All posts by TiLT News

The Freedom to speak honestly and from your heart is being eradicated. Truth is being skewed and creating a reality that none recognize. Criminals freed reek havoc. Law and order, the thin line between chaos and order are all on the chopping block. Your way of life is changing and not for the better. It takes ONE generation to flip any civilized society by indoctrinating your children and removing your connection to God. WHAT are you going to do about it! Spread the word.
Land of the Free | Perspective

Cornel West: “Massive Transfer of Military Weapons to Local Police” During Obama’s Reign | The Daily Sheeple

Leave a comment

Cornel West: “Massive Transfer of Military Weapons to Local Police” During Obama’s Reign | The Daily Sheeple.

The Daily Sheeple 
www.TheDailySheeple.com 
December 5th, 2014


Even as police abuse against minority communities dominates national headlines, many have noted that police have been hardily armed for war under a controversial Pentagon surplus program (known as the DoD 1033 program).

It is as if America has descended rapidly into a warzone, as local authorities have been quietly (and with few details) given “surplus” military tanks & MRAPs, guns, weaponry (including grenade launchers), equipment and training to local police departments (and even schools).

But is this program necessary or even justified? And are we really surprised to see the American people now increasingly mistreated at the hands of police wielding this dangerously wrong-headed training and equipment?

[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdi7jgbVGwA]



For the outspoken Cornel West, the outrage in Ferguson is tied to the failures of the Obama Administration to address problems in the black community. West told CNN:


“I think Ferguson signifies the end of the age of Obama,” said West in an unapologetic CNN interview. “It’s a very sad end. We began with tremendous hope and we end with great despair … because we have a Jim Crow criminal-justice system that does not deliver justice for black and brown people, and especially black and brown poor people. It’s very sad that Wall Street executives can go free, drone droppers can go free, torturers can go free, but police who kill our precious children walk free …

“The sad thing is,” he continued, “we have a black president and a black attorney general, we have a black head of Homeland Security, but not one federal prosecution of a case against a policeman killing a black youth under the five-and-a-half years where we’ve had all black folk in place.”

More broadly, these military weapons signal that the police state is here in America in full force, and ready to repress populations of all colors, cultures and backgrounds under a variety of conditions – including martial law.

As the economy continues to put pressure on the middle and lower classes, tragic and outrageous incidents with increasingly armed and aggressive police are sure to continue and likely increase.

H/t MOX News
Resources:

Rise of the Warrior Cop: The Militarization of America’s Police Forces

Police State – Ten Secrets The Police Don’t Want You To Know! “How To Survive Police Encounters!”

Police State USA: How Orwell’s Nightmare is Becoming our Reality

The Anatomy of a Breakdown

Total Breakdown in Less Than 24 Hours

Delivered by The Daily Sheeple

– See more at: http://www.thedailysheeple.com/cornel-west-we-saw-a-massive-transfer-of-military-weapons-to-local-police-under-obama_122014#sthash.lkmauCZR.dpuf

Land of the Free | Perspective

CALIFORNIA SHERIFF ACQUIRES ‘CROWD CONTROL’ DRONES THAT CAN SEE INSIDE BUILDINGS, TRACK GUNS

Leave a comment

http://www.infowars.com/california-sheriff-acquires-crowd-control-drones-that-can-see-inside-buildings-track-guns/

CALIFORNIA SHERIFF ACQUIRES ‘CROWD CONTROL’ DRONES THAT CAN SEE INSIDE BUILDINGS, TRACK GUNS
Revives Plan To Deploy after protests stopped; privacy concerns still ignored

California Sheriff Acquires ‘Crowd Control’ Drones That Can See Inside Buildings, Track Guns
Image Credits: Don McCullough / Flickr

by STEVE WATSON | INFOWARS.COM | DECEMBER 4, 2014

A county sheriff’s department in California has acquired two surveillance drones which it intends to deploy next year, despite being forced to scrap the plans last year after intense opposition.

The Alameda County Sheriff’s office, close to San Francisco, could still become the first law enforcement agency in the state to deploy FAA authorized drones after it revived the plans, despite not significantly changing any policy on privacy safeguards.

Ars Technica reports that the Sheriff, Gregory Ahern, made the announcement Wednesday at a press conference, presenting a “new” draft policy on the drone plan.

Privacy advocates and rights groups who fought Ahern on the matter in 2012 and 2013 say that they were unaware the conference was even taking place and only found out about the revived drone plan via an article in the San Francisco Chronicle.

Infowars previously highlighted how the Sheriff has suggested the drones, acquired via federal “community policing” grants, could be used to hunt for marijuana farms, and “track suspects with guns,” referring to such operations as “proactive policing.”

As Ahern notes in the following NBC report from 2012, the devices can also be fitted with thermal imaging devices that would allow police to see inside buildings, as well as license plate readers and laser radar.

An previous internal memo from the Sheriff’s Office also indicated that the department identified uses for the drone, including monitoring barricaded suspects, investigative and tactical surveillance, intelligence gathering, tracking suspicious persons and overseeing large crowd control disturbances. The new draft policy still allows for such uses of the drones.

In February of 2013, following a county hearing, it appeared that Ahern had been forced to abandon the drone plan due to backlash from local citizens and opposition from attorneys with the ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF).

“The Sheriff has done nothing to address the concerns expressed by the community at the February 2013 hearing,” Nadia Kayyali of the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) wrote in a statement Wednesday, citing the fact that the draft policy still does not explicitly limit drone use to search and rescue.

“And the Sheriff still hasn’t addressed the most basic standard for drone policies: law enforcement must be required to get a warrant before using drones.” Kayyali urged.

Linda Lye, an attorney with the ACLU of Northern California agreed that the privacy concerns have not been addressed at all.

“First, any ‘safeguards’ are not meaningful because this is simply an internal Sheriff’s department policy, which the Sheriff can unilaterally change,” she stated.

“Privacy safeguards need to be enforceable and this is not. Second, the policy lacks a key privacy safeguard—a requirement that information collected for one purpose only be used for the purpose for which it was collected.” Lye added.

“Section VII would authorize information collected from a drone to be reviewed and evaluated for ‘evidentiary value.’ This would allow data collected during a drone mission that was ostensibly conducted for ‘search and rescue’ to be analyzed for unrelated surveillance purposes.” the attorney explained.

“This portion of the policy therefore invites the very kind of generalized surveillance that the Sheriff has repeatedly said he will not conduct. And he has retained this language despite the ACLU’s repeated criticism of this provision.” Lye concluded.

When confronted on the concerns, the Sheriff essentially admitted that the draft policy has not changed, saying that accommodating privacy concerns would “endanger my people,” referring to bomb disposal teams within the department.

If you have children, do you allow your children to ride a bike without a helmet?” Ahern added. “I want to make sure that my people are as safe as they can be in each and every mission. It’s not easy to send people into harms way and not deploy tools that could help them,” he said.

The sheriff also attempted to placate privacy concerns by suggesting that the department could develop a smartphone app “that if someone were so concerned about our deployment that they could be immediately notified each and every time it’s deployed.”

Given Ahern’s previous comments and stated intentions to use drones for surveillance, it will take more than an as yet undeveloped app to convince residents to accept drones buzzing over their heads on a daily basis.

In 2015, the FAA is expected to announce newly compiled guidelines on the use of drones by law enforcement and government agencies. It is expected that many police and sheriff’s departments will get authorization to deploy the devices, despite surveillance concerns.

Land of the Free | Perspective

Obama amnesty faces lawsuit as 17 states argue immigration order violates Constitution – Washington Times

Leave a comment

Obama amnesty faces lawsuit as 17 states argue immigration order violates Constitution – Washington Times.

By S.A. Miller and Stephen Dinan – The Washington Times – Wednesday, December 3, 2014

Seventeen states and governors sued the Department of Homeland Security on Wednesday in a bid to halt President Obama’s new deportation amnesty, saying he violated the Constitution and broke federal laws by granting tentative legal status to millions of illegal immigrants.

“This lawsuit is not about immigration. It is about the rule of law, presidential power and the structural limits of the U.S. Constitution,” the governors said in a 75-page complaint, filed in federal district court in Texas.

The governors said they have standing to sue because they and their state taxpayers will be left on the hook for expenses related to schooling, health care and police to handle the extra illegal immigrants who will now have federal permission to stay in the U.S. despite having no permanent lawful status.

And the plaintiffs carefully chose the court where they filed their challenge, selecting Brownsville, Texas, where a judge last year wrote a scathing rebuke of Homeland Security for aiding human smugglers.

Mr. Obama’s unilateral immigration action, announced Nov. 20, would grant tentative status and work permits to nearly 5 million illegal immigrants, and would remove many others from any danger of deportation — though they would not have the same legal status as those officially granted the amnesty.

The policy provoked outrage among conservatives, immediately spurring Maricopa County, Arizona, Sheriff Joseph M. Arpaio to sue the administration and the GOP states to organize a lawsuit.

In Congress, Republicans have searched for ways to use legislation to block the president. Most GOP lawmakers have settled for a three-pronged attack that delays the showdown until the new Congress convenes in January, when Republicans will have the added leverage of controlling both the House and Senate.

The GOP-run House is prepared to vote Thursday on a bill by Rep. Ted S. Yoho, Florida Republican, that would declare the president’s action void. But it won’t get a vote in the Democrat-run Senate, rendering it a symbolic gesture.

Next week the House is expected to take up a pair of bills designed to set the stage for an immigration duel next year.

An omnibus bill will fund most of the government for the rest of the fiscal year, avoiding a government shutdown when current spending expires Dec. 11. A separate short-term spending bill will keep the Department of Homeland Security open until early next year, when the budget battle over immigration will begin in earnest.

Conservative lawmakers, who want to take a stand now against the amnesty, balked at the plan. But GOP leaders remained confident the bill will pass, likely with help from Democrats.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, has given the two-bill approach a green light as he prepares to close out his days atop the majority.

Under the setup, Mr. Obama could be confronted with legislation defunding his amnesty action and a likely veto battle with a GOP-run Congress before the end of January.

On Capitol Hill a small band of tea party conservatives rallied with like-minded lawmakers Wednesday, with calls to immediately defund Mr. Obama’s immigration moves.

Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, a tea party champion and prospective 2016 presidential contender, urged fellow Republicans to keep the campaign promises that helped them win control of the Senate and a larger majority in the House.

“What I am here urging my fellow Republicans to do is very, very simple: Do what you said. Honor your commitment,” he told about two dozen demonstrators.

Still, Mr. Cruz avoided talk of a government shutdown.

Mr. Obama defended his move in remarks to a gathering of business leaders, saying he wanted to keep the amnesty in place even if he and the new Congress strike a deal on other immigration issues, such as increased border security.

“I am not going to preside over a system [where] we know these folks are in the kitchens of most restaurants in the country, are cleaning up most of the hotels that all of you stay in, that are doing the landscaping in most neighborhoods where you live, whose kids are going to school with our kids, and we tolerate it because it’s good for us economically to have cheap labor and services, but we never give them a path to be part of this country in a more full and fair way,” Mr. Obama told the Business Roundtable meeting in Washington.

“That’s just not who we are,” he said.

The new lawsuit, which was spearheaded by Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott, repeatedly uses Mr. Obama’s own words against him, pointing to the nearly two dozen times he said he didn’t have the power to take the actions he took.

And in one critical attack, the lawsuit points to Mr. Obama’s own claim last week that he “took an action to change the law.”

“In this case, the president admitted that he ‘took an action to change the law.’ The defendants could hardly contend otherwise because a deferred action program with an acceptance rate that rounds to 100 percent is a de facto entitlement — one that even the president and OLC previously admitted would require a change to the law,” the challengers said in their complaint.

At the White House on Tuesday, press secretary Josh Earnest tried to walk back Mr. Obama’s law-changing comment, saying the president was trying to speak to the level of his audience in Chicago at the time.

“I think he was speaking colloquially,” Mr. Earnest said.

The spokesman went on to say that while the president didn’t change the law, his actions did change the way the law affects millions of people. “I think that’s what the president was alluding to,” Mr. Earnest said.

Legal analysts have heatedly debated whether Mr. Obama’s actions are legitimate, with the Justice Department saying that while it’s the biggest claim of prosecutorial discretion in history, the same moves were done on a smaller scale by previous Republican presidents.

However, it’s not even clear the courts will take the case. Judges have routinely rejected challenges to presidential actions by finding that plaintiffs can’t show a specific injury and thus don’t have standing to sue.

To combat that, Texas took pains to describe the increased spending for health care, licensing, policing and education.

The challengers also chose a Texas court where Judge Andrew S. Hanen last year blasted the Homeland Security Department for what he said amounted to aiding smugglers.

He said he’d come across several cases where illegal immigrant children had been smuggled into the U.S. and caught, only to have Homeland Security agents close the smuggling loop by delivering the children to their illegal immigrant parents already in the U.S.

“Instead of enforcing the laws of the United States, the government took direct steps to help the individuals who violated it. A private citizen would, and should, be prosecuted for this conduct,” the judge wrote.



Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/dec/3/obama-amnesty-faces-lawsuit-as-17-states-argue-imm/?page=3#ixzz3KwsBhpbb 
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter


 

Land of the Free | Perspective

The Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity : Ron Paul on the Next US Defense Secretary

Leave a comment

The Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity : Ron Paul on the Next US Defense Secretary.

Ron Paul on the Next US Defense Secretary

written by daniel mcadams
wednesday december 3, 2014
As the US media reported that President Obama was expected to nominate Ashton Carter to be the next Secretary of Defense, RPI Chairman Ron Paul was not optimistic. There is no reason to believe that Carter, a long-time Pentagon employee and former deputy secretary, would do anything to straighten out failing US foreign policy, he said in an interview. With more pressure on the administration from pro-war hawks in Congress and elsewhere in the administration, the wars will likely continue to escalate under the new defense secretary. The administration has already warned us that the war would not be short-lived, he added.

Speaking about the proposed secretary of defense’s long ties to the weapons manufacturers and military industrial complex, Dr. Paul made this very important point:

“Whether the connection to the Secretary is clear or not, there is always a connection behind the scenes between those who administer our policies and those people who make money off war.”

Watch the whole interview here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKWOyU-_kwo
Copyright © 2014 by RonPaul Institute. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit and a live link are given.
Please donate to the Ron Paul Institute
Land of the Free | Perspective

Oath Keepers » Blog Archive » Ben Swann Interviews Oath Keeper Sam Andrews

Leave a comment

 

Oath Keepers » Blog Archive » Ben Swann Interviews Oath Keeper Sam Andrews

December 2nd, 2014

Ben Swann Interviews Oath Keeper Sam Andrews

Share on facebook Share on twitter Share on email Share on print More Sharing Services 0

Sam Andrews

Sam Andrews

Ben Swann recently interviewed the Oath Keeper team leader on the ground in Ferguson. Sam Andrews is an articulate, careful and knowledgeable man, who has been doing a fantastic job protecting those businesses in Ferguson. Our thanks go to Sam and all of his team, for a great job. You are true Oath Keepers.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VoVa8J3FKBI

[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VoVa8J3FKBI]