UPDATED: "A threat to national security!" - Deep State's excuse for doing whatever it likes, regardless of the Constitution or other laws

9/11 changed everything. Right? Everybody knows that. Until 9/11, America, having won WWII single-handed, was thought by its people to be impregnable. [= can't have children? Ed.] The idea of enemies, especially backward barbarians [= people with beards. Ed.] attacking and killing Americans on their own soil was inconceivable [= can't have children? Ed.]

Then 9/11 happened and the United States of America became what I call the Paranoid States of America. I am not alone in thinking that Americans panic easily. The late great George Carlin said those exact words in a bit about "germs", which he performed years before the Great Dempanic. 

But this is not about the threat to the nation's wellbeing posed by the Wuhan flu or monkeypox or whatever health crisis comes along tomorrow. This is about how the Deep State used 9/11 to take control of the administration and take away Americans' freedoms, all in the name of "national security".

What follows is excerpted from The Greatest Story Ever Sold: The Decline and Fall of Truth in Bush's America, by Frank Rich (Penguin 2006). Talking about the Great Anthrax Scare -- remember that? -- which began just three weeks after 9/11, Mr Rich writes:

Bush said little about it, delegating the problem to ineffectual Cabinet members like [Tommy] Thompson, the secretaryof health and human services, and the attorney general, John Ashcroft.... They were Keystone Kops in the costumes of bureaucrats, ready at any time to slip on a banana peel....

Ashcroft often shook as if he'd just seen not only great Caesar's ghost, but perhaps John Mitchell's as well. In his disregard for the law, Ashcroft often did seem determined to emulate the Watergate-era attorney general, though on a grander scale.

It wasn't enough for Congress to enhance his antiterrorist legal arsenal legitimately by passing the USA Patriot Act before most of those on the Hill had taken the time or the trouble to read it; the attorney general changed other rules without consulting senators or congressmen of either party at all.

He abridged by decree the Freedom of Information Act, an esssential check on government misbehavior during peace and war alike, and discreetly slipped into the Federal Register a new directive allowing eavesdropping on conversaqtions between some lawyers and clients.

If the administration was really proud of grabbing "emergency" powers at wartime, why was it doing so in the dead of night? Ashcroft refused repeated requests to explain himself before congressional committees. At one House briefing where he did show up, he told congressmen they could call an 800 number if they had any questions about what his department was up to.

Remind you of anyone? Sounds to me like Merrick Garland, answering for the FBI raid on President's Trump's Florida home! Getting back to what Mr Ashcroft did, supposedly to protect national security, Mr Rich continues:

Ashcroft's Justice Department seemed to be squandering time and resources on wild goose chases that pumped up arrest numbers without making any progress on tracking down terrorists.... But Ashcreoft had been zealous and then some about warning of other terrorism attacks while the anthrax threat was proceeding under his nose. 

The first alert of a probable new attack was issued two weeks after 9/11. On the first month anniversary of 9/11, the attorney general and the FBI warned again that new attacks by terrorists either in America or overseas might happen in the "next several days." Bush endorsed this alert, but neither he nor anyone in the government explained how serious the threat was or what form it might take or when it might happen.

Before you say "So what? That's ancient history... and Bush was a Republican," please consider that the DOJ and other organs of the Deep State never gave back the far-reaching and unconstitutional powers they arrogated [excellent word -- look it up. Ed] to themselves in the aftermath of 9/11.

The Deep State and their bought-and-paid-for media say now that President Trump's keeping certain unspecified "top secret documents" mixed in with other papers at Mar-a-Lago represents a "threat to national security". I would like to know from whence comes that threat?!

Who is threatening the Paranoid States of America, now that Saddam Hussein has been killed, along with Obama Bin Laden and their successors. Who hates America and Americans enough to wage jihad against the Land of the Somewhat Free? 

OK, it's the Islamic extremists, right, the ones who pulled off 9/11 but haven't really done anything horrible on American soil since. Is the DOJ seriously suggesting that Mr Trump is somehow colluding with the mad mullahs and will reveal to them our plans to start the Gulf Wars again?

If not the Arabs, then how about the Russians? The Dumbocrats already tried without success to portray Messrs Trump and Putin as co-conspirators against Democracy with a capital D. It didn't work. China, then? Couldn't be. China only does business with Hunter Biden and Mr. Big.

So I repeat... where is the threat to national security? If, anywhere in the three dozen boxes of papers which have now been taken away from the Trump residence, there is one single iota, jot or tittle of evidence proving that President Trump was planning to sell out or otherwise harm the US of A, I'd like to see it. 

UPDATE ADDED 28/8/22: A federal judge in Florida told the Justice Department on Saturday to provide her with more specific information about the classified records removed from President Donald Trump's Florida estate. and said it was her "preliminary intent" to appoint a special master in the case, as requested by the former president's lawyers, who complained that the Feds didn't disclose enough information about exactly what was seized when the FBI raided Mar-a-Lago on August 8th.

FURTHER READING: "Unsealed Mar-a-Lago search warrant affidavit reveals the government has no case against Trump", by Kevin Brock, The Hill, 28/2/22. 

Laugh for the day: Hellery's e-mail "explanation"

Hellery Clinton's writers took a week to come up with her explanation for using her personal e-mail account rather than a government account during her entire tenure as Secretary of State. "It was for convenience," she told us, with a straight face (but somewhat fluttery body language).

The presidential wannabe says it was too much for her to juggle two "devices" and two phones, so she thought it would be simpler to just use the one, in spite of the legal requirement to preserve public records. Ms Clinton, being a college graduate, thought that she was capable of deciding which messages were personal and which were public, and FRA and FOIA be damned. Convenience trumps legalities.

Who finds this funny? Daniel Metcalfe -- that's who. Mr. Metcalfe was the most senior freedom-of-information official in the executive branch of the US government for over a quarter-century. It was his job to help four administrations — including that of Clinton the First — interpret the Freedom of Information Act.

When Mr. Metcalfe read a transcript of Clinton the Second's press conference, he told Canadian Press, "What she did was contrary to both the letter and the spirit of the law. There is no doubt that the scheme she established was a blatant circumvention of the Freedom of Information Act, atop the Federal Records Act."

Here's how he said he would have reacted if he'd heard about a cabinet member in his day setting up a personal email system — and deciding what got deleted and what got preserved as a government record: "I would've said, 'You've gotta be kidding me!"

Mr. Metcalfe said he knows from working under the Clintons [like Monica Lewinsky? Ed.] that Hillary — secretary of state, senator, 2016 presidential hopeful and lawyer — understands the Freedom of Information Act. "You can't have the secretary of state do that; that's just a prescription for the circumvention of the FOIA. Plus, fundamentally, there's no way the people at the archives should permit that if you tell them over there."

What Mr. doesn't fully appreciate is that laws, rules and regulations don't apply to the Clintons, just as they didn't apply to the Kennedys, back in the day. In the increasingly unlikely event that Hellery is elected to head a second Clinton administration, he will find that out.

Canuck Tories shelve internet spy 'n' snoop bill

Just checking the overnight news before I head out the door, and am delighted to read the report in this morning's Globe and Mail that "Call me Steve" Harper's government has put on hold legislation that would grant new powers to authorities to police the Internet. Let's hope that -- like when you call the government's "help line" -- it gets put on hold forever!

Time is Walt's enemy today, so I can only refer you to the newspaper article and posts in this space last week. But I do have time to say congratulations to all the Canadians who weren't fooled by the Tories' law and order bullshit, especially the part about protecting the world from pornographers.

A big debt of thanks is owed to all who posted comments in the social media and the lamestream media, and especially to those who took the time to e-mail or call Old Vic Toews and Rob "the Boy Wonder" Nicholson.

More anon.

Canada's Tories backtracking on internet snooping bill

"Old Vic" Toews, Canada's Minister of Public Safety & Security & Law & Order & Correct Behaviour, was interviewed on CBC Radio's The House today. The subject was Bill C-30. That's the one which, if you don't support it, you're standing with the child pornographers, according to Vic.

Mr Toews's characterization of those who believe in freedom of expression and freedom of information as supporters of porn peddlers drew a lot of ire, not just from the usual "progressive forces" but from libertarians as well. The outcry from normally passive Canadians seems to have surprised the minister, and his puppet-master, "Call me Steve" Harpoon. To judge from the interview, they're now in damage control mode.

Hence the unusual move to refer Bill C-30 to a parliamentary committe for further study, following first reading rather than second reading as is the usual procedure. Toews also says the government will look at any and all amendments which the opposition or anyone else -- for instance the Privacy Commissioner -- might suggest. (Canada's Privacy Commissioner was also interviewed on the programme.)

So the ball ["bill", surely. Ed.] has been pretty well kicked into the long grass. But that doesn't mean Canadians concerned about the invasion of their privacy shouldn't make their voices heard... while dissent is still legal. Here are some useful links.

The Honourable (sic) Vic Toews can be reached (supposedly) at vic.toews@parl.gc.ca. And here's his office phone number: +1-613-992-3128. For those still living in the `80s, Vic has a fax number too: +1-613-995-1049.

To yank the chain of the Rob Nicholson -- the one standing with Toews in the picture, not with the pornographers -- e-mail rob.nicholson@parl.gc.ca. (Are you starting to see a pattern to these e-mail addresses?) His phone number is +1-613-995-1547, fax +1-613-992-7910.

If you want to contact another of the 308 MPs, go here to find his or her co-ordinates. If it's a senator you want -- like that great champion of free speech Mike Puffy -- here's a list of those who slumber in the Red Chamber.

One more tip. It's still the law, in Canada, that anyone can write to a Senator or Member of Parliament for free! (That means Canada Post has to pay the cost, which sounds only fair to Walt.) Here are the addresses:

Senators: Name of Senator / The Senate of Canada / Ottawa / Ontario K1A 0A4
MPs: Name of Member of Parliament / House of Commons / Ottawa / Ontario K1A 0A6

And don't forget... no-one ever said you could write only once! Go ahead! Knock yourself (and them) out!

Note from Ed.: I meant to take some pornographic pictures for these posts, but I forgot my pornograph.

Do you want these men to know what you're looking at on the Net?

You know these guys, right? They are the federal ministers in charge of protecting Canadians from indecency, immorality, and incorrectness in all its forms.

Rob Nicholson, on the right, is the Minister of Justice. Vic Toews (rhymes with "raves"), on his right -- and that's pretty far right, believe me! -- is the Minister of "Public Safety". Old Vic is the one who, earlier this week, said that anyone who doesn't stand with the Harpoon government in support of its internet snoop and spy legislation is "either...with us or with the child pornographers". Walt's not making this up. Neither is Toews. He really means it.

In yesterday's post, I got the name of the Conservative government's latest police state law wrong. As you can see from the picture, it's now being called the "Protecting Children from Internet Predators Act". So if you're not a paedophile -- like that dreaful Herbert on Family Guy -- you've got nothing to fear.

If you're not using electronic communications devices, like computers and smartphones, to lure kids into your web of iniquity, the police will have no reason to read your e-mails or track your movements through cellphone signals. Right? Mind you, they wouldn't need a warrant to do so, so if they feel like "just checking", there's nothing to stop them. So even if all you're into is a little light self-gratification, you can't be sure no-one knows.

If you're still not worried, you might want to have a look at "Online surveillance bill targets child porn", on CBC.ca, which is the website of the government-owned broacaster -- the same government that's pushing this bill (C-30) through Parliament. Once passed, this noble-sounding act will require telecommunications and Internet providers to hand over -- without getting a warrant or other court order -- your subscriber data, including name, address, mobile phone number and IP address.

But wait (as Vince Offer says)... there's more! The bill will also make the communications companies give police a “back door” for easy surveillance. [Ah yes... the old back passage. Ed.] Police can also get warrants to track any information sent online, so they'll know who sent it and from where. And they can get court orders forcing other parties to preserve electronic evidence. That means if you delete a file that someone sent you -- even by mistake -- you can be guilty of an offence.

And that's the one that really sucks. (Sorry, Herbert!) Here we are fretting about what Google and Yahoo! and Facebook do with the stuff we put online, without thinking about who's going to be looking at our profiles, our pictures, our searches and so on. These things can now be seen by any cop or other guardian of the law or "protector of public safety" who asks for it.

NDP Member of Parliament argues that the Act will give the police an unlimited "fishing licence", letting them trawl through any and all "private communications", that being the all-encompassing term used in the bill. Mr. Angus said cellphones would become "electronic prisoner’s bracelets".

Welcome to the Conservatives' Canada. Will you being staying long, or will you be looking for someplace where you can have a little privacy? Good luck with that!

ON STRIKE vs SOPA & PIPA

Walt joins Wikipedia, Reddit and the Internet Archive in suspending service for today to protest two pieces of proposed American legislation targeted directly at freedom of the Internet: The Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the Protect IP Act (PIPA).

The proposed laws are just another step in the US administration's march towards creating a police state. Once America is firmly under control, the US government would then be in a position to control the entire world -- the New World Order envisioned by the Masonic founders of the USA and promised even today on the back of every American dollar bill.

If SOPA and PIPA pass, the federal government would have even greater powers to blacklist foreign websites accused of hosting copyright-infringing content. The laws are excessive in both remedy and scope, and would essentially make it impossible for sites such as YouTube and Flickr to exist in their current form.

Walt calls on his American readers to telephone, write or e-mail their congresspersons to demand that they not support these draconian and unnecessary measures to further restrict freedom of speech, not just in the USA but throughout the world.

Ordinary people... keep talking! Tell it like it is!

Out of town but still part of the wired world. Agent 17 e-mails this mini-review of Jon Krakauer's new book, Where Men Win Glory: The Odyssey of Pat Tillman.

"Finished the book. It should be must reading. It is a riveting account of a truly exceptional human betrayed by his own country, the army, military and civilian leaders.

"This disgusting episode would have died except for the Tillman family."

Walt comments: This is so often the case. The pundits -- the "wise men" whose columns and articles shape our opinions -- rely on what they hear from officials, "inside sources" and each other.

They don't often hear real stories from real people, so they don't find out what's really going on in places like Armpitistan. It takes ordinary people, like the Tillman family, to keep speaking the truth they know first-hand -- even when they're told to be quiet.

If there's someone out there who has a story that hasn't been told, something that the nation needs to know, please tell someone. You can write to an ombudsman, but civil servants like that are toothless fart-catchers for the government, so don't hold your breath waiting for justice.

Tell someone who cares! Tell a "muckraking journalist". Tell a friend. Tell anyone who's not part of the power structure. Start a blog. Use the social media. Get the truth out there where the rest of us can see it! Don't let the "powers that be" silence you.

Freedom of information...well, SOME information...Ontario-style

Getting information out of Canadian governments and their agencies has never been an easy thing. The federal government of "Call Me Steve" Harper has rightly been called the most secretive and controlling in history. But the federal Tories have their counterpart in the Ontario Liberal government of Haltin' McGuinty.

Trying to find out what's going on in Ontario's ministries, departments and crown agencies is like trying to pry state secrets out of the Kremlin. (Come to think of it, doesn't Queen's Park look a bit like the Kremlin?)

Whatever the Ontario government is doing, especially where our tax dollars are involved, they don't want us to know about it. Here we see McGuinty, flanked by the Ministers of Tourism and Finance, in conference on allegations of wrongdoing at the Niagara Parks Commission. (See "Power to the people of Niagara" in Walt's blog of October 29th.)

Thanks to pressure exerted by Preserve Our Parks (of which Agent 3 is a member), Bob Gale (a former commissioner) and Bill Windsor (a would-be business partner), the three unwise monkeys were finally coerced, earlier this year, into appointing an "independent" firm of auditors -- KPMG -- to look into the allegations of mismanagement, nepotism, favouritism and corruption.

In July, KPMG submitted a draft report. On page 3 we find this disclaimer: This draft has been prepared and is intended solely for Ministry of Tourism's internal use...and may not be edited, distributed, published, made available or relied on by any other person without KPMG's express written permission.

Presumably "any other person" includes the taxpayers who have paid 1000s of dollars for the auditors' work. Certainly the Minister, Monique Smith, was adamant in refusing to provide copies of the report or any part of it to anyone. Yes, anyone...including the MPP for Niagara Falls, Kim Craitor, who asked for a copy only to be told it was confidential and he couldn't see it. And hey, Craitor sits on the same side of the house as Minister Smith!

So steamed was Kim that he threatened to make an official request under the FIPPA, Ontario's freedom of information law. While he fumed, investigative reporter Anthony Reinhart of the Globe and Mail actually made the request, and was rewarded with a heavily redacted [censored! ed.] version of the "draft" report.

Reinhart's story, "Probe uncovers ethical breaches at Niagara Parks Commission", includes links to the KPMG report as well as the Ontario government's internal auditors' report into the NPCs procurement procedures...or lack thereof.

The text of the KPMG report takes up 48 pages. Check it out and you'll see that no fewer than 14 pages have been crudely deleted, apparently with bits of white paper being stuck over the naughty bits. Two pages (34 and 48) are left entirely blank.

Whatever damning facts or recommendations could they contain? Hint: the censored parts often occur just before or after references to "the Chairman". That would be NPC Chairman Jim Williams, who had the gall to boast in an "interview" apparently dictated to the Niagara Falls Review's cub reporter that he had been exonerated by the KPMG audit.

Is that right, Jim? Then perhaps you could let us have a look at your copy of the KPMG report...the whole thing, that is, with the coverup post-it notes removed.

While we wait, we take a little comfort in being at least somewhat enlightened. Somewhat. Sort of. In a typical half-assed Ontario way. The public's right to know? In Ontario? LMAO.