FEMA Camp Mass Incarceration Is A Goal of the Ebola Crisis

The Common Sense Show
by Dave Hodges

For a number of years, the topic of FEMA Camps (i.e. American concentration camps) have been rumored to exist. Jesse Ventura, on his show, Conspiracy Theory, revealed to the public the existence of FEMA Camps in such a dramatic fashion that the episode has been banned from public viewing.

Through the years, there has been much speculation about the existence of FEMA Camps and their true purpose. Recent events surrounding the recent Ebola crisis, is making it clear that the camps, as well as other co-opted public facilities (e.g. stadiums, malls, etc.) will be used to enforce medical martial law for both the sick as well as anyone else who the government determines is a (health) risk to the well-being of the public. Am I saying that the camps will be used to house political dissidents. This is undeniably true. This article traces the inception of FEMA camps to the present and intended purpose. This article will also expose the fact that it will not just be Ebola victims going to these camps where there will be medical facilities.

REX 84

REX 84 is the “granddaddy” of the modern era FEMA camp legislation. When the REX 84 FEMA Camp program was created by people such as Lt. Col. Oliver North, who was both National Security Council White House Aide, and NSC liaison to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and John Brinkerhoff, the deputy director of “national preparedness” programs for FEMA’s role in the creation of the camps, our ultimate fate for future generations of Americans was sealed.

The existence of the Rex 84 plan was first revealed during the Iran-Contra Hearings in 1987, and subsequently reported by the Miami Herald on July 5, 1987.

” These camps are to be operated by FEMA should martial law need to be implemented in the United States and all it would take is a presidential signature on a proclamation and the attorney general’s signature on a warrant to which a list of names is attached.”

The (FEMA) camps all have railroad facilities as well as roads leading to and from the detention facilities. Many also have an airport nearby. The majority of the camps can house a population of 20,000 prisoners.

Currently, the largest of these facilities is just outside of Fairbanks, Alaska. The Alaskan facility is a massive mental health facility and can hold thousands of  people”.

The Rex 84 Program was established on the reasoning that if a “mass exodus” of illegal aliens crossed the Mexican/US border, they would be quickly rounded up and detained in detention centers by FEMA. Since 1987 we have had an estimated 25-30 illegal aliens enter the United States and these camps were not used for “rounding up the mass exodus” of illegal aliens, nor, is this article suggesting that is what should have happened. The point being, the government is lying about the existence of these camps, despite irrefutable legislative proof. Not one illegal alien was sent to a FEMA camp in the recent Central American exodus this past summer, NOT ONE!

Some observers believe that as many as 4 million may have illegally crossed the border since the beginning of this year. Regardless, the stable of 800 existing FEMA camps remain untouched.

Why Aren’t 800 FEMA Camps Enough?

 

Operation Mountain Guardian was a disaster drill and a Continuity of Government exercise.

Operation Mountain Guardian was a disaster drill and a Continuity of Government exercise.

 

On September 23, 2011, the Department of Homeland Security and FEMA conducted a disaster drill in Denver, Colorado that they called Operation Mountain Guardian. The plan was all-inclusive and basically shut down the Denver metropolitan area including Denver International Airport, many malls, many schools and several other public venues including Sports Authority Field where the Denver Broncos play professional football. Why didn’t this event put people in the streets by the tens of thousands? To rub salt in the wound a similar drill was conducted at Giants Stadium in New York in the same year.

 

 

Got Freedom?

Got Freedom?

 

In September of 2011, Simon Properties, the largest owners of malls in North America inked a deal with DHS to allow their malls to be used as detention centers in times of “national emergency”.

Malls, the "new" FEMA camps.

Malls, the “new” FEMA camps.

 

 CBS News Admitted FEMA Camps Are Real

Did you know that during Hurricane Sandy, CBS actually admitted to the existence of FEMA camps? I was able to obtain documents and photos which can be accessed in an article entitled CBS News Admits FEMA Camps Are Real. The article also details how the FEMA has privately contracted with vendors who can erect temporary FEMA camps withing 24-72 hours as original authentic FEMA/KBR  communications were revealed. 

Your soon to be new accommodations are described in this PDF attachment, published by the Army (FM 3-39.40 Internment and Resettlement Operations (PDF). This document tells you that  This is what a typical American FEMA camp looks like. The camps will eventually be run for foreign assets, presumably UN troops.  Internment can occur for a variety of reasons including the stripping of one’s citizenship for political views which can get one to be declared to be a “sovereign citizen”. Medical incarceration would also be a reason that could land Americans into these camps. This document is less than a year old.

Medical Martial Law and HHS Run FEMA Camps

Recently, more attention has been brought to the subject of FEMA camps in the context of the present Ebola scare.

 

fema camp workers

Whether you know it or not, your future reservations remain untouched by the most recent immigration crisis. Soon it will be time to go on the vacation of your life. And this is one of the ways that you will get there.

The Legal Authority to Send “SUSPECTED” Ebola Patients to FEMA Camps and Anyone Suspected of Having Been Exposed!

Before one can “legally” transport Ebola patients to “death camps” and await the inevitable, the public must be reassured that the rule of law is being followed.

When Ebola strikes, the changes in the handling of Ebola patients have already been planned for through a series of legal actions, most of them are Executive Orders. For example, the Executive Order, entitled Revised List of Quarantinable Communicable Diseases, amends Executive Order 13295, passed by George W. Bush in April 2003, which allows for the, “apprehension, detention, or conditional release of individuals”, and Ebola is specifically mentioned. Obama’s executive order, entitled, Revised List of Quarantinable Communicable Diseases, amends Bush’s Executive Order 13295, which allows for the, “apprehension, detention, or conditional release of individuals  to prevent the introduction, transmission, or spread of suspected communicable diseases.”

Obama has granted his administration the authority to detain, in any manner deemed necessary, any person who demonstrates any degree of respiratory distress. This means people with noninfectious asthma could be detained.

The CDC has greatly expanded guidelines which permit the government to quarantine people with “fatigue” and lists this as a potential Ebola symptom. Anyone THOUGHT to be exposed to an Ebola patient can be quarantined. CDC has opened themselves up to the likelihood that Ebola can be transmitted even from people who are not presently symptomatic at the time of transmission. This goes hand in hand with present CDC measures that allow for the quarantine of non-symptomatic persons.

Medical Martial Law FEMA Camps to Be Run By HHS

In the event of a pandemic, the Secretary of Human Health Services (HHS) will assume operational control of Federal emergency public health and medical response.

“Ambulance” Contracts Will Deport Americans to FEMA Camps

I have found evidence supporting these claims in a federal document entitled  Emergency Support Function #8 (ESF #8) – Public Health and Medical Services Annex.  

This document can be accessed by Googling “ESF #8″ and you will arrive at the following listing and a PDF will appear.

[PDF]Emergency Support Function #8 – Public Health and Medical

http://www.fema.gov/…/emergency_s…

Federal Emergency Management Agency

Medical Services include responding to medical needs associated with mental health, ….. assistance are executed by ESF #8 in coordination with DHS/FEMA. … primarily for communications, aircraft, and the establishment of base camps.

ESF #8 established the national ambulance contract, which is designed to provide support forevacuating seriously ill or injured patients.

HHS will enlist the VA and Department of Defense assets (e.g. the military) in support of providing “transportation assets, operating and staffing NDMS Federal Coordination Centers, and processing and tracking patient movements from collection points to their final destination reception facilities (emphasis added).

The Ebola Detainment Centers (FEMA Camps) Have No Real Medical Facilities

Look at the participating partners in the “hospital” detainment centers in the EFS #8 document. This list is very revealing as to the intended purpose of these camps.

 Support Agencies:

Department of Agriculture

Department of Commerce

Department of Defense

Department of Energy

Department of Homeland Security

Department of the Interior

Department of Justice

Department of Labor

Department of State

Department of Transportation

Department of Veterans Affairs

Environmental Protection Agency

General Services Administration

U.S. Agency for International Development

U.S. Postal Service

American Red Cross

 

Sometimes, it is not what a person says that is important, it is what they do not say. In the above list of Ebola detainment centers, I don’t see the CDC or the National Institute of Health listed. Nor do I see any legitimate medical organizations. I don’t even see the presence of any “volunteer” medical organizations such as Doctors Without Borders. Does anyone else find it disturbing that the transport of very sick people will be conducted and the end point is devoid of any medical treatment organizations and/or facilities?

These camps are death camps. There is not one shred of evidence that these camps are intended to treat or even make comfortable people who will contract Ebola or be exposed to Ebola. The most disturbing thing is that these camps will be death camps for relatively healthy people. If you are a person who is unlucky enough to be discovered to have asthma or merely be temporarily suffering from congestion in one’s lungs from allergies or a simple cold, you could find yourself on one of the Federally approved ambulance services (bus, train, plane) and headed to your final destination.

Conclusion

I cannot shake a story that the late Larry Grathwohl told me regarding a conversation he had with Bill Ayers. Larry’s conversation took with Ayers while he was serving as a FBI special informant sent to investigate Ayers organization, the Weatherman Underground. Ayers is talso he man who launched President Obama’s political career from the living room of his Chicago area home.

Grathwohl revealed, on my talk show,  that he asked Ayers, the then leader of the radical group the Weathermen Underground, in a meeting of about 25 well-to do fellow Weatherman, most with advanced degrees from Ivy League Universities, what the Weathermen planned to do when they achieved their goal of a communist take over the government.  Grathwohl stated that Ayers paused for a moment and then said that it was likely that about 50 million Americans will have to be re-educated in concentration camps located in the American Southwest and that about 25 million would have to be eliminated, meaning that they would have to be murdered.  The potential implications are stunning.

To this day, two years later, and even after Larry’s passing, these words still haunt me.

The Common Sense Show

Did You Hear? Texas Plans to Fingerprint EVERYONE within the Next 12 Years

Activist Post
By Daisy Luther

texasfingerprint

(In case you missed it…)

The Texas Department of Public Safety might as well be called the Texas Department of Public Invasiveness.

They’ve launched a plan to fingerprint every single person of driving age in the state, after which they will add the person’s prints to the criminal database.

Is it just me or is that a rather Dystopian plan?

Jon Cassidy of Watchdog.org writes:

The credit for breaking the news on those two items goes to consumer affairs columnist Dave Lieber of the Dallas Morning News, whose long-running “Watchdog” column often shows up in my Google Alerts, for obvious reasons.

As an old-school columnist, Lieber tends to keep his opinions subdued, and he doesn’t generally call people dishonest. But I have no problem with doing that, so I’d like to point out that the DPS spokesman he quotes at length is less than straightforward about his department’s legal authority.

Last month, Lieber broke the news that DPS had started collecting full sets of fingerprints on everyone who went in to renew their license.

Friday, he followed up with a story on DPS’ dubious legal authority to do so, and then posted lengthy quotations on the issue to his blog.

Lieber quotes an entire email from DPS spokesman Tom Vinger, who quotes Transportation Code Sec. 521.059 at length, including the key phrase, “The department shall establish an image verification system based on the following identifiers collected by the department: ….an applicant’s thumbprints or fingerprints.” (source)

So the gist of this is: if you don’t allow the “authorities” to take your prints and file them away in the event that you commit some heinous crime in the future, you won’t be issued a driver’s license in the state of Texas. This means you’d theoretically be unable to drive or get insurance, because you’d be unlicensed. If you can’t get insurance, it will be difficult to own a car. This, of course, could effect your livelihood, your ability to get your kids to school, and myriad other day-to-day issues. I’m a big fan of opting out, but this makes it a lot more difficult for the average Joe or Josephine to do so.

Doesn’t this sound like a pre-crime system, gathering evidence for the potential day in the future when they wish to use a person’s cataloged prints to identify them?  At the very least, it is an invasion of personal privacy that is being enforced by hindering one’s ability to travel freely.

According to the laws on the books, it’s legal to take ONE print, but not a set of ten.

To get the full context, you’d have to go back to the original bill that was signed into law, and then look up the relevant section of law, which states that an application for a drivers’ license  “must include:  1) the thumbprints of the applicant or, if thumbprints cannot be taken, the index fingerprints of the applicant.”

So that’s why the law mentions fingerprints – it’s index fingerprints, not a full set of 10 fingerprints. While the law mentions that those records can be used by law enforcement agencies investigating a crime, it doesn’t say anything about making them generally available in a criminal database.

According to Lieber, a political science professor at Texas Christian University named Donald W. Jackson, who has a new organization called the North Texas Civil Rights Project, is offering legal support if anybody wants to challenge this new policy in court. (source)

I bet a lot of Texans will have one particular fingerprint they’ll be happy to give – the middle one.

Hat tip to Kimo

Activist Post

2010 Rockefeller Foundation Document Envisions Pandemic Police State Scenario

InfoWars
by MIKAEL THALEN

“Even after the pandemic faded, this more authoritarian control and oversight of citizens and their activities stuck and even intensified”

A May 2010 scenario planning report produced by The Rockefeller Foundation and the Global Business Network envisions the likely creation of a technological police state in response to a deadly worldwide pandemic.
lockstep

Lock Step: Think tank predicts possible outcome to deadly virus outbreak

The document, entitled Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development, attempts to wargame different government responses to several potential disasters, while painting the solution as global governance. Page 18 of the document breaks down a fabricated scenario in which the United States refuses to protect its borders and restrict air travel following the outbreak of a new deadly virus.

“In 2012, the pandemic that the world had been anticipating for years finally hit. Unlike 2009’s H1N1, this new influenza strain—originating from wild geese—was extremely virulent and deadly,” the scenario states. “Even the most pandemic-prepared nations were quickly overwhelmed when the virus streaked around the world, infecting nearly 20 percent of the global population and killing 8 million in just seven months, the majority of them healthy young adults.”

Drawing eerily similar circumstances with the current Ebola outbreak, the scenario goes on to detail a botched response by the United States government as large populations throughout Africa are decimated.

“The pandemic blanketed the planet—though disproportionate numbers died in Africa, Southeast Asia, and Central America, where the virus spread like wildfire in the absence of official containment protocols. But even in developed countries, containment was a challenge,” the document reads. “The United States’s initial policy of ‘strongly discouraging’ citizens from flying proved deadly in its leniency, accelerating the spread of the virus not just within the U.S. but across borders.”

Interestingly, the scenario’s author uses the Chinese Communist government as the entity which exhibits the best response, specifically mentioning mandatory quarantines and border protection.

However, a few countries did fare better—China in particular. The Chinese government’s quick imposition and enforcement of mandatory quarantine for all citizens, as well as its instant and near-hermetic sealing off of all borders, saved millions of lives, stopping the spread of the virus far earlier than in other countries and enabling a swifter post- pandemic recovery.

China’s government was not the only one that took extreme measures to protect its citizens from risk and exposure. During the pandemic, national leaders around the world flexed their authority and imposed airtight rules and restrictions, from the mandatory wearing of face masks to body-temperature checks at the entries to communal spaces like train stations and supermarkets.

Necessary and questionable tactics used to stem the tide of the virus remain long after the pandemic, allowing governments to impose “authoritarian” controls under the guise of protecting the public.

“Even after the pandemic faded, this more authoritarian control and oversight of citizens and their activities stuck and even intensified. In order to protect themselves from the spread of increasingly global problems—from pandemics and transnational terrorism to environmental crises and rising poverty—leaders around the world took a firmer grip on power.”

“At first, the notion of a more controlled world gained wide acceptance and approval. Citizens willingly gave up some of their sovereignty—and their privacy—to more paternalistic states in exchange for greater safety and stability. Citizens were more tolerant, and even eager, for top-down direction and oversight, and national leaders had more latitude to impose order in the ways they saw fit.”

The pandemic was also used to implement long-sought technologies, most notably biometric IDs for citizens.

In developed countries, this heightened oversight took many forms: biometric IDs for all citizens, for example, and tighter regulation of key industries whose stability was deemed vital to national interests. In many developed countries, enforced cooperation with a suite of new regulations and agreements slowly but steadily restored both order and, importantly, economic growth.

Across the developing world, however, the story was different—and much more variable. Top-down authority took different forms in different countries, hinging largely on the capacity, caliber, and intentions of their leaders. In countries with strong and thoughtful leaders, citizens’ overall economic status and quality of life increased. In India, for example, air quality drastically improved after 2016, when the government outlawed high- emitting vehicles.

While fictional, the attempt to predict and plan for major disasters by think tanks and governments alike could very well provide insight into decisions being made currently. Although certain medical protocols are needed, the likelihood for subtle power grabs are dangerous and present.

In regards to the current Ebola crisis, an executive order update by President Obama has caused concern among civil liberties advocates, especially given the President’s otherwise lackluster response.

The executive order, known as the Revised List of Quarantinable Communicable Diseases, allows President Obama to apprehend and detain any American who simply shows signs of any “respiratory illness.”

The dictate becomes even more troublesome in light of the recent admission by Missouri doctor James Lawrenzi, who exclusively told the Alex Jones Show last week that potential-Ebola patients are being “disappeared” from hospitals without notice.

“These patients are disappearing, they’re doing something with the patients and God knows where they’re going,” said the doctor.

Whether the Obama administration’s dismal response is pure ignorance or an attempt to get the public to demand authoritarian control remains to be seen.

Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development (Rockefeller Foundation and Global Business Network

InfoWars

Police State Targets Dissidents: Government To “Impose Extreme Disruption Orders On Individuals”

SHTFplan
by Mac Slavo

police-state-dissidents-1

The battle for hearts and minds is on and the elite are getting fed up with citizen proles who believe it a right to speak freely and openly about their ideologies and criticisms of government policies.

Their attempts to control the agenda and conversation have repeatedly been met with protests, both online and off, as traditional mainstream audiences migrate by the millions to alternative media and citizen journalism.

But this obvious threat to the establishment’s status quo won’t be allowed to go on much longer. A recent interview with the head of England’s Ministry of Home Security, the British counterpart of America’s Department of Homeland Security, shows just how dangerous open thought and free speech are.

Home Secretary Theresa May explains what the freedom-loving people of the United Kingdom can come to expect in the very near future if their online commentary is deemed to be hatred or extremist thought by the government. And this, as you’ll see below, isn’t just about the UK, which has often been used as a petri dish for global regulators who want to see what does or doesn’t work on a smaller scale before introducing their policies and legalese in the United States.

The police would also be given new powers to apply to a court to impose extreme disruption orders on individuals, using the same criteria.

This could result in those targeted being stopped from taking part in public protests, from being present at all in certain public locations, from associating with named people, from using of conventional broadcast media and from “obtaining any position of authority in an institution where they would have influence over vulnerable individuals or children”.

Breach of the restrictions – which would be time limited – would be a criminal offence. (BBC)

An interview of Theresa May discussing how these new policies will keep Brits “safe and secure” shows the Secretary repeating the same talking points over and over in defense of her position. When questioned about whether innocent people just speaking their minds could get caught up in the extremist web, May goes to her default answer:

What we are looking at is a situation where believe we need to take powers necessary to be able to deal with those people who are preaching hatred on our streets and that is an extremism which can lead others into violent acts.

Of course not all extremists are violent and not all violence comes out of that extremism. But there is a link. There is a thread between this. And I believe we need to be able to deal with that if we are going to do the job we want to do, which is keeping people safe and secure.


(Video via Steve Quayle and All News Pipeline)

But such things like supplanting political thought or the free expression of views only happens elsewhere. Such ludicrous ideas could never be introduced here in America.

Unless of course you consider that a bi-partisan Congressional panel is now looking to impose similar restrictions on free speech right here in the good ol’ USA:

A key Democrat on the Federal Election Commission called for burdensome new rules on Internet-based campaigning, prompting the Republican chairman to warn that Democrats want to regulate online political sites and even news media like the Drudge Report.

Ravel’s statement suggests that she would regulate right-leaning groups like America Rising that posts anti-Democrat YouTube videos on its website.

FEC Chairman Lee E. Goodman, a Republican, said if regulation extends that far, then anybody who writes a political blog, runs a politically active news site or even chat room could be regulated. He added that funny internet campaigns like “Obama Girl,” and “Jib Jab” would also face regulations. (Washington Examiner)

Make no mistake. Such regulatory and legislative policy would not only target conservative web sites. Every single American citizen would be subject to its rules.

Want to post a video with political undertones? Banned.

Did you mention a political candidate’s name in your social media post? Banned.

Did you send an email to friends and family promoting a particular idea that runs contrary to the traditionally accepted government policy? Banned.

Are you wearing a T-shirt that upsets the politically correct crowd? Banned.

And not just banned. In the United Kingdom you would face criminal repercussions. In the United States, as noted in the Patriot Act and the National Defense Authorization Acts, you could literally be swept up by militarized government SWAT teams and held indefinitely without charge or trial.

A person engages in domestic terrorism if they do an act “”dangerous to human life”” that is a violation of the criminal laws of a state or the United States, if the act appears to be intended to:  (i) intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination or kidnapping.  Additionally, the acts have to occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States and if they do not, may be regarded as international terrorism.

Source: USA Patriot Act

We can see by the broad language how easily one can be accused of “intimidation” or “coercion.” In the end it really just boils down to be a matter of interpretation, and you could bet your bottom dollar that Federal prosecutors and secret terrorism courts will ensure that you fall well within the Patriot Act should you step out of line.

In a recent piece penned by Paul Joseph Watson we can see these new regulations already taking shape through a redefining of terms such as “suspicious activity.”

Purchasing train tickets with cash, exiting a train before or after other passengers, or appearing calm or nervous are all examples of behavior that Amtrak employees have been told to report as “suspicious activity.”

A document entitled Guidelines for Amtrak Customer Service Employees, which was obtained by the ACLU after an FOIA request, lists a number of different behaviors that are “indicative of criminal activity” and should immediately be reported to law enforcement personnel by Amtrak ticket agents.

Are you calm when purchasing a ticket? That could mean you’re a terrorist.

What about nervous? Do you look at little nervous? Yup, that probably makes you a terrorist, too.

This is what the free people of the United States, the United Kingdom and the rest of the world are facing from entrenched elite financial, economic and geo-political organizations who mean to control every aspect of our lives.

And be assured, they’re not war-gaming civil unrest scenarios and stockpiling billions of rounds of ammunition just so they can play target practice.

Many Americans see what’s coming and are taking steps to prepare for a completely different world. But most don’t even have a clue.

Your views and ideas make you an enemy of the state.

In fact, the United Nations Charter on Human Rights addresses people like you, and despite the fact that our founders forbade international treaties for this very purpose, our government is a long-time proponent of these ideals and policies. The Charter talks a big game with, among other things, freedom of expression, the right to live peacefully, and protections to ensure you can’t be detained indefinitely without trial until, that is, you reach Article 29, Section 3:

These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

So, as long as you tow the party line you can enjoy your “freedom.”

For those that don’t, one day soon these international and domestic legislative implements will give them the pretext to come looking for you, as well as those who, as Theresa May stated, have a “thread” that might be connected to you.

SHTFplan

Amtrak: Purchasing Train Tickets With Cash is a “Suspicious Activity”

InfoWars
by PAUL JOSEPH WATSON

amtrak
Image Credits: locosteve, Flickr

Purchasing train tickets with cash, exiting a train before or after other passengers, or appearing calm or nervous are all examples of behavior that Amtrak employees have been told to report as “suspicious activity.”

A document entitled Guidelines for Amtrak Customer Service Employees, which was obtained by the ACLU after an FOIA request, lists a number of different behaviors that are “indicative of criminal activity” and should immediately be reported to law enforcement personnel by Amtrak ticket agents.

Those behaviors include;

- Unusual nervousness of traveler
– Unusual calmness or straight ahead stare
– Looking around while making telephone call(s)
– Position among passengers disembarking (ahead of, or lagging behind passengers)
– Carrying little or no luggage
– Purchase of tickets in cash
– Purchase tickets immediately prior to boarding

Of course, such behaviors are so ludicrously broad that virtually anyone is likely to have engaged in at least one of the above activities at some point for a perfectly innocent reason. The demonization of using cash as a tool of criminals or terrorists is also a theme that has become more prevalent in recent years, primarily because authorities dislike the anonymity of hard currency.

“As we have seen with Suspicious Activity Reports and the TSA’s SPOT program, reporting based on broad categories of “suspicious” behavior is problematic because it almost always results in racial and religious profiling, as well as the targeting of perfectly innocent activity,” reports the ACLU. “Most importantly, building mountains of irrelevant data is ultimately an ineffective law enforcement tactic.”

The report also notes how Amtrak has not caught a single criminal or terrorist as a result of the snitch program, with one woman arrested instead for talking too loudly on their phone, in addition to a photographer who was arrested for taking pictures for the annual Amtrak “Picture our Train” competition.

The program has also greased the skids for police to engage in civil asset forfeiture, which allows law enforcement to confiscate money from travelers with no due process whatsoever.

In 2010, the Department of Homeland Security announced that it was partnering with Amtrak to expand its ‘See Something, Say Something’ program to rail transportation.

As we documented at the time, the promotional videos that accompanied the launch of the campaign characterized “suspicious activity” as a whole range of mundane behaviors, including opposing surveillance, using a video camera, talking to police officers, wearing hoodies, driving vans, writing on a piece of paper, and using a cell phone recording application.

The DHS received criticism back in 2010 after it partnered with Walmart to remind employees and shoppers to report suspicious activity. The federal agency also tasked hot dog sellers and other vendors with spotting potential terrorists at the 2012 Super Bowl.

Airport security-style measures have increasingly been implemented across other forms of transportation in recent years. Back in 2011, a video emerged of train passengers, including children, being subjected to TSA pat downs and bag searches after they had already disembarked at the Savannah train station.

InfoWars

Land of the Free – 1 in 3 Americans Are on File with the FBI in the U.S. Police State

Liberty Blitzkrieg
by MICHAEL KRIEGER

Zero-tolerance attitude toward small crimes has led authorities to make more than a quarter of a billion arrests

cops

The sickening transformation of these United States into an authoritarian police state with an incarceration rate that would make Joseph Stalin blush, has been a key theme of my writing since well before the launch of Liberty Blitzkrieg. One of the posts that shocked and disturbed readers most, was published a little over a year ago titled: American Police Make an Arrest Every 2 Seconds in 2012. In the event you never read it, I suggest taking a look before tackling the rest of this piece.

Fast forward to fall 2014, and the Wall Street Journal has a powerful article about how children in schools systems across the U.S. are being arrested or turned over to police custody for doing things that children have always done since the beginning of time. Things such as wearing too much perfume, sharing a classmates’ chicken nuggets, throwing an eraser or chewing gum.

As a result of our insane societal obsession with authority and disproportionate punishment, the WSJ reports that “nearly one out of every three American adults are on file in the FBI’s master criminal database.

USA! USA!

From the Wall Street Journal:

A generation ago, schoolchildren caught fighting in the corridors, sassing a teacher or skipping class might have ended up in detention. Today, there’s a good chance they will end up in police custody.

In Texas, a student got a misdemeanor ticket for wearing too much perfume. In Wisconsin, a teen was charged with theft after sharing the chicken nuggets from a classmate’s meal—the classmate was on lunch assistance and sharing it meant the teen had violated the law, authorities said. In Florida, a student conducted a science experiment before the authorization of her teacher; when it went awry she received a felony weapons charge.

Over the past 20 years, prompted by changing police tactics and a zero-tolerance attitude toward small crimes, authorities have made more than a quarter of a billion arrests, the Federal Bureau of Investigation estimates. Nearly one out of every three American adults are on file in the FBI’s master criminal database.

Did you catch that too? “Zero-tolerance attitude toward small crimes.” Indeed, the big criminals go to Wall Street, crash the economy and then receive trillions in taxpayer bailouts. Or they get a top job in the Obama Administration, such as Jedi-master of cronyism, Tim Geithner, being chosen as Treasury Secretary.

Back to the WSJ…

At school, talking back or disrupting class can be called disorderly conduct, and a fight can lead to assault and battery charges, said Judith Browne Dianis, executive director of the Advancement Project, a national civil-rights group examining discipline procedures around the country.

If these rules were in place in my day, I would have been arrested about 150 times.

“We’re not talking about criminal behavior,” said Texas State Sen. John Whitmire, the Democratic chair of the senate’s Criminal Justice Committee, who helped pass a new law last year that limits how police officers can ticket students. “I’m talking about school disciplinary issues, throwing an eraser, chewing gum, too much perfume, unbelievable violations” that were resulting in misdemeanor charges.

According to the U.S. Education Department’s Office of Civil Rights, 260,000 students were reported, or “referred” in the official language, to law enforcement by schools in 2012, the most-recent available data.

The number of school police officers rose 55% to about 19,000 in the 10 years to 2007, the last year for which numbers were available, according to a 2013 study from the Congressional Research Service.

The schools crackdown has had its intended effect. Victims’ surveys compiled by the Education Department show that there is a lower rate of violent crime committed in schools, falling to 52 incidents per 100,000 students in 2012 from 181 incidents per 100,000 in 1992.Supporters say that alone proves the worth of aggressive policing.

Well yeah, and pigs in a pen are easily controlled too, but are these the types of children we want to raise?

And what about the downside, such as:

Brushes with the criminal justice system go hand in hand with other negative factors. A study last year of Chicago public schools by a University of Texas and a Harvard researcher found the high-school graduation rate for children with arrest records was 26%, compared with 64% for those without. The study estimated about one-quarter of the juveniles arrested in Chicago annually were arrested in school.

A science experiment that went awry turned into a 17-month battle for Kiera Wilmot and her mother as they tried to clear the honor student’s arrest record. According to the police report, she was on school grounds outside the classroom trying out an experiment that hadn’t been authorized by her teacher. Ms. Wilmot, now 18, said she put a piece of aluminum inside a bottle with two ounces of toilet cleaner to see what would happen. The teen’s mother said she was trying to simulate a volcanic eruption.

“It popped,” blowing the top off the bottle, she said. She was handcuffed by the school-resource office, escorted out of the Bartow, Fla., school and taken to a juvenile facility where she was charged with possessing or discharging firearms or weapons at school and making, throwing, possessing, projecting, placing or discharging a destructive device.

Think about what sorts of lessons we are teaching talented students about experimenting and being creative. A modern Benjamin Franklin would most likely be rotting away in solitary right now.

So as we militarize the police, we police the schools. See the direction this is all headed in?

Keep chanting muppets.

Liberty Blitzkrieg

“No Refusal” Blood Draw Checkpoint Planned for Ohio

InfoWars
by PAUL JOSEPH WATSON

Controversial procedure considered a 4th amendment violation by some

checkpoint
Image Credit: YouTube

A “no refusal” checkpoint where drivers will be forced to stop and potentially submit to having their blood taken on the side of the road by law enforcement authorities is planned for Clark County, Ohio tomorrow.

“Every car will be checked to ensure that drivers are not impaired. If there is sufficient probable cause to believe that a driver is operating a vehicle while impaired, law enforcement will seek a blood search warrant from a “neutral and detached magistrate,” reports ABC 22.

The time and location of the checkpoint will not be released until hours before it is set to begin.

Once a search warrant is obtained, a nurse will draw blood to check for alcohol or drugs. It is not specified whether the blood draws will take place on the side of the road or at a nearby jail.

Although the practice of taking blood from motorists suspected of being under the influence has been the law in numerous states for years, many remain unaware of how those who refuse to consent to the procedure are treated.

Last year we highlighted shocking video footage out of Georgia which showed police officers forcibly strapping down citizens accused of drunk driving before putting them in a headlock and having a nurse draw blood.

As the clip shows, even compliant individuals who are showing zero resistance have their heads forcibly pushed down as the blood is taken.

“We all are American citizens and you guys have me strapped to a table like I’m in Guantanamo f***ing Bay,” complains one individual.

Another man screams “what country is this?” as officers hold him down and take his blood without consent.

“Holding down and forcing somebody to submit to this is really intrusive in terms of that level of invasive procedure into someone’s body is ridiculous for investigating a misdemeanor,” Attorney David Boyle told Fox 5 Atlanta, describing the forced blood draws as an “unreasonable search” under the 4th Amendment.

In 2005, the Supreme Court ruled that it is not unconstitutional for the state to hold down Americans and forcefully withdraw blood. A January 2013 ruling affirmed that a warrant must be obtained for the process, although police could dispense with the warrant requirement in an “emergency”.

As we reported last December, citizens are also being intimidated into participating in so-called “voluntary” drug survey checkpoints, during which private firms working on behalf of the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy take DNA samples from motorists by swabbing their cheek.

Evidence clearly indicates that sobriety checkpoints have little to do with saving lives or catching drunk drivers and everything to do with revenue generation. In states like California, the number of vehicles impounded as a result of license violations is seven times higher than the number of drunk driving arrests during checkpoint operations.

InfoWars

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,083 other followers

%d bloggers like this: