"What emerges from this study? Above all, I suggest, the conclusion that Fascism is nothing but monopoly capitalism imposing its will on those masses whom it has deliberately transformed into slaves...a partnership between monopoly capitalism and the Nazi Party in which that supreme coercive power which is of the state's essence is used to compel obedience to the new system...

There is no reason to suppose that any nation is so inescapably wedded to democracy as to be free from the dangers of Fascism. Professor Brady shows how profound are Fascist tendencies in the United States...

The lesson of all foreign experience is that the governing class will not permit the use of democratic institutions to abrogate its economic privileges. So long as these institutions do not interfere with the basic structure of Capitalism, they are respected. But so soon as they are used to attempt a fundamental change in the incidence of economic power, faith in the validity of democratic institutions is rapidly undermined. Indeed, the experience of Western Europe makes it plain that the attempt need only be potential...

The regime which the Nazis proceeded to establish is fairly described, by the nature of the major interests which sponsored it, as a dictatorship of monopoly capitalism. Its 'fascism' is that of business enterprise organized on a monopoly basis, and in full command of all the military, police, legal, and propaganda power of the state...

(In its attempt)...It must divert the gaze of the masses from spiritual to material things." The Spirit and Structure of German Fascism, by Robert Brady.

Open the Book of the Prophet Jeremiah in Central and Eastern Europe at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries. Open the pages of the Book of Ezekiel here in America at the end of the 20th century. Read the chapters from East to West (and back again) and see in them the history of the Western world from the time of Christ to our own. Understand the words: This is Jerusalem: I have set it in the midst of the nations and countries thare round about it. (Ezekiel 5:5). Put Vienna at the center and understand that the same spirit and fascist state of mind that God used to judge His own people during the World Wars of the last century is the same that God shall use to awaken and liberate them now...(2 Thessalonians, chapter 2):


A Report on the Banality of Evil

by Hannah Arendt

"For it was history (God, that is) that, as far as the prosecution was concerned, stood in the center of the trial. 'It is not an individual that is in the dock at this historical trial, and not the Nazi regime alone, but anti-Semitism throughout history.' (O that they were wise, that they understood this...Deuteronomy 32:29). This was the tone set by Ben-Gurion and faithfully followed by Mr. Hausner, who began his opening address with Pharaoh in Egypt and Haman's decree 'to destroy, to slay, and to cause them to perish.' He then proceeded to quote Ezekiel: And when I (the Lord) passed by thee, and saw thee polluted in thine own blood, I said unto thee: In thy blood live, explaining that these words must be understood as 'the imperative that has confronted this nation ever since its first appearance on the stage of history.' It was bad history and cheap rhetoric; worse, it was clearly at cross purposes with putting Eichmann on trial, suggesting that perhaps he was only an innocent executor OF SOME MYSTERIOUSLY FOREORDAINED DESTINY, or for that matter, even of anti-Semitism, which perhaps was necessary to blaze the trail of 'the bloodshed road traveled by this people' to fulfill its destiny." Eichmann in Jerusalem, p.19.

"Eichmann's own attitude was different. First of all, the indictment for murder was wrong: 'With the killing of Jews he had nothing to do. I never killed a Jew, or a non-Jew, for that matter--I never (personally) killed any human being. I never gave an order to kill either a Jew or a non-Jew; I just did not do it."....Would he then have pleaded guilty if he had been indicted as an accessory to murder? Perhaps he would have made important qualifications. What he had done was a crime only in retrospect, AND HE HAD ALWAYS BEEN A LAW-ABIDING CITIZEN, because Hitler's orders, which he had certainly executed to the best of his ability, had possessed the force of law in the Third Reich." (pp.22-24).

"According to his (Eichmann's) religious beliefs, which had not changed since the Nazi period (in Jerusalem Eichmann declared himself to be a Gottglaubiger, the Nazi term for those who had broken with Christianity, and he refused to take his oath on the Bible), this event was to be ascribed TO A HIGHER BEARER OF MEANING, an entity somehow IDENTICAL WITH THE MOVEMENT OF THE UNIVERSE, in itself devoid of higher meaning, is subject. (The terminology is quite suggestive. To call God a Hoheren Sinnestrager meant linguistically to give him some place in the military hierarchy, since the Nazis had changed the military 'recipient of orders,' the Befehlsempfanger, into a 'bearer of orders,' a Befehlstrager, indicating, as in the ancient 'bearer of ill tidings,' the burden of responsibility and of importance that weighed supposedly upon those who had to execute orders. Moreover, Eichmann, like everyone connected with the Final Solution, was officially a bearer of secrets..." (p.27).

"When he was a child, his parents...had enrolled him in the Young Men's Christian Association, from which he later went into the German Youth Movement...A leaf in the whirlwind of time, he was blown into...the marching columns of the Thousand Year Reich, which lasted exactly twelve years and three months. (Consider Revelation 20:7-9). At any rate, he did not enter the party out of conviction, nor was he ever convinced by it--whenever he was asked to give his reasons, he repeated the same embarrassed cliches about the Treaty of Versailles and unemployment; rather, as he pointed out in court, 'IT WAS LIKE BEING SWALLOWED UP BY THE PARTY AGAINST ALL EXPECTATIONS AND WITHOUT PREVIOUS DECISION. It happened so quickly and suddenly.' He had no time and less desire to be properly informed, he did not even know the Party program, he never read Mein Kampf. Kalten Brunner said to him: Why not join the S.S.? And he had replied, Why not? That was how it happened, and that was about all there was to it....Of course, that was not all there was to it...From a humdrum life without significance and consequence, the wind had blown him into History, as he understood it, namely into a Movement that always kept moving and in which somebody like him--already a failure in the eyes of his social class, of his family, and hence in his own eyes as well--could start from scratch and still make a career..." (p.33).

"The German text of the taped police examination...constitutes a veritable gold mine for a psychologist...Dimly aware of a defect that must have plagued him even in school...he apologized, saying 'Officialese is my only language.' But the point here is that officialese became his language because HE WAS GENUINELY INCAPABLE OF UTTERING A SINGLE SENTENCE THAT WAS NOT A CLICHE...To be sure, the judges were right when they finally told the accused that all he had said was 'empty talk'--except that they thought the emptiness was feigned, and that the accused wished to cover up other thoughts which, though hideous, were not empty. This supposition seems refuted by a striking consistency with which Eichmann, despite his rather bad memory, repeated word for word the same stock phrases and self-invented cliches (when he did succeed in constructing a sentence of his own, he repeated it until it became a cliche...The longer one listened to him, THE MORE OBVIOUS IT BECAME THAT HIS INABILITY TO SPEAK WAS CLOSELY CONNECTED WITH AN INABILITY TO THINK, namely to think from the standpoint of somebody else. No communication was possible with him, not because he lied but because he was surrounded by the most reliable of all safeguards against the words and the presence of others, and hence against reality as such." (p.48,49).

"IT WAS NOT UNTIL THE OUTBREAK OF WAR, on September 1, 1939, THAT THE NAZI REGIME BECAME OPENLY TOTALITARIAN AND OPENLY CRIMINAL. One of the most important steps in this direction, from an organizational point of view, was a decree signed by Himmler, that fused the Security Service of the S.S....which was a Party organ, with the regular Security Police of the State, in which the Secret State Police, or Gestapo, was included. The result of the merger was the Head Office for Reich Security (R.S.H.A.), whose chief was first Reinhardt Heydrich...All officials of the police, not only of the Gestapo, but also of the Criminal Police and the Order Police, received S.S. titles corresponding to their previous ranks, regardless of whether they were Party members, and this meant that in the space of a day a most important part of the old civil services were incorporated into the most radical section of the Nazi hierarchy..." (p.69-71).


By Henry Makow Ph.D.
April 13, 2002

This 57-cent stamp shows an eagle, which according to Al Martin is an exact copy of the symbol of the Nazi Waffin-SS. The USPS introduced it in February 2001 as the innocuous sounding "art deco" eagle but in light of Sept. 11, its symbolism is ominous.

Martin says this Nazi design will also be used for the triangular arm badges and hats given to participants in the new Neighborhood Watch program. A commercial with Ed McMahon, the new Department of Justice spokesman, suggests that you cooperate with the Neighborhood Watch Association. You will be told how to spot "suspicious" characters or even people you know well, who are suddenly acting "out of character."

Similarly, John Ashcroft christened another homeland security force the "Freedom Corps", evoking the "Freicorps," the German army's "irregulars" that cleared the way for Hitler by murdering social democrats and communists. These allusions are sinister because the Third Reich was an early attempt at a "New World Order," and the Anglo American business elite was involved with that up to its ears. Are these fascist allusions coincidental? Or, is the elite coming out of the closet?

Economist Robert Brady defined the Nazi state as "a dictatorship of monopoly capitalism. Its 'fascism' is that of business enterprise organized on a monopoly basis, and in full command of all the military, police, legal and propaganda power of the state." (Richard Sasuly, "I.G. Farben," 1947, p. 128)

Nazi Germany was a capitalist paradise. There was a 60-hour workweek, low wages and no unions. Nazi expansionism represented the global ambitions of German cartels that started preparing for war long before they financed Hitler. As countries fell under the Nazi jackboot, they absorbed former competitors at fire sale prices. "For German big business, World War II was a chance to plunder on a scale without precedent in history," writes Sasuly (p.114)...

During the war, the allies deliberately prevented Jews from escaping from Europe. If someone sets a house on fire, and someone else blocks the exits, don't they share equal blame? On the first day of World War Two, His Majesty's ship "Lorna" fired on the limping overcrowded "Tiger Hill" as she approached Palestine with 1417 Jewish refugees. The first people killed by the British in WWII were not Germans but Jewish escapees from Germany. Other refugee ships (e.g. the "St. Louis") were sent back to Germany by the US or blown up with all souls on board by British MI-6 (the "Struma"). For the whole story, read "The Holocaust Conspiracy" (1989) by William R. Perl, a Lt. Colonel with the US Army Intelligence Service.

The list of US corporations that had the equivalent of $8 billion invested in Nazi Germany include Standard Oil, General Motors, IBM, Ford, the Chase and National City Banks, ITT and many others. As a result, the men of "We Were Soldiers" didn't know that ITT built the airplanes that dropped bombs on them. They didn't know that Ford and General Motors built the Nazi's trucks and tanks. They didn't know that ball bearings crucial to the Nazi war effort were manufactured in Philadelphia, yet were in short supply in the USA. This was all done with the knowledge and permission of the US government. For details, I recommend Charles Higham's "Trading with the Enemy"(1983). Christopher Simpson's "The Splendid Blond Beast"(1993) and "Blowback" (1988) are also useful.

This information is shocking if we assume that cartels owe an allegiance to their native country. This is not so. They live in a financial virtual reality, a spiritual limbo divorced from common sympathy with their fellow man. Their native countries are important only insofar as they provide patriots to die for the advancement of their financial interests.

If the elite backed the Nazis, why didn't the Nazis win? The elite also backed the Allies. It doesn't matter which version of NW0 the elite gets. The real money is in war and genocide itself. In addition, war degrades and demoralizes humanity so it will accept serfdom.

In conclusion, the Third Reich was an early attempt at the New World Order. The purpose of this kind of "globalization" is to institutionalize the political power of the cartels. This is the hidden agenda behind the current "war on terror," hence the fascist symbols and measures.

Most of our nation's leaders are hod carriers for the cartels, particularly oil. They are careerists who serve a class of people who have spiritually seceded from the human race. This class holds us in bondage while it amasses wealth that affords it neither peace nor joy.

I leave you with a famous quotation by US President Theodore Roosevelt. Uttered in 1906, it is relevant today because as long as cartels rule, the human race is stalled. "Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people. To destroy this invisible government, to befoul the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmanship of today."

A friend of ours, who had to leave the country recently because his and his wife's documentation had expired, said as he was passing through the checkpoints at Kennedy Airport, "I have this eerie feeling, the same as one might have had as they were leaving Germany just before the Nazis came to power in 1933." "Keep us in your prayers," I replied.

The author of the following article, David R. Hoffman, cannot yet fathom the great difference between the spirits of Adolph Hitler (The Destroying Angel...the Apollyon of Revelation 9:11) and the present fascist leaders of America--the absolutely fallen sons of Adam (Hitler made no such claim to it), but quite accurately describes the nature of fascism as it is taking form in America:


David R. Hoffman

Although the quest for or preservation of "democracy" is often used as a justification for war, history has incessantly revealed that such a quest is often little more than a thinly-veiled attempt to install a puppet regime. Nazi leader Herman Goering once remarked"THAT IT WAS EASY TO LEAD A PEOPLE INTO WAR, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THEY RESIDED WITHIN 'A DEMOCRACY, A FASCIST DICTATORSHIP, A PARLIMENT, OR A COMMUNIST DICTATORSHIP." All that was required, Goering argued, is for their government to "tell them they are being attacked, AND [THEN] DENOUNCE THE PACIFISTS FOR LACK OF PATRIOTISM AND EXPOSING THE COUNTRY TO GREATER DANGER."

Many years ago, when I was younger and more idealistic, I would have viewed Goering's statement as an anachronism. After all, millions had suffered immensely during the nightmare of World War II, and it seemed that this historical imprint alone would have indelibly reminded people about the folly of blindly following leaders into war. Also (and despite Goering's assertion) democracy appeared to offer additional protections from this folly as well, particularly in wealthy, industrialized nations like America, where freedom of speech and press permitted the free exchange of ideas, which in turn served to balance emotion and reason, and exposed any lies used to rationalize an unjust war. While it is true that America still suffered through the Vietnam era, it did not do so unquestioningly, nor with a blind faith in the nation"s leaders.

But the coup by the plutocratic supporters of George W. Bush in the year 2000, coupled with the invasion of Iraq, changed all that, REVEALING HOW EASILY AMERICANS CAN BE MANIPULATED, HOW WILLING THEY ARE TO BE LIED TO, AND HOW VACUOUS THE FREEDOMS OF SPEECH AND PRESS HAVE BECOME WHEN THE BULK OF INFORMATION IS FILTERED THROUGH CORPORATE-CONTROLLED MEDIA that profit from jingoism, propaganda and dishonesty. But, perhaps most disturbingly, these events demonstrated that even though the words "freedom, democracy and human rights" are chanted like mantras by political leaders, many Americans have apparently welcomed, or at the very least are blissfully unconcerned about, the erosion of freedom, the abuse of human rights, and the nation"s growing transformation from a democracy into a neo-fascist dictatorship.

Although the quest for or preservation of "democracy" is often used as a justification for war, history has incessantly revealed that such a quest is often little more than a thinly-veiled attempt to install a puppet regime. Decades ago, the folk singer Phil Ochs, in his song COPS OF THE WORLD (the lyrics of which are still hauntingly relevant today), stated that in American lexicon democracy is simply another name for profits, and that in poorer, "third world" countries democracy normally consists of an imperialist power handpicking leaders for the local populace to "elect." The late Cuban guerrilla leader Che Guevara went even further, stating that in these impoverished nations democracies are simply facades established by imperialist powers to placate the masses, when in reality "third-world" governments, burdened with debt and dependent upon wealthier nations for basic necessities, frequently have to implement policies that appease their imperialist masters even if it means the suffering of their own people.

More recently PRAVDA columnist John Bourke examined this phenomenon in the context of American efforts to allegedly install "democracy" in Iraq (<http://english.pravda.ru/mailbox/22/98/387/11401_iraq.htmlIraqi Democracy or Our Iraqi Democracy, 12/1/03) by pointing out that the majority of Iraq"s population are from the Shiite sect of Islam, and a truly democratic vote would undoubtedly place their representatives into power. This could, Bourke explains, eventually lead to the establishment of a "fundamentalist Islamic state." Yet, despite all the Bush dictatorship"s pretensions about the Iraqi war bringing "democracy to the region," Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has flatly stated that no government in Iraq, even a democratically elected one, will be permitted to install an Islamic state. After Rumsfeld revealed that the desire to promote democracy in Iraq was basically a lie, another "justification" for the war became the need to defend "human rights." Clearly Saddam Hussein was a brutal dictator who maintained power through the use of fear, torture, disappearances and mass murders. But he was just one of many such dictators, some of whom are still in power and supported by the United States.

The reality is that it was not the violation of human rights that disturbed the neo-fascist ideologies of the Bush dictatorship, but the fact that Hussein had simply exhausted his usefulness. It is particularly revealing that the demonization of Hussein came after he was no longer needed as an American ally, just as, under the first Bush regime, the demonization of dictator Manuel Noriega, and the subsequent invasion of Panama, occurred only after Noriega was no longer needed as an American ally. Prior to this, the human rights violations committed by both these men were routinely ignored, and sometimes welcomed. As I reported in a previous PRAVDA article (<http://english.pravda.ru/accidents/21/96/383/11003_Hoffman.htmlPolitics of Assassination, 10/2/03), the CIA had on at least one occasion even turned over to Hussein a list of suspected communists with the knowledge that those on the list would be brutally tortured and executed. It was also revealing that the invasion of Panama conveniently came at a time when Americans were outraged about the billions of tax dollars they would be forced to pay to bail out defunct "savings and loans" companies, whose financial practices had resulted in the unjust enrichment of the few, and the loss of life savings for the many. It is equally revealing that the invasion of Iraq came while many, if not the majority of, Americans, felt that the corrupt appointment of George W. Bush to the presidency had undermined democracy, and that his inept handling of the economy was resulting in massive job losses for the poor and middle-class, while the rich were benefitting from "tax cuts."

In addition, America's alleged "respect" for human rights continues to be a lie, since one of the largest terrorist training camps in the world, the School of the Americas, which is located within the boundaries of the United States, still trains murderers, torturers and rapists whose atrocities, primarily throughout Central and South America, make the number of people killed by Al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups pale in comparison. Ironically (or perhaps not ironically) Manuel Noriega was a graduate of this "school." Of course all of the issues and facts discussed above are not "deep, dark secrets." But they also are not items Americans are likely to see or hear while watching or listening to news broadcasts from corporate-controlled media. These media are still licking their collective lips over the ratings and profits windfall sired by the Iraqi war, and are certainly not going to report upon anything that will prevent the Bush dictatorship from engaging in more wars and invasions in the future. So it has become the province of fictionalized dramas to expose what the jingoistic "news" media want hidden. One example is the medical drama ER (short for "Emergency Room"). In recent episodes an American doctor traveled to a war-torn African country to provide medical services for the humanitarian organization Doctors Without Borders. When asked why the American government's alleged concern for human rights did not extend to Africa, he sadly remarked, "They've got no oil." Another aid worker later remarked that she was astonished that Americans were not "rioting in the streets" in protest of the deceptions that led to the Iraqi war.

Although "rioting in the streets" would undoubtedly bring more political repression, courtesy of America's megalomaniacal Attorney General John Ashcroft and his so-called "Justice Department" (those who saw the videotaped abuses inflicted on post 9/11 detainees clearly know what this means), the lack of outrage in America against the lies, hypocrisy and bloodlust of the Bush dictatorship, and those who support it, is frightening. It would seem that all Americans, but particularly those with children or other family members serving in Iraq, would be demanding impeachment after seeing a bellicose Bush in military attire on the deck of an aircraft carrier, since he avoided military service himself by joining the National Guard, and then went absent without leave (AWOL) from that.

It would seem Americans would be equally infuriated that other deceptive instigators of the Iraqi war--like Dick Cheney, Karl Rove and Paul Wolfowitz--avoided serving in the military. It would also seem that Americans would rebel against those who not only undermined democracy to create the Bush dictatorship, but who never even bothered to protect this democracy through military service--like former Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris, Bush"s brother (and Florida Governor) Jeb, and Supreme Court "justices?" Antonia Scalia and Clarence Thomas. Finally it would seem that Americans would demand that the political commentators and celebrities who supported the Iraqi war, yet avoided serving in the military--like Sean Hannity, Joe Scarborough, William Kristol, Bill O"Reilly, Brit Hume, Kid Rock, Toby Keith, Ted Nugent, Bruce Willis and numerous others--now "put their money where their mouths are" by trading in their guitars, microphones, mansions and film careers playing "make-believe" soldiers for rifles, military fatigues and a "real" opportunity to get killed or maimed. After all, it is not difficult to be "brave" when the lives at risk are not one"s own.

But instead of outrage it appears that many Americans continue to be lulled into complacency by lullabies of propaganda and deceit, while those who exploit the war for self-aggrandizement and profit adroitly evade detection by camouflaging themselves in counterfeit garments of "patriotism."... Of course some may argue that Hitler clearly was compelled by evil motives, while Bush was compelled by "benevolent" ones. But this ignores the reality that the primary difference between Bush and Hitler may simply be milieu, not mind-set. In fact, actor/activist Harry Belafonte once courageously asserted that the Bush administration is "possessed of evil." These words should not be dismissed as hyperbole. Hitler, after all, did not begin his campaign for world domination until fascism was deeply entrenched in Germany. The Bush dictatorship is still manufacturing this entrenchment. Given the analogies above, one must wonder if history would have been so radically different if George W. Bush and his war-crazed cronies were in power in 1938 Berlin instead of 2004 America.

Even a cursory study of American history reveals a nation that perpetually swings, like a pendulum, from overreaction to regret. During these periods of regret, the excesses and harms that overreaction generates are usually cured. But, with the new millennium only a few years old, concerned Americans, as well as the rest of the world, are now facing the prospect of the most powerful country on earth metamorphosing into a neo-fascist nation, existing in a constant state of war as truth is sacrificed on the altar of bellicosity, nationalism, greed, hypocrisy and selfish ambition. If this is left unchecked, those who seek to resurrect that long moribund world of peace and justice will soon become lone voices in the wilderness, eventually being heard no more. And by the time the people of the United States realize how myopic they were to have placed their democracy, their freedoms, their trust and their lives into the hands of deceitful and evil people, the pendulum will have ceased swinging."


by Molly Ivins

Reading the newspapers anymore is eerily reminiscent of all those bad novels warning of the advent of fascism in America. "It Can't Happen Here" by Sinclair Lewis was a bad book, and the genre shades off into right-wing paranoia about black helicopters, including the memorably awful "Turner Diaries." I don't use the f-word myself--in fact, for years, I've made fun of liberals who hear the approach of jackbooted fascism around every corner. But to quote a real authority on the subject, "Fascism should more properly be called corporatism, since it is the merger of state and corporate power"--Benito Mussolini.

Paul Krugman recently quoted the quite apolitical Web site Corporate Governance, which matter-of-factly remarks,"Given the power of corporate lobbyists, government control often equates to de facto corporate control anyway." It's getting downright creepy out there.

The most hair raising news de jour is about Total Information Awareness, a giant government computer spy system being set up to spy on Americans and run by none other than John Poindexter of Iran-Contra fame. Total Information Awareness will provide intelligence agencies and law enforcement with instant access to information from e-mail, telephone records, credit cards, banking transactions and travel records, all without a search warrant. It will, said Poindexter, "break down the stovepipes" that separate commercial and government databases. The just-passed Homeland Security Bill undermines the Privacy Act of 1974, which was intended to limit what government agencies can do with personal information...

The great writer on the subject of totalitarianism was George Orwell, and "1984" is always worth rereading. Damned if GeeDubya Bush didn't pop up the other day to announce that we must fight a war "for the sake of peace." That's not vaguely Orwellian, it's a direct steal...


Authority For Domestic Spying

WASHINGTON__The Bush administration bestowed broad new domestic spying powers on the FBI yesterday, saying it needed a new weapon in the battle against terrorism and promising not to let the bureau lapse into the file-building abuses of a bygone era.

In a move aimed at averting attacks like those on Sept.11, Attorney General John Ashcroft freed the FBI to monitor Internet sites, libraries, churches and political organizations, calling restrictions on domestic spying "a competitive advantage for terrorists."...

Under present guidelines, Ashcroft said, agents "cannot surf the Web, the way you and I can" and cannot simply walk into public events to observe people and activities...The American Civil Liberties Union said the lifting of restrictions could renew abuses of the past. (Martin Luther) King's persecution by law enforcement is a necessary reminder of the potential abuse when a government with too long a leash seeks to silence voices of dissent," said Marvin Johnson of the ACLU....


by Ted Burns

WASHINGTON__They have broken into homes, offices, hotel rooms and automobiles. Copied private computer files. Installed hidden cameras. Listened with microphones in one couple's bedroom for more than a year. Rummaged through luggage. Eavesdropped on telephone conversations.

It's the FBI, operating with permission from a secretive U.S. court in a high-stakes effort pitting the nation's premier law enforcement agency against the worlds spies and terrorists. Most Americans never see this side of the FBI.

"The average citizen has no idea whether information about them might be caught up in one of these investigations," said David Sobel of the Washington-based Electronic Privacy Information Center...The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act--enacted in 1978 and strengthened after September, 2001, by the Patriot Act--gives investigators a potent arsenal against "agents of a foreign power" The Bush administration this week won an important court victory affirming its plans to expand these tactics to more cases. The Associated Press.


by Nat Hentoff

As usual, television-broadcast and cable-got it wrong. The thrust of what they call reporting on the reorganization of the FBI focused on the 900 or so new agents, the primacy of intelligence gathering over law enforcement, and the presence of CIA supervisors within the bosom of the FBI. (It used to be illegal for the CIA to spy on Americans within our borders).

But the poisonous core of this reorganization is its return to the time of J. Edgar Hoover and COINTELPRO, the counter-intelligence operation--perversively active from 1956 to 1971--that so disgraced the Bureau that it was forced to adopt new guidelines to prevent such wholesale subversion of the Bill of Rights ever again. Under COINTELPRO, the FBI monitored, infiltrated, manipulated, and secretly fomented diversions within civil rights, anti-war, black, and other entirely lawful organizations who were using the First Amendment to disagree with government policies...

In 1975, Frank Church of Idaho told the nation...that COINTELPRO had been "a sophisticated vigilante operation aimed squarely at preventing the exercise of First Amendment rights of speech and association." And Church pledged: "The American people need to be reassured that never again will an agency of the government be permitted to conduct a secret war against those citizens it considers a threat to the established order."...

From now on, covert FBI agents can mingle with unsuspecting Americans at churches, mosques, synagogues, meetings of environmentalists, the ACLU, the Gun Owners of America, and Reverend Al Sharpton's presidential campaign headquarters...

Back in 1975, Frank Church issued a warning that is far more pertinent now than it was then. He was speaking of how the government's intelligence capabilities aimed at "potential" enemies as well as disloyal Americans--could at any time be turned around on the American people, and no American would have any privacy left--such is the capacity to monitor everything, telephone conversations, telegrams, it doesn't matter. There would be no place to hide...


by Adam Cohen

When America is at war, according to Chief Justice William Rehnquist, people have to get used to having less freedom (which means, of course, that they didn't have any to begin with). There is a limit to what courts will do to help those deprived of rights, he says, because judges have a natural "reluctance" to rule "against the government on an issue of national security during wartime." In fact, there is some truth, he concludes, to the Latin maxim inter arma silent --in time of war, the law is silent.

With all the talk of war today...it may sound as if the chief justice is laying the groundwork for a drastic rollback in civil liberties. But these reflections come from a history book, "All the Laws but One: Civil Liberties in Wartime," that he wrote four years ago. When it came out...it seemed like an academic exercise...If Mr. Rehnquist the jurist sees the world as Mr. Rehnquist the historian does, there is cause for concern...


Now there rose up a new king over Egypt, which knew not Joseph.

And he said unto his people, Behold, the people of the children of Israel are more and mightier than we:

Come on, let us deal wisely with them; lest they multiply, and it come to pass, that when there falleth out any war, they join also unto our enemies, and fight against us, and so get them up out of the land...(Exodus 1:8-10).


by Chuck Baldwin

"What we thought we needed to fear from liberals, we find being championed by conservatives" says a conservative Christian minister and radio talk show host. "America survived the attacks of September 11. It may not survive the Bush administration."

It should be obvious to everyone by now that, wittingly or not, George W. Bush is in the process of creating (what this author will call) a communist-style form of government in the United States...

Bush Furious at "Fuhrer Slap

WASHINGTON__President Bush's spokesman yesterday denounced Germany's justice minister for painting Bush as a Nazi by comparing him to Adolph Hitler.

German Justice Minister Herta Daeubler-Gmelin said Bush is going after Iraq to disguise domestic problems, adding, "That's a popular method; even Hitler did that."

White House spokesman Ari Fleischer called the crack "outrageous and inexplicable." Deborah Orin

As details emerge regarding his new Department of Homeland Security, we discover that Bush and his band of belligerent brothers have begun a process of turning the federal government into a gargantuan police state not seen since Hitler's Third Reich and Stalin's Soviet Union.

According to press reports, Bush plans to do the following:

(1)...Merge 22 federal police and emergency agencies into his new Department of Homeland Security. (Say hello to the new SS Corps).

(2)...Create standardized biometric travel documents (Show me your papers or your iris. Seig Heil).

(3)... Develop "screening tools to predict human behavior, such as 'hostile intent.'" (Hello Dept. of Pre-Crimes).

(4)...Allow federal police to search and seize at will. (Goodbye 4th Amendment).

(5)...Allow federal police to incarcerate and indefinitely hold suspects without arrest or warrant and with no legal recourse by the person seized. (Goodbye 5th Amendment. Hello Gestapo).

(6)...Implement a national driver's license. (Hello National ID).

(7)...Allow the U.S. military to conduct lethal operations on U.S. soil.

(8)...Allow the President to unilaterally procure taxpayer dollars without the consent of Congress. (Goodbye U.S. Constitution).

(9)...Allow the federal government to act in secret. (Hello East German Secret Police, Stasi. Goodbye Freedom of Information Act).

(10)...Create a "Domestic Informant program whereby millions of Americans are authorized to spy on their fellow citizens on behalf of the federal government. (Hello Communist Amerika)....

In Nazi Germany, churches, pastors, and conservatives assisted the creation of tyrannical government. This is exactly what is happening right now in the United States. What we thought we needed to fear from liberals, we find being championed by conservatives. Right now George Bush and his fellow travelers compose the greatest threat to freedom and constitutional government that exists. Instead of fighting terrorism, they are actually destroying the very principles that they claim to be protecting.


And Samuel told all the words of the Lord unto the people that asked of him a king.

And he said, This will be the manner of the king that shall reign over you: He will take your sons, and appoint them for himself; for his chariots, and to be his horsemen (use your spiritual imagination), and some shall run before his chariot...

THE IMPERIAL PRESIDENCY IS BACK...Newsweek, Nov. 18, 2002. p.46.

And he will appoint him captains over Thousands (mayors), and captains over Fifties (governors); and he will set them to ear his ground, and to reap his harvest, and to make his instruments of war, and instruments of his chariots...

And ye shall cry out in that day because of your king which ye shall have chosen you; and the Lord will not hear you in that day.

Nevertheless the people refused to obey the voice of Samuel; and they said, Nay, but we will have a king over us,

That we may also be like all the nations; and that our king may judge us, and go before us, and fight our battles...(1 Samuel 8:5-22).


And when the dragon (the spirit of antichrist in America) saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the Woman which brought forth the Child. And the serpent cast out of his mouth water as a flood after the Woman, that he might cause her to be carried off of the flood (the wars)...(Revelation 12:13-15).

When the waves of death compassed me, the floods of ungodly men made me afraid...(2 Samuel 22:5).

For the mouth of the wicked is opened against me...They compassed me with words of hatred...(Psalm 109:2,3; Romans 3:10-19).


by Peter Brooks.

NEW HAVEN__Though George W. Bush admits he is not an avid reader, his wife is a serious lover of literature. Laura Bush has read widely, from Greek tragedy to William Faulkner to Truman Capote. When asked to name her favorite book, on the long list she has read, she selected The Grand Inquisitor section of Dostoyevsky's The Brothers Karamazov. This is an interesting and suggestive choice, of a chilling and troubling chapter in a challenging novel.

Of course Mrs. Bush's choice of reading has nothing to do with Republican philosophy. But since her husband is the party's nominee for president, one might speculate about the messages the Republicans could find in this literary work.

The Grand Inquisitor is actually a story told by Ivan Karamazov to his brother Alyosha, in which Ivan imagines the return of Jesus to earth...at the height of the Spanish Inquisition. Jesus is taken prisoner by the Grand Inquisitor who then--like police interrogators before and since--details the suspect's crimes. The return of Jesus after centuries of absence from the world interferes with the work of the church. Jesus preached a message of freedom, but the church has discovered that it is not freedom that humankind desires; it is authority.

"Oh we shall convince them that they will only become free when they resign their freedom to us, and submit to us,: says the Inquisitor. "The most tormenting secrets of their conscience--all, all they will bring to us, and we will decide all things, and they will joyfully believe our decision, because it will deliver them from their great care and their present terrible torments of personal and free decision."

As for Jesus, he has no place in a well-regulated society. He is a trouble-maker, a scandal: "For if anyone has ever deserved our stake, it is you. Tomorrow I shall burn you." He is sent to the auto-da-fe.

Dostoyevsky's creation of 1880 is hauntingly predictive of the inquisitors of the 20th century who all, from whatever political faith and ideological position, claim their authority to dispose of human freedom in the name of authority. Only the inquisitors know what humanity really wants and needs. We must surrender to the inquisitors for the sake of our salvation...

As a political and spiritual parable The Grand Inquisitor...might be recommended reading for writers of party platforms, which tend toward self-righteous, authoritive pronouncements on anguishing issues...


"Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience. Our problem is that numbers of people all over the world have obeyed the dictates of the leaders of their government and have gone to war, and millions have been killed because of this obedience. Our problem is that people are obedient all over the world in the face of poverty and starvation and stupidity, and war and cruelty. Our problem is that people are obedient while the jails are full of petty thieves, while the grand thieves are running and robbing the country; that's our problem." Howard Zinn.


There shall be in every city a great insurrection against them that fear the Lord.

They shall be as madmen sparing none, but still spoiling and destroying those that fear the Lord.

For they shall waste and take away their goods, and cast them out of their houses.

Then shall be known who are God's chosen, and they shall be tried as gold in the fire. (The days are at hand) be not afraid, neither doubt, for God is our guide...(2 Esdras 16:70-75).


Behold, I send you forth as sheep among wolves, be ye therefore wise as serpents and harmless as doves.

But beware of men, for they will deliver you up to the councils, and they will scourge you in their synagogues.

And ye shall be brought before governors and kings for my sake, for a testimony against them, and the Gentiles.

But when they deliver you up, take no thought how or what ye shall speak, for it shall be given you in that same hour what ye shall speak...

And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake; but he that Endureth to the end shall be saved.

But when they persecute in this city, flee ye into another: for verily...ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel till the son of man come...(Matthew 10:16-23; Luke 12:4-12).


For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do His good pleasure.

Do all things without murmuring and disputings,

That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons and daughters of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as Lights in the world...(Philippians 2:13-16).


Finally my brethren, be strong in the Lord, and in the Power of His Might.

Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil.

For we wrestle not against flesh and blood (against America's enemies), but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the Darkness of this world, AGAINST SPIRITUAL WICKEDNESS IN HIGH PLACES.

Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day; and having done all, to stand.

Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with Truth, and having on the breastplate of Righteousness, and your Feet shod with the preparation of the Gospel of Peace.

Above all, taking the shield of Faith, wherewith ye shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked.

And take the helmet of Salvation, and the Sword of the Spirit (Excalibur) which is the Word of God...(Ephesians 6:10-17).

By Ian Doherty
The Business Post - Ireland

It's the kind of initiative one would have expected to see in Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia or when Afghanistan was run by the Taliban. A 'Citizen Corps' with a projected ten million members, given power by a centralised government to spy on friends, neighbours, colleagues and even people who attend the same church. Feel a bit suspicious about the guy sitting next to you at work who doesn't stand up for the national anthem? Ring the Hotline. Do you feel that the pastor at your church isn't 100 per cent behind the government during his sermons? Ring the Hotline. Is your neighbour critical of the police? Well, you know what to do.

This initiative is taking place in America, which has seen the gradual erosion of civil liberties in the wake of September 11 become a deluge this week with the launch of the Citizen Corps and Operation Tips projects, or Operation Citizen Snitch as its critics are calling it. The latest in a long line of draconian measures to take place in America since John Ashcroft's appointment as Attorney General, both the Citizen Corps and Operation Tips have startled many civil libertarians who feel that the Bush administration's determination to oust Saddam Hussein has had the added -- and not unexpected -- bonus of deflecting public attention from some of their more severe domestic plans.

Both the Citizen Corps and Operation Tips (Terrorism Information and Prevention Service) are administered by the Department of Justice and, according to official documentation, "several other federal agencies", although it fails to mention that there are also provisions for the army to partake in police activities -- something unheard of in modern America.

According to their publicity material, "the programme will involve the millions of American workers who, in the daily course of their work, are in a unique position to see potentially unusual or suspicious activity in public places". Effectively, this has deputised the nation, but apart from becoming a cranks' charter in the work place, the real thrust of Operation Tips is to enable postal workers, repair men and other people who have routine access to private houses to report anything suspicious. Anything at all. "These workers will use their common sense and knowledge of their environment to identify suspicious or unusual activity," goes the blurb. Effectively, if a repair man arrives to fix your fridge, and happens to notice a copy of Michael Moore's book, Stupid White Men, on your counter, he would be within his remit to call the Hotline and you could, depending on how busy the local FBI field office is, find yourself receiving a visit from the federales.

It all sounds so absurd that most Americans are inclined to view such fears as an example of civil libertarianism gone bad. The only problem is that such events have already been going on for last ten months or so. Earlier this year, police in San Diego broke up a meeting held by the aforementioned Moore to discuss the refusal of local venues to give him a venue to launch his book. As one observer at the time commented, "they didn't use force, but they had their clubs and pepper spray out and made it quite clear that they were prepared to use them".

While it's clear that America has enough Constitutional checks and balances to make sure it can't turn into a police state overnight, there is a growing mood of alarm that Bush and his inner circle are happy to try. And along the way, if they manage to drag America closer to a theocracy than ever before, fundamentalist Christian John Ashcroft won't be complaining.

As the White House gears itself up for an attack on Iraq, in complete contravention of international law and against the advice of the now marginalised Colin Powell, even some of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the people in charge of the Pentagon have expressed surprise at the White House's belligerent attitude.
"I've never seen a civilian politician with such guts for war," one of the JCoS told the press, and the strangely public way the White House is going about their preparations for any attack are seen by some American commentators as little more than an example of political sleight of hand that could have come straight from the last president." Bill Clinton was a master of the political con trick. His major foreign military forays invariably coincided with some domestic problem. For instance, his bombing of Iraq in 1998 started just days before his impeachment was about to begin -- the impeachment was delayed.
As Americans focus on ousting the Iraqi leader, Bush has been giving a series of Homeland speeches where he has been warning that the "war will be fought on two fronts, against the enemy without and the enemy within". It's surprisingly similar to one speech given by his father who, on launching Operation Desert Storm more than a decade ago, warned of an internal enemy "weakening our country." At that time it was drug users, now it is the threat of terrorism.

At this point in time it is believed that more than 1,000 Arab Americans are being held somewhere in detention. The reason the figure is not exact is because the authorities don't have to release any information, don't have to charge those being held and can continue doing so with impunity. Using legislation last used against German spies in World War II, these people could even be executed without notification. As Rumsfeld steels himself for war abroad, Ashcroft is the domestic general, seeing not Reds but Browns under his bed. He has even been privately keen to discuss the possibility of interning Arab Americans, something America hasn't done since it shamefully interned nearly 100,000 American men, women and children of Japanese extraction during the second world war -- something most Americans are prepared to accept was an outrage.

A good example of where John Ashcroft is coming from, was his appointment of Peter Kirsanow to the US Civil Rights Commission, an oxymoronic title for the organisation following Kirsanow's recent statement that internment camps could be set up if there is another attack, "and if they (those responsible for any second attack) come from the same ethnic group as those who attacked the World Trade Center, you can forget about human rights". But perhaps the most bizarre twist of all came when Dave Lindorf, a journalist for web-based magazine, salon.com, signed up for Operation Tips and when he phoned the Hotline to provide some bogus information. He was passed through to the production offices of a television programme. He writes, "instead of getting a hardened G-person when I called, a mellifluous receptionist's voice answered, "America's Most Wanted". A little flummoxed, I said I was expecting to reach the FBI. "Aren't you familiar with the TV programme 'America's Most Wanted'?" she asked patiently. "We've been asked to take the FBI's Tips calls for them'."

So now, when those Americans who don't act American enough find themselves answering the door to the FBI some dark night, they could also find themselves being filmed by a crime-based reality programme.

General Ashcroft's Detention Camps

By Nat Hentoff

Time to Call for His Resignation
September 4 - 10, 2002

Jonathan Turley is a professor of constitutional and public-interest law at George Washington University Law School in D.C. He is also a defense attorney in national security cases and other matters, writes for a number of publications, and is often on television. He and I occasionally exchange leads on civil liberties stories, but I learn much more from him than he does from me. For example, a Jonathan Turley column in the national edition of the August 14 Los Angeles Times ("Camps for Citizens: Ashcroft's Hellish Vision") begins:

"Attorney General John Ashcroft's announced desire for camps for U.S. citizens he deems to be 'enemy combatants' has moved him from merely being a political embarrassment to being a constitutional menace." Actually, ever since General Ashcroft pushed the U.S. Patriot Act through an overwhelmingly supine Congress soon after September 11, he has subverted more elements of the Bill of Rights than any attorney general in American history.

Under the Justice Department's new definition of "enemy combatant"—which won the enthusiastic approval of the president and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld—anyone defined as an "enemy combatant," very much including American citizens, can be held indefinitely by the government, without charges, a hearing, or a lawyer. In short, incommunicado.

Two American citizens—Yaser Esam Hamdi and Jose Padilla—are currently locked up in military brigs as "enemy combatants." (Hamdi is in solitary in a windowless room.) As Harvard Law Professor Lawrence Tribe said on ABC's Nightline (August 12): "It bothers me that the executive branch is taking the amazing position that just on the president's say-so, any American citizen can be picked up, not just in Afghanistan, but at O'Hare Airport or on the streets of any city in this country, and locked up without access to a lawyer or court just because the government says he's connected somehow with the Taliban or Al Qaeda. That's not the American way. It's not the constitutional way. . . . And no court can even figure out whether we've got the wrong guy."

In Hamdi's case, the government claims it can hold him for interrogation in a floating navy brig off Norfolk, Virginia, as long as it needs to. When Federal District Judge Robert Doumar asked the man from the Justice Department how long Hamdi is going to be locked up without charges, the government lawyer said he couldn't answer that question. The Bush administration claims the judiciary has no right to even interfere.

Now more Americans are also going to be dispossessed of every fundamental legal right in our system of justice and put into camps. Jonathan Turley reports that Justice Department aides to General Ashcroft "have indicated that A 'HIGH-LEVEL COMMITTEE' WILL RECOMMEND WHICH CITIZENS ARE TO BE STRIPPED OF THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS AND SENT TO ASHCROFT'S NEW CAMPS."

It should be noted that Turley, who tries hard to respect due process, even in unpalatable situations, publicly defended Ashcroft during the latter's turbulent nomination battle, which is more than I did. Again, in his Los Angeles Times column, Turley tries to be fair: "Of course Ashcroft is not considering camps on the order of the internment camps used to incarcerate Japanese American citizens in World War II. But he can be credited only with thinking smaller; we have learned from painful experience that unchecked authority, once tasted, easily becomes insatiable." (Emphasis added.)

Turley insists that "the proposed camp plan should trigger immediate Congressional hearings and reconsideration of Ashcroft's fitness for important office. Whereas Al Qaeda is a threat to the lives of our citizens, Ashcroft has become a clear and present threat to our liberties." (Emphasis added.)

On August 8, The Wall Street Journal, which much admires Ashcroft on its editorial pages, reported that "the Goose Creek, South Carolina, facility that houses [Jose] Padilla—mostly empty since it was designated in January to hold foreigners captured in the U.S. and facing military tribunals—now has a special wing that could be used to jail about 20 U.S. citizens if the government were to deem them enemy combatants, a senior administration official said." The Justice Department has told Turley that it has not denied this story. And space can be found in military installations for more "enemy combatants."

But once the camps are operating, can General Ashcroft be restrained from detaining—not in these special camps, but in regular lockups—any American investigated under suspicion of domestic terrorism under the new, elastic FBI guidelines for criminal investigations? From page three of these Ashcroft terrorism FBI guidelines: "The nature of the conduct engaged in by a [terrorist] enterprise will justify an inference that the standard [for opening a criminal justice investigation] is satisfied, even if there are no known statements by participants that advocate or indicate planning for violence or other prohibited acts." (Emphasis added.) That conduct can be simply "intimidating" the government, according to the USA Patriot Act. The new Steven Spielberg-Tom Cruise movie, Minority Report, shows the government, some years hence, imprisoning "pre-criminals" before they engage in, or even think of, terrorism. That may not be just fiction, folks.

Returning to General Ashcroft's plans for American enemy combatants, an August 8 New York Times editorial—written before those plans were revealed—said: "The Bush administration seems to believe, on no good legal authority, that if it calls citizens combatants in the war on terrorism, it can imprison them indefinitely and deprive them of lawyers. This defiance of the courts repudiates two centuries of constitutional law and undermines the very freedoms that President Bush says he is defending in the struggle against terrorism."

Meanwhile, as the camps are being prepared, the braying Terry McAuliffe and the pack of Democratic presidential aspirants are campaigning on corporate crime, with no reference to the constitutional crimes being committed by Bush and Ashcroft. As Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis prophesied: "The greatest menace to freedom is an inert people." And an inert Democratic leadership. See you in a month, if I'm not an Ashcroft camper.

Recent Nat Hentoff columns
Fierce Watchdog of the Constitution 'Civil Liberty Is Why We Have This Country'
Who Made George W. Bush Our King? He Can Designate Any of Us an Enemy Combatant
The Once and Former Rule of Law Could Ashcroft Pass a Quiz on the Constitution?
Justice Denied at the Source Considered Guilty Until Proved Innocent

Fourth activist in D.M. ordered to testify
The federal probe also focuses on a November antiwar forum held at Drake University.


A federal investigation expanded Thursday as prosecutors subpoenaed a fourth peace activist to appear before a grand jury and secured a court order forbidding Drake University officials to discuss a demand for information about a November antiwar conference on campus.

Federal authorities so far have refused to disclose what the investigation is about or what laws might have been broken. But an officer with the FBI's Joint Terrorism Task Force served a subpoena to Wendy Vasquez of Des Moines on Thursday morning. Vasquez, an antiwar activist who visited Iraq in 2002, was surprised. "Just the whole idea that somebody would think I'm a terrorist is ludicrous," she said.

Vasquez's summons was the latest grand jury subpoena issued as part of a federal investigation that includes three other antiwar activists, as well as records of an activist legal group at Drake. Vasquez was among dozens of activists who attended a Nov. 15 conference at Drake called "Stop the Occupation! Bring the Iowa Guard Home!"

The conference was hosted by the Drake Chapter of the National Lawyers Guild. The event was followed the next day by a demonstration at the Iowa National Guard Headquarters in Johnston where 12 protesters were arrested. On Wednesday, federal investigators subpoenaed three activists involved that weekend. Elton Davis, Patti McKee and Brian Terrell have been ordered to appear in Des Moines before a federal grand jury on Tuesday.

Davis and Vasquez were arrested at the Nov. 16 demonstration, which Terrell also attended. McKee, who could not be reached for comment, is listed as an organizer of the conference. Federal prosecutors have refused to discuss the investigation or the purpose of the grand jury. But Thursday morning, at the request of the U.S. attorney's office in Des Moines, U.S. District Judge Ronald Longstaff issued an order under seal - meaning its contents are secret.

Sources say the order prohibits Drake employees from commenting about a separate subpoena demanding university records. The Drake subpoena asks for all records relating to the Nov. 15 conference. It also demands information about leaders of the National Lawyers Guild, location of the guild's offices and any annual reports since 2002. Part of the subpoena asks for "all records of Drake University campus security reflecting any observations made of the November 15, 2003, meeting, including any records of persons in charge or control of the meeting, and any records of attendees of the meeting."

The National Lawyers Guild is a New York-based organization that regularly involves itself in social activism and the defense of protesters. A guild official vowed that the group will fight the subpoena "with everything that we have...It's a clear First Amendment violation and a clear attempt to intimidate lawful expression," said Heidi Boghosian, the guild's executive director. "We have no intention of turning anything over."

Assistant U.S. Attorney Kevin Vanderschel said Thursday that he could "neither confirm nor deny the existence of any ongoing investigation...I'm not able to provide any further comments," he said. Drake officials also declined to comment when asked about the existence of a gag order.

Terrell, one of the activists who has been subpoenaed, was skeptical about the effort to silence Drake employees. "What they're doing is they're claiming it's to protect the privacy of students," he said.

(These charges were subsequently dropped).

Here It Comes: 'Brain Fingerprinting - A New Paragrim'
From Focus On Freedom
Counterterrorism Applications
Barin Fingerprinting Laboratories, Inc

(Note - Read this very carefully and 'imagine the possibilities...' We are now at the doorstep of 'thought crime' and facing possible conviction and prison for simply having READ something that those in control do not approve of. -ed)

There is a new technology, that for the first time, allows us to measure scientifically if specific information is stored in a person's brain. Brain Fingerprinting® technology determines the presence or absence of specific information, such as terrorist training and associations. This exciting new technology can address the following critical elements in the fight against terrorism: * Aid in determining who has participated in terrorist acts, directly or indirectly. * Aid in identifying trained terrorists with the potential to commit future terrorist acts, even if they are in a "sleeper" cell and have not been active for years. * Help to identify people who have knowledge or training in banking, finance or communications and who are associated with terrorist teams and acts. * Help to determine if an individual is in a leadership role within a terrorist organization.

One fundamental difference between a terrorist and an innocent suspect is that the terrorist has detailed knowledge of terrorist activities and an innocent person does not. A terrorist has either committed a crime, received training in terrorism or worked with others in planning terrorist attacks. The innocent suspect does not have this type of information stored in his brain.

Brain Fingerprinting technology is based on the principle that the brain is central to all human acts. In a terrorist act, there may or may not be peripheral evidence such as fingerprints or DNA, but the brain of the perpetrator is always there, planning, executing, and recording the crime. The terrorist has knowledge of organizations, training and plans that an innocent person does not have. Until the invention of Brain Fingerprinting testing, there was no scientific way to detect this fundamental difference. Brain Fingerprinting testing provides an accurate, economical and timely solution to the central problem in the fight against terrorism. It is now possible to determine scientifically whether or not a person has terrorist training and knowledge of terrorist activities.

Brain Fingerprinting testing can determine quickly and accurately whether or not specific knowledge is present or absent in an individual. In a Brain Fingerprinting test, words, pictures or sounds relevant to a crime, terrorist act or terrorist training are presented by a computer, along with other irrelevant images and sounds. Electrical brain responses are measured non-invasively through a patented headband equipped with sensors. A computer then analyzes the brain responses and determines whether or not the specific information is stored in the brain of the suspect. The results are not affected by the willingness of the person being tested to tell the truth. By testing for specific information, Brain Fingerprinting technology can accurately distinguish between a trained terrorist and an innocent person who may have knowledge of certain locations, people and events for legitimate reasons.

Brain Fingerprinting testing detects whether or not specific information is stored in a person's brain, not truth or falsehood. In fact, no questions are asked and no answers are given during a Brain Fingerprinting test. Brain Fingerprinting testing cannot be used for general, non-specific testing, something for which no reliable facts exist against which to compare the subject's answer. For example, a general question like "Are you a terrorist?" is not something that can be addressed by Brain Fingerprinting technology. However, the recognition of specific information from terrorist training or of individuals at a training camp can be detected. Investigators must have reliable, factual details from which to draw the information that will be used to structure the Brain Fingerprinting test.

Any known legitimate means through which a subject may have encountered crime or terrorist-relevant information are examined prior to conducting a Brain Fingerprinting test. Standard protocols ensure that the individual has a chance to reveal any circumstances through which he may have had legitimate access to the crime-relevant information in question. Any information the suspect has obtained through legitimate means is eliminated from consideration before the test is administered. A suspect is tested only on information that he has no legitimate means of knowing, information he denies knowledge of, and for which he has no legitimate explanation if it turns out that the information is indeed stored in his brain.

With the Brain Fingerprinting system, a significant scientific breakthrough has now become a practical applied technology. A new era in security and intelligence gathering has begun. Now, terrorists and those supporting terrorism can be identified quickly and accurately. No longer should any terrorist be able to evade justice for lack of evidence. And there is no reason why an innocent individual should be falsely imprisoned or convicted of terrorist activity. A Brain Fingerprinting test can determine with an extremely high degree of accuracy those who are involved with terrorist activity and those who are not.

From Ted Twietmeyer tedtw@frontiernet.net

Hi Jeff - As you know, I have a long and "colorful" history in electronics. I now work where the brain/vision connection are studied. Although not as expert in this as the scientists I work with are, I can shed some light on what this is about and how it really works. And right now, the research has barely scratched the surface of the complexities of the brain and its functioning. What brain fingerprinting is attempting to do, is to use something long known to scientists called "evoked response." A stimulus is presented to a test subject, often using a computer monitor for the visual stimulation. And ElectroEncephloGraph (EEG) is used to record the results. Experiments takes place in a SHIELDED room with a heavy door, which also keeps sound out. This improves the accuracy of tests, and the additional shielding is required for making some types of measurements. Signals from a special fabric head cap with more than 20 electrodes, are connected via shielded cables to the EEG machine outside that records the brainwaves syncronized with the visual stimulation.

The key thing here, is that testing requires VOLUNTARY participation by the subject. The question I share with many of your readers, is "How will you force someone, perhaps standing at a security station in a noisy airport or in an interrogation room, to stare at a computer monitor ? The idea in the real world is an impractical one. If the subject does not watch the screen, then nothing useful happens. As america seems to be plummeting headlong into a long-planned police state, we now see companies popping up attempting to take laboratory experiments into mainstream public applications. And of course, its not about security at all, its just about MONEY.

It will be up to the american citizen to stop this madness. McCarthy would be proud, and would have loved to have the toys we have today to spy on people. The checks and balances our founding fathers set up in government are under attack right now. This isn't a problem facing a future generation, its OUR problem. RIGHT NOW. Speak up and be a thorn in the side of those in power- let them know you don't want endless tracking, tracing and interrogations. People often think its "someone else's problem." Its a great way to lie to themselves to ignore it all.

Another common theme is "if you're innocent you have nothing to worry about." If one watches any television or reads the newspaper at all, police make mistakes all time. Some have actually died of a heart attack when their door was kicked in by mistake and they were shoved to the floor and cuffed. What happens, when it happens to YOU ? That will be the time when you'll be saying "why didn't I do something about this before ?" Too late now...

As a grandfather, I'm greatly concerned when I look at the grandchildren and think about what is being done to them even now. How can any parent with any children or grandchildren, not be concerned for their future freedom ? Pretending there is no loss of our precious liberty, is the ultimate criminal thought.


My dearest, bravest grandaughter. You will remember when you went into the military services that I told you the day would be coming soon in America when dissent (not only political but spiritual dissent) would not be tolerated by many of the "patriotic kind" in this country. I told you that if you were still in the military when these things began to happen that you would have to assist in rounding up and arresting people like me who have a long history of pacifism, and who seriously and mindfully adhere to the historical teachings and doctrines of Christ. (And I am not referring to the "religious" doctrines that they imbibe upon people in the American churches). Well the time is fast approaching. And even if you take a discharge from the military, and go into "law enforcement" as I hear of you, you will still be part of that great machine that has been oiled up for only one purpose, and that is to do the will of the "government" without questioning either the government's motives or your own. Why would you want to be in a position of authority over other human beings? Especially with a fire arm at your side, and with all the possibilities of killing others that go along with it? It is a GREAT danger to your own soul.

And so here I am again, reminding you of our conversation. Remember, the Good Shepherd lays down his and her life for the sheep, he or she does not take the life of others. Nor do they join forces with those that do.

My love for you is deep. Please remember that in the crises that are unfolding... Papa.