USPS delivering strange mail monday thru saturday.

So i just got a strange letter to my apartment in the mail today. It came through the Lansing area postal service as that is where it is post marked. It has no return address. On the inside was a birthday card with picture of Bill Clinton and his dog sniffing his crotch with Hillary standing there and a word bubble saying "I told you not to let Monica train the dog." There was also a bi-folded letter in it. The letter said as follows.

"Preliminary, but as yet unverified, whisperings and reports the the LA. SWAMP SPIRIT GUIDES indicate that the "BALD-EAGLE" is going to South American soon to be involved in intensive and extensive training for position placement in the New World Order Government now being visualized and formatted.

Where he goes, she cannot follow! We are indeed sorry about that! Expect confirmation data (or negation data) soon.

Communique does not originate from Adrian, but in relatively close proximity. And the PRESIDENT is not the "BALD-EAGLE" being reffered to.

Fraternally yours:"

Any thoughts from any readers on what this could be? I do not issue my address to anyone and have no clue or understanding of what is going on with this. I didn't even think that the post office delivered mail without return addresses, but I guess I was wrong. Figured I would share this bit of strangeness with anyone that actually happens to read this blog.

$4.50 for a gallon of milk?

I cant find the article right now and like a boner I did not book mark it. But yesterday I was reading an interesting piece on the rise of consumer goods due to the push for ethanol. Some areas of the country are already seeing milk at around $3/ gallon due to the increased demand for corn. Corn being the staple for cows in the mid west. What people don't want to see is that oil for the moment is the best route(for vehicles) and that ethanol and its HUGE government subsidies are not the answer. But as always our loyal and trusted public servants in the government are looking for the quick fix as opposed to the real answer.

Why Voting is for Suckers

The argument has been made time and time again that voting is a duty of a citizen of the United States. I call this “duty” false, as apparently does most of the US, considering the vast majority do not turn out for any election. This is not nearly the same as why I choose not to vote though.

The main problem I see with voting is that it is tantamount to terrorism. Your vote puts a man into a position of unjust power; a position of power that affects all sorts of third parties who have nothing to do with the actual election. If you are willing to vote, then you must also be willing to accept responsibility for any rights that are violated after he assumes his seat of power. I myself do not believe it is my right to impose my will on any other people, therefore it is not right for me to say that I cannot do that but I will allow someone else to do that for me. Voting for an elected official in my eyes would be me saying “I don’t want to take my neighbors money to pay for my child to go to school, so I will have someone else do it for me.” This is what you condone by voting. The question was posed to one Wendy McElroy of if she could cast the deciding vote against Hitler would she? Her answer was no, but her counter answer was brilliant , "No, but I would have no moral objection to putting a bullet through his skull." The logic here is that by putting a bullet through his head you affect a very limited amount of people. However by casting your vote against him you vote for the lesser of two evils and even if it is lesser, it is still evil.

Another question you must ask is if you accept the state as a ruling authority. I myself do not, ours is a country that is ruled by an elite class of citizen who have nothing in common nor any interest in advancing the common man. Our government has become one where big business and big government are one and the same. Especially with the current administration has turned into an Imperial form of government, one which does not follow its own rules nor one which follows the will of the people as was the intention of our founding fathers when this country was established. We need only look at our congress which cow tows to the president on his demands, or our president and vice president who do not believe they are part of the executive branch of government to see this.

On another note I will borrow a quote from a very wise man by the name of Lysander Spooner, he asked “Does choosing your master every four years make you less of a slave?” To this I give a resounding no. All you are accomplishing by casting your ballot is to choose who will be your master and who will make the decision on what is right and wrong for you, what you should and should not do. You do not cast a vote for freedom or for liberty you cast a vote for oppression and for control. By doing so you forfeit all right to complain about government in its decisions, even if you do not vote for the politician who gains power. Arguing that you can complain about his form of oppression and “for the good of the people” decision making is like starting a game and then saying you didn’t want to play if you knew you would lose. You willingly entered the contest but when the results don’t favor you, it’s no fair.

On the other hand by not voting I have put no one in power, nor do I believe that anyone should make my decisions for me. My life and my property are my right and my choice as are the rights of all other people. As Voltaire said “Man is free the instant he wants to be.” Until the citizens of this country stop being blind and voting into the same system that has failed for years they can never be free. There are some however who see this as the only solution and I now county myself as one of them.

5th Sentence Meme

Merely echoing the 5th Sentence Meme from No Third Solution.

Grab the nearest book.

1. Open it to page 161.
2. Find the fifth full sentence.
3. Post the text of the sentence along with these instructions.

Don’t search around looking for the coolest book you can find. Do what’s actually next to you.

Here goes:

"An early medieval Arab traveller describing to his readers the wonders of the mysterious land of China, has a strange tale to tell."

The sentence is from "The Middle East: A Brief History of the Last 2,000 years"

The American Gulag

This is the Dawn of the American Gulag...

First it starts with a 'list' that rapidly gets larger and larger with no controls(FBI Terror list at 509,000)...and the original purpose of the list becomes muted and then fades away as the true design becomes clear: as a tool for identifying and repressing potential dissidents to the increasingly authoritarian rule...America is, right now, not anything close to a democracy, nor a representative republic, it is a modern feudalistic state, fueled by corruption on virtually every side, and a drunk with power out-of-control vice-president and a stupid, stubborn, ignorant man who believes he has the Divine Right of Kings as president.

Great Link

Follow this link to Strike the Root for a great article by Robert Kaercher on the use of force in society as a sickness. It draws some great conclusions about what is going on this country and the indifference of the Amerikan people.

For those of you unfamiliar with Strike the Root, it is a hot bed of libertarian thought and offers up great articles and links on a daily basis. If you are looking for some good reads, this is the place to go. Also, they have a great archive highlighting reasons not to vote, also worth a read!

Whats the difference?

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The House of Representatives on Tuesday advanced legislation aimed at pressuring Egypt to improve its human rights record by withholding some military aid until progress is made.

The House Appropriations Committee approved a wide-ranging foreign aid bill for next year that would hold back $200 million in military funds for Egypt until the close U.S. ally takes steps to curb police abuses, reform its judicial system and stop weapons smuggling from Egypt to Gaza.

For more on this funding cut check out The Arabist.

This makes total sense, lets cut funding to Egypt for having poor human rights records from a government we installed and support through said human rights violations. It must be a pretty bad fall from the high horse when we decide that now after years and years we no longer approve.

The Question also begs, why are we cutting funding to Egypt and not Israel? As has been highlighted by numerous sources Israel has receieved dozens of UN sanctions(that arent enforced) for human rights violations on all levels. However this doesnt bother us or interupt their funding. As of this posting, Israel still receives more direct and indirect US funding than all other nations on earth combined. This willy nilly enforcement idea of who we should take money away from for bad human rights records simply highlights the fact that we work for Israel. It is not the other way around, we are the tool that keeps them afloat in the sea of hatred and resentment they have built. They are the tool that increases the hatred for us because of our horrendous foreign policy in the middle eastern region. I say if we take money from Egypt, we should strip all funding to Israel. It only makes sense seeing as they are a very advanced state with the 4th largest military on earth(from a "country" of 6 million people), of all the places in need of US aid, they are the last.

Preemptive War

Obviously I have already delved into the issues that I think are happening in Iran and some logical presentations of why Iran is not searching for a conflict with the US. But lets say that in fact they are on the verge of creating and arming themselves with nuclear weapons, there is a great reason for this.

The reason is because there is now a rouge nation on the prowl who preaches and practices the doctrine of preemptive war. This rouge state is none other than your very own United States of America. If you were in a country that had been receiving what I will call threats from said rouge nation would you not proceed with the steps neccessary to possibly discourage any preemptive attack? If you could develop nuclear weapons and deter said attack would that not make logical sense? Please leave some comments and let me know if Im the only one thinking that it makes sense for Iran to develop these weapons.

On a sidenote as I have said short of dropping a nuke in Iraq which is not in their best interest, even if they develop a nuclear weapon they have no means to deliver it to the United States, thus not being the threat they are depicted as.

Whose government is it?

“They can try to have their votes of no confidence, but it’s not going to determine — make the determination who serves in my government,” Mr. Bush said, adding, “This process has been drug out a long time, which says to me it’s political.” George W. Bush from a NY Times Article.

This is disturbing, he refers to it as serving in his government. It is not his government last time I checked, by the definition it is a government by the people for the people. While this may not completely be the case, it is the intention of our government. Not for some power hungry lunatic in the White House to declare it his government. Lord help us should there be another "catastrophic emergency" which would allow George to invoke Homeland Security Presidential Directive/HSPD-20 which would bestow upon the president the authority to personally take control of the entire federal government including the judicial and legislative branches for the purpose of “ensuring constitutional government". Sounds to me like a means to an end for an essential take over of the US Government. I for one believe that if there was ever a person in the White House crazy enough to declare himself the sole government and ruler of all people and to eliminate another election it would be young George. This is what democracy has brought us, dont you think we could do a lot better?

“It’s an interesting comment about Congress, isn’t it, that, on the one hand, they say that a good general shouldn’t be reconfirmed, and on the other hand, they say that my Attorney General shouldn’t stay,” he said today. “And I find it interesting. I guess it reflects the political atmosphere of Washington.”

Also from the same article. The fact is that the general not being renewed has overseen the debacle and clusterfuck that is US involvment in Iraq. We are mired in a stagnat pit of violence which no reasonable man would try to say shows any signs of improvement, that is why he is not being renewed, not politics. The attorney general also didnt receive a ringing vote of support, they did receive a majority, but not the 60 votes necessary(That raises the question to me that if it is a democratic vote, then how come 51 votes isnt all they need, thats democracy.). Gonzalez has acted in a manner unbefitting a man in charge of the highest law in the land and has treated it as a partisan play thing. He is yet another whore for President Bush that says yes to any question asked no matter how he may violate the constitution and the rights of the people.

Vietnam part II?

Early military reports revealed the difficulty that the Soviet forces encountered in fighting in mountainous terrain. The Soviet Army was unfamiliar with such fighting, had no counter-insurgency training, and their weaponry and military equipment, particularly armored cars and tanks, were sometimes ineffective or vulnerable in the mountainous environment. Heavy artillery was extensively used when fighting rebel forces.

The Soviets used helicopters (including Mil Mi-24 Hind helicopter gunships) as their primary air attack force, which was regarded as the most formidable helicopter in the world, supported with fighter-bombers and bombers, ground troops and special forces.

The inability of the Soviet Union to break the military stalemate, gain a significant number of Afghan supporters and affiliates, or to rebuild the Afghan Army, required the increasing direct use of its own forces to fight the rebels. Soviet soldiers often found themselves fighting against civilians due to the elusive tactics of the rebels. They repeated one of the American Vietnam mistakes by winning almost all of the conventional battles, but failing to control the countryside.

**Thanks to Wikipedia for the above info.

Now re-read all of that. But when doing so, replace mountainous with urban, Soviet with American, and Afghan with Iraqi and what does it sound like? Kind of strange what they say, those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it. This would be the second repeat as Russia in Afghanistan was the first.

The Problem With Police

Ive posted on this topic before as have many others, and I wont lie Im blatanly copying and pasting this one but I could never explain and give an example this well. This is another case of police all dressed up and playing solider with no intention of carrying through because they may put themselves in danger to stop the victimization of innocent civilians. Despite the fact that this is what they are hired and sworn in to do it is not in severe cases the reality of the situation.

Portion of article lifted from Pro Libearte courtsey of William N. Grigg

Once again, the operational principle was not to “protect and serve” the innocent, but officer safety uber alles.

This is not always the case, of course. There are, I happily and gratefully acknowledge, many genuinely heroic men in law enforcement and rescue units who defy the officer safety dogma to and on behalf of the innocent, despite the fact that the State does not require them to.

He died trying to save a stranger: The heroic Kris Kime (l.) and the memorial plaque in Seattle's Pioneer Square district, where he was murdered (r.).

In fact, that's what happened in the case of Kris Kime, as described in this excerpt from an account compiled by a Seattle law firm:

“Kris Kime was with his friends in the midst of Pioneer Square.... The group of friends became separated. Some of the young women were assaulted. They were in the process of desperately trying to leave when Kris bent over to help a victimized woman who had been knocked to the ground. As he reached out to her, Kris had no idea that [Jerell] Thomas [who murdered Kime] was approaching him from the rear. Massive blows were delivered to the back of Kris’ head and he fell to the ground....

The group of friends and onlookers created a circle around Kris as the mob surged around. A few people tried to kick him.

As he lay dying in the street, the City [police] stood by and did nothing. Friend Louis Dickinson called 911 to get help. The dispatcher explained that the police would not go in to the melee. `He’s hurt bad' Dickinson pleaded. Not giving up, he ran to the perimeter and begged the police directly. In wooden tones they told him that they had heard the dispatch but would not go in. Meanwhile two off duty paramedics came to help and along with a few of the friends were able to drag Kris out of the square. No ambulances or aid vehicles were present, so Kris was placed into the rear of a patrol car and taken to Harborview.”

While the entire police force – commanders, dispatchers, and officers on the street – allowed this murder to unfold before their eyes, it was a couple of off-duty paramedics who risked their lives in a doomed but noble attempt to save the life of the stricken Samaritan.

Perhaps these heroic paramedics were able to see their moral duty clearly because they were off the clock, and thus not working for the State.

The only excuse for putting up with government at all is the assumption that it will protect us from the violence of the lawless: That's the actual import of the much-misused passages in Romans 13 urging Christians to be subject to governments: God has placed the sword into the hands of rulers to defend the innocent against evil-doers.

Where governments do not carry out that function, they have no moral or practical reason to exist.

As we mourn for the innocent dead and wounded, and pray for the consolation of their families, let us also reflect on the unambiguous truth that the State that rules us cannot protect us -- and that only idolatrous fools would permit that State to disarm us.

*****Original Content*****

This seems to be the main problem with any of the numerous yahoos who decide they want to be swat officers. They all want to play army, have the toys, dress the part and fluff their machismo for all to see. However when it comes to nut cutting time, more often than not they sit back and do not enter the fray for fear of endangering themselves in the effort to prevent violence. A prime example is Columbine when numerous swat teams descened on the high school but none entered to confront the gunmen. The reasoning, A.) that they feared seeting off another gunfight. Horrible logic as innocent unarmed students and teachers were being gunned down in a place devoid of protection. This is what a swat team is for but since it didnt involve an early morning no knock raid the situation was to dangerous. Reason B.) They were afraid that since they did not know who the suspects were it would put officers in danger. What the FUCK? How on earth did they propose to find the suspects wait until everyone was dead or sit back as they did, wait until the killers shot themselves and then slap each other on the back for a job well done.

The willingness of these groups to use their arms in situations that dont need them is startling. Below are links the same blog above that highlight some of these occurences. Only when the threat is minimal and a story of danger can be manufactured does it seem that the officers will draw arms or place themselves in "danger".

http://freedominourtime.blogspot.com/2007/05/another-victim-of-warfarehomeland.html
http://freedominourtime.blogspot.com/2007/05/biden-gives-his-blessing-to-derek-hales.html
http://freedominourtime.blogspot.com/2007/05/when-state-owns-your-name.html
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig7/bothwell2.html

Check here: http://www.cato.org/raidmap/ and you can find any number of egregious offenses by your hard working boys in blue.

With this body of work and some peoples denial of the second ammendment I must ask, are you really comfortable letting only these over anxious "peace officers" have the guns?

Incoherent Ramblings of a Malcontent

With everyday that passes, the US puts down more roots into the soil of Iraq. More bases are built, more influence gained, more troops stationed. All under the guise of promoting freedom and peace for the Iraqi people, but last I checked it is a real quagmire where violence and corruption rum rampant with no force being able to check them. The only areas of the country that I would consider safe are the Green Zone and areas that are dominated by certain militias who have been able to control the streets and provide protection the US presence cannot.

With recent talk from the White House and Central Command we now hear that the US is planning a long and enduring stay in Iraq. The likes of what we have in Korea or Japan. There are several problems with this plan.

The first problem is that our mere presence on Arab and Islamic soil is enough to breed hatred. We are forcibly and violentlf defiling countries where the citizens dont want us. It isnt just Iraq, but is Saudia Arabia, Egypt etc. We have a huge problem thinking that everyone wants our help when i reality no one in the middle east wants us there except the weak goverments who suppress their people which we support. Thats one great step to change our image in the Middle East(sarcasm).

The second problem is that Iraq will never be like either of those countries. The reality of it is that in South Korea, tehy wanted us there and need us to stay because of the communist threat(boogie man) in the north. No one in Iraq wants us to stay, hell im pretty sure that as soon as we caught Saddam they didnt want us around anymore. But we persist to tell another country what is in its best interest and how they should live and how thankful they should be. The end result, something that isnt happening in Korea, thats right an insurgency. Last time I checked no US troops were being killed in Korea every day, the people werent rebeling against us and the overwhelming population didnt hate us and want us out.

If George W. Bush can get over this idea in his head that he needs to be saving countries that dont want saving things may improve. You have to wonder if he actually thinks that he can bomb the middle east into peaceful democracies with leaders who love us, because thats the way it looks . That wont happen, he is so conservative and "born again" that there is no doubt in my mind that he views this as a "crusade" of sorts, its almost like he is trying to promote end times because he believes in it. I am rambling and off point but it all just makes no sense.

Our government is a sham, power simply breeds more power, and greed and corruption, find me an honest politician in Washington who is actually looking out for the interests of the people. YOu cant, it wont happen, all our government has become is big buisness, bent on filling their own pockets no matter what ethics they violate, whose wheels get greased and what civil and constitutional rights get trampled in the process. Our founding fathers had the right idea, they knew what tehy wanted but politicians have become so distorted since then that it will never be the same, our democracy now is simply how civilized people loot, opress and murder one another as opposed to the way it used to be with barbarians.

As a last note I would like to remind our serivce men and women out there what they should be defending. Your oath of service did not say that you would defend the United States against all foes foreign or domestic. It stated that you will defend the United States CONSTITUTION against all foes foreign and domestic. Last I checked the Iraqi insurgency is not violating the constitution. Rather it is our goverment who sent you off to an illegitimate war who has raped and defiled your constitution, looks like the fight should be at home.

Iran vs. US, lets apply some logical thinking.

There is alot of sabre rattling by the US these days towards Iran. The administration is already actively painting the picture that Iran is a serious and legitimate threat to the security of the United States. Again this falls in line with the pattern of ruling by fear. The fact of the matter is that neither country would have anything to gain by going to war, least of all Iran which begs the question, are they even posturing for a conflict?

First off let’s look at the alleged ace in the hole of the Bush administration, the nuclear program (which the US actually helped Iran start in the 1950's). There are two schools of thought on this issue, the first being the Bush School of thought that Iran is developing and already has the capability to produce nuclear weapons. Based on "intelligence" the administration claims this is the case. Bare in mind this is the same "intelligence" gathering that led us into the Iraq war under false pretenses. The second school of thought is that Iran is not allowing inspectors in to see their nuclear program because they have failed to produce anything close to nuclear weapons grade plutonium yet. I would say that this is more than likely the case with Iran. Also, why on earth should Iran not be allowed to develop nuclear energy and weapons, I know for a fact if I was any other country in the Middle East that I would be trying knowing that the militaristic regime in Israel has nuclear weapons. The countries surrounding Israel would be stupid not to be developing these technologies. Then there is also the chance that Iran is using the nuclear program to actually develop energy sources to use other than Oil which would be a great thing for any country.

Next, let’s look at this from a Military stand point. The US, although short on manpower due to Iraq is the strongest military in the world. We are vastly superior to Iran in terms of Naval and air power in any conflict and despite all the showing off that Iran has done recently with their naval and ground forces they know this. This leads to the understanding from Iran that their Navy and Air force would not stand for 24 hours in the face of what would be an overwhelming attack by US forces (which would be another illegitimate mass murdering in a preemptive war). After the initial attack there is no doubt that much like Iraq, Iran's infrastructure would be in total ruins setting the country back years. This is not what the government in Iran wants or needs. For the US the initial war would go quickly and smoothly much like Iraq, but the aftereffects would be devastating. If we think that we are seeing a powerful insurgency in Iraq then there is no way that the US would have the stomach for what would occur in Iran. The elite military units of the Iranian military would no doubt disband and meld into the insurgency that would begin. There would be much more sophisticated and advanced IED's** as well as military tactics overall and unlike Iraq, the people in Iran are not living with the hatred of their government so there goes the "lets free them" idea.

Another interesting thing to look at is that Iran has not started any military conflict in decades, especially not since the Iranian Revolution of 1979. Whereas the US in the same time period has started numerous conflicts and has intervened in many others (this is the new US imperialism).

So logically who would appear to be the instigator of this potential conflict? I think when you add up the realities of the situation that Iran knows that they have nothing to gain with open conflict with the US. George Bush and Cheney no doubt see this as another just cause no doubt supported by their twisted and ideological world view. The fact is however that it would result in another conflict that US would have no chance in sustaining with troop levels and like Iraq that they would have no chance in actually achieving victory. If anyone who reads this can tell the last time a western army went into the Middle East and was actually able to conquer and replace a regime I would love to hear it. Western thinking cannot realize the overwhelming role of religion and religious classes in Middle Eastern life; we cannot understand that democracy is not what these countries want. The sooner we change our foreign policy and the sooner we realize that we have nothing to gain by trying to influence the affairs of countries that don’t want our help the better off we will be as a country.

On a side note I’m sure many people aren’t really paying attention to the events that unfolded in Lebanon recently; the rise of Sunni insurgent groups against the Lebanese government . I’m sure also that many people don’t know how this all occurred. Here is what went down. After Hezbollah stood up to the might of the Israeli onslaught and proved themselves a very capable guerilla organization the United States became a bit worried. In an attempt to counter this Shiite militia that lives in Lebanon the US began to fund and equip various Sunni organizations to act as a counter to Hezbollah (look there, encouraged sectarian violence). Well as a result there are now well equipped and funded Sunni groups who have decided that they aren’t the biggest fans of the Lebanese government so they took actions. So lets see how our actions worked there, we armed Sunnis to fight Shiites, instead they fight a democratically elected government. Looks to me like we lose on both counts and have only created more problems for ourselves in the Middle East. It is very similar to what occurred in Afghanistan in terms of arming one group to support our cause only to find out that our causes are not the same. Gives great credence to the quote "Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it" good job George W, you've made some great decisions in your two terms so far, lets see how many more lives you can cost this great nation and how many more conflicts you can create you are hands down the worst president in the history of the United States.

For a further example of the US not practicing what it preaches in terms of exporting democracy (which Bush actually was opposed to in his first campaign as well as using our troops for nation building.) we need only look at our close ally Pakistan. Pakistan is governed my a military dicator in "president" Musharaf who took power in a coup. Simply because he attached the word president to his title doesnt make him democratically elected. Yet we supply this military dictatorship with millions and millions of dollar of aid as he continues to supress the rights of his people. If our foreign policy doesnt help to breed hate I dont know what would. If you are one of the Americans who think the Arab world hates us for our freedom, I suggest you stop watching TV and pick up a book.

**Interstingly enough, despite the Pentagons best efforts to better protect US troops from IED attacks, they are killing soldiers with more regularity than ever. A great example of a guerilla movement out thinking and outpacing a multi billion dollar militart industrial complex.

Homeland Security, how safe do you feel?

With the events that occurred on 9/11 we ushered in a brand new era of powers to the executive branch of government. We saw George W. Bush institute new reforms to violate our personal freedoms and trample on the amendments. One of the biggest violations that occurred was the formation of the good old Department of Homeland Security. This was an organization that was created to prevent terrorists and the threat they pose of attacking us on our home soil.

One of the claims made by the DHS is that by clamping down on all forms of immigration they have made it virtually impossible for terrorists to come to the United States. Unless you are a total idiot, then you can see through this we have very loose borders even after 9/11 and the flow of immigrants has not ceased. Look at what was happening in NJ with the threat of an attack on the Army base they were foreign immigrants yet they were here. Our system of keeping track of immigrants was so flawed when 9/11 occurred that the attackers had been in our country for some time illegally and no one knew, yet they were all on a watch list. The current watch list is no better with many innocent civilians being placed on the list for having similar names and even when showing they are not who the government thinks they are, have no recourse to get themselves off the list.

Another startling statistic of the DHS is that of 800,000 plus individuals charged, only 114 have been charged with terror related offenses. That comes up to less than .01% for those of you keeping track at home. Are we to believe that this organization is necessary when after all its work and all its charges only .01% of the people it has charged are even linked to terrorism? What then is the DHS doing? Are we to believe that there are either no terrorists, or that DHS is just terrible at catching them, which do you think it is? I’m betting on a combination of the two. The threat of domestic attack and terrorism in this country is drastically overblown by the Bush Administration who rules purely by fear. If the White House can’t keep the majority of lemmings I mean citizens afraid of a terror that doesn’t exist how can they continue to suppress our rights?

Two Links/ Articles to consider:

Since 9/11 the PATRIOT Act has been used in numerous cases involving American citizens, including strip club owners, toy store proprietors, the homeless, owners of websites, writers, internet users, artists, journalists and photographers.

Maybe in order to find more terrorists the DHS should investigate itself. In 2004 the DHS employed former East German Stasi head, the 'Silver Fox' Markus Wolfe who had previously been denied entry to the US as he was considered a terrorist. In addition, the DHS also hired Ex-head of the Soviet KGB, General Yevgeni Primakov.

Lets all salute the new world order of the Bush Administration. To think like a police state it only helps if we hire those who are from the police state, this is your new America.
Special thanks with this piece to this article at Infowars.net.

I work with a person who I would describe as fairly right wing and who is supportive of the current administration. We were discussing some of the steps taken under the Patriot Act etc. the other day while driving from one job site to the other. I brought up the idea of illegal wiretaps, and of email checking and other forms of spying by the US government on its citizens. His response was the "because I’m not doing anything I don’t care". I was the complete opposite and I think many people would agree with me, it is precisely because of the fact that I am innocent that I object so much to the idea of being spied on by my own government. If I have done nothing then why should I be watched? It is the idea that innocence should mean compliance that is flawed thinking by many Americans today. It has been said that people should not fear their government, but the government should fear its people, I don’t think we could be further from that point.