The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 was originally established to protect American citizens from the federal use of military troops to enforce and execute the laws of the land unless expressly authorized by the Constitution or  Congress. Since then, for over a century, this task has fallen upon local and federal law enforcement. But with the War on Terror taking center stage in the United States for the last decade, elements within the government have been working tirelessly to expand the mission of the US military on the domestic front.

First, they passed the Patriot Act, which gave the government sweeping new powers to categorize any individual as a terrorist, whether they are operating on foreign lands or here at home. In 2011, as America brought in the New Year, they signed into law the National Defense Authorization Act, which made it possible for American citizens who were categorized as domestic terrorists under the Patriot Act to be detained and imprisoned indefinitely without charge or trial.

Finally, last week we learned that, as President Obama came under fire for the many scandals rocking his administration, the government was quietly moving to give the Department of Defense unprecedented authority on U.S. soil, effectively nullifying Posse Comitatus.

Eric Blair of Activist Post writes:

First, the senate is debating an expansion of the already broad powers of the 2001 Authorization to Use Military Force (AUMF) so the U.S. can essentially engage any area in the world in the war on terror, including America. Which brings us to the second development: the Pentagon has recently granted itself police powers on American soil.

Assistant Secretary of Defense Michael Sheehan told Congress yesterday that the AUMF authorized the US military to operate on a worldwide battlefield from Boston to Pakistan.  Sheehan emphasized that the Administration is authorized to put boots on the ground wherever the enemy chooses to base themselves, essentially ignoring the declaration of war clause in the US Constitution.

While Americans were distracted with three developing scandals pushed by both wings of the mainstream media, sinister developments were taking place behind closed doors. In essence, the US military has granted itself the power to deploy troops on the streets of America without approval from the President or Congress, and the AUMF, which was originally designed to target the terrorists responsible for 9/11, has been expanded to give the government authority to use military assets on the domestic front without a declaration from Congress.

Charlie McGrath of Wide Awake News explains:

Thanks to the hard work of Eric Blair at Activist Post we understand that Washington D.C. has been very busy eroding your freedom.

In fact, Senator Angus King went so far as to say that the hearing he was involved in was the most astonishing and disturbing hearing he has ever seen.

Even John McCain, war hawk John McCain, came out and said the government has gone way beyond its authority.

What are they talking about? The AUMF – Authorization to Use Military Force.

This piece of legislation that was put into place way back when we started the war on terror that is now turning from foreign enemies to YOU. Don’t be shocked by that, because you are on the list if you are a freedom minded, free thinker that believes in a Constitutional Republic.

They are changing the wording of this thing so that the military can be used on the streets of this country.

It’s not a conspiracy theory. It’s not some kind of a fancy fantasy that may come true down the road.

It is happening right now, in the guise of other news events that are not news events.

Even more terrifying is the fact that West Point has come out recently and said that you – if you have a theory that the federal government is trying to take over and implement a national police force – you could fall into the category of a domestic terrorist.

A domestic terrorist that can be dealt with by military force…

The only conspiracy here is what the government is telling us.

This legislation is real. The militarization of America is in full force. We are the targets.

They write the rules. One set for them. One set for us.

50 million of our fellow countrymen starve and depend on paltry government distributions to put food on the table every month. Millions have lost their homes and their jobs. And future generations are saddled with trillions of dollars in debt that can never be repaid.

All the while, those who are supposed to serve the people have only one goal: to enrich themselves and raise their elite status.

While the majority of America drinks Kool-Aid, they drink $500 bottles of wine. And, all of it is achieved at our expense.

47% of our Congress members are millionaires. The craziest part is, they tend to get richer in office. And, that is no coincidence.

They get richer in many unsavory ways.

One [way] is by using private information they obtain in office to make trades in the stock market. And, although they’re not supposed to do that, it’s pretty obvious that they do… Right before the stock market crashed in 2008, many of them invested in instruments that went up in value because the market went down.

…Then, there are earmarks, where Congress people secure federal money, as in your tax dollars, for projects that will benefit them directly. Take Nancy Pelosi. she owns an office building in San Francisco. She secured about $900 million in federal earmarks to build a light rail system that would, surprisingly, stop right by her own building. Once the project is completed, the value of her building could skyrocket 150%.

… Then there’s the revolving door, where members of Congress agree to do the bidding of lobbyists and corporations while they’re in office. In exchange, they get big fat salaries at jobs when they get out of Congress.

79% of members  of Congress who have left office since 1998 have gone to work as lobbyists.

…

The bottom line is, Americans, almost half of your Congress people are millionaires and many of them got that rich by using their powers in office.

Do you really think they’re there to represent you? Or to gain wealth for themselves?

(Video via Rense.com)

A stunning 50% of Americans surveyed said yes. What’s more, a full 25% of democrats polled by the firm agreed. The poll has a margin of error of 4.36%.

“It may be early in the process for members of Congress to start planning for impeachment of Barack Obama, but the American public is building a serious appetite for it,” said Fritz Wenzel.

…

“Half or nearly half of those surveyed said they believed Obama should be impeached for the trifecta of scandals now consuming Washington.”

Actually, on the issue of the Benghazi scandal, where four Americans were killed when in what may have been a politically motivated series of moves, a surging danger to Americans at the foreign service facility there was ignored until al-Qaida-linked terrorists attacked, 50.1 percent of Americans said Obama should be impeached. That included 27.6 percent of the responding Democrats.

On the scandal of the Internal Revenue Service intentionally harassing conservative and Christian organizations? Forty-nine percent said they agree that impeachment is appropriate, including 24.4 percent of the Democrats.

And on the fishing trip the Obama administration took into AP reporters’ telephone records in search of something that may well have been done by his own administration, 48.6 percent impeachment is appropriate. That included 26.1 percent of the Democrats.

WND Poll

Is this the most corrupt administration ever?

Let’s see how I do with the list.

• Fast And Furious (guns for drug lords, resulting in murder of Americans and Mexicans)
• Robosigning (over 100,000 perjured affidavits filed in court cases)
• IRS Tea Party and other group and individual abuse in direct violation of the law (politically-based harassment and now apparently-perjured testimony before Congress)
• Money Laundering for terrorists and drug lords (by multiple large banks)
• Intentional and unlawful destruction of property rights (GM bondholders screwed for political cronies in the UAW)
• Intentional and unlawful destruction of your saved wealth (QE, QE2, QE3, QEinfinity, $1 trillion+ deficits, etc; Treasury and Federal Reserve actions)
• Benghazi (apparent illegal arming of terrorists, then an attempt to reverse that leading to the attack on our CIA outpost and what appears to beintentional indifference and orders to stand down during the attack that had to come from the White House despite ability to respond; this amounts to conspiracy with the terrorists to kill Chris Stevens and the others who died.)
• Swindles by the billions in countless schemes during the 2000s related to securitizations and other hinky deals (where despite black letter legal requirements for actual endorsement and delivery of documents banks simply did not comply and now argue there should be no penalty for not having done so, and that these defects are “mere procedural errors” despite intent to not comply.)  The result is that our land title system no longer has any resemblance of integrity.
• Intentional destruction of anything approaching a “free market” for health care going back 30+ years and now compounded through active conspiracy by Obama and all of the political parties to grant, protect and enforce through government monopolies and cost-shifting resulting in cost escalations of 500-1,000% or even more against market prices and now, with Obamacare, abuse of the IRS tax power to force another 100% or more increase in those expenses down your throat for the express purpose of enrichment of those in the medical industry.

Source: Karl Denninger’s Market Ticker

This administration is involved in machinations and back-office deals that have not only cost Americans trillions of dollars in economic losses, but countless lives as evidenced by Benghazi and the Fast & Furious gun running operation.

As an American citizen you live under the rule of law; it’s a law that is supposed to apply to every one of us, equally.

If you forge signatures on official documents you go to prison.

If you fail to pay your taxes you go to prison.

If you attempt to hide money within our banking system you go to prison.

If you tap someone’s phone – or even attempt to record federal or state officials in public venues with your cell phone, they send you to prison.

If you knowingly sell guns to criminals you go to prison.

If you conspire to create a story and lie about your involvement in the murder of others you go to prison.

But if you’re an Obama administration official or have political and financial ties to the President, you have immunity or “Executive Privilege”.

This is NOT how our system of justice is supposed to work.

One set of laws for us – another set of laws for them.

There is only one solution – and it involves handcuffs… for a lot of people, from the President of the United States on down.

How 50% of Americans can sit idly by while their nation and their personal liberties are supplanted at every turn is beyond words.

Remember, impeachment does not mean the President would be kicked out of office. It means that he and his administration would be extensively investigated by independent prosecutors, questioned by Congress, and judged by the American people in a public forum.

To the question of “Should President Obama be impeached,” 100% of Americans should have responded with a resounding yes.

The integrity of the highest office in our land is being called into question – and half of our countrymen don’t care.

It’s a stark reminder of where we’re headed.

Microstamping, or ballistic imprinting, is a technology patented in the 1990′s by engineer and NRA member Todd Lizotte. When a gun is fired, a tiny engraving on the firing pin etches a microscopic identifier onto the cartridge as it is expended by the firearm.

The law, which requires every semi automatic gun sold in the state to imprint the gun’s serial number on the cartridge, was signed into law by former California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in 2007 and was delayed due to patent stipulations in the legislation.

The legislation specified that it would take effect only when the technology was available and all private patents had expired.

But at a Los Angeles news conference Friday, Harris announced that micro-stamping had cleared all technological and patenting hurdles and would be required on newly sold semiautomatics, effective immediately.

“The patents have been cleared, which means that this very important technology will help us as law enforcement in identifying and locating people who have illegally used firearms,” Harris said.

According to proponents of the legislation, ballistic micro-stamping will help law enforcement investigators track down firearms used in the commission of crimes:

Attorney Benjamin Van Houten of San Francisco’s Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence said the announcement should send a message to other states, the Obama administration and the gun industry that “this is the future and it’s really critical to helping law enforcement solve gun crimes.”

Implementation of micro-stamping “moves California to the forefront of the nation in combatting gun crime,” said the law’s author, former Assemblyman Mike Feuer, D-Los Angeles, who attended the news conference and is running for city attorney.

It’s not clear exactly how a firearm that has been illegally purchased, such as through straw buyers who purchased semi-automatic rifles to Mexican drug cartels from federal agents in Operation Fast and Furious, could help track down criminals using untraceable guns in the commission of a crime.

In addition to being ineffective in tracking gun crimes, NRA attorney C.D. Michel suggests that with firearm sales across the country already putting overwhelming demand on gun manufacturers, the new California law could lead to widespread shortages of handguns in the state:

“This is not going to help solve crimes,” he said. “It’s easily defeated, easily wears out and can be used to lead police down false alleys” if the serial numbers are altered.

Worse yet, Michel said, manufacturers will be unwilling to add this expensive feature to guns sold in a single state, and will instead keep manufacturing weapons for the other states, where demand already far exceeds supply.

The effect, he said, would be a ban on new semiautomatic handguns in California, which the NRA will challenge in court.

As has been the case with California’s 1990′s ban on semi-automatic rifles and larger capacity magazines, the microstamping legislation aims to reduce availability of firearms to law abiding citizens. Because the legislation specifically targets semi-automatic handguns, a staple personal self defense firearm, the vast majority of those affected will be people who simply want to own a handgun to protect themselves and their families.

The law will have almost no effect on a criminal’s ability to gain access to firearms through the black market. This has been proven time and again with semi-automatic rifles and shotguns, which are already illegal in California but are regularly used by gangs and criminals.

It will also be the case with new micro-stamped handguns, which just like non-ballistically identified firearms, can be stolen and moved through back channels without restriction. If anything, criminals will prefer stolen micro-stamped guns over others because when police forensic teams show up, their investigations will be diverted to the original owner of the firearm, not to the criminal who stole it or purchased it through underground dealers.

And for those who think this is restricted to the left-coast, similar legislation is under consideration in New York, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Maryland, Wisconsin, and Illinois. Likewise, a federal push for micro-stamping was attempted in 2008 by both the House and the Senate in the form of the National Gun Crime Identification Act.

Microstamping is yet another purported “common sense approach” that makes no sense in the real world.

Watch: Stealing Freedom: Microstamping, Firearms and Ammunition

Hattip BigB

According to the Bureau of Labor and Statistics, the CPI (Consumer Price Index) inflation rate remains well below the Federal Reserve’s 2.5% threshold. Insofar as the government is concerned America’s core inflation rate is just 1.7%, a testament to the economic prowess of our central bank and Chairman Ben Bernanke.

And because there is no significant price rise being realized in consumer goods based on the government’s calculations, the millions of Americans dependent on disbursements like social security, disability assistance and nutritional food support will see no adjustments to their monthly stipend. And why would they? Prices aren’t rising!

Or are they?

According to Peter Schiff, who is well known for his dire economic warnings leading up to the crash of 2008, the government is involved in a wide array of manipulations and fuzzy-math in an effort to convince us that the price increases we’ve seen in stores, restaurants and gas stations over the last decade are merely a figment of our imagination.

“What we get from the government when it comes to inflation is not information, it’s propaganda. “

Citing anecdotal evidence because of a complete lack of transparency from the Fed, BLS and government as a whole, Schiff points to the “Big Mac Index,” which has tracked the price of a McDonald’s Big Mac at restaurant chains across the world for decades.

Because McDonald’s caters to tens of millions of customers yearly and offers food at a fairly low cost compared to others in the food service industry, it is a fairly insightful gauge of consumer activity.

According to the Big Mac Index, and contrary to the government’s claims of stable prices, since 2003 when the Federal Reserve really began cranking hundreds of billions of dollars into an already troubled financial system, the price of inflation is more than double what is being claimed.

The Big Mac has gone up by over 6% per year, yet the government claims CPI is only 2.5% per year. So something’s wrong. Either something’s changed at McDonald’s, or something has changed in the way we report inflation. And I trust a hamburger more than I trust the U.S. government.

That price [of the hamburger] went up in line with the CPI for sixteen years, and then in 2002 they started to diverge.

What’s the explanation?

Look at the chart below, and you’ll see that the divergence started taking place when the Federal Reserve started expanding our monetary base after the 2002 crash (with the largest spikes occurring after the 2008 crisis) and when the U.S. government turned to tripling our national debt.

We got news from Tyson foods that showed a big drop in meat processing and pork processing, and an increase in chicken because Americans can’t afford the rising cost off food, so they’re trading down.

The government claims we’re spending more and prices aren’t rising, but the only reason we’re spending more is because prices ARE rising.

In fact, imports from China last month plunged to a three month low because we’re spending so much more money on food, utilities and rent because we can’t afford to buy the things that we want because we’re paying more for the things that we need.

…

Look, the government is creating inflation. The money supply has exploded. The Fed’s got interest rates at zero. It’s buying $85 billion worth of mortgages and government bonds every month. 

That’s the inflation.

You can see it manifest itself in stock prices, in real estate prices, in bond prices… it’s all over the place.

But the government can’t acknowledge that exists, because they can’t do anything about it.

Because if the Fed takes away the cheap money, if they raise interest rates, this whole phony recovery that they’ve created will collapse and we’ll be in a worse economic crisis than 2008. 

So the government cannot tell us the truth about inflation. They’re going to keep lying until people wake up.

Video via SGT Report:

It’s a Catch 22. There’s no way out.

If the government acknowledges what is happening, confidence in the economy and financial markets will be lost and we’ll have a repeat of 2008 or worse.

If the Federal Reserve stops expanding the monetary base and puts an end to the monthly $85 billion in purchases, the entire house of cards will collapse in on itself.

So, their only option is to continue on this course. But it is a trajectory that will lead to a collapse so severe that our civilization may not be able to survive it.

The inflation we’re seeing in the price of our milk, our gas, our electricity and other good and services we depend on is a symptom of a much greater problem.

We have blown the largest bubble in the history of mankind.

One day we’re going to pay for it – not with money. But, rather, it will be paid with the collateral that was used to back the loans – our lives.

Our creditors will soon come for their pound of flesh.

The government of the United States is already preparing for the economic collapse and the civil unrest that will follow.

You should to.

Military no longer under civilian control?

In a move that makes clear the direction that our country is increasingly heading towards, the Department of Defense has published an update to a US code that outlines military power during civil unrest.

The code, ““Defense Support of Civilian Law Enforcement Agencies,” was slightly altered during a May 13th update which now allows the military to unilaterally declare martial law without presidential approval.

Multiple sections of the code outline plans and policies for a martial law scenario and should be considered a must read for any American worried about their freedoms in what has become a hostile American police state.

The rule seems to actually contradict itself, in one part claiming that the military can only be used during extreme circumstances with Presidential approval and then, in an updated part of the code, declaring that the military can put troops on the streets without approval from the president or local law enforcement.

The primary restriction on DoD participation in civilian law enforcement activities is the Posse Comitatus Act. It provides that whoever willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute U.S. laws, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, shall be fined under title 18, U.S.C., or imprisoned not more than two years, or both. Section 182.6 (a) describes in detail the assistance that the Department of Defense may and may not provide civilian law enforcement agencies.

b. Support During Civil Disturbances
The President is authorized by the Constitution and laws of the United States to employ the Armed Forces of the United States to suppress insurrections, rebellions, and domestic violence under various conditions and circumstances. Planning and preparedness by the Federal Government, including the Department of Defense, for civil disturbances is important due to the potential severity of the consequences of such events for the Nation and the population. The employment of Federal military forces to control civil disturbances shall only occur in a specified civil jurisdiction under specific circumstances as authorized by the President, normally through issuance of an Executive order or other Presidential directive authorizing and directing the Secretary of Defense to provide for the restoration of law and order in a specific State or locality.

A little further down within the code the above text is made completely irrelevant. (emphasis mine)

Domestic emergencies. Emergencies affecting the public welfare and occurring within the 50 states, District of Columbia, Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, U.S. possessions and territories, or any political subdivision thereof, as a result of enemy attack, insurrection, civil disturbance, earthquake, fire, flood, or other public disasters or equivalent emergencies that endanger life and property or disrupt the usual process of government. Domestic emergencies include civil defense emergencies, civil disturbances, major disasters, and natural disasters.

[[Page 21829]]

Emergency authority. A Federal military commander’s authority, in extraordinary emergency circumstances where prior authorization by the President is impossible and duly constituted local authorities are unable to control the situation, to engage temporarily in activities that are necessary to quell large-scale, unexpected civil disturbances
because:

(1) Such activities are necessary to prevent significant loss of life or wanton destruction of property and are necessary to restore governmental function and public order; or
(2) Duly constituted Federal, State, or local authorities are unable or decline to provide adequate protection for Federal property or Federal governmental functions.

Most worrying is that the examples given as possible reasons for when the military would need to use their, “emergency authority,” are so broad and open to interpretation that it essentially gives them the power to declare martial law whenever they choose.

A recent piece published by the Long Island Press further expanded on the repercussions of these “subtle” changes to the US code.

The lines blurred even further Monday as a new dynamic was introduced to the militarization of domestic law enforcement.

By making a few subtle changes to a regulation in the U.S. Code titled “Defense Support of Civilian Law Enforcement Agencies” the military has quietly granted itself the ability to police the streets without obtaining prior local or state consent, upending a precedent that has been in place for more than two centuries.

{….}

Bruce Afran, a civil liberties attorney and constitutional law professor at Rutgers University, calls the rule, “a wanton power grab by the military,” and says, “It’s quite shocking actually because it violates the long-standing presumption that the military is under civilian control.”

What exactly giving the power of martial law to a military commander actually means was also explained:

One of the more disturbing aspects of the new procedures that govern military command on the ground in the event of a civil disturbance relates to authority. Not only does it fail to define what circumstances would be so severe that the president’s authorization is “impossible,” it grants full presidential authority to “Federal military commanders.”

According to the defense official, a commander is defined as follows: “Somebody who’s in the position of command, has the title commander. And most of the time they are centrally selected by a board, they’ve gone through additional schooling to exercise command authority.”

As it is written, this “commander” has the same power to authorize military force as the president in the event the president is somehow unable to access a telephone. (The rule doesn’t address the statutory chain of authority that already exists in the event a sitting president is unavailable.)

In doing so, this commander must exercise judgment in determining what constitutes, “wanton destruction of property,” “adequate protection for Federal property,” “domestic violence,” or “conspiracy that hinders the execution of State or Federal law,” as these are the circumstances that might be considered an “emergency.”

“These phrases don’t have any legal meaning,” says Afran. “It’s no different than the emergency powers clause in the Weimar constitution [of the German Reich]. It’s a grant of emergency power to the military to rule over parts of the country at their own discretion.

This power grab comes at a time when police forces throughout the country are already becoming increasingly militarized, with the recent police response during the manhunt for one of the Boston Bombings suspects being a prime example.

Rather than a force of peacekeepers, the police looked more like troops on the battlefield, and in many ways they acted like it. This has all been made possible by little reported on Pentagon programs that give military gear to police forces.

The focus on the DoD regulatory change obscures the creeping militarization that has already occurred in police departments across the nation.

Even prior to the NDAA lawsuit, journalist Chris Hedges was critical of domestic law enforcement agencies saying, “The widening use of militarized police units effectively nullifies the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878.”

This de facto nullification isn’t lost on the DoD.

The DoD official even referred to the Boston bombing suspects manhunt saying, “Like most major police departments, if you didn’t know they were a police department you would think they were the military.”

According to this official there has purposely been a “large transfer of technology so that the military doesn’t have to get involved.” Moreover, he says the military has learned from past events, such as the siege at Waco, where ATF officials mishandled military equipment. “We have transferred the technology so we don’t have to loan it,” he states.

This so called large transfer of technology has allowed law enforcement to basically change their entire purpose by implementing gear and weaponry that twenty years ago would never have been considered for use on the American people.

Sadly, America is increasing becoming eerily similar to many different dictatorships throughout history. From unilateral powers to declare martial law, to the ability to indefinitely detain American citizens without charge, the powers that be have truly moved towards an American police state.

Further Information:
https://publicintelligence.net/dod-support-civilian-law-enforcement/
http://uscode.house.gov/download/pls/10C18.txt
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-04-12/html/2013-07802.htm

Delivered by The Daily Sheeple

Daniel Jackson is a seasoned journalist with a passion for exposing corruption and the lies of the global elite. DJ has a passion for truth and liberty that is shown through his extensive reporting on numerous globally significant topics not normally covered by the corporate controlled media. He is is a writer, researcher and editor for The Daily Sheeple. Wake the flock up!

With seven billion people on the planet energy and food resources are already highly strained, as evidenced by the fact that the majority of the world’s population lives on just scraps a day.

It wouldn’t take much to send us over a cliff. The last several years have not only reduced food reserves significantly because of widespread droughts, but have led to price inflation in essential grains necessary to feed ourselves as well as the livestock on which millions of Americans depend.

The reality is that we’re just one major calamity away from a catastrophic impact on our ability to feed the people of earth.

And, according to recent data published by the Bee Informed Partnership, that calamity could come in the form of a totally unexpected event: Peak Pollination.

According to the latest survey results, an astounding 31.3 percent, or roughly one-third, of all managed bee colonies in the U.S. were wiped out during the most recent 2012/2013 winter season, a rate that represents a 42 percent increase compared to the number of colonies lost during the previous 2011/2012 winter season.

U.S. beekeepers on average lost more than 45 percent of their colonies during the 2012/2013 winter season, a 78.2 percent jump in losses over the previous season.

And overall, more than 70 percent of respondents, most of whom were backyard beekeepers, experienced losses beyond the 15 percent “acceptable” threshold, illustrating a monumental problem not only for bee survival but also for the American food supply.

…many are worried that this year-after-year compounded increase will very soon make it impossible for grow enough food.
“We’re getting closer and closer to the point where we don’t have enough bees in this country to meet pollination demands,” says Dennis vanEngelstorp, an entomologist at the University of Maryland who led the survey. “If we want to grow fruits and nuts and berries, this is important.

One in every three bites [of food consumed in the U.S.] is directly or indirectly pollinated by bees.

Via: Natural News

The bee population has been diminishing at an astounding 30% per year over the last decade, a decline that is often overlooked or ignored by central planners.

Bees are absolutely essential to the cycle of life. In the United States they pollinate about 90% of flowering crops, including those used as feed for cattle.

Take away the bees and the majority of the world’s population will be dead within a year because there will be no way to pollinate the billions of pounds of fruits, vegetables and other plants required to keep all of us alive.

The most frightening thing about the destruction of bee colonies is that we have absolutely no idea what is causing it. It could be contaminants in the air such as industrial pollutants or radiation. Some have surmised that it’s electro-magnetic and radio signals from millions of internet-wired devices. Or, perhaps it’s the very plants the bees are pollinating, most of which are now genetically modified to serve corporate business interests.

Whatever the cause, we have no solution, which means we can expect this trend to continue.

Nature has struck a very delicate balance on our planet. From the thermo-halene circulation of our oceans to the oxygen and carbon dioxide in our air, even tiny changes make for significant global impacts.

At this pace it is only a matter of time before the population of bees on our planet falls below the threshold necessary to produce enough food required to meet global demand.

Adee Honey Farms of South Dakota, the largest beekeeping business in the country, lost 28,000 of its 70,000 hives. That’s about a billion bees gone missing. “It’s off the charts,” said Bret Adee. “It’s not a sustainable thing, what’s happening now.” (link)

How long before we go critical is anybody’s guess, but peak pollination is coming unless we can reverse the trend (something that doesn’t look very promising).

At current rates about half of the world’s bee population is being destroyed every two years.

These are massive numbers.

With bees responsible for pollinating about 35% of the food produced for global consumption, it’s easy to see how serious of a crisis we’ll face if Colony Collapse Disorder can’t be stopped.

Couple this with all of our other problems, both natural and man-made, and things could go very badly, very quickly.

The debate over what actions actually constitute “terrorism,” I believe, will become one of the defining ideological battles of our era. Terrorism is not a word often used by common people to describe aberrant behaviors or dastardly deeds; however, it is used by governments around the world to label and marginalize political enemies. That is to say, it is the government that normally decides who is a “terrorist” and who is a mere “criminal,” the assertion being that one is clearly far worse than the other.

The terrorist label elicits emotional firestorms and fearful brain-quakes in the minds of the masses. It causes the ignorant and unaware to abandon principles they would normally apply to any other malicious enterprise. They begin to reason that a criminal should be afforded justice, while a terrorist should be afforded only vengeance, even though the act of branding a person a “terrorist” is often completely arbitrary. This vengeance is usually pursued by any means. Thus, the terrorist moniker becomes a rationalization for every vicious and inhuman policy of the establishment, as well as for the citizenry.

Dishonorable and foolish people claim the existence of terrorism essentially gives license for the rest of us to become criminal, willfully trampling on individuals’ rights to privacy, property, free speech, due process, civic participation, etc. Mass criminality against the individual in the name of social safety is the glue that holds together all tyrannical systems, triggering a catastrophic cycle of moral relativism that eventually bleeds a culture dry.

Historically, the expanded use of the terrorist label by governments tends to coincide with the rising tides of despotism. A government that quietly seeks to dominate the people will inevitably begin to treat the people as if they are the enemy. Those citizens who present the greatest philosophical or physical threat to the centralization of power are usually the first to suffer. I do not think it is unfair to say that any system of authority that suddenly claims to see terrorists under every rock and behind every tree is probably about to rain full-on fascism down upon the population.

The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) is the legal extension of this process, with a vaporous gray language that allows the government to interpret it in any manner it deems useful, which conveniently allows it to interpret a wide range of “offenses” as acts of war against the state.

The Department of Homeland Security’s “If You See Something Say Something” campaign is the social extension of the process, by which it creates the framework for a paranoid self-censored surveillance culture.

The fusion center network is the enforcement extension designed to surround local and State police with an atmosphere of indoctrination and federalized dogma, teaching common cops to profile according to a template that is so ambiguous that literally any activity could be considered suspicious or terroristic.

All that is left for the establishment is to force the vocabulary of fear into mainstream consciousness. This means constant propaganda. This means furious hype. This means an utterly shameless barrage of false associations, misdirections and fantastical fairyland lies. This means that we have reached a point in the grand totalitarian scheme in which the American populace is about to be bombarded with an endless drone of terrorism brainwashing — not demonizing a foreign enemy, but demonizing the hypothetical extremist next door. In fact, the Boston Marathon bombing seems to have been the signal for an escalation of such rhetoric. The high-speed conditioning has already begun.

In Middlefield, Ohio, James Gilkerson, an unemployed man taking care of his elderly mother, was pulled over during a routine traffic stop only to exit his vehicle firing an AK-47 at police officers. The action was obviously unprovoked; the police responded with deadly force, and rightly so. I would have done the same. Gilkerson’s attack was crazy, yes. Criminal? Yes. But Middlefield Police Chief Arnold Stanko’s remarks to the press bring a whole other dark side to this already tragic event. Stanko stated that: “He got out of the vehicle, intending to kill my officers. We don’t know why he did it… He was a scumbag and a terrorist, and he’s dead.”

Stanko doesn’t know why Gilkerson fired at police, but he is certain that the man was a “terrorist.” What if Gilkerson was depressed or overmedicated or he just snapped that day? Terrorism denotes certain premeditation and planning. This attack was clearly not part of a malicious scheme, yet the label of “terrorist” is being thrown around nonchalantly, almost as if law enforcement has been trained to use such rhetoric whenever it suits them.

In Montevideo, Minn., the FBI recently raided the home of Buford Rogers, who was convicted of felony burglary in 2011. Authorities had received reports that Buford was in possession of a firearm, which is illegal for convicted felons. The raid did indeed produce firearms, as well as items the FBI dubbed “explosive devices.” They did not specify what these “explosive devices” were or if they actually posed a significant threat to anyone. After the bust, headlines read “FBI Thwarts Terror Attack.”

Again, there is absolutely no indication here of a planned attack. There’s no indication that Rogers had any intent to hurt anyone or even any ideological motivations to hurt anyone. Yet the terrorism label is used again to describe a routine criminal arrest.

In Tempe, Ariz., 18-year-old Joshua Prater was arrested after a maid found an “explosive device” in his closet and turned it in to authorities. Prater claims he built the device, consisting of a carbon dioxide cartridge, a fireworks fuse, gunpowder, match heads and fireworks, eight years ago; and he claims he was not aware it was dangerous. Police did not call Prater a terrorist, but they did refer to his device as an “IED,” which, as we all know, is the abbreviation used by U.S. soldiers to describe an “improvised explosive device,” the favorite weapon of insurgents and “terrorists” in Iraq and Afghanistan. Such terminology is not coincidental. Make no mistake; this is a calculated effort to introduce the language of the battlefield to the streets of America.

Seattle police are now holding simulation drills at local schools in which law enforcement officials fight against gun-wielding proxy opponents posing as “angry parents.”

These kinds of drills are a part of a larger DHS program implemented through fusion centers which, in my view, is designed to desensitize law enforcement to violence against common citizens. Said drills have simulated conflicts with constitutionalists, home-schoolers, patriots and so on. Let’s be clear here; the “terrorists” that the police are now being trained to fight against are people like you and me. We are being painted as the future enemy.

Just to solidify this reality, I will also point out the recent exposure of a DHS training program series available on the Federal Emergency Management Agency Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program website, which includes a media section designed to provide teaching aids to agency heads and law enforcement. The series includes a fabricated news broadcast that covers a hypothetical raid on a “militia headquarters.” The video shows semi-automatic firearms, rifle scopes, night vision, flak jackets — all perfectly legal in the United States today — as illegal “contraband,” while painting gun owners and militias as chemical weapon-wielding terrorists.

What started as an appeal to the average American’s sense of Islamophobia after the 9/11 attacks has now evolved into the full-spectrum theater of random domestic terrorism that culminates in what the establishment calls “self-radicalization.”

The concept of self-radicalization is a very interesting propaganda tactic. Rather than limiting the public’s fear only to some outside foreign enemy like Al Qaeda or some domestic activist organization like the liberty movement, the establishment has now composed a narrative in which each and every one of us might one day catch the extremist virus of dissent, defiance or ideological violence and suddenly decide to kill, kill, kill.

The more naïve subsections of our society will accept unConstitutional methods against the “radicalized” out of fear and conditioning, without realizing that the machinations of bureaucracy being used against those they hate could just as easily be used against them in the future.

If the elites achieve the social endgame they desire, legal and political wordplay will become so broad that anyone could be targeted. If you are a citizen who defies the establishment power structure, then you are an extremist. If you are an extremist, then you are a terrorist. If you are a terrorist, then you are an enemy combatant. And, under the NDAA, if you are an enemy combatant, you are no longer a citizen and you no longer deserve Constitutional protection. The circular logic is maddening, not to mention outrageous. But it is also very useful when an abusive government needs a pretext to silence or destroy dissent. Under totalitarianism, all people become terrorists. It starts with the mistreatment of the worst of us, and it ends with the mistreatment of the best of us.

You can contact Brandon Smith at:  brandon@alt-market.com

Alt-Market is an organization designed to help you find like-minded activists and preppers in your local area so that you can network and construct communities for mutual aid and defense.  Join Alt-Market.com today and learn what it means to step away from the system and build something better.

To contribute to the growth of the Safe Haven Project, and to help us help others in relocating, or to support the creation of barter networks across the country, visit our donate page here.

At the conclusion of the New Jersey Senate Budget & Appropriations Committee meeting last Thursday, an open microphone caught three state senators, identified by voice as Senate Majority Leader Loretta Weinberg, Assistant Majority Leader Sandra Cunningham, Senate Majority Whip Linda Greenstein, and at least one staff member talking candidly about their intent to confiscate all guns from the people they serve. It should be noted that Senator Loretta Weinberg is the chief proponent of the anti-gun legislation being moved through the New Jersey State Senate.

Although some of the candid conversation is a bit difficult to discern due to the ambient noise, their message is clear. “We need[ed] a bill that was going to confiscate, confiscate, confiscate,”stated one high ranking senate member.

“They don’t care about the bad guys.  All they want to do is have their ‘little guns’ and do whatever they want with them,” added another in an obviously demeaning manner. Another conceded that gun owners do, in fact, want to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, but added that “they don’t have any regulations to do it.” Oh really?

For anyone doubting the bitter contempt these legislators hold for gun owners and pro-Constitutionalists, a YouTube video that captured the “open microphone moment” is available for review.

Sourced from HomeLandSecurityUs.com via Infowars

In what seems to be the government’s latest attack on private transactions between individuals, the Department of Homeland Security has shut down funds transfers operated by mobile processing platform Dwolla, which is responsible for managing transfers for the BitCoin digital currency exchange.

Details are still sparse, but a spokesperson for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) confirms that an investigation is in progress and Dwolla is no longer able to accept currency transfers for its customers.

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security confirmed it has initiated legal action that prompted the Dwolla payment service to stop processing bitcoin transactions.

Nicole Navas, a spokesperson for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, confirmed the legal action to CNET this afternoon.

Dwolla, a Des Moines, Iowa-based startup, which raised $16.5 million in funding two weeks ago, notified users about the move earlier Tuesday. It blamed the decision on “recent court orders” limiting its ability to send money through Mt. Gox, the largest bitcoin exchange.

“In order not to compromise this ongoing investigation being conducted by ICE Homeland Security Investigations Baltimore, we cannot comment beyond the information in the warrant, which was filed in the District of Maryland earlier today,” Navas told CNET.

Dwolla has refused to elaborate, saying through its support account on Twitter only that “we received a court order” and inquirers should follow up with the affected parties.

…

Homeland Security declined to elaborate on the warrant or court proceedings.

The court order has yet to be made available for public scrutiny, but sources close to the Bitcoin Ecosystem have suggested that this may be the first of many coming government investigations into the cryptographic digital currency which makes it possible for money transfers to be made without intrusion, verification or a paper trail:

There are certainly more questions than answers at this stage. We are prompted to wonder whether this is this the first of a series of governmental assaults on the exchanges? That’s what they’d target if they want to put the kibosh on bitcoin. Or, is this a case where DHS is investigating some individual or organization who may have used bitcoins, via Dwolla, for some potentially nefarious or terroristic reasons?

Members of the PandoDaily team have spoken to sources close to the bitcoin ecosystem and have been hearing that it’s likely the former.