TiLTNews Network: Earth Watch - Freedom is defined by the ability of citizens to live without government interference, not by safety. It is easy to clamor for government security when terrible things happen; but liberty is given true meaning when we support it without exception, and we will be safer for it ~ Dr. Ron Paul
Wednesday, August 27, 2014
Independent Living Bullion
Independent Living Bullion.
https://www.independentlivingbullion.com/news/2014/08/25/secret-buyer-of-us-debt-emerges-to-fill-feds-shoes-000593?AID=3818#disqus_thread
Secret Buyer of U.S. Debt Emerges to Fill Fed’s Shoes Precious Metals Market Update
August 25th, 2014
Reported strength in the U.S. economy is boosting the dollar and putting a damper on precious metals at this moment. Increasing geopolitical turmoil around the world has not, as of yet, driven enough buying demand for gold and silver to offset selling related to the brighter economic outlook.
The FOMC minutes released last week confirmed the Fed bond purchase program, which has run nearly continuously for the past 6 years, will end in the fall. Meanwhile, they’ve suggested increasing the key Fed funds rate within a few months thereafter.
Fed Chair Janet Yellen and crew have not made a credible case that the housing and stock markets won’t suffer a large setback when rates go up significantly. But investors aren't asking.
How Long Can the Fed Have It Both Ways?
https://www.independentlivingbullion.com/news/2014/08/25/secret-buyer-of-us-debt-emerges-to-fill-feds-shoes-000593?AID=3818#disqus_thread
Secret Buyer of U.S. Debt Emerges to Fill Fed’s Shoes Precious Metals Market Update
August 25th, 2014
Reported strength in the U.S. economy is boosting the dollar and putting a damper on precious metals at this moment. Increasing geopolitical turmoil around the world has not, as of yet, driven enough buying demand for gold and silver to offset selling related to the brighter economic outlook.
The FOMC minutes released last week confirmed the Fed bond purchase program, which has run nearly continuously for the past 6 years, will end in the fall. Meanwhile, they’ve suggested increasing the key Fed funds rate within a few months thereafter.
Fed Chair Janet Yellen and crew have not made a credible case that the housing and stock markets won’t suffer a large setback when rates go up significantly. But investors aren't asking.
How Long Can the Fed Have It Both Ways?
Fed officials began tapering late last year. Nine months later, the flow of freshly printed cash flooding into the markets to buy Treasuries and mortgage securities has dwindled from more than $80 billion per month to a “mere” $25 billion.
By October, Fed bond purchases using newly created money appear likely to end altogether. (But Fed officials have not suggested they would sell the trillions of dollars in bonds they now hold.) Interest rate hikes could be coming next year.
Partly in reaction to this shift in Fed policy, the dollar has strengthened, and the precious metals markets have struggled to move up.
But some market movements are difficult to explain. Record equity market valuations and lower Treasury yields don’t make a lot of sense if the flow of newly printed Fed cash is coming to an end.
Markets are famous for being irrational. There are plenty of examples of counterintuitive moves persisting for some time. But we don’t think investors should expect the current dichotomy to last forever.
The strength in the market for U.S. Treasuries is perhaps the most bizarre. Prior to tapering, the Fed bought more than 80% of all new issuance. Some rightly wonder how the central bank could now prevent bond yields from rising as needed to attract replacement buyers.
By October, Fed bond purchases using newly created money appear likely to end altogether. (But Fed officials have not suggested they would sell the trillions of dollars in bonds they now hold.) Interest rate hikes could be coming next year.
Partly in reaction to this shift in Fed policy, the dollar has strengthened, and the precious metals markets have struggled to move up.
But some market movements are difficult to explain. Record equity market valuations and lower Treasury yields don’t make a lot of sense if the flow of newly printed Fed cash is coming to an end.
Markets are famous for being irrational. There are plenty of examples of counterintuitive moves persisting for some time. But we don’t think investors should expect the current dichotomy to last forever.
The strength in the market for U.S. Treasuries is perhaps the most bizarre. Prior to tapering, the Fed bought more than 80% of all new issuance. Some rightly wonder how the central bank could now prevent bond yields from rising as needed to attract replacement buyers.
Perhaps all is not quite as it appears.
About the time the Fed implemented the first round of tapering late last year, a mysterious new buyer suddenly appeared on the Belgian-based Euroclear clearinghouse. This buyer filled the enormous demand void left by the Fed. The surge in holdings is attributed to Belgium itself in the reports, but don’t be misled. The tiny nation is simply where Euroclear is based, and the real buyer remains a well-guarded secret.
The secret buyer of U.S. government debt may well be the European Central Bank in cooperation with the Fed. It is also quite possible our privately held and unaccountable central bank is working with some other proxy. The market-manipulators at the Fed can certainly create the illusion of buyers clamoring to buy Treasuries at epic low yields -- even if they can’t have it in reality. The Fed is all about psychological manipulation.
Clint Siegner is a Director at ILB, the nation's largest and fastest-growing dealer in low-premium precious metal coins, rounds and bars. Siegner, a graduate of Linfield College in Oregon, puts his experience in business management along with his passion for personal liberty, limited government and honest money into the development of ILB's brand and reach. This includes writing extensively on the bullion markets and their intersection with policy and world affairs.
About the time the Fed implemented the first round of tapering late last year, a mysterious new buyer suddenly appeared on the Belgian-based Euroclear clearinghouse. This buyer filled the enormous demand void left by the Fed. The surge in holdings is attributed to Belgium itself in the reports, but don’t be misled. The tiny nation is simply where Euroclear is based, and the real buyer remains a well-guarded secret.
The secret buyer of U.S. government debt may well be the European Central Bank in cooperation with the Fed. It is also quite possible our privately held and unaccountable central bank is working with some other proxy. The market-manipulators at the Fed can certainly create the illusion of buyers clamoring to buy Treasuries at epic low yields -- even if they can’t have it in reality. The Fed is all about psychological manipulation.
Clint Siegner is a Director at ILB, the nation's largest and fastest-growing dealer in low-premium precious metal coins, rounds and bars. Siegner, a graduate of Linfield College in Oregon, puts his experience in business management along with his passion for personal liberty, limited government and honest money into the development of ILB's brand and reach. This includes writing extensively on the bullion markets and their intersection with policy and world affairs.
Monday, August 25, 2014
Holocaust survivors pen open letter condemning Israel’s Gaza war
http://rt.com/news/182472-israel-holocaust-gaza-war/
Holocaust survivors pen open letter condemning Israel’s Gaza war
Published time: August 24, 2014 17:26
Palestinians look at the remains of a commercial center, which witnesses said was hit by an Israeli air strike on Saturday, in Rafah in the southern Gaza Strip August 24, 2014 (Reuters / Ibraheem Abu Mustafa)
Tags
Army, Conflict, Israel, Military, Religion,War
Over 300 survivors and descendants of the Holocaust have published an open letter condemning what they call Israel's "genocide" in Gaza. http://ijsn.net/gaza/survivors-and-descendants-letter/
The letter slamming the “massacre of Palestinians in Gaza and the ongoing occupation and colonization of historic Palestine” was signed by 327 descendants and survivors of the Nazi genocide and placed by the International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network as an advertisement in the New York Times.
1The letter also condemns politicians and opinion writers who have, the signatories say, openly called for the “genocide of Palestinians” in what they say is an “extreme, racist dehumanization of Palestinians in Israeli society.”
The survivors point to the death of more than 2,100 Palestinians in Israel’s campaign, many of whom are children and the bombing of UN shelters, homes, hospitals and universities. On the Israeli side, 68 people have been killed, mainly soldiers.
The letter concludes by calling the Gaza campaign “genocide of Palestinian people” and demands an end to the Israeli blockade of the tiny strip of land.
Hollywood against Hamas
The letter was published just moments after 190 influential people in Hollywood put their names on a statement condemning the actions of Hamas, saying the organization “cannot be allowed to rain rockets on Israeli cities”.
A general view of the rubble of a residential tower, which witnesses said was destroyed in an Israeli air strike, is seen in Gaza City August 24, 2014 (Reuters / Mohammed Salem)
It was published by the Creative Community for Peace, which was founded in 2011 and aims to bring together “prominent members of the entertainment industry to counter the cultural boycott against Israel and promote an accurate image of the Jewish state.”
The list included actors Minnie Driver, Sylvester Stallone and Arnold Schwarzenegger, although the vast majority of actors did not put their names to the statement.
The statement referred to Article 7 of Hamas’ charter which says, “There is a Jew behind me, come and kill him!” which they say reflects Hamas’ true nature.
However, the statement is also headlined “Commitment to justice and peace”.
Hamas cannot be allowed to “hold its own people hostage. Hospitals are for healing, not for hiding weapons. Schools are for learning, not for launching missiles. Children are our hope not our human shields,” it reads.
Israel tightened its blockade of Gaza in 2007 after Hamas, which rejects Israel's right to exist, took control of the territory, having won elections the year before and ousted political rivals Fatah.
Tel-Aviv’s operation Protective Edge which started in early July was triggered by rocket attacks by the military wing of Hamas on Israeli. Hamas has been shelling Israel’s south with barrage of rockets, some of which made it as far as the capital’s metropolitan area.
Since then, over 17,000 homes have been destroyed or damaged beyond repair in the Gaza Strip, making around 100,000 Palestinians homeless, since the war began on July 8, according to UN estimates.
Egypt called on Israel and the Palestinians on Saturday to halt hostilities and resume peace talks, but both sides kept up attacks.
Holocaust survivors pen open letter condemning Israel’s Gaza war
Published time: August 24, 2014 17:26
Palestinians look at the remains of a commercial center, which witnesses said was hit by an Israeli air strike on Saturday, in Rafah in the southern Gaza Strip August 24, 2014 (Reuters / Ibraheem Abu Mustafa)
Tags
Army, Conflict, Israel, Military, Religion,War
Over 300 survivors and descendants of the Holocaust have published an open letter condemning what they call Israel's "genocide" in Gaza. http://ijsn.net/gaza/survivors-and-descendants-letter/
The letter slamming the “massacre of Palestinians in Gaza and the ongoing occupation and colonization of historic Palestine” was signed by 327 descendants and survivors of the Nazi genocide and placed by the International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network as an advertisement in the New York Times.
1The letter also condemns politicians and opinion writers who have, the signatories say, openly called for the “genocide of Palestinians” in what they say is an “extreme, racist dehumanization of Palestinians in Israeli society.”
The survivors point to the death of more than 2,100 Palestinians in Israel’s campaign, many of whom are children and the bombing of UN shelters, homes, hospitals and universities. On the Israeli side, 68 people have been killed, mainly soldiers.
The letter concludes by calling the Gaza campaign “genocide of Palestinian people” and demands an end to the Israeli blockade of the tiny strip of land.
Hollywood against Hamas
The letter was published just moments after 190 influential people in Hollywood put their names on a statement condemning the actions of Hamas, saying the organization “cannot be allowed to rain rockets on Israeli cities”.
A general view of the rubble of a residential tower, which witnesses said was destroyed in an Israeli air strike, is seen in Gaza City August 24, 2014 (Reuters / Mohammed Salem)
It was published by the Creative Community for Peace, which was founded in 2011 and aims to bring together “prominent members of the entertainment industry to counter the cultural boycott against Israel and promote an accurate image of the Jewish state.”
The list included actors Minnie Driver, Sylvester Stallone and Arnold Schwarzenegger, although the vast majority of actors did not put their names to the statement.
The statement referred to Article 7 of Hamas’ charter which says, “There is a Jew behind me, come and kill him!” which they say reflects Hamas’ true nature.
However, the statement is also headlined “Commitment to justice and peace”.
Hamas cannot be allowed to “hold its own people hostage. Hospitals are for healing, not for hiding weapons. Schools are for learning, not for launching missiles. Children are our hope not our human shields,” it reads.
Israel tightened its blockade of Gaza in 2007 after Hamas, which rejects Israel's right to exist, took control of the territory, having won elections the year before and ousted political rivals Fatah.
Tel-Aviv’s operation Protective Edge which started in early July was triggered by rocket attacks by the military wing of Hamas on Israeli. Hamas has been shelling Israel’s south with barrage of rockets, some of which made it as far as the capital’s metropolitan area.
Since then, over 17,000 homes have been destroyed or damaged beyond repair in the Gaza Strip, making around 100,000 Palestinians homeless, since the war began on July 8, according to UN estimates.
Egypt called on Israel and the Palestinians on Saturday to halt hostilities and resume peace talks, but both sides kept up attacks.
Bergdahl swap – Obama used illegal means say US investigators | shaunynews
Bergdahl swap – Obama used illegal means say US investigators | shaunynews
The Pentagon violated the law when it swapped a soldier held in captivity for five years in Afghanistan for five Taliban detainees without giving politicians sufficient notice, US investigators have found. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) said that President Barack Obama’s administration violated a law, which bars defence officials from using federal funds to transfer any Guantanamo detainees without giving key committees in Congress at least 30 days’ notice. The Department of Defence used $988,400 of its wartime funding for the transfer that freed Sergeant Bowe Bergdahl. The GAO also said on Thursday that the department had spent money that was not “expressly appropriated for the purpose”. With a 2014 law, Obama gained some flexibility in transferring prisoners from the US detention centre at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
But he was still required to notify Congress 30 days in advance. The GAO said members of congress were advised by telephone of the decision to make the swap on May 31, the day it took place, and June 1, and received written notice on June 2, the AFP news agency reported. At the time, Republicans, and even some of Obama’s Democratic allies, fumed over what they considered a bad and dangerous deal. The White House and Pentagon defended the transfer, arguing that protecting US lives was the executive branch’s constitutional obligation. They cited Bergdahl’s rapidly deteriorating health and security to justify quick action and keeping Congress in the dark until the last minute. “We believe it was lawfully done and lawfully conducted and this was a judgment shared with the Justice Department,” Pentagon spokesman Rear Admiral John Kirby told CNN after the GAO released its findings.
Qatar-brokered deal
US Defence Secretary Chuck Hagel has said the deal brokered by Qatar represented the “last, best opportunity” to ensure Bergdahl’s freedom. Bergdahl disappeared from his post at a base in eastern Afghanistan in June 2009. To get him back, five senior Taliban leaders were released from Guantanamo and sent to Qatar, where they are due to remain for one year. The soldier has returned to duty by working a desk job at Fort Sam Houston in Texas. On Wednesday, his lawyer said Bergdahl wanted to leave the military and return to civilian life, the Reuters news agency reported. “It is time for Sergeant Bergdahl to just become plain old Bowe Bergdahl and move on with his life,” Eugene Fidell said. He remains under investigation for leaving his unit in Afghanistan, and a US Army investigator began formal questioning of the former prisoner of war on August 6.
http://redalertpolitics.com/2014/08/21/government-watchdog-says-bergdahl-swap-illegal-doubly-illegal/
The Pentagon violated the law when it swapped a soldier held in captivity for five years in Afghanistan for five Taliban detainees without giving politicians sufficient notice, US investigators have found. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) said that President Barack Obama’s administration violated a law, which bars defence officials from using federal funds to transfer any Guantanamo detainees without giving key committees in Congress at least 30 days’ notice. The Department of Defence used $988,400 of its wartime funding for the transfer that freed Sergeant Bowe Bergdahl. The GAO also said on Thursday that the department had spent money that was not “expressly appropriated for the purpose”. With a 2014 law, Obama gained some flexibility in transferring prisoners from the US detention centre at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
But he was still required to notify Congress 30 days in advance. The GAO said members of congress were advised by telephone of the decision to make the swap on May 31, the day it took place, and June 1, and received written notice on June 2, the AFP news agency reported. At the time, Republicans, and even some of Obama’s Democratic allies, fumed over what they considered a bad and dangerous deal. The White House and Pentagon defended the transfer, arguing that protecting US lives was the executive branch’s constitutional obligation. They cited Bergdahl’s rapidly deteriorating health and security to justify quick action and keeping Congress in the dark until the last minute. “We believe it was lawfully done and lawfully conducted and this was a judgment shared with the Justice Department,” Pentagon spokesman Rear Admiral John Kirby told CNN after the GAO released its findings.
Qatar-brokered deal
US Defence Secretary Chuck Hagel has said the deal brokered by Qatar represented the “last, best opportunity” to ensure Bergdahl’s freedom. Bergdahl disappeared from his post at a base in eastern Afghanistan in June 2009. To get him back, five senior Taliban leaders were released from Guantanamo and sent to Qatar, where they are due to remain for one year. The soldier has returned to duty by working a desk job at Fort Sam Houston in Texas. On Wednesday, his lawyer said Bergdahl wanted to leave the military and return to civilian life, the Reuters news agency reported. “It is time for Sergeant Bergdahl to just become plain old Bowe Bergdahl and move on with his life,” Eugene Fidell said. He remains under investigation for leaving his unit in Afghanistan, and a US Army investigator began formal questioning of the former prisoner of war on August 6.
http://redalertpolitics.com/2014/08/21/government-watchdog-says-bergdahl-swap-illegal-doubly-illegal/
Saturday, August 23, 2014
Rethink Military Action ‘Before Our Men Die’ | Voices of Liberty, Powered by Ron Paul
Rethink Military Action ‘Before Our Men Die’ | Voices of Liberty, Powered by Ron Paul Updated: August 21, 2014 by Ron Paul
Rethink Military Action ‘Before Our Men Die’
August 9, 2014 – The president has forewarned us that we must plan to be in Iraq for a long time. I guess our 24-year involvement hasn’t been enough time to bring unity and democracy to Iraq.
How many more years and how many more lives lost must we endure attempting to justify such a miserable failure in policy? I guess we’re supposed to be pleased because it’s certainly been a bipartisan effort. One of the sickest argument made for continuing our effort and even expanding it is to make sure the men and women who lost their lives did not do so in vain.
How will more losses justify what has already been lost?
The 24-year effort to remake the Middle East and, in particular, Iraq and Afghanistan, was doomed to fail from the start. Many informed Americans from the very beginning in 1990 argued the case for staying out of this effort. They were ignored by both Republican and Democratic leaders. The president suggested the problem is that the Iraqis are not united. They were once, under Saddam Hussein. Getting rid of him solved nothing since the right of self determination was denied.
Permitting the natural desire for smaller and separate government entities could have gone a long way in preventing the chaos which set the stage for the Islamic State invasion armed with American weapons coming from our ridiculous policy of arming the rebels in Syria.
We’re now hearing about the humanitarian concerns for the refugees in in northern Iraq. The real motivation may well be the danger to our military advisors trapped in Erbil—some boots on the ground that never left.
More people should listen to Ronald Reagan as he reflected in his memoirs on the tragic loss of 241 marines in a suicide attack in Beirut in 1983.
We’re now hearing about the humanitarian concerns for the refugees in in northern Iraq. The real motivation may well be the danger to our military advisors trapped in Erbil—some boots on the ground that never left.
More people should listen to Ronald Reagan as he reflected in his memoirs on the tragic loss of 241 marines in a suicide attack in Beirut in 1983.
“Perhaps we didn’t appreciate fully enough the depth of the hatred and the complexity of the problems that made the Middle East such a jungle. The irrationality of Middle Eastern politics forced us to rethink our policy there. If there would be some rethinking of policy before our men die, we would be a lot better off. If that policy had been changed to a neutral position and neutrality, those 241 Marines would be alive today.”
Open Letter of Warning to Governor Nixon From Missouri Oath Keepers
Open Letter of Warning to Governor Nixon From Missouri Oath Keepers
http://campaign.r20.constantcontact.com/render?ca=f5a38c39-4870-4d9c-a743-cc128522e47a&c=587a5b70-cd6d-11e3-b5ca-d4ae5275b3f6&ch=597a6650-cd6d-11e3-b62c-d4ae5275b3f6
An Open Letter To Missouri Governor Nixon from Oath Keepers
There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. - Marine General Smedley Butler - Two-time recipient of the Medal of Honor.
http://campaign.r20.constantcontact.com/render?ca=f5a38c39-4870-4d9c-a743-cc128522e47a&c=587a5b70-cd6d-11e3-b5ca-d4ae5275b3f6&ch=597a6650-cd6d-11e3-b62c-d4ae5275b3f6
An Open Letter To Missouri Governor Nixon from Oath Keepers
There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. - Marine General Smedley Butler - Two-time recipient of the Medal of Honor.
Governor Nixon:
The events in Ferguson have shown us daily that the looting and violence by a few is not being stopped, while the right of the people to peaceably assemble and petition government for redress of grievances is not being respected. The current riot control tactics of the local police, rooted in outmoded techniques developed in the 1950's - and only made worse by the ongoing militarization of our police - are failing the people of Ferguson, giving them a false choice between rampant looting on the one hand, and hyper-militarized police and curfews on the other (which also fail to stop the looting, leaving the mistaken impression among many of the American people that even more militarization and curtailment of free speech and assembly is needed). Our local boots on the ground, made up of retired police officers, military veterans, and intelligence workers (with critical input from current serving Missouri police officers) have answers that could provide the people of Ferguson the relief they need and deserve while respecting their rights. It is time to change a losing game.
The militarized police response we saw in Ferguson did not work. All it did was violate the rights of peaceful protesters and media, alienate the community, and make our country look even more like a police state, with big, intimidating displays of heavily armed, militarized officers, in full "battle-rattle" and backed by BearCat type armored vehicles, firing CS gas and rubber bullets into peaceful protesters and even at media personnel, while failing to stop those relative few who were actually looting, throwing Molotov cocktails, and shooting.
The police focus on peaceful protesters, with lines of policemen equipped in riot gear, in fundamentally static positions - at best, slow, plodding, on-line advances - are easily thwarted by modern looters and thugs with cell phones and team work. Such outdated tactics fail to apprehend those actually looting and shooting.
What they do succeed in doing is alienating the local population while risking additional shooting incidents due to unsafe gun-handling. There were multiple instances of police officers pointing M-4s and sniper rifles at unarmed, peaceful protesters, media, and local residents just going about their business, in displays of spectacularly unsafe weapons discipline and methodology. As one of our police sniper veterans pointed out, even police snipers deployed in response to prior incidents of shots fired should have used spotting scopes to observe the crowd and search for potential threats, not their rifle scopes.
Even worse were the well-publicized incidents of officers routinely pointing M-4s at unarmed protesters at close range for no apparent reason other than to intimidate. An officer facing an actual lethal threat should be moving to cover, not standing there in a static bunch with other officers, using the rifle as a threat display. And a properly trained and disciplined professional keeps his rifle pointed down, where it is pointed in a safe direction but still ready to bring up on target within a second at close range, and it stays pointed down unless and until he identifies an actual lethal threat, while he uses his presence and voice, first and foremost, to control the situation - all without covering anyone with his muzzle.
Such over-the-top threatening displays, with rifles pointed-in indiscriminately at protesters and residents, only anger and frighten the people and reinforce the perception that it is "the police vs. the people" rather than the police vs. a small number of criminals, while risking the lives of the very people our police are supposed to be serving.
And much like over-the top and indiscriminate threat displays and use of force in Iraq lost the hearts and minds of the locals, so too does it lose the battle for hearts and minds here at home - assisting in the agendas of those who wish to divide us along racial lines and create an "us vs. them" mentality among both the people and the police.
The overt displays of heavily armed officers lined up to intimidate the crowds were also tactically unsound for the officers themselves, leaving them exposed in the streets. The more skilled the opposition, the more such tactics fail. So far, it has only been random, inaccurate, handgun fire directed at the police in Ferguson, not rifle fire. Against rifle fire, a long line of exposed officers standing in the open would be a disaster for the police. One active duty police sergeant told us, "I don't want my guys stationary - they just become targets for the thugs throwing bricks and taking pot shots at us with their pistols." The analysts in our group take this kind of feedback from the rank-and-file very seriously, and you should too. And, again, it doesn't get the job done. It doesn't secure the arrest of those who are looting and shooting. It leaves the officers exposed while it only punishes and threatens those who are there to protest - those who are not looting and shooting.
Likewise for the imposition of curfews, which violate the right of the people to peaceably assemble, while also failing to stop the looters and shooters who ignore such decrees. The First Amendment prohibits "abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances" period. It doesn't add on "unless a politician declares a state of emergency and imposes a curfew." Nor does it say "unless other people are looting and being violent, in which case all of you lose your right to peaceably assemble." Curfews punish the peaceable majority for the actions of a violent few, and again, alienate the community and send the message that the police see them all as the enemy and seek to trample on the rights of all of them.
The local police are capable of handling the current situation in a way that both respects the rights of the people and gets the actual criminals off the streets, but only if a paradigm shift in strategy and tactics can be made. The leadership, starting with you, Gov. Nixon, and on down the chain of command, must make the changes that are needed to bring sane, effective, and constitutional policing to this situation.
A Constitutional and Effective Strategy
One retired Special Forces veteran in our group suggested that instead of grouping the police officers in large blocks (50 to 100 men), that you should break up these groups into rapid reaction teams of 20 to 25 officers and disperse them, staging them in places spread around Ferguson, with a focus on the looters, not the protesters. Our intelligence and police veterans concurred, and added that you should also task some officers to go out in street clothes to blend in to the crowds and work as Scouts, identifying threats and looters. The plainclothes Scouts should be directing the rapid reaction teams to protect the businesses from the ongoing crime, and refocus the police assets away from unconstitutional activities like shooting CS gas at peaceful protesters and enforcing curfews, and get to the business of putting the real criminals behind bars. If you think you need more minority officers for this role, you could easily find them in the St. Louis County Police Department, St. Charles County Sheriff Department, and other local municipal police departments. The plainclothes officers can identify and locate the trouble-makers and their caches and resources, such as gas cans and bottles for Molotov cocktails, bricks, etc., and they can also film the trouble-makers in support of later arrests and prosecutions.
Those plainclothes Scouts can also be directly backed up by small teams of five to seven additional plainclothes officers to take down identified looters in a manner that uses minimum force along with effective surprise applied only to the actual suspected looter. And those plainclothes small reaction teams can be further backed up by the uniformed rapid response teams, if needed, as they apprehend the looters and shooters. If possible, each officer should have a small, discrete camera - such as a badge camera - pinned to their clothing and running at all times, so that there is a recording of all that occurs.
An additional recommendation from one of our members was that, rather than closing portions of West Florrisant Avenue and ordering protesters to disperse, officers could place cones on the street to reserve the center lane for police use only (warning that any others entering that lane will be arrested), staging officers at various points along that center lane and using it for police vehicles, while leaving traffic free to move North and South (with appropriate turn lanes interspersed), leaving the sidewalks open for protesters and media, and not trying to confine either to any particular area. That preserves the middle lane for police to move freely back and forth along that critical two mile stretch while not restricting free speech and assembly rights.
The initial response of the Highway Patrol, to deescalate and demilitarize the situation, was on the right track. However, it also failed to secure the arrest of the looters. In fact, officers were explicitly told to not go after the looters. De-escalating of militarized policing against peaceful protesters was a good idea. But the "de-escalation" toward the looters and shooters - intentionally NOT going after them - was insane and failed to protect the people and businesses of Ferguson. Backing off and letting the looters run free failed to solve the problem and actually made it worse, with the success of the looters drawing trouble-makers from all over the country, who came to Ferguson to loot and shoot and incite more violence. As evidence of the failure, we now have local business owners having to hire private security to protect them from looting because the police in their community are failing to do so.
De-escalation and demilitarization must go hand-in-hand with effective policing that stops the looters and shooters. The officers must be told that if they see an act of looting or violence, they must arrest that man. That needs to be the policy from the beginning to the end. Again, we recommend the use of plainclothes officers and small reaction teams to effectively arrest looters and shooters while respecting the rights of the peaceable protesters.
With hundreds of criminals stealing the businesses of Ferguson blind and damaging private property, how many arrests of actual looters took place? The percentage is embarrassing (and arrests of otherwise peaceful protesters for "failure to disperse" or "failure to keep moving" don't count). The Highway Patrol's tactics did not work, and it is time to admit it. It was a mistake to remove St. Louis County from a command role. Instead, Governor, you should have directed them to use their considerable assets to go after the looters while respecting the right of the people to peaceably assemble.
Likewise, bringing the National Guard in for "force protection" secured the Command Location, but what about all the other locations where people's lives were being destroyed? The National Guard was not the answer. Effective, smart, focused policing was. You did the right thing by finally pulling the National Guard back out. Now you just need to direct the application of effective, focused policing.
We need officers focused on looters, not on bullying the media and protesters. We need officers to put violent criminals in jail, not shoot tear gas and rubber bullets at reporters too ignorant to not shine lights in the officers' eyes while they are trying to work. We need a Governor smart enough to reject the riot control tactics developed before cell phones - tactics that are now failing catastrophically - and smart enough to not try to stifle free speech and violate our Bill of Rights. We need a Governor to show enough wisdom to lead our state by the Constitution rather than against it with ineffective abuses like curfews. Governor Nixon, tell us you are wise enough to defeat the criminals without violating our rights. No, SHOW us you are wise enough to change your failing tactics and demand from your men that they discern between peaceful protesters and looting thugs. SHOW US, you will protect the rights of the FREE PRESS and have the courage to demand your officers arrest the real bad guys. Stop gassing the innocent and start arresting the looters!
Wisdom and discernment will go a long way on the streets of Ferguson, and it is time you focus the police on putting real criminals behind bars, not reporters and peaceful protesters. It is time the people of Ferguson look up and see a beautiful moon, instead of a cloud of smoke and tear gas. Truth demands change.
A Critical Warning
In closing, we must warn you that you are making a grave mistake by continuing the pattern of militarization and abuse of rights that we saw during Occupy Wall Street (with curfews imposed on peaceful protesters, who were wrongly ordered to disperse and then pepper-sprayed at point-blank range); with the egregious death of Marine combat veteran Jose Guerena at the hands of a Tucson SWAT team while serving a mere search warrant; during the response to the Boston Bombing (with families being ordered out of their homes at gun-point, with many veterans telling us that the people of Iraq were treated with more respect and consideration than they saw in Watertown, Massachusetts); and with the recent horrendous use of "First Amendment Areas," military trained snipers, and militarized, heavy-handed Federal law enforcement at Bundy Ranch in Bunkerville, Nevada that galvanized veterans from all across America to travel there to prevent that ranching family from being "Waco'd" (with the Washington Times later disclosing that the Obama Administration did, in fact, consider using military force against the Bundy family and their supporters, but thankfully decided not to). Those examples only scratch the surface of a systemic problem that has been ratcheting up over the years in nearly every community in America, as Washington Post journalist Radley Balko has exhaustively documented.
The rapidly escalating militarization of America's police is fundamentally incompatible with our Constitution and incompatible with a free nation, and inevitably leads to violence against We the People and gross violations of our rights, for which so many of our brothers have fought, bled, and died throughout this nation's history.
For us, this is not about race. This is about defending the Bill of Rights, which is a shield against government abuse that is meant to protect ALL Americans, of whatever color. Those of us who served as Marine or Army infantry learned to see only one color: green. Some of our brothers in our fire-teams and squads were dark green, while others were medium or light green, but they were all our brothers, and in combat, they all bled the same color - red - in defense of this nation and in defense of the Constitution, which each of us swore an oath to defend against all enemies, foreign and domestic. And the same can be said for those constitutional Sheriffs and police officers among us who still know what it means to be a peace officer, not a "law enforcer."
The militarization of our police is not a "black problem." It's an American problem, and it affects all of us. Senator Rand Paul is right. We must demilitarize our police. Governor Nixon, you stand at a critical moment in history. You must reverse course and set the example for other states to follow, to demilitarize our police and bring police methods back within the bounds of the Constitution. A failure to do so will further place millions of us American veterans who still take our oaths seriously on a fateful collision course with a burgeoning police state that is going down the same road that other nations have traveled, with tragic ends.
Our grandfathers and fathers fought against totalitarian police states overseas. Please don't force us to fight against one here at home. Demilitarize the police now, and let us all live in peace under the Constitution, with liberty, and justice, for all.
Missouri Oath Keepers
https://www.facebook.com/stloathkeepers
www.oathkeepers.org
View and comment on this article at: http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2014/08/22/open-letter-of-warning-to-governor-nixon-from-missouri-oath-keepers-2/
The events in Ferguson have shown us daily that the looting and violence by a few is not being stopped, while the right of the people to peaceably assemble and petition government for redress of grievances is not being respected. The current riot control tactics of the local police, rooted in outmoded techniques developed in the 1950's - and only made worse by the ongoing militarization of our police - are failing the people of Ferguson, giving them a false choice between rampant looting on the one hand, and hyper-militarized police and curfews on the other (which also fail to stop the looting, leaving the mistaken impression among many of the American people that even more militarization and curtailment of free speech and assembly is needed). Our local boots on the ground, made up of retired police officers, military veterans, and intelligence workers (with critical input from current serving Missouri police officers) have answers that could provide the people of Ferguson the relief they need and deserve while respecting their rights. It is time to change a losing game.
The militarized police response we saw in Ferguson did not work. All it did was violate the rights of peaceful protesters and media, alienate the community, and make our country look even more like a police state, with big, intimidating displays of heavily armed, militarized officers, in full "battle-rattle" and backed by BearCat type armored vehicles, firing CS gas and rubber bullets into peaceful protesters and even at media personnel, while failing to stop those relative few who were actually looting, throwing Molotov cocktails, and shooting.
The police focus on peaceful protesters, with lines of policemen equipped in riot gear, in fundamentally static positions - at best, slow, plodding, on-line advances - are easily thwarted by modern looters and thugs with cell phones and team work. Such outdated tactics fail to apprehend those actually looting and shooting.
What they do succeed in doing is alienating the local population while risking additional shooting incidents due to unsafe gun-handling. There were multiple instances of police officers pointing M-4s and sniper rifles at unarmed, peaceful protesters, media, and local residents just going about their business, in displays of spectacularly unsafe weapons discipline and methodology. As one of our police sniper veterans pointed out, even police snipers deployed in response to prior incidents of shots fired should have used spotting scopes to observe the crowd and search for potential threats, not their rifle scopes.
Even worse were the well-publicized incidents of officers routinely pointing M-4s at unarmed protesters at close range for no apparent reason other than to intimidate. An officer facing an actual lethal threat should be moving to cover, not standing there in a static bunch with other officers, using the rifle as a threat display. And a properly trained and disciplined professional keeps his rifle pointed down, where it is pointed in a safe direction but still ready to bring up on target within a second at close range, and it stays pointed down unless and until he identifies an actual lethal threat, while he uses his presence and voice, first and foremost, to control the situation - all without covering anyone with his muzzle.
Such over-the-top threatening displays, with rifles pointed-in indiscriminately at protesters and residents, only anger and frighten the people and reinforce the perception that it is "the police vs. the people" rather than the police vs. a small number of criminals, while risking the lives of the very people our police are supposed to be serving.
And much like over-the top and indiscriminate threat displays and use of force in Iraq lost the hearts and minds of the locals, so too does it lose the battle for hearts and minds here at home - assisting in the agendas of those who wish to divide us along racial lines and create an "us vs. them" mentality among both the people and the police.
The overt displays of heavily armed officers lined up to intimidate the crowds were also tactically unsound for the officers themselves, leaving them exposed in the streets. The more skilled the opposition, the more such tactics fail. So far, it has only been random, inaccurate, handgun fire directed at the police in Ferguson, not rifle fire. Against rifle fire, a long line of exposed officers standing in the open would be a disaster for the police. One active duty police sergeant told us, "I don't want my guys stationary - they just become targets for the thugs throwing bricks and taking pot shots at us with their pistols." The analysts in our group take this kind of feedback from the rank-and-file very seriously, and you should too. And, again, it doesn't get the job done. It doesn't secure the arrest of those who are looting and shooting. It leaves the officers exposed while it only punishes and threatens those who are there to protest - those who are not looting and shooting.
Likewise for the imposition of curfews, which violate the right of the people to peaceably assemble, while also failing to stop the looters and shooters who ignore such decrees. The First Amendment prohibits "abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances" period. It doesn't add on "unless a politician declares a state of emergency and imposes a curfew." Nor does it say "unless other people are looting and being violent, in which case all of you lose your right to peaceably assemble." Curfews punish the peaceable majority for the actions of a violent few, and again, alienate the community and send the message that the police see them all as the enemy and seek to trample on the rights of all of them.
The local police are capable of handling the current situation in a way that both respects the rights of the people and gets the actual criminals off the streets, but only if a paradigm shift in strategy and tactics can be made. The leadership, starting with you, Gov. Nixon, and on down the chain of command, must make the changes that are needed to bring sane, effective, and constitutional policing to this situation.
A Constitutional and Effective Strategy
One retired Special Forces veteran in our group suggested that instead of grouping the police officers in large blocks (50 to 100 men), that you should break up these groups into rapid reaction teams of 20 to 25 officers and disperse them, staging them in places spread around Ferguson, with a focus on the looters, not the protesters. Our intelligence and police veterans concurred, and added that you should also task some officers to go out in street clothes to blend in to the crowds and work as Scouts, identifying threats and looters. The plainclothes Scouts should be directing the rapid reaction teams to protect the businesses from the ongoing crime, and refocus the police assets away from unconstitutional activities like shooting CS gas at peaceful protesters and enforcing curfews, and get to the business of putting the real criminals behind bars. If you think you need more minority officers for this role, you could easily find them in the St. Louis County Police Department, St. Charles County Sheriff Department, and other local municipal police departments. The plainclothes officers can identify and locate the trouble-makers and their caches and resources, such as gas cans and bottles for Molotov cocktails, bricks, etc., and they can also film the trouble-makers in support of later arrests and prosecutions.
Those plainclothes Scouts can also be directly backed up by small teams of five to seven additional plainclothes officers to take down identified looters in a manner that uses minimum force along with effective surprise applied only to the actual suspected looter. And those plainclothes small reaction teams can be further backed up by the uniformed rapid response teams, if needed, as they apprehend the looters and shooters. If possible, each officer should have a small, discrete camera - such as a badge camera - pinned to their clothing and running at all times, so that there is a recording of all that occurs.
An additional recommendation from one of our members was that, rather than closing portions of West Florrisant Avenue and ordering protesters to disperse, officers could place cones on the street to reserve the center lane for police use only (warning that any others entering that lane will be arrested), staging officers at various points along that center lane and using it for police vehicles, while leaving traffic free to move North and South (with appropriate turn lanes interspersed), leaving the sidewalks open for protesters and media, and not trying to confine either to any particular area. That preserves the middle lane for police to move freely back and forth along that critical two mile stretch while not restricting free speech and assembly rights.
The initial response of the Highway Patrol, to deescalate and demilitarize the situation, was on the right track. However, it also failed to secure the arrest of the looters. In fact, officers were explicitly told to not go after the looters. De-escalating of militarized policing against peaceful protesters was a good idea. But the "de-escalation" toward the looters and shooters - intentionally NOT going after them - was insane and failed to protect the people and businesses of Ferguson. Backing off and letting the looters run free failed to solve the problem and actually made it worse, with the success of the looters drawing trouble-makers from all over the country, who came to Ferguson to loot and shoot and incite more violence. As evidence of the failure, we now have local business owners having to hire private security to protect them from looting because the police in their community are failing to do so.
De-escalation and demilitarization must go hand-in-hand with effective policing that stops the looters and shooters. The officers must be told that if they see an act of looting or violence, they must arrest that man. That needs to be the policy from the beginning to the end. Again, we recommend the use of plainclothes officers and small reaction teams to effectively arrest looters and shooters while respecting the rights of the peaceable protesters.
With hundreds of criminals stealing the businesses of Ferguson blind and damaging private property, how many arrests of actual looters took place? The percentage is embarrassing (and arrests of otherwise peaceful protesters for "failure to disperse" or "failure to keep moving" don't count). The Highway Patrol's tactics did not work, and it is time to admit it. It was a mistake to remove St. Louis County from a command role. Instead, Governor, you should have directed them to use their considerable assets to go after the looters while respecting the right of the people to peaceably assemble.
Likewise, bringing the National Guard in for "force protection" secured the Command Location, but what about all the other locations where people's lives were being destroyed? The National Guard was not the answer. Effective, smart, focused policing was. You did the right thing by finally pulling the National Guard back out. Now you just need to direct the application of effective, focused policing.
We need officers focused on looters, not on bullying the media and protesters. We need officers to put violent criminals in jail, not shoot tear gas and rubber bullets at reporters too ignorant to not shine lights in the officers' eyes while they are trying to work. We need a Governor smart enough to reject the riot control tactics developed before cell phones - tactics that are now failing catastrophically - and smart enough to not try to stifle free speech and violate our Bill of Rights. We need a Governor to show enough wisdom to lead our state by the Constitution rather than against it with ineffective abuses like curfews. Governor Nixon, tell us you are wise enough to defeat the criminals without violating our rights. No, SHOW us you are wise enough to change your failing tactics and demand from your men that they discern between peaceful protesters and looting thugs. SHOW US, you will protect the rights of the FREE PRESS and have the courage to demand your officers arrest the real bad guys. Stop gassing the innocent and start arresting the looters!
Wisdom and discernment will go a long way on the streets of Ferguson, and it is time you focus the police on putting real criminals behind bars, not reporters and peaceful protesters. It is time the people of Ferguson look up and see a beautiful moon, instead of a cloud of smoke and tear gas. Truth demands change.
A Critical Warning
In closing, we must warn you that you are making a grave mistake by continuing the pattern of militarization and abuse of rights that we saw during Occupy Wall Street (with curfews imposed on peaceful protesters, who were wrongly ordered to disperse and then pepper-sprayed at point-blank range); with the egregious death of Marine combat veteran Jose Guerena at the hands of a Tucson SWAT team while serving a mere search warrant; during the response to the Boston Bombing (with families being ordered out of their homes at gun-point, with many veterans telling us that the people of Iraq were treated with more respect and consideration than they saw in Watertown, Massachusetts); and with the recent horrendous use of "First Amendment Areas," military trained snipers, and militarized, heavy-handed Federal law enforcement at Bundy Ranch in Bunkerville, Nevada that galvanized veterans from all across America to travel there to prevent that ranching family from being "Waco'd" (with the Washington Times later disclosing that the Obama Administration did, in fact, consider using military force against the Bundy family and their supporters, but thankfully decided not to). Those examples only scratch the surface of a systemic problem that has been ratcheting up over the years in nearly every community in America, as Washington Post journalist Radley Balko has exhaustively documented.
The rapidly escalating militarization of America's police is fundamentally incompatible with our Constitution and incompatible with a free nation, and inevitably leads to violence against We the People and gross violations of our rights, for which so many of our brothers have fought, bled, and died throughout this nation's history.
For us, this is not about race. This is about defending the Bill of Rights, which is a shield against government abuse that is meant to protect ALL Americans, of whatever color. Those of us who served as Marine or Army infantry learned to see only one color: green. Some of our brothers in our fire-teams and squads were dark green, while others were medium or light green, but they were all our brothers, and in combat, they all bled the same color - red - in defense of this nation and in defense of the Constitution, which each of us swore an oath to defend against all enemies, foreign and domestic. And the same can be said for those constitutional Sheriffs and police officers among us who still know what it means to be a peace officer, not a "law enforcer."
The militarization of our police is not a "black problem." It's an American problem, and it affects all of us. Senator Rand Paul is right. We must demilitarize our police. Governor Nixon, you stand at a critical moment in history. You must reverse course and set the example for other states to follow, to demilitarize our police and bring police methods back within the bounds of the Constitution. A failure to do so will further place millions of us American veterans who still take our oaths seriously on a fateful collision course with a burgeoning police state that is going down the same road that other nations have traveled, with tragic ends.
Our grandfathers and fathers fought against totalitarian police states overseas. Please don't force us to fight against one here at home. Demilitarize the police now, and let us all live in peace under the Constitution, with liberty, and justice, for all.
Missouri Oath Keepers
https://www.facebook.com/stloathkeepers
www.oathkeepers.org
View and comment on this article at: http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2014/08/22/open-letter-of-warning-to-governor-nixon-from-missouri-oath-keepers-2/
Thursday, August 21, 2014
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)