“The President has put in place an organization with the kind of database that no one has ever seen before in life,” Representative Maxine Waters told Roland Martin on Monday.
“That’s going to be very, very powerful,” Waters said. “That database will have information about everything on every individual on ways that it’s never been done before and whoever runs for President on the Democratic ticket has to deal with that. They’re going to go down with that database and the concerns of those people because they can’t get around it. And he’s [President Obama] been very smart. It’s very powerful what he’s leaving in place.”
That video only has 13,000 views. This was not done in secret. This video and interview was seen little and talked about less when it came out in 2013.
We are also reporting today that Freedom Watch has uncovered some disgusting information as well.
Our own Nancy Hayes reports that a massive amount of data on 47 hard drives from a government whistle blower was turned over to the Freedom Watch group recently.
Americans should be OUTRAGED! It looks pretty solid that Illegal and unconstitutional electronic surveillance was committed by the Obama administration. Not only did the illegal electronic surveillance involve Obama, it involved several top level officials within the NSA, CIA, DHS, FBI and Treasury Department. Heads should roll! President Trump was right when he said he was “wiretapped” by Obama and “The Hammer” is about to go down.
The information proves Obama and company spied on everyone. He has spied on Trump! He has most likely spied on many of you!
I remember how J. Edgar Hoover had something on everyone. This enabled him to not be fired as FBI Director. When he died (code name Open Territory) everyone scrambled to find the hidden files.
Or maybe that was just a Robert Ludlum book…?
Who knows?
The scary part is people like this keep getting reelected…
How is this news? I thought news that which is new?
I first heard about the Russians and Chinese buzzing U.S. waters back in the mid-70’s, from a good friend who was a Marine stationed aboard the Glomar [name redacted] spy ship in the early 70’s!
Ended with the Cold War? (tsch!)
It was (and is) a standard tactic ‘testing the fences’ (think Jurassic Park velociraptors) from time immemorial.
They just want to check our reaction time and methods.
They play silly games, as do we…
I’m not worried. Aren’t Trump and Putin bosom buds, now?
(I’m going back to watching my Fail Safe, Dr. Strangelove and War Games triple-header!)
I don’t drive much, anymore. Between having a beater car (when my roomie’s car isn’t available – thanks J.!), the cost of maintenance (which I can’t afford) and gas, and the whack-jobs on the road…
Speaking of whack-jobs! (See above)
I understand you don’t want to climb into the back seat of the car in front of you, both for safety reasons and just general courtesy.
BUT IT SEEMS 6 OUT OF 10 CARS KEEP A DISTANCE AT A STOP LIGHT OF GREATER THAN ONE CAR LENGTH! SOMETIMES MORE THAN TWO!!
Have so many been rear-ended they are paranoid?
It’s just an annoyance if there are only two cars stopped at an intersection. But if there are 12 cars in three lanes, and 60% of them are ‘keeping their distance’ of more than a car length, it causes back-ups! Sometimes back to the previous stop light!
And I’ve NEVER seen anyone getting a citation for being stopped too far back – if there even is such a thing?
Personally, I keep a safe distance, usually enough to see the license plate in front of me. A reasonable distance.
This phenomena seems to have developed over the past ten years.
(March 15 for the Julius Caesar/Shakespeare impaired!)
I subscribe to a smattering of emails from allegedly like-minded individuals.
Sometimes I am in agreement with their themes.
Other times, not so much.
One guy, who operates a small libertarianesque, survivalist business has been promoting a book ‘not yet in bookstores’, purporting to describe the next financial collapse, and confiscation of bank accounts(!) by the government!!
I received two emails yesterday from two (one would think) like-minded entities. One, the NRA (full disclosure, I am long time Life Member), the second, Gun Talk Media, an Internet blog and media source.
I have posted on this blog regarding the NRAs push to contact Congress regarding the last administration’s efforts to restrict gun rights to those who may have mental limitations (by their view mental illness). And I have supported their efforts to reverse this measure.
Now comes these emails. The NRAs requesting immediate action on a pending Senate vote to stop this travesty.
And this from Gun Talk Media:
FAKE NEWS ALERT
Social Security Administration Gets Into Gun Ban Business
As he left office, President Obama screwed American seniors who own or want to own guns by issuing an executive order directing the Social Security Administration to treat seniors in the same miserable way the Veterans Administration does our vets. That is, the SSA now reports to the FBI anyone who prefers to have someone else handle their finances, and the FBI puts that person on the list that is a LIFETIME BAN on owning firearms.
Naturally, the general media portrayed this as keeping guns out of the hands of those with serious mental defects, and when the House of Representatives voted 235 to 180 to repeal this gun confiscation move, the howls from the fourth estate nearly drowned out the facts. Nearly.
As a Gun Talk Truth Squad member, you have the opportunity to push back on these bogus reports, and to answer friends who offer that this ban “seems reasonable.” Here are the facts.
The media said that the SSA would be providing the information to the FBI so these people could
be included in a “background check database.” Well … doesn’t that sound reasonable? The fact is that this move actually puts these people on a list that bans firearms ownership for life.
Who would oppose putting those with “serious mental defects” into a “background check database?” The NRA, of course. But wait. Another vocal opponent is the ACLU. Yes, the American Civil Liberties Union. Groups supporting and providing aid to those who actually do suffer from mental handicaps also opposed the “I’m outta here” move by the departing “vertical pronoun” President to ban tens of thousand of Americans from owning guns, and all without due process.
Here’s an example of the media coverage of the House vote to repeal this rule. This is from Politico.
Democrats ripped the move as an effort by Republicans to undermine background checks for gun purchasers. After the House vote, Sen. Dianne Feinstein pleaded with supporters to rally against the move in the Senate. “Senate may vote today to weaken background checks on gun purchases. Call your Senator to oppose this change — ensure your voice is heard!” she wrote.
Tell your friends that there has been a law in effect for decades that prohibits the truly mentally incompetent from owning guns, and this law provides for due process. Under current law, if one has been adjudicated mentally incompetent, he or she can’t own a gun. “Adjudicated.” As in, a judge and a court room. Where you can defend yourself. Not a bureaucrat who checks a box and places your name on the banned-for-life list. ~ Tom
So, has the NRA been waving a false flag (creating FAKE NEWS) to feather it’s own nest? Or is it simply rubber stamping additional efforts to let the government know we are no longer allowing our civil rights to be curtailed without due process?
It’s important to understand why liberals are so angry and so scared. They are angry because they believe they have a moral right to command us, apparently bestowed by Gaia or #Science or having gone to Yale, and we are irredeemably deplorable for not submitting to their benevolent dictatorship.
They are scared because they fear we will wage the same kind of campaign of petty (and not so petty) oppression, intimidation, and bullying that they intended to wage upon us.
Privacy mavens have been going on for some time regarding the complete lack of privacy on the Internet. Coupled with private industry and public intelligence, license plate readers and facial recognition software, the NSA listening to our cellular telephone calls and reading our email, and cameras everywhere, from about 2002, lets face it…
A global conference of senior military and intelligence officials taking place in London this week reveals how governments increasingly view social media as “a new front in warfare” and a tool for the Armed Forces.
The overriding theme of the event is the need to exploit social media as a source of intelligence on civilian populations and enemies; as well as a propaganda medium to influence public opinion.
. . .
The event, the Sixth Annual Conference on Social Media Within the Defence and Military Sector, is sponsored by the Thales Group, the tenth largest defense company in the world, which is partially owned by the French government.
Participants in the conference—chaired by Steven Mehringer, Head of Communication Services at NATO—will include military and intelligence leaders from around the world, especially “social media experts from across the armed forces and defense industry.”
. . .
“Social Media is increasingly important to the portrayal of armed forces, at home and abroad on operations; raising awareness of institutional issues; and gaining support through successful recruitment campaigns,” said conference Chairman, NATO’s Steven Mehringer, in an invitation brochure for the event.
The military’s goal of using social media to influence the beliefs of populations to win wars is alluded to in the description of other panels. A proposed panel titled ‘NATO’s Digital Outreach: Creating a Global Conversation’, describes NATO’s aim of “cultivating a global audience through social media to support The Alliance.”
Another panel discussion makes direct reference to the role of social media in covert US military ‘psychological warfare’ operations—i.e. propaganda—as well as the use of social media to support mass surveillance.
At first I assumed that the conference was about nothing more or less than the usual propaganda exercises employed by all sides in any conflict. However, reading between the lines, it appears that they’re talking about more active – and more covert – interventions, such as ‘sock-puppeting‘ comments on or reactions to articles, blog posts, etc. that they don’t like. In other words, they wouldn’t act openly, or say that this is the view of a particular party; so one wouldn’t be able to exercise informed judgment on what they have to say.
I know some of the more totalitarian governments have been doing this for decades. (The so-called ‘Great Firewall of China‘ is a good example, and it’s now morphing into a ‘citizen score‘ for every person, upon which will depend their ability to get good jobs, get loans, or even eat well.) If Western nations are now starting to venture into the same territory, we’ll have to be on our guard.
Translates as “Let justice be done, though the world perish”. Apparently it’s not really a phrase from the Roman Empire but from a book in 1563. Wikipedia says:
This sentence was the motto of Ferdinand I, Holy Roman Emperor, probably originating from Johannes Jacobus Manlius’s book Loci Communes (1563). It characterizes an attitude, which wants to provide justice at any price. Its first documented use in English literature was about half a century later.
Hat Tip to The Arts Mechanical for this information, in a piece called Nightmare Fuel, and it really is reading that’s not for the squeamish. He, in turn, links to a number of sources that are reporting on the truly disgusting things going on in Clinton Foundation’s universe. First a link to True Pundit:
Not forgetting about Benghazi, the Clinton Foundation, Hillary’s gun control plans, the illegal sale of plutonium to Russia, arming ISIS, the countless mysterious deaths and intimidations, Bill’s serial rapes…
(I could go on – but I have to go take some Pepto now.)
This does NOT mean I am actively supporting the Republican candidate! He may be a pig and has used inappropriate language, and at best is a populist (see Huey Long)
Libertarians? Two governors with scant international experience? One of who is a rebranded, gun-controlling Democrat?! And the Presidential candidate supports global-warming taxes?!
(I’m not even mentioning the Greens or the Commies… I know, I’m being redundant)
So VOTE. Vote not with your heart, but with your brain.
Yesterday I wrote about the impossible conundrum facing police. They’re literally in a no-win situation. If they enforce and uphold the laws, they’re accused of racism, abuse of authority, and everything else one can imagine. If they don’t, the law-abiding citizens they’re sworn to protect and serve will pay the price in the anything-goes free-for-all that will result.
A graphic example of how this plays out every day on the streets of some of our rougher neighborhoods was given in Chicago a few days ago. The video below is profane, graphic and very disturbing. I can only commend the police involved for not giving in to what must, at times, have been the overwhelming temptation to deal with the interlopers as their conduct deserved.
LANGUAGE ALERT: Profanity is frequent and very graphic. If you’d like to read what happened, and watch the video with the sound turned off, you’ll find the details here.
Now ask yourself, dear readers: if you find yourself on the streets of a city or suburb like that (say, after a traffic accident, while you’re waiting for emergency services to arrive), and you get heckled like that . . . what are you going to do about it? You probably won’t have sufficient legal justification to open fire on the mob. If you produce a gun and try to threaten them, their reactions will be just as they are above. They’ll dare you to use it, knowing that if you do, the law will basically side with them, no matter how provocative and threatening their conduct might have been. What’s more, some of them will probably have guns too. If you use yours, they’ll likely shoot back – and your family and anyone else with you will be in the line of fire. You might be well advised to leave the area as quickly as possible, by any means necessary (including hitching a ride with passing motorists), and abandon your vehicle. If it gets stripped or stolen, that’s still a lot less trouble than what might happen if you stay with it.
The best way to handle any potentially injurious encounter is: Don’t be there. Arrange to be somewhere else. Don’t go to stupid places. Don’t associate with stupid people. Don’t do stupid things. This is the advice I give to all students of defensive firearms. Winning a gunfight, or any other potentially injurious encounter, is financially and emotionally burdensome. The aftermath will become your full-time job for weeks or months afterward, and you will quickly grow weary of writing checks to lawyer(s). It is, of course, better than being dead or suffering a permanently disfiguring or disabling injury, but the “penalty” for successfully fighting for your life is still formidable.
Crowds of any kind, particularly those with an agenda, such as political rallies, demonstrations, picket lines, etc are good examples of “stupid places.” Any crowd with a high collective energy level harbors potential catastrophe. To a lesser degree, bank buildings, hospital emergency rooms, airports, government buildings, and bars (particularly crowded ones) fall into the same category. All should be avoided. When they can’t be avoided, we should make it a practice to spend only the minimum time necessary there and then quickly get out.
“A superior gunman is best defined as one who uses his superior judgment in order to keep himself out of situations that would require the use of his superior skills.”
Words to live by more than ever, in these troubled times. Kudos to those cops for keeping their cool under very trying circumstances. I doubt I’d have done as well.
Peter
Obviously, it’s a matter of degree and circumstance. A couple of kids talking smack to sound tough, or a violent street gang just looking for an excuse – any excuse. Sometimes, as proposed in the essay, we find ourselves in a bad geographical area. Wrong turn off the freeway, followed by car trouble…
Massad Ayoob famously stated if you feel the need to carry into a bar, perhaps you need to consider a different watering hole. Perhaps. Watering hole choice is usually voluntary. (I see this as ‘not using the seat belt; not getting into an accident’ thinking. Just because it’s not a dive bar doesn’t mean bad things won’t happen. – Guffaw)
This all goes back to basics – situational awareness and mindset. We don’t always have control, and may have to wait for others to act for us to respond – morally and legally.
(March 15 for the Julius Caesar/Shakespeare impaired!)
Privacy mavens have been going on for some time regarding the complete lack of privacy on the Internet. Coupled with private industry and public intelligence, license plate readers and facial recognition software, the NSA listening to our cellular telephone calls and reading our email, and cameras everywhere, from about 2002, lets face it…
Guffaw in AZ 