Issues from Ferguson and Lee Rigby


This article contains a vid pane in which multiple news broadcasts on Ferguson follow one another and it’s eye opening.

There are issues to go into:

Why did the National Guard hold back?

There’ve been two explanations.  One is by ex-Mayor Giuliani [and he should know] who said there is a school of thought which says ‘cooling off period’.  In practice, there is no cooling off, only a heating-up.  The only proper reaction of law enforcement, in Giuliani’s view, is to go with the protesters and while they shout and wave placards, it’s fine.  No need to even kettle.

The instant a rock is thrown at a window, arrest.  No hesitation.  If the mob turn on the police, call in immediate reinforcement.  If it needs 10,000 officers, so be it.  100,000 officers, bus them in.  The job is to restore order in accordance with their training.

That is an explanation and solution most people would accept, I’d think.  There is, however, a different explanation.

That is that the Democrat governor, opposed by the Republican vice-Governor, acted on orders from Holder and/or Obama that the cooling off method was to be used.  Worse is that Obama’s backers actually wanted that conflagration to happen for political reasons.

Once again, for those who automatically cry out that no govt would ever act against its people, I point to Fast and Furious and WTC7.

In support of this explanation is our own current issue that the surveillance of the Rigby killers ceased at the critical time and guess what is being put forward as the explanation?

Yep, you’ve got it – that famed old ‘incompetence’.  Sorry but bollox.  Such operations do not work that way – there are procedures, there are known suspects, those suspects are kept monitored.

In this case, as in 7/7, as in the CCTV mysteriously failing at the critical time, as in known suspects mysteriously being let off the radar – there was gross neglect of duty.  Ditto with 911. I’ve written time and time again that government agencies don’t go out themselves and cause the atrocities, they simply take the leash off and act all incompetent.

An off-topic analogy.  In this litigious society of ours, I knew a man who said that if he wanted to make some money, he’d go into an office and look about.  If there was a loose cord on the floor, he’d incompetently fall over it, then sue.  This is precisely the method I’m referring to at government agency level – this feigned incompetence.

Coupled with this was a reader’s comment some time back that sometimes the minions do things off their own bat, they think it supports the cause and to a lesser extent, will score brownie points.  It’s getting so far into your supported organization that you do things off your own bat, expecting approbation of course.  How many atrocities have been committed in the name of that?

Moving on, the clip below is of a nutter I can’t abide and many have posted on before.  Bill Whittle takes her apart in some of his vids.  The most annoying thing in this clip is the way she pretends to write down key points on paper, as if showing that what is being said is wrongdoing and is being taken down for later use against the speaker.  Intensely annoying mannerism on her part and makes it difficult to watch.  Even the manner of her outrage compared to, say, a Fox report, shows how out of control she is as a person, what a meat-axe.

Despite all of that, it’s still worth watching when they can stop the contrived editing which repeats for emphasis and just let the footage stand on its own, unembellished.  Because something Obama said he would do and actually followed up by doing comes out:

Maddow is actually right here in comparing this to Minority Report and the concept of pre-crime arrest and in this, the Heritage people and Change halves of society are at one – you simply can’t, in all legitimacy, implement that as policy against your own people.

There’s no doubt about it though, no misinterpretation – Obama did try, in 2012, with the NDAA legislation, to bring in pre-crime and got slapped down for it.  The text from here on comes initially from the Twitter account of a man called Voice of Reason and he has a site The Last Great Stand.  So let’s start.

This is what happened to Obama’s first attempt:

In a considerable setback for a president eager to ravage the due process rights of the American people, Federal Judge Kathleen Forrest granted a preliminary injunction on Wednesday, striking down those sections of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2012 which sought to provide Barack Obama the power to indefinitely detain citizens without benefit of their 5th Amendment rights.

Signed very quietly into law on New Year’s Eve, the controversial Act has been roundly criticized as unconstitutional by groups on both the political left and right. Of greatest concern was Section 1021, which grants the United States military authority to exercise police powers on American soil. Upon order of the president and at his sole discretion, agents of the military are empowered to detain “until the end of hostilities” anyone the president believes to have “substantially supported” al Qaeda, the Taliban, or “associated forces.”

Judge Forrest concluded that the Section “…failed to ‘pass Constitutional muster’ because its broad language could be used to quash political dissent.” (Really??? You think Barack would ever do that? Naaah!) In a statement clearly directed to lawmakers, she added, ”Section 1021 tries to do too much with too little – it lacks the minimal requirements of definition and scienter that could easily have been added, or could be added, to allow it to pass constitutional muster.”

That is, Congress failed—perhaps deliberately– to define “substantial support” of terrorist groups or describe those activities which might be construed as crossing the legal line.

And no law may be enforced if those to whom it applies are unable to clearly understand what a violation of that law entails.

You might think he would retire, defeated.  Not a bit of it.  These people do not ever retire, defeated.  Look at the Irish referenda, look at the Lisbon Treaty.  Obama came back hard in 2014 but with something added – he had already been doing all the hacking and tapping that he was now getting approval of.  This is mindboggling for a POTUS to openly admit.

For two years, the NDAA included provisions that purported to authorize the president of the United States to deploy the U.S. military to apprehend and indefinitely detain any person (including an American citizen) who he believes “represent[s] an enduring security threat to the United States.”

Such an immense grant of power is not only unconscionable, but unconstitutional, as well.

Regardless of promises to the contrary made every year since 2011 by President Obama, the language of the NDAA places every citizen of the United States within the universe of potential “covered persons.” Any American could one day find himself or herself branded a “belligerent” and thus subject to the complete confiscation of his or her constitutional civil liberties and to nearly never-ending incarceration in a military prison.

Finally, there is in the NDAA for 2014 a frightening fusion of the federal government’s constant surveillance of innocent Americans and the assistance it will give to justifying the indefinite detention of anyone labeled an enemy of the regime.

Section 1071 of the version of the 2014 NDAA approved by the House and Senate committees this week expands on the scope of surveillance established by the Patriot Act and the Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF).

Section 1071(a) authorizes the secretary of defense to “establish a center to be known as the ‘Conflict Records Research Center.’” According to the text of the latest version of the NDAA, the center’s task would be to compile a “digital research database including translations and to facilitate research and analysis of records captured from countries, organizations, and individuals, now or once hostile to the United States.”

In order to accomplish the center’s purpose, the secretary of defense will create an information exchange in cooperation with the director of national intelligence.

Key to the functioning of this information exchange will be the collection of “captured records.” Section 1071(g)(1), defines a captured record as “a document, audio file, video file, or other material captured during combat operations from countries, organizations, or individuals, now or once hostile to the United States.”

When read in conjunction with the provision of the AUMF that left the War on Terror open-ended and the prior NDAAs’ classification of the United States as a battleground in that unconstitutional war, and you’ve got a powerful combination that can knock out the entire Bill of Rights.

Finally, when all the foregoing is couched within the context of the revelations regarding the dragnet surveillance programs of the NSA, it becomes evident that anyone’s phone records, e-mail messages, browsing history, text messages, and social media posts could qualify as a “captured record.”

After being seized by the NSA (or some other federal surveillance apparatus), the materials would be processed by the Conflict Records Research Center created by this bill. This center’s massive database of electronic information and its collaboration with the NSA converts the United States into a constantly monitored holding cell and all its citizens and residents into suspects. All, of course, in the name of the security of the homeland. (source)

That’s not all.  The very nature of how the detention would work also now came out through a leaked document which went viral on the net.  It was titled FM 3-39.40 Internment and Resettlement Operations:

[It] makes it clear that the policies apply “within U.S. territory” and involve, “DOD support to U.S. civil authorities for domestic emergencies, and for designated law enforcement and other activities,” including “man-made disasters, accidents, terrorist attacks and incidents in the U.S. and its territories.”

The manual states, “These operations may be performed as domestic civil support operations,” and adds that “The authority to approve resettlement such operations within U.S. territories,” would require a “special exception” to The Posse Comitatus Act, which can be obtained via “the President invoking his executive authority.” The document also makes reference to identifying detainees using their “social security number.”

Aside from enemy combatants and other classifications of detainees, the manual includes the designation of “civilian internees,” in other words citizens who are detained for, “security reasons, for protection, or because he or she committed an offense against the detaining power.”

Though I don’t dispute the provisions, I’ve some reservations when it comes to the footage of the FEMA camps and that’s partly because many of the shots are of extant prisons or of old facilities abandoned.  For example, this one is an existing facility in Pennsylvania, housing 1296 inmates.  Only issue is it is built for ten times that number.  Why would the local community need that?


This one’s an abandoned aircraft hangar and grounds:


And so on.

So, at the point of dismissing these as a bit fanciful, came a list I saw and have now lost of site after site after site occupied and upgraded, reports from many parts of the U.S.

Just how many insurgents would there be in a local area? Even in Ferguson, how many? A few thousand? Yet many of these facilities can house ten, twenty thousand. Why?

There was a map did which the rounds:


… of where camps were being set up.

There were those plastic coffins blogged on not so long ago, which the local resident found out were called plastic grave liners. The idea was that the govt was expecting victims of plague and had made around 500,000 of these. We saw footage of about 200,000, all stacked together in a field and trucks came and took them away bit by bit.

Naturally, the conspiracy world saw this, in the light of the NDAA and all that, as being intended for them, the dissidents and whistleblowers.

But then I saw a site last night which put a different scenario – that the detention facilities were for a mass importing of illegals. You’ve seen, of course, that just as in this country, where the govt is handing out passports at breakneck speed to immigrants, so in the States, the ‘undocumented’ are about to be documented but perhaps not all of them – only the useful. The rest go into these camps.

It’s just a scenario, a possible explanation. Leave it aside for now because we simply don’t know what they’re for. However, what we do know is that there is a lot of action going on, from the NDAA to the FM 3-39.40 Internment and Resettlement Operations document to all this building and construction of boxes.

At an absolute minimum, one would think that there should be some sort of explanation forthcoming for what looks like a correctional facility being built in an abandoned railway yard up the road from your house. There would surely be something in the local paper about it but no – there appears not to have been, they just go up in this locale or that.

At a bare minimum, there should be some sort of question and answer going on.

Meanwhile, the other events are taking place out there.

2 comments for “Issues from Ferguson and Lee Rigby

  1. Flyinthesky
    November 27, 2014 at 6:54 pm

    The essences that we have to be mindful of:
    Those who sacrifce freedom for security deserve niether……. and will lose both.
    The inferred terrorism threat is god’s gift to governments, the control potential is near limitless.

    I don’t proffer a solution, it’s just an observation.

    It does however raise a question: what is the driving force behind it all and what are it’s motivations. What I am near sure of is it all has commonality. We haven’t got here by accident. There is intent, I just can’t figure out who’s or what it is.

  2. November 30, 2014 at 7:05 am

    “The only proper reaction of law enforcement, in Giuliani’s view, is to go with the protesters and while they shout and wave placards, it’s fine. No need to even kettle.”

    He must have been training the Met… :/

Comments are closed.