Tag Archives: the US

Aug 20 2014

The Founding Fathers Fought the Revolutionary War to Stop the Type of Militarized Police We Now Have In the U.S.


Yes they did and John Locke explained back than how it can be justified!

Aug 20 2014

A Neutral Guide to Net Neutrality


It will not be long untill there are no freedoms left!

Pundit Planet's avatarpundit from another planet

Stephanie-Crets-portraitFor SingleHop, Stephanie Crets writes: Net Neutrality has been the topic of intense conversation recently, as the FCC solicits and considers public comments about how to regulate Internet traffic. We’ve put together the overview below to help you understand the issues and players that influence the way we use the Internet daily for business, research, entertainment, and social activities.nanotube.computerx299

Net Neutrality Overview

Net Neutrality refers to the idea that all data on the Internet should be treated equally by Internet Service Providers (ISPs). For most of the Internet’s history, ISPs generally did not distinguish between the various types of content that flow through their networks, whether web pages, email, or other forms of information. In the 1990s and early 2000s, the few ISPs that tried to block certain types of data faced strong opposition from consumers, tech companies, and regulators.

With the rise of bandwidth-heavy services such…

View original post 334 more words

Aug 20 2014

DHS Warns of “Domestic Violent Extremists” Targeting Government Officials and Law Enforcement


I’m not sure when disagreeing with the government was a criminal offense?

Aug 18 2014

New Army Manual Calls for the Use of Lethal Force Against Peaceful Protesters


New Army Manual Calls for the Use of Lethal Force Against Peaceful Protesters. Keep in Mind that in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) there is language that allows the Present to define what “terror” is and use deadly force in America at his sole discretion!

Re-Post from The Common Sense Show 18 Aug, 2014 by Dave Hodges

The new Army manual, known as ATP 3-39.33, provides discussion and techniques about civil disturbances and crowd control operations that occur in the continental United States (CONUS) and outside the continental United States (OCONUS).

This document, just published this past Friday, August 15, 2014, promises to change the way the “authorities” deal with protesters, even peaceful ones. The consequences of ATP 39.33 could prove deadly for protesters. Further, the provisions of this Army manual could prove to be the end of the First Amendment right to peaceably assemble.

On August 15, 2014, the U.S. Army published and released the Army-Civil Disturbances Manual-2014. The contents are frightening and should be offensive to American citizen.

Army-CivilDisturbances-2014

In section 1-2., the manual states that “Civil unrest may range from simple, nonviolent protests that address specific issues, to events that turn into full-scale riots“. This section of the manual clearly states that protesting is a right protected by the Constitution. However, the authorities leave themselves an out to “legally” engage in lethal force toward protesters when the manual states that “peaceful protests can turn into full-scale riots” and field commanders have the right to make that determination. Subsequently, all protests, peaceful or not, need to be managed by the potential for violence. In other words, all protests are to be considered to be violent and handled accordingly. This certainly explains the violent manhandling of the media by the DHS controlled and militarized police in Ferguson, MO.
Posse Comitatus Is Violated

On the surface, the Posse Comitatus Act (18 USC 1385) act should prevent the Army from deploying the troops in the midst of a protest that is not on the scale of something like the 1992 LA Riots. However, the Army claims exemption from Posse Comitatus in the four following areas.

10 USC 331. When a state is unable to control domestic violence and they have requested federal assistance, the use of the militia or Armed Forces is authorized.

10 USC 332. When ordinary enforcement means are unworkable due to unlawful obstructions or rebellion against the authority of the United States, use of the militia or Armed Forces is authorized.

10 USC 333. When a state cannot or will not protect the constitutional rights of the citizens, due to domestic violence or conspiracy to hinder execution of State or Federal law, the use of the militia or Armed Forces is authorized.

House Joint Resolution 1292. This resolution directs all departments of the U.S. government, upon request of the Secret Service, to assist in carrying out its statutory duties to protect government officials and major political candidates from physical harm.

With regard to 10 USC 331, if the local authorities have lost control in the midst of a profound display of domestic violence (e.g. LA Riots), most Americans support the use of National Guard or the military. However, in 10 USC 332, 333 and House Joint Resolution 1292 are ripe with exceptions which opens the door to federal authorities abusing the public for exercising their Constitutional right to protest.

In 10 USC 332, the phrase “unlawful obstructions or rebellion against the authority of the United States, use of the militia or Armed Forces is authorized” and this permits the federal government from being demonstrated against. An act of demonstration, or the most benign demonstrations of civil disobedience gives the government the authority to take “deadly action” against the public because there are no clear distinctions on when the use of lethal and nonlethal force is appropriate (see the two charts displayed below).

murietta-2

In 10 USC 333, any disruption of federal law can be decisively dealt with by the federal government. The phrase “…conspiracy to hinder execution of State or Federal law, the use of the militia or Armed Forces is authorized” is a telling passage of this Army document. If 10 USC 333 is applied to the letter of the written Army policy, the protesters who recently objected to illegal aliens being deposited in Murietta, California, could be subject to deadly force. Further, the protesters in Ferguson could be subject to the use of lethal force as well (Again, see the charts below).

The next time a community decides that it does not want to accept illegal immigrants, or protest the shooting of an unarmed 18 year old, they could be met by the following:

swat-team-ferguson-890x395_c

SWAT Team

protest-no-more

“I feel threatened. No more protests”.

The fourth exception claimed by the Army with regard to the Army’s right to violate Posse Comitatus, is presented to the American people under the veil of the need to protect politicians.

House Resolution 1292 claims any protest which makes a public official feel “threatened” would be illegal and subject to intervention by the U.S. Army. Hypothetically, if 100 protesters were to gather outside of Senator John McCain’s office in Phoenix, would that be enough to trigger a violent response by the Army? If McCain says he feels threatened, regardless if his claims are legitimate or not, it most certainly would justify the strongest response possible from the Army. Therefore, all a politician has to do is to say they feel threatened by any gathering to have the gathering dispersed and the protesters dealt with in any manner seen fit by the field commander. Make no mistake about it, this is the end of the First Amendment’s right peaceably assemble.
Army Depictions On How Best to Kill An American Citizen Who Expresses Disagreement with the Government

Do you remember the uproar when DHS was caught distributing target practicing sheets of pregnant women to be used for DHS agents when they were engaged in target practicing?

dhs-target-2

And of course, I am certain that you recall the use of an elderly person’s image to be used by DHS agents for the same purpose. The implication is clear; The American people are the new terrorists.

dhs-target-1

Below, is the graphic depiction of the Army’s version of a terrorist and worse yet, there are instructions on how to best maim and kill an American citizen who is engaged in their Constitutional right to protest

army-trauma-chart-268x300

army-use-of-lethal-force-300x220

The second chart is a sample guideline on when the application of lethal force is appropriate to be applied to protesters. Please note the ambiguity with regard to the application of lethal force. It is also noteworthy to point out that the following chart provides for the planned use of snipers to target the perceived leaders of a protest. These procedures remind one of the events in Kiev prior to the ouster of the Russian-friendly Prime Minister. It would appear that CIA agents were beta testing these procedures in Kiev prior to the coup.
Conclusion

ATP 39.33 is quite clear in its intent which is to eliminate the act of protesting from the American landscape. More disturbingly, the right to summarily execute peaceful protesters is contained in this Army manual due to the purposeful ambiguity of when it is appropriate to use deadly force against protesters.This Army manual is an example of hard core, in-your-face martial law befitting the most violent regimes in the history of the planet.

There is another message contained in ATP 39.33 and that is the clear anticipation that the American people are going to feel the need to be protesting in earnest in the foreseeable future. What exactly are the American people going to feel compelled to protest that remains unspecified in this manual? Could it be resistance to mandatory Ebola vaccinations? Could we be looking at food riots in the future? Will it be a currency collapse that puts Americans in the street? Will America rise up and say no to the plans for World War III and the coming conscription of both potential military personnel and a civilian labor slave force as described under Executive Order 13603?

Not only should this document be a frightening wake-up call for all Americans, it should also serve as a warning for what is to come.

Aug 18 2014

Breaking: Nuclear Sabotage in Europe?


Re-Posted from POWERLINE originaly Posted on August 18, 2014 by Steven Hayward

Here’s a curious story out of Belgium that is receiving no media attention (outside a few mentions in the specialized press) in the US:

Belgian Doel-4 Nuclear Reactor Closed Till Year-End

PARIS, Aug 14 (Reuters) – Belgian energy company Electrabel said its Doel 4 nuclear reactor would stay offline at least until the end of this year after major damage to its turbine, with the cause confirmed as sabotage. . .

The shutdown of Doel 4′s nearly 1 gigawatt (GW) of electricity generating capacity as well as closures of two other reactors (Doel 3 and Tihange 2) for months because of cracks in steel reactor casings adds up to just over 3 GW of Belgian nuclear capacity that is offline, more than half of the total. . .

Energy experts have raised the spectre of possible blackouts this winter and say Belgium will have to boost interconnection capacity with neighbouring countries to prevent power shortages.

A GDF Suez spokesman confirmed Belgian press reports about suspicion of sabotage.

“There was an intentional manipulation,” he said, adding that somebody had tampered with the system used for emptying oil from the Alstom-made turbine.

He said no outsiders had penetrated into the plant but declined to say whether an employee could have purposely caused the leak, as has been reported in some Belgian media.

He said Electrabel had filed a complaint and that the Belgian police had started an investigation.

According to a separate report in the Belgian press, Belgian anti-terrorism investigators are working on the case.

Meanwhile, a 1-gigawatt power plant is significant for a country of Belgium’s size, and it will be worth seeing whether this leads to increased electricity output from conventional sources in Germany and elsewhere to make up the slack (with the consequent increases in greenhouse gas emissions). The fact that blackouts are possible as a result of this shows the narrow capacity margins Europe operates under right now. Coming soon to a state near you?

Aug 18 2014

Confirmed “NO BULLETS IN Big Mike’s BACK” – Mike Brown Family Autopsy Released “Mr. Brown, 18, was also shot four times in right arm, all the bullets were fired into his front”….


Lets see how much play this gets are whether Holder will say its faked!

Aug 18 2014

BREAKING – Ferguson Explodes, Local McDonalds Swarmed With Rioters, Shots Fired, Molotov Cocktails Thrown, Police Under Attack, Officer Down…


Its what the thugs do!

Aug 18 2014

Thoughts on the Ritual Now Taking Place in Ferguson, Missouri


Re-Posted from POWERLINE posted on August 17, 2014 by John Hinderaker

Eight days ago, a Ferguson, Missouri police officer named Darren Wilson shot and killed Michael Brown, a young but very large (6′ 4″, 300 pounds) African-American, under circumstances that remain murky. Since then, a ritual with which we have become tiresomely familiar has unfolded: demonstrations that turned into riots, Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson–still!–descending on the scene, pleas for peace, intervention of federal authorities, calls for reappraisal of American race relations. Followed by more riots and looting.

We have been here before, too many times. But why? What is so special, so symbolic, about the death of Michael Brown? In the month before the Brown case exploded on the nation’s front pages, 40 people were murdered in Chicago, a large majority of them black. This led to no demonstrations or riots, no news coverage outside Chicago, no appearances by Sharpton and Jackson. So what made the death of Michael Brown so newsworthy?

Two factors: first, Brown was killed by a white man; second, the white man was a police officer. But here we come to a fork in the road. Was this particular death noteworthy because it was typical of so many others, or because it was so rare? Evidently the latter. Last time I checked the numbers, there were about 15 times as many instances where blacks murdered whites as where whites murdered blacks. Why do we never have riots over the murder of a white person by a black man? Such events happen, relatively speaking, all the time.

As for the fact that Brown was shot by a white police officer under circumstances deemed dubious, this is a particularly rare occurrence. So unusual that every time it happens, as best I can tell, it becomes a national news story. In this particular instance, the press (along with many residents of Ferguson and the St. Louis area) leaped to the assumption that Brown was an innocent victim, killed in a hail of gunfire as he fled from the police, or as he turned to surrender. The New Yorker wrote:

[Brown] was eighteen years old, walking down a street in Ferguson, Missouri, from his apartment to his grandmother’s, at 2:15 on a bright Saturday afternoon. He was, for a young man, exactly where he should be—among other things, days away from his first college classes.

That was how Brown was first introduced to the public. Only later did it come out that he was not, in fact, walking “from his apartment to his grandmother’s,” nor was he “exactly where he should be.” Rather, he was fleeing after robbing a convenience store and assaulting a store clerk. Liberals now say that this fact is irrelevant. But then, why was it so important to tell us that Brown was just walking to is grandmother’s house and was about to start college?

Was Brown an innocent victim? We still don’t know. The Ferguson Police Department has not released any detailed statement from its officer, Darren Wilson. Amazingly, given all that has transpired, the riots and the commentary, we don’t know why he shot Brown. A possible clue emerged yesterday, as a recording came to light in which an eyewitness said that Brown started to retreat from the police car, but then “doubled back” and “kept coming toward him.”

Wilson might have shot a fleeing Brown repeatedly in an act of unwarranted, almost insane violence, but that seems highly unlikely. The truth, while almost certainly more complicated, is still unknown. An autopsy may shed partial light. How many times was Brown shot? In the front or the back? From what approximate distance? And was he hopped up on meth or some other drug, that might have caused him irrationally to steal a box of cigars, attack a store clerk, and charge an armed policeman? These questions may explain why Eric Holder has ordered a second autopsy to be conducted under auspices of the political arm of the Democratic Party.

Given those uncertainties, and given the rarity of such incidents–white officers killing blacks under doubtful circumstances–what accounts for the media hysteria and the riots? Why does this incident–a tragedy, to be sure, but one among many–merit such an extraordinary degree of attention?

The answer lies in the political realm. A great deal of power–and, sadly, a great deal of money–turns on the perpetuation of certain myths. Chief among them is the myth of black victimization by whites. The killing of Michael Brown is deemed to be emblematic of something, but what? The most common answer is, the way in which our legal system discriminates against African-Americans. But this makes little sense. Darren Wilson was not acting on behalf of the legal system when he shot Brown. Rightly or wrongly, he evidently felt threatened and acted in what he thought was self-defense. The judicial system will be far harder on Wilson than it ever would have been on Brown.

Although there is no apparent connection to the Brown case, it is true that African-Americans are disproportionately charged and convicted of crimes. But that is because they disproportionately commit crimes. The black homicide rate is eight times the white rate. We know from victims’ reports that the frequent prosecution and conviction of blacks is due to the fact that they commit so many crimes. Scott has done as much as anyone to report on this fact. The idea that the judicial system discriminates against African-Americans is a myth.

But think how much depends on perpetuation of the myth. The Democratic Party desperately needs racial polarization. It can’t win national elections without a ridiculous proportion of African-American votes–perhaps as much as 90%. No other ethnic or demographic group votes so monolithically. It is, frankly, unnatural. Yet the Democratic Party needs that absurd level of polarization to continue. So what does it do? Its reporters and politicians gin up controversies like the Brown case to instill fear and paranoia in blacks. How else can the Democrats expect voters to overlook its failed policies and continue to toe the party line?

This is why the Obama administration lost little time falling in with the protesters, rioters and looters. Barack Obama has not yet said that Michael Brown looked like the son he never had–probably not because the physical resemblance is implausible, but because he has already used that line. No matter: everyone knows whose side the administration is on, and it isn’t Darren Wilson’s, even though Wilson’s story is still unknown. There is way too much power and money at stake to wait for the facts to be known before choosing sides.

Aug 18 2014

Who watches the watchers?


One does have to wonder!

Aug 18 2014

Famous Law Professor: Charges Against Rick Perry Are Bogus… Here’s Why


Once we start doing this in more than one place than the republic is gone!

deacon303's avatarWhiskey Tango Foxtrot

The charges are pretty obviously politically motivated, with even many liberals calling the charges bogus, including law professor Alan Dershowitz, according to Newsmax.

Dershowitz, who is admittedly not a fan of Perry’s, nevertheless said he is “outraged” by the indictments.  He said they are politically motivated, and a part of a “dangerous trend” of people using courts instead of the ballot box to effect political change.

“Everybody, liberal or conservative, should stand against this indictment,” Dershowitz said. “If you don’t like how Rick Perry uses his office, don’t vote for him.”

Dershowitz said that indictments against political opponents is something that is done in third-world totalitarian countries, and has no place in the United States.

“In America, you vote against them…this should be up to the voters. There is no room in America for abuse of office charges, and this has to stop once and for all. This is a…

View original post 179 more words