-
🛑Hello, this board in now turned off and no new posting.
Please REGISTER at Anabolic Steroid Forums, and become a member of our NEW community! 💪 -
🔥Check Out Muscle Gelz HEAL® - A Topical Peptide Repair Formula with BPC-157 & TB-500! 🏥
Police State 4: The Rise of FEMA
- Thread starter SFW
- Start date
the speculators and financiers have already fucked up the global economy with their fictitious wealth created on computers which started in the 80's. the rise of the police state is the "solution" for the inevitable collapse of the dollar and US economy which ever comes first as we have both to look forward to.
OP, can you "quote" a snippet so we have some idea what this is about?
Well for example, they touched upon a new american police force, which are nothing more than foreign mercenaries from pakistan, egypt and serbia, being trained here in the states and contracted out to small towns with full police powers and under UN rule. But its not limited to small towns. They will probably be used in the case of civil unrest, where as an American soldier, who took an oath to uphold the constitution, would see shooting americans as immoral. These foreigns do not take that same oath and would have no problem killing US citizens if given the authority to do so.
It proves that posse comitatus is being ignored, meaning they are using military personnel to interfere with civilian matters. Such as marines and national guard troops to perform "DWI check points" or seat belt checks. Its to beta test the public's reaction and to acclimate citizens slowly into a militarized, police state without us ever realizing. Under the guise of "anti terror" etc. Not to mention troops are now performing door to door searches for weapons in some towns. They call it "urban training" and nothing more. But its a glimpse of things to come.
They did this during Katrina in the high and dry areas of Louisiana. The military went door to door after the storm, in dry, unflooded areas of wealthy neighborhoods, and demanded citizens turn over their firearms.
Just shows how FEMA uses natural disasters as a stage to strip citizens of their rights. But it wouldnt stop at natural disasters. It could occur during a staged bio attack, or false flag type of terrorist situation etc.
As far as the PDF link....FEMA and homeland have identified certain US citizens as the new public enemy. Its not Haji, its the white male, brought up christian, believes the Fed is run by foreign banks, believes RFID chips will be in use, believes that FEMA is installing camps to imprison americans, as the enemy.
The video is an eye opener to the reality of what is coming.
Not fear mongering, just reality.
It proves that posse comitatus is being ignored, meaning they are using military personnel to interfere with civilian matters. Such as marines and national guard troops to perform "DWI check points" or seat belt checks. Its to beta test the public's reaction and to acclimate citizens slowly into a militarized, police state without us ever realizing. Under the guise of "anti terror" etc. Not to mention troops are now performing door to door searches for weapons in some towns. They call it "urban training" and nothing more. But its a glimpse of things to come.
They did this during Katrina in the high and dry areas of Louisiana. The military went door to door after the storm, in dry, unflooded areas of wealthy neighborhoods, and demanded citizens turn over their firearms.
Just shows how FEMA uses natural disasters as a stage to strip citizens of their rights. But it wouldnt stop at natural disasters. It could occur during a staged bio attack, or false flag type of terrorist situation etc.
As far as the PDF link....FEMA and homeland have identified certain US citizens as the new public enemy. Its not Haji, its the white male, brought up christian, believes the Fed is run by foreign banks, believes RFID chips will be in use, believes that FEMA is installing camps to imprison americans, as the enemy.
The video is an eye opener to the reality of what is coming.
Not fear mongering, just reality.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2011
- Messages
- 183
- Reaction score
- 15
- Points
- 18
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=melLHbYi2pE&feature=youtube_gdata_player
Merry xmas in march... according to the Obama health bill, at that point everone will supposedly be required to have the chip, so the bill says.
Merry xmas in march... according to the Obama health bill, at that point everone will supposedly be required to have the chip, so the bill says.
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2004
- Messages
- 32,369
- Reaction score
- 2,936
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 51
- Location
- In a van, down by the river...
With the title of Police State 4: The Rise of FEMA, I feel like I've missed out on three potentially good games.
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2004
- Messages
- 32,369
- Reaction score
- 2,936
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 51
- Location
- In a van, down by the river...
I really, really liked that fight, and the KO.
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2011
- Messages
- 4,228
- Reaction score
- 2,259
- Points
- 113
Bisping talked a lot of trash before this fight. During his pre-fight interview, he said he trained for 16 weeks to avoid Dan Henderson's right hand. This was probably one of the worst knockout in UFC history. (Dan even added a cherry on top with the additonal blow after he was counting sheep)
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2004
- Messages
- 32,369
- Reaction score
- 2,936
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 51
- Location
- In a van, down by the river...
He talked a lot of trash for someone that only fought cans. Dan was nothing but class.
It looked like Dan punched Bisping in the soul.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqyu6qCnSfw
FAA: Drone Operators Have Zero Privacy Obligations
Agency is greasing the skids for authorities to gather private information on regular Americans
Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
November 30, 2012
Agency is greasing the skids for authorities to gather private information on regular Americans
Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
November 30, 2012
In a response to questions from lawmakers, the Federal Aviation Authority admitted that surveillance drone operators have zero privacy obligations, prompting Reps. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) and Joe Barton (R-Texas) to complain that the federal agency is greasing the skids for authorities to gather private information on regular Americans.
Markey and Barton, who co-chair the congressional privacy caucus, sent a letter to the FAA seven months ago demanding to know what privacy protections the agency was putting in place in anticipation of granting approval for commercial groups to fly drones from 2015 onwards.
In its reply (PDF) , the federal agency responded to a question asking whether drone operators had to follow guidelines that address privacy concerns by stating, ?The FAA?s primary mission is ensuring safety of the NAS (National AIrspace System).? While acknowledging that there were ?privacy concerns related to UAS operations,? the agency did not indicate that it would mandate drone operators to follow any privacy rules.
Four additional questions on how the FAA plans to protect privacy rights are also included under question 7 in the letter. However, the FAA?s response to all of them is a single glib paragraph which merely repeats that ?privacy concerns? are an issue but fails to identify what the agency will do to uphold them.
?FAA does not appear to be prioritizing privacy and transparency measures in its plan to integrate nonmilitary drones into U.S. airspace,? Markey said in a follow up statement. ?While there are benefits to using drones to gather information for law enforcement and appropriate research purposes, drones shouldn?t be used to gather private information on regular Americans.?
A bill passed by Congress in February paves the way for the use of surveillance drones in US skies on a widespread basis. The FAA predicts that by 2020 there could be up to 30,000 drones in operation nationwide.
US law enforcement bodies are already using drone technology to spy on Americans. In December last year, aPredator B drone was called in to conduct surveillance over a family farm in North Dakota as part of a SWAT raid on the Brossart family, who were suspects in the egregious crime of stealing six missing cows. Local police in this one area have already used the drone on two dozen occasions since June last year.
The Department of Homeland Security has revealed it plans to use spy drones for ?public safety applications? and has already begun tests of a ?Robotic Aircraft For Public Safety? at Fort Sill, Oklahoma.
Police departments are also attempting to get approval to use surveillance blimps that sit over cities and watch for ?suspicious activity.?
The U.S. Army recently tested a football field-sized blimp over the city of New Jersey. The blimp can fly for a period of 21 hours and ?is equipped with high-tech sensors that can monitor insurgents from above.?
? FAA: Drone Operators Have Zero Privacy Obligations Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!
? FAA: Drone Operators Have Zero Privacy Obligations Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!
jagbender
Registered
Coming to America!
Soon!
Soon!
WOMAN ARRESTED WHILE REFUSING SMART METER INSTALLATION ON HER PROPERTY TELLS US HER STORY
Jennifer Stahl has been a strong advocate against the smart meter program in Naperville, Ill., for the last two years. The issue came to a head Wednesday afternoon when she was arrested while refusing to let the utility workers install the controversial device.
?I was protecting my property,? Stahl said in an interview with TheBlaze Thursday afternoon. ?I felt my emotion was like a momma bear protecting her babies.?
Stahl was at a friend?s house when she received the call from her husband that the utility workers had arrived. She was home within 15 minutes and saw they were at a neighbor?s house. Her neighbors were not home, but they had signs stating they did not permit the new meter to be installed.
Stahl said she waited on her porch for the workers to arrive at her house. When they did, she refused them access to her backyard through her locked gate. The police ? including the police supervisor, a sergeant ? were called. Stahl said the sergeant explained the workers had authorization to access the meter, but Stahl stood her ground saying she didn?t approve it. The sergeant continued to try and convince Stahl to comply and said if she didn?t, he?d arrest her.
?The city has always had and maintains the right to access our equipment, and today we were simply exercising that right,? City Manager Doug Kreiger told the Chicago Tribune, which reported Wednesday?s events.
The lock on Stahl?s fence was cut, and when Stahl wouldn?t step away from the meter, she was lead away by an officer, cuffed and waited for a marked squad car to arrive to take her to the department. When asked why she was being arrested, she was told it was for interfering with a police officer.
Did she ever think it would come to this?
?It occurred to me,? Stahl said, explaining that she previously had considered how far she would go to maintain her stance.
?I didn?t put my name on a federal lawsuit? to stand down now, Stahl continued.
The group Naperville Smart Meter Awareness has filed a lawsuit, for which there are currently motions to dismiss as well as to grant temporary restraining orders for residents refusing the meters.
Tom Glass, a member of the Naperville Smart Meter Awareness group, told TheBlaze Thursday he felt the fact that the city is arresting residents for refusing is ?completely frightening in this day in age.?
?The city is still sending around people to read these [smart] meters ? they don?t work,? Glass continued.
Stahl was one of two women arrested while smart meters were being installed on their property without permission Wednesday. Malia ?Kim? Bendis was the second who received two misdemeanors for attempted eavesdropping and resisting a police officer, according to the Tribune.
This video posted to YouTube shows Bendis protesting the removal of her analog meter for installation of a smart meter:
Stahl estimated at the rate the city is going installing smart meters that they?ll be complete with 100 percent compliance by the end of the week. The Tribune reported 57,000 homes (99 percent) have them so far.
?It?s not acceptable that the city can choose for me on my behalf to install this meter that I don?t think is appropriate for myself,? Stahl said. ?I choose to keep my analog meter because of all the issues. I can?t believe the city is not providing an alternative option.?
The controversy over smart meters has been seen in cities around the nation. Some have concerns about the type of data the smart meters will allow to be collected (and how that data will be used). Others worry about the health risks associated with transmitter in the smart meter, including headaches, insomnia, tinnitus and DNA breakdown.
Here?s video of a third Naperville mother emotionally refusing the smart meter Wednesday fearing her daughter?s health:
As for Stahl, she said when she arrived home later, the smart meter was installed.
?I choose to rise above. I?m not going to worry about what I?m going to do [about the meter] at this point. I?m going to focus on my energy into mobilizing the people of Naperville and around the country ? to do something to take a stand as well,? Stahl said.
[video=youtube;4MkzIdKmeWo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=4MkzIdKmeWo[/video]
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/01/24/woman-arrested-while-refusing-smart-meter-installation-on-her-property-tells-us-her-story/
Jennifer Stahl has been a strong advocate against the smart meter program in Naperville, Ill., for the last two years. The issue came to a head Wednesday afternoon when she was arrested while refusing to let the utility workers install the controversial device.
?I was protecting my property,? Stahl said in an interview with TheBlaze Thursday afternoon. ?I felt my emotion was like a momma bear protecting her babies.?
Stahl was at a friend?s house when she received the call from her husband that the utility workers had arrived. She was home within 15 minutes and saw they were at a neighbor?s house. Her neighbors were not home, but they had signs stating they did not permit the new meter to be installed.
Stahl said she waited on her porch for the workers to arrive at her house. When they did, she refused them access to her backyard through her locked gate. The police ? including the police supervisor, a sergeant ? were called. Stahl said the sergeant explained the workers had authorization to access the meter, but Stahl stood her ground saying she didn?t approve it. The sergeant continued to try and convince Stahl to comply and said if she didn?t, he?d arrest her.
?The city has always had and maintains the right to access our equipment, and today we were simply exercising that right,? City Manager Doug Kreiger told the Chicago Tribune, which reported Wednesday?s events.
The lock on Stahl?s fence was cut, and when Stahl wouldn?t step away from the meter, she was lead away by an officer, cuffed and waited for a marked squad car to arrive to take her to the department. When asked why she was being arrested, she was told it was for interfering with a police officer.
Did she ever think it would come to this?
?It occurred to me,? Stahl said, explaining that she previously had considered how far she would go to maintain her stance.
?I didn?t put my name on a federal lawsuit? to stand down now, Stahl continued.
The group Naperville Smart Meter Awareness has filed a lawsuit, for which there are currently motions to dismiss as well as to grant temporary restraining orders for residents refusing the meters.
Tom Glass, a member of the Naperville Smart Meter Awareness group, told TheBlaze Thursday he felt the fact that the city is arresting residents for refusing is ?completely frightening in this day in age.?
?The city is still sending around people to read these [smart] meters ? they don?t work,? Glass continued.
Stahl was one of two women arrested while smart meters were being installed on their property without permission Wednesday. Malia ?Kim? Bendis was the second who received two misdemeanors for attempted eavesdropping and resisting a police officer, according to the Tribune.
This video posted to YouTube shows Bendis protesting the removal of her analog meter for installation of a smart meter:
Stahl estimated at the rate the city is going installing smart meters that they?ll be complete with 100 percent compliance by the end of the week. The Tribune reported 57,000 homes (99 percent) have them so far.
?It?s not acceptable that the city can choose for me on my behalf to install this meter that I don?t think is appropriate for myself,? Stahl said. ?I choose to keep my analog meter because of all the issues. I can?t believe the city is not providing an alternative option.?
The controversy over smart meters has been seen in cities around the nation. Some have concerns about the type of data the smart meters will allow to be collected (and how that data will be used). Others worry about the health risks associated with transmitter in the smart meter, including headaches, insomnia, tinnitus and DNA breakdown.
Here?s video of a third Naperville mother emotionally refusing the smart meter Wednesday fearing her daughter?s health:
As for Stahl, she said when she arrived home later, the smart meter was installed.
?I choose to rise above. I?m not going to worry about what I?m going to do [about the meter] at this point. I?m going to focus on my energy into mobilizing the people of Naperville and around the country ? to do something to take a stand as well,? Stahl said.
[video=youtube;4MkzIdKmeWo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=4MkzIdKmeWo[/video]
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/01/24/woman-arrested-while-refusing-smart-meter-installation-on-her-property-tells-us-her-story/
all this shit is being brought about by the rich,
anyone who tried to rein the rich in a bit gets attacked for being a socialist?
not starting something, just dont understand americans....
anyone who tried to rein the rich in a bit gets attacked for being a socialist?
not starting something, just dont understand americans....
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2004
- Messages
- 32,369
- Reaction score
- 2,936
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 51
- Location
- In a van, down by the river...
It's because you probably watch biased media. I'm not certain, but you're Australian, right? I read and watch Australian news. It's very, very biased. Just like American media. You need to cut through the shit.
There's a difference between wanting to tax the rich their fair share (I'm for this), and taking more from the middle class (who already pays the highest percentage towards taxes) and giving it to the poor. I'm against that sort of crap. I'm even more against it when my own government won't seal the borders and keep out those that leech off the system.
This Is How We Resist *Video*
Mac Slavo
SHTFPlan.com
March 1, 2013
It should be clear by now that the Federal government, through various agencies like the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security, is rapidly moving towards a legal model that aims to strip fundamental rights traditionally protected by the Constitution of the United States.
The Second Amendment is and has been under fire for quite some time, but what many Americans fail to realize is that the attack on our right to bear arms is only part of a much broader plan, one that aims to quietly kill any semblance of liberty we have left.
The Fourth Amendment, which protects an individual?s right to be secure in their own person and home is as important as the right to speak freely and defend one?s self, yet it is being eroded without respite.
At some point in the last couple of decades there was a shift in how the justice system deals with average citizens. No longer is there a presumption of innocence on the part of police or prosecutors. In the eyes of the government, we?re all guilty of something, a position that has left countless Americans imprisoned or dead for no other reason than the arresting officer or government attorney wanting to stroke their ego or increase their conviction rate.
When the government is allowed into our homes, our cars, our phone conversations or our pockets without cause, we are no longer the America of our forefathers. Rather, we begin to reflect the principles of tyrants like Josef Stalin, Adolf Hitler or Mao Zedong who deliberately ravaged their countrymen and left their nations devoid of common sense, humanity and the rule of natural law.
Many of us are struggling to find a way to resist the overt tyranny being imposed across our once free nation.
There?s a way, but we must fight this battle on our streets, one individual at a time.
When they come to question us, or come to search our personal effects, or ask us to voluntarily detain ourselves, it?s time we push back and exercise the rights our founders fought so hard to protect.
This is how we resist.
Watch the following video mash up of Americans resisting unlawful requests by various enforcement officials:
(Watch at Youtube)
When you resist you will undoubtedly be met with counter-resistance, perhaps even threatened with arrest or worse.
Oftentimes, prosecutors and judges will side with law enforcement officers in the ?typical your word against their?s? scenario.
But with modern day technology, you can turn the tables, and never have to face unjust questioning, detainment, or arrest again.
Here are some tips for joining the resistance using technology you have at your fingertips:
Thirty thousand drones soon to be patrolling our skies with high definition recording capabilities. Cameras on every street corner and in every police car. Audio recording devices on buses and trains. NSA monitoring stations and DHS fusion centers aggregating and flagging all of it.
Who?s watching the watchers?
We are.
Mac Slavo
SHTFPlan.com
March 1, 2013
It should be clear by now that the Federal government, through various agencies like the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security, is rapidly moving towards a legal model that aims to strip fundamental rights traditionally protected by the Constitution of the United States.
The Second Amendment is and has been under fire for quite some time, but what many Americans fail to realize is that the attack on our right to bear arms is only part of a much broader plan, one that aims to quietly kill any semblance of liberty we have left.
The Fourth Amendment, which protects an individual?s right to be secure in their own person and home is as important as the right to speak freely and defend one?s self, yet it is being eroded without respite.
At some point in the last couple of decades there was a shift in how the justice system deals with average citizens. No longer is there a presumption of innocence on the part of police or prosecutors. In the eyes of the government, we?re all guilty of something, a position that has left countless Americans imprisoned or dead for no other reason than the arresting officer or government attorney wanting to stroke their ego or increase their conviction rate.
When the government is allowed into our homes, our cars, our phone conversations or our pockets without cause, we are no longer the America of our forefathers. Rather, we begin to reflect the principles of tyrants like Josef Stalin, Adolf Hitler or Mao Zedong who deliberately ravaged their countrymen and left their nations devoid of common sense, humanity and the rule of natural law.
Many of us are struggling to find a way to resist the overt tyranny being imposed across our once free nation.
There?s a way, but we must fight this battle on our streets, one individual at a time.
When they come to question us, or come to search our personal effects, or ask us to voluntarily detain ourselves, it?s time we push back and exercise the rights our founders fought so hard to protect.
This is how we resist.
The motto of our modern police state is, ?if you?re not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to fear.?
We must respond by staying true to the fourth amendment: ?If I?m not doing anything wrong, and you have no probable cause, evidence or warrant, then I respectfully demand that you let me go about my business.?
It works. Really.We must respond by staying true to the fourth amendment: ?If I?m not doing anything wrong, and you have no probable cause, evidence or warrant, then I respectfully demand that you let me go about my business.?
Watch the following video mash up of Americans resisting unlawful requests by various enforcement officials:
(Watch at Youtube)
When you resist you will undoubtedly be met with counter-resistance, perhaps even threatened with arrest or worse.
Oftentimes, prosecutors and judges will side with law enforcement officers in the ?typical your word against their?s? scenario.
But with modern day technology, you can turn the tables, and never have to face unjust questioning, detainment, or arrest again.
Here are some tips for joining the resistance using technology you have at your fingertips:
- Always have a video camera on you. Most of us already have the means to record footage using our cell phones.
- Add a secondary device covertly hidden in your vehicle in the event you are pulled over. Preferably, you?ll want it to be transportable when you go for a leisurely stroll, so a James Bond style spy pen may be your best bet. Most can record up to 6 hours of audio and video in high definition. If your camera is seized and the storage chip destroyed, your secondary device will not only prove your innocence, but show that evidence was purposefully destroyed.
- Stream your recording to the internet as it happens. In recent years new ?apps? have been made available that essentially allow you to instantly stream your recordings to the internet, so no matter how hard they stomp on your mobile device, it?ll be too late because the video of that boot coming down on your cell phone camera is being uploaded in real time. (Here are some apps to try that will allow you to instantly record to your Facebook, Youtube or cloud server: VTweetIT for Android, Qik for Android, More Streaming Apps for Android, OpenWatch for iPhone, Qik Video for iPhone)
- Do not tell police you are recording them when they first approach you. Police officers will often claim that we have no right to record them. Because they almost always execute their duties in public and they have no reasonable expectation of privacy when doing so, we the people have every right to make a record of their activities ? it?s like writing it down in a journal, except using modern tech. In May of 2012 the 7th Circuit Court found a specific First Amendment right to record police officers (link), a ruling whose legality was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court. This means that you are well within your right to record a police officer without having to alert them to the recording, even if your state requires ?two party consent? for audio or video recordings.
Who?s watching the watchers?
We are.
most of them never leave the country for any measurable amount of time and not many know real world history, just the BS taught to Americans in our ridiculously easy and unchallenged public schools.
printed media in the US is done so at about an 8th grade reading level
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2005
- Messages
- 14,833
- Reaction score
- 1,676
- Points
- 113
- Age
- 41
- Location
- In my imagination.
rofl!
dave 236
Elite Member
Truth is (oh god im agreeing with LAM) most high school grads these days dont know how to think critically. They have only been taught memorization skills and how to take standardized tests. So reading and discerning the difference in opinions - in other words thinking for themselves is more effort than most new voting age kids are willing to put forth.
Sent from my DROID4 using Tapatalk 2
dave 236
Elite Member
The agreeing with you part was in jest. We're all more alike than different. Just to clarify.
Sent from my DROID4 using Tapatalk 2
Sent from my DROID4 using Tapatalk 2
Government arms race kicks into high gear as DHS buys 2,700 armored vehicles for streets of America
Mike Adams
Natural News
March 5, 2013
When DHS purchased 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition to be used domestically, inside the USA, and I said this looks like a government agency preparing for war with the American people, I was told, ?That?s crazy. The government would never do that.?
When DHS purchased 7,000 full-auto assault rifles to be used inside the United States, calling them ?personal defense weapons? that could be used in urban warfare, I was once again told I was crazy for suggesting the government was arming up for war with the American people.
Now DHS has retrofitted 2,717 ?Navistar Defense? armored vehicles for service on the streets of America. Click here to see pictures and specs for this vehicle from the manufacturer?s website.
These vehicles, which people who don?t know any better might call ?light tanks,? are specifically designed to resist mines and ambush attacks. They use bulletproof windows and are designed to withstand small arms fire, including smaller-caliber rifles such as .223 Remington.
The retrofit was completed in May, 2012, and these 2,700+ armored vehicles are now ready to deploy across the streets of America, reports Modern Survival Blog, the primary source for this story.
A domestic arms race
Importantly, none of these armaments ? billions of bullets, thousands of full-auto assault rifles and thousands of armored assault vehicles ? are being purchased by the Pentagon for use in wars overseas. Instead, these are being purchased by DHS for use inside the United States? on the streets of America.
This is a domestic department of the federal government that is clearly and unambiguously arming for war against the American people.
This war will also involve the use of armed military drones attacking American citizens, which is exactly why the Obama administration now claims the legal authority to assassinate Americans on U.S. soil using militarized drones.
This is at the same time the American people are arming up like never before as well. U.S. ammunition manufacturers are currently producing over one billion rounds per week. All that ammo is flying off the shelves, with virtually nothing remaining in stock anywhere.
Magazine manufacturers like ProMag Industries are backordered for over a year, and gun manufacturers are anywhere from 6 months to 18 months behind schedule, desperately trying to keep up with customer demand that continues to grow. I called Desert Tactical Arms today and confirmed their guns are running six months behind schedule. This is the company that makes the portable .338 Lapua and .50 BMG rifles favored by U.S. troops in activities such as so-called ?hard target interdiction.? (i.e. killing vehicles.)
As the government arms race continues to stockpile weapons and ammo in the hands of DHS, the American people are increasingly turning to large-caliber weapons for their own stockpiles. Just last week, I recently went shooting here in Texas where we had three .50 cal Barrett BMG rifles, plus two .338 Lapua magnum sniper rifles, all firing on some thick steel targets. The targets were decimated, and every single shooter in our group was able to put lead on target, even from long-range distances.
Holocaust deniers and DHS deniers
Of course, there are people who deny DHS is engaged in an arms race, just as there are Holocaust deniers who deny Hitler ever took guns away from the Jews (before committing mass murder). Those deniers either claim that these purchases are not happening (but they are), or that the government is only buying such large quantities ?to save money.?
This is a distraction, of course. You don?t ?save money? buying things you don?t need. Clearly, someone at the top of DHS believes the government needs these armored vehicles and full-auto assault rifles deployed on the streets of America.
But the bigger question ? and this is the question the mainstream media refuses to even ask ? is WHY does DHS need:
? 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition
? 7,000+ assault rifles
? 2,700+ armored assault vehicles
Unless you?re insane or a denier, the answer is clear: DHS is expecting a large-scale domestic conflict.
Why is DHS expecting a domestic war?
So then, the commonsense question becomes: Why is DHS expecting a domestic war?
I?ve asked this question of many of my contacts, and what I keep hearing is that an economic collapse is fast approaching, and DHS is likely going to use all this equipment to try to maintain government power during the chaos and riots that are sure to follow the economic collapse. This equipment will all be needed to ?maintain order on the streets,? I?m told.
But that?s only one possible scenario. Another scenario involves the criminally-run government announcing a nationwide gun confiscation scheme (just as Sen. Feinstein says she wants), then attempting to defend itself against the inevitable civil war that will result. The most likely outcome here is that DHS will only be able to control the areas that have been forcibly disarmed such as Chicago and New York City. They will be utterly unable to hold rural territories where freedom-loving Americans have already decided to fight back against tyranny no matter what the cost.
Yet a third scenario could involve government anticipation of a nuclear attack from North Korea followed by a ?Red Dawn? land invasion from China or Korea. And DHS is here to fight for freedom and defeat the communists. (And if you believe that, I have a bridge to sell ya? far more likely is that DHS wants to welcome in the communists!)
This domestic war machine was built by claiming it was for terrorists
Keep in mind that DHS was created by President Bush in response to the 9/11 terror attacks. In fact, since 2001, the U.S. federal government has built a domestic war infrastructure by claiming it was all being constructed to protect us from the terrorists.
Now, in 2013, the government has ?flipped the script? on who the threat is. According to Janet Napolitano, head of DHS, the real threat to America is now returning veterans and gun owners. So the feds have this massive armament infrastructure and spy grid lockdown over the entire population, and it turns out it was all built not for terrorists but for YOU.
The terrorists are nowhere to be found in all this, by the way. Every single terror plot halted by the FBI is a terror plot that was literally dreamed up, planned and nearly carried out by the FBI.
TSA has caught exactly zero terrorists trying to sneak through airport security.
The ?war on terror? is and always has been a complete hoax. The purpose of the hoax was to provide a cover story for the building up of a massive domestic military force to be used against the American people when the time comes.
That?s what we are really seeing with the purchase of ammo, automatic weapons and armored assault vehicles. This is why cable barriers are being erected on highways across the country. And this is why DHS has recently begun redacting the requested quantities from its public bid documents? in order to make sure the public can no longer learn how much it?s stockpiling weapons and ammo.
But none of this is real, right?
Astonishingly, the vast majority of Americans remain completely unaware of any of this. For those mainstream sheeple, anything that doesn?t appear on CNN must not be real.
So DHS really isn?t buying 1.6 billion rounds of ammo, 7,000+ assault rifles, or 2,700+ armored mine-resistant assault vehicles. All of us who are reporting these purchases are ?conspiracy theorists,? we?re all told, even though what we?re reporting on is absolutely true.
Remember this: Former White House press secretary Robert Gibbs has now publicly admitted he was ordered by the White House to deny the existence of the U.S. militarized drone program even while the program existed and was known to be real. Denial has always been a key tactic for any government preparing to do something unethical or criminal.
But I?ve been told by some seemingly convincing people that none of this is real. It?s all just a bad dream, you see, and soon you will wake up and find yourself in the land of the free, where there isn?t poison in the crops and there isn?t mercury in the vaccines. The President love you, and corporations are all ethical. Senators are humanitarians who put the good of the country ahead of their own selfish greed. The FDA stops censoring the truth about nutritional therapies and the USDA outlaws GMOs.
That?s the delusional world that 90% of Americans believe they live in, and they even believe that as long as they just ?believe? something, then reality doesn?t even matter. Belief IS reality, according to the ?Law of Attraction? followers, and if you just believe the government is good, then your belief will make it so.
That?s a fascinating bit of self-hypnosis, because DHS doesn?t care what you believe. It is stockpiling guns, ammo and armored vehicles for some very real reason. This isn?t their imagination: it?s hardware.
And hardware is rarely accumulated in such large quantities unless it is deemed necessary for some specific purpose. It seems that the American people ? delusional or otherwise ? may soon discover what purpose DHS has in mind.
http://www.infowars.com/government-arms-race-kicks-into-high-gear-as-dhs-buys-2700-armored-vehicles-for-streets-of-america/
Mike Adams
Natural News
March 5, 2013
When DHS purchased 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition to be used domestically, inside the USA, and I said this looks like a government agency preparing for war with the American people, I was told, ?That?s crazy. The government would never do that.?
When DHS purchased 7,000 full-auto assault rifles to be used inside the United States, calling them ?personal defense weapons? that could be used in urban warfare, I was once again told I was crazy for suggesting the government was arming up for war with the American people.
Now DHS has retrofitted 2,717 ?Navistar Defense? armored vehicles for service on the streets of America. Click here to see pictures and specs for this vehicle from the manufacturer?s website.
These vehicles, which people who don?t know any better might call ?light tanks,? are specifically designed to resist mines and ambush attacks. They use bulletproof windows and are designed to withstand small arms fire, including smaller-caliber rifles such as .223 Remington.
The retrofit was completed in May, 2012, and these 2,700+ armored vehicles are now ready to deploy across the streets of America, reports Modern Survival Blog, the primary source for this story.
A domestic arms race
Importantly, none of these armaments ? billions of bullets, thousands of full-auto assault rifles and thousands of armored assault vehicles ? are being purchased by the Pentagon for use in wars overseas. Instead, these are being purchased by DHS for use inside the United States? on the streets of America.
This is a domestic department of the federal government that is clearly and unambiguously arming for war against the American people.
This war will also involve the use of armed military drones attacking American citizens, which is exactly why the Obama administration now claims the legal authority to assassinate Americans on U.S. soil using militarized drones.
This is at the same time the American people are arming up like never before as well. U.S. ammunition manufacturers are currently producing over one billion rounds per week. All that ammo is flying off the shelves, with virtually nothing remaining in stock anywhere.
Magazine manufacturers like ProMag Industries are backordered for over a year, and gun manufacturers are anywhere from 6 months to 18 months behind schedule, desperately trying to keep up with customer demand that continues to grow. I called Desert Tactical Arms today and confirmed their guns are running six months behind schedule. This is the company that makes the portable .338 Lapua and .50 BMG rifles favored by U.S. troops in activities such as so-called ?hard target interdiction.? (i.e. killing vehicles.)
As the government arms race continues to stockpile weapons and ammo in the hands of DHS, the American people are increasingly turning to large-caliber weapons for their own stockpiles. Just last week, I recently went shooting here in Texas where we had three .50 cal Barrett BMG rifles, plus two .338 Lapua magnum sniper rifles, all firing on some thick steel targets. The targets were decimated, and every single shooter in our group was able to put lead on target, even from long-range distances.
Holocaust deniers and DHS deniers
Of course, there are people who deny DHS is engaged in an arms race, just as there are Holocaust deniers who deny Hitler ever took guns away from the Jews (before committing mass murder). Those deniers either claim that these purchases are not happening (but they are), or that the government is only buying such large quantities ?to save money.?
This is a distraction, of course. You don?t ?save money? buying things you don?t need. Clearly, someone at the top of DHS believes the government needs these armored vehicles and full-auto assault rifles deployed on the streets of America.
But the bigger question ? and this is the question the mainstream media refuses to even ask ? is WHY does DHS need:
? 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition
? 7,000+ assault rifles
? 2,700+ armored assault vehicles
Unless you?re insane or a denier, the answer is clear: DHS is expecting a large-scale domestic conflict.
Why is DHS expecting a domestic war?
So then, the commonsense question becomes: Why is DHS expecting a domestic war?
I?ve asked this question of many of my contacts, and what I keep hearing is that an economic collapse is fast approaching, and DHS is likely going to use all this equipment to try to maintain government power during the chaos and riots that are sure to follow the economic collapse. This equipment will all be needed to ?maintain order on the streets,? I?m told.
But that?s only one possible scenario. Another scenario involves the criminally-run government announcing a nationwide gun confiscation scheme (just as Sen. Feinstein says she wants), then attempting to defend itself against the inevitable civil war that will result. The most likely outcome here is that DHS will only be able to control the areas that have been forcibly disarmed such as Chicago and New York City. They will be utterly unable to hold rural territories where freedom-loving Americans have already decided to fight back against tyranny no matter what the cost.
Yet a third scenario could involve government anticipation of a nuclear attack from North Korea followed by a ?Red Dawn? land invasion from China or Korea. And DHS is here to fight for freedom and defeat the communists. (And if you believe that, I have a bridge to sell ya? far more likely is that DHS wants to welcome in the communists!)
This domestic war machine was built by claiming it was for terrorists
Keep in mind that DHS was created by President Bush in response to the 9/11 terror attacks. In fact, since 2001, the U.S. federal government has built a domestic war infrastructure by claiming it was all being constructed to protect us from the terrorists.
Now, in 2013, the government has ?flipped the script? on who the threat is. According to Janet Napolitano, head of DHS, the real threat to America is now returning veterans and gun owners. So the feds have this massive armament infrastructure and spy grid lockdown over the entire population, and it turns out it was all built not for terrorists but for YOU.
The terrorists are nowhere to be found in all this, by the way. Every single terror plot halted by the FBI is a terror plot that was literally dreamed up, planned and nearly carried out by the FBI.
TSA has caught exactly zero terrorists trying to sneak through airport security.
The ?war on terror? is and always has been a complete hoax. The purpose of the hoax was to provide a cover story for the building up of a massive domestic military force to be used against the American people when the time comes.
That?s what we are really seeing with the purchase of ammo, automatic weapons and armored assault vehicles. This is why cable barriers are being erected on highways across the country. And this is why DHS has recently begun redacting the requested quantities from its public bid documents? in order to make sure the public can no longer learn how much it?s stockpiling weapons and ammo.
But none of this is real, right?
Astonishingly, the vast majority of Americans remain completely unaware of any of this. For those mainstream sheeple, anything that doesn?t appear on CNN must not be real.
So DHS really isn?t buying 1.6 billion rounds of ammo, 7,000+ assault rifles, or 2,700+ armored mine-resistant assault vehicles. All of us who are reporting these purchases are ?conspiracy theorists,? we?re all told, even though what we?re reporting on is absolutely true.
Remember this: Former White House press secretary Robert Gibbs has now publicly admitted he was ordered by the White House to deny the existence of the U.S. militarized drone program even while the program existed and was known to be real. Denial has always been a key tactic for any government preparing to do something unethical or criminal.
But I?ve been told by some seemingly convincing people that none of this is real. It?s all just a bad dream, you see, and soon you will wake up and find yourself in the land of the free, where there isn?t poison in the crops and there isn?t mercury in the vaccines. The President love you, and corporations are all ethical. Senators are humanitarians who put the good of the country ahead of their own selfish greed. The FDA stops censoring the truth about nutritional therapies and the USDA outlaws GMOs.
That?s the delusional world that 90% of Americans believe they live in, and they even believe that as long as they just ?believe? something, then reality doesn?t even matter. Belief IS reality, according to the ?Law of Attraction? followers, and if you just believe the government is good, then your belief will make it so.
That?s a fascinating bit of self-hypnosis, because DHS doesn?t care what you believe. It is stockpiling guns, ammo and armored vehicles for some very real reason. This isn?t their imagination: it?s hardware.
And hardware is rarely accumulated in such large quantities unless it is deemed necessary for some specific purpose. It seems that the American people ? delusional or otherwise ? may soon discover what purpose DHS has in mind.
http://www.infowars.com/government-arms-race-kicks-into-high-gear-as-dhs-buys-2700-armored-vehicles-for-streets-of-america/
Holder: Yep, Obama could kill Americans on U.S. soil
President Barack Obama has the legal authority to unleash deadly force?such as drone strikes?against Americans on U.S. soil without first putting them on trial, Attorney General Eric Holder wrote in a letter released Tuesday.
But Holder, writing to Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, underlined that Obama ?has no intention? of targeting his fellow citizens with unmanned aerial vehicles and would do so only if facing ?an extraordinary circumstance.?
Paul had asked the Obama administration on Feb. 20 whether the president "has the power to authorize lethal force, such as a drone strike, against a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil and without trial." On Tuesday, he denounced Holder's response as ?frightening? and ?an affront to the Constitutional due process rights of all Americans.?
?The U.S. government has not carried out drone strikes in the United States and has no intention of doing so,? Holder assured Paul in the March 4, 2013 letter. The attorney general also underlined that ?we reject the use of military force where well-established law enforcement authorities in this country provide the best means for incapacitating a terrorist threat.?
Holder added: ?The question you have posed is therefore entirely hypothetical, unlikely to occur, and one we hope no President will ever have to confront."
But "it is possible, I suppose to imagine an extraordinary circumstance in which it would be necessary and appropriate under the Constitution and applicable laws of the United States for the President to authorize the military to use lethal force within the territory of the United States," Holder said. "For example, the President could conceivably have no choice but to authorize the military to use such force if necessary to protect the homeland in the circumstances of a catastrophic attack? like Pearl Harbor or 9/11.
?Were such an emergency to arise, I would examine the particular facts and circumstances before advising the President on the scope of this authority,? said Holder.
Paul, whose office released the letter, denounced the attorney general?s comments.
"The U.S. Attorney General's refusal to rule out the possibility of drone strikes on American citizens and on American soil is more than frightening?it is an affront the Constitutional due process rights of all Americans," the senator said in a statement.
The exchange came as the White House agreed to give Senate Intelligence Committee members access to all of the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel opinions justifying Obama's expanded campaign of targeted assassination of suspected terrorists overseas, including American citizens. Some lawmakers had warned they would try to block top Obama counterterrorism adviser John Brennan's nomination to head the CIA unless they were able to see the memos.
A few hours after the White House agreed to share the information, the committee approved Brennan 12-3, setting the stage for a full Senate vote.
Obama's drone war?relatively popular at home, reviled across the Muslim world?has drawn fresh scrutiny ever since NBC News obtained and published a Justice Department memo that lays out the legal justification behind it. The White House has defended the policy as ?necessary,? ?ethical? and ?wise.? But civil liberties champions have sharply criticized it.
Holder: Yep, Obama could kill Americans on U.S. soil | The Ticket - Yahoo! News
President Barack Obama has the legal authority to unleash deadly force?such as drone strikes?against Americans on U.S. soil without first putting them on trial, Attorney General Eric Holder wrote in a letter released Tuesday.
But Holder, writing to Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, underlined that Obama ?has no intention? of targeting his fellow citizens with unmanned aerial vehicles and would do so only if facing ?an extraordinary circumstance.?
Paul had asked the Obama administration on Feb. 20 whether the president "has the power to authorize lethal force, such as a drone strike, against a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil and without trial." On Tuesday, he denounced Holder's response as ?frightening? and ?an affront to the Constitutional due process rights of all Americans.?
?The U.S. government has not carried out drone strikes in the United States and has no intention of doing so,? Holder assured Paul in the March 4, 2013 letter. The attorney general also underlined that ?we reject the use of military force where well-established law enforcement authorities in this country provide the best means for incapacitating a terrorist threat.?
Holder added: ?The question you have posed is therefore entirely hypothetical, unlikely to occur, and one we hope no President will ever have to confront."
But "it is possible, I suppose to imagine an extraordinary circumstance in which it would be necessary and appropriate under the Constitution and applicable laws of the United States for the President to authorize the military to use lethal force within the territory of the United States," Holder said. "For example, the President could conceivably have no choice but to authorize the military to use such force if necessary to protect the homeland in the circumstances of a catastrophic attack? like Pearl Harbor or 9/11.
?Were such an emergency to arise, I would examine the particular facts and circumstances before advising the President on the scope of this authority,? said Holder.
Paul, whose office released the letter, denounced the attorney general?s comments.
"The U.S. Attorney General's refusal to rule out the possibility of drone strikes on American citizens and on American soil is more than frightening?it is an affront the Constitutional due process rights of all Americans," the senator said in a statement.
The exchange came as the White House agreed to give Senate Intelligence Committee members access to all of the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel opinions justifying Obama's expanded campaign of targeted assassination of suspected terrorists overseas, including American citizens. Some lawmakers had warned they would try to block top Obama counterterrorism adviser John Brennan's nomination to head the CIA unless they were able to see the memos.
A few hours after the White House agreed to share the information, the committee approved Brennan 12-3, setting the stage for a full Senate vote.
Obama's drone war?relatively popular at home, reviled across the Muslim world?has drawn fresh scrutiny ever since NBC News obtained and published a Justice Department memo that lays out the legal justification behind it. The White House has defended the policy as ?necessary,? ?ethical? and ?wise.? But civil liberties champions have sharply criticized it.
Holder: Yep, Obama could kill Americans on U.S. soil | The Ticket - Yahoo! News
(Reuters) - The Obama administration is drawing up plans to give all U.S. spy agencies full access to a massive database that contains financial data on American citizens and others who bank in the country, according to a Treasury Department document seen by Reuters.
The proposed plan represents a major step by U.S. intelligence agencies to spot and track down terrorist networks and crime syndicates by bringing together financial databanks, criminal records and military intelligence. The plan, which legal experts say is permissible under U.S. law, is nonetheless likely to trigger intense criticism from privacy advocates.
Financial institutions that operate in the United States are required by law to file reports of "suspicious customer activity," such as large money transfers or unusually structured bank accounts, to Treasury's Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN).
The Federal Bureau of Investigation already has full access to the database. However, intelligence agencies, such as the Central Intelligence Agency and the National Security Agency, currently have to make case-by-case requests for information to FinCEN.
The Treasury plan would give spy agencies the ability to analyze more raw financial data than they have ever had before, helping them look for patterns that could reveal attack plots or criminal schemes.
The planning document, dated March 4, shows that the proposal is still in its early stages of development, and it is not known when implementation might begin.
Financial institutions file more than 15 million "suspicious activity reports" every year, according to Treasury. Banks, for instance, are required to report all personal cash transactions exceeding $10,000, as well as suspected incidents of money laundering, loan fraud, computer hacking or counterfeiting.
"For these reports to be of value in detecting money laundering, they must be accessible to law enforcement, counter-terrorism agencies, financial regulators, and the intelligence community," said the Treasury planning document.
A Treasury spokesperson said U.S. law permits FinCEN to share information with intelligence agencies to help detect and thwart threats to national security, provided they adhere to safeguards outlined in the Bank Secrecy Act. "Law enforcement and intelligence community members with access to this information are bound by these safeguards," the spokesperson said in a statement.
Some privacy watchdogs expressed concern about the plan when Reuters outlined it to them.
A move like the FinCEN proposal "raises concerns as to whether people could find their information in a file as a potential terrorist suspect without having the appropriate predicate for that and find themselves potentially falsely accused," said Sharon Bradford Franklin, senior counsel for the Rule of Law Program at the Constitution Project, a non-profit watchdog group.
Despite these concerns, legal experts emphasize that this sharing of data is permissible under U.S. law. Specifically, banks' suspicious activity reporting requirements are dictated by a combination of the Bank Secrecy Act and the USA PATRIOT Act, which offer some privacy safeguards.
National security experts also maintain that a robust system for sharing criminal, financial and intelligence data among agencies will improve their ability to identify those who plan attacks on the United States.
"It's a war on money, war on corruption, on politically exposed persons, anti-money laundering, organized crime," said Amit Kumar, who advised the United Nations on Taliban sanctions and is a fellow at the Democratic think tank Center for National Policy.
SUSPICIOUS ACTIVITY
The Treasury document outlines a proposal to link the FinCEN database with a computer network used by U.S. defense and law enforcement agencies to share classified information called the Joint Worldwide Intelligence Communications System.
The plan calls for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence - set up after 9/11 to foster greater collaboration among intelligence agencies - to work with Treasury. The Director of National Intelligence declined to comment.
More than 25,000 financial firms - including banks, securities dealers, casinos, and money and wire transfer agencies - routinely file "suspicious activity reports" to FinCEN. The requirements for filing are so strict that banks often over-report, so they cannot be accused of failing to disclose activity that later proves questionable. This over-reporting raises the possibility that the financial details of ordinary citizens could wind up in the hands of spy agencies.
Stephen Vladeck, a professor at American University's Washington College of Law, said privacy advocates have already been pushing back against the increased data-sharing activities between government agencies that followed the September 11 attacks.
"One of the real pushes from the civil liberties community has been to move away from collection restrictions on the front end and put more limits on what the government can do once it has the information," he said.
EXCLUSIVE - U.S. to let spy agencies scour Americans' finances | Reuters
The proposed plan represents a major step by U.S. intelligence agencies to spot and track down terrorist networks and crime syndicates by bringing together financial databanks, criminal records and military intelligence. The plan, which legal experts say is permissible under U.S. law, is nonetheless likely to trigger intense criticism from privacy advocates.
Financial institutions that operate in the United States are required by law to file reports of "suspicious customer activity," such as large money transfers or unusually structured bank accounts, to Treasury's Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN).
The Federal Bureau of Investigation already has full access to the database. However, intelligence agencies, such as the Central Intelligence Agency and the National Security Agency, currently have to make case-by-case requests for information to FinCEN.
The Treasury plan would give spy agencies the ability to analyze more raw financial data than they have ever had before, helping them look for patterns that could reveal attack plots or criminal schemes.
The planning document, dated March 4, shows that the proposal is still in its early stages of development, and it is not known when implementation might begin.
Financial institutions file more than 15 million "suspicious activity reports" every year, according to Treasury. Banks, for instance, are required to report all personal cash transactions exceeding $10,000, as well as suspected incidents of money laundering, loan fraud, computer hacking or counterfeiting.
"For these reports to be of value in detecting money laundering, they must be accessible to law enforcement, counter-terrorism agencies, financial regulators, and the intelligence community," said the Treasury planning document.
A Treasury spokesperson said U.S. law permits FinCEN to share information with intelligence agencies to help detect and thwart threats to national security, provided they adhere to safeguards outlined in the Bank Secrecy Act. "Law enforcement and intelligence community members with access to this information are bound by these safeguards," the spokesperson said in a statement.
Some privacy watchdogs expressed concern about the plan when Reuters outlined it to them.
A move like the FinCEN proposal "raises concerns as to whether people could find their information in a file as a potential terrorist suspect without having the appropriate predicate for that and find themselves potentially falsely accused," said Sharon Bradford Franklin, senior counsel for the Rule of Law Program at the Constitution Project, a non-profit watchdog group.
Despite these concerns, legal experts emphasize that this sharing of data is permissible under U.S. law. Specifically, banks' suspicious activity reporting requirements are dictated by a combination of the Bank Secrecy Act and the USA PATRIOT Act, which offer some privacy safeguards.
National security experts also maintain that a robust system for sharing criminal, financial and intelligence data among agencies will improve their ability to identify those who plan attacks on the United States.
"It's a war on money, war on corruption, on politically exposed persons, anti-money laundering, organized crime," said Amit Kumar, who advised the United Nations on Taliban sanctions and is a fellow at the Democratic think tank Center for National Policy.
SUSPICIOUS ACTIVITY
The Treasury document outlines a proposal to link the FinCEN database with a computer network used by U.S. defense and law enforcement agencies to share classified information called the Joint Worldwide Intelligence Communications System.
The plan calls for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence - set up after 9/11 to foster greater collaboration among intelligence agencies - to work with Treasury. The Director of National Intelligence declined to comment.
More than 25,000 financial firms - including banks, securities dealers, casinos, and money and wire transfer agencies - routinely file "suspicious activity reports" to FinCEN. The requirements for filing are so strict that banks often over-report, so they cannot be accused of failing to disclose activity that later proves questionable. This over-reporting raises the possibility that the financial details of ordinary citizens could wind up in the hands of spy agencies.
Stephen Vladeck, a professor at American University's Washington College of Law, said privacy advocates have already been pushing back against the increased data-sharing activities between government agencies that followed the September 11 attacks.
"One of the real pushes from the civil liberties community has been to move away from collection restrictions on the front end and put more limits on what the government can do once it has the information," he said.
EXCLUSIVE - U.S. to let spy agencies scour Americans' finances | Reuters
Bowden
Elite Member
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2009
- Messages
- 1,798
- Reaction score
- 736
- Points
- 0
Please provide some names of small towns and the state they are located in that currently have or will have police forces consisting of "foreign mercenaries from Pakistan, Egypt and Serbia, that are being trained here in the states and contracted out to small towns with full police powers and under UN rule."
not sure if this has happened but if not it's going to per the India-US Joint Working Group.
Joint Statement by the India - U.S. Joint Working Group on UN Peacekeeping