John R. Houk, Blog Editor
© October 2, 2021
America is under a state of tyrannical control which in my opinion has not been experienced since the series of events that led 13 British Colonies on the North American continent to unite and declare Independence in 1776.
In a true history deprived America, many Americans might not be aware that those colonial citizens were not united in desiring to end British rule. There may have been loose unity to end British tyranny, but not necessarily to end British citizenship.
TODAY Americans are way more divided now than American colonists before, during and after 1776. I marvel that Americans exist that are 100% behind the Dem-Marxist agenda to transform America AWAY from HER Founding Principles making the State supreme in the lives of citizens rather than individual citizens supreme over how the government is operated. The supreme State dissolves WE THE PEOPLE.
Here are three essay posts highlighting that the end of WE THE PEOPLE is imminent creating Sheeple obeisance to State diktats on belief systems. UNLESS there is some kind American Great Awakening of massive resistance. It could be time for Patriots desiring to Remember Founding Liberty to shrug off any State-imposed stain of domestic terrorist and begin to chant REMEMBER 1776 much like yesteryear Texans chanted Remember The Alamo in their rebellion against tyranny.
I need your generosity in 2021 via – credit cards, check cards
& debit cards are accepted by my PayPal account:
Or if not donating you can support by getting in the Coffee from home business earning yourself extra cash – OR just buy some TASTE GOOD healthy coffee, that includes immune boosting products. Big Tech Censorship is pervasive – Share voluminously on all social media platforms!
POLL: Over 50% Of Trump Voters Want To Secede, 41% Of Dems Agree It’s Time To ‘Split The Country’
Most Trump voters are in favor of seceding from the government of the United States according to a new poll by the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia.
By ANDREW WHITE
October 1, 2021
A shocking poll conducted by the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia (UVA) has revealed that most Trump voters and a significant number of Biden voters are in favor of seceding from the Union and splitting the country.
52% of Trump voters and 41% of Biden voters “at least somewhat agree that it’s time to split the country, favoring blue/red states seceding from the union,” according to a shocking poll conducted by the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia.
“Significant numbers of both Trump and Biden voters show a willingness to consider violating democratic tendencies and norms if needed to serve their priorities,” the pollsters explained. “Roughly 2 in 10 Trump and Biden voters strongly agree it would be better if a ‘President could take needed actions without being constrained by Congress or courts,’ and roughly 4 in 10 (41%) of Biden and half (52%) of Trump voters at least somewhat agree that it’s time to split the country, favoring blue/red states seceding from the union.”
As the Gateway Pundit reported this afternoon, “Democrats are aligning themselves with anti-American policies of censorship, destruction of billions in wealth, murder of those in their way (remember it was four Trump supporters who were murdered on Jan. 6), aligning with fascist groups like BLM and Antifa, election theft, arming the Taliban enemy with $83 billion in US military equipment, using a pandemic to steal American freedoms, false arrests of individuals for fake crimes, government harassment through the courts, and imprisonment based on fake crimes in kangaroo courts, etc.”
A report from Mediaite on the subject emphasized a similar YouGov poll conducted in June which found that 66% of Republicans in southern states support seceding from the United States, noting that Joe Biden’s recent failures in Afghanistan, as well as his handling of COVID-19 have rendered his “reunification” platform to be ineffective as his approval ratings among Americans have gone “underwater.”
The idea that the nation’s political divide has become so toxic that we should prepare from some sort of “national divorce” has largely been left to clever thought experiments best left for dinner parties and ironically detached columns. However, we’ve now arrived at a point where more than half of Trump voters “somewhat agree” that the time for secession is nigh.
Comedian and well known liberal Sarah Silverman recently echoed this call for a national divorce, suggesting the country separate into two or three countries based on political affiliation and COVID-19 policies.
Andrew White is a Northern Virginia native. His work here at National File has been previously featured on Alex Jones’ Infowars and Revolver News. White is a constitutionalist Patriot, who focuses on social issues, election integrity, globalism, US politics, as well as general corporate and government corruption.
© COPYRIGHT NATIONALFILE.COM. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. © 2019 Flyover Media, LLC – All materials contained on this site are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast, in whole or part, without the prior written permission of NationalFile.com [Blog Editor: Permission was not attained ergo upon request this cross post will be removed]
The Definitive List Of How We’re Living In “1984”
By Tyler Durden
OCTOBER 2, 2021
While some may think we’re living more of an Animal Farm existence (pigs hatch a coup and overthrow the humans, only to end up in worse shape thanks to a dictator named Napoleon who uses propaganda to obscure his incompetence), Sarah A. Downey – operating partner at Accomplice VC (and Dune fan, gamer and cosplayer) has assembled a comprehensive Twitter thread on why we’re actually living in Orwell’s other notable work – 1984, a cautionary tale of life under communism.
Presented for your edification (and click here or scroll to the bottom for Downey’s July 2020 interview with Benjamin Boyce where she opines on free speech, cancel culture and more):
Note that I’m not saying that the dystopian, totalitarian hellscape of 1984 is exactly what’s happening today. However, the last couple of years have seen some disturbing parallels emerge.
The 1984 concept will have a emoji to represent Big Brother
The current expression we’re seeing in society will have a emoji
* * *
Discouraging good relations between the sexes by only allowing unattracted people to marry; weaponizing sexual frustration into political rage
Labeling stereotypically masculine behavior “toxic;” the all-time low rate of having sex, particularly in Millennials/Gen-Z
* * *
Changing the meaning of common words/phrases instantly and punishing those who do not adapt
The redefinition (literally) overnight of phrases like “sexual preference” (used to be fine; suddenly “bigoted” and rewritten in the dictionary)
* * *
Tactical language changes, continued
Changing definitions of “racism” (to pretty much anything where there are disparate outcomes among races) and “white supremacy” (to…pretty much anything involving white people)
* * *
The ubiquitous presence of technology that delivers you content but mainly serves to spy on you (primarily the Telescreen but also cameras, mics, etc.)
Amazon Echos, Google Homes, smart TVs, mobile apps that covertly monitor you (ahem, Facebook)
* * *
The attack on objective reality as a way to demoralize and control people; “2+2=5”
People saying 2+2=4 is some sort of “racist math” washingtonexaminer.com/news/math-prof… Statements that everyone knows are true (e.g., men and women are biologically different) have become “unsayable”
* * *
Newspeak, the Party language in 1984, designed to eliminate critical thinking, free will, personal identity, self-expression, and descriptions of objective reality
Political correctness, resulting in dehumanizing language like “bodies with vaginas” for “women”
* * *
The Newspeak tactic of renaming words/phrases so that disagreement is hard (e.g., removing “bad” as a word & replacing w/ “ungood”)
Slogans like “black lives matter,” where the broadness of the phrase makes it difficult to state any disagreement with its methods
* * *
“Memory-holing,” where the controlling government effectively erases a person, word, or event from history
Government-led “disappearing” of uncooperative individuals (e.g., the CCP memory-holing actress Fan Bingbing) businessinsider.com/fan-bingbing-c…
* * *
The Party changing the status quo in real time, then acting like it’s always been this way (“we’ve always been at war with Eurasia”)
E.g., Biden saying in 2020 that vaccines won’t be mandatory (bbc.com/news/world-us-…), then making them mandatory for millions in 2021
* * *
Another example of “we’ve always been at war with Eurasia” below:
The sudden shift in summer 2020 from “if you’re out in big groups, you’re literally killing people” to “if you’re not out protesting in big groups, you’re a bad person” cbc.ca/radio/asithapp…
* * *
Another example of “we’ve always been at war with Eurasia” below:
E.g., the current administration expressing hesitance about *certain shots* under Trump, and now behaving as though such hesitancy is inconceivable
* * *
Tiered society: the elitist Inner Party on top, then the Outer Party, then the Proles; the Inner Party have special privileges and exemptions from rules
“Rules for thee but not for me;” e.g. @GavinNewsom‘s French Laundry dinner; only staff wearing masks at the Met Gala
* * *
Doublethink/speak (phrases that are obviously false but stated as true): “FREEDOM IS SLAVERY; IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH.”
E.g., CNN reporting on “mostly peaceful protests” in front of burning buildings thehill.com/homenews/media…
“2 weeks to slow the spread” lasting 563 days
* * *
“My body, my choice” applying to abortion rights but not vaccine mandates; feminists who “support women’s sports” but see no problem with people who’ve lived 30+ years as biological males competing in said sports apnews.com/article/2020-t…
* * *
The Ministry of Truth, “which concerned itself with news, entertainment, education and the fine arts” & puts out propaganda
The too-close relationship between big tech, the media, and the government and their fight against “misinformation,” AKA whatever ideas they dislike
* * *
The Ministry of Truth, continued
The media/big tech declaring that story about Hunter Biden’s laptop wasn’t true when it was; the same declaring Russiagate was true when it wasn’t, at least in part greenwald.substack.com/p/the-indictme…
* * *
The mandate that there’s only one “correct” political party and set of opinions (The Party’s)
Many people’s repeated insistence that they’re “on the right side of history” and the increasing lack of tolerance for any diversity of opinion washingtontimes.com/news/2016/oct/…
* * *
“Vaporization:” “Your name was removed from the registers, every record of everything you had ever done was wiped out, your one-time existence was denied and then forgotten.”
Severe cancellations where one becomes an “unperson:” fired, socially isolated, etc.
* * *
Indoctrination of children so that they become spies who turn in their parents for “wrongthink”
The increasingly political stance of many teachers who take it upon themselves to transfer political beliefs to children rather than educate them neutrally/factually
* * *
The Thought Police who surveil the population looking for the slightest indication that a person doesn’t fully support The Party
Scanning of social media, e.g., police showing up to people’s houses in Australia to question them about their posts reclaimthenet.org/australia-poli…
* * *
Controlling speech to control (and prevent) thought
Social media platforms silencing people (like @NICKIMINAJ), applying “misinformation” warnings, blocking hashtags/link-sharing around convos they don’t want to exist
* * *
Using citizens to spy on each other and report “ungood behavior”
E.g., the Texas 6-week abortion law encouraging citizens to report anyone in violation newsweek.com/texas-abortion…
Encouraging citizens to turn in others who aren’t following lockdowns police.vic.gov.au/palolr
* * *
Tribalism: The Party vs The Brotherhood
Tribalism: vaccinated vs unvaccinated, Left versus Right, Republicans versus Democrats, etc. How about we focus on something we can all agree on: avoiding a future like 1984?
* * *
Youtube VIDEO: Privacy, Speech, & Capital | with Sarah Downey
[Posted by Benjamin A Boyce
Published Jul 16, 2020
… MORE TO READ]
ACTIVIST POST – ALTERNATIVE INDEPENDENT NEWS – CREATIVE COMMONS 2019
Covid Camps: Are government round-ups of resistors in our future?
By John Whitehead and Nisha Whitehead
October 1, 2021
“No doubt concentration camps were a means, a menace used to keep order.”—Albert Speer, Nuremberg Trials
It’s no longer a question of whether the government will lock up Americans for defying its mandates but when.
Here’s what we know: The government has the means, the muscle and the motivation to detain individuals who resist its orders and do not comply with its mandates in a vast array of prisons, detention centers, and FEMA concentration camps paid for with taxpayer dollars.
It’s just a matter of time.
It no longer matters what the hot-button issue might be (vaccine mandates, immigration, gun rights, abortion, same-sex marriage, healthcare, criticizing the government, protesting election results, etc.) or which party is wielding its power like a hammer.
The groundwork has already been laid.
Under the indefinite detention provision of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), the president and the military can detain and imprison American citizens with no access to friends, family or the courts if the government believes them to be a terrorist.
So it should come as no surprise that merely criticizing the government or objecting to a COVID-19 vaccine could get you labeled as a terrorist.
After all, it doesn’t take much to be considered a terrorist anymore, especially given that the government likes to use the words “anti-government,” “extremist” and “terrorist” interchangeably.
For instance, the Department of Homeland Security broadly defines extremists as individuals, military veterans and groups “that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely.”
Military veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan may also be characterized as extremists and potential domestic terrorist threats by the government because they may be “disgruntled, disillusioned or suffering from the psychological effects of war.”
Indeed, if you believe in and exercise your rights under the Constitution (namely, your right to speak freely, worship freely, associate with like-minded individuals who share your political views, criticize the government, own a weapon, demand a warrant before being questioned or searched, or any other activity viewed as potentially anti-government, racist, bigoted, anarchic or sovereign), you could be at the top of the government’s terrorism watch list.
Moreover, as a New York Times editorial warns, you may be an anti-government extremist (a.k.a. domestic terrorist) in the eyes of the police if you are afraid that the government is plotting to confiscate your firearms, if you believe the economy is about to collapse and the government will soon declare martial law, or if you display an unusual number of political and/or ideological bumper stickers on your car.
The government also has a growing list – shared with fusion centers and law enforcement agencies – of ideologies, behaviors, affiliations and other characteristics that could flag someone as suspicious and result in their being labeled potential enemies of the state.
This is what happens when you not only put the power to determine who is a potential danger in the hands of government agencies, the courts and the police but also give those agencies liberal authority to lock individuals up for perceived wrongs.
It’s a system just begging to be abused by power-hungry bureaucrats desperate to retain their power at all costs.
It’s happened before.
As history shows, the U.S. government is not averse to locking up its own citizens for its own purposes.
One need only go back to the 1940s, when the federal government proclaimed that Japanese-Americans, labeled potential dissidents, could be put in concentration (a.k.a. internment) camps based only upon their ethnic origin, to see the lengths the federal government will go to in order to maintain “order” in the homeland.
The U.S. Supreme Court validated the detention program in Korematsu v. US (1944), concluding that the government’s need to ensure the safety of the country trumped personal liberties.
Although that Korematsu decision was never formally overturned, Chief Justice Roberts opined in Trump v. Hawaii (2018) that “the forcible relocation of U. S. citizens to concentration camps, solely and explicitly on the basis of race, is objectively unlawful and outside the scope of Presidential authority.”
Roberts’ statements provide little assurance of safety in light of the government’s tendency to sidestep the rule of law when it suits its purposes. Pointing out that such blatantly illegal detentions could happen again – with the blessing of the courts – Justice Scalia once warned, “In times of war, the laws fall silent.”
In fact, the creation of detention camps domestically has long been part of the government’s budget and operations, falling under the jurisdiction of FEMA, the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
FEMA’s murky history dates back to the 1970s, when President Carter created it by way of an executive order merging many of the government’s disaster relief agencies into one large agency.
During the 1980s, however, reports began to surface of secret military-type training exercises carried out by FEMA and the Department of Defense. Code named Rex-84, 34 federal agencies, including the CIA and the Secret Service, were trained on how to deal with domestic civil unrest.
FEMA’s role in creating top-secret American internment camps is well-documented.
But be careful who you share this information with: it turns out that voicing concerns about the existence of FEMA detention camps is among the growing list of opinions and activities which may make a federal agent or government official think you’re an extremist (a.k.a. terrorist), or sympathetic to terrorist activities, and thus qualify you for indefinite detention under the NDAA.
Also included in that list of “dangerous” viewpoints are advocating states’ rights, believing the state to be unnecessary or undesirable, “conspiracy theorizing,” concern about alleged FEMA camps, opposition to war, organizing for “economic justice,” frustration with “mainstream ideologies,” opposition to abortion, opposition to globalization, and ammunition stockpiling.
Now if you’re going to have internment camps on American soil, someone has to build them.
Thus, in 2006, it was announced that Kellogg Brown and Root, a subsidiary of Halliburton, had been awarded a $385 million contract to build American detention facilities. Although the government and Halliburton were not forthcoming about where or when these domestic detention centers would be built, they rationalized the need for them in case of “an emergency influx of immigrants, or to support the rapid development of new programs” in the event of other emergencies such as “natural disasters.”
Of course, these detention camps will have to be used for anyone viewed as a threat to the government, and that includes political dissidents.
So it’s no coincidence that the U.S. government has, since the 1980s, acquired and maintained, without warrant or court order, a database of names and information on Americans considered to be threats to the nation.
As Salon reports, this database, reportedly dubbed “Main Core,” is to be used by the Army and FEMA in times of national emergency or under martial law to locate and round up Americans seen as threats to national security. There are at least 8 million Americans in the Main Core database.
Fast forward to 2009, when the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) released two reports, one on “Rightwing Extremism,” which broadly defines rightwing extremists as individuals and groups “that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely,” and one on “Leftwing Extremism,” which labeled environmental and animal rights activist groups as extremists.
Incredibly, both reports use the words terrorist and extremist interchangeably.
That same year, the DHS launched Operation Vigilant Eagle, which calls for surveillance of military veterans returning from Iraq, Afghanistan and other far-flung places, characterizing them as extremists and potential domestic terrorist threats because they may be “disgruntled, disillusioned or suffering from the psychological effects of war.”
These reports indicate that for the government, so-called extremism is not a partisan matter. Anyone seen as opposing the government – whether they’re Left, Right or somewhere in between – is a target, which brings us back, full circle, to the question of whether the government will exercise the power it claims to possess to detain anyone perceived as a threat, i.e., anyone critical of the government.
The short answer is – yes.
The longer answer is more complicated.
Despite what some may think, the Constitution is no magical incantation against government wrongdoing. Indeed, it’s only as effective as those who abide by it.
However, without courts willing to uphold the Constitution’s provisions when government officials disregard it and a citizenry knowledgeable enough to be outraged when those provisions are undermined, it provides little to no protection against SWAT team raids, domestic surveillance, police shootings of unarmed citizens, indefinite detentions and the like.
Frankly, the courts and the police have meshed in their thinking to such an extent that anything goes when it’s done in the name of national security, crime fighting and terrorism.
Consequently, America no longer operates under a system of justice characterized by due process, an assumption of innocence, probable cause and clear prohibitions on government overreach and police abuse. Instead, our courts of justice have been transformed into courts of order, advocating for the government’s interests, rather than championing the rights of the citizenry, as enshrined in the Constitution.
We seem to be coming full circle on many fronts.
Consider that two decades ago we were debating whether non-citizens—for example, so-called enemy combatants being held at Guantanamo Bay and Muslim-Americans rounded up in the wake of 9/11—were entitled to protections under the Constitution, specifically as they relate to indefinite detention. Americans weren’t overly concerned about the rights of non-citizens then, and now we’re the ones in the unenviable position of being targeted for indefinite detention by our own government.
Similarly, most Americans weren’t unduly concerned when the U.S. Supreme Court gave Arizona police officers the green light to stop, search and question anyone – ostensibly those fitting a particular racial profile – they suspected might be an illegal immigrant. A decade later, the cops largely have carte blanche authority to stop any individual, citizen and non-citizen alike, they suspect might be doing something illegal (mind you, in this age of overcriminalization, that could be anything from feeding the birds to growing exotic orchids).
Likewise, you still have a sizeable portion of the population today unconcerned about the government’s practice of spying on Americans, having been brainwashed into believing that if you’re not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to worry about.
It will only be a matter of time before they learn the hard way that in a police state, it doesn’t matter who you are or how righteous you claim to be, because eventually, you will be lumped in with everyone else and everything you do will be “wrong” and suspect.
Indeed, it’s happening already, with police relying on surveillance software such as ShadowDragon to watch people’s social media and other website activity, whether or not they suspected of a crime, and potentially use it against them when the need arises.
It turns out that we are Soylent Green, being cannibalized by a government greedily looking to squeeze every last drop out of us.
The 1973 film Soylent Green, starring Charlton Heston and Edward G. Robinson, is set in 2022 in an overpopulated, polluted, starving New York City whose inhabitants depend on synthetic foods manufactured by the Soylent Corporation for survival.
Heston plays a policeman investigating a murder who discovers the grisly truth about the primary ingredient in the wafer, Soylent Green, which is the principal source of nourishment for a starved population. “It’s people. Soylent Green is made out of people,” declares Heston’s character. “They’re making our food out of people. Next thing they’ll be breeding us like cattle for food.”
Oh, how right he was.
Soylent Green is indeed people or, in our case, Soylent Green is our own personal data, repossessed, repackaged and used by corporations and the government to entrap us in prisons of our own making.
Without constitutional protections in place to guard against encroachments on our rights when power, technology and militaristic governance converge, it won’t be long before we find ourselves, much like Edward G. Robinson’s character in Soylent Green, looking back on the past with longing, back to an age where we could speak to whom we wanted, buy what we wanted, think what we wanted, and go where we wanted without those thoughts, words and movements being tracked, processed and stored by corporate giants such as Google, sold to government agencies such as the NSA and CIA, and used against us by militarized police with their army of futuristic technologies.
We’re not quite there yet, but as I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, that moment of reckoning is getting closer by the minute.
Constitutional attorney and author John Whitehead is founder and president The Rutherford Institute.
Support LeoHohmann.com. We are committed to investigative reporting and relevant, concise analysis for a 21 century audience that is awake and in search of answers. If you appreciate our articles and commentaries, please consider a donation of any size. You may send c/o Leo Hohmann, PO Box 291, Newnan, GA 30264, or via credit card below.