U.S. Code Chapter 115 - TREASON, SEDITION, AND SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITIES -- https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/part-I/chapter-115
During times of war and under the grounds of National Security, any form of dissent can be associated to Sedition and the subsequent ground(s) for Insurrection; thus individuals who advocate seditious activities will be tried under the Military Tribunal system. Read the contents of the U.S. Code: Title 50 - WAR AND NATIONAL DEFENSE, placing emphasis on CHAPTER 13—INSURRECTION (§§ 201 to 204–226) -- https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/chapter-13
During times of war and under the grounds of National Security, monitoring US Citizens is LEGAL.
50 U.S. Code § 1861 - Access to certain business records for foreign intelligence and international terrorism investigations -- https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/1861
During times of war and under the grounds of National Security, compulsory internment of certain US Citizens and Aliens living in Continental United States and overseas possessions into designated military areas is LEGAL. Executive Order 9066 is a historical precedence for this case and these types of actions carried out by the Executive Branch are non-reviewable by the courts. -- http://www.ourdocuments.gov/pr...pt&doc=74& title=Transcript+of+Executive+Order+9066:++Resulting+in
+the+Relocation+of+Japanese+(1942)
Read also Korematsu v. United States, 323 U.S. 214 (1944): United States Supreme Court case concerning the constitutionality of Executive Order 9066, which ordered Japanese Americans into internment camps during World War II regardless of citizenship. IN A 6–3 DECISION, THE COURT SIDED WITH THE GOVERNMENT, RULING THAT THE EXECUTIVE ORDER WAS CONSTITUTIONAL.
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=323&invol=214
During times of war and under the grounds of National Security, the Executive Branch is granted extraordinary powers to govern by decree if necessary; therefore, constitutional rights can be suspended at any given time and without notice if the government deems imperative.
In legal terms the United States of America is currently in a State of War: Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) -- http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/P...publ40.pdf
written by Brandon Smith , February 12, 2016
@Pietro
Just to be clear, are you claiming that a state of war is a reasonable rationale for the suspension of constitutional freedoms, or, are you only saying that this is what the government believes?
Nowhere in the constitution does it say that your civil liberties can be suspended. Circumstances of war and or national crisis are irrelevant.
Also, legal precedence is meaningless if I and millions of others decide that the law is simply immoral and that we will not abide by it. The Soviets and the Nazis passed all kinds of laws making their criminal actions technically "legal". Man-made laws that stand contrary to natural law are not valid.
