(archived from June 20, 2013)
by Scott Creighton
“”Governments should not have this capacity. But governments will use whatever technology is available to them to combat their primary enemy – which is their own population,” Noam Chomsky
FBI director Robert Mueller just committed an act of domestic terrorism, another act of domestic terrorism, this time in congress. That is if you accept the FBI’s own definition of domestic terrorism:
“Domestic terrorism is the unlawful use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a group or individual based and operating entirely within the United States or Puerto Rico without foreign direction committed against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof in furtherance of political or social objectives.” FBI (dot) gov definition of terrorism
Yesterday I wrote an article wondering if FBI Director Robert Mueller had issued a not-so veiled threat to congress when he suggested that there may be another “terrorist” attack if they shut down the NSA blanket surveillance program. My conclusion was reached after reading two articles written about Mueller’s testimony in congress, one of which was an AP story.
This morning I viewed a brief video clip of part of that testimony on NBC News and it turns out the AP story didn’t accurately report on his exact words. Without any doubt, FBI Director Mueller directly threatened members of congress with another “terrorist” attack if the NSA blanket spying program were to be cancelled or “go dark” as he put it.
“Inevitably, the communications are the soft underbelly of, uh, uuu… the terrorists. They’ve got to communicate and to the extent to which we can intercept those communications, to that extent, we can prevent terrorist attacks. If that goes dark on us, if we go black, then we are going to be sitting, waiting for the next one, without the tools we need to uhhh, prevent that attack” FBI Director Robert Mueller
That’s a threat. And a that’s a threat made by a man who heads an agency which has fabricated at least 20 terrorist plots (that we know of) since 9/11 so his agency can stop them just in the nick of time. They do things like take disadvantaged mentally handicapped young men and pay them money, give them drugs, set them up with an informant who pretends to be al Qaeda and then they give those half-wits a plan, a car, and a bomb, drive them to the location, show them how to activate the bomb and then give them a phone from which they can detonate the bomb. This is what they do on a regular basis in order to help create the narrative that there is some kind of shadowy hidden threat lying just beneath the surface in our American community.
This threat comes from a man who heads the agency which just shot a young man in the head while being questioned. A man who heads an agency of “law enforcement” that can’t seem to prosecute one single upper level CEO for the massive criminal activities of the banks and financial institutions and who by policy don’t record interviews with suspects in any way because it might harm their efforts to prosecute them in the future.
This Gestapoesque creation of the NSA’s that Mueller is defending to the point of making threats to congress is about the mass collection and storage of everything you write, say, email, buy, Tweet, “like”, visit and do. Everything. What Mueller is saying is if they can’t collect all the data available on you, store it and process it through programs like NarusInsight, then there will be another terrorist attack.
“They don’t want people to know what they’re doing. They want to be able to use [new technology] against their own people.” Noam Chomsky
Of course the law enforcement community would still have the ability to intercept communications between terrorists and people inside this country and of course they would still be able to monitor those whom a court has decided is worthy of monitoring because Mueller’s FBI has come forward with EVIDENCE that they should be monitored.
You see, that’s called police work and for some of us, that’s what we expected them to be doing before the whistleblowers came out and told us it was something different that they were doing. The short list of those whistleblowers being:
Thomas Andrews Drake – the Trailblazer Project and the ThinThread project exposure in 2005
William Binney in 2002 – “Binney has also been publicly critical of the NSA for spying on U.S. citizens, saying of its expanded surveillance after the September 11, 2001 attacks that “it’s better than anything that the KGB, the Stasi, or the Gestapo and SS ever had“
This program and the others like it isn’t about stopping the terrorists. The terrorists are the ones running the program and profiting off the data it collects on all of us non-terrorists.
In a sense, this program is terrorism itself or at least telling us about it is. When you frighten a population with the express purpose of changing the economic, political or social structure of that population, that’s terrorism. Coming out with this program, faking the whistleblower through the Washington Post and the Guardian in order to affect a social and political change in America, is by definition, terrorism.
And beyond that, what Mueller just did in congress was definitely domestic terrorism. By definition. The FBI’s definition.
The mood of the people, reflected by congress, is to reinstate our constitutional rights by rolling back the broad scope of this PRISM program and others like it.
Mueller, understanding that mood, came right out in congress a day ago and threatened use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government in furtherance of political or social objectives.
The head of the NSA stood up upon leaving after his testimony and leaned over to one of Mueller’s subordinates and said he owes Mueller “another beer” for his testimony, this testimony, before congress.
What does that tell us? That tells us that Mueller wasn’t simply stating a fact about the ineptitude of the FBI were these programs cancelled, he was providing support for the continuation of the program for other reasons (presumably not just a beer… lets hope) and that goes to his efforts in the “furtherance of political or social objectives”
“This is obviously something that should not be done. But it is a little difficult to be too surprised by it. They [governments and corporations] take whatever is available, and in no time it is being used against us, the population. Governments are not representative. They have their own power, serving segments of the population that are dominant and rich.” Noam Chomsky
There is no question that what Mueller was doing was threatening congress with violence if the current social and political environment changed in America. And on a broader level, he was threatening us as well.
The program has caught no terrorists. It has prevented no rapes. It has prevented no murders or bank robberies or the Boston Bombing, the Times Square Attack, the Anthrax attack or Umar Fizzlepants’ diaper of doom. It didn’t stop the Aurora massacre or the Sandy Hook shooting or even catch that guy in California who went on that bizarre killing spree. It has done nothing of value that we know of.
But for some unknown reason, a terrorist like Mueller who heads the new American Gestapo, is willing to go before congress and commit an act of domestic terrorism by his own agency’s definition. Why would he do that?
He would do that because that’s his job.
“”Governments should not have this capacity. But governments will use whatever technology is available to them to combat their primary enemy – which is their own population,” Noam Chomsky
No comments:
Post a Comment