Solicitation for “role-players” confirms DoD training in Boston on heels of JADE HELM 15

boston jade helm

CRISIS ACTORS CALLED TO DUTY

BY SHEPARD AMBELLAS

VIRGINIA BEACH, Virginia (INTELLIHUB) — After the Sandy Hook School Shooting and the Boston Bombing took to center stage in the press well-researched investigative journalists along with portions of the general public who did their due diligence began to realize that “crisis actors” or “role-players” were being used by the mainline press to trick the sheeple.

Continue reading

Advertisements

US airport screeners missed 95% of weapons, explosives in undercover tests

airport-640x397

Transportation Security Administration screeners allowed banned weapons and mock explosives through airport security checkpoints 95 percent of the time, according to the agency’s own undercover testing.

ABC News reported the results on Monday, but Ars could not independently confirm them. According to ABC News, a Homeland Security Inspector General report showed that agents failed to detect weapons and explosives in 67 out of 70 undercover operations. The report said:

Continue reading

Homeland Security is a Corporate Welfare Scam

Department+Homeland+Security+Headquarters+TpSfGFx0T7-l

By Geoffrey Pike

With the current political saga wrapping up of the possible shutdown of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), we have to ask whether this was really a debate or a show.

I’ll let you in on a little secret regarding the funding of the DHS …

I knew there was not going to be any shutdown of the DHS, or at least anything of any significance.

Even if there had been a shutdown, it probably would have resembled the government shutdown of a couple of years ago where almost nothing changed.

How did I know the DHS would not be shut down? You just have to follow the money. Continue reading

Homeland Security’s New $3.9 Billion Headquarters

The construction site of the Department of Homeland Security's new headquarters, Feb. 15, 2012, in Washington, DC

President Barack Obama is trying to solve big problems in his proposed 2014 budget. His efforts to curtail entitlement spending have gotten most of the headlines. But he also seems determined to complete the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s new headquarters, the largest federal construction project since the Pentagon rose in the 1940s. The cost: $3.9 billion.

The project would unite at a single location nearly all DHS’s 22 divisions devoted to thwarting terrorists and safeguarding the populace from natural and manmade disasters. The site is the campus of St. Elizabeth Hospital, a former federal asylum that was once the home of poet Ezra Pound and John Hinckley, Ronald Reagan’s would-be assassin. There would be 4.5 million square feet of workspace in the new facility and ample employee parking.

The project’s supporters say the price tag is justified. They say it’s not easy to get the various DHS divisions to operate in concert with each other if they are scattered throughout the capital area. At the 2009 groundbreaking, DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano herself made the casefor the agency’s costly new digs: “It will help us have meetings. It will help us create a culture of ‘one DHS.’”

It didn’t take long for the project to become mired in politics. House Republicans, a number of whom see the DHS as an inefficient and fiscally profligate bureaucracy, were loath to fund the new headquarters fully. A new headquarters for the U.S. Coast Guard, which involved more excavation than any real estate development in the District of Columbia’s history, moved forward. The rest of the endeavor languished, becoming a symbol of Washington dysfunction. The tighter integration that Napolitano promised also remained a work in progress. The DHS is on the U.S. Government Accountability Office’s “high risk” list, a distinction it shares with such troubled federal agencies as the U.S. Postal Service.

Now Obama is trying to ensure that the DHS headquarters eventually rises. On Wednesday, the president included $367 million in his budget to continue construction.

Getting the money won’t be easy. In February, one of the DHS’s more persistent naysayers, U.S. Representative John Mica, a Florida Republican, boasted about how he and his fellow party members had curtailed the project.He said he would also like to dismantle much of the DHS.

He’d better act swiftly. If the White House ever gets all the DHS’s divisions on one campus, nobody will want to move them again.

 

 

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-04-12/the-department-of-homeland-securitys-new-3-dot-9b-headquarters

MD Residents to Pay New “Rain Tax” For Rain That Falls on Their Property

RainYesterday we reported that Wesley Snipes was finally released from prisonafter serving a 3 year sentence for refusing to pay the government extortion racket known as “taxation”.  If you had a difficult time seeing through the scam of taxation with that story, hopefully this one can show you how taxation is blatant theft and thuggery.

10 Maryland countiesincluding the one that I live in will now be taxing people for how much rain falls on their property.  How much area is paved on their property, and how big their deck is will be primary factors in this new taxation scheme.

According to a local newspaper:

In 2010 the Obama administration’s Environmental Protection Agency ordered Maryland to reduce stormwater runoff into the Chesapeake Bay so that nitrogen levels fall 22 percent and phosphorus falls 15 percent from current amounts. The price tag: $14.8 billion.

And where do we get the $14.8 billion? By taxing so-called “impervious surfaces,” anything that prevents rain water from seeping into the earth (roofs, driveways, patios, sidewalks, etc.) thereby causing stormwater run off. In other words, a rain tax.And who levies this new rain tax? Witness how taxation, like rain, trickles down through the various pervious levels of government until it reaches the impervious level — me and you.

The EPA ordered Maryland to raise the money (an unfunded mandate), Maryland ordered its 10 largest counties to raise the money (another unfunded mandate) and, now, each of those counties is putting a local rain tax in place by July 1. So, if you live in Montgomery, Prince George’s, Howard, Anne Arundel, Carroll, Harford, Charles, Frederick, Baltimore counties or Baltimore city, you’ll be paying a rain tax on your next property tax bill.

The article goes on to explain the government will survey peoples property using drones and satellite imagery.

Daily Finance Explained that:

Homeowners will bear the brunt of the rain tax: of the $14.8 billion to be raised — $482 million each year until 2025 — about three-quarters will come from residential property owners. The rate is expected to start at $100 a year for most homeowners, although that could rise. The only rain tax shelter: credits and exemptions for property owners who follow stormwater “best practices.”  How the money will be spent is another murky situation.

As i reported last week, while the government uses the EPA to tax drivers and regulate how people are landscaping in their back yards, that same government has uncontrollable biological weapons sitting all over the country like toxic time bombs.

Most specifically, the area in question, the Chesapeake bay is terribly polluted with toxic chemical, biological and radioactive waste that was released from the Lockheed Martin facility in Middle River MD, and the Aberdeen Proving Grounds military base in Aberdeen MD, since around the time of World War 2.  Both of these facilities have unleashed a stew of toxic waste into rivers that lead directly into the bay, even going as far as storing radio active waste under the seabed for decades.  I will be doing a full series of reports on these toxic waste sites in the coming weeks and months, stay tuned to intellihub.com for more information.

 

Intellihub.com

When Did Peaceful Protests Become ‘Anti-Government Rallies’?

bullshit

(Activist Post) -I love my children more than anything in the world, as I’m sure all of the parents reading this can relate.  It’s a strange way to start a post about free speech and word manipulation, but I assure you it’s relevant.

The recent story of a couple kidnapping their own children from a court-appointed custodian after having their parental rights stripped has jarred me to the core. This could easily be me, or you.

What did the parents do that was so awful that they lost permanent parental rights of their boys?

ABC reports:

According to earlier information, the couple lost custody of the two boys after attending an anti-government rally in Louisiana. The father was charged with possession of drugs (pot) in the presence of the children. (my emphasis and additions).

What really shocked me in this story was the use of “anti-government rally” in place of peaceful protest.  Aren’t all protests for redress of grievances “anti-government”?

I realized that this was done very deliberately, and not the first time I’ve seen this subtle tactic used to bastardize the First Amendment right to free speech. In fact, it is now frequently used in place of “demonstrations” or “protests” in news headlines everywhere.  Google “anti-government rally” and have fun scrolling.

It seems that when the establishment dislikes the message of a given demonstration they call it an “anti-government rally” ever-so-slightly invoking thoughts of Klan rallies and all the emotional triggers that come with it. Just like how all pro-Second Amendment demonstrations are referred to as “gun rallies”.

Compare this rhetoric of the Arab Spring or Uprising, or Occupy Wall Street demonstrations. Anti-government rally was NEVER used by the establishment to describe those protests. So when it is used, its negative connotation is clearly being used for a purpose.

But for what? To change the definition of peaceful protesters to something more insidious? Or to soil free speech altogether? Or both?

The right to peaceably assemble has already become criminalized.  People protesting too close to public buildings in America are now felons thanks to the passage of HR 347, the “Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011,” or “Trespass Act.”

It seems that was the beginning of demonizing protests as anti-government.

In a free society there is nothing wrong with protesting the government’s actions, or even in the term anti-government. Yet, since the war-on-terror-industrial complex seems to have run out of Islamic villains to demonize, detain indefinitely, torture, or drone bomb, a new enemy had to be invented to keep the money flowing and civil liberties suppressed.

The US Justice Department and Homeland Security have been cleverly, deliberately, and methodically swapping in the “anti-government” label for terrorist. Without ever really defining what anti-government means, they both officially state that “anti-government” Americans are now the biggest threat in the war on terror.

A Fusion Center in Arkansas, which coordinates anti-terror activity between the DHS and local law enforcement, recently announced that they don’t spy on all Americans without a warrant, just the ones on the anti-government list.

How comforting, since the label is conveniently broad enough that potentially anyone who complains about the government, a policy, or a politician could be on the anti-government watch list. This is nearly anyone who’s even remotely paying attention by the way. And it seems these poor parents in the story above made it to this dreaded list.

Now they have been pushed to extreme measures by a ridiculously intrusive government that would have your kids, too, if they caught you with weed at an anti-prohibition rally. I don’t know about you, but I’m not sure I would have the willpower not to tie up the custodian and kidnap my own children if I was an actor in this made-for-TV movie.

I’m radically opposed to the policy that led to these children being stripped from their parents, which must make me anti-government.  I’m disgusted that marijuana, a perfectly safe and helpful plant, remains illegal while alcohol freely flows. Strike two for being anti-government. And I despise that my own government spies on me, suppresses my free speech rights, and lumps me in with violent extremists. Strike three.

Add me to your list. I’ll see you at the next rally.

Connecticut: State passes sweeping gun laws! More than 100 weapon types banned. You now have to register and have a state issued certificate to buy guns, ammo…

(investmentwatchblog.com) Newtown parents, including Mark Barden, spoke at the state capitol building on Monday to call for a complete ban on high-capacity ammunition magazines

Lawmakers in the US state of Connecticut have agreed to a sweeping set of gun restrictions, including a ban on new high-capacity magazines.

The proposal requires background checks on all gun sales and expands the state’s assault weapons ban.

It comes as new federal gun measures appear to have stalled in Congress.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-21997806

 

HARTFORD, Conn. (CBSNewYork) — Connecticut state lawmakers came to an agreement Monday on what they said will become some of the nation’s toughest gun control laws.

As CBS 2?s Lou Young reported, the deal included a ban on high-capacity ammunition magazines, such as the one that was used in the Sandy Hook Elementary School Massacre in Newtown. The deal also calls for a new registry for existing high-capacity magazines, and background checks that would apply to private gun sales.

http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2013/04/01/connecticut-lawmakers-reach-deal-on-gun-control-laws/

Connecticut lawmakers announced a deal Monday on what they called some of the toughest gun laws in the country that were proposed after the December mass shooting at a school in Newtown. Some highlights from the proposal:

GUN LAWS

—Ban sales of high-capacity ammunition magazines;

—Background checks for private gun sales;

http://www.boston.com/news/education/2013/04/01/conn-proposals-guns-other-items-after-newtown/0Qn1nJQI3223inrmQWfMFI/story.html

Connecticut Lawmakers Agree to Gun Control Bill – Bans Magazines over 10 rounds, Requires a State Issued Permit to Buy Ammo, & Mental Checks!

Connecticut Lawmakers Agree to Gun Control Bill
Bans Magazines over 10 rounds
Requires a State Issued Permit to Buy Ammo
Must submit to universal background and Mental Checks
Bans any weapon with any “assault weapon” characteristics (pistol grips or anything that “looks scary”)

http://offgridsurvival.com/connecticutgunban/

Conn. lawmakers unveil bipartisan gun control plan

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20130402/DA5D80EG2.html

Communists Stand in Defiance of Bill of Rights

(fromthetrenchesworldreport.com) The communist insurgents within the United States continue their push to disarm we American nationals, even to the point of presenting poll numbers which have been proven to be false via their own previous admissions.  Captain Mark Kelly, the husband of ex-Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, was making the rounds over the weekend, spouting his sedition while trying to present himself as some kind of American hero.

Let’s look at this logically and ask the question. Does the government grant the people their rights?  Was the Bill of Rights written by the government to outline the privileges they were to bestow upon us, said privileges of course to be revoked, altered, or regulated at the government’s whim?

This is the position the government would like to establish.  It is however absolutely a fiction.  This government did not grant us our rights, as all power within this nation resides in the people.  We granted the government limited power, which they have distorted.  Our rights are inalienable, they cannot be removed as we are born with them and they stay with us until our deaths.

The 2nd Article to the Bill of Rights states in part: “The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”  This is an absolute statement and there is no way it can be misconstrued.

Infringe is defined as: “Act so as to limit or undermine; encroach on”, therefore any government action that alters, in the smallest degree, any American nationals right to arm, as he or she sees fit, is by definition an infringement and is not law, but rather an act of sedition.

The infringements that have been levied upon our Bill of Rights are too numerous to count.  These infringements have in fact brought us to the precipice of slavery.  The only thing standing in the way of a complete takeover of the people by the government is our possession of our firearms which have not yet been made a part of the infringements.

This is not just about our 2nd Article right.  This is about our freedom and liberty, et.al.  A person who is governed by another person is not free.  This is why our Republic emphasizes self governess of, by, and for the individual.

Mark Kelly spouted the lie that 92% of the American people support universalbackground checks, which can only be accomplished through universal registration.  Again, this is a lie, but even if it were not, it would not matter.  If 99.999% supported it, no one of us can alter the rights of another.

Our employees in the government are forbidden by law to advocate in any way to alter our Bill of Rights. The 1934 Gun Control Act was and is an infringement, and tell me how bold would these actors within this police state be in attacking our homes, if we still had our machine guns and hand grenades?  The 1968 Gun Control Act was and is an infringement, as the 2nd Article to the Bill of Rights does not say “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed except for those who are felons. “

These communists are parasites of the lowest degree and have sleazed their way into our lives in taking our kindness for weakness, said kindness fostered in reality via stupidity as the most feared threat to our safety is an armed government wielding tyranny over an unarmed population.

These present infringements have been put forth for no other reason than to segment another portion of our population to be without their inalienable rights.  And with the new mental health aspect, hell you do not even have to be accused of harming anyone.  Now, instead of being dispossessed of our rights via conviction, which again is unconstitutional, we are to be disarmed for what could happen: an ‘if’ or a ‘maybe’.

We must stand firm in our defiance of universal background check registration and let these communists know that not only are they going to cease and desist in their attempt at further infringement, but we demand that all past infringements be removed as a precursor to their trials for sedition.

God bless the Republic, death to the international corporate mafia, we shall prevail.

The Anger Phase Of Humanity Is Coming

Do not use Safety Deposit Boxes

(dinarvets.com) U.S DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HAS TOLD BANKS – IN WRITING – IT MAY INSPECT SAFE DEPOSIT BOXES WITHOUT WARRANT AND SEIZE ANY GOLD, SILVER, GUNS OR OTHER VALUABLES IT FINDS INSIDE THOSE BOXES!

According to in-house memos now circulating, the DHS has issued orders to banks across America which announce to them that “under the Patriot Act” the DHS has the absolute right to seize, without any warrant whatsoever, any and all customer bank accounts, to make “periodic and unannounced” visits to any bank to open and inspect the contents of “selected safe deposit boxes.”

Further, the DHS “shall, at the discretion of the agent supervising the search, remove, photograph or seize as evidence” any of the following items “bar gold, gold coins, firearms of any kind unless manufactured prior to 1878, documents such as passports or foreign bank account records, pornography or any material that, in the opinion of the agent, shall be deemed of to be of a contraband nature.”

DHS memos also state that banks are informed that any bank employee, on any level, that releases “improper” “classified DHS Security information” to any member of the public, to include the customers whose boxes have been clandestinely opened and inspected and “any other party, to include members of the media” and further “that the posting of any such information on the internet will be grounds for the immediate termination of the said employee or employees and their prosecution under the Patriot Act.” Safety deposit box holders and depositors are not given advanced notice when failed banks shut their doors.

If people have their emergency money in a safe deposit box or an account in a bank that closes, they will not be allowed into the bank to get it out. They can knock on the door and beg to get in but the sheriff’s department or whoever is handling the closure will simply say “no” because they are just following orders.

Deposit box and account holders are not warned of the hazards of banking when they sign up. It is not until they need to get their cash or valuables out in a hurry that they find themselves in trouble.

Rules governing access to safe deposit boxes and money held in accounts are written into the charter of each bank. The charter is the statement of policy under which the bank is allowed by the government to do business. These rules are subject to change at any time by faceless bureaucrats who are answerable to no one. They can be changed without notice, without the agreement of the people, and against their will. People can complain but no one will care because this is small potatoes compared to the complaints that will be voiced when the executive order that governs national emergencies is enforced.

That order allows the suspension of habeas corpus and all rights guaranteed under the Bill of Rights.

A look at the fine print of the contract signed when a safety deposit box is opened reveals that in essence the signer has given to the bank whatever property he has put into that deposit box. When times are good people will be allowed open access to their safe deposit box and the property that is in it. This also applies to their bank accounts.

But when times get really bad, many may find that the funds they have placed on deposit and the property they thought was secured in the safe deposit box now belong to the bank, not to them. Although this was probably not explained to them when they signed their signature card, this is what they were agreeing to.

During the Great Depression in the early 1930’s people thought that many banks were going to fail. They were afraid they would lose their money so they went in mass to take it out, in what is known as a run on the banks. The government closed the banks to protect them from angry depositors who wanted their money back. Throughout history, governments have acted to protect the interests of banks and the wealthy people who own them, not the interests of depositors or box holders.

In a time of emergency, people will have no recourse if access to their safe deposit box and bank accounts is denied. If they are keeping money in a bank that would be needed in an emergency or in a time when credit is no longer free flowing, they may not be able to get it out of the bank. The emergency may occur at night or on a weekend or holiday when the bank is closed.

The solution is to take emergency cash or valuables out of the safe deposit box or bank account and secure them somewhere else, like in a home safe. An even better idea may be to close the safe deposit box account completely, letting someone else entertain the illusion of safety.

Americans have learned a few things since the Great Depression. They now have the FDIC to liquidate any failed banks.

The FDIC promises to set up a series of dates and times when safe deposit box renters can access their boxes by appointment to remove their property and surrender their keys. The FDIC also promises to mail bank customers an announcement of the dates for such events and include a question and answer page that addresses safe deposit box access.

The people have the FDIC to give them back the money they had on deposit that they were unable to get out of any failed bank that carries FDIC insurance. Sheila Bair, head of the FDIC, promises that depositor`s money will be available in 24 hours or less. But people should remember that the FDIC is just another bureaucracy, and it`s probably best not to rely on a bureaucracy in an emergency.

THE SAME HOLDS TRUE FOR STORAGE FACILITIES

DON’T PUT ANYTHING VALUABLE AND/OR NON-REPLACEABLE IN ANY BANK OR STORAGE FACILITY

 

Note: We’ve been asked to site sources for this article but we did not write it, the source in which it came from is at the top. Also see this,  http://investmentwatchblog.com/u-s-department-of-homeland-security-has-told-banks-in-writing-it-may-inspect-safe-deposit-boxes-without-warrant-and-sieze-any-gold-silver-guns-or-other-valuables-it-finds-inside-those-boxes/

Majority of U.S. Senators back President Obama’s ability to Kill American Citizens.

McCain(offgridsurvival.com) In case you missed what happened yesterday, because it was not covered by the Mainstream Media, Senator Rand Paul led a 12 hour filibuster of CIA Nominee John Brennan, after the White House refused to say they don’t have the authority to kill American Citizens on American Soil.

In what should have had 100% support by every member of the Senate, only managed to garner the support of a handful of senators. In fact this morning, the Senate, led by Sens. John McCain and Lindsey Graham, took to the Senate floor to denounce Rand Paul’s demands. Senator McCain said he was doing a “disservice” to the country.

A disservice to the country?

Since when is standing up for our right to live a disservice to the country? Every last one of these people needs to be voted the hell out of office. The fact that we couldn’t even get a majority of the U.S. Senate to agree that the President does not have the authority to Kill American Citizens on American Soil (without a trial), is an absolute travesty of justice. What a sad day it is for America when it’s even up for debate.

What the hell happened to America? The sad reality of what happened yesterday, on the Floor of the Senate, should send chills through the spines of every red blooded American. Can you believe we have come to a place where it’s now being debated whether or not the federal government can ignore the Constitution and kill Americans without a trail?

For the last couple of years we’ve highlighted the drone programs, the effort to disarm America, and how the Department of Homeland Security is stockpiling massive amounts of Ammunition. What some called wild conspiracy theories, don’t seem so wild anymore do they?

Senate Refuses to Pass Non-Binding Bill Saying President doesn’t have the right to Kill Americans

To bring the Filibuster to a close, Senator Rand Paul offered a non-binding resolution opposing the President’s ability to kill Americans in drone strikes on US soil. Something that should have received 100% support in the Senate, couldn’t even get enough votes to pass. We are living in a country where only a handful of our elected representatives seem to have a problem with our government conducting the targeted killing of American Citizens.

Democrat Senator Dick Durbin, speaking for the majority, was designated to say he objects to Paul’s non-binding resolution. The fact that a majority of the U.S. Senate could not even stand together in opposition to something as simple as opposing (in a non-binding resolution) the President’s ability to assassinate citizens in drone attacks on US soil is simply inexcusable.

This is not a Partisan Issue: Both Sides are to Blame

For those that want to claim this as a partisan issue, I want to remind people that both political parties, Democrats and Republicans, overwhelmingly supported President Obama’s ability to kill American Citizens without a trial. In fact, at the same time Rand Paul made his stand to say that, “No President has the right to say that he is judge, jury, and executioner”,  a huge number of Republican Senators decided to ignore what was going on in the Senate, and instead attended a swanky dinner with President Obama.

The Following Republicans decided it was more important to be seen eating dinner with the President than it was to Stand with Rand Paul and Support the Constitution and your right to live.

senatorsobamadinner

When asked this morning whether the president has the power to kill Americans here at home, Senator Lindsey Graham said “I find the question offensive, I do not believe that question deserves an answer.” Senator John McCain then went to the Senate floor and defended President Obama’s ability to kill American Citizens on American Soil, by arguing that America is part of the worldwide battlefield. He publicly stated that the President has the right to kill Americans (without a trial) who are deemed to be “enemies” of the country.

Obama DHS Purchases 2,700 Light-Armored Tanks to Go With Their 1.6 Billion Bullet Stockpile

(thegatewaypundit.com) This is getting a little creepy.
According to one estimate, since last year the Department of Homeland Security has stockpiled more than 1.6 billion bullets, mainly .40 caliber and 9mm.

DHS also purchased 2,700 Mine Resistant Armor Protected Vehicles (MRAP).
homeland security mrap

Modern Survival Blog reported:

The Department of Homeland Security (through the U.S. Army Forces Command) recently retrofitted 2,717 of these ‘Mine Resistant Protected’ vehicles for service on the streets of the United States.

Although I’ve seen and read several online blurbs about this vehicle of late, I decided to dig slightly deeper and discover more about the vehicle itself.

The new DHS sanctioned ‘Street Sweeper’ (my own slang due to the gun ports) is built by Navistar Defense (NavistarDefense.com), a division within the Navistar organization. Under the Navistar umbrella are several other companies including International Trucks, IC Bus (they make school buses), Monaco RV (recreational vehicles), WorkHorse (they make chassis), MaxxForce (diesel engines), and Navistar Financial (the money arm of the company).

DHS even released a video on their newly purchased MRAPs.
Via Pat Dollard:

The MRAP featured in this video is was in Albuquerque, New Mexico for Law Enforcement Day which was held at a local area Target Store. This MRAP is stationed in El Paso, Texas at The Homeland Security Investigations Office. MRAP is a Mine Resistant Armor Protected Vehicle.

 

 

Are the elites going into hiding?

1aabbc

(InvestmentWatch) -Pope “quits” first time in 600 years.

Rockefellers flee to Fiji after they “stripped the US Federal Reserve System  of all major assets, just as previously they had stripped Fort Knox of all  deliverable, non-tungsten, gold.”

http://lightworkersxm.wordpress.com/2013/02/11/more-cracks-and-clost-closing-going-on-rockfellers-scarper-to-fiji-all-eyes-on-nazi-queen-lizzie-2-as-pope-ratslinger-throws-the-towel-in-on-a-disgraceful-career-of-total-disgust/

Congress leaves town for a quote “LONG WEEKEND” with no deal struck.  Sequester hits the fan.

http://radio.foxnews.com/2013/02/28/congress-leaves-without-avoiding-sequester-video/

http://washingtonexaminer.com/congress-leaves-town-after-failing-to-stop-sequester/article/2522909

Head of DHS “quits” unexpectedly

“I extend my deepest appreciation to DHS Chief of Staff Noah Kroloff for his  over four years of service to the Department of Homeland Security and his eight  years of service to me while I served in Arizona as Governor and Attorney  General. Noah has been a trusted advisor, a good friend, and a superb Chief of  Staff to this department. Since January 2009, he has been instrumental in  establishing and guiding many of the department’s key initiatives,” wrote Napolitano, according to the email obtained by Mike Allen. – See more  at:  http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/chief-staff-out-dhs_704981.html#sthash.xzXvmCcp.dpuf

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/chief-staff-out-dhs_704981.html

Queen Lizzy cancels all engagements.

Dutch Queen Beatrix announced that she will abdicate on April 30  after 33 years as head of state,  clearing the way for her eldest son, Crown Prince Willem-Alexander, to become  the nation’s first king in more than a century.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/01/28/dutch-queen-beatrix-abdication/1871275/

This CANNOT be ignored. The list keeps growing. Something IS up. Time to  bring in the tomatoes.

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/nation_world/20130228_ap_benedictbecomes1stpopein600yearstoresign.html

– See more at:  http://investmentwatchblog.com/are-the-elite-going-into-hiding-pope-quits-head-of-dhs-quits-rockefellers-flee-to-fiji-queen-cancels-engagements-more-list-growing-daily/#sthash.IqeWU8II.dpuf Read more at http://investmentwatchblog.com/are-the-elite-going-into-hiding-pope-quits-head-of-dhs-quits-rockefellers-flee-to-fiji-queen-cancels-engagements-more-list-growing-daily/#WGHJptdc0ezxqSCK.99

Here are Homeland Security’s Top 5 Priorities for Suspicious Activity Reporting This Season

1a

(PublicIntelligence) -A document issued last month by the Department of Homeland Security identifies priorities for the collection of suspicious activity reports from local communities around the U.S.  The document describes “topics of interest” identified by DHS Intelligence and Analysis (DHS/I&A) analysts as priorities for the Winter 2013 period that should be utilized by “law enforcement, first responders, and other homeland security professionals” to improve their reporting of suspicious activity.  The topics of interest include examples of suspicious activities related to each topical area.  They are also accompanied by several tracking numbers identifying the activities within DHS/I&A’s system of Standing Intelligence Needs which “form the foundation for information collection activities within the Department and provide other Intelligence Community (IC) and Homeland Security Enterprise members the ability to focus their collection, analytic, and reporting assets in support of the homeland security mission.”  These numbers are often found in DHS and fusion center bulletins indicating a reported activity’s relation to standing intelligence needs determined by DHS/I&A.  The topics are not in order of importance and DHS/I&A reminds the reader that previous topics “remain relevant” and reports should still be submitted on those issues.

  • Threats to religious or cultural facilities including “verbal ortelephonic threats of violence” or “property damage, including vandalism or arson”.
  • Suspicious activities or incidents associated with state, local, tribal, territorial, or private sector computer networks and Web sites including “denial of service (DoS) attacks against Web sites”, “web page defacement” and “suspicious e-mails that install malware on the network”.
  • Suspicious activities or incidents associated with mass gatherings, and special events including “breaches or attempted intrusions at event locations or related venues”, suspicious “inquiries about security protocols for events or VIPs” and “incidents of suspicious acquisition of explosiveprecursor materials”.
  • Suspicious activities, queries, theft, sabotage, tampering, or vandalism within the transportation sector—including mass transit, aviation, maritime, ground and surface, rail, and pipeline systems including “unusual questions about routes, capacities, peak travel time, training, and security”.
  • Efforts to artfully conceal improvised explosive devices in innocuous items, such as satchels, backpacks, suitcases, jars, bottles, cans, shoes, clothing, parcels, or toys including “unsolicited or unusual parcels delivered from unfamiliar overseas addresses noting the identification of the sender and recipient and whether the recipient has reported multiple suspicious parcels in recent weeks or months.

 

Illegal immigrants being released from prison to save money on the eve of sequester

1aa

(RT)-Illegal immigrants are being released from US detention facilities ahead of looming federal budget cuts that would slash funding for the removal and detention of illegal aliens.

In an attempt to save money ahead of the automatic budget cuts, which are scheduled to take effect Friday, the detainees are being released in the US – even though they are facing the prospect of deportation.

 

For several days, Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has been opening their doors, sending off “low priority” detainees with little more than ankle bracelets and parole.

 

“All I can say is look, we’re doing our very best to minimize the impacts of sequester,” Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said in a press briefing Monday. “But there’s only so much I can do. I’m supposed to have 34,000 detention beds for immigration. How do I pay for those?”

 

The average daily cost of detaining an immigrant is $122 to $164 per detainee, the American Civil Liberties Union reports. In 2011, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) detained 429,000 immigrants, which is more than twice as much as the 202,000 that were detained in 2002. The National Immigration Forum estimates that it would cost the federal government only 30 cents to $14 per day to monitor a detainee on supervised release.

 

Illegal immigrants are often kept in prison-like conditions, with many of them reporting poor sanitation conditions, lack of medical services, and abusive treatment by detention personnel. Still, the government shovels out billions of dollars each year to house inmates using its 34,000 beds – money that could be saved if less immigrants were kept behind bars.

 

Earlier this month, DHS proposed a $5.65 billion budget for ICE. But the sequester has forced the agency to find alternate ways to keep track of illegals.

 

“In order to make the best use of our limited detention resources in the current fiscal climate and to manage our detention population under current congressionally mandated levels, ICE has directed field offices to review the detained population to ensure it is in line with available funding,” ICE spokeswoman Gillian Christensen said in a statement.

 

Christensen also confirmed that illegal immigrations are continuing to be deported at record levels and that cases against them will continue, even if they have been temporarily released. ICE claims that the Obama administration has expelled more immigrants than ever before and that the release of low-priority immigrants will only allow the agency to better focus on high-level offenders.

 

While advocacy groups largely applauded the decision to release low-priority illegal immigrants, they also expressed disappointment in the fact that it took looming budget cuts to force ICE to do so.

 

“The people being released today are people ICE could have released months – or in some cases, years – ago,” Mohammad Abdollahi, member of the Dreamer-led National Immigrant Youth Alliance, told the Huffington Post.

 

“It shouldn’t take a manufactured crisis in Washington to prompt our immigration agencies to actually take steps towards using government resources wisely or keeping families together,” Carolina Canizales of United We Dream told the New York Times.

 

But some opponents of the administration’s initiatives have condemned ICE for releasing illegal immigrants, concerned that the move is a political one made in support of letting more immigrants stay in the country.

 

One Republican aide who reviewed the DHS budget told the Washington Times than only about 5 percent of the ICE budget would be cut by the sequester and that savings could come from a cut in maintenance funds instead of releasing detainees.

“It is ludicrous for the administration to assert that the immediate release of thousands of already-apprehended illegal aliens and fugitives is the way to meet this target,” the aide said. “Clearly this is a political decision – not a financial one.”

DHS Use Police Depts to Gather Intel on Citizens & Label Them Extremist Threats

(From the Trenches) According to the White House Blog website, the Obama administration is working to “counter online radicalization” by “violent extremist groups” such as “al-Qaeda and its affiliates and adherents, violent supremacist groups, and violent ‘sovereign citizens’.”

The White House claims that “these groups use the Internet to disseminate propaganda, identify and groom potential recruits, and supplement their real-world recruitment” with “resources to propagate messages of violence and division.” Through the exploitation of “popular media, music videos and online video games”, allegedly there are “countless opportunities “to draw targets into private exchanges” and provide “violent extremists with access to new audiences and instruments for radicalization.”

The US government stated they will combat these extremist groups by “raising awareness about the threat and providing communities with practical information and tools for staying safe online.” They are solidifying their relationships with private sector corporations involved in technology to implement “policies, technologies, and tools that can help counter violent extremism online.”

The 2011 document entitled “Empowering Local Partners to Prevent Violent Extremism in the United States” outlines how a “comprehensive strategy” to counter the influence of al-Qaeda is being championed by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) with digital information sharing and coordinating intelligence with local law enforcement to thwart terrorist plots and “save many American lives”.

Using propaganda, under the guise of “local partners in their grassroots efforts to prevent violent extremism” the federal government is building a network with local law enforcement against the threat of radicalization online and in the real-world.

The document names plots devised by neo-Nazis, anti-Semitic hate groups, racial supremacists, international and domestic terrorists inspired by al-Qaeda as a threat to the US. The federal government is utilizing local police departments to build a “local level . . . resilience against violent extremism.”

DHS trains local police officers at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) provides funding to local police departments to send their officers to FLETC to receive militarized education in tactical operations.

FLETC has locations in Georgia, New Mexico, South Carolina, andWashington DC. This federal militarization of local police extends tointernational policing agencies which “develops, coordinates, manages, and delivers international training and technical assistance that promotes the rule of law and supports U.S. foreign policy.”

Another report the White House is using to justify the demonization of US citizens as radical extremists is entitled “Strategic Implementation Plan for Empowering Local Partners to Prevent Violent Extremism in the United States”. This report, published in December of 2011, further reinforces the role of local police departments to ‘address community needs and concerns, including protecting rights and public safety.”

The federal government acquires platforms to infiltrate communities they have identified as potentially under threat of violent extremist groups. Across the nation, senior officials are deployed with the assistance of fake grassroots propaganda to partner with “Governor-appointed Homeland Security Advisors, Major Cities Chiefs, Mayors’ Offices, and local partners.”

Training of local police department officers to paramilitarize and integrate them into military tactical operations is the key to combating localized extremism.
Over the last few years the DHS have been indoctrinating local police departments into “non-Federal law enforcement agencies” as outlined in the DHS directive from the Office for State and Local Law Enforcement (SLLE).

DHS is successful in their relationship with local police departments all across the nation because they are contracted private security firms (or hired armed guards) that are placed in a city or town to secure the population and generate revenue for the local government.

In early 2012, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) released a reportentitled “Homeland Security and Intelligence: Next Steps in Evolving the Mission” which outlined in part on how to redirect efforts of the federal government from international terrorism toward home-grown terrorists and build a DHS-controlled police force agency that would control all cities and towns through the use of local police departments.

DHS maintains that “the threat grows more localized” which necessitates the militarization of local police in major cities in the US and the training of staff from local agencies to make sure that oversight is restricted to the federal government.

Countering online extremism is a task allocated to the DHS who have identified “behaviors, tactics, and other indicators that could point to potential terrorist activity.” DHS will host conferences for local police departments and federal partners to attend that will provide education on countering extremism.

Other “training initiatives” include “hundreds of thousands of front line officers” who are the ground-force infantry needed by DHS to “prevent” extremist activities.

The “If You See Something, Say Something” campaign is specifically designed to target local communities to turn ordinary citizens into a Stasi for the federal government with the local police department allocated as their first line of intelligence gathering.

Intelligence on citizens who are supposed to be extremists is gathered from multiple avenues such as:

• Local government
• Local law enforcement
• Parent/Teacher Associations
• School district officials
• Influential members of local communities
• Religious leaders

These collaborations provide “critical information” and real-time “assessments of [any] threat” to local communities and incorporate this information into training programs and federal initiatives.

DHS Purchases 21.6 Million More Rounds Of Ammunition

Cuomo: Gun Control Would Have Never Happened If Public Was Allowed To Review It

(Infowars) -The Department of Homeland Security is set to purchase a further 21.6 million rounds of ammunition to add to the 1.6 billion bullets it has already obtained over the course of the last 10 months alone, figures which have stoked concerns that the federal agency is preparing for civil unrest.

A solicitation posted yesterday on the Fed Bid website details how the bullets are required for the DHS Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in Artesia, New Mexico.

The solicitation asks for 10 million pistol cartridge .40 caliber 165 Grain, jacketed Hollow point bullets (100 quantities of 100,000 rounds) and 10 million 9mm 115 grain jacketed hollow point bullets (100 quantities of 100,000 rounds).

The document also lists a requirement for 1.6 million pistol cartridge 9mm ball bullets (40 quantities of 40,000 rounds).

An approximation of how many rounds of ammunition the DHS has now secured over the last 10 months stands at around 1.625 billion.

To put that in perspective, during the height of active battle operations in Iraq, US soldiers used 5.5 million rounds of ammunition a month. Extrapolating the figures, the DHS has purchased enough bullets over the last 10 months to wage a full scale war for almost 30 years.

Such massive quantities of ammo purchases have stoked fears that the agency is preparing for some kind of domestic unrest. In 2011, Department of Homeland Security chief Janet Napolitano directed Immigration and Customs Enforcement to prepare for a mass influx of immigrants into the United States, calling for the plan to deal with the “shelter” and “processing” of large numbers of people.

The federal agency’s primary concern is now centered around thwarting “homegrown terrorism,” but information produced and used by the DHS to train its personnel routinely equates conservative political ideology with domestic extremism.

A study funded by the Department of Homeland Security that was leaked last year characterizes Americans who are “suspicious of centralized federal authority,” and “reverent of individual liberty” as “extreme right-wing” terrorists.

In August 2012, the DHS censored information relating to the amount of bullets purchased by the federal agency on behalf of Immigration & Customs Enforcement, citing an “unusual and compelling urgency” to acquire the bullets, noting that there is a shortage of bullets which is threatening a situation that could cause “substantial safety issues for the government” should law enforcement officials not be adequately armed.

As we highlighted last month, the DHS’ previous ammunition solicitation was awarded to Evian Group, an organization that was formed just five days before the announcement of the solicitation and appeared to be little more than a front organization since it didn’t have a genuine physical address, a website, or even a phone number.

While Americans are being browbeaten with rhetoric about the necessity to give up semi-automatic firearms in the name of preventing school shootings, the federal government is arming itself to the teeth with both ammunition and guns. Last September, the DHS purchased no less than 7,000 fully automatic assault rifles, labeling them “Personal Defense Weapons.”

Department of Homeland Security Raids Gun Collector Who Didn’t Violate the Law

 

 

Feds_seize_nearly_1500_in_gun_raid_544430000_20130131183522_320_240

(IntelHub) -New Mexico – The Department of Homeland Security has raided the home of a noted gun collector, confiscating hundreds of firearms for what they claim was possible violations of the law.

That’s right, the man didn’t actually violate any laws but that didn’t stop homeland security from raiding him and openly stealing his firearms.

Federal Homeland Security Investigation agents raided the home of Robert Adams, seizing 317 rifles and 548 handguns.

A report by local mainstream news outlet KRQE revealed the details of the raid:

Last week rifles lined the lawn of a northeast Albuquerque home that belonged to Robert Adams. Homeland Security Investigations was also busy loading hundreds of handguns into boxes.

It took federal agents days to log every weapon seized into evidence.

Four search warrants filed Thursday show the HSI investigators seized nearly 900 firearms from Adams’ home. There were 548 handguns and 317 rifles listed in the warrant return inventory.

They also searched his office that day taking 599 pistols and revolvers.

Adams has not been charged with any crimes although Homeland Security said the investigation is not over yet.

Neighbors described Adams as a gun collector and a possible licensed firearms dealer. For their part, Homeland Security admitted he had not broken any laws but that he is still being investigated for gun smuggling and tax evasion.

U.N. Drone Investigator: If Facts Lead to U.S. War Crimes, So Be It

 Ben Emmerson wants to be clear: He’s not out to ban flying killer robots used by the CIA or the U.S. military. But the 49-year-old British lawyer is about to become the bane of the drones’ existence, thanks to the United Nations inquiry he launched last week into their deadly operations.

(Wired.com) Emerson, the United Nations’ special rapporteur for human rights and counterterrorism, will spend the next five months doing something the Obama administration has thoroughly resisted: unearthing the dirty secrets of a global counterterrorism campaign that largely relies on rapidly proliferating drone technology. Announced on Thursday in London, it’s the first international inquiry into the drone program, and one that carries the imprimatur of the world body. By the next session of the United Nations in the fall, Emmerson hopes to provide the General Assembly with an report on 25 drone strikes in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia and Palestine where civilian deaths are credibly alleged.

That carries the possibility of a reckoning with the human damage left by drones, the first such witnessing by the international community. Accountability, Emmerson tells Danger Room in a Monday phone interview, “is the central purpose of the report.” He’s not shying away from the possibility of digging up evidence of “war crimes,” should the facts point in that direction. But despite the Obama administration’s secrecy about the drone strikes to date, he’s optimistic that the world’s foremost users of lethal drone tech will cooperate with him.

In conversation, Emmerson, who’s served as special rapporteur since 2011, doesn’t sound like a drone opponent or a drone skeptic. He sounds more like a drone realist. “Let’s face it, they’re here to stay,” he says, shortly after pausing to charge his cellphone during a trip to New York to prep for his inquiry. “This technology, as I say, is a reality. It is cheap, both in economic terms and in the risk to the lives of the service personnel who are from the sending state.

“And for that reason there are real concerns that because it is so cheap, it can be used with a degree of frequency that other, more risk-based forms of engagement like fixed-wing manned aircraft or helicopters are not,” Emmerson says. “And the result is there’s a perception of the frequency and intensity with which this technology is used is exponentially different, and as a result, there is necessarily a correspondingly greater risk of civilian casualties.”

LAPD Spied on 21 Using StingRay Anti-Terrorism Tool

1a

(LAWeekly) -A secretive cellphone spy device known as StingRay, intended to fight terrorism, was used in far more routine LAPD criminal investigations 21 times in a four-month period during 2012, apparently without the courts’ knowledge that the technology probes the lives of non-suspects who happen to be in the same neighborhood as suspected terrorists.

According to records released to the First Amendment Coalition under the California Public Records Act, StingRay, which allows police to track mobile phones in real time, was tapped for more than 13 percent of the 155 “cellular phone investigation cases” that Los Angeles police conducted between June and September last year.

As L.A. Weekly first reported in September, LAPD purchased StingRay technology sometime around 2006 with federal Department of Homeland Security funds. The original DHS grant documents said it was intended for “regional terrorism investigations.”

But the newly released LAPD records show something markedly different: StingRays are being deployed for burglary, drug and murder investigations.

Yet LAPD still refuses to answer questions about the spy technology or the legal interpretation that Chief Charlie Beck‘s office thinks give his department such powers.

Peter Scheer, executive director of the First Amendment Coalition, says the documents released by LAPD acknowledge “that they do have this technology, and that they’re using it. … But the documents are ambiguous about whether or not the procedure requires a warrant or other judicial permission … ”

The portable StingRay device impersonates a cellphone tower, electronically fooling all nearby mobile phones — not just the suspect’s phone — to send their signals into an LAPD computer. That signal reveals to police the location of phones in real time.

But the technology sucks up the data of every cellphone in the area, and these innocent phone owners never know police are grabbing their information.

Security researcher Chris Soghoian last year warned that StingRays can jeopardize privacy: “If the government shows up in your neighborhood, essentially every phone in the neighborhood is going to check in with the government. … It’s almost like Marco Polo — the government tower says ‘Marco,’ and every cellphone in the area says ‘Polo.’ ”

Privacy advocates are troubled by StingRay’s “self-service” aspects: Police can use the technology to get around the now-routine process of requesting location data from cellphone service providers. Carriers like Sprint and AT&T usually require that LAPD get a court order.

StingRay could let police bypass the service providers entirely, and secretly.

LAPD won’t comment on whether that’s what it is doing.

As with other emerging technologies, there’s disagreement over how StingRays should fit into privacy laws, which weren’t written with such sophisticated gadgets in mind. The courts have not yet weighed in.

ACLU of Northern California attorney Linda Lye, who closely follows StingRay technology, says it appears LAPD has embraced a very permissive interpretation toward obtaining court orders.

The records suggest that LAPD doesn’t explicitly describe StingRay but instead seeks a judge’s permission to use a “pen register/trap and trace” — which is technology from landline days that functions like a caller ID, can’t zero in on a person’s real-time location like StingRay, and doesn’t grab dozens or hundreds of innocent phone users in its web.

Equating StingRay with a “pen register/trap and trace,” Lye says, is like applying for a search warrant for someone’s home and then searching the entire apartment complex. “The government has the duty of candor when it goes to the court,” she says. “If in fact they got court orders 21 times, and these were the court orders they sought, they were in no way disclosing the technology they were using — and that is very troubling.”

Scheer says the First Amendment Coalition is preparing requests for more information in hopes of clearing up what LAPD is telling judges — and how often L.A. cops use the spy device without bothering to get a judge’s approval.

Government Website For Immigrants: Come To America And Take Advantage Of Our Free Stuff

(endoftheamericandream.com) A website run by the federal government (“WelcomeToUSA.gov“) encourages new immigrants to the United States to apply for welfare benefits.  This website is run by the Department of Homeland Security and it says that it “is the U.S. Government’s official web portal for new immigrants.”  So your tax dollars were used to build and maintain a website that teaches immigrants how to come into this country and sponge a living off of federal welfare programs paid for by your tax dollars.  What in the world is happening to us?  Yes, we will always need some legal immigration.  We are a nation of immigrants and immigration has been very good to this country.  But at a time when there are millions upon millions of American citizens out of work and at a time when we are absolutely drowning in debt, do we really need to encourage millions more immigrants to come over and take advantage of our overloaded social welfare programs?  WelcomeToUSA.gov actually encourages new immigrants to apply for food stamps, Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security, Supplemental Security Income and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families.  Of course not all immigrants are eligible for all of those programs, but if an immigrant can get over to the U.S. and just get signed up for a couple of programs they can enjoy a higher standard of living doing nothing here than they can working at a low paying job back home.  We have created a perverse system of incentives that makes it very attractive to people all over the world to do whatever they can to hitch a ride on “the gravy train” and take advantage of all of the benefits that they possibly can.  And once immigrants get on welfare, many of them never leave.  For example, one study discovered that 43 percent of all immigrants who have been in the United States for at least 20 years were still on welfare.  We can’t even take care of our own citizens, and yet more immigrants hop on to the safety net every single day.  At some point the safety net is going to break and then we won’t even be able to take care of the struggling Americans that really need it.

When I first discovered WelcomeToUSA.gov I was absolutely floored.  In particular, the page that encourages immigrants to apply for federal welfare benefits is just shocking.  Here is the opening paragraph

Depending on your immigration status, length of time in the United States, and income, you may be eligible for some federal benefit programs. Government assistance programs can be critically important to the well-being of some immigrants and their families. Frequently, however, there is a lack of information about how to access such benefits. Benefit programs can be complicated and you may be given misleading information about how they operate.

The page also contains a list of links where new immigrants can find instructions about how to apply for programs such as Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, Food Stamps, Supplemental Security Income and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families…

The links below will lead you to official government websites describing a range of assistance programs.

So why is the Department of Homeland Security doing this?  The following iswhat the Daily Caller was told when they asked…

USCIS spokesman Bill Wright told The Daily Caller that the site is not intended to advise individuals on their eligibility.

“The website seeks to improve access to federal government information on the Internet by consolidating information into helpful categories and highlight new resources available to immigrants and the organizations that serve them,” Wright explained in an email.

Well, isn’t that special?

Perhaps this could be their new slogan: “Come To America And Take Advantage Of Our Free Stuff”.

Sadly, the truth is that our insane immigration policies are doing an incredible amount of damage to this country.  Our current system makes it very difficult on those immigrants that want to do things the right way and that want to come into this country for the right reasons.  On the other hand, our current system makes things very easy on those that want to come into this country illegally and on those that want to take advantage of our generosity.

Posted below is a list of 10 things that are going to happen if the federal government continues to systematically legalize illegal immigration that comes from one of my previous articles.  Illegal immigration is causing chaos in communities all over America, and it is going to get a lot worse if changes are not made…

#1 There Will Be Fewer Jobs For American Workers

In the United States today, 53 percent of all college graduates under the age of 25 are either unemployed or underemployed.  Many of them are absolutely desperate for work.

Overall, there are more than 100 million working age Americans that do not have jobs right now.

Meanwhile, millions of illegal immigrants are occupying jobs that could otherwise be held by American citizens.  Many employers prefer to hire illegals because they work for a lot less money.

Sadly, many prominent politicians actually support the “right” of these “undocumented workers” to steal our jobs as a recent article by Devvy Kidd pointed out….

In April 2008, the very popular, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, prostituted himself during a speech for votes at an event sponsored by the Latino Leadership Alliance of New Jersey by assuring his audience illegal aliens were not really here illegally, but were simply “undocumented.”

The ‘unofficial’ number of unemployed Americans is close to 25 MILLION. Those “undocumented” criminals Gov. Christie refers to are illegally holding 11.5 MILLION jobs that belong to Americans and naturalized citizens. Shame on you, Gov. Christie for thumbing your nose at our federal immigration laws and encouraging even more criminals to break into our country. Roll out the welcome mat. Unemployment in New Jersey is holding at a steady 9.3%. Gov. Christie apparently doesn’t care if jobs go to illegal aliens instead of legal citizens in his state. After all, they’re simply “undocumented”.

#2 Wages For American Workers Will Continue To Decline

When you have a lot more workers competing for the same number of jobs, what happens?

That is right – wages go down.

We are seeing this happen in industry after industry.

For example, several decades ago a roofer could live a nice middle class lifestyle and support an entire family on one income.

But today that is no longer the case.

So what has changed?

A flood of illegal labor has entered the marketplace.

#3 Illegal Immigrants Will Overwhelm Our Welfare System

Every year, illegal immigrants receive tens of billions of dollars in welfare payments.  They get free food assistance, free housing assistance, free health care benefits and free education for their children.  Life is good if you are an illegal immigrant and you know how to game the system.

In fact, many cities in United States now openly advertise that they will help illegal immigrants with these things.

Unfortunately, according to Devvy Kidd the cost to taxpayers is getting to be astronomical….

Last year alone, the cost to taxpayers of LA County was whopping $600 MILLION dollars in welfare for children of illegal aliens. I guess it doesn’t bother the people there getting fleeced in taxes to pay for all that welfare because they continue to elect governors who refuse to lock down the border and sympathizers of the invasion across the southern border of California to their legislature.

Overall, it has been estimated that U.S. taxpayers spend $12,000,000,000 a year on primary and secondary school education for the children of illegal immigrants.

#4 Mexican Drug Cartels Will Establish A Presence In Nearly Every City In The United States

Mexican drug cartels continue to expand their influence inside the United States at a frightening pace.  They are slowly taking over our communities.  How far do things have to go before we say enough is enough?

The amount of money that Mexican drug cartels bring in from selling drugs inside the United States is absolutely staggering….

In the sober reckoning of the RAND Corporation, for instance, the gross revenue that all Mexican cartels derive from exporting drugs to the United States amounts to only $6.6 billion. By most estimates, though, Sinaloa has achieved a market share of at least 40 percent and perhaps as much as 60 percent, which means that Chapo Guzmán’s organization would appear to enjoy annual revenues of some $3 billion — comparable in terms of earnings to Netflix or, for that matter, to Facebook.

Can you imagine that?

We are talking about serious money.

And Mexican drug cartels are not just operating in huge cities such as Los Angeles, Chicago and New York.  The truth is that they have become deeply embedded in many rural communities as well….

News of cartel machinations are common in cities near the border, such as Phoenix, and the far-flung drug hubs of New York, Chicago or Atlanta, but smaller towns bring business, too. In unsuspecting suburbs and rural areas, police are increasingly finding drugs, guns and money they can trace back to Mexican drug organizations.

The numbers could rise in coming years. The Justice Department’s National Drug Intelligence Center estimates Mexican cartels control distribution of most of the methamphetamine, heroin and marijuana coming into the country, and they’re increasingly producing the drugs themselves.

In 2009 and 2010, the center reported, cartels operated in 1,286 U.S. cities, more than five times the number reported in 2008. The center named only 50 cities in 2006.

#5 There Will Be Increasing “Anti-American Violence” Inside The United States

These days a lot of Americans are being attacked (and sometimes killed) down in Mexico.

The following is from a recent ABC News article….

American travelers to Mexico should beware of possible violent retaliation for this week’s arrest of alleged Zetas drug cartel associates and family members inside the U.S., the U.S. State Department has warned.

Though the warning does not specify which “Transnational Criminal Organization” might engage in “anti-American” violence, on Tuesday federal authorities arrested seven alleged associates of the powerful Zetas drug cartel in New Mexico and Oklahoma for allegedly laundering millions in drug profits through breeding and racing quarterhorses in the U.S. Those arrested included Jose Trevino Morales, the brother of Zetas leaders Miguel Angel and Oscar Omar Trevino Morales, who were also indicted but remain at large in Mexico.

As Mexican drug cartels and criminal gangs expand north, it is inevitable that “anti-American violence” will spread deeper and deeper into the U.S. itself.

The level of violence that we are seeing down in Mexico right now is absolutely frightening.  These drug cartels can be absolutely brutal….

Fourteen dismembered bodies were found in a truck in the center of a town in northern Mexico on Thursday in what appeared to be the latest atrocity committed by rival gangs battling over drug-smuggling routes, local media said.

The bodies of 11 men and three women were discovered in the sugar-cane farming town of Ciudad Mante in the south of Tamaulipas state, which borders on Texas, daily Milenio reported on its website.

Overall, more than 55,000 people have been killed in drug-related violence in Mexico since 2006.

Is that the kind of violence we want in this country?

Already the region along the U.S./Mexico border is an open war zone.

Just across the U.S. border, the city of Juarez, Mexico is considered to be one of the most dangerous cities on the face of the earth.  In fact, Juarez is now the murder capital of the western hemisphere.

But instead of strengthening security along the border, Barack Obama wants to make the border meaningless.

#6 Massive Bribes Will Corrupt Our Judicial System

When there are billions of dollars involved, it is inevitable that some members of the police and some members of the judiciary will take bribes.

Just look at what has happened down in Mexico.  The following is from a recent article in the New York Times….

When you tally it all up, bribery may be the single largest line item on a cartel’s balance sheet. In 2008, President Felipe Calderón’s own drug czar, Noe Ramirez, was charged with accepting $450,000 each month. Presumably, such gargantuan bribes to senior officials cascade down, securing the allegiance of their subordinates. “You have to recruit the high commands, so they can issue the information to lower ranks and order whatever they want,” the corrupt cop, Fierro Méndez, testified. But in key jurisdictions, the cartel most likely makes payments up and down the chain of command. In a 2010 speech, Genaro García Luna, Mexico’s secretary of public security, speculated that together, the cartels spend more than a billion dollars each year just to bribe the municipal police.

What would you do if you were offered a bribe of $450,000 a month?

Don’t assume that Americans are so much more “moral” than the Mexicans are.

#7 Gang Activity Will Continue To Grow In The United States By Leaps And Bounds

Gang activity is absolutely exploding inside the United States.

According to the FBI, there are now 1.4 million gang members involved in the 33,000 different gangs that are active inside the United States.

The number of gang members in America has increased by 40 percent since 2009.

Those stats should be very alarming to all of us.

What are we going to do if gangs keep growing at this rate?

According to federal statistics, gang members are responsible for up to 80 percent of all violent crimes committed in the United States every year.

A very large percentage of these gang members have entered the United States from Mexico, but the federal government refuses to do anything to stop it.

#8 The Decline Of Our Health Care System Will Continue To Accelerate

Illegal immigrants are overwhelming emergency rooms all over the country.  They walk in, receive high quality treatment and often never pay after they leave.

Things have gotten so bad in many areas of the nation that it is causing entire hospitals to go bankrupt and shut down.

In a previous article, I described what unchecked illegal immigration is doing to the health care system in California….

Thanks to illegal immigration, California’s overstretched health care system is on the verge of collapse.  Dozens of California hospitals and emergency rooms have shut down over the last decade because they could not afford to stay open after being endlessly swamped by illegal immigrants who were simply not able to pay for the services that they were receiving.  As a result, the remainder of the health care system in the state of California is now beyond overloaded.  This had led to brutally long waits, diverted ambulances and even unnecessary patient deaths.  Sadly, the state of California now ranks dead last out of all 50 states in the number of emergency rooms per million people.

#9 Legalizing Illegal Immigrants Will Cause A Huge Shift In Voting Patterns

Instead of looking out for the American people, many Democrats support legalizing illegal immigration because it will give the Democratic Party more support at the polls.

This is incredibly selfish and self-serving, but this is the way that the political game is played in 2012.

#10 There Will Be A Flood Of New Illegal Immigrants

Amazingly, far more people move into the United States illegally than come in through the legal immigration process.

As word spreads of the “Obama amnesty”, millions more will come on over.  After all, what would they have to lose?  If they get caught crossing over they will just get nicely sent back and can try again in a few days.

If they make it they can take advantage of all the free goodies here in the United States.  Thanks to Obama, the odds of deportation are now very slim.  And they can often make significantly more money in the “underground economy” in the U.S. than they can back home.

Rep. Ted Poe says House Judiciary Committee could move to limit drone spying over United States

Rep. Ted Poe (Image credit: Official House portrait)

(EndTheLie) -Representative Ted Poe, a Texas Republican, said that he thinks the House Judiciary Committee could move to regulate the use of drones for surveillance over the United States after a conversation with Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte, potentially assisting nationwide efforts to regulate drone use.

This is incredibly important given the fact that drones are already being used quite often in the U.S., the military is sharing data captured by drones with law enforcement, the Pentagon identified 110 potential drone bases in the U.S., the National Guard uses drones in the U.S., the Department of Homeland Security has embraced small spy drones, and even the Federal Aviation Administration realizes there are significant privacy concerns.

Poe said that he discussed the privacy risks inherent in the use of drones domestically with Goodlatte, a Virginia Republican, on Tuesday, according to The Hill.

“I think that’s on his agenda, to have some kind of drone legislation during the Congress,” said Poe after an event at the National Press Club held to discuss drones.

An aide also told The Hill that the issue is a priority for Goodlatte as he begins his first term as the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.

During the last session of Congress, Poe penned the Preserving American Privacy Act, which would have restricted drone use to law enforcement agencies and would require them to be investigating a felony.

While this falls far short of the mark many would hope for in that it doesn’t outright block law enforcement from using drones unless a probable cause warrant has been issued, one might argue that it’s better than nothing.

Poe stated that he plans to re-introduce legislation similar to that he introduced last session in concert with another member of the Judiciary Committee, Rep. Zoe Lofgren, a California Democrat.

“I think what we need to do is make sure there are some definite guidelines for law enforcement,” Poe said.

However, Poe said that the legislation should include exceptions allowing police to conduct surveillance without obtaining a warrant during emergencies.

While such an exception could be viable, it would require explicit definition of the types of emergencies in which warrantless surveillance could be conducted. Even then, it would likely be easily abused.

“It’s my opinion that Congress should take the lead on this issue, rather than wait for cases to occur, and those cases end up in different courts throughout the country,” Poe said.

During the discussion at the National Press Club, a panel of legal scholars and privacy experts pointed out the ambiguity of the constitutional limits on drone surveillance which would – or arguably would not – be imposed by courts in the future.

“Traditionally, courts have granted people limited privacy protections when they are in public spaces,” writes Brendan Sasso for The Hill. “The persistent tracking made possible by drones poses new constitutional questions for the courts, the experts said.”

The scholars pointed out that drones can be combined with facial recognition technology, cell phone tapping and tracking, along with thermal imaging to further endanger privacy.

“Gretchen West, executive vice president for the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems, a drone lobbying group, said that drones currently have only limited technical capabilities to conduct surveillance,” according to The Hill.

It’s worth noting that this is the same lobbying group that has bragged about taking a major role in crafting drone legislation.

Indeed, even The Hill reports that West “noted that her organization has created privacy guidelines for drone makers and argued that the FAA is poorly suited for regulating privacy issues.”

This same argument has been presented by a group of leaders in the aviation industry in a letter to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in which they claimed that the FAA should only be concerned with safety rather than privacy.

Yet without strict privacy controls at the federal, state and local level, this radically invasive drone use will continue and can only get worse as time goes on.

“The current state of the law is inadequate to address the threat … as drone technology becomes cheaper, the threat to privacy will become more substantial,” said Amie Stepanovich, a lawyer with the Electronic Privacy Information Center, according to the Washington Times.

“This is a natural space for Congress to step in and say that we have a new technology, and we’re worried about its privacy implications,” said Orin Kerr, a professor of law at George Washington University Law School.

“Ultimately, we don’t have to accept new technologies and let them go and see how they work. We can try and regulate the privacy implications at the outset,” Kerr added.

More at EndtheLie.com – http://EndtheLie.com/2013/01/16/rep-ted-poe-says-house-judiciary-committee-could-move-to-limit-drone-spying-over-united-states/#ixzz2ICIHYeK6

Eighteen severed human heads are discovered by customs agents at Chicago’s O’Hare airport

 

(Dailymail) -A suspicious shipment containing 18 severed human heads was discovered at a U.S. airport yesterday.

Customs agents found the human heads, still covered in skin, at Chicago’s O’Hare International Airport, but have declined to further discuss their condition.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection are currently investigating whether the foreign shipment are legitimate medical specimens.

 
nCustoms agents made a grisly discovery of 18 human heads Monday at Chicago’s O’Hare International Airport

Meanwhile, the human body parts were sent to he Cook County Medical Examiner’s office for inspection.

The Department of Homeland Security confirmed that the heads were shipped from outside U.S. borders but declined to specify exact location, nor indicate where or to whom they were destined.

 

 

The heads appear to be medical samples at first blush, Brian Bell, spokesman for the Department of Homeland Security told Chicago Herald Sun.

‘There’s no issue with the transportation of body parts for medical purposes, there’s nothing against the law that says you cannot ship them, provided you have the right documentation.

‘Everybody here is “Oh my gosh, you got a box of heads” and everybody thinks that it’s unheard of.

‘It is a potentially legitimate medical shipment. We’ve seen it at various ports in the nation.’

 
Mysterious: Officials said no foul play was suspected Mysterious: Officials said no foul play was suspected

Local authorities said no foul play was suspected in the shipment, but will be investigating the matter further.

The heads may have been ordered by Cook County Medical Examiner’s office but the office have yet to comment any further than a confirmation that the body parts have been received.

In 2010, a shipment of 60 human heads and parts of heads, wrapped with duct tape and stuffed in plastic containers, was seized at an Arkansas airport.

Investigators said the heads appeared to be medical specimens.

Authorities believed the specimens were part underground market for human body parts

AP Exclusive: US ordered delay in intern’s arrest

Photo - FILE - This Sept. 27, 2012 file photo shows Sen. Robert Menendez, D-N.J. speaking in Sayreville, N.J. Federal immigration agents were prepared to arrest an illegal immigrant and registered sex offender days before the November elections but were ordered by Washington to hold off after officials warned of "significant interest" from Congress and news organizations because the suspect was a volunteer intern for Menendez, according to internal agency documents provided to Congress. (AP Photo/Mel Evans, File)
FILE – This Sept. 27, 2012 file photo shows Sen. Robert Menendez, D-N.J. speaking in Sayreville, N.J. Federal immigration agents were prepared to arrest an illegal immigrant and registered sex offender days before the November elections but were ordered by Washington to hold off after officials warned of “significant interest” from Congress and news organizations because the suspect was a volunteer intern for Menendez, according to internal agency documents provided to Congress. (AP Photo/Mel Evans, File)

WASHINGTON (AP) — Federal immigration agents were prepared to arrest an illegal immigrant and registered sex offender days before the November elections but were ordered by Washington to hold off after officials warned of “significant interest” from Congress and news organizations because the suspect was a volunteer intern for Sen. Robert Menendez, according to internal agency documents provided to Congress.

The Homeland Security Department said last month, when The Associated Press first disclosed the delayed arrest of Luis Abrahan Sanchez Zavaleta, that AP’s report was “categorically false.”

Sanchez, 18, was an immigrant from Peru who entered the country on a now-expired visitor visa. He eventually was arrested at his home in New Jersey on Dec. 6. He has since been released from an immigration jail and is facing deportation. Sanchez has declined to speak to the AP.

After the AP story, which cited an unnamed U.S. official involved in the case, Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa and six other Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee asked the Obama administration for details about the incident.

According to those documents, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in Newark had arranged to arrest Sanchez at the local prosecutor’s office on Oct. 25. That was fewer than two weeks before the election.

Noting that Sanchez was a volunteer in Menendez’s Senate office, ICE officials in New Jersey advised that the arrest “had the possibility of garnering significant congressional and media interest” and were “advised to postpone the arrest” until officials in Washington gave approval. The documents describe a conference call between officials Washington and New Jersey to “determine a way forward, given the potential sensitivities surrounding the case.”

The senators, in a letter to the Homeland Security Department, said the agency documents showed that Sanchez’s arrest “was delayed by six weeks,” as AP had reported. They asked for details about the department’s review of potentially sensitive, high profile immigration cases when arrests are delayed.

In a letter Monday, Assistant DHS Secretary Nelson Peacock said an allegation that the government delayed Sanchez’s arrest “for political purposes” was categorically false. Neither the unnamed U.S. official cited in AP’s original story or the senators in their letters to the department had specifically alleged that the arrest had been delayed for political purposes.

The documents provided to Congress do not indicate why the arrest should have been delayed or whether anyone outside Immigration and Customs Enforcement — such as in the headquarters offices of the Homeland Security Department — was consulted.

Menendez, D-N.J., who advocates aggressively for pro-immigration policies, was re-elected on Nov. 6 with 58 percent of the vote. Menendez said last month that his staff was notified about the case immediately before AP’s story, he learned about the case from the AP and he knew nothing about whether or why DHS had delayed the arrest.

According to police records, Sanchez was 15 when he was arrested on a charge of aggravated sexual assault in 2009. The records show he was accused of sexually assaulting an 8-year-old boy at least eight times and sentenced to two years’ probation and required to register as a sex offender. The AP is not reporting the boy’s relationship to Sanchez to avoid identifying the victim.

The agency documents show that Sanchez failed to update his sex offender registration, and local prosecutors considered arresting him for that. During the same time, immigration officials learned that Sanchez had applied for the Obama administration’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, which would have allowed him to stay in the country and legally work for two years. He did not disclose his arrest or status as a sex offender on the application and was eventually denied, according to the documents.

Immigration enforcement operations in New Jersey were largely halted starting Oct. 28 as officials prepared for Hurricane Sandy. By Nov. 29, ICE had planned to arrest Sanchez after Citizenship and Immigration Services had formally denied his deferred action application. The following day, the ICE Office of the Principal Legal Advisor was consulted. The agency’s chief counsel was also consulted and the arrest was approved Dec. 5.

Sanchez was arrested the next day.

During the final weeks of President George W. Bush’s administration, ICE was criticized for delaying the arrest of President Barack Obama’s aunt, who had ignored an immigration judge’s order to leave the country several years earlier after her asylum claim was denied. She subsequently won the right to stay in the United States after an earlier deportation order, and there was no evidence of involvement by the White House.

In that case, the Homeland Security Department had imposed an unusual directive days before the 2008 election requiring high-level approval before federal agents nationwide could arrest fugitive immigrants including Zeituni Onyango, the half-sister of Obama’s late father. The directive from ICE expressed concerns about “negative media or congressional interest,” according to a copy of that directive obtained by AP. The department lifted the immigration order weeks later.

U.S. Drone Pilot: ‘Did We Just Kill A Kid?’

(PekinTimes)

After Barack Obama joined the rest of us in mourning the slaughter of innocent children in Newtown, Conn., Sanford Berman, a Minnesota civil liberties activist, wrote me: “Obama’s tears for the dead Connecticut kids made me sick. What about weeping over the 400 or more children he killed with drone strikes?”

Indeed, our president has shown no palpable concern over those deaths, but a number of U.S. personnel — not only the CIA agents engaged in drone killings — are deeply troubled.

Peggy Noonan reports that David E. Sanger, in his book “Confront and Conceal: Obama’s Secret Wars and Surprising Use of American Power,” discovered that “some of those who operate the unmanned bombers are getting upset. They track victims for days. They watch them play with their children.” Then what happens: “‘It freaks you out’” (“Who Benefits From the ‘Avalanche of Leaks’?” Wall Street Journal, June 15).

For another example, I introduce you to Conor Friedersdorf and his account of “The Guilty Conscience of a Drone Pilot Who Killed a Child” (theatlantic.com, Dec. 19).

The subtitle: “May his story remind us that U.S. strikes have reportedly killed many times more kids than died in Newtown — and that we can do better.”

The story Friedersdorf highlights in the Atlantic first appeared in Germany’s Der Spiegel about an Air Force officer (not CIA) who “lamented the fact that he sometimes had to kill ‘good daddies’” … (and) “even attended their funerals” from far away.

And dig this, President Obama: “as a consequence of the job, he collapsed with stress-induced exhaustion and developed PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder).” Yet these drones, “Hellfire missiles,” are President Obama’s favorite extra-judicial weapons against suspected terrorists.

Getting back to the Air Force officer, Brandon Bryant, with the guilty conscience. Friedersdorf’s story quotes extensively from Der Spiegel’s article, which recalls that, when Bryant got the order to fire, “he pressed a button with his left hand and marked the roof (of a shed) with a laser. The pilot sitting next to him pressed the trigger on a joystick, causing the drone to launch a Hellfire missile. There were 16 seconds left until impact …

“With seven seconds left to go, there was no one to be seen on the ground. Bryant could still have diverted the missile at that point. Then it was down to three seconds …

“Suddenly a child walked around the corner, he says. Second zero was the moment in which Bryant’s digital world collided with the real one in a village between Baghlan and Mazar-e-Sharif. Bryant saw a flash on the screen: the explosion. Parts of the building collapsed. The child had disappeared.

“Bryant had a sick feeling in his stomach.

“‘Did we just kill a kid?’ he asked the man sitting next to him.

“‘Yeah. I guess that was a kid,’ the pilot replied.

“‘Was that a kid?’ they wrote into a chat window on the monitor.

“Then someone they didn’t know answered, someone sitting in a military command center somewhere in the world who had observed their attack. ‘No. That was a dog,’ the person wrote.

“They reviewed the scene on video. A dog on two legs?”

Friedersdorf adds: “The United States kills a lot of ‘dogs on two legs.’ The Bureau of Investigative Journalism reported last August that in Pakistan’s tribal areas alone, there are at least 168 credible reports of children being killed in drone strikes.” As for those in other countries, he adds, that’s “officially secret.”

He writes: “Presidents Bush and Obama have actively prevented human-rights observers from accessing full casualty data from programs that remain officially secret, so there is no way to know the total number of children American strikes have killed in the numerous countries in which they’ve been conducted, but if we arbitrarily presume that ‘just’ 84 children have died — half the bureau’s estimate from one country — the death toll would still be more than quadruple the number of children killed in Newtown, Conn.”

Are you proud, as an American, to know this?

After reading about Obama’s silence in “The Guilty Conscience of a Drone Pilot Who Killed a Child,” does the conscience of those of us who re-elected Obama ache?

As Friedersdorf writes, Obama has never spoken of these deaths as he did about the ones in Newtown, when he said: “If there’s even one step we can take to save another child or another parent … then surely we have an obligation to try. … Are we really prepared to say that dead children are the price of our freedom?”

Do you mean, Mr. President, only the dead children of Newtown?

These targeted killings continue in our name, under the ultimate authority of our president — as the huge majority of We The People stays mute.

Nat Hentoff is a nationally renowned authority on the First Amendment and the Bill of Rights. He is a member of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, and the Cato Institute, where he is a senior fellow.

Illusion of Choice By George Carlin, Ron Paul, and Judge Napolitano

Sweeping new gun laws proposed by influential liberal think tank

Washington Post – by Philip Rucker

With President Obama readying an overhaul of the nation’s gun laws, a liberal think tank with singular influence throughout his administration is pushing for a sweeping agenda of strict new restrictions on and federal oversight of gun and ammunition sales.The Center for American Progress is recommending 13 new gun policies to the White House — some of them executive actions that would not require the approval of Congress — in what amounts to the progressive community’s wish list.

CAP’s proposals — which include requiring universal background checks, banning military-grade assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition clips, and modernizing data systems to track gun sales and enforce existing laws — are all but certain to face stiff opposition from the National Rifle Association and its many allies in Congress.Obama, as well as Vice President Biden, who is leading the administration’s gun violence task force, has voiced support for many of these measures. Yet it is unclear which policies he ultimately will propose to Congress. Biden is planning to present his group’s recommendations to Obama on Tuesday.CAP’s recommendations, presented Friday to White House officials and detailed in an 11-page report obtained by The Washington Post, establish a benchmark for what many in Obama’s liberal base are urging him to doafter last month’s massacre at an elementary school in Newtown, Conn.

“There’s nothing here that interferes with the rights of people to have a gun to protect themselves,” CAP President Neera Tanden said. But, she added, “We have daily episodes where it seems that guns are in the wrong hands, and that’s why we think it’s important that the president acts.”

On Monday, Tanden will moderate a public discussion with three Democrats who have played leading roles in the gun debate: Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, who during the Clinton administration helped get the 1994 assault-weapons ban passed; Sen. Charles E. Schumer (N.Y.), who helped write that bill as a House member; and Rep. Mike Thompson (Calif.), who chairs the House Gun Violence Prevention Task Force.

One of CAP’s suggestions to toughen federal regulation of gun sales is to make the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, which is currently an agency within the Department of Justice, a unit of the FBI. CAP says absorbing the ATF into the FBI would better empower the ATF to combat gun crime and illegal trafficking.

“It is a beleaguered agency lacking leadership and resources,” said Winnie Stachelberg, senior vice president of CAP. “It needs to be a well-functioning federal law enforcement agency, and we need to figure out ways to ensure that happens.”

CAP’s top recommendation is to require criminal background checks for all gun sales, closing loopholes that currently enable an estimated 40 percent of sales to occur without any questions asked. The organization also wants to add convicted stalkers and suspected terrorists to the list of those barred from purchasing firearms.

CAP is urging the Obama administration to back Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s proposal to ban assault weapons. The California Democrat wants to prohibit the sale, transfer, importation and manufacturing of military-style assault weapons and ammunition magazines that carry more than 10 bullets.

The group also suggests requiring firearms dealers to report to the federal government individuals who purchase multiple semiautomatic assault rifles within a five-day period. Current law requires reporting multiple purchases of handguns, but not semiautomatic assault rifles.

CAP also wants the administration to free public health research agencies, including the National Institutes of Health and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, to study the impact of gun violence on injuries and deaths. For years, lawmakers, urged by the NRA, have placed riders on spending bills that restrict these and other agencies from conducting such research.

ENOUGH! (Guns, Active Shooters And Pharma)

The Market Ticker

I’m done being nice.

And I’m doubly-done with the damned leftists in this country performing the moral equivalent ofritual human sacrifice of children to advance their gun-control agenda.

That’s what I charge they’re doing.

And I’m going to back it up with mathematics, using just one of the common psychotropic medications used commonly today — Paxil.

This is from the prescribing information for Paxil:

Clinical Worsening and Suicide Risk:

Patients with major depressive disorder (MDD), both adult and pediatric, may experience worsening of their depression and/or the emergence of suicidal ideation and behavior (suicidality) or unusual changes in behavior, whether or not they are taking antidepressant medications, and this risk may persist until significant remission occurs. Suicide is a known risk of depression and certain other psychiatricdisorders, and these disorders themselves are the strongest predictors of suicide. There has been a long-standing concern, however, that antidepressants may have a role in inducing worsening of depressionand the emergence of suicidality in certain patients during the early phases of treatment. Pooled analyses of short-term placebo-controlledtrials of antidepressant drugs (SSRIs and others) showed that these drugs increase the risk of suicidal thinking and behavior (suicidality) in children, adolescents, and young adults (ages 18-24) with majordepressive disorder (MDD) and other psychiatric disorders. Short-term studies did not show an increase in the risk of suicidality with antidepressants compared to placebo in adults beyond age 24; there was a reduction with antidepressants compared to placebo in adults aged 65 and older.

That’s a problem.  What’s worse is this:

The following symptoms, anxiety, agitation, panic attacks, insomnia, irritability, hostility, aggressiveness, impulsivity, akathisia (psychomotor restlessness), hypomania, and mania, have been reported in adult and pediatric patients being treated with antidepressants for majordepressive disorder as well as for other indications, both psychiatric and nonpsychiatric. Although a causal link between the emergence of such symptoms and either the worsening of depression and/or the emergence of suicidal impulses has not been established, there is concern that such symptoms may represent precursors to emerging suicidality.

And it doesn’t end there:

Screening Patients for Bipolar Disorder

A major depressive episode may be the initial presentation of bipolar disorder. It is generally believed (though not established in controlledtrials) that treating such an episode with an antidepressant alone may increase the likelihood of precipitation of a mixed/manic episode in patients at risk for bipolar disorder.

Now let’s be frank: Mixed manic states are mental states during which all sorts of really ugly things happen, including panic attacks, agitation, impulsiveness, paranoia and rage — all at extreme levels.

In other words, if you miss someone being bipolar and give them this drug you may precipitate a full-on Hulk-style “rage monster” sort of attack!

How often does something like this happen?

Activation of Mania/Hypomania:

During premarketing testing, hypomania or mania occurred in approximately 1.0% of unipolar patients treated with PAXIL compared to 1.1% of active-control and 0.3% of placebo-treated unipolar patients. In a subset of patients classified as bipolar, the rate of manic episodes was 2.2% for PAXIL and 11.6% for the combined active-control groups. As with all drugs effective in the treatment of major depressive disorder, PAXIL should be used cautiously in patients with a history of mania.

So if you miss a bi-polar person in your “analysis” before prescribing, it’s more than doubly-likely that they will have a “rage-monster” episode than if not.

So let’s assume we’re not talking about bi-polar people — that is, let’s make the assumption that we properly screen for each person and perfectly identify all bi-polar people before we prescribe.

What is the expected number of people who will undergo some sort of manic episode, which includes the subset that will turn into rage-monsters and shoot up schools, movie theaters and other public places?

Answer: About 0.7% more that can be charged to the drug (the risk if you do nothing is 0.3%.)

Other similar drugs have similar risk profiles; Paxil is not particularly-remarkable in this regard.

I note, and you should note, that 0.7% is a pretty low risk!  That is, 993 people out of 1000 can get a perfectly good outcome from the drug (or at least no harm) but that other 7 in 1000 have an outcome ranging from bad to catastrophically-bad.

Now let’s assume for the sake of argument that we are 99% effective in physician monitoring of these patients.  That is, we’re able to somehow confirm that they take the drug exactly as prescribed (no more or less), and we have enough time and physician resources to evaluate them on a regular and continuing basis.  This, incidentally, is a fantasy-land level of performance; no profession could possibly meet that standard of care, but we’ll use it to make the point.

But this level of performance, which we can never meet, would provide that of the rage monsters we potentially create with these drugs we catch 99% of them before the episode escalates into something “bad.”

That’s 1% of 0.7%, incidentally, or 0.007% of the total users who (1) have the bad reaction and then (2) we fail to detect via monitoring.  In other words, those are the people who shoot up the schools, movie theaters and US Representatives.

The last figures I have are that in 2005 27 million people in the United States, or close to 1 in 10 of all persons, are on some sort of antidepressant carrying these risks.

So if 0.7% of 27 million people have a manic episode caused by these drugs – that is, under perfect conditions where we catch every single bipolar individual first and never prescribe to any of them we will have 189,000 persons in a year who have a manic reaction to these drugs.

That’s horrifying.

But what’s worse is that if we assume 99% effective surveillance by the medicalprofession — that is, 99% of the time the doctor intercepts the person with themanic episode and modifies or terminates their use of the drug before something bad happens….

WE CREATE AND THEN FAIL TO DETECT, WITH NEARLY PERFECT PERFORMANCE (that we will never achieve) 1,890 RAGE MONSTERS EVERY YEAR WHO ARE MENTALLY CAPABLE OF COMMITTING A MASS HOMICIDE.

We’re surprised that there are a few of these a year, when we create more than 5 of them each and every day with near-perfect performance — and likely several times that many given the real-world monitoring that can actually be achieved?

We create these Zombies.

We prescribe the drugs to them.

We do this knowing that the risk exists and that at least one subset of that risk is materially higher for those under the age of 25 who are consuming these drugs. 

In point of fact, most of the rage monsters who have committed these crimes are under the age of 25 and either using or having recently terminated the use of these drugs.

Again I reproduce the information directly from the maker of Paxil:

There has been a long-standing concern, however, that antidepressants may have a role in inducing worsening of depressionand the emergence of suicidality in certain patients during the early phases of treatment. Pooled analyses of short-term placebo-controlledtrials of antidepressant drugs (SSRIs and others) showed that these drugs increase the risk of suicidal thinking and behavior (suicidality) in children, adolescents, and young adults (ages 18-24) with majordepressive disorder (MDD) and other psychiatric disorders. Short-term studies did notshow an increase in the risk of suicidality with antidepressants compared to placebo in adults beyond age 24;

Something changes around the age of 24 with these drugs and their interaction with the human mind.  We don’t know exactly what it is, but we know that it happens.  We also know that these substances have a low but present risk of inducing mania, including rage.

Utterly nobody is bringing this element to the table in debate, but we must, as the rise of these incidents isdirectly correlated to the gross increase in the number of people, including most-especially young people, taking these drugs.  The number of users doubled from 1996 – 2005.

If you want to address a problem you must look at the data and follow it where it leads.

Where it leads is into a horrifying mess of prescription psychotropic drug use among our youth and the rare but catastrophic side effects they sometimes produce.

I have friends who have versions of the problem in their families among older individuals; members of the family who doctor-shop for prescription on top of prescription and are mentally questionable to start with.  We’re supposed to have some sort of reasonable check and balance on this and indeed Florida claims to have clamped down on the “pill mills” but I can tell you right now that this is utter and complete crap.  There is nothing preventing people from going to 10 different doctors until they find three or four that will write scripts and then abusing the drugs — and when they run out “early” calling up for a refill — and getting it.  It happens every damned day and if other family members try to intervene, including getting the physicians or the law involved (prescription fraud is supposed to be illegal!) they’re blown off!

It’s true that most of the crazy people in the world aren’t violent, and that being crazy, standing alone, is perfectly legal.  It’s also true that nearly all of the people who take these drugs won’t become violent — that’s a side effect that only bites a small percentage of the people who take the drug.

But the risk of turning people into rage monsters and suicidal maniacs appears to be mostly confined to those under the age of 24 according to the drug companies own information and this information is strongly correlated with the actual real-world data on these incidents.

We must have a discussion about this as a society.  We might decide that out of the 27 million or more Americans taking these drugs that enough get benefit that we are willing to accept the occasional school or movie theater shooting gallery as the price of prescribing these drugs to those under the age of 24.

If so then we need to be honest about the trade-off we have made as a society and shut the hell up instead of dancing in the blood of dead children to score political points and destroy The Constitution.

But if not, and you can count my vote among the “No” votes in this regard, then we must ban these substances from those under the age of 24 until we understand what’s different among that age group that alters the risk unless and except those persons are under continual professional supervision such as inpatient hospitalization.

Yeah, I understand this will cut into the profits of the big drug companies and thus is “unacceptable” to many political folks, not to mention that the media won’t even talk about the subject due to the advertising they run on their networks on a daily basis for this drug or that.

But unless we want to keep burying kids we had damned well better have that debate.

Mr. Biden, Mr. Obama and the rest on both the left and right who are refusing to go where the data leads are all practicing the moral equivalent of ritual child sacrifice, fueling the pyre under the bodies of our kids with the Bill of Rights.

Stand up America and say in a loud voice: ENOUGH!

The U.S. Now Spends More on Immigration Than the Rest of Federal Law Enforcement Combined

(Atlantic) -So what would you guess is the main job of federal law enforcement in 2013? Breaking up drug rings? Patrolling white collar crime?

Try: coping with illegal immigration.

The Migration Policy Institute is out with a new report adding up what the United States has spent trying trying to seal off the border and ferret out undocumented individuals since 1986, when President Regan signed his landmark immigration reform bill. The big, headline-grabbing stat is that we now spend roughly $18 billion annually on immigration control, more than the rest of our major federal law enforcement agencies combined. Part of that is due to the immense increase in border patrol agents — they’ve doubled in the last seven years — who also play a key role intercepting drug shipments. Still, more than half of all federal prosecutions now involve immigration-related crimes — no great surprise, given where we’re putting our resources.

Here’s what the comparison between our immigration spending and the rest of the federal law enforcement budget circa 1986.

Immigration_Policy_Immig_v_Everything_1986_Edited.png

Now here it is today.

Immigration_Policy_Immig_v_Everything_2012_edited.png

 

And finally, here’s the growth of our immigration spending over time. In total, we’ve shelled out $219 billion in today’s dollars in the last 27 years.

Migration_Policy_Spending_86_12.PNG

 

 

 

 
 
 

 

 

 

 

The Department Of Homeland Security Is Hard At Work With One Billion New Bullets

(Business Insider) -Last March we found 450 million rounds of .40 caliber ammunition slated for delivery to the Department of Homeland Service and its agencies.

Weeks later we found an additional request for 750 million rounds. The news wasn’t reported much, though the order forms are still floating around.

It’s not as demand for ammunition by the DHS is terribly new. Manufacturer Winchester posted an award to its site in 2009 agreeing to deliver 200 million rounds for the agency over five years. But if that’s accurate it’s an additional order that’s still coming in on top of the others.

Major General Jerry Curry, (Ret) offered up a good point when the 750 million order became public last fall saying that number of bullets was more than 10 times what U.S. troops used in a full year of Iraqi combat.

Now that a new Department of Homeland Security order for another 200,000 hollow points has been placed, we’re curious to see what happens to that much ammunition in 12 months. Knowing that DHS trains rural, regional, and federal law enforcement at their Georgia training center, we took a look online to see what programs they have requiring so much firepower.

The Firearms Division at the DHS Federal Law Enforcement Training Center is the biggest facility of its kind in the nation and has more than 88 officers from several federal agencies teaching students all they need to know.

Main firearm courses where some of those millions of bullets go:

Homeland Security offers a Rifle Training Program, a Precision Rifle Observer Training Program (PROP) that looks like a 37 hour sniper/counter-sniper course. The bonus at PROP is any uniformed officer can take the course and receive the advanced training, since assignment to a sniper team or tactical unit is not required. No rifle or sniper training at all, in fact, is required to take this one where public servants learn to take out targets at more than 1,800 feet away.

There’s also the Reactive Shooting Instructor Training Program (RSITP), which looks like some sound practical advice for folks facing off against bad people during their workday.

The Submachine Gun Instructor Training Program (SMGITP) is the class you just know gets wait-listed with the brass and its friends. If shooters are unfortunate enough to lack their own machine guns, DHS provides H&K MP-5 and UMP-40, Colt M-4, SMG (9mm) and the FN P90 for testing and training. There are even two tests required to graduate this one. Maybe submachine guns are as difficult to fire as they are fun, or maybe it’s just another couple chances to cook off more free ammunition. One test goes down with the H&K MP-5 the other the Colt M-4.

Finally, the Survival Shooting Training Program (SSTP) seems like a challenging 8.5 day Master course where Law Enforcement Officer’s become acquainted with a variety of weaponry, technique, and the effects of stress.

HK UMP

Wikimedia Commons

UMP-40

Definitely a comprehensive program, especially the Interesting Facts About The Firearms Division page. I’ll list them below in their entirety after I point one fact that states all the firing in the above courses, and whatever else gets expended, requires about 15 million rounds of ammunition a year.

That doesn’t make the most recent batch of 200,000 rounds seem out of line, but those billion or so rounds, seem like they could be better accounted for. Anyway, as promised — all the interesting facts about the firearms division:

  • Firearms Division (FAD) has approximately 49 buildings that include indoor and outdoor firing ranges, offices, ammunition and weapons storage, equipment and supply storage spaces.
  • The indoor range complex and the outdoor ranges (to include 2 outdoor ranges currently under construction) have a combined total of approximately 384 firing points for live fire training.
  • These do not include the various scenario-based training ranges that FAD uses for tactical training.
  • FAD has approximately 9 training ranges used for scenario-based tactical firearms training.
  • There are approximately 150 staff members assigned to the Firearms Division including managers, support personnel and instructors.
  • The instructor cadre consists of former law enforcement and/or military personnel who now work for the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC) and current law enforcement personnel detailed from many of the agencies who participate in training conducted at the FLETC.
  • Training requires the use of approximately 15 million rounds of ammunition annually.
  • The ammunition includes lead projectiles and reduced hazard (environmentally friendly) ammunition.
  • The reduced hazard ammunition accounts for approximately 70 percent of the ammunition expended for training.
  • FAD offers 8 advanced firearms training programs. These programs are open to Federal, state and municipal law enforcement personnel. Some international law enforcement personnel attend these programs when they are sponsored by one of the Federal partner agencies.
  • FAD offers approximately 120 firearms courses. Many of these are contained in FLETC basic, agency basic and advanced law enforcement training programs.
  • FAD conducts advanced export training (off site) at other Federal, state and municipal facilities around+ the country on an as-needed basis.
** Signing off the DHS FLETC home page we noticed a small banner at the bottom right stating firearms training requires about 20 million rounds annually. So give-or-take five million or so. No wonder they need so many deliveries.

New Documentary Blames U.S. Department of Homeland Security for Brittany Murphy’s Death [W/ VIDEO]

(Huffington Post) When Brittany Murphy died back in 2009, many believed the actress’s abuse of prescription drugs and historic eating disorders were to blame. But now a controversial documentary claims her demise was far more sinister.

Top Priority: The Terror Within tells the alleged true story of how Brittany was caught up in a government plot against a national security whistleblower.

Another conspiracy theory you may think but after speaking to the whistleblower and filmmaker Julia Davis the accusation does not seem so outlandish.

According to Julia, ‘Britt defended [her] from false allegations and [she] intends to keep doing the same for her, even in death.’

‘Britt was neither paranoid nor a drug abuser [but] was branded as such simply because her friends and industry contacts couldn’t believe the magnitude of retaliation the couple were facing.’

The actress’s movie breakthrough came in the 90s as Ty in classic teen comedy Clueless. Afterwards, Brittany racked up a number of high profile roles, in films like Sin CityDon’t Say A Word and Just Married, where she met former beau Ashton Kutcher.

So like many I was shocked to hear of her death at such a young age and as a result ‘of natural causes’. Especially as two months after announcing the cause of death, Los Angeles Assistant Chief Coroner Ed Winter changed his mind, adding ‘multiple drug intoxication’ to the report.

The Girl, Interrupted star was laid to rest at Forest Lawn Memorial Park on Christmas Eve, 2009, but as worldwide speculation into her sudden death continued, her British husband Simon Monjack, 39, died under similar circumstances just five months later on May 23, 2010.

Celebrity blogger Perez Hilton said it ‘came as no surprise’, and, only a month before making this statement, he predicted that she would be the next big Hollywood death on a U.S. radio show.

In 2011 Brittany’s mother, Sharon Murphy, was unhappy with the coroner’s report and wanted a better explanation. She blamed the death of her daughter and son-in-law on toxic mould found in their Hollywood home.

That’s when Sharon – who lived in the house with the couple – decided to file a suit against Brittany’s lawyers who she claimed double-crossed her into giving up her rights to sue the builders for wrongful death.

However, the documentary points the finger at a far greater power, at U.S. government spooks who allegedly targeted Murphy and her husband.

The film reveals that:

    • Murphy and Monjack were on the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) watch list;

 

    • U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) were trying to kick her screenwriter husband out of the country;

 

    • Monjack was arrested over an expired visa – a ruthless tactic to intimidate Murphy after she spoke out in defence of Julia Davis, a former Customs and Border Protection agent.

 

 

‘Britt and her husband Simon didn’t deserve to be terrorized by the Department of Homeland Security for standing up to defend me,’ says Davis.

The former enforcement officer was suing the government for wrongful imprisonment and according to the film, Homeland Security falsely claimed that the statement given by Murphy supported their allegations against Davis.

Davis’s husband BJ – who co-produced the documentary – says that their actress friend was ‘completely taken aback’ by the department’s deceit and hit back against their lies by issuing a sworn statement through her attorneys.

But BJ says that ‘Britt’s life was never the same’ and from then on she placed herself ‘in the crosshairs of Julia’s attackers.’

The film isn’t the first to note the couple’s fear of being under government watch. American journalist, Alex Ben Block, said that Simon Monjack told him ‘they were under surveillance by helicopters and their phone was bugged.’

And within days of sharing his worries, on 21 December, Murphy was dead.

She was found unconscious in her bathroom by her mother, who called an ambulance to rush her daughter to Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, LA, where she was pronounced dead on arrival.

In a bid to find the truth about the star’s death – like her mother Sharon – Brittany’s father Angelo Bertolli had to pay for his daughter’s hair samples to be saved from destruction after the LA Coroner admitted tests ‘for poisons and toxic substances’ had not been carried out during the autopsy.

But as Angelo failed to term up to a court hearing to make his case, the lawsuit was subsequently thrown out. However, with the fresh investigation into Murphy’s death, favour does seem to be falling on the side of the filmmakers.

But let’s go back to the beginning, to the moment in 2004 when Homeland Security branded Davis a ‘domestic terrorist’ because she accused government officials of breaching national security.

Davis had discovered that 23 foreigners from terrorist countries had been allowed onto U.S. soil, the same day Osama Bin Laden had planned terrorist attacks on America.

After Julia Davis highlighted the security breach in a report to her supervisors, the film claims Homeland Security took ‘hostile action’ against Davis, her family and friends.

This included a staggering 54 investigations leading to two malicious prosecutions, two false imprisonments, and a Black Hawk helicopter raid on her home that involved 27 DHS agents and one U.S. Marshal.

Shockingly, the film says the hush-hush tactics and the attack on Julia Davis, her family and Hollywood friends took more military manpower than the assassination of Bin Laden.

Luckily for Davis, she was finally cleared of all accusations in 2010. But not content, she decided to tell her story by writing and producing the film, that made sure ‘these monsters’ didn’t get away with their crimes.

The film’s director Asif Akbar says that when he first met BJ and Julia Davis he knew the ‘incredible true story had to be told.’ The filmmaker found it shocking that so many government officials and citizens, ‘were willing to accept corruption as the norm of life.’

Akbar now claims he and his family are being targeted by Homeland Security. He says officials have ‘raided their business’ after Top Priority premiered at the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences on May 16 this year.

Remarkably, Julia Davis is still under surveillance by the government, saying that her bank accounts are levied ‘on special dates.’ But her film won’t be the only project to shed some light on the mysterious life of Brittany Murphy.

Akbar and Davis have teamed up again, along with the actress’s father, to write and produce a biopic, called Britt. The director says the film will cover everything during Brittany’s rise to fame including ‘her romances, lifestyle, career and her untimely death.’

Considering the subject matter and heavy accusations it is unsurprising that reviews of the documentary have not been kind, with the New York Times describing Top Priority as serving ‘neither the viewer nor its embattled subject.’

Another critic suggests it ‘too often distracts from the core story instead of enhancing it.’

Whether you believe Julia Davis’ story or not, there is no doubt that the ambiguous life of Brittany Murphy is a tale worth telling.

Watch the trailer for Top Priority: The Terror Within here…

 

 

Two Time Olympic Gold Medalist Detained As Possible Terrorist

theintelhub.com
Two time Olympic gold medal winner Mo Farah was recently detained and questioned as a possible terrorist by overzealous US Customs officials in Oregon.

Farah, both gold medals in hand, was apparently singled out and pulled aside by officials due to his Somali origin.

MO Farah was quizzed by US customs on suspicion of being a terrorist — even though he had his two Olympic gold medals in his suitcase.

The Team GB hero, one of the world’s most famous athletes, was hauled off for questioning after border guards saw he was born in Somalia.

Mo, 29, said: “I couldn’t believe it.

Because of my Somali origin I get detained every time I come through US Customs.

This time I even got my medals out to show who I am, but they wouldn’t have it.”

Startlingly, this is not the first time Farah has been accused of being a terrorist by US officials.

After leaving Portland on a travel visa and expecting to return on a more permanent residency visa that had already been given the go ahead by sports giant Nike, Farah was stopped from entering the country due to suspicion that he was a terrorist.

“We were in Portland on a tourist visa so had to leave and re-enter the country as a resident.

“So we flew to Toronto to stay for a few days, then come back in.

{…..}

“But when we were there we got a letter telling us we’re under investigation as a terrorist threat and we would have to stay away for 90 days.

Only after his coach in Portland contacted a friend in the FBI was the gold medalist allowed to enter the US.

“As luck would have it Alberto has a friend who works for the FBI.

This guy happens to be a massive running fan, knew exactly who I was and got it sorted then and there.

The above display of ridiculous American police state tactics is only one small example of what has sadly become an everyday occurrence in America.

From TSA sexually harassing anyone from children to grandmothers, DHS labeling OWS as a possible terrorist group, and police around the country completely ignoring the 4 amendment, this country is slowly but surely transforming into an Orwellian police state nightmare.

Hillary Clinton Admitted To Hospital With A Blood Clot Following Concussion

 

 
 
 
 
 

 

Hillary Clinton
(Business Insider) -The Associated Press is reporting that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has been admitted to the hospital with a blood clot following a concussion, according to a spokesperson. 

CBS News correspondent Margaret Brennan tweets that a spokesperson for Clinton confirmed that the former First Lady has been taken to New York Presbyterian, and that the hospital will monitor her for the next 48 hours.

According to Foreign Policy’s Josh Rogin, Clinton was scheduled to return to work this week following a three-week recovery from a stomach virus and concussion.

The illness was first reported December 10, when Clinton’s office announced that it was the reason the Secretary of State had canceled a scheduled trip to the Middle East. On December 15, Clinton’s doctors reported that she had also sustained a concussion after fainting from her illness.

Conservative pundits and bloggers have accused Clinton of faking the illness in order to avoid testifying in an open Congressional hearing about the Sept. 11 attacks on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya. Clinton has said she will testify in front of both House and Senate committees when she returns to work.

Atty-Gen secretly granted the power to create, store dossiers on innocent Americans

(End The Lie) -It is now being reported that U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder secretly gave the U.S. government the authority to create and store dossiers on innocent Americans not suspected of committing any crime, without any debate or approval from lawmakers.

This is hardly surprising since Holder gave the same entity, the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) the ability to store the personal information of Americans for up to five years, even without so much as a suspicion of the individual being involved in criminal activity of any kind.

Furthermore, this is the same Attorney General who claimed that secret reviews of classified evidence count as due process when deciding if the executive branch can assassinate Americans allegedly involved in terrorist activity.

While in days past, the NCTC could not store data compiled on U.S. citizens unless they were at least suspected of some terrorist activity or were otherwise relevant to an ongoing terrorism investigation, they not only can collect and store massive databases of private information but also “trawl through and analyze it for suspicious patterns of behavior in order to uncover activity that could launch an investigation,” according to Wired’s Threat Level.

It just continues to get worse, if such a thing is even possible. Holder now instituted changes that allow databases filled with U.S. citizens’ private information to be shared with foreign governments for their analysis as well.

Of course, this is all done under the guise of fighting terrorism, something which is patently absurd given that Americans are included in the databases even when they do not have the most tenuous of links to terrorism.

According to one former senior White House official quoted by the Wall Street Journal, the new changes are “breathtaking in scope.” This did not, however, stop counterterrorism officials from attempting to downplay the seriousness of this new development, which was first reported by the Journal.

“The guidelines provide rigorous oversight to protect the information that we have, for authorized and narrow purposes,” claimed Alexander Joel, Civil Liberties Protection Officer for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.

These types of claims are regularly made, but one must realize that they are likely without much merit seeing as the Obama administration didn’t even have formal drone guidelines while they were killing a 16-year-old American and countless others abroad with unmanned aerial systems (UAS).

Currently, the NCTC’s Terrorist Identities Datamart Environment (TIDE) database houses data on over 500,000 people either suspected of terrorist activity or links to terrorism which includes “friends and families of suspects, and is the basis for the FBI’s terrorist watchlist,” according to Threat Level.

However, the new rules will likely make this database even larger since the NCTC can now gather any and all information they claim is “reasonably believed” to contain “terrorism information.”

This could include – and if the government’s history is any indicator, likely will – personal information ranging from financial forms submitted by individuals attempting to get federally-backed mortgages to health records of individuals who sought out mental or physical healthcare at government-run medical facilities, such as Veterans Administration hospitals.

Similar proposals but forth by the Bush administration in the past were shot down after a great deal of outcry, but it seems that the Obama administration is somehow immune to this type of scrutiny and condemnation.

Threat Level cites the Pentagon’s Total Information Awareness program which, in 2002, “proposed to scrutinize both government and private databases, but public outrage killed the program in essence, though not in spirit.”

“Although Congress de-funded the program in 2003, the NSA continued to collect and sift through immense amounts of data about who Americans spoke with, where they traveled and how they spent their money,” Threat Level adds.

While the Federal Privacy Act prohibits government entities from sharing private data for any purpose other than that for which it was originally obtained, this is actually only in principle.

In reality, government agencies regularly avoid this restriction “by posting a notice in the Federal Register, providing justification for the data request. Such notices are rarely seen or contested, however,” according to Threat Level.

It seems that the justification being used in an attempt to make this slightly more palatable to the public is the 2009 case of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, better known as the underwear bomber.

However, we now know that this case – like another underwear bombing plot earlier this year along with countless other cases – was intimately linked to the government itself.

While they claim that systems like that now implemented in the NCTC are necessary because “Abdulmutallab wasn’t on the FBI watchlist, but the NCTC had received tips about him, and yet failed to search other government databases to connect dots that might have helped prevent him from boarding the plane,” we now know that his father made several calls about his son, all of which were apparently ignored.

Furthermore, eyewitness testimony presented in court and in media reports (see TV news report on the subject here) by practicing lawyer Kurt Haskell makes the entire government narrative look dubious at best.

As Haskell stated in court, “I became further saddened from this case, when Patrick Kennedy of the State Department during Congressional hearings, admitted that Umar was a known terrorist, was being followed, and the U.S. allowed him into the U.S. so that it could catch Umar’s accomplices.”

It just got worse when Haskell noted, “Michael Leiter of the National Counter terrorism Center admitted during these same hearings that intentionally letting terrorists into the U.S. was a frequent practice of the U.S. Government.”

So, is this something that should be remedied by giving the government even more power over the private information of Americans? I see no reason to believe that would help anything at all.

The NCTC claims that their counterterrorism activities were hindered because they “couldn’t look through the databases trolling for general ‘patterns,’” according to the Journal.

While former Department of Homeland Security Chief Privacy Officer Mary Ellen Callahan attempted to defend the rights of Americans by arguing that the new rules were a “sea change in the way that the government interacts with the general public,” according to the ABA Journal.

This led to the conclusion that, as Threat Level put it, “every interaction a citizen would have with the government in the future would be ruled by the underlying question, is that person a terrorist?” Callahan ended up losing her battle and subsequently left her position after which she entered private practice.

So are these new powers necessary or justifiable? I seriously doubt it. Let us know what you think in the comments section of this post.

Son of top DHS border cop busted for running cocaine

Cocaine trafficking via AFP

 
 (Raw Story) -Four south Texas police officers, including the son of a top cop advising the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) on border issues, were charged Thursday with accepting thousands of dollars in bribes to guard cartel cocaine shipments.

One of the officers arrested, 29-year-old Alexis Rigoberto Espinoza, is the son of Hidalgo Chief of Police Rodolfo Espinoza, according to south Texas newspaper The Monitor.

Another one of the officers, 29-year-old Jonathan Treviño, is the son of Hidalgo County Sheriff Lupe Treviño. The elder Treviño also serves on the Southwest Border Task Force, a group established by DHS chief Janet Natpolitano in 2009 to advise her on border issues.

 

Two other officers, 28-year-old Fabian Rodriguez and 30-year-old Gerardo Duran, were reportedly members of the sheriff’s narcotics task force, nicknamed the “Panama Unit,” according to Government Security News. All four men were arrested on Wednesday.