Mike Krieger On Intensifying Police State Measures And Internet Demonization

Tyler Durden's picture

Submitted by Mike Krieger from KAM LP

Police State Measures Intensify as well as Internet Demonization

Two very important articles have come out in the last couple of days that you must take the time to read thoroughly.   The first is from the Washington Post and is entitled:  “Monitoring America.”  It is a lengthy article worth your time since it shows in no uncertain terms how the U.S. government has now officially started to turn war on terror technology and military weaponry on American citizens domestically.  Stuff that had formerly only been “used in Iraq or Afghanistan” is now being turned on Americans and this newspaper reports it in a matter of fact manner.  It also describes how anyone can just say that they think a fellow citizen is acting suspiciously and then all of a sudden the government’s “fusion centers” start snooping on you and a file remains “open” for five years.  For nothing more than someone saying they thought you were acting suspiciously.   Welcome to East Germany.  This is where tax dollars are going, that and to pay bankster bonuses.  Link is below. 


Second article also encompasses and interview with Attorney General Eric Holder.  In it he clearly explains that enemy number one is the domestic America citizen and that is where the war on terror is now focused.  This is exactly as I predicted earlier this year.  That the “war on terror” would be soon revered onto average everyday citizens.  Ok, so how about this one.  In the interview, Holder talks about Anwar al-Awlaki and talks about how this guy is enemy number 1 now and as dangerous as Bin Laden.   Well, interesting because this guy was invited to DINE AT THE PENTAGON after 9/11.  This is a fact.  It was reported by all the mainstream news sources.  See these links on it….

Anwar al-Awlaki - the radical spiritual leader linked to several 9/11 attackers, the Fort Hood shooting, and the attempted Christmas Day bombing of an airliner - was a guest at the Pentagon in the months after 9/11, a Pentagon official confirmed to CBS News.

Awlaki was invited as "...part of an informal outreach program" in which officials sought contact "...with leading members of the Muslim community," the official said. At that time, Awlaki was widely viewed as a "moderate" imam at a mosque in Northern Virginia.

This is what Holder said today about him:  "He's an extremely dangerous man. He has shown a desire to harm the United States, a desire to strike the homeland of the United States," Holder said. "He is a person who -- as an American citizen -- is familiar with this country and he brings a dimension, because of that American familiarity, that others do not."

CBS reports


MSNBC reports


Fox News Reports


So our government is so trustworthy on intelligence that we had the most dangerous terrorist in the world over for dinner at the Pentagon!  So either we are really retarded beyond belief or the whole “WAR ON TERROR” is a total SHAM to place in the police state.  More on the interview with Holder, he is consistently demonizing the internet with statements like.

“"The ability to go into your basement, turn on your computer, find a site that has this kind of hatred spewed ... they have an ability to take somebody who is perhaps just interested, perhaps just on the edge, and take them over to the other side," he said.”

Full article here:  http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/attorney-general-eric-holders-blunt-warning-terror-attacks/story?id=12444727&page=1

This is all good news and bad news.  The good news is that the global plantation owners would not be moving so aggressively unless they were losing the info war.  Clearly they are, which is why they are freaking out.  The next thing that is likely to happen is a false flag attack where the “attacker” ends up being a libertarian with a Ron Paul sticker.  That way they can move from Al Awlaki to the folks they are really afraid of: Good caring and armed American people that still have the capacity to think rationally. 

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
bob_dabolina's picture

Welcome to Nazi Germany...I mean America

When can we start burning books that are not conducive with the state agenda?

-Michelle-'s picture

Have you been to your local library lately?  They're tossing out the classics to make room for drivel.

No need for a bonfire, not when you have your friendly neighborhood recycling center.

Mr Lennon Hendrix's picture

New Renaissance formulating how to get over and under the fastist structure of 'governing'.

ConfederateH's picture

And all you people insisted that the hours Glenn Beck spent exposing Cass Sunstein and Obama's shadow government was just the ranting of "fox news types".  Well sheeple, it looks like Beck was right all along...

Trundle's picture

Beck was basically full of shit until he started to channel/ripoff Alex Jones.  Now, he's only about 20-25% disinformation.

Jasper M's picture


And a remarkably accurate synopsis, for three lines. 

clymer's picture

totally true, Trundle. Why you got junked, I have no clue. I remember when Beck was calling Ron Paul supporters ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIDDc8UodYQ ) potential domestic terrorists, 9-11 truthers as potential terrorists.. Out and out lies.

He's a ratings whore.

A kid I knew in Junior High (Trevor Lyman) organized that money bomb, and there is not a violent bone in that dudes body. Beck is not to be trusted.


jeff montanye's picture

isn't it good to know that as weak, disappointing, ineffective, wasteful, corrupt, impractical, mendacious, cruel and foolish as the obama admin. is, it will be defeated in '12? 

Real Estate Geek's picture

Not particularly, because it's clear that the weak, disappointing, ineffective, wasteful, corrupt, impractical, mendacious, cruel and foolish __________ admin. will take its place.

Terminus C's picture

Isn't is scary to know that "as weak, disappointing, ineffective, wasteful, corrupt, impractical, mendacious, cruel and foolish as the obama admin. is, it will be" replaced by the same or worse in '12?

Max Hunter's picture

That's true.. Except they sell them.. I make sure i'm there.. $1 hadback... No matter the title.. I'm collecting quite a library over the years..

-Michelle-'s picture

It depends on the condition, but you're right.  I picked up a 60-volume Great Books collection for $60.  The best price for the same thing online was $300.  The clerks thought I was joking when I said they were for my (then) one-year-old.

downrodeo's picture

my fiancee was reading by age 1.5. This is not normal though, you have a gifted child.

-Michelle-'s picture

:).  I read about the same time as your fiance, but no, my kid wasn't reading at 1.  I meant that I purchased the books on his behalf.  The homeschooling curriculum we're using is Great Books-based.

InExile's picture

i thought that they were all available on google

Sean7k's picture

Everything will be- until it isn't. Real books are the precious metals of knowledge.

Lower Class Elite's picture

Amen to that.  Kindle my ass.

Hey Assholes's picture


I am buying every Mises and Rothbard book I can so I can pass on to my grandchildren.

The flame of liberty must be passed on or it will be forgotten.

Terminus C's picture

+ infinity

I build my library with as much care as I build my wealth

NumberNone's picture

Actually had a conversation with a high school librarian about this.  Books are becoming irrelevant and all the 'research' is now being done on computers in the library.  Paper books are becoming obsolete...and in cash strapped states not having to buy thousands of paper books to stock in libraries probably sounds like a pretty good deal right now.  Why not migrate everything online and let the kiddos get all their information there?

My concern to her on this is the fact that once paper copies are gone and the only versions available for public veiwing are electronic...how long before TPTB decide to start editing them?  These changes will be unalterable and few will have original source material to refer to to verify.  Soon the online version will be the accepted version.  Frightening what the ramifications of this are 50-100 years down the road. 

I'm sure that initially changes will be done in a manner that starts off harmless...for example, Huck Finn would be an acceptable book in high school again if we removed..ahem...'pesky' words from it.  Why not?  A couple of keystrokes and every high school in America has access to a government approved and socially friendly copy of the Mark Twain classic.  Those kids get to grow up thinking that is how Mark Twain wrote it and no harm done...right?  Ahhh, the possibilities are endless!! 

ThreeTrees's picture

Why do people think it's remotely possible for individual entities to deliberately alter what is essentially the public history of the internet?  What has ever been posted on the web, especially if it was widely read/viewed/played/accessed, exists in some form buried in some server somewhere.  You can control access and what you release, but once it's out there, it's out there for good.

Sean7k's picture

Why do people believe the history they are taught in school? How many people use due diligence? Do you believe the government? Do you believe the newspaper? How do you find the needle of truth in a haystack of lies? 

The vast majority of people never question a source in my experience. This is why a paper copy is essential- or have you been paying attention to foreclosuregate?

tmosley's picture

Thing is, with the internet, any attempt to modify an existing file amounts to a needle of a lie in a haystack of truth.

RKDS's picture

I refer you to Exhibit A, Amazon's remote deletion of 1984 and Animal Farm:


Just wait until all books and media reside on perpetually connected hardware filled with backdoors for priviledged users...

-Michelle-'s picture

No need to alter everything if you can simply restrict access to "approved" sites.  Do you think government schools would allow students unfettered access?

NumberNone's picture

Of course we need to send them only to government approved sites and documents...for their safety.  We love our children don't we?

nmewn's picture

"Why do people think it's remotely possible for individual entities to deliberately alter what is essentially the public history of the internet?"

Because it has already happened/happening.

Organizations/election campaigns/government sites are replete with examples of them going back in and "modifying" or completely deleting what was "there" yesterday.

Screenshots have busted them doing it numerous times.

Here ya go:


It's been going on longer than you think.

Of course, they can still do it the old fashioned way...just blatantly lie and make shit up...LOL.

"The newest charges from scientists follows the release of a report to media yesterday,  by the Interior Department’s Inspector General, which found that a drilling safety report was edited by the White House in order to suggest that its findings supported the administration’s six month ban on new deep water drilling."



AnAnonymous's picture

Why do people think it's remotely possible for individual entities to deliberately alter what is essentially the public history of the internet?  What has ever been posted on the web, especially if it was widely read/viewed/played/accessed, exists in some form buried in some server somewhere.  You can control access and what you release, but once it's out there, it's out there for good.


It means nothing. Reads  like Vatican archives story. Truth is there, buried under piles of dust. Nobody has access to it but who cares?


Better to rely on what has happened.

Take Wikipedia. Wikipedia is the perfect example of what possibly happens.

Wikipedia is the reflection of various groups struggling over the control of this medium; leading wars of edition until one side prevails, the others giving up because of attrition.

Wikipedia is interesting in the way it delivers right in the face the convenient presentation of data of the internet dominant group. I followed the evolution of topics over the starting years. A fascinating process. Propaganda at its best. The battle between various propagandists and in the end, the vision of what is the least costly to admit for the dominant group.

This is how it happened for Wikipedia. Claiming that the Internet could not open ways to Wikipedia dealing is delusional. Having access to a source that cannot be that easily manipulated like a book is of course a different story. But that is not the Internet.


Titus's picture

Why do people think it's remotely possible for individual entities to deliberately alter what is essentially the public history of the internet?  What has ever been posted on the web, especially if it was widely read/viewed/played/accessed, exists in some form buried in some server somewhere.  You can control access and what you release, but once it's out there, it's out there for good.


It may be out there but so are hundreds of pounds of sunken gold in the ocean. Can you point me to it? I tried google but the site hits don't seem to be there...

-Michelle-'s picture

Seems like the changes made there were for the better.

In one of the most significant changes leading up to the vote, the board attempted to water down the rationale for the separation of church and state in a high school government class, pointing out that the words were not in the Constitution and requiring that students compare and contrast the judicial language with the wording in the First Amendment.


They also rejected language to modernize the classification of historic periods to B.C.E. and C.E. from the traditional B.C. and A.D., and agreed to replace Thomas Jefferson as an example of an influential political philosopher in a world history class. They also required students to evaluate efforts by global organizations such as the United Nations to undermine U.S. sovereignty...


During the monthslong revision process, conservatives strengthened requirements on teaching the Judeo-Christian influences of the nation's Founding Fathers and required that the U.S. government be referred to as a "constitutional republic," rather than "democratic." Students will be required to study the decline in the value of the U.S. dollar, including the abandonment of the gold standard.



jahbless's picture

then that was the wrong link, sorry.  The piece I recall was mexicano heroes getting written out of history in the local textbooks...I'll dig it out.



downrodeo's picture

Yeah, none of this addresses the issue of the point of education. Currently, the point of the education system is to teach the student WHAT to think. We need to change things so that teachers can help the student discover HOW to think. They could teach critical thinking, and research methods, and the scientific method, and a whole plethora of useful learning tools. Then they could say, "have at it kids, go learn what you will. Ask me if you have any questions".

nmewn's picture

"Currently, the point of the education system is to teach the student WHAT to think. We need to change things so that teachers can help the student discover HOW to think."

I'm gonna monkey hammer this till everyone understands.

John Taylor Gatto.



-Michelle-'s picture

Gatto was who finally convinced me that homeschooling was the way to go.

nmewn's picture

You're a good parent.

We chose otherwise, living in a small town it's not "as" bad. Most, if not all, of the edicts from on high are ignored by the locals.

The system is set up for indoctrination...whatever slips through here doesn't matter, the deprogramming start's at 4:00 each & every school day.

Terminus C's picture

This is actually the curriculum of public schools in Alberta.  Critical thinking is the primary skill required and tested in the Social Studies and Language Arts (read "English") programs.

Science and Math curricula are heading in that direction.  Skills focus rather than content focus.  While the system is not perfect, and there are indoctrinal aspects of the education system, teachers have a lot of lattitude to develop the thinking and awareness tools in their students.  I use sources from this site on almost a daily basis in my classroom.  It is a far cry from what I understand the American education system to be.

Unfortunately, Alberta educators face an uphill battle against mass media and ijunk. 


AnAnonymous's picture

Your vision is distorted. Critical thinkers are a failure. Nearly as big as responsibility.

Propagandists critically think. They manage facts with the purpose of cashing on credibility. They are factual when facts are begnin to them and cash on their credibility to get the most of a promising lie.

People lie on purpose. They lie to get what they could not get when telling the truth. Anytime truth is less profitable than lies, people, especially US citizens, prefer lies over truth.

This site is packed with people who lie. All the elites mantra etc. They are only furious because they are less and less significant to the people they call elite and therefore forgotten by the socalled elite who no longer have to bribe them.

People are tossed out of the bowl. They do not oppose the process by itself. They oppose being left behind. They want to jump on the train and not be left on the platform.

Critical thinking, education, all these are failures that should be acknowledged very fast.

DosZap's picture

Yeah, we Texans got that school book shit straightened out a lot.(once we dumped the Libs).

Some REAL History is now in them.

And,since we're such a small state, a LOT of states use the same books we do...........shame ain't it.

Cleve Meater's picture

Holy moly... I had never even considered this.  Fantastic point.  The digerati always talks about how the Internet will expand access to knowledge.  There's another side of this coin that I'd never even considered.  You're exactly right -- digital copies can be altered by TPTB, very subtly.

NumberNone's picture

That's my point exactly.  When all books are accessed via notepads from a few finite sources, who's going to go find a paper book to verify that a few words in Hamlet are not exactly correct.  Who's to say what a version of Hamlet could look like 100 years from now?  On a long enough timeline everyone that saw the paper copy will be dead...

Kyron95131's picture

some of this is actually true

my girlfriend is a librarian and i asked her to get a copy of "Brave new world" and "1984" to read

she told me i would have to go to another library as that one had "banned" those books

when i asked "wtf, its a public library?! how are we banning books?!"

she explained that be it as though its publicly or state funded. local lists can be put together of unacceptable material and pulled form the shelves. if they are state funded, the list comes down from library headquarters.

The Alarmist's picture

Ah, the art of a self-fulfilling prophecy.  When I was going through school, the so-called progressives, who were tossing 1984, Fahrenheit, etc. at us as warnings against the facist state of the conservatives (usually their parents), were already exuding a smell of things to come, and we could see it leaping off the pages of the very books they were using to make the case that they should be running the world.  To paraphrase Girls Aloud, You can't escape their tautology.

Terminus C's picture

1984 is required reading in most western Canadian English and Social Studies curriculum. 

It is really sad to see, and scary as hell, the "land of the free" fall so far into fascisim.

Fearless Rick's picture

That is just royally fucked up.

andybev01's picture


My city library has more DVD's to let (for a fee...) than actual books any more.

Farenheit 451 anyone?

Mentaliusanything's picture

Yes - a good example. 1966 and in the movie they had flat screen TV's, Thimble radio      (IPods), Cameras on every light pole, people frisking you aka TSA and a raft of other tech gear we have Now. 

Parallel universe ?

It may be a good Idea to watch this trailer (4 mins)

Digitise it ALL and we have control through our servers. Money, music, books, film, records, photos, Life. Endgame.


andybev01's picture

I did like the movie but that was after reading the book.

"What do you think, Linda?"

Terminus C's picture

The book and premis are good... the movie... not so much.

Showed the movie to my class once... the most common comment I got was "wtf is this boring ass shit"

Hah, I just talk about it now, the movie actually ruined student engagement.

andybev01's picture

Apparently the male lead and the director were literally battling over interpretation.

It still hods up visually all these years later.