Cultural Balkanization

Liberal losing a debate?

Americans are continuing to buy into the “divide and rule” strategies being employed by the government and its sponsors for their own nefarious purpose. The most obvious right now is the great racial divide that is manufactured to ensure there can never be unity in opposition to their existing power structure.  It’s been said that it’s easier to prevent small groups from linking forces, than to break them apart once they have aligned.

Chaos and confusion also make one easier to manipulate and we are definitely seeing the chaos being ratcheted up across the country. The shootings are being used not only to bring about gun control, but also to distract from events going on that need to be kept below the radar (i.e. the disastrous state of the economy, the national security crisis, the Trans-Pacific Partnership, corruption in the courts, and the presidential election to name just a few.) Professional agitators are out in full force looking for opportunities to create further racial, cultural, political and class tensions to divide and conquer American citizens. The mainstream media is doing their part to keep the public uninformed and brainwashing citizens to think the way our ruling elite want us to think.


MAN FATALLY SHOT DURING TRAFFIC STOP IN MINNESOTA, GOVERNOR REPORTEDLY EVACUATED

The country could very well be in for yet another round of severe social unrest

Man Fatally Shot During Traffic Stop In Minnesota, Governor Reportedly Evacuated


Shootings of Blacks Symptomatic of Racial Disparities in U.S., Obama Says          By JORDYN PHELPS

Jul 7, 2016, 7:23 PM ET

PHOTO: President Obama speaks about the recent police shootings during a press conference from Warsaw, July 7, 2016.

OBAMA/SOROS BEHIND DALLAS POLICE MASSACRE

SICK: 'Black Lives Matter' Supporters Celebrate Murder of Dallas Cops

The war on police is another mechanism being used to destabilize the country. The created perception is that police are mowing people down left and right with the overall goal of POLICE REFORM. Reform is all about federalizing and militarizing police to take over local law enforcement. Globalists want to federalize the police in order to use them as their own personal army in their new world order but first, they need to destroy the old world order.

Obama Chooses Six Cities to Test Federal Police Scheme

Under the guise of “restoring trust” between communities and police departments that have been militarized by the federal government, the Obama administration’s Justice Department announced this month that it had selected six U.S. cities to serve as pilot sites, to develop and deploy federal guidance for local police to create better procedures, reduce racial bias, and regain citizens’ trust.

The first six cities to be targeted as pilot sites will be Birmingham, Alabama; Fort Worth, Texas; Gary, Indiana; Minneapolis, Minnesota; Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; and Stockton, California. Fort Worth Mayor Betsy Price described the program as “a tool to strengthen our partnership with the justice system.” However, other police departments are also in the cross hairs. According to the official announcement, an unspecified number of “police departments and communities that are not pilot sites” will also be targeted for more DOJ “training” and “technical assistance.”

Continue Reading: http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/crime/item/20501-obama-chooses-six-cities-to-test-federal-police-scheme


The only race at issue is the human race and people need to wake up to the cultural indoctrination being shoved down their throats. THERE IS NO GROUP OF PEOPLE THAT DESERVE SPECIAL RIGHTS AND TREATMENT!

A government that believes it can run our lives, run the economy, and run the world will inevitably come to believe it can, and should, have the power to silence its critics. Eliminating the welfare-warfare state is the key to protecting our free speech, and other liberties, from an authoritarian government. Ron Paul

Obama Has Covertly Signed the US Over to the United Nations


agenda 2030

Agenda 2030 is often referred to as Agenda 21 on steroids. We talk and write about Agenda 2030 as if it were something that will someday come our way if we are not careful. Well, my fellow Americans, I have very bad news. To quote my friend and colleague, Steve Quayle, when he says “what is coming is no longer coming, it is already here”.

After reading the paragraphs below, you will be able to form no other conclusion than

Agenda 2030 Is Already Here

From Obama’s Whitehouse.gov “FACT SHEET: U.S. Global Development Policy and Agenda 2030″, we have a declaration on the part of the Obama administration to “to adopt the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (“2030 Agenda”).” 

From the above-mentioned White House document, dated September 27, 2015, we see that President Obama effectively signed over the sovereignty of the United States to the United Nations and its Agenda 2030 program when the “United States joined OGP Steering Committee members in signing a declaration on Open Government for the Implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development”.

On paper, the United States became a de facto puppet state of the United Nations nearly nine months ago. In fact, Obama has stated that “The United States is exercising global leadership that will be pivotal in achieving the 2030 Agenda”, in the following areas”:

Global health and Global Health Security Agenda: What this means is that mandatory vaccinations will be required world-wide.

Meet the man who will one daybring us a vaccine for stupidity.

Meet the man who will one day bring us a vaccine for stupidity.

“That is why we have made a commitment to assist at least 30 countries to achieve the targets of the Global Health Security Agenda to build national, regional, and international capability to prevent, detect and respond to infectious disease threats…” This is United Nations speak for world-wide vaccinations and the United States is going to assist the United Nations in forcing their will upon “at least 30 countries”. Health care will be rationed and form the basis of worldwide depopulation through the death panel age-exclusion orientated health official that we presently see in Obamacare. And, of course, the Bill Gates will maintain his omnipresent influence.

Continue Reading: http://www.thecommonsenseshow.com/2016/06/20/obama-has-covertly-signed-the-us-over-to-the-united-nations/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=obama-has-covertly-signed-the-us-over-to-the-united-nations

Healthy Marriage~Responsible Fatherhood & Faith~Based Grants . . . We Know What the Game Is!

HMRF A

Let’s Get Honest! Blog

Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family –and “Conciliation” — Courts’ Operations, Practices, and History

Note To Readers: See New Page “Just HHS, Just Georgia, Just HMRF” grants

Publicizing my new pageHHS Grantees, Just Georgia, Just HMRF (CFDA 93086), May 13, 2016, Report Run. Take a look!  You will see it in the right sidebar, atop a list labeled “Vital Info/Links.” Scroll or “page-down” below a green-background rectangle of text (“Contributions Appreciated” section) to find “Vital Links.”

Also see this related (or, “what inspired it”) 5/12/2016 post:  Despite Truly Funky Tax Returns, HHS Remains Loyal (2010-2015) to One Faith-Based (under Two Diff’t EIN#s, ONE of which the IRS acknowledges#) in Stone Mountain–or is it Conyers?– Georgia

But first and FYI in the cream-colored, fine-print, maroon-bordered box right below, I also put a link to a “Congressional Research Service” (CRS) 12/11/2012 Report showing the Origins of HHS, certain Presidential Powers, and some Recent Developing Trends, and possibly already passed, House and Senate bills re-instituting those Presidential Powers (odd capitalization there deliberate).

Recommended Reading:  This CRS link, “Presidential Reorganization Authority, History, Recent Initiatives, and Options for Congress” (Henry B. Hogue, Dec. 11, 2012), has a Summary which explains a request to renew this authority was made January 2012 by President Obama, and explains how we got the “Federal Security Agency –>>  Health Education and Welfare ==> Health and Human Services  + (separately) Department of Education.

[An extended version of this box recurs below, while I talk some about the situation]…

I might start posting this link at the top of ALL posts until the message sinks in that existing federal agencies are in a state of constant transition, and sometimes re-organization, and we ought to get a basic read on where they came from — and in which direction they are now going.  For, example, does this direction EVER include reducing budgets based on having actually solved any problems they were set up to solve, or curtailing grants streams the grants streams were set up to resolve? And if not, does that not reflect (badly) on either the operation of, or perhaps even the original intentions of, those who pushed for the funding streams in the first place? (“Who” entails both individuals and corporate, often nonprofit “persons” run by certain individuals).

Or, are we going continue, as we do now, sponsoring an UNENDING stream of funding for the behavioral/mental health/social control categories** relating to the family court systems:

Batterer Intervention Programming seeking to further classify Batterer typologies, and simultaneously and opposing the concept that battering is actually “bad,” while attempting to behaviorally modify the batterers, AND, co-parenting coaching in an UNENDING stream attempting to change the behavior of the spouse or parent that protests battering, AND an Unending stream of grants encouraging teenagers to abstain from sex as a way out of poverty (using money diverted from funds that might otherwise more directly help their parents out of poverty, i.e., “TANF”) (“Abstinence Education”) AND so forth.[*as opposed to “medical research and development” or “curtailing the outbreak of contagious diseases” category under which the public health system originated..]

Thus, through these self-contradictory funding streams, the public is forced to separately fund under the banner of men’s rights (to their families, i.e., families as property rights), and women’s rights to not be assaulted or subjected to violence in the name of family (i.e., women, including mothers and the children they have given birth to NOT as an adjunct form of property owned by the men, including fathers), and the institutions (family courts) in which the staged custody battles take place, propped up in part (and — I do show this — the larger part) by Healthy Marriage/Responsible Fatherhood funding, and at that point NOT significantly protected by the Domestic Violence Prevention funding.

Meanwhile, as this built-in funding and “federal policy position” conflict facilitates generation after generation of children growing up witnessing abuse and experienced adults somewhat confused on whether or not it’s a crime, or a social disease, or the fault of their mothers’ or fathers’ lack of “communications skills,” obviously, there is from the USDOJ a Defending Children’s Initiative, plus Task force on Children Exposed to Violence.

Some of these children then, periodically, may run away, which then can be blamed on the mother and generate more criminal cases.  She can be hunted down, or they can be hunted down, at which point the Reunification Services can be ordered — a good deal, if you’re in that business.

The runaway children, and I’m talking now about those  running away from the abusive households to which the family courts “re-aligned” them under Promoting Healthy Marriage, Access and Visitation (etc.) at times MAY enter the foster care system (more HHS funding), OR, they may become runaway youth and end up, temporarily, in a transitional housing for youth shelter.  FYI, one of mine, shortly after reaching the age of majority and having apparently, outlived her fiscal and psychological utility for my “ex” (i.e., reducing significant child support arrears), the family court system (ordering more personnel — a GAL — into the mix, and engendering through poor decision-making, the “left-behind” parent’s [in my case, that was me, the mother] need to keep coming back to court hoping to regain contact with the separated children), which itself then “supports” the rationale to further streamline procedures, reduce legal protections to due process, based on “the courts are overloaded.”

Meanwhile, and I am still talking primarily HHS funding — the “smart ones” who may not necessarily have a strong overlap with the “honest” ones or those with a high personal sense of ethics regarding their own accountability, or understanding of the downside of diverting private nonprofits with private agenda — these “smart ones” (or, politically connected ones) — instead of choosing “just one of the above” can — and my Georgia-based page SHOWS (Excerpts below also validate in part) — are simply positioning themselves, AS ARE STATE AGENCIES, to say, “come through us, government — come to us, clients” and take Abstinence Education, Responsible Fatherhood/Healthy Marriage, AND Family Violence Prevention.

For a reminder (I did post on this in 2016), the “FVPSA” (Family Violence Prevention Services Act) dates back to 1984 and involves primarily the agency HHS.   By contrast, the Violence Against WOMEN Act, was in 1994, and is commonly associated in the public mind, and in general, with the USDOJ’s “Office of Violence Against Women” which exists to implement grants from that Act.  BUT, organizations are free to take from both the USDOJ and the USDHHS, as they are free to take from apparently equal and apparently opposing sides from the staged “gender wars.”

At a certain point, it’s time to call those in the game — at the highest levels, not the lowest levels– at this game, and let our Congressmen and women know that we know what is that game.

In order to do that, I recommend those approaching Congress not show up dumber-than-dirt on who is the HHS, what is “Presidential Reorganization Authority” historically, and a few things about 1996 PRWORA welfare reform as it pertains to HMRF funding as administered through HHS.

So, you might want to bookmark this link and get back to it, and you might want to also mark out some time to read my confrontational and, in general, NOT popular among the domestic violence groups OR protective mothers’ groups* BLOG.

*Why not?  After all, I am indeed a survivor of domestic violence, becoming through those court actions, a “protective mother,” and even though several years down the road, after it became clear that the family court would facilitate a state of ongoing disruption, minus enforceable safety boundaries from the same individual, until suddenly, and temperamentally, switching custody.  Right now, I just discovered leading feminist jumping in to promote the term “Mothers of Lost Children” (and her book) and the same professionals which I have documented, refused to seriously discuss the “HHS / HMRF” factor in between their laments about badly behaving judges, GALs, and custody evaluators.

I learned, over time, that to perpetuate any form of abuse — and economic control is essential to trapping people in abusive relationships, marital or other — the art of, pardon me, bullshitting the bystanders– is an essential part. They need to call it something else — like “Marriage” or “Family.”  There also have to be effective means, utilized at the same time,  of silencing future outcries (dissents), just in case, some bystanders might DO something about the abuse, and cut into the privilege — and profits– involved in exploiting other human beings in the name of some social benefit.

Recommended Reading:  This CRS link, “Presidential Reorganization Authority, History, Recent Initiatives, and Options for Congress” (Henry B. Hogue, Dec. 11, 2012), has a Summary which explains a request to renew this authority was made January 2012 by President Obama, and explains how we got the “Federal Security Agency –>>  Health Education and Welfare ==> Health and Human Services  + (separately) Department of Education.  It also explains the relationship of this particular authority to how forms of it were perpetuated under the Wartime Powers Act (for WWI and WWII) and that, among other things, such agencies as FEMA, the EPA and (as above) HEW were originally formed. This is a fairly neutral report, bipartisan, intended for members of Congress (CRS = Congressional Research Service) of the larger context of one of the largest grant making federal agencies, whose activities I continue report, particularly after learning how badly the policies compromised my personal family line, and kept them in danger, needlessly, for years, based on re-classifying “danger” from existing criminal definitions, to membership in a socially targeted as “dangerous” demographic group, i.e., single-mother=-headed households.


I do not know yet, whether Congress in 2012 did, in fact, reauthorize this “Reorganization Authority” but every thing I can see at the observational level is that a consolidation of federal DEPARTMENTS (HUD, HHS, etc.) programming is taking place under HHS programs targeted to HMRF funding — and the HMRF funding itself, along with funding to “Prevent Family Violence” — is also (at least in Georgia, this page shows) being centralized to go to just a very few organizations, with the former “Statewide Coalitions Against Domestic Violence” (CADV groups), themselves a symptom of centralized control of battered women’s shelters and services to help victims, are getting a small percentage of what the state agencies are getting.

Now, about that New Page, HHS Grantees, Just Georgia, Just HMRF (CFDA 93086), May 13, 2016, Report Run. Take a look!

That approximately 10,000 word PAGE (not post) is meant as an example, and a point of reference to how states are handling both the HMRF funding AND (as it turned out) the DV Funding, and just how centralized it is possible to become over time.  It currently is on top of my list of “Vital Links/Info” on the sidebar.

It is informative, and it does some detailed lookups on the very few grantees at this time, receiving straight CFDA 93086 grants.  As it turns out, some of these are also receiving the bulk of the “Family Violence Prevention/DISCRETIONARY” grants also, and as such have delivered coordinated control of that field over to the same agencies (and there are TWO referenced, which you will see, ONE of which also is handling the Healthy Marriage/Responsible Fatherhood grants).

Again, Title of the page:  HHS Grantees, Just Georgia, Just HMRF (CFDA 93086), May 13, 2016, Report Run. Take a look!

BY THE WAY — I could use some help looking up some of these corporations, from people willing to write-up and provide links to their efforts.  

Contact me through a comment if interested, but expect to make a time commitment if you’re serious about asking my time to again, review how to do this.  If this leads to other posts on this blog, that might also be good….

Why bother?

Well, it’s rewarding and enriching personally to SEE what is happening and there IS no better way to learn it than by starting to look at the evidence first-hand, and let that evidence speak to you.  Listening to the narratives of others who have looked it up and are talking about it, qualifies you as a second-hand witness, not an eye-witness.  Listening to others (including reading their accounts) is no real substitute for the real thing to get the “gray matter” working. It will raise some hard questions which, then, by even attempting to answer, will put anyone in a better position to understand more of current events in this country, including probably (especially, if you’re family-court-involved) in your life also.  There are all kinds of corollary benefits to following the money trail where public funds are involved. Understanding increases exponentially.

One of the hard questions that may come up should also include: “Why haven’t others — why haven’t “the experts” we’ve been reading advocating for Family Court Enhancement (or, Fixing), or about making family courts safe for children, or about stopping domestic violence, or about the issues of “parental alienation” either as a reality, or as an “unsound psychological theory” — talking about the same things Let’s Get Honest and just a few others, over many years, are talking about?

Ideally, if pursued, this might awaken one to the reality of how much national public policy is public relations-driven, i.e., the “Freud’s nephew factor” (Edward L. Bernays). This should then lead to a consideration of who controls the technology on which the media is based, which again, ought to lead RIGHT BACK to, “who owns this place, anyhow?” WHO controls it fiscally, WHO controls the operational infrastructure, and who controls most of the assets in the United States of America.

Continue Reading: https://familycourtmatters.wordpress.com/2016/05/17/note-to-readers-see-new-page-just-hhs-just-georgia-just-hmrf-grants/

STRONG CITIES

Paris, Minneapolis, Rotterdam, and Montreal are among the 25 cities around the world that have signed up for the program — dubbed “Strong Cities” — which encourages participants to communicate directly with one another about suspicious activity while “respecting the fundamental rights of citizens.”   nydailynews.com

Reblogged from Activist Post

Strong Cities Network; DHS; and the SPLC

total surveillanceBy Tom DeWeese

Thinking Globally, Acting Locally to Destroy Freedom

On September 29, 2015, Attorney General Loretta Lynch delivered a speech to the United Nations that should be considered one of the most powerful and frightening threats to American freedom ever conceived. Lynch was announcing United States’ support and participation in a new program called the Strong Cities Network.

Of course her words were cleverly prepared to disguise the obvious threats of the program. She spoke of creating a link between cities to learn new ways to “lift up communities worldwide.” She went on to say, “It also sends a message about who we are and what we aspire to be – as an alliance of nations and as a global community.”

Those words alone should send a clear warning to everyone that the Strong Cities is bad news – a direct threat to national sovereignty and the establishment of a one size fits all socialist society of man. I’ve been sounding the warnings against that as the direct goal of Agenda 21 and its threat to our local communities through Sustainable Development and Smart Growth.

But the Strong Cities Network is much more than that. To get through all the double speak and rhetoric designed to throw you off the trail, one must look at the source of the program.

Like most things that emerge from the global cesspool called the United Nations, the Strong Cities Network springs from a Non Governmental Organization (NGO) called the Institute for Strategic Dialog (ISD). It’s what’s referred to as a “think and do tank.” In other words, ISD doesn’t just dream up these schemes, it then sets about to make them reality.

The ISD has set its sights on tackling “Extremism.” Now, given the insanity that is overtaking our world in recent years, it’s reasonable to believe that the average reader would probably think that the ISD fight against extremism would be aimed at radical Islam and its effort to wipe out Western culture. Beheadings of Christians, suicide bombers in crowded buildings, and mutilation of women are a few visions that come to mind. Is the ISD a force to bring some sanity to those attacks on innocent people?

Well, ISD does give some lip service to their concern over women, particularly American women who are being lured to join ISIS over the Internet. But, no, Muslim extremism really isn’t the focus of ISD. “Far Right Extremism” is the battle cry, according to the ISD website (www.strategicdialogue.org).

The ISD actually believes the threat of Far Right Extremism is a threat to Islam! Here is a direct quote from the website,

Though parliamentary manifestations of the radical right are non-violent and operate within the rules of democracy, there remains confusion over …the dangers of the growing presence of far-right extremism… and the increasing legitimization of anti-immigration and anti-Islamic discourses…

Beheadings, burning people alive, drowning them in cages as they are slowly lowered into a pool – these apparently are not a threat according to ISD. But citizens of European nations and the United States that express concern – “non-violent” words – about the flood of immigrants rushing across their borders, especially an invasion of radical Islamists who seek to change their culture, rape their women, and dismantle their governments – that’s a threat to world peace according to the ISD!

And this is what Attorney General Loretta Lynch, representing Barack Obama’s Administration, endorsed for our nation through the Strong Cities Network. Just weeks before her appearance at the UN, she announced that her Justice Department will create a new position in the department that will focus on investigating domestic terrorist, defining them as those who hold racist, bigoted or anti government views or see themselves as “sovereign citizens.” Now, through the Strong Cities Network Lynch plans to “globalize” local police forces to enforce the strategy.

Where have we heard such talk before? For years, the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) has targeted Conservatives as a threat and issued report after report labeling Conservatives as possible domestic terrorists. I personally have been on such lists and the focus of at least four SPLC reports.

In one SPLC report entitled, “30 New Activists Heading Up The Radical Right,” I was named along with what SPLC calls “Islamophobes,” “Political Opportunists,” “Religious Right Anti-Gay groups” and “Patriot groups.” Says the report, “Most dramatically, so-called ‘Patriot’ groups – which, unlike most hate groups, see the federal government as their primary enemy – have grown explosively in just the last three years…”

Of course they’re talking about the Tea Party as a hate movement, and I’m pretty sure that’s why I’m listed. In particular, they report on my efforts against Agenda 21, saying “DeWeese’s outfit is only one of several obsessed with what has become one of the main conspiracy theories of the antigovernment ‘Patriot’ movement.” This report from SPLC is just one of a series of attacks against Conservatives and others who support the founding principles of the United States.

In March, 2010, SPLC issued a report entitled “Rage on the Right: The Year in Hate and Extremism,” in which groups opposed to issues like the Obama health care plan and illegal immigration were lumped with white supremacist groups like the National Socialist Movement and Neo-Nazi Skin Heads.

In August, 2010, SPLC launched an attack against my organization, the American Policy Center, and our Freedom Action Conference, held at Valley Forge, PA. The event featured such speakers as best selling author Tom Woods, former presidential candidate Michael Badnarik, Sheriff Richard Mack, five respected state legislators, and many more well known spokesmen. Someone at the conference commented to me that I had assembled the “brain trust” of the Freedom Movement at my conference.

The title of the SPLC attack against me read, “Patriot Rhetoric Becomes Increasingly Violent,” and said we were “united by rage” at the federal government. Not one speaker at our conference advocated violence or lawlessness of any kind. I can prove these statements because we have the entire conference on video tape. Yet we were labeled as dangerous and potentially violent terrorists by SPLC.

I live in the world of rough and tumble politics. Charges are regularly made in both directions. I give as good as I get. I state my opposition to some policies. They attack my positions for the same reason. It’s called political discourse; debate; and free speech. It’s been our right to participate in such public activity for over 200 years. So, why do I care what this one private organization (SPLC), with its own political agenda, says about me?

I care because the Southern Poverty Law Center has direct ties to the Department of Homeland Security, helping to write official DHS policy that may affect my life, my freedom, my ability to travel and my ability to speak out.

Now, through the creation of the Strong Cities Network, those attacks and the close ties of the SPLC with the Department of Homeland Security have new, much more dangerous implications to freedom of speech, assembly, and independent thought. Step by step, local police forces are being militarized and trained to look for dangers from “Right-Wing extremists.” Consider the following facts:

Item: In 2009, The DHS issued a report entitled “Right-wing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment.”

That official document of an agency of the United States government said “Right-wing extremism in the United States can be broadly divided into those groups, movements, and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups), and those that are mainly anti-government, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration.”

Item: Two weeks later, the DHS released a second report entitled: “Domestic Extremism Lexicon,” designed to provide specific definitions of just who may be Right wing extremists.

That report labeled the following to be extremists, bordering on terrorism: Those concerned over the economy; loss of jobs; foreclosures; antagonism toward the Obama Administration; Criticism of free trade programs; anti-abortion; oppose same sex marriage; believe in the “end times;” stock pile food; oppose illegal immigration; oppose a New World Order; oppose the UN; oppose global governance; fear of Communist regimes; oppose loss of US manufacturing to overseas nations; oppose loss of US prestige; use of the Internet (or alternative media) to express any of these ideas.

And there’s more. The Department of Homeland Security has established Fusion Centers in each state. These are designed to combine federal, state and local law enforcement. Their stated purpose is to assure immediate and efficient response to a terrorist attack or a Katrina-like disaster without bureaucratic red tape.

Item: However, in 2009, the Missouri Fusion Center set off a fire storm over a report it issued entitled “The Modern Militia Movement.” Reported Fox News, the report “identifies the warning signs of potential terrorists for law enforcement communities.” In other words, this report was issued to law enforcement agencies across the state as official documentation described who the cops should look out for as potential violent terrorists.

According to the report, the list of potential terrorists included Americans who voted for presidential candidate Ron Paul; Constitution Party presidential candidate Chuck Baldwin); and Libertarian Party presidential candidate Bob Barr. It also cited those of us who opposed the creation of a North American Union with Canada and Mexico.

Item: in the Spring of 2010, the Department of Homeland Security organized a “Countering Violent Extremism Working Group.” This is an advisory council given the task of creating a plan to reach out to local law enforcement and community activists for training to respond to potential violence and terrorist threat.

Leafing through the report one gets the distinct impression that the plan is basically a “turn in your neighbor,” neighborhood-watch approach. It talks extensively of “sharing” information, along with “training, training, training.”

Training for what? To identify potential terrorists, of course. And who are those potential terrorist? A look at the members of the working group offers a clue. While the group includes several public and law enforcement officials from around the nation, it also includes Mohamed Magid, president of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), an un-indicted co-conspirator in a case concerning the funding of Muslim terrorist organizations. In 2012 the SPLC issued a report labeling those who oppose radical Islamic activities as “Islamophobes.” Coincidence?

The working group member list also includes Richard Cohen, President of the Southern Poverty Law Center. In addition, as one of the “Subject Matter Experts,” it lists Laurie Wood, an analyst for the Southern Poverty Law Center and an instructor for the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center.

That training center is run by the Southern Poverty Law Center and is one of the most visible direct links between DHS, the Fusion Centers and SPLC. Law enforcement agencies actually send their personnel to these training classes to gain Federal Law Enforcement Training Center certification.

That means that policy for this DHS working group is being created by the very organization that has labeled those who advocate Constitutional law to be potential terrorists. The pattern is clear, one of the nation’s leading hate groups, the Southern Poverty Law Center, which opposes even the right of free speech by people it labels potential terrorists, is helping the largest federal enforcement agency in the nation to create its policy.

That policy clearly implies, according to DHS reports, that anyone disagreeing with actions by the U.S. government is a potential terrorist and must be, at least, watched and monitored by federal, state, and local authorities.

The result of such surveillance could possibly lead to loss of freedom, loss of jobs, loss of the right to travel, and loss of the ability to speak publicly, for anyone who opposes the Obama Administration and the private agenda of the Southern Poverty Law Center. It is an effort to silence their opponents. Honest political debate is being interpreted as dangerous extremism.

Now, Attorney General Loretta Lynch has upped the stakes by joining forces with the United Nations and international NGOs with the stated purpose of closing the lid on right-winged opposition.

Will this effort bring Blue Helmeted police into American cities as some believe? Probably not, at least in the short term. The Southern Poverty Law Center and the Department of Homeland Security have done their job well to train local police forces. Now, through the Strong Cities Network, mayors and city councils are being encouraged to use their local offices to direct local authority to take action against this so-called Right-Wing threat.

How long will it be before Tea Party groups are denied the ability to rent meeting rooms to assemble? When will such meetings be interrupted by armed swat teams sent in to close it down and arrest participants? When will spokesmen such as myself be denied access to air travel? How soon will even the threat of such action scare people into staying home, perhaps even on Election Day? That is the threat we face with the Obama/Lynch/UN cabal organized in the name of the Strong Cities Network.

Will the U.S. Congress allow such a threat to freedom to be imposed by the Department of Justice? Will it simply sit back and do nothing as it has throughout the openly hostile Obama Administration? Or will new Speaker Paul Ryan honor his stated commitment to “fix” this broken system and put a stop to this dangerous assault on American freedom?

And how about every concerned American? Will you fight back and demand that Congress take action to protect your Constitutionally-guaranteed freedoms of speech, assembly and private thought?

If you want to take action, I have prepared a petition to Speaker Ryan demanding that he lead the Congress to take action to stop the Strong Cities Network. Sign it here and demand action in the name of Freedom in the United States of America – or do nothing and watch our nation disappear. Now is the time to decide.

Click here to sign the petition

Tom DeWeese is one of the nation’s leading advocates of individual liberty, free enterprise, private property rights, personal privacy, back-to-basics education and American sovereignty and independence.