Category Archives: conspiracy

What those Muslims were chanting at Washington National Cathedral

On Nov. 14, 2014, the Washington National Cathedral in D.C. — an Episcopal Christian church that calls itself “the spiritual home for the nation” — hosted a Muslim prayer service that was by invitation only.

I’ve posted about how the Muslim prayer service to “Allah” — a moon god whom Arabs had worshiped before Mohammad founded Islam — violated the First Commandment.

I’ve explained that the cathedral’s hosting a Muslim prayer service is an invitation to Muslims to claim the cathedral as theirs because according to Islam, physical possession of an area by Muslims is regarded as spiritual possession by Islam, especially when Muslims pray there.

But the National Cathedral chose to ignore all of that, in the interest of promoting “religious freedom” and “interfaith dialogue” and against “Islamophobia.”

I’ve also posted about a brave woman, Christine Weick, who alone spoke up for Christ amidst that blasphemous prayer service in which Muslim prayer rugs replaced the Cross. Pointing to the cross, Weick proclaimed: “Jesus Christ died on that cross. He is the reason we are to worship only Him. Jesus Christ is our Lord and Savior. We have…allowed you your mosques in this country. Why don’t you worship in your mosques and leave our churches alone? We are a country founded on Christian principles.”

She was escorted quickly out of the church by security guards.

Christine Weick

But are you curious about the prayer service itself? What prayers did the Muslims say?

I searched the Internet but found only two sources that actually reported what those Muslims said, prayed, and chanted at the National Cathedral, neither of which is mainstream U.S. media.

Muslims praying at Washington National Cathedral

From CBN News:

1. A Muslim man sang from the podium, “allahu akbar, allahu akbar,” a phrase which can be translated to mean “allah is greatest” or “allah is greater.”

2. Rizwan Jaka of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) called the National Cathedral a house of prayer for all people. The ISNA has ties to the radical Muslim Brotherhood, and was named by federal prosecutors in 2007 as an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terrorism financing trial in U.S. history.

3. A woman named Inas Shabazz said, “I think that if people read and have a better understanding that they will know that we are a peaceful people. You know… the Koran… Islam… Muslim… it all means peace and love. There’s nothing terroristic about it.

By the Koran and Islam being all “peace and love,” was Shabazz referring to these quotes from the Koran?

Sura 9:29– “Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.”

Sura 9:5– “Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, and take them (captive), and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush. But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then leave their way free.”

From Israel Today:

1. Hundreds of Muslims prostrate on their prayer rugs chanted in unison: There is only one god, he begets not and I bear witness that Muhammad is His only servant and Apostle.”

Just so you know, by “he begets not,” Muslims mean Jesus is not the son of God. 

2. An Imam led the congregation of hundreds in declaring that “god has no son, that Jesus Christ cannot be his son, and that there is no god like Allah.”

In other words, on November 14, in a Christian cathedral that has seen countless funerals for presidents and other dignatories of the still Christian America, hundreds of Muslims defiled the church by denouncing Jesus Christ as Son of God, and proclaiming their blood-thirsty moon god as the one god.

That’s a hell of a way to promote “interfaith dialogue and tolerance.”

The liberal clerics of Washington National Cathedral might as well have invited outright Satanists. At least satanists are honest about the god demon they worship.

~Eowyn

Jon Gruber who thinks Americans are stupid made nearly $2M from Obamacare

jonathan-gruber

Jonathan Gruber is an MIT economics professor who was the architect of Romneycare in Massachusetts and a key architect of Obamacare, aka the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

But both Gruber and the Obama administration kept his work on Obamacare a secret, and instead portrayed him as merely an independent economist who supports Obamacare. Gruber was frequently quoted by journalists and lawmakers who did not know of his connection to the administration; nor did Gruber disclose his connection when writing opinion articles. To this day, Obama denies Gruber’s role in formulating Obamacare or even that he knows the economist at all. (See “Obama lies again: Jon Gruber never worked for me“)

Thanks to Rich Weinstein, a Philadelphia investment adviser, Gruber has now been exposed, not only for his role in crafting Obamacare, but more importantly for his arrogant and contemptuous declarations — captured on video — that Obamacare INTENTIONALLY was written in a tortured and confusing way so as to conceal the law’s true costs from the American people who are too stupid to understand the law anyway, a stupidity “that was really, really critical to get this thing to pass.” 

Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) told Fox News’s “On the Record” on Nov. 12, 2014, that Gruber was paid almost $400,000 ($392,600 to be exact) by the federal government for his “consulting” work in crafting Obamacare.

But it turns out $400,000 is a gross understatement of Jon Gruber’s earnings from Obamacare. After the bill became law, he made a good deal more — 463% more.

Obamacare exchange

Byron York reports for Washington Examiner, Nov. 16, 2014, that when Obamacare became law, many states had to set up online “exchanges” by which individuals and small businesses can compare policies and purchase the now-mandatory health insurance (with a government subsidy if eligible).

Those exchanges would have to be built from the ground up. Studies would have to be done. And Gruber — who had designed Obamacare to begin with — was just the man to do the job. The Charleston Daily Mail in September 2012 even called Gruber “a policy rock star.”

Below are Jonathan Gruber’s earnings for his work as a consultant on Obamacare, both before and after it became law:

1. In 2009, as Obamacare was moving its way through Senate committees, Gruber was a paid consultant to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) on two contracts — one in March for $95,000 to work on the project; and the second in June for $297,600 to continue that work. Altogether, Gruber received a total of $392,600 from HHS. 

2. In 2010, the state of Wisconsin, under Democratic Gov. Jim Doyle, paid Gruber $400,000 to do a study of the impact of healthcare reform. By the time Gruber finished his report, however, Republican Scott Walker had been elected governor and wasn’t much interested in using Gruber’s study.

3. In 2011-2013, the state of Minnesota paid Gruber $329,000 to study how to make its exchange conform with Obamacare requirements.

4. In November 2011, the state of Vermont hired a consulting firm that paid Gruber at least $91,875 to study the state exchange. 

5. In 2012, the state of West Virginia signed a contract for $121,500 with Gruber to study its healthcare system.

6. In 2012, the state of Michigan included Gruber in a multi-firm, $481,050 contract to study its exchange system. It’s not clear how much of that went to Gruber himself.

Altogether, Jon Gruber was paid $1,816,025 from federal and state governments. If we exclude item #6 above, at a minimum, Gruber still made a whopping $1,334,975 for his “consultant” work on Obamacare — a bill that he intentionally designed to be confusing so that those stupid American people wouldn’t know what’s in it, which would enable those stupid Congress critters to pass the bill, many if not all of whom didn’t even bother to read the bill before they passed it into law. And then after the bill became law, Gruber then made even more money — 4.63 times more than what he was paid for crafting Obamacare — for his “consultancy” to state governments on how to make the deliberately-confusing law work.

Obamacare Screw U

But to say that Jonathan Gruber was paid $1,334,975 to $1,816,025 by the federal (HHS) and state governments is really a misnomer.

In the end, it was the American taxpayers who paid Jonathan Gruber nearly $2 million dollars — those same “stupid American people” who are too stupid to understand Gruber’s deliberately-confusing “health care” law.

This is what Obamacare is about, from the beginning. Don’t say we hadn’t warned you.

Who's exempt from Obamacare

~Eowyn

Waiting for Ferguson grand jury, St. Louis buys guns and prepares for worst

People in St. Louis, Missouri, are preparing for the worst as they await the grand jury’s decision in the police shooting death of 300-lb. Michael Brown on August 9, 2014, in Ferguson, a suburb of St. Louis.

The shooting of the black 18-year-old by white officer Darren Wilson had sparked looting and weeks of sometimes-violent protests all through the month of August. Fearing for his life, Officer Wilson has been in hiding on paid leave ever since the shooting.

ferguson-market-looting

.

On Monday, Missouri Governor Jay Nixon declared a state of emergency and called out the National Guard in advance of the decision by the grand jury.

Gun shops in the St. Louis area reportedly are selling everything they can get their hands on.

Metro Shooting Supplies, near the city’s main airport, is selling two to three times more weapons than usual in recent weeks — an average of 30 to 50 guns each day. Owner Steven King said, “We’re selling everything that’s not nailed down. Police aren’t going to be able to protect every single individual. If you don’t prepare yourself and get ready for the worst, you have no one to blame but yourself.”

Other gun dealers say their sales spikes are comparable to the increases seen soon after Brown’s death on Aug. 9. County Guns owner Adam Weinstein said, “I’ve probably sold more guns this past month than all of last year.” Last summer, Weinstein had fended off looters with an assault rifle and pistol at his storefront on West Florissant Avenue, the roadway that was the scene of many nightly protests.

Many commenters on the “St. Louis Coptalk” forum expressed fears that demonstrators will take to the streets regardless of the grand jury’s decision. A man who calls himself “A Concerned [Ferguson] Cop” issued a warning to the community to protect their families with firearms:

If you do not have a gun, get one and get one soon. We will not be able to protect you or your family. It will be your responsibility to protect them. Our gutless commanders and politicians have neutered us. I’m serious, get a gun, get more than one, and keep one with you at all times.”

While the commenter’s status as a police officer cannot be confirmed, his warning is neither alarmist nor preposterous. None other than the FBI had released an intelligence bulletin stating a grand jury decision “will likely be exploited by some individuals to justify threats and attacks against law enforcement and critical infrastructure.”

Indeed, the protest group RbG Black Rebels tweeted a stream of violent online posts saying “We are paying $5k cash for location of Ofc. Darren Wilson. Real $, no joke, no crime we just wana get his photo an ask him a few questions,” and boasting of “combat experience,” “stockpiling” ammunition, cleaning out gun stores and being #WarReady. 

RbG Black Rebels tweet
It doesn’t help that Muslims are exploiting the Ferguson unrest by equating Brown’s death to the death of a black radical Islamist, Detroit mosque leader Imam Luqman Ameen Abdullah, who was shot during an FBI raid in 2009.

Luqman Ameen Abdullah, b. Christopher Thomas in 1956

Luqman Ameen Abdullah, b. Christopher Thomas in 1956

Federal prosecutors say Abdullah was a separatist intent on overthrowing the U.S. government. But Dawud Walid, executive director of CAIR’s Michigan Chapter, calls Abdullah a martyr and portrays both Abdullah and Brown as victims of a national security apparatus that had “completely gone wild” and engaged in “demonizing and criminalizing Muslims.” (Michael Brown was not a Muslim. He was buried in August after a memorial service at the Friendly Temple Missionary Baptist Church in St. Louis.)

Kyle Shideler, director of the Washington-based watchdog group Center for Security Policy’s Threat Information Office, says that CAIR and other radical Muslims are “interested in building coalitions with other organizations in order to effect a legislative change to weaken anti-terrorism laws and weaken the ability of law enforcement to engage in counter terrorism.”

Sources: Bearing Arms; CBS St. Louis; New York Times, Daily Mail; Fox News

See also:

~Eowyn

Obama lies again: Jon Gruber never worked for me

Jonathan Gruber is an MIT economics professor who is heavily involved in crafting public health policy and is widely called one of the key architects of Obamacare — the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

For his work as a “technical consultant” on Obamacare, Gruber was very well paid, to the tune of almost $400,000 ($392,600 to be exact), according to Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), on Fox News’ “On the Record” on Nov. 12, 2014.

jonathan-gruber

On Nov. 11, 2014, news came of Gruber being caught on video saying that, to ensure its passage, Obamacare was deliberately and intentionally written in a confusing way so as to conceal the law’s true costs from the American people who are too stupid to understand the law. 

So Gruber went on MSNBC, claiming that his comments were “off the cuff” and should be disregarded. And he expects us to believe his lie because, after all, Americans are really really stupid. The only problem is that we have video evidence of him making those arrogant and contemptuous remarks, which you can see and hear for yourself by going to my post “Obamacare’s architect says Americans are too stupid to understand it“.

Gruber is now politically radioactive. So Democrat politicians are doing their darnedest to distance themselves from him. Congresswoman (and still head of House Democrats) Nancy Pelosi actually claimed she did not know who Gruber is although she once had touted his work. Like Gruber, Pelosi also thinks we are stupid.

Obama, too, is denying he’s ever known Gruber.

On November 15, 2014, while he was in Brisbane, Australia for the G20 Summit, a reporter asked him about Gruber.

Reporter: “At your Burma town hall a couple of days ago, you tried to inspire young leaders by saying governments need to be held accountable and be responsive to the people. I wonder how you square that with your former adviser Jonathan Gruber claiming you were not transparent about the health law because, in his words, the American voters were stupid. Did you mislead Americans about taxes, about keeping your [health] plan, in order to get the [Obamacare] bill passed?”

Obama: “No, I did not. Uh, uh. I just heard about this. Uh, I get world-briefed before I come out here. Uh. the fact that some adviser who never worked on our staff, uh, expressed an opinion that, uh, I completely disagree with, uh, in terms of the voters, is no reflection on the actual process that was run.” Obama then said every detail of Obamacare was “fully debated on” and insisted it was “fully transparent.”

By referring to Gruber as “some adviser who never worked on our staff,” Obama is:

  • explicitly denying Gruber had worked on Obamacare and was paid for his work by the federal government (“never worked on our staff”); and
  • implicitly saying he doesn’t even know who Jon Gruber is (“some adviser”).

You see, like Gruber and Pelosi, Obama also thinks the American people are stupid — so stupid that we can’t unearth evidence that directly contradicts his denial.

But some not stupid American(s) did.

Here’s video evidence of then-U.S. Senator Barack Obama (D-Illinois) at a Brookings Institute forum  on April 5, 2006, referring to Jon Gruber by name, calling him one “of the brightest minds” from whom he had “stolen ideas”.

Obama said, “You [Brookings Institute] have already drawn some of the brightest minds from academia and policy circles, many of them I have stolen ideas from liberally, people ranging from Robert Gordon to Austan Goolsbee; Jon Gruber; my dear friend, Jim Wallis here, who can inform what are sometimes dry policy debates with a prophetic voice.”

In fact, Gruber had attended 5 meetings on Obamacare at the White House in 2009, including one with Obama present, as you can see in the video below, which also includes Pelosi and Senators Harry Reid (D-Nevada) and Max Baucus (D-Montana) extolling good ol’ “Americans are too stupid to understand Obamacare” Gruber.

Simply put, Obama, Pelosi, Reid, Baucus, and Gruber are sociopaths. Only sociopaths can lie so shamelessly, easily, and without remorse.

H/t ZeroHedge

See also:

~Eowyn

Soros-funded organization has 666 address

“Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.” -Rev. 13:18

That's George Soros in the chair on the right. Soros hosted Obama's first presidential campaign fund-raising soiree.

That’s George Soros in the chair on the right. Soros hosted Obama’s first presidential campaign fund-raising soiree.

One of the leftwing groups that international currency speculator George Soros funds is the noble-sounding Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR).

According to the website NGO Monitor, George Soros is a major donor to CCR:

CCR’s net assets (2006) exceeded $5 million, 77% from endowments, foundations and individual gifts. These donations include large donations from the Ford Foundation, and George Soros’ Open Society Institute. Over 1,050 other foundations and individuals have donated to CCR.

Founded in 1966 “by attorneys who represented civil rights movements in the South,” CCR describes itself as “a non-profit legal and educational organization” dedicated to “advancing and protecting the rights guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.”

CCR’s real mission, however, is revealed after the verbiage about the Constitution — “committed to the creative use of law as a positive force for social change.”

But if CCR is honest, its mission statement instead should read “committed to the PERVERSE use of law as a DESTRUCTIVE force for social change.” As evidence, let’s look at the groups and movements supported by and to which CCR is linked. Those groups include:

1. The criminal syndicate ACORN or Association and Community Organizations for Reform Now , a private network of “community organizing” groups funded by taxpayers whose criminal activities included voter registration fraud and home loans for illegal aliens. A July 2009 congressional report, “Is ACORN Intentionally Structured As a Criminal Enterprise?,” accused ACORN of massive fraud, money laundering, and racketeering directed from the highest levels of the organization’s management. On September 17, 2009, Congress passed the “Defund ACORN Act,” resulting in the disbanding of ACORN groups across the U.S. and the reconstitution of some of the same groups under different names. (See my post of Feb. 24, 2010, “ACORN, the Undead“.) Given the fact the ACORN supposedly no longer exists, at least under the ACORN name, it is noteworthy that the Soros-funded Center for Constitutional Rights still lists ACORN among the groups and movements CCR supports.

2. The Hyde – 30 Years is Enough! Campaign: “a national network of grassroots groups working to repeal the Hyde Amendment and, in doing so, restore full public funding of abortion as part of a comprehensive health care for all,” i.e., as part of Obamacare.

3. New Sanctuary Movement: “a coalition of interfaith religious leaders and participating congregations” that provide sanctuary to illegal migrants, i.e., protection to criminals.

4. The Audre Lorde Project: “a Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Two Spirit [what's dat?], Trans and Gender Non Conforming People of Color center for community organizing, focusing on the New York City area.”

Writing in Freedom Outpost, Matt Barber tells us the latest project of CCR is the persecution of pastor Scott Lively of Abiding Truth Ministries:

Scott LivelyBecause Lively exercised his God-given First Amendment rights, as well as his free-speech rights afforded by the laws of Uganda, and spoke biblical truth about homosexual sin after having been invited there by a number of Ugandan pro-family groups, homosexual activists set out to make an example of him.

In March of 2012 CCR sued Lively in a Massachusetts federal court for “crimes against humanity” – the same charge filed against Nazis who stood trial in Nuremberg – on behalf of another moonbat organization called “Sexual Minorities Uganda,” which, and again, you can’t make this stuff up, prefers the moniker “SMUG.” [...]

Lively is being tried for “crimes against humanity” for merely uttering, publicly, millennia-old biblical orthodoxy relative to sexual morality.

So how could such an Orwellian lawsuit – clearly designed as a weapon to both harass and intimidate Lively and anyone else who might dare challenge the global homosexual activist political agenda – even make its way into a U. S. federal court? [...]

Michael PonsorMeet federal Judge Michael Ponsor [...] the textbook example of a judicial activist. He has admitted as much, once saying in another context that, “At some point I realized that judges are the unappointed legislators of mankind, and what we do is just as creative.” [...]

SMUG’s and CCR’s end game is clear: Make war criminals out of anyone who encourages any legislative body to pass any legislation upholding the traditional family. If Scott Lively is guilty of the Crime Against Humanity of Persecution, then so are the Houston pastors and anyone who has ever tried to influence legislation against the homosexual juggernaut. There is no limiting principle,” concluded Harry Mihet, Pastor Lively’s lead attorney. [...]

This was never about winning or losing.

It was always about intimidation.

(See also DCG’s post, “City of Houston subpoenas pastors’ sermons in equal rights ordinance case”.)

Guess what the Center for Constitutional Rights’ address is.

From CCR’s “Contact” page:

The Center for Constitutional Rights is located at:

666 Broadway
7th Floor
New York, NY 10012

You can’t make this stuff up.

H/t Don Hank

~Eowyn

As America waits for Ferguson grand jury decision, Obama has secret meeting with protest leaders to “stay on course”

The grand jury’s decision on whether to prosecute white Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson for the shooting on August 9 of black 300-lb 18-year-old Michael Brown is expected sometime this week.

Michael Brown (l); Darren Wilson (r)

Michael Brown (l); Darren Wilson (r)

Demonstrators have been mobbing the St. Louis County Courthouse all last week.

Yesterday, demonstrators actually staged a die-in — laying in the middle of a street in University City, Mo., near Ferguson.

Ferguson die-in, University City, Mo

Ferguson protesters already had looted over 100 businesses in the St. Louis area, but the Justice for Mike Brown protest group released a list of new potential targets that includes not just the expected Ferguson City Hall and the County Courthouse, but also targets like Anheuser Busch and Boeing that have NOTHING to do with the Michael Brown situation.

ferguson-market-looting

As the Ferguson police and police nationwide brace themselves for unrest, they should know that none other than their big boss, the president of the United States, is playing puppet master, orchestrating and planning with protest leaders.

On November 5, the day after the midterm elections that delivered him a stunning blow from the electorate, Obama met with Ferguson protest leaders to ensure that they “stay on course” — whatever that means. (See “Beware of Obama, the wounded vengeful narcissist”)

The meeting was not on Obama’s daily schedule, which means the American public aren’t supposed to know about the meeting. That, in turn, means the meeting is supposed to be a secret.

Buried in a long New York Times article on Ferguson, Nov. 16, 2014, is this fascinating piece of information (colored red below):

[Protest] leaders here [Ferguson] acknowledge that there are disagreements about what form of response is fitting and whether militant acts might spill over into violence.

At least one group has said on Twitter that it was offering a reward for information on the whereabouts of the officer, Darren Wilson, and, at another point, that it was “restocking on 7.62 & 9 mm ammo.” 

[...] About 50 organizations…have joined forces in a “Don’t Shoot Coalition,” and the level of planning is intense…. some leaders say they intend to carry out their acts of protest even if the grand jury brings charges against Officer Wilson to show that the issues raised by this case reach beyond a single shooting.

At times, there has been a split between national civil rights leaders and the younger leaders on the ground here, who see their efforts as more immediate, less passive than an older generation’s….

Some of the national leaders met with President Obama on Nov. 5 for a gathering that included a conversation about Ferguson.

According to the Rev. Al Sharpton, who has appeared frequently in St. Louis with the Brown family and delivered a speech at Mr. Brown’s funeral, Mr. Obama “was concerned about Ferguson staying on course in terms of pursuing what it was that he knew we were advocating. He said he hopes that we’re doing all we can to keep peace.”

Obama said he hopes that protest organizers are doing all they can to keep peace?

What a load of bovine excrement!

Demonstrations began immediately after Michael Brown’s death on Aug. 9, and have continued nearly every night since. Some of the protests became violent. Stores were looted. Demonstrators threw gasoline bombs and tried to set fires. The police used tear gas and rubber bullets.

That’s what Obama means by the Ferguson demonstrators “staying on course.”

H/t Gateway Pundit

See also:

~Eowyn

Pentagon pressed to change program arming police with military gear

In the six years of Obama’s presidency, America has become increasingly militarized — not our troops abroad, but right here at home — and transforming before our eyes into a police state. (See “Police State U.S.A.”)

40 civilian agencies of the federal government now have armed divisions. Those of us who are not low-information voters are familiar with the alarming purchases of guns, rifles, and lethal hollow-point bullets by the Department of Homeland Security and other agencies, including the Department of Education!

The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution 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.

Increasingly, however, police across America are violating the 4th Amendment by storming into homes, armed to the teeth in military gear, under the pretext of apprehending some suspected criminal. (See “Obama regime supplies military-grade arms to police”)

The most egregious example took place on April 19, 2013.

During a manhunt in the Boston suburb of Watertown, MA, for Boston Marathon bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, heavily-armed SWAT police and federal agents spent the day storming people’s homes and performing illegal searches, ripping people from their homes at gunpoint, marching the residents out with their hands raised above their heads in submission, and then storming into their homes to perform warrantless searches. (See “Boston Bombing: Getting the sheeple used to the police state”)

Watertown2Watertown1

Charles Hoskinson reports for the Washington Examiner that last Thursday, Nov. 13, 2014, reacting to images of heavily armed police amid the Ferguson racial protests, a House Armed Services subcommittee looked into the issue of the militarization of police.

“In light of these and other disturbing events around the country, it is incumbent on us to review this Department of Defense program,” said Rep. Niki Tsongas (D-Mass.), referring to Ferguson.

But Pentagon officials and representatives of national law enforcement groups told the committee that although the Defense Department is overhauling the program that gives surplus military equipment to local police departments, there is good reason to keep it going.

Alan Estevez (principal deputy undersecretary of defense for acquisition, logistics and technology) and Vice Adm. Mark Harnitchek (director of the Defense Logistics Agency) said that 96% of the equipment transferred under the program is non-lethal items such as commercial vehicles, office furniture and supplies, generators, tents, tarps, tool kits, first-aid kits, blankets, safety glasses and hand tools — not the small arms and armored vehicles such as the MRAPs used by troops in Afghanistan and Iraq.

___________

Translated, that means at least 4% of the equipment “transferred” to local police are LETHAL (see below). Don’t you feel better now? /sarc

police state

Harnitchek said that the program does not include items that have only offensive military value, such as belt-fed machine guns. “None of those are authorized for transfer.” He said Pentagon officials have removed some items that were previously provided after determining they were not appropriate for police use, such as military helmets, body armor and camouflage uniforms currently used by U.S. troops.

I don’t like seeing any of the police agencies in my state in military-style uniforms. I think that’s un-American,” responded Rep. Austin Scott (R-Ga).

But the program remains controversial, and lawmakers have been putting pressure on the Pentagon for further changes and stricter accountability of how the equipment is used. Some want the program eliminated outright, a proposal that drew pushback from representatives of national police groups.

1. Mark Lomax, executive director of the National Tactical Officers Association, said, “The 1033 program has provided the necessary equipment to protect our brave officers and provide security and effective response to our communities.”

2. Jim Bueermann, president of the Police Foundation and the retired chief of the Redlands, Calif., police department, said, “Completely eliminating it could have substantial impact on public safety and local budgets.” Bueermann proposed a number of reforms that would make the program more accountable to local communities, including:

  • Public input and approval of a local governing body before police receive any surplus military equipment.
  • Public disclosure of how and how often the equipment is to be used.
  • Requiring police officers be trained on the proper use of the equipment.

Though the Pentagon requires police departments to demonstrate eligibility for transfers and to maintain control of inventory, the program as it is today does not include local oversight, and the Defense Department does not dictate the ways in which they are used by local police.

~Eowyn

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 4,820 other followers

%d bloggers like this: