4.27.2013

Raid On 'Extremist Militants' (VIDEO)

This video was found on a FEMA website.

video




 

4.26.2013

Families Ripped From Homes By Police In Watertown (VIDEO)

This is an absolutely sickening display of police force, violation of the Constitution, and clearly shows that America is now dead. Welcome to the Fourth Reich.

Notice how the homeowner is pulled from the house and does not give permission for the police to enter. Notice too how the militant SWAT officer screams at the boy "hands up!" as if he is about to shoot the resident.


WATERTOWN, MA -- On Friday, April 19, 2013, during a manhunt for a bombing suspect, police and federal agents spent the day storming people's homes and performing illegal searches. While it was unclear initially if the home searches were voluntary, it is now crystal clear that they were absolutely NOT voluntary. Police were filmed ripping people from their homes at gunpoint, marching the residents out with their hands raised in submission, and then storming the homes to perform their illegal searches.
https://www.facebook.com/PoliceStateUSA
This was part of a larger operation that involved total lockdown of the suburban neighbor to Boston. Roads were barricaded and vehicle traffic was prohibited. A No-Fly Zone was declared over the town. People were "ordered" to stay indoors. Businesses were told not to open. National Guard soldiers helped with the lockdown, and were photographed checking IDs of pedestrians on the streets. All the while, police were performing these disgusting house-to-house searches.

It was just a few years ago when I presented the following video on another website. People rolled their eyes and the majority of the comments were along the lines of "that will never happen here." The frog is boiled now my friends.








Warrant Needed For Drug and Alcohol Test, SCOTUS Rules

US Supreme Court rules against use of forced blood draws in all DUI cases.

Justice Sonia SotomayorAmerica's top court does not want cops forcibly extracting blood from motorists without a warrant. The Supreme Court on Wednesday found Tyler McNeely's constitutional rights were violated when he was taken to a hospital for a blood draw after a Missouri state patrolman accused him of driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI) in October 2010.
The state trooper says McNeely was speeding and weaving across the centerline at around 2:08am on that fateful day. McNeely's speech was slurred, he smelled of alcohol and he failed the standard field sobriety tests. The officer wanted a breath test, but McNeely declined. At a hospital, McNeely also refused a blood tests. The blood was taken anyway and his blood alcohol content (BAC) was measured at 0.15. The officer never sought a warrant.

Read more at: theNewspaper.com

PDF file for the 48-page decision: CLICK HERE


In this day and age it certainly seems rare when the Supreme Court rules against an expansion of police powers. This decision however, seems to be in keeping with the true spirit of the Constitution and the 4th Amendment which states:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized
In many states, like here in New York state where this blog is based, drivers have long maintained a right to refusal for not only blood tests, but also for breathalyzer alcohol analyses as well. A refusal can trigger all sorts of other penalties from the DMV including revocations of your right to drive and monetary civil penalties as well, but a person does still maintain the right to refuse the invasive search... even when a police officer has probable cause to believe you are in criminal violation of the law by driving under the influence of a controlled substance.

This decision by the US Supreme Court upholds that standard.

This decision might also be seen as a precedent for drug/alcohol testing in general, and the testing of welfare recipients in particular. This idea of drug testing people who partake of government services, particularly the poor and destitute, has grown in popularity in recent years, especially among those with a right-wing/conservative political bend. Ironically enough it is usually the political-right who will obstinately defend the strictest interpretations of the Constitution in most instances, but do an about-face when it comes to protecting the liberty of folks whom they view with disdain.

2nd Amendment, 4th Amendment, and the Freedom of Hypocrisy

The conservative will often say that "welfare is not a right" or that is not in the Constitution. This may be true, but driving is not a right either, according to the laws in most states, and what is in the Constitution is the right to be free from invasive searches without a warrant. There is no asterisk there to make exception for welfare recipients, anyone partaking of any government service, or someone driving down a taxpayer funded public highway.

We see in this Supreme Court ruling that even when a police officer has reasonable suspicion to believe that a person is under the influence of a controlled substance, they must still have a warrant before conducting a substance screening on the suspect. Again, this is despite the fact that the officer believes a crime has occurred, this is despite the fact that the person is in a public area and potential threat to public safety. And even though a person holding a driver license has essentially already consented when they made a contractual agreement with the state in order to hold that license, that person may still refuse the search by a police officer. Again, the person may be held accountable for breaching that contract with the DMV by refusing the test, but cannot be held criminally accountable for exercising their 4th Amendment rights.

It seems inconceivable then, that a person on welfare could be held to a far less rigorous standard without the practice being considered highly biased and prejudicial. After all, a person on welfare is not even accused of any crime at all, nor is there any reasonable suspicion to believe that an individual receiving a government benefit is under the influence of a controlled substance.

Essentially, drug testing a welfare applicant would be the same as drug testing anyone who applies for a driver license, or even a permit to carry a concealed pistol as another example. Drug testing the welfare recipient monthly would be like requiring the same from any other person who has a government-issued permit. Allowing for random screenings would be the no more justified than randomly stopping and testing anyone who uses any government service even, like public transportation, walking down a public street, or getting the Federally protected mail from your mailbox.

So far, the Supreme Court has ruled that drug testing of welfare recipients is indeed a violation of the 4th Amendment. With this ruling pertaining to suspected drunk drivers, it seems as though that standard is still being held, at lest for the time-being.

For more reasons other than the 4th Amendment of why drug testing should not be allowed, read:

Why Drug Testing of Welfare Recipients Is a Bad Idea














4.25.2013

Giant Head Found Floating In Hudson River

Marist College rowing crew members made a bizarre find in the chilly Spring waters of the Hudson River. A giant fiberglass and styrofoam head. It was floating near the Poughkeepsie college, but closer to the Highland shore of the river.


Read more at: Poughkeepsie Journal


Who Was the Naked Suspect?

Police state that they got into a shootout with Boston bombing suspects Tamerlan Tsarnaev and his younger brother Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, just after a MIT campus police officer was shot and killed while sitting in his patrol car, again, allegedly by the two brothers. There are also reports that bombs were thrown during the confrontation, and later that undetonated bombs littered the streets.

At some point during this confrontation, police took a man into custody who had been stripped naked. This suspect has not been publicly identified.


Police maintain that there were only two shooters, so it is not clear how a third suspect would have been drawn into the situation. Police state that the man taken into custody was actually not involved and was soon released. Why he was arrested and marched naked down the street to a waiting police cruiser has not been explained.

An aunt of the two alleged bombers claims that the man seen in the video there was actually her older nephew, Tamerlan. If this is true, that would mean so-called Suspect #1 was taken into police custody uninjured, but showed up at the hospital a short time later critically injured.

"From head to toe, every region of his body had injuries." -Dr. David Schoenfeld

Huffington Post

Boston Herald

Corpse Photo of Tamerlan Dzhokhar aka Suspect #1


It is quite possible that this "third suspect" was indeed an innocent bystander inadvertently caught up in the incident. It is not unreasonable to believe that the situation was confusing, and certainly very dangerous. Nevertheless, we must also consider the possibility that perhaps, just perhaps the naked suspect was in fact Tamerlan. If this is true, it would be compelling evidence that he was not killed during the shootout, but rather murdered while in police custody.

That may sound far-fetched, even offensive to even consider that possibility, but given so many irregularities in the case, it must be considered. Especially too, when we see that police tried to kill Suspect #2, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev.

Bombing Suspect Was Not Armed


The following clip is a bit of a talk from Alex Jones, but at about the 6:45 mark you can hear the suspects aunt adamantly state that the naked suspect taken into custody was her nephew, Tamerlan.










Did Cops Try to Murder Bombing Suspect?

It is being reported that Boston bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was not armed when he was taken into police custody.

USA Today

Huffington Post

This news disproves earlier reports that the suspect may have tried to commit suicide by shooting himself. There were no guns found in the boat where he had been hiding, and he was not carrying any firearms when taken into custody.

The latest reports suggest his wounds may have been inflicted during the initial confrontation with police many hours earlier, but this seems unlikely given the seriousness of those injuries. In this first image we can see that the suspect was able to climb out of the boat where he was hiding, unassisted and without obvious signs of serious injury.


Nevertheless, within moments of surrendering, he was on the ground, possibly unconscious, and being given a tracheotomy.


We do know that police opened fire on the unarmed suspect, but no legitimate explanation for that has been given. Aside from the obvious reasons why police are not allowed to shoot or try to kill an unarmed suspect, in this case there was a very clear need to take the suspect alive for questioning. With his alleged accomplice to the bombings killed in the initial confrontation with police, this left the younger brother the only person who could possibly shed any light on the bombings. It was imperative that he be taken alive to be sure there were no other devices still left to go off, to name any other possible co-conspirators, and so forth. Of course, that is assuming that the suspect is indeed one of the actual bombers, as authorities claim.

Both the father and mother of the suspected bombers claim that their sons are innocent. In what is believed to be his last Facebook message, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev tells his father that he was set up and did not do what he is being accused of.


Of course, it is not unusual for a suspect to claim they are innocent, nor is it unusual for a suspect's parents to defend them. But there have been numerous irregularities in this case from the start, and it seems possible that the brothers may have indeed been set up as patsies. Such a claim sounds like lunatic-fringe conspiracy-theory perhaps, but this possibility has even led a New Hampshire state legislator to make the provocative claim that the Federal government is responsible for the bombings.

It is not known what evidence the government has to show that the brothers were responsible for the bombings. There have been no images or video released of them actually planting the bombs. It is also not known what led to their initial confrontation with police, or what evidence there is that they killed the MIT officer. It doesn't seem likely that a pair of terrorists on the run would be hanging around a college campus causing a disturbance or trying to attract attention to themselves.

Why Were Bombers At MIT?


It was initially reported that they had tried to rob a 7-11 store, but that was not true, so we still don't know what the nature of the disturbance actually was that might have led them to kill a police officer. We also don't know what ever became of a third suspect, or why this man was arrested and then stripped naked before being paraded in front of cameras and loaded into a police car.


Whether or not the brothers actually committed the double-bombing, or whether they killed the MIT police officer is probably something that will be debated for many years to come. If there was indeed a conspiracy, and a plot by factions within our own government, then there would be a clear motivation to kill the patsies who were set up to take the blame for the terrorism.

If they were truly guilty, then as we already mentioned, there was a very real need to take the suspect alive for questioning. It hardly seems reasonable for the police to risk killing the suspect, who as we see now was not even armed. Even if he had been armed, the police should have made every effort, even at the risk of their own lives, to take the suspect alive to glean intelligence necessary for the greater public safety concerns. That is of course, unless the FBI already knew all the answers, which would then lead us back to the notion that they were at least fully aware of the plot, if not directly involved. .

Of course, there is a third line of reasoning which could also be applied here. Plain old-fashioned revenge. It is not at all unreasonable to suspect that the police might have been willing to commit murder themselves in order to get revenge not only on a terrorist, but against a young man who they believed had just killed one of their own. This sort of  "cowboy" mentality is all to prevalent among police today, and it might have even been something counted on by inside conspirators, if it was indeed a government plot as some claim. In this manner, the police could be made to do the bidding of the plotters but in total ignorance. This scenario is an excellent example of why police must be held to the highest ethical standards, rather than routinely excused for criminal behavior.

Knowing now that the suspect was not armed it is almost inexcusable that the police opened fire on him both from a moral standpoint, and of course because killing him might have actually put the public in greater danger. Again, it doesn't seem likely that his wounds were from the initial confrontation with police in which his brother was killed. It also does not appear that the suspect was wounded inside the boat. We might tend to make excuses for jittery police who were, perhaps, assuming that the suspect was armed. But this reasoning collapses when we look at the photographic evidence. Frighteningly, that evidence appears to show that the suspect was shot after he climbed out of the boat and surrendered.

This first image shows Dzhokhar Tsarnaev in the hospital. You will notice what appears to be powder burns on his face, which would be consistent with being shot at very close range. Much like if he had put a gun in his mouth, and fired, trying to kill himself. This would also be consistent with reports that he has a bullet wound exiting out the back of his neck. This is impossible though, since he was not armed.



So we know that his wounds were certainly inflicted by police. If those wounds came during the initial confrontation when his brother was killed, if they were in fact exchanging gunfire with police as was reported, then the police were certainly justified to return fire. As we already pointed out though, it's unlikely that he survived the 20 or so hours without medical care for those very serious wounds. So now the question is when, exactly, did police shoot him?

As you can see in this photo, there was no blood visible at the scene when the suspect was still inside of the boat.


In this photo however, blood is clearly visible on the wheel shroud of the trailer. This means that the blood is not from an earlier wound that might have leaked when the suspect first climbed into the boat to hide. This means that it could only have been left there after the suspect climbed out of the boat. Why would police shoot him after he had surrendered?


We can see that there is no blood inside of the boat, which would indicate earlier wounds or that he was shot before he surrendered. Looking more closely at the blood that does appear in the image, the observation becomes even more chilling. There is a distinct spray pattern further supporting that the wound was inflicted there. We also see that the blood is sprayed across the top of the wheel shroud, but not the side, except for where it dribbled over a little bit from pooling on top. This means that he was, more than likely, up against that wheel shroud when he was shot. Going by the height of the investigator in the image, the pattern of the blood, the wound to the suspect, a very disturbing image now appears. It looks as if Dzhokhar Tsarnaev may have been on his knees, with his back against the wheels, that someone put a gun in his mouth and shot him, execution style.




4.22.2013

Boogie Ghost Caught In Cell Pic


Read the story at: Mail Online

4.21.2013

Why Were Boston Bombers at Mass Institute of Tech?

Neither of them were enrolled as students at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and no ties between them and any persons on the campus have been reported. Nevertheless, this happens to be where the suspects in the Boston bombing were first engaged by police, and where a campus officer was killed.

M.I.T. has a long history of involvement with the government, often plays a role in various conspiracy theories, and of course, is the home to research of some of the world's most bizarre, cutting edge technologies.

So when I heard that M.I.T. was at the center of another major event, a few hairs stood up on the back of my neck, and I asked myself... What were the bombers doing there?

Could this have something to do with it?

Massachusetts Demonstrates S&T Funded Technology at Boston Marathon

Runners and spectators from all over the world will descend on Boston for the 116th annual Boston Marathon on April 16, 2012. As the world's oldest annual marathon, the event draws more than 20,000 participants and nearly 500,000 spectators each year.

This year, the Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency, in coordination with the Boston Athletic Association (BAA), Massachusetts National Guard, and eight localities along the marathon route, will use the Next-Generation Incident Command System (NICS) to help manage the event and keep everyone safe.

S&T funded the development of NICS, an online incident map that provides timely situational awareness for first responders. Developed by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Lincoln Laboratory, in partnership with the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE), NICS aims to help first responders work together effectively during a disaster or other large-scale event. During an incident, NICS manages real-time feeds of vehicle locations, airborne images, video, weather, critical infrastructure, and terrain. These feeds are integrated as selectable layers onto a map using a geographical information system. NICS works as a virtual white board where responders can then use this information to team up, pool resources, and plot strategies. Any credentialed responder can mark up the map or type a message on the whiteboard below it.

For the Boston Marathon, NICS will display information like the marathon route, the locations of aid stations and water stations, and the GPS coordinates of the lead and trailing vehicles. Additionally, the NICS team is working with the BAA to access runner chip data along the marathon route. This information will provide a density map of runners so that first responders can better understand where the packs of runners are located and better prepare for potential incidents. NICS will also test the integration of local road opening and closing data to give neighboring towns better situational awareness of race conditions and route planning for emergency vehicles.


For more information on NICS, please view its technology profile here.

Created: 4/16/2012 3:51 PM












Chinese Attacks Army at Wal-Mart

In some ways, I can understand why people are pissed off at Americans in general, and at soldiers in particular. The agenda being carried out around the globe is murderously imperialistic, and even here at home our own government is waging a cold war on it's own people.

Nonetheless, I can't help but think that someone needs to be put on the first boat back to China.




Schenectady man assaults Army captain in Albany. Shocking moment man attacked uniformed U.S. Army captain at Wal-Mart because of his military service. A crazed man attacked a U.S. Army officer at a Wal-Mart store in Albany, New York, after verbally harassing the solider for his military service, video surveillance footage shows.

Albany police released the footage after charging 47-year-old Yiqiang Wu of Schenectady with assault as a hate crime for Thursday's fight at a checkout line.

The Army captain told police that a man behind him in line began to yell derogatory comments at him about the United States and his service to the nation.

'It started with the middle finger and the officer asked if it was for him or something of that nature and it escalated from there,' Officer Steve Smith, of the Albany Police Department, told News10.com.

Police said Wu then struck the captain several times in the face.

'It looks like he displayed a great deal of restraint which is consistent with the armed forces, law enforcement and public service,' Smith said. 'We are held at a higher standard and you have to commend him for being able to have that restraint.'

The Army captain was treated for his injuries at the scene.

The video shows the officer, dressed in camouflage fatigues, confronting the man before being attacked.

Wu is free on bail.

It couldn't be determined if he had a lawyer.




Boston Bomber Silenced?

This image shows Boston bombing suspect #2 Dzhokhar Tsarnaev climbing out of the boat where he was hiding, unarmed, and not apparently injured.


Despite the most Constitutionally invasive search and imposition of martial law on American soil in history, thousands of police officers and government agents using state-of-the-art equipment failed to locate the suspect. Instead, the most wanted man in America was stumbled on by a homeowner, who found the alleged bomber hiding in a boat parked in the driveway of his home. Why the suspect did not flee at that moment is not clear.

Instead, he waited there for police to arrive, there was another round of gunfire, and then a standoff which lasted more than two hours. When it was over, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev climbed out of the boat on his own, unassisted, and not appearing to be grievously wounded. It is not clear how he might have survived for two hours bleeding from a critical wound, much less 20 or so hours from the original confrontation with police in which his brother was killed, and then able to climb out of the boat.

Nonetheless, police were quick to report that the suspect was seriously wounded. This picture shows the suspect on the ground, likely unconscious, and being given a tracheotomy.


Now today, investigators are suggesting that the suspect tried to kill himself. There is no explanation as to why he was not successful, or why he would have allowed himself to be taken alive by police if it was his intent to die.

Did teen terrorist suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev attempt to shoot himself in the throat as cops closed in?

While a throat injury is keeping the 19-year-old from talking, investigators are speculating that a bullet wound to the back of the neck may have been self-inflicted, sources told CBS News. The wound may have been caused by a gun that was fired through the mouth, the sources said.

Tsarnaev remained sedated and in serious condition Sunday after suffering unspecified injuries, including to the throat, during a police shootout and ensuing manhunt.

Boston Mayor Thomas Menino said he may never speak again.

"We don't know if we'll ever be able to question the individual," Menino told ABC's "This Week" on Sunday.

Read more at: Daily News









Latest Headlines

Which Mythical Creature Are You?                         Sexy Out of This World Aliens                         Is That a Ghost or Just a Dirty Lens                         Can You Survive the Zombie Apocalypse?                          Do You Know Vampires?                          Preparing for the Zombie Apocalypse                          Ten Amazing Urban Legends That Are Actually True                          Unbelievable UFO Sightings                          Is Your Dealer a Cop?

Search This Blog