| Hyscience Posted: 22 Jul 2013 05:08 AM PDT
| Rise of the Warrior Cop Is it time to reconsider the militarization of American policing? Posted: 21 Jul 2013 02:40 PM PDT
I want our world back but it doesnt seem likely to happen; not when our country is run by lawless politicians and thugs who set the example for our police departments.
What ever happened to the motto of many police departments, To Protect and Serve? 
You bet it's time to reconsider the militarization of our police. They have become today's equivalent of jack booted thugs or Hitler's Gestapo. Manhunt Underway In Los Angeles After Shots Fired At Two Detectives 
If you note the street sign above it reads Lomita Blvd. Not far from where I failed to grow up. 
My question is, where are the Norman Rockwell paintings of our world turned upside down? They are equipped with military assault vehicles, and assault weapons, has the world gone mad or have we just become to lazy to fight this nonsense at city hall?
It would seem the police would also like a de-escalation of this situation before it turns into a full-blown civil war.
The Wall Street Journal The Saturday Essay By RADLEY BALKO On Jan. 4 of last year, a local narcotics strike force conducted a raid on the Ogden, Utah, home of Matthew David Stewart at 8:40 p.m. The 12 officers were acting on a tip from Mr. Stewart's former girlfriend, who said that he was growing marijuana in his basement. Mr. Stewart awoke, naked, to the sound of a battering ram taking down his door. Thinking that he was being invaded by criminals, as he later claimed, he grabbed his 9-millimeter Beretta pistol.
Photo illustration by Sean McCabe The police say that they knocked and identified themselves, though Mr. Stewart and his neighbors said they heard no such announcement. Mr. Stewart fired 31 rounds, the police more than 250. Six of the officers were wounded, and Officer Jared Francom was killed. Mr. Stewart himself was shot twice before he was arrested. He was charged with several crimes, including the murder of Officer Francom. The police found 16 small marijuana plants in Mr. Stewart's basement. There was no evidence that Mr. Stewart, a U.S. military veteran with no prior criminal record, was selling marijuana. Mr. Stewart's father said that his son suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder and may have smoked the marijuana to self-medicate. Early this year, the Ogden city council heard complaints from dozens of citizens about the way drug warrants are served in the city. As for Mr. Stewart, his trial was scheduled for next April, and prosecutors were seeking the death penalty. But after losing a hearing last May on the legality of the search warrant, Mr. Stewart hanged himself in his jail cell. The police tactics at issue in the Stewart case are no anomaly. Since the 1960s, in response to a range of perceived threats, law-enforcement agencies across the U.S., at every level of government, have been blurring the line between police officer and soldier. Driven by martial rhetoric and the availability of military-style equipment ÂÂÂfrom bayonets and M-16 rifles to armored personnel carriers American police forces have often adopted a mind-set previously reserved for the battlefield. The war on drugs and, more recently, post-9/11 anti-terrorism efforts have created a new figure on the U.S. scene: the warrior cop ÂÂÂarmed to the teeth, ready to deal harshly with targeted wrongdoers, and a growing threat to familiar American liberties. The acronym SWAT stands for Special Weapons and Tactics. Such police units are trained in methods similar to those used by the special forces in the military. They learn to break into homes with battering rams and to use incendiary devices called - flash-bang grenades, which are designed to blind and deafen anyone nearby. Their usual aim is to a building that is, to remove any threats and distractions (including pets) and to subdue the occupants as quickly as possible.
image Daily Republic/Associated PressToday the U.S. has thousands of SWAT teams. A team prepares to enterahouse in Vallejo, Calif., on March 20, above. The country first official SWAT team started in the late 1960s in Los Angeles. By 1975, there were approximately 500 such units. Today, there are thousands. According to surveys conducted by the criminologist Peter Kraska of Eastern Kentucky University, just 13% of towns between 25,000 and 50,000 people had a SWAT team in 1983. By 2005, the figure was up to 80%. The number of raids conducted by SWAT-like police units has grown accordingly. In the 1970s, there were just a few hundred a year; by the early 1980s, there were some 3,000 a year. In 2005 (the last year for which Dr. Kraska collected data), there were approximately 50,000 raids. A number of federal agencies also now have their own SWAT teams, including the Fish & Wildlife Service, NASA and the Department of the Interior. In 2011, the Department of Education SWAT team bungled a raid on a woman who was initially reported to be under investigation for not paying her student loans, though the agency later said she was suspected of defrauding the federal student loan program. The details of the case aside, the story generated headlines because of the revelation that the Department of Education had such a unit. None of these federal departments has responded to my requests for information about why they consider such high-powered military-style teams necessary. Americans have long been wary of using the military for domestic policing. Concerns about potential abuse date back to the creation of the Constitution, when the founders worried about standing armies and the intimidation of the people at large by an overzealous executive, who might choose to follow the unhappy precedents set by Europe's emperors and monarchs. The idea for the first SWAT team in Los Angeles arose during the domestic strife and civil unrest of the mid-1960s. Daryl Gates, then an inspector with the Los Angeles Police Department, had grown frustrated with his departments inability to respond effectively to incidents like the 1965 Watts riots. So his thoughts turned to the military. He was drawn in particular to Marine Special Forces and began to envision an elite group of police officers who could respond in a similar manner to dangerous domestic disturbances.
When A strike force raided the home of Matthew David Stewart, one officer was killed. Entire article below. Entire article below.
| | Bill Whittle, on the real Truth About the Trayvon Martin And George Zimmerman Case (What the media didn't tell you and what they lied about) Posted: 21 Jul 2013 01:58 PM PDT Bill Whittle examines the death of Trayvon Martin and the trial of George Zimmerman. Is the acquittal of Zimmerman one of the great civil rights injustices of our time? Find out the real truth here. Take the time to watch it all and find out how the media and the prosecuter hid evidence and lied about Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman:
Related:
ACLU to Holder: Zimmerman case is over
Race Baiting and Lies in America | | Video: 'Detroit and Other Liberal Success Stories' Posted: 21 Jul 2013 01:25 PM PDT Over and over and over again, experience shows that liberalism doesn't work. Here, Intellectual Froglegs provides entertaining documentation of a case in point:
It's a sad state in America when a plain ole redneck displays more common sense than the media and the clown in the White House that's suppose to represent ALL Americans ... not just Black Americans ... but seems to consistently jumps to play judge in behalf of only Black Americans. Hat tip to Moonbattery for the video. | | 545 Politicians vs. 300,000,000 People Posted: 21 Jul 2013 09:57 AM PDT This article has been rewritten several times over the years, each keeping faith with the essence of the original message. Agree (and many from both sides of the isle do) or disagree, one thing cannot be argued, and that is the simple math!
Orlando Sentinel - March 7, 1995 by Charley Reese - Looking for someone to blame? Congress is a good place to start. Politicians, as I have often said, are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them. Everything on the Republican contract is a problem created by Congress. Too much bureaucracy? Blame Congress. Too many rules? Blame Congress. Unjust tax laws? Congress wrote them. Out-of-control bureaucracy? Congress authorizes everything bureaucracies do. Americans dying in Third World rat holes on stupid U.N. missions? Congress allows it. The annual deficits? Congress votes for them. The $4 trillion plus debt? Congress created it. To put it into perspective just remember that 100 percent of the power of the federal government comes from the U.S. Constitution. If it's not in the Constitution, it's not authorized. Then read your Constitution. All 100 percent of the power of the federal government is invested solely in 545 individual human beings. That's all. Of 260 million Americans, only 545 of them wield 100 percent of the power of the federal government. That's 435 members of the U.S. House, 100 senators, one president and nine Supreme Court justices. Anything involving government that is wrong is 100 percent their fault. Continued HERE Related:
This posting is one of the revised and worth reading - 545 vs 300,000,000 People By Charlie Reese
This post a difference of opinion - Charlie Reese is wrong. Was Eric Holder Right?
| | Hospital Layoffs Pick Up As ObamaCare Era Starts Posted: 21 Jul 2013 09:23 AM PDT When Obama's minions designed what we refer to as ObamaCare and must more accurately be referred to as Obama's Health Care and Rationing system, they knew what they were doing. The entire sham had nothing to do with health care but was a power grab of 17% of the nations G.D.P. at the time. This is a program that few desire, and was pushed through using back room deals and bribes. When Obama told us if you like your physician you can keep him, 'If your like your health care plan you can keep it,' this was just as we have found an addition to what would become a long list of lies. How does one keep their physician as many will retire when Obama's health cared denial and rationing oath goes into full effect if in fact that ever happens. Medical schools will be graduating fewer medical students. Why work in what could become a government run enterprise if the desired goal of a single payer system were to be reached? The vast majority of physicians took the hippocratic oath, and oath they believe in. Fear not, Republicans who listen to their constituents, are dismantling the plan. The House of Representatives will begin further defunding. Obama knows that financially the plan will implode, that is why he put the official implementation date back a year. Jed Graham reports at INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY: That busy health care industry to-do list ahead of ObamaCare includes an increasing number of hospital job cuts. Since the start of May, hospital groups have announced plans to lay off nearly 6,000 workers. Add in several thousand additional positions seeing fewer hours or cuts through attrition and buyouts, and the work reductions impact more than 9,000 jobs. An IBD review found layoff and workforce reduction announcements covering 75 hospital groups in 33 states and the District of Columbia. Prognosis Negative 
While hospital layoffs are much more common in recent years, what is notable is how widespread they've become, impacting even firms that have never before resorted to job cuts. Even more striking is the sudden change in patient behavior and rapid deterioration in hospital finances. Continue reading here. | | If Babies Could Speak Posted: 21 Jul 2013 08:50 AM PDT There would be approximately 300,000,000 voices weighing opinion on the Zimmerman/Martin case as the whole world seems to be doing so. Because we are each unique in thought processes and life experiences the voices would range from the unreasonable to the reasonable. I am confident there will be no shouts of censorship as I cut out 299,999,997 voices. The views of the three below are worth listening to, IMO, and will be judged as reasonable, or unreasonable, by the 299,999,997. Welcome to the beautiful First Amendment and perhaps, some amount of healing thru what Kira described as "grace."
| | Commander of 22nd Marine Expeditionary Unit relieved of command Posted: 21 Jul 2013 08:18 AM PDT 
The article below is true, but the justification, in government speak, is for a paper pushing flag officer kissing Obama's back side. Via Marine Corps Times Col. James Christmas served this spring as both the commander of the Marine Corps' new crisis-response unit, Special-Purpose Marine Air-Ground Task Force Crisis Response, and as the 22nd MEU commander, has been relieved of his command. (Marine Corps) The commander of the 22nd Marine Expeditionary Unit was removed from his position on Wednesday, less than a week after the force subordinate units were first brought together to deploy in 2014, Marine officials said. Col. James Christmas was relieved of command by Maj. Gen. Raymond Fox, the commander of II Marine Expeditionary Force, out of Camp Lejeune, N.C., after the general lost confidence in Christmas ability to continue commanding the Marines and sailors of the 22nd MEU,said Capt. Binford Strickland, a Marine spokesman. No additional explanation was given for the decision. The II Marine Expeditionary Force is not a zero-defect organization, and the relief of a commander is never an easy decision, Strickland said. "However, the commanding general decided this action was in the best interest of the Marines and sailors of the 22nd MEU and the Marine Corps. Christmas served this spring as both the commander of the Marine Corps new crisis-response unit, Special-Purpose Marine Air-Ground Task Force Crisis Response, and as the 22nd MEU commander, according to a previous Marine news release. The 550-Marine unit deployed for the first time in April to Morn Air Base in Spain, providing the U.S. with a new option to respond to emergencies in northern Africa. Christmas became the commander of the 22nd MEU on June 28, 2012, replacing Col. Eric Steidl. Col. William Dunn will now take over the 22nd MEU, Marine officials said. He was selected last summer by Commandant Gen. Jim Amos to be the next commander of the 26th MEU, also out of Camp Lejeune, but will instead take this assignment. Entire article below. At least six other Marine officers have been removed from command since mid-March. In each case, Marine officials have provided little explanation for why the decisions were made, saying a general officer had lost confidence in that commanderpersonnel. The decision to relieve Christmas abruptly ends his time with the unit. He was selected for the post last June, and took command after finishing a tour as the deliberate plans branch chief with U.S. Special Operations Command, according to his official biography. While there, he was the lead writer of the Defense Department Global Campaign Plan for Countering Terrorism. He could not immediately be reached for comment. Previously, Christmas commanded Lejeune 1st Battalion, 2nd Marines, as it deployed to Iraq in 2007. He then became the operations officer for 2nd Marine Division until he was selected for a prestigious top-level school assignment. He is the recipient of the Bronze Star with combat distinguishing device and gold star, in lieu of a second award. Christmas also is part of a family with a rich Marine tradition. His father, retired Lt. Gen. Ron Christmas, is a Navy Cross recipient who served as the president and CEO of the Marine Corps Heritage Foundation from 1996 to 2011. His brother is Col. Brian Christmas, who as a lieutenant colonel led Lejeune 3rd Battalion, 6th Marines, during the assault on the Taliban stronghold of Marjah, Afghanistan. The 22nd MEU is expected to deploy early next year with the Bataan Amphibious Ready Group and conduct operations in the Middle East, Africa and Europe, Marine officials said. Its major elements include Battalion Landing Team 1st Battalion, 6th Marines; Marine Medium Tiltrotor Squadron 263 (reinforced); and Combat Logistics Battalion 22. They were about to embark on a rigorous six-month training cycle ahead of deploying.
Besides underfunding the military, Obama shows his hatred for it by getting rid of some of its finest members. But hey, the guy can't be all bad, he allows transsexuals, gays and lesbians to serve proudly on your dime while they can now kiss in public wearing their uniforms. 
What's not to like? Kinda makes you feel all warm and fuzzy doesn't it? Isn't it time for flag officers in the military to rise up and begin showing Obama no more respect than he shows the men and women they command?
| | Are you a racist because you fully understand the evils of the seventh century cult Islam? Posted: 21 Jul 2013 08:01 AM PDT Bet your goat, your camel and your flying rug I'm a racist by my criteria and not theirs.
I'm against Islam because those in the in the third world tend to participate in the most severe radical teachings of Islam taught in Saudi funded madrasas. What religion demands of its adherents life long membership or being subjected to death? Islam hijacked Muslims, not the other way around. Hear the chants, "Death to the Infidel."
An Infidel is a non believer (of Islamism) and there is no way you will subject me or the United States to the evils and horrors of your cult. Islam(ism) is not a religion, it meets the criteria of a cult. It is a tyrannical cult of followers of the seventh century war lord, Mohammed. (sentences edited to reflect difference between peaceful Muslims and Islamists) Non-edited content cross posted from We the People
| | Obama's Rule by Decree Posted: 21 Jul 2013 07:14 AM PDT When Barack Hussein Obama slid under the door at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue it marked the acceleration of the present rapid descent of America becoming a truly socialist state. Obama's leadership style is that of a monarch, circumventing congress, using his unelected czars to formulate radical socialist plans like his health care denial and rationing law and his penchant for following Albert Gore Jr's. penchant for a green environment. Problematically the only science in "Man Made Global Warming," is political science; said another way, just another scheme to redistribute wealth. Obama's administration has been the most scandal prone administration in United States History. If Obama is a leader, he leads from behind and if he excels at anything it the art of the cover up by obstructing justice as he puts his minions out to lie.
In the end, when his administration is accurately judged, it won't be for what he accomplished for our country, but what he did in his attempts to bring it down. The collapse of law is the Obama administration's most egregious scandal.
But don't just take my word for it, syndicated columnist Andrew C. McCarthy spells it out for you in his excellent piece at National Review Online : Barack Obama has never been clear on the distinction between sovereign and servant, between the American people and those, including himself, elected to do the people's business. We saw that yet again this week with the president's unilateral rewrite of the Bataan Death March known as the Affordable Care Act -- Obamacare. For this president, laws are not binding expressions of the popular will, but trifling recommendations to be ignored when expedient.
The collapse of law -- not just Obamacare but law in general -- is the Obama administration's most egregious scandal. With the IRS here, Benghazi there, and Eric Holder's institutionalized malevolence crowding the middle, it gets little direct attention. Perhaps it is so ubiquitous, so quotidian, that we've become inured to it.
Above all else, though, the office of the president was created to take care that the laws be faithfully executed. For this president, to the contrary, law is non-existent -- and not merely law in the traditional sense of our aspiration to be "a nation of laws not men." Obama has contorted the law into a weapon against our constitutional order of divided powers and equal protection for every American.
As with most things Obama, this Olympian outrage springs from a kernel of propriety. We want our laws enforced, particularly when they reflect basic obligations of government in a free, civil society. Nevertheless, we know that the resources of government are finite, that laws are numerous and elastic, and that a federalist system implies a significant enforcement role for states. Thus, our legal system is premised on executive discretion. Not every law can or should be enforced to its fullest extent -- nobody would want to live in that sort of society. To execute the laws faithfully is to remain mindful of the federal government's essential but finite role in our framework and to concentrate its limited resources on enforcement of the most vital laws. As a practical matter, this necessitates selectivity -- some laws will go unenforced, some wrongs unaddressed. With a president who acts in good faith, this is not a problem. For example, simple possession of prohibited narcotics is a federal crime. But it is also a state crime. Given the need to prioritize, it is sensible for the feds to focus their efforts on what the federal government was designed for -- international and interstate challenges that the states are not well equipped to address. So the Justice Department targets major drug-importation and distribution networks, leaving less serious drug infractions to the local district attorneys. Notice: This does not mean the executive branch is effectively decriminalizing less serious drug offenses in contravention of Congress's statutes. It means the public's federal buck goes to where it gets the best bang. The separation-of-powers principle also has implications for executive discretion. To promote liberty, the Framers constructed a central government of divided authorities in which each branch was given tools to check inevitable encroachments by the others. Congress has an irresistible propensity to enact laws that usurp the powers of the executive and the states, and that erode the rights of the people. But Congress can only write the laws. It must depend on the president to execute them. A president who believes in good faith that a congressional act is constitutionally invalid may properly decline to enforce it -- in fact, he would in good conscience be bound to decline -- at least until the Supreme Court has ruled on its validity. Faithfully executing the laws has never mandated that a president enforce unconstitutional statutes. But note that this is a matter of legal legitimacy, not policy preference. Faithful execution, abiding by the president's oath of office, means enforcing even those laws a president disagrees with on policy grounds if the laws are plainly constitutional. The Constitution gives Congress a wide berth to enact unwise laws, to say nothing of perfectly sensible laws that are uncongenial to a hard-left ideologue. There is nothing wrong with a president's working to change those laws; in the meantime, though, he breaks his solemn pledge by failing to enforce them. Continue reading here. | | Re: The Zimmerman case is an excellent proof that the Left is deep-down racist Posted: 21 Jul 2013 07:07 AM PDT Although I don't necessarily agree with the title in it's entirety, I do find much of John J. Ray's ,M.A.; Ph.D., viewpoint in general, rather spot-on. Ray writes: Blacks are dying at the hands of other blacks daily in Chicago and elsewhere. What do we hear from the Left about that? Crickets. A white man kills a black man in an act of self defense and what do we hear about that? Boiling outrage nationwide! At the very least it is clear that whites (even "Hispanic whites"ÂÂ) are held to a much higher standard of behavior than blacks. All those protesting would appear to believe that their protest will do some good. They clearly believe that Zimmerman has slipped from the very high standard applicable to whites and should be punished for that. If different standards for different races don't equate to racism, I don't know what would. Faced with a problem like Chicago, Leftists clearly just throw up their hands. They clearly see blacks as different -- and different in a most alarming and incurable way. The Christian adage that all life is sacred clearly does not apply to blacks as perceived by Leftists. ... More here. Meanwhile, our race-stoking president talks about how Martin could be his son ... or him, and our race-stoking Attorney General Holder talks about trying to find a basis for civil rights charges against Zimmerman (before an NAACP audience) ... when neither the jury or the F.B.I found none whatsoever. And as for when a Black man shot a white teen (once in the back), and a jury found him not guilty (self defense), where were the riots? There were none. Where was any outrage from the media? Nothing but ... crickets, crickets, crickets. I'm not saying that there should have been ... because there shouldn't have been - just like there shouldn't have been in the Zimmerman case either, but it speaks volumes about the racism of the left and in the media (but I repeat myself). Related: Two Marines brutally attacked by black mob after Zimmerman Verdict (where's the outrage?)
| | "Barry Soetoro" Has Registered to Vote at White House Address Posted: 20 Jul 2013 10:30 AM PDT Does it need to be any more clear? What will it take for members of congress to impeach Obama. If the allegations by P.J. Media are in fact true then members of congress must remember the oath they took to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic. 
J.Christian Adams writes for Pajamas media: According to a search at the D.C. Board of elections using the search terms Barry Soetoro, President Obama's date of birth and the zip code of 20500, a registered voter of that name is registered to vote at the White House for D.C. elections. Barry Soetoro is a name that President Obama has used in the past. 
Did President Obama submit this registration, or is it a fraud? Who knows? Obtaining the actual registration forms (or on-line) submitted to the D.C. election's board might answer the question. In my view, it is worse if it is a fraud because it illustrates the ease at which one can trick the system. Or perhaps, President Obama wants out of crime-infested Chicago after his term is up and registered using his old name. I'll go with option 1, the fraud. According to a search at the D.C. Board of elections using the search terms Barry Soetoro, President Obama's date of birth and the zip code of 20500, a registered voter of that name is registered to vote at the White House for D.C. elections. Barry Soetoro is a name that President Obama has used in the past. Did President Obama submit this registration, or is it a fraud? Who knows? Obtaining the actual registration forms (or on-line) submitted to the D.C. election's board might answer the question. In my view, it is worse if it is a fraud because it illustrates the ease at which one can trick the system. Or perhaps, President Obama wants out of crime-infested Chicago after his term is up and registered using his old name. I'll go with option 1, the fraud. | | Obama's Plan To Seize Control Of Our Economy And Our Lives Posted: 20 Jul 2013 09:36 AM PDT Executive orders have been issued since the early days of our republic. Does Obama stand a chance of putting Executive Order 13606 into play?
Why not? He has circumvented congress whenever he felt like it and continually displays his disregard for the U.S. Constitution.
They are intended to insure that each department of the government is functioning as it should be. The Executive Order was not created so that a sitting president could circumvent congress and create new law.
As Jim Powell at Forbes Magazine writes;
An executive order may be about all sorts of things large and small. Paul Begala, who was an advisor to President Bill Clinton, reportedly remarked, "Stroke of the pen, law of the land, kinda cool." What about the Constitution? It describes presidential power broadly. There isn't anything in the Constitution that authorizes an executive order or limits what a president can do with it.
Entire article below |  |
No comments:
Post a Comment