Recently by Andrew Gavin Marshall: Debt Dynamite Dominoes: TheComing FinancialCatastrophe
As outlined in Part 1 of this series, The Technological Revolution and the Future of Freedom, there are two major geopolitical realities in the world today, both largely brought about as a result of the Technological Revolution in which technology and electronics have come to define and shape our society.
The Technological Revolution has led to a diametrically opposed, antagonistic, and conflicting geopolitical reality: never before has humanity been so awakened to issues of power, exploitation, imperialism and domination; and simultaneously, never before have elites been so transnational and global in orientation, and with the ability to impose such a truly global system of scientific despotism and political oppression. These are the two major geopolitical realities of the world today. Never in all of human history has mankind been so capable of achieving a true global political psycho-social awakening; nor has humanity ever been in such danger of being subjected to a truly global scientific totalitarianism, potentially more oppressive than any system known before, and without a doubt more technologically capable of imposing a permanent despotism upon humanity. So we are filled with hope, but driven by urgency. In all of human history, never has the potential nor the repercussions of human actions and ideas ever been so monumental.
Not only is the awakening global in its reach, but in its very nature. It creates within the individual, an awareness of the global condition. So it is a global awakening both in the external environment, and in the internal psychology. This new reality in the world, coupled with the fact that the worlds population has never been so vast, presents a challenge to elites seeking to dominate people all over the world who are aware and awakened to the realities of social inequality, war, poverty, exploitation, disrespect, imperialism and domination. This directly implies that these populations will be significantly more challenging to control: economically, politically, socially, psychologically and spiritually. Thus, from the point of view of the global oligarchy, the only method of imposing order and control on this unique and historical human condition is through the organized chaos of economic crises, war, and the rapid expansion and institutionalization of a global scientific dictatorship. Our hope is their fear; and our greatest fear is their only hope.
This essay (Part II) will undertake an examination of these two geopolitical realities on a national scale, focusing primarily on the American Awakening.
The American Awakening
In the past decade, there has been an enormous surge in popular political activism, which has corresponded to the expansion of imperialism, exploitation and despotism in the world. The events of September 11th, 2001, sparked two major geopolitical events. The first was the implementation of the Bush Doctrine the War on Terror which was organized in response to the terrorist attacks. This imperialist expansion led to the war and occupation of Afghanistan, the war on Iraq and subsequent occupation, the war in Lebanon in 2006, the war on Somalia, continuing military expansionism and imposition in the Palestinian territories, as well as expansive covert operations in the Middle East, Central Asia, Africa and around the world.
The second major geopolitical trend instigated by the 9/11 attacks was the formation of what has come to be known as the 9/11 Truth Movement, in which millions of people around the world, including thousands of academics, architects, engineers, government officials, intelligence and military officials and other professionals, as well as an exponentially growing abundance of people in the general population internationally have sought to question and challenge the official accounts of the events of 9/11. Like all activist groups, there are fringe and radical elements within the movement, those who claim that no planes were used in the attacks, or that the attacks were undertaken by Israel with anti-Semitic undertones or other such fringe theories. Regardless of the fringe elements, the main focus of the movement is based around the fact that the official story of events does not stand up to any form of independent and unbiased, rational analysis. The media for years ignored the growing international movement, but only in recent years have acknowledged the movement; however, they did not address the movement by analyzing the information and issues, but rather by seeking to discredit and demonize the political movement, focusing on the fringe elements and beliefs and applying labels of conspiracy theorist, attempting to discredit anyone who questions the official story.
In 2006, Time Magazine acknowledged that the 9/11 Truth Movement is not a fringe movement, but is, in fact, a mainstream political reality. They also cited a major political poll by Scripps-Howard in 2006, which revealed that 36% of Americans think it is very likely or somewhat likely that government officials either allowed the attacks to be carried out or carried out the attacks themselves.
The growth of this movement spurred on major new movements and political activism, driven almost exclusively by organized and politically awakened civilians. Driven largely by the Internet, this movement has awakened a mass of people globally to the political and strategic reality of what is known in military terms as a false flag operation, in which an attack is carried out against a certain target, where those undertaking the attack fly the flag of someone else (i.e., false flag) in an effort to implicate them in the attack; and thus the response to an attack would be against the perceived attackers. It is, essentially, a covert military stratagem: a strategic deception. The Greek dramatist and playwright Aeschylus wrote that, In war, the first casualty is truth. A false flag attack is an act of war that is deliberately designed to deceive and hide the truth. It is an attack carried out and blamed on ones enemy in order to justify implementing a political agenda. Governments have used such tactics for centuries, and especially western nations in the past half-century.
This movement has spawned an activist resurgence in other global issues, such as the global economic system, and most notably, the central banking system, particularly the Federal Reserve. While many Americans knew next to nothing about their central bank, the Federal Reserve, a growing movement of Americans and others around the world were educating themselves about the Federal Reserve System and the global banking system in general. Many found a leader in a Texas Congressman named Ron Paul, who campaigned on the Republican ticket for President in 2008, and who drew the widest grassroots support from across the nation of any Republican candidates. Among Democrats, 9/11 Truthers and others critical of US foreign policy came to find a passionate leader in Cynthia McKinney, who was one of the lone voices in Congress to directly challenge the Bush administration on the official version of events, and has challenged the election fraud in 2000 and 2004, conducted a Congressional hearing on covert activities in Africa, exposing the hand of western nations behind the Rwandan genocide and Congo Civil War.
In late 2008, as the government began its financial bailout of the banks, the End the Fed movement emerged in sporadic protests at the 12 Federal Reserve Banks located around the country, and over 40 protests took place across the nation within a matter of months.
The Homeland Security State Targets Dissenters
With the increasing militarization of foreign policy, we also see the increasing militarization of domestic politics, and most notably the emergence of a high-tech surveillance police state: a Homeland Security State. National and international elites are in the process of incrementally constructingv a u201Cnew totalitarianismu201D in replacing democracy. Civil rights and freedoms are dismantled through anti-terrorist legislation, wiretapping and internet surveillance are rampant and expansive, watch lists are constructed, which often include the names of dissenters, and the military is increasingly poised to partake in policing. Further, over the past decade, we have seen the rapid expansion of Continuity of Government (COG) plans, which plan for the suspension of the Constitution and imposition of martial law in the event of an emergency. At this point in American society, if there was a rapid and expansive economic collapse or another major terrorist attack on US soil, America would transform into a military government, more fascist in nature than anything; but equipped with an arsenal and technetronic police state the likes of which no dictator in history has had access to. Freedom has never been so threatened; yet, people have never been so mobilized in modern history to challenge the threats to freedom and democracy in America, in the west, and in the world.
In 2003, General Tommy Franks gave an interview with Cigar Aficionado magazine in which he elaborated on this concept. Tommy Franks was the former Commander of the Pentagons Central Command over the Middle East, and thus he was the top General overseeing the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. In his interview with the magazine, Franks stated that the objective of terrorism is to change the mannerisms, the behavior, the sociology and, ultimately, the anthropology of a society, and thus, in the event of another major terrorist attack in America or in the West:
the western world, the free world, loses what it cherishes most, and that is freedom and liberty we’ve seen for a couple of hundred years in this grand experiment that we call democracy. Now, in a practical sense, what does that mean? It means the potential of a weapon of mass destruction and a terrorist, massive casualty-producing event somewhere in the western world it may be in the United States of America that causes our population to question our own Constitution and to begin to militarize our country in order to avoid a repeat of another mass-casualty-producing event. Which, in fact, then begins to potentially unravel the fabric of our Constitution.
One interesting facet that very little is known about in the militarization of domestic society and incremental totalitarianism is how the coercive state apparatus, while being justified under the guise of fighting terrorism or protecting the Homeland, is in fact being directed against citizen activists and popular political movements. For example, following 9/11, the Department of Homeland Security established what are known as Fusion Centers, set up all over the United States, and which are designed as information sharing and collecting hubs, in which agencies like the CIA, FBI, Department of Justice, Homeland Security and the US Military collect and analyze information together. As of July 2009, there were 72 acknowledged Fusion Centers around the United States. Think of them as local surveillance centers, because thats what they are.
Fusion Centers are also positioned to take part as local command centers in the event of a national emergency or implementation of Continuity of Government plans to declare martial law. State and local law enforcement agencies provide the majority of information to the local Fusion Centers, which is then analyzed and disseminated to the major intelligence, military or Homeland Security departments and agencies. However, in recent years, Fusion Centers have been criticized for their purported agenda, as they are justified on the basis of acting as centers designated for counter-terrorism purposes, but in practice are directed against citizen groups.
In the spring of 2009, it was revealed that the Missouri Information Analysis Center (MIAC) a Fusion Center had put out an information pamphlet designed to help law enforcement officials identify potential domestic terrorists. According to the report:
If you’re an anti-abortion activist, or if you display political paraphernalia supporting a third-party candidate or a certain Republican member of Congress, if you possess subversive literature, you very well might be a member of a domestic paramilitary group.
When did our society become something out of 1984? When did our governments designate subversive literature as a sign of terrorism? The report classified such activities as being part of a Modern Militia Movement, and further identified potential threats to American security as:
People who supported former third-party presidential candidates like Texas Rep. Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin and former Georgia Rep. Bob Barr are cited in the report, in addition to anti-abortion activists and conspiracy theorists who believe the United States, Mexico and Canada will someday form a North American Union.
In other words, those who are opposed to the political and economic process of North American integration are seen and identified as potential militia members. The report even directly identified possession of such films like the anti-Federal Reserve film, America: Freedom to Fascism as potential signals of militia involvement. The document put out by the Fusion Center further warned law enforcement officials to be on the lookout for bumper stickers advertising third party candidates, or people with copies of the United States Constitution. The report wrote that due to the economic crisis, a lush environment for militia activity has been created, and:
It goes on to cite possible militia members as people who talk about the New World Order conspiracy, express anger with the Federal Reserve banking system, resist paying taxes, warn other citizens about the perceived dangers of radio frequency identification (RFID) or lobby for a return to strict constitutionalism as possible threats to law enforcement.
While the memo does offer something of a lopsided summary of many of the various groups which swelled enormously following the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, it also links individuals who are otherwise peaceful with the Ku Klux Klan and other violent organizations.
Another Fusion Center in Virginia identified many universities as potential radicalization nodes for terrorists, singling out historically black colleges as potential threats, and it also contains an extensive list of peaceful American and International activist groups from nearly all cross-sections of political engagement, placing them side-by-side with groups that have long been known for resorting to violence.
In April of 2009, the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) released a report on the threat to liberties and civil rights posed by the Fusion Centers, saying that, Fusion centers have experienced a mission creep in the last several years, becoming more of a threat than a security device. With no overarching guidelines to restrict or direct them, these centers put Americans privacy at huge risk. The ACLU report identified several troubling incidents in regards to Fusion Centers violating privacy and civil rights:
- A May 7, 2008 report entitled Universal Adversary Dynamic Threat Assessment authored by a private contractor that labeled environmental organizations like the Sierra Club, the Humane Society and the Audubon Society as mainstream organizations with known or possible links to eco-terrorism;
- A potential abuse of authority by DHS officials who improperly monitored and disseminated the communications of peace activists affiliated with the DC Anti-War Network (DAWN);
- A report produced on February 19, 2009 by the North Central Texas Fusion System entitled Prevention Awareness Bulletin which described a purported conspiracy between Muslim civil rights organizations, lobbying groups, the anti-war movement, the U.S. Treasury Department, hip hop bands and former Congresswoman and presidential candidate Cynthia McKinney to provide an environment for terrorist organizations to flourish;
- A Strategic Report produced February 20, 2009 by the Missouri Information Analysis Center that described a purported security threat posed by the modern militia movement but inappropriately included references to social, religious and political ideologies, including support of third party presidential candidates such as Congressman Ron Paul and former Congressman Bob Barr; and
- A Protective Intelligence Bulletin issued by the DHS Intelligence Branch of the Threat Management Division of the Federal Protective Service which improperly collected and disseminated information regarding political demonstrations and inappropriately labeled peaceful advocacy groups and other activists as extremists.
To those in power, u201Cpeaceu201D is an u201Cextremistu201D idea, because u201Cwaru201D and u201Cviolenceu201D are the norms to them. Now it has come to the point where those who challenge the structures of power are simply designated as terrorists and extremists. This is an incredibly dangerous political road at which the end is despotism and the death of democracy. Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney, as one of those identified by Fusion Centers as providing an environment for terrorist organizations to flourish, had this to say about the Fusion Center report:
As a student of COINTELPRO, the government’s infamous Counter-Intelligence Program [directed against the Civil Rights Movement in the 1960s], I know what my government is capable of doing to quash dissent. That’s why I voted against the Patriot Act, worked in Congress to roll back the Secret Evidence Act, and introduced legislation to repeal the Military Commissions Act. I come from a long legacy of activists for justice and freedom inside this country. I am on the advocacy front lines for peace abroad and justice at home. But I know that we will not have peace or justice without truth. Truth is the foundation of the dignity that we seek. Dignity for all is not a threat to the United States.
It has become evident that the response of the American government to the global political awakening within the United States is aimed at demonizing, discrediting, and oppressing activist groups and political movements. But how far can this oppression go?
Detention Camps for Dissidents?
One startling and deeply concerning development in the area of Homeland Security is the highly secretive and deliberately quiet establishment of detention centers within the United States, designed to house millions of people in the event of an emergency. In 2002, Attorney General John Ashcroft announced [a] desire for camps for U.S. citizens he deems to be enemy combatants, and that his plan would allow him to order the indefinite incarceration of U.S. citizens and summarily strip them of their constitutional rights and access to the courts by declaring them enemy combatants.
Also in 2002, it was reported that FEMA, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (now under the purview of the Department of Homeland Security), was moving ahead with plans to create temporary cities that could handle millions of Americans after mass destruction attacks on U.S. cities. Newsmax reported that, FEMA was seeking bids from three major real estate and/or engineering firms to help prepare for the creation of the emergency cities, using tents and trailers if an urban area is attacked by NBC (nuclear, chemical or biological) weapons.
In 2006, Dick Cheneys former company, Halliburton, and its subsidiary company, Kellogg-Brown & Root (KBR) received a major contract from the Department of Homeland Security worth $385 million, which was given to support the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facilities in the event of an emergency. A press release on KBRs website stated that:
The contract, which is effective immediately, provides for establishing temporary detention and processing capabilities to augment existing ICE Detention and Removal Operations (DRO) Program facilities in the event of an emergency influx of immigrants into the U.S., or to support the rapid development of new programs.
Further, it stated that, The contract may also provide migrant detention support to other U.S. Government organizations in the event of an immigration emergency, as well as the development of a plan to react to a national emergency, such as a natural disaster. In the event of a natural disaster, the contractor could be tasked with providing housing for ICE personnel performing law enforcement functions in support of relief efforts.
July 13, 2010
Andrew Gavin Marshall is a Research Associate with the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG). He is currently studying Political Economy and History at Simon Fraser University.