Published by NextNewsNetwork
Obama Administration Violates NDAA
Is the United States supporting al-Qaeda in Syria — and if so, why? During the Memorial Day weekend, Arizona Republican Senator John McCain, one of the most fervent supporters of increased U.S. military involvement in Syria, visited that country and posed for photographs of a rebel group with ties to al-Qaeda.
A few days earlier a video emerged showing one of the field commanders of that rebel group eating the heart of a dead Syrian soldier. Other video from the Syrian civil war shows U.S.-backed rebels marching in the ranks of a unit calling itself the Osama bin Laden Brigade.
Under federal law, lending material support for a group listed as a terrorist organization by the State Department is a felony. Under the National Defense Authorization Act of 2011 — which was supported by McCain — providing material support for al-Qaeda or “associated forces” is grounds for indefinite detention in military custody.
If those laws were applied even-handedly, Senator McCain would find himself in the dock — or perhaps even in Gitmo. But the same would be true of many other officials — including President Obama, Secretary of State John Kerry, and numerous congressmen from both parties — who have approved of providing humanitarian and military aid to the al-Qaeda connected Syrian rebels.
How did we find ourselves in this position? What is likely to happen in Syria, and the region, as the country’s civil war deepens, and U.S. involvement expands? We’ll discuss these urgent questions with Jason Ditz, a contributing editor at AntiWar.com.
By Eric Blair
Two disturbing developments have occurred in the last couple of days that have gone relatively unnoticed compared to the recent IRS, AP, and Benghazi scandals.
First, the senate is debating an expansion of the already broad powers of the 2001 Authorization to Use Military Force (AUMF) so the U.S. can essentially engage any area in the world in the war on terror, including America. Which brings us to the second development: the Pentagon has recently granted itself police powers on American soil.
Assistant Secretary of Defense Michael Sheehan told Congress yesterday that the AUMF authorized the US military to operate on a worldwide battlefield from Boston to Pakistan. Sheehan emphasized that the Administration is authorized to put boots on the ground wherever the enemy chooses to base themselves, essentially ignoring the declaration of war clause in the US Constitution.
Senator Angus King said this interpretation of the AUMF is a “nullity” to the Constitution because it ignores Congress’ role to declare war. King called it the “most astoundingly disturbing hearing” he’s been to in the Senate.
Even ultra-hawk John McCain agreed that the AUMF has gone way beyond its authority.
“This authority … has grown way out of proportion and is no longer applicable to the conditions that prevailed, that motivated the United States Congress to pass the authorization for the use of military force that we did in 2001,” McCain said.
Glenn Greenwald wrote an excellent piece describing how this hearing reveals the not-so-secret plan to make the war on terror a permanent fixture in Western society.
It is hard to resist the conclusion that this war has no purpose other than its own eternal perpetuation. This war is not a means to any end but rather is the end in itself. Not only is it the end itself, but it is also its own fuel: it is precisely this endless war – justified in the name of stopping the threat of terrorism – that is the single greatest cause of that threat.
A self-perpetuating permanent war against a shadowy undefinable enemy appears to be the future of American foreign policy. How convenient for the war machine and tyrants who claim surveillance is safety.
But perhaps most disturbing of all of this is the military’s authority to police American streets as if it was in civil war. For all those still in denial that America is a militarized police state, this should be the ultimate cure to your delusion.
Jeff Morey of AlterNet writes:
By making a few subtle changes to a regulation in the U.S. Code titled “Defense Support of Civilian Law Enforcement Agencies” the military has quietly granted itself the ability to police the streets without obtaining prior local or state consent, upending a precedent that has been in place for more than two centuries.
The most objectionable aspect of the regulatory change is the inclusion of vague language that permits military intervention in the event of “civil disturbances.” According to the rule: “Federal military commanders have the authority, in extraordinary emergency circumstances where prior authorization by the President is impossible and duly constituted local authorities are unable to control the situation, to engage temporarily in activities that are necessary to quell large-scale, unexpected civil disturbances.”
A law from 1878 called the Posse Comitatus Act was put in place to prevent the Department of Defense from interfering with local law enforcement. But now, the DoD claims they’ve had this authority for over 100 years.
I awoke this Saturday morning reflecting back on the heinous crime committed causing loss of life and so many casualties, grieving for the victims and their families. Then reflecting on the massive manhunt for this 19 year old, the lone surviving suspect of the crime, and the level that this manhunt has grown to. It appears all levels of law enforcement were involved, from local police to federal agents. Looking back at the massive amount of man (and woman) hours involved, the millions of dollars expended in the pursuit and lost community revenues due to city lock downs, along with the MSM spin time devoted to the coverage of the man hunt for this suspect, I think back to how this would have been handled in the pre-police militarization state we find our selves in.
When all is said and done, for now, the suspected criminal in custody, the cities are no longer locked down and life in these towns resume. So is it to be assumed the man hunt mission was triumphant? The police state enacting marshal law and locking down five cities came up empty handed. It took a home owner checking his personal property to find the suspect and close the current chapter of this story that a dominating military presence in the local streets could not, at least up to that point in time.
In the end, five cities locked down, cell phone service killed, people locked into their homes, military and militarized police patrolling the streets and entering to search door to door. The result when the victim was captured was praise and adulation, mission accomplished. The other mission accomplished was the social engineering, not only to the people in the Boston area, but also all those tuning in to the MSM, as armored personnel carriers, SWAT teams on roof top and police carrying M-16 rifles (called assault weapons if owned by civilians) while searching your homes are a good thing, as giving up person freedom and liberty is a small price to pay for false security. Finally, the assistance of an alert home owner was needed to accomplish what the police state was having great difficulty in completing.
My appreciation to Daniel’s post below featured on Lew Rockwell.
Martial Law in Boston Did Not Catch the Suspect
Look at these chilling photos of a major American city under total martial law. The local police force and investigative units have switched over to military assault vehicles on the streets, robo-cop science-fiction soldiers plugged in to all manner of spooky devices looking like the Borg and screaming orders like “if you want to live, turn off your cell phones.”
We read the shocking full story in the Washington Post today. Perhaps some of us are too naive, but this still seems unreal in the United States:
“By order of the state, a public transit system that serves more than 1.3 million riders a day was padlocked. Amtrak trains were suspended between Boston and New York. Businesses, offices and some of the world’s greatest universities were shut. Taxis were ordered off the streets for part of the day. Residents were instructed to stay inside.”
As does this:
“An indication of the complex investigation ahead came Friday night, when an Obama administration official told NBC News that Tsarnaev would not be given a Miranda warning when he is physically able to be interrogated after receiving medical treatment.
“Instead, the official said, the government will invoke a legal rule known as the ‘public safety exception,’ which will enable investigators to question Tsarnaev without first advising him of his right to remain silent and to be afforded legal counsel.”
But this is what strikes one the most, pondering all of the above: the police state did not catch the suspect. The borg did not catch the suspect. Martial law did not catch the suspect. People forced to stay in their homes did not catch the suspect. Warrantless searches did not catch the suspect.
Like the government’s initial failure (or worse) to identify and apprehend the suspects before the bombing, the government also failed in its military assault on an entire city.
Let us never forget that Dzhokar Tsarnaev was discovered by a private citizen, who happened to go out and check on his boat (i.e. violating the lockdown order of the cops), see a body inside of it, and call the cops. In other words, the police state achieved nothing but the psychological conditioning of the population: when we, the state, decide any particular event is important enough, you will lose every single right including possibly the right to life if you resist.
Writing in the Washington Times Communities section, Thomas Mullen sums it up nicely:
19-year-old Boston Marathon bombing suspect Dzhokar Tsarnaev is in custody. Assuming that Tsarnaev is indeed guilty of these crimes, a very real threat to public safety has been taken off the streets. That’s the good news.
The bad news is that the Tsarnaev brothers have taken the last vestiges of a free society in America down with them.
The Bill of Rights was already on life support before this tragedy. Before the dust settled after 9/11, the 4th Amendment had been nullified by the Patriot Act. The 5th and 6th Amendments were similarly abolished with the Military Commission Act of 2006 and the 2012 NDAA resolution, which contained a clause allowing the president to arrest and indefinitely detain American citizens on American soil without due process of law.
This legacy is the real Boston tragedy. The Rubicon has been crossed.
H/T to Matthew Hays
Published on Jan 26, 201
Uploaded by: THISISZION42303
Obama to Top Brass: Will you fire on American Citizens?
The Obama administration is openly escalating its campaign against private gun ownership, and shaking up the top ranks of the military command structure — but is it also preparing to make war on the American population? According to a person identified as a former senior military official, the answer to that shocking question is yes.
World-renowned educator and human rights activist Jim Garrow says that the source, man regarded as “one of America’s foremost military heroes,” told him that President Obama is using a new litmus test for “determining who will stay and who must go” among top-ranked military leaders. That test is whether they will fire on US citizens or not. Garrow says that his source made the disclosure in order to “sound the alarm” over the administration’s plans.
While Garrow will not yet reveal the identity of the source, it’s important to note that Garrow himself is a man of considerable accomplishment. He is the founder of the Bethune Institute, which has established hundreds of schools throughout China. Three years ago, he was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize for his work though a group called Pink Pagoda, which combat “gendercide” in China — that is, the practice of rescuing baby girls who had been abandoned or targeted for infanticide because of the government’s one-child policy. He was personally involved in helping to save the lives of more than 50,000 Chinese girls. He joins Gary Franchi on WHDT World News to discuss this new “Litmus Test.”
Next News Network’s WHDT World News Program airs daily at 6pm and 11pm Eastern on Comcast, DirecTV and Over-the-Air and Online at http://usmediavault.com/
By Paul Howe
I have quietly watched and evaluated the in pouring of e-mails reference the liberal’s intent to seize guns and crush the second amendment. I want to add a few of my own thoughts on this issue as I have worked in and around all the people who could be tasked to seize your guns.
WHO’S COMING TO GET THEM?
United Nations (UN)
We are the UN. Other countries mostly join the U.N. to secure money, funding and training and few have any offensive combat capability. Most serve as guards at static locations and have no will to fight. America is the enforcement arm of the U.N. We have the money, equipment, personnel and lift platforms to get the job done.
If the president ever let the U.N. in this country, it would be a foreign invasion and armed Americans would stand up and crush them in a day. Our government would break down and the president would be ousted for letting foreign militaries invade our country.
Federal Government Military
Having served over 20 years in our military, I know that most soldiers would refuse the order to take part in the confiscation of weapons. First, the president would have to give the order, which is an “Illegal Order” in violation of the constitution. I don’t believe that service members would go back into the communities that raised them and conduct raids on good Americans in violation of the constitution.
Remember, these forces would have to come from a military base that is surrounded and supported by American communities. Civilians would simply cease to support the bases and they would fold in a short time. Cut of the fuel, food, electricity on bases and this would stop the silliness. Also, many, many service members live in the communities and they would have to travel from their houses to base unless they were locked down. In that case, their families would still be in the community and people would not be too friendly to those supporting these actions.
Federal Government DHS or TSA
The Federal government is not large enough or talented enough to seize guns. If they were to do 5-8 raids a day seizing guns, they would be physically and mentally exhausted and need a break. Physically conducting raids is exhausting. After the first few raids, the word would get out and Americans would start to fight back. It would take one good ambush from a house or along a travel route to decimate a tactical force or make it combat ineffective
Next, most Federal Agencies work out of a fixed location centrally located in a community. Also, their personnel live in those communities along with their families. Once the word got out that they were doing raids in violation to the constitution, they and their families would be at risk. If they were to start raiding houses, kicking in doors and breaking in windows looking for legally owned guns, their homes would be subject to the same treatment by Americans rising up to defend themselves. They would shortly find themselves without a place to live.
State Law Enforcement
The Governor would have to order State and Local Law Enforcement to either:
- Seize guns
- Ignore the Federal Orders
If they ignore the Federal Orders, things would be tense, but people would be civil. If they started to seize guns, they only have limited people and assets to do this. Much the same consequences would take place as with the Federal Government.
Local Law Enforcement
Local Police and Sheriff Departments are the backbone of who protects American Citizens. A Sheriff or Chief of Police would have to give the order for his people to begin to seize weapons. Their people would either comply or see it as an illegal order and refuse.
Remember, Chiefs and Sheriff’s also have to live and work in the same communities they serve. As I described with the Federal Government, local Tactical Teams could probably only do 8-10 hits in a day and then need a break. So they hit ten houses and seize their guns, the word would get out and now they are subject to living in the same community as those they are attacking. It would not go well. Also, after one or two determined Americans or combat vets fought back, the team would lose many to death or injury and they would have made a decision whether to continue to push the fight. Remember also, they have to sleep sometime. Their homes and families would be at risk. It is an ugly scenario at best.
Nation of Combat Veterans and Patriots
Having been at war for over 10 years, we have a nation of combat vets and contractors that have seen more action than many of our WWII vets. It has been said that only a small percentage of Americans stood up to the British War machine in the Revolutionary War. Americans are better armed and trained today than at any time in our nation’s history. Think about what would happen if just our nation’s veterans stood up. People have been buying more guns and ammunition in the past five years than any time in my life. The guns and ammunition are out there along with the talent to use them.
Kool-Aid Drinkers is the term I use to describe the Jonestown voluntarily massacre where the Peoples Temple Agricultural Project, a dedicated community western Guyana by the Peoples Temple led by cult leader Jim Jones intentionally drank poison Kool-Aid. Over 900 people died.
In every law enforcement, government and military agency or branch, there are a small number of Kool-Aid drinkers who would blindly follow orders. They would either be purged internally by their co-workers or people they attacked would stop their gene pool.
Also, at the police tactical team level, all members “volunteer” for the job and they can have the individual integrity to terminate their team service at any time if their profession becomes corrupt or misguided. I know many a good officer that has done that in the past.
Finally, there would be a certain number of American Kool-Aid drinkers that would turn in their weapons if asked. I believe it would be a small percentage as there are always those that do not have the will to resist or fight and they are not needed should thing get tough.
History of “Gun-Free Zones”
Our nation’s history is filled with examples of “gun-free” zones failed.
The Aurora Colorado movie massacre and the recent Connecticut shooting are two that come to mind. Also, remember the Fort Hood massacre where an Islamic extremist Major Nidal Malik Hasan killed 13 soldiers because our military bases are gun free zones. Combat trained soldiers had to be rescued by a security guard. That is embarrassing.
Evil came to all of these places and everyone was disarmed and not ready to fight back because they were gun free zones.
Think what would happen at a national level if the American people were disarmed. Another evil would come along either from inside our country or outside of it and resulting in our downfall.
How about others in recent history:
In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.
China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated
Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million.
Write your state representatives and let them know how you feel about this issue. I would like to think that most states would refuse the order.
Next, at the local level, talk to your Sheriff or Chief of Police and ask them if they would allow or support the federal government in their confiscation of firearms. Put them on the spot now and hold them accountable. I like to think that most states would refuse the order.
Should firearm confiscation begin, solutions are simple. If they cannot live in a community, they cannot work in a community. If their house goes away while they are at work confiscating guns, so be it. Allow them to leave with their family and what possessions they can pack in their car. Point them to California and let them know all the Hollywood types would be happy to financially support them in the fantasy land they wish to live in and that they are not welcome in Free America.
In the end I believe that guns are the glue that hold our country together. Guns keep the government in check and the individual American safe and free. Remove guns and the government will no longer be controlled by the people. The government will control the people.
Finally, it is claimed that the Battles of Lexington and Concord, in 1775 were started because General Gage attempted to carry out an order by the British government to disarm the population resulting in the “Shot heard round the world.”
About the Author
Paul R. Howe is a 20-year veteran and former Special Operations soldier and instructor. He owns Combat Shooting and Tactics (CSAT), where he consults with, trains and evaluates law enforcement and government agencies in technical and tactical techniques throughout the special operations spectrum. See www.combatshootingandtactics.com for details.
Image added to original post.
Published on Sep 3, 2012 by NextNewsNetwork
http://NextNewsNetwork.com | Is America descending into a gray state? We sit down with writer/producer David Crowley and Actor Danny Mason from the new “Gray State” film to preview the concept trailer and discuss the just how far America has fallen into the “Gray State.”
Please watch, share, like and subscribe!
Get the latest on the film at http://GrayStateMovie.com
US Army statistics show that the suicide rate among military personnel is rising exponentially. Last July, an estimated 38 suicides were “confirmed or suspected” by soldiers making that month the deadliest time in Army history.
Active duty suicides have climbed up to 22% with 116 deaths so far in 2012. Veterans are in most danger of committing suicide. While the Army has traditionally viewed younger soldiers as “at risk” for suicide, since the majority of deaths are occurring with veteran and older soldiers, that assumption is shifting.
Gen. Lloyd J. Austin III, US Army vice chief of staff, said: “Suicide is the toughest enemy I have faced in my 37 years in the Army. And, it’s an enemy that’s killing not just soldiers, but tens of thousands of Americans every year. That said, I do believe suicide is preventable. To combat it effectively will require sophisticated solutions aimed at helping individuals to build resiliency and strengthen their life coping skills. As we prepare for Suicide Prevention Month in September we also recognize that we must continue to address the stigma associated with behavioral health. Ultimately, we want the mindset across our force and society at large to be that behavioral health is a routine part of what we do and who we are as we strive to maintain our own physical and mental wellness.”
Leon Panetta, US Defense Secretary testified before Congress about solider suicides, saying “that this is an epidemic . . . something’s wrong.”
By Paul Joseph Watson
Wednesday, August 15, 2012
Federal agency blacks out amount of bullets being bought
The Department of Homeland Security has redacted information relating to the quantity of bullets it is buying following a controversy concerning the agency’s purchase of over a billion rounds of ammo, which many fear is a sign the federal government is preparing for civil unrest in the United States.
Despite the fact that documents are only supposed to be redacted if authorized by Congress or for national security reasons, a solicitation posted on the FedBizOpps website yesterday concerning ammunition purchases made by the DHS on behalf of Immigration & Customs Enforcement (ICE) contains numerous blacked out sections.
The classified portions of the document include references to the amount of 223 62 and 223 64 grain ammunition being purchased.
The solicitation explains how the contract put out by the DHS to purchase the ammunition was not subject to “full and open competition,” a process justified by what the DHS claims was an “unusual and compelling urgency” to acquire the bullets, noting that there is a shortage of bullets which is threatening a situation which could cause “substantial safety issues for the government” should law enforcement officials not be adequately armed.
The Department of Homeland Security’s decision to black out sections of the document, including the number of bullets being purchased, is likely to be related to a massive controversy which has snowballed over the last few weeks pertaining to concerns as to why the federal agency has purchased well over a billion rounds of bullets over the last 6 months alone.
Michael Chertoff, former director of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) have brought the influence of the Israel Defense Force to local police departments across America. By using Zionist training, local police are being mentally and physically shifted from being protectors of American law to purveyors of Zionist control-schemes.
While the suppressive, over-reaching Obama administration, under control of the global Elite, turns our Constitutional Republic in a Fascist Dictatorship, the police forces have been a clear reflection. Suddenly the use of military uniforms, armored vehicles, assault weapons, illegal surveillance is evidence of a Nazi-style computer interference systems are evidencing a dramatic shift in American societal structure.