August 9, 2010
Do you remember when the FBI used to be an ethical, highly respected police agency with only the purest of intentions? Neither do I.
As far back as I recall, the FBI was the butt of jokes, jeered and sneered for its incompetence, bureaucracy, and extortionist approaches to law enforcement. Lately, though, the organization has been building a well-deserved reputation for being a bunch of out-of-touch sociopaths.
Case in point– FBI Director Robert Mueller has been recently made to explain in front of the press why so many of his agents cheated on an exam of the Bureau’s most-important regulatory policies.
You see, the FBI ordered all of its agents to take a compliance exam, ensuring that they understand the rules for conducting surveillance on Americans without evidence of criminal wrongdoing.
I’m not even going to address the obvious issue of conducting surveillance without evidence of criminal wrongdoing… but the fact that so many agents cheated on the exam is a testament to the cavalier attitude with which they treat the civil liberties of Americans.
Not to be outdone by its own perversity, the FBI followed up that stunt with something to prove unequivocally to all Americans how completely out of touch the Bureau really is. Instead of fighting terrorists and organized crime, the FBI is now focusing its resources on…. Wikipedia.
In a letter dated July 22nd to the free online encyclopedia, the Bureau has demanded that Wikipedia remove an image of the FBI’s seal from its website. The FBI asserts that the image facilitates “deliberate and unwitting” reproduction of the seal, and must be removed.
Considering that any knucklehead who watches an FBI news conference on CSPAN, or does a simple search for “FBI seal” (which returns over 500,000 results), or takes a tour of the FBI headquarters can get an up-close and personal view of the seal, I wouldn’t exactly consider this the world’s best kept secret.
Clearly, though, Wikipedia poses a major security risk and needs to be stopped.
We live in a time when any element of any situation can be construed as a threat, including a teenage girl blowing bubbles within a 5-meter vicinity of police during G20 protests… or an innocent Londoner walking home from work, also during G20 protests.
Even when police agencies’ responses to perceived security threats border on the insane or criminal, heads rarely roll. There is an unspoken bond of protection between police agencies and the masters they serve– and no, I’m not talking about ‘the people.’
Anyone who thinks that the primary responsibility of police agencies is to keep the people safe is absolutely kidding himself. These organizations exist to keep the people in check, not to protect them. In fact, they exist to protect the political leadership from the people.
Sure, in their spare time they’ll pound the streets catching prowlers, speeders, and drug dealers, stuffing the prison system full of nonviolent offenders. But make no mistake, when the bureaucrats come to town, police agencies will quickly shift their focus back to fear and intimidation tactics.
The quid pro quo is extremely twisted. The politicians get their backs scratched, keeping protestors at bay and ensuring that everyone is afraid of the government. In exchange, the police agencies get their backs scratched– expanded powers and authority, impunity, and public defense in front of the media.
Western economies are becoming more and more like police states. Unless you plan on living your life in the most unnaturally sterile way possible, I think everyone in these places should count on the very high probability of a run-in with the government at some point in the future, whether it’s the cops, tax authorities, or some regulatory agency.
It’s not enough that all of these police agencies have the power to confiscate all of your assets with no evidence of wrongdoing whatsoever, and then force you to defend yourself without any resources to do so. Now the trend is against you personally, not just your assets.
Every time I read about these sorts of things, I’m thankful to be living outside of this system by planting multiple flags. I think anyone who lives, works, invests, banks, holds assets, etc. in the same country of their citizenship without having a multiple flags plan is setting themselves up for trouble.
If you’re not sure where to start with your own plan, I would definitely encourage you to pick up a copy of Going Global if you haven’t done so already; this is the special report that I recently co-authored with some of the folks at Casey Research.
Going Global is a detailed multiple flags overview that explains all of the key concepts of offshoring– where should you get started looking for second passports, international property, foreign bank accounts, and more. Consider it your quick start guide to planting multiple flags.