January 3, 2009 at 16:55:57

Cryptic Connotation of the Term "Law Enforcement"

SAVE AS FAVORITE

VIEW FAVORITES

By Carlisle Collins (about the author) Page 2 of 2 page(s)

opednews.com Permalink

During a quiet moment, ponder on why we rarely respond to heinous acts perpetrated by our leaders? And when (IF) we do, how come it is typically half-hearted and fleeting? What made us so “tolerant” toward the victimization of others? And what makes us so damn certain it won’t happen to us next?

This macabre drama has been played out kazillion times in the past; avarice is still manifesting disguised as religion, politics, or some purportedly noble undertaking, as though such flimsy excuses bestow a tunic of respectability and validate gross criminal acts. Just as stealing is unacceptable by universal standards and one’s own conscience (no matter how convincing the reason sounds), so is stealing another’s hopes, dreams, aspirations and very right to exist.

Soon, people shall realize that the term “Public Order” is a euphemism for “Resigned Servitude”. There are creative technological means at work to accomplish this.

Along with persuasive propaganda and the time-honored advice on ‘How To Take Over a Country’, there are at the very present a host of other more sinister devices secretly molding public thought and opinion. Without delving too much into the validity of some “conspiracy theories”, the general public is beginning to see only the “tip of the iceberg” that conceals a major inventory of Hyper-Tech mind altering enforcement tools developed for domestic “crowd control”, suppressing riots, and to maintain Public Order in the very near future. Such futuristic technology that intrudes on the sovereignty of one’s mind, or genetics, or beliefs, etc., has always given rise to public outcry. Yet such technology and research has continued unabated in secret.

One sees red flags all over the horizon when such technology has been approved for use and its purpose is clearly yet another implement to suppress dissent. But when the underlying purpose and resulting consequences of other State run experiments are unknown or mostly conjecture, it is prudent to view them (and the motives) suspiciously.

[‘More government and law enforcement resources are being re-allocated to fight dissenting opinion from the “enemy within.” And a new class of weapons is being developed to fight “bloodless” battles, fry computer circuitry and control human minds en masse. “Less Than Lethal anti-personnel weapons” are seen in some influential quarters as being the ideal remedy for future domestic revolutionary disturbances. It may be necessary for western democracy to avert severe set-backs and become increasingly repressive and oligarchic. Armed with innovative technological weapons that do not necessarily kill, but which render disenfranchised segments of society physically inactive, emotionally stupefied and incapable of meaningful thought is a goal of those who favor a “psycho-civilized society.” This is a frightening and all too realistic scenario. Whether by design or by default, such an outcome is nothing short of a dictatorship.’ Synopsis from David G. Guyatt’s SOME ASPECTS OF ANTI-PERSONNEL ELECTROMAGNETIC WEAPONS].

1 | 2

https://havepenwillwrite.wordpress.com/

My dad, a retired United Nations' diplomat, entertained hopes for a 'bright future' for me. "An ambassador," he avowed; "a plenipotentiary, to make us all proud!" As my grades seemed to be plummeting in step with the higher levels of classes I was (more...)

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.