Tag Archives: Prison Planet

Hillary Clinton Vows New Gun Grab in Secret Recording

“The Supreme Court is wrong on the Second Amendment”

“So I’m going to speak out. I’m going to do everything I can to rally people against this pernicious, corrupting influence of the NRA,” Clinton asserts.

“And we’re going to do whatever we can. I’m proud when my husband took them on and we were able to ban assault weapons but he had to put a sunset on it so, 10 years later, of course, Bush wouldn’t agree to reinstate them.”

“We’ve got to go after this,” Clinton urged.

“Here again, the Supreme Court is wrong on the Second Amendment and I am going to make that case every chance I get.”

“The location and date of the recording are unknown. It sounds like an intimate room and was likely recorded on a cell phone or similar device. The Republican National Committee, which posted the clip on YouTube, has not provided additional details,” writes Kyle Olsen.

Hillary’s appetite for gun control has cropped up on the campaign trail numerous times.

Last month during an event in Philadelphia, Clinton vehemently agreed with a supporter who urged her to use executive orders to restrict the Second Amendment.

During a round table discussion in New York, the former Secretary of State nodded along vigorously as a member of the panel described gun owners as terrorists.

“Citizens are the terrorists, right?” the woman states as Hillary nods multiple times. “We’re so worried about terrorism but we have terrorism on our own soil,” she continued.

Hillary’s daughter Chelsea also gave a speech following the death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia urging Democrats to exploit his absence to pass strict new gun control laws.

https://westernrifleshooters.files.wordpress.com/2016/05/communism.jpg?w=750&h=599

by Paul Joseph Watson | Prison Planet

Playing The Government’s Game: When It Comes To Violence, We All Lose

 https://i0.wp.com/api.ning.com/files/6A05RJELsOArr-QJZkN2S-zKiN774*PtDxqE2n-HD9bc2BLODdE2jne48WcuZjiO*3DATB6Adbc6Y4RvD0hFYaCp1mIxa9nQ/ARM.jpg

“When it gets down to having to use violence, then you are playing the system’s game. The establishment will irritate you – pull your beard, flick your face – to make you fight. Because once they’ve got you violent, then they know how to handle you. The only thing they don’t know how to handle is non-violence and humor.”  – John Lennon

Yes, the government is corrupt.

Yes, the system is broken. By broken, I mean it’s “dysfunctional, gridlocked, and, in general, incapable of doing what needs to be done.”

Yes, the government is out of control and overreaching on almost every front.

Yes, the government’s excesses—pork barrel spending, endless wars, etc.—are pushing the nation to a breaking point.

https://i0.wp.com/api.ning.com/files/nCeZ1KiqCuZgh4Sq4-34-irUkdePcngOyQLzUD4mlwzCV79tir6YqhTYgdPGUo315wqzYSckmGgdx8HLtiGpBbsWn2TqcUE4/newAUG.jpg

Yes, many Americans are afraid. Who wouldn’t be afraid of an increasingly violent and oppressive federal government?

Yes, the citizenry has little protection against standing armies (domestic and military), invasive surveillance, marauding SWAT teams, an overwhelming government arsenal of assault vehicles and firepower, and a barrage of laws that criminalize everything from vegetable gardens to lemonade stands.

Yes, in the eyes of the American surveillance state, “we the people” are little more than suspects and criminals to be monitored, policed, prosecuted and imprisoned. As former law professor John Baker, who has studied the growing problem of over criminalization, noted, “There is no one in the United States over the age of 18 who cannot be indicted for some federal crime.”

Yes, the United States of America is not the democracy that is purports to be, but rather an oligarchy ruled by a wealthy corporate elite.

Yes, politics is a sham. Average Americans have largely lost all of the conventional markers of influencing government, whether through elections, petition, or protest, have no way to impact their government, no way to be heard, and no assurance that their concerns are truly being represented.

Yes, the Obama administration’s efforts to identify, target and punish “domestic extremists” through the use of surveillance, corporate spies, global police and the Strong Cities network sends a troubling message to all Americans that any opposition to the government—no matter how benign—will be viewed with suspicion and will likely be treated with hostility.

Yes, we have reached a tipping point. The freedoms we once enjoyed are increasingly being eroded: speech, assembly, association, privacy, etc.

Yes, something needs to be done about the government’s long train of abuses, power grabs, erosion of private property, and overt acts of tyranny.

Yes, many Americans, increasingly dissatisfied with the government and its heavy-handed tactics, are tired of being used and abused and are ready to say “enough is enough.”

https://i1.wp.com/api.ning.com/files/FLP1JPTpU*NXYFQaUmWwyNdGGBxzfoY4YmujJoDN3ZVmdB*fgt7EWrx8-XuAJGySDvl3bq*HKPGxeVhaTaSDuw__/Logo.gif

No, violence is not the answer.

A handful of armed protesters are not going to fix what’s broken in the government by forcing a showdown with government agents. In fact, this kind of scenario plays right into the government’s hands by provoking a violent confrontation that allows government officials to sanctimoniously justify their use of surveillance, military weaponry and tactics, and laws criminalizing guns and hate speech in order to target anyone who even vaguely resembles an “anti-government extremist.”

Take the latest spectacle in Oregon, for example.

Armed activists led by brothers Ryan and Ammon Bundy have occupied a federal wildlife refuge. The Bundys (infamous for their 2014 standoff with the Bureau of Land Management over grazing rights on federal land in Nevada) are protesting the government’s prosecution of two ranchers, Dwight and Steven Hammond, who have been sentenced to five years in prison for allegedly setting back fires on government-owned land in Oregon. (Mind you, the government owns more than half the land in Oregon.)

Few conflicts are ever black and white, and this situation involving the Bundys, the Hammonds and the BLM is no exception. Yet the issue is not whether the Hammonds are arsonists as the government claims, or whether the Bundys are anti-government extremists as the government claims, or even whether ranchers should have their access to government-owned lands regulated as the BLM claims.

No, as I point out in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, the larger question at play here is who owns—or controls—the government: is it “we the people” or private corporations?

https://i2.wp.com/api.ning.com/files/j5WbzQSo3h-5DY1*FVoNbfYoKdY89ySXVLl-yUu3toYOYdfqFDgOZsqYJ7ACz7GL-OCbghFqbSNxnUbSKq6FZyGfvB8NepeV/wethepeoplehavehadenough.jpg

Are American citizens shareholders of the government’s vast repositories, or are we merely serfs and tenant farmers in bondage to corporate overlords? Do we have a say in how the government is run, or are we merely on the receiving end of the government’s dictates? What recourse do we have if we don’t approve of the government’s actions?

Almost every struggle between the citizenry and the government is, at its core, about whether we are masters or slaves in this constantly evolving relationship with the government.

  • Do parents have a right to allow their children to play outside alone, or must they abide by the government’s dictates about how to raise their families?
  • Do activists have a right to freely associate with one another, assemble in public, and voice their opinions publicly or privately, or must they be constrained by what the government and its corporate partners deem to be appropriate?
  • Do residents of a community have to obey whatever a police officer says, lawful or not, or do Americans have a right to resist an unlawful order without getting shot or arrested?

It doesn’t matter what the issue is – whether it’s a rancher standing his ground over grazing rights, a minister jailed for holding a Bible study in his own home, or a community outraged over police shootings of unarmed citizens – these are the building blocks of a political powder keg.

Much like the heated protests that arose after the police shootings in Ferguson and Baltimore, there’s a subtext to the Oregon incident that must not be ignored, and it is simply this: America is a pressure cooker with no steam valve, and things are about to blow.

This is what happens when a parasitical government muzzles the citizenry, fences them in, herds them, brands them, whips them into submission, forces them to ante up the sweat of their brows while giving them little in return, and then provides them with little to no outlet for voicing their discontent.

As psychologist Erich Fromm recognized in his insightful book, On Civil Disobedience: “If a man can only obey and not disobey, he is a slave; if he can only disobey and not obey, he is a rebel (not a revolutionary). He acts out of anger, disappointment, resentment, yet not in the name of a conviction or a principle.”

Let me say it again: an armed occupation of a government property only plays right into the government’s hands and increases its power over the citizenry. Yet it speaks to a growing tension over how to bring about meaningful change when dealing with a government that refuses to listen to its citizens.

This is what happens when people get desperate, when citizens lose hope, and when lawful, nonviolent alternatives appear pointless.

Whether the parties involved are blameless or not, whether they’re using the wrong tactics or not, whether their agendas are selfless or not, this is the face of a nation undergoing a nervous breakdown on all fronts.

Now all that remains is a spark, and it need not be a very big one, to set the whole powder keg aflame.

The government has been anticipating and preparing for such an explosion for years. For example, in 2008, a U.S. Army War College report warned that the military must be prepared for a “violent, strategic dislocation inside the United States,” which could be provoked by “unforeseen economic collapse,” “purposeful domestic resistance,” “pervasive public health emergencies” or “loss of functioning political and legal order”—all related to dissent and protests over America’s economic and political disarray. Consequently, predicted the report, the “widespread civil violence would force the defense establishment to reorient priorities in extremes to defend basic domestic order and human security.”

In 2009, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) released two reports, one on “Rightwing Extremism,” which broadly defines right wing extremists as individuals and groups “that are mainly anti-government, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely,” and one on “Left wing Extremism,” which labeled environmental and animal rights activist groups as extremists.

Incredibly, both reports use the words terrorist and extremist interchangeably.

That same year, the DHS launched Operation Vigilant Eagle, which calls for surveillance of military veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan, characterizing them as extremists and potential domestic terrorist threats because they may be “disgruntled, disillusioned or suffering from the psychological effects of war.” These reports indicate that for the government, anyone seen as opposing the government—whether they’re Left, Right or somewhere in between—can be labeled an extremist. Under such a definition, John Lennon, Martin Luther King Jr., Patrick Henry, Thomas Jefferson and Samuel Adams—all of whom protested and passionately spoke out against government practices with which they disagreed—would be prime targets.

https://i2.wp.com/api.ning.com/files/EDr-zswlq3OtCe-tZKX0dS6htzGwvE44KSvuw7wLpEZZaCl6QXDEB5bKV2sp*6osJACAc5EGSa4hmU-pRkm6GLcPswSN8gBz/AmRRON_CH3_Hectagon.jpg

Fast forward a few years, and you have the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which President Obama has continually re-upped, that allows the military to take you out of your home, lock you up with no access to friends, family or the courts if you’re seen as an extremist. Now connect the dots, from the 2009 Extremism reports to the NDAA and the UN’s Strong Cities Network with its globalized police forces, the National Security Agency’s far-reaching surveillance networks, and fusion centers that collect and share surveillance data between local, state and federal police agencies.

Add in tens of thousands of armed, surveillance drones that will soon blanket American skies, facial recognition technology that will identify and track you wherever you go and whatever you do. And then to complete the circle, toss in the real-time crime centers being deployed in cities across the country, which will be attempting to “predict” crimes and identify criminals before they happen based on widespread surveillance, complex mathematical algorithms and prognostication programs.

Hopefully you’re getting the picture, which is how easy it is for the government to identify, label and target individuals as “extremist.”

All that we have been subjected to in recent years—living under the shadow of NSA spying; motorists strip searched and anally probed on the side of the road; innocent Americans spied upon while going about their daily business in schools and stores; homeowners having their doors kicked in by militarized SWAT teams serving routine warrants—illustrates how the government deals with people it views as potential “extremists”: with heavy-handed tactics designed to intimidate the populace into submission and discourage anyone from stepping out of line or challenging the status quo.

What we’re grappling with is a double standard in what the government metes out to the citizenry, and how the citizenry is supposed to treat the government.

SWAT teams can crash through our doors without impunity, but if we dare to defend ourselves against unknown government assailants, we’ll be shot or jailed.

Government agents can confiscate our homes, impound our cars and seize our bank accounts on the slightest suspicion of wrongdoing, but we’ll face jail time and fines for refusing to pay taxes in support of government programs with which we might disagree.

Government spies can listen in on our phone calls, read our emails and text messages, track our movements, photograph our license plates, and even enter our bio metric information into DNA databases, but those who dare to film potential police misconduct will likely get roughed up by the police, arrested, and charged with violating various and sundry crimes.

This phenomenon is what philosopher Abraham Kaplan referred to as the law of the instrument, which essentially says that to a hammer, everything looks like a nail. In the scenario that has been playing out in recent years, we the citizenry have become the nails to be hammered by the government’s battalion of laws and law enforcers: its police officers, technicians, bureaucrats, spies, snitches, inspectors, accountants, etc.

This is exactly what those who drafted the U.S. Constitution feared: that laws and law enforcers would be used as tools by a despotic government to wage war against the citizenry.

That is exactly what we are witnessing today: a war against the American citizenry.

Is it any wonder then that Americans are starting to resist?

by The Rutherford Institute

Drudge: ‘Why aren’t we seeing Hillary’s lovers?’

Media mogul questions lack of reporting on leading Democrat presidential candidate

Adan Salazar Prison Planet.com October 7, 2015

As the media continues to expose the alleged sexual victims of former beloved comedian Bill Cosby, Matt Drudge, the independent proprietor of one of the most organically trafficked news sites on the web, is asking why no journalists are probing into the rumored sordid life of one of the next possible leaders of the free world: Hillary Clinton.

Drudge admitted, during a special, rare appearance on the Alex Jones Show Tuesday, he’s seen as a “right wing gossip monger” by the left “mainly because of Lewinsky and those years, which,” he says, “by the way are back.”

“Where I’ve had a lot of success is I’m getting people from both sides of the aisle,” Drudge said. “They’ve always said, ‘oh, he’s a right-wing gossip monger,’ mainly because of Lewinsky and those years–which, by the way, are back.”

“Why aren’t we seeing Hillary’s lovers? … Where’s the coverup on this?” Drudge highlighted. “So many issues that are suppressed on a daily basis.”

The former secretary of state, currently running for president despite being embroiled in a slew of scandals, has been accused frequently in the past of homosexual activity.

In 2013, Gennifer Flowers, reportedly “one of the most high profile mistresses in America,” told the UK’s Daily Mail about the time she’d spent with former President Bill Clinton, who allegedly confided in her that “Hillary was bisexual and he didn’t care.”

“I don’t know Huma or the Weiners,” Flowers said, referring to two Clinton confidants. “I just know what Bill told me and that was that he was aware that Hillary was bisexual and he didn’t care. He should know.”

“He said Hillary had eaten more p***y than he had,” Flowers claimed.

During an appearance on the Alex Jones Show in June, legendary Clinton insider Larry Nichols, who was at one time appointed marketing director for the Arkansas Development Finance Authority by then Governor Bill Clinton, also claimed Hillary had “had more women than he had.”

“It was hard enough to cover up for the affairs of Bill, but it was extremely difficult to cover up for Hillary and her lesbian affairs,” Nichols said. “And It was tough and she was tough. She’s a butch.”

Nichols also described an instance in which Secret Service agents in the White House heard commotion emanating from the upstairs living quarters, and entered to find Hillary in bed with Night Court actor Markie Post.

“They were in bed together and Bill pulled up a chair and wanted to watch and Hillary was throwing ashtrays and laughs at him,” Nichols claimed. “That’s the sicko people we call the Clintons.”

Drudge also highlighted how Democrats are having trouble finding young, viable candidates, referring to Hillary’s possible presidency as the “brain in the jar” in the Oval Office.

“You’ve got to be the greatest you can be now–now,” Drudge told Alex Jones. “Before this country is so completely altered and we’re left with Hillary’s brain in the Oval Office in a jar. Cuz that’s what we’re getting. She is old and she’s sick. She is not a contender. They’re making her a contender with these propped up Saturday Night Live things; it’s like a head on a stick. And then on the Today show with [Savannah Guthrie]–a head on a stick. She is not a viable, vibrant leader for this country of 300–including the illegals, 380 million–Americans. So the media is trying to put us to sleep.”

Vika Konvisar – AC/DC Touch Too Much

Texas Cops Shoot Man With Hands Up (video)

Sheriff’s department condemns news station for publishing cell phone footage.

Cell phone video obtained by a local news station appears to show the moment two Texas deputies gunned down a man who held his hands up, contradicting police’s version of events.

On Friday, deputies responding to a domestic violence call encountered 41-year-old Gilbert Flores on the front yard of a home in San Antonio.

Flores was suspected of assaulting a woman and infant inside the residence.

Police said Flores appeared to have a knife when they arrived, and attempted to “resist and fight back,” according to Bexar County Sheriff’s Office PIO James Keith.

Deputies Greg Vasquez and Robert Sanchez claimed they attempted to use non-lethal force to stop Flores, including tasers and riot shields, according to Think Progress, but their efforts proved fruitless, they said, and they had to open fire on the man, killing him.

However, cell phone video filmed by a neighbor and obtained by ABC affiliate KSAT News shows a shirtless Flores putting his hands up multiple times and little if any effort by law enforcement to employ non-lethal force.

Instead, the alarming footage appears to feature one, if not both officers opening fire on Flores as his hands are raised in the air.

“Certainly what’s in the video is a cause for concern,” Bexar County Sheriff Susan Pamerleau commented on the footage Friday, “but it’s important to let the investigation go through its course so that we can assure a thorough and complete review of all that occurred.”

Yesterday, the department posted a message to Facebook denouncing KSAT 12 News for making the footage publicly available, labeling the news group’s act “unethical and sad” and “sensational.”

https://i2.wp.com/www.infowars.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/bexar-county-post.jpg

Currently deputies Vasquez and Sanchez, both with the sheriff’s office for longer than a decade, are on paid administrative leave. They have not yet been charged with a crime, according to the Associated Press.

by Adan Salazar in Prison Planet