The Orwellian Tidal Wave: Bush's New Police State and WP Activists

by William Randolph Royere III

Constitutions are intended to preserve practical and substantial rights, not to maintain theories. Oliver Wendell Holmes, Davis v. Mills, 194 U.S. 451, 457 (1904)

Using the September 11, 2001, attacks as cover, the Bush Administration deftly negotiated a massive intelligence apparatus that federal officials lusted after for years but couldn't get. The new powers this structure assumes, which arose, in part, from the PATRIOT Act, exceed any we've hitherto seen, even in wartime contexts. Officials will use said powers to neutralize radical domestic political elements or, address "the spectre of domestic terrorism." This article examines how officials -- in concert with corporate interests and the Zionist lobby -- seized these new powers, and how they'll affect White Nationalists.


Why should this concern VNN readers? After all, we aren't terrorists; we're merely regular, tax-paying, law-abiding citizens, concerned about our race's future. Or are we? Not according to Robert Burnham, FBI's one-time domestic terrorism czar. In an MSNBC interview, interviewers asked Burnham (a dedicated and vocal cheerleader for the Jew-inspired, virulently anti-White Project Megiddo) to describe the last decade's domestic terrorism trends.

In response, he parroted the Jew's radical, anti-White agenda: "I think in the last 10 years...we've seen...a rise in anti-government sentiments -- anti-government from the standpoint of militia groups, Aryan Nations, skinheads, KKK. I think the thing that probably binds them all together, in one way or another, is the anti-government sentiment. And what we are also starting to see entwined with that is religious extremists -- the Christian Identity movement." Domestic terrorism: the FBI; An interview with the man in charge of confronting the tide.. [Emphasis Added].

I won't here dispute that the groups Burnham mentioned have anti-government sentiment, for they do, for obvious reasons. But I would (and will below) vigorously dispute that such groups account for any noteworthy domestic terrorism. Indeed, if official records are any indication, Burnham's assertions are patently false -- but that doesn't bar others from reiterating it, again and again, without supporting evidence.

For example, consider Lynn F. Fischer's report, "The Threat of Domestic Terrorism," which opens with the statement that domestic terrorism is associated with...: "...the rise of anti-government sentiment and the proliferation of self-styled militia and paramilitary groups -- some of which take extremist positions on race, religion, federal authority, gun control, or taxation." The Threat of Domestic Terrorism, Lynn F. Fischer, DoD Security Institute. [Emphasis Added].

Money-grubbing hucksters -- even those not openly on the imperial payroll -- jumped on this bandwagon with a vengeance, labeling anyone and everyone "domestic terrorists" and White Nationalists are primary targets (but not alone). These brazen operators smell big money in the mix, and with good reason (the Bush administration promised $37 billion to those who play ball). Hence, even skilled private-sector hustlers are whoring for a piece of the "homeland security" pie.

Consider former SPLC flunkey Mike Reynolds' smear masterpiece, Virtual Reich, that ran in February's Playboy Magazine. In it, an inveterate Reynolds peddled a fantastic scenario, claiming that:

Fascism is back, featuring a strange cast of Islamic fundamentalists, skinheads, and homegrown terrorists. Here's the sinister part: they're all talking to one another.

William Luther Pierce III , head of National Alliance, minced few words in his timely response, and brutally exposed Reynolds' poorly researched propaganda for what it was. Pierce said:

It's a trashy article in a trashy magazine, but it mentions me at length, and that was my reason for choosing it as an example. And with a circulation of more than 3 million copies each month and probably half again that many readers, Playboy does have a significant role in the popular culture. The article is almost entirely make-believe. It has a few quotations from things I've written, a few quotations from other people, most of whom I've never met or even corresponded with, and then it throws us all into one pot and stirs us up as if we're part of a giant, worldwide, terrorist conspiracy: me along with Muslim fundamentalists, German and English nationalists, anti-abortionists, Tim McVeigh and Ted Kaczynski, nutcase Christian millennialists, environmental activists, and elderly SS veterans -- just about everyone the Jews don't like. It's not only the basic theme of the article that is wrong -- claiming one giant conspiracy where there is none -- but the details are chock full of errors too. It's clear that no one bothered to check the article for accuracy. The Culture of Lies , Dr. William Pierce, National Alliance , American Dissident Voices Broadcast (January 19, 2002). [Emphasis added].

Bill White, Libertarian Socialist of, reiterated these points (and dissected Reynolds' article ) in a recent Pravda piece. In it, White mercilessly slammed Reynolds' smear as:

" of many published by militant neo-liberal activist Michael Reynolds in a recent Playboy article 'Virtual Reich' -- the latest hack job from a recently active collective of writers dedicated to the demonization and suppression of popular dissent. Funded and controlled by the Southern Poverty Law Center, the nebulous nucleus of neo-liberal fascism working and a major sponsor of the 'anti-hate' movement -- a government sponsored movement to suppress dissenting political views -- these writers have been publishing wild conspiracy theories, on the internet and off, claiming that the anti-globalization movement, the anarchist black block, and radical environmental movements like Earth First! are all being controlled by a shadowy neo-Nazi-Muslim 'axis' who is working behind the scenes to turn today's youth into the 'hard-core soldiers of neo-fascism.'" Virtual Retch Southern Poverty Law Center Joins With Pornographers And Neo-Cons To Attack The Anti-Globalist Movement, Bill White,

Reynolds' article -- merely one of many that sucked up to Bush's multi-billion-dollar pork-fest for snitches, NGO intelligence gathering cells, and already-engorged corporate welfare-dependent think tanks -- universally angered many factions, including anti-globalist forces, militia, socialists, communists, constitutionalists, the right, the left, and especially Earth Liberation Front (ELF), a cell-based, leaderless resistance-style environmental "direct action" organization that Reynolds nonchalantly singled out for demonization.

ELF reportedly responded by issuing a fatwa against Reynolds, Playboy, and SPLC, in which ELF agents unknown (operating, no doubt, from some suitably green, forest location) wrote: "ELFers, don't let shit like this slide!!!!!! If you can organize sabotage, then organize counters to this type of libel. Don't let Playboy print this shit without a response that they can't ignore!"

In a public forum, I mused that Reynolds made a grave political miscalculation: "My money says that ELF wins the first round. Reynolds and Dees pissed off the wrong folks this time. If I were an SPLC-er, I'd invest in some fire extinguishers, lickety-split. People often too casually use the term 'incendiary' when describing articles or books, but in this particular instance, it fits nicely." (Note: ELF's preferred method of dissent is arson). But we needn't belabor the public response. Clearly, if folks who hail from such widely diverse political roots all agree that something's amiss with Reynolds' assertions (which differ little from Burnham's, Fischer's, and others ad infinitum), something is amiss. Indeed, even prominent Jew journalists -- who side with anti-Jew elements one time out of a thousand -- declared this administration's maneuvers bogus. Bruce Shapiro, of Salon Magazine, in his article, The Hyping of Domestic Terrorism, called the administration's propaganda campaign "a con job," noting that FBI's director himself demonstrated that these wild assertions are spurious:

"In the Los Angeles Times, commission advisor Brian Michael Wilson of the Rand Corp. [I go after Rand in a moment] called the report 'a wake up call to a more violent future.' But behind this dramatic and headline-grabbing report, the facts are these: The National Commission on Terrorism's warnings are a con job, with roughly the veracity of the latest Robert Ludlum novel. Evidence of this fraud comes not from civil libertarians or American friends of some guerrilla army, but from the top G-man himself: FBI Director Louis Freeh...Just over a year ago, on Feb. 4, 1999, Freeh testified on the subject of terrorism before the Senate Appropriations Committee's Subcommittee on the departments of Commerce, Justice and State. 'The frequency of terrorist incidents in the United States has decreased in number,' Freeh emphasized." The Hyping of Domestic Terrorism, Bruce Shapiro, Salon Magazine.

So, everyone agrees: it's a con job, and an amusing one -- but for one disturbing fact: this particular con job (and the powers that it purchased for intelligence agencies) could someday cost you your life or liberty. (Just ask Sherman Austin, the teenage webmaster for For this reason alone, every VNN reader should be concerned. In the below paragraphs, I'll demonstrate just how dangerous this "con job" is, and how it will affect you personally.

How Administration Officials Seized New Powers

Administration officials based their well-executed "backdoor" constitutional assault on the September 11th tragedy, asserting that further attacks could soon follow. That radical Islamic fundementalists operate within U.S. borders, I will not dispute. And, given the administration's unbalanced position on the Palestinian issue, such radical elements will continue their quest for equity by killing Americans wherever and whenever they find them vulnerable. Our government is morally bound to address these problems (which arise from its policies alone, and its backing of a murderous, oppressive Zionist state, something most Americans do not support). However, suspension of our Bill of Rights -- which is what Bush administration officials essentially achieved -- is a unacceptable solution.

The administration achieved this feat -- a maneuver The Nine will doubtless eventually shoot down -- through a two-pronged strategy. The first vicious blow was one that students of political propaganda and intelligence agencies know well. In olden spy days, spooks sometimes called this "matting" or "framing," which works like this: when our government (or more commonly, our intelligence community) seeks to perform an operation that Americans won't likely accept, the government turns to think tanks and press organizations who, at the government's behest, produce news articles, statistics, and other propaganda showing a "need for immediate action." Government operatives, intelligence officials, press personnel, and PR firms then carefully choose outlets for such "product," aiming at distribution points most likely to influence public opinion [on the specific issue presented].

Properly orchestrated, this process bends public opinion just enough for administration officials to undertake their nefarious actions. Congressional support staffers then closely watch public opinion polls (and other indicative sources) to verify when (or whether) their employers (senators, congressmen) can safely support the proposed measures. If administration officials implement their matting campaign skillfully, most senators and congressmen can support said measures without losing their respective constituencies. CIA uses this technique when building international support for us to overthrow this or that foreign regime (typically, one we created to begin with). It first seeds newspapers -- in appropriate geographical regions -- with articles and op-ed pieces that tear down the target's reputation. (A favorite is to expose the target's "human rights" abuses.) Frequently, however, these well-orchestrated campaigns meet resistance overseas, for, many foreign nationals don't vacantly watch wrestling, "Survivor," or "The Weakest Link." Instead, some avidly read, and well recognize what materials originate from our propaganda machine and what materials don't.

In the September 11 tragedy, though, the administration had to fool only one target population: Americans (and this was easy). The anger, sadness, outrage, and shock that Americans understandably experienced over September 11th events predisposed them to support any measure -- no matter how draconian -- to obtain justice. Americans thus gave this administration a free pass, as it were, or carte blanche, to do anything necessary to even the score. And naturally, bloodthirsty media Jews -- in this instance -- enthusiastically supported the administration's efforts. But Jews were not alone in this; many of their lackey "Christian fundamentalist" leaders obediently disseminated information sufficient to get the job done "in the trenches," molding the opinions of their slack-jawed, glassy-eyed local constituencies, and thus, delivered majority support (or perhaps, widespread apathy, which is good enough in such situations).

Armed with this media onslaught (and Jew-disseminated, repetitive, gratuitous coverage of the tragedy, which inflamed simple Americans even more), administration officials went in for the kill, issuing the second vicious blow, effortlessly felling the Founders by sucker-punching an unsuspecting American public. Through the PATRIOT Act and related measures, they obtained hitherto unparalleled powers for America's intelligence agencies, and blasted gaping holes in the well established legal walls between them (i.e., prohibitions of FBI and CIA sharing certain data without first securing that right through appropriate judiciary channels). The result was an exquisitely stealthy fly-by for all measures concerned. The PATRIOT Act, frankly, skipped through Congress like a fly-fishing lure across still waters, making nary a sound, and scarcely disturbing the pool. That leaves us where we are today, stripped of countless civil rights we once took for granted.

Let's look at what benefits administration officials realized from their skillful machinations.

What Did the Government Get in the Bargain?

Administration officials overcame a staggering number of 1970s-instituted controls on intelligence gathering activity, most of which arose after negative public reaction to the Church Committee hearings.


For a blow-by-blow account on mid-1970s investigations into domestic spying, see Intelligence Activities And The Rights Of Americans, Book II, Final Report Of The Select Committee To Study Governmental Operations With Respect To Intelligence Activities, United States Senate. What the Church Committee and the Carter Administration took away over a several year period, the Bush administration rapaciously reclaimed -- in a matter of days.

The present administration turned back the clock and obtained authority to do a multitude of things hitherto prohibited or strictly controlled or regulated by Congress or our judiciary. For example:

  • Library records - Federal officials can now coerce libraries and bookstores into coughing up client lists. That means this: Uncle Sam can now find out (for the price of an envelope and a stamp) what books you've been reading. If you've been contemplating thought-crimes, you'd better reconsider. (One wonders what thoughts Mr. Ashcroft considers dangerous. Certainly, his ongoing bout to stifle The Spirit of Justice is a matter worth consideration). Thomas Jefferson is rolling in his grave.

  • Wiretaps - The administration now has the authority to conduct roving or roaming wiretaps, where warrants to conduct such activity now "stick" to an individual (instead of specific telephonic devices used by the same). Hence, intelligence agencies (including CIA, an organization historically barred from conducting purely domestic operations) need only obtain authority once to tap every telephone you use.

  • Internet intelligence gathering - this administration now has the authority to conduct wide-scale packet filtering and electronic eavesdropping on any network (like this one) that houses views or speech expressions considered "suspect" or which display anti-government sentiment. This is especially damaging because it enables such agencies to analyze human networks by capturing all email and IP addresses going in or out of any given server or network. As an example, radical, anti-globalist anarchists expressed relief hen FBI released Sherman Austin, but their rejoicing is perplexing. FBI, in seizing Austin's hard disk drives and logs therein, geometrically expanded its field of operation. It can now monitor all networks that accessed Austin's web site. (In other words, anti-globalists should expect more raids in the not-too-distant future). Also, the government reportedly has entertained watching search engine queries. Further, the government can now demand much wider information from Internet Service Providers (ISPs), including dynamic IP-to-telephone-line matching. And finally, intelligence agencies can now obtain wiretaps for mere suspicion of anyone violating computer abuse statutes.

  • Expansion of computer crime statutes -- presumably to stifle political hackers (or "hacktivists"), the administration asked for -- and received -- substantial enhancements in computer abuse penalties. Judges can now give hacktivists double-digit sentences merely for defacing web sites and there, issuing radical political statements.

And the aforementioned contingencies just scratch the surface. You cannot appreciate the degree to which the administration can now spy on Americans -- Americans like me (who write articles like this) and Americans like you (who read them). But, you can begin to understand these issues if you download RAND's "Networks and Netwars: The Future of Terror, Crime, and Militancy," a 300+ page report (more intelligence "product" to back the administration's next move). It basically breaks down to this: almost six years ago, I warned of this, when I wrote:

"The Internet favors both forms of intelligence, but is a natural for collective intelligence. Consider USENET posts. These are publicly available to anyone, twenty-four hours a day, via systems like Users can track your messages and by doing so, learn a great deal about you, including your core interests, your political views and affiliations, and with whom you discuss these issues. Law enforcement agencies exploit this to analyze human networks online."

"This represents a monumental shift from 25 years ago. To understand why, rewind to the early 1970s. In America, the 70s brought violent political turmoil. Many of the radical organizations that emerged advocated violent government overthrow. Our domestic and foreign intelligence operatives responded by conducting wide-scale collective and penetrative operations."

"For example, to identify Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) members and supporters, police sent agents on foot. These agents were typically police officers, FBI agents, or civilian informants. Such agents mixed with crowds, recorded license plate numbers, gathered names at rallies, and so on. Later, police used the collective intelligence to match faces, fingerprints, and addresses to the gathered names, retrieved criminal records, and questioned other informants. Through these techniques -- cornerstones of human intelligence -- the FBI, BATF, and other agencies built profiles of suspected conspirators."

"Historically, law enforcement agencies needed some lawful mandate, approval by department heads, or warrants from magistrates to conduct such activity. True, the process of obtaining these lawful mandates was often perfunctory, not difficult, and done chiefly to satisfy constitutional requirements, the absence of which could later threaten a conviction at appellate levels. But nevertheless, police were required by law to obtain them."

"Today, police still conduct such operations, but these techniques are becoming less necessary. Instead, the Net permits government agents to monitor public sentiment from the comfort of cushy offices. Further, agents can do this without violating the law. No search warrant is required to study the overt activity of Internet users. Likewise, no warrant is required to use the Internet to compile lists of people who are apparently involved in illegal, seditious, or suspicious activity."

"If you harbor radical political views and espouse them online, know that others are watching and archiving your statements. But, USENET is just the beginning. Everything you do online creates a record of some sort, both on your end and elsewhere. Some records are more difficult to acquire than others, but nearly all are obtainable at some level. And, as you'll learn in the next section -- which focuses on network intelligence -- spies needn't necessarily capture your statements or discussions to ascertain valuable information."

The Bush administration is cozy with our enemies, too. Hence, let all White Nationalists beware: it's time to sterilize your homes and offices. Dispose of paperwork you don't need (by shredding it) that evidences lists of associates, strategies, and so forth. Obtain a decent education in characteristically "strong" encryption, shield your equipment from electronic eavesdropping, order your FBI file, and take extra care now with whom you associate (checking local county clerk and federal judicial records to see whether "new" associates have sustained recent busts). In other words, get suited up for intrusion, because it's coming. Plainly, we've become a major force, and one that frightens the Jew (and hence, his minions). High Noon is upon us.


Back to VNN Main Page