By John W. Whitehead
We’ve been down this road many times.
If the government is consistent about any one thing, it is: It has an unnerving tendency to exploit crises and use them as opportunities for power grabs under the guise of national security.
Cue the Emergency State, the government’s Machiavellian version of crisis management that justifies all manner of government tyranny in the so-called name of national security.
Terrorist attacks, mass shootings, 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, the government has been anticipating and preparing for such crises for years.
It’s all part of the grand plan for total control.
The government’s proposed response to the latest round of mass shootings, red flag gun laws, precrime surveillance, fusion centers, threat assessments, mental health assessments, involuntary confinement, is just more of the same.
It’s a simple enough formula: First, you create fear, then you capitalize on it by seizing power.
For instance, in his remarks on the mass shootings in Texas and Ohio, president Donald Trump promised to give the FBI “whatever they need” to investigate and disrupt hate crimes and domestic terrorism.
Let that sink in a moment.
In a post-9/11 America, Trump’s promise bodes ill for whatever remnants of freedom we have left. With that promise, flippantly delivered without any apparent thought for the U.S. Constitution’s prohibitions on such overreach, the president has given the FBI the green light to violate Americans’ civil liberties in every which way.
It is how the emergency state works, after all.
So what does the government’s carefully-calibrated response to this current crisis mean for freedom as we know it? Compliance and control.
For starters, consider Trump’s embrace of red flag gun laws, which allow the police to remove guns from people suspected of being threats, will only add to the government’s power.
Be warned: These laws, growing in popularity as a legislative means by which to seize guns from individuals viewed as a danger to themselves or others, are yet another Trojan Horse, a stealth maneuver by the police state to gain greater power over an unsuspecting and largely gullible populace.
Seventeen states, plus the District of Columbia, now have red flag laws on their books. That number is growing.
In the midst of what feels like an epidemic of mass shootings, these gun confiscation laws, extreme risk protection order (ERPO) laws, may appease the fears of those who believe that fewer guns in the hands of the general populace will make our society safer.
Of course, it doesn’t always work that way.
Anything, knives, vehicles, planes, pressure cookers, can become a weapon when wielded with deadly intentions.
With these red flag gun laws, the intention is to disarm individuals who are potential threats.
Therein lies the danger of these red flag laws, specifically, and pre-crime laws such as these generally, especially when you put the power to determine who is a potential danger in the hands of government agencies, the courts, and the police.
After all, it is the same government that uses the words anti-government, extremist, and terrorist interchangeably.
It is the same government that has a growing list, shared with fusion centers and law enforcement agencies, of ideologies, behaviors, affiliations and other characteristics that could flag someone as suspicious and result in their being labeled potential enemies of the state.
For instance, if you believe in and exercise your rights under the U.S. Constitution (namely, your right to speak freely, worship freely, associate with like-minded individuals who share your political views, criticize the government, own a weapon, demand a warrant before being questioned or searched, or any other activity viewed as potentially anti-government, racist, bigoted, anarchic or sovereign), you could be at the top of the government’s terrorism watch list.
Moreover, as a New York Times editorial warns, you may be an anti-government extremist (a.k.a. domestic terrorist) in the eyes of the police if you are afraid that the government is plotting to confiscate your firearms, if you believe the economy is about to collapse and the government soon will declare martial law, or if you display an unusual number of political and/or ideological bumper stickers on your car.
According to the FBI’s latest report, you might be classified as a domestic terrorism threat if you espouse conspiracy theories, especially if you attempt to explain events or circumstances as the result of a group of actors working in secret to benefit themselves at the expense of others and are usually at odds with official or prevailing explanations of events.
In other words, if you dare to subscribe to any views that are contrary to the government’s, you well may be suspected of being a domestic terrorist and treated accordingly.
Be warned: Once you get on such a government watch list, whether it’s a terrorist watch list, a mental health watch list, a dissident watch list, or a red flag gun watch list, there’s no clear-cut way to get off, whether or not you actually should be on there.
You will be tracked wherever you go.
You will be flagged as a potential threat and dealt with accordingly.
This is pre-crime on an ideological scale and it’s been a long time coming.
If you’re not scared yet, you should be.
Connect the dots.
Start with the powers amassed by the government under the USA Patriot Act, note the government’s ever-broadening definition of what it considers to be an extremist, then add in the government’s detention powers under NDAA, the National Security Agency’s far-reaching surveillance networks, and fusion centers that collect and share surveillance data between local, state, and federal police agencies.
To that, add tens of thousands of armed, surveillance drones, facial recognition technology that will identify and track you wherever you go. And then to complete the picture, toss in the real-time crime centers which will attempt to predict crimes and identify so-called criminals before they happen based on widespread surveillance, complex mathematical algorithms and prognostication programs.
See how easy we’ve made it for the government to identify, label, target, defuse and detain anyone it views as a potential threat, including those who challenge its authority?
Yet, I make clear in my book, “Battlefield America: The War on the American People,” you don’t even have to be a dissident to get flagged by the government for surveillance, censorship and detention.
All you really need to be is a citizen of the American police state.
—The Rutherford Institute