End Times and Current Events
October 22, 2017, 09:15:13 pm
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: "Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me." John 5:39 (KJB)
 
  Home Help Search Gallery Staff List Login Register  

America Is Being Systematically Transformed Into A Totalitarian Society

Shoutbox
October 17, 2017, 01:25:20 am Christian40 says: It is good to type Mark is here again!  Smiley
October 16, 2017, 03:28:18 am Christian40 says: anyone else thinking that time is accelerating now? it seems im doing days in shorter time now is time being affected in some way?
September 24, 2017, 10:45:16 pm Psalm 51:17 says: The specific rule pertaining to the national anthem is found on pages A62-63 of the league rulebook. It states: “The National Anthem must be played prior to every NFL game, and all players must be on the sideline for the National Anthem. “During the National Anthem, players on the field and bench area should stand at attention, face the flag, hold helmets in their left hand, and refrain from talking. The home team should ensure that the American flag is in good condition. It should be pointed out to players and coaches that we continue to be judged by the public in this area of respect for the flag and our country. Failure to be on the field by the start of the National Anthem may result in discipline, such as fines, suspensions, and/or the forfeiture of draft choice(s) for violations of the above, including first offenses.”
September 20, 2017, 04:32:32 am Christian40 says: "The most popular Hepatitis B vaccine is nothing short of a witch’s brew including aluminum, formaldehyde, yeast, amino acids, and soy. Aluminum is a known neurotoxin that destroys cellular metabolism and function. Hundreds of studies link to the ravaging effects of aluminum. The other proteins and formaldehyde serve to activate the immune system and open up the blood-brain barrier. This is NOT a good thing."
http://www.naturalnews.com/2017-08-11-new-fda-approved-hepatitis-b-vaccine-found-to-increase-heart-attack-risk-by-700.html
September 19, 2017, 03:59:21 am Christian40 says: bbc international did a video about there street preaching they are good witnesses
September 14, 2017, 08:06:04 am Psalm 51:17 says: bro Mark Hunter on YT has some good, edifying stuff too.
September 14, 2017, 04:31:26 am Christian40 says: i have thought that i'm reaping from past sins then my life has been impacted in ways from having non believers in my ancestry.
September 11, 2017, 06:59:33 am Psalm 51:17 says: The law of reaping and sowing. It's amazing how God's mercy and longsuffering has hovered over America so long. (ie, the infrastructure is very bad here b/c for many years, they were grossly underspent on. 1st Tim 6:10, the god of materialism has its roots firmly in the West) And remember once upon a time ago when shacking up b/w straight couples drew shock awe?

Exodus 20:5  Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;
September 11, 2017, 03:40:40 am Christian40 says: those in america should better repent or things will only get worse
September 08, 2017, 08:03:04 pm Psalm 51:17 says: http://abcnews.go.com/US/wildfires-rage-west-amid-scorching-temperatures/story?id=49677869

Quote
There are currently 78 large wildfires burning in eight western states, including Montana, Idaho, Oregon, Washington and California.

View Shout History
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: America Is Being Systematically Transformed Into A Totalitarian Society  (Read 5849 times)
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20936



View Profile
« Reply #210 on: May 13, 2015, 04:11:43 pm »


Special Forces Train With Cops For House to House Raids
South Carolina residents warned they may encounter military vehicles


http://www.infowars.com/special-forces-train-with-cops-for-house-to-house-raids/

Go to link, lots if vids and pics...




Amendment III

No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.


Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20936



View Profile
« Reply #211 on: May 15, 2015, 09:24:56 am »

10 Pictures That Show How America Is Becoming A Lot Like Nazi Germany

The history books tell us about how evil and wicked the Nazis were, so why aren’t we more alarmed that the United States is becoming more like Nazi Germany with each passing day?  More than three years ago, I wrote an article entitled “25 Signs That America Is Rapidly Becoming More Like Nazi Germany” which got a ton of attention.  Unfortunately, nothing has gotten better since I first published that piece.  Government control freaks are still watching us, tracking us, recording our phone calls and monitoring our emails.  TSA thugs at our airports are still fondling the private parts of our women and children and laughing while they do it.  Our police and our military are still training for civil unrest and martial law in America.  And even though our politicians are socializing our economy and destroying our constitutional freedoms, the American people keep sending most of them back to Washington time after time.  It is an incredibly sad thing to watch the country that you love slowly die right in front of your eyes.

At the heart of Nazism was a desire to control everyone and everything, and that is exactly what we are seeing in America today.  Most of our “leaders” are psychotic control freaks that want to micromanage every aspect of our lives.  For example, a bill that was just introduced in Congress would force all children in public schools nationwide to be vaccinated with no exceptions whatsoever.  Other new legislation that was just introduced would ban all sales of ammunition over the Internet and require ammo dealers to report all bulk sales to individuals to the government.  Our founders intended for this nation to be a place where individual freedom and liberty were maximized, but today we literally have millions of laws, rules and regulations that wrap us so tightly in red tape that we can hardly breathe.

To say that we are becoming just like the Nazis is a very strong statement, but I think that after reviewing the evidence you will agree with me.  The following are 10 pictures that show how America is becoming just like Nazi Germany…

pics + stories : http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/10-pictures-that-show-how-america-is-becoming-just-like-nazi-germany
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20936



View Profile
« Reply #212 on: May 26, 2015, 11:31:46 am »

Police Militarization: Preparation for Economic Collapse, Food Shortages, Civil Unrest and Martial Law

The following is a study I've done proving that the active militarization of police dramatically increased after the financial crisis of 2008. The U.S. military's nationwide Civil Disturbance Operations, Jade Helm and ARSOF Operating Concept are all a cohesive preparation for a forthcoming nationwide economic collapse, civil unrest and martial law due to widespread food shortages and lack of emergency services. It's all connected, ladies and gentlemen, and I'll show you how.


too much to post follow link

http://americathebattlefield.blogspot.com/2015/05/police-militarization-for-economic-collapse-food-shortage-civil-unrest-martial-law.html
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20936



View Profile
« Reply #213 on: June 14, 2015, 02:50:56 pm »

Clearing your browser history could land you in prison

Over the past couple of decades, our increasingly authoritarian government has become particularly adept at using "terrorist" events and threats both real and imagined as an excuse for curtailing ordinary citizens' freedom and criminalizing their actions.

An obvious example is the USA PATRIOT Act, which was created as a response to the September 11, 2001 attacks. Under this act, many freedoms were taken away from Americans while simultaneously authorizing the government to begin spying on its own citizens and violating what were once considered precious and inviolable rights to privacy.

The PATRIOT Act was the excuse for the NSA's mass collection of phone call data, as revealed by Edward Snowden. This policy has just been extended, albeit with a few ineffectual and largely symbolic changes designed to whitewash the continued practice of spying on innocent citizens.

The latest move towards criminalizing what most would consider normal behavior follows in the wake of the Boston bombings and the subsequent prosecution of those involved, however marginally.

The Nation reports:

    Khairullozhon Matanov is a 24-year-old former cab driver from Quincy, Massachusetts. The night of the Boston Marathon bombings, he ate dinner with Tamerlan and Dhzokhar Tsarnaev at a kebob restaurant in Somerville. Four days later Matanov saw photographs of his friends listed as suspects in the bombings on the CNN and FBI websites. Later that day he went to the local police. He told them that he knew the Tsarnaev brothers and that they'd had dinner together that week, but he lied about whose idea it was to have dinner, lied about when exactly he had looked at the Tsarnaevs' photos on the Internet, lied about whether Tamerlan lived with his wife and daughter, and lied about when he and Tamerlan had last prayed together. Matanov likely lied to distance himself from the brothers or to cover up his own jihadist sympathies -- or maybe he was just confused.


What happened next is crucial: Matanov then went to his home and cleared his internet browser. That action led to him being charged with destruction of records under what is called the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, a law that was passed after the Enron scandal and was ostensibly created to protect Americans from predatory practices by corrupt corporations.

Matanov is not the only person being subjected to the law; there are other cases where citizens are being charged and convicted of acts that amount to little more than clearing one's browser history, something many of us do innocently on a regular basis.

The problem is that the use of this law to charge and convict individuals has become more common, and its application is often questionable. The Nation gives a hypothetical example and an explanation of why the increasing use of this law is so dangerous:

Prosecutors are able to apply the law broadly because they do not have to show that the person deleting evidence knew there was an investigation underway. In other words, a person could theoretically be charged under Sarbanes-Oxley for deleting her dealer's number from her phone even if she were unaware that the feds were getting a search warrant to find her marijuana. The application of the law to digital data has been particularly far-reaching because this type of information is so easy to delete. Deleting digital data can inadvertently occur in normal computer use, and often does.

This is a clear example of how our government uses high-profile and emotionally-charged cases to convince us that it's excusable to strip us of our rights. It also shows how vaguely worded laws can be used in broad ways to control us and limit our freedoms.

Curtailing Second and First Amendment Rights
Another recent example concerns proposed regulations by the State Department that seek to limit "unregulated" discussions and videos on internet forums dealing with firearms.

The Washington Examiner states:

In updating regulations governing international arms sales, State is demanding that anyone who puts technical details about arms and ammo on the web first get the OK from the federal government -- or face a fine of up to $1 million and 20 years in jail.

Is anyone else beginning to see a pattern here?

Sources:

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/050044_browser_history_PATRIOT_Act_NSA.html#ixzz3d4H668uJ
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28356


View Profile
« Reply #214 on: July 03, 2015, 06:41:49 pm »

http://www.thelastgreatstand.com/concentration-camps-disguised-as-shopping-malls-being-built-everywhere/
7/1/15
Concentration Camps Disguised As Shopping Malls Being Built Everywhere

In the video below, you’ll see there are a whole new strain of shopping malls opening up just in time for the Christmas Season… a time that is not expected for things to be good here in the United States. The most obvious notable changes to this new design of shopping malls, is the multiple “Guard Towers” built in, along with narrow ways of entry and exit, meaning that once they are closed off and the towers are manned… good luck!
 
Coming in October of 2015, all across the country, happy American shoppers will see a whole slew of new shopping malls opening, just in time for the Christmas shopping season. Interestingly enough, and possibly just by ‘coincidence’, EVERY one of these shopping malls that will be opening in October of 2015 has characteristics of FEMA concentration camps including guard towers overlooking the properties and several of them LOOKING just like fortresses!



Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20936



View Profile
« Reply #215 on: July 25, 2015, 05:51:53 am »

Florida Man Ordered by City to Keep BBQ Smell From Leaving His Property
"You’re allowed to have it smell on your property, so that doesn’t count, but when I’m on the street, that’s when it counts"


 Huh

A Florida man was confronted by a county environmental specialist this week and absurdly ordered to keep the smell of his BBQ from leaving his property.



Video of the incident, originally posted to Facebook Wednesday by homeowner Scotty Jordan, shows Pinellas County Environmental Specialist Joe Graham discussing the alleged infraction with Jordan and friends after a nearby neighbor alerted the county.

“I’m only here because of the odor,” Graham says. “I’m only here because of the smoke.”

During the conversation, Graham asserts that the men are in violation of a local “rule” that bans the smell of BBQ from crossing over one’s property line.

“I can smell it again right now, but I’m on your property,” Graham tells the group. “You’re allowed to have it smell on your property, so that doesn’t count, but when I’m on the street, that’s when it counts.”

Astonished by the claim, the cameraman asks Graham how the group, or anyone for that matter, would be able to control where odor travels.

“So we’re supposed to control the smoke and the wind and where it’s blowing it?” he asks.

Graham goes on to suggest that the group move their BBQ on a regular basis in conjunction with wind patterns or purchase a specialized version designed to minimize smoke.

The local ordinance, similar to countless others across the country, falls in line with a longstanding effort from the Environmental Protection Agency that aims to limit everything from BBQs to wood stoves under the guise of reducing pollution.

http://www.infowars.com/florida-man-ordered-by-city-to-keep-bbq-smell-from-leaving-his-property/
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20936



View Profile
« Reply #216 on: August 20, 2015, 06:19:08 am »

United States Drops In Overall Freedom Ranking

A new report on the freedom of countries around the world ranks the United States 20th, putting countries like Chile and the United Kingdom ahead of the U.S.

Last year, the U.S. was ranked 17th, but a steady decline of economic freedom and “rule of law” has dropped the level of freedom, according to the Cato Institute, Fraser Institute and the Swiss Liberales Institut, which created the study together.

Co-author of the report Ian Vasquez told The Daily Caller News Foundation that the steady growth of government and increased regulations of business and labor contribute to the U.S. low rating.

“Since the year 2000, the U.S. has been on a decline in terms of economic freedom,” Vasquez told TheDCNF.

The other main reason for the United States’ low rank comes from the “rule of law” measure. Vasquez told TheDCNF that increased invasions of privacy through the war on drugs and war on terror have contributed to the decline in freedom.

Also, the increased use of eminent domain is factored in as a violation of property rights.

The other indicators used to make the list were security and safety, movement, religion, association, assembly and civil society, expression, relationships, size of government, legal system and property rights, access to sound money, freedom to trade internationally, regulation of credit, labor and business.

Based on those measures, here are the top 25 countries.

1. Hong Kong

2. Switzerland

3. Finland

4. Denmark

5. New Zealand

6. Canada

7. Australia

8. Ireland

9. United Kingdom

10. Sweden

11. Norway

12. Austria

12. Germany

14. Iceland

14. Netherlands

16. Malta

17. Luxembourg

18. Chile

19. Mauritius

And then finally..

20. United States

Just after the U.S.,

21. Czech Republic

22. Estonia

22. Belgium

24. Taiwan

25. Portugal

“The U.S. performance is worrisome and shows that the United States can no longer claim to be the leading bastion of liberty in the world,” Vasquez wrote.”In addition to the expansion of the regulatory state and drop in economic freedom, the war on terror, the war on drugs, and the erosion of property rights due to greater use of eminent domain all likely have contributed to the U.S. decline.”

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2015/08/18/united-states-drops-in-overall-freedom-ranking/#ixzz3jLxQ1joC
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20936



View Profile
« Reply #217 on: September 16, 2015, 05:13:55 am »

Obama issues Orwellian executive order

Welcome to President Obama’s brave new world.

Federal agencies have been directed to hire psychologists to experiment and find ways to better manipulate the American people to the federal government’s will.

“A growing body of evidence demonstrates that behavioral science insights – research findings from fields such as behavioral economics and psychology about how people make decisions and act on them – can be used to design government policies to better serve the American people,” Obama wrote in an executive order released Tuesday on WhiteHouse.gov. The origin of the order can be traced back to a 2013 policy proposal entertained by the White House called “Strengthening Federal Capacity for Behavioral Insights.”

The president’s new order said streamlined applications for federal financial aid and automatic retirement payments are two examples where behavioral-science lessons applied to government programs have been effective.

“[T]o more fully realize the benefits of behavioral insights and deliver better results at a lower cost for the American people, the federal government should design its policies and programs to reflect our best understanding of how people engage with, participate in, use, and respond to those policies and programs,” Obama wrote, the Washington Examiner reported.

Obama has not hidden his interest in using federal resources to employ behavioral science techniques on the public. The White House launched a Social and Behavioral Sciences Team, or SBST, in February 2014 and then celebrated its one-year anniversary on the White House blog.

“SBST had a successful first year, launching a wide variety of evidence-based pilots with objectives ranging from connecting veterans with employment and educational counseling benefits to helping struggling student borrowers understand their loan repayment options,” the Obama administration wrote Feb. 9, 2015.

SBST will now move forward to identify programs that will “most effectively promote public welfare, as appropriate, giving particular consideration to the selection and setting of default options.” The team’s work is done under the purview of the National Science and Technology Council.

Two figures whose research played a key role in bringing the new initiative to fruition were Harvard Law School professor Cass Sunstein (once deemed Obama’s regulatory czar), and Richard Thaler, a University of Chicago economist, the Daily Beast reported Tuesday.

“The two behavioral scientists argued in their 2008 book ‘Nudge’ that government policies can be designed in a way that ‘nudges’ citizens toward certain behaviors and choices,” the Daily Beast reported.

Obama’s executive order requires SBST to issue guidance to federal agencies on how to implement his policy directive within the next 45 days.

SBST will also consider different ways of labeling “benefits, taxes, subsidies, and other incentives” to “more effectively and efficiently promote” the president’s policy goal.

http://www.wnd.com/2015/09/obama-issues-orwellian-executive-order/


In other news...

Over half of psychology studies fail reproducibility test

Largest replication study to date casts doubt on many published positive results.


Don’t trust everything you read in the psychology literature. In fact, two thirds of it should probably be distrusted.

STORY: http://www.nature.com/news/over-half-of-psychology-studies-fail-reproducibility-test-1.18248

In other words the Gov will use this to make any one look crazy or what ever they want.
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20936



View Profile
« Reply #218 on: September 16, 2015, 08:37:35 am »

Obama and Allies Seek to Nationalize Local Police

On December 18, 2014, President Obama signed an executive order creating the President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing. In May 2015, the task force came out with its Final Report, which is commonly given the title “21st Century Policing.”

One of the report’s recommendations, which the Obama-friendly media fixated on, concerns greater restrictions on transfers of military equipment to local police agencies. However, as we reported in a related article ("What's Happening to Our Police?"), the new “accountability” rules will not explicitly reduce the flow of war materials to law enforcement, but simply place more federal controls over local police. Moreover, the new Obama rules regarding military gear were just one component of a broader set of recommendations issued by Obama’s plan for “21st Century Policing” — the overarching theme of which was promoting increased federal control over law enforcement.

While speaking to a group of police at a carefully stage-managed event in Camden, New Jersey, the president also touted some of his other efforts to exert more control over police — officers who, in accordance with the Constitution, are supposed to serve and be accountable to local communities and the wishes of local citizens, not the mandates of the White House. Among other schemes, Obama boasted of his administration’s alleged efforts to “fight crime,” improve relations between police departments and the communities they serve, and promote “transparency.” He also touted a White House “data initiative” aimed at prodding police departments into following federal “guidelines” on data and body cameras.

Finally, Obama also celebrated federal “grants” created by the administration to promote and fund the implementation of dubious policies associated with “community policing strategies.” Those federal grants, of course, along with others, are at the heart of Obama’s efforts to nationalize everything from healthcare and education standards to law enforcement. Among the schemes to be promoted with the new grants are national standards for police departments receiving federal funds. Some critics have started describing the plot as “Common Core for police,” a reference to the Obama administration’s Department of Education efforts to bribe states into imposing the deeply controversial national K-12 school standards and the associated federal testing regime. The effort also comes just a few months after United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, citing Ferguson, demanded that American police submit to “international standards.”

According to a report by Obama’s task force released in March, two tentacles of the Department of Justice, the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) and the Office of Justice Programs, “should provide technical assistance and incentive funding to jurisdictions” that adhere to the White House plan, “in return for receiving federal funds.” The report also called for uniform federal standards for data collected by local police departments, and much more.

Even before citing militarization of police as an excuse to usurp more control over local police, Obama was celebrating the recommendations of his task force, and demanding rapid implementation. “I’m going to be asking Eric Holder and the Justice Department and his successor to go through all of these recommendations so that we can start implementing them,” he explained. “I know one area that’s going to be of great interest is whether we can expand the COPS program that in the past has been very effective, continues to be effective, but is largely underfunded.”

The recommendations offered a “great opportunity” to “really transform how we think about community law enforcement relations,” Obama said. “We need to seize that opportunity,” he continued, echoing the “never let a crisis go to waste” rhetoric of other statists. “This is something that I’m going to stay very focused on in the months to come.” He certainly was not kidding.

Just weeks after the report was released, the administration unveiled a list of six U.S. cities targeted to serve as “pilot sites” to develop and deploy federal guidance for local police — all of it supposedly to create “better procedures, reduce racial bias, and regain citizens’ trust.” The plan, officially dubbed the “National Initiative for Building Community Trust and Justice,” will use U.S. taxpayer dollars to deploy “experts” and “researchers” charged with training officers to act in a manner that the DOJ deems just — in essence doing the bidding of the Obama administration. Officially, the Justice Department will be helping local officials “fight crime” under the scheme, according to news reports.

Initially, the program, which will cost American taxpayers almost $5 million, will aim to “assess” the relationship between local police and the communities they serve. Then, the DOJ squads will work to develop plans supposedly aimed at enhancing “procedural justice,” reducing bias, and supporting “reconciliation in communities where trust has been eroded,” the Justice Department said in a statement announcing the plan. With more than two-thirds of Americans saying in a survey that the federal government is “out of control” and a “threat” to their liberties, it was not immediately clear how “trust” would be “restored” by deepening federal involvement.

The first six cities to be targeted as pilot sites will be Birmingham, Alabama; Fort Worth, Texas; Gary, Indiana; Minneapolis, Minnesota; Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; and Stockton, California. Fort Worth Mayor Betsy Price described the program as “a tool to strengthen our partnership with the justice system.” But other police departments are also in the cross hairs. According to the official announcement, an unspecified number of “police departments and communities that are not pilot sites” will also be targeted for more DOJ “training” and “technical assistance.”

It bears mentioning that the DOJ,  which supposedly will guide local law enforcement in proper procedures, has in recent years been exposed training state and local police to view citizens’ speech as potential indicators of terrorism — including among damning public expression mundane matters such as bumper stickers promoting the Bill of Rights or a U.S. withdrawal from the UN. Ironically, at the time of the announcements on pilot cities, the DOJ was being led by disgraced Attorney General Eric Holder, who was held in criminal contempt of Congress for trying to stonewall an investigation into the administration’s “Fast and Furious” scheme to arm Mexican drug cartels.

The efforts to further nationalize and federalize law enforcement are also in line with Obama’s campaign rhetoric about building a “civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded” as the U.S. military. And critics say the agenda should be ringing alarm bells nationwide.

“Americans everywhere should be very concerned about oversight of local police agencies,” explained former detective Jim Fitzgerald, the national field director for The John Birch Society, the parent organization of this magazine. The constitutionalist group, which has chapters in all 50 states, has been running a campaign for decades called “Support Your Local Police and Keep Them Independent.” The effort is meant to, among other goals, protect local communities from having their police departments turned into tentacles of an all-powerful federal government.

“These steps to exercise and take control over police departments should raise a red flag among police officials and give deep concern to anyone who understands the history of national police forces,” continued Fitzgerald. “Have we so soon forgotten the Gestapo and the KGB, both national police agencies, that terrorized the citizens of Germany and Russia and led to the imprisonment and deaths of tens of thousands of innocent men and women? Has there ever been a national police force that benefited the citizens who live under it? Never!”

Of course, the nationalization of police did not begin with Obama, and it probably will not end with him. So-called fusion centers, pairing local and state officials with federal bureaucrats under the sprawling “Homeland Security” banner, have been in place since the George W. Bush administration. And a broad range of DOJ offices and programs has been quietly expanding federal control over police for decades. But the trends are accelerating, and the endgame is becoming more clear.

police under fire coverDecentralized government is one of the cornerstones of America’s freedom and its constitutional system of federalism. Even if Obama’s radical plans to nationalize police departments were not unconstitutional, though, history provides numerous examples showing why national policing is not just unwise, but extremely dangerous to liberty. Congress must rein in Obama, and in the meantime, state and local governments should refuse to surrender self-government to an out-of-control White House in exchange for unconstitutional federal bribes. The American people, if they hope to preserve liberty and self-government, should work to support their local police, and keep them independent;

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/21582-obama-and-allies-seek-to-nationalize-local-polic
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20936



View Profile
« Reply #219 on: September 28, 2015, 12:29:04 pm »

Feds returning to local crime fight

Mounting concern over recent violent crime surges in some U.S. cities has prompted the Justice Department to call a meeting next month of more than a dozen local law enforcement officials to deal with persistent public safety threats, ranging from criminal gangs to domestic violence, Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates told USA TODAY in an interview.

The Justice summit builds on an increasing federal re-engagement with local police whose forces in the past two years have been buffeted by questions over lethal force policies and flagging public trust.

Earlier this year, in the face of rising tensions between the police and the public in communities across the nation, a special White House policing task force issued a slate of recommendations aimed at restoring public confidence. The Justice Department also has opened inquiries into the operations of more than 20 police departments across the country since 2009, including earlier this year in Baltimore where days of civil unrest was sparked by the death of a local man in police custody.

Several big U.S. cities see homicide rates surge

Although violent crime has been in decline in much of the country for years, federal authorities are re-committing resources, some of which were directed to address anti-terror concerns in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, to battle troubling spikes in local crime.

Yates on Monday is set to identify five cities—Compton, Calif., Little Rock, Ark., West Memphis, Ark., Newark, N.J., and Flint, Mich.— which are poised to get an infusion of federal help to battle violence even as most of the country has enjoyed relative calm.

"Every community is different and every community has their own unique challenges,'' Yates said. "For us to be most effective, we really need to be digging in at the local level… to fashion our response. This is not a one-size-fits-all kind of solution.''

The five cities represent the first expansion of the so-called Violence Reduction Network, launched last year by the Justice Department to address similar violent crime problems in Chicago, Detroit, Wilmington, Del., Camden, N.J., and in the Oakland-Richmond, Calif., area.

Murders, shootings on the rise in Chicago

While no federal money is attached to inclusion in the network, Yates said the designation provides cities unique access to existing federal expertise in gang investigations, drug trafficking inquiries, the pursuit of violent fugitives, intelligence gathering and other strategies that may be lacking at local public safety agencies.

In some small departments, the deputy attorney general said, problems may be as fundamental as having no experience requesting federal grant money for use in hiring additional police officers or to purchase needed equipment.

Earlier this summer, while cities such as Chicago and Baltimore continued to battle worrisome rashes of violence, Attorney General Loretta Lynch directed the nation's 93 U.S. attorneys to begin gathering information about local crime trends in their jurisdictions to better measure the needs of state, county and municipal agencies.

In Chicago, homicides have been running at levels nearly 20% more than last year. And similar spikes have been recorded in Milwaukee and St. Louis.

Yates said there is "no indication'' that the surges signal a possible return to the waves of violence that plagued the 1980s and early 1990s.

"It's too early to know if this is a long-term shift or a short-term cyclical change,'' Yates said. "But it doesn't really matter from our perspective because our response is always going to be the same: that is to dig in to try to find out what the causes are.''

In Camden, Chief Scott Thomson credits federal help with contributing to a 50% reduction in shootings and homicides during the past two years.

Thomson said the federal violence reduction program has "reinvented the way cities, challenged with violent crime, work with federal law enforcement agencies.''

Camden authorities, Thomson said, specifically benefited from digital imaging training provided by the FBI, which allowed investigators to extract video from private security systems to quickly identify suspects in various local crimes.

Thomson said videos are being converted to "commercials'' for broadcast on traditional and social media to solicit public assistance.

"We are now alerting the public within hours, rather than days, which has facilitated the identification and apprehension of dozens of individuals suspected of crimes ranging from child luring to murder,'' he said.

Camden also was among a number of cities that benefited earlier this year from a broad U.S. Marshals Service operation, resulting in the arrest of 7,100 fugitives during a six-week sweep.

Among those arrested: 519 wanted on homicide charges and 583 for alleged sexual assault.

Yates cited the U.S. Marshals operation as the type of targeted assistance that the federal government can offer local agencies who lack resources.

The October meeting of law enforcement officials called by the Justice Department, Yates said, is another attempt to "try to find out what's working and what is not working.''

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/09/28/crime-spikes-federal-action-yates/72924738/
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20936



View Profile
« Reply #220 on: October 02, 2015, 10:07:56 am »

Ohio judge says defendant has no right to mention Constitution during trial, laughs at concept of free speech

An independent journalist and local newspaper editor from central Ohio was laughed out of a Greene County courtroom recently after suggesting that talking to people on a public sidewalk constitutes free speech. Retired Judge Catherine (Kathryn) Barber, who was filling in for Xenia Municipal Judge Michael Murray, literally laughed at Virgil Vaduva from the Greene County Herald when he attempted to defend his First Amendment right to talk to people in public.

The outrageous incident occurred after Vaduva decided to stand out in front of the Xenia City Hall to raise public awareness about the unconstitutionality of the city's anti-panhandling law, which prohibits people from asking other people for help within 20 feet of public sidewalks or local businesses. Vaduva recorded his various encounters with local residents, many of whom he persuaded that anti-panhandling laws are unconstitutional, resulting in some of them even making donations to a local charity as a result.

Perhaps not surprisingly, the city was none too pleased with Vaduva's exercise in free speech -- and in an ironic twist decided to falsely prosecute him for panhandling, based on the very law against which he was protesting! In a rational society, this blatant form of civil persecution by the state would have been immediately identified as such and thrown out as a false charge. But Vaduva was ordered to appear in court to defend his fourth degree misdemeanor charge, and it was in the courtroom where things got really interesting.

Greene County, Ohio, Judge Catherine Barber prohibits mention of Constitution or civil rights in courtroom, claims doing so would "confuse the jury"
An audio recording of Vaduva's pre-trial hearing tells the full story of this major case of injustice in Xenia, as Judge Barber is heard agreeing with a motion filed by Ronald C. Lewis that "there will be no mentioning of the Constitution" in the courtroom. Judge Barber can also be heard laughing at Vaduva as he attempts to defend his free speech activities on public sidewalks:
Bambuser.com.

This scandalous response, according to an account of the proceedings by the Liberty Crier, was preceded with a suggestion by the prosecutor that any mention of the constitution or civil rights would just "confuse the jury." And apparently Judge Barber agreed with this sentiment -- referencing the founding documents of our nation in an official courtroom was not to be allowed because it might expose the City of Xenia for violating the civil rights of its residents.

"By dictating the nature of speech in a public space, the City of Xenia has directly violated the first amendment of the United States Constitution," wrote Vaduva in a personal account of his experience published in the Greene County Herald.

Ironically, the prosecutor in the case, Ronald C. Lewis, had earlier been charged with committing tax fraud after it was discovered that he had avoided paying taxes on income earned off the books. Lewis was let off the hook by a municipal judge, and yet he is now attempting to convict another local resident of committing the non-crime of exercising free speech.

"You see how easy it is for those in power to get away with serious crimes?" notes Vaduva. "It is almost like magic. Those of us who do not wear black robes and blue uniforms are often looked at as property by those in power. Judges, politicians and police are in essence running this new plantation where the poor and the disenfranchised are barely allowed to exist."

Sources for this article include:

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/051402_US_Constitution_free_speech_Judge_Catherine_Barber.html#ixzz3nQJe2AX9

Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20936



View Profile
« Reply #221 on: October 21, 2015, 10:26:34 pm »

Secret Service allowed to use warrantless cellphone tracking

 A new policy allows the Secret Service to use intrusive cellphone-tracking technology without a warrant if there's believed to be a nonspecific threat to the president or another protected person.

Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Seth M. Stodder described to a House subcommittee Wednesday the department's policy on the use of cell-site simulators.

Civil libertarians and privacy advocates have long expressed concern about the suitcase-size devices, known as Stingrays, which mimic cell-towers to scoop up electronic data that can be used to locate nearby phones and identify their owners. The devices don't listen in to phone calls or capture text messages, Stodder said.

The policy the department unveiled this week is similar to the one announced in September by the Justice Department, which includes the FBI.

Federal law enforcement officers are required to get a warrant signed by a judge before using Stingrays, except under emergency "exigent circumstances" meeting the constitutional standard for probable cause under the Fourth Amendment, but when there is no time to get a warrant.

Stodder cited the example of kidnappings, such as a recent case where Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers used a Stingray to help locate and rescue a 6-year-old girl being held hostage by human smugglers in Arizona.

But Stodder said another allowed exception under the policy would let the Secret Service use Stingrays in "exceptional circumstances" without meeting the legal threshold for probable cause. In such cases, using the devices would require direct approval from "executive-level personnel" at Secret Service headquarters and the U.S. attorney for the relevant jurisdiction.
Asked whether that essentially granted a blanket exception for the Secret Service, Stodder said that the exemption would not be used in routine criminal probes, such as a counterfeiting investigation.

"The key exception that we envision is the Secret Service's protective mission," Stodder said. "In certain circumstances where you could have an immediate threat to the president and you have cryptic information, our conclusion in drawing the line between security and privacy here is to err on the side of protection."
Stodder added that such information could be "a cryptic email or something like that" indicating a security threat to the president where agents would lack the time or the information to determine probable cause, "but you need to locate that person."

Cell-site stimulators have been used for years by both state and federal law enforcement agencies, who tout them as a vital tool to catch fugitives and locate suspects. But privacy groups and some lawmakers have raised alarms about the secrecy surrounding its use and the collection of cellphone information of innocent bystanders who happen to be in a particular neighborhood or location.

Stodder could not immediately say how many times department law-enforcement officers had used Stingrays without warrants in recent years.

Rep. Ted Lieu, D-Calif., said Wednesday the newly announced guidelines are a good first step, but added that the policy still lacks transparency and provides overly broad permission for Stingrays to be used without warrants. The new federal policies also don't apply to state and local law enforcement agencies that have purchased Stingrays, sometimes through the use of federal grants.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20151021/us-cell-site-technology-119affce57.html
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
RickStudy
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 80


View Profile
« Reply #222 on: October 21, 2015, 11:36:24 pm »

In all of these things and more the country has morphed into the biblical Babylon the Great. Unfortunately, most Christians do not comprehend the predictions of Jeremiah and Isaiah regarding Great Babylon and remain unable to recognize what has happened.
Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20936



View Profile
« Reply #223 on: October 22, 2015, 06:21:04 pm »

Things Are Getting Scary: Global Police, Precrime and the War on Domestic ‘Extremists’

Are you afraid that the government is plotting to confiscate your firearms?
Do you believe the economy is about to collapse and the government will soon declare martial law?
Do you display an unusual number of political and/or ideological bumper stickers on your car?
If you answered yes to any of the above questions, you may be an anti-government extremist (a.k.a. domestic terrorist) in the eyes of the police.

As such, you are now viewed as a greater threat to America than ISIS or al Qaeda.

Let that sink in a moment.

If you believe in and exercise your rights under the Constitution (namely, your right to speak freely, worship freely, associate with like-minded individuals who share your political views, criticize the government, own a weapon, demand a warrant before being questioned or searched, or any other activity viewed as potentially anti-government, racist, bigoted, anarchic or sovereign), you have just been promoted to the top of the government’s terrorism watch list.

I assure you I’m not making this stuff up.

Police agencies now believe the “main terrorist threat in the United States is not from violent Muslim extremists, but from right-wing extremists.”

A New York Times editorial backs up these findings:

Law enforcement agencies around the country are training their officers to recognize signs of anti-government extremism and to exercise caution during routine traffic stops, criminal investigations and other interactions with potential extremists. “The threat is real,” says the handout from one training program sponsored by the Department of Justice. Since 2000, the handout notes, 25 law enforcement officers have been killed by right-wing extremists, who share a “fear that government will confiscate firearms” and a “belief in the approaching collapse of government and the economy.”
So what is the government doing about these so-called terrorists?

The government is going to war.

Again.

Only this time, it has declared war against so-called American “extremists.”

After decades spent waging costly, deadly and ineffective military campaigns overseas in pursuit of elusive ISIS and al Qaeda operatives and terror cells (including the recent “accidental” bombing of a Doctors Without Borders hospital in Afghanistan that left 22 patients and medical staff dead), the Obama administration has announced a campaign to focus its terror-fighting forces inwards.

Under the guise of fighting violent extremism “in all of its forms and manifestations” in cities and communities across the world, the Obama administration has agreed to partner with the United Nations to take part in its Strong Cities Network program. Funded by the State Department through 2016, after which “charities are expected to take over funding,” the cities included in the global network include New York City, Atlanta, Denver, Minneapolis, Paris, London, Montreal, Beirut and Oslo.

Working with the UN, the federal government will train local police agencies across America in how to identify, fight and prevent extremism, as well as address intolerance within their communities, using all of the resources at their disposal.

What this program is really all about, however, is community policing on a global scale.

Community policing, which relies on a “broken windows” theory of policing, calls for police to engage with the communityin order to prevent local crime by interrupting or preventing minor offenses before they could snowball into bigger, more serious and perhaps violent crime. The problem with the broken windows approach is that it has led to zero tolerance policing and stop-and-frisk practices among other harsh police tactics.

When applied to the Strong Cities Network program, the objective is ostensibly to prevent violent extremism by targeting its source: racism, bigotry, hatred, intolerance, etc.

In other words, police—acting ostensibly as extensions of the United Nations—will identify, monitor and deter individuals who exhibit, express or engage in anything that could be construed as extremist.

Consider how Attorney General Loretta Lynch describes the initiative:

As residents and experts in their communities, local leaders are often best positioned to pinpoint sources of unrest and discord; best equipped to identify signs of potential danger; and best able to recognize and accommodate community cultures, traditions, sensitivities, and customs.  By creating a series of partnerships that draws on the knowledge and expertise of our local officials, we can create a more effective response to this virulent threat.

Translation: U.S. police agencies are embarking on an effort to identify and manage potential extremist “threats,” violent or otherwise, before they can become actual threats. (If you want a foretaste of how “extreme” things could get in the U.S.: new anti-terrorism measures in the U.K. require that extremists be treated like pedophiles and banned from working with youngsters and vulnerable people.)

The government’s war on extremists, of which the Strong Cities program is a part, is being sold to Americans in much the same way that the USA Patriot Act was sold to Americans: as a means of combatting terrorists who seek to destroy America.

For instance, making the case for the government’s war on domestic extremism, the Obama administration has suggested that it may require greater legal powers to combat violent attacks by lone wolves (such as “people motivated by racial and religious hatred and anti-government views” who “communicate their hatred over the Internet and through social media”).

Enter the government’s newest employee: a domestic terrorism czar.

However, as we now know, the USA Patriot Act was used as a front to advance the surveillance state, allowing the government to establish a far-reaching domestic spying program that has turned every American citizen into a criminal suspect.

Similarly, the concern with the government’s anti-extremism program is that it will, in many cases, be utilized to render otherwise lawful, nonviolent activities as potentially extremist.

Keep in mind that the government agencies involved in ferreting out American “extremists” will carry out their objectives—to identify and deter potential extremists—in concert with fusion centers (of which there are 78 nationwide, with partners in the private sector and globally), data collection agencies, behavioral scientists, corporations, social media, and community organizers and by relying on cutting-edge technology for surveillance, facial recognition, predictive policing, biometrics, and behavioral epigenetics (in which life experiences alter one’s genetic makeup).

This is pre-crime on an ideological scale and it’s been a long time coming.

For example, in 2009, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) released two reports, one on “Rightwing Extremism,” which broadly defines rightwing extremists as individuals and groups “that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely,” and one on “Leftwing Extremism,” which labeled environmental and animal rights activist groups as extremists.

Incredibly, both reports use the words terrorist and extremist interchangeably.

That same year, the DHS launched Operation Vigilant Eagle, which calls for surveillance of military veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan, characterizing them as extremists and potential domestic terrorist threats because they may be “disgruntled, disillusioned or suffering from the psychological effects of war.”

These reports indicate that for the government, anyone seen as opposing the government—whether they’re Left, Right or somewhere in between—can be labeled an extremist.

Fast forward a few years, and you have the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which President Obama has continually re-upped, that allows the military to take you out of your home, lock you up with no access to friends, family or the courts if you’re seen as an extremist.

Now connect the dots, from the 2009 Extremism reports to the NDAA and the UN’s Strong Cities Network with its globalized police forces, the National Security Agency’s far-reaching surveillance networks, and fusion centers that collect and share surveillance data between local, state and federal police agencies.

Add in tens of thousands of armed, surveillance drones that will soon blanket American skies, facial recognition technology that will identify and track you wherever you go and whatever you do. And then to complete the circle, toss in the real-time crime centers being deployed in cities across the country, which will be attempting to “predict” crimes and identify criminals before they happen based on widespread surveillance, complex mathematical algorithms and prognostication programs.

Hopefully you’re getting the picture, which is how easy it is for the government to identify, label and target individuals as “extremist.”

We’re living in a scary world.

Unless we can put the brakes on this dramatic expansion and globalization of the government’s powers, we’re not going to recognize this country 20 years from now.

Frankly, as I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, the landscape has already shifted dramatically from what it was like 10 or 20 years ago. It’s taken less than a generation for our freedoms to be eroded and the police state structure to be erected, expanded and entrenched.

Rest assured that the government will not save us from the chains of the police state. The UN’s Strong Cities Network program will not save us. The next occupant of the White House will not save us. For that matter, anarchy and violent revolution will not save us.

If there is to be any hope of freeing ourselves, it rests—as it always has—at the local level, with you and your fellow citizens taking part in grassroots activism, which takes a trickle-up approach to governmental reform by implementing change at the local level.

Attend local city council meetings, speak up at town hall meetings, organize protests and letter-writing campaigns, employ “militant nonviolent resistance” and civil disobedience, which Martin Luther King Jr. used to great effect through the use of sit-ins, boycotts and marches.

And then, while you’re at it, urge your local governments to nullify everything the federal government does that is illegitimate, egregious or blatantly unconstitutional.

If this sounds anti-government or extremist, perhaps it is, in much the same way that King himself was considered anti-government and extremist. Recognizing that “freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed,” King’s tactics—while nonviolent—were extreme by the standards of his day.

As King noted in his 1963 “Letter from Birmingham City Jail”:

[A]s I continued to think about the matter I gradually gained a bit of satisfaction from being considered an extremist. Was not Jesus an extremist in love—“Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, pray for them that despitefully use you.” Was not Abraham Lincoln an extremist—“This nation cannot survive half slave and half free.” Was not Thomas Jefferson an extremist—“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.” So the question is not whether we will be extremist but what kind of extremist will we be. Will we be extremists for hate or will we be extremists for love?

So how do you not only push back against the police state’s bureaucracy, corruption and cruelty but also launch a counterrevolution aimed at reclaiming control over the government using nonviolent means?

Take a cue from King.

http://www.rightsidenews.com/editorial/us-opinion-and-editorial/things-are-getting-scary-global-police-precrime-and-the-war-on-domestic-extremists/
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28356


View Profile
« Reply #224 on: October 23, 2015, 11:43:34 am »

Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20936



View Profile
« Reply #225 on: November 09, 2015, 06:12:53 pm »

University officials agree to rip up Constitution in undercover video

Conservatives have long accused academics of shredding the Constitution, figuratively speaking, but a Project Veritas sting operation recently caught them doing it literally.

Undercover video released last week showed administrators at Yale, Cornell, Syracuse, Vassar and Oberlin agreeing to rip up copies of the Constitution handed out off campus after an investigator posing as a student described the document as “triggering” and “oppressive.”

“Well, I think that the Constitution means things to different people; like you said it is a flawed document and the people who wrote it are certainly flawed individuals in my mind,” Cornell lead Title IX investigator Elizabeth McGrath says on the video.

Ms. McGrath agrees to rip up the hand-held copy of the Constitution and run it through a shredder after the female “student” asks, “Is there any way that maybe like we can get rid of it somehow or I can just see that like maybe it will be like therapy for me, like if you can like shred it or something?”

Project Veritas president James O’Keefe, known for his undercover video operations against ACORN and the National Public Radio, said the videos showed that the willingness to cut up the Constitution was “not an isolated incident.”

“Using a shredder, scissors, and bare hands to destroy the U.S. Constitution, makes you stop and think: where did we go wrong?,” said Mr. O’Keefe in a Thursday statement. “In this latest investigative series we have been to five schools so far and the results have been frightening at each one.”

Only Cornell reacted the videos with an official statement. Joel M. Malina, Cornell vice president for university relations, said that the administrator, “whatever her personal views,” was “appropriately focused on addressing the apparently urgent need of the person before her and not on any larger political context.”

“The Project Veritas video released today would have you believe an employee was helping a student make a political statement by denigrating the U.S. Constitution,” said Mr. Malina in a Thursday statement. “In fact, the video shows a ‘reporter’ misrepresent herself as a student with a mental health crisis. Under the guise of addressing her mental health issues, the ‘student’ asked the employee to help her shred the document she brought with her that was the apparent source of her anguish.”

At Oberlin, spokesman Scott Wargo called the episode “deplorable” in a comment to the Oberlin Review.

“Posing as a student in crisis, secretly recording a private conversation and then strategically editing the footage in order to support a specific, predetermined agenda is deplorable,” Mr. Wargo said.

College Fix editor Jennifer Kabbany agreed that the investigator had put up the administrators to destroying the Constitution copies, and that none volunteered to do so until it was suggested.

“So they are, on some level, trying to ease her ‘pain,’” said Ms. Kabbany in a Friday commentary. “And in fact that is part of their job descriptions.”

At the same time, she said the biggest surprise was that the administrators actually fell for the Project Veritas con, which she said reveals something about the “whiny” attitude of students on college campuses.

VIDEOS @ SITE
Story Continues → http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/nov/8/yale-cornell-syracuse-vassar-oberlin-administrator/
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20936



View Profile
« Reply #226 on: January 15, 2016, 12:30:26 am »

Oregon Fire Chief Resigns After He Says He Secretly Followed Men From Armory and Uncovered Shocking Truth About Their Identities

An Oregon fire chief resigned Wednesday after he claimed he discovered undercover FBI agents were at work in his community and then was told by a judge to not question their presence.

Chris Briels, fire chief in Harney County, was standing next to Ammon Bundy — leader of the armed group that’s taken over the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in Burns — when he announced that he had resigned, KATU-TV reported.

Briels told reporters that he followed two men from the local armory, questioned why the were there and didn’t get a straight answer. He then said he ran their vehicle’s license plate, which “came back undercover FBI agents.”

After explaining what he discovered to Judge Steve Grasty, Briels said Gratzy told him has “no right” to question anybody in regard to what he discovered.

“This is absolutely appalling to me,” Briels said, adding that “I will not stick my head in the sand.”

More from KATU:

Briels is a member of the Community Committee for Public Safety, which is a local group that’s expressed interest in taking over for the Bundy protesters to work to reclaim local rancher’s land rights when and if they leave.

“I’ve been told by Steve to distance myself from this committee of public safety. I’ve been told that we don’t know what we’re doing. I’ve been told that my life is in danger. I’ve been told all kinds of things. I will not be told what to do,” Briels said, according to KATU. “I have my own mind, and I will use my own mind, not somebody else’s.”



http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2016/01/14/oregon-fire-chief-resigns-after-he-says-he-secretly-followed-men-from-armory-and-uncovered-shocking-truth-about-their-identities/
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28356


View Profile
« Reply #227 on: March 02, 2016, 10:10:26 pm »

http://www.nowtheendbegins.com/clear-channel-outdoor-advertising-launches-minority-report-style-talking-billboards-nteb/

MINORITY REPORT: Clear Channel Outdoor Advertising Launches Billboards That Read You

Clear Channel and its partners — AT&T Data Patterns, a unit of AT&T that collects location data from its subscribers; PlaceIQ, which uses location data collected from other apps to help determine consumer behavior; and Placed, which pays consumers for the right to track their movements and is able to link exposure to ads to in-store visits — all insist that they protect the privacy of consumers. All data is anonymous and aggregated, they say, meaning individual consumers cannot be identified.


3/2/16

Pass a billboard while driving in the next few months, and there is a good chance the company that owns it will know you were there and what you did afterward.

“And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.” Revelation 13:16,17 (KJV)

In 2002, Tom Cruise starred in a movie called ‘Minority Report‘ which featured the state of Mark of the Beast style technology in the year 2054. Some of the most amazing scenes in the movie where the ones where ‘talking technology’ followed Tom Cruise’s character wherever he went. In 2016, Clear Channel Outdoor has just rolled out that technology on a global scale, and it works through the device nearly every has in their pockets and purses – your mobile device.

Clear Channel Outdoor Americas, which has tens of thousands of billboards across the United States, will announce on Monday that it has partnered with several companies, including AT&T, to track people’s travel patterns and behaviors through their mobile phones.

Clear Channel Outdoor Mobile Connect:

Clear Channel Outdoor launches ‘Connect,’ the first global out-of-home mobile interactive advertising platform. Platform will initially reach 175 million consumers monthly across 23 countries on 5 continents — creating the largest network of its kind. 75,000 sites worldwide will be equipped with NFC, QR code and/or SMS capabilities. San Francisco and Washington, D.C. are first U.S. markets to be launched, with more to follow.

By aggregating the trove of data from these companies, Clear Channel Outdoor hopes to provide advertisers with detailed information about the people who pass its billboards to help them plan more effective, targeted campaigns. With the data and analytics, Clear Channel Outdoor could determine the average age and gender of the people who are seeing a particular billboard in, say, Boston at a certain time and whether they subsequently visit a store.

“In aggregate, that data can then tell you information about what the average viewer of that billboard looks like,” said Andy Stevens, senior vice president for research and insights at Clear Channel Outdoor. “Obviously that’s very valuable to an advertiser.”

more
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28356


View Profile
« Reply #228 on: March 08, 2016, 05:17:26 pm »

http://www.nowtheendbegins.com/pre-crime-people-will-soon-be-arrested-for-thinking-about-committing-a-crime/

Pre-Crime: People Will Soon Be Arrested For Thinking About Committing A Crime

A pre-crime system called Beware, for example, is capable of rating citizens of Fresno, California, as posing a high, medium or low level of threat. Press accounts say the system amasses data not only on past crimes but on web searches, property records and social networking posts.

3/8/16

Being Arrested For The Crime You Have Not Yet Committed

Computers are getting pretty good at predicting the future. In many cases they do it better than people. That’s why Amazon uses them to figure out what you’re likely to buy, how Netflix knows what you might want to watch, the way meteorologists come up with accurate 10-day forecasts.

Now a team of scientists has demonstrated that a computer can outperform human judges in predicting who will commit a violent crime. In a paper published last month, they described how they built a system that started with people already arrested for domestic violence, then figured out which of them would be most likely to commit the same crime again.



The technology could potentially spare victims from being injured, or even killed. It could also keep the least dangerous offenders from going to jail unnecessarily. And yet, there’s something unnerving about using machines to decide what should happen to people. If targeted advertising misfires, nobody’s liberty is at stake.

For two decades, police departments have used computers to identify times and places where crimes are more likely to occur, guiding the deployment of officers and detectives. Now they’re going another step: using vast data sets to identify individuals who are criminally inclined. They’re doing this with varying levels of transparency and scientific testing. A pre-crime system called Beware, for example, is capable of rating citizens of Fresno, California, as posing a high, medium or low level of threat. Press accounts say the system amasses data not only on past crimes but on web searches, property records and social networking posts.

Critics are warning that the new technology had been rushed into use without enough public discussion. One question is precisely how the software works — it’s the manufacturer’s trade secret. Another is whether there’s scientific evidence that such technology works as advertised.

By contrast, the recent paper on the system that forecasts domestic violence lays out what it can do and how well it can do it.

One of the creators of that system, University of Pennsylvania statistician Richard Berk, said he only works with publicly available data on people who have already been arrested. The system isn’t scooping up and crunching data on ordinary citizens, he said, but is making the same forecasts that judges or police officers previously had to make when it came time to decide whether to detain or release a suspect.

The Technology Shown Us In Minority Report Has Already Come True:



He started working on crime forecasting more than a decade ago, and by 2008 had created a computerized system that beat the experts in picking which parolees were most likely to reoffend. He used a machine learning system – feeding a computer lots of different kinds of data until it discovered patterns that it could use to make predictions, which then can be tested against known data.

Machine learning doesn’t necessarily yield an algorithm that people can understand. Users know which parameters get considered but not how the machine uses them to get its answers.

In the domestic violence paper, published in February in the Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, Berk and Penn psychologist Susan Sorenson looked at data from about 100,000 cases, all occurring between 2009 and 2013. Here, too, they used a machine learning system, feeding a computer data on age, sex, zip code, age at first arrest, and a long list of possible previous charges for such things as drunk driving, animal mistreatment, and firearms crimes. They did not use race, though Berk said the system isn’t completely race blind because some inferences about race can be drawn from a person’s zip code.

The researchers used about two-thirds of the data to “train” the system, giving the machine access to the input data as well as the outcome – whether or not these people were arrested a second time for domestic violence. The other third of the data they used to test the system, giving the computer only the information that a judge could know at arraignment, and seeing how well the system predicted who would be arrested for domestic violence again.

It would be easy to reduce the number of repeat offenses to zero by simply locking up everyone accused of domestic violence, but there’s a cost to jailing people who aren’t going to be dangerous, said Berk. Currently, about half of those arrested for domestic violence are released, he said. The challenge he and Sorenson faced was to continue to release half but pick a less dangerous half. The result: About 20 percent of those released by judges were later arrested for the same crime. Of the computer’s choices, it was only 10 percent.

Berk and Sorensen are currently working with the Philadelphia police, he said, to adapt the machine learning system to predict which households are most at risk of domestic violence. Those, he said, can be targeted with extra supervision.

The parole system has already been implemented in Philadelphia. Parolees in the city are assigned to high-, medium- and low-risk groups by a machine-learning system, allowing parole officers to focus most of their attention on the high-risk cases.

One downside might be a more one-dimensional decision-making process. Several years ago, when I wrote an article on the parole system for the Philadelphia Inquirer, I learned that some parole officers found the system constraining. They said that they could have a bigger impact by spending more time with low-risk offenders who were open to accepting help in getting their lives together – getting off drugs, applying for jobs, or getting a high school degree.

Their concern was that their bosses would put too much faith in the system and too little in them. This echoes the problem Berk says worries him: That people will put too much trust the technology. If a system hasn’t been through scientific testing, then skepticism is in order. And even those that have been shown to beat human judgment are far from perfect. Machine learning could give crime fighters a source of information in making decisions, but at this stage it would be a mistake for them to let it make the decisions for them. source
Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20936



View Profile
« Reply #229 on: April 07, 2016, 04:45:13 am »

Texas School Bans Parents From Walking Children Onto and From School Property — and Principal Is ‘Threatening to Arrest’ Those Who Try

One Texas elementary school is coming under fire after the principal banned parents from walking their children to and from school, and who is threatening parents with arrest.

The trouble began in September when the principal at  Bear Branch Elementary School in Magnolia, Texas, decided to implement a policy that not just discourages but prohibits parents from walking their children home from school or walking inside the school to retrieve their children after parents had parked their cars, according to KPRC-TV.

Parents began expressing their frustration because of the inconvenience they said they felt waiting for almost an hour in their cars. Parents were asked pick up their children only in the school’s winding pick-up lane after school.

“People start lining up here about 2:30 p.m. for a 3:25 p.m. dismissal,” parent Jeff Wendinger had told KPRC.

Parent Jackie McConnell say’s she’s frustrated, too: “It’s a ridiculous situation for everyone.”

But now some people are expressing outrage because the principal has threatened parents who persist in walking their children home from school with charges for trespassing or other criminal charges, according to KRIV-TV. Parents have also begun pulling their kids from school over the issue.

“She’s threatening to arrest people,” mother Wendy Jarman told KRIV about the school’s principal, Holly Ray, before adding that she has pulled her children out of the school. “This has happened to many parents. They have been cited. They have been threatened, if they step one foot on school property, they will be arrested and charged with who knows what.”

But Ray will not allow parents within walking distance of the school to escort them home, and she has gotten Montgomery County Constables aid in enforcing the policy. The Magnolia Independent School District also issued a statement declaring that the new policy was meant to ensure a “safe dismissal process.”

But many of the parents took issue with the fact that neither Ray nor the school district showed a willingness to negotiate with the hundreds of people who signed a petition to change the policy, calling it “bully tactics.” Parent Frank Young, who also received a warning for escorting his children home on foot, ultimately pulled his kids out of the school.

“Mrs. Ray’s policy is implying that a parent doesn’t have the ability or capability to decide what is safest for their children and that the school district does,” Young told KRIV. “I disagree.”

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2016/04/06/texas-school-bans-parents-from-walking-children-to-and-from-school-and-principal-is-threatening-to-arrest-those-who-try/
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20936



View Profile
« Reply #230 on: April 11, 2016, 06:58:52 pm »

Things Are Getting Scary: Global Police, Precrime and the War on Domestic ‘Extremists’

Are you afraid that the government is plotting to confiscate your firearms?
Do you believe the economy is about to collapse and the government will soon declare martial law?
Do you display an unusual number of political and/or ideological bumper stickers on your car?
If you answered yes to any of the above questions, you may be an anti-government extremist (a.k.a. domestic terrorist) in the eyes of the police.

As such, you are now viewed as a greater threat to America than ISIS or al Qaeda.

Let that sink in a moment.

If you believe in and exercise your rights under the Constitution (namely, your right to speak freely, worship freely, associate with like-minded individuals who share your political views, criticize the government, own a weapon, demand a warrant before being questioned or searched, or any other activity viewed as potentially anti-government, racist, bigoted, anarchic or sovereign), you have just been promoted to the top of the government’s terrorism watch list.

I assure you I’m not making this stuff up.

Police agencies now believe the “main terrorist threat in the United States is not from violent Muslim extremists, but from right-wing extremists.”

A New York Times editorial backs up these findings:

Law enforcement agencies around the country are training their officers to recognize signs of anti-government extremism and to exercise caution during routine traffic stops, criminal investigations and other interactions with potential extremists. “The threat is real,” says the handout from one training program sponsored by the Department of Justice. Since 2000, the handout notes, 25 law enforcement officers have been killed by right-wing extremists, who share a “fear that government will confiscate firearms” and a “belief in the approaching collapse of government and the economy.”
So what is the government doing about these so-called terrorists?

The government is going to war.

Again.

Only this time, it has declared war against so-called American “extremists.”

After decades spent waging costly, deadly and ineffective military campaigns overseas in pursuit of elusive ISIS and al Qaeda operatives and terror cells (including the recent “accidental” bombing of a Doctors Without Borders hospital in Afghanistan that left 22 patients and medical staff dead), the Obama administration has announced a campaign to focus its terror-fighting forces inwards.

Under the guise of fighting violent extremism “in all of its forms and manifestations” in cities and communities across the world, the Obama administration has agreed to partner with the United Nations to take part in its Strong Cities Network program. Funded by the State Department through 2016, after which “charities are expected to take over funding,” the cities included in the global network include New York City, Atlanta, Denver, Minneapolis, Paris, London, Montreal, Beirut and Oslo.

Working with the UN, the federal government will train local police agencies across America in how to identify, fight and prevent extremism, as well as address intolerance within their communities, using all of the resources at their disposal.

What this program is really all about, however, is community policing on a global scale.

Community policing, which relies on a “broken windows” theory of policing, calls for police to engage with the communityin order to prevent local crime by interrupting or preventing minor offenses before they could snowball into bigger, more serious and perhaps violent crime. The problem with the broken windows approach is that it has led to zero tolerance policing and stop-and-frisk practices among other harsh police tactics.

When applied to the Strong Cities Network program, the objective is ostensibly to prevent violent extremism by targeting its source: racism, bigotry, hatred, intolerance, etc.

In other words, police—acting ostensibly as extensions of the United Nations—will identify, monitor and deter individuals who exhibit, express or engage in anything that could be construed as extremist.

Consider how Attorney General Loretta Lynch describes the initiative:

As residents and experts in their communities, local leaders are often best positioned to pinpoint sources of unrest and discord; best equipped to identify signs of potential danger; and best able to recognize and accommodate community cultures, traditions, sensitivities, and customs.  By creating a series of partnerships that draws on the knowledge and expertise of our local officials, we can create a more effective response to this virulent threat.

Translation: U.S. police agencies are embarking on an effort to identify and manage potential extremist “threats,” violent or otherwise, before they can become actual threats. (If you want a foretaste of how “extreme” things could get in the U.S.: new anti-terrorism measures in the U.K. require that extremists be treated like pedophiles and banned from working with youngsters and vulnerable people.)

The government’s war on extremists, of which the Strong Cities program is a part, is being sold to Americans in much the same way that the USA Patriot Act was sold to Americans: as a means of combatting terrorists who seek to destroy America.

For instance, making the case for the government’s war on domestic extremism, the Obama administration has suggested that it may require greater legal powers to combat violent attacks by lone wolves (such as “people motivated by racial and religious hatred and anti-government views” who “communicate their hatred over the Internet and through social media”).

Enter the government’s newest employee: a domestic terrorism czar.

However, as we now know, the USA Patriot Act was used as a front to advance the surveillance state, allowing the government to establish a far-reaching domestic spying program that has turned every American citizen into a criminal suspect.

Similarly, the concern with the government’s anti-extremism program is that it will, in many cases, be utilized to render otherwise lawful, nonviolent activities as potentially extremist.

Keep in mind that the government agencies involved in ferreting out American “extremists” will carry out their objectives—to identify and deter potential extremists—in concert with fusion centers (of which there are 78 nationwide, with partners in the private sector and globally), data collection agencies, behavioral scientists, corporations, social media, and community organizers and by relying on cutting-edge technology for surveillance, facial recognition, predictive policing, biometrics, and behavioral epigenetics (in which life experiences alter one’s genetic makeup).

This is pre-crime on an ideological scale and it’s been a long time coming.

For example, in 2009, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) released two reports, one on “Rightwing Extremism,” which broadly defines rightwing extremists as individuals and groups “that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely,” and one on “Leftwing Extremism,” which labeled environmental and animal rights activist groups as extremists.

Incredibly, both reports use the words terrorist and extremist interchangeably.

That same year, the DHS launched Operation Vigilant Eagle, which calls for surveillance of military veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan, characterizing them as extremists and potential domestic terrorist threats because they may be “disgruntled, disillusioned or suffering from the psychological effects of war.”

These reports indicate that for the government, anyone seen as opposing the government—whether they’re Left, Right or somewhere in between—can be labeled an extremist.

Fast forward a few years, and you have the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which President Obama has continually re-upped, that allows the military to take you out of your home, lock you up with no access to friends, family or the courts if you’re seen as an extremist.

Now connect the dots, from the 2009 Extremism reports to the NDAA and the UN’s Strong Cities Network with its globalized police forces, the National Security Agency’s far-reaching surveillance networks, and fusion centers that collect and share surveillance data between local, state and federal police agencies.

Add in tens of thousands of armed, surveillance drones that will soon blanket American skies, facial recognition technology that will identify and track you wherever you go and whatever you do. And then to complete the circle, toss in the real-time crime centers being deployed in cities across the country, which will be attempting to “predict” crimes and identify criminals before they happen based on widespread surveillance, complex mathematical algorithms and prognostication programs.

Hopefully you’re getting the picture, which is how easy it is for the government to identify, label and target individuals as “extremist.”

We’re living in a scary world.

Unless we can put the brakes on this dramatic expansion and globalization of the government’s powers, we’re not going to recognize this country 20 years from now.

Frankly, as I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, the landscape has already shifted dramatically from what it was like 10 or 20 years ago. It’s taken less than a generation for our freedoms to be eroded and the police state structure to be erected, expanded and entrenched.

Rest assured that the government will not save us from the chains of the police state. The UN’s Strong Cities Network program will not save us. The next occupant of the White House will not save us. For that matter, anarchy and violent revolution will not save us.

If there is to be any hope of freeing ourselves, it rests—as it always has—at the local level, with you and your fellow citizens taking part in grassroots activism, which takes a trickle-up approach to governmental reform by implementing change at the local level.

Attend local city council meetings, speak up at town hall meetings, organize protests and letter-writing campaigns, employ “militant nonviolent resistance” and civil disobedience, which Martin Luther King Jr. used to great effect through the use of sit-ins, boycotts and marches.

And then, while you’re at it, urge your local governments to nullify everything the federal government does that is illegitimate, egregious or blatantly unconstitutional.

If this sounds anti-government or extremist, perhaps it is, in much the same way that King himself was considered anti-government and extremist. Recognizing that “freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed,” King’s tactics—while nonviolent—were extreme by the standards of his day.

As King noted in his 1963 “Letter from Birmingham City Jail”:

[A]s I continued to think about the matter I gradually gained a bit of satisfaction from being considered an extremist. Was not Jesus an extremist in love—“Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, pray for them that despitefully use you.” Was not Abraham Lincoln an extremist—“This nation cannot survive half slave and half free.” Was not Thomas Jefferson an extremist—“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.” So the question is not whether we will be extremist but what kind of extremist will we be. Will we be extremists for hate or will we be extremists for love?

So how do you not only push back against the police state’s bureaucracy, corruption and cruelty but also launch a counterrevolution aimed at reclaiming control over the government using nonviolent means?

Take a cue from King.

http://www.rightsidenews.com/editorial/us-opinion-and-editorial/things-are-getting-scary-global-police-precrime-and-the-war-on-domestic-extremists/

The UNITED NATIONS/ATF Are Installing Spy Boxes Above Your House-The Strong Cities Network



What is in the box? If you see one of these on your property hovering on a utility pole, you are not alone. This is going on all across America. Soon, as part of the Safe Cities Network (SCN), these invasive surveillance devices will  be everywhere courtesy of America’s acquiescence to United Nations authority as carried out by the ATF.

Attorney General Loretta Lynch stated that:

“The Strong Cities Network will serve as a vital tool to strengthen capacity-building and improve collaboration,” Lynch proclaimed for the United Nations SCN launch. “As we continue to counter a range of domestic and global terror threats, this innovative platform will enable cities to learn from one another, to develop best practices and to build social cohesion and community resilience here at home and around the world.”
This quote by Attorney General, Loretta Lynch, is a thinly veiled announcement that Americans are going to be spied upon like never before because of the need to prevent the (artificially created) terror threat. It is an excuse for full frontal spying on the American people.

As of September 29, 2015, the Strong Cities Network was announced. It is described on the Strong Cities Network website as “a global network of local authorities united in building resilience to prevent violent extremism.” And, again, to prevent “violent extremism”, one must preemptively spy upon all the population to prevent “terrorism”.

The SCN is global but it is also local. Ask yourself, why is the ATF putting surveillance boxes on top of utility power lines on private property without a court order (see the news story below)? Amazingly, the ATF states that they can basically do whatever they want, whenever they want. Legally, they are correct. The US Constitution is dead. This treaty that we entered into (SCN) supersedes all other arrangements. AND THIS WAS ALL DONE WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE SENATE WHICH IS REQUIRED FOR ALL TREATIES.

The SCN and the Police State Surveillance Grid

The SCN fully admits to a program of dedicated spying on the population as part of the protocols related to the sharing of information, for the purposes of providing training to government officials, and a developing a platform for municipalities to make their communities “more secure”. There we go with that “trading liberty f0r security” nonsense! The SCN’s International Advisory Board is run by the Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD), a London based think-tank with ties to the defense ministries of Britain, Germany, and France. This means that foreigners will be spying on you as well as your own government.

“The SCN is a part of a broader effort going under the name of Countering Violent Extremism (CVE), developed by the Department of Homeland Security.”
The above paragraphs are a snap shot of the UN spying on Americans on a macro level. Below is what this program looks like on a micro level (i.e. you and your community).

Here Is What UN/ATF Spying Looks Like

From Phoenix ABC 15 NEWS

The bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms and Explosives came forward Thursday, admitting that a box spotted and removed from an SRP power pole on 21st and Glendale avenues belonged to them and was part of an ongoing investigation.

ATF officials would not elaborate on the investigation and would not say if they were conducting surveillance in the area.

“I don’t feel safer,” said Brian Clegg, who called ABC15 about the box on the power pole behind his house.

Clegg was suspicious there could be cameras installed in the boxes but ATF would not confirm that.

“I feel that my privacy has been violated,” said Clegg. “It’s right behind my house.”

There are homes, a high school, an apartment complex and a strip mall in the area. The strip mall has a salon, pet grooming store, alterations business, ammunition store and a barber shop.

“It makes me feel like they’re up to something grimy,” said Kevin Moreno who is a manager at the barber shop.

SRP (utility company) tells ABC15 they had no idea the box was installed on their power pole. They said ATF has to notify them or work with them if they have an object on their property.

ATF tells ABC15 depending on the investigation and security they can put security measures in place without permission. [Ed. Please note the ATF is admitting that this is for security (i.e. spying)].

They (ATF) say in this case they “acted within their bounds” but would not elaborate. (Ed. the “bounds means the UN Strong Cities Program agreed to by Attorney General Lynch.
Here is the TV report from ABC 15 in Phoenix



Conclusion

There is no question that the “power line incident” is about surveillance, but to what end? Please allow me the courtesy of some idle speculation. First, we know that the NSA is listening to every electronic communication. This program allow the criminal elite to listen to EVERY communication, electronic or otherwise.  There is another more ominous feature and consideration. One must consider what the criminal elite will do with all this data? Consider the fact that the depopulation agenda, which is well publicized, may depend on the creation of a naughty or nice list. So if you look up and see an ATF/UN surveillance box above your house, make certain that you say nice things about climate change , free trade agreements and the sovereignty of corporations of over governments. Your life may depend upon it!

 http://www.thecommonsenseshow.com/2016/04/10/the-un-and-atf-are-installing-spy-boxes-above-your-house-the-strong-cities-network/
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20936



View Profile
« Reply #231 on: April 29, 2016, 06:42:14 pm »

Why Is The Federal Government Installing Mysterious Boxes On Utility Poles? (Videos)

At the end of the first week in April, a mysterious box was spotted on a Phoenix utility pole that aroused the suspicions of a homeowner in the area who believed the box had surveillance cameras inside. After the homeowner involved the media, several days later The bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms and Explosives came forward, admitting that the box reported belonged to them, and that it was part of an ongoing investigation. Apparently the box was part of what has come to be known as a typical “Top Secret Obama” investigation, because neither local law enforcement, nor the electric company that owned the pole knew anything about the box, or ever saw a warrant. That seems to be the way Obama likes his investigations: As illegal as can be, and with zero oversight.

In the following video by Dahboo77, he explains how the box in Phoenix was the exact same type of box that Lavoy Finicum spotted on a pole outside the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in Burns, Oregon. To find out about that box, Finicum climbed the pole and actually looked inside the strange box. Sure enough it was filled with surveillance cameras, so he ripped them all out. For anyone who doesn’t know, Lavoy Finicum was later assassinated in cold blood by the FBI.

First, check out the video below giving you a brief background of the most recent case of Uncle Barry’s government gone wild, and then my intention for the rest of this post is to demonstrate other instances where the feds have been caught doing similar things. I suspect by the end of this post, some of you may not feel comfortable walking out of your home. Remember all this on election day, and whatever you do… DO NOT MISS THE FINAL EXAMPLE AT THE BOTTOM. Science fiction movies haven't even started using that kind of technology yet, but good old Uncle Sam is…



Before we get into the Phoenix story below, to REALLY understand how much you are being spied on, the earliest I could trace back easily obtainable information was back to 2008. When I first came across this back in 2012, there were three interviews with Dr. Katherine Albrecht linked below, but now only the second one is still active. I left the other two links so you could see their titles in the event someone wants to look for them.

For anyone who doesn't know, Dr. Katherine Albrecht is an internationally known privacy researcher, consumer advocate, bestselling author, and nationally syndicated radio host. Katherine holds a Doctorate in Human Development and Consumer Education from Harvard University, has studied at the MIT Media lab, and received a Masters from Harvard in Technology, Innovation, and Education.

Katherine has authored pro-privacy legislation, testified before the Federal Trade Commission and numerous state legislatures, and was appointed as a consumer technology expert by NH Governor John Lynch. She co-authored the bestseller Spychips, has granted over 2,000 media interviews with news outlets around the globe, including CBS, NBC, CNN, NPR, Fox News, Good Morning America, the BBC, Wired Magazine, The New York Times, and hundreds more. Katherine is currently serving as the Associate Editor of the IEEE Technology & Society Magazine, co-authors an online security blog for eHow, and she heads the 18,000 member consumer privacy organization, CASPIAN.

BOTTOM LINE: Dr. Katherine Albrecht is the real deal, and she was warning back in 2008 about how out of control government was!!! Remember, only the second one below works:

Radio Interview – February 27, 2009 (Select “Hour 1”)  <– Recent
http://www.katherinealbrecht.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=3039:fri-february-27-2009&catid=20:show-archives&Itemid=44

WORKING ONE: Radio Interview – February 22, 2008 (Select “Hour 2”)  <– 2008
http://mp3.wtprn.com/Albrecht/0802/20080222_Fri_Albrecht.m3u

Also: See WorldNet Daily’s related article: “Radio Chip Coming Soon to your Driver’s License?” 2/28/09
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=90008

Even though the particular video below was uploaded in 2013, in the Interview with Dr. Katherine Albrecht, and in the article by Joseph Watson below, the equipment in the video below is the same as was being used in 2009 that they talk about.



Back in 2009, Paul Joseph Watson reported:

The Department of Homeland Security is set to activate a national license plate tracking system that will be shared with law enforcement, allowing DHS officers to take photos of any license plate using their smartphone and upload it to a database which will include a “hot list” of “target vehicles”.

The details are included in a PDF attachment uploaded yesterday to the Federal Business Opportunities website under a solicitation entitled “National License Plate Recognition Database.”

The system will “track vehicle license plate numbers that pass through cameras or are voluntarily entered into the system from a variety of sources (access control systems, asset recovery specialists, etc.) and uploaded to share with law enforcement” in order to help locate “criminal aliens and absconders.”

The technology shown above and being used by DHS is not “new” technology to many cities. For the sake of the sanity of the citizens, in many of the cities using this technology, the citizens probably don't even know they are victims, otherwise there would be protests without a doubt, and rightfully so. With the device shown above, in many areas DHS has taken it upon themselves to install RFID chips in every license plate, and then they have scanners virtually EVERYWHERE tracking those chips.

The scanners are on bridges, on roads, in tunnels… you name it, and most have a highly intrusive CAMERA capability, so when they spot your Car/Chip coming, they begin snapping pictures of you and the family. Isn’t that sweet? All this time you thought no one was watching when you're loading the groceries into the car. Don't you feel better now that you know you're not only being watched, there is a file with pictures of you in it. You're like a mini-celebrity or something! GREAT HUH?

Before getting to the incidents in Seattle in 2013 below, it’s worth mentioning in New York I also followed a case where‘Dangerous’ camera boxes mounted ‘without authorization’ along New York streets. That was another case where neither law enforcement nor the electric company knew who put the devices up, or where the information being collected was sent.

Now, working our way back to the box found in Phoenix…. Derrick Broze at Activist Post writes:

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms and Explosives has claimed ownership of a mysterious box that was removed from a utility pole in Phoenix, Arizona.

Phoenix resident Brian Clegg was concerned about a box he witnessed being installed on a power pole. Clegg said the box was facing his house and he believed it may have had cameras inside. The pole was owned by Arizona’s largest power provider, SRP, who claimed no one had permission to put the box on their pole. Brian Clegg says shortly afterwards SRP sent a crew to remove the box.

Shortly after ABC15 investigated the matter, the bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms and Explosives(ATF), a branch of the U.S. Department of Justice, acknowledged installing the box as part of an ongoing investigation. Officials with the ATF would not provide details about their alleged investigation and would not confirm if they were conducting surveillance in the area.

“I don’t feel safer,” said Brian Clegg. “I feel that my privacy has been violated.”

SRP told ABC15 they were unaware the box had been installed and that the ATF has to notify them if they are going install something on their property. The ATF told ABC15 they can put security measures in place without asking for permission. Obviously the federal government feels comfortable doing whatever it wants to do, whenever it wants to, law be damned.

One other interesting aspect of Clegg’s story is the fact that he claims the crew who installed the box came in a truck marked “Field Pros.” The thought of undercover government agents installing surveillance equipment while masquerading as utility workers is highly disturbing and sounds like a scene right out of a Hollywood film. Unfortunately, Phoenix is not the only city to have surveillance equipment installed by an agency of the federal government.

In November 2013, Seattle residents pushed back against the installation of several mesh network nodes attached to utility poles around the downtown area. The nodes were purchased by the Seattle Police Department via a $2.7 million grant from the Department of Homeland Security. The American Civil Liberties Union of Washington and privacy advocates were immediately concerned about the ability of the nodes to gather user information via the Wi-Fi connection.

The video below comes from a story I did about the incident mentioned above in Seattle in 2013. In the video, you’ll learn that the city of Seattle's police department along with DHS were installing 'WHITE BOXES' on utility poles, buildings, towers and lampposts all over the city (without permission or warrants) that did WAY more than just eavesdrop or take pictures. The secret spying contraptions gave warrantless government officials massive abilities to track EVERY CITIZEN in the city in real time, with voice recognition, GPS of their last 1000 locations, facial recognition software, and more.



“How accurately can it geo-locate and track the movements of your phone, laptop, or any other wireless device by its MAC address? Can the network send that information to a database, allowing the SPD to reconstruct who was where at any given time, on any given day, without a warrant? Can the network see you now?” asked Seattle newspaper The Stranger.

Initially the Seattle PD was reluctant to speak about the network. However, the police ultimately yielded to public opinion and decided, “the wireless mesh network will be deactivated until city council approves a draft policy and until there’s an opportunity for vigorous public debate.”

Although the situation in Seattle played out in favor of the people, we must recognize that there is a growing partnership between the surveillance agencies of the federal government and the increasingly militarized local police forces in the United States. As Activist Post previously reported, a new policy from the Obama administration will make it easier for the NSA to share information between law enforcement agencies with very little oversight.

According to the New York Times:

The Obama administration is on the verge of permitting the National Security Agency to share more of the private communications it intercepts with other American intelligence agencies without first applying any privacy protections to them, according to officials familiar with the deliberations.

The new rule changes would allow federal agencies such as the FBI to access streams of information gathered by the spy agency, “including emails, phone calls and location data.” These federal agencies would then have the ability to pass the data to state and local law enforcement. As the Times points out, “all of this can happen without any congressional or judicial oversight under a Reagan era executive order known as EO 12333.”

 WHILE WERE ON THE TOPIC OF WITHOUT ANY OVERSIGHT…

In the video below, Paul Joseph Watson of Infowars reports on a set of 17 Mysterious 'Fake' Cell Phone Towers Found Across America back in 2014. Apparently while ISIS was just a JV team not worthy of Obama’s time or attention, spying on the American people was…



Obama knows all this is illegal, he just doesn’t care! He knows the Supreme Court has held a person does not have a reasonable expectation of privacy on a public road. However, the Supreme Court decided the use of devices to track a defendant’s “movements from one place to another,” and tracking the defendant’s every movement twenty-four hours a day violated a reasonable expectation of privacy, because no agency would have the resources for a team of agents to do that. United States v. Maynard, 615 F.3d 544, 558 (D.C. Cir. 2010). Since then, U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on the issue of twenty-four hour GPS surveillance, and it ruled twenty-four hour surveillance with a device does constitute a search, and therefore without a warrant is unlawful.

United States v. Jones, 132 S.Ct. 945 (2012).

THIS IS THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION WE’RE TALKING ABOUT HERE…

LAWS? LAWS? OBAMA DON’T NEED NO STINKING LAWS…


Now that technology has advanced even further, there is almost no limit to the types of nefarious conduct His Highnesses Royal Ass Barack Obama will engage in… see the following:

Why Are Weaponized Cell Phone Towers Being Constructed Everywhere?

More on Why Weaponized Cell Phone Towers Are Popping Up Everywhere (Video)

Weaponized Cell Towers Are Directly Related to Why Chemtrails Are Sprayed (Video)

The rule change by the Obama administration is only one of several tools that both local police and federal agencies have at their disposal. From drones to stingrays, gunshot detectors and automatic license plate readers – the State has an arsenal of spy equipment. How can the free hearts and minds of the world live free, happy, and abundant lives with the ever-present eyes and ears of Big Brother? We must educate ourselves about the tools used for surveillance and oppression and begin working to redirect the technology at the tyrants. We must persevere, be courageous, and shine a light on the darkness.


Since the article at Activist Post brought up the drones, I’ll close with these fun links before sharing the NSA’s big toy!

DHS Secretary Nomination Approved Targeting U.S. Citizens With Drones

SHOCK!!!!!! DHS Built Domestic Surveillance Into Predator Drones

FBI Director Admits Drones Used For Surveillance of Americans

Homeland Security Drones Looking For Civilians Carrying Guns

64 Drone Bases on American Soil

Defense Department's DARPA Deploying New Autonomous Killer Drones (Video)

Shocking Revelation? Obama's Drones Are Now Targeting Non-Military (Video)

Finally, as if the government having all those toys doesn’t make you feel all warm and fuzzy… get a load of this: I’m not a scientist, so I don’t know how this is even possible, but the NSA’s spying technology is so advanced, they let’s say for example you had a computer sitting in the bottom of a closet, in a mountain cabin, a million miles from anywhere, and underneath a bunch of clothes or whatever, and you’ve never even plugged the computer into an AC socket or the Internet… Ever…

http://thelastgreatstand.com/2016/04/29/why-is-the-federal-government-installing-mysterious-boxes-on-utility-poles-videos/

Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20936



View Profile
« Reply #232 on: May 27, 2016, 10:59:32 pm »

NYC gets OK to issue salt fines during appeal

New York City plans to start enforcing a first-of-its-kind requirement for chain restaurants to use icons to warn patrons of salty foods after getting an appeals court's go-ahead Thursday to start issuing fines. But it's not the final word on whether the regulation will stand.

The novel rule took effect in December, and some eateries already have added the requisite salt-shaker-like icons to menu items that contain more salt than doctors recommend ingesting in an entire day.

But penalties have been in limbo as the National Restaurant Association fights the measure in court. That clash is ongoing, but an appeals court Thursday lifted a temporary hold on issuing the fines while the case plays out. Fines can be up to $600.

The city will start enforcing the rule June 6.

Democratic Mayor Bill de Blasio applauded the appeals court's decision on what he called "a common-sense regulation that will help New Yorkers make better decisions and lead healthier lives." The city won the first round of the lawsuit in a trial court in February; the restaurant association appealed.

The group called on the city Thursday to delay enforcement voluntarily until the appeal is resolved.

"Today's decision ... will force the men and women that own New York City's restaurants to start complying with this unlawful and unprecedented sodium mandate before the court has the chance to rule on the merits of our appeal," the organization said in a statement.

The average American consumes about 3,400 milligrams of sodium per day, while the recommended limit is 2,300 mg, or about a teaspoon. Experts say eating too much salt, over time, can increase the risk of high blood pressure and heart disease.

Pointing to such restaurant fare as cheddar bacon burgers with nearly 4,300 milligrams of salt and boneless Buffalo chicken salads with more than 3,000milligrams, New York City officials say the warnings help make diners aware of how much sodium they're consuming.
Related Stories

But the restaurant association argues the city should leave nutritional warnings up to federal regulators and that there's disagreement among scientists about how much salt is too much. The group also argues the city's requirement violates restaurateurs' free-speech rights.

The regulation applies to the New York City locations of restaurants and fast-food places with more than 15 outlets nationwide.

http://www.fox5ny.com/news/local-news/145569935-story
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28356


View Profile
« Reply #233 on: May 31, 2016, 03:07:56 pm »

http://www.nowtheendbegins.com/big-chill-eu-tech-giants-team-banish-illegal-hate-speech-online/

FREE SPEECH BIG CHILL: EU And Tech Giants Team Up To Banish ‘Illegal Hate Speech’ Online

"The internet is a place for free speech, not hate speech," said Vera Jourova, the EU commissioner responsible for justice, consumers and gender equality. She added that the code of conduct, which will be regularly reviewed in terms of its scope and its impact, will ensure that public incitement to violence to hatred has "no place online."

5/31/16

The European Union reached an agreement Tuesday with some of the world’s biggest social media firms, including Facebook and Twitter, on ways to combat the spread of hate speech online.

EDITOR’S NOTE: While removing speech that directly calls for violence is a good thing, the definition of what ‘hate speech’ is remains a little murky. For example, will it be considered hate speech for the Bible believing Christian to say that homosexuality is wrong and that transgender men should not be in the ladies bathroom? Something tells me this is exactly where we are headed.

Under the terms of a code of conduct, the firms, which also include YouTube and Microsoft, have committed to “quickly and efficiently” tackle illegal hate speech directed against anyone over issues of race, color, religion, descent or national or ethnic origin. The sites have often been used by terrorist organizations to relay messages and entice hatred against certain individuals or groups.

Among the measures agreed with the EU’s executive arm, the firms have said they will establish internal procedures and staff training to guarantee that a majority of illegal content is assessed and, where necessary, removed within 24 hours. They have also agreed to strengthen their partnerships with civil society organizations who often flag content that promotes incitement to violence and hateful conduct. The European Commission and the firms have also agreed to support civil society organizations to deliver “anti-hate campaigns.”

more
Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20936



View Profile
« Reply #234 on: June 29, 2016, 05:40:46 pm »

Why police were called to a South Jersey third-grade class party

On June 16, police were called to an unlikely scene: an end-of-the-year class party at the William P. Tatem Elementary School in Collingswood.

A third grader had made a comment about the brownies being served to the class. After another student exclaimed that the remark was "racist," the school called the Collingswood Police Department, according to the mother of the boy who made the comment.

The police officer spoke to the student, who is 9, said the boy's mother, Stacy dos Santos, and local authorities.

Dos Santos said that the school overreacted and that her son made a comment about snacks, not skin color.

"He said they were talking about brownies. . . . Who exactly did he offend?" dos Santos said.

The boy's father was contacted by Collingswood police later in the day. Police said the incident had been referred to the New Jersey Division of Child Protection and Permanency. The student stayed home for his last day of third grade.

Dos Santos said that her son was "traumatized," and that she hopes to send him to a different Collingswood public school in the fall.

And she wants an apology. She said she graduated from Collingswood High School and has two other children, a 21-year-old who also went through Collingswood schools, and a 3-year-old. Her husband, the third grader's father, is Brazilian, dos Santos said.

"I'm not comfortable with the administration [at Tatem]. I don't trust them and neither does my child," she said. "He was intimidated, obviously. There was a police officer with a gun in the holster talking to my son, saying, 'Tell me what you said.' He didn't have anybody on his side."

The incident, which has sparked outrage among some parents, was one of several in the last month when Collingswood police have been called to look into school incidents that parents think hardly merit criminal investigation.

Superintendent Scott Oswald estimated that on some occasions over the last month, officers may have been called to as many as five incidents per day in the district of 1,875 students.

This has created concern among parents in the 14,000-resident borough, who have phoned their elected officials, met with Mayor James Maley, blasted social-media message boards, and even launched a petition calling on the Camden County Prosecutor's Office to "stop mandated criminal investigation of elementary school students."

The increased police involvement follows a May 25 meeting among the Collingswood Police Department, school officials, and representatives from the Camden County Prosecutor's Office, where school officials and police both said they were told to report to police any incidents that could be considered criminal, including what Police Chief Kevin Carey called anything "as minor as a simple name-calling incident that the school would typically handle internally."

The police and schools were also advised that they should report "just about every incident" to the New Jersey Division of Child Protection and Permanency, Carey said.

Previously, the school district, following the state's Memorandum of Agreement Between Education and Law Enforcement Officials, had only reported incidents it deemed serious, like those involving weapons, drugs, or sexual misconduct. Both Carey and School Board President David Routzahn described the protocol set forth after that May meeting as a significant change in procedure.

"It was a pretty clear directive that we questioned vehemently," Oswald said.

But a month after the meeting, and after police investigations that parents consider fruitless had begun to gain attention, Maley wrote in a public letter that the May 25 meeting was intended to "reinforce the applicability" of the MOA, "not to expand its terms." Prosecutor Mary Eva Colalillo, in an accompanying statement, said she hoped Maley's message "clarifies" the responsibilities of school officials.

Maley said in an interview Tuesday that there had been a "misunderstanding" during the May 25 meeting. But Oswald said the Prosecutor's Office was shying away from its own instructions.

"At some point, it seems, they've realized that the intent of the MOA that they're leaning heavily upon is not what they directed us to do," Oswald said. "It went way above what that MOA says."

Another point of contention between the Prosecutor's Office and school officials is what prompted Maley's meeting in the first place.

In a public letter issued to parents Monday, Routzahn said he was "not aware of any single event" in the district that might have prompted the Prosecutor's Office to ask for a higher reporting standard.

But Maley said the Prosecutor's Office had been concerned about a "delay" in reporting an incident at Collingswood High School this spring. He would not comment further, noting that the incident was under investigation by the Prosecutor's Office.

Oswald said the high school incident had not been raised during the meeting May 25.

"I welcome discussion on that as well," he said.

Several parents said they consider the recent police involvement not only ridiculous but harmful.

Megan Irwin, who has two daughters who have attended Collingswood public schools and who teaches first grade in Pennsauken, said the police had been called to deal with behavior the schools could easily have handled.

"Some of it is just typical little-kid behavior," Irwin said. "Never in my years of teaching have I ever felt uncomfortable handling a situation or felt like I didn't know how to handle a situation."

And Pam Gessert, a Collingswood resident who works as a school counselor in Burlington County, said that because teachers have the best relationships with students, they are most qualified to determine what happened in a particular incident.

Most of all, parents said they were concerned that undue police involvement threatened their children's well-being.

"I don't want this to happen to another child," dos Santos said.

http://www.philly.com/philly/education/20160629_Why_police_were_called_to_a_South_Jersey_third_grade_class_party.html
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20936



View Profile
« Reply #235 on: July 09, 2016, 04:50:23 pm »

Obama Pushes More Federal Oversight of Cops After Dallas Attack on Cops

President Barack Obama is harnessing the increasing attacks on police in Dallas — and the periodic shootings of people by stressed cops — to push his agenda to federalize state and local police forces.
“I want to start moving on constructive actions that are actually going to make a difference,” he said during his evening press conference in Poland when he was asked about the Dallas attack.

Those actions, he said, would  be based on the recommendations of the panel that he picked after the 2014 street riots in Ferguson, Missouri. The panel offered “practical concrete solutions that can reduce — if not eliminate — the problems of racial bias,” Obama said.

The dramatic shootings are an opportunity to push that agenda, Obama said. “If my voice has been true and positive, my hope would be that… [the panel] surfaces problems, it frames them, it allows us to wrestle with these issue and try to come up with practical solutions,” he said.

Obama began touting the panel’s recommendations in March 2015. The report, titled “President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing Report,” was published in May 2015.

The report urges the federal government to federalize police training and practices, via the use of federal lawsuits, grants and threats to cut federal aid. So far, Obama’s deputies have cajoled and sued more than 30 police jurisdictions to adopt federal rules in a slow-motion creation of a national police system, similar to the slow-motion creation of a federal-run health-sector via Obamacare.

Obama also used the press conference to insulate his federalized police program — and his allies in the Black Live Matter movement — from popular rejection after the five police were murdered by the anti-cop African-American in Dallas.

“The danger is that we somehow think the act of a troubled person speaks to some larger political statement across the country — it doesn’t,” Obama insisted.

Obama shrugged off growing criticism that his own anti-cop statements helped trigger the shootings in Dallas and several other cities on Thursday and Friday. “It is very hard to untangle to motives of this [Dallas] shooter …  you have a troubled mind … what feeds it, what sets it off, I’ll leave that to psychologists and people who study these kids of incidents.”

Throughout his press conference, Obama tried to play the role of national healer. “As painful as this week has been, I firmly believe that America is not as divided as some have suggested. Americans of all races and all backgrounds are rightly outraged by the inexcusable attacks on police … that includes protestors, it includes family members who have grave concerns about police conduct, and they’ve said that this is unacceptable, there is no division there,” he said.

http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/07/09/dallas-obama-federal-shootings/
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28356


View Profile
« Reply #236 on: September 30, 2016, 11:19:33 am »

http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/computers/item/24165-obama-un-internet-takeover-is-just-hours-away-congress-must-act
Thursday, 29 September 2016
Obama-UN Internet Takeover Is Just Hours Away

October 1 is D-Day for the start of the international takeover of the Internet, a scheme the Obama administration and the United Nations have been advancing for years. Why are GOP leaders AWOL as President Obama and the United Nations move to transfer critically important jurisdiction over the Internet to an unaccountable UN-aligned monopoly? Why are Ryan and McConnell doing nothing?

On October 1 — which is only hours away — U.S. oversight of the Internet’s domain name system is scheduled to be stripped from the U.S. and transferred to the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) designed by global “multistakeholder” activists. Members of Congress, national security experts, military professionals, constitutional authorities, privacy advocates, and human rights activists are warning that this pending transition to “independent” oversight by “the international community” is fraught with danger.

However, as on so many other crucial issues, the Republican-controlled Congress is acting as a rubber stamp for Obama. Although few Americans are aware of the serious threat posed by this impending transition, the UN’s Internet takeover scheme is not something that has sprung upon us recently or ex nihilo; we have been reporting on this growing peril for the past several years (see here and the articles linked below, following this story).

Rick Manning, president of Americans for Limited Government (ALG), yesterday blasted House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) for failing even to attempt to block the Internet giveaway, while at the same time caving in to threats of a government shutdown by President Obama and the Democrats if the Republicans didn’t give them all the funding they demanded. One of the key issues was a deal to provide the city of Flint, Michigan, a liberal Democrat stronghold, with $170 million in federal funds for their municipal water supply.

“So, Democrats block the continuing resolution, demand money for the Flint, Mich. water supply,” noted Manning. “House Republicans led by House Speaker Paul Ryan relent and agree to add it to the House water bill after that proposal was defeated in the House Rules Committee, and got nothing in return.”

“Republicans have majorities in both houses of Congress, Democrats were actively demanding extra add-ons for these bills, and they couldn’t even get a rider stopping the irreversible transition of U.S. oversight of the Internet’s domain name system," ALG’s Manning charged. “That, even though the Department of Justice has repeatedly failed to respond to the House and Senate Judiciary Committees on a number of outstanding legal concerns with the Internet transition of U.S. oversight of the domain name system,” he said, referring to the most recent letter from Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.).

In their September 21 letter to Attorney General Loretta Lynch, the chairmen raised serious national security concerns and important constitutional matters that the Department of Justice has failed to address, despite repeated requests. The DOJ has failed to address, the chairmen pointed out, “how the transfer will effect free speech and the openness of the Internet, if U.S. control of the .mil and .gov domains will be compromised, if the transfer will open the Internet to undue influence from foreign nations, if the transfer will lead to the improper conveyance of United States government property, or if the transfer affects any existing antitrust immunity and increases the likelihood of significant antitrust litigation.”

ALG’s Rick Manning charges that “these issues risk either creating an unaccountable global Internet monopoly or a potentially fractured domain name system if antitrust does come into play. The transition proposal contemplates neither scenario, and these issues cannot be addressed once the transition occurs on October 1.” (See here for a detailed legal analysis by ALG’s senior editor Robert Romano of the anti-trust issues involved in the transfer.)

The letter by chairmen Grassley and Goodlatte asked Attorney General Lynch to answer “whether or not the administration has the constitutional authority to conduct the IANA transition without the authorization of Congress because of the United States property interests in the root zone file — or other similar components of the Internet that were created and financed by the United States.” The chairmen pointed out that under Article IV, Section 3 of the Constitution, Congress has the exclusive power “to dispose of and make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property belonging to the United States.”

On September 26, a stellar coalition of 77 generals, admirals, intelligence experts, cybersecurity professionals, and industry leaders sent a letter to Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs General Joseph Dunford, calling on them to intervene in opposition to President Obama’s radical plan to jeopardize the security of the Internet, which is vital to national (and global) security.

“As individuals with extensive, first-hand experience with protecting our national security, we write to urge you to intervene in opposition to an imminent action that would, in our judgment, cause profound and irreversible damage to the United States’ vital interests,” the letter states. Of immediate concern, say these national security professionals, “is the prospect that the United States might be transferring to future adversaries a capability that could facilitate, particularly in time of conflict, cyberwarfare against us.” The letter continued, “In the absence of NTIA’s stewardship, we would be unable to be certain about the legitimacy of all IP addresses or whether they have been, in some form or fashion, manipulated, or compromised. Given the reliance of the U.S. military and critical infrastructure on the Internet, we must not allow it to be put needlessly at risk.”

Among the signers of the letter are Adm. James A. “Ace” Lyons, USN (Ret.), former commander-in-chief U.S. Pacific Fleet; Lt. General William “Jerry” Boykin, USA (Ret.), former deputy under secretary of defense for intelligence; Lt. Gen. Thomas McInerney, USAF (Ret.), former deputy chief of staff, United States Air Force; Hon. Charles E. Allen, former under secretary of the Department of Homeland Security for intelligence and analysis; Lt. Gen. C. E. McKnight, Jr., USA (Ret.), former director, Command and Control Systems for Nuclear Forces, Joint Chiefs of Staff; Dr. Lani Kass, former firector, Air Force Chief of Staff’s Cyber Task Force; Rear Adm. Philip S. Anselmo, USN (Ret.), former director of Command Control Communications Computers and Intelligence (C4I); Rep. Brian Babin (R-Tex.), Chairman, House of Representatives’ Committee on Science Space and Technology Subcommittee; Jody R. Westby, CEO, Global Cyber Risk LLC and former chief administrative officer & counsel, In-Q-Tel.

Considering the Obama administration’s contempt for the Constitution’s system of checks and balances, its record for ignoring Congressional requests and concerns, and President Obama’s penchant for “legislating” by executive order, it is not surprising that the administration has completely ignored these appeals by Congress, as well as military and cybersecurity experts. Nor is it a surprise that the Republican leaders have failed, once again, to fight for America’s vital interests. As ALG’s Manning notes, their failure even to engage Obama on this issue is inexcusable.

“Did they even try?” Manning asks. “Ryan and McConnell have not issued any public statements on the matter, so we must assume they actively agree with surrendering U.S. oversight of the Internet. They didn’t even put up a fight. House and Senate Republicans are not what they say, they are what they do. And what they are doing is allowing President Obama to give away the Internet to the international community, threatening the American people’s vital Internet freedoms. And don’t let any Republican tell you different.”

Last-ditch effort: State Attorneys General sue to block transfer
The clock is ticking and October 1 is only hours away. Yesterday both houses of Congress adjourned for a six-week recess; they are not scheduled to return until November 14, after Election Day. In a last-ditch effort to stop the planned transfer, the attorneys general of four states -- Arizona, Texas, Oklahoma, and Nevada -- filed a lawsuit yesterday in federal district court in Texas. The suit says the four states “seek declaratory and injunctive relief against the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA); the United States of America; the United States Department of Commerce; Penny Pritzker, in her official capacity as Secretary of Commerce; and Lawrence E. Strickling, in his official capacity as Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information and Administrator of NTIA.”

“The States each operate multiple websites, including those that use the .gov top-level domain name, to conduct their business and communicate with their citizens,” the complaint states. “Examples of these government websites include www.az.gov, www.Texas.gov, www.Oklahoma.gov, and www.nv.gov. State agencies also maintain .gov websites, such as www.azag.gov. These .gov websites are well-known, established sources of reliable and authoritative information for citizens, and private companies and persons are not allowed to use .gov addresses.”

“Substituting unchecked ICANN oversight in place of NTIA’s current role also exposes Plaintiffs to possible interference in its property interests from foreign governments,” the four-state complaint continues. “ICANN’s transition proposal outlines a distinct role for governments outside the United States as voting participants in a Government Advisory Committee that may send advice directly to ICANN’s Board. This mechanism could result in foreign governments pressuring ICANN over policy matters that will directly affect the property interests of the Plaintiffs.”

The complaint was submitted by Attorney General of Arizona Mark Brnovich, Attorney General of Texas Ken Paxton, Attorney General State of Oklahoma Scott Pruitt, and Attorney General State of Nevada Adam Paul Laxalt. Barring an extraordinary outpouring of public pressure that forces Congress to convene an emergency session, the outcome of this pending court case may be the only thing standing in the way of the transfer.
Report Spam   Logged
christistruth
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 165


View Profile
« Reply #237 on: October 01, 2016, 11:11:06 pm »

Clinton announces ‘National Service Reserve’ for millennials
https://www.yahoo.com/news/clinton-announces-national-service-reserve-for-millennials-153311173.html
Hillary Clinton announced Friday that she wants to enlist 5 million new volunteers into a “National Service Reserve” aimed at 18- to 30-year-olds.

“What if we strengthen the culture of service in America so it wasn’t just something we did one day a year, but it became a regular part of our lives?” she asked at a Florida rally on the topic of national service on Friday.

The former secretary of state argued that her volunteer plan would help combat growing self-segregation in America, where people surround themselves with people who think, talk, look and read the same news as they do. “That comes with a cost. It magnifies our differences,” she said, adding that the election has drawn attention to that trend. “Then it makes it harder to put those differences aside when our country needs us.”

Reservists, under Clinton’s plan, would respond to natural disasters, help the homeless or tackle other local problems, the campaign said. Under the plan, they would be eligible for college credit, time off from work, or even a “modest stipend,” based on financial need, to participate in the Reserve. (Clinton will negotiate with higher education institutions and corporations to get those benefits.)

Clinton also wants to expand AmeriCorps, a paid-service organization, from 75,000 members to 250,000, and expand the Peace Corps for those who want to volunteer abroad. The “ultimate goal” is that anyone who wants to serve full time will be able to do so, Clinton said in her speech. Part of the plan is also aimed at adding volunteer opportunities for Americans over 55 by increasing slots for them in AmeriCorps and involving them in other volunteer organizations.

A Clinton campaign aide said the program offers a contrast to Trump’s “self-centered message” during a week in which he has feuded with a former beauty queen on Twitter and in interviews. “As we see Trump focused on making sexist and derogatory comments and dividing the country, we are going to continue to run a campaign that’s about bringing the country together,” the aide said of Clinton’s national service speech.

The plan also offers an opportunity for the candidate to emphasize her own record of service for children — which could help combat her high unfavorable ratings — while also reaching out to voters under 30.

Clinton has struggled to consolidate support among millennials, whose votes she needs to win crucial swing states like Florida and North Carolina. Earlier this month, she gave a speech aimed at the group, admitting that many of them have doubts about her but vowing to win their support. Her top surrogates, including Michelle Obama and Bernie Sanders, have fanned out on college campuses in battleground states to urge young voters to back Clinton and to tout her plan to make college “debt free” for middle-class families.

The campaign noted that millennials are particularly interested in volunteerism and that five times as many people apply for AmeriCorps than get accepted.
Report Spam   Logged

Luke 21:28

Jesus is the answer for our moral ills. Conservative principals are the answer to our government corruption.
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20936



View Profile
« Reply #238 on: October 06, 2016, 05:56:37 pm »

Dems reject call to protect Internet news, talk radio from regs

In the latest partisan escalation on the Federal Election Commission, a top Democratic commissioner has ripped a Republican commissioner's bid to protect books, radio and Internet media from regulation as "pitiful." Ann Ravel, a former FEC chairwoman, joined other Democrats...to block Republican Lee Goodman's proposal to explicitly expand the "press exemption" from regulations to books, satellite radio and Internet-based news media. 

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/fec-war-dems-reject-call-to-protect-internet-news-talk-radio-from-regs/article/2603712
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28356


View Profile
« Reply #239 on: October 21, 2016, 02:21:06 pm »

http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/21/technology/ddos-attack-popular-sites/index.html
10/21/16
Popular sites like Reddit, Twitter and Netflix suffer outages

A number of popular websites like Twitter and Netflix were down for some users on Friday in what appears to be a massive cyber attack.

Dyn, which manages website domains and routes internet traffic, experienced two distributed denial of service attacks on its DNS servers. A DDoS attack is an attempt to flood a website with so much traffic that it impairs normal service.

Affected sites included Twitter (TWTR, Tech30), Etsy (ETSY), Github, Vox, Spotify, Airbnb, Netflix (NFLX, Tech30) and Reddit.

"If you take out one of these DNS service providers, you can disrupt a large number of popular online services, which is exactly what we're seeing today," said Jeremiah Grossman, chief of security strategy at cybersecurity startup SentinelOne.

more
Report Spam   Logged
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
Free SMF Hosting - Create your own Forum

Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines