WW3: Japan Activates Marines For First Time Since WWII On Chinese Border

Fears of a third world war spiked over the weekend as Japan activated their marines for the first time since World War 2. About 2,100 members of the Amphibious Rapid Deployment Brigade (ARDB) were activated in a ceremony in which the troops wore camouflage.

ARDB also completed a 20-minute mock drill for the public in which the “retook” an island from an invading force. According to Reuters, the formation of the Japanese marine brigade is controversial because amphibious units can project military force and could, critics warn, be used to threaten Japan’s neighbors. In its post-WW2 constitution, Japan renounced the right to wage war.

The newly activated unit is highly trained to counter invaders occupying Japanese islands along the edge of the East China Sea that Tokyo fears are vulnerable to attack by China. “Given the increasingly difficult defense and security situation surrounding Japan, defense of our islands has become a critical mandate,” Tomohiro Yamamoto, vice defense minister, said in a speech.

The brigade is the latest component of a growing marine force that includes helicopter carriers, amphibious ships, Osprey tilt-rotor troop carriers, and amphibious assault vehicles. All of these marine measures are meant to deter China as it pushes for easier access to the Western Pacific.

The activation of the 2,100 strong ARDB takes Japan a step closer to creating a force similar to a U.S. Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU) able to plan and execute operations at sea far from its home base. “They’ve already demonstrated the ability to put together an ad hoc MEU. But to have a solid, standing MEU capability requires a concerted effort,” Grant Newsham, a research fellow at the Japan Forum for Strategic Studies. “If Japan put its mind to it, within a year or year and a half it could have a reasonable capability.”

Coincidentally, the United States last month deployed its F-35Bs for their first at-sea operations aboard the USS Wasp amphibious assault ship, which is based in Sasebo. The Kyushu port is also home to Japan’s Ise and close to the ARDB’s base.

All of these military decisions seem to coalesce and reignite fears of a war. The amphibious marine force of Japan has been advancing over the past few years with the help of the United States Marines. 

US Official: ‘Time is Running OUT’ To Avoid Nuclear War With North Korea

President Donald Trump’s national security adviser warned that now is the time to avoid a war with North Korea. H.R. McMaster, speaking at an event for the British think tank Policy Exchange, said “time is running out” to prevent a nuclear war.

According to Newsweek, McMaster was previewing the new National Security Strategy, a document put out by each administration that shapes how it approaches foreign policy and national security issues during its tenure. Trump will unveil the full document on Monday.

McMaster’s remarks come just after North Korea demonstrated a missile last month that, experts say, puts the continental United States in range. Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong-Un have also traded verbal barbs, with Trump calling Kim “Rocket Man” and Korean government outlets referring to Trump as a “dotard.” Those threats and the advances in North Korea’s nuclear program have heightened tensions on the Korean Peninsula and pushed the two sides toward what experts say would be a horrific nuclear war.

“Now it’s time for all nations to do more,” McMaster said. The National Security Strategy document also includes details about how the administration is dealing with North Korea. McMaster said that policy is focused on the “denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula,” not ousting Kim Jong-Un. That includes potential action against companies that illegally do business with North Korea, along with continued pressure on China to help curb North Korea’s nuclear tests.

“North Korea’s government is dependent on isolation,” said Britain’s national security advisor, Mark Sedwill. “Those who talk about reintegrating North Korea miss the point of that regime,” Sedwill said, lacking confidence that North Korea could ever be normalized.

Another section of the strategy will focus on “cooperation with reciprocity,” a phrase meant to coax U.S. allies to spend more on their own defense, a critical component of Trump’s campaign rhetoric on national security.

US Official: ‘Time Running OUT’ To Avoid Nuclear War With North Korea

President Donald Trump’s national security adviser warned that now is the time to avoid a war with North Korea. H.R. McMaster, speaking at an event for the British think tank Policy Exchange, said “time is running out” to prevent a nuclear war.

According to Newsweek, McMaster was previewing the new National Security Strategy, a document put out by each administration that shapes how it approaches foreign policy and national security issues during its tenure. Trump will unveil the full document on Monday.

McMaster’s remarks come just after North Korea demonstrated a missile last month that, experts say, puts the continental United States in range. Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong-Un have also traded verbal barbs, with Trump calling Kim “Rocket Man” and Korean government outlets referring to Trump as a “dotard.” Those threats and the advances in North Korea’s nuclear program have heightened tensions on the Korean Peninsula and pushed the two sides toward what experts say would be a horrific nuclear war.

“Now it’s time for all nations to do more,” McMaster said. The National Security Strategy document also includes details about how the administration is dealing with North Korea. McMaster said that policy is focused on the “denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula,” not ousting Kim Jong-Un. That includes potential action against companies that illegally do business with North Korea, along with continued pressure on China to help curb North Korea’s nuclear tests.

“North Korea’s government is dependent on isolation,” said Britain’s national security advisor, Mark Sedwill. “Those who talk about reintegrating North Korea miss the point of that regime,” Sedwill said, lacking confidence that North Korea could ever be normalized.

Another section of the strategy will focus on “cooperation with reciprocity,” a phrase meant to coax U.S. allies to spend more on their own defense, a critical component of Trump’s campaign rhetoric on national security.

Mass Shootings: The Military-Entertainment Complex's Culture Of Violence Turns Deadly

Authored by John Whitehead via The Rutherford Institute,

This latest mass shooting in Las Vegas that left more than 50 people dead and more than 500 injured is as obscure as they come: a 64-year-old retiree with no apparent criminal history, no military training, and no obvious axe to grind opens fire on a country music concert crowd from a hotel room 32 floors up using a semi-automatic gun that may have been rigged to fire up to 700 rounds a minute, then kills himself.

We’re left with more questions than answers, none of them a flattering reflection of the nation’s values, political priorities, or the manner in which the military-industrial complex continues to dominate, dictate and shape almost every aspect of our lives.

For starters, why do these mass shootings keep happening? Mass shootings have taken place at churches, in nightclubs, on college campuses, on military bases, in elementary schools, in government offices, and at concerts. This shooting is the deadliest to date.

What is it about America that makes violence our nation’s calling card?

Is it because America is a gun culture?

Is it because guns are so readily available? After all, the U.S. is home to more firearms than adults. Curiously enough, the majority of gun-related deaths in the U.S. are suicides, not homicides.

Is it because entertainment violence is the hottest selling ticket at the box office?

Is it because the government continues to whet the nation’s appetite for violence and war through paid propaganda programs (seeded throughout sports entertainment, Hollywood blockbusters and video games) - what professor Roger Stahl refers to as “militainment” - that glorify the military and serve as recruiting tools for America’s expanding military empire?

Is it because the United States is the number one consumer, exporter and perpetrator of violence and violent weapons in the world? America spends more money on war than other countries. America polices the globe, with 800 military bases and troops stationed in 160 countries. And the war hawks have turned the American homeland into a quasi-battlefield with military gear, weapons and tactics. In turn, domestic police forces have become roving extensions of the military - a standing army.

Or is the Second Amendment to blame, as many continue to suggest? Would there be fewer mass shootings if tighter gun control laws were enacted?

Then again, could it be, as some have speculated, that these shootings are all part of an elaborate plan to incite fear and chaos, heighten national tensions and shift us that much closer to a complete lockdown? After all, the military and our militarized police forces have been predicting and preparing for exactly this kind of scenario for years now.

Perhaps there’s no single one factor to blame for this gun violence. However, there is a common denominator, and that is a war-drenched, violence-imbued, profit-driven military industrial complex that has invaded almost every aspect of our lives.

Ask yourself: Who are these shooters modelling themselves after? Where are they finding the inspiration for their weaponry and tactics? Whose stance and techniques are they mirroring?

In almost every instance, you can connect the dots back to the military.

We are a military culture.

We have been a nation at war for most of our existence.

We are a nation that makes a living from killing through defense contracts, weapons manufacturing and endless wars.

In order to sustain the nation’s appetite for war over the long haul in spite of the costs of war in lives lost and dollars spent—and little else to show for it—the military has had to work overtime to churn out pro-war, pro-military propaganda. It’s exactly what President Eisenhower warned against (“the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex”) in his 1961 farewell address.

We didn’t listen then and we’re still not listening now.

All the while, the government’s war propaganda machine has grown more sophisticated and entrenched in American culture.

All of the military equipment featured in blockbuster movies such as X-Men and Transformers is provided—at taxpayer expense—in exchange for carefully placed promotional spots aimed at indoctrinating the American populace into believing that patriotism means throwing their support behind the military wholeheartedly and unquestioningly.

Even reality TV shows have gotten in on the gig.

It’s estimated that U.S. military intelligence agencies (including the NSA) have influenced over 1,800 movies and TV shows.

And then there are the growing number of video games, a number of which are engineered by or created for the military, which have accustomed players to interactive war play through military simulations and first-person shooter scenarios.

This is how you acclimate a population to war.

This is how you cultivate loyalty to a war machine.

Not satisfied with peddling its war propaganda through Hollywood, reality TV shows and embedded journalists whose reports came across as glorified promotional ads for the military, the Pentagon turned to sports to further advance its agenda, “tying the symbols of sports with the symbols of war.”

The military has been firmly entrenched in the nation’s sports spectacles ever since.

Remember, just before this Vegas shooting gave the media, the politicians and the easily distracted public something new to obsess over, the headlines were dominated by President Trump’s feud with the NFL over players kneeling during the national anthem.

That, too, was yet another example of how much the military entertainment complex - which paid $53 million of taxpayer money between 2012 and 2015 to pro sports teams for military tributes—has infiltrated American culture.

Are you starting to get the picture now?

When you talk about the Las Vegas mass shooting, you’re not dealing with a single shooter scenario. Rather, you’re dealing with a sophisticated, far-reaching war machine that has woven itself into the very fabric of this nation.

You want to stop the gun violence?

Stop the worship of violence that permeates our culture.

Stop glorifying the military industrial complex with flyovers and salutes during sports spectacles.

Stop acting as if there is anything patriotic about military exercises and occupations that bomb hospitals and schools.

Stop treating guns and war as entertainment fodder in movies, music, video games, toys, amusement parks, reality TV and more.

Stop distributing weapons of war to the local police and turning them into extensions of the military—weapons that have no business being anywhere but on a battlefield.

Most of all, as I point out in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, stop falling for the military industrial complex’s psychological war games.

All The Countries America Has Invaded... In One Map

From Montezuma to the shores of Tripoli, the US has had a military presence across the world, from almost day one of its independence. For those who have ever wanted a clearer picture of the true reach of the United States military - both historically and currently - but shied away due to the sheer volume of research required to find an answer, The Anti Media points out that a crew at the Independent just made things a whole lot simpler.

Using data compiled by a Geography and Native Studies professor from Evergreen State College in Olympia, Washington, the indy100 team created an interactive map of U.S. military incursions outside its own borders from Argentina in 1890 to Syria in 2014.

To avoid confusion, indy100 laid out its prerequisites for what constitutes an invasion:

“Deployment of the military to evacuate American citizens, covert military actions by US intelligence, providing military support to an internal opposition group, providing military support in one side of a conflict, use of the army in drug enforcement actions.”

But indy100 didn’t stop there. To put all that history into context, using data from the Department of Defense (DOD), the team also put together a map to display all the countries in which nearly 200,000 active members of the U.S. military are now stationed.

For more details, click on the country:

The three countries with the biggest U.S. presence, according to DOD numbers, are Japan at 39,623, Germany at 34,399 and South Korea at 23,297.

The publication of the maps comes just after President Donald Trump announced the military would not be pulling out of its 16-year engagement in Afghanistan - a reversal of his previous stance - and that the U.S. would seek stronger ties with India to combat terrorism in South and Central Asia.

Eric Parker Ripped from Witness Stand – Bunkerville Retrial

PROVOCATION BY THE GOVERNMENT IS NOT A DEFENSE. IT IS IRRELEVANT AND ONLY GOES TO JURY NULLIFICATION. ~JUDGE NAVARRO

By Shari Dovale   August 10, 2017

The Retrial of Defendants Eric Parker, Steven Stewart, Scott Drexler, and Ricky Lovelein took a decided twist today in a Las Vegas Federal courtroom.

Cliven Bundy walks by a first amendment area set up by the BLM near Bunkerville, Nev.

The defense had already been shot down by Judge Gloria Navarro. Yesterday, the day was spent previewing the defense witness testimony and Navarro refused to allow their witnesses to take the stand. She called the testimony “Not Relevant”.

She has made it clear that there is no such thing as self defense against the government, or that of defending anyone else against the government. Law enforcement cannot be considered to use “excessive” force in this case. She believes that if any of this is brought to the jury, they may acquit for “jury nullification”. Navarro seems to have a pathological fear of jury nullification.

It was left to Parker to take the stand in his own defense.

BLM Snipers above the wash in Bunkerville

Within 10 minutes of taking the stand, AUSA Myhre began his objections. Between Parker mentioning the “First Amendment Zone” that was set up several miles away from the wash and his saying that he “looked up to the right” (where the BLM snipers were located), Myhre nearly went into conniptions.

After long side bars, Navarro finally removed Eric Parker from the witness stand. She came back to the bench and, without explanation, told him to step down. He will not be allowed to continue defending himself, there will be no cross examination and no jury questions.

Parker was so stunned that it took him a minute to get back to the defense table where he became very emotional at the thought of not being allowed to fight for his very life.”The jury was also stunned and shocked. When Judge Navarro released them so abruptly, they all sat there for several moments, with at least a few jurors having their mouths hanging open.

Judge Gloria Navarro made several points earlier, outside of the jury’s hearing. Self Defense is not allowed. Defense of another is equally not a valid defense. Provocation by the government is not a defense. All of these are irrelevant and only go to jury nullification.

Navarro has said that a group of protesters that advance on the government are aggressors and the law is clear that the government agents and law enforcement can defend themselves using deadly force.

Based on the statements, rulings and opinions of Judge Navarro, Martin Luther King, during his march from Selma to Montgomery, could have legally been shot by the government, and his crowd of supporters, as well.

Breaking News: bunkerville retrial

Posted by Redoubt News on Thursday, August 10, 2017

Redoubt News

.

Navarro’s Counterfeit Court – Bunkerville Retrial

by Shari Dovale   August 9, 2017

The Bunkerville Retrial in Las Vegas has taken yet another turn for the worst. Judge Gloria Navarro allowed the defense to proffer several witnesses via SKYPE today. The testimony was taken out of the hearing of the jury so that she might determine if the testimony is relevant.

Included in this group was former FOX News reporter Dennis Michael Lynch, and a few citizens that were actually in the wash on April 12, 2014.

Each of the witnesses testified to the fear they felt that day watching the multiple law enforcement agencies point guns at them and hearing statements on the loudspeakers that the BLM had been given authority to shoot the protesters.

“If you move forward you can be shot,” Lynch said, reciting the message.

“I thought we might die in the wash that day,” Kenneth Rhoades testified.

The same testimony was repeated throughout the day. However, when it was all said and done, Judge Navarro said that this testimony was not relevant to the case so she will not allow it to be presented to the jury.

The BLM was allowed to testify to their fear of the protesters, as Navarro called them the “victims” in the case.

This is not the only misleading directions that Navarro has given in this travesty of justice. Navarro has ruled that all bad acts by the BLM, or any other law enforcement, will not be presented on the record. She feels that there is nothing relevant about showing this. She has stated that, “The law does not recognize self defense against law enforcement officers.”

Navarro has previously said that anytime a person is open-carrying a weapon and a law enforcement officer happens to see that weapon, then that is evidence of a threat to the officer and is considered assault. She reiterated that there cannot be excessive force for law enforcement. They are allowed to do as they choose, regardless of the law.

The law does not apply to those that enforce it.

Jess Marchese, attorney for Eric Parker, complained to the court that he has been stopped from representing his client. The defense “cannot give the jury the full picture.” Navarro practically mocked him when she said that she didn’t know what to tell him, as she cannot give him guidelines on how to represent his client.

Judge Navarro has ruled that the government can present any, and all, evidence they wish, including what led up to the standoff, and what the defendants did up to two years after the standoff. However, the defense is only allowed to present a limited scope of evidence concerning a 40-minute period on the day of the standoff.

This goes for the defendants testifying, as well. If the defendants choose to testify on their own behalf, they will not be allowed to tell the jury why they went to Nevada, but the jury is supposed to judge them on why they went.

Nevada is an open-carry state, meaning it is legal to carry a firearm within the state. However, the jury is not to be told this fact as Judge Navarro feels it might “confuse” them. But, the jury will be asked to convict the defendants of carrying weapons.

The defendants cannot tell of seeing the ‘First Amendment Zone’ set up by the BLM several miles from the wash. They cannot tell of seeing a grandmother thrown to the ground by law enforcement officers. They cannot mention the tazing of Ammon Bundy.

They are not allowed to talk of the BLM slaughtering and burying the Bundy cattle, or the lies the agents told about doing so. They cannot talk about Special Agent in Charge, Daniel P. Love, who is currently under investigation for his alleged illegal conduct.

Most of the defendants knew nothing about cows or grazing fees. They knew what they saw on the videos, both in the mainstream media and on the internet. The knew their neighbors were in trouble and they came to help. They understood the US Constitution and wanted to defend it.

Judge Navarro continues to recite her mantra, that the full story of the defendants is not “Probative” or “Relevant” therefore it is not admissible in this case.

Navarro, and the prosecutors, repeatedly state that they are very worried the defendants will attempt jury nullification. This seems to be the only option left to them, however, Navarro is cracking down hard against that possibility.

What everything comes down to is this: Judge Gloria Navarro is so invested in this verdict that she is willing to trample on every right these defendants have. She is willing to throw every citizen of this country under the bus to meet her own agenda.

Since the Constitution is not allowed in this courtroom, there is now a precedent set for the rest of the country. If the government, or the judiciary, chooses to deny any and all rights guaranteed by our BILL OF RIGHTS, they will be allowed to do so, because it was already approved of in this case.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions has given his stamp of approval, when he praised AUSA Myhre for the job he was doing on this case. That very day, as soon as Sessions made his statement, the court doubled-down on the attacks to the defendants case.

Secretary of the Interior, Ryan Zinke, made the same types of statements when he visited Bunkerville recently. He gave his seal of approval on the entire land grab by the BLM, and by extension, this prosecution.

It falls to President Donald Trump to prove his campaign promises to look out for ‘We The People’. His administration has thrown out the Constitution and spat on the citizens. Will he allow this to continue IN HIS NAME?

These defendants have no other options. This dog-and-pony show is an exercise in going through the motions.

This is not a trial. This is a grand jury hearing where no defense is even allowed to be presented. The defendants have been thrown to the wolves by their own government. What happened to our Republic?

Roger Stone has written a new petition that he is ready to present to President Trump. Check it out here.

Redoubt News

.

The House Does Not Lose In Las Vegas – Bunkerville Trial

The House Does Not Lose In Las Vegas

By Loren Edward Pearce

In Las Vegas, Sin City, it is known that the house never loses.  Likewise, at the U.S. District Court in Las Vegas, Nevada the federal team, consisting of the judge, the prosecutors and the marshals, will not lose in their own house.  The statistics are clearly in favor of the house.  Between guilty pleas and trials, the conviction rate was 99.8% in U.S. federal courts in 2015: 126,802 convictions and 258 acquittals. That wasn’t an anomaly. In 2014 the conviction rate was 99.76% and in 2013 it was 99.75%.

That is why the full acquittal in the Oregon trial of the Bundys et al, is such a miracle.  Now, in Nevada, we have an entirely different situation as the federal team (judge, prosecutors, marshals) double down in a determined effort not to repeat the loss in their own house.  Kelli Stewart, who attended most of the trial in Oregon, was able to see the contrast between the two federal District Courts.  Stewart, who came all the way from Washington to attend court and see/hear/smell/sense for herself how awful Nevada court is, was able to confirm what she had heard from others.  I was in Las Vegas also and it was refreshing to have Kelli confirm what we were experiencing, i.e., that the behavior of the Nevada federal team (judge, prosecutors, marshals) was abysmally awful.

Las Vegas Nevada, Federal court house. Judge Gloria Navarro is running a scam and calling it Justice. Cliven Bundy et al vs The United States of America. Court recap. Enter into the realm of insanity. This is the truth of what went on in that court room today. We are no longer a nation of order but of chaos and tyranny and our people are suffering alone in cells tonight, and they need YOU. One letter, one call, one hug, one prayer, one voice can change the world.

Posted by Kel Stewart on Monday, April 10, 2017

I was there also.  I can vouch for and confirm what she is describing.   As noted in previous articles, the bias and incompetence of Gloria Navarro are breathtaking.  We cannot shrug it off because of the mind boggling consequences to the defendants, many years of prison, sexual abuse, solitary confinement and separation from family and means of earning a livelihood.

BOUNCING AROUND THE COURTROOM LIKE PEEWEE HERMAN

1.     Referring to Prosecutor Nicholas Dickinson, Stewart describes his sinister, malevolent and smug mannerisms and behavior as he cross examined defendant Eric Parker on the witness stand.  It almost seemed that Dickinson slithered rather than walked around the courtroom.  As he presented government evidence with photos and video, dozens and dozens of times he would say, “that is you with the long rifle, the vest with the metal plates and the hat with the white logo?”  And dozens and dozens of times, Eric would say respectfully, “yes sir”.  Finally, in frustration, Eric said, “yes sir, I never changed my clothes until that night.”   What Dickinson was trying to achieve, I don’t know, but Peewee Herman weirdness, it was.

2.     As we returned from a break, a supporter of the defendants was beginning to take a seat when a marshal screamed at him that he didn’t have his pocket constitution turned the right way.  The man acted confused and before he could get clarification, a marshal grabbed him by the arm and ejected him from the court.  The marshals demand that the front cover of the pocket constitution not be shown but must be turned around and face backwards.   If there is any doubt that this court is their house, the marshals confirmed it was.

3.     The prosecution presented evidence that Eric Parker was associated with the Idaho 3% militia in an attempt to show the jury that anybody that is associated with a militia is a bad guy.  Regardless of the fact that a civilian militia is mentioned three times in the constitution, the federal team would have you believe that a militia is bad.

VIOLATION OF THE 1^ST AMENDMENT: YOUR FACEBOOK POSTS WILL BE USED AGAINST YOU

4.     For me, the most shocking development of the trial was the federal team’s use of Facebook posts against the defendants.  The defense attorney’s objected on the basis of authenticity.  Other people can post, tag, like, share or fraudulently post in your name (identity theft) and you are guilty of conspiracy against the federal team and subject to harsh penalties and years of prison if you post something (or somebody posts for you) that the government doesn’t like.  1^st Amendment right to free speech?  No mention of the 1^st Amendment in front of the jury was allowed.   The defense also objected on hearsay and almost all defense objections were denied by the federal team in their own house.

5.     Dickinson tried to use Facebook posts from Parker that referred to having won against the feds as a show of conspiracy and Facebook quotes from “Art of War” by Sun Tzu as evidence that Parker conspired to war against the feds.  Parker responded that he was debating with another Facebook user about “Art of War” and not conspiring to war against the feds.  Again, the lengths the federal team was willing to go to not lose in their own house.  The feds had pulled off the internet reams of posts, emails and other private matters in violation of the 1^st and 4^th amendments.

6.     The prosecution showed quotes from Parker that had to do with Range War.  Parker explained that the word “war” does not refer to violence or blood shed any more than the War on Poverty, or the War on Obesity refers to violence.    The prosecution tried to use a video interview with Parker on the bridge where he asked for a “show of force” as further evidence that he was inciting violence against federal officials.  Parker replied that he wanted a show of force in terms of numbers, strength in numbers, not in the use of firearms or weapons.

KEY WITNESSES DENIED BY THE FEDERAL TEAM

7.     At one point, the prosecution raised the subject of Margaret Houston, the woman who was body slammed by the BLM agent, and the defense claimed that the prosecution had opened the door to having Houston testify.  The federal team (Navarro) sustained their own objection and refused to allow Houston to testify as her testimony would be very harmful to the federal team’s goal to not lose in their own house.

8.     As you may know, Special Agent Dan Love, who was in charge of the Bunkerville operation, was prohibited from testifying by the federal team (Navarro) so as to not lose in their own house.

Stewart said that we need to prepare the defendant supporters, emotionally and psychologically, for a guilty verdict absent divine intervention.  As she notes in her video, the defense attorneys have basically given up, are ineffective and defeated as they realize it is impossible to win in the house of the federal team.

The problem is this,  losing is not an option for the defense.  Having visited some of the unconvicted prisoners in the Nevada prison, I can say that the degree of suffering and depression experienced by the prisoners is beyond comprehension.

I am writing this article in a local McDonald’s.  I just overheard one of the customers say, “Are you ready for Easter?”  as the average American, oblivious to these atrocities, goes about their lives.

Put yourself in the prisoner’s place.  What would you do?

From Redoubt News

Judge Navarro Pushes Defense To Rest Case in Bunkerville Trial

by Shari Dovale

It has been two days that the defense has been attempting to present their case to the jury in the Bunkerville trial being held in Las Vegas, Nevada.

Out of these two days, the jury has been in the courtroom about 15 minutes, or so. The remaining time has been filled with frustrations from the defendants and laughter from the Judge and prosecutors.

Yes, Judge Gloria Navarro continued to laugh at the distress of the defendants every time she slapped more evidence out of their hands.

Eric Parker

Eric Parker said yesterday that he would testify, as he felt he had no other options. Navarro and the prosecutors subjected him to another round of intimidation today in their attempts to make him change his mind. Navarro has already threatened him with “enhanced” perjury charges if she feels he has not told the truth.

And the truth is very subjective in her courtroom. She spent most of the morning going over jury instructions. She intends to instruct the jury that just carrying a holstered weapon can be a criminal act. She also does not intend to allow the jury to hear that there is a “Right To Carry” law in Nevada.

The defense asked for an instruction to be included about the missing witness, Dan Love. They have been attempting to introduce video evidence. This video includes Dan Love and Pete Santilli, yet neither one of them are allowed to testify, therefore, there is no one available to introduce this evidence. Navarro dismissed that motion and will not allow the instruction.

Todd Engel

The only bright spot today is that Navarro has finally agreed to allow Todd Engel to present his closing arguments. Engel is still not allowed to do anything else, including speak, in her courtroom, but he can represent himself in the closing.

I am happy that the defense was able to discuss the Facebook evidence. It has been stressed throughout the country and the government that Facebook posts and articles are not to be considered trusted sources. Yet, the prosecution has brought in over 500 posts, memes and more to show just how evil these defendants are. The prosecution has even gone so far as to suggest that using the phrase “Whatever it takes” is an implied threat.

They have suggested very warped definitions of ‘threats to the government’. Navarro has made it clear from the very first day that she makes law in that courtroom, therefore, if she wants to distort the truth to the jury, then we must accept that.

The prosecution continues to stress their “ongoing criminal investigation” into UN-indicted Co-conspirators. They have suggested that they can prosecute people just for showing up to watch the protesters. They have even implied that if someone “Likes” a post on Facebook, that is evidence for conspiracy. Based on their definitions, just by reading this article you can be considered a conspirator. I guess I will continue to be on their list, as I will continue to write these articles and expose their corruption.

Navarro was not concerned with the defense arguments, yet it did get on the record. That made it worthwhile at least.

The defense also argued for “limited immunity” for select witnesses so they may testify to the events. The prosecution refused and the Judge agreed. They do not want the defense to have any witnesses, though the defense will likely present one or two witnesses.

After the prosecution had extended time, over five weeks, and the defense has yet to be allowed to call any witnesses, the Judge asked the defense if they were ready to rest their case tomorrow.

From Redoubt News

If you believe in the mission of Oath Keepers, to defend the Constitution against all enemies,  foreign and domestic, please consider making a donation to support our work.   You can donate HERE.

Judge Openly LAUGHS At Defendants Rights – Bunkerville Trial

By Shari Dovale

Judge Gloria Navarro made a mockery of the judicial system today.

The first Bunkerville trial is underway in Las Vegas, Nevada. The prosecution has had over five weeks to present their case. Now that the defense is ready to put on their case, Judge Gloria Navarro has shut them down.

Out of the entire witness list, there is one witness, other than the defendants, that she will allow to testify. Garrett Frenner was a witness to the slaughter of the Bundy cattle. However, Judge Navarro will not allow him to testify to those events. The prosecutors and the FBI spent a couple of hours harassing this man, threatening him with prosecution if he dared to testify. She has made it clear that he can ONLY testify to which of the defendants he saw with guns.

Every witness that the defense tried to proffer today was questioned by the Judge. She stressed to each one of them that she was ready to have them removed from the courtroom in handcuffs, if she thinks they are committing perjury.

Judge Navarro then backed up the prosecution when they threatened witnesses by naming them as “UNindicted Co-conspirators”. Navarro allowed this bullying, and took part in it herself.

After the intimidation of their witness, the defense believes he has been compromised and stated they are unsure of calling him as a witness. This made Eric Parker so distraught and upset that they have no witnesses for their defense that he broke down and cried in the courtroom. This, of course, made his wife and supporters cry as well.

Judge Navarro showed no sympathy. Reports are that she actually laughed out loud at their distress. The prosecutors also laughed and joked at the defense. She continued to reiterate that they have no rights as defendants.

Navarro also stated in the courtroom that no one is guaranteed their first amendment rights or their second amendment rights. Additionally, she told everyone that there is Never a time when anyone is allowed to defend themselves against a Law Enforcement Officer, even if they caught him breaking into their home. If he even sees a gun near them, they are guilty of assaulting him.

The defense had plans to call numerous witnesses, including Carole Bundy, Shawna Cox, Michele Fiore and more. Judge Navarro refused to allow them to testify because she feels their testimony might risk her jury to nullify.

Jury Nullification is her worst fear. She continues to tell the defense that she will not allow them to put on any defense that might sway her jury to nullify. This includes any information of why these men came to Bunkerville, the abuses of the BLM agents, and more.

Judge Navarro is quoted as saying, “The risk of jury nullification… for the jurors to hear about different defense witnesses, that can’t happen!” Navarro mentioned this at least three times during the day.

When the defense team attempted to object, she shut them down again, saying “Don’t bother to object.” as she intendeds to side with the prosecution each time.

And she carried through with this threat, not allowing the defense any leeway at all.

Dan Love was the Special Agent in Charge of the operation in Bunkerville, and his testimony was the main evidence in front of the Grand Jury. However, because he is under investigation for abuses, Judge Navarro has ruled his testimony is irrelevant and will not allow him to be called to testify.

Eric Parker has now decided that he has no choice but to testify. He may very well be the only witness in the defense case. This case could end up in the jury’s hands as early as tomorrow.

The heavy-handed judge has ruled these men do not deserve the right to defend themselves.

Bundy Ladies:

John Lamb and Andrea Parker:

 

From Redoubt News

If you believe in the mission of Oath Keepers, to defend the Constitution against all enemies,  foreign and domestic, please consider making a donation to support our work.   You can donate HERE.

“When Police Crackdown On All Leftist Protests, Will Conservatives Cheer the Measure?”

This article was written by Brandon Smith and originally published at his Alt-Market.com site.

Editor’s Comment: The rise of violent political demonstrations is upon us. The question is, will it push society over into the next phase of self-destruction? That all depends upon how people react. Specifically, the left-right divide is geared up for sharp clashes, and the stakes have been raised and racheted up again and again. The present climate is deeply hostile, with the left absolutely rabid against President Trump, and the right suspicious of the agenda and tactics of the left.

Brandon outlines how not to be baited, how not to be pushed and prodded, and how not to justify even more police state action. If outright riots and fights take place, or assassinations and coups, there can only be more policing, military tactics and financial restrictions. Society could take a dark turn here, but it all depends upon how people react when they are tested… but people with cooler heads and better judgement might sit it out altogether, with enough supplies to ride out any situation, no matter how grim it gets.

How To Counter Leftist Violence While Maintaining The Moral High Ground

by Brandon Smith

Social division is an undeniable reality of human existence; it is also not necessarily a negative aspect of human existence. The moment a society is forced or manipulated into blindly agreeing on everything is the moment that society begins to die and the future of mankind in general becomes rather bleak. Ideas need to be tested, they need to be scrutinized and they need to be verified, perpetually. That said, there are right ways and wrong ways of doing this.

Diving into a culture of zealotry is certainly the WRONG way. Zealotry requires a religious-like idolization of a particular idea or philosophy; it requires unverified faith and an unwavering devotion. Once people become zealots, they cannot be reasoned with, they cannot be debated, they cannot be dissuaded. They are, for all intents and purposes, automatons with only one mission — to spread their beliefs by any means necessary.  They do not care about being right, they only care about “winning.”  Because, in their minds, their position is unassailable.  They are righteous, and thus, the ends will always justify the means.

The culture of the Left in the U.S. is beginning to embrace zealotry and the path can only get more ugly from here. This is evident not only in the violent behavior of more vocal groups like Antifa, but also in the lack of self criticism by many on the left that would consider themselves more moderate. There are very few voices among liberals and “progressives” today that are openly admonishing the counterproductive and thuggish actions of their more extreme members (this includes not only Antifa, but other groups like Black Lives Matter).  In many cases, “moderate” leftists even cheer such actions.

There is this notion among some in the Liberty Movement that to even point out this dynamic is irresponsible because it only reinforces the concept of the false left/right paradigm. Most of these people I find are very new (newbies) to the Liberty Movement and don’t really understand what the false left/right paradigm is. When we talk about the Left and the Right as an illusion, we are talking about the elites who sit at the TOP of the sociopolitical sphere. Meaning, the elites have no loyalties to concepts on either the left or the right in politics. In fact, they often switch back and forth like chameleons depending on what they want from the public at the time. They have their own agenda which does not include the rest of us.

To be clear, I was just as much against the fake conservatism of George W. Bush as I was against the fake liberalism of Barack Obama.

This false paradigm does not, however, apply to regular citizens. The further away you get from the top of the pyramid, the more people tend to legitimately associate closer to one philosophy or the other. In times of crisis and uncertainty, these divisions become more pronounced. This is reality. Anyone who argues that there is no left/right paradigm when it comes to the average citizen has no idea what they are talking about.

So, now that we have acknowledged that the problem exists, lets examine it more in depth…

The Problem

All one needs to do is observe the attitudes, insane demands and criminality of hardcore leftists in the past year to see that at least one side of the paradigm cannot be salvaged. They are a lost cause.

This is a prime example of how it is impossible to win an argument when your position is fundamentally illogical. In most cases, these protesters can’t even specify their reasons for protesting, and they don’t really care to examine why they do what they do. They only know that their ideology is not being represented in totality.  They are unsuccessful at debating their ideas coherently and don’t have the intelligence to convince others that they are correct. They aren’t going to give up simply because they are wrong, so, their only other option is to slander the character of those who disagree, attack them physically and disrupt their ability to speak freely.

Keep in mind, there is no moral conundrum for zealots. They believe they are completely justified in what they do because the other side represents a “greater evil.” Labeling their opponents as “fascists” is a get-out-of-conscience-free card for them.

It is important to note that we are not quite at the moment of crisis yet, but I would consider 2017 a turning point. This is where our (conservatives and sovereignty champions) decisions now could affect the future for decades to come. I suspect that as we move closer to summer and warmer weather, riots designed to cancel conservative speaking events (and random riots with no specific purpose) will expand tenfold. Leftists seem to be more active in warmer weather (there is a reason most of them live near the coasts).

All American citizens, regardless of their political leanings or personal ideals, have a right to speak and the right to listen to those speaking. All American citizens also have a right to redress grievances. This includes leftists. That said, it is important to make a distinction here — NO ONE has the right to silence speech in public spaces in the name of “activism,” and this is where the Left has gone off the rails. My right to speak and be heard is protected; their “right” to silence me is not protected.

There is a line here that cannot be crossed. Conservatives must be allowed free speech in public places, and leftists must be allowed to protest in public places as long as that protest is PEACEFUL. Once an individual or group uses force to silence speech, they have given up the moral high ground.

I recognize that there are paid provocateurs operating among liberal protesters and that this likely contributes to higher chances of violence and the madness of mobs. The presence of elitist money among leftist groups has been exposed on numerous occasions in reference to George Soros’ Open Society Foundation, which admitted to injecting $33 million dollars into the Ferguson protests (riots). WashingtonCAN! (another Soros-funded group) put out a Craigslist ad in Seattle offering to pay people $15-$20 an hour to “organize” anti-Trump rallies. WashingtonCAN claims this was merely an ad to hire “phone solicitors,” but they do in fact help organize protests, and nowhere in the ad is phone solicitation mentioned.  I do not think it is a stretch to suggest that these paid “organizers” are present at protests, nor do I think it is a stretch to suggest that they are contributing to the mob mentality.

This should be taken into account as well. There are moments in any high-tension protest where the mob can be swayed to remain peaceful or to break out into thuggery. Usually, if the mob sees a few people getting away with violent attacks, this gives them license to unhinge as well.

Is the proper response to crush all leftist protests simply because of the violence of a handful? No. The key is to disrupt individual provocateurs before they can entice the mob to forget themselves. Normally, this would be the job of police on the scene, but as I’m sure many of you have noticed recently (Berkeley being a prime example), the police have been reticent to intervene in a tactically intelligent manner, depending on what municipality they are operating. It seems that when it comes to state and local law enforcement there are only two modes of response, either they are mostly hands off, or, they go full crackdown.

The issue that needs to be considered is when police or the federal government do initiate a full crackdown on all protests. Will conservatives cheer the measure?

As I have noted in past articles including ‘Globalists Want To Destroy Conservative Principles – But They Need Our Help’, I believe the greatest danger today is not crazed leftists, but how we RESPOND to crazed leftists.

To give some historical perspective, the Antifa movement, for example, is nothing new. It is an odd plagiarism of the “Anti-Facist” movements in Europe during the 1920s. Antifa was essentially an offshoot of communist movements in Italy opposed to the rise of Benito Mussolini, but it then spread to other European nations. It was in fact the belligerence of communist groups that actually inspired public support for fascist leaders like Mussolini and Hitler. As common people grew fearful of a monstrous Bolshevik-style revolution, the only other option offered to them was fascism, which at the time appeared to many to be a saving grace.

Of course, it was not, and totalitarianism in the name of defeating the communists only led to atrocities equal to communist dictatorships. This is what I call a “morally relativistic choice;” a catch-22 that is usually engineered, forcing the populace to pick between the “lesser of two evils.”

There are those who might argue that there is little chance of a similar development in America today, but consider this — conservatives movements were prodded and harassed for eight years by a constitution-trampling president who originally claimed he was going to undo the trespasses of the constitution-trampling president before him. This took place while leftist organizations imposed thought control and political correctness on us with relative glee. Conservatives have been organizing, training and arming themselves for nearly a decade in the event that globalist and Marxist ideologies take one more inch of rope, the expectation being that Hillary Clinton would attempt to take a mile.

Now, with Trump in office, we are a hammer looking for a nail.

This is what the left simply does not grasp. We are certainly not fascists now, but with continued violence from the left something in the collective conservative mind will eventually snap. My suspicion is that this is exactly what elites like George Soros want. They are using the left as sacrificial pawns in order to goad conservatives into going nuclear.

There are millions of conservatives coming home from work right now, sitting with their families, and seeing news each day filled with leftist protesters trampling all over conservative events and in many cases getting away with it. These conservatives are becoming more and more angry; more and more willing to embrace an ends justify the means reaction. Ultimately, they may very well support a full spectrum government stranglehold on protests and the speech of those we disagree with. This will make us the villains of our little period in history, and this is something I would like to avoid.

So, the question is, how do we counter violent leftists like those in Antifa without abandoning our constitutional principles?  Lets talk about solutions…

The Solution

There is a school of thought that suggests we should stand back, let the mobs tire themselves out and in this way we avoid “escalation.” I would point out that the Left has been escalating matters quite expertly without our intervention. When you have elitist funded organizations generating momentum at a constant pace, it is hard for me to back the notion of complete pacifism. On the other hand, moderation and an even hand rule the day.

Countering leftist mobs requires a scalpel, not a bulldozer, metaphorically speaking.

Conservatives are less likely to support police state intervention if they see that leftist attacks are already being countered in a rational way.  I would argue that this could be done by limited groups of civilian volunteers (around 50-100 men strong), without any government involvement, acting as security for speakers and the attendees of events.

These people would have to be highly vetted — no criminal background, no background of mental instability or psychotropic usage, a professional demeanor, absolutely no ties to federal agencies, no propensity to be ruled by emotion, no stolen valor, etc. etc.  They would also have to be physically capable.

Members would need previous training as well as updated training in self-defense and riot response, as well as defusing confrontation.  They would have to be invited by the event organizers in question and their goal would be to defend attendees from violence in a non-lethal manner.  Their purpose cannot be to stop a protest from happening, only ensuring that protesters do not overstep their bounds and harm others.

Of course, the immediate accusation that will be used is that this kind of organizing is simply the formation of “brownshirts” for Trump.  This is why a security group of this caliber would have to also be willing to offer their services to ANY speaker or event, regardless of political affiliation.  It cannot be exclusively about Trump. If a mob of conservatives were threatening to use violence to shut down a liberal speaker, then the group would have to be willing to protect those people as well. I don’t see any examples of this happening anywhere, but again, the group’s concerns must focus on free speech and those that are trying to squash it, regardless of who they are.

This civilian security organization would require funding at a grassroots level through donations from regular people. Large sums of cash from major political donors or non-profit foundations could not be accepted.  The group would have to be beholden to no one.  It would also need to be separate from any already existing organization and function as its own animal in order to prevent conflicting goals.

Donations would be needed to fund travel and food expenses for volunteers, as well as some protective gear, the cost of initial training, the expense of background checks as well as legal defense. This organization would have to be limited in size to prevent confusion and a lack of structural discipline.  I suspect that such a venture would start small, and truly qualified people would be limited in the beginning anyway.

I am willing to coordinate this effort with others depending on the level of enthusiasm that is generated and if donations are adequate. I am ready to help provide training for those who pass the vetting process.  Interested parties can contact me at: brandon@alt-market.com

I am also willing to be present and in harms way at every single event that requires a security response.

I have looked into money raising avenues like Kickstarter, but I believe strongly that these websites will not allow crowdfunding for this venture for political reasons. If there is a strong response to this idea, I will post regular updates to Alt-Market.com on money raised as well as progress made.

It is entirely possible that I will not be able to find the support needed to make this volunteer venture happen. I can only present the concept and hope that people agree with it. Make no mistake though, if I do not do it, someone else eventually will. It is vitally important that these people are found trustworthy and have a track record of supporting Constitutional principles as well as a track record of competence.  Anyone that arrives on the scene from nowhere should not be trusted.  Anyone looking merely for notoriety and celebrity should not be taken seriously. Anyone looking to start a confrontation rather than prevent one should be dismissed.  We cannot allow ourselves to become what the left accuses us of being.  This is a time for extreme caution, and quiet professionalism.

This article was written by Brandon Smith and originally published at his Alt-Market.com site.

Coming Soon To A City Near You: The US Military's Plan To Take Over America

Submitted by John Whitehead via The Rutherford Institute,

“Our current and past strategies can no longer hold. We are facing environments that the masters of war never foresaw. We are facing a threat that requires us to redefine doctrine and the force in radically new and different ways. The future army will confront a highly sophisticated urban-centric threat that will require that urban operations become the core requirement for the future land-force. The threat is clear. Our direction remains to be defined. The future is urban.”

-“Megacities: Urban Future, the Emerging Complexity,” a Pentagon training video created by the Army for U.S. Special Operations Command

The U.S. military plans to take over America by 2030.

No, this is not another conspiracy theory. Although it easily could be.

Nor is it a Hollywood political thriller in the vein of John Frankenheimer’s 1964 political thriller Seven Days in May about a military coup d’etat.

Although it certainly has all the makings of a good thriller.

No, this is the real deal, coming at us straight from the horse’s mouth.

According to “Megacities: Urban Future, the Emerging Complexity,” a Pentagon training video created by the Army for U.S. Special Operations Command, the U.S. military plans to use armed forces to solve future domestic political and social problems.

What they’re really talking about is martial law, packaged as a well-meaning and overriding concern for the nation’s security.

The chilling five-minute training video, obtained by The Intercept through a FOIA request and made available online, paints an ominous picture of the future—a future the military is preparing for—bedeviled by “criminal networks,” “substandard infrastructure,” “religious and ethnic tensions,” “impoverishment, slums,” “open landfills, over-burdened sewers,” a “growing mass of unemployed,” and an urban landscape in which the prosperous economic elite must be protected from the impoverishment of the have nots.

And then comes the kicker.

Three-and-a-half minutes into the Pentagon’s dystopian vision of “a world of Robert Kaplan-esque urban hellscapes — brutal and anarchic supercities filled with gangs of youth-gone-wild, a restive underclass, criminal syndicates, and bands of malicious hackers,” the ominous voice of the narrator speaks of a need to “drain the swamps.”

Drain the swamps.

Surely, we’ve heard that phrase before?

Ah yes.

Emblazoned on t-shirts and signs, shouted at rallies, and used as a rallying cry among Trump supporters, “drain the swamp” became one of Donald Trump’s most-used campaign slogans, along with “build the wall” and “lock her up.”

Funny how quickly the tides can shift and the tables can turn.

Whereas Trump promised to drain the politically corrupt swamps of Washington DC of lobbyists and special interest groups, the U.S. military is plotting to drain the swamps of futuristic urban American cities of “noncombatants and engage the remaining adversaries in high intensity conflict within.”

And who are these noncombatants, a military term that refers to civilians who are not engaged in fighting?

They are, according to the Pentagon, “adversaries.”

They are “threats.”

They are the “enemy.”

They are people who don’t support the government, people who live in fast-growing urban communities, people who may be less well-off economically than the government and corporate elite, people who engage in protests, people who are unemployed, people who engage in crime (in keeping with the government’s fast-growing, overly broad definition of what constitutes a crime).

In other words, in the eyes of the U.S. military, noncombatants are American citizens a.k.a. domestic extremists a.k.a. enemy combatants who must be identified, targeted, detained, contained and, if necessary, eliminated.

Welcome to Battlefield America.

In the future imagined by the Pentagon, any walls and prisons that are built will be used to protect the societal elite—the haves—from the have-nots.

We are the have-nots.

Suddenly it all begins to make sense.

The events of recent years: the invasive surveillance, the extremism reports, the civil unrest, the protests, the shootings, the bombings, the military exercises and active shooter drills, the color-coded alerts and threat assessments, the fusion centers, the transformation of local police into extensions of the military, the distribution of military equipment and weapons to local police forces, the government databases containing the names of dissidents and potential troublemakers.

This is how you prepare a populace to accept a police state willingly, even gratefully.

You don’t scare them by making dramatic changes. Rather, you acclimate them slowly to their prison walls. Persuade the citizenry that their prison walls are merely intended to keep them safe and danger out.

Desensitize them to violence, acclimate them to a military presence in their communities and persuade them that there is nothing they can do to alter the seemingly hopeless trajectory of the nation.

Before long, no one will even notice the floundering economy, the blowback arising from military occupations abroad, the police shootings, the nation’s deteriorating infrastructure and all of the other mounting concerns.

It’s happening already.

The sight of police clad in body armor and gas masks, wielding semiautomatic rifles and escorting an armored vehicle through a crowded street, a scene likened to “a military patrol through a hostile city,” no longer causes alarm among the general populace.

Few seem to care about the government’s endless wars abroad that leave communities shattered, families devastated and our national security at greater risk of blowback. Indeed, there were no protests in the streets after U.S. military forces raided a compound in Yemen, killing “at least eight women and seven children, ages 3 to 13.”

Their tactics are working.

We’ve allowed ourselves to be acclimated to the occasional lockdown of government buildings, Jade Helm military drills in small towns so that special operations forces can get “realistic military training” in “hostile” territory, and  Live Active Shooter Drill training exercises, carried out at schools, in shopping malls, and on public transit, which can and do fool law enforcement officials, students, teachers and bystanders into thinking it’s a real crisis.

Still, you can’t say we weren’t warned.

Back in 2008, an Army War College report revealed that “widespread civil violence inside the United States would force the defense establishment to reorient priorities in extremis to defend basic domestic order and human security.” The 44-page report went on to warn that potential causes for such civil unrest could include another terrorist attack, “unforeseen economic collapse, loss of functioning political and legal order, purposeful domestic resistance or insurgency, pervasive public health emergencies, and catastrophic natural and human disasters.”

In 2009, reports by the Department of Homeland Security surfaced that labelled right-wing and left-wing activists and military veterans as extremists (a.k.a. terrorists) and called on the government to subject such targeted individuals to full-fledged pre-crime surveillance. Almost a decade later, after spending billions to fight terrorism, the DHS concluded that the greater threat is not ISIS but domestic right-wing extremism.

Meanwhile, the government has been amassing an arsenal of military weapons for use domestically and equipping and training their “troops” for war. Even government agencies with largely administrative functions such as the Food and Drug Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs, and the Smithsonian have been acquiring body armor, riot helmets and shields, cannon launchers and police firearms and ammunition. In fact, there are now at least 120,000 armed federal agents carrying such weapons who possess the power to arrest.

Rounding out this profit-driven campaign to turn American citizens into enemy combatants (and America into a battlefield) is a technology sector that has been colluding with the government to create a Big Brother that is all-knowing, all-seeing and inescapable. It’s not just the drones, fusion centers, license plate readers, stingray devices and the NSA that you have to worry about. You’re also being tracked by the black boxes in your cars, your cell phone, smart devices in your home, grocery loyalty cards, social media accounts, credit cards, streaming services such as Netflix, Amazon, and e-book reader accounts.

All of this has taken place right under our noses, funded with our taxpayer dollars and carried out in broad daylight without so much as a general outcry from the citizenry.

It’s astounding how convenient we’ve made it for the government to lock down the nation.

So what exactly is the government preparing for?

Mind you, by “government,” I’m not referring to the highly partisan, two-party bureaucracy of the Republicans and Democrats.

I’m referring to “government” with a capital “G,” the entrenched Deep State that is unaffected by elections, unaltered by populist movements, and has set itself beyond the reach of the law.

I’m referring to the corporatized, militarized, entrenched bureaucracy that is fully operational and staffed by unelected officials who are, in essence, running the country and calling the shots in Washington DC, no matter who sits in the White House.

This is the hidden face of a government that has no respect for the freedom of its citizenry.

What is the government preparing for? You tell me.

Better yet, take a look at the Pentagon’s training video.

It’s only five minutes long, but it says a lot about the government’s mindset, the way its views the citizenry, and the so-called “problems” that the military must be prepared to address in the near future. Even more troubling, however, is what this military video doesn’t say about the Constitution, about the rights of the citizenry, and about the dangers of using the military to address political and social problems.

The future is here.

We’re already witnessing a breakdown of society on virtually every front.

By waging endless wars abroad, by bringing the instruments of war home, by transforming police into extensions of the military, by turning a free society into a suspect society, by treating American citizens like enemy combatants, by discouraging and criminalizing a free exchange of ideas, by making violence its calling card through SWAT team raids and militarized police, by fomenting division and strife among the citizenry, by acclimating the citizenry to the sights and sounds of war, and by generally making peaceful revolution all but impossible, the government has engineered an environment in which domestic violence has become almost inevitable.

Be warned: in the future envisioned by the military, we will not be viewed as Republicans or Democrats. Rather, “we the people” will be enemies of the state.

As I make clear in my book, Battlefield America: The War on the American People, we’re already enemies of the state.

For years, the government has been warning against the dangers of domestic terrorism, erecting surveillance systems to monitor its own citizens, creating classification systems to label any viewpoints that challenge the status quo as extremist, and training law enforcement agencies to equate anyone possessing anti-government views as a domestic terrorist. What the government failed to explain was that the domestic terrorists would be of the government’s own making, whether intentional or not.

“We the people” have become enemy #1.