While the media has been busy trying to reassure the public over the frightening tone and scope of the Jade Helm 15 military exercises, it is clear that many Americans are not buying it.
Establishment outlets everywhere are scrambling to declare with authority that there is nothing to see here.
A cursory news search reveals a clear meme being circulated that all is quiet on the front and that Jade Helm is most certainly not martial law training:
But are these media tactics working?
A recent poll conducted by Rasmussen, the country is indeed quite alarmed over the exercise, with a near majority concerned about federal intrusion and apparent preparations to use martial law during crises – perhaps not too much different than what is going on in Baltimore, or previously in Ferguson.
Eight weeks of U.S. military exercises this summer in several southwestern states – dubbed Jade Helm 15 – have some wondering if the government is preparing for martial law. Most voters don’t oppose such exercises, but a surprising number worry about what the federal government is up to.
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 65% of Likely U.S. Voters favor the U.S. military conducting training exercises in their state. Just 16% are opposed, but slightly more (19%) are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
Only 21% believe the government’s decision to conduct military training exercises in some states is an infringement on the rights of the citizens in those states. Sixty-two percent (62%) disagree. Sixteen percent (16%) are not sure.
But 45% of voters are concerned that the government will use U.S. military training operations to impose greater control over some states, with 19% who are Very Concerned. Just over half (52%) are not concerned that the government has an ulterior motive for the training exercises, including 26% who are Not At All Concerned.
Among voters who oppose military exercises in their state, 82% are concerned that the federal government has greater control in mind. Just 34% of those who favor the exercises share that concern.
This poll gives documented reasons to think that many are waking up to the abuses of power, not just of police in urban areas, but of the larger system of government using scare tactics to demand more power for all of its agencies.
There are plenty of reasons to be concerned about Jade Helm, but the powers that be are doing everything they can to deflect attention from the merits of this issue – and denial and ridicule, as usual, are the first tools at hand to dismiss public concerns. The Dallas Morning News wrote :
Several websites have spread fear along the Internet that the 8-week exercise this summer in seven states is a ruse to impose martial law and confiscate guns in hostile states.
The conspiracy theory was bolstered when Gov. Greg Abbott this month wrote a letter to the Texas State Guard, ordering them to monitor the exercises to ensure civil rights were maintained.
Rasmussen pollsters said the reaction of those polled to the exercises reflects a heightened feeling of distrust for the federal government among voters.
Almost half of those polled – 47 percent – believe the federal government has too much influence over state governments, but that number has dropped from 56 percent five years ago.
Quick conspiracy theory: Could the identification of Texas as “hostile” in the Jade Helm exercise – conducted to “master the human domain” – be linked to its fierce political attitude towards federal government meddling? Did Texas win the role of ‘hostile’ in the military exercise because of:
a) the previous governor’s history of branding succession from the union as a political rally point, b) Texas’ refusal to give “dual command status” over Texas National Guard to the Fed’s emergency relief powers after Hurricane Rita, c) conspiracy talk and “radio-show driven” fears about martial law, d) its status as a pro-gun, pro-Constitution hold out for a staunch conservative base and a swelling libertarian-minded demographic, or the general attempts to turn the state blue for electioneering purposes, or e) all of the above and more.
- image: http://www.wnd.com/wp-content/plugins/wp-print/images/print.png
- Text smaller
- Text bigger
The Third Amendment, which guards against the quartering of soldiers in citizens’ homes – and which came into being because of the abuse of British troops against American patriots – has just been dinged by a judge who ruled the provision doesn’t apply to police.
In essence, that means police on official business could claim the legal right to bust into a private citizen’s home and occupy it.
The determination from federal district court Judge Andrew Gordon was rendered when he dismissed a Third Amendment claim from a Henderson, Nevada, family who suffered that very fate.
“Police State USA: How Orwell’s Nightmare Is Becoming Our Reality” chronicles how America has arrived at the point of being a de facto police state, and what led to an out-of-control government that increasingly ignores the Constitution. Order today!
Anthony Mitchell and his parents Michael and Linda Mitchell sued the City of Henderson and several police agents in federal court for a July 2011 incident they described in court papers.
Volokh reported: “On the morning of July 10, 2011, officers from the Henderson Police Department responded to a domestic violence call at a neighbor’s residence. … [Police] told [Mitchell] police needed to occupy his home in order to gain a ‘tactical advantage’ against the occupant of the neighboring house. Anthony Mitchell told the officer that he did not want to become involved and that he did not want police to enter his residence.”
Police went to the Mitchell family house anyway, and “banged forcefully on the door and loudly commanded Anthony Mitchell to open the door to his residence,” his complaint read.
Mitchell then reportedly contacted his mother to let her know what was going on – and police “smashed open” his door with a metal ram, court documents indicated.
From there, the situation grew even more chaotic. Mitchell wrote in court papers police pepperballed him and his dog, gave him conflicting orders and ultimately arrested him. He was released the next day from jail.
But Mitchell and his parents turned around and sued, alleging their Third and Fourth Amendment rights had been violated – the Third, because the police were acting like members of the military. The case was closely watched by legal minds, given the unusual nature of the Third Amendment alleged violation.
But Gordon dismissed that claim in a court action that fell largely under the nation’s radar.
He wrote, the Washington Post reported: “Various officers … entered into and occupied Linda’s and Michael’s home for an unspecified amount of time (seemingly nine hours), but certainly for less than 24 hours. The relevant questions are thus whether municipal police should be considered soldiers, and whether the time they spent in the house could be considered quartering. To both questions, the answer must be no. I hold that a municipal police officer is not a soldier for purposes of the Third Amendment.”
As Ilya Somin, professor of law at George Mason University, opined, however: The judge’s dismissal should be regarded with wary eyes.
One “complicating factor,” he said, in the Washington Post, “is the increasing militarization of police forces in many parts of the country, which has resulted in cops using weapons and tactics normally associated with military forces. If a state or local government decides to quarter a SWAT team in a private home, it is not clear whether that is meaningfully different from placing a National Guard unit there.”
WND reported there are some 17,000 police departments nationwide equipped with $4.2 billion worth of equipment ranging from Blackhawk helicopters and battering rams to explosives, body armor and night vision.
Military assault rifles, grenade launchers and 14-ton Mine-Resistance Ambush-Protected vehicles built for taking down terrorist enclaves are becoming part of the toolbox of local police departments under the federal 1033 program that supplies “surplus” military weapons to local officers, departments and agencies on request and without charge.
WND recently reported the American Civil Liberties Union was critical of the 1033 program, and a growing number of cities and counties are now returning the war weapons.
“Whenever this kind of armament is brought into a community, it should only be done with the knowledge and consent of the citizenry,” John Whitehead, a constitutional attorney based in Charlottesville, Virginia, said in a statement released to WND.
The news of JADE HELM 15 has caught the internet on fire. Now, coming out of the woodwork are the nay sayers, propagandists, and straight out liars. Yes, I am calling them exactly what they are, liars. Political Correctness stops here. The truth may hurt, but it is the truth. If you don’t like that, then either go to a different site or change your behavior.
There have been individuals from “trolls” to others that “claim” they are ex-Special Operations Command stating “this is not a real drill,” Or that “the documents have been modified.” These statements are not true, and are only being used in another “PSYOP” upon the American People. I will prove to you beyond the shadow of a doubt this operation is, in fact, true, and call these people out for what they are, liars! Anyone who tells you this is not a planned drill is lying to you either blatantly or by complete ignorance, neither of which is acceptable.
JADE HELM 15 is a (SOC) Special Operations Command (RMT) Realistic Military Training planned drill for the South Western United States covering seven states which broke in alternative media almost a week ago. Freedom Outpost’s Joe McMaster covered this on March 20, 2015. I will not sit idly by and allow our alternative media to be portrayed as “conspiracy theorists” by those that are ignorant or liars. I stand in defense of all the alternative media that have reported and helped to expose this very real “exercise/drill,” JADE HELM 15, to the American Public. I challenge the propagandists, liars, and PSYOP’s to debunk this! You have been caught with your pants down and now you are trying to do “damage control.” It’s not going to work.
On OFFICIAL: February 10, 2015 the Brazos County Commissioners Court held a meeting about “JADE HELM 15”. Ref: #4
OFFICIAL: Thomas Mead the JADE HELM Operations Planner/MSEL addressing Brazos County Commissioners on February 10, 2015. Including them planning “surgical strikes”, while the county commissioner makes a joke of it. Listen below:
Read more at http://freedomoutpost.com/2015/03/jade-helm-15-is-real-heres-the-proof/#2otfDbO1JveJe1uE.99
U.S. District Judge Andrew S. Hanen ordered federal agencies to cease implementing Obama’s amnesty plan.
An attorney for Sheriff Joe Arpaio made a filing with the federal judge who ordered the halting of President Obama’s executive amnesty, asking that a hearing be held on Obama’s refusal to comply with the court’s order.
The attorney, Larry Klayman of Freedom Watch, stated to the judge in the filing:
“Several reports indicate that the executive branch under the Obama administration has not complied with this court’s temporary injunction, but continues full-speed to implement a grant of amnesty and related benefits to approximately 5 million citizens of foreign countries who are illegally in the United States under the defendants’ November 20, 2014, executive action programs implemented by several memoranda issued by Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson.”
Advertisement-content continues below
U.S. District Judge Andrew S. Hanen ordered federal agencies to cease implementing Obama’s amnesty plan; but, since then, Obama has warned that “one federal judge” will not stand in his way toward implementing amnesty.
Obama, according to the Washington Times, “told a Miami crowd that he will move ahead with his executive action on immigration and vowed that his administration will become even more aggressive in the weeks and months to come.”
Klayman noted in the filing: “The Obama administration is continuing to signal not only its disagreement with the court’s order, which is its right, but beyond that its non-compliance with the court’s order.”
Advertisement-content continues below
He went on to write:
“In short,” Klayman told the court, “President Obama’s defiant pledge in Miami, Florida, on February 25, 2015, to move forward aggressively with implementation of his deferred action amnesty by executive over-reach … more than suggests that the Obama administration is continuing to implement the executive action amnesty in defiance of the court’s temporary injunction.
“Given the strong reports that DHS is continuing to implement the programs that the court enjoined, the court should issue an order to show cause and call for clarification and assurance from the defendants that they are and will comply with the court’s temporary injunction, and if not take immediate remedial actions to [ensure] that the order is being complied with.”
Klayman also noted that Obama is threatening “consequences” to federal employees who obey the federal judge’s ruling to cease implementation of his amnesty.
Share this article on Facebook and Twitter if you believe that Obama has blatantly ignored the judge’s ruling and the rule of law.
The Eric Holder Justice Department is arguing in court for a totalitarian government that can spit on the Fourth Amendment.
Here is the text of the Fourth Amendment:
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.
So Eric Holder’s Department of Justice (so-called) is now arguing in court, that the government can secretly vandalize your property, pretend to be repairmen, and then use their access to your property—which they gained through a criminal destruction of property and deception—to search your “persons, houses, papers, and effects.” And all of this is warrantless. They can then use anything they find as the basis for a warrant. (For all I know their argument would actually say you can skip the warrant and use what they found as the basis for pressing charges.
I suppose the government might insist that disrupting utilities that you have paid and contracted for, so that you think you need a repairman, doesn’t count as vandalism. That is a poor argument.
Federal agents, as NPR reports, disrupted the internet service of a rented villa in order to make the tenants believe they needed repairmen to come and fix it. Then they posed as the needed repairmen and used the access they gained to “just look around and see what we see.”
Defense lawyer Goldstein contends that not only was the search illegal, but the government knew it was and tried to cover it up. He contends that the materials submitted to a federal magistrate judge in seeking a warrant later carefully eliminated all indications that the federal agents had themselves cut the Internet line so that the villa occupants would ask for repairmen to come to the villa to fix the problem.
“They just managed not to tell the magistrate what it is they had actually done,” says Goldstein.
Indeed, Goldstein notes that he and his clients never would have known that it was the FBI agents who cut the line were it not for one slip of the tongue that the agents made — recorded on tape — when talking among themselves. He adds that when the defense asked for further recordings, the FBI provided two blank CDs, claiming the recording devices malfunctioned.
“There’s no real way of looking at this other than to say that it is a cover-up,” contends Goldstein.
Cover-up or not, the legal theory used here by the Justice Department and the FBI would change the legal rules of the road dramatically if adopted by the courts.
“The theory behind this search is scary,” says George Washington University law professor Stephen Saltzburg, author of a leading criminal law text. “It means the government can cut off your service, intentionally, and then pretend to be a repair person, and then while they’re there, they spend extra time searching your house. It is scary beyond belief.”
And it’s not just Internet service that could be cut off. Cable TV lines, plumbing or water lines — the list in the modern world is a long one.
The Justice Department won’t explain itself to the media so that it can seem fresh and new when it makes up garbage in court to attack the Fourth Amendment. Given the idiocy of claiming the government can look at emails because they are held by third parties—email service providers—I suspect they are going to claim that all the utilities you have paid for are all fair game. They can stop your water to make you call a plumber.
These are criminal assaults. When I disrupt services to your house that you have contracted and paid for, I am engaged in a criminal act of aggression. The police, whether state or Federal, have no business attacking innocent parties in this way.
Reflect on the fact that the Feds tried to hide what they had done before they got caught, turned shameless, and claimed the right to be criminals. If one agent hadn’t slipped on tape, the victims would have never known what the Feds had done.
What this indicates to me is that this criminal act, that ought to send cops to jail for criminal trespass, vandalism, and fraud—is quite probably business as usual. They have been doing this trick as standard operating procedure.
Yo, Liberals! Will this be enough to get you to think differently about Eric Holder?
The recent civil disobedience, rioting, and police brutality in Ferguson, Missouri reminds us of what happens when police states and bad economics are mixed together.
Devastated by decades of ruinous economic policies, the economies of many inner cities continue to languish as the self-ownership of local residents is treated with contempt by the police and any attempt at building a small business-based or wage-based economy is hobbled by government regulation.
The result is a local economy with chronically-unemployed wage earners coupled with entrepreneurs who lack the capital necessary to deal with government regulations. The social consequences of such a situation are dire and lead to a population that lives in the area, but is not invested in it.
Some conservatives have taken to asking why some of the residents are destroying their own neighborhoods through looting and other forms of violence. But of course, even if we make the obvious distinction between looters (a minority of the population) and the non-violent population, these are not “their” neighborhoods in any meaningful sense: the residents have not been allowed to attempt to build local capital or even have control over their own bodies.
Policing and Self-Ownership
The killing of Michael Brown, an unarmed teenager, by Ferguson police is just one of countless stories we see daily in which police use overwhelming force against unarmed citizens. The police, in the aftermath, only receive raises and huge pensions. Indeed, year after year, the cost and scope of police forces grow higher and higher while the quality of service (the percentage of murders solved has dropped from 91 percent to 61 percent since 1963) continues to go down.
This is exactly what we should expect from an organization that enjoys a total monopoly within its jurisdiction and simultaneously is the last word in whether or not it will be held accountable for the cost or quality of its work. The same organization that controls the police, controls the courts, and also has the power to tax. Consequently, as Hans-Hermann Hoppe has noted, the state at all levels is an “agency that unilaterally fixes the price that private citizens must pay for the state’s service as ultimate judge and enforcer of law and order.”
Murray Rothbard has explored the nature of non-monopolist policing, and how it would much more effectively protect private property. But in today’s world, the average citizen, and especially the low-income average citizen, has virtually no influence over policing decisions and, in cases of abuse, he has little hope of assistance from those who control the police.
All citizens of modern nation-states are subject to police forces of this sort, but the aggressiveness of police in American inner cities has been shown to be far greater and with much higher likelihood of arrest of citizens for minor non-violent offenses ranging from smoking a joint to jaywalking.
The expansion of police prerorgatives has accelerated in recent decades, first with the “War on Drugs,” and then with the “War on Terrorism,” both of which have resulted in what we see today in the form of heavily militarized police forces, asset forfeiture, and an endless list of federal laws that bring long jail sentences, even when no criminal intent is proven.
As the prerogatives and wealth of the police expand, the personal freedoms and self-ownership of citizens continues to shrink, but nowhere is this felt more keenly than in low-income areas.
The War on Drugs has likely been the greatest catalyst for this, since as Ludwig von Mises explained, once it is established that the state can regulate what one puts into one’s body, there are no grounds left on which to oppose other intrusions of the state.
Thanks largely to the War on Drugs, the police, in addition to enjoying a total legal monopoly on force, have become essentially unrestrained in questioning and detaining citizens. Once upon a time, the idea of it being a crime to merely possess a non-weapon like marijuana or cocaine would have been considered ludicrous. But today, any citizen at any time can be suspected of carrying an illegal substance, and subject to being questioned and detained.
This ever-present justification for disrupting the daily lives of peaceful private citizens perhaps does more to foster an environment of violence and suspicion than anything else. Not surprisingly, no-knock raids, aggressive questioning, frisking, and pointless arrests provide ample (and totally unnecessary) opportunities for interactions between police and citizens to turn violent.
The Destruction of Inner-City Economies
Naturally, the effects of such a state of affairs on the local economy are not good. Citizens who are constantly in danger of losing wages due to arrest or fines, or who may have their assets seized (without any due process) can hardly be expected to acquire much capital or develop a low time preference in the same way as people who are relatively free of repeated police harassment. Certainly, citizens who develop a criminal record for petty non-violent offenses will see economic opportunities severely limited, and act accordingly.
But even if one manages to escape the frequent harassment of street police, the constraints placed on average citizens by an ever-expanding regime of economic regulations hobble economies everywhere, and are especially damaging in places that already lack capital such as Ferguson.
The narrative among conservatives is that welfare, by distorting the incentive structure, has ruined the economies of the inner cities. This is true to an extent, but the problem is far more fundamental than this. This is not simply a matter of people choosing not to work (although that is often the case), this is a matter of people being excluded — by law — from participation in the economic system.
The most notable aspects of this are the minimum wage and the high cost of entry for small business into the economy.
For many residents of inner cities, entering the economy as an entrepreneur or wage earner is out-and-out illegal. In a place like Ferguson, a young person is prevented from working full time during much of his youth thanks to mandatory school attendance laws. If he misses school, he and his parents are harassed by police, and possibly arrested and left to face economic ruin. Upon graduating, the young person, thanks to the public schools, then faces the world with few marketable skills.
He is employable at some level, but as a low-productivity worker, the only entry-level wage he can command is at a level below the minimum wage. In this situation, federal law dictates that he shall remain unemployed indefinitely. Consequently, unemployment among black teenagers is over 20 percent. Common sense tells us that the best way a new public-school grad can attain any marketable skills is by working at a job. And yet, these jobs are all closed to him by law.
If our public-school grad then attempts to turn to legal self-employment, he will find himself similarly out of luck because the cost of entry into the economy as a small business owner has been raised to a largely-unattainable level by government regulation. Licensing, and compliance with OSHA, EEOC, forced “tolerance,” and a bevy of other regulations render the small business avenue closed for someone in such a community. Even if such a person manages to somehow acquire an automobile in spite of all the licenses, taxes, and certifications required, he can’t even rent out the car or drive customers for money without special permission from the government. Certainly some people are able to come from within the community and succeed under these conditions, but if your economy requires near-heroic levels of perseverance and luck just to open a burger stand, there is something deeply wrong with your economy.
How can we be the least surprised, then, when people in these communities simply give up or turn to black markets (i.e., illegal entrepreneurship such as drug dealing) to make a living?
Further complicating the situation is the fact that wage earners and entrepreneurs face a community stripped of capital in recent decades by damaging federal laws. During the 1970s and 1980s, federal “anti-segregation” mandates such as forced busing meant that the middle classes fled the cities, and took their capital with them, leaving workers behind, but not capital. Both racial and economic segregation became worse, and worker productivity plummeted. The government’s solution of course, was not to deregulate, but to distribute welfare funds in amounts too low to provide a decent standard of living, but just high enough to prevent widespread revolt against the political system.
Naturally, this economic gutting of the inner cities, fostered by federal, state, and local laws, led to crime. But what has the response of both national policy makers and local “leaders” been? It most certainly has not been to call for the legalization of low-skill labor (lowering the minimum wage) or the empowerment of local entrepreneurs (by lowering taxes and eliminating regulations). No, the answer is always more police, more government, more regulation, and more welfare. Michael Brown and many like him have paid the price for this dead-end strategy. Freeing inner cities from militarized police forces is a good start, but government is destroying these communities in many ways, and police brutality is just one of them.
I believe our nation is in a great deal of trouble; in fact, I don’t think I’m going too far in saying that we are on the precipice of once again, repeating history . Not only can you compare America’s current state of affairs to the fall of Rome, I believe we are on the verge of yet another government sponsored genocide in our nation. Though, the correct term for the government sponsored murder of its own citizens is democide.
Governments are actually responsible for the senseless deaths of millions upon millions of people. In fact, governments, in time of peace, have murdered more people than the combined deaths of all of mans wars in history. This is especially true of the twentieth century with the rise of communism. Over one hundred million people were brutally murdered by communist regimes in search of Utopia between 1900 and 2000. From Lenin and Stalin to Mao Tse Tsung, to Pol Pot in Cambodia and the Brutal Regime of North Korea, the quest to create a perfect society where people accept total state domination has been nothing but bloody.
The reason for this is simple. Communism is a system that demands total and complete obedience to the state and anyone who opposes that is standing in the way of progress and needs to be eliminated. Bringing society to the point where they will willingly participate in the slaughter of their own countrymen is not an overnight process. It is a gradual conditioning of the population to get them to believe that some people are not as worthy of life as others.
I believe that here in the United States we are witnessing this gradual process unfold before our very eyes. Gregory H. Stanton has identified an eight-stage process that generally occurs in the conditioning of a people to prepare them for genocide. In this article I intend to give a brief analysis of each of the eight steps (if applicable because we have not completed all of them) and how they apply to the situation we currently face in the United States.
The first step is classification. This simply means classifying people into different groups and intentionally dividing people along ideological lines. Once this is accomplished, stark contrasts can be made between different cultural groups and these differences can be used to incite hatred and create discontent. The job of community organizers is essential here because one group of people will be convinced they are being oppressed by another.
In the United States we no longer have an “American,” who understands America’s values and the virtues of liberty. We have the proverbial “hyphenated American” who instead of being taught the benefits of assimilating into American culture is actually being encouraged through “Multiculturalism” to retain their own culture. This does little more than ensure America’s vast population has no common virtue in which they can unite. The best way to explain this is simply saying, “United we stand, divided we fall.”
The next stage is known as “symbolization.” This is the process of attaching a negative symbol to the dominating ideology of the targeted group. While many may argue that the communist and fascist regimes of the twentieth century went as far as forcing different groups to wear different symbols for identification, and in America we don’t that, it is just as effective to create “mental associations.” This simply means attaching an idea or a belief to the targeted group.
In the United States today, right-wing Americans have been classified as potential terrorists because of their willingness to defend their rights under the Constitution. White males have been classified as being “automatically racist simply for being white” through the fallacious White Privilege ideology. These ideas are meant to work on the collective level and once they are seated they are nearly impossible to alter or eradicate. This is especially true when aided by the rabble rousings of a community organizer whose job is specifically targeted at creating discontent.
The next stage is known as “dehumanization.” I personally can’t think of anything more dehumanizing than being assumed to be a racist simply because I am white. By teaching students that white men are privileged and racist, our universities are dehumanizing nearly every white male in the country, at least in the eyes of the minorities that white allegedly oppress. This is why we are constantly being called racist for opposing anything proposed by the left.
In an effort to get the world to see us as without compassion and mean-spirited, they are actually paving the way for the acceptance of our extermination. Think about the narrative concerning the border. Obama brought children to the border specifically to dehumanize any opposition to his amnesty agenda. The same holds true for Christians as well because they stand in the way of the state’s utopia, therefore they must be discredited and dehumanized in order for them to no longer pose a threat. Christians overseas are already facing extermination at the hands of the Islamofascists.
The next stage is “organization.” The political left is the master of organization. Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals is the organizing bible for the left and they have mastered the art of teaching minorities that they are oppressed by America’s evil white men. They have the schools, the government agencies, the non-profit organizations, and the message that America’s rich white men are intentionally keeping them down for financial gain is constant and relentless.
We saw in 2010 the formation of the “Occupy Wall Street” movement and the lengths they are willing to go to make a point. This is a testament to how well the left can organize a political movement. These folks are Lenin’s useful idiots and they should not be underestimated. They would likely follow any charismatic leader on a genocidal march across the land if they believed it would bring about the utopian Promised Land.
The next stage is “polarization.” Stanton identifies this as the downward spiral of killings until the vortex of all out genocide is reached. There is little doubt that the white man in America is being polarized as over the past number of years we have seen a drastic rise in black on white violence.
Colin Flaherty, in his book “White Girl Bleed A Lot” has done unprecedented work in reporting the mass wave of black mob violence against whites. This violence is actually the result of the “dehumanization” stage of the genocide process. Black people have been so conditioned to believe that the white man is intentionally keeping him down that violence has become the accepted and justified solution. They are also being aided by a race-baiting president and an attorney general who has signaled that they will not be charged with hate crimes for committing such violence. It must be noted that these people are again, the proverbial useful idiots being used to carry out a political agenda. When it is accomplished they too will be targeted.
This brings us to the final three stages which are “preparation, extermination and denial.” I stopped with polarization because I believe that is the stage we are currently in. However, it could be argued that we are in the preparation stage as it has been reported that all Americans must be micro chipped by 2017 per Obamacare regulations or even the call for a universal I.D. can be used to justify the idea that we are in the preparation stage. After that it is all over. The justified slaughter of millions takes place and no one questions it because they have been psychologically conditioned to accept it because the targeted population has been reduced to nothing but a burden on society.
The genocide is often times carried out with the belief that they are doing something for the betterment of mankind. In the end, it’s nothing but the senseless murder of millions. Then, when it is completed, it is denied. To this day there are many people who view the Old Soviet Block as a paradise on Earth and refuse to believe that Lenin and Stalin together, murdered nearly 60 million of their own countrymen. This is done through the skillful use of propaganda and the ridiculing of those who tell the truth.
Whether or not this happens in America is entirely up to us my friends.
Read the rest of this Patriot Update article here: http://patriotupdate.com/articles/communism-white-privilege-coming-genocide/#rbUcmAD7SahJsQZf.99
NYPD Get Their Man! Arrest Man Who Videoed Police Homicide of Eric Garner
You may remember recently reading about Eric Garner. He was “arrested” in a way that left him dead. The death was video-recorded by New York City resident Ramsey Orta.
Orta has now been arrested on the charge of carrying an unloaded gun. There is no explanation as to what benefits Orta expected to gain from a handgun without bullets. But, even unloaded, the gun is illegal.
According to the local CBS station,
Orta pleaded not guilty two counts of criminal possession of a weapon and is being held on $75,000 cash bail, 1010 WINS’ Carol D’Auria reported. The bail was set in part due to what a judge called Orta’s “significant” record that included two felony convictions.
So Orta is a repeat offender. Ironically, so is the police officer whom Orto caught on video. As William Griggs writes,
The same is true, however, of NYPD Officer Daniel Pantaleo, who assaulted Eric Garner with an illegal chokehold, leading to what the medical examiner has concluded was a death by homicide.
Pantaleo was the subject of several previous complaints for excessive force prior to his lethal assault on Garner. One of them was filed by a Staten Island welder named Tommy Rice,who was one of four men stopped by Pataleo and several other officers about a mile from the site where Garner was killed. According to a lawsuit filed by Rice and his friend Darren Collins, they were stopped without cause and publicly strip-searched – the officers pulling down their pants and slapping their genitals in the futile hope of finding drugs. The suit was eventually settled for a trivial amount.
Another lawsuit filed by Rylawn Walker accuses Pantaleo of arresting him without cause, holding him for 24 hours, and then inventing a “cover charge” to justify the abduction. Walker’s lawsuit against Pantaleo remains active.
Continuing with the story from CBS:
As CBS 2’s Andrea Grymes reported, Orta’s wife, Chrissie Ortiz, left the courthouse in tears following the arraignment.
“It’s ridiculous,” she said. “It’s obvious he was set up. Who cannot see that?”
Orta was arrested Saturday night on Staten Island, a few blocks from where officers confronted Garner on July 17.
Around 9:45 p.m. Saturday, police said plainclothes officers from a Staten Island narcotics unit saw Orta stuff a silver-colored, .25-caliber handgun into a 17-year-old female companion’s waistband as they were leaving the Hotel Richmond single-room occupancy facility.
Orta’s mother tells the same story as his wife:
Orta’s mother, Emily Mercado, said police have been following her son ever since he recorded Garner’s arrest.
“They’ve been following him,” she said. “They’ve been sitting in front of my house. They put spot lights in my window.”
Ortiz also said police have been harassing him.
“It’s payback for him exposing what they did to Eric Garner and the bad things that they were doing,” she said.
Ortiz said her husband believed police were trying to set him up.
“He called me and said, ‘babe, hurry up and come over here. They’re trying to pin something on me,’” she said. “The day after they declare it a homicide, you find someone next to him with a gun, and you saw him pass it off? Out in public when he knows he’s in the public spotlight? It makes no sense.”
Of course, it is completely possible that Orta is a guy who breaks the law pretty often, and he just happened to get caught after video-recording the police. But it does seem likely that he wasn’t spotted and arrested because he happened to spotted by plainclothes officers but because he was being followed by plainclothes officers. If so, then, even if he is guilty of breaking New York City’s strict gun control laws, he wasn’t arrested to keep the residents of New York City safe. He was arrested as payback.
As will Griggs points out, this is a city where almost half of all murders go unsolved. I’m not sure how residents can sleep easier at night knowing that the NYPD spent time and resources getting an unloaded handgun off the street. It seems only slightly more important than dealing with the white flag bridge joke.