Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Add Reply
The red dot is on YOU; ...coming from US government guns!
Topic Started: Feb 20 2013, 07:15 PM (951 Views)
kbp

Linked from TH:

http://www.infowars.com/dhs-supplier-provides-shooting-targets-of-american-gun-owners/

DHS Supplier Provides Shooting Targets of American Gun Owners

Company produces cardboard cut-outs of “non-traditional threats”: Pregnant women, elderly & children


Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
February 19, 2013

UPDATE: Company Behind Shooting Targets of Children Received $2 Million From DHS

UPDATE: Law Enforcement “Requested” Shooting Targets of Pregnant Women

A provider of “realistic” shooting targets to the Department of Homeland Security and other federal agencies has created a line of “non-traditional threat” targets that include pregnant women, mothers in playgrounds and elderly American gun owners.

Posted Image

Law Enforcement Targets, Inc. is a 21-year designer and full service provider of training targets for the DHS, the Justice Department and thousands of law enforcement agencies throughout the country.

The company’s website offers a line of “No More Hesitation” targets ”designed to give officers the experience of dealing with deadly force shooting scenarios with subjects that are not the norm during training.” The targets are, “meant to help the transition for officers who are faced with these highly unusual targets for the first time.”

The targets include “pregnant woman threat,” “older man with shotgun,” “older man in home with shotgun,” “older woman with gun,” “young school aged girl,” “young mother on playground,” and “little boy with real gun.”

Why are top training target suppliers for the government supplying the likes of the DHS with “non-traditional threat” targets of children, pregnant women, mothers in playgrounds, and elderly American gun owners unless there is a demand for such items?

This is particularly alarming given the fact that the Department of Homeland Security has purchased roughly 2 billion rounds of ammunition over the course of the last year, enough to wage a near 30 year war.

In comparison, during the height of active battle operations in Iraq, US soldiers used 5.5 million rounds of ammunition a month.

The DHS also purchased no less than 7,000 fully automatic assault rifles last September, labeling them “Personal Defense Weapons.”

The fact that targets of armed pregnant women, children, mothers in playgrounds, and American gun owners in general are being represented as “non traditional threats” “for the first time” is deeply concerning given the admitted preparations for civil unrest undertaken by Homeland Security as well as other federal agencies.

A leaked US Army Military Police training manual for “Civil Disturbance Operations” also outlines how military assets are to be used domestically to quell riots, confiscate firearms and even kill Americans on U.S. soil during mass civil unrest.

This also dovetails with the continuing characterization of Americans who are “suspicious of centralized federal authority,” and “reverent of individual liberty” as “extreme right-wing” terrorists by DHS-funded studies.

The US military trained last year to take on another “unusual target” – zombies – which some fear is just a ruse to get troops used to engaging crowds of people with deadly force. As Alex Jones documented in his film Police State 2000, numerous “urban warfare” training drills stretching back well over a decade have revolved around incarcerating and battling the American people on domestic soil.

See the other “non-traditional threats” that are being provided in the form of shooting targets to the DHS and thousands of law enforcement agencies below.

Note: The website containing these targets has crashed since this article was published, but this graphic shows a screenshot of the page with the URL visible.

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Infowars.com and Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a host for Infowars Nightly News.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kbp

http://www.infowars.com/company-behind-shooting-targets-of-children-received-2-million-from-dhs/print/

Company Behind Shooting Targets of Children Received $2 Million From DHS

Contracts were for “training aids” and “paperboard”


Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
February 20, 2013

The company behind controversial shooting targets that include images of children, pregnant women and elderly gun owners received almost $2 million dollars in contracts from the Department of Homeland Security.

Minnesota-based Law Enforcement Training Inc., which brags of its close relationship with the DHS and thousands of law enforcement agencies, has stoked outrage after producing shooting targets which feature “non traditional” threats amidst banal environments such as a pregnant woman in a nursery, a mother in a school playground and a little boy.

The company reacted to the furore by asserting the products helped override “hesitation on the part of cops when deadly force is required on subjects with atypical age, frailty or condition,” and to “break that stereotype on the range, regardless of how slim the chances are of encountering a real life scenario that involves a child, pregnant woman, etc.”

Following concerns that the issue could be linked with Homeland Security’s purchase of around 2 billion bullets over the last year, which many fear is linked to preparations for domestic disorder, it has now emerged that Law Enforcement Training Inc. has racked up contracts worth almost $2 million dollars with the DHS over the last three years.

The vast majority of those contracts were for “training aids” and “paperboard,” according to the USASpending.gov website, which lists numerous different contracts each in the region of $150,000 and $180,000 dollars stretching back to early 2010 and running through to July 2012.

While it is not known whether the DHS purchased the “no hesitation” targets, a company representative admitted to a customer that law enforcement agencies had “requested” at least one of the images which depicted a pregnant woman as a “threat”.

A customer who called Law Enforcement Inc. yesterday told Infowars that the company informed him the targets were, “strictly for Department of Homeland Security and other law enforcement agencies.”

The story has prompted widespread condemnation on the Internet, with Law Enforcement Inc. being slammed by Facebook users after it issued a statement.

Retired City of Houston police officer T.F. Stern reacted to the issue by remarking, “There’s something wrong, seriously wrong here. If we start to desensitize law enforcement officers, have them disregard humanity, to feel nothing’s wrong in shooting a pregnant lady or an old man with a shotgun inside his own home…then what kind of society have we become? How will police officers react after they no longer believe they are part of the society which they have been charged with policing, when they have become used to shooting pregnant ladies and old men?”

View all the “no hesitation” targets, which are still available on the company’s website:
http://www.letargets.com/estylez_ps.aspx?searchmode=category&searchcatcontext=%7E500000%7E500100
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kbp

http://www.infowars.com/law-enforcement-requested-shooting-targets-of-pregnant-women/print/

Law Enforcement “Requested” Shooting Targets of Pregnant Women

DHS supplier responds to outrage over “no hesitation” targets which include children


Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
February 20, 2013

Law Enforcement Targets, Inc., a provider of shooting targets to the Department of Homeland Security, has admitted that targets depicting pregnant women were “requested” by law enforcement agencies.

As you can hear in the YouTube clip above, Blaine Cooper enquired about the company’s “no hesitation” targets, which also feature children, elderly gun owners and mothers in playgrounds, and was told that the target showing a pregnant woman was a “requested law enforcement target for training.”

The representative refused to answer why police would be interested in training to shoot pregnant women, but went on to explain, “unfortunately our world is made up of people, pregnant or otherwise, that are gun owners not for the right reasons,” adding that the targets were to “train police officers”.

The woman refused to give her name, accusing Cooper of being “angry.” “Could you understand why I’m upset if the government is trying to make targets to kill citizens – I don’t feel that’s right,” he responded.

Cooper also makes reference to the DHS’ purchase of 2 billion bullets, “enough rounds to kill every citizen of the United States five times over.”

The representative also claims that the targets could be used for “don’t shoot” training, which is somewhat dubious given that they are called “no hesitation” targets and every single one of them is described as a “threat” target in the product description.

The shooting targets, intended to “help the transition for officers who are faced with these highly unusual targets for the first time,” include “pregnant woman threat,” “older man with shotgun,” “older man in home with shotgun,” “older woman with gun,” “young school aged girl,” “young mother on playground,” and “little boy with real gun.”

Our story yesterday about the targets caused outrage, crashing Law Enforcement Targets, Inc.’s website and leading the company to release a statement on Facebook inviting comment and criticism about the products.

LET Inc brags on its website that it is a full service provider of training targets for the DHS, the Justice Department and thousands of law enforcement agencies throughout the country. The company has has racked up $5.5 million worth of contracts with the federal government, with almost $2 million dollars coming from Homeland Security.

Another customer who called the company claims he was told that the targets were, “strictly for Department of Homeland Security and other law enforcement agencies.”

Asked by Mike Riggs at Reason about the targets, the company responded, “The subjects in NMH targets were chosen in order to give officers the experience of dealing with deadly force shooting scenarios with subjects that are not the norm during training. I found while speaking with officers and trainers in the law enforcement community that there is a hesitation on the part of cops when deadly force is required on subjects with atypical age, frailty or condition (one officer explaining that he enlarged photos of his own kids to use as targets so that he would not be caught off guard with such a drastically new experience while on duty). This hesitation time may be only seconds but that is not acceptable when officers are losing their lives in these same situations. The goal of NMH is to break that stereotype on the range, regardless of how slim the chances are of encountering a real life scenario that involves a child, pregnant woman, etc. If that initial hesitation time can be cut down due to range experience, the officer and community are better served.”

The targets are still available for sale on the company’s website
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kbp

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/02/17/Feds-Buy-2-Billion-Rounds-Of-Ammunition

Feds Buy Two Billion Rounds of Ammunition

Something strange is going on. Federal non-military agencies have bought two billion rounds of ammunition in the last 10 months. The Obama Administration says that federal law enforcement agents need the ammunition for “mandatory quarterly firearms qualifications and other training sessions.”

Radio show host Mark Levin is suspicious. He commented:

  • To provide some perspective, experts estimate that at the peak of the Iraq war American troops were firing around 5.5 million rounds per month. At that rate, the [Department of Homeland Security] is armed now for a 24-year Iraq war. A 24-year Iraq war! I’m going to tell you what I think is going on. I don’t think domestic insurrection. Law enforcement and national security agencies, they play out multiple scenarios. … I’ll tell you what I think they’re simulating: the collapse of our financial system, the collapse of our society and the potential for widespread violence, looting, killing in the streets, because that’s what happens when an economy collapses. I suspect that just in case our fiscal situation, our monetary situation, collapses, and following it the civil society collapses, that is the rule of law, they want to be prepared. I know why the government’s arming up: It’s not because there’s going to be an insurrection; it’s because our society is unraveling.
Even though the National Rifle Association says that the amount of ammunition bought isn’t excessive, considering the number of federal agents and the fact that the ammunition is used over a five-year period, there are others who question why the need for so many federal agents. Among them is Jeff Knox, director of The Firearms Coalition, who said:

  • It’s not the number of bullets we need to worry about but the number of feds with guns it takes to use those bullets. There are currently more than 70 different federal law enforcement agencies employing over 120,000 officers with arrest and firearms authority . . . That’s an increase of nearly 30 percent between 2004 and 2008. If the trends have continued upward at a relatively steady rate, that would put the total number of federal law enforcement officers at somewhere between 135,000 and 145,000. That’s a pretty staggering number, especially when you consider that there are only an estimated 765,000 state and local law enforcement officers. That means that about one in seven law enforcement officers in the country works directly for the federal government, not a local jurisdiction.



Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Toast
Member Avatar

I find this to be very disturbing.


TH also has put up an NRA video, called "Stand and Fight"


The potential for warfare is very real.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kbp

Toast
Feb 20 2013, 08:52 PM
I find this to be very disturbing.


TH also has put up an NRA video, called "Stand and Fight"


The potential for warfare is very real.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=kj3xsX9XMMY
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Baldo
Member Avatar

I could suggest they buy some targets of actual terrorists.

Posted Image

Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan

Posted Image

The Underwear Bomber

Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab

Posted Image

911 Hijackers

But that would be cheating!
Edited by Baldo, Feb 21 2013, 09:42 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kbp

This administration has been very busy at dividing the people and openly working to limit / control our freedom. One result has been an unbelievable growth in purchases of guns by citizens.

Had we known the real Barry in 2007, investments would have been simple!
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
chatham
Member Avatar

Come on folks. We know obama wants to build a citizen army. He is doing it. He is making targets of everyday middle class Americans for goverment officials to practice on. Shoot at a pregnant waman target it wont bother you so much when your shooting at a real pregnant woman. He is buying over a billion rounds of ammo, and adding more every day. And he keeps hiring people to work for the government, AKA citizen army. Dont ya think these people are the ones doing the target practice with all that ammo getting ready to protect them against the citizen uprising that they expect? Has nothing to do with dividing the people. It has everything to do with keeping these idiots in power. That was their hope an their change they preached so successfuy for 2 election cycles now.

Get used to it or be prepared.
Edited by chatham, Feb 21 2013, 11:00 AM.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kbp

Longstop
 
Clearing Away the Rubble...with Black Hawks, Tanks, and Loads of Ammo

We have cleared away the rubble of crisis," President Obama reported in his State of the Union address, "and we can say with renewed confidence that the State of our Union is stronger." He cited troops coming home after a decade of "grinding war," six million jobs created "after years of grueling recession," American car purchases up, foreign oil purchases down, a healing housing market, a rebounding stock market, corporate profits that "have skyrocketed to all-time highs," Republicans and Democrats working together "to reduce the deficit by more than $2.5 trillion," "tens of thousands" of American jobs created by green energy, and a boom in natural gas production that's lowering our energy bills.

If things are so peachy, I have a question for the president. What's with the Black Hawk helicopters and urban warfare drills?

The Army took over an empty high school in southeast Houston without warning last month in a Department of Defense drill. Terrified residents mistook blank fire for live rounds. At a City Council meeting the next day, Mayor Annise Parker decried "a shocking lack of sensitivity to community concerns" that caught even some in the police department by surprise. About the same time council members were meeting in Houston, "federal law enforcement" agents were rappelling down ropes from military helicopters hovering over the Capitol in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.

Days earlier in Miami, one local news station reported that blanks fired from Black Hawks soaring low over downtown were "pinging off the high rises[,]" and another reported troops "rappelling from the military choppers onto the Metrorail station platform." The official explanation: "The training is designed to ensure that military personnel are able to operate in urban areas and to focus on preparations for overseas deployment. It also serves as a mandatory training certification." If true, why so many exercises now, when more troops are scheduled to come home than be deployed? And why are so many of them, like one in Los Angeles last January, team exercises with local law enforcement? A reader claiming to be a former Marine commented on the CBS Los Angeles news website that he was an infantryman for 20 years and never trained in any city or town with civilians present. Others are skeptical as well.

snip


http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/02/clearing_away_the_rubblewith_black_hawks_tanks_and_loads_of_ammo.html
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kbp

Posted Image
Quote:
 
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/feb/24/privacy-profits-collide-over-drone-policy/

Privacy, profits collide over drone policy; states jockey to host test sites

In a battle between privacy and profits, many states find themselves playing both sides of the street in the intense national debate over drones.

Worried about violations of civil liberties, at least 19 states are considering limits on how the unmanned craft can be used, a response to swelling public fear that drones pose serious threats to Fourth Amendment and privacy rights.

But many of those same states don’t want to miss out on the billions of dollars in potential economic activity and development the booming drone technology may be offering. They also want a front seat for the hottest new sector in aviation technology.

To that end, about 30 states are angling to host one of the Federal Aviation Administration’s six proposed test sites, where drones will undergo rigorous evaluation to see how they handle different altitudes, climates and other varying conditions. Government and high-skilled industry jobs are tied to the test-site program, and, by extension, so is a great deal of money to be spent in each host state.

The potential payoffs are huge: A Government Accountability Office (GAO) study last September cited an industry survey that put the combined public- and private-sector spending on drones over the next decade at $89 billion, including spinoff spending for research and development estimated at $28.5 billion over the same period.

Industry leaders are urging states to use caution when walking that tightrope.

The sector’s leading trade group, the Association of Unmanned Vehicle Systems International (AUVSI), is sensitive to rising privacy concerns, but also fears states may be sabotaging their own ability to cash in on the drone revolution.

“Depending on the provisions of specific state legislation, state officials may be working at cross-purposes — working to attract [drone] jobs on the one hand while, on the other, working to kill the job-creation potential of the technology,” said AUVSI spokeswoman Melanie Hinton. “We would encourage officials in all states, and especially those seeking test sites, to work collaboratively to ensure that state legislation doesn’t undermine the job-creation potential of unmanned aircraft or a particular state’s ability to compete for a test site.”

Competing to host

The FAA formally unveiled its test-site program Feb. 14. It’s now accepting applications to host the locations, which will be part of the agency’s complex and challenging effort to safely integrate commercial drones into U.S. airspace by September 2015.

As the FAA deals with safety, it and other federal departments are struggling with how best to ensure that privacy rights aren’t violated by increasingly small, fast and undetectable drones. Jim Williams, who heads the FAA's Unmanned Aircraft Systems Integration Office, recently compared the regulatory challenge posed by private-sector drones to that posed by the Wright brothers’ invention of the airplane.

Last week, another GAO report revealed that it is even unclear which arm of the federal government has primary responsibility for protecting those privacy rights from infringement by law enforcement, media or any other entity using a drone.

While more than a half-dozen privacy bills have been introduced in Congress, the confusion over exactly who would enforce those laws has led states to propose their own limits.

One such state is Virginia, which is not only seeking to host an FAA test site, but also is considering some of the harshest drone legislation in the country: a two-year moratorium on all state and local agency use of drones. The bill passed the state General Assembly on Thursday and is now on GOPGov. Bob McDonnell’s desk.

State Delegate Benjamin L. Cline, Amherst County Republican, who introduced the ban in the state House, argues there’s no contradiction in what Virginia is doing. The drone legislation, he said, would not prohibit the FAA, the Department of Defense or other agencies from flying drones as part of testing procedures. It also wouldn’t hinder Virginia’s aviation and aerospace industries, he said.

“Virginia has been a leader in economic development in those areas,” Mr. Cline said. “We’re open for business. When it comes to these technologies, we want to remain a leader. We feel approval [to host an FAA test site] would be another step forward in Virginia’s continued leadership.”

The state has partnered with neighboring Maryland and will submit a joint application to the FAA. It’s not clear when the agency will announce the winners of the test-site competition.

Drone duality

Just as in Virginia, a drone duality is unfolding in Arizona. State Rep. Tom Forese, Maricopa County Republican, is sponsoring a privacy-protection bill while also lobbying for the state to be chosen by the FAA.

“On one hand, you have economic development. We’re talking about millions of dollars and thousands of jobs,” he said, according to the Arizona Daily Star. “On the other hand, you have significant threats to our privacy. I take them very seriously. We’re talking about the potential to be searched without a warrant.”

While it may seem that states are trying to have it both ways, it’s possible to both protect privacy and be part of drone expansion, said Jay Stanley, a senior policy analyst with the American Civil Liberties Union’s Speech, Privacy and Technology Project.

“We shouldn’t be selling our oldest traditions of privacy for some temporary economic gain. … That’s one of the reasons why state legislators should get ahead of the curve here and put in place some good privacy protections and open up the path for a lot of good, innovative uses for drones,” he said. “In the short term, this may look like a conflict. But in the long term, even the most greedy person who wants to do nothing but sell this technology, it’s in their interest for the privacy [questions] to be settled.”

Such a balance may be possible, but states realize that some voters may remain skeptical as drone expansion continues. They’re trusting that, by taking concrete steps to protect privacy rights while also promoting cutting-edge technology, they will eventually convince most residents of the virtues of unmanned aerial systems while putting their fears to rest.

“It is one thing to offer soaring rhetoric about the importance of both technology and/or civil liberties. But eventually both must be proven, affirmed and protected in the real world. That is exactly what we are offering to do in Florida,” said Jim Kuzma, chief operating officer of Space Florida, the state’s aerospace economic development organization.

Florida is yet another state where strict privacy laws are under consideration in the legislature — while Mr. Kuzma and others ready a pitch for an FAA test site.

States will sell YOU out for more FREE MONEY from Big Brother!

Maybe we should stick this thread in the You might be having your location tracked thread. It seems to hit on the same topic, merely adding reason to fear what Big Brother's objectives might be.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kbp

http://www.wnd.com/2013/02/see-police-confiscate-guns-from-americans/

good videos
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kbp

Quote:
 
http://www.wnd.com/2013/02/palin-washington-buying-bullets-for-us/

Palin: Washington buying bullets for us

Imagine the worst-case scenario if the sequester goes through. The market nosedives. The economy implodes. Empty shelves. Riots. The feds hit the streets in force to restore order in a “national emergency.”

Sounds like something in a Third World country or Greece. It could never happen here, right? Think again, says Sarah Palin.

The former Alaska governor and Republican vice-presidential nominee believes the federal government is “stockpiling bullets in case of civil unrest.”

Palin says the feds are afraid of what might happen if the sequester goes into effect.

She writes on her Facebook page: “If we are going to wet our proverbial pants over 0.3% in annual spending cuts when we’re running up trillion dollar annual deficits, then we’re done. Put a fork in us. We’re finished. We’re going to default eventually and that’s why the feds are stockpiling bullets in case of civil unrest.”

The sequester will trigger $85 billion in immediate cuts to federal funding and $1.2 trillion over 10 years unless lawmakers reach a deal by Friday.

The prospect of civil unrest puts a chilling spin on an off-teleprompter remark then-candidate Barack Obama made in a Colorado campaign speech in July, 2008.

“We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded,” said candidate Obama.

Palin’s warning echoes a WND report Feb. 17 citing radio host Mark Levin’s point that federal non-military agencies have purchased enough ammunition recently not only to shoot every American five times but also engage in a prolonged, domestic war.

Why do federal agencies need all that ammunition?

The government’s official explanation for the massive ammo buy is that law enforcement agents in the respective agencies need the bullets for “mandatory quarterly firearms qualifications and other training sessions.”

The staggering number and lack of details in the official explanation, however, has led to rampant speculation, including concerns DHS is arming itself to fight off insurrection by Americans.

“To provide some perspective,” Levin noted, “experts estimate that at the peak of the Iraq war American troops were firing around 5.5 million rounds per month. At that rate, the [DHS] is armed now for a 24-year Iraq war. A 24-year Iraq war!

“I’m going to tell you what I think is going on,” Levin offered. “I don’t think domestic insurrection. Law enforcement and national security agencies, they play out multiple scenarios. I’ll tell you what I think they’re simulating: the collapse of our financial system, the collapse of our society and the potential for widespread violence, looting, killing in the streets, because that’s what happens when an economy collapses.

“I suspect that just in case our fiscal situation, our monetary situation, collapses, and following it the civil society collapses, that is the rule of law, they want to be prepared,” Levin said. “I know why the government’s arming up: It’s not because there’s going to be an insurrection; it’s because our society is unraveling.”

As WND reported last August, news that the Social Security Administration was set to purchase 174,000 rounds of hollow-point bullets for 41 locations across the country followed word of major ammo buys by the DHS and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

A solicitation posted by the SSA on the FedBizOpps website asked for contractors to supply 174,000 rounds of .357 Sig 125 grain bonded jacketed hollow-point pistol ammunition.

An online ammunition retailer described the bullets as suitable “for peak performance rivaling and sometimes surpassing handloads in many guns,” noting that the ammo is “a great personal defense bullet.”

WND has been at the forefront of reporting growing federal police power across dozens of government agencies for more than a decade and a half.

  • In 1997, WND blew the lid off 60,000 federal agents enforcing over 3,000 criminal laws, a report that prompted Larry Pratt of Gun Owners of America to remark, “Good grief, that’s a standing army. … It’s outrageous.”

  • Also in 1997, as part of a ongoing series on the militarization of the federal government, WND reported on the armed, “environment crime” cops employed by the Environmental Protection Agency and a federal law enforcement program that had trained 325,000 prospective federal police since 1970.

  • WND also reported on thousands of armed officers in the Inspectors’ General office and a gun-drawn raid on a local flood control center to haul off 40 boxes of … paperwork.

  • WND further reported on a plan by then Delaware Sen. Joe Biden to hire hundreds of armed Hong Kong policemen into dozens of U.S. federal agencies to counter Asian organized crime in America.

  • In 1999, WND CEO Joseph Farah warned there were more than 80,000 armed federal law enforcement agents, constituting “the virtual standing army over which the founding fathers had
    nightmares.” Today, that number has nearly doubled.

  • Also in 1999 WND reported plans made for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, or FEMA, to use military and police forces to deal with Y2K.

  • In 2000, Farah discussed a Justice Department report on the growth of federal police agents under President Clinton, something Farah labeled “the biggest arms buildup in the history of the
    federal government – and it’s not taking place in the Defense Department.”

  • A 2001 report warned of a persistent campaign by the Department of the Interior, this time following 9/11, to gain police powers for its agents.

  • In 2008, WND reported on proposed rules to expand the military’s use inside U.S. borders to prevent “environmental damage” or respond to “special events” and to establish policies for “military support for civilian law enforcement.”

  • Most recently, WND reported that while local police have found themselves short of necessary ammunition, the federal government has been stockpiling billions of rounds for its non-military, non-FBI law enforcement officers.
Recently, other media outlets have begun to take notice of the alarming trend.

Andrew Malcolm wrote Feb. 8 for Investors.com: “In a puzzling, unexplained development, the Obama administration has been buying and storing vast amounts of ammunition in recent months, with the Department of Homeland Security just placing another order for an additional 21.6 million rounds.

“Several other agencies of the federal government also began buying large quantities of bullets last year. The Social Security Administration, for instance, not normally considered on the frontlines of anything but dealing with seniors, explained that its purchase of millions of rounds was for special agents’ required quarterly weapons qualifications. They must be pretty poor shots.”

Another recent report questions the motives of the DHS.

On Jan. 4, Ryan Keller wrote at Examiner.com: “DHS has stockpiled nearly 2 billion rounds of ammo. This is an unusually large amount for a federal agency to be stockpiling. The agency has refused to give an explanation for these purchases, going so far as to black out information on another solicitation, which is illegal without Congressional authorization or in response to national security issues.

“The typical response from the media has been that the rounds are for target practice; however, hollow points are not used for target shooting. Hollow points are too expensive and not designed for target practice; instead, full metal jacket rounds are used for training.”


Many links to sources in the article, though I am certain there are none that provide absolute proof.

It is strange that they'd rather practice shooting at civilians, using fake bullets from black helicopters, while closing more federal land from drilling the black gold that would add to the federal revenue and create jobs.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
chatham
Member Avatar

DONTFORGET TO WAVE!!!! :madF:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57572207-38/dhs-built-domestic-surveillance-tech-into-predator-drones/

DHS built domestic surveillance tech into Predator drones
Homeland Security's specifications say drones must be able to detect whether a civilian is armed. Also specified: "signals interception" and "direction finding" for electronic surveillance.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kbp

chatham
Mar 2 2013, 09:04 PM
DONTFORGET TO WAVE!!!! :madF:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57572207-38/dhs-built-domestic-surveillance-tech-into-predator-drones/

DHS built domestic surveillance tech into Predator drones
Homeland Security's specifications say drones must be able to detect whether a civilian is armed. Also specified: "signals interception" and "direction finding" for electronic surveillance.
The courts ruled that even though it is information you can obtain in public, heat sensors cannot be used to detect pot growing inside a home. I know a persons castle has more privacy rights than a person in public, but that isstill a search of your body.

They allow searches at airports and a few other places where it is evidenlty not an absolute right to be armed evidently.

In addition to me leaning towards this being ruled a violation of our rights, I'm lost as to why they want to do it unless they are planning for a war here.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · LIESTOPPERS UNDERGROUND · Next Topic »
Add Reply