Tag Archives: Michael Bloomberg

De Blasio aide blames Bloomberg for growing number of homeless New Yorkers

Shocker, neither commie wants to man up to this mess.

deblasio and bloomberg

NY Daily News: It’s not his fault. The de Blasio administration, which has been under fire for the growing number of homeless New Yorkers, is pushing back and blaming former Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

One of Mayor de Blasio’s top aides took to Twitter Tuesday to point out the city’s shelter population exploded under Bloomberg. “Who was mayor during time when NYC homeless numbered 25,000 in 2002 and jumped to 53,000 by 2013. Not @BilldeBlasio,” press secretary Karen Hinton tweeted.

Her comment came hours after MSNBC host Joe Scarborough ripped de Blasio on air for 10 minutes, saying his “misguided liberalism” is contributing to the homelessness crisis.

lauren bacall

“There are a lot of liberal New Yorkers that are sick and tired of this happening with de Blasio,” Scarborough, a former Republican congressman from Florida who lives in New Canaan, Conn., ranted. “He can run a social experiment somewhere else, he can go to Philadelphia if he wants to run it.”

“Talk from pundits is cheap,” Hinton said. She said in the “face of past deep cuts to successful programs,” de Blasio has offered more support services and more care for the mentally ill homeless and increased affordable housing.

The number of people living in city shelters is close to 57,000, down from a historic high of 59,068 in February — which was a 10% jump from the number of people who lived in shelters when de Blasio took office in January 2014.

Numbers spiked after the city eliminated the Advantage Program, which gave rent subsidies up to $1,000 a month to select homeless families, following state budget cuts in 2011.

Bloomberg said on the radio that year that the program might have encouraged people to become homeless. “One theory is that some people have been coming into the homeless system, the shelter system, in order to qualify for a program that helps you move out of the homeless system,” he said.

Mary Brosnahan, of Coalition for the Homeless, said Bloomberg’s policies have contributed greatly to the uptick in homelessness in recent years. “He never really believed housing was the solution,” she said. “It was always, ‘Get a job.’ ”

A spokesman for Bloomberg declined comment.

On Monday, former Mayor Rudy Giuliani told NBC New York that he recently filed a complaint about a homeless man on his block. He said as mayor his policy was to “chase ’em, and they either get the treatment that they need or you chase ‘em out of the city,” he said.

His comments angered Brosnahan. “Asking Giuliani for advice on homelessness is like asking Bill Cosby to pour your wife a drink,” she said.


After Charleston church shooting, Republican strategist Karl Rove joins chorus calling for gun control

Rahm Emanuel, Obama’s first White House adviser and now mayor of gun-control and gun-homicide Chicago, famously said “Never let a serious crisis go to waste.”

Even before the bodies of the nine blacks allegedly shot to death by Dylann Roof in a church in Charleston, SC, went cold, the usual voices calling for gun control are heard, notably:

  • Charleston Mayor Joe Riley blamed the killings on the “easy ability for people to gain possession” of guns. He said, “I personally believe there are far too many guns out there, and access to guns, it’s far too easy. Our society has not been able to deal with that yet.” He then used the church shooting as “another example of why” more gun-control measures should be enacted.
  • Hillary Clinton, in a speech on June 20 at a conference of U.S. mayors, called for “common-sense” gun control measures and said the Charleston shooting was not an “isolated” tragedy, but a chilling reminder of enduring racism and “bigotry” in the U.S. (Source: WSJ)
  • Barack Obama echoed Riley, saying “We don’t have all the facts, but we do know that once again, innocent people were killed in part because someone who wanted to inflict harm had no trouble getting their hand on a gun.”
Joseph P. Riley Jr.

Joseph P. Riley Jr.

Democrat Joseph P. Riley Jr. will be retiring next year after 40 years (!) as Charleston’s mayor. Coincidentally or not, Riley is a member of the Mayors Against Illegal Guns Coalition, a bi-partisan gun control group co-chaired by former New York mayor Michael Bloomberg and Boston mayor Thomas Menino.

Yesterday, June 21, on “Fox News Sunday,” Republican strategist and longtime gun rights advocate Karl Rove joined the gun control chorus. He opined that the only way to stop gun-related violence like the Charleston church massacre is to repeal Americans’ Second Amendment rights. Sounding like a teenager with his profligate use of the word “basically,” Rove said:

“I mean basically the only way to guarantee that we will dramatically reduce acts of violence involving guns is to basically remove guns from society, and until somebody gets enough ‘oomph’ to repeal the Second Amendment, that’s not going to happen.”

The Charleston church shooting is tailor-made for gun control advocates. For that reason, although I’m weary to the bone with false flags, I will look into the shooting and report on my findings tomorrow.

See also “Charleston church killer Dylann Roof’s racist manifesto“.

H/t Barry Soetoro, Esq. and Kelleigh.


Gun control propaganda: video of fake gun store with fake customers

A pro-gun control group that calls itself States United Against Gun Violence did a video of a gun store wherein potential customers were dissuaded from buying guns by the store clerk.

There’s just one big thing wrong with the video: It’s fake. Both the potential “customers” and the “store clerk” are actors. Even the “gun store” is fake.

From Infowars:

“That’s quite the ‘hidden camera social experiment’ when your [filming] permit is for ‘actors’ to be ‘interviewed,’” David Codrea of the Shooter’s Log reported, who filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for the filming permit.

Additionally, the gun control group may not have followed the city’s gun laws because, as Codrea pointed out, records for the fake gun store’s inventory were no where to be found.

“Noting the complexity of special theatrical permit requirements for applicants and dealers, and restrictive New York laws on imitation firearms, it’s surprising to find that a fake gun shop can be set up containing hundreds of replica weapons with no paperwork, apparently on just the say-so of on-site NYPD officers,” he wrote.

So basically, a gun control group filmed a fake clerk of a fake gun store obtaining fake reactions from fake customers and then presented the video as genuine to the public.

That’s the anti-gun movement in a nutshell; unlike pro-gun activists who volunteer their free time to organize public rallies to promote the Second Amendment, authoritarians hire paid actors to deceive the public into surrendering their gun rights.

That’s because gun control did not originate from the grassroots but is rather a top-down movement bankrolled by powerful politicians, such as former New York mayor Michael Bloomberg, who want nothing more than to expand government powers at the expense of individual liberties.

H/t Barry Soetoro, Esq., and FOTM’s Three Percent


Despite Michael Bloomberg’s money, pro-gun sheriff wins in Wisconsin

Yesterday, I did a disheartening post about a research study that found ordinary Americans have a near-zero impact on public policy. Instead, government policy is controlled by the monied élite.

Frequent FOTM commenter Seumas proposed that our battle should begin “at the local level, and not try for too big a fish too soon, get the town/city and county governments free of corruption first, including the police departments,” with which I heartily agree. It is at the local level that we truly can effectuate changes.

Below is one encouraging example of voters defeating monied interests.

Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr.Sheriff David A. Clark Jr.

Cheryl K. Chumley reports for The Washington Times, Aug. 13, 2014, that pro-gun incumbent sheriff David Clarke in Milwaukee County, Wisconsin, beat back the anti-gun money of former New York City Mayor and billionaire Michael Bloomberg to win his primary contest for re-election by a handy margin, 52% vs. 48%.

100% of precincts have reported, giving Sheriff Clarke a 4,700 vote lead. But his Bloomberg-backed opponent, Chris Moews, has yet to concede, deciding instead to wait for the count on the 6,000 absentee ballots.

Clarke is a Democrat and is now almost sure to win in November because no Republican is challenging him.

Sheriff Clarke made national headlines with a public service ad in 2013 in which he stated, in part: “I’m Sheriff David Clarke and I want to talk to you about something personal: Your safety. It’s no longer a spectator sport. I need you in the game. But are you ready? With officers laid off and furloughed, simply calling 911 and waiting is no longer your best option. … Consider taking a certified safety course in handling of firearms, so you can defend yourself until we get there. You have a duty to protect yourself and your family. We’re partners now. Can I count on you?”

The sheriff was also a featured speaker at the National Rifle Association’s annual meeting in Indianapolis — during which he harshly criticized Bloomberg’s anti-gun efforts.

The race took on national tones just last week when Bloomberg — who helps head the Mayors Against Illegal Guns group and has taken up a personal crusade to scale back Second Amendment rights — threw in $150,000 to defeat Sheriff Clarke. That amount was more than what Sheriff Clarke and his opponent had spent on their entire campaigns.

Happily, Bloomberg’s efforts to sway voters down the anti-gun path failed. dancingbanana


Pro-amnesty billionaires should open their mansions to illegals

billionaires for amnesty

A country is like a house, but with borders instead of doors.

Anyone who enters your home without your invitation or permission are trespassers. The same applies to a country.

But Barack Obama, with the active collusion of the governments of Mexico and Guatemala, has decided to throw open America’s southern border by refusing to enforce border security and immediately sending back or deporting trespassers.

In so doing, the POS is committing dereliction of duty as the head of the U.S. government, and of malfeasance — an act that is criminal or wrongful which causes injury of another person. In this case, “another person” actually numbers in the millions. They are the citizens, legal residents and legal immigrants of the United States, as well as people across the world who respect our laws, having applied to and are patiently awaiting immigration to the U.S.

President Lucifer has powerful and vocal allies not only in the MSM but also among the richest and most powerful — the 0.1 percenters. They include multi-billionaires Sheldon Adelson (casino mogul), Michael Bloomberg (finance-media mogul and former NY mayor who wants to change the U.S. Constitution to prevent future Boston Marathon bombings), Warren Buffet (investor and abortion funder), Bill Gates (founder of Microsoft and funder of a remote-controlled contraceptive-abortion microchip implant), Charles and David Koch (industrialists and businessmen), Rupert Murdoch (media mogul), George Soros (currency profiteer and manipulator), and Mark Zuckerberg (founder of Facebook).

As Hunter Wallace observes in the blog, Occidental Dissent:

Whether Left or Right, Republican or Democrat, Jew or Gentile, the billionaires in this country – the “1 percent” who rule the American oligarchy – overwhelmingly support amnesty for illegal aliens. The GOP establishment, the Obama administration, the Left, the SPLC [Southern Poverty Law Center], and the “1 percent” are on the same side of this issue.

Are they on your side?

In the video below, Bill Whittle asks the pro-amnesty billionaires to match their deeds to their rhetoric by opening the doors of their mansions to house the illegals flooding across the US-Mexico border, because that effectively is what they are asking from you, me, and the non-élite American people who will have to cough up even more in taxes to pay for the costs of transporting, housing, feeding and schooling HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of illegals.


Were Boston Marathon bombings a false flag? – What’s a false flag?

False flag! False flag!

That’s the cry on the Internet as soon as another traumatic incident of mass casualties occurs in the United States.

It is said that the 9/11 terrorist attacks were a false flag. Skeptics of the Sandy Hook school massacre suspect it was a false flag. The latest incident — that of the two bombings at the April 15th Boston Marathon — is no exception.

I was aware of the latest cries of “False flag!” but was very reluctant to explore their credibility because if proven to be true, I think my last remaining shred of trust in my government would be obliterated.

But the cries persist. Notwithstanding my reluctance, I am undertaking a series of posts to explore that subject — in as responsible and careful a manner as I am able and as the gravity of a “false flag” accusation demands. This is the first post in that series.

Of all my (too many) years of undergraduate and graduate schooling, hands down the most useful course I’d ever taken was one on epistemology and the philosophy of science, from which I learnt how to think clearly and intelligently.

Epistemology is simply a fancy word referring to that branch in Philosophy that studies the nature of human knowledge:

  • The four different types (or domains) of truth claims: Empirical; Analytical (Math & Logic); Metaphysical; and Normative.
  • The criteria we use to evaluate and determine the truth or falsity of any truth claim (which depends on whether the claim is empirical, analytical, metaphysical, or normative).

But before one can even begin to evaluate the truth or falsity of some proposition, we must first have a clear idea about what the proposition says.

In this case — on whether the Boston bombings were a false flag event — before we examine the evidence (or lack thereof), we must first define the term “false flag” and list the criterial attributes of what constitutes a false flag incident. The definition and criterial attributes, in turn, will serve as our standards against which to assess the evidence.

What’s a False Flag?

From Wikipedia:

The name “false flag” has its origins in naval warfare where a flag other than the belligerent’s true battle flag is used as a ruse de guerre. […] False flag (or black flag) describes covert military or paramilitary operations designed to deceive in such a way that the operations appear as though they are being carried out by other entities, groups or nations than those who actually planned and executed them. Operations carried during peace-time by civilian organizations, as well as covert government agencies, may by extension be called false flag operations if they seek to hide the real organization behind an operation.

As the term is used in contemporary America, a “false flag” incident is some traumatic public event that is:

  • False: The public are given an untruthful version of the event by the government and the media. The falsity can range from no one actually had been killed or hurt (it was all theater); to some of the alleged victims are real; to all the alleged victims are real but the alleged perpetrator(s) is a fall guy who was set up by the “real” conspirators behind the scenes.
  • Results in a “rallying around the flag” effect: Whatever the true nature of the “false flag” event, the objective is to arouse and manipulate the emotions (fear, anger, outrage, indignation) of the American people so that they’ll “rally around the flag” in an outburst of patriotism, supplying the current White House occupant and his (and his party’s) policies with their support and loyalty.

As an example, it is said the Sandy Hook massacre was a contrived event engineered to effect gun control. Conjectures about the massacre range from the extreme of no one in the school was killed (although Adam and Nancy Lanza were), to the 20 students and 6 adults of the school said to be killed really are dead but Adam Lanza wasn’t the killer (which would explain why Social Security had a date-of-death of Dec. 13, 2012 for him — one day before the massacre).

This blog on ZeroHedge lists governments from around the world that’ve admitted they carry out false flag terror.

What are some of the suggested signature attributes of a False Flag event?

1. Government officials and their mouthpieces use the incident to advance their policy agenda. This most certainly was and is the case with the Sandy Hook massacre. In the case of the Boston bombings, New York mayor Bloomberg already is using the bombings as a pretext, declaring that “our laws and our interpretation of the Constitution have to change” because of the bombings. (See also “Boston Bombing: Getting the sheeple used to the police state).

2. The co-occurrence of a government drill at the same time as the traumatic event and in around the same place. The purpose of the concurrent drill is to provide special ops personnel (who are the real perpetrators of the false flag incident) and/or professional crisis actors with a cover story should they be seen or caught on film at the false flag event. (See “Remarkable resemblance of Sandy Hook victims and professional crisis actors)

Indeed, the federal government’s Department of Homeland Security (DHS) conducts HSEEP drills/exercises across America, in partnership with local/state governments. HSEEP refers to Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program. In the case of Sandy Hook, on the day of the shooting massacre at Sandy Hill Elementary School (SHES), Dec. 14, 2012, HSEEP conducted a “training course” drill, ”FEMA L-366 Planning for the Needs of Children in Disasters,” at 2800 Main Street, Bridgeport, CT, which is about 14 miles from SHES.

It is claimed that in the case of the Boston Marathon bombings, there was also a drill both before and during the marathon, and that suspicious-looking private military operatives were seen (and photographed) at the bombings.

3. Lastly, if we have evidence of outright fakery, for example, victims who supposedly were killed or wounded, but aren’t, then the event being a false flag is a no-brainer. Alas, clear and incontrovertible evidence is hard to come by, which is why some find significance in the odd behaviors of Sandy Hook parents, quickly switching from laughing and joking to near-choking on tears, and the absence of tears or of other signs of weeping, such as a red nose; and in memorial, donation, and other Sandy Hook massacre websites having a creation date that predates the massacre.

These subjects, and more, will be explored in my posts to come. So put your thinking caps on and stay tuned!



Hitler Bloomberg: Boston Bombing means Constitution will have to change

Terrorism is extra-procedural violence to effectuate a political end that cannot be achieved via “normal” political methods.

Scholars on terrorism warn us that one of the objectives of terrorists is to incrementally push the target government to adopt increasingly draconian policies and methods — all in the name of national security and ensuring the people’s safety. In this manner, the government more and more becomes dictatorial. The hoped-for result is a populace increasingly unhappy and alienated from the government, and the government’s concomitant loss of legitimacy.

We are seeing that malignant process unfurling before our very eyes.

The 9/11 terrorist attacks led to the Bush administration’s Patriot Act and a never officially-declared state of emergency. Next, while declaring that the War on Terror was over, the Obama regime nevertheless not only continued but exacerbated the Patriot Act with the NDAA — the infamous National Defense Authorization Act that “authorizes” the president and the military to arrest and indefinitely detain U.S. citizens without charge or trial.

Now, right on cue, New York mayor Michael “Hitler” Bloomberg — whose every bone and sinew seem bent on restricting the liberties of New Yorkers, from super-sized soft drinks to breastfeeding to gun control — says our “interpretation” of the United States Constitution “will have to change” after the 4/15 Boston Marathon terrorist bombings, to allow for greater security to stave off future attacks.

Hitler Bloomberg

Jill Colvin r
said during a press conference in Midtown:

“The people who are worried about privacy have a legitimate worry. But we live in a complex world where you’re going to have to have a level of security greater than you did back in the olden days, if you will. And our laws and our interpretation of the Constitution, I think, have to change.

Look, we live in a very dangerous world. We know there are people who want to take away our freedoms. New Yorkers probably know that as much if not more than anybody else after the terrible tragedy of 9/11.

We have to understand that in the world going forward, we’re going to have more cameras and that kind of stuff. That’s good in some sense, but it’s different from what we are used to.”

Bloomberg then pointed to the gun debate and noted the courts have allowed for increasingly stringent regulations in response to ever-more powerful weapons. “Clearly the  Supreme Court has recognized that you have to have different interpretations of the Second Amendment and what it applies to and reasonable gun laws.”

While urging that our “interpretation” of the Constitution “will have to change,” Bloomberg is insistent that Muslims must be protected. He pontificates: “What we cant do is let the protection get in the way of us enjoying our freedoms. You still want to let people practice their religion, no matter what that religion is. And I think one of the great dangers here is going and categorizing anybody from one religion as a terrorist. That’s not true … That would let the terrorists win. That’s what they want us to do.”

Bloomberg said nothing about a U.S. military training manual putting Christians as the No. 1 “extremist” threat to America.

Yeah, Bloomberg, you really care about religions and religious freedom — but only if the religion is Islam and religious freedom means Muslims’ construction of a mosque at Ground Zero.