Tag Archives: police state

Will the Real Zombies Please Stand Up?

Will the Real Zombies Please Stand Up?

by Dave Hodges – thecommonsenseshow.com

Zombies are currently all the rage. Between movies, books, games, television shows, and other media the concept of a zombie apocalypse is very popular. And before you accuse yours truly of totally losing his mind, you should note the accompanying picture is brought to you courtesy of the CDC.

Also, when I read that Russia was testing a beam weapon, which was introduced by Russian defense minister Anatoly Serdyukov that could fight back against a zombie attack, I wondered if I had missed something in my undergraduate Zoology class.

The Australia’s Herald Sun reports that this Russian weapon could transform humans into Zombies. I began to wonder if there really is something to the rumors coming out of both the mainstream media (MSM) about the plausibility of something transforming humans into zombies, which would, in-turn, terrorize humanity.

In October of 2012, Navy special-operations forces, along with the Marines, took part in a DHS drill on an island off the coast of San Diego. The entire drill was based upon a zombie invasion. This drill was not a parody as the exercise was also attended by former CIA director Michael Hayden.

Let me be clear on this point, DHS director, Janet Napolitano is not secretly concerned that the undead will soon overrun the human population. Instead, the agency said it wanted to make a serious counter-terrorism training exercise more fun. ABC news reported the event as an example of wasteful spending. In fact, Senator Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) told ABC News that DHS also spent “$30,000 on an underwater robot for Columbus, Ohio, $240,000 for a armored personnel carrier to protect New Hampshire’s annual pumpkin festival and $69,000 for a hovercraft in Indianapolis.” Wasteful spending, more fun? What a great way to hide what DHS is truly up to.

And just when it could not get an weirder, it is now reported that FEMA will hold a Zombie Apocalypse/Alien Invasion drill in Moscow, Idaho on April 27th, from 9 am to 5 pm with 100 participating actors. DHS scrubbed the notice of the drill from its website. However, the drill is still a go as evidenced by the fact that the County Coordinator, Sandi Rollins, for the Moscow, ID. area is listed as being the local person in charge of the drill. Here is Ms. Rollins’ contact information

County Coordinator
Latah County
PO Box 8068
Moscow, ID 83843 [email protected] 209-883-2265

The National Geographic Channel Popularizes the “Zombie Threat”

The National Geographic Channel produced a docudrama entitled The Truth Behind Zombies. The threat from Zombies begins as an outbreak in which humans exhibit an extreme level of violence, entranced states as they plunge into absolute madness. Within days, the epidemic spreads and humanity is griped with fear. The show speculates that there is something behind the zombie myth. The show then proceeds to speculate on whether a mutated virus could create a vast army of Zombies and the producers go so far as to teach viewers how to survive such a threat.

Before running for the hills, it might be useful to recall that National Geographic has always been a CIA enterprise. And it is interesting that this show surfaced in proximity to the Zombie drills sponsored by DHS.

Against all common sense, I began to wonder if there could really be something to the legends of Zombies and if DHS actually knew something that we did not about this potential threat. Being a researcher, I began to systematically examine each and every instance of the reports of threatening Zombies using the principle known as Occam’s Razor which states that the simplest answer is most often correct answer.

The Russian Zombie Death Ray Gun

Upon closer examination, the alleged Russian inspired Zombie creating death ray is no more than a crowd control device capable of inflicting massive pain and mind-control. The hordes of newly created Russian Zombies were no more than dissidents who needed to brought under control. And the Russian weapon is similar to the “microwave heater” used by the US government for the same purpose. Although the Zombie producing ray gun is a myth, the fact that the device is a crowd control device is highly significant. Perhaps the Russian version of the DHS is also accumulating billions of rounds of ammunition in order to use it against the Russian people.
DHS Zombie Defense Drills

When we strip away the Zombie hype in the media, the Zombie preparation drill in October of last year, according to the videotape evidence, is no more than a glorified target practice session designed to practice shootinh humans.

Below is a two minute clip of the Zombie preparedness drills sponsored by DHS.

It is very difficult for anyone, who is not dumber than a box of rocks, to find the real threat posed by Zombies in this video. It was difficult to hold back the laughter as I watched this video. However, the important thing to remember about this exercise is that the targets were human and they were unarmed and this is no laughing matter.
DHS Training Exercises and Manuals

When one considers the leaked US Army Military Police training manual, which details how military assets are to be used to stop acts of civil disobedience, to confiscate firearms and to even murder Americans on American soil and these documents are further characterizing Americans as enemies of the state who are “suspicious of centralized federal authority.” Christians who believe the Bible is the literal word of God.are also the enemy of DHS.

dhsWhat the hell is DHS up to? Who are the real Zombies? This is a very reasonable question to ask especially with DHS purchasing billions of rounds of ammunition, placing orders for 2700 armored personnel carriers and placing solicitations for 7,000 fully automatic rifles, one should become very suspicious as to the true motives of DHS.
Who Could Ever Forget?

sDo you remember when the DHS got caught using the images of these people as target practice? I have concluded that the pregnant woman is a Zombie as is the little boy and the elderly lady. And just like the Zombies in San Diego and soon to be in Moscow, Idaho, DHS has simply replaced the term domestic terrorist with the term Zombie. Why?

America, YOU Are the Zombies

A mythical Zombie invasion is a politically correct way to practice shooting American citizens in a civilian uprising. Can you imagine the outcry if it were discovered that our military, DHS forces and foreign assets were practicing for civilian uprisings by murdering unarmed civilians in the street? This would serve to awaken a lot of the sheep that mistakenly believes that DHS was actually put in play to protect you from al Qaeda. Also, when you train your troops to be shooting at zombies, it dehumanizes the target and desensitizes the act, thus, making it easier to pull the trigger for American soldiers when they are called upon to fire upon American citizens.

Conclusion

The battle lines have been drawn. Yet, most Americans are still unaware that they are about to the most hunted prey on the planet. Field Marshall Napolitano, on behalf of the globalists, has declared most Americans to be enemies of the illegitimate state.

When you go to bed tonight, instead of counting sheep, instead, maybe you should think about waking up a few of the sheep before you are living through a perpetual globalist nightmare.
SOURCE

SWAT Cop Attracts Ridicule After He’s Pictured with His Rifle Sight on Backwards

SWAT Cop Attracts Ridicule After He’s Pictured with His Rifle Sight on Backwards

SWAT COP WITH SITE ON BACKWARDS

(DAILY MAIL) A SWAT team in upstate New York is being mocked as an example of the difference between military and police training after an officer was captured peering through a backwards sight on his combat rifle.


As users on the military Reddit were quick to point out when the image was posted, the reverse sight makes it effectively useless.

Users mocked the SWAT officers training and some went so far as to question the motives of some of the men serving in local law enforcement.

The officer is using a ‘military style’ assault weapon with a close quarters combat sight that costs roughly $500.

‘It’s disturbing to think that 1) none of his buddies corrected it, and 2) he’s in a real-life situation with his optic on backwards, which means he’s never fired that rifle with the optic on it, which means it isn’t zeroed and he thought it was OK to show up to a gunfight with an unzeroed weapon,’ wrote one Reddit user.SOURCE

Big Sis Refuses To Answer Congress On Bullet Purchases

Big Sis Refuses To Answer Congress On Bullet Purchases

Steve Watson
Infowars.com

Speaking at CPAC with Infowars and We Are Change reporter, Luke Rudkowski, Congressman Timothy Huelscamp revealed this week that the Department of Homeland Security has refused to answer questions from “multiple” members of Congress regarding its recent purchase of huge amounts of weapons and ammunition.

“They have no answer for that question. They refuse to answer to answer that,” Huelscamp said.

“I’ve got a list of various questions of agencies about multiple things. Far from being the most transparent administration in the world, they are the most closed and opaque,” the Congressman added.

“They refuse to let us know what is going on, so I don’t really have an answer for that. Multiple members of Congress are asking those questions,” he added.

“It comes down to during the budget process, during the appropriations process, are we willing to hold DHS’s feet to the fire?”

“We’re going to find out… I say we don’t fund them ’til we get an answer. Those type of things really challenge Americans. They are worried about this administration,” Huelscamp urged.

Watch the clip below:

The Congressman’s comments come in the wake of a demand for answers from New Jersey Congressman Leonard Lance on the same subject.

“I would like a full explanation as to why that has been done and I have every confidence that the oversight committee ….should ask those questions,” said Lance, adding that he shared a belief, “that Congress has a responsibility to ask Secretary Napolitano as to exactly why these purchases have occurred.”

The DHS has purchased over 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition over the past year – enough to wage a 20 year plus war. Earlier this month, Forbes Magazine called for a “national conversation” on the matter.

During the CPAC interview, Congressman Huelscamp also spoke briefly about why he voted twice against the National Defense Authorization Act, stating that it was because of the lack of detail regarding the provision in the bill to allow for incarceration of Americans without due process.

“I think it’s something that is so Constitutionally suspect,” Huelscamp said. “It’s one of those things, if you’re not absolutely crystal clear on a Constitutional issue like that, we shouldn’t take those chances.”

“I gather there are folks on the other side who think they covered that. I just don’t think we did a good enough job,” the Congressman added. “And based on how hard it was for Senator Paul to get an answer out of the administration, very clearly we need to make it absolutely clear that there are Constitutional protections in this country.”

The Congressman also spoke with regards to the recent and ongoing furor over the Obama administration’s intentions for using drones domestically and it’s withholding of information on it’s overseas drone program.

“One of the difficulties I have as a member of Congress is the failure of this administration to provide information on what is actually going on,” Huelscamp said.

“When we take office we sign an oath to office, but we also sign a little card that says we have access to classified military intelligence, and I’ll just tell you, this administration and prior administrations are not very clear or transparent with the folks that actually control their budget.”

“Every member of Congress should know the answers to those questions, and whether or not they can share them,” the Congressman concluded.SOURCE

Democratic Rep: Amend Constitution To Allow Control Of Speech

Democratic Rep: Amend Constitution To Allow Control Of Speech

– A Democratic representative is calling for an amendment to the United States Constitution that would allow for some legislative restriction of freedom of speech.

“We need a constitutional amendment that would allow the legislature to control the so-called free speech rights of corporations,” Rep. Hank Johnson (D-GA) was quoted as saying by CNS News.

He reportedly made these comments while speaking at the Annesbrooks HOA candidate Forum held last month.

In a video obtained by the website, Johnson asserts that “corporations control … patterns of thinking.”

“They control the media. They control the messages that you get,” he added. “And these folks … are setting up a scenario where they’re privatizing every aspect of our lives as we know it. So, wake up! Wake up! Let’s look at what’s happening.”

Corporations and unions are protected under the First Amendment of the Constitution because of the ruling in “Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission,” which found that a state law prohibiting corporations from making political campaign contributions using their treasury funds was unconstitutional.

The ruling additionally stated that the spending was a form of political speech that is protected by the First Amendment, according to the official blog of the Supreme Court of the United States.

“These corporations, along with the people they support, other millionaires who they’re putting into office, are stealing your government,” Johnson was quoted as saying by CNS News. “They’re stealing the government and the U.S. Supreme Court was a big enabler with the Citizens United case.”

SOURCE

Depopulation Through Planned Governmental Starvation of U.S. Citizens

Depopulation Through Planned Governmental Starvation of U.S. Citizens

Dave Hodges

“If people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny.”

Thomas Jefferson

The lessons of history clearly demonstrate that dictatorial regimes, whether they be Socialists, Communists, and Marxists will not hesitate to use food as a weapon against their own people in order to solidify power and impose absolute autocratic control. Food can be withheld from the masses by preventing it from being grown and harvested, by contaminating it and rendering it unfit for human consumption or by simply preventing food from being distributed to a targeted population.

The two most notable examples of dictators using food a weapon in order to destroy the free will of their people comes from the regimes of Stalin and Hitler.

Josef Stalin engaged in his own Soviet style Holocaust when, in 1932 and 1933, and estimated six to 20 million people in the Ukraine died from starvation when Stalin implemented his prescription of “hope and change” policies in order to eliminate the Ukrainian’s desire for becoming their own nation-state.

Upon assuming power, the Stalinist Communist regime rapidly nationalized the food industry and forced all of the region’s farms into collectives. Thus, Stalin’s version of the Holocaust came to fruition in what history has dubbed, the “Holdomor,” in which millions perished in only a two year period when the Soviet government began to exterminate the Ukrainian population by taking control of food and food production.

Hitler proclaimed that food could be used as a tool “…to discipline the masses” and he did not hesitate to use the control of food as a type of carrot and stick in which he would reward accomplishment and punish failure as well as to ferment preferential class distinctions in which his armed forces received the largest food ration cards. Skilled workers who were engaged in industries critical to the building of the German war machine, received food ration cards which were slightly less in value. And, finally, the prisoners and the Jews received the lowest valued Nazi food ration cards. Food ration cards were also utilized as incentives to increase industrial production and were also increased in value when productive Nazi workers would be promoted. Food ration cards were diminished in value for the failure to meet Nazi production goals. Hitler’s use of what psychologists refer to as classical conditioning techniques reduced the will of the German population to a pack of Pavlovian dogs who were conditioned to be totally dependent upon the government for their survival.

Most recently, Somalia thug, Farah Aideed, systematically starved his people into submission as a brutal civil war raged in both Darfur and Rwanda where the Islamic regimes sought the annihilation of ‘infidels’ and the use of food was one of the primary weapons designed to force compliance. And of course, Pol Pot, Castro and Mao all used food deprivation to quarantine their political opposition and exact absolute allegiance to their respective dictatorial regimes.

I venture to say that most individuals who get their “news” from FOX and CNN would hold fast to the belief that the benevolent U.S. government would never use food as a weapon against the American people. Someone should remind these “sheeple” that this is the same U.S. government which has been caught shipping drugs into Mexico under Operation Fast and Furious which has resulted in the deaths of a half dozen U.S. law enforcement officials. Yes, this is the same government which has turned a blind eye to HSBC bank setting up fictitious bank accounts in order to launder money derived from the profits of drug trafficking and running guns and then turning around and sending this money to fund various terrorist organizations. Yes, this is the same government which permits the Federal Reserve to send trillions of American dollars in order to bail out their own personal banking interests in Europe. Yes, this is the same U.S. government , through the TSA, which commits second degree sexual assault on airline travelers under the guise of protecting Americans from the very terrorists that they are complicit in funding through organizations such as the HSBC bank. Therefore, it is prudent to ask the question, would the United States use food a tool of governmental policy in order to control its population? Unfortunately, this question has already been answered in the affirmative.

The use of food by the U.S. government has been a matter of official U.S. governmental covert policy since 1974-1975.

In December, 1974, National Security Council directed by Henry Kissinger completed a classified study entitled, “National Security Study Memorandum 200: Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests.” The study was based upon the unproven claims that population growth in Lesser Developed Countries (LDC) constituted a serious risk to America’s national security.

In November 1975 President Ford, based upon the tenets of NSSM 200 outlined a classified plan to forcibly reduce population growth in LDC countries through birth control, war and famine. Ford’s new national security adviser, Brent Scowcroft, in conjunction with CIA Director, George H. W. Bush, were tasked with implementing the plan and the secretaries of state, treasury, defense, and agriculture assisted in the implementation of these insane genocidal plans.

NSSM 200 formally raised the question, “Would food be considered an instrument of national power? … Is the U.S. prepared to accept food rationing to help people who can’t/won’t control their population growth?” Kissinger has answered these questions when he stated that he was predicting a series of contrived famines, created by mandatory programs and this would make exclusive reliance on birth control programs unnecessary in this modern day application of eugenics in a scheme that would allow Henry to have his cake and eat it too in that the world would finally be rid of the “useless eaters!”

Third world population control, using food as one of the primary weapons, has long been a matter of official covert national policy and a portion of President Obama’s Executive Order (EO), National Defense Resources Preparedness is a continuation of that policy. Only now, the intended target are not the LDC’s but, instead, the American people.

With the stroke of his pen, Obama has total and absolute control over all food where his EO states:

e) “Food resources” means all commodities and products, (simple, mixed, or compound), or complements to such commodities or products, that are capable of being ingested by either human beings or animals, irrespective of other uses to which such commodities or products may be put, at all stages of processing from the raw commodity to the products thereof in vendible form for human or animal consumption. “Food resources” also means potable water packaged in commercially marketable containers, all starches, sugars, vegetable and animal or marine fats and oils, seed, cotton, hemp, and flax fiber, but does not mean any such material after it loses its identity as an agricultural commodity or agricultural product.

(f) “Food resource facilities” means plants, machinery, vehicles (including on farm), and other facilities required for the production, processing, distribution, and storage (including cold storage) of food resources, and for the domestic distribution of farm equipment and fertilizer…”

This unconstitutional EO is particularly disturbing in that it clearly states that the government has control over anything that is “capable of being ingested by either human beings or animals…” If you thought that you and Fido were going to get through coming food crisis by storing and consuming dog food, think again.

How will farmers maintain the nation’s food supply when all fertilizer, their farm equipment and all of their vehicles are under the control of this sociopathic President or the next power-hungry President?

The term “all food storage facilities” includes your refrigerator, your pantry and even the very food in your cabinets as well as what is on your kitchen table. In short, anywhere you keep food is now under the control of the government and can be redistributed.

Have you recently been scratching your head in bewilderment as you watch on the news as the Amish have had their farms raided, raw milk producers have been jailed and the kids running lemonade stands have been shut down and ticketed? Now you know why these abuses are being perpetrated by the government in that it represents a mere conditioning process designed to get all U.S. citizens used to the idea that the government owns all food and food production.

The most clever aspect of this EO is that no Hegelian Dialectic (i.e., false flag event) is needed as a pretense to seize food and imperil survivability. Section 201(b) of the Obama EO clearly states that this EO is enforceable under both emergency and non-emergency conditions.”

Even Ray Charles could see that Obama is setting the table to take his place among Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, Castro and Mao as another despot in the long line of tyrannical leaders who would grant themselves the authority to subjugate the masses by using food as a weapon. Americans desperately need to look at history in order to understand what happens every time the people of a government allows the government to control its food supplies and farms. It was with great forethought that the second part of the title of this article reads “…systematic population reduction.”

In hindsight, I have often wondered how prophetic was Obama’s campaign speech when he promised to fundamentally transform America? This was actually one campaign promise that Obama is trying to keep. NSSM 200 has come full circle, but in this case, it is specifically aimed at the American people. History show us that Socialists, Communists, Islamists and Marxists, use food and the production of food as a weapon against their own people in order to solidify power and control. Hitler himself said that using food as a weapon was “a beautiful instrument . . . for maneuvering and disciplining the masses.”

Through the National Defense Preparedness Act, Obama is following in the footsteps of Hitler and Stalin and we should all be worried, very worried.

SOURCE

The Family of a Man Who Died in Police Custody Asking Questions

The Family of a Man Who Died in Police Custody Asking Questions
By: Jessica Guy

A Little Rock family making funeral arrangements tonight after their son 34-year-old Booker Davis Jr. died in police custody on Sunday night.

While they take on that emotional task other questions linger as to what exactly happened that night and why they weren’t able to see his body.

KARK spoke to the family and they tell us that Little Rock Police never contacted them when their son died in police custody. And no one has told them what happened.

They had to get news of their son’s death from someone else. The family received a call from Davis’s landlord on Sunday night.

He told the family to get over to Booker Jr.’s house quickly. “When we arrived there was police cars and crime scene tape all over the place.”

Little Rock Police got a call to the 1400 block of South Izard Street, where officers say a man was acting erratically and taking his clothes off.

The family says an eyewitness gave them a different account.

“Someone told us that the police beat him and they had gone inside his apartment. And when they went in he was okay, when he came out he was on a stretcher.”

Booker’s dad says that is strange to him. ” I don’t know why they would take him inside his apartment if he was naked in the streets. My assumption is no matter how they arrive they put you in a police car.”

Booker was transported to UAMS where his mom and dad say they were denied access to him even after he was pronounced dead.

“The doctor was acting real weird, he didn’t know anything and i said well was he handcuffed, yes, was he bruised? He said i don’t know. Well if you examined him, why don’t you know?”

They left UAMS and called the coroner in hopes they could see their son.

“They said they did not have viewing facilities.”

Davis says he thought whenever someone died the family would be notified to come and identify the body.

“So we assumed we would see our son cause as far as we know, technically speaking we don’t know whether he is dead or not because we haven’t seen him.”

Sgt. Cassandra Davis of LRPD says “in this incident someone identified Mr. Davis, and once it becomes an investigation the family members unfortunately are not allowed to come in and view the body.”

It’s been four days and they still haven’t seen Booker’s body or know exactly how he died. His mother says an officer told her Booker may have died from a drug overdose.

“I said an overdose of what and he said he didn’t know, why would you say that and don’t have anything to back it up. He shouldn’t have said that , i’m his mom.”

A mother and father planning their son’s funeral with still a lot of unanswered questions.

“I just don’t understand how all blacks die in police custody and that’s just it.”

Sgt. Cassandra Davis did tell KARK that Booker was maced and there was a struggle.

She also says this investigation is still ongoing.

SOURCE

Texas Police Kill Unarmed Man Before Confiscating Witness Camera and Deleting Images

Texas Police Kill Unarmed Man Before Confiscating Witness Camera and Deleting Images

By Carlos Miller -…

Police in Texas shot an unarmed man 41 times, then turned around and confiscated another man’s camera after he started taking photos and shooting video of the bloody aftermath.

Dallas-area cops then deleted the man’s footage before returning the camera four days later.

Now police from two agencies are vowing to do a “complete investigation,” which, of course, means we will hear nothing more about the August 31 incident for at least several months.

But so far, the partial investigation has determined that Garland police officer Patrick Tuter lied in his initial report when he claimed that suspect Michael Vincent Allen backed his truck into the patrol car, causing the cop to fear for his life and leaving him no choice but to fire 41 times, meaning he reloaded at least once.

Miraculously, a 20-year-old unarmed woman who was sitting in the cab of the pick-up truck emerged unscathed.

According to the Dallas Morning News, Mesquite police officers confiscated the witness’s camera:

“From the time they yelled, ‘Get out, get out,’ they didn’t give him three seconds to get out,” Mitchell Wallace said, adding that he counted about 20 bullet holes in Allen’s truck.

Wallace and his wife were asleep when the gunshots began, but they quickly made it to the porch to see Allen’s passenger being pulled from the truck and a police dog jumping into the cab. The German shepherd bit Allen in the neck and jaw area and dragged him out of the truck and onto the pavement, Wallace said.

Police officers pulled the dog off, flipped Allen on his stomach and handcuffed him before checking his pulse. Autopsy results are pending on the cause of Allen’s death.

Wallace took cellphone pictures and video after the shooting stopped, but he said Mesquite police confiscated the phone and deleted the video and pictures. The phone was returned four days later, he said.

Mesquite police are conducting the criminal investigation, which hopefully includes whether or not Tuter acted lawfully, and Garland police are conducting the internal investigation.

Photography is Not a Crime reader Avi Adelman, a Dallas resident who runs the local news blog Barking Dogs is demanding Mesquite conduct an internal investigation into their officers for confiscating Wallace’s camera and deleting his images, which is a violation of federal law.

The law states that police need a court order to confiscate a camera unless it was used in a commission of a crime. The only exception is if there are exigent circumstances, such as a strong belief that the witness will destroy the photos, therefore destroying evidence.

Under no circumstances do police have the right to delete footage.

Adelman stated the following in a letter he fired off to Mesquite City Manager Ted Barron:

Mr. Barron, the actions of the unnamed Mesquite police officer(s) was a violation of Mr. Mitchell’s First and Fourth Amendment rights. Attached to this fax is a US Department of Justice memo clearly outlining the issues regarding illegal seizures and deletions of video and photos captured by the public of police activities. I am also requesting in advance a copy of the Mesquite Police Departments internal affairs investigation, under the Texas Public Information Act.

Adelman has also been staying on top of the Memorial Day incident in which a Dallas sheriff deputy arrested a motorcyclist because he wouldn’t hand over his helmet camera footage as evidence against other bikers.

Adelman contacted the sheriff’s department late last month about that incident and was told it was still under investigation.

When he made some critical comments regarding that incident on the Dallas Sheriff Facebook page, they were deleted immediately.

In the recent incident, police say they tried to pull Allen over because he had been involved in a previous chase with another Dallas-area law enforcement agency.

But then they said he led them on a 30-minute chase with speeds reaching 100 mph.

He eventually pulled into a cul-de-sac, which is when they said he tried to ram his way to freedom.

But a dash cam video proved that to be a lie.

Garland police also said Tuesday that dash-cam video revealed that Officer Patrick Tuter crashed his squad car into a truck driven by the suspect, Michael Vincent Allen, before the shooting started. Initial reports had said Allen had hit Tuter’s car, prompting the officer to open fire.

It was only two months ago that Houston police also confiscated a camera from a witness in the aftermath of a shooting, an incident in which no update has been made available.

UPDATE: As of this writing, the Dallas Sheriff’s deputy who arrested the motorcyclist was suspended without pay for nearly two months.
Read more at SOURCE

The Post-Aurora “Rampage” Few Have Heard About

The Post-Aurora “Rampage” Few Have Heard About

William Grigg
lewrockwell.com

One day after a lethal shooting rampage in Aurora, Colorado left twelve people dead and scores injured, another eruption of criminal violence left one dead and several others injured in Anaheim, California. The perpetrators of the second assault were officers from the Anaheim Police Department, who used “non-lethal” rounds — such as rubber bullets, which are reliably lethal at close range – to disperse a spontaneous protest that coalesced after the “officer-involved shooting” of a young man in the neighborhood.

Cell phone video of the police assault shows a wall of officers in riot gear directing “non-lethal” fire at a group of unarmed and terrified civilians — including several small children, who were shielded by a man who appeared to be their father. Another officer unleashed a police dog, which immediately attacked a stroller containing an infant. A bystander who interposed himself — and was mauled by the dog for doing so — probably saved the child’s life.

Those acts, in which private citizens protected the innocent from criminal violence at the hands of the State’s armed servants, were just as heroic as those of the three men in Aurora who died protecting their girlfriends during the shooting rampage.

Local news accounts, which retailed the department’s version of events, described the crowd as “unruly” and the protest as a “near-riot” in which angry citizens “encircled” the officers and “began throwing things, including bottles and possibly rocks, at them,” in the words of a Los Angeles Times report.The police also claimed that “several fires” had been started in trashcans. None of those claims have been been corroborated by video evidence or eyewitnesses. Nor have the police explained why the police gunned down the young man, referred to only as “Stomper,” after he and two others fled when approached by the cops.

Immediately after the shooting, several residents confronted the police to demand answers. The Anaheim PD — sensing an ominous tremor of righteous outrage on the part of a neighborhood that has endured seven “officer-involved shootings” this year — reverted to type as an army of occupation: Within a matter of minutes, the unarmed protesters were outnumbered by heavily armed cops in body armor.

In the wake of the Aurora massacre, the public has been encouraged to believe that because of private gun ownership, every public gathering place can be transformed into the scene of a massacre. The Anaheim police rampage illustrates how quickly the State’s armed enforcement caste — which, according to “gun control” activists, should have a monopoly on firearms — can turn any neighborhood into an urban war zone.

SOURCE

10 Signs That The Highways Of America Are Being Transformed Into A High Tech Prison Grid

10 Signs That The Highways Of America Are Being Transformed Into A High Tech Prison Grid

Once upon a time, the open highways of America were one of our greatest symbols of liberty and freedom. Anyone could hop in a car and set off for a new adventure at any time and even our music encouraged us to “get our kicks on route 66”. But today everything has changed. Now the highways of America are being steadily transformed into a high tech prison grid. All over the country, thousands upon thousands of surveillance cameras watch our highways and automated license plate readers are actually being used to track vehicle movements in some of our largest cities. Many state and local governments have come to view our highways as money machines and our control freak politicians have established a vast network of toll booths, red light cameras and speed traps to keep cash endlessly pouring in. If all of that wasn’t enough, TSA “VIPR teams” are now hitting the interstates and conducting thousands of “unannounced security screenings” each year. Driving on the highways of America used to be a great joy, but now “Big Brother” is rapidly sucking all of the fun out of it. Eventually, it may get to the point where Americans simply dread having to go out on the highway.

The following are 10 signs that the highways of America are being transformed into a high tech prison grid….

#1 Surveillance Cameras

All over the United States, a vast network of surveillance cameras is carefully watching our highways. The following is an excerpt from a recent article in the Baltimore Sun about this phenomenon….

The room is large and well lit, and it buzzes with activity even though its occupants remain seated.

The video screen at the front of the room is as wide as an IMAX, though not quite as tall. It consists of 64 smaller screens – 16 columns of four apiece – that monitor every inch of interstate between Great Wolf Lodge and the Virginia Beach Oceanfront. There is an emphasis on tunnels and bridges, and one corner screen is tuned in to a 24-hour weather report.

If you are driving on an highway in Hampton Roads, VDOT is watching you.

#2 Automated License Plate Readers

In a previous article, I detailed how automated license plate readers are being used to track the movements of every single vehicle that enters Washington D.C.

A recent Washington Post article explained that most people do not even know that they are there….

More than 250 cameras in the District and its suburbs scan license plates in real time, helping police pinpoint stolen cars and fleeing killers. But the program quietly has expanded beyond what anyone had imagined even a few years ago.

With virtually no public debate, police agencies have begun storing the information from the cameras, building databases that document the travels of millions of vehicles.

Nowhere is that more prevalent than in the District, which has more than one plate-reader per square mile, the highest concentration in the nation. Police in the Washington suburbs have dozens of them as well, and local agencies plan to add many more in coming months, creating a comprehensive dragnet that will include all the approaches into the District.

A lot of police cruisers are being outfitted with this technology around the nation as well.

So if you see a police car pull up behind you, there is a very good chance that a computer has already read your license plate and is giving the officer all of your information.

#3 Ridiculous Regulations

Some of the new “auto safety laws” going in around the nation are absolutely absurd.

For example, do you buckle up your pet when you go for a ride? Well, in New Jersey you can now be fined up to $1000 for not having your pet properly restrained while you are out driving.

#4 Outrageous Fines

In many areas of the country, unpaid traffic tickets can rapidly become a major financial burden.

For example, the new tolls on the 520 floating bridge in Seattle are absolutely killing some commuters…..

Registered vehicle owners who do not pay their toll within 80 days or more will be mailed a $40 civil penalty for each unpaid toll transaction in addition to a $5 reprocessing fee.

WSDOT confirmed some tolls plus penalty fees have added up to more than $1,000.

#5 Oppressive Toll Roads

Toll roads have become one of the favorite “revenue raising tools” for our politicians.

At this point the tolls on some roads have become so incredibly oppressive that many people simply cannot afford to drive on them anymore.

And for some reason the toll increases are coming especially fast and furious this year.

A recent USA Today article summarized some of the oppressive toll increases that we are seeing all over the nation….

•California and Washington authorized high-occcupancy toll (HOT) lanes, where tolls rise or fall depending on traffic flow. Texas enacted laws authorizing private toll roads and allowing regional authorities to collect tolls. Indiana removed a provision requiring legislative approval for toll roads.

•Some Maryland tolls will double this year as the state seeks money to rehabilitate aging roads, bridges and tunnels.

The use of tolls on interstate highways also is spreading:

•Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell, a Republican, just won approval from the Federal Highway Administration to add tolls on Interstate 95 in his state. The state estimates that tolls on the heavily traveled corridor could generate $250 million over the first five years for expanding, improving and maintaining the highway.

•New York and New Jersey recently announced that E-ZPass commuters will pay $1.50 more and cash customers $2 more to cross bridges and tunnels between the two states.

•Georgia just created toll lanes on Interstate 85 in suburban Atlanta.

The toll hikes are more than chump change: Cash tolls on the Chesapeake Bay Bridge jumped to $4 from $2.50, and to $12 from $8 on all the New York-New Jersey Hudson River crossings.

Toll roads are one of my pet peeves. Any time I see a toll booth it immediately puts me in a bad mood.

#6 Red Light Cameras

Red light cameras are another favorite “revenue raising tool” for the control freaks that run things.

Unfortunately, these cameras don’t always work right so a lot of innocent people end up getting ticketed.

But politicians love them because they can raise a lot of cash. The following is from a recent Business Insider article….

According to U.S. PIRG (Public Interest Research Group), nearly 700 U.S. cities and towns installed the cameras, which accounted for more than 90 percent of tickets issued for illegal right turns, or rolling stops.

In one New Jersey town, PIRG found 2,500 tickets were issued at one intersection within the first two months of installing a camera.

#7 Speed Traps

In the old days, speed traps were mostly about making the roads safer.

Today, they are mostly about raising money.

One police chief up in Michigan has even admitted that the nature of his job has fundamentally changed….

“When I first started in this job 30 years ago, police work was never about revenue enhancement, but if you’re a chief now, you have to look at whether your department produces revenues.”

Speed traps are becoming more common almost everywhere, but some areas of the country are worse than others.

A recent report from the National Motorists Association ranked how likely you are to get a speeding ticket in each of the 50 U.S. states….

After crunching the numbers, the NMA found that Nevada is the state most likely to issue you a traffic ticket, followed by Georgia and Alabama. In 2010 Florida took the top spot and Georgia and Nevada tied for second place.

The state where you’re least likely to get ticketed is Wyoming, followed closely by Montana. These two ranked at the bottom in 2010 as well.

#8 Government Spying

It has been revealed that the federal government has been secretly putting GPS tracking devices on thousands of vehicles in order to track the movements of people that they are interested in watching.

Most of the time the people involved have not even been charged with any crimes.

The following is a short excerpt from a recent Wired magazine article about this phenomenon….

The 25-year-old resident of San Jose, California, says he found the first one about three weeks ago on his Volvo SUV while visiting his mother in Modesto, about 80 miles northeast of San Jose. After contacting Wired and allowing a photographer to snap pictures of the device, it was swapped out and replaced with a second tracking device. A witness also reported seeing a strange man looking beneath the vehicle of the young man’s girlfriend while her car was parked at work, suggesting that a tracking device may have been retrieved from her car.

Then things got really weird when police showed up during a Wired interview with the man.

The young man, who asked to be identified only as Greg, is one among an increasing number of U.S. citizens who are finding themselves tracked with the high-tech devices.

The Justice Department has said that law enforcement agents employ GPS as a crime-fighting tool with “great frequency,” and GPS retailers have told Wired that they’ve sold thousands of the devices to the feds.

#9 Extraction Devices

If you get pulled over by police, you never know what to expect these days. Previously, I have written about how law enforcement authorities in some parts of the U.S. are using “extraction devices” to download data out of the cell phones of motorists that they pull over.

The following is how a recent article on CNET News described the capabilities of these “extraction devices”….

The devices, sold by a company called Cellebrite, can download text messages, photos, video, and even GPS data from most brands of cell phones. The handheld machines have various interfaces to work with different models and can even bypass security passwords and access some information.

#10 VIPR Teams

If all of the above was not bad enough, now we have to deal with TSA “VIPR teams” terrorizing us on the highways.

If you regularly travel across the country, there is a good chance that you have already encountered one of their “unannounced security screenings”.

The following is from a local news report down in Tennessee about how local authorities are working with VIPR teams to fight “terrorism” on the interstates….

You’re probably used to seeing TSA’s signature blue uniforms at the airport, but now agents are hitting the interstates to fight terrorism with Visible Intermodal Prevention and Response (VIPR).

“Where is a terrorist more apt to be found? Not these days on an airplane more likely on the interstate,” said Tennessee Department of Safety & Homeland Security Commissioner Bill Gibbons.

Tuesday Tennessee was first to deploy VIPR simultaneously at five weigh stations and two bus stations across the state.

TSA VIPR teams now conduct approximately 8,000 “unannounced security screenings” at subway stations, bus terminals, seaports and highway rest stops each year.

Are you starting to see what I am talking about?

All of this “security” is becoming extremely oppressive.

We don’t need “Big Brother” constantly watching us, tracking us and fining us on our highways.

So do you have any examples of how the highways of America are being transformed into a high tech prison grid to add to the list above?

Please feel free to post a comment with your thoughts below….

SOURCE

CFR Proposes Using Army To Enforce Domestic Law

CFR Proposes Using Army To Enforce Domestic Law

Steve Watson

The Council On Foreign Relations, the elite think tank long associated with globalist policy making and subversion of the principles of the US Constitution, has published an article that proposes using the army to plan and carry out domestic law enforcement missions in the US.

An article in the May/June issue of the CFR official journal, Foreign Affairs, calls for the army to address “challenges in the United States itself” with the justification being to protect Americans from terrorist attacks.

The article, written by Chief of Staff of the U.S. Army, General Raymond T. Odierno states:

“Where appropriate we will also dedicate active-duty forces, especially those with niche skills and equipment, to provide civilian officials with a robust set of reliable and rapid response options.”

Odierno suggests that major changes within the US now deem it necessary to use the military in such a way. The General points to “declining budgets due to the country’s worsened fiscal situation”; “a shift in emphasis to the Asia-Pacific region”; and a “broadening of focus from counterinsurgency, counterterrorism, and training of partners to shaping the strategic environment, preventing the outbreak of dangerous regional conflicts, and improving the army’s readiness to respond in force to a range of complex contingencies worldwide.”

Odierno suggests that the army be “transitioned” into a more “flexible force” by deploying in situations normally reserved for domestic law enforcement officials. He argues that by doing so, troops will be better equipped to deal with conflict elsewhere.

A d v e r t i s e m e n t

Odierno also specifically singles out The Army National Guard and the Army Reserve, noting “Today’s army also has an unprecedented level of integration between its active and its reserve components… Our reserve component soldiers are better than they have ever been, and we will dedicate resources to ensure that some of them will be either deployed or ready to deploy around the globe.”

The article presents a red flag to anyone who has followed the consistent push by the federal government to militarize the police and further integrate the armed forces into domestic law enforcement.

Of course, the use of U.S. troops in law enforcement duties is a complete violation of the Posse Comitatus Act and the Insurrection Act, which substantially limit the powers of the federal government to use the military for law enforcement unless under precise and extreme circumstances.

Section 1385 of the Posse Comitatus Act states, “Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.”

However, despite the constitutional protections outlined in these laws, there has been and is an ongoing push to blur the divisions between military and domestic law enforcement officials.

National Guard troops are routinely involved in ‘urban warfare training’ drills. Usually such drills take place within the confines of military bases, however, more recently heavily armed troops are increasingly seen patrolling residential neighborhoods and even the downtown areas of major US cities.

Such “invasions” are often reported on as nothing to worry about and even as “cool.”

Indeed, back in 2008 the Washington Post reported how 20,000 U.S. troops returning from Iraq would be stationed inside America under Northcom for purposes of “domestic security” from September 2011 onwards.

Northcom officials were forced to subsequently issue a denial after the Army Times initially reported that the troops would be used to deal “with civil unrest and crowd control.”

As Alex Jones exposed back in the late 1990’s, U.S. troops have been training to impose martial law for a considerable amount of time. During numerous urban warfare drills that Jones attended and reported on, troops were trained to raid, arrest, and imprison U.S. citizens in detention camps as well as taking over public buildings and running checkpoints. During role playing exercises, actors playing prisoners would scream “I’m an American citizen, I have rights” as they were being dragged away by troops.

The fact that such drills are now set to involve Russian soldiers training on U.S. soil to hunt “terrorists” has also caused consternation.

Federal authorities in the United States have clearly been preparing for domestic civil unrest for a number of years. The Department of Homeland Security recently purchased a staggering 450 million rounds of hollow point bullets as well as bullet-proof checkpoint booths that include ‘stop and go’ lights.

In addition, worrying legislation such as the National Defense Authorization Act, has paved the way for the incarceration of American citizens under military laws, and numerous leaked and semi-secret documents position the army as partners to domestic federal agencies in quelling unrest in America and even engaging in missions involving the ”resettlement” of US citizens.

—————————————————————-

Steve Watson is the London based writer and editor for Alex Jones’ Infowars.net, and Prisonplanet.com. He has a Masters Degree in International Relations from the School of Politics at The University of Nottingham in England.

SOURCE

You are being desensitized to their presence

Military training in the middle of Miami jolts residents out of bed

By Scott Hiaasen

No, there was no smell of napalm in the morning.

But there was the thunderous whump whump of low-flying helicopters, and even the jarring blast of explosions at the abandoned Grand Bay Hotel in Coconut Grove early Tuesday during a military training exercise that jolted many unsuspecting residents from their beds.

“It was quite a shocking experience,” said Jane Muir, who was awakened around 1:45 a.m. by the sound of military choppers that later dropped rappelling soldiers onto the Grand Bay’s rooftop. “It was kind of that bizarre feeling that you were surrounded by wind.”

From her third-floor balcony, Muir then watched the soldiers fire off flares and smoke bombs before searching floor by floor through the darkened hotel, their paths marked by flashlights and the pop-pop-pop of gunshots. “The show of force was so overwhelming,” she said.

The maneuvers were part of a “realistic urban training” exercise for about 100 military personnel, and organized by the U.S. Special Operations Command, said Maj. Michael Burns, a U.S. Army spokesman. The exercise also included three military helicopters, and the use of simulated explosions and gunfire to mimic real-life military scenarios.

“They have to train in a realistic environment,” Burns said. “We didn’t use any real bullets,” he added reassuringly.

Miami police assisted in overseeing the exercises — but they were instructed to keep quiet about the exercises until late Monday, for security reasons. The police also blocked off roads around the Grand Bay during the exercise, Muir said.

“It was the federal government’s call on what was being done. We were courteously advised,” said Miami commissioner Marc Sarnoff, whose district includes Coconut Grove.

Miami Police Maj. Delrish Moss said that a news release about the training was sent out around 5 p.m. Monday, but it went largely unnoticed.

The explosions, however, did not. A handful of alarmed Grove residents called the police and City Hall to ask about the armed choppers flying over their homes.

Muir, for one, would not have minded a heads up beforehand.

“I thought it was kind of rude, to tell you the truth,” she said. “One neighbor was swearing, he was so annoyed.”

But despite the neighborhood anxiety, the exercise went off safely and quickly, Burns said.

“It seems very high drama, but to us it’s kind of simple,” he said.

Miami Herald staff writer Charles Rabin contributed to this report.

Read more here: SOURCE

Potential NATO Summit Violence Leaves Chicago on Edge

Concerns About NATO Summit Violence Leave Chicago Guessing About Security

War On

— As concerns about security grow in the run-up to the NATO summit, it’s becoming difficult to separate myth from reality.

Are there plans in place for a mass evacuation of downtown in the event of riots on May 20-21? A Red Cross memo out of Milwaukee indicates that there is.

Officials there have been asked to make plans to assist residents in the event of a mass exodus.

Chicago officials say the plan didn’t come from them. The U.S. Secret Service isn’t talking.

There also are reports that a heavily armed security team will start making a very public appearance around federal buildings in the Loop this week. Officials with the Chicago NATO host committee were completely in the dark. They had no reports of any such plans.

A source told CBS 2 that security forces in full battle gear would not be seen this week.

As for the Red Cross plan, CBS 2 News has obtained a copy of an e-mail sent to volunteers in the Milwaukee area.

It said the NATO summit “may create unrest or another national security incident. The American Red Cross in southeastern Wisconsin has been asked to place a number of shelters on standby in the event of evacuation of Chicago.”

According to a chapter spokesperson, the evacuation plan is not theirs alone.

“Our direction has come from the City of Chicago and the Secret Service,” she said.

Officials at Chicago’s Office of Emergency Management and Communication said the directive did not come from them.

The U.S. Secret Service did not return calls for comment.

Some downtown residents told CBS 2’s Mike Parker that the news has them on edge.

Brad Klein said it is “very unnerving. I feel a little bit unsafe, just a bit more than a little bit. It doesn’t make me feel like I want to be in the city during the NATO conference.”

An executive with the Service Employees International Union, who trains members in preparation for the summit, thinks such a plan might be “over the top.”

SEIU Local 1 training director Tom Dobry said, “This could be a lot like Y2K – a lot of hype and buildup. People will say, ‘that was it?’ Not a big deal.”

Chicago residents certainly hope that to be true. But one cannot blame them for wondering exactly what’s going on.

One example happened last week, when protest groups revealed the plans for a security zone around the summit meeting site: McCormick Place.

One major expressway (I-55), Lake Shore Drive, and a large chunk of the lakefront will be closed. The security zone will extend several blocks to the west, south and north of McCormick place. That zone will be completely shut down, they say.

Those protesters came directly from a meeting with the Secret Service when those details were released. However, there was not a single confirmation from the feds.

One thing they have confirmed: Commuter trains will run under McCormick Place during the summit, but the Secret Service said in a statement to “expect delays.”

How bad will those delays get? They aren’t saying.

However, the South Shore will be asking riders to take a survey to determine how many people will even bother coming into the city.

Conductors on the train said the rail agency is trying to determine how many cars to run per train. Since each train car, they say, will take up to eight minutes to undergo a security sweep, they want to run a few cars as possible

SOURCE

7 Rules for Recording Police

7 Rules for Recording Police

Last week the City of Boston agreed to pay Simon Glik $170,000 in damages and legal fees to settle a civil rights lawsuit stemming from his 2007 felony arrest for videotaping police roughing up a suspect. Prior to the settlement, the First Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously ruled that Glik had a “constitutionally protected right to videotape police carrying out their duties in public.” The Boston Police Department now explicitly instructs its officers not to arrest citizens openly recording them in public.

Slowly but surely the courts are recognizing that recording on-duty police is a protected First Amendment activity. But in the meantime, police around the country continue to intimidate and arrest citizens for doing just that. So if you’re an aspiring cop watcher you must be uniquely prepared to deal with hostile cops.

If you choose to record the police you can reduce the risk of terrible legal consequences and video loss by understanding your state’s laws and carefully adhering to the following rules.

Rule #1: Know the Law (Wherever You Are)

Conceived at a time when pocket-sized recording devices were available only to James Bond types, most eavesdropping laws were originally intended to protect people against snoops, spies, and peeping Toms. Now with this technology in the hands of average citizens, police and prosecutors are abusing these outdated laws to punish citizens merely attempting to document on-duty police.

The law in 38 states plainly allows citizens to record police, as long as you don’t physically interfere with their work. Police might still unfairly harass you, detain you, or confiscate your camera. They might even arrest you for some catchall misdemeanor such as obstruction of justice or disorderly conduct. But you will not be charged for illegally recording police.

Twelve states-California, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, and Washington-require the consent of all parties for you to record a conversation.

However, all but 2 of these states-Massachusetts and Illinois-have an “expectation of privacy provision” to their all-party laws that courts have ruled does not apply to on-duty police (or anyone in public). In other words, it’s technically legal in those 48 states to openly record on-duty police.

Rule #2 Don’t Secretly Record Police

In most states it’s almost always illegal to record a conversation in which you’re not a party and don’t have consent to record. Massachusetts is the only state to uphold a conviction for recording on-duty police, but that conviction was for a secret recording where the defendant failed to inform police he was recording. (As in the Glik case, Massachusetts courts have ruled that openly recording police is legal, but secretly recording them isn’t.)

Fortunately, judges and juries are soundly rejecting these laws. Illinois, the state with the most notorious anti-recording laws in the land, expressly forbids you from recording on-duty police. Early last month an Illinois judge declared that law unconstitutional, ruling in favor of Chris Drew, a Chicago artist charged with felony eavesdropping for secretly recording his own arrest. Last August a jury acquitted Tiawanda Moore of secretly recording two Chicago Police Internal Affairs investigators who encouraged her to drop a sexual harassment complaint against another officer. (A juror described the case to a reporter as “a waste of time.”) In September, an Illinois state judge dropped felony charges against Michael Allison. After running afoul of local zoning ordinances, he faced up to 75 years in prison for secretly recording police and attempting to tape his own trial.

The lesson for you is this: If you want to limit your legal exposure and present a strong legal case, record police openly if possible. But if you videotape on-duty police from a distance, such an announcement might not be possible or appropriate unless police approach you.

Rule #3: Respond to “Shit Cops Say”

When it comes to police encounters, you don’t get to choose whom you’re dealing with. You might get Officer Friendly, or you might get Officer Psycho. You’ll likely get officers between these extremes. But when you “watch the watchmen,” you must be ready to think on your feet.

In most circumstances, officers will not immediately bull rush you for filming them. But if they aren’t properly trained, they might feel like their authority is being challenged. And all too often police are simply ignorant of the law. Part of your task will be to convince them that you’re not a threat while also standing your ground.

“What are you doing?”

Police aren’t celebrities, so they’re not always used to being photographed in public. So even if you’re recording at a safe distance, they might approach and ask what you are doing. Avoid saying things like “I’m recording you to make sure you’re doing your job right” or “I don’t trust you.”

Instead, say something like “Officer, I’m not interfering. I’m asserting my First Amendment rights. You’re being documented and recorded offsite.”

Saying this while remaining calm and cool will likely put police on their best behavior. They might follow up by asking, “Who do you work for?” You may, for example, tell them you’re an independent filmmaker or a citizen journalist with a popular website/blog/YouTube show. Whatever you say, don’t lie-but don’t let police trick you into thinking that the First Amendment only applies to mainstream media journalists. It doesn’t.

“Let me see your ID.”

In the United States there’s no law requiring you to carry a government ID. But in 24 states police may require you to identify yourself if they have reasonable suspicion that you’re involved in criminal activity.

But how can you tell if an officer asking for ID has reasonable suspicion? Police need reasonable suspicion to detain you, so one way to tell if they have reasonable suspicion is to determine if you’re free to go. You can do this by saying “Officer, are you detaining me, or am I free to go?”

If the officer says you’re free to go or you’re not being detained, it’s your choice whether to stay or go. But if you’re detained, you might say something like, “I’m not required to show you ID, but my name is [your full name].” It’s up to you if you want to provide your address and date of birth if asked for it, but I’d stop short of giving them your Social Security number.

“Please stop recording me. It’s against the law.”

Rarely is it advisable to educate officers about the law. But in a tense recording situation where the law is clearly on your side, it might help your case to politely present your knowledge of state law.

For example, if an insecure cop tries to tell you that you’re violating his civil liberties, you might respond by saying “Officer, with all due respect, state law only requires permission from one party in a conversation. I don’t need your permission to record so long as I’m not interfering with your work.”

If you live in one of the 12 all party record states, you might say something like “Officer, I’m familiar with the law, but the courts have ruled that it doesn’t apply to recording on-duty police.”

If protective service officers harass you while filming on federal property, you may remind them of a recently issued directive informing them that there’s no prohibition against public photography at federal buildings.

“Stand back.”

If you’re approaching the scene of an investigation or an accident, police will likely order you to move back. Depending on the circumstances, you might become involved in an intense negotiation to determine the “appropriate” distance you need to stand back to avoid “interfering” with their work.

If you feel you’re already standing at a reasonable distance, you may say something like, “Officer, I have a right to be here. I’m filming for documentation purposes and not interfering with your work.” It’s then up to you to decide how far back you’re willing to stand to avoid arrest.

Rule #4: Don’t Share Your Video with Police

If you capture video of police misconduct or brutality, but otherwise avoid being identified yourself, you can anonymously upload it to YouTube. This seems to be the safest legal option. For example, a Massachusetts woman who videotaped a cop beating a motorist with a flashlight posted the video to the Internet. Afterwards, one of the cops caught at the scene filed criminal wiretapping charges against her. (As usual, the charges against her were later dropped.)

On the other hand, an anonymous videographer uploaded footage of an NYPD officer body-slamming a man on a bicycle to YouTube. Although the videographer was never revealed, the video went viral. Consequently, the manufactured assault charges against the bicyclist were dropped, the officer was fired, and the bicyclist eventually sued the city and won a $65,000 settlement.

Rule #5: Prepare to be Arrested

Keene, New Hampshire resident Dave Ridley is the avatar of the new breed of journalist/activist/filmmaker testing the limits of the First Amendment right to record police. Over the past few years he’s uploaded the most impressive collection of first-person police encounter videos I’ve ever seen.

Ridley’s calm demeanor and knowledge of the law paid off last August after he was arrested for trespassing at an event featuring Vice President Joe Biden. The arresting officers at his trial claimed he refused to leave when ordered to do so. But the judge acquitted him when his confiscated video proved otherwise.

With respect to the law Ridley declares, “If you’re rolling the camera, be very open and upfront about it. And look at it as a potential act of civil disobedience for which you could go to jail.” It’s indeed disturbing that citizens who are not breaking the law should prepare to be arrested, but in the current legal fog this is sage advice.

“Shut it off, or I’ll arrest you.”

At this point you are risking arrest in order to test the boundaries of free speech. So if police say they’ll arrest you, believe them. You may comply by saying something like “Okay, Officer. But I’m turning the camera off under protest.”

If you keep recording, brace yourself for arrest. Try your best not to drop your camera, but do not physically resist. As with any arrest, you have the right to remain silent until you speak with a lawyer. Use it.

Remember that the camera might still be recording. So keep calm and act like you’re being judged by a jury of millions of your YouTube peers, because one day you might be.

Rule #6: Master Your Technology

Smartphone owners now outnumber users of more basic phones. At any moment there are more than 100 million Americans in reach of a device that can capture police misconduct and share it with the world in seconds.

If you’re one of them, you should consider installing a streaming video recording and sharing app such as Qik or Bambuser. Both apps are free and easy to use.

Always Passcode Protect Your Smartphone

The magic of both apps is that they can instantly store your video offsite. This is essential for preserving video in case police illegally destroy or confiscate your camera. But even with these apps installed, you’ll want to make sure that your device is always passcode protected. If a cop snatches your camera, this will make it extremely difficult for her to simply delete your videos. (If a cop tries to trick you into revealing your passcode, never, never, never give it up!)

Keep in mind that Qik and Bambuser’s offsite upload feature might be slow or nonexistent in places without Wi-Fi or a strong 3G/4G signal. Regardless, your captured video will be saved locally on your device until you’ve got a good enough signal to upload offsite.

Set Videos to “Private”

Both apps allow you to set your account to automatically upload videos as “private” (only you can see them) or “public” (everyone can see them). But until police are no longer free to raid the homes of citizens who capture and upload YouTube videos of them going berserk, it’s probably wise to keep your default setting to “private.”

With a little bit of practice you should be able to pull your smartphone from your pocket or purse, turn it on, enter your passcode, open the app, and hit record within 10 seconds. Keep your preferred app easily accessible on your home screen to save precious seconds. But don’t try to shave milliseconds off your time by disabling your passcode.

Both apps share an important feature that allows your video to be saved if your phone is turned off-even if you’re still recording. So if you anticipate that a cop is about to grab your phone, quickly turn it off. Without your passcode, police won’t be able to delete your videos or personal information even if they confiscate or destroy your phone.

With the iPhone 4 and Samsung Galaxy Android devices I tested, when the phone is turned off the Qik app immediately stops recording and uploads the video offsite. But if the phone is turned off while Bambuser records, the recording continues after the screen goes black.

This Bambuser “black out” feature is a double-edged sword. While it could easily trick cops into thinking you’re not recording them, using it could push you into more dangerous legal territory. As previously mentioned, courts have shown a willingness to convict citizens for secretly recording police. So if you’re somehow caught using this feature it might be easier for a prosecutor to convince a judge or jury that you’ve broken the law. It’s up to you to decide if the increased legal risk is worth the potential to capture incriminating police footage.

Other Recording Options

Cameras lacking offsite recording capability are a less desirable option. As mentioned earlier, if cops delete or destroy your footage-which happens way too often-you might lose your only hope of challenging their version of events in court. But if you can hold on to your camera, there are some good options.

Carlos Miller is a Miami-based photojournalism activist and writer of the popular Photography is Not a Crime blog. While he carries a professional-end Canon XA10 in the field, he says “I never leave home without a Flip camera on a belt pouch. It’s a very decent camera that’s easier to carry around.”

The top-of-the-line Flip UltraHD starts at $178, but earlier models are available for $60 on Amazon. All flip models have one-button recording, which allows you to pull it out of your pocket and shoot within seconds. The built-in USB then lets you upload video to YouTube or other sharing sites through your PC.

Small businessman and “radical technology” educator Justin Holmes recommends the Canon S-series line of cameras. In 2008, his camera captured a police encounter he had while rollerblading in Port Dickenson, New York. His footage provides an outstanding real-life example of how a calm camera-toting citizen can intelligently flex their rights.

“I typically carry a Canon S5-IS,” Holmes says. “But if I was going to buy one new, I’d go for the SX40-HS. If I were on a budget and buying one used, I’d go for S2-IS or S3-IS.” The features he regards as essential include one-touch video, high-quality stereo condenser microphones, fast zoom during video, and 180×270 variable angle LCD. But the last feature he regards as “absolutely essential.” With it the user can glance at the viewfinder while the camera is below or above eye level.

Rule #7: Don’t Point Your Camera Like a Gun

“When filming police you always want to avoid an aggressive posture,” insists Holmes. To do this he keeps his strap-supported camera close to his body at waist level. This way he can hold a conversation while maintaining eye contact with police, quickly glancing at the viewfinder to make sure he’s getting a good shot.

Obviously, those recording with a smartphone lack this angled viewfinder. But you can get a satisfactory shot while holding your device at waist level, tilting it upward a few degrees. This posture might feel awkward at first, but it’s noticeably less confrontational than holding the camera between you and the officer’s face.

Also try to be in control of your camera before an officer approaches. You want to avoid suddenly grasping for it. If a cop thinks you’re reaching for a gun, you could get shot.

Becoming a Hero

If you’ve recently been arrested or charged with a crime after recording police, contact a lawyer with your state’s ACLU chapter for advice as soon as possible. (Do not publicly upload your video before then.) You may also contact Flex Your Rights via Facebook or Twitter. We’re not a law firm, but we’ll do our best to help you.

If your case is strong, the ACLU might offer to take you on as a litigant. If you accept, your brave stand could forever change the way police treat citizens asserting their First Amendment right to record police. This path is not for fools, and it might disrupt your life. But next time you see police in action, don’t forget that a powerful tool for truth and justice might literally be in your hands.

SOURCE

ATF Preparing to Outlaw Shotguns

ATF Preparing to Outlaw Shotguns

The Constitution states that Congress and the federal government shall not infringe upon the right to bear arms. However, we know in the past the federal government has trampled this liberty. Remember the assault weapons ban that banned AR-15s and other rifles?

It appears the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms is preparing to pass its own law leaving Congress out of the equation and clearly ignoring the Constitution. This time its shotguns that are under attack.

The Greeley Gazette
notes of the ATF’s coming ban:

The ATF completed a study regarding the importability of certain shotguns. The basis for a possible ban is based on a loosely defined “Sporting Purpose” test. Using the vague definition almost all pump-action and semi-automatic shotguns could be banned as they are all capable of accepting a magazine, box or tube capable of holding more than 5 rounds. Other characteristics determined to be “military” by the ATF can also be used as a basis for a ban.

Ironically, many shotguns with “military” features are currently being used in shooting competitions held by the USPSA, IDPA and IPSC. The rules could also result in obscure regulations where an individual would be unsure if he is violating them or not.
Dudley Brown, Executive Director of Rocky Mountain Gun Owners, said if the ATF succeeds with the banning of tactical shotguns it “will be the most dangerous interpretation of the 1968 Gun Control Act ever envisioned and will outlaw thousands of perfectly legitimate home defense shotguns.”

The ATF is currently allowing public comments on the study until the end of the month. Those wishing to express concerns about the study can send an email to [email protected]

SOURCE

Could Your Shotgun Soon be Outlawed? Maybe, If the ATF Has Its Way

by Jonathon M. Seidl Jonathon M. Seidl

What’s the definition of a “shotgun?” According to Dictionary.com it’s “a smoothbore gun for firing small shot to kill birds and small quadrupeds, though often used with buckshot to kill larger animals.” For the gun enthusiasts, that’s only partly true, as there is also the option of using slugs. But what if there’s another addition that will soon be added to the definition? How about, illegal.

Could Your Shotgun Soon be Outlawed? Maybe, If the ATF Has Its Way

In a series of fascinating, and eerie, posts over at the blog Beregond’s Bar (and linked on Redstate.com), author “Tom” pens a four-part series on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms and their new campaign to change the definition of the term “shotgun.” A change, based on a recent study,* that could soon make some of them illegal. But as Tom points out, the implications for all guns are chilling.

Could Your Shotgun Soon be Outlawed? Maybe, If the ATF Has Its Way

Below are excerpts from the series. Click on the appropriate link to read more.

Part 1, which focuses on changing the term “sporting use” in order to ban certain shotguns:

The Obama administration is seeking once again to do via regulation what they would never be able to do via legislation. This time shotguns are in the crosshairs, specifically certain popular imported weapons.

[…]

Sporting use is one of the three main thrusts of gun control efforts in America. The other two are racism and those who openly advocate complete bans except for military and police. (The complete ban advocates often hide under cover of sporting use, but that and the racist history of gun control are topics for another day.
Click here to find out more!

Sporting use was how the original distinction was made about what weapons would be subject to a special tax in the National Firearms Act (NFA) in 1934, and again in Title II of the Gun Control Act of 1968. The congressional power to tax was used selectively to make ownership of weapons the government didn’t like burdensome and expensive. This was gun control via the back door, as even the ATF admits. As would become the pattern, politicians found that actually dealing with crime and criminals was difficult and expensive. Blaming guns and passing a law to look like they were doing something about it was much simpler.

Part 2, which notes that the administration and the ATF’s definition of “sporting use” includes a list of things that cannot apply to such use. Things that are common in hunting and self-defense:

In this case the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) is seeking to master the definition of the term “sporting use” to “traditional” sports, things similar to what might have been found in 1934 when the Treasury Department first began regulating firearms. The ATF “Study on the Importability of Certain Shotguns” (PDF) limits “sporting purpose.”

However, consistent with past court decisions and Congressional intent, the working group recognized hunting and other more generally recognized or formalized competitive events similar to the traditional shooting sports of trap, skeet, and clays.

In order to decide what shotguns fit the “sporting purpose” definition the study comes up with a list of characteristics that aren’t sporting. Nobody has yet taken to bayoneting deer or skeet as far as I know, so I’m not going to raise a big stink about bayonet lugs being on the list of features that aren’t particularly suited for sporting purposes. (Please stop shouting that the Constitution of the United States says nothing about “sporting purpose.” We’ll look at why the “sporting purpose” rule violates the constitution in Part 3.)

One major problem (aside from the constitution) is that many of the features the ATF study group settled on make a shotgun particularly useful for self defense, especially home defense. Here are the characteristics that the study has decided are unsuitable for sporting use:

(1) Folding, telescoping, or collapsible stocks;

(2) bayonet lugs;

(3) flash suppressors;

(4) magazines over 5 rounds, or a drum magazine;

(5) grenade-launcher mounts;

(6) integrated rail systems (other than on top of the receiver or barrel);

(7) light enhancing devices;

(8) excessive weight (greater than 10 pounds for 12 gauge or smaller);

(9) excessive bulk (greater than 3 inches in width and/or greater than 4 inches in depth);

(10) forward pistol grips or other protruding parts designed or used for gripping the shotgun with the shooter’s extended hand.

Some of these features, such as folding stocks and larger capacity magazines clearly are useful in sports if you include practical shooting sports.

Part 3, which looks at how “sporting use” stacks up to the Constitution and how it came into use:

But there is a far more basic objection that must be raised to this new attempt at regulatory gun ban- Nowhere in the constitution of the United States is there anything about a “sporting purpose.” The second amendment says:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Like all rights of Americans, the rights exist because you are a person. The Constitution is a contract we have with the central government to protect those rights against all enemies, foreign and domestic. One of the enumerated rights is the right to keep and bear arms. Nary a “sporting purpose” in sight in the entire document. So where did it come from?

And finally, Part 4, which shows that the ATF’s “sporting use” definition puts all guns, not just certain shotguns, at risk of being outlawed:

One factor that jumps out from the current ATF study is that it differs from the Clinton gun ban in a critical way. The Clinton ban looked at guns and said if it could accept a high capacity magazine and had any 2 other characteristics then it was banned. Thus you could have a magazine and a pistol grip, or a magazine and night sights, and still be legal. Few people missed having a bayonet lug, and grenade launchers and grenades had essentially been banned from civilian hands since the NFA became law in 1934. The current study says that any ONE item on a list, including a magazine that holds more than five rounds or a place to attach a flashlight so you can see the burglar in your home, and the gun is banned.

So the problem doesn’t end with shotguns. The current study refers to the conclusions drawn in prior ATF studies of rifles in 1989 and 1998, and handguns in 1968. It also draws on the NFA and the GCA (Gun Control Act of 1968) to justify the “sporting purpose” test, and the narrow interpretation that the ATF places on the test. The justifications are all linked together, like a knitted sweater. Pull on the piece of yarn called “imported shotguns” and you find when it’s unraveled enough that you’re tugging on the “domestic shotguns” yarn. Only now the “imported rifle” bit of yarn is hanging loose, just begging for someone to tug on it. Unravel that a bit and you reach “domestic rifles.” A similar bit of unraveling is likely to happen with the piece of yarn labelled “handgun.”

Each piece is well worth the time it takes to read it. Meanwhile, the ATF is taking comments on its study. Tom lets you know how here.

But here’s the catch: in order to let the ATF know what you think, you have to give it your mailing address.

Interesting.

*According to Tom, the study “spends a lot of time showing that hunting, trap and skeet, and target shooting are sports, but plinking and practical shooting sports are not REALLY sports, and therefore guns that are particularly suitable for, or readily adaptable to those sports shouldn’t be allowed into the country.

UPDATE:

Jack Minor of the Greeley Gazette covered the ATF’s study, too. He puts in terms of “military”-style shotguns vs. others. But, he notes, according to the specifications used, “military” could apply to so many shotguns:

The ATF completed a study regarding the importability of certain shotguns. The basis for a possible ban is based on a loosely defined “Sporting Purpose” test. Using the vague definition almost all pump-action and semi-automatic shotguns could be banned as they are all capable of accepting a magazine, box or tube capable of holding more than 5 rounds. Other characteristics determined to be “military” by the ATF can also be used as a basis for a ban.

Ironically, many shotguns with “military” features are currently being used in shooting competitions held by the USPSA, IDPA and IPSC. The rules could also result in obscure regulations where an individual would be unsure if he is violating them or not.

Dudley Brown, Executive Director of Rocky Mountain Gun Owners, said if the ATF succeeds with the banning of tactical shotguns it “will be the most dangerous interpretation of the 1968 Gun Control Act ever envisioned and will outlaw thousands of perfectly legitimate home defense shotguns.”

The Most Powerful Man in the World: The Black Pope

The Most Powerful Man in the World: The Black Pope


Black Pope Adolfo Nicolas, Superior General of the Society of Jesus Diabolical Plan for a New World Order.

1. The Superior General of the Jesuits The Black Pope, Adolfo Nicolas and his 6 generals control the “White Pope” Pope Benedict XVI and the Vatican.
2. The Illuminati, Zionists, globalist Elites, Council on Foreign Relations, Bilderberg group, Freemasons, Council of 300 and the evil Council of Trent.
3. The Jesuits control the Knights Templar, Knights of Columbus and the Knights of Malta.
4. The CIA, FBI, NSA, ASIO, MI5, MI6, NCIS, FSB, DGSE, Mossad and every intelligence agency in the world are masonic and controlled by the Jesuits.
5. The Jesuits have infiltrated all governments & Leaders like Obama, Rudd, Blair, Jintao, Sarkozy, Peres are only puppets that carry out Jesuit orders.

The”NEW WORLD ORDER” is the GLOBAL TOTALITARIANISM dream that a BANKER called Mayer Amschel Rothschild, helped revive in 1760?s to protect his private bank from global government regulation. His grand blue print is best described by his paid social engineer called Dr. Adam [Spartacus] Weishaupt, Professor of Canon Law in the university of Ingolstadt. Weishaupt adopted the term “Illuminati.” This nightmare is still sought after today by their family’s decedents. Below is the ‘outline’ Weishaupt set out for his banker financier master! Carefully notice the similarities between Karl Marx’s 10 Plank’s of his Communist Manifesto and Weishaupt’s outline. Also, please read Communism & The New World Order.

The blue print for the NWO is:
* Abolition of all ordered governments
* Abolition of private property
* Abolition of inheritance
* Abolition of patriotism
* Abolition of the family
* Abolition of religion
* A global population of 500 million
* Creation of a world government

Mayer Amschel Rothschild 1828 “Allow me to issue and control the money of a nation, and I care not who writes the laws.” [Even a 4 year old can understand that people with control of money…write the laws!]

“Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it.” – Woodrow Wilson

So who is this subtle, complete organized power that Wilson is talking about? The answer to that my friends is the Jesuits.

Who are the Jesuits you may ask? Arent they just missionaries, priests and general do-gooders who establish schools, universities and pride themselves in being pillars in the community? If so, then why was The Jesuit Order abolished in over 80 countries in 1773? J.E.C. Shepherd states that “Between 1555 and 1931 the Society of Jesus [i.e., the Jesuit Order] was expelled from at least 83 countries, city states and cities, for engaging in political intrigue and subversion plots against the welfare of the State, according to the records of a Jesuit priest of repute [Thomas J. Campbell]. Practically every instance of expulsion was for political intrigue, political infiltration, political subversion, and inciting to political insurrection.” They are overlords of chaos. In a nut shell the Jesuits are Warlords, Assassins, Teachers, Infiltrators, Tyrants. They tried their hand at global domination with the “League of Nations” but it failed, now they are trying again, under a new name…The United Nations, and its about to work!

What people are not understanding is that the Jesuits command the White Pope and the Vatican City, Obama /Bush’s/ Clinton’s / Blair’s / Peres/ Rudd / Jintao / Sarkozy / Medvedev (and frankly every government on earth) including the the evil Council of Trent, CFR, Illuminati, the Zionists, the Bilderberg group, the Freemasons, the Knights of Malta, the Knights of Columbus, the Knights Templar, Council of 300, and every intelligence organization in the world all have ties to the Jesuit Order and more specifically, the Superior General of the Jesuits known as The Black Pope Adolfo Nicolas who as of January the 19th, 2008 succeeded Peter-Hans Kolvenbach as the 30th Superior General of the Jesuit Order.

Additional Information:
http://wikicompany.org/wiki/911:Vatican_%26_Jesuits
http://wikicompany.org/wiki/911:Military_Order_of_Malta
http://wikicompany.org/wiki/911:Pilgrim_Society

SOURCE